Exactly who is it that is in ‘Denial’?

February 16, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

A somewhat biased film review

By Gilad Atzmon

In her book Denying the Holocaust (1993), Deborah Lipstadt confessed that it was David Irving’s considerable reputation as an historian that made him “one of the most dangerous spokespersons for Holocaust denial.” “Familiar with historical evidence,” she wrote, “he bends it until it conforms with his ideological leanings and political agenda.” Irving responded by claiming that Lipstadt’s words were libellous and filed a legal case against her and her publisher Penguin Books.

Was Irving brave or naïve in putting the Holocaust on trial? Probably both. Back in 1996, was Irving a hero or just grossly miscalculating in believing he stood a chance in taking on the Holocaust, still the most popular Jewish religion? Again, probably both.

The other day, I watched Mick Jackson’s ‘Denial’. The film tells the story of Irving’s 2000 defeat in court – a disaster he voluntarily brought upon himself and indeed, Irving has clearly made some mistakes in his life. Yet, in 2017 it is impossible to deny that, back in 2000, Irving was well ahead of most of us.


Watching the film in the aftermath of Brexit, the Trump victory and the surge of Right Wing consciousness in the West in general, it is clear that Irving, undoubtedly one of the greatest living biographer of Hitler, understood human nature better than the British judge, Lipstadt’s legal team, the BBC and probably the rest of us altogether.

Back in 2000, the Holocaust narrative was as solid as a rock. The Jews were perceived as the ultimate victims and their plight at the time of World War II was unquestionable.  No one dared ask how is it is possible that, three years after the liberation of Auschwitz, the newly-born Jewish state ethnically cleansed Palestine of its indigenous population? At the time of the trial, no one dared ask why is the Jewish past just a chain of holocausts – that is, no one except David Irving (and a few others).

At the time of the trial, I read an interview with David Irving that opened my eyes to the idea that history is a revisionist adventure, an attempt to narrate the past as we move along. I realised then that the past is subject to changes. It morphs along with humanity.

In that interview, Irving was quoted as‘ blaming the victims.’

“If I were a Jew,” he said, “I would ask myself why it always happens to us?”

At the time, I was a still Jew but I took up Irving’s challenge. I looked in the mirror and didn’t like what I saw so I decided to leave the tribe and I stopped being a Jew.

But Irving is no longer a lone voice. Two weeks ago, on Holocaust Memorial Day, it was actually the American president himself who managed to universalize the Holocaust by omitting to mention the Jews or their shoah. As we Westerns obliterate country after country with our immoral interventionism, the Holocaust is no longer a Jews-only domain and all the time more and more people grasp that it is actually Israel and its affiliated Jewish lobbies that are pushing us into more and more unnecessary global conflicts.

‘Denial’ was made to sustain a ‘progressive’ vision of the past. In this progressive but misguided universe, people ‘move forward’ but their past remains fixed, often sacred and always untouched. Nationalists, on the other hand, often see the past as a dynamic, vibrant reality. For them, nostalgia, is the way forward.

But some Jews are tormented by this nostalgia. They want their own past to be compartmentalized and sealed, otherwise, they are fearful that some people may decide to examine Jewish history in the light of Israeli crimes.

In the film, Irving is an old style British gent who sticks to his guns and refuses to change his narrative just to fit in with any notions of correctness. Irving states what he believes in and stands firmly behind it.

For Irving, one of the most damaging pieces of evidenced presented to the court was a little ditty he wrote to his daughter when she was just a few months old, and conceived by the court as the ultimate in crude misanthropy.


“I am a Baby Aryan,

Not Jewish or Sectarian.

I have no plans to marry-an

Ape or Rastafarian.”


On the day of the verdict, Irving visited the BBC Newsnight studio to be grilled by Jeremy Paxman who read the little ditty to Irving.


“What’s racist about that?” Irving wondered. “You are not being serious,” was Paxman’s  reply. Paxman, one of Britain’s best TV journalists, was, like the rest of us, trained to react to soundbites. “Aryan is a racial categorisation” he insisted.

Back in 2000, Paxman probably failed to see that,

if Jews are entitled to identify politically as a race, as a biology or as set of cultural symptoms then Whites, Muslims and everyone else must surely be entitled to do the same.

Back in 2000, Irving understood this potential Identitarian shift. Sixteen years later, Donald Trump and Nigel Farage translated this Identitarian shift into a victory. The Clintons, the Soros’ and the Deborah Lipstadts of this world are still struggling to make sense of it.

‘Denial’, is actually a film about righteousness, exceptionalism and victimhood.  It is about the condition of being consumed by self-love, that blind belief that justice is always on your side, that you are the eternal victim and the other, namely the ‘Goy’ is always the murderous aggressor.

But this type of ‘denial’ can be dealt with easily and here is just one example: The Jewish press in Britain  complains constantly that antisemitism is soaring. The more funds the British government dedicates to fighting antisemitsm, the more antisemitic incidents are recorded. I guess the time is ripe for Jews to listen to David Irving and ask themselves why?

If Jews want anti-Semitism to come to an end once and for all, all they need do is to self-reflect. However, my personal experience suggests that once you do that, you may stop being a Jew.

Note: It is worth mentioning that, since the 2000 trial, Irving is on record on numerous occasions as revising his views on the Holocaust and on the destruction of European Jews. Certainly, as he moves along, David Irving at least is able to revise the past.



Ziad Fadel


Al-Salamiyya:  This town is famous for its majority Isma’ili Muslim population, a very courteous people with no axe to grind with anyone.  That doesn’t stop the devil-worshiping Nusra/Alqaeda from trying to exterminate them, however.  Yesterday and today, the forces of villainy in this world tried desperately to overrun several SAA and PDC positions near the town, specifically at Al-Sat-hiyyaat west of the town about 10kms.  The attack has, so far, been a disaster for the terrorist cannibals who also attacked at Khunayfees and Al-Ramliyya.  All attacks were blunted by the force of SAA artillery, PDC rangers and helicopter gunships.  The number killed has been estimated at 33 rodents.  Intercepted communications indicate a breakdown in command structure and a diminution in the amount of weapons and ammunition wielded by the foreign-supported vermin.  Hence, the following story:




West Al-Haraat Village:  Members of the PDC militia set a trap for a truck barreling down a road carrying weapons to Nusra/Alqaeda in the Al-Salamiyya area and engaged the terrorists occupying it in a firefight which the militia won handily.  Both driver and his sidekick were killed and their carcasses converted into instant fertilizer.  After inspecting the truck, the militia showcased a terrorist surveillance drone and a great many light, medium and heavy weapons, and rockets for RPG anti-tank launchers.  It was obvious the rodents in Al-Salamiyya were anxious to be resupplied as reports filter in of a large SAA column moving in their direction.


The Al-Hayyaan Natural Gas Station was set ablaze by ISIS on orders from American-accented terrorist enablers in Turkey.  This intelligence was gathered by Russia and delivered to the SAA-MI.  It took place 2 days ago as the vermin withdrew rapidly from this area, one of Syria’s most important natural resources-rich installations.  The rodents knew they could not hold out as they observed the SAA moving to surround them and close off all escape routes.  CIA operatives informed their rodents that they should leave the area quickly but, before doing so, to lay waste to as much of the facility as possible.  Some have doubted that the ISIS rats were able to demolish the gas production facility.  My sources say it did happen but that only a portion of the plant was destroyed.


Al-Qunaytiraat Axis:  We can confirm the deaths of 23 Nusra/Alqaeda rodents here on the Homs-Al-Salamiyya Road.  With large SAA reinforcements moving to buttress the forces in Al-Salamiyya, the terrorists, now increasingly under American command before the ascension of Donald Trump, tried to cut off the Homs-Salamiyya Highway.  To no avail.  The SAAF went into action immediately with ground support from SAA artillery and rocket units and clobbered the syphilis-ridden vermin.  They also were annihilated at another site near the ‘Izzeddeen-Al-Qunaytiraat Junction by very precise artillery and rocket fire.

The number of Nusra/Alqaeda dead is 23 so far with these named:

Abu Hamza Al-Jawlaani (Id pending. Leader of Alqaeda)

Khaalid Dardar (Alqaeda leader of Turk descent)

Muneef Khalaf Seedu

‘Ammaar Al-Hammood

Muhammad Hussayn Al-Sharaabi

Hussayn Al-Ruzz

Abu Miqdaad Al-Dayri (Id pending)

The rest were not identified because they were foreign.  5 pickup trucks with 23mm cannons were destroyed in the melee.





Dayr Muqrin:  The Syrian Army has completely liberated this village adjacent to the ‘Ayn Al-Feeja water source and aquifer.  The Nusra/Alqaeda rodents have withdrawn to what they think are defensible positions.  Actually the wanted to make a deal and get over to Idlib, but, the Saudi Arabian money-rats nixed he whole project threatening to cut off all aid to anybody who surrendered or agreed to pull out.  Saudi Arabia seems to think that all water comes from one place.  Not true.  In any case, the Saudis will be pleased to know that a large contingent from the fully mechanized 4th Armored Division led by Maj. Gen. Maahir Al-Assad is about to pounce on the rodents and orders are to take no prisoners.


Faaiza Amna Hameed invited you to her event

Support Palestine in DC 2017! (Official)

Sunday, March 26 at 12 PM

The White House in Washington, District of Columbia



John Esq. sent me this great video about the modern Russian weapons now in Syria.

John Esq. also sent this video about Russia’s warning that any air force attacking the SAA will be shot down:

Joaquin Flores sent this one with Dr. Assad explaining that most of the prisoners freed have returned to the government:

Waf Halabi informs us that the U.N. has successfully supplied the citizens of Mu’adhdhamiyya with enough food for 40,000 people:

While I have already posted this article by Sharmine Narwani, Patrick Henningsen sends it again and I think it’s a great article:

Alex Kharegi asks if Russia is really pulling forces out of Syria:

The French delegation to Syria was targeted by the “moderate” terrorists:

The latest on Waadi Baradaa and the big trip to Idlib from Waf Halabi:

Waf Halabi gives us this video depiction of fighting to defend Deir El-Zor from the Obama savages of ISIS:
Read more 

Israel’s never-ending crimes: It’s not just settlements


By Stanley L Cohen

Israel has not just committed unspeakable acts of genocide but done so with absolute transparency.

Last week, the world stood fixated at a largely symbolic gesture by the United Nations in which it found the continued Israeli occupation of the West Bank of Palestine to be illegal. Or did it?

Although the UN Security Council, with rare uniformity, chastised Israel for flouting the law of occupation, the resolution, crafted with ambiguous lawyerly precision, left experienced thinkers on the subject debating just what it means.

In its most ambitious read, some would argue it appears that the decree concerned the occupation as a whole, and swept within its prohibitive reach all settlement activity since 1967 when Israel seized the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, from Arab-Palestinian control.

Others view its advisory language as helpful through its continued embrace of the time-tired two-state solution and its apparent call for a return to the status quo ante of some 15 years ago when illegal settlements had not as yet swallowed much more than 60 percent of the West Bank.

In its least appealing landscape painting, it would appear that the resolution seemingly bestows upon already completed settlements de facto legitimacy and addresses only that part of the building glut currently under way or planned for tomorrows yet to come.

To make matters worse, despite its gratuitous dicta, the resolution remains very much a toothless declaration without any enforcement mechanism whatsoever – essentially relying upon a sudden burst of Israeli conscience to reverse a steady march of indifference to international law that has led Israel’s way since the very first day it was manufactured from stolen land in Palestine.

Defiant Netanyahu

Predictable in immediacy and urgency, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu threw his weekly tantrum, accusing the world of a dark conspiracy organised by the soon to be ex-President of the United States, Barack Obama, who on his way out of the door after years of obsequious obedience to Israeli will, has suddenly discovered that it’s OK to say no … well … maybe … or perhaps, to its glaring intransigence.

But then again, it’s kind of hard to take seriously “pressure” exerted by a country that has just enriched Israel’s military coffers and occupation to the tune of $38bn.

Not satisfied with the echo of his own vitriol, Netanyahu was just beginning. Next, he singled out Senegal – one of the most impoverished countries in the world and a mover of the resolution – for economic reprisal. Its offence is having the temerity to believe in the rule of law and being housed in the international building with flags of 193 nations and the State of Palestine that sits overlooking the East River of New York City.

Netanyahu told the world just what he thinks of the UN and its resolution when he announced plans to proceed with the building of thousands of new housing units in Jerusalem in particular.

“Israel will not turn its other cheek,” Netanyahu proclaimed as he went on to prophesy a “plan of action” against the UN directly. Not long thereafter he suspended working ties with the UK, France, Russia, China, Japan, Ukraine, Angola, Egypt, Uruguay, Spain, Senegal and New Zealand, those countries that supported the resolution.

Like a dark lord

Netanyahu should quit while he’s ahead, but he just can’t. There is no incentive. Like the hundreds of earlier resolutions critical of Israeli policies, as worded, the most recent condemnation by the UN can do little more than cry out for justice in the night from a state built from the marrow of genocide.

I get “bombast”, “brash” and, at times, even “bully”. However, it’s the two-legged beasts that feed on the innocent I do not. Netanyahu is very much that kind of beast – an ogre who lives in a world surrounded by dark, deadly thoughts. With delusion his ally, dishonesty his friend and death his messenger, he thumbs his nose at the world as his reign of state terror consumes more and more civilian victims guilty of no offence other than breathing the air that surrounds them and seeking a free life.

When the history of our times is written, an honest accounting will no doubt add Netanyahu’s wicked shadow – and that of his predecessors – to the list of fiends that have seen the world as little more than a playground within which to use their toys of death and despair – always, of course, for the right reasons and always, of course, against the meek and defenceless among us.

The sum total of Israel’s efforts these past 68 years is nothing short of the deliberate infliction upon Palestinians, as a cognizable group, conditions of life and death calculated to bring about their physical destruction in whole or in part.

In the world of Joseph Stalin, induced famine was the prime weapon of choice, though mass execution and exile helped him dispose of tens of millions he viewed as “enemies of the people”.

To Henry Kissinger, the world, particularly Indochina, was very much a small chess game. Civilians were mere pawns ripe for sacrifice through hi-tech weaponry, including biological and chemical warfare, to enforce his worldview at any cost. Millions lost their lives to his cerebral game board.

To Pol Pot, struggle was little more than purification, erasing through starvation, overwork and execution a quarter of his people whose sole crime was to see life through a prism that collided with his own – no matter how soft their view or backward his sight.

In Rwanda up to half a million women were sexually assaulted, mutilated or murdered, along with an equal number of male Tutsis, as enemy agents of the Hutu state – machetes and rape induced Aids to the plentiful weapons of preference.

Slow-motion genocide

These are but a few of the extremes of genocide, those rare cases we are told noted mostly for mass murder, systemic rape or group starvation – the worst of the worst. Yet, genocide does not demand of us an immediate mountain of bodies or an explosive rage of terror for international law to take hold.

As it turns out, in what increasingly seems to be more than mere passing coincidence, the legal definition of “genocide” enacted by the UN General Assembly was born in 1948, the very same year as Israel – which has since gone on to become both expert at its application and legendary in its denial.

In relevant part, under the applicable Convention, genocide means “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) killing members of the group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; or (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”. Each and every one of these types of genocide has been perpetrated by Israel, seemingly with almost proud boast, and no accountability, for almost 70 unbroken years.

One need not rest upon obtuse historical footnotes to find abundant, indeed systemic, acts of extermination carried out by Israel since 1948 against Palestinians – very much a cognizable “national, ethnical, racial or religious group” as those terms are contemplated and commonly understood and applied under international law.

Beginning with its mass expulsion, rape and murder at the onset of the Nakba (the Catastrophe) Israel has devoted itself to 68 years of non-stop genocide coming up for air only periodically to retool or to change the nature of its weaponry of choice.

What started out with the expulsion, at gunpoint, of more than 700,000 Palestinians from their ancestral homeland set in motion a refugee stampede that has grown to more than seven million displaced and stateless people, providing the world more than a disturbing glimpse of what was to come decades later in Syria.

Never-ending violence

Over the years, Israel has found diverse ways to kill more than 400,000 Palestinian civilians and injure or cripple two to three times as many, including tens of thousands of women and children. Whether by tank fire, rockets, or cluster or phosphorus bombs, it has given new meaning to the evil of willful group slaughter.

In its thirst to ethnically cleanse all of Palestine of its remaining inhabitants, it has made use of starvation, in violation of Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, as a method of war targeting foodstuffs, crops and livestock throughout the occupied territories.

In particular, it has destroyed more than a million olive trees which not only serve as an essential mainstay of Palestinian culture but, along with hundreds of thousands of razed fruit trees, constitute key products of a Palestinian national economy largely in various states of ruin.

In Gaza, Israel has targeted hospitals, schools, daycare centres, multi-storey apartment complexes, UN Relief and Works Agency shelters and mental health clinics with a deadly proficiency that would make historic war criminals blush with envy.

It has laid waste to thousands of its hardscrabble built homes and left upwards of a hundred thousand Palestinians internally displaced, indeed homeless – leaving many families at a breaking point.

For the survivors of the Gaza killing fields, Israel has made life unbearable over the past decade though a criminal embargo that not only guarantees insufficient caloric intake, fresh water and medicine, but denies to its 1.8 million survivors building materials essential for the reconstruction of its beleaguered, and largely levelled, infrastructure.

Not satisfied with physical pain alone, with cruel, wanton abandon, it is no stretch to find that its master plan has consciously induced levels of post-traumatic stress disorder unmatched anywhere else in the world.

Given all these palpable elements of ethnic cleansing, it is reasonably projected that Gaza will be uninhabitable by 2020 thereby once again driving several million traumatised refugees out on to the road of an uncertain and dangerous diaspora.

To describe Israel’s Gaza strategy as anything but one intended to cause “serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group” is to deny a very public and systematic orgy of punishment meted out to Palestinian civilians on the basis of group identity and dynamic – and nothing more.

In the West Bank, Israel’s calculus of pain and punishment is largely a difference without a distinction: one that varies in form but not intent or ultimate goal.

Not satisfied with the 531 villages and localities it depopulated and completely eradicated during the early days of the Nakba, since 1967 Israel has stolen, resettled and annexed almost all of the West Bank, including much of East Jerusalem, in clear violation of Article 4 of the Geneva Conventions which prohibit an occupation force from doing little more than erecting limited bases for its own security needs in occupied land.

During this criminal land grab, it has approved, indeed subsidized, the building of illegal housing for some 800,000 – largely immigrant – settlers at the same time it has destroyed almost 50,000 Palestinian structures, largely homes, many of them ages-old, rendering tens of thousands of its indigenous population homeless, often destitute or dependent upon the largesse of already overcrowded housing of family or friends.

None of these facts about Israel’s sordid and deadly history can be dispatched as the product of mere hyperbole or unsupported hearsay.

Claims of Israeli genocide have been substantiated time and time again by a host of independent human rights organisations and NGOs, with no axe to grind, and include findings from respected groups from within Israel, itself.

In point of fact, from its arrogant perch, Israel has not just committed unspeakable acts of genocide but done so with absolute transparency as if to say to the rest of the world: there we did it, and we are well beyond the reach of international law.

Make no mistake about it, the sum total of Israel’s efforts these past 68 years is nothing short of the deliberate infliction upon Palestinians, as a cognizable group, conditions of life and death calculated to bring about their physical destruction in whole or in part.

In the presence of overwhelming evidence of premeditated Israeli genocide, to argue otherwise is to reduce the dark, evil and systematic deeds of Stalin, Kissinger, Pol Pot and the Hutu state to little more than a collection of misunderstood happenstance.

Yes, Mr Prime Minister, you should quit while you are ahead. Today, Israel stands charged with violations of the law of occupation. Tomorrow, it might very well, indeed should, find itself seated in a well-deserved international dock on trial for genocide.

Stanley L Cohen is a lawyer and human rights activist who has done extensive work in the Middle East and Africa.

Israeli Pine Forests were planted to hide the plunder of Palestine!

November 28, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

The Village Under the Forest

The Village Under The Forest explores the hidden remains of the destroyed Palestinian village of Lubya, which lies under a purposefully cultivated forest plantation called South Africa Forest.

The documentary explores themes related to the erasure and persistence of memory and dares to imagine a future in which dignity, acknowledgement and co-habitation become shared possibilities in Israel/Palestine.

The Village Under The Forest is co-directed by Emmy-winner Mark Kaplan and scholar and poet Heidi Grunebaum. If the music sounds familiar to you, it is because you may recognise me in it.

في ذكرى وعد بلفور المشؤوم

  220 world dignitaries demand UK to apologize for Balfour Declaration

راسم عبيدات ـ القدس المحتلة

نتيجة بحث الصور عن الكاتب راسم عبيداتأكثر من مقالة كتبت حول ضرورة مطالبة بريطانيا بتحمّل مسؤولياتها التاريخية والسياسية والأخلاقية تجاه ما لحق بشعبنا من نكبات ومظالم مستمرة حتى يومنا هذا، فبريطانيا هذه الدولة الإستعمارية المارقة، هي المسؤول الأول والمباشر عن زرع دولة الاحتلال الإسرائيلي على أرض شعبنا وفي خاصرة أمتنا، ونتيجة لذلك لم يتعرّض شعبنا لنكبة واحدة باحتلال أرضه وإحلال المستوطنين الصهاينة مكانهم بعد طردهم وتهجيرهم قسراً عن ديارهم عام 1948، بل ما زالت نكباتنا مستمرة ومتواصلة، وما زالت بريطانيا الاستعمارية تدعم دولة الاحتلال الصهيوني، فاليهود عندما تعرّضوا لـ«الهولوكست» على يد النازية، ما زالت ألمانيا تتحمّل تبعات ذلك حتى اليوم وتدفع لهم التعويضات المالية وتقدّم المساعدات بشتى أنواعها المدنية والعسكرية لدولة الاحتلال.

أما نحن الفلسطينيون، فما زالت بريطانيا، ترفض تحمّل مسؤولياتها التاريخية والسياسية والأخلاقية عما حلّ بشعبنا الفلسطيني، نتيجة ماPicture سمّي بوعد وزير خارجيتهم بلفور لرجل الاقتصاد والمال اليهودي روتشيلد، بمنحهم فلسطين أرضنا كـ«وطن قومي» لهم، ولذلك نحن كشعب فلسطيني علينا في ذكرى هذا الوعد المشؤوم، القيام بإطلاق حملة واسعة تمتدّ من 2/11/2016 وحتى 2/11/2017 وتشمل فعاليات متنوّعة تستمرّ على امتداد عام كامل لوضع المجتمع الدولي، وخاصة بريطانيا أمام مسؤولياتها التاريخية ودعوتها للتكفير عن الجريمة الكبرى التي ارتكبتها، ورفع الظلم التاريخي الذي لحق بالشعب الفلسطيني. ورفع قضايا عليها تلزمها بدفع تعويضات لمئة عام مقبلة عما لحق بشعبنا من ظلم واضطهاد، وهذا لن يتأتى إلا من خلال استنفار كلّ طاقات وإمكانيات شعبنا الفلسطيني في الداخل والخارج بقواه السياسية ومكوناته المجتمعية والمؤسساتية والشعبية والجماهيرية، عبر فعاليات متعدّدة ومتنوّعة يتكاتف ويتقاطع فيها الجهد الشعبي والرسمي، من أجل محاكمة بريطانيا وإلزامها ليس فقط بدفع التعويضات، بل تصحيح هذا الخطأ التاريخي والعمل على تمكين شعبنا الفلسطيني من تحقيق حلمه وحقه في دولة مستقلة على أرضه التي طرد وهجر منها.

وعد بلفور هو في الجوهر مشروع استعماري ألبس غطاء دينياً وأسطورياً زائفاً بهدف تحقيق المطامع الاستعمارية لبريطانيا وربيبتها الحركة الصهيونية، والتي لا تزال حتى الآن من خلال مشروعها الكولونيالي دولة إسرائيل مرتبطة بمصالح الرأسمالية المتعولمة المتوحشة وزعيمتها الحالية الولايات المتحدة الأميركية.

في ذكرى هذا الوعد المشؤوم، نجد بأنّ بريطانيا ما زالت من أكثر الدول عداء لشعبنا وتنكراً لحقوقه الوطنية المشروعة، ونحن نتذكر جيداً كيف عملت بريطانيا على تعديل قوانينها وتشريعاتها القضائية، من اجل منع اعتقال ومحاكمة قادة الاحتلال العسكريين والسياسيين وضباطه وجنوده ومستوطنيه المتهمين بارتكاب جرائم حرب بحق شعبنا، على الأراضي البريطانية، وكذلك هي من هدّدت نشطاء المقاطعة بالاعتقال، واعتبرت مقاطعة دولة الاحتلال اقتصادياً واكاديمياً وثقافياً وتجارياً إلخ… شكلاً من أشكال اللاسامية.

ودائماً وقفت الى جانب أميركا برفض ممارسة أية ضغوط او عقوبات على «إسرائيل»، نتيجة لخرقها القانون الدولي واستمرار احتلالها لأرضنا، وتكثيفها للإستيطان بشكل جنوني في القدس والضفة الغربية، وبما يلغي أيّ إمكانية عملية لتحقيق ما يسمى بـ»حلّ الدولتين».

ولم تتورّع بريطانيا عن وصف نضال شعبنا بـ»الإرهاب»، حتى في ظلّ الحرب العدوانية الأخيرة على شعبنا في قطاع غزة تموز 2014 «الجرف الصامد»، وجدنا قاتل أطفال العراق والمبعوث الخاص السابق للرباعية الدولية في المنطقة، توني بلير، ذهب لكي يتضامن مع مستوطني غلاف قطاع غزة ضدّ «الإرهاب» الفلسطيني في نصرة ودعم للجلاد على الضحية، ولذلك علينا الا نألو جهداً مع كلّ اصدقائنا في العالم، من أجل خلق رأي عام ضاغط على بريطانيا، حتى في بريطانيا نفسها، لحملها على تصحيح خطئها التاريخي، وإلغاء هذا الوعد المشؤوم، وتحمّل مسؤولياتها التاريخية والسياسية والأخلاقية، فهذا الوعد المشؤوم، لم ينتج عنه نكبة واحدة لشعبنا، بل استتبعتها نكبات كثيرة، فشعبنا في الخارج حتى في مخيمات اللجوء، لم يسلم من القتل والتشريد، وشعبنا في قطاع غزة يعيش في أوضاع شبيهة بالقرو وسطية، حيث البنى التحتية المدمّرة والطاقة والكهرباء المقننة، والحصار المستمر، وعجلة الإعمار الدائرة ببطء شديد، وأكثر من 70 ألف مواطن ممن دمّرت الحرب العدوانية الأخيرة منازلهم، ما زالوا في مراكز الإيواء، والنقص في الأدوية والخدمات الطبية والصحية، والبطالة والفقر بلغت أرقاماً قياسية، أكثر من 70 من أهلنا هناك يعيشون على الإغاثة والإعانات، وتمارَس بحقهم ليس فقط عقوبات جماعية، بل يتعرّضون لسياسة تطهير عرقي من أجل إحداث تغيير كبير في الواقع الديمغرافي لصالح المستوطنين، والضفة الغربية تغرق بالمستوطنين، لكي يكونوا دولة داخل دولة، والداخل الفلسطيني 48 لم يسلم من مشاريع التهويد، حيث مشروع «برافر» التهويدي للنقب، والنكبة استولدت نكبات متوالية، ما زال شعبنا يدفع ثمنها دماً وتضحيات ولجوءاً وتشرّداً وبعداً عن أرضه التي ولد فيها وترعرع عليها، ما زالت بريطانيا والمجتمع الدولي الظالم يتنكرون لحق شعبنا في الحرية والإستقلال، والعيش بحرية وكرامة في وطن مستقلّ، علينا ملاحقة بريطانيا في كلّ المحافل الدولية وتأليب الرأي العام عليها في بريطانيا وأوروبا والعالم الغربي والعربي والإسلامي، ليس لكي تصدر اعتذاراً، بل وعداً مضاداً يؤكد حق شعبنا وحق لاجئينا بالعودة الى أرضهم التي شرّدوا منها.

وفي ذكرى هذا الوعد المشؤوم لتكن شعاراتنا المرفوعة وحملتنا ونشاطاتنا مكثفة ومركزة على «نعم لمحاكمة بريطانيا الإستعمارية»، و«لتتحمّل بريطانيا الإستعمارية مسؤولياتها التاريخية والسياسية والأخلاقية عن نكبات شعبنا ومآسيه»، «بريطانيا ملزمة بدفع تعويضات لشعبنا لمئة عام مقبلة» و«بريطانيا ملزمة بتصحيح خطئها التاريخي وتمكين شعبنا من استعادة أرضه المغتصبة».


نتيجة بحث الصور عن ‪balfour declaration‬‏

Related Videos

The Kafr Qasem Massacre–60th Anniversary


[ Ed. note – It happened on October 29, 1956. The killing started in the late afternoon as Palestinian residents of the village of Kafr Qasem were returning home following a day of work in their nearby fields and olive groves. Israeli border police, under the command of an Israeli Army officer, began arbitrarily murdering the villagers as they arrived and attempted to enter their village. The victims included men, women, and children. By the end of the night, nearly 50 people lay dead. It has come to be known as the Kafr Qasem massacre. Today is it’s 60th anniversary. Below is a post I put up back in 2014 detailing the events of that day and also including commentaries from a couple of different sources–two women–one Palestinian, the other Jewish.

Before you get to that, however, let me mention, as something of an aside, the post I put up yesterday–on the Israeli court which dismissed charges against the two Israeli border police officers who had been implicated in the the deaths 23-year-old Maram Salih Hassan Abu Ismail and her 16-year-old brother, Ibrahim Taha. Maram and Ibrahim, you may recall, were killed at the Qalandia military checkpoint on April 27, 2016. If you read my post, you know that witnesses at the time said they had posed no threat to security forces. The article I posted yesterday, from Ma’an News, discusses the dropping of all criminal charges against the border officers by an Israeli court. Longtime observers will of course recognize a pattern here, but what some may be unaware of is that the pattern goes back at least 60 years–for something similar happened to those charged in the Kafr Qasem massacre as well.

Colonel Issachar Shadmi was an Israeli Army officer in charge of the border police unit which carried out the 1956 massacre. He and others were charged, but were let off with light sentences–ridiculously light in Shadmi’s case. The court which heard his case imposed a fine of 10 prutas. A pruta was an aluminum coin formerly used by Israel. Ten prutas were basically the equivalent of one cent. ]

By Richard Edmondson

(Originally published January 22, 2014)

This afternoon I logged onto the Internet and began perusing through some of the blogs I regularly follow, at which point I came upon a fairly fascinating post at Aletho News—it was an article by an artist who has done a series of drawings of the Kafr Qasem massacre and who plans to publish them in book form.

I say it is fascinating and here’s why: I don’t know if the artist intended it as such, but her article and drawings (which I reproduce below) brought home for me in a very visual and compelling manner why the state of Israel needs to be peacefully dismantled as quickly and as rapidly as possible and its nuclear weapons secured.

Most people have heard of the Deir Yassin massacre, carried out by Jewish terror gangs in 1948 as the state of Israel was being established. The much less-known massacre at the Palestinian village of Kafr Qasem took place in 1956, eight years into the state’s existence, and though the death toll was not as high as Deir Yassin’s, in some respects it was every bit as horrific. Perhaps even more so. I say that because the people killed that evening were innocents—they were tired workers returning home from a day of work—and they were fully recognized as such by the Israeli border police who slayed them. Many were women and children. There was no possible threat to the Israeli state from any of them. Why did the Israelis do it? Was there any logic to it? Or was the Kafr Qasem massacre merely the inevitable byproduct of a nation founded and operating upon the principles of the Old Testament?

Those same principles, we see, have been in effect, through one war after another, all though the 66 years of the Jewish state’s existence, and were on display again as recently as yesterday when the Israeli prime minister threatened more violence upon besieged Gaza.

On December 20 Israeli soldiers shot and killed Oudeh Hamad, a Palestinian man collecting scrap metal near the Gaza border fence. Hamad’s brother, who accompanied him at the time, was injured. (See video below). On December 22, Israeli soldiers shot and wounded another man in Gaza. Two days later, on December 24, a sniper in Gaza fired upon and killed an Israeli contractor doing maintenance work on the border fence. Israel responded by ordering missile strikes on six locations across Gaza, wounding ten more people and killing three-year-old Hala Abu Sbeikha.

For years now Israeli leaders have talked openly of maintaining a policy of “disproportionate response” in imposing its occupation. This is what we see in the recent violence in Gaza: Israel commits an act of aggression against Palestinians—Palestinians answer back in some way—and then Israel responds “disproportionately,” inflicting an augmented level of punishment with vengeance. It is a pattern, one deployed over and over through the years, and it is straight out of the Old Testament, found in such passages as Deuteronomy 20: 16-18 or I Samuel 15:3. What does this mean for the future of the planet? And what does it imply in terms of a possible future faced by the Jewish people themselves? There seems to be a growing animus towards Jews in general. You can see it in reader comments posted at this website and countless others. The existence of the state of Israel has long been viewed by many Jews, even by those who don’t live there, as a factor helping to ensure their safety in the event of some presumed future outbreak of anti-Semitism. But is it possible the reverse is true—that Israel, with its mounting aggressions, its perpetual wars, hostilities and attacks upon other countries, rather than being the “safe haven” they believe it to be, is in fact their greatest peril?

This possibility, of Israel’s aggressive actions posing a danger to Jews around the world, was even addressed in a column in Haaretz:

Israel was founded, first and foremost, to be a safe haven for all Jews. In that respect, actions that are meant to contribute to Israel’s security should in fact contribute to the security of Jews living outside Israel. Except those Jews are at once exposed to grave physical danger in the form of reprisals for Israel’s said actions.

Of course it isn’t only the Jewish state’s treatment of the Palestinians or its military aggressions against its neighbors; there are also the activities of Jewish lobbies in Western countries that seem intent upon instigating new wars and involving their host countries in them. This too is creating anger, particularly in America. Does this pose an actual physical danger to American Jews? Probably not at this point. But if Israel’s bad behaviors aren’t reined in at some point that could begin to change. At any rate—something to keep in mind as you browse through the material below.

Here is what you’re going to see in order: first the article by artist Samia Halaby, along with some of her drawings of the Kafr Qasem massacre. Halaby is a Palestinian artist whose family was expelled from Palestine in 1948. She presently lives in America. Beneath Halaby’s article I present an account of the massacre by a Jewish writer, Roberta Feuerlicht, from her work, The Fate of the Jews, a book which was met with hostility from her fellow Jews upon its publication in 1983. When you read the passages below, you’ll see why. Beneath the two passages from the book, you’ll see a short article by Feuerlicht herself, published in 1985, describing how the book was received, or more precisely not received.

Below that you will see a video of Raddad Hamad, the brother of Oudeh Hamad, giving an account of his brother’s murder by Israeli soldiers on December 20, this followed by some closing comments of my own.


Drawing the Kafr Qasem Massacre: An Introduction to the Ongoing Project

By Samia Halaby | Jadaliyya | Aletho News

When I first accepted the challenge of drawing the Kafr Qasem massacre, I wanted to represent its events as though I were a camera on site. Documentary drawings, I thought, could recreate what photography might have given us if done on a historical basis. I would learn all I could and present the specific individuals and the documented events. I worked on the project in three major periods, each occupying most of a year or several years. I began work in 1999 and continued into 2000. In 2006, on the occasion of the fiftieth memorial of the massacre, I created both a web page and an exhibition of the drawings. In 2012, I returned to the project with the intention of finalizing it by making large-scale drawings and developing a book.

The story of the Kafr Qasem massacre is compelling. At first hidden from the world, it was members of the Communist Party who broke the military and information blockade in order to call attention to the horrific massacre; a detailed press release was finally published by party member Tawfiq Toubi twenty-six days after the massacre on 23 November, 1956 in Arabic, English, and Hebrew. His comrade, the distinguished Palestinian writer, Emile Habibi covered the massacre in issues of the CP organ, Al Ittihad, and in 1976 published a booklet on the subject. In one chapter, Habibi recounted the events and provided a structure whereby the chronology of events were numbered and termed “waves” of killing.

Israel’s military campaign against Egypt and the Suez started at 3pm on 29 October, 1956. One and a half hours later, at 4:30pm, the mukhtar (mayor) of Kafr Qasem was informed of an imminent curfew to begin at 5pm. Twenty-five minutes after this sudden warning, at 4:55, soldiers of the Israeli Border Police began killing anyone they found outside their home—be they man or woman, child or elder. Many were workers unaware of the curfew, as they were just then returning home. At the end of the night, forty-nine civilians lay dead on the roadways. Although each event of the massacre was nightmarish, the last one seemed to shock the villagers most of all, as fourteen women who had been olive picking were forced off a truck and shot at continuously from close range until they all fell dead over each other. The sole survivor of this wave of killing was a fifteen-year-old girl, who, when heavily wounded, lost consciousness, and lay under the corpses of the other women for most of the night. To add terror to brutal injury, the Israelis buried their bodies while their relatives were imprisoned in their homes on pain of death through the use of a twenty-four hour curfew.

A massacre is like a hammer blow that shatters a hard mass to smithereens. At first the pieces, the individuals who suffer this blow, do not all see who wields the hammer nor are they able to attack it. Anger and blame are bottled up. Painful energy flies in all directions. The town receiving the blow is shattered, broken to pieces, and as the pieces settle, loss, recrimination, shock, disbelief, and desperation emerge. Added to all this, as in the case of the Kafr Qasem massacre, is the poverty and depression resulting from a brutal military occupation.

What does a father tell his wife when he returns home alive but their eight-year old child whom she sent to warn him dies in the massacre? Why is a small girl unable to tell her mother that her father lies dead or wounded in the street except to say that dinner need not be prepared for him? Why do men and women, unable to believe their own experience, return to the scenes of the massacre to confirm its reality with those who shared it only to find death instead of fellowship? Why was the only survivor of one of the events of the massacre insensitively asked why she was the only one to survive? Why does a wounded man who had escaped, return on seeing the Israeli soldiers killing fourteen women only to be shot dead himself? Why did some whisper that the pregnant woman in her final month dropped the baby in the agony of her death?

When I first met Aishy Amer of Kafr Qasem, the beautiful scent of revolution permeated her words and manners. We had met through the internet and from her first visit to my loft she began to persuade me that, as an artist, I must do drawings of the massacre. Aishy and I eventually visited Kafr Qasem together, where she introduced me to her large family and friends and opened the way for me into a tightly knit village society made up of only five extended families. Following this first visit, she would assign her friends to help me. After interviewing some individuals several times over a period of thirteen years, they came to trust me as a friend. In fact in 2012, during my last visit to attend the annual memorial march, I found myself receiving extended interviews while members of the press were disregarded.

Along with my interviews, I conducted extensive research for historical materials and found a gold mine in the locally published magazine, Al-Shorok, each October issue of which is dedicated to the massacre. In it are countless long interviews conducted by Majd Sarsour, editor and principal of one of the town’s high schools. In general, the outside press did not match this valuable source of detailed information. It was rare to find newspaper articles that contained more than small bits of quoted information. Yet Al-Shorok allowed each individual to fully tell his or her story. Al-Shorok also insisted on detailing not only the names of victims and their ages, but also those of their children, the gender of the children, and their ages at the time of the parents’ death. In one particular article, the magazine detailed the ages of over four thousand offspring of the victims who had already given birth. An intense need to replenish the village overtook the survivors.

I came to truly respect the village, now grown into a town, regardless of its various types and admire the combination of earthy nobility, innocence, and wisdom they possessed. I learnt of the depth of pain they experienced, causing many to be unwilling to tell their stories. I learnt to value their trust and grew to understand that documentation should respectfully memorialize, avoiding sensation and spectacle.

I began drawing immediately after the first visit and continued to do so in separate periods of intense focus. As I worked and my knowledge grew, many of my initial aesthetic decisions matured. I determined that I would avoid simply showing piles of dead bodies. I would show people in their dignity at the last moments of their life. There would be no blood. I determined that the individual victims should face out towards the viewer, be in control of the aesthetic situation if not the original situation, which brought their violent end.

I began drawing in an illusionist way in the traditions of Renaissance art, but as the project progressed, I often questioned whether I perhaps should use an expressionist method. I admired Diego Rivera and thought that working in that manner, which many of the Palestinian artists of the Intifada were influenced by, might be a more modern path. However, after a lot of thought, I decided that the expressionism and semi-cubist style of Rivera did not suite the ambition of presenting people as specific individuals in documented events.

There is a paucity of visual information on the massacre, leaving written material as the basic source. Transforming verbal description and researched information into visual images presented serious problems. Words can focus on one subject and describe it accurately but not wholly. Pictures describe a scene wholly (from one point of view) but cannot show what happened just before or after. Pictures lack the specificity of time while words lack the specificity of space.

Truthful witness statements can hold up in a court of law but they lack the type of information pictures need regarding the appearance of a whole scene, information about color, light, background, relative positions of parts, and a host of other scenic details. This forced me into a certain amount of invention, which seriously conditioned my ambition to be a camera.

One of my initial inquiries was how to represent the killers, the soldiers of the Israeli Border Police who had executed the massacre. Based on things that I have seen in Palestine combined with my loathing, I made several horrifying renditions. In the end, I decided that the story was not about them and eliminated them from the drawings. However, in the final set done in 2012, I included fragments of them in outlined silhouette although I rendered their weapons carefully. By then I had researched the weapons and noted that they were semi-automatic weapons and that some of them were British made, reminding me of the part British colonialism had in arming and organizing the Zionist terrorists.

I asked for a great deal of criticism from residents of Kafr Qasem and from friends, and their opinions helped me greatly. I was not on a research mission to discover new formal languages but rather on a mission to tell a piece of Palestinian history in comprehensible visual form. I received a rating of seventy over one hundred on my drawing of the sixth wave of killing. I was flattered to have such a high grade for the man grading me, Omar Ahmad Hamdan Amer, known as Abu Naser, was the town’s historian, a man who lived his entire life immersed in the history of the massacre.

Did I meet my own challenge? An inner voice says: do it all over again and do it better. But another voice says: another way to fail is to disregard time. For now, I will be happy when my planned publication of drawings on the subject of the massacre is complete. The book will be called “Drawing the Kafr Qasem Massacre.” It will include a detailed history, a timeline, numerous witness statements, the drawings with my commentary, a roster of victims, and essays by scholars.

Below is a selection of drawings from the series with the artist’s captions:


Killing inside the village–the Essa family

During less than two hours on 29 October, 1956, Israeli Border Police killed forty-nine people in the Palestinian village of Kafr Qasem. They were mostly workers and children returning home in the evening. Most were killed on the western entrance, while inside the village it began when eight-year-old Talal Easa went out to retrieve a goat after the suddenly announced curfew. Talal’s father, Shaker, heard the shots and dashed out to his son. He was also shot. Talal’s mother, Rasmiyya, and, right after, Talal’s teenage sister, Noor, ran to their bleeding family and suffered the same fate. They remained where they fell, bleeding until morning when they were hauled off by truck to a hospital. Talal died. The grandfather, Abdallah Isaa, then ninety years old, was left alone and saw the massacre of his family. The following morning, Abdallah was found dead.


Killing in the northern fields

In the northern fields of the village, three shepherd boys were out watering the family’s flock of sheep not knowing that Israel had launched a surprise attack on Egypt just hours before, nor did they know of the curfew imposed on their village. The oldest boy, Abdallah Easa was sixteen and the youngest, Abed Easa, was nine years old. Ibraheem Easa, their uncle who was thirty-five years of age, had learnt of the curfew and left the safety of his home to bring them back. They returned immediately with Ibraheem leading. Abed and Abdallah were just behind him while the third boy, Sami Mustafa, was watching the rear of the herd. The boys were met by Israeli soldiers of the Border Police, who immediately shot and killed Ibraheem, Abed, and Abdallah. Sami saw them being shot and fell to the ground, played dead and survived.


The first wave of killing

Five minutes before the curfew, and unaware of it, four quarry workers were returning home to Kafr Qasem on bicycles. When confronted by Israeli soldiers, with whose harassment they were familiar, they reached for their identity cards. Instead, an order to “harvest them” was given. Two, Ahmad Freij, age thirty-five, and Ali Tah, age thirty, died. Both were fathers of young children. Two others, Mahmoud Freij and Abdallah Badair, managed to escape. Mahmoud was wounded in the thigh and managed to crawl to an olive tree and hide until morning.


The third wave of killing–child Fathi

The twelve-year-old shepherd boy, Fathi Easa, was leading his family’s herd of black goats home after pasture. His father was driving the herd from the rear having heard of the curfew and had come to hurry his son home. There were three weapons in the hands of the Israeli Border Police all aimed at the boy, an Uzi, a Bren, and a rifle. All were fired, and the boy collapsed and died.


The sixth wave of killing

Evening was darkening as the Israeli Border Police ordered thirteen or more workers to lineup on one side of the road. They had arrived on bicycles and a mule wagon. One of the workers, seventeen-year old Saleh Easa, had arrived with his two cousins. They had heard about the curfew and only feared a beating. When the execution style shooting began six fell dead. Saleh, wounded, playing dead, was dragged to the pile of bodies. He remained quiet, gritting his teeth in spite of extreme pain. He witnessed the rest of the massacre and later crawled to safety.


The ninth wave of killing–Implosion

Night had fallen when the truck arrived at the location of the massacre. Among the victims of the ninth wave were two men in the cab of the truck and fourteen women with two boys in the back. The driver, seeing the scattered dead, tried to escape at high speed. This interrupted the singing women, who unwittingly began to scream, thus alerting the recumbent soldiers resting at the school’s well. The soldiers ran after the truck, shot its tires and gas tank, and stopped it. Safa Sarsour, having just seen her sixteen-year-old son, Jum’a, dead on the side of the road, now witnessed her second son, fourteen-year-old Abdallah, being killed with the men. The women, some pregnant, elders and girls, pleaded for their lives. The only survivor was Hana’ Amer, fifteen years of age, who said that the women clung to each other for protection, even the two girls who had managed to escape returned to the circle. As they were being shot, they turned in a big group and one by one they fell. The soldiers continued shooting into their heads to insure their death. How does it measure western civilization when soldiers of the Israeli border police line up defenseless women—some pregnant, tired, returning home from work—and kill them with cold deliberation?

*All images copyright the artist. 


The following is an excerpt from the book The Fate of the Jews, by Roberta Feuerlicht, published in 1983. The account of the massacre differs from Halaby’s in certain small details, such as total number of victims, but otherwise is substantively the same. Likely Feuerlicht relied principally upon media accounts, whereas Halaby spoke directly to village residents—this would perhaps explain the minor discrepancies.


The Fate of the Jews

The Israelis did not work out their subjugation of the Arabs only on paper, and only after Begin was in power. On October 29, 1956, because of the Sinai War, the curfew on Israeli Arab villages near the Jordanian border was moved forward from 9 p.m. to 5 p.m. This decision was made after the villagers left for work that day, so they were unaware of it.

That evening, in the village of Kafr Kasem, the first workers to return were four men on bicycles. They were halted by the Israeli border police. When they identified themselves, the Israeli police opened fire. Two died at once; two survived by pretending to be dead.

Soon after, a wagon came with an Arab and his younger daughter, followed by two men and a boy on foot. The children were permitted to pass into the village. One of the men, seeing the bodies of the first Arabs, asked, “Why do you want to shoot us?” He was told to “shut up.” Then the three men were shot.

As others returned to the village, some were arbitrarily permitted to enter unharmed; others were just as arbitrarily murdered. By the end of the evening, forty-three Israeli Arabs were dead, including seven children and ten women. None of this happened in the heat of battle; Israelis simply stood at the entrance to a peaceful village and decided who shall live and who shall did. Some victims were killed while they lay wounded on the ground. One man was shot from behind after he was given permission to enter the village.

Israeli officials tried to keep details of the murders secret. Two weeks after the massacre at Kafr Kasem, the government said that the earlier curfew was declared “in order to protect the lives of the villagers,” and that “several villagers were hurt.” When a member of the Israeli parliament spoke of the massacre, the censor had the speech removed from the public record. For two months, Israeli newspapers were forbidden to print news of what had happened at Kafr Kasem.

But news of the massacre could not be suppressed forever. Israeli officials told the men involved that if they would plead guilty “fast and quietly” they would be given prison sentences of only two years. However, Israeli public opinion and the International Red Cross forced the government to hold a public trial.

At the trial it was revealed that the border police had been given orders to enforce the new curfew in a manner that would impress the inhabitants of all the local Arab villages: Violators were to be shot, not arrested, even though they did not know about the curfew. Several of the defendants testified that the police officer in charge had said that if some Arabs were killed it would make the task of enforcing the curfew that much easier. The officer also said he did not want any wounded, or special treatment for women and children. The police officer said he was obeying the orders of the military officer in charge; the military officer denied this.

Several of the defendants said they were just obeying orders. The Israeli judge, Binyamin Halevi, rejected this defense, saying they should have been able to recognize an “illegal” order. Halevi said that when an order has a “clear criminal character…if the eye is not blind and the heart not corrupted…the soldier is free from his obligation to obey orders and is responsible for the criminal acts.”

Some of the defendants received prison terms ranging from seven to seventeen years, but the military officer was freed with a nominal fine of the smallest Israeli coin. On appeal, all of the prison terms were reduced; one year after sentencing, the defendants were free.


(Below is an additional passage from The Fate of the Jews—concerning observations on the treatment of Palestinian prisoners by an Israeli human rights lawyer):


Langer, who often represents Palestinian suspects, has seen the inside of West Bank prisons. She has seen distinguished Palestinians—doctors, editors—thrown into solitary cells to eat off the floor and live in their own filth.

She has described crowded prison conditions, bad food, inadequate medical care. Prisoners are beaten, tortured, often on the genitals. They are given pills that bring on hysteria and hallucinations. They are hung upside down. Noxious, poisonous gases (“Made in the USA”) are thrown into their cells or sprayed into their faces. Cigarettes are stubbed out on their bodies.

Their jailers spit into their mouths and threaten to rape their wives and sisters in front of them. Some are made to stand for days in special boxes too small for them to either sit or lie down. Some are made to stand for a week or more, usually without food or toilet facilities, their heads covered with layers of bags, the hands cuffed behind their backs.

Langer has written, “Prisoners are being put to death…This crime is occurring gradually and is being covered up efficiently.”


The Fate of Author of “Fate”

By Roberta Strauss Feuerlicht

I am the unknown Jew. Just as there are monuments to the unknown soldier and the unknown political prisoner, there should be a monument to the unknown Jew. We are Jews who oppose Zionism, who deplore Israeli oppression and aggression, who fear that Judaism may not survive Israel. We are probably a majority of Jews, but no one knows this because we have been effectively intimidated and suppressed by the Zionist minority.

The degree of suppression is inconceivable in a democratic society. I wrote a book called The Fate of the Jews, which was published in August, 1983. It argues that Jewish ethics and Israeli power are incompatible; that Jewish obligations to love thy neighbor, do justice and love mercy, oppress not the stranger, are being obliterated by Israel; and that the Israelis are surviving, but not as Jews.

Attempts were made to bury the book even before publication. For example, a liberal magazine expressed interest in publishing an excerpt, the text of which apparently was given to a prominent liberal Jewish journalist. His reaction was vehement; the magazine changed its mind about the excerpt and the journalist wrote a personal letter to my agent trying to kill the book with one mighty blow. “It is a preposterous book,” he said, “easily the worst I’ve looked at in years.”

So much for Jewish liberalism. Shortly thereafter, Publishers Weekly, the bible of the publishing industry, offered a very different opinion in its prepublication review. “The book is an outcry right out of Jeremiah.” said the review. “Written with courage and clarity, Feuerlicht’s detailed analysis of what she sees as American Jewry’s embrace of a false god in the state of Israel is certain to place her book in the heart of a raging controversy.”

But I was not fated to be at the heart of a raging controversy, because you cannot hear silence. The publisher did not take out a single advertisement for the book. Many bookstores refused to carry it. In one major chain, where it had been ordered, it was on a list of books not to be reordered.

The least expensive way to promote a book is to put the author on television and radio. For a previous book on the Sacco-Vanzetti trial in the 1920’s, I was on 65 or 70 TV and radio shows in just four cities. For this more timely book on Jews and Israel—a story that is in the headlines almost every day—the publisher found no television and only eight minor radio shows in New York. Of the eight, two were cancelled and two that had been taped were not broadcast, at least not when they were scheduled.

Finally, I hired my own publicity person and though some shows did turn me down, I was booked on major TV and radio programs in Washington, Cleveland, Detroit, Boston, and Houston. I didn’t go any farther because I couldn’t afford to and because appearances cannot sell books that are not in bookstores.

I have written children’s books that received more attention than The Fate of the Jews. As far as I know, only three newspapers reviewed it, The Los Angeles Times, The Pittsburgh Press,and, under prolonged pressure, The Christian Science Monitor. The Washington Post praised the Sacco-Vanzetti book on the front page of its Sunday book review; The Fate of the Jews went unnoticed.

When all else failed, I told my story to several well known iconoclastic journalists. All were suitably indignant, all promised me their support, all were either voluntarily or involuntarily suppressed.

Jews are disturbed about Israel. I believe more of them would have read The Fate of the Jews if they knew it existed. Zionists feared the book because they were judged by Jewish standards and found wanting. They didn’t dare openly criticize or burn it because the noise or the smoke might have attracted attention. In the freest country in the world, with the aid and acquiescence of the freest press in the world, a zealous minority successfully suppressed dissent and stoned me to death with silence. The book is now out of print.


The above piece was published at Washington Report on Middle East Affairs in 1985. Feuerlicht passed away in 1991. She seems to have been a talented writer, one willing to speak the abhorrent, unpleasant truths that need to be spoken nowadays, although I’d have to say that I do disagree with her on one point when she says that “Israelis are surviving, but not as Jews.” On the contrary, Israelis today, nourished on a myth of themselves as direct descendants of the biblical Jews, see themselves as–and for all intents and purposes are–the quintessentialJews–that is to say the “Israelites,”in the Old Testament sense of the word.


Roberta Strauss Feuerlicht


I have a sneaky feeling we’ll get a comment or two telling us that Feuelicht’s writings have been “debunked.” We actually had a comment posted the other day saying that about Shlomo Sand’s history of the Khazars. It seems to be the tack taken when Jewish authors dare speak certain uncomfortable truths about who the Jews are and what they have become.

At any rate here is the video of Oudeh Hamad’s brother:

Israel isn’t the only state in the world that tortures and kills people, of course. The difference is that in other states where this occurs the savageries are not condoned by religious teachings. Judaism is unique among world religions in that it sets apart one group of people who are regarded as “chosen” and who are given license by “God” to rob and plunder and destroy any nation or group of people opposing them. I think many are now waking up to the fact that the UN made a calamitous error when it voted, in 1947, for the creation of a Jewish state. The question now is whether or not it’s possible to undo this, and if so, how to go about it. As I said above, the state of Israel needs to be peacefully dismantled, and its nuclear weapons secured, as quickly as possible. The “fate of the Jews”—indeed all of humanity—depends on it.

How Shimon Peres Stole the Nuclear Bomb with a Bluff, and Why Military Censor Doesn’t Want Israelis to Know about It

Global Research, September 23, 2016
Richard Silverstein 16 September 2016

Shimon Peres had a severe stroke two days ago and while his health has improved since he entered the hospital, at age 93, he is in the twilight of his years.  It’s appropriate to take stock of his legacy as an epochal figure who spans the founding of the State to the present day.  I can’t think of another active Israeli politician with that length of service or span of history.

When Peres dies, an entire nation will mourn him as a founding father of the state.  Someone who served it faithfully and diligently for nearly seven decades.  The accolades will pour forth.  Newscasters will show historic footage of him with his political mentor, David Ben Gurion, and intone solemnly about the deeds of the Great Man.

But, as is often the case in these matters, the truth lies elsewhere.  Peres began his career as Ben Gurion’s errand boy.  He was diligent and inventive.  What the boss needed done, he always figured out a way to accomplish.  Eventually became his chief fixer.  That’s how he was assigned the monumental task of getting Israel the Bomb.  Such a task is no small feat and it required immense amounts of grit, determination, invention, and even outright thievery.  Peres was more than up to the task.

israeli censorship nuclear bomb

Uncensored version of Wall story which describes Peres’ bluff which enabled French to circumvent international nuclear prohibition against selling uranium to Israel

From almost the first moment after the State was founded Ben Gurion aspired to create a nuclear weapon.  He saw it as his Doomsday device.  The ace he could draw from the deck if all the cards were stacked against him.  Though Israel’s actual strategic strength was quite robust, Ben Gurion suggested otherwise.  In a famous episode of that era, he’s reputed to have looked at a map of the Middle East spread upon the wall of his study and exclaimed to those around him:

“I didn’t sleep a wink last night because of this map.  What is Israel?  A single tiny speck.  How can it survive amidst this Arab world?!”

This was part and parcel of the Israeli strategy of portraying itself as the eternal victim, the weaker party to every conflict, who required moral and military support to prevent its destruction.  None of it was true.  But in the aftermath of the Holocaust, the world felt it couldn’t to take a chance that it might happen again.  That’s how Israel became little David to the Arab Goliath in the eyes of much of the world after 1948.

Though the conventional Israeli belief is that Israel’s  WMD was meant to protect Israel from imminent destruction should  it suffer a catastrophic defeat, that theory is wrong either in whole or in part.  In actuality, Israel never faced such a threat.  It always maintained military superiority over its enemies in every war from 1948 through 1967 (and after).

Ben  Gurion’s real goal in obtaining nukes was political.

He wanted to ensure Israel would never have to negotiate away the gains it made on the battlefield.  He wanted a weapon he could hold over the heads of any enemy, that would ensure he never had to renounce anything that was rightfully Israel’s (in his mind at least).  So Israel’s Bomb has enabled it to reject virtually every peace initiative offered going all the way back to 1967.  Israel’s leaders knew that the U.S. would never gamble that it wouldn’t use WMD if it had to.  So American presidents already had one hand tied behind their backs in such negotiations.  In a card game, when one party holds the ace of spades in his pocket and everyone else playing knows this, it’s not much of a game, is  it?

Israeli Opponents of the Bomb

It would be a misnomer to believe that Ben Gurion and Peres were lionized by their peers for their visionary project.  Opposition to an Israeli Bomb was strong and crossed party lines.   Among those who were against were future prime minister Levi Eshkol, Pinchas Sapir, Yigal Alon, Golda Meir, and Israel’s leading weapons developer, Yisrael Galili.  Even then IDF chief of staff Chaim Leskov opposed the Bomb.  Prof. Yeshayahu Leibowitz, in his typically prophetic fashion created an NGO that called for making the Middle East a nuclear-free zone (it was called in Hebrew “the Public Committee to Demilitarize the Middle East of Nuclear Weapons”).  It was probably the first such call anywhere in the world.  In one matter, he turned out to be wrong.  He predicted that by building the nuclear reactor Israel would tempt its enemies to bomb and destroy it.  Afterward, Lebowitz predicted, they would call Dimona: “Shimon’s Folly.”

The sheer chutzpah that Peres employed to get what he wanted was astonishing.  He played on the heartstrings of German guilt to obtain funding for the  nuclear arms project.  He recruited Arnon Milchan as a covert operative to organize a conspiracy to steal highly enriched uranium from the U.S. depository where it was stored.  Peres negotiated with the French a complex deal to build the Dimona plant, which to this day produces the plutonium for Israel’s WMD arsenal.

The defense ministry director general traveled extensively to France in those days and cultivated the entire political leadership in pursuit of the necessary agreements to build the Dimona plant.  On the very day he flew to France to sign the final deal, the government in Paris fell.  Though Ben Gurion saw Peres’ trip as wasted, the latter refused to give up.  He went to the resigning prime minister and suggested that they back-date the agreement to make it appear as if it had been signed before the resignation.  The French leader agreed.  And so, Israel’s Bomb was saved by an audacious bluff.  When someone asked Peres afterward how he thought he could get away with such a stratagem, he joked: “What’s 24 hours among friends?”

Peres facilitated outright theft as well.  If Israel waited to produce the highly enriched uranium it would need to create a Bomb on its own, it would’ve taken years longer than it did.  If it could procure the uranium by other means it would immensely speed the process.

That’s how the father of the Israeli Bomb recruited future Hollywood film producer Milchan to steal hundreds of kilos of nuclear materials from a warehouse in Pennsylvania with the connivance of American officials who were pro-Israel Jews recruited to the task.

Roger Mattson recently published a book on the subject, Stealing the Atom Bomb: How Denial and Deception Armed Israel.

This article summarizes his findings. Among them, are that a group of American Jewish scientists and engineers founded the company which likely embezzled and transferred to Israel enough material to make six nuclear bombs. Several officers of this company later became national officers in the Zionist Organization of America. A founder of the company fought in the Haganah during the 1948 War and was a protege of future Israeli intelligence chief, Meir Amit. Key figures in U.S. intelligence even suggested that the company itself was established by Israeli intelligence in order to steal U.S. materials and technological expertise in the service of Israel’s nuclear weapons project. All of this means that leaders of one of the key organizations in the Israel Lobby aided and abetted a huge national security breach which gave Israel the bomb.

If you’re a pro-Israel advocate you likely see such figures as heroes. If so, consider this: Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were executed in 1956 for doing far less harm to America’s nuclear program than these individuals did.

Israel Lobby’s Covert Fundraising Program

The WMD project was extraordinarily expensive.  The new State, saddled with huge expenses to feed and house millions of  new immigrants, had no budget to fund it.  That’s where Peres turned to wealthy Diaspora Jews like Abe Feinberg to covertly raise funds for the Israeli bomb.  Feinberg spearheaded a fundraising campaign which raised $40-million, equivalent to $260-million in today’s dollars.  Feinberg also conspired through his Democratic Party connections to secure from Pres. Johnson Israel’s right to refuse to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation pact.

Nasser announces the nationalisation of the Suez Canal

The Israeli news portal Walla describes the brilliant stratagem Ben Gurion and Peres concocted that drew France to Israel’s side in the effort to make a Bomb.  It began in 1956 with a secret meeting at a French villa outside Paris with a high-level British and French contingent.  The goals of the French and British were aligned with those of Israel, but not completely so.  The British and French wanted to give Egypt’s new firebrand leader, Gamal Nasser a black eye for nationalizing the Suez Canal and offering aid to the Algerian resistance.  They hatched a plan to attack Nasser and carve up Egypt’s strategic assets for themselves.  Israel was happy to go along for the ride.  But it had a separate goal–to garner European support for its nuclear effort.

After getting the go-ahead sign from Ben Gurion, Peres approached his French counterparts and announced Israeli agreement to join in the attack which later came to be known as Operation Kadesh.  But Israel, he told them, faced far more danger in the venture than either the British or French.  If Israel lost, its very existence could be threatened.  That’s why it needed a strategic weapon that could prevent its annihilation in the event of a disastrous defeat.

As negotiations proceeded with the French, they warned the Israelis that there were prohibited from selling them uranium under international agreements.  Peres came up with a typically brilliant and devious solution:

“Don’t sell it to us, lend it to us,” he said.  “We will return it to you after our mission is completed.”

So began the real effort to build an Israeli Bomb.  The reactor was completed in 1960 and by 1967 Israel had its first primitive nuclear weapon to use in case it lost the 1967 War.

For some strange reason, the Israeli military censor disapproved of Walla talking about Peres’ “bluff” regarding back-dating the French-Israeli nuclear agreement. In the censored version, you won’t find any reference to it. Nor will you find the story about Peres’ suggestion that the French “lend” the uranium to Israel, since it was illegal to sell it.  My guess is that with Peres’ demise likely, they preferred not to tarnish the Old Man’s reputation any more than necessary. Which raises the question: why is a censor stooping to protect Israeli politicians’ reputations rather than protecting the security of the state, which is its putative mission?”

%d bloggers like this: