Inner and Outer Ugliness: Congress Proves Once Again it is Occupied Territory

cspan1

By Richard Edmondson

In the photo above we see US Congressman Ed Royce of California discussing HR 11, a resolution he introduced condemning the UN Security Council for its recent action on Israeli settlements. You’ll also notice, to Royce’s right, Florida  Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen brushing her hair with a pink hairbrush.

The scene is from a debate in Congress which took place on January 5, 2017. Royce and a number of other congressional representatives (342 of them in all) became hot and bothered over the UN’s pointing out (correctly of course) that the settlements are illegal. The photo is a screen shot I took from a C-Span video.  It’s a long video, more than eight hours, but if you advance it to about the 5:19:52 mark, you can watch the entire House debate on HR 11, which not surprisingly includes a lot of groveling to Israel (hat tip to Greg Bacon).

Just to refresh your memory, the Security Council, by a vote of 14-0 with 1 abstention, passed a resolution on December 23 “condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967.” Voting in favor were Russia, China, Malaysia, Venezuela, New Zealand, Senegal, Spain, Uruguay, France, Angola, Egypt, Japan, UK, Ukraine; the lone abstention was by the US.

The Security Council action was welcomed by a good many people the world over, although Benjamin Netanyahu threw a temper tantrum, claiming to have “absolute” proof the Obama administration had been secretly behind it. Other critics accused the US of a “betrayal” of its longtime “ally,” and an enormous amount of controversy erupted over the issue in the waning days of 2016 and carrying over into the new year.

Of course, anytime a dispute emerges between the US and Israel, members of Congress can always be counted upon to side with the latter rather than with their own nation–and this time was no exception.

“Today we put Congress on record objecting to the recent UN Security Council resolution that hurt our ally, that hurt Israel, and I believe that puts an enduring peace further out of reach,” fretted Royce.

Let me call once again your attention to the image of Ros-Lehtinen brushing her hair, for throughout a good portion of Royce’s speech, the Florida congresswoman–apparently unaware she was on camera–seemed preoccupied with primping and applying makeup to herself, this presumably in an effort to make herself look “beautiful.”

In the first frame of the montage below we see her with the pink hairbrush, followed by a shot of her rummaging in her purse. In the third frame she pulls out what appears to be lipstick or eyeliner (I’m not an expert on women’s makeup), and lastly applying it with her right hand while still holding the container with her left hand.

makeupsession

In the following three frames we see a now cosmetically-adorned Ros-Lehtinen giving her speech before Congress and the C-Span cameras:

l1

l2

l3

“Our closest friend and ally, the democratic, Jewish state of Israel, has been under constant attack by the United Nations,” she claimed.

The Security Council resolution that occasioned Ros-Lehtinen’s diatribe specifically is entitled UNSC Resolution 2334. I put up a post about it on December 24 that contains its full text. The measure expresses “grave concern” that settlements, including those in East Jerusalem, are “dangerously imperiling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines.” It also:

1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;

For Ros-Lehtinen, however, UNSC Resolution 2334 was nothing more than an execrable attempt to “delegitimize” Israel–and all the more reason why swift passage by Congress of HR 11 was needed to repudiate it!

This resolution, Mr. speaker, will not undo the damage that has been done at the Security Council, but it sends an important  message to the world that the United States Congress resoundingly, and in a strong bipartisan manner, disapproves of the vote taken on resolution 2334, and it sends a warning to the nations that will gather in Paris next week to discuss the peace process that there will be repercussions if there is a move to introduce a parameters resolution before the 20th and in an effort to further isolate Israel. Our closest friend and ally, the democratic, Jewish state of Israel,  has been under constant attack by the United Nations. Abu Mazen and the Palestinians have pushed a campaign to delegitimize the Jewish state, to undermine the peace process, to achieve unilateral statehood recognition.

For some reason–I’m not quite sure why–the sight of Ros-Lehtinen primping and then fulminating at the podium brought to mind a picture I once saw of an economically-impoverished elderly woman kissing a bird.

beauty

I first came across this image several years ago in a poem posted by Nahida the exiled Palestinian, whose website, Poetry for Palestine, can be found here. Her poem is entitled “Beauty.”  It is not a lengthy poem at all. In fact, it contains a mere five very short, but very powerful, lines:

Sometimes, beauty is mistakenly understood;
Assuming that
If someone is beautiful, they are always good,
When truth is
When someone is good, they are always beautiful.

The woman whose picture accompanies the poem is beautiful in a way that Ros-Lehtinen is not. In addition to berating the Security Council, the Florida congresswoman also attacked the UN Human Rights Council.

“We’ve seen it at  the Human Rights Council where Israel is constantly demonized  and falsely accused of human rights violations while the real abusers of human rights go unpunished because that body has utterly failed to uphold its mandate,” she insisted. “This is a body that allows the worst abusers of human rights–like Cuba, Venezuela, and China–to actually sit in judgement of human rights worldwide. What a pathetic joke!”

It’s interesting that Ros-Lehtinen would single out Cuba, Venezuela, and China as being among “the worst abusers of human rights,” while saying nothing–zip–zero–about Saudi Arabia, a country that executes people by beheading and which currently holds the chair of the Human Rights Council.

 photo syrianchildren.jpg“Yet the only thing they can agree on is to attack Israel,” the congresswoman blubbered on, “the only democracy in the Middle East and the only place in the region where human rights are protected.”

Exceptions were taken to other UN deliberative bodies  as well.

“We’ve seen this scheme to delegtimize Israel at the General Assembly where in its closing legislative session, the General Assembly passed twenty–twenty–anti-Israel resolutions and only four combined for the entire world!” Ros-Lehtinen bellowed.

“These institutions have no credibility, and now we have the unfortunate circumstance of the White House deciding to abstain from this anti-Israel, one-sided resolution at the Security Council,” she added. “Our ally was abandoned, and credibility and momentum were given to the Palestinians’ schemes to delegitimize the Jewish state, to undermine the peace process, and while the damage has been done, Mr. Speaker, by this act of cowardice at the Security Council, we will have an opportunity to reverse that damage.”

What exactly she meant by “we will have an opportunity to reverse that damage” is unclear. Possibly the Trump administration has some plan to introduce a new measure at the UN. In any event, Ros-Lehtinen clearly seems to be a person of both inner and outer ugliness–though of course she is not the only member of Congress with such attributes. Perhaps the most groveling speech of all those given in Congress on January 5 was that delivered by House Speaker Paul Ryan.

“The cornerstone of our special relationship with Israel has always been right here in Congress, this institution,” said Ryan. “The heart of our democracy has stood by the Jewish state through thick and thin. We were there for her when rockets rained down on Tel Aviv; we were there for her by passing historic legislation to combat the boycott divestment and sanctions movement; and we’ve been there for her by ensuring Israel has the tools to defend herself against those who seek her destruction.”

“I am stunned! I am stunned!” the House speaker continued, “at what happened last month! This government, our government, abandoned our ally Israel when she needed us the most! Do not be fooled. This UN Security Council resolution was not about settlements, and it certainly was not about peace. It was about one thing and one thing only. Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish democratic state. These types of one-sided efforts are designed to isolate and delegitimize Israel. They do not advance peace, they make it more elusive.”

If Ryan was the supreme groveler in the debate, Royce would probably have to rank a close second. One thing which seemed terribly to incense the California congressman about the Security Council resolution is that it doesn’t recognize Israel’s right to steal East Jerusalem.

“This dangerous resolution effectively states that the Jewish quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem and the Western Wall, Judaism’s holiest site, are in the words of the resolution ‘occupied territory.’ Why would we not veto that?” asked Royce.

“It also lends legitimacy to efforts by the Palestinian authority to put pressure on Israel through the UN rather than to go through the process of engaging in direct negotiations, and it puts wind in the sails of the shameful Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement,” he added.

gzmrg4Royce also claimed that Israel, not Occupied Palestine, is suffering “bullying and harassment.” That may sound like the statement of someone living in a parallel universe, but it is a view shared by New York Congressman Eliot Engel, one of HR 11’s original cosponsors.

“Throughout its entire history the state of Israel has never gotten a fair shake from the United Nations,” insisted Engel. “Year after year after year member states manipulate the UN to bully our ally Israel, to pile on one-sided resolutions placing all the blame for the ongoing conflict on Israel.”

Even those representatives who spoke in opposition to HR 11, did so while expressing their support for Israel at the same time. One such member was Rep. David Price, a Democrat from North Carolina.

“The fact is, H Res 11 runs a real risk of undermining the US Congress as a proactive force working toward a two-state solution,” Price lamented. ” And in this period of great geopolitical turmoil and uncertainty, we must reaffirm those fundamental aspects of our foreign policy, including our strong and unwavering support for Israel, while also demonstrating to the world that we are committed to a diplomacy that defends human rights and promotes Israeli and Palestinian states  that live side-by-side in peace and security, a formulation that has characterized our country’s diplomacy for decades.”

Another who voted against HR 11 was Jan Schakowsky, a Democrat from Illinois who is also married to Robert Creamer, the Democrat Party operative who was seen in a Project Veritas video discussing plans to have protestors show up at Trump rallies during the campaign. Schakowsky feels that a little bit of criticism of Israel is allowable at times, and furthermore she holds to this belief as a “proud Jew,” as she stated to her colleagues.

 photo thousandeyes_zps2c4c47c1.jpg“I stand here as a proud Jew and someone who throughout my entire life has been an advocate for the state of Israel, and I am standing here to oppose our H Res 11,” said the Illinois congresswoman. “And as a member of congress I have been committed to maintaining America’s unwavering support for Israel, which has lasted from the very first moments of  Israel’s existence. The US-Israel bond is unbreakable, despite the fact that the United States administrations have not always agreed with the particular policies of an Israeli government.”

Yes, to be sure, our own government and Israel’s have not always seen eye-to-eye, but funny how that never seems to stop the billions in US tax dollars flowing into the Jewish state’s coffers each year. Schakowsky went on:

Presidents from Lyndon Johnson to George W. Bush have each vetoed, and sometimes voted for, a UN resolution contrary to the wishes of Israel’s government at the time, and only the Obama administration, until two weeks ago, never, ever cast a vote against what Israel wanted. But opposition to the building of settlements on land belonging to Palestinians before the 1967 war was, with the exception of the land, of course, that’s going to be swapped, agreed to by both parties, has been the official US policy for many decades, contrary, again, to the assertions of H Res 11.  It has also been the policy of the United States to recognize that the only long term solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict, the violence, the loss of life, is to create two states, one for the Palestinians and one for Israel.

 photo statehood2.jpg

Exactly how a contiguous Palestinian state is going to be created in a West Bank splotched and dotted with all those settlements, is something Schakowsky left unaddressed. But having voiced a few mild criticisms of Israel, the congresswoman apparently felt an overwhelming need for balance–and so she tossed out a few criticisms of the Palestinians for good measure.

“A two-state solution is the only way Israel can continue as both a democratic and a Jewish state living in peace and security that has eluded her from the very beginning,” she said. “The building of settlements is an obstacle to achieving that goal–and of course settlements aren’t the only obstacle to Israeli-Palestinian peace. The US resolution reiterates the Palestinian Authority security forces must continue to counter terrorism and condemn all of the provocations.”

 photo terrorreigns2.jpg

Provocations? It’s an interesting word when referring to a people who have been resisting land theft and occupation for more years than most of us have been alive. It also gives rise to a question: How is it possible to carry out “provocations” against a country or governmental entity that technically speaking is in all likelihood guilty of the crime of genocide? Of course it’s unlikely you’ll get an honest answer to that question from Schakowsky or any other member of Congress.

At any rate, HR 11–a resolution which not only impugns the Security Council but even criticizes the United States–passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 342-80, with 4 abstentions. You can go here to see  the roll call on the vote.

It was Jeffrey Blankfort who first coined the old saying about Washington being Israel’s “most important occupied territory.” I think it was sometime back in the late eighties or the nineties when Jeffrey made that comment, and if anything, over the years, it has become more profoundly true than ever.

‘The Last Bullet in the Peace Process’–Abbas Urges Trump not to Move US Embassy to Jerusalem

In addition to writing to Trump, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas also reportedly has written letters to the leaders of Russia, China, France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the Arab League asking them to do what they can to stop the newly-elected president of the the US from moving the embassy.

Secretary of State John Kerry has waded into the controversy as well, warning that if the embassy is moved, “you’d have an explosion–an absolute explosion in the region, not just in the West Bank and perhaps even Israel itself, but throughout the region.”

A typically un-hinged-from-reality comment on the matter has come from an Israeli official. Ron Dermer, the ambassador to the US, said the embassy “move would be a great step forward to peace,” and he claims also that it would work to undo the “delegitimization of Israel.”

There are also now reports of worries that moving the embassy could increase security threats to State Department personnel in other countries besides Israel–but apparently this doesn’t concern Florida Sen. (and devoted Zionist) Marco Rubio.

“Jerusalem is the eternal capital of the Jewish state of Israel, and that’s where America’s embassy belongs,” says Rubio. “It’s time for Congress and the president-elect to eliminate the loophole that has allowed presidents in both parties to ignore U.S. law and delay our embassy’s rightful relocation to Jerusalem for over two decades.”

Rubio is referring to the “Jerusalem Embassy Act,” approved by Congress in 1995, which calls for the moving of the US embassy to Jerusalem but which also allows for a presidential waiver if it is deemed the move would harm US security interests. Every president from the time the law was passed up until today has exercised the waiver.

The PLO response to the move–at least as stated in the above video–would be a withdrawal of its recognition of Israel. There is also a warning that the Palestinian Authority could dissolve itself, effectively rendering Israel responsible for administering what are now referred to as the “Palestinian territories.” This would leave the Jewish state with the choice of either annexing the territories and giving Palestinians living within them the right to vote in Israeli elections–or, alternately, Israel could openly rule over a subject people who have no rights as citizens. This would basically remove the fig leaf cover and expose Israel once and for all as an apartheid state. Should it choose this latter course of action, doubtless it would become grist for the mill for a conference set to take place in Ireland and which I posted an article about four days ago.

The three-day conference is to be entitled “International Law & the State of Israel: Legitimacy, Exceptionalism, and Responsibility,” and as I reported, one of the questions its participants will examine is whether Israel has a legal right to exist under international law.

If Dermer and other Israeli officials are worried about the “delegitimization” they are experiencing now, doubtless the fires of illicitness will get hotter if the Palestinian Authority “hands the keys to the territories” back to Israel. Whether the PA will actually go through with that remains to be seen, however. And my own personal view is that it is something they probably should have done a long time ago.

However, if today’s resignation of a Palestinian mayor inside of Israel is any indication, we could perhaps seem something like that come to pass.

3 Myths About Israeli Settlements…plus…Does Israel have a Right to Exist?

 

Does Israel Have a Right to Exist?

As bad as the settlements are–and as the video above makes clear, they have in essence destroyed any chance of peace–maybe the time has come to stop having debates about the settlements per se. Maybe the time has come instead to approach the problem from an entirely different perspective–maybe, rather than  deliberate and wrangle over settlements, the real issue humanity should take up now, after witnessing 50 years of illegal occupation and land grabs, is the question of whether Israel should even have a right to exist at all.

A three-day conference entitled “International Law & the State of Israel: Legitimacy, Exceptionalism, and Responsibility” is scheduled to take place this spring in Ireland. (H/T Rehmat) A visit to the conference website would suggest that this indeed is the question, or at least one of the questions, the conference will attempt to answer.

This is a conference that was initially supposed to have been held in 2015 at the University of Southampton in the UK, but which had to be postponed–and eventually cancelled altogether–due to Zionist pressure applied to the university administration.

It has since been moved to University College Cork, in Cork, Ireland, where Zionists are still trying their utmost to abort it from happening, although so far they have not succeeded.

A statement by the organizers has been posted on their website which reads in part:

This conference will be the first of its kind and constitutes a ground-breaking historical event on the road towards justice and enduring peace in historic Palestine. It is unique because, while most attention today is directed at Israel’s actions in the 1967 Occupied Territories, the conference seeks to expand the debate surrounding the nature of the State of Israel and the legal and political reality within it.

The conference will raise questions that link the suffering in historic Palestine to the manner of Israel’s foundation and its nature. It aims to generate a debate on legitimacy, exceptionalism and responsibility under international law as provoked by the nature of the Israeli state. It will also examine how international law could be deployed, expanded, and even re-imagined, in order to achieve peace and reconciliation based on justice.

A “ground-breaking historical event” that will explore questions surrounding Israel’s “legitimacy” is something that is of course long overdue. Additionally the website states:

Legal scholarship on Palestine-Israel and international law, involving issues of self-determination, human rights and constitutional law, has largely focused on the Israeli occupation since 1967 of the Palestinian territories of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza and on the illegality of Israel’s settlements and apartheid colonization in these territories.

Alongside these debates, there has been a persistent, if marginalized, scholarship examining and analyzing problems associated with the creation and the nature of the Jewish state itself and the status of Jerusalem. This research has combined historical scholarship and legal analysis of the manner by which the State of Israel came into existence as well as what kind of state it is. The issues explored hitherto linked reflections on the scholarship between international law and: identity and injustice; violence and morality; nationality and citizenship; self-determination and legitimacy; exceptionalism; and responsibility.

Hopefully these debates–i.e. on Israel’s “foundation and its nature,” and, by turn, its ensuing “legitimacy” or lack thereof–will continue to be “marginalized” for not much longer. And a conference of this nature stands a good chance of helping to push the issue from the margins to the mainstream.

Perhaps this is why Zionists are working so feverishly to stop it. The Board of Deputies of British Jews reportedly was instrumental in killing off the conference in the UK, and according to a report here the Israeli Embassy in Ireland is now issuing condemnations of the organizers.

The conference is scheduled to take place March 31-April 2, 2017. The list of confirmed speakers includes academics from the US, the UK, and Israel:

  • Professor Richard Falk, Albert G. Milbank Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University and Research Fellow of the Orfalea Centre of Global Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara
  • Professor Ilan Pappe, Department of History, University of Exeter
  • Professor Ugo Mattei, Distinguished Professor of Law, and Alfred and Hanna Fromm Chair in International and Comparative Law, University of California, Hastings College of the Law
  • Professor Cheryl Harris, School of Law, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA)
  • Professor Nadera Shalhoub-Kevorkian, Faculty of Law/Institute of Criminology and the School of Social Work and Public Welfare, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
  • Dr. Azmi Bishara General Director, Doha Institute of Graduate Studies, and former Member of the Knesset
  • Elias Khouri, Novelist, Beirut
  • Dr. Haitam Suleiman, Al-Quds University Jerusalem
  • Dr. Salman Abu-Sitta, Palestine Land Society
  • Dr. Anthony Löwstedt, Media Communications Department, Webster University Vienna
  • Dr. Blake Alcott, Independent Researcher
  • Dr. Catriona Drew, School of Law, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS)
  • Dr. Ghada Karmi, Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies, University of Exeter
  • Dr. Hatem Bazian, Departments of Near Eastern and Ethnic Studies at Berkeley University of California (UC Berkeley)
  • Dr. Jeff Handmaker, the International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University (EUR)
  • Dr. John Reynolds, Law Department, National University of Ireland Maynooth
  • Dr. Marcelo Svirsky, School of Humanities & Social Inquiry LHA Faculty, University of Wollongong
  • Dr. Mazen Masri, City Law School, City University of London
  • Dr. Michael Kearney, School of Law, University of Sussex
  • Dr. Mutaz Qafisheh, College of Law, Hebron University
  • Dr. Ronit Lentin, Retired Associate Professor in Sociology, Trinity College Dublin
  • Dr. Ruba Salih, Centre for Gender Studies, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS)
  • Dr. Valentina Azarova, Centre for Global Public Law, Koç Üniversitesi
  • Dr. Victor Kattan, Law Faculty, National University of Singapore
  • Joni Assi, Community arts activist
  • Mr. Eitan Bronstein Aparicio, Co-Director of De-Colonizer and Founder of Zochrot
  • Ms. Lea Tsemel, Lawyer and human rights activist
  • Ms. Mia Tamarin, Law School, University of Kent
  • Ms. Ofra Yeshua-Lyth, Writer, journalist, and member of Jaffa One State Group.
  • Ms. Salma Karmi Ayyub, Barrister
  • Professor Alan Johnson, Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre (BICOM)
  • Professor Brad Roth, College of Liberal Arts & Science and School of Law, Wayne State University
  • Professor Geoffrey Alderman, Politics and Contemporary History, University of Buckingham
  • Professor George Bisharat, Hastings College of the Law University of California
  • Professor Haim Bresheeth, Centre for Media Studies, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS)
  • Professor Joel Kovel, Independent Researcher.
  • Professor John Strawson, School of Law, University of East London
  • Professor Kevin Jon Heller, School of Law, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS)
  • Professor Nur Masalha, Centre for Religion and History, St. Mary’s University
  • Professor Oren Ben-Dor, Law School, University of Southampton, UK.
  • Professor Penny Green, School of Law, Queen Mary University of London
  • Professor Robert Wintemute, Law School, King’s College London
  • Professor Robert Home, Law School, Anglia Ruskin University
  • Professor Virginia Tiley, Professor of Political Science, Southern Illinois University Carbondale
  • Professor Yakov Rabkin, Department of History, University of Montréal
  • Professor Yosefa Loshitzky, Centre for Media Studies, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS)
  • Adv. Yoella Har-Shefi, legal adviser for the Ani-Israeli Association and a human rights activist

See also

Around the World the Flag of Palestine is Growing Quite Popular!

You can find the Palestinian flag flying in a lot of places these days–some of them thousands of miles away from Occupied Palestine…

Buenos Aires

Buenos Aires

Last week, football fans in St. Etienne, France waved Palestinian flags as their team competed against Beitar Jerusalem, a club from Israel. The incident was widely reported, including by media in Israel. It is said that the Israeli players were confronted with Palestinian flags after their own fans had been prohibited from carrying Israeli flags into the stadium…

flag_stetienneFrance

St. Etienne, France

This took place just a week after football fans in Scotland waved Palestinian flags during a match between their own club, the Celtics, and another Israeli team, the Hapoel Be’er Sheva. The Union of European Football Associations, or UEFA, apparently got wind that something was up and issued a stern warning prior to the game–demanding that the Scottish fans refrain from displaying the flag. The fans defied the ban and waved it anyway…

flag_scotland

Glasgow, Scotland

Elsewhere in the UK…

 photo flag_london2_zps2ngg9ic5.jpg

London

 photo flag_london_zpsn1mjvkvm.jpg

London

Elsewhere in France…

Lyon, France

Lyon, France

The Palestinian flag is beloved by the young…

flag_buenosaires2

Buenos Aires

As well as the old…

 photo zempel_zpsfac26b3b.jpg

USA

On Monday of this week, Nickolay Mladenov, a UN envoy to the Middle East,reported to the UN Security Council that Israel continues to ignore international calls to halt its settlement activity on Palestinian lands. Mladenov was referencing a report by the so-called Quartet on the Middle East–comprised of the UN, the US, Russia, and the EU–which was released earlier this year and which called upon Israel to halt its settlement activity and its demolition of Palestinian homes.

“It’s (the report’s) recommendations continue to be ignored, including by a surge in Israeli settlement-related announcements and continuing demolitions,” he said.

In his comments, Mladenov pointed out that rather than curtailing its settlement activity, Israel–in the two months since the report was released–has actually increased it, with the advancement of more than 1,000 new units in occupied East Jerusalem and 735 units in the West Bank, according to a report in Press TV.

“All of these plans would essentially create new illegal settlements, and I call on Israel to cease and reverse these decisions,” Mladenov said.

With the US veto as Israel’s ace in the hole, I doubt we’ll see the Security Council take action, at least any time soon.

But be that as it may, the Palestinian flag continues to fly…

In Australia…

flag_australia

Australia

In Germany…

flag_Munich

Munich, Germany

At packed concerts in Catalonia…

In Los Angeles…

 photo flag_LA_zps81t9w7z7.jpg

Los Angeles

In New York…

flag_US

New York

And in India…

 photo flag_india_zpsihiwtczu.jpg

India

One place where the Palestinian flag is flown especially proudly is South Africa…but that’s not surprising given most people there remember their own history under apartheid rule…

We can also see the Palestinian flag flown in Chile…

flag_chile

Chile

In Barcelona…

flag_barcelona

Barcelona

And many other places as well.

What accounts for all this popularity of the Palestinian flag? Is it love for Palestine? Is it detestation of Israel? Is it a little of both perhaps? Perhaps the comments of these people in Italy might help shed some light on the matter…

“We will continue despite the power of the Zionist lobby in our country…”

“They think they can do anything because governments are backing them…”

Well, that says it fairly clearly, but if you’re still not clear on the answer, then ask yourself the following question: Does it help Israel’s cause, or hurt it, when some of the dirtiest, most corrupt politicians…in Italy…in the UK…in the US, and many other countries besides, go about constantly professing their eternal, undying, no-daylight-between-us support for Israel? The daily news provides an unappetizing display of this with each passing day.

Obviously support for Palestine is growing, and obviously the Palestinian flag has a special place in the hearts of a lot of people. I’m guessing the reasons for this have as much to do with the occupation that the Palestinians are suffering as with what people are experiencing in their own countries and the sense many have of feeling betrayed by their own leaders. Corruption is the order of the day, particularly in the West. This has resulted in unprecedented wealth inequalities, but just as tides change and the great fall, so do inequalities have a way of rectifying themselves. Palestine will one day be free, and so will the rest of us.

Related Video

Gaza in Context… Watch it!!!

July 27, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

UK could apologize for creating Israel: British MP

BRITAIN USA ISRAEL

PRESS TV – UK Labour politician Rupa Asha Huq has suggested that Britain could apologize for helping to create Israel in the occupied Palestinian territories, a new report claims, further fueling an ongoing row over Israel that has seen senior Labour members suspended by the party.

Huq, a member of Parliament (MP) who represents the London borough of Ealing, made the remarks at a meeting with the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign last year, the Daily Mail reported Sunday.

In response to a question about whether London should make an apology, Huq said: “1948; that happened under a British government. To my mind, an apology – yes. You could do one. A Labour Government could probably get that through.”

However, she noted that an apology would be subject to criticism similar to those former Prime Minister Tony Blair faced for bringing up long-past historical events, including the Irish potato famine and slavery.

The revelation comes shortly after Huq was attacked for defending fellow Labour MP Naz Shah, who was forced to apologize for backing calls for Israel’s “relocation” to the United States.

The former mayor of London Ken Livingstone (pictured below) became the most prominent Labour figure to face the same fate as Shah after defending her and adding that Adolf Hitler was a Zionist.

“The creation of the state of Israel was fundamentally wrong, because there had been a Palestinian community there for 2,000 years,” Livingstone recently told Arabic TV station al-Ghad al-Arabi.

The illegal Israeli regime was established in 1948, when it occupied Palestinian land along with expanses of other Arab territories during full-fledged military operations. The occupied lands also include Lebanon’s Shebaa Farms and Syria’s Golan Heights.

In 1967, it occupied the Palestinian territories of the West Bank, including East al-Quds (Jerusalem), and the Gaza Strip. It later annexed the West Bank and East al-Quds in a move never recognized by the international community.

The Labour Party has suspended as many as 50 members over allegations of “anti-Semitism” and racism in the past two months.

Last month, Corbyn ordered an inquiry into the issue and said he would propose a new code of conduct banning any forms of racism in the party.

SOURCE: PRESS TV 

Dealing Death the Israeli Way

It has been a number of months since Israel passed that law making it legal for soldiers to shoot people for throwing rocks. I had kind of forgotten about that. How many civilized countries have a law like that on the books?

The Israelis seem to have a real knack for “delegitimizing” themselves. The counter-argument to that, though, is that Israelis live in a “rough neighborhood” and face challenges the rest of us don’t have to worry about. But is that really the case? I suppose it all depends on how you look at it.

“They started it!”

In the eyes of Joan Alexandra Molinsky, aka Joan Rivers, who floated joyfully out of this life a year and a half ago, the guilty parties in this conflict were clear–it’s those wearing the kaffiyehs rather than the kippahs. And no doubt that’s the prevailing view in Hollywood…

They started it!”  Is Ms. Molinsky trying to say it was the Palestinians who stole the homes and land of the Jews back in 1948? That’s funny, I always thought it was the other way around. I guess we’ve had it backwards all these years.

%d bloggers like this: