Hamas Commander: Iran Only State Seeking Islamic Unity

Zahar is one of the “Good Guys” among Hamas Previous leadership. In the above interviw with Al-Mayadeen he claimed:

We are loyal to those who stood by our side and helped us.

When asked about the restoration of the relationship with Syria, Zahar replied:

We are with the restoration of the relationship with Syria and all Arab and Islamic countries [Yahudi Arabia].  

He undertook “not to interfere in internal Arab affairs so as not to deviate from our jihadist alliance” and immediatly contradicted his undertaking and demanded that

Syria should rebuild itself and absorb all its components [Brotherhood] in order to overcome the crisis.

Blue is mine

Seven years ago, his brother Khalid Amayreh demanded the same: “The Syrian regime must change, or it will be changed” 

The required change is not democracy, elections, new constitution, freedom of speech, nor lifting emergency law, its nothing but handing over Syria to his Brothers of America,

On Iran, the “Only State Seeking Islamic Unity”,  7 years ago, his brother Khalid Amayreh 

worried about the “ill-will that keeps coming from the Iranian and Shiite religious establishment, he called “all gulf states to unite before its too late”, because Shea may take Mecca.

BTW, all such anti-syria articles are removed from PIC site a mothpiece of Obama Brothers


Hamas Commander: Iran Only State Seeking Islamic Unity

September 5, 2017

Hamas official, Mahmoud Zahhar

Hamas high-ranking commander Mahmoud Al-Zahhar stated on Monday that Iran is the only state that seeks the islamic Umma’s unity, adding that the Palestinian movement’s relations with the Islamic Republic and Syria must be improved.

Al-Zahhar also demanded that Iran intensifies its aids to the Hamas movement, adding that Syria and Turkey must follow the Iranian track in order to sustain the Islamic unity.

Source: Al-Manar Website


Ikhras Shoe-Of-The-Month Award Winner – August 2017



The Ikhras awards committee is pleased to announce the Muntadhar Zaidi Ikhras Shoe-Of-The-Month for August, 2017 is awarded to the UAE’s ambassador to the United States, Yousef al-Otaiba. Otaiba, who is proudly marketing himself as the new Arab face of the emerging GCC-Israel alliance, is proving to be a hawkish actor at the behest of Israel’s most aggressive lobbying groups. The UAE ambassador, son of the country’s first oil minister, avoids all mention of Palestine and centers his policy remarks around how the UAE can best serve the interests of U.S. imperialism and the usurping Zionist entity. What Otaiba’s actions and recently leaked emails further prove is not only is there a budding plot against Iran, Syria and the region, but that GCC actors will work tirelessly with the Zionist lobby behind closed doors in order to sacrifice the Palestinians and liquidate the Palestine cause.

Far from bring the powerful diplomat wielding influence in Washington, as U.S. beneficiaries (journalists, “think-tankers” and lobbyists) of his largess often describe him, Otaiba is little more than a filthy pimp-turned-mouthpiece for a tyrannical, repressive regime presiding over a mini-state with no real geopolitical influence.

In the grand scheme of International relations, the ambassador of any state does not determine foreign policy in the host country. He or she functions as the representative of his government and oversees official diplomatic relations. The interests of the U.S. ruling class, internal foreign policy determinants of the U.S. regime and the global balance of power remain the determining factors upon which U.S. foreign policy and bilateral relations can be analyzed and understood. When it comes to a tiny, subordinate Arab Sheikhdom like the UAE, which is entirely subservient and beholden to its imperialist masters, the alleged charisma and interpersonal skills of the ambassador become even less relevant.

Nevertheless, this has not prevented “Brotaiba”, as he’s known at the U.S. State Department, from spending lavishly on Washington DC “thinks tanks”, journalists, lobbyists, and extravagant dinner parties.

But if the power and influence of a country is measured by the number of parties hosted by its ambassador or the media attention he garners, the People’s Republic of China is an irrelevant city-state ruled by a single Arab family with no significant role or influence on the global stage.

The fawning media coverage of Otaiba in the U.S. resembles the coverage former Saudi Arabian Ambassador Bandar Bin-Sultan used to receive. But in contrast with Bandar, who came across as a rehearsed Arab buffoon mimicking the White Man, Otaiba has a natural American demeanor, speaks English with ease, and is far more comfortable among the political and media elites. Back in the UAE, his ability to oversee a well-funded promotional campaign for the Al-Nahyan family regime and host lavish dinner parties makes him a shrewd political operative. And for the ignorant royals that employ him, Otaiba’s mastery of American clichés, mannerisms and idiosyncrasies qualify him as an intellectual of the highest caliber.

Numerous Ikhras readers have nominated Otaiba for the Shoe-Of-The-Month. He has partly earned this award for coordination with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a thoroughly pro-Israel think-tank funded by Sheldon Adelson. In leaked emails authored by FDD CEO Mark Dubowitz, sent to Otaiba and FFD Senior Counselor John Hannah, who served as national security advisor to Dick Cheney, there is a discussion of how the UAE could target Iran by pressuring companies investing in the country. “This is a target list for putting these companies to a choice, as we have discussed,” the email read in part.

In numerous email exchanges to Otaiba there is talk of a larger campaign against Iran which would use “U.S./UAE policies to positively impact Iranian internal situation” in order to “contain and defeat Iranian aggression“. Hannah even complains to Otaiba, who is considered to be somewhat of a lavish celebrity in national security circles, about HAMAS after learning that members of the organization will be hosted in an Emirati hotel. Otaiba responds by throwing blame on the U.S. military base in Qatar, writing “How’s this, you move the base then we’ll move the hotel 🙂.”

The leaked exchanges between Otaiba and officials from the FDD show clear intentions as to destabilizing Iran in order to bolster both the U.S. and Israel’s hegemony in the region, with Gulf monarchs working as offense and, as usual, providing the funding.

Otaiba has also advocated for a direct, all-out U.S. war on Syria to topple the government and punish the fiercely independent and stubbornly anti-imperialist Arab state for refusing to accept the same subservient role the GCC regimes embrace and was on grotesque display during Donald Trump’s recent visit to Saudi Arabia.

Otaiba has also been emphasizing that new leaders in the GCC will work to liquidate the Palestine cause under the guise of a comprehensive Arab-Israeli “peace” settlement: “I think the region needs this,” Yousef al-Otaiba, the United Arab Emirates ambassador to Washington, said in an interview. “If we can make a breakthrough on this right now, it would be a game changer for the region.

Otaiba and the royals that employ him do not speak for the Palestinians and the Arab world. And despite their delusions of power and influence, they will remain irrelevant vassals unable to deliver on the promises they’ve made to their American masters and Israeli allies. Otaiba has wholeheartedly accepted his role as a leading proponent of Arab collaboration with Israel and works tirelessly to foster close ties to the pro-Israel lobby on behalf of the GCC regimes, a role for which his previous experience as a pimp prepared him well and earned him the August 2017 Ikhras Shoe-Of-The-Month.



Ikhras awards the Muntadhar Zaidi Shoe Of The Month to the House Arab or Muslim individual or organization whose behavior that month best exemplifies the behavior of what Malcolm X described, in the language of his own time, as the “house negro” (see video). The award is named in honor of the brave Iraqi journalist Muntadhar Zaidi who threw his shoes at war criminal George W. Bush at a time House Arabs and Muslims were dining with him at the White House and inviting him to their mosques. Arab dictators, political and religious leaders, assorted traitors and puppets of the empire are also qualified to enter the shoe of the month competition based on their own subservience to U.S.-led global imperialism and normalization with Zionism. Contest guidelines include the “James Zogby Rule” which prohibits any one individual or organization from winning the award more than three times a year. Ikhras encourages readers to submit their own nominations.

BDS Changed its Goal Statement Once Again

A to Zion-The definitive Israeli Lexicon 

A to Zion-The definitive Israeli Lexicon

By Gilad Atzmon

When the call for Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions of Israeli goods was established in 2005 in Ramallah its first demand was for Israel to:

Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN Resolution 194

 “End[ing] its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantl[ing] the Wall” (http://www.bdsmovement.net/call)

This call didn’t leave room for interpretation. Back in 2005, the BDS movement disputed the legitimacy of the Jewish State.

But in 2010, its primary goal was changed significantly into:

“Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall.”

This change didn’t leave much room for a doubt. The BDS has become an instrument to legitimise the Jewish State within its pre 1967 borders.

There was no public record of the process that led to this change. And, as if to prove its deceptive nature, the change appeared only in English and has never been integrated into any of the official BDS publications in Arabic. It is likely that most Palestinians were not aware of the change made on their behalf by people who claim to be their ‘grassroots’ representatives.

My research suggested that the change in the BDS goal statement that, de facto, legitimised the Jewish State took place at the time the BDS movement became popular amongst Jewish activists and started accepting funds from liberal Zionist George Soros’s Open Society Institute.*

But the BDS campaign has now decided to change its first goal once again. It now reads:

“Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall” (https://bdsmovement.net/what-is-bds)


The 2010 embarrassing reference to the 1967 Israeli occupation is now  removed. However once you read the small letters, you grasp that BDS is more of a JVP (Jewish Voice for Peace) rather than a Palestinian voice.  Though the goal does refer, once again, to Israeli “colonization of all Arab land,” the statement now makes it clear that it limits its demands to territories occupied in 1967:

“International law recognises the West Bank including East Jerusalem, Gaza, and the Syrian Golan Heights as occupied by Israel. As part of its military occupation, Israel steals land and forces Palestinians into ghettos, surrounded by checkpoints, settlements, and watchtowers as supplemental to the illegal apartheid Wall. Israel has imposed a medieval siege on Gaza, turning it into the largest open air prison in the world. Israel also regularly carries out large-scale assaults on Gaza that are widely condemned as constituting war crimes and crimes against humanity.”

Though the first goal may resemble the original 2005 BDS call, in practice it is consistent with the left Zionist mantra – it opposes the occupation.

Disappointing? Not really. Treacherous? It depends on who you ask.

The truth of the matter is that the  BDS is not really a Palestinian grassroots organization as it claims to be. It is an integral  part of the ever growing solidarity industry. Though I don’t have any doubt about the benevolent intentions of many BDS supporters and leaders, the BDS movement has managed to unwittingly serve Israel and its interests. It has managed, for instance, to divert the essential discussion about the legitimacy of the Jewish State and the Right of Return into an endless – and meaningless – discussion about Israeli products. It, de facto, legitimized the existence of the Jewish State over the land of Palestine.

*You can read more about BDS, Soros money promoting BDS campaign here: http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/israelpalestine-and-the-queer-international-a-book-review-by.html

Kosher Palestinians! by Nahida Exiled Palestinian

 by Nahida Exiled Palestinian 

A kosher Palestinian, is the one who he believes in:

  • The “specialness” and “chosen-Mess” of Jews”, for they always “know better” and no movement or organization can function if not headed by them and guided by their “light”
  • They believe that anyone on earth be called racist supremacist except Jews, so they take “strong stands” against “Palestinian racism” and “Palestinian antisemitism” if Palestinians question the right of the “Jewish state” to exist, but a Kosher Palestinian never ever questions Jewish supremacy and racism, worse, they accuse those who request a condemnation of ideological Jewish supremacy of being “antisemites”
  • They also believe in the “primacy of Jewish suffering”, more than their own, and revere the “holocaust” as their one and only true deity worthy of worshiping, never to be doubted or questioned

Image result for Vanessa BeeleyBOYCOTT ALL SOFT ZIONISTS…and APOLOGISTS


Ali Abunimah of Electronic Intifada supports cancellation of the US Nakba speaking tour in case it offends the Zionists. I say boycott Abunimah and all the other sell outs and vassals of the illegal and oppressive state of Israel.

Abunimah’s [false] claim was that Alison Weir of If Americans Knew [one of the best websites educating Americans about the Palestinian cause] might have been in the audience.

Anyone who supports this Zionism apologist, please feel free to unfriend me right now.

Paul Larudee of the Free Palestine Movement.

Alison Weir had nothing to do with the event and apparently showed up to hand out flyers for her website. One of the SJPers criticized Alison,claiming that the issue was Alison’s refusal to respect Israel’s “right to exist” as a regime. The Palestinian speaker, Amena Ashkar, agreed with Alison’s view on this matter, but was told by organizers that she was not allowed to voice her opinion. The speaker, being a principled person, refused to give the talk if her feelings about the colonial regime that dispossessed her were going to be censored from the discussion. So the organizers decided to cancel the entire event.

Their own explanation doesn’t even make sense. If the problem was Alison Weir or her flyers they could have simply removed the materials (and Alison as well), and in fact it appears they had done that just. Instead they cancelled the entire event, and that is because they did not want Amena’s views to be expressed.

It is beyond despicable that Stanford SJP would go to this length to cancel a talk by two Palestinian refugees who have spent their lives in a refugee camp, unlike the privileged brats who organized — and then cancelled –this talk. That includes an 85-year-old Nakba survivor. But now they want to rationalize their disgusting behavior by drudging up rumors and innuendo about some white lady who was in the audience and her pamphlets?

Stanford SJP owes their guests — and the rest of us — an apology. I am currently speaking to some of the national tour organizers about putting out a public statement where Amena can express the ideas Stanford SJP denied her the opportunity to speak at Stanford, and calling on Stanford SJP to retract this ridiculous explanation and show some accountability for what they just did.



Gilad Atzmon‘s article:



A Handy Guide To International Boycotts

May 12, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

Boycott or Herem in Hebrew, used to mean ‘united against the Goyim.’ Now the Goyim are trained to unite against themselves. I found the folloning  here: https://thenodster.wordpress.com

A Handy Guide To International Boycotts

Iran = OK

Iraq = OK

Soviet Union (deceased) = OK

Putin’s Russia = OK

South Africa = OK

Zimbabwe = OK

Venezuela = OK

Cuba = OK

Syria = OK

Qatar = OK

North Korea = OK

Nicaragua = OK

Libya = OK

Israel = Not OK. Anti-semitic.

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.


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.

Did Israel just shot-down a Russian passenger plane



The plane is operated by Russian Metrojet. Its website identified the pilot, captain Valery Nemov with excellent flying record of 12000 hours. It also said that the aircraft was in good shape.

The Egyptian government of military dictator Gen. Sisi has called the accident a result of “crashed landing” due to some technical problems.

Now, here why I smell some rotten eggs in this story;

1) Gen. Sisi is a Crypto Jew and very popular within Israeli regime,

2) Israel has offered its “help” to investigate (remove any evidence of Mossad involvement as it did France, Argentina, Spain, Kenya, the US, UK, Turkey, etc. in the past) the accident,

3) US-Israel’s baby ISIS has taken credit for shooting the plane to revenge Russian airstrikes in Syria against anti-Assad rebels,

4) Egyptian Sinai Peninsula which borders Israel, was occupied by Israel for nearly two decades,

5) Egypt has welcomed Russian military involvement in Syria claiming that would root-out Salaafi/Wahabi terrorism,

6) Israeli poodle governments in Bonn and Paris have banned commercial flights over Sinai Peninsula, and

7) Rita Katz, the Jewish ‘video expert’ has already released a video in support of ISIS claim.

Russian Transport Ministry officials have rejected ISIS claim saying that “plane at 31K feet is outside MANPAD range”.

Mokhtar Awad, an analyst with the Center for American Progress, has also rejected ISIS claim – calling it “quite vague”. The Washington-based group was founded by Bill Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, John Podesta (Jewish) in 2003.

Lt. Col. Stephen Avery, who had piloted Airbus 321 in the past, has also rejected IS claim in the video. He says that Airbus 321 doesn’t have the power to reach 31,000 feet range.

I’m surprised the Egypt, Israel and United States have not awarded the honor of planting a bomb inside the plane to anti-Israel Muslim Brotherhood that supported Mufti al-Husseini against Jew settlers.

The shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missile MANPAD has a maximum range of 1500 feet. The question is who provided the IS those missiles other than the US or Israel?

Based on the above facts, I believe it was a warning to Putin to get the hell out of Syria by USrael.


’External’ Factors Caused Crash of Egypt Plane: Russian Airline

Local Editor

  The Russian passenger jet that crashed in Egypt could only have broken up midair because of “external” factors, the airline company said Monday.

“There are no technical failures that could lead to the plane breaking up in the air,” Alexander Smirnov, director of flights at Kogalymavia charter airline told a press conference in Moscow.

He added that “the only explanation — is some kind of external action”, without giving further details.

He said the plane began falling out of control and the pilots had no time to report the emergency situation.

“The crew totally lost control and for that reason there was not one attempt to get in contact and report on the accident situation onboard,” Smirnov said.

The plane was “flying out of control — that is it wasn’t flying, it was falling,” he said.

“Apparently by that moment the plane had received significant damage to its construction that did not allow it to continue the flight.”

While stressing the need to wait for the findings of an investigation, Smirnov said that he ruled out both a technical fault and human error.

“We rule out technical faultiness of the plane, we exclude a mistake by the pilot or the crew, the so-called human factor,” he said.

He said the plane was in “excellent technical condition” at the time of the accident.

The Moscow-based airline’s technical director also ruled out that damage to the plane while it was under previous ownership could have been a factor, saying that it had been regularly checked since.

Source: AFP

02-11-2015 – 13:52 Last updated 02-11-2015 – 13:52

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!

Hot Off The Press: How The Israeli Government Subverted The Solidarity Movement

July 04, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

 By Gilad Atzmon

Two days ago, some invaluable information surfaced relating to the treacherous role of Jewish liberals in derailing the BDS campaign. A Ynet article disclosing the Israeli strategy relating to the pro Palestinian campaign disclosed the close links between the Israeli Government and the Jewish ‘pro’ Palestinian organizations. It revealed the manner in which both have been acting in concert to subvert this humanitarian discourse.

According to the Ynet article, Eran Shayshon, Director of Policy and Strategy at the Reut Institute*, had a clear message to his Israeli Government – we need to recruit left-wing groups associated with BDS to control our opposition. The mission set by Shayshon and the Reut Institute was: 

“to divide and drive a wedge between the leaders of the BDS campaign.”

“For Israel, the key is to actually making a clear distinction between the extremists and the rest. The goal is to divide them,” Shayshon says.

“That means to be open to listen to criticism from moderate voices against the government, in order to return the extremists back to their natural size. To achieve this goal, we explained to the government representatives that we have to operate with as large a base as possible; meaning, recruit not only right-wing agencies and groups to the fight, but also left-wing groups who criticize the government.”

This clarifies the role of JVP within the movement and explains the rationale behind the BDS campaign against some of our most profound pro-Palestinians voices (Norman Finkelstein, Alison Weir, Daniel Barenboim, Jacob Cohen and many others).

And here is Max Blumenthal/JVP/ Mondoweiss’ thought policing agenda as articulated in clear by Hasbara merchant Shayshon in Jerusalem: “The message for left-wing organizations is that criticism is legitimate, but there are red lines of terminology and entities with whom we cooperate.” When you read this you may ask yourself, who was it who changed Mondoweiss comment policy, banning any criticism of the Jewish State that analyses Jewish perspectives. Was it Philip Weiss in NYC or Eran Shayshon in Jerusalem?

In case you still find this hard to accept, I’ll be as clear as I can. Shayshon instructed his government that liberal Jews, the Blumenthals, JVPs and Mondoweisses are good for the Jews. Now, we may understand how Max Blumenthal and Philip Weiss make it in and out of Ben Gurion airport. Shayshon has provided us with a possible answer. I guess that the same applies to Omar Barghouti, as long as he keeps close ties with Judith Butler and the Jewish crowd.

Shayshon admits that his strategy wasn’t as successful as he wished.  “We initiated meetings between government representatives and several Jewish left-wing organizations in Israel and abroad, but it did not bear any fruits. So we lost effective and good soldiers for the fight.” We now know that our so-called Jewish ‘allies’ have been negotiating with the Israeli Government behind our backs while claiming to care for Palestinians and their plight. This is a textbook case of a controlled opposition operation. We are inundated with Immanuel Goldsteins. I am not shocked by this–my book The Wandering Who exposes the ideological, political, spiritual and cultural continuum between Zionism and its imaginary Jewish dissent—but I am surprised Shayshon exposed his Sayanim network in our midst. I trust he knows what he is doing.

But the betrayal doesn’t end there.  Even B’Tselem, an organization many of us cherish, is also primarily committed to the Jews and their interests. Uri Zaki, B’Tselem’s former US Director told Ynet,

“I went to universities in the United States, specifically on Apartheid Week, in order to explain that I was an Israeli patriot, and to oppose the boycotts. Like the Jewish left-wing groups in America who joined the fight against the boycott, our position has great influence. It is true that we will not fight a boycott of settlement products, but our efficacy in the fight over sovereign Israel’s good name is very obvious, much more than that of right-wing groups.”

Interesting isn’t it? Zaki, an Israeli patriot, was welcome to speak at Israeli Apartheid Week in opposition to BDS, Anna Baltzer, another Jew ‘anti’ Zionist was desperate to stop me from talking at the same Israeli Apartheid Week because I advocate the Palestinian Right of Return. She failed by the way.

According to Ynet,

“B’Tselem has already proven its contribution when it strongly criticized the Goldstone Report, which greatly embarrassed South African jurist Richard Goldstone.”

The message is unmistakable. Jewish progressives are dedicated primarily to Jewish interests and the Jewish state is such an interest. There is no way to hide it anymore. This explains why the Palestinian solidarity movement has never achieved anything for the Palestinians. It is now becoming clear that the BDS is the front that Israel prefers to fight. Instead of confronting authentic Palestinians over their Right of Return, Israelis are engaged in an internal Jewish battle over ‘the right to BDS.’ It might be hilarious except that the lives and the prospects of millions of deprived refugees are at stake.  

Read more about The Jewish Solidarity Spin http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/2015/5/16/the-jewish-solidarity-spin

* Reut Institute -an agency advising the Israeli National Security Council, the Strategic Affairs Ministry and the Foreign Ministry.

Christians Reacting To Rabbi Alissa Wise

July 02, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

Following the publication of my deconstruction of Rabbi Alissa Wise’s appalling  speech at Sabeel, I was approached by many outraged humanists, some of then Christians. People out there are starting to show some clear signs of fatigue of the Jewish Left spin…
1. An email from Janice (pseudonym). For the obvious reason Janice asked to hide her name. Once again, the fear of Jewish terror i must assume.

Subject: Rabbi Alissa Wise at Friends of Sabeel

I was at the Sabeel conference in Vancouver, and I agree with every word you say. The truth is, however, that I was too scared to stand up and say what I was thinking: “We’re here to talk about the Palestinians and BDS, and you’ve just given us a lecture on anti-semitism!” I did start to say it to the people sitting near me (who I mistakenly thought were murmuring about it). One of them turned out to be Jewish – so I ended up backpedalling (out of cowardice). I sent an email on this issue to the organizers, but never heard back. Rabbi Wise highjacked the evening conference, and we all just sat there and took it.


2. An email from Renne Kumba:

I think rabbiness Alissa Wise could say what she really wants
a bit more directly and straightforwardly. For example:

My not-so-dear lemmings, o.k. Christian sheeple,

I am sure that by now all of you know very well that
the Holocaust was the biggest event in the whole of human history, and there is absolutely nothing else that could ever match that. Don’t
even think of trying!!
It’s completely VERBOTEN!!
And yes, you like to celebrate your Christian “thingies” like
Christmas, Easter or something in between, but please keep it to a
bare, invisible minimum.
We have a very strong allergy to all those Christmas trees, lights,
ornaments, carols, animals, plants, music, cheers, spirit, food (well, maybe not food), etc.,
so you have to respect that and not to expose us to those nasty, very
nasty, allergens.
We thank you in advance for your cooperation. So, no more public Christmas from now on.
Understood? Oh, and no more Easter as well. All those eggs, bunnies, crosses, hymns, etc.  Who needs that anyway?
Although, my not-so-dear, soon-to-be sacrificial lambs.
It is ok to slightly, and I mean slightly, criticize Israel, but…. you
have to watch your mouth. (Or we’ll wash it with our brand new,
Nazi-made soap), and you shalt not utter anything that is not approved and stamped “kosher” by us. If you disobey, we’ll have
our not-so-secret weapon directed at you at once.
We’ll call you an anti-Semite (or a Jew-hater) and you life will be a
pure misery from that moment on. So, don’t you even try. ADL is already watching you, btw.
And they, mind you, are doing an excellent job.
Thanks Abe, (she blows kisses in the air).
As you all know, we want peace. Peace on our terms and peace among us Jews. You have to work very hard for that. Our peace is very important,
so don’t you get lazy. You must make sure that there is
peace for us.
We sort- of love you, but ONLY when you do exactly what we
tell you to do and ONLY what we tell you. Appreciate it.

You rabbiness Alissa, also called Wise.

P.S. Where is the standing ovation, the applause?
Where is everybody?? They all left? How dare they? What a bunch of anti-Semites.


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!

BDS Excommunicates the Great Jacob Cohen

I have just learned that Jacob Cohen, the internationally acclaimed Jewish humanist and intellectual was forbidden to attend the French BDS annual meeting. While it is hard to determine whether the BDS movement has actually liberated a single Palestinian, the list of top pro Palestinian intellectuals and activists who have been harassed, smeared and excommunicated by the BDS* keeps growing.  One may wonder, when did the BDS stop being a ‘Palestinian Grassroots Movement’ and become a synagogue?

The following is a translation of an email sent to Cohen by the BDS campaign organiser.

Re: Meeting 7 July.
Dear Jacob Cohen.
We inform you that we do not accept your registration application because of your association with Egalité et Réconciliation  (E&R) and Dieudonné, known for their anti-Semitism. They are contrary to the spirit of BDS that strongly opposes to any racism.

Typical idiotic statement by BDS’ leadership. The assertion that E&R and Dieudonné are associated with Jacob Cohen concede that both E&R and Dieudonné are neither anti-Semitic nor they are anti-Jews. They are certainly oppose Jewish political Power. And I wonder, shouldn’t the BDS also oppose Jewish political power?

I saw Jacob Cohen last Sunday at the Bal Des Quenelles celebration held near Paris. I asked him whether he had been officially excommunicated by the Jews. Back in 2012 following the publication of his positive review of my book, ‘The Wandering Who,’ the Jewish French Palestinian Solidarity Group demanded that Cohen withdraw his support for my work or face the consequences. Cohen refused to bow to the Jewish pressure and excommunicated himself. But apparently this wasn’t enough. BDS, now a Jewish occupied zone, decided to punish the French celebrity further.

It would be illuminating to find out from the commissars at BDS France what is it about E&R that they hate so much?  Is it the fact E&R and Dieudonné’s sites pull 2 million visitors a day? Is it the fact that E&R and Dieudonné are part of a widely popular and diverse movement that includes people of colour, multi ethnic migrants as well as French working class?  Is it because E&R and Dieudonné are everything the left Jews claim to be but have never been?

Watch Jacob Cohen in a conversation with Gilad Atzmon (Paris 2013)

*George Galloway, Greta Berlin, Jacob Cohen, me and many others

Druze of Syria within the Takfiri Storm

Mistaken is the one who thinks, even for a moment, that the “Nusra Front” and its sister groups distinguish between a Muslim and a Christian when carrying out their terrorism. These groups in fact make their living off the smell of blood. They enjoy dancing on the bodies of humans. Their act of takfir does not prevent them from burning down entire cities, or destroying homes over the heads of their inhabitants.

al-Nusra Terrorists

The examples are numerous. Those Takfiris are alone in targeting the minorities of the Levant. The Assyrians of Hasaka were not spared their hatred, as well as the Yazidis in Iraq, and the Christians of Ma’loula. Today, the Druze minority took its ample share of the above mentioned crimes.

The massacre by the ‘Nusra Front’ in Qalb Lawzah, Idlib, did not surprise the Druze community. They were aware that the ‘razor’ will reach their necks someday. The history of the Takfiris demonstrated this. However, what fueled the anger (of the Druze community) was the manner in which Lebanese MP Walid Jumblatt reacted to the news of the massacre.

Many of the children of his religious community, as well as his supporters, are beginning to see the bottom of the abyss that their leader led them to, according to a leadership source in Chouf. Many of the sons of the Druze sect are ashamed by the ‘Beik’ for what they call the great crime that he virtually committed by courting the ‘Nusra Front’, and denying the occurrence of the massacres (that they were committing), thus giving them a verdict of innocence, freeing them of responsibility for their terrorism.

However, the insistence of Jumblatt on providing justifications for these terrorist gangs, and stripping off the label of ‘takfir’ from them, pushed (Jumblatt’s community) to consider that ‘their leader ‘ has lost the ability to distinguish between friend and foe. Therefore, they felt certain that there is no alternative to bearing arms in order to confront the upcoming threats.

Instead of following the logic of providing justifications for these terrorist groups, it would have been better for Abu Timor (Jumblatt) to follow the approach of his father, Kamal Jumblatt, and to take (lessons from) from his pan-national history, in which he said: “the one who escapes from the battle of life, is like the one who escapes from the battle of truth”.

Perhaps it would have been better if he had weaved together a statement categorically denouncing what the hand of terrorism has carried out, that perhaps – according to the leadership source -would have washed away the sin of continuous courtship of the ‘Nusra Front’. The Unitarians (Druze), who have long put their faith in the son of the sect (Jumblatt), were surprised by the reaction of Jumblatt, causing the Mokhtara Palace (belonging to Jumblatt) to lose much popularity.

The [Druze community] thought for a long time that the ‘Beik’ will protect them by relying on the influence he has within the (Syrian) ‘opposition’ on the one hand, and within the leading capital cities of ‘NATO’ on the other. Today, their hope has been lost. According to the leadership source, they have become disillusioned. They repeated in their meetings, whether private or public, (questions such as) ‘in which era does this man live in’, and ‘to which denomination does he belong?’.

This has put Jumblatt before a major challenge, having found himself in a “dilemma”, his wrong bets leading him to this situation. His call for the Druze Religious Council to convene is only aimed at covering up his “weak” stances. According to the source, Jumblatt seeks through this council, which is only made up of “his group”, to minimise the fallout and justify his positions before his community, but in vain.

One who reflects on the archive of the statements of the ‘Beik’ since the outbreak of the Syrian crisis until recent days, can see that he views the ‘Nusra Front’ as a harmless child. Probably Abu Timor acted based on the principle of “whichever hand you cannot bite, then kiss it”. He forgot that the pound requires a pound and an ounce (traditional Arab saying). These types of creatures [Nusra Front] can only be dealt with on the basis of a life or death battle. He thought that through these stances, he will protect the people of his community.

The writer and political analyst Ghalib Abu Muslih goes further than this. He says that the fate of the Druze, especially those in the Summaq Mountain are not even on the list of concerns of the Mokhtara leader Jumblatt. He called more than once for the Druze of the Mountain of the Arabs to adopt neutrality and a non-combative stance towards the ‘Nusra Front’, towards which he has shown affection.

Abu Muslih was not surprised by all the tweets and statements that Jumblatt cleverly made. In his opinion, the history of this man testifies to betting on Saudi Arabia, and the United States, and on other states which brought up the Takfirists in Syria. He puts his interests above any national interest, and he bets on the hope that the people of his community do not stand in national ranks that are hostile to those aforementioned states.

What matters most for this man, is that he protects his head, and nothing else matters after that. Abu Muslih regrets – though is not surprised – by the approach adopted by the resident of Clemenceau [Jumblatt], which is far removed from the path of his father, the pan-Arab Kamal Jumblatt. In his opinion, the only son of Kamal resorted to similar positions during many historical stations under the pretext of defending the Druze community, just like what happened during the ‘Israeli’ occupation.

It is Walid Jumblatt, and do not expect from him anything other than that, concludes the writer.

Source: al-Ahed news

15-06-2015 | 09:07

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!

Charlie Hebdo, the people behind it and its anti-religious provocation disguised as freedom of expression

Charlie Hebdo Slaughter: Tragic Lesson for Europe to Learn

The bloody events that took place in Paris on January 7 made once again remember the «Clash of Civilizations» used as the way to guide social and political process. In the West the idea to put the theory to practical use surfaced in 1990 with the publication of The Roots of Muslim Rage by Bernard Lewis, a British-American historian specializing in oriental studies. Bernard Lewis painted Islam as a reactionary religion immune to changes and filled with hatred against the West and its values. According to him, a «surge of hatred» is rising from the Islamic world to reject the Western civilization based on Judaism and Christianity.

* * *

A great number of information warfare experts work hard to shape the image of enemy among Europeans. Charlie Hebdo, the Paris-based weekly satirical publication, has a special role to play in this campaign. Its main instrument is anti-religious provocation disguised as freedom of expression. 

Founded in 1970 by left-wing journalists as an outlet of «revolutionary criticism», it folded to be resurrected in 1992 when Philippe Val became its editor-in chief. He is a follower of Zionist Bernard-Henri Lévy, the French philosopher with Zionist leanings, who was actively involved in the events in Libya and, then, Ukraine. Since then Charlie Hebdo has been mocking the religious feelings of Muslims and Catholics. 

In 2006 Charlie Hebdo republished several cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad from Jyllands-Posten, a Danish newspaper. The cartoons had led to widespread anger and violent protests across the Muslim world. Muslim organizations wanted to prevent the publication, but the satirical outlet had influential sponsors.

Stéphane Charbonnier (Charb) became the chief editor in 2009. He continued the policy of inciting hatred and anti-French feelings among Muslims. The war in Libya was raging. Charb mocked those who suffered as a result of merciless and cynical attacks delivered by NATO. One of his followers has said that Charlie Hebdo became a classic war time media outlet with caricatures mocking the enemies. Charbonnier was candid enough to admit that the edition made its living by publishing a provocation every week. 

In 2011 Charlie Hebdo was attacked for the first time – it was gutted by a fire bomb to cause arson for having run cartoons of the prophet Mohammed. Back then the staff put out a new issue with a cover drawing of a bearded, presumably Muslim man kissing a cartoonist. The caption was «Love: Stronger than hate». New caricatures appeared in 2012 and 2013. The publications were condemned by religious organizations and politicians. The editorial policy remained the same to provoke the January 7 night attack by gunmen leaving a dozen people dead, including the editor-in-chief and well-known cartoonists. One of the recent drawings by Charlie Hebdo’s editorial director Stephane Charbonnier shows a bearded man with a shoulder gun making the same gesture. Its caption reads: «Still no attack in France?» followed by «Wait, we have until late January to present our wishes».

The cover of the latest issue of Charlie Hebdo features another figure well-known to French readers: Michel Houellebecq. He was the one to depict Islam as «the most stupid religion» and «Islam is a dangerous religion». «Soumission» (Submission) is a novel set in France in the 2022, when, to counter the far right Le Pen, French voters elect a moderate Muslim president. Then the country quickly shifts into a Muslim-like state. The Sharia laws are introduced and Europeans submissively accept the reality. The book hit the shelves the same day – January 7. It had given rise to fierce debate when the angry Muslim organizations said Michel Houellebecq was responsible for inciting Islamophobia and racial hatred. 

The January 7 attack gave rise to immediate and charged reaction in the West. The French political forces were unanimous saying the act was a declaration of war to France and its democratic values, especially the freedom of expression. National unity was the best way to counter «terrorism and barbarity». The position received wide support from the Pope to UN Secretary General. The terrorist act was described as a barbarian crime. Je suis Charlie (I am Charlie) shirts and placards expressed the cry of defiance as a wave of coordinated public actions was replicated across the world.

But nobody in the West has clearly defined the attitude towards the perverse perceptions of freedom of expression that engender irresponsibility threatening human lives and undermining civil peace. 

On January 7 the wave of protest against «barbarian Islamic fundamentalism» was staged the very same way the anti-Islam campaign was orchestrated in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist act in the United States.

Ramazan Osmanov is a Kurdish political scholar. For 15 years he has been studying the implementation of US Greater Middle East policy. According to him, «The Americans spook the world with the terrorist Islamic State and got formal pretext to justify their presence in Syria and Iraq. The caliphate is moving to the Caucasus and Europe to make the world face another Armageddon. At least some forces in the Middle East take up arms and resist but in Europe Islamists have scored a great success. Europeans are like rabbits, they have lost the ability to offer armed resistance. A dozen of seasoned Islamic State warriors are enough to capture a peaceful European city. Believe me! Besides, the Islamists have agents everywhere. Marseille and Brussels have already become Arab cities where police is afraid to intervene».

* * *

Few of European analysts offer honest and sober assessment of the situation after the Paris massacre. One of them is Tierry Meyssan, a French journalist and political activist, the founder and president of the think tank Réseau Voltaire. In his January 7 article he called the Charlie Hebdo attack «the French September 11». According to him, it was not revenge, but rather a provocation aimed at sparking a European civil war as «the Clash of Civilizations» process is taking shape. The perpetrators knew the action would lead to a split between 6 million of French Muslims and the French non-Muslim population. «We do not know who sponsored this professional operation against Charlie Hebdo, but we should not allow ourselves to be swept up. We should consider all assumptions and admit that at this stage, its most likely purpose is to divide us; and its sponsors are most likely in Washington», concludes Thierry Meyssan.

Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture Foundation on-line journal www.strategic-culture.org.

Fabrication in BBC Panorama’s ‘Saving Syria’s Children’


Correspondence with the BBC over allegations that the Panorama documentary ‘Saving Syria’s Children’ broadcast on 30 September 2013 included staged sequences purporting to show the aftermath of an alleged incendiary bomb attack on an Aleppo school on 26 August 2013


UPDATE 1: In July 2014 BBC Worldwide began blocking You Tube copies of ‘Saving Syria’s Children’. Other editions of Panorama remain unaffected. On 1 August 2014 BBC Worldwide provided this explanation. The BBC iPlayer version of ‘Saving Syria’s Children’ expired on 17 October 2014. Please refer either to this copy or to this (downloadable here).

UPDATE 2: On 8 August 2014 the BBC issued  its decision not to place my complaint before the Trust. A final appeal containing fresh evidence identifying a possible participant in the “napalm bomb” event is here (summary here and further brief submission here).

UPDATE 3: The BBC’s further response of 26 September 2014 is here (a second BBC decision at this stage appears unusual). My final submission of 13 October 2014 is here.


On 29 August 2013, as the UK House of Commons vote on possible military intervention in Syria was closing, BBC News at Ten broadcast a report by Panorama reporter Ian Pannell and cameraman Darren Conway which claimed that a Syrian fighter jet had dropped an incendiary bomb containing a “napalm-like” substance – possibly thermite – on the playground of an Aleppo school.

The report contained harrowing scenes of teenage boys and young men, their skin apparently in tatters, racing into what the report describes as “a basic hospital funded by handouts” to be treated for burns. In one particularly disturbing scene a tableau of young men writhe, drool and groan, seemingly in great distress.

On further viewings, however, this scene in particular is strikingly odd. The young men are quiet and mostly static until spotting the camera upon them, at which point the central figure (Mohammed Asi) raises his arm and the group instantly becomes animated and begins groaning in unison.

Mohammed Asi begins to sway and lurch, the boy in the black vest suddenly pitches onto his side, the boy in red raises his head and peers quizzically around, while the boy in the white shirt rises effortlessly to his feet. As the camera pulls backboy in a yellow ‘Super 9′ t-shirt rises from the floor, flailing his head and torso and rolling his eyes as a team of medics sweeps dramatically in.





This and other questionable elements in this brief report prompted my first letter to the BBC on 4 October 2013.

While I was completing this letter the BBC broadcast a follow-up news report on 30 September 2013, shortly prior to the transmission of the full Panorama programme Saving Syria’s Children the same evening.

Comparing the 29 August and 30 September reports a discrepancy in the soundtrack was apparent. In the first, “Dr Rola” (her face covered by a mask) had referred to “napalm”, in the second she said “chemical weapon”. I commented on this in the PS to my letter. The audio editing was subsequently discussed by former UK ambassador and political blogger Craig Murray here and here. Speculation on this point has since been widespread (see for example this RT report). My own concern remains on the evidence of wider fabrication in the hospital scenes.

The BBC’s initial response of 2 December 2013 dealt largely with the editing of Dr Rola Hallam’s words. My correspondence with the BBC continues (see here and below). Some of the points that have arisen are as follows.

Date and time of the alleged incident

The BBC and most other reports state the events occurred on Monday 26 August 2013.

In an article for Foreign Policy Dr Saleyha Ahsan, one of the British doctors featured in Saving Syria’s Children, gave the date of the alleged attack as 27 August, a highly surprising error for a journalist to make, especially considering her statement that “out of all the war zones I have ever been to, today has been by far the worst”.

In a 3 October article Dr Ahsan wrote “This month, Dr. Hallam and I found ourselves in a school that had been hit by a napalm-like bomb”. This seems intended to suggest that Drs Ahsan and Hallam were present at the school as it was allegedly being attacked, rather than at the hospital treating the alleged victims; “this month” is also odd as Dr Ahsan claims elsewhere to have visited the school two days after the attack, i.e. on Wednesday 28 August .

A series of eighteen photographs showing two of the alleged victims originally appeared on the website Demotix dated 25 August. Demotix has since altered the date of the photographs to 26 August. When the images were dated 25 August, Ian Pannell denied that they featured victims seen in Panorama; after the date was changed, the BBC acknowledged that they did.

Other discrepancies abound. For instance a Human Rights Watch report states (p12) that the attack on the school occurred “around midday”; a report by the Violations Documentation Center in Syria (a regularly cited source by the BBC) says it took place at 2.00 pm (see p4 of the PDF version); Ian Pannell has categorically stated the attack happened “at around 5.30 pm at the end of the school day”.

Conflicting accounts of the first victims

At 31 minutes in Saving Syria’s Children Dr Ahsan is shown attending to the first alleged victim – a baby, accompanied by his father. Ian Pannell’s narration at this point states “no-one’s quite sure what’s happened.” Only subsequently do the “dozens” of other alleged victims begin to arrive. This sequence of events is portrayed in several other accounts, including others given by Dr Ahsan.

However in an interview with Australian broadcaster ABC on 27 November 2013 Dr Ahsan gives an entirely contradictory account (from 02:38):

Interviewer: “Those scenes are hard to listen to but even harder to watch. Can you tell us what you saw that day?”

Dr Ahsan: “It was quite a quiet day and I was beginning to think ‘ooh gosh I’ve really got my timing wrong ‘cause what’s the point in me being here if I’m not going to be helping out?’ and then suddenly, standing to my left I just saw this rather strange vision I ju…  I I felt as if I was having an out of body experience because I couldn’t quite work out what I was seeing, there was a boy, covered in this strange white dust, had wide staring eyes, his clothes were hanging off him, and he had this huge laceration on the side of his face, and his skin looked like it had areas of burn, and he was saying in a very calm voice ‘where shall I go okhty?’ which means sister in Arabic…”

The baby and his father do not feature at all in this account. Instead Dr Ahsan states “it was quite a quiet day” prior to the arrival of the person she now claims was the first victim – a boy covered in “strange white dust”, who had a “huge laceration on the side of his face” and who spoke to her, asking her where he should go. This clear and vivid account is entirely irreconcilable with what viewers saw in ‘Saving Syria’s Children’.

Alleged injuries of the baby and his father

The baby featured from 31 minutes in Panorama does not appear to have suffered “severe burns” as claimed in the narration, and certainly not the 80% burns that were later claimed by Dr Hallam which, as the high percentage indicates, would cover the majority of the infant’s body. Rather, he appears unscathed and in no unusual degree of distress (click images below to enlarge).



At 31:18 Dr Ahsan’s advises “this baby needs to be picked up” and the child is robustly handled by Dr Ahan and the supposed father. If the baby had truly suffered severe burns of up to 80% this would seem extremely inappropriate and reckless.

Subsequent accounts of the infant’s injuries range from “nasty scolds [sic] on his legs” (Dr Ahsan) to Dr Hallam’s “80% burns”.

Ian Pannell’s BBC News article states that the baby’s father “was also burnt and sat helplessly on a stretcher clutching his son”. Dr Hallam states (from 22:17) he “also had a burnt face”. However the child’s supposed father (seen over Dr Ahsan’s left shoulder at 31:16 and again holding the baby at 31:31) appears animated, vocal and entirely unscathed.



Plausibility of injuries and demeanour of other alleged victims

Most of the alleged victims presented in ‘Saving Syria’s Children’ are notably calm and quiet. Some mill around in the hospital and its yard.

  • From 33:05 – 33:46 Lutfi Arsi (in the yellow ‘Super 9′ t-shirt) calmly inspects his fellow alleged victims, helpfully directs a member of staff towards them, ambles to the back of the room, pulls up a chair and takes a seat.*
  • In the same sequence note the bizarre “zombie” swaying and lurching of the man in the white t-shirt at the back of the room; identifiable by the three black marks on his t-shirt, this is the supposed teacher who some time later (judging by the addition of bandages to his arm) provides this perfectly relaxed and cogent interview.
  • At 36:52 Anas Said Ali speaks in English (“I’m so bad, so bad”) .
  • At 38:13, allegedly suffering 86% burns, Lutfi Arsi sits up to peer inquisitively at the camera

The implausibility of this behaviour is indicated in the comments provided by a practising doctor in the section immediately below.

All alleged victims in ‘Saving Syria’s Children’ seem to have retained their eyebrows, despite white cream suggesting treatment for facial burns. Note in particular the pristine eyebrows of the alleged teacher and those of Siham Kanbari “a few weeks after the attacks in hospital”.

The appearance of supposedly peeling skin on Ahmed Darwish‘s and Lutfi Arsi’s hands and arms is unconvincing. In particular, Ahmed’s hands appear exaggeratedly large, as if sheathed in prosthetics. As a practising doctor states below “Some are shown with skin hanging off but the flesh beneath is not that convincing it actually looks like more skin”.

* On 18 July 2014 BBC News published a short “retrospective” on the “napalm bomb” incident. From 32 – 40 seconds the background figures in the hospital, including Lutfi Arsi and the “teacher”, are heavily blurred.





A doctor’s view of the alleged injuries

A practicing doctor has offered a medical opinion of the alleged injuries in ‘Saving Syria’s Children’:

I have watched the panorama BBC documentary. Makes for interesting viewing but I think the scene of the school children coming in with the burns was an act.

I worked on trauma and orthopaedics last year for four months, so I have worked with burns victims first hand. These victims displayed what appeared to be “less painful” burns. They were able to sit down, be touched by others even talk. This is not how a severe burn victim would present. Most victims:

  • would be screaming the place down in agony. Even after treatment and with all sorts of pain drugs they still hurt and still scream.
  • Many burns victims cannot even focus enough to follow instructions such as sit down and wait because of pain. This young boy, I found very odd (I don’t think it is cultural thing as pain is pain and it can drive a person mad).
  • would have difficulties with their airways, almost immidiatley, hence in the UK many are intubated and treated in ITU. This shows them able to speak and breathing very well no obvious signs of respiratory distress like coughing, shallow breathing etc. In such an attack the poisons are inhaled.
  • They say they douse them in water (wouldn’t the high spray of the hose cause more problems to burnt skin).
  • when they came to the hospital they have evidence of this white powder on their skin but not evident burn blisters which fill with fluid with in minutes. Some are shown with skin hanging off but the flesh beneath is not that convincing it actually looks like more skin.
  • The walk is very odd. why??
  • The other concern in burns is their fluid status as they will be losing large amounts of fluid through their burns. The cannula is essential to resuscitate them. Im not sure what A and E that doctor worked in but I have not worked in A and e this year and I have placed I think almost 6 cannulas in peoples feet.* Any access is essential in burns, a standard training skill!
  • If the poison was dropped from above (a plane) their hair would have been lost and patches would be evident. Many still had a full heads.

* The reference is to  is to 37:37 in Saving Syria’s Children (see image below) where Dr Saleyha Ahsan attempts to insert a cannula into Mohammed Kenas‘ foot, stating “As you can see there’s nothing coming up for me to put a cannula in”.

The doctor’s opinion is congruent with that of former UK ambassador Craig Murray who, in a 31 March 2014 email regarding the nomination  of Ian Pannell and the “Chemical School Attack” report for One World Media awards, wrote: “having personally been in my career in rather similar conflict situations, I was struck by the strange absence of panic and screaming both by patients and surrounding family – I have seen people in that sort of pain and situation and they are not that quiet and stoic, in any culture.”


“Im not sure what A and E that doctor worked in but I have not worked in A and e this year and I have placed I think almost 6 cannulas in peoples feet. Any access is essential in burns, a standard training skill!” – practicing doctor on the efforts of Dr Saleyha Ahsan to insert a cannula at 37:37 in ‘Saving Syria’s Children’

Two women wearing identical clothes

A woman wearing a distinctive black dress with a gold flower design rushes through the hospital gate at around 36 minutes in Panorama with a man claiming to be her father (they appear of similar age). In other footage from the hospital a younger woman is seen wearing an identical dress and blue headscarf. Why would clothing apparently be recycled between victims in this way?

The older woman (centre) appears at the hospital gate at 36 minutes in Panorama (with her “father”, who appears to be of similar age) and moments later is seen in a chronologically earlier sequence being carried into the hospital on a stretcher. She is perhaps 40. There is no suggestion that she is intended to represent a student at the supposed school, which would indeed be extremely implausible given her obviously mature years.

An identically dressed younger woman features in You Tube video of the same event (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb4XvVu7g_8). She is a teenager or perhaps in her early twenties and her words (“all I saw was people on fire, I was on fire, my friends were on fire”) indicate that she is to be understood as an alleged student at the supposed school.

Misleading and manipulative editing

‘Saving Syria’s Children’ is extensively edited, arguably in order to mislead and manipulate. Some examples are as follows:

  • At 02:08 in the 29 August BBC News report Mohammed Asi is shown climbing down from a truck, accompanied by Dr Ahsan’s words “more coming? More? More?” However Asi had already been shown walking into the hospital from 01:44.
  • At 34:08 in Panorama the narration states “within minutes the hospital is overwhelmed” over footage of Lutfi Arsi being carried into the hospital. However this is Arsi’s third appearance in the programme, having previously been seen at 32:26 and from 33:05 – 33:44.
  • Victim X is shown arriving in the hospital yard at 35:35 in Panorama, heralded by Dr Ahsan’s words “I think there’s more coming, I think there’s more coming”, despite his having previously seen being “treated” inside the hospital from 34:36 – 34:55.
  • A woman exclaims “yama yama yama” as she enters the hospital at 34:02; the same audio clip is also used over footage of Victim Y entering the hospital at 31:44.

‘Saving Syria’s Children’ blocked by BBC Worldwide

At the start of July 2014 BBC Worldwide began blocking  You Tube copies of ‘Saving Syria’s Children’, including the copy I had been referencing in my correspondence from 30 January 2014 and the copy referenced by Australian peace campaigner Susan Dirgham in her letter of complaint to the BBC.

I began substituting links in my blog to correspond with an alternative You Tube copy of the programme. On 20 July this too was blocked by BBC Worldwide. (On 23 July it was removed by the channel owner). Part 1 of a version originally shown on Australian television featuring the hospital scenes in excerpt was blocked at some point after 20 July, while Part 3, which does not feature Panorama footage, remains available. The final existing full You Tube copy of ‘Saving Syria’s Children’ was deleted by BBC Worldwide between 25 and 28 July.

Dozens of other Panorama programmes posted by non-BBC entities remain on You Tube.

The BBC iPlayer version is available in the UK only until 30 September 2014.

This copy of ‘Saving Syria’s Children’ has been uploaded to a personal website and adheres to the timings given in this blog. It can be downloaded here. A somewhat higher quality copy is available here.

On 1 August 2014 BBC Worldwide provided this response to questions about the You Tube blockings.

mphill cropped

Who were the alleged victims in ‘Saving Syria’s Children’?

This report by the Violations Documentation Center in Syria links to this list of 41 alleged victims of the attack. Several of the names are identifiable as those ascribed to individuals featured in ‘Saving Syria’s Children’, however their date of death in all cases is given as 26 August.

While this reflects the Panorama account in respect of Lutfi Arsi (Loutfee Asee on the list), whom the BBC claims “died on his way to hospital in Turkey”, it contradicts it in respect of Anas Sayyed Ali (Anas al-Sayed Ali), whom the BBC claims “died a few days later in hospital in Turkey”; Ahmed Darwish (Ahmad Darwish), who was filmed by Panorama “a few weeks after the attack in hospital in Turkey”; Siham Kanbari (Siham Qandaree), also filmed later in hospital and whom Dr Ahsan has stated died on 20 October; and Mohammed Asi (Muhammad Assi) who is pictured in an image provided by BBC Audience Services “two weeks after the attack in hospital in Turkey”.

The list omits Mohammed Kenas who according to Panorama “died on the way to hospital in Turkey”.

The list includes a Muhammad Abdullatif, age 15. Mohammed Abdullatif is the name of the adult eyewitness who appears in the 29 August BBC News report (02:54) and in this non-BBC footage of the same “interview”.

The Violations Documentation Center is regularly cited as a source in BBC reports and analysis.

Dr Rola Hallam and Hand in Hand for Syria

Dr Rola Hallam is described as “a British doctor visiting for the charity Hand in Hand for Syria”.

Dr Hallam’s father is Dr. Mousa al-Kurdi. According to Dr Hallam’s colleague Dr Ahsan, Dr al-Kurdi is “ involved politically with the Syrian National Council”.  In this Al Jazeera interview Dr al-Kurdi advocates for the Syrian National Council’s recognition as the sole representative of the Syrian people (from 1:22) and relates how, following his address to the Friends of Syria summit in Istanbul in 2012, attended by Hillary Clinton, he personally told Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu “You’re not doing enough” and demanded of Professor Davutoğlu and several other foreign ministers, including Victoria Nuland of the US State Department, “either you defend us or you arm the Syrian Free Army to defend us – you have the choice” (from 5:15).

When questioned at a Save the Children event Dr Hallam stated of her father “he is certainly not a member of the Syrian National Council; he is a gynaecologist, who like most Syrians has taken an interest in what’s happening in his country”. 

Dr Hallam is a member of the charity Hand in Hand for Syria’s executive team. Hand in Hand’s original three-star logo is plainly based on the flag adopted by the Free Syrian Army and the Syrian National Council. In 2014 the charity removed the stars from its logo.

Until July 2014 the Facebook banner of Hand in Hand’s founder, Faddy Sahloul, read WE WILL BRING ASSAD TO JUSTICE; NO MATTER WHAT LIVES IT TAKES, NO MATTER HOW MUCH CATASTROPHE IT MAKES. The image was removed shortly after this comment was posted under a Guardian article.

Further questions about the financial affairs and political affiliations of Hand in Hand for Syria have been raised by Dr Declan Hayes of the University of Southampton.



Atareb: “a basic hospital funded by handouts”?

A recent fundraising campaign by Hand in Hand for Syria identifies the hospital featured in Panorama as Atareb Hospital, Aleppo.

On 29 August 2013 Ian Pannell described Atareb as “a basic hospital funded by handouts” (03:17) and on 30 September 2013 as a “field hospital”. Dr Hallam also refers to Atareb as a “field hospital” at 38:04 in ‘Saving Syria’s Children’.

This Hand in Hand campaign page for Atareb (now deleted) states that the hospital opened in May 2013 as a small A&E unit and now “offers 68 beds and a wide range of services – from maternity and neo-natal facilities to many outpatient departments, three excellent operating theatres and a laboratory”. Atareb is described as “One of the country’s most sophisticated remaining hospitals” with operating costs of “between $60,000 and $70,000 a month”. Atareb’s current facilities are further indicated in the campaign materials.

The campaign page, dated 10 June 2014, also states that “The hospital’s funding comes from a European donor which supports global emergency response. This funding reaches Hand in Hand for Syria via an INGO partner. Although that funding is still very much in place, after one year our agreement with our INGO partner has come to an end – and the funding has to come through a partner.”

This makes clear that major funding for Atareb was in place prior to Ian Pannell’s description of it as “a basic hospital funded by handouts”. Indeed, images on the Atareb Facebook page posted prior to 26 August 2013 depict a relatively well-equipped facility, including a kidney dialysis machine and surgical and x-ray facilities. (Please note there are some highly distressing images on the Atareb Facebook page).

Regular Atareb Hospital staff absent on day of alleged attack

This post on Atareb Hospital’s Facebook page shows that on 26 August 2013, the date of the alleged attack, hospital staff were “attending a battle first aid training course in Antakia, Turkey”. This may indicate that some of the medics filmed by the Panorama team were not regular Atareb staff members. If not, who were they?

Bias and lack of analysis in ‘Saving Syria’s Children’

Susan Dirgham, National Coordinator of Australians for Mussalaha (Reconciliation) in Syria, has lodged an official complaint about ‘Saving Syria’s Children’ invoking sections of the BBC Editorial Guidelines which relate to Accuracy, Impartiality, Fairness, Conflicts of Interest and Accountability.

Complaints correspondence with BBC

First letter of complaint to the BBC    4 October 2013

BBC response to first letter of complaint    2 December 2013

Second letter of complaint to BBC    30 January 2014

BBC response to second letter of complaint    18 February 2014

Third letter of complaint to the BBC    17 March 2014

BBC Editorial Complaints Unit Provisional Finding    23 April 2014

Comments on BBC Editorial Complaints Unit Provisional Finding    7 May 2014

BBC Editorial Complaints Unit Final Report    19 May 2014

Request to BBC Trust for review of  Editorial Complaints Unit’s report   11 June 2014

Urgent submission to BBC Editorial Standards Committee   19 June 2014

BBC Senior Editorial Strategy Adviser’s decision  8 August 2014

Final appeal to BBC Trust and summary of grounds of appeal  2 September 2014

Further submission to BBC Trust   14 September 2014

BBC Senior Editorial Complaints Adviser’s decision   26 September 2014

Request for review of Senior Editorial Complaints Adviser’s decision   13 October 2014

CAIR And The Clowns Of Muslim American Organziations

September 30, 2014

[Ikhras Note: The following post first appeared on The Angry Arab Blog on September 27, 2014 (photo added by ikhras). CAIR is the highest-profile House Muslim organization in the US and a recipient of the ikhras shoe-of-the-month award. To learn more about this corrosive, establishment organizationvisit ikhras.]

You know the story: all Muslim and Arab American organizations in DC have fallen under the direct influence of Gulf regimes, as have most Arabs journalists in the capital. This happened right after 1990 when the Saudi regime sent various princes to close the deal to control all Arab media and organizations in the West (as many were under the influence of Saddam or Qadhdhafi). 

Saudi Arabia did not want dissent from Arabs in the West lest they disturb their lobbying and propaganda efforts in the West. I read that CAIR and other Muslim American organizations held a press conference to issue statements against ISIS: as if any Muslims in the US or elsewhere listen to them and adhere to their standards. And why is it their business to issue exclusive denunciations?

Were Jewish organizations expected during the savage war on Gaza to issue statements of denunciations against Israeli terrorism? And don’t they with their theatrics not reinforce the association between Islam and the terrorism and kooky ideology of ISIS (shared by the same patrons of Arab and Muslim organizations in DC)?

They should if they want condemn terrorism in all its form and not focus on “Islamic terrorism” and they should even categorically reject the notion that there is a religious label to terrorism.  But then again: it is a job and they have to do it and those are willing to abandon two of the five pillars of Islam in return for a photo op at the White House.  Instead, they should say that ISIS should be blamed on the foreign policies of the US and its allies who have in the last several decades produced the monsters of Al-Qa`idah and ISIS, among other terrorists roaming the Middle East region.

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!

No Comments: Listen to the Bastard, Khalid Mishael, thanking the “brave” Amir of Qattar, Erdoghan, Tunis Marzouki, Kuwait, Oman, Malisya………….and Iran

 خالد مشعل من خندقه في فندق بخمسة نجوم في الدوحة عن الانتصار في العصف الماكول بغزة؟؟؟ بدون تعليق 

مشعل يكتفي بشكر قطر وتركيا وتونس.. ويتعرض للنقد

رئيس المكتب السياسي لحركة حماس وخلال المؤتمر الصحفي عبر عن شكره لكل من قطر وتركيا وتونس، وأشار إلى وقوف بعض الدول الأخرى كالسودان والكويت وعمان، على وقوفها إلى جانب غزة أثناء العدوان، وقال إن المسؤولين الإيرانيين اتصلوا به للتعبير عن وقوفهم إلى جانب المقاومة.
رئيس تحرير جريدة “رأي اليوم” الالكترونية عبد الباري عطوان علق في حديث للميادين على الشكر الذي قدمه خالد مشعل لبعض الدول على وقوفها إلى جانب غزة خلال العدوان فقال “هذه الدول لم تقدم أي شيء لغزة، وخالد مشعل أراد أن يجامل معظم الزعماء العرب”، وتابع “من كان مع قطاع غزة هم بالدرجة الأولى من زود القطاع بالسلاح والصواريخ”.
وأضاف عطوان “كان على مشعل أن يشكر الدول التي زودت المقاومة بالصواريخ والأسلحة، ووقفت في خندقها لسنوات عديدة.. كنت أتمنى أن يذكر أن هندسة الصواريخ تعلمتها المقاومة الفلسطينية من حزب الله.. وأن يذكر أن الصاروخ الذي أطلقته المقاومة ووصل إلى حيفا بأنه صناعة سورية، وأننا تعلمنا هذه التكنولوجية من خلال بعثات ذهبت إلى إيران”.
من جهته أستاذ العلوم السياسية بجامعة النجاح الدكتور عبد الستار قاسم علق على الشكر الذي وجهه مشعل للنظام الرسمي العربي بالقول “هذا الزمن ليس زمن المجاملات، ونحن دفعنا ثمن المجاملات”، سائلاً مشعل “ما هي الأنظمة العربية التي وقفت مع غزة والنضال الفلسطيني؟”، مضيفاً إن السيد مشعل أراد أن يتحدث ويجامل دبلوماسياً، ولكنه يعرف في قرارة نفسه أن هذه الأنظمة تعاونت  أمنياً مع إسرائيل في كثير من الأحيان”.
المصدر: الميادين


من غزة المنتصرة عن البنيان المرصوص

القيادي في حركة الجهاد الإسلامي د.محمد الهندي

الجهاد وسرايا القدس في مهرجان النصر: مستعدون للمعركة المقبلة ونشكر من وقف مع المقاومة

وجّه القيادي في حركة الجهاد الإسلامي د.محمد الهندي التحية إلى شعب فلسطين الذي احتضن المقاومة والتحية لكتائب المقاومة الذين ثبتوا في الميادين وقدموا القادة الشهداء.
وقال الهندي في كلمة خلال مسيرة مسيرة حاشدة للجهاد احتفاءً بانتصار المقاومة بمعركة “البنيان المرصرص”: غزة في الميدان تدافع عن كل معاني الحق في العالم وفشل العدو الذي استهدف تصفية قضية فلسطين. وقال: في فلسطين قررنا أن ندفع ثمن المعادلة الظالمة في العالم لأننا شعب حر. ولأننا نريد لشعبنا أن يتحرر قررنا أن نواجه العدوان الصهيوني
وقال: على المجتمع الدولي أن يخجل من جرائم الاحتلال خلال العدوان، مضيفاً أن: 86 بالمئة من الشهداء جراء العدوان من المدنيين وفقاً للأمم المتحدة، وأكد أن الاحتلال ليس له الحق في الدفاع عن النفس بل عليه أن ينهي احتلاله
وقال الهندي: نحن في الخندق الأول ندافع عن المنطقة من تغول “إسرائيل”، ومشكلتنا مع هذا العدو الذي يحتل أرضنا.
وفيما يتعلق بالتنسيق مع الاحتلال ومفاوضات السلطة قال: اليوم يتم تشييع أوسلو إلى مثواها الأخير التي دفنت تحت ركام غزة ولا حاجة لاستمرار الترتيب مع العدو، مؤكداً بأننا: بحاجة إلى وقف التنسيق الأمني مع العدو في الضفة الغربية حيث المعركة الحقيقية.
وفيما يتعلق بحجم جرائم الاحتلال بغزة قال الهندي: نحتاج إلى الانضمام إلى ميثاق روما من أجل محاكمة الاحتلال على جرائمه، وأنه: انكشفت حقيقة الاحتلال المتعطش للدم ولا يحق لهم بعد اليوم احتكار دور الضحية.
وقال الهندي: نقول للشعب الفلسطيني لقد حققتم انتصاراً ولأول مرة يستجدي الاحتلال الأمن في حيفا وتل أبيب، وأضاف: رغم الألم والمعاناة لم يسمع العالم منكم كلمة ضجر واحدة وأثبتنا للعالم أنه وبعد حصار 8 سنوات واجهنا تتار العصر.
وقال الهندي: علينا أن نتجند الآن لخدمة الأهالي والأيتام والمصابين دون انتظار المساعدات الخارجية.


In case you missed it:
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!

Palestine’s ‘allies’ must stop condemning armed resistance

“Nobody is asking white people to take up arms and join the Palestinian factions in Gaza – just respect the right and the choice of the Palestinian people: stop issuing blanket condemnations of armed struggle.”

A relatives of four Palestinian boys, all from the Bakr family, mourns over the body of one of the boys at the morgue of al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City, on July 16, 2014. (Photo: AFP – Mahmud Hams)
Published Thursday, July 17, 2014
Abby Martin, the anchor for the Breaking the Set program on Russian network Russia Today had a short segment about media bias on Palestine last week. Overall it was good. The spot was popular on social networks, with a copy of it being subtitled into Arabic.
In the segment, she criticized White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest for stating that “we support Israel’s right to defend itself against these vicious [Palestinian] attacks.” She commented, correctly, that “it’s important to not frame this as a cycle of violence that’s equal. One is the colonizer-oppressor, one is the colonized oppressed.”
Unfortunately, she appended a caveat: “I denounce deadly force on both sides” – a wide reaching statement which seems to call for Palestinians to lay down their arms in the face of Israeli aggression and ultra-violence.
The American rapper Lupe Fiasco has been critical of Israel in the past and has spoken out in favor of Palestinian rights, famously waving the Palestinian flag at one of his concerts. But as this latest Israeli aggression rained down on Gaza, he took to Twitter (where he has 1.2 million followers) to condemn “both sides” for what he termed over-reaction, later clarifying that he was referring to “the Hamas rockets” on the Palestinian side.
Left-wing pundit and columnist Owen Jones responded to the Israeli assault with a fairly popular article criticizing Israel. But he also criticized Palestinians resistance, stating that there is “no defense for Hamas firing rockets into civilian areas” – taking as a given this Israeli propaganda line.
Like most other journalists, Jones is ignoring the fact that in their statements, Hamas and other resistance factions regularly declare military targets. As the brilliant Nazareth-based journalist Jonathan Cook often points out, tight Israeli military restrictions on reporting the landing locations of Resistance rockets makes this all hard to verify.
Far too many of those in the West who regard themselves of Palestine’s allies speak in similar terms. Activists and critical journalists will make all the right criticisms of Israel, and speak up in support of Palestinian rights. But far too often they balk at the simple fact that Palestinians have a right in international law to used armed struggle against Israel.
Why should this be so hard?
In objective terms, it is not a controversial position to take. Numerous UN resolutions back up this basic right of occupied peoples in international law, including a General Assembly resolution of November 1974, which “reaffirms the legitimacy of the peoples’ struggle for liberation from colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation by all available means,including armed struggle” (my emphasis).
Even officials of the normally supine Palestinian Authority (PA) will pay lip service to right to resist. This past weekend, the PA’s ambassador in London, Manuel Hassassian told the BBC News channel that the rockets of Hamas and other resistance factions are being launched from Gaza in “self defense” and they should not stop until Israeli aggression against Gaza stops. His remarks stood in contrast to Mahmoud Abbas’s criticisms of the rockets.
While it’s true that Resistance factions are accountable to the laws of war no less than anybody else, it should not be the role of westerners to call for Palestinians to lay down their arms, even as they are being brutally attacked by Israel.
Whether people in Europe and America like it or not, there is awidespread Palestinian consensus, in Palestine and in the diaspora, in favor of all forms of resistance against Israel, including armed struggle.
With an enemy as brutal as Israel gunning for them, one should not expect anything else of the Palestinian people. It is often taken as a given that because Palestinians are out-gunned by Israel that fighting back is “useless” and that the rockets are “puny” or “pathetic.” This blinkered viewpoint, however, ignores the basic dynamic of guerrilla warfare, and the facts of recent regional history.
The Palestinian people know very well that South Lebanon was liberated in 2000 only through the forces of armed struggle: at one point, Hezbollah’s military force could have been said to be “puny” and hopeless against Israel. But the Resistance ultimately prevailed.
Israel refers to Palestinians as a whole as “terrorists” – it is a blanket and racist term. They do not care whether the rockets hit military bases or civilian areas: anyone who dares stand up to them is slandered as a “terrorist.” When Hamas commandos last week very precisely attacked an Israeli military base that was being used to launch assaults on civilians in Gaza, these brave fighters were still slandered as “terrorists.”
There are Palestinian thinkers, writers and leaders who have legitimate questions and criticisms surrounding the efficacy and morality of particular manifestations of armed resistance – but let’s leave such questions to them.
Regardless of particular strategic and tactical considerations, the choice of the Palestinians in the struggle against Israel is, and always has been resistance. Nobody is asking white people to take up arms and join the Palestinian factions in Gaza – just respect the right and the choice of the Palestinian people: stop issuing blanket condemnations of armed struggle.
Asa Winstanley is an investigative journalist and associate editor with The Electronic Intifada, based in London.
Related Articles 
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!

Can we really expect the USA to help fight ISIS terrorists in Iraq when they are arming/funding them in Syria?

State Dept: ISIL in Iraq and Syria ‘Entirely Different Situations’

Iraq faces ‘disintegration’ as militants push toward Baghdad; Obama leaves options open
Read more at http://endthelie.com/2014/06/12/iraq-faces-disintegration-as-militants-push-toward-baghdad-obama-leaves-options-open/#XsKoiqvDxYmwlrt5.99

The crisis in Iraq only continues to get worse as the country faces what some are calling “disintegration” and Islamists militants continue their push toward Baghdad.

Read our latest: “Militants in Iraq seize Tikrit, take Turkish diplomats hostage, carry out mass beheadings” and “Iraqi police, military abandon posts and weapons as militants seize Iraq’s 2nd largest city

Militants associated with the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) have now seized Tikrit and Mosul, the second-largest city in Iraq.

In responding to the situation in the country and helping the embattled government fight with insurgents, President Barack Obama said, “I don’t rule out anything,” according to The Telegraph.

“Iraq is going to need more help, it’s going to need more help from us and it’s going to need more help from the international community,” Obama said.

The government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is now calling for U.S. airmen and drone pilots to return to his country, according to the Daily Beast.

The Iraqi government isn’t requesting a surge in ground forces like the one seen in 2007 under President George W. Bush, but they are seeking air strikes and assistance with intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

In addition to Tikrit and Mosul, ISIS now claims they have completely surrounded the city of Samarra, which is just 70 miles north of Baghdad, according to The Washington Post.

The entire country seems “to be fast slipping out of government control,” the Post reports.

Kirkuk, a city in northern Iraq, is now under the control of the semiautonomous Kurdish government, after Iraqi security forces fled the town instead of fighting.

A senior official with the Kurdish forces told the Associated Press that they did not take over the oil-rich city of Kirkuk.

Northern Iraq is now “beyond the central government’s authority,” according to the Post.

When al-Maliki attempted to get parliament to grant him greater powers under a state of emergency earlier this week, the lawmakers failed to assemble the quorum required to do so.

The Associated Press reports that there are now signs that ISIS is “backed in its campaign by former military officers and other members of ousted dictator Saddam Hussein’s regime.”

One such individual is Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, the former deputy of Hussein who escaped during the 2003 invasion led by the U.S. and has avoided capture ever since.

Two unnamed senior intelligence officials told AP that an armed group led by al-Douri and other military figures from the Hussein era have joined ISIS in the fight against the government.

In Tikrit, witnesses told AP that posters of Saddam Hussein and al-Douri were raised.

The involvement of individuals from the Saddam Hussein regime has created the potential to “escalate the militants’ campaign to establish an al-Qaida-like enclave into a wider Sunni uprising,” according to AP. The possibility of geographical fragmentation has become increasingly likely.

Experts told The Washington Post that it is “wrong to assume that heavily fortified Baghdad, with its large Shiite population and concentration of elite forces, could easily fend off an ISIS attack.”

Not What the US Planned (ARE YOU SURE?) : Al-Qaeda Tears Down Syria-Iraq Border

Not What the US Planned: Al-Qaeda Tears Down Syria-Iraq Border

Bulldozers Tearing Down Earthen Border

While most of the high profile coverage of al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI)’s latest gains came in the major cities it took over, one of the most telling aspects of what is happening in Iraq’s northwest and Syria’s northeast could be seen only at what passes for a border.

Syria and Iraq are largely divided by a berm, an earthen mound border that prevents vehicles from driving through in places other than the official crossings. The problem is neither Syria nor Iraq controls these areas anymore: on both sides it’s all AQI land.

AQI seems confident this isn’t just a temporary possession either, and so their bulldozers are hard at work, tearing through the berm and clearing some new dirt roads to connect their new state more efficiently.

That reflects the group’s ongoing effort to rebrand itself the “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant,” which has designs on eventually taking most or all of both Iraq and Syria as one Salafist theocracy.

These days, that seems less like an idle threat and more like a reality, as ISILstan now seems to encompass much of Syria from the edge of Aleppo through Raqqa, and down into al-Bukamal, then spans Iraq’s Anbar and Nineveh Provinces, with the capital of Salaheddin Province, Tikrit, also falling today.

Latest smokescreen on MH370, blame Al-Qaeda, but that doesn’t explain where the plane is

Eleven terrorists with links to Al Qaeda have been arrested on suspicion of being involved in the disappearance of MH370

  • Suspects were arrested in the capital Kuala Lumpur and the state of Kedah
  • Said to members of violent new terror group said to be planning attacks
  • Interrogations came after demands from agencies including FBI and MI6
  • Manifest revealed presence of consignment but did not reveal its contents
  • Airline has admitted 200kg of lithium batteries was among the items
  • It refused to say what else, citing ‘legal reason’ related to ‘ongoing’ probe
  • A group of 11 terrorists with links to Al Qaeda were yesterday being interrogated on whether they are behind the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370.

    The suspects were arrested in the capital Kuala Lumpur and in the state of Kedah last week and are members of a violent new terror group said to be planning bomb attacks in Muslim countries.

    The interrogations come after international investigators, including the FBI and MI6, asked for the militants, whose ages range from 22 to 55 and include students, odd-job workers, a young widow and business professionals, to be questioned intensively about Flight MH370.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2619388/What-havent-told-cargo-MH370-Mystery-deepens-missing-flight-claims-loaded-2-3tonnes-items-not-listed-manifest.html#ixzz30jSDqcV3

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2619388/What-havent-told-cargo-MH370-Mystery-deepens-missing-flight-claims-loaded-2-3tonnes-items-not-listed-manifest.html#ixzz30jS3FzdM

New York Times Comic Retracts Russian-Photo Scoop


Exclusive: After starting a propaganda stampede – with a lead story about photos of Russian troops purportedly in Ukraine – the New York Times admits the pictures really don’t prove much, and one photo was labeled as snapped in Russia when it was really taken in Ukraine, writes Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

Two days after the New York Times led its editions with a one-sided article about photos supposedly proving that Russian special forces were behind the popular uprisings in eastern Ukraine, the Times published what you might call a modified, limited retraction.

Buried deep inside the Wednesday editions (page 9 in my paper), the article by Michael R. Gordon and Andrew E. Kramer – two of the three authors from the earlier story – has this curious beginning: “A collection of photographs that Ukraine says shows the presence of Russian forces in the eastern part of the country, and which the United States cited as evidence of Russian involvement, has come under scrutiny.”

Photograph published by the New York Times purportedly taken in Russia of Russian soldiers who later appeared in eastern Ukraine. However, the photographer has since stated that the photo was actually taken in Ukraine, and the U.S. State Department has acknowledged the error.

In the old days of journalism, we used to apply the scrutiny before we published a story on the front page or on any other page, especially if it had implications toward war or peace, whether people would live or die. However, in this case – fitting with the anti-Russian bias that has pervaded the mainstream U.S. press corps – the scrutiny was set aside long enough for this powerful propaganda theme to be put in play and to sweep across the media landscape.

Only now do we belatedly learn what should have been obvious: the blurry photographs provided by the coup regime in Kiev and endorsed by the Obama administration don’t really prove anything. There were obvious alternative explanations to the photos that were ignored by the Times, such as the possibility that these were military veterans who are no longer associated with the Russian military. Or that some photos are not of the same person.

And, one of the photos featured by the Times in its Monday lead article, purportedly showing some of the armed men in Russia, was actually shot in the Ukrainian town of Slovyansk, according to Maxim Dondyuk, the freelance photographer who took the picture and posted it on his Instagram account.

Here is the tortured way the Times treated that embarrassing lapse in its journalistic standards: “A packet of American briefing materials that was prepared for the Geneva meeting asserts that the photograph was taken in Russia. The same men are also shown in photographs taken in Ukraine.

“Their appearance in both photographs was presented as evidence of Russian involvement in eastern Ukraine. The packet was later provided by American officials to The New York Times, which included that description of the group photograph in an article and caption that was published on Monday. … The dispute over the group photograph cast a cloud over one particularly vivid and highly publicized piece of evidence.”

Then, after noting Dondyuk’s denial that the photo was snapped in Russia, the Times quoted State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki as acknowledging “that the assertion that the photograph in the American briefing materials had been taken in Russia was incorrect. But she said that the photograph was included in a ‘draft version’ of a briefing packet and that the information has since been corrected.”

But the misidentification of the photo’s location as Russia, not Ukraine, was not some minor mistake. If the photo was taken in Ukraine, then the whole premise of the claim that these same guys were operating in Russia and have since moved to Ukraine collapses.

Note how the Times framed this point in its Monday article: “Some of the men photographed in Ukraine have been identified in other photos clearly taken among Russian troops in other settings.” Then, the cutline below the photo read: “Soldiers in a group photo of a reconnaissance unit, which was taken in Russia, were later photographed operating in towns in eastern Ukraine.” There was no attribution. The location is stated as flat fact.

Still, the Obama administration is not going to let its sloppy mistake get in the way of a potent propaganda theme. According to the Times, Psaki insisted that there was plenty of other classified and unclassified evidence proving that the Russians are behind the eastern Ukrainian uprisings, but none of that supposed evidence was included in Wednesday’s story.

The problem for the Times, however, is different. Many of the flaws in the photographic evidence were there to see before Monday’s front-page article, but the newspaper was apparently blinded by its anti-Russian bias.

For instance, the article devoted much attention to the Russian skill at “masking” the presence of its troops, but that claim would seem to be contradicted by these allegedly secret warriors posing for public photos.

The Times also ignored the fact that the U.S. Special Forces – and indeed the special forces of many other nations – also seek to blend in with the populations by growing beards and wearing local clothing. This is not some unique tactic employed by the nefarious Russians.

%d bloggers like this: