Robert Stuart: One Man’s Quest to Expose ‘Absolutely Historic’ @BBC Panorama ‘Fakery’

BBC Panorama ‘Fakery’ – Sputnik International

EXCLUSIVE: One Man’s Quest to Expose ‘Absolutely Historic’ BBC Panorama ‘Fakery’

For over four years, Robert Stuart has been forensically investigating the innumerable inconsistencies, contradictions, anomalies and apparent falsehoods in BBC Panorama documentary Saving Syria’s Children. Speaking exclusively to Sputnik, the former journalist shares his most troubling discoveries.

On the evening of August 29 2013, just as the UK parliament was quite literally voting on possible military intervention in Syria, BBC News at Ten broadcast a report by journalist Ian Pannell and cameraman Darren Conway from Syria, which claimed a Syrian fighter jet had dropped an incendiary bomb containing a “napalm-type” substance — possibly thermite — on the playground of an Aleppo school.

After its broadcast, some viewers took to the internet to express concerns about the veracity of the report’s footage. Among them was Robert Stuart, a former journalist working for a small community organization in Islington, London.

Walking Dead?                                                                         

One scene in particular struck him as “extremely odd.” In it, males young and old, their skin apparently in tatters, race into a “basic hospital funded by handouts” to be treated for chemical burns. At one particularly disturbing point, a number writhe, drool and groan, apparently in great distress.

However, the men are initially “quiet and static,” before the central figure looks directly into the camera for several moments and raises his arm, at which point “they start rolling around in agony and wailing. It looks farcical, ridiculous,” Robert told Sputnik.

A GMC-registered practicing doctor, who’d worked with burns victims firsthand, believed the scene to be “an act.”

“[They] were able to sit down, be touched by others, even talk. This is not how a severe burn victim would present. Most would be screaming the place down in agony even after treatment and all sorts of pain drugs, but they’re able to speak and breathe very well. Some are shown with skin hanging off but the flesh beneath actually looks like more skin. Also, if the poison was dropped from a plane, their hair would’ve been lost and patches would be evident — many still have full heads,” the doctor said.

This scene and other questionable aspects of the brief report prompted him to pen a letter to the BBC — as he was writing it, the BBC broadcast a Panorama documentary, Saving Syria’s Children, which expanded on the original report, and included further footage.

The documentary was said to have been intended to cover the work of two British doctors in Syria — but apparently completely by chance, while they were filming, the chemical attack occurred.

Ever since, Robert has repeatedly reviewed the program. As of December 2017, he’s identified contradictions, anomalies and areas of concern “almost too numerous to list.” At best, he believes the broadcast contains many scenes which are “largely, if not entirely, staged” — at worst, he suggests its content, and even the attack it allegedly covers, may be “fictionalized.”

​His correspondence with the UK’s state broadcaster about these issues has also continued — their response has been equal parts “stonewalling, evasion and misdirection.” Part of this effort, he alleges, includes the “diligent” blocking of every copy of Saving Syria’s Children on YouTube — as a result, one won’t find a “single scrap” of footage from the documentary on the platform. Anything uploaded is “taken down within hours,” which Robert claims isn’t the case with “any other” Panorama documentary.

Where, When, What, How?

One key source of confusion concerns the time of the attack. According to the BBC it took place August 26, 2013, although accounts of its timing “implausibly” span a range of six hours — Human Rights Watch states it occurred “around midday,” while the Violations Documentation Center places it at two in the afternoon.

Conversely, Pannell himself stated in BBC Complaints correspondence with Robert the strike occurred “at around 5.30pm,” while Conway places it between three and five. Alleged eyewitness Abu Yousef suggests it was closer to six, which is corroborated by a Turkish media article quoting a Syrian doctor who says it occurred at that time — although the chemical weapon was instead said to be a “phosphorus bomb.”

​Complicating the picture further, a team of Syrian investigators has researched the attack, contacting a former commander of the Al-Tawhid Brigade based in Aleppo province in August 2013. Despite having every reason to validate the claim, given it would offer useful propaganda against the Syrian government, they instead attested a “napalm bomb” attack did not happen that month, and none of the events depicted in the documentary actually occurred.

“We did not meet any air strike with the substance of napalm on Urum al Kubra or on any other region in the North West Aleppo countryside and the cheap fabrication of the BBC undermines the credibility of the Free Syrian Army. We’ve done a field investigation with the help of the delegate of the Free Syrian Red Crescent and [found] no victims, no traces and no memory with anybody of the alleged air strikes with the substance of Napalm,” the commander said.

The commander has agreed to provide a full statement to the BBC and offered to provide BBC journalists with safe transit from Antakya, Turkey to Urm Al-Kubra to interview witnesses and conduct their own investigation.

A July 2014 telephone conversation between two members of said Syrian investigative team documents the account of a local resident, who similarly affirms the alleged napalm bomb attack did not occur.

“He told me, ‘we didn’t hear about such a thing…we hear about rockets, there is a lot.’ When I told him it burns, he told me ‘we never had something like that, never, never. Nor did we ever hear about it.’ I asked him whether he was maybe out of the region at the specific time, and he said ‘even if I would have left the people keep on talking about this thing, I would have known about it’,” the investigator said.

Untroubled Journey

Almost every repeat viewing of Saving Syria’s Children raises further concerns and questions for Robert. A relatively recent discovery was reporter Pannell and cameraman Conway’s apparent embedment with jihadi group Ahrar al-Sham.

Approximately 10 minutes into the documentary, in a scene said to be shot the morning of August 25, Dr. Hallam sets off to “see what medical care is available for children closer to where the fighting is” — and Pannell follows.

“Western journalists have been targeted in Syria, so I have to travel with my own security. The doctors are able to be more low key and take their own vehicles,” he explains.

A number of vehicles are then shown setting off in convoy — among them a white pickup truck which, dashcam level footage reveals, bears the Ahrar al Sham emblem on its bonnet.

Ahrar al Sham has been accused of being involved in, or leading, numerous atrocities over the course of the Syrian crisis — a mere three weeks prior to Pannell’s trip, Human Rights Watch alleges the group were, alongside Daesh and al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra, “key fundraisers, organizers, planners, and executors” of an attack in which at least 190 killed and over 200 — “the vast majority women and children” — were kidnapped.

As the program enters its eleventh minute, Pannell’s van approaches a checkpoint held by a separate rebel faction, an experience common across the country at the time. After a brief and seemingly superficial inspection, the convoy is allowed to pass through unmolested.

As Pannell himself narrates, the faction in question is “ISIS…the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.” At the time, the group was not subject to the extreme global notoriety it endures today — Robert suggests such a scene “simply wouldn’t be plausible now.”

“Conway is seemingly able to hop between vehicles with impunity at the checkpoint. As they reach it, Pannell instructs the cameraman — presumably Conway, the sole shooter credited on the documentary — to ‘put the camera down a bit’. Seconds later, in footage filmed from the rear of another vehicle, a Daesh guard inspects vehicles. How did they not end up in orange jumpsuits having their heads chopped off?” Robert told Sputnik.

​Daesh also crops up elsewhere in the documentary — an ambulance bearing the group’s distinctive flag calmly transports victims of the apparent attack to hospital — a “marked contrast” from the “ostensibly tense” checkpoint scene.

Trust Me, I’m a Doctor

A recurring character throughout Saving Syria’s Children is Dr. Rola Hallam, a British doctor representing the charity Hand in Hand for Syria. She immediately jumped out to Robert due to the manner of her introduction — taking time out during the apparent mass casualty scenario to conduct a calm and coherent to-camera interview.

​Dr. Hallam also appeared on the BBC prior to the Panorama broadcast — interviewed on Newsnight August 30 2013, the day parliament voted against military action, she expressed disappointment at the result, suggesting the world had “failed the Syrian nation.”

Subsequent digging into the doctor’s background offered yet further indications she and the organization she represents harbor strongly interventionist stances.

For instance, her father is Dr. Mousa al-Kurdi — who, according to a February 2013 article written Dr. Hallam’s colleague Dr. Saleyha Ahsan, is “involved politically” with the controversial Syrian National Council.

Dr. Hallam has denied that allegation — nonetheless, in a 2012 Al Jazeera interview, he passionately advocated for the Syrian National Council’s recognition as the “sole representative” of all Syrians. He also boasted of how at that year’s Friends of Syria summit in Istanbul — attended by Hillary Clinton — he told the foreign ministers of several governments, including Victoria Nuland of the US State Department, “either you defend us or you arm the Free Syrian Army to defend us — you have the choice.”

Facebook banner of Faddy Sahloul, cofounder of Hand in Hand for Syria.
Facebook banner of Faddy Sahloul, cofounder of Hand in Hand for Syria.

Robert’s exploration into Hand in Hand for Syria also raised many serious anxieties. The UK Charity Commission states the organization exists for “the advancement of health or saving lives” — yet, he found until July 2014, the Facebook banner of cofounder Faddy Sahloul read “WE WILL BRING ASSAD TO JUSTICE; NO MATTER WHAT LIVES IT TAKES, NO MATTER HOW MUCH CATASTROPHE IT MAKES.”Moreover, he uncovered a photo of a Hand in Hand for Syria nurse, who also appears in the documentary, tending to the injuries of a child soldier.

Unidentified Hand in Hand for Syria worker with child soldier.
Unidentified Hand in Hand for Syria worker with child soldier.

“In September 2015, I formally raised my concerns with the Charity Commission, which ruled the cofounder’s bloodthirsty Facebook banner was a ‘historical issue’ that had since been addressed by the charity’s trustees, and the image of the nurse treating a child fighter was not ‘sufficient’ evidence Hand in Hand for Syria was ‘celebrating or supporting violence’,” Robert told Sputnik.

Iessa Obied, a medical professional connected with Hand in Hand for Syria, poses with rocket launcher.
Iessa Obied, a medical professional connected with Hand in Hand for Syria, poses with rocket launcher.

His battles with the Charity Commission did not end there — in March 2016, he submitted a further complaint, after uncovering images of Iessa Obied, a medical professional connected with Hand in Hand for Syria, posing with a “shocking” array of armaments, including rocket launchers, sniper rifles, “hell cannon” mortars, tanks, and more.

Iessa Obied, a medical professional connected with Hand in Hand for Syria, poses with a rifle.
Iessa Obied, a medical professional connected with Hand in Hand for Syria, poses with a rifle.

However, for the Commission, the images “[did] not raise sufficient regulatory concern.”RIP BBC?

Despite official denials, Robert intends to continue his campaign until the truth has finally been revealed — his determination stems from a belief the alleged falsification was “absolutely historic, and unbelievably brazen.”

“It was clearly very carefully orchestrated and set up. I had few illusions about the corporate media and the BBC, the one remaining perhaps being they wouldn’t fake something outright. This is an absolutely historic case, and unique. Whatever criticisms you could level at state-owned media in Iran or North Korea, nobody has ever done this before,” he rails.

In March 2017, Robert’s efforts attracted the attention of leading TV and radio producer Victor Lewis-Smith. He raised troubling questions with the BBC about Saving Syria’s Children, threatening to literally tear up a contract for a forthcoming radio comedy pilot with the corporation unless top brass could offer satisfactory answers.

In response, the BBC alleged Ofcom had reviewed the program and confirmed the authenticity of the documentary. However, the organization’s ruling related to a news report by television channel RT, which featured Robert’s investigation.

The BBC complained to OfCom “the program presented information in an inaccurate and misleading way.” While Ofcom upheld the complaint, it acknowledged it did not “undertake an assessment of the accuracy and/or impartiality of the program” in reaching its decision. Robert states this was “in no way a clean bill of health” for the documentary.

“It was not possible or appropriate for Ofcom to attempt to prove or disprove the allegations made about the BBC in the program. Similarly, Ofcom had no statutory jurisdiction to assess the accuracy and impartiality of the BBC program. Rather, our concern in this case was solely whether [it] resulted in unfairness to the BBC,” the regulator wrote.

​Lewis-Smith didn’t accept their defense, again threatening to terminate his contract, and demanding Panorama release raw footage of the event in order to gauge its veracity.

The eventual statement issued by the BBC in response to these concerns did nothing to address his concerns, and his contract was shredded. ​He now intends to make a crowdfunded documentary investigating the program, with Robert’s assistance. Sputnik submitted requests for comment from the BBC, but as of December 30 2017 has received no response.

“If the extent to which the BBC manufactured this documentary was proven, it would be a watershed moment. There’d be no coming back from that. It would destroy their credibility globally. Pannell and Conway could go down in history as having destroyed the BBC,” Robert concludes.

The views and opinions expressed by Robert Stuart are those of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik. 

Advertisements

Trump apes Balfour: giving away what isn’t his to give

Source

Trump in solidarity with Netanyahu

By Stuart Littlewood

Here’s what an Early Day Motion, tabled by several prominent British MPs in the House of Commons, says about Trump’s statement on Jerusalem.

That this House notes with dismay that Donald Trump, President of the USA, has declared that the US has formally recognised Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and that the US embassy in Israel will relocate from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem; further notes that no other country currently has an embassy in Jerusalem, and the international community, including the US until now, does not recognise Israel’s jurisdiction over and ownership of the eastern part of that city; acknowledges Jerusalem’s status as an extremely sensitive aspect of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict which it considers will be antagonised by this move; further acknowledges that the final status of Jerusalem is to be determined by negotiation; notes that East Jerusalem is intended to be the capital of a future Palestinian state, but that East Jerusalem is currently occupied by Israel; considers that this decision was taken against the advice of a wide range of world leaders and breaks with years of precedent; further considers that the announcement itself may lead to unrest in the Middle East and that the longer term consequences are unpredictable; condemns in the strongest possible terms what it considers to be a rash, unnecessary and deliberately inflammatory act, and one which destroys the US’s credibility as an honest broker in the Middle East peace process; and calls on world leaders to put pressure on the president to reverse this ill-advised decision.

Early Day Motions (EDMs) are formal motions submitted for debate and they must be squashed into a single sentence. The House seldom gets around to actually debating them but they are an effective way of attracting the attention of MPs and especially the media to matters of concern.

The wording of this EDM isn’t too bad. However, East Jerusalem, including the Old City, is regarded by the world community and international law as Palestinian, and Israel has no business occupying or annexing it.

It’s worth recalling that the UN Partition of 1947 intended Jerusalem to be a corpus separatum under international administration, for the obvious reason that the Holy City cannot be said to belong to any single religious persuasion. None has exclusive claim.

Trump has simply hammered the final nail into any prospect of the US being taken seriously ever again in a peacemaking role.

I question the quaint idea that Jerusalem’s final status should be “determined by negotiation”. We’ve seen these lopsided negotiations before, brokered by meddlers who are totally devoid of impartiality or goodwill. And besides, the issue has already been determined by international law and is waiting to be enforced. Again and again, politicians overlook the simple fact that there can be no peace while one side’s boot is on the other’s neck and without first delivering justice.

Furthermore, it is not Trump who has destroyed the US’s credibility as an honest broker. If such credibility ever existed it evaporated decades ago. Trump has simply hammered the final nail into any prospect of the US being taken seriously ever again in a peacemaking role.

You may think that the EDM is just a bunch of British MPs sounding off. No. The EDM fairly represents the view of the whole world – barring Israel and its stooges in London, Washington and Paris.

As protesters here in the streets are saying, Jerusalem is not Trump’s to give away in 2017 any more than Palestine was Balfour’s to promise the Zionists in 1917. So, hands off Jerusalem! We see where Balfour’s running sore has led one hundred years later.

Americans should know that Britain isn’t with them on this Jerusalem lunacy. And neither is anyone else.

Campaign Against Antisemitism is Grooming British Police Forces

December 08, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

groomimg_edited-1.jpg

Please see yourself invited to review the intimate correspondence between the ultra Zionist Campaign Against Antisemitism and our British police forces.

Documentation here

Listen  to the great Richie Allen elaborating on the above.

‘Reasonable basis’ to believe UK soldiers committed war crimes in Iraq: ICC. Actually just being in Iraq was a “war crime”

Source

Critics say the British government has been unwilling to bring soldiers and commanders who committed abuses to justice

File photo of Iraqi soldiers training with British soldiers inside UK base on the outskirts of Basra, 15 February 2006 (AFP)

The International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda said on Monday that there is a “reasonable basis” to believe that some British soldiers committed war crimes after the US-led invasion of Iraq.

The disclosure came in a 74-page report on preliminary inquiries as ICC member states gather in New York for an annual nine-day meeting to discuss matters relating to the tribunal.

“Following a thorough factual and legal assessment of the information available… there is reasonable basis to believe that members of the UK armed forces committed war crimes, within the jurisdiction of the Court, against persons in their custody,” Bensouda said.

The Hague-based prosecutor in 2014 reopened an initial probe into war crimes allegations relating to prisoner abuse, after rights groups and lawyers said that at least 1,071 Iraqi detainees were tortured and ill-treated between March 2003 to December 2008.

The same groups also alleged that British personnel committed 52 unlawful killings of people in their custody over the same period.

However, several lawyers who were part of those making the allegations were later found guilty on misconduct charges, including making false allegations of abuse. The lawyers’ lead counsellor was struck off.

But Bensouda’s office said individual statements received from those lawyers “could be considered credible enough if substantiated with supporting material” such as detention records, medical certificates and photographs.

Her office is now considering “complementarity and gravity” before evaluating further steps.

Set up in 2002, the Hague-based ICC is an independent court of last resort, only to intervene and prosecute those committing the world’s worst crimes if a member country is unwilling or unable to do so themselves.

“The prosecutor must be satisfied as to admissibility on both aspects before proceeding,” the report said.

Bensouda will then decide whether to ask ICC judges for permission to launch a full-blown investigation.

The world war crimes court’s previous chief prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, said in 2006 he would not open a full probe in Iraq because he did not have enough evidence.

Earlier this year, Britain dismissed hundreds of allegations of misconduct by its soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Supporters of referring abuse cases to the ICC argue that the British government has been unwilling to bring soldiers and commanders who committed abuses to justice.

“The submission to the ICC highlights the British authorities’ failure for over a decade to investigate and prosecute these alleged war crimes, including the command responsibility of its senior military and political figures,” Clive Baldwin, a legal adviser for Human Rights Watch, wrote in 2014

Judaic terrorism against Britain

 

Coat Bomb and Explosive Prosthesis: British Intel Files Reveal How the Zionist Stern Gang Terrorized London

MI5’s dossiers on the group released this week cast the Cold War’s early years in a stark new light: Terrorism, not the Soviet Union, was the main threat

Haaretz

Records declassified this week by Britain’s Security Service, MI5, reveal an urgent terrorist threat that Britain faced in the 20th century. No, it wasn’t the Irish Republican Army or Islamist terrorist groups that would plague Britain later in the century, but rather extremist Zionist groups fighting the British after World War II to establish the State of Israel.

In July 1946, one of these groups, the Irgun, led by the future Israeli prime minister and Nobel Peace Prize winner Menachem Begin, blew up the headquarters of the British administration in Palestine, Jerusalem’s King David Hotel, with heavy loss of civilian life and damage. The newly released MI5 files show that another group fighting the British, the Lehi or “Stern Gang,” dispatched cells to carry out bombings and assassinations in Britain itself. The Stern Gang is thought to be the world’s last terrorist group to describe itself publicly as “terrorist,” with some of its members using the term as a badge of honor.

In April 1947, two Stern Gang terrorists, a man and a woman, attempted to blow up the Colonial Office in Whitehall in the center of London. They planted a bomb containing 24 sticks of explosives at Dover House, headquarters of the Colonial Office, but it failed to go off because it was not fused correctly. The head of London’s Special Branch, commander Leonard Burt, believed that if the bomb had gone off, it would have caused as much damage as the bombing of the King David Hotel in London nine months earlier.

The Stern Gang’s attempted bombing of the Colonial Office in London has been previously revealed. But the files released this week are the first public records from British intelligence’s secret archives to show how the Stern Gang operators were tracked down. They also reveal significant new facts about the plot and aspects of it that apparently MI5 did not detect.

In June 1947, two months after the attempted bombing of the Colonial Office, a Stern Gang cell operating in Italy posted 21 letter bombs to senior British politicians and cabinet members including Prime Minister Clement Attlee, Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin and Chancellor of the Exchequer Stafford, Cripps as well as Winston Churchill. Most of the letter bombs were intercepted, but some reached their intended recipients and failed to go off.

The Conservative Party’s Anthony Eden carried a letter bomb disguised in a book around with him for a whole day, until he was warned of the plot and checked inside his briefcase, where it was. British explosive experts reported that all the letter bombs were potentially lethal. One Stern Gang member involved in the plot later claimed that he had “invented the book bomb.”French-Belgian border check

In the wake of the Colonial Office and letter bombs, borders and ports in Britain were placed on high alert to look for suspicious people potentially planning further attacks, and MI5 placed known extremist Jewish and Zionist groups in Britain under intense surveillance. But as one MI5 officer wrote in an internal memo, “these terrorists are hard nuts to crack.”

In a routine inspection that same month, June 1947, Belgian police stopped and searched two people, a man and a young woman, at the border crossing to France. The woman’s suitcase was found to have a false bottom with a secret compartment. It contained letters addressed to British officials, together with explosives, 14 pencil-type batteries, seven detonators and a watch constructed as a time fuse — similar to the letter bombs sent earlier that month and the bomb rigged up at the Colonial Office.

A wanted poster of the Palestine Police Force during the 1920-48 Mandate period: Lehi members Yaacov Levstein, left, Yitzhak Shamir and Natan Yellin-Mor.

The man and woman were arrested by the Belgian police, who, because of the envelopes addressed to British officials, contacted the British authorities. It didn’t take MI5 long to conclude that the pair had been planning to carry out bomb attacks in Britain. One of the letters, soon to be a letter bomb, was addressed to the chief secretary of the Palestine Administration, Sir John Shaw, who later secretly worked for MI5.

The arrested 22-year-old woman was identified as Betty Knouth, who also went under the name Gilberte Elizabeth Lazarus. She was a French national who had served with the Resistance during the war and was now, as she put it, at war with Britain. She was sentenced to a year in prison in Belgium for carrying explosives.

Checking its records, MI5 quickly discovered that Knouth fitted witness descriptions of an attractive young woman seen at the Colonial Office when the bomb was left, carrying a distinctive blue-leather miter-shaped handbag, which was still in her possession when she was arrested in Belgium. Knouth also admitted to being in Britain at the time of the Colonial Office bomb.

The arrested man went under the name Jacob Elias, but when his fingerprints were sent to London, his real identity was established as Yaacov Levstein, who had a long track record as a terrorist. His named appeared on the “Terrorist Index” compiled and circulated by the Palestine police and MI5.

The letter alerting British authorities of the Stern Gang members’ arrest on the French-Belgium border, June 7, 1947. Britain’s Security Service Archive

Levstein had been a member of the Stern Gang throughout the war, and was wanted by the Palestine police for his believed killing of numerous police officers and an attempt on the life of the British high commissioner. He had been captured and sentenced to life imprisonment in Palestine, but escaped from jail. His fingerprints matched those found on the timer of the failed bomb at the Colonial Office. He was given eight months in prison in Belgium for carrying concealed explosives.

‘We are still at war with Britain’

A newspaper cutout referring to Stern Gang Member Betty Knouth, who also went by the name Gilberte Elizabeth Lazarus. Britain’s Security Service Archive

At a Stern Gang press conference in Tel Aviv after her release from jail, Knouth said in response to a question: “Did I post letter bombs? Unfortunately the Belgian police got me before I could do so. They are a Stern Gang patent you know.”

Asked if she had anything to do with the bomb left at the Colonial Office, she said: “Scotland Yard could give you very precise details about that, but I don’t consider this the right time to time to talk about it. We are still at war with Britain. But my terrorist days are over and done with for now. I hope to settle down in Israel one day.”

Britain’s intelligence records released this week reveal that MI5 did not detect some terrorist operations. The files note that Levstein was an “expert in explosives” but do not grasp the true devilish nature of his expertise. The files correctly record that a French veteran associated with Levstein, Jacques Martinsky, was denied entry when he landed in London in March 1947 for showing no good reason why he was traveling to Britain.

However, MI5 appears not to have detected that, on Levstein’s instructions, Martinsky was using the prosthetic leg that he acquired after being wounded in the war to smuggle explosives into Britain for the Colonial Office bomb. This was a lucky escape for British security.

Where Martinsky failed, another of Levstein’s group got through. As Levstein later explained, he succeeded in getting explosives for the Colonial Office bomb into Britain by devising an ingenious “coat bomb” with explosives stitched inside. It was worn by another of his accomplices, Robert Misrahi, a French student and protégé of Jean-Paul Sartre at the Sorbonne who carried this dynamite coat from Paris across the Channel to Britain.

The new files show that Misrahi’s name was on MI5’s radar, but there is no evidence that the security service detected the plot. As Levstein later put it: “The execution was perfect. I learned an important lesson. No security measures can stop sophisticated imaginative planning.”

MI5’s dossiers on Stern Gang members released this week cast the early years of the Cold War in a stark new light — terrorism, not the Soviet Union, was the main threat. The newly released files also have an enduring legacy. Many of the security techniques British intelligence developed to deal with the Irgun and Stern Gang — surveillance of extremist groups, border and port checks, liaison with foreign police agencies — were the same counterterrorist procedures later used against the IRA and current Islamist terror groups.

Is Trump a Fascist?

November 30, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

great dictator.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

Progressives routinely apply the terms ‘fascism’ and ‘Nazism’ to anything of which they disapprove.

And naturally, The Guardian’s Richard Wolffe marches into the same trap.  “Yet more proof: Donald Trump is a fascist sympathiser”  was the title of his article last night.

“It was true after the racist mob in Charlottesville three months ago. And it’s still true today: Donald J Trump quite literally sympathizes with fascists,” Wolffe writes. But what makes Britain First or American ultra Nationalists into ‘fascists’ is not obvious.

Evidently, Wolffe doesn’t like Jayda Fransen and Britain First. He is not alone. I am also not a fan. But is Britain First  ‘fascist’?  Do they believe in socialism within a state? Or the socialism of a people? Equality of one race? Does Britain First preach equality of any sort? Fascism is a secularist viewpoint that rejects religion, the Guardian may need to explain to us how Fransen and her ‘Christian Patrols’ fit within the term ‘Fascism?’ And what about authoritarianism, do we have good reason to believe that Fransen is a tyrannical character of any sort?

Wolffe’s observation that “Fransen sounds a lot like the president of the United States.” is correct as far as it goes. And the American President was unapologetic about retweeting Fransen’s videos. While the entire British cabinet expressed frustration over the presidential endorsement of a British fringe right wing group, Trump showed the finger to Theresa and her kingdom.

But what specifically is Fransen saying that bothers Wolffe and others? Fransen is a rabid Islamophobe. She openly hates Muslims and devotes her time to inciting hatred against Muslims and Islam. However, Fransen and Britain First do not hate all foreigners and immigrants. Wolffe may not readily admit it, but Fransen and Britain First function as an extension of Israel’s long arm. Britain First openly supports Israel. Britain First, like the British Defence League, often waves Israeli flags and rallies for the Jewish cause to the point that one can hardly tell who is more Juif; Theresa May or Jayda Fransen. The following statement Fransen made in Poland resembles the official Likud party mantra for the Goyim:

“There is a cancer moving through Europe and that is Islam. Our children are being bombed, our children are being groomed and our government does nothing … Evil will not prevail.”

During the presidential campaign, Donald Trump was accused by his Jewish opponents of inciting antisemitsm.  Trump wooed his voters by pointing directly at Wall Street bankers, Soros and the Fed. Of course, a few days after his victory, Fox News informed us that Trump wasn’t anti Jewish at all, he was actually the ‘First Jewish President.’

Watch Jayda Fransen performing a “solidarity patrol” with the Jewish community

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJkQcCU6lpU.

Trump and Fransen are not ‘Fascists;’ they are manifestations of Zionist power. And they are not acting alone. Jeremy Corbyn quickly and rightfully denounced Trump for circulating Fransen’s hateful videos. But what exactly is Corbyn doing to prevent the ongoing Zionist purge of his party now that it has been reduced to a laughable Orwellian grotesque? And what about Theresa Je Suis Juif May, is she any better than Fransen? I would like to know how many Syrian refugees May’s government has taken in. Last but not least, why do The Guardian and Wolffe work so hard to conceal the fact that the so-called ‘fascist’ Britain First is acting as an Israeli tool cultivating hatred in our midst?

Trump is not a Fascist. He is a democratically elected right wing enthusiast.  Trump is not a  ‘national socialist,’ he is, in fact, a national ­uber capitalist. Trump was elected on a platform that pledged to combat immigration, build walls and seal American borders. Whether or not we are willing to admit it, Trump’s political agenda is indistinguishable from Jewish nationalism. The Alt Right model which Trump appears to support is inspired by the Zionist project. Not to see or accept this is nothing short of pathological denial.

If Wolffe and the Guardian are concerned about Trump and Fransen, they had better transcend the banality of name calling and try to understand what exactly they are up against. Britain has already proved that it is not entirely impressed with the multi cultural agenda. Brexit was a clear sign of British mass fatigue.

The West is growing nostalgic and calling people ‘fascists’ or ‘Nazis’ is not going to help, in fact it may prove to be counter effective.

If they want to burn it, you want to read it

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto, 

Amazon.co.uk , Amazon.com and  here (gilad.co.uk). 

 

@GazaBoatConvoy Vs. The Lobby

November 30, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

perspective.jpg

Reported by Gilad Atzmon

 Jewish Labour councillor Adam Langleben (@adamlangleben) is angry that his demands haven’t been promptly met.
 “There is a member of the Labour Party in the constituency where I am a councillor,” Langleben told the JC.  “She is an antisemite. I put in a complaint in July and to date no action has been taken. She continues to attend meetings and take part in street stalls. I believe in due process and I had hoped that my formal complaint would lead to a swift and speedy conclusion… But it has not.”

The Labour party is being blamed for not taking action against an active party member who ‘attends meetings and takes part in street stalls.’ The member in question runs a Twitter account called “GazaBoatConvoy”.

This Twitter account is known to many of us as an outspoken supporter of Palestine and an opponent of Zionism and Jewish power. So it is no surprise that Jewish councillor Langleben, a rabid pro Israel Labour (local) politician, is unhappy with GazaBoatConvoy. But he has a point, it is  perplexing that the Labour party has been so slow to react. Considering its total domination by Jewish institutions as shown by the Labour party’s current purge, one would have expected GazaBoatConvoy to be booted back in July.

Apparently, the Labour party is not doing its job very well. Although it was initially committed to working class politics, operating as a Jewish thought police and running kangaroo trials on a massive scale and on  behalf of The Lobby has taken its toll. Seemingly, there are a few ethical Labour members still hanging on to their membership cards.

According to the Jewish councillor, GazaBoatConvoy describes itself as a Labour member who joined the party as part of its £3 membership offer in 2015 specifically to vote for Jeremy Corbyn. The convoy  tweeted in April 2016 that “I want my £3 back. I thought Corbyn would rid Labour of Zionist occupation. Seems he buckled under Zio bullying”. As we can see, the Jewish councillor also wants to cleanse the miserable party of any sense of irony.

Langleben told the JC that “what had angered him the most about this case..was that the person in question was ‘abusing the Palestinian cause’ to promote a ‘sick and twisted’ view of Jews.”

I wonder, is it really down to a pro Israel Jewish councillor with zero record of activity in support of Palestinians to determine what ‘serves’ the Palestinian cause? I am also not sure that a pro Israel Labour politician is an impartial judge of what is or what isn’t a ‘twisted view of the Jews.’

“There are millions of people who care about the Palestinians, and they go about that without being antisemitic. But there is a… narrow strain of pro-Palestinian activism which engages in the blatant antisemitism that we’d expect from the BNP or the Nazi party”.

This is a common mistake that must be addressed once and for all. If Labour Party’s values are ‘built on equality and social justice’ as the Party’s website insists, then the Party must depart from its Big Brother McCarthyite culture. If  ‘Labour values’ mean anything at all, then the Party must reject Israel and Zionism. It must  openly support Palestinian resistance and endorse the notion of absolute freedom of expression. At the moment, we see the complete opposite.  The Labour Party has been reduced into an Orwellian grotesque.  It demands each of its members to perform a total submission to a peculiar immoral foreign Zio-centric narrative.

I am not holding my breath. I do not see Corbyn as forceful enough to amend the situation and as far as I am aware, there are no members of the Labour Party who could push for an ethical transition of any sort. In its present incarnation, the Labour party has been hijacked by the interests of a tiny, yet influential foreign lobby.

Bearing in mind Labour’s hopeless situation, I hereby offer a simple resolution for the current GazaBoatConvoy affair. I would suggest that the Party expel GazaBoatConvoy at once or better yet, exchange  GazaBoatConvoy’ for the notorious Anti Zionist Zionist Tony Greenstein (cowboy) as he perfectly embodies Labour’s political duplicity and crypto Zionist affiliation. 

 Problem solved I guess…

exvjange.jpg

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto, 

Amazon.co.uk , Amazon.com and  here (gilad.co.uk). 

%d bloggers like this: