The Lobby – USA – Episode 4 – Media, Scams And Zionist Control

Rebel Voice

In this final episode of the ground-breaking series that has exposed the malign influence of Zionism in the United States, ‘Tony’, the undercover reporter, meets with American personnel working for the Israeli consulate in New York and learns of their underhanded roles in working for Israel. It becomes apparent during conversations and symposiums that the Zionist movement is obsessed with the Boycott, Divest, Sanction (BDS) organisation and is hell-bent on countering and eventually destroying BDS.

Israel, it seems, now realizes that BDS might have the same effect on the Zionist state that a similar boycott campaign had on the Apartheid regime of South Africa during the eighties. The pro-Israelis are becoming increasingly desperate as BDS gains momentum. Therefore, in order to discredit BDS, Zionism has sought to recruit black Americans. Their deceptive tactics have failed as black America stands evermore solidly behind Palestinians in their quest for human…

View original post 252 more words

Advertisements

The Lobby – USA – Episode 3 – Zionist Schemes And Twisted Dreams

Rebel Voice

Following on from episodes 1 and 2, Rebel Voice is pleased to present part 3 of the groundbreaking documentary that reveals the shady world of Israeli scheming in all its dark and malign majesty in the United States of America.

The first two shows in this 4 part series demonstrated the dirty tactics used by the pro-Israel lobby to discredit those who would support Palestinian human rights, as well as their methods for ensuring that the US taxpayer continues to fund the Zionist entity in the Middle East, even as citizens of the US suffer from a lack of government investment.

In this episode, ‘Tony’, the undercover reporter heading the investigation, finds out about the money behind such shady groups as Canary Mission and The Israel Project. It’s revealed that Adam Milstein, a convicted felon, is responsible for providing funding for both.

The program looks at more of…

View original post 347 more words

The Lobby – USA – Episode 2 – Israeli Interference In US Society Exposed In Covert Documentary

Rebel Voice

Following on from Episode 1 of this excellent undercover documentary series, Rebel Voice is please to present the second instalment. The covert reporter from before has already exposed the ways in which corporate Zionism has sought to influence and control opinions on the campuses of US universities. We have seen how groups such as AIPAC and StandWithUs fund shady pressure groups on college campuses. In this explosive second program, viewers are given further insight into the methods employed by AIPAC, which is the second largest lobby group in the United States (after the NRA).

At a time when the US media, and political parties, are screaming about suspected Russian involvement in the running of the nation and its elections, we are now given evidence of the myriad ways in which the state of Israel is exerting not only influence, but control, upon the senators and congressmen and women of…

View original post 303 more words

The Lobby – USA – Episode 1 – Explosive Exposé Of Zionist Spying And Attacks On US Students

Rebel Voice

In this groundbreaking documentary, the media outlet, Al Jazeera, has conducted a sensational undercover investigation into the actions of Zionists in the United States.

Although the Israeli government has fought to have the video and all footage blocked from publication, they have failed. Now citizens from across the globe can see for themselves how pro-Israelis work and scheme feverishly to manipulate US public opinion into supporting the racist, supremacist Zionist agenda.

The AJ undercover reporter, identified only as ‘Tony’, managed to infiltrate strongly Zionist organisations in the US and recorded their boasts and plots on a day-to-day basis. It makes for gripping viewing and kudos must go to the individual who risked his safety to document the insidious conduct of groups such as AIPAC, StandWithUs and The David Project.

Such Zionist organisations are multi-billion dollar corporations with a goal of securing de facto Israeli control of US…

View original post 223 more words

Israel Wins US 2018 Election

Astute News

Judging from the mainstream media, Israel was not a major issue in the midterm election but it sure did come up a lot when candidates for office were wooing Jewish or Evangelical voters. To cite only one example, Florida Congressman Ron DeSantis criticized his opponent Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum during their gubernatorial race for receiving support from the Dream Defenders, a group favoring Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel, and giving a speech welcoming members of the Council on American-Islamic Relations to his city. DeSantis claimed in a video clip that “I can find anti-Semites around him, but it’s almost like ‘we don’t want to discuss that.’”

DeSantis, who sponsored the 2013 Palestinian Accountability Act which called for the withholding of U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority until it recognizes Israel as a Jewish state, charged that Gillum would not be a “friend” of Israel. In 2017, he co-founded

View original post 2,424 more words

Hollywood Fundraiser for Israel’s Killing Machine

By Stephen Lendman
Source

So-called Friends of the Israeli Defense Forces (FIDF) hold annual gala fundraisers for its killing machine in US cities nationwide – a way to extort money from naive and supportive donors.

Guests include high-ranking Israeli military and government officials. Well-known Americans attend.

Event raise millions of dollars annually for Israeli militarism, belligerence, and cold-blooded murder. 

It’s shocking that anyone would contribute to what demands condemnation – donors complicit with Israeli crimes of war, against humanity, and other forms of apartheid ruthlessness.

The FIDF Los Angeles chapter says it aims “to raise money for the young men and women soldiers of the IDF and to create a community that cares for and supports Israel and its soldiers” – mindless of the pain and suffering they inflict on defenseless Palestinians and other victims of their high crimes.

On November 4 at the Beverly Hilton, the FIDF said it raised a record $60 million at its annual star-studded gala, attracting 1,200 attendees, including actor Andy Garcia and other celebrities.

Billionaires Haim Saban and Sheldon Adelson were the largest donors – each giving $10 million to Israel’s killing machine.

Saban said “(w)e are thrilled that so many members of our community, including major Hollywood figures, are coming together to help us support the brave (IDF) men and women…Standing behind these heroes is one of the greatest honors in my life.”

There’s nothing heroic about occupation harshness, Gaza’s suffocating blockade, IDF snipers murdering peaceful Palestinians in cold blood, naked aggression at Israel’s discretion, terror-bombing Syria, aiding ISIS and likeminded jihadists, along with other forms of apartheid ruthlessness.

Israeli General (Res.) Meir Klifi-Amir serves as FIDF national director and CEO, a position he assumed in September 2014. 

In 33 years of active duty, he was directly involved in enforcing occupation harshness, including as military secretary to prime ministers Ehud Olmert and Netanyahu – also as their special security advisor and partner in national security decisions. 

He was involved in Israel’s 2006 premeditated Lebanon war, along with naked aggression on Gaza.

He and other IDF commanders have much to answer for. So do FIDF supporters for contributing funds for Israeli mass slaughter and destruction.

During 2012 Israeli Pillar of Cloud naked aggression in Gaza, FIDF said the following:

Its members “worked around the clock to ensure the IDF’s hardworking soldiers were taken care of.”

“Whether it was by sending packages of snacks and much-needed clothing or by sending a ‘Break from the Battlefield’ package including an LCD TV screen and board games, soldiers were able to uphold hygiene and were kept entertained in their few moments off from the battlefield and during the difficult task of keeping Israel safe under fire.”

Callous support for IDF premeditated mass slaughter and destruction demands the harshest condemnation – not funding to aid its naked aggression.

Palestine Solidarity at the Crossroads

lord-polack-696x392.jpg

Last week we saw how Baroness Jenny Tonge was cruelly maligned in the House of Lords by Lords Pickles and Polak. Pickles invited the minister and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) to join him in condemning Jenny for “suggesting that the murders in Pittsburgh were caused by the actions of the Israeli Government”.

He accused her of causing “great pain in Pittsburgh” and (horror of horrors) falling foul of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of anti-Semitism.

Jewish News reported that Pickles and Polak, both high-ranking figures in the Israel lobby, slammed her “callous inflammatory” remarks which, they claimed, were “in clear violation of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism adopted by the UK Government. For a Member of the House of Lords to publish such hateful thoughts brings Parliament into disrepute.”

Polak, according to this report in The Guardian, appears to work pretty much full-time for Israel and has abused the privilege of peerage. Many might think that brings the British Parliament into far greater disrepute.

So what did Baroness Jenny say on her Facebook page to warrant such a nasty personal attack? “Absolutely appalling and a criminal act, but does it ever occur to Bibi and the present Israeli government that its actions against Palestinians may be reigniting anti-Semitism? I suppose someone will say that it is anti-Semitic to say so?”

The PSC issued a statement complaining she “suggested Israel’s policies and its treatment of the Palestinians could be contributing to a rise in anti-Semitism generally” and the PSC regarded her post as “deeply troubling… and risked being read as implying that anti-Semitism can only be understood in the context of a response to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. Such a view risks justifying or minimising anti-Semitism.”

As if their snottiness towards one of its founders and patrons wasn’t enough the PSC told Jewish News they were considering “further steps”. Baroness Jenny is a founder and long-time member of the PSC and a courageous fighter for Palestinian rights. At that point, given the PSC Management’s uncalled-for hostility, she thought it best to spare her many friends embarrassment and resign.

Now a petition is being put to the PSC by members expressing outrage that instead of defending her the PSC’s Executive joined in the Zio attacks. It insists that nothing she said was anti-Semitic, adding that “it is perfectly reasonable to link Israel’s murderous behaviour with attacks on Jews”. It calls for the Executive to apologise and ask Jenny to reconsider her decision to resign.

But would she? Jenny Tonge might do better hitching her wagon to a reinvigorated, turbocharged BDS movement, at least until the PSC is purged of its head office idiots.

‘The Inquisition rules’

Two weeks earlier the Jewish Chronicle and the British Medical Journal reported another craven act against the Baroness, this time by the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine which withdrew its invitation to Jenny to be a panellist at a meeting on maternal health. The reason? Because of “very recent media reports and allegations of anti-Semitic sentiment which are contradictory to our organisational ethos, and which we do not feel are complementary to this event.” What sort of organisational ethos confuses anti-Semitism with maternal health issues in developing countries?

Jenny said: “I was un-invited after complaints from an unknown source, claiming that my presence would disrupt the meeting. I was not allowed to know who the complainant was… How they thought I could bring criticism of the government of Israel into maternal health I do not know.

“Criticise the Israeli government and you are excluded from other things too. The inquisition rules.”

The Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine subsequently told the BMJ: “There was external concern that a successful debate… would be sidetracked by public questions related to the extensive anti-Semitic issues linked to the Labour Party that were dominating the UK media at the time of the event.”

Feeble excuse. It doesn’t say much for whoever chairs their meetings if they cannot stop the discussion from being sidetracked and going off-topic.

How many anti-Semitism claims have a legal basis?

Hugh Tomlinson QC recently warned that if a public authority did decide to adopt the IHRA definition (though it wasn’t obliged to) then it must interpret it in a way that’s consistent with its statutory obligations and doesn’t cut across the European Convention on Human Rights, which provides for freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Freedom of expression applies not only to information and ideas that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive, but also to those that “offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population”. Unless, of course, they amount to a call for violence, hatred or intolerance.

A further obligation put on public authorities is “to create a favourable environment for participation in public debates for all concerned, allowing them to express their opinions and ideas without fear, even if these opinions and ideas are contrary to those defended by the official authorities or by a large part of public opinion, or even if those opinions and ideas are irritating or offensive to the public”. A public authority seeking to apply the IHRA definition to prohibit or punish such expressions “would be acting unlawfully.”

Pickles and Polak should remember this next time they rise to speak in the House of Lords or anywhere else.

Retired Lord Justice of Appeal, Sir Stephen Sedley, pointed out that the 1986 Education Act established an individual right of free expression in all higher education institutions “which cannot be cut back by governmental policies”. He called for the Government to retreat from its “naively adopted” stance.

So according to top legal opinion the IHRA Definition does not make calling Israel an apartheid state or advocating boycott, divestment or sanctions (BDS) against Israel anti-Semitic. Also, Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights includes “the freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”.

As for the ghastly truth about Israel on top of all the other evidence, the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) produced a report establishing that Israel, beyond a shadow of a doubt, is a thoroughly vile apartheid regime. Such was the fuss kicked up when it appeared that it has been withdrawn from UN websites.

But don’t worry, you can read about it here.  Among its conclusions:

  • The authors urge the United Nations to implement this finding by fulfilling its international responsibilities in relation to international law and the rights of the Palestinian people as a matter of urgency, for two reasons.
  • First, the situation addressed in the report is ongoing….. In the case of Israel-Palestine, any delay compounds the crime by prolonging the subjugation of Palestinians to the active practice of apartheid by Israel. Prompt action is accordingly imperative….
  • Secondly…. since the 1970s, when the international campaign to oppose apartheid in southern Africa gathered momentum, apartheid has been considered in the annals of the United Nations and world public opinion to be second only to genocide in the hierarchy of criminality.
  • This report accordingly recommends that the international community act immediately, without waiting for a more formal pronouncement regarding the culpability of the State of Israel, its Government and its officials for the commission of the crime of apartheid….
  • The prohibition of apartheid is considered ‘jus cogens’ in international customary law. States have a separate and collective duty (a) not to recognize an apartheid regime as lawful; (b) not to aid or assist a State in maintaining an apartheid regime; and (c) to cooperate with the United Nations and other States in bringing apartheid regimes to an end. A State that fails to fulfil those duties could itself be held legally responsible for engaging in wrongful acts involving complicity with maintaining an apartheid regime.

No wonder it was hushed up.

What next?

Miko Peled, in my recent interview with him, underlined the need for activists to shift up a gear and accelerate from solidarity to full-on resistance. This means wider involvement, better co-ordination, revised targeting and sharper strategy. In effect a BDS Mk2, turbocharged. And it involves treating Zionism and those who promote or support it with far less tolerance. As Miko said on another occasion, “If opposing Israel is anti-Semitism then what do you call supporting a state that has been engaged in brutal ethnic cleansing for seven decades?”

Indeed. And what do you call people in public life who adore and defend that state and intimidate anyone who voices disapproval?

Things are changing. The Stop the War Coalition last weekend brought together a number of experts in a conference about “re-framing the debate” on Palestine. That whole discussion is long overdue and I’m waiting to hear what came out of it. For example, robust measures must be put in place to counter bogus accusations of anti-Semitism stifling free speech

It might be no bad thing if someone came forward with a proposal for a centralised legal unit to reprimand the Zio-extremists who overstep the mark and use false accusations of anti-Semitism to pour hatred on the likes of Jenny Tonge.

Efforts must be made to ensure public institutions like Parliament don’t provide a platform for such odious behaviour. It would also be the unit’s task to launch into the public domain a working definition of anti-Palestinian racism similar to the one recently proposed by Jewish Voice for Labour.

By Stuart Littlewood
Source

%d bloggers like this: