Balfour, the creation of israel. Probably the most shameful part of British history and there’s been many

Despicable Balfour: A story of betrayal

 

Balfour, Britain and Israel

By Stuart Littlewood

The 2 November marks the centenary of the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which began the still-ongoing colonisation of Palestine and sowed the seeds of an endless nightmare for the Palestinian people, both those who were forced to flee at gunpoint and those who have managed to remain in the shredded remains of their homeland under Israel’s brutal military occupation. 

A movement called the Balfour Declaration Centenary Campaign is urging action and wants an apology.

We call on the international community and all peace and justice loving people to join the campaign to call on the government and parliament of the United Kingdom to:

1. Reject the Balfour Declaration, including its role as an instrument of displacement and dispossession of the Palestinian people;

2. Issue an official apology to the Arab Palestinian people for their role in issuing the Balfour Declaration and making possible the displacement and dispossession of the Palestinian people;

3. Acknowledge their historic, legal and moral responsibility for damages sustained as a result of the implementation of the Balfour Declaration

4. Institute reparations to the Palestinian people in accordance with the provisions and principles of international law, justice and equity, which guarantee the right of return of the Palestinian refugees to their homeland and the right of self-determination.

A century of ethnic cleansing and denial of Palestinian rights

In his excellent book, Blood Brothers, David Hazard charts the life of Father Elias Chacour, a remarkable Christian Palestinian who grew up on the shores of Galilee and saw his beautiful world shattered by the Israeli occupation. Like countless others, he was made a refugee in his own country.

Mr Hazard describes an encounter he had with a young Palestinian, one of millions who suffer daily persecution, harassment and humiliation at the hands of Israeli soldiers and settlers.

A seventeen-year-old girl trembling with grief and rage told me how she witnessed her teenage cousin being shot through the head by Israeli soldiers. They had been walking to school together and the soldiers were taunting him. In response he had picked up a rock. She accused me and all Americans of knowing about these daily abuses against Palestinians but not caring. I tried to tell her that most Americans do not know about these tragedies, and that we would never support those who perpetrate them. But her belief that the average American is savvy about international politics was as strong as it was naive. “Of course Americans know we’re suffering over here,” she retorted.“You’re the most powerful nation on earth. And everyone has a television. I know you know.”

Americans aren’t alone in ignorance of their complicity. British people too seem largely unaware of how tragedy was allowed to overtake the Palestinians, and how this once-peaceful province of the Ottoman Empire, renowned for its antiquities and culture, became a land scarred by conflict, where everyday the humiliation of illegal occupation stokes the fires of hatred. You cannot get in or out, or move around, without running the gauntlet of Israeli customs, baggage searches, roadblocks and checkpoints under the sneer of contemptuous, sun-glassed troops. Even in the remote countryside you’ll run into one of six or seven hundred armed checkpoints. And that’s what visitors have to put up with. Imagine what it’s like for residents.

The so-called “Israel Defence Forces” is largely made up of conscripts – men and women – teenagers drafted in and trained to use lethal force. They have a reputation for being trigger-happy. Of course, they don’t all wish to play the thug or necessarily agree with their orders.

The truth about Palestine doesn’t sit well with Britain’s now crumbling reputation for fair play. Its name has been airbrushed from maps and purged, like a dirty word, from the diplomatic lexicon. Even today the subject is only haphazardly taught in our schools. For older generations like mine it was never on the curriculum. To understand why, one must at least dip a toe into the complicated history of the last 100 years. To help readers over this hurdle, I offer this “potted” version. At least it will explain why, 10 years ago, I went to see Palestine for myself.

For centuries long our land enslaved
by Turkish kings with sharpened blade.
We prayed to end the Sultan’s curse,
the British came and spoke a verse.

“It’s World War One, if you agree
to fight with us we’ll set you free.”

The war we fought at Britain’s side,
our blood was shed for Arab pride.

At war’s end Turks were smitten,
our only gain, the lies of Britain.

Stephen Ostrander’s simple verse manages to cut through a mountain of rhetoric to the root cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

There was a Jewish state in the Holy Land some 3,000 years ago, but the Canaanites and Philistines were there first. The Jews, one of several invading groups, left and returned several times, and were expelled by the Roman occupation in 70AD and again in 135AD. Since the 7th century Palestine has been mainly Arab. During World War I the country was ‘liberated’ from Turkish Ottoman rule after the allied powers, in correspondence between Sir Henry McMahon and Sharif Hussein ibn Ali of Mecca in 1915, promised independence to Arab leaders in return for their help in defeating Germany’s ally.

At the same time, however, a new Jewish political movement called Zionism was finding favour among the ruling élite in London, and the British government was persuaded by the Zionists’ chief spokesman, Chaim Weizman, to surrender Palestine for their new Jewish homeland. Hardly a thought, it seems, was given to the earlier pledge to the Arabs, who had occupied and owned the land for 1,500 years – longer, say some scholars, than the Jews ever did.

The Zionists, fuelled by the notion that an ancient Biblical prophecy gave them the title deeds, aimed to push the Arabs out by inserting millions of Eastern European Jews. They had already set up farm communities and founded a new city, Tel Aviv, but by 1914 Jews numbered only 85,000 to the Arabs’ 615,000. The infamous Balfour Declaration of 1917 – actually a letter from the British foreign secretary, Lord Balfour, to the most senior Jew in England, Lord Rothschild – pledged assistance for the Zionist cause with apparent disregard for the consequences to the native majority. Calling itself a “declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations”, it said:

His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing and non-Jewish communities…

Balfour, a Zionist convert, later wrote:

In Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country. The four powers are committed to Zionism and Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long tradition, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now occupy that land.

There was opposition. Lord Sydenham warned:

The harm done by dumping down an alien population upon an Arab country may never be remedied. What we have done, by concessions not to the Jewish people but to a Zionist extreme section, is to start a running sore in the East, and no-one can tell how far that sore will extend.

The American King-Crane Commission of1919 thought it a gross violation of principle:

No British officers consulted by the commissioners believed that the Zionist programme could be carried out except by force of arms. That, of itself, is evidence of a strong sense of the injustice of the Zionist programme.

There were other reasons why the British were courting disaster. A secret deal, called the Sykes-Picot Agreement, had been concluded in 1916 between France and Britain, in consultation with Russia, to re-draw the map of the Middle Eastern territories won from Turkey. Britain was to take Jordan, Iraq and Haifa. The area now referred to as Palestine was declared an international zone. The Sykes-Picot Agreement, the Balfour Declaration and the promises made earlier in the McMahon-Hussein letters all cut across each other. It seems to have been a classic case of the left hand not knowing what the right was doing in the confusion of war.

Some distinguished Jews opposed a “national home” in Palestine

After the Russian Revolution of 1917 Lenin released a copy of the confidential Sykes-Picot Agreement into the public domain, sowing distrust among the Arabs. Thus, the unfolding story had all the makings of a major tragedy. Subsequent crimes – on both sides – flow from this triple-cross. The Zionist organisation asked permission to submit its proposal for Palestine to the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, hitching a ride on the British request to be granted a mandate over Palestine in order to implement the Balfour Declaration. The Zionist case included the statement that

the land itself needs redemption. Much of it is left desolate. Its present condition is a standing reproach. Two things are necessary for that redemption – a stable and enlightened government, and an addition to the present population which shall be energetic, intelligent, devoted to the country, and backed by the large financial resources that are indispensable for development. Such a population the Jews alone can supply.

Prominent US Jews opposed to this move handed President Woodrow Wilson a counter-statement objecting to the Zionists’ plan, and asked him to present it to the peace conference. It said the scheme to reorganise the Jews as a national unit with territorial sovereignty in Palestine

not only misrepresents the trend of the history of the Jews, who ceased to be a nation 2,000 years ago, but involves the limitation and possible annulment of the larger claims of Jews for full citizenship and human rights in all lands in which those rights are not yet secure. For the very reason that the new era upon which the world is entering aims to establish government everywhere on principles of true democracy, we reject the Zionistic project of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine.

Foreseeing the future with uncanny accuracy, it went on to say:

We rejoice in the avowed proposal of the Peace Congress to put into practical application the fundamental principles of democracy. That principle, which asserts equal rights for all citizens of a state, irrespective of creed or ethnic descent, should be applied in such a manner as to exclude segregation of any kind, be it nationalistic or other. Such segregation must inevitably create differences among the sections of the population of a country. Any such plan of segregation is necessarily reactionary in its tendency, undemocratic in spirit and totally contrary to the practices of free government, especially as these are exemplified by our own country.

The counter-statement quoted Sir George Adam Smith, a noted biblical scholar and the acknowledged expert on the region, who had said:

It is not true that Palestine is the national home of the Jewish people and of no other people… It is not correct to call its non-Jewish inhabitants “Arabs”, or to say that they have left no image of their spirit and made no history except in the great Mosque… Nor can we evade the fact that Christian communities have been [there] as long as ever the Jews were… These are legitimate questions stirred up by the claims of Zionism, but the Zionists have not yet fully faced them.

America, England, France, Italy, Switzerland and all the most advanced nations of the world, it said, are composed of representatives of many races and religions. “Their glory lies in the freedom of conscience and worship, in the liberty of thought and custom which binds the followers of many faiths and varied civilisations in the common bonds of political union… A Jewish state involves fundamental limitations as to race and religion, else the term “Jewish” means nothing. To unite church and state, in any form, as under the old Jewish hierarchy, would be a leap backward of two thousand years…

We ask that Palestine be constituted as a free and independent state, to be governed under a democratic form of government recognising no distinctions of creed or race or ethnic descent, and with adequate power to protect the country against oppression of any kind. We do not wish to see Palestine, either now or at any time in the future, organised as a Jewish state.

But Wilson apparently failed to put the document before the Conference.

In 1922 the League of Nations placed Palestine under British mandate, which incorporated the principles of the Balfour Declaration. Jewish immigration would be facilitated “under suitable conditions” and a nationality law would allow Jews taking up permanent residence to acquire Palestinian citizenship (in sharp contrast to the Jews-only law now operated by a dominant Israel). But the high commissioner was soon recommending a halt to Jewish immigration for fear that it would create a class of landless Arabs. That same year the British government, aware of Arab concerns that the Balfour Declaration was being interpreted in an “exaggerated” way by Zionists and their sympathisers, issued a White Paper to clarify the position.

“The terms of the Declaration referred to,” it said,

do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish national home, but that such a home should be founded “in Palestine”. In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organisation, held at Carlsbad in September 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development…

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organisation in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organisation may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status.

“It is necessary,” said the White Paper with masterly ambiguity,

that the Jewish community in Palestine should be able to increase its numbers by immigration. This immigration cannot be so great in volume as to exceed whatever may be the economic capacity of the country at the time to absorb new arrivals. It is essential to ensure that the immigrants should not be a burden upon the people of Palestine as a whole, and that they should not deprive any section of the present population of their employment.

However, the White Paper flatly denied that a promise had been made to the Arabs ahead of the Balfour Declaration.

It is not the case, as has been represented by the Arab Delegation, that during the war His Majesty’s Government gave an undertaking that an independent national government should be at once established in Palestine. This representation mainly rests upon a letter dated the 24th October 1915 from Sir Henry McMahon, then His Majesty’s High Commissioner in Egypt, to the Sharif of Mecca, now King Hussein of the Kingdom of the Hejaz. That letter is quoted as conveying the promise to the Sharif of Mecca to recognise and support the independence of the Arabs within the territories proposed by him. But this promise was given subject to a reservation made in the same letter, which excluded from its scope, among other territories, the portions of Syria lying to the west of the District of Damascus. This reservation has always been regarded by His Majesty’s Government as covering the vilayet of Beirut and the independent Sanjak of Jerusalem. The whole of Palestine west of the Jordan was thus excluded from Sir Henry McMahon’s pledge.

Nevertheless, it is the intention of His Majesty’s government to foster the establishment of a full measure of self-government in Palestine. But they are of the opinion that, in the special circumstances of that country, this should be accomplished by gradual stages…

From then on, the situation would go from bad to worse.

In 1937 the Peel Commission declared that British promises to Arabs and Zionists were irreconcilable and unworkable. Too late, Britain dropped its commitment to the Zionists and began talking about a Palestinian state with a guaranteed Arab majority and protection for minorities.

The Zionists reacted furiously. Their underground military wing, the Haganah, and other armed groups, unleashed a reign of terror in the run-up to World War II. They continued their attacks on the British after the war and tried to bring in hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees.

In 1946 they blew up the south wing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, which housed the British mandatory government, killing 91. This terrorist act was ordered by David Ben-Gurion in retaliation for the arrest of Haganah, Irgun and Stern Gang members suspected of attacks on the British. He then thought better of it and cancelled the operation but Menachem Begin, who led the Irgun, went ahead. Both Ben-Gurion and Begin, who had a big price on his head as a wanted terrorist, became Israeli prime ministers.

Throughout this period the United States was reluctant to allow Jews fleeing Europe to enter the empty spaces of North America, preferring to play the Zionist game and see them funnelled into Palestine. In 1945 the new US president, Harry Truman, offered Arabs this excuse: “I am sorry, gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands of those who are anxious for the success of Zionism; I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents.”

However, Truman was frequently exasperated by the Zionist lobby and on one occasion had a delegation thrown out of the White House for their table-thumping antics. He wrote:

I fear very much that the Jews are like all underdogs. When they get on top they are just as intolerant and cruel as the people were to them when they were underneath.

American author Gore Vidal provided an intriguing insight.

Sometime in the late 1950s, that world-class gossip and occasional historian, John F. Kennedy, told me how, in 1948, Harry S. Truman had been pretty much abandoned by everyone when he came to run for president. Then an American Zionist brought him two million dollars in cash, in a suitcase, aboard his whistle-stop campaign train. “That’s why our recognition of Israel was rushed through so fast.” As neither Jack nor I was an anti-Semite (unlike his father and my grandfather) we took this to be just another funny story about Truman and the serene corruption of American politics.

By now this monster Britain had breathed life into, was running out of control. The Arabs, tricked and dispossessed, were outraged. The collision has been fatally damaging to the West’s relationship with Islam ever since. As the violence escalated, Gandhi was moved to comment:

Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English. They [the Jews] have erred grievously in seeking to impose themselves on Palestine with the aid of America and Britain and now with the aid of naked terrorism.

With the mandate about to expire in 1948 an exhausted Britain handed over the problem to the United Nations and prepared to quit the Holy Land, leaving a powder-keg with the fuse fizzing. The newly-formed UN thought it would save the situation by partitioning Palestine into Arab and Jewish states and making Jerusalem an international city. But this gave the Jews 55 per cent of Palestine when they accounted for only 30 per cent of the population. The Arab League and the Palestinians of course rejected it.

Map 1: 1947 UN Partition of Palestine

Map of 1947 UN Partition Plan

Under the UN Partition Plan the Jews received 55 per cent of the country (including both Tel Aviv/Jaffa and Haifa port cities, the Sea of Galilee and the resource-rich Negev) although they accounted for only a third of the population (548,000 out of 1,750,000) and owned only 6 per cent of the land. The Jewish community accepted the Partition Plan; the Palestinians (except those in the Communist Party) and the Arab countries rejected it.

The UN partition of Palestine never did stand close scrutiny. At that time, as some commentators have pointed out, UN members did not include African states, and most Arab and Asian states were still under colonialist regimes. The UN was pretty much a white colonialist club. The Palestinians themselves had no representation and they weren’t even consulted.

The first vote failed to reach the required two-thirds majority: 25 for partition, 13 against and 19 abstentions. To ensure success in the second vote, a good deal of arm-twisting was applied to the smaller countries, but again it fell short. At the third attempt France was persuaded to come “on board” after the US threatened to withdraw desperately needed post-World War II aid, and on 29 November the UN voted to partition Palestine into three parts: a Jewish state on 14,000 sq km with some 558,000 Jews and 405,000 Palestinian Arabs; and an Arab state on 11,500 sq km with about 804,000 Palestinian Arabs and 10,000 Jews. Jerusalem, including major religious sites, would be a corpus separatum, internationally administered.

Map 2: Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories

Map of 1949 Israeli-Arab armistice line

By the end of the 1948 war Israel controlled 78 per cent  of the country, including half the territory that had been allocated by the UN to the Palestinians. Around 750,000 Palestinians living in what became Israel were made refugees: only 100,000 remained in their homes. More than 418 villages (two-thirds of the villages of Palestine) were systematically destroyed by Israel after their residents had left or been driven out. The Arab areas were now reduced to 22 per cent  of the country, the West Bank was taken by Jordan and Gaza by Egypt. The 1949 Armistice Line (the “Green Line”) remains the de facto boundary of the state of Israel until today. Since 1988, when the Palestinians recognised Israel within that boundary, it has been the basis of the two-state option.

This ludicrous carve-up was quickly followed by shameful incidents at Deir Yassin, Lod and Ramle. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs were uprooted from their homes and lands and to this day are denied the right to return. They received no compensation, and after their expulsion Jewish militia obliterated hundreds of Arab villages and towns. No sooner had Britain packed its bags than Israel declared statehood on 14 May 1948 and immediately set about expanding control across all of Palestine.

The following day, 15 May, is remembered by Palestinians as the Day of Al-Nakba (the Catastrophe), which saw the start of a military terror campaign that forced three-quarters of a million Palestinians from their homeland to make room for the new Jewish state. Some 34 massacres were allegedly committed in pursuit of Israel’s territorial ambitions.

An event permanently etched on the Palestinian memory is the massacre at Deir Yassin by Zionist terror groups, the Irgun and the Stern Gang. On an April morning in 1948 130 of their commandos carried out a dawn raid on this small Arab town with a population of 750, to the west of Jerusalem. The attack was initially beaten off, and only when a crack unit of the Haganah arrived with mortars were the Arab townsmen overwhelmed. The Irgun and the Stern Gang, smarting from the embarrassment of having to summon help, embarked on a “clean-up” operation in which they systematically murdered and executed at least 100 residents – mostly women, children and old people. The Irgun afterwards exaggerated the number, quoting 254, to frighten other Arab towns and villages. The Haganah played down their part in the raid and afterwards said the massacre “disgraced the cause of Jewish fighters and dishonoured Jewish arms and the Jewish flag”.

Deir Yassin signalled the ominous beginning of a deliberate programme by Israel to depopulate Arab towns and villages – and destroy churches and mosques – to make room for incoming holocaust survivors and other Jews. In any language it was an exercise in ethnic cleansing, the knock-on effects of which have created an estimated 4 million Palestinian refugees today.

By 1949 the Zionists had seized nearly 80 per cent of Palestine, provoking the resistance backlash they so bitterly complain about today. Many Jews condemn the Zionist policy and are ashamed of what has been done in their name.

UN Resolution 194 had called on Israel to let the Palestinians back onto their land. It has been re-passed many times, but Israel is still in breach. The Israelis also stand accused of violating Article 42 of the Geneva Convention by moving settlers into the Palestinian territories it occupies, and of riding roughshod over international law with their occupation of the Gaza Strip and West Bank.

But expulsion and transfer were always a key part of the Zionist plan. According to historian Benny Morris, no mainstream Zionist leader was able to conceive of future co-existence without a clear physical separation between the two peoples. David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister, is reported to have said:

With compulsory transfer we have a vast area [for settlement]… I support compulsory transfer. I don’t see anything immoral in it.

He showed astonishing candour on another occasion when he remarked:

If I were an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. We have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it is true, but 2,000 years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti- Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country.

General Moshe Dayan, hero of the 1967 war, made it known to Palestinians in the territories that “you shall continue to live like dogs, and whoever wishes, may leave, and we shall see where this process will lead.” That appears to have been the general attitude ever since.

In 1967 Israel used a number of Arab threats designed to check Zionist ambitions, including a blockade of their Red Sea port, as a pretext to launch war. In a series of pre-emptive strikes against Egypt, Syria and Jordan, Israel succeeded in doubling the area of land under its control, seizing the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the Syrian Golan Heights, violating both international law and the UN Charter, which says that a country cannot lawfully make territorial gains from war. It was reported that Israel demolished 1,338 Palestinian homes in the West Bank and detained some 300,000 Palestinians without trial.

The UN issued Security Council Resolution 242, stressing “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war” and calling for “withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict”. It was largely ignored, thus guaranteeing further discord in the region.

Israel’s most notorious prime minister, Ariel Sharon, made a name for himself in 1953 when his secret death squad, Unit 101, dynamited homes and massacred 69 Palestinian civilians – half of them women and children – at Qibya in the West Bank. His troops later destroyed 2,000 homes in the Gaza Strip, uprooting 12,000 people and deporting hundreds of young Palestinians to Jordan and Lebanon.

Then in 1982 he masterminded Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, which resulted in a massive death toll of Palestinians and Lebanese, a large proportion being children. An Israeli tribunal found him indirectly responsible for the massacre of Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps and removed him from office. But he didn’t stay in the background for long.

By the end of 1967 there were just three illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Jerusalem. By the end of 2005 the total was 177. “When we have settled the land,” the then chief of staff of the Israeli armed forces, Rafael Eitan, remarked in 1983, “all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle”.

By 2015 there were 196 illegal Israeli settlements in addition to  232 settler outposts in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, according to the Applied Research Institute of Jerusalem, and upwards of 750,000 settlers residing there.

Apartheid and occupation: “in practice there is little difference”

So what sort of person was responsible for this misery and mayhem in the Holy Land – the “running sore” Lord Sydenham predicted? At Cambridge Arthur Balfour read moral sciences (no, seriously!). Much good it did the poor Palestinian Arabs he helped dispossess.

Described as born lazy, aloof and having an attitude problem, he was convinced of his personal superiority and wished to keep the vulgar world at arm’s length. Balfour famously remarked: “Nothing matters very much, and few things matter at all.”

He had been prime minister (1902-05) and was regarded as weak. At the time of the Declaration blunder he was foreign secretary. In the words of one commentator, Balfour’s career “stretches before our eyes in a flat and uneventful plain of successful but inglorious and ineffective self-seeking”. He was said to be a man who would make almost any sacrifice to remain in office. In this case, he sacrificed the Arab homeland. In 1922 the League of Nations put Palestine under British mandate, which incorporated the principles of the Balfour’s Declaration.

How have things turned out?

John Dugard, Professor of International Law and former Special Rapporteur to the UN Human Rights Council on the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, explained on Aljazeera the differences and similarities between apartheid South Africa and apartheid Israel.

Of course, the regimes of apartheid and occupation are different. Apartheid South Africa was a state that practised discrimination against its own people. It sought to fragment the country into white South Africa and black Bantustans. Its security laws were used to brutally suppress opposition to apartheid. Israel, on the other hand, is an occupying power that controls a foreign territory and its people under a regime recognised by international law [as] belligerent occupation.

However, in practice, there is little difference. Both regimes were/are characterised by discrimination, repression and territorial fragmentation (that is, land seizures).

Israel discriminates against Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in favour of half a million Israeli settlers. Its restrictions on freedom of movement, manifested in countless humiliating checkpoints, resemble the “pass laws” of apartheid. Its destruction of Palestinian homes resembles the destruction of homes belonging to blacks under apartheid’s Group Areas Act. The confiscation of Palestinian farms under the pretext of building a security wall brings back similar memories. And so on. Indeed, Israel has gone beyond apartheid South Africa in constructing separate (and unequal) roads for Palestinians and settlers.

Apartheid’s security police practised torture on a large scale. So do the Israeli security forces. There were many political prisoners on Robben Island but there are more Palestinian political prisoners in Israeli jails.

Apartheid South Africa seized the land of blacks for whites. Israel has seized the land of Palestinians for half a million settlers and for the purposes of constructing a security wall within Palestinian territory – both of which are contrary to international law.

Dugard suggested there is sufficient evidence for a legitimate enquiry into the question of whether Israel violates the prohibition of apartheid found in the 1973 Apartheid Convention and the Rome Statute.

Sydenham’s “running sore” has been festering for a century, crippling the Middle East and turning the Holy Land into an abomination. Balfour and his fellow Zionist stooges in the corridors of British power clearly had no understanding of the true purpose and base methods of Zionism.

This is also true of present-day Christian-Zionists. Some Christian churches have rejected Zionist doctrine as false teaching that corrupts the biblical message of love, justice and reconciliation. They deplore the cosy relationship between Christian Zionist leaders and the governments of Israel and the United States that impose their pre-emptive borders and domination over Palestine. And they condemn the teachings of Christian Zionism that support those policies as they encourage racial exclusivity and perpetual war.

In other words, no Christian with a functioning brain cell should touch Zionism with a bargepole. Yet the upper echelons of our government and many Western churches are riddled with Zionist sympathisers. Unless they are smoked out, a hundred years from now an outraged civil society will still be calling for government apologies for the actions of that lunatic Balfour and his successors.

‘Let them eat precaution ?’ A recipe for social darwinism, corporate malfeasance, global terrorism …

‘Let them eat precaution ?’ A recipe for social darwinism, corporate malfeasance, global terrorism …

July 25, 2016

by Paul Matthews, poet & writer

«1 Nobel peace prize, 8 economists, 24 physicists, 33 chemists, 41 doctors» – and a partridge in a pear tree …

Israel's true friend 2015The Right Honourable Theresa May learns her lines as “Israel’s true friend”…

Her Majesty’s Government has never been a fan of the Precautionary Principle. Ever since the 23 December 1913 Federal Reserve Act and the ensuing two world wars, the magnates of the central banking system have a long established tradition of investing the lifeblood of nations in their disastrous Ponzi schemes. This is more than apparent as we sleepwalk our way towards open conflict with Russia and China and as UK and Israeli Jews jubilate over the choice of their favourite as the next British Prime Minister : a former financial consultant who, on two occasions, following in Manuel Valls’ footsteps, has pledged her undying allegiance to Zionism.

The dismal spectacle of an obsequious, flowerpot hatted Theresa May revelling in Israel’s 67th Independence Day (יום העצמאות‎‎) celebration in the heart of London at Finchley Synagogue, in April 2015, is a sure sign that Whitehall and Westminster will be throwing caution to the wind and their combined weight behind ploys to wash away sins committed in Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine etc. with more bloodletting as they devote their efforts to supporting NATO and the Jewish state’s daily ghoulish bloodfest in the Middle East.

Having read with interest the GMWatch reports on 107 Nobel laureates propagandising GM food, one could easily dwell on the moral turpitude of the snake oil salesmen and women who would have us leave our senses as they spin their treacherous web of deceit. But I will not waste too many words on the latest wheeze from the global PR Industry and the Monsanto-linked sponsorship of Golden Rice evangelists petitioning for the release to the environment of more hazardous recombinant DNA. One of them, pharmacologist and biochemist Alfred Goodman Gilman (1941-2015), would appear to have been on his deathbed when he put his signature to this underhand attack on our health, reason and dignity ! I also note that the only signatory who could be deemed an ‘authority on risk’ – namely Robert C. Merton – turns out to be co-director of American hedge fund management firm Long-Term Capital Management (LTCM) which, following the 1997 Asian financial crisis and the 1998 Russian financial crisis, lost all of its capital in less than four months ! We live in desperate times. I say this in the light of what we now know about horizontal gene transfer, dangerously compromised natural resources and what Edward Osborne Wilson, Richard Leakey and Roger Lewin write about the Holocene or Sixth Extinction.

It can be termed casuistry, deception, chicanery or dissembling. However shamelessly and deliberatelylying – to protect ‘special interest groups’ – is established practice among all who would ascend the greasy pole of our politically corrupt civilisation to the summit of what someone more knowledgeable than myself in such matters – namely sociology professor James Petras – calls the Zionist Power Configuration. As we know to our cost, we can never say with any confidence that the facts will speak for themselves, given the rate at which steps are taken to suppress them as the war mongers and gossip merchants in a big business friendly mass media work flat out to dumb down and conceal the truth. But why is the general public so easily spooked by appearances ?

Possibly people are mesmerised by the spectre of the Dr Strangeloves with their paws on the tiller of Western diplomacy. Nothing beguiles ordinary mortals more than the accoutrements of power and the paraphernalia of worldly success. Hence the bogus moral standing of the Nobel dynasty’s arms manufacturing concerns and the meretricious professorial stature of many prize winners, glaringly obvious once the 1973 Nobel Peace Prize was vouchsafed the war criminal Henry Kissinger ; a nauseous precedent hammered home by what Barack Hussein Obama and his presidency was to accomplish after he had been bequeathed the coveted trophy in 2009.

Then there’s the case of the 1986 Peace Nobelist, arch-zionist and horror storyteller Elie Wiesel whose recent death unearths again the whole sorry saga. Here’s an extract from a memorable article by Gilad Atzmon about

«the man who turned the Holocaust into a business career […] concerned only with the primacy of Jewish suffering and [who] has totally failed to transform the Holocaust into a universal message».

He continues :

«Wiesel is critical of Germany, German people and their culture. “We must not forget what civilized people once did. People raised on Kant, Fichte and Hegel. People who listened to Beethoven and read Schiller in the morning, and in the afternoon killed children and parents”. But what about those people who don’t read Kant, Fichte and Hegel, but instead read the Old Testament and Wiesel’s Shoa literature ? Do they not kill children and parents ? Do they not engage in mass killings of innocent civilians pouring white phosphorous on UNRA shelters ? Yes, they do – and for more than six decades, slightly longer than Wiesel’s Shoa …». November 04, 2012 / Gilad Atzmon http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/elie-wiesel-on-haaretz.html.

Wiesel is German for weasel. Out of respect for the nimble witted, slender-bodied quadruped, the comparison should stop there. As for the ‘expertise’ of the world’s most famous ‘Holocaust survivor’, he is the acclaimed author of an alleged “autobiographical eye-witness report” of events in Auschwitz and Buchenwald circa 1944-1945, in a lurid text which continues to be marketed and widely interpreted as the gospel truth regarding the Nazi concentration camps. It first came to light in 1956 when an 862-page manuscript in Yiddish was brought out in Argentina as the 245-page work Un di velt hot geshvign(Translation : And the world remained silent).

French Académicien, novelist and poet François Mauriac (1952 Nobel literature prize) was instrumental in getting Les Éditions de Minuit to publish in Paris their 178 page version as La Nuit in 1958 and in 1960Hill & Wang in New York put in print a 116-page translation as Night. It is appears in 30 languages and record sales of between six and ten million copies are chronicled. However eyebrows have been raised among thoughtful scholars as to the publisher and the author’s clearly elastic understanding of what notions like ‘autobiography’ and ‘veracity’ should or may signify, especially as unambiguous signs of ‘poetic licence’ in the work remain unacknowledged, primarily by the Romanian-born American Jewish professor and political activist, himself the writer of no less than 57 books, drafted mostly in French and English. As we shall soon see, for a number of observers, the epithet impostor would not be not too strong a term to characterise an internationally honoured dignitary who like, the Blairs and Clintons, was paid lavishly for his conferences and whose mortal remains are today pushing up daisies in Sharon Gardens cemetery, Valhalla, Westchester County, New York-cite_ref-43″> State.

Alongside Steven Spielberg, Elie Wiesel was one of the ten or so, mostly Jewish, celebrities and socialites, who lost millions to the Jewish American fraudster Bernie Madoff, speculating with their life savings or money from one or other of their ‘foundations’. Late in life the person whom POTUS Obama termed ‘the conscience of the world’ was tackled over glaring discrepancies in his narrative and accused of being overly economical with the truth. He kept his counsel – to the end – apparently in denial, believing he could take his secret to the grave. However alongside the tributes and obituaries in the minutes, days and weeks following his death at his home in Manhattan, the internet has been alive with questions and remarks casting doubts on the official storyline.

The above suspicion ‘Shoah filmmaker’, Claude Lanzmann – quoted a reliable eye witness, Nobel Laureate in Literature in 2002, Hungarian Jew Imre Kertész – who survived deportation to Auschwitz and Buchenwald – to infer that Elie Weisel could not have spent more than four days and four nights in Auschwitz, before moving to Buchenwald. More compelling testimony comes from another Hungarian Jew deported to both aforementioned concentration camps. Nikolaus (Miklós) Grüner writes in his personal account ‘Stolen Identity’ that the universally famous would-be deportee born in 1928 in Sighet – a town in the Carpathian mountains of northern Transylvania – was unfamiliar with Hungarian and that, for the purposes of his ‘autobiography’, he usurped the number A-7713.

Moreover according to the Auschwitz archives themselves the number A-7713 was in fact allocated to an older man on 24 May 1944. His name : Hungarian-born Jew, Lázár Wisel (né at Marmaroasieget, Hungary, 1916). With his older brother, Abraham, he was to take the young Nikolaus (Miklós) Grüner (né 4 or 6 April 1928 at Nyiregihaza, Hungary) – then aged fifteen – under his wing. The existence, dates and places of birth of all three internees are attested by documents stored at the Polish State Museum of Auschwitz-Birkenau at Oświęcim.

Nikolaus (Miklós) Grüner had every reason to remember the number A-7713. In 1986, living in Australia, he was contacted by an employee of the Swedish magazine Sydsvenska Dagbladet in Malmö and invited to meet the latest nominee for the Nobel Peace Prize – someone named Elie Wiesel. He believed at the time that he was about to meet Lázár Wisel and rejoiced at the prospect of being reunited with his old friend. The encounter, as is customary for Nobels, took place at the grand Hôtel Savojen in Stockholm in December 1986. Miklos recalls :

«…I was very happy at the idea of meeting Lázár but when I confronted the so-called “Eli Wiesel”, I was stunned to see a man I did not recognize at all, who did not even speak Hungarian or Yiddish and instead he was speaking English in a strong French accent. Therefore our meeting was over in about ten minutes. As a goodbye gift, the man gave me his book entitled “Night” of which he claimed to be the author. I accepted the book I did not know at that time but told everyone there that this man was not the person he pretended to be !».

Elie Wiesel declined to show him the tattoo on his forearm. Yet Primo Levi writes, on page 27 of the US edition

of his indelible 1947 work, Se questo è un uomo ( ‘If this is a man’), that every prisoner had to have a tattoo :

«It seems that this is the real, true initiation : only by showing one’s number can one get bread and soup». Primo Levi If this is a man Abacus 2001

Available on Youtube in 2010, but no longer, video images of the bare armed Elie Wiesel filmed for a full-length documentary in 1996 in Romania appear to reveal no tattoo at all. So the question, never answered, remains : without a tattoo how did he survive in 1944-1945 ? It seems that the indefatigable public speaker once aired his ‘tattoo’ to an Israeli journalist, who subsequently met Nikolaus (Miklos) Grüner and who, when asked, replied that he had been unable to read the number and that he did not believe it really was a tattoo.

All of which is hotly contested by associates of Elie Wiesel, like Michaël de Saint-Cheron, who deem such testimony to amount to blasphemy, but offer no proof in support of their arguments. Instead one is regaled by displays of emotional blackmail or worse, as Italy joins the long list of NATO affiliated countries that punish ‘thought crime’ with prison sentences. Legitimate criticism of the homicidal Jewish state is thus muzzled by privately orchestrated smear campaigns, prohibitively costly SLAPP type legal actions, backstairs pressure to intimidate and stifle open public debate in favour of free speech and religious tolerance for every living soul and not just for that microscopically small minority opinion seeking to bring to heel every critic of Israel.

As the French epistemologist Lucien Cerise intimates in : Neuro-pirates – Réflexions sur l’ingénierie sociale (Kontre Kulture 2016 q.v.), evidence-based inquiry has moved on to the shifting sands of devotional faith and cultural dogma. It’s a question of who’s got the power and money to inflict the cognitive dissonance, captious reasoning, hairsplitting – the Hebrew term for which is pilpul (פלפול) from “pepper,” loosely meaning “sharp analysis” – ie what underpins the massive social-engineering daily assaulting our neuronal architecture.

It will not have escaped your attention that the gloves are off ever since Hillary Clinton declared the USA was losing the global information war in 2011. The academic climate today is replete with intellectual terrorism and diligently orchestrated psychological operations (psyops), as dissident Jews and non-Jews alike are plied with accusations of antisemitism and death threats. Having to sacrifice one’s means of livelihood, in defence of one’s views is another major risk. As evinced by the experience of Nikolaus (Miklós) Grüner himself and of Norman (Ich bin Der Stürmer ?) Finkelstein, the American Jewish political scientist, activist, professor and author whose primary fields of research are Israel’s occupation of Palestine and Holocaust politics, an interest motivated by filial intimacy with the deep moral convictions and the personal ordeals of his parents both of whom survived in the Warsaw Ghetto and periods in the Majdanek and Auschwitz concentration camps.

To get a measure of the man you can watch his contribution to Defamation (Hebrew: השמצה‎‎), a powerful 2009 documentary by award-winning Israeli cinéaste Yoav Shamir. The sequences were filmed in Chicago on the shores of Lake Michigan, before Norman Finkelstein was dislodged from his DePaul University tenure, following intense pressure from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B’nai B’rith and Alan Dershowitz.

A member of the ‘Herem Club‘, whose membership includes Uriel_da_Costa, Baruch_Spinoza, Paul Eisen, Jacob Cohen, Gilad Atzmon, he authored The Holocaust Industry : Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering (2000). In this he argues that Elie Wiesel et al. have patented ‘victimhood’ as an exclusively Jewish phenomenon, capitalising on the memory of what European Jewry went through in WWII as an ‘ideological weapon’. He calls the Holocaust a ‘shakedown’ and a ‘straight-out extortion racket’ – that has milked Germany and more recently France for all they are worth – enabling Israel, ‘one of the world’s most formidable military powers, with a horrendous human rights record, [to] cast itself as a victim state’, thereby providing what is a suffocatingly self-righteous haven of National Zionism with ‘immunity to criticism’ … and a licence to kill.

Given the ‘nature of the beast’, the degree of ‘thought control’ and the vast corrupting power and influence of a tentacular Jewish lobby on US foreign and domestic policies – revealed by Norman Finkelstein himself and in a study by Professors John J Mearsheimer and Stephen M Walt (q.v. infra), self censorship – induced by an albeit genuine fear of judicial retribution – preclude a robust appraisal of the problems raised by these issues.

I argue that we need to think seriously about what many citizens – for both the best and worst possible reasons – consider a distinctly taboo subject : namely the way Jewish tribalism or identity politics and today’s obsession with pedigree and DNA are closely associated and how much cultural bias – that manacles genuine research – for example in epigenetics or environmental factors – is fostered by the élitism and funding from a minority whose religious traditions predispose them to think excessively in terms of blood ties, heredity and genetics.

People identified as Jewish Americans make up less than 2 % of the population, yet represent up to 48 % of US billionaires. It will therefore come as a surprise to nobody – as Meersheimer and Walt point out – that :

«Israel has been the largest annual recipient of direct US economic and military assistance since 1976 and the largest total recipient since World War II […] Israel is the only recipient that does not have to account for how the aid is spent, an exemption that makes it virtually impossible to prevent the money from being used for purposes the United States opposes, like building settlements in the West …».Mearsheimer and Walt pages 30-31.

While Britain’s many Labour, Conservative and LibDem Friends of Israel aren’t Jewish, Stuart Littlewood draws an alarming picture of this over-representation by the organised Jewish community in British politics :

«The Jewish Chronicle has published a list of Jewish MPs in Britain’s parliament. It names 24 – Conservatives 12, Labour 10 and Liberal Democrats two. I thought it was more. But let us for the sake of argument accept the Jewish Chronicle’s figures. The Jewish population in the UK is 280,000 or 0.46 per cent. There are 650 seats in the House of Commons so, as a proportion, Jewish entitlement is only three seats. The conclusion is pretty obvious. With 24 seats, Jews are eight times over-represented. Which means, of course, that other groups must be under-represented, including Muslims…If Muslims, for instance, were over-represented to the same extent as the Jews (i.e. eight times) they’d have 200 seats. All hell would break loose …». 21st May 2010 / Stuart Littlewood http://www.redressonline.com/2010/05/jews-eight-times-over-represented-in-uk-parliament/.

Which brings us to the messianic supremacist agenda of GMOs and the Genetic Literacy Project of GLS team leader Jon Entine whose work in my view reflects an unhealthy interest in élitist, socially divisive, ‘high tech’ quick fixes, unsafe palliative solutions – synthetic biology, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, chemical and genetic engineering – sociocidal ventures comparable to the ethnic cleansing now balkanising the Holy Lands under the aegis of Bernard Lewis and his ‘clash of civilisations’. One recalls the bloodcurdling and vindictive purple prose of Deuteronomy and Joshua. I kid you not. Fanatical hatred of Gentiles in parts of the Hebrew Bible and some Talmudic Scriptures is well documented. The GLS philosophy is likewise transhumanist in its espousal of a misanthropic, quasi-religious creed, endorsing an eradicative use of ‘life sciences’ and a deadly capital intensive precision agriculture : both highly valued WMDs in the oligarchy’s divide and rule toolbox.

The photo taken in January 2015 on the premises of the British Board of Deputies – down the road from the Emirates Stadium and Holloway Prison – of an otherwise perfectly non-Jewish Right Honourable Madame Home Secretary proclaiming she is kosher sums up the pack of lies one is expected to swallow in a day’s perusal of the world news and current affairs. France is likewise held hostage by the pro-Israel Atlanticists.

Despite the UKUSA_Agreement‘s ECHELON /Five Eyes (FVEY) and the Frenchelon system, this banana republic’s intelligence services are unable to protect inhabitants and visitors from the carnage of Paris and Nice. Just as French farming is hijacked by the big business community, government and mass media outlets are the useful idiots of a PR machine abusing the population with torrents of disinformation, islamophobia and russophobia, the unquestioning allegiance to NATO in accordance with a praetorian Loi Fabius-Gayssot.

Enacted on 13 July 1990, when the nation was in holiday mode, this law makes it a criminal offence to query the existence, nature or size of the category of crimes against humanity as defined in the London Charter of 1945, on the basis of which Nazi leaders were executed in a frenzy of ‘victor’s justice’ (Siegerjustiz) a form of lex talionis (Cf. International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1945-46 art.9). What this signifies for serious students of history is that key aspects of WWII have been sealed in a judicial vault and the key thrown away.

East of Covent Garden, south of Clerkenwell, west of Whitechapel, north of the Thames, St Paul’s Cathedral no longer stands out on the summit of Ludgate Hill. The City of London’s once historic skyline features now a bewildering array of steel, glass and concrete. Gone are the traces of The Blitz and the massive Provisional IRA truck bombs of the 1990s. The hub of Britain’s international financial services industry accommodates a very small resident population of about 7,000 and a daily influx of over 300,000 commuters on weekdays.

Its pseudo medieval coat of arms evinces a puerile infatuation with The Crusades with sword, shield, crested helmet, a Cross of Saint George, silver dragons, underlined by a 17th century Latin motto Domine nos dirige (‘O Lord, guide us’). Despite the appeal to the deity, this onshore bailiwick’s core business activity resides in maintaining and developing a global network of tax havens that plunder vast amounts of public resources.

The City resembles no other statutory body except perhaps the dual legal entity of the Vatican and the Holy See. Derided as Britain’s ‘last rotten borough’, the falsely patriotic, deeply conservative, ‘local authority’, that runs the tiny municipal enclave peripheral to London’s metropolis, brooks no external oversight. The Post-Brexit talk is of the ‘Asian pivot’ as Mexican standoffs cascade from NATO’s witches brew of containment policies on the borders of Russia, in Sudan and the South China Sea and further moves are made in the geopolitical -firstHeading2″>sphere to uncouple the debt merchants and investment banks from the reality of ordinary people’s lives to forge a global 100% unaccountable offshore economy. Communities at the business end of the Square Mile’s unpleasantly sharp practices may indeed see their high brow tormentors as servants of the Antichrist. Maybe those seeking out the Synagogue of Satan twice voiced in the Book of the Apocalypse need look no further. Either way full spectrum dominance is required to protect this global empire from the infidels and unbelievers who challenge a world order of would be divine rights authorised to trade in murder and mayhem and govern by chaos. Ezra Pound was made a political prisoner for 13 years for daring to think and say such things. Writers, economists and historians like Carroll Quigley, Eustace Mullins, Antony C. Sutton and others who refuse to play the rôle of gatekeepers to the central banking system’s japes are likewise ostracised as extremists and conspiracy theorists.

City of London arton40282-d38e8——-

Notes

«War does not determine who is right – only who is left». Attributed to Bertrand Russell (1872-1970).

Un_Di_Velt_WieselUn di velt hot geshvign … (Cf. supra)

«To make the history of antisemitism complete, omitting none of the manifestations of this sentiment and following its divers phases and modifications, it is necessary to go into the history of Israel since its dispersion, or, more properly speaking, since the beginning of its expansion beyond the boundaries of Palestine. Wherever the Jews settled after ceasing to be a nation ready to defend its liberty and independence, one observes the development of antisemitism, or rather anti-Judaism; for antisemitism is an ill chosen word, which has its raison d’être only in our day, when it is sought to broaden this strife between the Jew and the Christians by supplying it with a philosophy and a metaphysical, rather than a material reason. If this hostility, this repugnance had been shown towards the Jews at one time or in one country only, it would be easy to account for the local causes of this sentiment. But this race has been the object of hatred with all the nations amidst whom it ever settled. Inasmuch as the enemies of the Jews belonged to divers races, as they dwelled far apart from one another, were ruled by different laws and governed by opposite principles; as they had not the same customs and differed in spirit from one another, so that they could not possibly judge alike of any subject, it must needs be that the general causes of antisemitism have always resided in Israel itself, and not in those who antagonized it. This does not mean that justice was always on the side of Israel’s persecutors, or that they did not indulge in all the extremes born of hatred; it is merely asserted that the Jews were themselves, in part, at least, the cause of their own ills …». Antisemitism: Its History and Causes. Bernard Lazare Editions Léon Chailley, 1894. -Chapter One”>Chapter One: General Causes of Antisemitism https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/lazare-bernard/1894/antisemitism/ch01.htm.

(Top of page 5 in this translated edition http://solargeneral.org/wp-content/uploads/library/anti-semitism-its-history-and-causes-bernard-lazare.pdf).

French Jewish literary critic, political journalist, polemicist, anarchist, who was among the first Dreyfusards, Bernard Lazare (1865-1903) wrote the most authorative account of the causes and history of antisemitism and for that reason is treated as a pariah by today’s Jewish community.

To avoid any possible misunderstanding here is the Merriam-Webster’s dictionary simple definition of Jew :

«Someone whose religion is Judaism, who is descended from Jewish people, or who participates in the culture surrounding Judaism».

The Merriam-Webster dictionary’s full definition of Jew qualifies this with a series of subsets :

«1a : a member of the tribe of Judah

b : israelite (person who was born in or who lived in the ancient kingdom of Israel : descendant of the Hebrew patriarch Jacob ;

specifically : a native or inhabitant of the ancient northern kingdom of Israel. As opposed to the kingdom of Judah).

  1. 2 : a member of a nation existing in Palestine from the sixth century B.C. to the first century A.D.
  2. 3: a person belonging to a continuation through descent or conversion of the ancient Jewish people
  3. 4: one whose religion is Judaism …». Source : Simple and Full Definitions of Jewhttp://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Jew.

NB The Jewish calendar is lunar and Judaism should not be conflated with Talmudism. Jewish identity is awarded to anybody who converts to Judaism or whose mother is Jewish and who, as such, participates in the secular or religious culture arising from Jewish history and Judaism. Matrilineal descent still is the rule within Orthodox Judaism, which believes that anyone with a Jewish mother is endowed with an irrevocable Jewish status. Note that ‘born-again Londoner’ Gilad Atzon has renounced both his Israeli citizenship and his Jewishness. He has also abandoned all hope of ever being reunited with his foreskin ! Wth the emergence of Jewish denominations, opinion within the wider Jewish community is divided over the question of matrilineal and patrilineal descent, with Reform Judaism in the USA officially adopting a bilineal policy since 1983.

*********

Les causes cachées de la guerre du Donbass (Ukraine) Allbright et Soros contre la Russie : 5 milliards de dollars investis depuis 1991. Emmanuel Leroy qui est le président de l’association humanitaire Urgence Enfants du Donbass,analyse ici les causes profondes de la guerre du Donbass et de la déstabilisation de l’Ukraine, prélude à la déstabilisation de la Russie, que l’oligarchie anglo-américaine prépare depuis des décennies, voire des siècles. 125 juillet 2016 http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Les-causes-cachees-de-la-guerre-du-Donbass-Ukraine-40442.html.

May vows to stop tax avoidance … while her husband profits from Amazon & Starbucks

13 July 2016 https://www.rt.com/uk/350901-theresa-may-husband-taxes/.

The Rt. Hon Theresa May Home Secretary – 22nd April 2015 – Yom Ha’atzmaut 5775, London.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75bfKQLUaUY&feature=youtu.be Filmed by Torah Digital Bnei Akiva UK

Theresa May Performs The Pre Traumatic Stress January 19, 2015 / Gilad Atzmon

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2015/1/19/theresa-may-performs-the-pre-traumatic-stress

At Last, a Jewish Prime Minister July 11, 2016 / Gilad Atzmonhttp://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2016/7/11/at-last-a-jewish-prime-minister.

«רה”מ הבריטית הבאה: “תמיד אתמוך בישראל» http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4826908,00.html 11July 2016

Le serment d’allégeance de Theresa May à Israël Le futur Premier ministre britannique a appliqué la “méthode Valls” 11 juillet 2015

http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Le-serment-d-allegeance-de-Theresa-May-a-Israel-40385.html.

Times of Israel May versus Leadsom : Who gets the community’s vote ? July 5, 2016http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:vqqgujHVxT0J:jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/may-versus-leadsom-who-gets-the-communitys-vote/. Rebecca Pinnington.

Pro-GMO campaign exploits Nobel laureates to attack Greenpeace and fool the people Claire Robinson 30 June 2016

http://www.gmwatch.org/news/latest-news/17077-pro-gmo-campaign-exploits-nobel-laureates-to-attack-greenpeace-and-fool-the-people.

107 Nobel Laureate Attack on Greenpeace Traced Back to Biotech PR Operators by Jonathan Latham PhD July 1, 2016

https://www.independentsciencenews.org/news/107-nobel-laureate-attack-on-greenpeace-traced-back-to-biotech-pr-operators/.

Don’t Eat the Yellow Rice : The Danger of Deploying Vitamin A Golden Rice by Ted Greiner, PhD July 11, 2016

https://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/dont-eat-the-yellow-rice-the-danger-of-deploying-vitamin-a-golden-rice/.

Richard Leakey and Roger Lewin, The Sixth Extinction : Patterns of Life and the Future of Humankind, (Anchor, 1996). In The Future of Life (Vintage, 2002), Harvard biologist, Edward Osborne Wilson, who founded the discipline of sociobiology and first coined the term biodiversity, argues tha,t at the current rate of human interference in the biosphère, half the planet’s remaining species will be gone by mid-century.

*********

Lanzmann, Finkielkraut et Lévy réagissent à la mort du menteur Elie Wiesel L’escroc à la Shoah, pavé dans la marre du communautarisme juif

4 July 2016 https://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Lanzmann-Finkielkraut-et-Levy-reagissent-a-la-mort-du-menteur-Elie-Wiesel-40261.html.

Grüner Nikolaus ©2005-2006 Stolen Identity printed in Swedenhttp://www.nazigassings.com/PDFs/StolenIdentity2.pdf.

3 July 2016 -63943650956674880251″>Elie Wiesel est morthttp://robertfaurisson.blogspot.fr/2016/07/elie-wiesel-est-mort.html.

17 October 1986 -10108616216624575051″>A Prominent False Witness: Elie Wieselhttp://robertfaurisson.blogspot.fr/1986/10/a-prominent-false-witness-elie-wiesel.html.

17 octobre 1986 Un grand faux témoin : Elie Wiesel http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.fr/1986/03/un-grand-faux-temoin-elie-wiesel.html.

29 juin 1993 -68180305653085006371″>Un grand faux témoin : Élie Wiesel (Suite)http://robertfaurisson.blogspot.fr/1993/06/un-grand-faux-temoin-elie-wiesel-suite.html.

Blanrue : « Je n’ai jamais surpris Faurisson en flagrant délit de fraude ou de mensonge ! -yiv8608005257yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467895974766_54221″>Questions à Paul-Éric Blanrue, réalisateur du documentaire «-yiv8608005257yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467895974766_54231″>Un Homme» (Par Rachid Guedjal pour Algérienetwork)-yiv8608005257yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467895974766_55431″> octobre 2011 http://algerienetwork.com/entrevue/blanrue-je-nai-jamais-surpris-faurisson-en-flagrant-delit-de-fraude-ou-de-mensonge/. Blanrue poursuivi par la LICRA pour “contestation de crimes contre l’humanité” 2 mars 2012 http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Blanrue-poursuivi-par-la-LICRA-pour-contestation-de-crimes-contre-l-humanite-10693.html.

Paul Rassinier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Rassinier.

Faussaires du sport Par E&R Midi-Pyrénées 29 décembre 2012

http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Faussaires-du-sport-15629.html.

Chabanais – 1944: la part d’ombre des maquisards Par Jean-François BARRÉ 08 août 2014

http://www.charentelibre.fr/2014/08/04/1944-la-part-d-ombre-des-maquisards,1908180.php,

20 April 1987-41442593216257948251″> Pierre Vidal-Naquet juge Elie Wieselhttp://robertfaurisson.blogspot.fr/1987/04/pierre-vidal-naquet-juge-elie-wiesel.html.

Les fabuleuses aventures d’Elie Wiesel 3 juillet 2016 https://herveryssen.wordpress.com/2016/07/03/les-fabuleuses-aventures-delie-wiesel/.

-post-19581″> Elie Wiesel Knows Soviet “Liberators” Destroyed the Birkenau Crematoriums, Carolyn Yeager

May 10, 2012 http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/tag/un-di-velt-hot-geshvign/,

Quel procès pour ceux qui mettent Elie Wiesel en procès ? Michaël de Saint-Cheron 11 mars 2013

http://laregledujeu.org/2013/03/11/12685/quel-proces-pour-ceux-qui-mettent-elie-wiesel-en-proces/.

Elie Wiesel n’a pas le tatouage d’Auschwitz qu’il prétend avoir-yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467642178580_121691″> 24 décembre 2012, -yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467642178580_121701″> Auteur : -yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467642178580_121711″>-yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467642178580_121721″>Jean-yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467642178580_121731″>-yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467642178580_121741″> Robin 237 commentaires

-yiv0801716699yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467636753265_553221″>-yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467642178580_120741″>http://www.enquete-debat.fr/archives/elie-wiesel-na-pas-le-tatouage-dauschwitz-quil-pretend-avoir-94416.

2010 Elie Wiesel’s House of Lies Is Crashing – Truth no defence – Is Elie Wiesel “The Most Credible Living Witness
to Holocaust?” By Carlo Mattognohttp://www.adelaideinstitute.org/HomePage28April2009/wiesel_crashing_10.htm.

Octobre 30, 2012 Alain Soral clash Jean Robin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_L6A6E-i0-E.

Novembre 8 2012 -eow-title”>sur la pensée “pilpoul” Jean Robin, journaliste écolohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_ahhxMeXZs.

-eow-title1″> Septembre 14, 2013 Alain Soral interrogé par Jean Robin PART 1https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoiu27r6dQU.

Septembre 14, 2013 Alain Soral interrogé par Jean Robin PART 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnwNA9lGSRA.

Elie Wiesel, escroc à la Shoah Un cas isolé ? 4 jillet 2016 http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Elie-Wiesel-escroc-a-la-Shoah-40254.html.

Palestine occupée : -yiv0574589189yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467749919029_3717″>-yiv0574589189yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467749919029_3713″>La zone grise : Israël et la Palestine sous le regard de Primo Levi et de Kafka 3 juin 2007

http://www.alterinfo.net/La-zone-grise-Israel-et-la-Palestine-sous-le-regard-de-Primo-Levi-et-de-Kafka_a9012.html.

Is it time to call Ken Waltzer a fraud ? By Carolyn Yeager copyright 2013 Carolyn Yeager Updated April 7th 2013

http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/is-it-time-to-call-ken-waltzer-a-fraud/. Posted on June 11, 2013 Elie Wiesel Was Not in Buchenwald” Made Simple http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/elie-wiesel-was-not-in-buchenwald-made-simple/.

Une lettre inédite de Primo Levi sur la Shoah dévoilée Par Sandrine Szwarc Le 27/01/2015 Rubrique Monde juif http://www.actuj.com/2015-01/monde-juif/1386-une-lettre-inedite-de-primo-levi-sur-la-shoah-devoilee In Previously Unknown Letter, Primo Levi Explains the Holocaust to a Young Girl ‘Rather than accusing them of cruelty, I would accuse the Germans of these days of selfishness, of being indifferent and intentionally ignorant’. Anna Momigliano Jan 27, 2015http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/news/.premium-1.639195.

Newly Unearthed Version of Elie Wiesel’s Seminal Work Is a Scathing Indictment of God, Jewish World In Wiesel’s uncensored Hebrew ‘Night’ manuscript, unveiled here for the first time, the author expresses desire to take revenge on the Hungarians, lashes out at fellow Jews and describes sexual scenes from the train to Auschwitz. Ofer Aderet May 01, 2016 http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/news/.premium-1.717093?.

Haaretz Obituary for Elie Wiesel : Author and human rights activist made perpetuating the memory of the Shoah his life’s work By Ronen Shnidman Jul 02, 2016 http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.575072

-eow-title2″> [Extrait] Alain Soral sur Elie Wiesel, escroc à la Shoah – Entretien de janvier 2013

ERTV Officiel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKjBTbuM_9k.

-eow-title3″> Nikolaus Grüner reveals his tattoo on American TV in 2008 !https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCF9NcJMWdg.

-eow-title4″> Elie Wiesel, the fake survivor of Auschwitz Nikolaus Miklos Gruner 9 March 2016https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HlCwoJMBDI.

-eow-title5″> Elie Wiesel & the Holocaust Fraud Carolyn Yeager Jan 12 2016https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTV0a_sJFbU.

Elie Wiesel, “conscience du monde” ? Spéculer avec l’argent d’une œuvre caritative, de la “grandeur d’âme” ? 6 juillet 2016

https://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Elie-Wiesel-conscience-du-monde-40290.html Elie Wiesel, plus que l’ombre d’un doute Elie Wiesel

était-il désintéressé ? Christophe Servan http://www.bvoltaire.fr/christopheservan/elie-wiesel-plus-que-lombre-dun-doute,269124.

Auschwitz Survivor Claims Elie Wiesel Was an Impostor

July 2, 2016 http://www.henrymakow.com/translated_from_the_hungarian.html.

Scoop : Elie Wiesel serait un imposteur sur son passé d’holocauste 1 décembre 2011

http://rvlations.forum-actif.info/t520-scoop-elie-wiesel-serait-un-imposteur-sur-son-passe-d-holocauste.

Elie Wiesel Levels Scorn at Madoff By Stephanie Strom February 26, 2009http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/27/business/27madoff.html?_r=0.

Elie Wiesel on Losing His Life Savings in Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi Scheme http://www.oprah.com/own-super-soul-sunday/elie-wiesel-on-losing-his-life-savings-to-bernie-madoff-video .

10 Celebrities who were Victims of Bernie Madoff’s $50B Ponzi Scheme Posted by Staff Reporter (media@realtytoday.com) on Sep 21, 2015 http://www.realtytoday.com/articles/36921/20150921/10-celebrities-who-were-victims-of-bernie-madoffs-50-b-ponzi-scheme.htm.

Grüner False Identity Lawsuit Against Elie Wiesel Set For January 24 in Budapest by Carolyn Yeager Myklos Grüner will finally get his day in court ! 18 November 2011http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/gruner-false-identity-charge-against-wiesel-set-for-january-24-in-budapest/.

Proof that the man in the famous Buchenwald photograph is NOT Elie Wiesel. Four men in bunk by Carolyn Yeager September 12, 2011 http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/EW_four-men-in-bunk.pdf. Gigantic Fraud Carried Out for Wiesel Nobel Prize

by Carolyn Yeager September 12, 2011 http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/gigantic-fraud-carried-out-for-wiesel-nobel-prize/.

Elie Wiesel has said under oath that he has one, and that it is number A7713.

http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/the-evidence/the-tattoo/where-is-elies-tattoo/,

New (old) pictures come to light in wake of Elie Wiesel’s death by Carolyn Yeager 2016

http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/new-old-pictures-come-to-light-in-wake-of-elie-wiesels-death/.

9 nov. 2015 – Show us a tattoo darn it ! Carolyn Yeager http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/show-us-a-tattoo-darn-it/.

Comment le protégé de Hitler a commencé à travailler pour le Mossad 21/06/2016 La revue “Sang-froid” raconte l’incroyable histoire d’Otto Skorzeny, ancien militaire SS devenu agent des services de renseignements israéliens… (Cf. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Skorzeny).

http://www.lepoint.fr/monde/comment-le-protege-de-hitler-a-commence-a-travailler-pour-le-mossad-21-06-2016-2048341_24.php.

********

«The Hebrew term pilpul (Hebrew: פלפול, from “pepper,” loosely meaning “sharp analysis”) refers to a method of studying the Talmud through intense textual analysis in attempts to either explain conceptual differences between various halakhic rulings or to reconcile any apparent contradictions presented from various readings of different texts.-cite_ref-11″>[1] Pilpul has entered English as a colloquialism used by some to indicate extreme disputation or casuistichairsplitting …». https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilpul.

Italie : le révisionnisme devient un délit Jusqu’à six ans de prison, au nom de la liberté d’opinion …

9 juillet 2016 http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Italie-le-revisionnisme-devient-un-delit-39817.html.

Neuro-pirates : réflexions sur l’ingénierie sociale (Lucien Cerise) in culture by ex-libris 14 avril 2016

http://www.medias-presse.info/neuro-pirates-reflexions-sur-lingenierie-sociale-lucien-cerise/52765,

http://www.kontrekulture.com/produit/neuro-pirates-reflexions-sur-l-ingenierie-sociale,

Compte-rendu de la conférence-débat de Lucien Cerise au Forum du FNJ Paris … Lucien Cerise, penseur de la dissidence, auteur de l’essai Gouverner par le chaos … Janvier 2014http://www.fnjeunesse.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Compte-rendu-Lucien-Cerise-3.pdf.

Argumenter contre le transhumanisme – Conférence de Lucien Cerise en Normandie 7 juillet 2016 vidéos en deux parties

http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Argumenter-contre-le-transhumanisme-Conference-de-Lucien-Cerise-en-Normandie-40291.html.

Hillary Clinton declares international information war 2 March, 2011https://www.rt.com/news/information-war-media-us/.

Gilad Atzmon: The Herem Law in the context of Jewish Past and Present -yui_3_17_2_1_1468155356174_3551″>July 16, 2011-yui_3_17_2_1_1468155356174_3541″> / -yui_3_17_2_1_1468155356174_3531″>Gilad Atzmon

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/gilad-atzmon-the-herem-law-in-the-context-of-jewish-past-and.html,

Herem : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herem_(censure).

Judith Butler : «Malgré mon désaccord avec Israël, je ne peux renoncer à mon identité juive» Par Sylvain Bourmeau — 6 décembre 2013

http://www.liberation.fr/planete/2013/12/06/malgre-mon-desaccord-avec-israel-je-ne-peux-renoncer-a-mon-identite-juive_964713.

The Holocaust Industry https://wikispooks.com/w/images/4/48/The_Holocaust_Industry.pdf.

Norman Finkelstein http://normanfinkelstein.com/ /// https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein.

Book Calling Holocaust a Shakedown Starts a German Storm Roger Cohen February 8, 2001

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/08/world/book-calling-holocaust-a-shakedown-starts-a-german-storm.html.

-eow-title6″> Norman Finkelstein in “Defamation” April 12, 2010 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcWIaYJGlOQ.

Defamation (2009) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation_(film).

Checkpoint https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Checkpoint_(2003_film).

Yoav Shamir https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoav_Shamir.

19 January 2015 Norman Finkelstein: Charlie Hebdo is sadism, not satire World renowned political science professor says he has ‘no sympathy’ for staff at Charlie Hebdo By Mustafa Caglayanhttp://aa.com.tr/en/politics/norman-finkelstein-charlie-hebdo-is-sadism-not-satire/82824.

Pour le rôle de la SNCF dans la Shoah, Paris va verser 100 000 euros à chaque déporté américain -publisher”>Le Monde.fr avec AFP | 05.12.2014

http://www.lemonde.fr/ameriques/article/2014/12/05/etats-unis-paris-va-indemniser-les-victimes-de-la-shoah-transportees-par-la-sncf_4535530_3222.html.

La SNCF versera 60 millions de dollars pour indemniser les victimes de la Shoahhttp://www.latribune.fr/actualites/economie/international/20141205trib0ff2f80c4/la-sncf-versera-60-millions-de-dollars-pour-indemniser-les-victimes-de-la-shoah.html.

Left Forum 2016 – A Dialogue on Israel and Palestine with Tariq Ali and Norman Finkelstein On Tuesday, May 24th, 2016

http://normanfinkelstein.com/2016/05/24/left-forum-2016-a-dialogue-on-israel-and-palestine-with-tariq-ali-and-norman-finkelstein/.

********

48 Percent Of U.S. Billionaires Are Jewish 29 July 2013 http://politicsinn.com/48-percent-of-u-s-billionaires-are-jewish/.

The Israel Lobby and US foreign policy (2000) John J. Mearsheimer, Stephen M. Walthttp://mearsheimer.uchicago.edu/pdfs/IsraelLobby.pdf.

-eow-title9″> What Does it Mean to be a Friend of Israel ? Anthony Lawson Published May 11, 2014https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhwW9JFEGkI.

Conservative Friends of Israel http://powerbase.info/index.php/Conservative_Friends_of_Israel.

Labour Friends of Israel http://powerbase.info/index.php/Labour_Friends_of_Israel.

LibDem Friends of Israel http://powerbase.info/index.php/Liberal_Democrat_Friends_of_Israel.

U.S. Policy in Syria : An Interview with VA Senator Richard Black Published on May 6, 2016 -eow-description1″>EIR’s Jeff Steinberg interviews Virginia State Senator Richard Black on his recent trip to Syria and Lebanon. The two discuss the resilience of the Syrian people, the impact of U.S. sanctions on Syria, and the overall U.S. and Western strategy of “regime change”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ivZKHE-STk.

Robert Fisk – Life after ISIS (2016) UCD – University College Dublin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ivZKHE-STk. May 6, 2016.

Collaboration : L’Autorité palestinienne arrête des militants du mouvement BDS

10 juin 2014 http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Collaboration-25939.html.

The Extraordinary Trial of Arthur Topham November 08, 2015 / Gilad Atzmon

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2015/11/8/the-extraordinary-trial-of-arthur-topham.

The Expert Witness – Part 1 November 09, 2015 / Gilad Atzmon

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2015/11/9/the-expert-witness-part-1.

Gilad Atzmon’s Index and topics November 10, 2015 / Gilad Atzmon

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2015/11/9/gilad-atzmons-index-and-topics#_ftn1.

********

The Jewish Religion : Its Influence Today Formerly titled The Plot Against Christianity

Fourth edition 1983 revised with index http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/jriit.pdf.

From The Jewish Religion : Its Influence Today by Elizabeth Dilling

III. The Talmud and Bible Believers http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/chapt03.html#T163.

Babylonian Talmud : Tractate Gittin -57a1″>Folio 57a http://www.come-and-hear.com/gittin/gittin_57.html.

Elizabeth Dilling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Dilling.

ERTV s’est entretenu avec Gilad Atzmon chez lui à Londres sur l’attitude des premiers sionistes vis-à-vis du Judaïsme et des Juifs (10 mars 2016) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C2belnQSEI&feature=youtu.be Gilad Atzmon : “Le sionisme fut d’abord conduit par un esprit athénien” (French subtitles) Dans la première partie de cet entretien réalisé pour ERTV par l’association «Les Amis d’Alain Soral à Londres», le jazzman britannique d’origine israélienne Gilad Atzmon revient sur la tentative des premiers sionistes de «réinventer le judaïsme». 12 juillet 2016

http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Gilad-Atzmon-Le-sionisme-fut-d-abord-conduit-par-un-esprit-athenien-40398.html.

********

«Jon Entine is a corporate propagandist and pseudo-journalist who utilizes his media savvy to promote the opinions and positions of chemical corporations, by posing as an independent journalist. Entine has multiple, documented ties to biotech companies Monsanto and Syngenta, and plays a key propaganda role via another industry front group known as the American Council on Science and Health, a thinly-veiled corporate front group that Sourcewatch describes as holding “a generally apologetic stance regarding virtually every other health and environmental hazard produced by modern industry, accepting corporate funding from Coca-Cola, Kellogg, General Mills, Pepsico, and the American Beverage Association, among others». Source : http://www.truthwiki.org/jon_entine/ who sourced their info here :http://gmwatch.org/news/latest-news/16722-jon-entine-the-chemical-industry-s-master-messenger who reproduced this : http://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/jon-entine-the-chemical-industrys-master-messenger/.

 

Meet Jon Entine: Pro-Monsanto GMO activist and pro-Bill Gates activist Posted on July 14, 2013 by The Refusers

Meet Jon Entine: Pro-Monsanto GMO activist and pro-Bill Gates activist

The Making of an Agribusiness Apologist Tom Philpott-dateline1″> February 24, 2012

http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2012/02/atrazine-syngengta-tyrone-hayes-jon-entine.

Jon Entine: The Chemical Industry’s Master Messenger February 16, 2016 by Gary Ruskin

http://usrtk.org/hall-of-shame/jon-entine-the-chemical-industrys-master-messenger/.

Genetic Literacy Project http://www.truthwiki.org/genetic-literacy-project/. A sample of Jon Entine’s anthropologically disruptive output :

Taboo : Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We’re Afraid to Talk About It, 2000,ISBN 1-58648-026-X

Let Them Eat Precaution : How Politics is Undermining the Genetic Revolution, 2006, ISBN 0-8447-4200-7

Abraham’s Children: Race, Identity and the DNA of the Chosen People, 2008, ISBN 0-446-58063-5

Scared to Death: How Chemophobia Threatens Public Health, 2011, ISBN 978-0-578-07561-7

Crop Chemophobia: Will Precaution Kill the Green Revolution? 2011, ISBN 978-0-8447-4361-5

La stratégie du choc des civilisations (Youssef Hindi et Jean-Michel Vernochet) 14 juillet 2016

La stratégie du choc des civilisations (Youssef Hindi et Jean-Michel Vernochet)

choc-civilisations

********

Deconstructing Russophobia June 10, 2016 Caroline Brown https://off-guardian.org/2016/06/16/deconstructing-russophobia/

36 Comments, Also published here June 17, 2016 : http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/deconstructing-russophobia/ri15031.

Unworthy victims: Western wars have killed four million Muslims since 1990 Nafeez Ahmed Wednesday 8 April 2015

http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/unworthy-victims-western-wars-have-killed-four-million-muslims-1990-39149394.

Bank for International Settlements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_for_International_Settlements.

Special Drawing Rights (Currency code XDR, also abbreviated SDR) are supplementary foreign exchange reserve assets defined and maintained by the IMF. From November 2015 onwards, the SDR/XDR basket has consisted of the following five currencies : US Dollar 41.73% ; Euro 30.93% ; Chinese Yuan 10.92% ; Japanese Yen 8.33% ; British Pound 8.09%.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_drawing_rights.

24 May 2016 City firms switching from Tories to UKIP says Nigel Farage Companies are sick of the ‘unending blizzard’ of regulation coming out of Brussels, says Nigel Faragehttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/10079115/City-firms-switching-from-Tories-to-UKIP-says-Nigel-Farage.html. 24 June 2016 Brexit : What the world’s papers sayhttp://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36619254,

8 juillet 2016 Les USA arborent leurs forces en mer de Chine méridionale avec des bâtiments de guerre et des avions militaires

L’arbitrage sur la mer de Chine méridionale par Zheng Ruolin http://www.legrandsoir.info/l-arbitrage-sur-la-mer-de-chine-meridionale.html.

31 October 2011 George Monbiot The medieval, unaccountable Corporation of London is ripe for protest

Working beyond the authority of parliament, the Corporation of London undermines all attempts to curb the excesses of finance

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/corporation-london-city-medieval.

‘NOT for the immature ! Zionist Antichrist will rule the NWO’ Aug 1, 2011https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oq0_n7ZBX_c. ‘Eustace Mullins was the most dangerous man in the world’ according to FBI director Hoover. He found out too much that people in power would prefer to remain hidden so they could continue their dirty work unhindered. Author of The Secrets of The Federal Reserve (1953) he speaks of Ezra Pound’s four protégés, three of them becoming Nobel Literature Prize winners : WB Yeats (1923), Ernest Hemingway (1954). TS Eliot (1948) James Joyce. Predictably, because of what he revealed about ‘centralised banking’, he is pigeonholed as an ‘American antisemitic writer and Holocaust denier’.

The Secrets of the Federal Reserve – the London Connection, First published as Mullins on the Federal Reserve (1952-1953)

Reprinted, 1983. http://arcticbeacon.com/books/Eustace_Mullins-SECRETS_of_the_Federal_Reserve_Bank.pdf (326 pages) .

Les Secrets de la Réserve Fédérale par Eustace Mullins Préface de Michel Drac Traduction : Jean-François Goulon
Editeur : le retour aux sourceshttp://questionscritiques.free.fr/edito/les_secrets_de_la_reserve_federale_291110.ht. (436 pages)

Eustace Mullins : The Curse of Canaan: A Demonology of History Revelation Books, Staunton, Virginia, 1987, 242 pages,

https://archive.org/stream/EustaceMullins-TheCurseOfCanaanADemonologyOfHistory1987#page/n5/mode/2up..

Anthony C Sutton : The Best Enemy Money Can Buy (1986) http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/best_enemy/index.html.

Anthony C Sutton : Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development (in three volumes : 1968 , 1971, 1973).

-eow-title10″>Wall Street et l’ascension d’Hitler – Antony C. Sutton STFRhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S12LfqeT00w.

-eow-title11″> Antony Sutton: Wall Street & the rise of Hitler 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sCpsq55uic.

Antony Sutton: Wall Street & the rise of Hitler 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3MSX_YM1Gc.

Antony Sutton: Wall Street & the rise of Hitler 3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYzXp2eUGz8.

Antony Sutton: Wall Street & the rise of Hitler 4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abZp6MkSFx0.

Antony Sutton: Wall Street & the rise of Hitler 5 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38burerNKB8.

AC Sutton The Federal Reserve Conspiracy, Common Sense, Union, New Jersey, 1954, 144 pages

http://usawealthpartners.com/Federal-reserve-conspiracy-by-antony-sutton.pdf (115 pages).

Carroll Quigley : The Anglo-American Establishment : From Rhodes to Cliveden (Books in Focus 1981)

http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/The_Anglo-American_Establishment.pdf (354 pages).

Epilogue

«To come into the world is not a great deal for most of us. No questions asked and no entry permit to be agreed, but the actual ceremony that is waiting for one, can make one or do one in. But sometimes the delivery gets out of balance and then one can get the shortest straw and be sentenced to bear the Jewish faith. That is when the trouble starts. Unfortunately one can’t turn back, one can only proceed to bear the sentence that is one for all and all for one, which makes one to be a bloody Jew». The Papercut Silhouette of my Life Nikolaus Grüner A-11104 (Auschwitz) 120762 (Buchenwald) Stolen Identity ©2005-2006 Stockholm printed in Sweden http://www.nazigassings.com/PDFs/StolenIdentity2.pdf.*

To put things into perspective you really need to see how Jews at the legislative branch of the Israeli government are unable to control themselves when confronted by a feisty Palestinian Arab Israeli Knesset Member -firstHeading”>Haneen Zoabi (حنين زعبي) who was on board the MV Mavi Marmarain May 2010 where she says she witnessed two wounded passengers bleed to death after the Israelis refused to provide requested medical aid.

The One and Only Haneen Zoabi (May god bless her) -more-174881″>Israeli MPs try to assault Haneen Zoabi :

June 30th, 2016 ttp://normanfinkelstein.com/2016/06/30/the-one-and-only-haneen-zoabi-may-god-bless-her/.

Knesset Members Attack Haneen Zoabi After Gaza Flotilla Jun 7, 2010 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsrHms0RhSc.

July 29th 2014 Hanin Zoabi suspended from Knesset for six months Balad MK who is under investigation for incitement is banned by ethics committee from participating in debateshttp://www.timesofisrael.com/hanin-zoabi-suspended-from-knesset-for-six-months/.

Nationalist MK Hotovely VS. Arab MK Zoabi Arutz Sheva TV Jun 28, 2011https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlzyp8jJMO8.

*Traduction : «Venir au monde n’est pas une affaire compliquée pour la plupart d’entre nous. Pas de questions posées et aucune autorisation d’entrée à convenir, mais la cérémonie réelle qui nous attend, peut nous faire ou defaire. Mais parfois, la livraison peut créer un déséquilibre, puis on peut obtenir la plus courte paille et être condamnés à supporter la foi juive. C’est alors que les ennuis commencent. Malheureusement, on ne peut pas revenir en arrière, on ne peut que procéder à supporter la peine qui est un pour tous et tous pour un, ce qui nous rend le statut d’un foutu Juif».

La silhouette de ma vie découpée dans du papier. Nikolaus ou Miklos Grüner A-11104 (Auschwitz) 120762 (Buchenwald) Stolen Identity ©2005-2006 Stockholm L’identité volée imprimée et publiée en Suède http://www.nazigassings.com/PDFs/StolenIdentity2.pdf.

«Miko Peled is from a famous and influential Israeli Zionist family and was born in Jerusalem. Miko’s father was a famous general in the Israeli army. Miko too has served his time there. When his niece was killed in a Palestinian suicide bomb attack, his family surprisingly placed the blame squarely on the state of Israel. They believed it was the torture, violence and forced eviction from their homes that was driving Palestinians to commit suicide to fight back. In this honest, ground breaking talk Peled reveals the truth about the terror state of Israel. His talk is based on his father’s insider knowledge on the Israeli war of terror, coupled with his own research. Many Jews and Israel supporters will be deeply shaken by this expose. Some facts from his talk are that the returning Jews are not the original expelled Jews, nor their descendants. He also reveals that until 1947 when Israel launched their illegal terrorist attacks on the people of Palestine, there was no conflict. Miko Peled is one of many modern day Jews who are standing up to the Zionist state of Israel. This talk is a must watch for everybody, to clear their minds of the lies spread and supported by the Zionist owned mainstream media. -eow-title8″>An honest Israeli Jew tells the Real Truth about Israel December 2, 2012 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etXAm-OylQQ.

Brexit, Russia & Proxy Wars Sheikh Imran Hosein Interview 5323 Views July 03, 2016 – 21 Comments

http://thesaker.is/brexit-russia-proxy-wars-sheikh-imran-hosein-interview/.

Putin – Cometh the Hour, Cometh the Man By Finian Cunningham November 18, 2015-yiv6553610906yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1467313894673_101241″>http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article43469.htm.

Brexit : et si la City était pour ? 5 juillet 2016 Valérie Bugault est avocate spécialisée en fiscalité internationale

http://www.medias-presse.info/le-brexit-et-si-la-city-etait-pour-jean-michel-vernochet-valerie-bugault/57528.

Interrogée par Jean-Michel Vernochet, Valérie Bugault analyse les suites du référendum pour la sortie du Royaume-Uni de l’Union européenne. Les élites financières ont-elles anticipé le Brexit ?http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Brexit-et-si-la-City-etait-pour-40282.html

24 September 2015 Britain bets the bank on a pivot to China UK assumes an economic relationship requires submission on everything else

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4d8cdea2-6210-11e5-9846-de406ccb37f2.html#axzz4E5JiTXfw. We can pivot too 24 October 2015 – The government makes a big bet on …http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21676773-government-makes-big-bet-asias-rising-power-we-can-pivot-too.

 

UK Labour Party in Grip of Zionist Inquisition

April 30, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

 by Stuart Littlewood

The orchestrated smear campaign against pro-Palestine sympathisers sent me reaching for my pen. But Gilad Atzmon too was eyeing the Labour Party’s crazed witch hunt for “antisemites” with misgiving and had already declared, in his usual robust way, that Labour under Jeremy Corbyn was not so much a party as a piece of Zionist-occupied territory.

Writing in his blog about Corbyn and McDonnell’s servile commitment to expel anyone whose remarks might be interpreted by Zionist mafioso as hateful or simply upsetting to Jews, Atzmon concludes: “Corbyn’s Labour is now unequivocally a spineless club of Sabbos Goyim” [which I take to mean non-Jewish dogsbodies who do menial jobs that Jews are forbidden to do for religious reasons].

“The Labour party’s policies,” says Atzmon, “are now compatible with Jewish culture: intolerant to the core and concerned primarily with the imaginary suffering of one people only. These people are not the working class, they are probably the most privileged ethnic group in Britain.  Corbyn’s Labour is a Zionist Occupied Territory…  It proves my theses that the Left is not a friend to Palestine, the oppressed or the workless people.

“I would have never believed that Jeremy Corbyn would engage in such colossally treacherous politics. I did not anticipate that Corbyn would become a Zionist lapdog.  Corbyn was a great hope to many of us. I guess that the time has come to accept that The Left is a dead concept, it has nothing to offer.”

This writer too is shocked after signing up a supporter (though not a member) of the Labour Party with the express purpose of voting in the leadership election for that beacon of common sense, that staunch champion of high ideals, that great white hope who would start a revolution in British politics and sweep away the crap and corruption left behind by Blair and Brown.

Boy, was I in for a disappointment!

And the latest casualty in this ugly Zionist power-play is former mayor of London Ken Livingstone. In a heated public spat with one of the party’s chief inquisitors, MP John Mann, he had the temerity to defend a female MP, Naz Shah, who had fallen foul of the party’s antisemitism police for comments made on Facebook before becoming an MP. She had suggested that Israel be transferred to the United States. She apologised profusely, but Labour’s Israel lobby went ballistic after raking up this old remark. Had they forgotten that their hero, David Ben-Gurion, himself, was mad-keen on population transfer… of Palestinian Arabs, that is? So what’s to get excited about? Mann happens to be chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Antisemitism. One-sidedness is the name of his game.

What seems to have generated greatest sound and fury is this observation by Livingstone: “When Hitler won his election in 1932 his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.”

Joan Ryan MP, Chair of Labour Friends of Israel, said: “To speak of Zionism – the right of the Jewish people to self-determination – and Hitler in the same sentence is quite breathtaking. I am appalled that Ken Livingstone has chosen to do so…. He should be suspended from the Labour Party immediately.”

It scarcely needs saying that Zionism may mean self-determination for the Jewish people but it has cruelly denied the Palestinians their right to self-determination for decades. Nevertheless Livingstone is suspended from the party after 47 years.

President of the Board of Deputies of British Jews Jonathan Arkush can be relied on to put in his two-pennyworth on these occasions, and he didn’t disappoint: “Ken Livingston’s comments were abhorrent and beyond disgraceful.  His latest comments combine Holocaust revisionism with antisemitism denial, when the evidence is there for all to see.  He lacks any sense of decency.  He must now be expelled from the Labour Party.”

And on the suspension of Naz Shah, Arkush was in overdrive: “If the Labour party is to re-establish its credibility on this issue, it needs to take four important steps forward:

First, there must be a credible inquiry into the entire Naz Shah episode.  Secondly, the party has to take effective measures to eradicate antisemitism wherever it occurs within its membership.  Thirdly, the leader must make it clear that allegations of antisemitism are not to be dismissed as arguments about Israel.  Fourthly, Jeremy Corbyn must now respond to our repeated calls for him to accept that his meetings with rank antisemites before he became leader were not appropriate and will not be repeated.

Witch hunters’ balloon pricked

Whether Livingstone’s claim that Hitler was a Zionist is correct, I know not and care not. He presumably checked his facts and was itching to score with this mischievous titbit. Whether that was a wise thing to do is a matter for idle chatter, not expulsion. Meanwhile Zio hotheads inside and outside the party would do well to pay attention to the The Jewish Socialists’ Group, which has some sound advice for them and sticks a pin in their not-so-pretty balloon with this measured statement:

Antisemitism and anti-Zionism are not the same. Zionism is a political ideology which has always been contested within Jewish life since it emerged in 1897, and it is entirely legitimate for non-Jews as well as Jews to express opinions about it, whether positive or negative. Not all Jews are Zionists. Not all Zionists are Jews.

Criticism of Israeli government policy and Israeli state actions against the Palestinians is not antisemitism. Those who conflate criticism of Israeli policy with antisemitism, whether they are supporters or opponents of Israeli policy, are actually helping the antisemites. We reject any attempt, from whichever quarter, to place legitimate criticism of Israeli policy out of bounds.

Accusations of antisemitism are currently being weaponised to attack the Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour party with claims that Labour has a “problem” of antisemitism. This is despite Corbyn’s longstanding record of actively opposing fascism and all forms of racism, and being a firm supporter of the rights of refugees and of human rights globally.

A very small number of such cases seem to be real instances of antisemitism. Others represent genuine criticism of Israeli policy and support for Palestinian rights, but expressed in clumsy and ambiguous language, which may unknowingly cross a line into antisemitism. Further cases are simply forthright expressions of support for Palestinian rights, which condemn Israeli government policy and aspects of Zionist ideology, and have nothing whatsoever to do with antisemitism.

The JSG goes further and suggests that the attacks come from four main sources – the Conservative Party, Conservative-supporting media and pro-Zionist Israeli media sources, right-wing and pro-Zionist elements claiming to speak on behalf of the Jewish community, and opponents of Jeremy Corbyn within the Labour party. These groups make common cause to wreck the Corbyn leadership, divert attention from Israeli government crimes and discredit those who dare to criticise Israeli policy or the Zionist enterprise.

In short, the JSG says what needs to be said and puts the witchfinder-generals firmly in their place.

Of course, if Labour – or the Conservatives – truly wished to be squeaky-clean in matters of racism they would disband their Israel fan clubs (i.e. Friends of Israel) and suspend all who refuse to condemn Israel’s brutal acts of ethnic cleansing and other war crimes. If people holding public office put themselves in a position where they are influenced by a foreign military power, they flagrantly breach the Principles of Public Life. There are far too many Labour and Conservative MPs and MEPs who fall into that category.

The Labour Party announced today it is considering reviewing its rules to send a clear message of zero-tolerance on antisemitism. For balance, why not match this with zero-tolerance of those who use the party as a platform for promoting the criminal Israeli regime and its continuing territorial ambitions? Go on, Labour, prove Atzmon wrong… prove the party is not Zionist occupied territory.

 

source:

DV- http://dissidentvoice.org/2016/04/uk-labour-party-in-grip-of-zionist-inquisition/

 

Stuart Littlewood’s book Radio Free Palestine, with Foreword by Jeff Halper, can now be read on the internet by visiting radiofreepalestine.org.ukRead other articles by Stuart.

What it really means to be a friend of israel

What it really means to be a friend of Israel

Israel Stooges

David Cameron Friend of Israel

The humbug of “shared values”

By Stuart Littlewood

Once again the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) annual pantomime in Washington DC has played itself out while the world outside watches aghast at the gullibility of America’s political elite. And how they flocked to hear Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s

Whatever happened to the Un-American Activities Committee set up to investigate disloyalty and subversive activities on the part of private citizens and public employees, one wonders?

Who is this “we”?

“The terrorists have no resolvable grievances. It’s not as if we could offer them Brussels or Istanbul, or California or even the West Bank,” said Netanyahu. “That won’t satisfy their grievances because what they seek is our utter destruction and their total domination. Their basic demand is that we should simply disappear.”

Funny, the Israelis have been working for nearly 70 years to make the Palestinians disappear. Domination is their specialty.

“The only way to defeat these terrorists is to join together and fight them together… with political unity and with moral clarity. I think we have that in abundance…” Achingly funny.

“The chain of attacks from Paris to San Bernardino to Istanbul to the Ivory Coast and now to Brussels, and the daily attacks on Israel… This is one continuous assault on all of us.” No it isn’t.

And who is this “we”? It’s Netanyahu’s endless attempt to push the old hasbara line to make us think we’re all in it together.

The Israel Project

A few years back The Israel Project, a US media advocacy group, produced a revised training manual to help the worldwide Zionist movement win the propaganda war, keep its ill-gotten territorial gains in Palestine and persuade international audiences to accept that its crimes are necessary and conform to “shared values” between Israel and the civilised West.

  • ”Draw direct parallels between Israel and America – including the need to defend against terrorism… The more you focus on the similarities between Israel and America, the more likely you are to win the support of those who are neutral. Indeed, Israel is an important American ally in the war against terrorism, and faces many of the same challenges as America in protecting their citizens.”

Note how Israel’s strategy is almost totally dependent on the false idea that Israelis are victims of terror and Western nations need to huddle together with Israel for mutual protection.

  • ”The language of Israel is the language of America: ‘democracy,’ ‘freedom,’ ‘security’ and ‘peace’. These four words are at the core of the American political, economic, social and cultural systems, and they should be repeated as often as possible because they resonate with virtually every American.”

If so fluent in this language, why won’t Israel acknowledge its neighbours’ rights to democracy, freedom, security and peace and end its military oppression? Level-headed people have begun to realise who the terrorists really are. And it is obvious by now that allowing parallels to be drawn between Israel and America only serves to increase the world’s hatred of America.

  • ”A simple rule of thumb is that once you get to the point of repeating the same message over and over again so many times that you think you might get sick — that is just about the time the public will wake up and say ‘Hey, this person just might be saying something interesting to me!’ But don’t confuse messages with facts… ”

The only people who are interested these days are the “Friends” and the other assorted stooges in thrall to the Israelis and the politicians they have bribed.

  • “Successful communications is not about being able to recite every fact from the long history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is about pointing out a few core principles of shared values – such as democracy and freedom – and repeating them over and over again… You need to start with empathy for both sides, remind your audience that Israel wants peace and then repeat the messages of democracy, freedom and peace over and over again… we need to repeat the message, on average, 10 times to be effective.”

Is democracy a shared value? Around Western nations, maybe. But Israel is an ethnocracy and a rather nasty one. Is freedom a shared value? The world is still waiting for Israel to allow the Palestinians their freedom after decades of brutal military occupation.

Embracing evil

As La Clinton and others perform their obscene ritual acts of obeisance, let us ponder what being a Friend of Israel really entails. It means aligning yourself with the vilest villainy. It means embracing the terror and ethnic cleansing on which the state of Israel was built.

It means embracing the dispossession at gunpoint and oppression of the native Palestinians. It means embracing the discriminatory laws against those who remain.

It means embracing the jackboot thuggery that abducts civilians, including children, and imprisons and tortures them without trial.

It means embracing the theft and annexation of Palestinian land and water resources, the imposition of hundreds of military checkpoints, severe restrictions on the movement of people and goods, and maximum interference with Palestinian life at every level.

It means embracing the strangulation of the West Bank’s economy and the cruel blockade on Gaza.

It means embracing the denial of Palestinians’ right to self-determination and return to their homes.

It means embracing the religious war that humiliates Muslims and Christians and prevents them from visiting their holy places.

It means endorsing a situation in which hard-pressed British and American taxpayers are having to subsidise Israel’s illegal occupation of the Holy Land.

And if, after the most recent bloodbaths inflicted by the Israelis on Gaza, you are still Israel’s special friend, you are comfortable with blowing to smithereens hundreds of children, maiming thousands more, trashing vital infrastructure such as hospitals, schools, power plants and clean water supplies, and causing USD 6 billion of devastation that will take 20 years to rebuild. And, by the way, where is the money for that coming from?

By then you should consider how you no longer qualify for membership of the human race and it’s time for the revolver on the silver tray

UK’s Palestine Solidarity Campaign blocks call to expel Israel from UN

Introduction by Gilad Atzmon:

The following article by Stuart Littlewood  is an opportunity to witness, once again, the degree of infiltration into the Palestinian Solidarity movement. As I have been arguing for years, the UK PSC subscribes to kosher agenda; it operates as a Zionist controlled opposition apparatus.

http://www.redressonline.com/

By Stuart Littlewood

At its Annual General Meeting last weekend the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) threw out a proposal to seek Israel’s expulsion from the United Nations.

Chairman Hugh Lanning is reported to have kicked off proceedings on a positive note saying: “Let us recommit to Palestine to make sure that we make a difference in the coming year.”

But the mask slipped when a motion was put for the PSC’s Executive Committee to

request the government of the United Kingdom, enforced by a petition and lobbying, to submit a motion to the Security Council recommending that the General Assembly expel Israel from the UN in compliance with the UN Charter, Article 6.

The motion failed – 76 in favour, 116 against. A statement by its main sponsor, Blake Alcott, says that an identical motion to the AGM a year ago was likewise opposed by the PSC leadership who felt “the time is not yet right”. His reaction to this latest rejection was to say: “Pro-Palestinians must wonder how much worse Israel’s crimes must be before the international community takes disciplinary action.”

There is ample reason for calling for Israel’s expulsion from the UN. It chimes very well with the “Sanctions” element of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions(BDS). And it is a good fit with the sort of measures that, in the “Call to Action” by the BDS Movement, should be maintained until Israel meets its obligation to recognise the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by:

1. Ending its occupation and colonisation of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall;
2. Recognising the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and
3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194.

Israel clearly isn’t the “peace-loving state” required by UN Charter Article 4. Nor has it fulfilled the four conditions put on its acceptance as a member back in May 1949. As the record shows, Israel has wilfully breached conditions of membership for decades. Many have argued it automatically disqualifies itself by failing to fulfil membership requirements in the first place. Furthermore, it continues to show contempt for numerous UN resolutions, despite frequent reminders.

Israel has certainly violated every norm, every rule of decency, every principle of humanity in the book. And it continues to do so without showing a shred of remorse. 

When considering an appropriate response for civil society to make, suspension sounds “softer” than expulsion as membership can be speedily restored if and when Israel satisfies the other member states that it now conforms. And, in the circumstances, suspension would surely be more difficult to veto.

But under the rules suspension isn’t an option, it seems. This is what the relevant part of the UN Charter says:

(Article 5) A member of the United Nations against which preventive or enforcement action has been taken by the Security Council may besuspended from the exercise of the rights and privileges of membership by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council. The exercise of these rights and privileges may be restored by the Security Council.
(Article 6) A member of the United Nations which haspersistently violated the principles contained in the present Charter may be expelled from the organisation by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council.

It might be argued that the passing of numerous UN Security Council resolutions amounts to “preventive action” (although still awaiting “enforcement”). But Article 6, which stipulates expulsion, is more clear-cut. Israel has certainly violated every norm, every rule of decency, every principle of humanity in the book. And it continues to do so without showing a shred of remorse.

Too timid to put down a marker for upholding international law?

Of course, Alcott’s motion, if passed, would have been brushed off by the British government which is pledged by Prime Minister David Cameron to protect and reward Israel right or wrong. But that is not the point. The aim of the motion was to put down a marker and provide a focus around which other campaign groups across the world could mobilise, bringing similar pressure to bear on their own governments and creating an irresistible swell of global opinion to ensure international law is eventually upheld.

Where does the PSC go from here, after failing a simple test? How will it now “make a difference” on behalf of the long-suffering Palestinians? The PSC’s media people have been asked twice for comment and further information but are “too busy”.

Right now some 71 UK doctors are pressuring the World Medical Association to revoke the membership of the Israel Medical Association over claims that its doctors perform medical torture on Palestinian patients. According to Press TV/Al-Ray, if the British physicians succeed, the Tel Aviv regime will be banned from taking part in international medical conferences and publishing in journals. Evidently our doctors have the balls for firm action, so why not the PSC?

Meanwhile, ace propagandist and chief spokesman for the terror regime in Tel Aviv, Mark Regev, is due to take up his appointment as Israel’s ambassador to the UK later this year. His presence here will have special significance. If the PSC and the impotent Palestine Mission in London are the best he’ll come up against, we can expect a media communications massacre.

Look Who’s in Charge of UK Government Cyber Security

Global Research, November 08, 2015

Matthew_Gould

A chilling remark from a House of Lords debate just caught my eye.

Column GC355 in Hansard, the verbatim report of proceedings of the UK parliament, dated 4 November 2015, said:

Lord Mendelsohn: We welcome the appointment of the former British ambassador to Israel, Matthew Gould, who will have a key role in cyber security inside the Cabinet Office – a very useful and important position.

Sure enough, the UK government’s website confirms that Gould is now director of cyber security and information assurance at the Cabinet Office. “He and his team are focused on keeping Britain safe from cyber attack, through delivering the UK’s Cyber Security Strategy.”

They must think we have very short memories. As Britain’s first Jewish ambassador to Israel, Gould described himself as a “passionate” Zionist and while in Tel Aviv he was instrumental in setting up the UK-Israel Tech Hub. In the words of MATIMOP (the Israeli Industry Centre for Research and Development), the hub was established

to promote partnerships in technology and innovation between Israel and the UK, and is the first initiative of its kind for the British government and for an embassy in Israel. The hub’s creation followed an agreement between prime ministers David Cameron and Binyamin Netanyahu to build a UK-Israel partnership in technology.

Three years ago Cameron appointed venture capitalist Saul Klein as the UK Tech Envoy to Israel with the task of promoting the partnership, leading UK technology missions to Israel, bringing Israeli start-ups to Britain, and hosting technology events in both countries.

MATIMOP quotes Britain’s National Health Service as an example of successful UK-Israel technology collaboration. The NHS

has now formed strong collaborations with Israeli life sciences companies conducting clinical trials in the UK. The cooperation was made as part of the burgeoning partnership between Israel and Britain’s life sciences industries initiated by the UK-Israel Tech Hub.

Driven by the Israel lobby

Four years ago Craig Murray, a former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, argued that British policy was being driven in an underhanded fashion by the Israel lobby. He linked Gould with the Fox-Werritty scandal and raised questionsabout meetings between disgraced former Defence Secretary Liam Fox and Fox’s friend/adviser, Adam Werritty (who was backed financially by Israel lobbyists but had no security clearance and therefore no authorised role) and Gould.

Murray wrote to Gould asking when he first met Werritty, how many times he had met him, and how many communications of every kind had passed between them. He was told these questions would be answered in Cabinet Secretary O’Donnell’s investigation. “But Gus O’Donnell’s report answered none of these questions,” wrote Murray. “It only mentioned two meetings at which Fox, Gould and Werritty were all three present…”

This prompted Murray to dig further. “There were at least six Fox-Werritty-Gould meetings, not the two given by O’Donnell… Matthew Gould was the only British Ambassador who Fox and Werrity met together. They met him six times. Why?”

Murray, with many useful sources from his days as an ambassador, claimed to have serious evidence connecting Gould with a secret plan to attack Iran, but the Foreign Office and the Cabinet Secretary blocked questions. Murray published his story, “Matthew Gould and the plot to attack Iran”, here.

In it he pointed out that

Matthew Gould does not see his race or religion as irrelevant. He has chosen to give numerous interviews to both British and Israeli media on the subject of being a jewish ambassador, and has been at pains to be photographed by the Israeli media participating in Jewish religious festivals. Israeli newspaper Haaretz described him as “Not just an ambassador who is Jewish, but a Jewish ambassador”. That rather peculiar phrase appears directly to indicate that the potential conflict of interest for a British ambassador in Israel has indeed arisen.

He went on to say that Gould stood suspected of long term participation with Fox and Werritty “in a scheme to forward war with Iran, in cooperation with Israel”. The stonewalling by O’Donnell and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office led Murray to conclude that “something very important is being hidden right at the heart of government”.

Labour Member of Parliament Paul Flynn remarked that no previous ambassadors to Israel had been Jewish so as to avoid conflict of interest and accusations of going native. He immediately came under intense flak. Flynn too asked about meetings between Werritty and Gould, as some reports suggested that Gould, Werritty and Fox discussed a potential military strike on Iran with Mossad. “I do not normally fall for conspiracy theories,” said Flynn, “but the ambassador has proclaimed himself to be a Zionist and he has previously served in Iran.”

Fox had earlier made the idiotic claim: “Israel’s enemies are our enemies” and “in the battle for the values that we stand for… Israel’s enemies are our enemies and this is a battle in which we all stand together”. The Jewish Chronicle hailed him as “a champion of Israel within the government”. Furthermore, Fox continually rattled the sabre against Iran which, of course, was no threat to Britain but is regarded by Israel as a bitter enemy. Iraq too was Israel’s enemy, not ours. Yet Fox, according to the theyworkforyou.com, voted “very strongly” for the Iraq war. He was also an enthusiastic supporter of the war in Afghanistan.

Gatekeepers or fifth columnists?

Given that Fox so eagerly waved the flag of a foreign military power and was a man with dangerous beliefs and demonstrably weak judgement, how could those who appointed him not see that he was unemployable as a minister of the British Crown – unless they were similarly tainted?

When the Werritty relationship came to light Fox jumped before being flung from the battlements. But the good people of North Somerset, in their wisdom, re-elected him at the general election last May. He’s already on the road to political rehabilitation among the Conservative high command.

Gould’s new job as head of the Office of Cyber Security and Information Assurance (OCSIA) involves giving strategic direction to cyber security and information assurance for the UK. This includes  internet crime, working with private sector partners on exchanging information, and engaging with international partners in improving the security of cyber space and information security. Does it seem right for such a person to be in charge of crucial security matters at the heart of our government? What was in fellow Zionist David Cameron’s mind when he appointed him?

Well, here’s a possible clue. In March of this year Francis Maude, the previous Cabinet Office minister responsible for cyber security, announced three UK-Israel academic collaboration ventures with cyber research funding, the partnerships being University of Bristol/Bar Ilan University, University College London/Bar Ilan University and University of Kent/University of Haifa. They’ll be working together on six specific areas of research:

  • identity management
  • governance: regulating cyber security
  • privacy assurance and perceptions
  • mobile and cloud security
  • human aspects of security or usable security
  • cryptography.

This builds on existing UK-Israel cooperation. Both parties signed a Memorandum of Understanding on digital cooperation in March 2014.

Still sitting comfortably? Only this week the Cameron government was lecturing us on threats to national security and announcing plans to trawl through our personal emails and web browsers in order to “keep us safe”. The question is, who trawls Gould’s private emails?

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Who’s in Charge of U.K. Government Cybersecurity?

Via

cyberzion-529

by Stuart Littlewood, VT
(submitted by ‘Old Sniper‘)
[emphasis added]

Hansard 4 Nov 2015 : Column GC355

Lord Mendelsohn: We welcome the appointment of the former British ambassador to Israel, Matthew Gould, who will have a key role in cybersecurity inside the Cabinet Office — a very useful and important position.

Sure enough, the UK Government’s website confirms that Gould is now Director of Cyber Security and Information Assurance at the Cabinet Office.

“He and his team are focused on keeping Britain safe from cyber attack, through delivering the UK’s Cyber Security Strategy.”

They must think we have very short memories. Gould was the first Jew ever to hold the post of Britain’s ambassador to Israel. He describes himself as a “passionate” Zionist and whilst in Tel Aviv was instrumental in setting up the UK-Israel Tech Hub.

In the words of MATIMOP (the Israeli Industry Center for R&D), the Hub was established

“to promote partnerships in technology and innovation between Israel and the UK, and is the first initiative of its kind for the British Government and for an embassy in Israel. The Hub’s creation followed an agreement between Prime Ministers David Cameron and Benjamin Netanyahu to build a UK-Israel partnership in technology.”


Three years ago Cameron appointed venture capitalist Saul Klein as the UK Tech Envoy to Israel with the task of promoting the partnership, leading UK tech missions to Israel, bringing Israeli start-ups to Britain, and hosting tech events in both countries.

MATIMOP quotes Britain’s National Health Service as an example of successful UK-Israel tech collaboration.

The NHS “has now formed strong collaborations with Israeli life sciences companies conducting clinical trials in the UK. The cooperation was made as part of the burgeoning partnership between Israel and Britain’s life sciences industries initiated by the UK-Israel Tech Hub.”

Four years ago Craig Murray, a former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, argued that British policy was being driven in an underhanded fashion by the Israel lobby. He linked Gould with the Fox-Werritty scandal and raised questionsabout meetings between disgraced former Defense Minister Liam Fox and Fox’s friend/adviser Adam Werritty (who was backed financially by Israel lobbyists but had no security clearance and therefore no authorized role) and Gould.

Murray wrote to Gould asking when he first met Werritty, how many times he had met him, and how many communications of every kind had passed between them. He was told these questions would be answered in Cabinet Secretary O’Donnell’s investigation. “But Gus O’Donnell’s report answered none of these questions, wrote Murray. “It only mentioned two meetings at which Fox, Gould and Werritty were all three present…”

This prompted Murray to dig further. “There were at least six Fox-Werritty-Gould meetings, not the two given by O’Donnell…. Matthew Gould was the only British Ambassador who Fox and Werrity met together. They met him six times. Why?”

Murray, with many useful sources from his days as an ambassador, claimed to have serious evidence connecting Gould with a secret plan to attack Iran, but the Foreign Office and the Cabinet Secretary blocked questions. Murray published his story ‘Matthew Gould and the plot to attack Iran’ here.

In it he pointed out that “Matthew Gould does not see his race or religion as irrelevant. He has chosen to give numerous interviews to both British and Israeli media on the subject of being a Jewish ambassador, and has been at pains to be photographed by the Israeli media participating in Jewish religious festivals. Israeli newspaper Haaretz described him as ‘Not just an ambassador who is Jewish, but a Jewish ambassador’. That rather peculiar phrase appears directly to indicate that the potential conflict of interest for a British ambassador in Israel has indeed arisen.”

He went on to say that Gould stood suspected of long term participation with Fox and Werritty “in a scheme to forward war with Iran, in cooperation with Israel”. The stonewalling by O’Donnell and the FCO led Murray to conclude that “something very important is being hidden right at the heart of government”.

Labour MP Paul Flynn remarked that no previous ambassadors to Israel had been Jewish so as to avoid conflict of interest and accusations of going native. He immediately came under intense flak. Flynn too asked about meetings between Werritty and Gould, as some reports suggested that Gould, Werritty and Fox discussed a potential military strike on Iran with Mossad. “I do not normally fall for conspiracy theories,” said Flynn, “but the ambassador has proclaimed himself to be a Zionist and he has previously served in Iran.”

Fox had earlier made the idiotic claim: “Israel’s enemies are our enemies”and “in the battle for the values that we stand for… Israel’s enemies are our enemies and this is a battle in which we all stand together”.

The Jewish Chronicle hailed him as “a champion of Israel within the government”. Furthermore Fox continually rattled the sabre against Iran which, of course, was no threat to Britain but is regarded by Israel as a bitter enemy. Iraq too was Israel’s enemy, not ours. Yet Fox, according to the theyworkforyou.com, voted “very strongly” for the Iraq war. He was also an enthusiastic supporter of the war in Afghanistan.

Given that Fox so eagerly waved the flag of a foreign military power and was a man with dangerous beliefs and demonstrably weak judgement, how could those who appointed him not see that he was unemployable as a Minister of the British Crown – unless they were similarly tainted?

When the Werrity relationship came to light Fox jumped before being flung from the battlements. But the good people of North Somerset, in their wisdom, re-elected him at the general election last May. He’s already on the road to political rehabilitation among the Conservative high command.

Gould’s new job as head of The Office of Cyber Security & Information Assurance (OCSIA) involves giving strategic direction to cyber security and information assurance for the UK. This includes e-crime, working with private sector partners on exchanging information, and engaging with international partners in improving the security of cyberspace and information security.

Does it seem right for such a person to be in charge of crucial security matters at the heart of our government?

What was in fellow Zionist David Cameron’s mind when he appointed him?

Well, here’s a possible clue. In March of this year Francis Maude, the previous Cabinet Office minister responsible for cyber security, announced three UK-Israel academic collaboration ventures with cyber research funding, the partnerships being University of Bristol/Bar Ilan University, University College London/Bar Ilan University and University of Kent/University of Haifa.

They’ll be working together on six specific areas of research:

  • identity management
  • governance: regulating cyber security
  • privacy assurance and perceptions
  • mobile and cloud security
  • human aspects of security or usable security

This builds on existing UK-Israel cooperation. Both parties signed a Memorandum of Understanding on digital co-operation in March 2014.

Still sitting comfortably?

Only this week the Cameron government was lecturing us on threats to national security and announcing plans to trawl through our personal emails and web browsers in order to “keep us safe”.

Question is, who trawls Gould’s private emails?


R E L A T E D      TO  :

Is “Israel”, the Zionist colonial entity with a long history of covert terrorist operations, with total control of the Sinai and of the security of local airports and skies, responsible of the Russian Metro-Jet crash in Egypt?

Kaiser_544

Regarding the destruction of the Russian civil flight A-321 on Egyptian skies: was the explosive device on board planted by agents of Western intelligence agencies and activated by an electronic control remotely from an American base? Most likely this is the truth ~ [Related Reports, Photos, Videos]

Kaiser_557


SOURCES:
VeteransToday
Submitted by 'The Old Sniper' 
WarPress.info Network at:
https://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/2015/11/10/u-k-cybersecurity/

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian 

  

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

%d bloggers like this: