Abby Martin “Exposes” Zionism & israel

Abby Martin “Exposes” Zionism & Israel

Abby Martin goes on about the crimes of Israel and Zionists, which is commendable. However, she can’t figure out why the United States gives billions of dollars in foreign aid to Israel — Go to 9:00 to hear her being ‘confused’.

Advertisements

Anti-Democratic israeli Laws

Anti-Democratic Israeli Laws

by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org – Home – Stephen Lendman)

Ziofascists and religious fundamentalists dominate Israel’s Knesset. It shows in deplorable racist, anti-democratic legislation, hardening repression against Palestinians.

Key measures enacted this year and in 2016 focused on land ownership and use, free expression and association, as well as civil and political rights.

In June 2016, an anti-terror law established new criminal offenses, including public expressions of support or empathy for ill-defined terrorist groups. Penalties were greatly increased.

The Settlements Regulation Law enacted in February let Israeli authorities steal vast tracts of private Palestinian land for settlement construction.

It established a process to legitimize about half of Israeli outposts, until now declared illegal by the state. It authorized 3,500 new housing units in existing illegal settlements.

In March, legislation banning foreign nationals and Palestinian BDS supporters from entering Israel was enacted. It violates the fundamental right of free expression and views on any issue.

The measure states “(n)o visa and residency permit of any type will be given to a person who is not an Israeli citizen or does not have a permit for permanent residency in the State of Israel if he, [or] the organization or entity for which he works, has knowingly issued a public call to impose a boycott on the State of Israel, as defined in the Preventing Harm to the State of Israel through Boycott Law…or has committed to participate in such a boycott.”

In March, a measure disqualifying candidates from Knesset elections was enacted, banning aspirants negating Israel as a “Jewish and democratic state” – which it’s not!

Enacted in April, the Kaminitz Law expanded regime power to demolish privately owned Palestinian homes. It authorizes prison sentences and fines for violations of discriminatory planning and building laws.

It limits judicial review by Israeli courts. The law’s main objective is preventing Palestinian construction on their own land – unauthorized without near-impossible to get permit permission. The right to appeal state rulings is practically eliminated.

In July, the NGO Foreign Funding Law was enacted, requiring these organizations receiving more than 50% of their annual budget from foreign governments to declare their sources of funding in all publications, including letters to government and public officials, as well as in reports to the Registrar of Non-Profit Associations.

Human rights groups fear the measure will chill views these organizations feel free to express, the law enacted to undermine their ability to operate effectively.

Enacted in July, the Expulsion of MKs Law lets a Knesset majority oust an MK for the remainder of the current term for alleged incitement to racism, support for an enemy state’s armed struggle and/or an Israeli designated terrorist organization.

The measure’s objective is stifling Arab MKs criticism of regime policies and/or expressing support for Syria’s war on US and Israeli supported terrorists.

Pending legislation includes the Negev Development Authority Bill to give settlements equal legal status (sic) to other area communities.

Enactment would contradict Israeli statute law, along with breaching international law and exacerbating human rights violations against Palestinians.

Other pending legislation seeks to annex settlements to Israel, one at a time or altogether. Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem was achieved this way.

A measure was introduced to deny tax-exempt status to NGOs criticizing Israeli policies, including accusing the ruling regime of committing war crimes and other human rights abuses.

A pending Cultural Loyalty Bill would require cultural institutions and artists seeking state funding to declare their loyalty to the State of Israel and its laws.

The measure targets Palestinian cultural and artistic institutions, restricting their artistic expression freedom.

The History of israeli Support for Oppression and Genocide across the World (Part II)

(Part II)

The history of supports that the Zionist regime has provided for dictatorships around the world is filled with examples that should be registered in a long list.
South African Prime Minister Vorster meets with Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Knesset members Menachem Begin and Moshe Dayan, during a reception at Jerusalem’s Hilton.

The Israeli regime, weak at the beginning in the mid of twentieth century, made attempts to favor the countries from which it could get a mutual support. From the US to Britain, Germany and smaller countries like Myanmar, the Zionists made a long history of lining up with dictatorships.

Between 1973 and 1991, Pinochet’s dictatorship in Chile received weapons and training from Israeli governments and the IDF. The regime committed crimes against humanity, disappeared thousands, and tortured tens of thousands. The Pinochet regime brought torture to new heights of cruelty, unseen in modern history.

Between 1991-1995, the second Rabin Government sold arms used in both the Rwandan Genocide and the Bosnian War. As early as mid-1992, reports and footage of concentration camps set up by the Serbs for Bosnian Muslims began to emerge. Detainees in these camps were starved and tortured, and their bodies were thrown to the animals. Additional findings attested to the existence of rape camps, where Serbs held Muslim and Croatian women. Yet Israeli arms exports did not stop.

It was revealed, in September 2016, that Israel is trying to ensure the lifting of sanctions against Sudan, following the latter’s abandonment of its alliance with Iran. This took place although no one can deny that Sudanese dictator Omar al-Bashir — wanted by the International Criminal Court for the genocide in Darfur — continues to commit grave crimes.

The Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law (1950), The Israeli Law on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide (1950) and Article 16 of the Israeli Penal Law (added in 1994) were the Three laws which deals with offenses by “the Law of the Nations.” They have all stipulated universal jurisdiction in Israel for severe crimes under international law. In reality, these laws have been rendered null and void by the IDF, the Ministry of Defense, Israeli arms dealers, and senior Israeli officials.

The State of Israel’s fight against global anti-Semitism has been hollow from the beginning, in view of the racist elements underlying the ostensibly democratic regime within the Green Line and the military government in the occupied Palestinian territories, as well as Israel’s treatment of Mizrahi Jews, Ethiopian Jews, Palestinian citizens, refugees, and foreign workers.

One cannot fight anti-Semitism seriously without fighting racism inside and outside Israel, and without ending Israeli support for racist regimes across the world. One cannot speak of the lessons of the Holocaust while abetting the genocide of other nations, and even inviting murderers to lay wreaths at Yad Vashem.

Israel is the modern version of dictatorship from which no one could expect justice because it has been ruled mainly by dictators who excuse anything for the sake of reaching selfish and inhumane aims.

The History of israeli Support for Oppression and Genocide across the World (Part I)

(Part I)

Source

For Israel, any sort of political, military or moral code could be violated if it leads to benefits for Zionist extremists.
Chilean President Augusto Pinochet meets with U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in 1976.

Since taking the office in January 20, 2017, Donald Trump made many remarks that should have been reacted by Israelis in a normal condition. While avoiding any reference to Jewish victims from its official statement on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, visiting the monument commemorating the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising in Poland, and evading from referring to the suffering of the Jews in Second World war while he referred to Polish agonies, Donald Trump was never reacted by Israeli belligerent leaders. They were only the last ones to condemn Trump’s position in comparing Charlottesville neo-Nazis and white Supremacists to anti-racist activists.

Political and economic interests have always come first in Israel. Successive Israeli governments have abetted the genocides of other nations, preferring realpolitik to confronting anti-Semitism, Nazism, and the like.

The first Rabin Government did not balk at hosting Apartheid South Africa’s Prime Minister John Vorster in April 1976. He had been a member of a pro-Nazi group during World War II. The visit was part of Israel’s security relations with the apartheid regime. During his visit, Vorster laid a wreath at Yad Vashem.

That regime also developed chemical toxins for the murder of individuals in the liberation movements, which included scientific experiments on Africans. Such experiments were carried out on prisoners of war; after they were killed, their bodies were dumped by planes in the Atlantic Ocean.

Both the first Rabin Government and the Begin Government collaborated with the junta in Argentina, despite the fact that Jews were murdered by the regime between 1976 and 1983 in large numbers. Members of the military government supported Nazi ideology and the repression of dissidents included the use of Nazi expressions and symbols, even in torture chambers

In the 70s and 80s, Israeli governments sold arms to the military regimes in Bolivia. One of the senior figures in the Bolivian junta’s security establishment, which cast terror on the indigenous population, was senior Nazi criminal Klaus Barbie, head of the Gestapo in Lyon, who was nicknamed “The Butcher of Lyon.”

In the 70s and 80s, Israeli governments and IDF officers sold arms and training to the juntas in Guatemala, which carried out a genocide of around 200,000 people, most of them indigenous.

In 2016, Burmese (Myanmar) was provided with weapons and training to the special forces by Netanyahu Government. Myanmar government has been committing crimes against humanity in Rakhine State, against the Muslim Rohingya minority. Women and girls are being raped; civilians are being tortured, murdered, and disappeared.

These are only part of the Zionists’ crimes or the support they provided for the expansion of oppression across the world boosting their benefits in the so-called zones

Religious bigotry is alive and well in israel

Source

Huge Spike in Number of Israelis ‘un-Jewed’ by Chief Rabbinate in Past Two Years

Trend appears related to new practice of re-examining and revoking religious status of citizens already recognized as Jewish

Judy Maltz, Haaretz
17 September 2017

The number of Israelis featured on a blacklist of  “unmarriageable” individuals, maintained by the Chief Rabbinate, has grown exponentially over the past two years, a new document obtained through a Freedom of Information Act inquiry shows. The list refers to individuals who are recognized as Jewish in the Population Registry but who are prohibited from marrying in Israel for various reasons.

This spike, as documented in a recent petition to the Supreme Court, coincides with a relatively new practice embraced by the Chief Rabbinate: Over the past two years, its representatives have begun summoning immigrants, already recognized as Jewish and who married in Israel, for background checks after doubts were raised about the religious status of relatives seeking to marry in the country. In such cases, after the marriage applicants had their request to marry denied, their relatives in Israel were suddenly notified that their Jewish status was either revoked or awaiting clarification.

Jews cannot marry in Israel without providing evidence to the Chief Rabbinate that they are Jewish. Typically, that evidence consists of the marriage certificates of their parents or, in the case of Jews from abroad, letters of certification from their congregational rabbis. Immigrants are often asked to provide the names of relatives living in Israel who can vouch for them. The Chief Rabbinate has the sole authority over marriage and divorce of Jews in Israel. Without being approved by the Chief Rabbinate, Jews cannot marry legally in Israel.

According to the newly released document compiled by the administrative offices of Israel’s rabbinical courts, almost 900 Israelis were added in 2015 and 2016 to the list of “unmarriageable” individuals in the following two categories: “pending clarification” and “non-Jews.” In all cases, these were individuals who were previously registered as Jewish.

The Chief Rabbinate began compiling its blacklist of “unmarriageable” Israelis in 1954. Since then, the total number of individuals in these two categories has been fewer than 4,000. That means that 22 percent of them were added in the past two years alone. Other categories included on the blacklist are “mamzerim” (the offspring of relationships forbidden by Jewish law), individuals suspected of still being married or divorced couples who have resumed living together. The total number of individuals on the list, since it was first compiled, is close to 6,800.

These numbers were compiled by the administrative offices of Israel’s rabbinical courts in response to a Freedom of Information Inquiry submitted by ITIM, an organization that advocates on behalf of immigrants facing challenges from Israeli religious authorities.

They are cited in an appeal to the Supreme Court filed by the organization several weeks ago on behalf of four families in Israel whose members were recently added to the blacklist.

The appeal was filed after the highest court of the Chief Rabbinate ruled, on appeal, that its representatives are authorized to reexamine the Jewish credentials of Israelis who have already been recognized as Jews in Israel. The ruling was issued in December, just days after the Chief Rabbinate published a new regulation allowing it to investigate the religious status of Israelis even if they are not applying to marry in Israel and even if they were already recognized as Jewish for the purpose of marriage.

In its appeal, ITIM argues that the Chief Rabbinate does not have this authority. It also argues that such background checks constitute an invasion of privacy.

According to Rabbi Seth Farber, the founder and executive director of ITIM, never in the past have relatives of marriage applicants had their Jewish status revoked or subject to further clarification.

“The idea that the Chief Rabbinate can suddenly ‘un-Jew’ individuals,” he said, “is completely antithetical to halakha (Jewish religious law), which states that one must take the word of people who say they are Jewish,” he said.

Representing the four families whose Jewish status in Israel has been challenged are also the Center for Women’s Justice and the Rackman Center for the Advancement of the Status of Women at Bar-Ilan University.

One case involves an American-born woman who married an Israeli in a civil ceremony in Florida in 1984. The couple moved to Israel that year, and the woman and the couple’s oldest child converted to Judaism the following year. Both were subsequently registered as Jewish in the Population Registry, as were two daughters later born to the couple. A few years ago, the oldest daughter applied to marry in Israel. In the process, her mother was notified by a representative of the Chief Rabbinate that her marriage was no longer valid because she was not Jewish. Her daughter subsequently decided to marry in a civil ceremony in Cyprus. The couple’s other daughters were notified that their names had been added to the blacklist until further clarification.

A second case involves a family of immigrants from the former Soviet Union. Recently, a relative of theirs who applied to get married in Israel was rejected because he could not provide sufficient proof that he was Jewish. After he was rejected, all his family members, who had already been registered as Jewish, were notified that their Jewish status was now pending clarification. A third case involves another family that immigrated to Israel from the former Soviet Union. When a daughter of theirs applied to get married two years ago and was not able to provide sufficient proof of her Jewish ancestry, all her relatives in the country, who already had been registered as Jewish, were subsequently informed that their religious status was now also pending clarification.

The fourth case also involves a family of immigrants from the former Soviet Union. In this particular case, an investigation was launched when a member of the family sought to divorce her husband, citing domestic violence. The estranged husband, in response, claimed that his wife had converted to Christianity. Based on this claim, which the woman categorically denied, the Chief Rabbinate notified relatives, who had already been registered as Jewish, that their Jewish status was now pending clarification.

Commenting on the four cases, Farber said: “ Behind each story here are real families who have had the carpet pulled out from under their feet. Halachic Judaism is not meant to cause suffering. By initiating Jewishness investigations, the rabbinate is further undermining its historic role in Israel.”

A few months ago, it emerged that the Chief Rabbinate also maintains a blacklist of rabbis from abroad whose letters of certification for the purpose of marriage it does not honor. This controversial list was also obtained through a Freedom of Information Act inquiry. The Chief Rabbinate has since announced that it plans to make public a new list of criteria for approving rabbis from abroad for such letters of certification.

“The Occupation of the American Mind”: Documentary Looks at israel’s PR War in the United States #BDS

Source

U.S. held firmly under the Zionist jackboot: Senate Bill 720: Making It a Crime to Support Palestinian Human Rights :#BDS

Senate Bill 720: Making It a Crime to Support Palestinian Human Rights

By James Zogby,

It is fascinating to watch some U.S. senators tripping over themselves as they attempt to defend their support for or opposition to proposed legislation that would make it a federal crime to support the international campaign to Boycott, Divest, or Sanction (BDS) Israel for its continued occupation of Palestinian lands. What ties these officials up in knots are their efforts to square the circle of their “love of Israel,” their opposition to BDS, their support for a “two-state solution,” and their commitment to free speech.   

The bill in question, S.720, was introduced on March 23, 2017 by Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD). S.720 opposes calls by the United Nations to boycott or “blacklist” companies that support Israeli activities in the territories occupied in the 1967 war. The bill further prohibits any U.S. person from supporting this U.N. call to boycott and establishes stiff fines and/or imprisonment for Americans who violate this prohibition.

There are a number of problems with the legislation. In the first place, supporters of S.720 grossly mischaracterize the intent of the U.N. approach as “anti-Israel.” In fact, as S.720, itself, acknowledges, the U.N. Human Rights Council specifically targets only businesses that engage in activities in “territories occupied [by Israel] since 1967.” The U.N. target is not Israel, but Israeli actions that serve to consolidate its hold over the occupied territories.

Then there is the concern that by making illegal either the act of boycotting Israel, or advocating for such a boycott, S.720 is criminalizing free speech and stifling legitimate peaceful protest.

Sen. Ben Cardin

Finally, the legislation continues to build on earlier congressional legislation using sleight-of-hand language in an attempt to erase the distinction in U.S. law between Israel and illegal Israeli settlements in occupied territories. While earlier legislation accomplished this by referring to “Israel and areas under Israel’s control,” S.720 notes that its boycott prohibition applies to “commercial relations…with citizens or residents of Israel, entities organized under the laws of Israel, or the Government of Israel.”

Since S.720 quickly gained 48 co-sponsors (35 Republicans and 13 Democrats) and has been supported by AIPAC and the Anti-Defamation League, one might have expected it to sail effortlessly through the Congress and be put on the president’s desk for his signature. That, however, has not been the case, due to the efforts of many, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other progressive organizations led by MoveOn.

While the ACLU has based its opposition on the concern that the legislation violates the free speech rights of American citizens, MoveOn has taken a more expansive approach addressing both the concern with free speech and the fact that S.720 “erases the distinction in U.S. law between Israel and Israeli settlements.”

Given the capacity of both organizations to influence and organize liberal opinion, some Democratic senators have felt compelled to either justify their support for the bill or to distance themselves from it. In too many instances, these efforts have been awkward.

Two sponsors, Sens. Cardin and Ron Wyden (D-OR), have gone to great, but unconvincing, lengths to explain that S.720 does not violate an individual’s right to free speech. They argue that the bill is only directed at businesses or individuals who boycott Israel in response to international entities (like the U.N. or the European Union). But what they cannot explain is how punishing an American citizen who advocates for a U.N. boycott would not violate that citizen’s right to free speech.

Cardin, Wyden and other Democrats who support S.720 also go to great lengths to pledge their support for a “two-state solution.” But their pledges are hollow, since they fail to acknowledge that the provision of S.720 that protects Israel’s settlement enterprise (“entities organized under the laws of Israel”) makes realization of a “two-state solution” impossible—given the location, size and continued expansion of these illegal settlements.

Even those who have come out against S.720 have had some difficulty explaining themselves. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand​ (D-NY), for example, was one of the bill’s early endorsers. She courageously removed her name as a sponsor after learning of the free speech concerns of constitutional lawyers, saying

“I cannot support the bill in its current form if it can be interpreted as stifling or chilling free speech… So I took my name off the bill.”

Gillibrand, nevertheless, felt the need to balance her free speech concern with her support for Israel and her opposition to BDS, adding,

​”I cannot state this more clearly: I vehemently oppose the BDS movement.”

It’s this last point that requires closer examination. While Israel and its supporters make a brave show of shrugging off the threat of BDS, they clearly feel threatened—otherwise why the hyper-activity to punish BDS? S.720 isn’t the first such effort in the Congress, and nearly one-half of the 50 states have been pressed to pass their own versions of anti-BDS resolutions.

In order to build support for their effort, advocates for Israel have tried to portray BDS in the harshest of terms. They have made Israel the victim, while portraying advocates of BDS as “virulently anti-Semitic” aggressors. All of this has been done to obfuscate the reality that BDS is nothing more than a “strategic Palestinian-led form of nonviolent resistance to the occupation and denial of human rights.”

A Challenge to Act

After 50 years of occupation, Palestinians have taken it upon themselves to challenge the world community to act. They have had enough of seeing their homes demolished and lands confiscated to make way for Jewish-only roads and settlement colonies in their midst. They want an end to the daily humiliation of being a captive people denied basic freedoms and justice. Instead of submitting to the occupier, they have decided to boycott, and have urged those who support their human rights to join them in their call for an end to the occupation. Their action is as legitimate as was the call of African Americans in the Deep South in the ’50s, and that of Nelson Mandela in South Africa in the ’80s.

For the Senate to oppose or to punish those who support this Palestinian call to individuals, businesses and governments to boycott, divest, or sanction Israel for its oppressive occupation would put the Senate in the position of saying that: they support Israeli practices; they don’t want Palestinians to use nonviolent means to protest their treatment; and/or they simply don’t believe that Palestinians are equal humans who deserve to have their rights protected.

And so the messages we should send to senators are clear. To those who support S.720: “Shame on you.” To those who oppose S.720: “Thank you for your opposition, but think again about whether the problem is BDS or the occupation that gave birth to it.” And to all senators: “Stop hiding behind your hollow profession of support for ‘two states.’ If you are serious about peace, justice and equality, stop enabling the occupation that makes the realization of those goals impossible.”

James J. Zogby is president of the Arab American Institute in Washington, DC.

%d bloggers like this: