"All vows, oaths, promises, engagements, and swearing,……"

Mr. Hart asked: Will God forgive?

“If this goy (me) completely understands the message, the Chief Rabbi is calling on British Jews (and by obvious implication all others) to say sorry to the people they have hurt as well as God. And if that is so I have three questions.

1. Do the people who have been hurt by Jews in Zionism’s name include the Palestinians?
2. If the answer is “No”, why not?
3. If the answer is “Yes”, why is that most Jews can’t say sorry to the Palestinians for the terrible wrongs done to them in Zionism’s name? (The terrible wrongs only begin with the first phase of Zionism’s ethnic cleansing of Palestine).”

Alan, I think, like “there was No surrender” you heard from your friend “Mother Israel”, and like “there was No Peace” I learned from my friend Gilad Atzmon, who says in their language the word “SHALOM” means “security  for the Jews”, I would claim,  you know there is no such word as “Sorry” in the Chief Rabbi’s language. 

I shall try to read the Rabbi’s statement: 

In his Special Praying at this time of the year as he “come close to Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, the Jewish new year and the day of atonement…there’s something so powerful about the ability to say sorry“. In that the moment of honesty in his lifetime he can say sorry to his God because he “know he forgives him”, the Rabbi know that because that’s the kind of God he is, [THE GOD OF CHOSEN] who gave the Rabbi Yom Kippur. to say sorry to God…. and  to the people he hurt. [Which people?].

I guess, he ment the “Master Race” and that may answer your first question. How come he may say sorry to “Goyim” and in particular to Palestinians, the natives of the “PROMISED LAND”??
The chief Rabbi shall never tell you “Our vows shall be no vows, and our oaths no oaths at all.” Schulc,han Aruch, Edit. I, 136. “31. All vows, oaths, promises, engagements, and swearing, which, beginning this very day or reconciliation till the next day of reconciliation, we intend to vow, promise, wear, and bind ourselves to fulfill, we repent of beforehand; let them be illegalized, acquitted, annihilated, abolished, valueless, unimportant. Our vows shall be no vows, and our oaths no oaths at all.” is the talmud defensible as a holy text  My catbird seat – check the comments.

In your third question you asked: “why is that most Jews can’t say sorry to the Palestinians for the terrible wrongs done to them in Zionism’s name? (The terrible wrongs only begin with the first phase of Zionism’s ethnic cleansing of Palestine).” 

Alan, do you think, the israelis and most of the Jews, who failed to say sorry to Turkey, may say say sorry to Palestinians?”

Alan, you asked: Will God forgive?
My answer: Yes the “God of Chosen” should.

If you are seeking answers to your questions, Brig. Gen. Gordon “Jack” Mohr asked
If Jews Are Really Persecuted  – Why?
Check it and read carefully items 6, which explains why the Rabbi may not answer “Goy’s” questions, item 31 about the the Rabbi’s “special moment” and special praying.

BTW: The new “Father Palestine” wishes Peres a happy new year while occupation seals West Bank

Alan Hart: Rosh Hashanah (Jewish New Year): Will God forgive

By Alan Hart

At the start of the Jewish New Year I have some questions for Britain’s Chief Rabbi, Lord Sacks. They are for him in particular because of what he said in a recorded message of preparation for the New Year, but they are also questions that could and should be asked of rabbis everywhere.

First here’s the complete text (quite short) of what Lord Sacks said and can be seen to be saying on You Tube.

“That’s the sound of selichot (the choral-like prayer that opened his lordship’s presentation). Of saying sorry. The special prayers we say at this time of the year as we come close to Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, the Jewish new year and the day of atonement. And there’s something so powerful about the ability to say sorry.

“Out there in secular society we live in a non penitential culture. When was the last time you heard a politician say, ‘I’m sorry’. Or a rabbi say, ‘I got it wrong’. Or a pundit say, ‘I made a mistake’.
“Yet we’re always getting things wrong. That’s what it is to be human. So to be able to say, I’m sorry, I was wrong, forgive me, is important. It’s a moment of honesty in a lifetime of keeping up appearances; of trying to look infallible. And I can say sorry to God because I know he forgives me. I know that because that’s the kind of God he is. That’s why he gave us Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. So try saying sorry to God. It might just help you, as it has helped me, to say sorry to the people I’ve hurt. Saying sorry is the superglue of interpersonal life. It mends relationships that would otherwise be broken beyond repair. You won’t be sorry that you said, ‘I’m sorry, Shanah toya’.
“Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish new year, is a kind of clarion call, a summons to the Ten Days of Penitence which culminate in the Day of Atonement. Yom Kippur is the supreme moment of Jewish time, a day of fasting and prayer, introspection and self-judgement. At no other time are we so sharply conscious of standing before God, of being known.”

If this goy (me) completely understands the message, the Chief Rabbi is calling on British Jews (and by obvious implication all others) to say sorry to the people they have hurt as well as God. And if that is so I have three questions.
1. Do the people who have been hurt by Jews in Zionism’s name include the Palestinians?
2. If the answer is “No”, why not?
3. If the answer is “Yes”, why is that most Jews can’t say sorry to the Palestinians for the terrible wrongs done to them in Zionism’s name? (The terrible wrongs only begin with the first phase of Zionism’s ethnic cleansing of Palestine).

As I was turning over in my gentile mind possible answers to the last question, I recalled a very revealing story Golda Meir told me in our last conversation shortly before she died.

It was about what happened early on the first morning (day two) of the Yom Kippur war when Sadat’s forces were consolidating their hold on the Suez Canal which they had crossed in a surprise attack. Prime Minister Meir convened a kitchen cabinet meeting in her small and very modest Tel Aviv home. Defense Minister Dayan proposed that the IDF should “surrender” its remaining frontline positions on the canal to save lives and withdraw 25 kilometers.
To me Golda said: “I told Moshe there was no such word as surrender in our language, then I rushed to that little room there, the toilet, and vomited.” (The full version of that story, and many others, is in my book, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews).

Is it the case that there’s no such word as sorry in Zionism’s vocabulary?

As I understand it the real problem is that saying sorry to the Palestinians requires all Jews, not only Israeli Jews, to acknowledge the wrong done to the Palestinians in Zionism’s name. And that in turn would require all Jews, not only Israeli Jews, to play their necessary part in righting the wrong done to the Palestinians.

Perhaps more to the point is that saying sorry to the Palestinians would raise the Mother and Father of all questions about the legitimacy and criminality of Zionism’s colonial-like enterprise.

I’ll address my last question for the moment directly to Lord Sacks.

Chief Rabbi, do you really believe that God will forgive the Jews if they don’t say sorry to the Palestinians and then play their necessary part in righting the wrong done?

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Netanyaho could not say “Yes” to President Obama and the Palestinian could not say “No”.

Palestine – Hope or Despair?

“So I cannot entertain the view that Israeli Jews could save themselves from themselves (perhaps I should say save themselves from their leaders). Put another way, I can see reasons for despair, not hope.”

var addthis_product = ‘wpp-261’;var addthis_config = {“data_track_clickback”:true};
If the drama about to happen at the UN assists the process of truth-telling, this Palestinian initiative will have been worthwhile.

 by Alan Hart

The main difference between Netanyahu and Abbas was that the Israeli leader could not say “Yes” to President Obama and the Palestinian could not say “No”.

But the drama about to unfold at the UN in New York indicates that Abbas, better late than never, has discovered his testicles – both of them if he goes all the way with his insistence that the Palestinian request for UN recognition as a member state must be presented to the Security Council, but only one of them if he settles for a vote in the General Assembly and spares Obama the embarrassment of having to cast another veto which would fully expose the president’s sick-making hypocrisy (the consequence of his fear of confronting the Zionist lobby) and his administration’s double standards.

As I write I find myself wondering if in an event in Ramallah on 28 July was Abbas clearing his deck to be able to say “No” to Obama. On that day Fatah security forces surrounded and raided the home of Mohammed Dahlan. They arrested 23 of his bodyguards and confiscated their weapons. Could Abbas have feared that if he continued to defy the Obama administration by proceeding with his UN initiative, Dahlan would lead an American-encouraged and Israeli-supported coup against him? (It’s not much of a secret that Dahlan is a CIA asset and a Mossad collaborator.

Until 2007 he was Fatah’s security chief in the Gaza Strip where he was preparing to lead an American-requested and an Israeli-supported operation to smash Hamas. It didn’t happen because Hamas got wind of the plot and moved pre-emptively against Dahlan and his Fatah forces. In June of this year he was expelled from Fatah for his criticising Abbas in meetings with activists. That would have disappointed those of Israel’s leaders who were were hoping that Dahlan would emerge as the Palestinian leader to do their dirty work and use whatever force was necessary to compel the Palestinians to accept crumbs from Zionism’s table – a Palestinian “state “ of three or four Bantustans).

“Construction will continue in Jerusalem as this has been the case over the past 42 years,” Netanyaho told members of his Likud party.

It’s reasonable to speculate that Abbas will emerge from the forthcoming UN session with General Assembly recognition of Palestine as a non-voting member or observer state, but will that be a reason for hope that the Palestinian cause can at last be advanced where it matters – on the ground?
One man who apparently sees a ray of hope is the eminent, German-born, American Jewish Henry Siegman; eminent because he’s the president of the U.S. Middle East Project having previously been a member of the Council On Foreign Relations and before that the executive director of the American Jewish Congress. In an article for Forward under the headline “September Madness” he asked two questions.

The first was this.
“Is there anyone familiar with the history of the Israel-Palestine peace process who still believes that this Israeli government would defy the over half-a-million settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem – by far the most influential political force in Israel – and their networks of supporters within Israel, and present Palestinians with a reasonable peace plan for a two-state solution…?”

kosher-congress

The second was this. “And is there anyone who witnessed the frenzied applause that greeted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s most recent speech before the U.S. Congress in which he left no doubt about his government’s intentions for East Jerusalem and for the West Bank, or heard President Obama’s assurances to AIPAC’s conventioneers that the ties that bind the U.S. to Israel are forever “unbreakable,” who still believes that the U.S. will ever exert the kind of pressure on Israel that will finally change its cost/benefit calculations with regard to its colonial project?”

Siegman’s own answer to that question was this. “The contrast between America’s reaction to Israeli and Palestinian transgressions dramatically illustrates the futility of relying on the U.S. to present the parties with a fair and balanced framework for a final status solution and then using its considerable clout to see to its implementation. Instead, the U.S. can be counted on to make the protection of Israel’s interests – as defined even by its most reactionary and xenophobic governments – its first priority. The U.S. Congress, if not the White House, will see to that.”

American Jewish — Henry Siegman, President of the U.S. Middle East Project

So what is the ray of hope Siegman sees?

He put it this way. “President Abbas and his supporters have reason to be confident that in refusing to withdraw their U.N. initiative they have chosen the right course. For Palestinians, as well as the international community, must come to terms with the hard reality that a two state solution will have to be achieved not only without U.S. help but in the face of its opposition. A General Assembly resolution affirming the Palestinians’ right to statehood within the 1967 borders and granting them “non-member state” observer status will not produce immediate progress in ending Israel’s occupation. But it is likely to trigger a global reaction to Israel’s continuing efforts to dispossess Palestinians from the 22% of Palestine that has been left them. That reaction will have a far better chance of bringing Israelis back to their senses, and to the values of the Jewish state’s founders, than any of America’s feckless efforts have to date.”

Put more bluntly what Siegman is saying is that the drama about to happen at the UN will assist the process of isolating Israel as a pariah state and that at a point this process – the rising global tide of anti-Israelism – might bring Israeli Jews, enough of them, to their senses.

My problem with that analysis is that it applies reason to the Jewish citizens of a state who are, most of them, beyond reason, brainwashed by Zionist propaganda and needing to believe they are the victims when they are the oppressors.

So I cannot entertain the view that Israeli Jews could save themselves from themselves (perhaps I should say save themselves from their leaders). Put another way, I can see reasons for despair, not hope.

But I remain committed to the view that there is a way to confront and defeat Zionism. It is by empowering the citizens of nations, the Western nations in particular and America especially, with the truth of history, in order to enable them to make their democracies work for justice and peace in the Middle East. I believe that if President Obama gets a second term, he will welcome such assistance in order to have a chance of breaking the power of the Zionist lobby and its stooges in Congress.
If the drama about to happen at the UN assists the process of truth-telling, this Palestinian initiative will have been worthwhile.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Alan Hart: “Could Arab (Palestinian) staying power ultimately defeat Zionism?”

Hart finaly got it, thanks to David Hearst, “Palestinian steadfastness is a victory”
In his attempt to offer a “substantial explanation of why Palestinian steadfastness is a victory, he insists that the “Palestine file” was closed “by Israel’s victory on the battlefield in 1948, it was not supposed to have been re-opened.There was not supposed to have been a regeneration of Palestinian nationalism. The Palestinians were supposed to accept their lot as the sacrificial lamb on the altar of political expediency.
Behind closed doors, and despite their rhetoric to the contrary, the Arab regimes shared the same hope as Zionism and the major powers – that the Palestine file would never be re-opened.”

It’s logical to assume that Alan is talking Arab regimes as on 1948, mainly, Syria and Kingdoms in Jordan, Saudia, Iraq and Egypt. Having read Alan’s previous articles, it is Arafat “Father Palestine” who regenerated the “Palestinian nationalism.”

When?
Between 1958 (the Peak of Arab Nationalism) and 1965 
 
Alan ignored that the Great Palestinian revolution was inspired and lead by the Syrian Muslim Sheikh Ezideen Al-Qussam.

He Ignored the impact of the Nakba on some of the regimes who “behind closed doors…..shared the same hope as Zionism and the major powers – that the Palestine file would never be re-opened.” I mean, the July revolution in Egypt, and the series of copes in Syria, the 1956 war, the birth of United Arab repuplic, and the revolutions in Iraq.

I wonder how Alan,  dares to claim that “the Arab regimes, also feared that a Palestinian state, if it was ever established, would be more or less democratic and provide a model of government which all Arabs would want.” would explain why those Arab regimes funded and crowned the “Father Palestine”, (the “re-generator” of the so-called “Palestinian nationalism.”), as the KING of Palestine???
I claimed, and still claim, that the doomed “Palestinian nationalism” that lead to Oslo, with Alan’s help, was the best way to close the “Palestine File”.

However, they plan, and God “Allah” plan, he is the Best Planner.
Thanks to the Arab Syrian Nationalists and Islamic Hamas/Jihad for keeping the Palestine File penned. 
Finaly Allan confessed “To date Palestinian Sumud has proved to be stronger than Zionism’s ability to destroy it
but…
Does it necessarily follow that at some point in the future it will defeat Zionism?
My friend Gilad answered Alan’s question: “Israel is falling apart because ‘living together’ in harmony is foreign to its exclusivist ghetto ideology.” Gilad come from them, and he know how they think.

Tuesday, August 9, 2011 at 6:39AM Gilad Atzmon

Gilad Atzmon: A very interesting piece by Alan Hart

However, I may as well note that the one of the most intellectually intriguing aspect of this conflict is the bizarre fact that Israel is in a rapid process of disintegration regardless of its ‘strength’ or the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

Israel is falling apart because ‘living together’ in harmony is foreign to its exclusivist ghetto ideology.

The mass protest in Israel is just one expression. Israeli Jews find it impossible to cope with the life in the so called ‘Jewish State’.

“Could Arab (Palestinian) staying power ultimately defeat Zionism?”

By Alan Hart

That was the headline over a recent post by David Hearst for The Guardian’s Comment Is Free space. It began: “There is an Arabic word you come across a lot when Palestinians talk about their future. Sumud means steadfastness, and it has turned into a strategy: when the imbalance of power is so pronounced, the most important thing to do is to stay put. Staying put against overwhelming odds is regarded as a victory.”

Hearst didn’t offer any substantial explanation of why Palestinian steadfastness is a victory, so I will.

When the Palestine file was closed by Israel’s victory on the battlefield in 1948, it was not supposed to have been re-opened. There was not supposed to have been a regeneration of Palestinian nationalism. The Palestinians were supposed to accept their lot as the sacrificial lamb on the altar of political expediency.

And the whole truth includes this fact. Behind closed doors, and despite their rhetoric to the contrary, the Arab regimes shared the same hope as Zionism and the major powers – that the Palestine file would never be re-opened. They knew that if it was, there would one day have to be a confrontation with Israel and its big power supporters, the U.S. in particular, and they didn’t want that.

They, the Arab regimes, also feared that a Palestinian state, if it was ever established, would be more or less democratic and provide a model of government which all Arabs would want. Palestinian nationalism was therefore perceived by Arab autocrats as a potentially subversive force. (It’s because my book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews tells these and related truths that it can’t be published in the Arab world. The regimes of an impotent, corrupt and repressive Arab Order order were and still are every bit as determined as Zionism to suppress the truth of history as it relates to the making and sustaining of the conflict in and over Palestine that became the Zionist not Jewish state of Israel).

For their part Israel’s leaders were aware that if they failed to keep the Palestine file closed, a regeneration of Palestinian nationalism would cause the legitimacy of Zionism’s colonial-like enterprise (not to mention its crimes only starting with the first ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians) to be called into question.

After its occupation in 1967 of the West Bank including East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, Israel’s leaders became more and more aware that Palestinian Sumud is a very powerful weapon. (Actually it’s the only weapon the Palestinians had and have). In essence Israel’s strategy for dealing with it was, and still is, humiliating the occupied Palestinians and making life hell for them, in the hope that they will give up their struggle for an acceptable amount of justice and accept crumbs from Zionism’s table or, better still, abandon their homeland and seek a new life elsewhere.

To date Palestinian Sumud has proved to be stronger than Zionism’s ability to destroy it but… Does it necessarily follow that at some point in the future it will defeat Zionism? It depends on the answer to another question. How will the demographic time-bomb created by Israeli occupation be defused?

In theory are three possibilities.

1. Israel ends its occupation completely (subject to minor and mutually agreed border modifications) to make the space for a viable Palestinian state with Jerusalem an open, undivided city and the capital of two states. In this scenario provision would have to be made for appropriate compensation to be paid to those Palestinian refugees wishing to return but for whom there was no the space in the Palestinian mini state. In reality this won’t happen because Zionism was and remains a project for taking for keeps the maximum amount of land with the minimum number of Arabs on it. Also true is that Zionist colonization of the West Bank has gone much too far to be reversed without a Jewish civil war; and as Shimon Peres once said to me (quoted in my book), no Israeli prime minister is going down in history as the one who triggered it.

2. As the Zionist state becomes more and more isolated in the world, enough Israelis come to their senses and demand that their government goes for the One State solution in order to best protect their own interests. One of my Jewish friends said it could be called Palestein! If it happened this would be the end of Zionism and complete victory for Palestinian steadfastness. (My own take on the One State solution is well known but bears repeating. The Jews, generally speaking, are the intellectual elite of the Western world. The Palestinians are by far the intellectual elite of the Arab world. Together in peace and partnership in One State with equal human and political rights for all, they could play the leading role in changing the region for the better and by doing so give new hope and inspiration to the whole world).

3. Zionism’s in-Israel leaders create a pretext (possibly involving Mossad agents dressed as Arabs planting bombs) to go for a final round of ethnic cleansing – to drive the Palestinians off the West Bank and into Jordan or wherever.

It’s because I believe a Zionist Final Solution (as in 3 above) is a real possibility in a foreseeable future that I think a way should be found for the major powers, led by America, to put Israel on public notice that if it did resort to a final round of ethnic cleansing, it would be universally condemned as a criminal state and subjected to sanctions of every kind, universally applied.

• ALAN HART: Does the Palestinian Diaspora Care Enough To Become Engaged?
• Alan Hart: Saudi King Abdullah Should invite Netanyahu to Riyadh? Commented by Uprooted Palestinian
• Alan Hart: Israel has no right to exist unless recognized by Palestinians
• Palestinians versus the Samson option blackmail
• Alan Hart the Linkman of Peres with “FATHER PALESTINE”: Time to close the Palestinian file
• Annual Nakba Commemoration Dinner Speech – Carton added 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Silenced Evidences in Hariri’s Assassination -Part I

Eslam al-Rihani

“Once the billionaire PM Rafik Hariri moves inside Beirut, everybody takes note of it. His limousine is equipped with a device able to foil any assassination attempt via booby-trapped car. Mobile phones are disrupted in the area near the convoy, .. Whenever he leaves his house, his guards carry out car patrols in the streets for camouflage.” This was extracted from an entire file submitted by the founder of the American Committee for Free Lebanon – Ziad Abd al-Nour – in cooperation with Ghazi Kambel – who edited the file within a bulletin of Middle East intelligence in 2001. “The report was very interesting in terms of the information contained and the political position of the editor,” the German forensic expert Yurgen Kulbel stated in commenting on the report. ZIONIST ORGANIZATION In an exclusive interview with Al-Manar Website, the German expert said “the report is of the American Committee for Free Lebanon, and was issued years before Harriri’s assassination. The committee is close to Neoconservatives and maintains good relations with the Jewish and Christian pressure chambers, while coordinating its political activities in accordance with the policy of the Zionist Likud party via the Jewish institute for National Security Affairs.” “In addition to that, there is a strong relationship between the committee, the Orthodox Union, AIPAC and the Christian Coalition, where many observers consider Abd al-Nour’s committee as an Israeli warlike organization that works against Lebanon and Syria. It is an Israeli structure with a Lebanese mask,” he added. “This committee had posted on its website (http://freelebanon.org/) photos of Lebanese political figures as targets to be hit after being accused of being Syrian agents in Lebanon. Those figures included Nabih Berri, Emile Lahoud, Walid Junblat, Rafik Hariri and others. The interesting is that among those photos there is one of Elias Hobaiqa crossed in red lines, signifying that he had been eliminated,” Kulbel noted. MADE IN ISRAEL As for the information mentioned in the report, the German expert said “it is well known that Hariri’s convoy was equipped with one of the latest jamming Israeli device, produced by Netline Communications, which work as mobile phones and other devices jammers within a radius of 500 meters, to prevent a murder attempt by a car bomb or radio-oriented bombs.” Kulbel made a link between the report and the analysis of the journalist “Menhaj Qodwa” – specialized in politics – in which he wrote: “Days will reveal the true killers of Hariri. However, the means of assassination – although Hariri had the safer jamming devices at all – indicates that the operation was orchestrated by people who know how to disrupt the jammers.” The German forensic expert expressed beliefs that the information about the jamming device is very important, which formed the starting point in his research process as a journalist and expert specialized in crimes science. “this information was the incentive to make an interview with the Israeli producer, for he is the only one who knows how to dismantle the security system of the device.” Referring to his book, “Hariri’s Assassination – Hidden Proofs” published in May 2006, Kulbel said: “Prior to the completion of writing this book, an expert lives in Switzerland informed me that Hariri had made up his mind some day to buy jamming devices from Israel, while refusing to buy them from Switzerland. The expert also said that the producer – who also works for the Mossad – knows how his jamming devices work and how to disrupt them.” Answering a question on the possibility that Hariri could bring the device directly from the Israelis, the German expert said that “Hariri could buy it from any other country, even though it was made in Israel.” “Mehlis knew all these information, and I have no idea why he deliberately hide them,” Kulbel added sarcastically. To be continued … In Part II: ‘Secret fighters’ related to the ‘Guardians of the Cedars’ and the Lebanese Forces, and their association with the Unit 504?

Source: Website Team 25-07-2011 – 20:35 | 287 View

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

London Panel: ‘Jewishness and Israeli criminality’

Posted on May 8, 2011 by rehmat1

The British Israel lobby and the so-called ‘anti-Zionist’ groups had campaigned for weeks against holding an anti-Israel panel meeting at the University of Westminster Campus (London, UK). The topic of the debate was ‘Jewishness and Israeli criminality’. The debate, scheduled on May 3 made a huge success.

Israel-born internationally-known British saxophonist and author Gilad Atzmon had put together the panel which included Alan Hart, British author and ME specialist, Karl Sabbagh, British author and TV producer and Sameh Habib, a young founder and editor of the online newspaper The Palestine Telegraph.

I have read and quoted both Gilad Atzmon and Alan Hart. However, I am not familiar with Karl Sabbagh and Sameh Habib. While Gilad Atzmon believes in a single secular-democratic state for both the natives and the foreign Jews with equal rights – Alan Hart bluntly says that Israel has no right to exist. Alan’s views are more ‘extreme’ than Iran’s President Dr. Ahmadinejad, who had said that ‘Zionist regime has no right to exist’.

“The Zionist state which came into being as a consequence of Zionism terrorism and ethnic cleansing had no right to exist and more to the point could have no right to exist unless it was recognized and legitimized by those who were dispossessed of their land and their rights during the creation of the Zionist state. In international law, only the Palestinian could give Israel the legitimacy it craved….”, Alan Hart wrote to David Cameron, then Leader of Conservative Party, in August 2007.

Last year in an interview, Gilad Atzmon told Theo Panayides: “I don’t write about politics. I write about ethics. I write about identity. I write a lot about the Jewish Question – because I was born in the Jew-land, and my whole process in maturing into an adult was involved in the realization that my people are living on stolen land.”

Alex Seymour explained Jewishness: “If you ask a Muslim what he is he will explain his relationship to the Koran and his beliefs; if you ask a Christian what he is, he will talk about God and Jesus etc; if you ask an orthodox Jew what he is he will explain the concept of the 613 mitsvot and his belief in the Torah.  Ask a secular Jew what he is however and he will define himself by what he is not; he is not Christian, not Muslim, not religious, not anything; basically his identity is based on something like the traditional Jewish chicken soup”.
Sabbagh prefers historical facts to rhetoric. “You cannot argue with people from a position of logic when they come from a position of no logic.” For an example he describes the old lie that the Nakba was in fact the time, in 1948, when a small group of brave Jewish Holocaust survivors, fought against the might, cruelty and brutality of the surrounding Arabs. In fact, Sabbagh who specialises in this era of history reports that when the British mandate ended in ignominy; “Ninety thousand well-armed, highly trained Jews, went against, twenty thousand, poorly motivated, badly trained ill equipped Arabs! You tell them this (British Jews who support Israel) and they say it didn’t happen”.

Alex Seymour’s report of the event entitled ‘Wandering Who?’ can be read here.

Gilad Atzmon’s article entitled ‘Britain’s Jewish anti-Zionist pretenders lose another battle’ can be read here.
Lauren Booth’s report of the event entitled ‘Jewishness’, Scare Tactics and a Sense of Humour’ can be read here.

Panel Event Update: Zionism, Jewishness and Israel

Sunday, May 1, 2011 at 6:22PM Gilad Atzmon

 
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=160038250722935

Time:    Tuesday, May 3 · 6:30pm – 8:30pm
Location: We will meet outside Cavendish Campus’ main entrance, University Of Westminster, 115 New Cavendish Street, London W1W 6UW
Speaker’s Include:
Alan Hart:
Author, former Middle East Chief Correspondent for Independent Television News and former BBC Panorama presenter specialising in the Middle East.
Sameh A. Habeeb:
Palestinian Journalist, Palestine Telegraph.
Gilad Atzmon:
Jazz artist and author.
Karl Sabbagh:
Writer, television producer and publisher.
This is promised to be the event of the year.
Don’t miss it.

University Of Westminster, 115 New Cavendish Street, London W1W 6UW
Speaker’s Include:
Alan Hart:
Author, former Middle East Chief Correspondent for Independent Television News and former BBC Panorama presenter specialising in the Middle East.
Sameh A. Habeeb:
Palestinian Journalist, Palestine Telegraph.
Gilad Atzmon:
Jazz artist and author.
Karl Sabbagh:
Writer, television producer and publisher.
This is promised to be the event of the year.
Don’t miss it.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Gilad Atzmon: Drama in London

Thursday Apr282011

A panel discussion titled ‘Zionism, Jewishness and Israel’ will take place at The University of Westminster – Cavendish Campus on Tuesday May the 3rd, from 6:30pm – 8:00pm.

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=160038250722935

As one may imagine, the Zionist operators in Britain are not happy about the meeting at all: ‘Green Engage’, a Zionist anti-BDS campaign group launched an immediate campaign, soon after the announcement of the panel. Far from being surprising, within hours, they were joined by Tony Greenstein and the so called Jewish ‘anti Zionist’ network.

The original panel was supposed to include John Rose, Ghada Karmi, Alan Hart and myself.

The venue as well as the panelists (except myself funnily enough) came under severe pressure that verged on abuse: one of the panelists admitted to the organisers that he had received twelve phone calls from different Jewish ‘anti-Zionist’ activists, who insisted that — ‘for the sake of Palestine’– no one should share a stage with Gilad Atzmon.

Now, interestingly enough, when I asked the panelist whether any Palestinians had actually called to preach for the ‘sake of Palestine’ — the answer was a resounding negative. I guess that Jewish ‘anti Zionists’ know better than everyone what is good for Palestine, they are chosen after all.

John Rose and Ghada Karmi pulled out, and that is understandable: not many can endure such a level of abuse – as we learnt recently, Judge Goldstone has also surrendered, and by doing so, has severely damaged his credibility and reputation.

In the early days I myself struggled a lot: on a daily basis I would hear from one ‘progressive’ Jew or another who I should like and who I should hate. Being a rebel, I never followed any of these ‘instructions’. It took me years to develop a very thick skin, to believe in myself and to believe in ethical thinking. And, having done so, I am now happier and free, and I continue in the spirit of humanism and resistance.

Resisting Zionist tactics then, the organisers of the event and the venue are undeterred, standing strong, and determined to continue with the original plan: a list of Palestinian intellectuals and journalists stepped immediately in place of Ghada and John. I advised the organisers not to publish their names for the time being, simply to save them from the unnecessary irritation, annoyance and abuse. However, I myself made sure that they are fully aware of the possible trouble ahead.

This event is promising to be a turning point — The relentless attempts by Jewish political bodies to gate-keep the discourse needs to be confronted and exposed.

And I guess that what we see here proves beyond doubt my arguments regarding the duplicity that is tragically manifested all too often by different bodies and individuals within the Jewish ‘anti-Zionist’ network.

Come and support freedom and intellectual exchange Panel Event: Zionism, Jewishness and Israel
Time: Tuesday, May 3 · 6:30pm – 8:00pm
Location: University Of Westminster – Cavendish Campus
A panel discussion examining Israeli Criminality in the wake of the Goldstone Retract.
Alan Hart, Gilad Atzmon and others
(Facebook event Announcement)

“Despite the huge pressures from certain Zionist and “anti-zionist” groups, John Rose and Ghada Karmi have pulled but have been replaced with a number of other high profile and brilliant speakers.

A lot of criticism has been mounted about the fact that the event is putting “Jewishness” into the debate with Zionism and Israel. The fact that Israel calls itself the “Jewish State” warrants that we as rational, critical individuals must at least enquire and question what this may mean.

This is not anti-semitic nor racist, and in fact every religion has been subject to these criticisms and enquiries, and in a truly democratic society, any exclusive belief that posits itself as the truth must be scrutinised and put under the spotlight.” 

Palestine was NEVER a "lost cause"

 

In his article Palestine does not have to be a lost cause, Alan Hart advices Palestinian that the only way to save their “lost cause” is by declaring to their occupiers “… we will never accept anything less than a complete end to Israel’s 1967 occupation, as required by UN Security Council resolutions and international law.”

WRONG MR Alan Hart … WRONG

Nothing short of FULL LIBERATION of Palestine is acceptable to us, Palestinians

****************

Mr Hart continues to advice them to give up on their right of return and to accept the “crumbs of zionism” mini state, saying“…the right of return would have to be limited to the territory of the Palestinian state, with compensation for those who wished to return and for whom there was no space…. but it does not necessarily have to be the end of the right of return story. Why not? Because it’s not impossible that after a generation (perhaps two) of living side by side in peace with the Palestinians in a mini state of their own, many Israeli Jews would conclude, or at least be open to the idea that there should be one democratic state for all”

WRONG Again MR Hart … VERY WRONG

Neither Mr Hart, nor any of the zionist Jews of the world, nor any of their allies, or crypto-allies have the right to tell Palestinians what rights to give up, what rights to keep or what rights to fight for

Any decision on the solution for the Palestinian problem and any future decision about the status of ILLEGAL COLONIZERS in Palestine should be a PALESTINIAN DECISION; they, and ONLY they, can make such choices

The aims and aspirations of Palestinians cannot be imposed on them, neither by their enemy who illegally occupies their land nor by friends.

The boundaries of Palestinian longing for justice, their yearning to get back their stolen rights and freedom should not be defined by the imagination of any one, but themselves

A pathetic “mini” state, a nominal acceptance of a few thousands of refugees to return, a deceleration of some changes of zionist regime, or some vacuous declaration of abandonment of zionism do not come close enough to the fulfillment of the Palestinian aim.

The Palestinian aim is the strict, legally and morally necessary, FULL Liberation of Palestine, and the FULL restoration of all their rights.

During the almost a century time, since they began to invade Palestine, the Judeo-Zionists would have had enough time to begin to notice their own crimes, and begin to exhibit signs of remorse, of respect and willingness to behave like decent human beings. Had they embraced the hospitable people of Palestine, rather than methodically annihilating them they might have had a chance to be accepted and forgiven.

Not any more, as far as, I am concerned, they have lost that opportunity.

Furthermore, in the context of shifting balance of power, the rest of the world begins slowly to wake up to the truth, and the Muslim world will certainly not remain lethargic forever.

People of the world are opening their eyes to the alarming level of zionist infiltration in their own affairs; governments manipulations, media control, financial corruption It is not going to be a pleasant reckoning.

Moreover, the truth about the catastrophic, supremacist, genocidal Talmudic ideologies only just began to “leak” out and to attract the attention of truth-seekers, despite the fact that many who are infatuated with the “chosen”, continue to dance around these facts while looking the other way, or worse, they try to obfuscate the dangers and the horrors inherent in such extreme Jewish ideologies by pointing their finger instead at what they call “Islamic extremism”

Even decades of deception do not prevent karma.

As the world wakes up to all this, it will become evident that in order for justice and human rights to have any meaning, there need to be a global stance against the zionist monster

Unrelenting Judeo-zionist blackmail of mass genocide and world annihilation, will not bring them much support, but rather bring the world to stand up like the brave Palestinians and STOP this madness once and for all.

Indubitably, the world will regurgitate those who drive for its annihilation, Samson-ists and Armageddon-ists. The world will unite and rid itself of this Frankenstein.

In the end, zionists and their associates will not find many to shed tears for them, nor will they find many open doors to welcome them. The only open doors will be the EXIT doors of expulsion out of Palestine.

Time, perhaps another couple of thousand years, might help them to learn the lesson, bring them to their senses, back into humanity.

Then and only then, only when animated by peaceful intentions, can they try to knock at Palestine’s doors again. Not now, and not for a long time.

With patience, steadfastness and time (and Palestinians have lots of all that) it becomes evident that the only possible outcome is the unconditional, FULL LIBERATION of Palestine!

Now, I would like to invite Mr Hart to get to know Palestinians a little better, let me introduce some of them

After that, does any one still think that Palestine is a lost cause?

The only lost cause I see, is the cause of such barbarians:

.

Posted by nahida the Exiled Palestinian at 6:57:00 AM

Hezbollah’s Nasrallah could be right (IS RIGHT)

>

It’s not impossible that Hezbollah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah was right when he described the tribunal investigating the assassination of Lebanon’s Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in 2005 as “an American and Israeli tool”.

Though I myself see Israel’s military and political leaders as those with most to gain – I mean thinking they have most to gain – from a successful attempt to pin the blame on Hezbollah.

But once again Israeli strategy (state terrorism pure and simple) backfired. Israel’s 2006 war united the Lebanese (more or less) and Hezbollah came out of it stronger not weaker. (It’s worth remembering that Hezbollah would not have come into existence if Israel had not invaded Lebanon all the way to Beirut in 1982 and remained in occupation of the south. Just as Hamas would not have come into existence if Israel had been prepared to do the two-state business with Arafat).

When their unopposed air force devastated large parts of Lebanon’s infrastructure (as well as Hezbollah’s headquarters area of Beirut) in 2006, Israel’s leaders thought that by doing so they would turn the Lebanese army and Christian and Sunni militias against Hezbollah. In other words, by massively punishing all of Lebanon, Israel’s leaders believed they could push the Lebanese army and Christian and Sunni militias into doing the Zionist state’s dirty work.

Comment:

I used to say Magic will turn against Magicians, but I can’t agree with Alan that Hezbollah has come to existance because of Israeli 1982 invasion, I would say because of the “Father Palestine” bad performance, his withdrawal to Beirut without fighting, and later leaving Lebanon to Tunis. We all know that Hezbollah is an offshoot of Amal movement founded by Immam Mosa Sadr many years before 1982 invasion.

As for Hamas, Hamas was founded as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood 1987 during the First Intifada, six years before Oslo, and I am sure Alan being a key player in the “Peace conspiracy” is aware that his conspiracy killed the intifada. 

In both cases Magic turned against magicians and in both cases blood defeated the sword.

Uprooted

Fast forward to today.

Israel’s leaders are itching to have another go at Hezbollah and hopefully destroy it. But there’s a problem. Hezbollah today is much better armed than it was in 2006. It has rockets and (some say) missiles, primarily for defense, but which could do a great deal of damage to and in Israel’s cities including Tel Aviv.

The soft underbelly of Israeli public opinion would not like that. For most Israeli Jews, wars are only great if they are relatively cost free in terms of casualties on their side. So if Hezbollah succeeded in making Israel pay a high price in terms of IDF forces and civilians killed and wounded, it’s by no means impossible that, for the first time ever, many Israeli Jews would seriously question their government’s policy of living by the sword.

From an Israeli leader’s perspective, that must not happen.

So before they go to war again, Israel’s leaders (and their unquestioning American allies) know they need to discredit Hezbollah in order to greatly improve the prospects of other Lebanese forces making effective common cause with Zionism to destroy Nasrallah and all he and his movement represent.

I must confess, and do so cheerfully, that one thing above all others has always puzzled me about the circumstances of the explosion that killed Rafik Hariri and 22 others. His wealth and contacts would have ensured the he had state of the art electronic protection when he was on the move. Taking it out or in some way neutralizing it surely had to be an inside job? (That’s a question not a statement). Who could have had the necessary access?
 

A Mossad agent? Very possible.

A CIA agent? Again, very possible.

A Hezbollah agent? Unlikely, or so it seems to me.

Paul J. Balles: Grains of sand: perspectives on roles of Israel and USA in Middle East

>

Sunday, January 16, 2011 at 4:35AM Gilad Atzmon

In an article entitled “Weapons of mass deception“, I suggested that there has been too much control of the mainstream media by too few people.

The result? Much gets left out, covered up or distorted to suit special interests like those of Rupert Murdoch.

In a subsequent article, I suggested reading writers in the alternative media, a facility that has grown significantly on the internet.

As might be expected, a few knowledgeable commentators suggested that they had better choices of both websites and authors than those I offered. No doubt.

My pick of both writers and venues is based on several criteria: (1) they’re honest and reliable, (2) they often provide information unavailable in the mainstream media and (3) they focus on political, social, environmental, aesthetic or educational issues that concern me.

Thus, other readers’ different interests will naturally lead to different writers in different places.

In my article “Grains of sand: highlights from the alternative media”, I quoted a number of my favourite authors on a variety of issues coming through my lens: the establishment press, international relations, wars and threats of war, Palestine and Israel, American weaknesses and WikiLeaks.

Israel and the role of America in the Middle East

This week, I’d like to share my interest in writers who have brought important perspectives to one major issue: Israel and the role of America in the Middle East. Incidentally, six of my choice authors (three here) are Jewish.

Uri Avnery

”The country [Israel] is embracing the racist demon. After millennia as the victims of racism, it seems as if Jews here are happy to be able to do unto others what has been done to them.”

Franklin Lamb

“The 522 hour indiscriminate carnage, ‘Cast Lead’ that killed 1,417 Palestinians, mostly civilians, 352 of them children, injuring for life more than 5,300 , indicts Israel as well as those countries that continue to supply it weapons, diplomatic cover and to enforce Israel’s illegal siege on sealed Gaza.”

Debbie Menon

“There will never be peace in the Middle East unless the US, the major force which sustains Israel, withdraws its support, and Israel loses its most important and essential crutches for its survival, the money of the American people and the lives of American soldiers!”

Mike Whitney

“US foreign policy doesn’t change. It is immutable, relentless and vicious. America owns the world and demands that foreign leaders obey Washington’s directives. ‘Follow orders, or else’; that’s all one needs to know about US foreign policy.”

Jeff Blankfort

“…thanks to the unconditional backing by the US for all its crimes, and given its arsenal of nuclear weapons, I consider Israel to be the most immediate threat to the future of the planet.”

Alan Hart

“If it is the case that American presidents are frightened of provoking Israel, the conclusion would have to be that the Zionist state is a monster beyond control and that all efforts for peace are doomed to failure.”

Gilad Atzmon

“Israeli behaviour should be realized as the ultimate vulgar biblical barbarism on the verge of cannibalism. Israel is nothing but evilness for the sake of evilness. It is wickedness with no comparison.”

James Petras

“We are a people colonized and directed by a small, extremist and militarist ‘ally’ [srael] which operates through domestic proxies, who, under any other circumstance, would be openly denounced as traitors.”

Richard Falk

“We have witnessed the carnage of ‘pre-emptive war’ and ‘preventive war’ in Iraq, but we have yet to explore the moral and political imperatives of ‘pre-emptive peace’ and ‘preventive peace.’ How long must the peoples of the world wait?”

Source: http://www.redress.cc/global/pjballes20110116

Israeli Radio: Saad Hariri’s security detail using ‘Israeli made devices’…

>

Israeli Radio: Saad Hariri’s security detail using ‘Israeli made devices’…

Hariri denies. 16 December 2010

BEIRUT: Prime Minister Saad Hariri’s press office dismissed Wednesday as “fabricated” an Israeli media report claiming that security agencies responsible for Hariri’s security use an advanced Israeli-made device when taking protection measures.

“Prime Minister [Saad] Hariri’s press office denies this piece of news … and considers that circulating such fabricated news aims at disclosing methods used to protect Prime Minister [Saad] Hariri,” said a statement issued by Hariri’s press office.

The statement urged media outlets not to circulate such a media report.

Israel’s radio said the device diagnoses hostile elements several kilometers apart by the use of air wave technology.

The radio said the Israeli police noted that the device operates through vibrations that can’t be traced or blocked.

According to the radio report, the Israeli company that produces such devices had sold one of its products to a French company which provided it to the Lebanese government.

Hariri’s father, former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, was assassinated in February 2005 when his convoy, believed to have been equipped with sophisticated protection devices, was blown up in Downtown Beirut. The blast, which resulted from a suicide truck bombing, killed Hariri and 22 other individuals, including a number of Hariri’s body guards.

A series of assassinations targeting politicians from the March 14 coalition followed, prompting the younger Hariri to take strict security measures when traveling throughout Lebanon.

Many politicians rely on services provided by private security companies to ensure their safety. – The Daily Star

© Copyright The Daily Star 2010.

**************************************
Lebanon is officially in a political coma … until the indictments release

Expect gradual escalation…

Posted by G, Z, or B at 4:58 PM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Alan Hart: To Pevent the rising tide of anti-Israelism from being transformed into violent anti-Semitism, requirepreventing the final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine

>

After Obama’s total Surrender to Zionism, Alan Hart  re-stated his well known priorities:

 

“Priority number one is preventing the final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

Priority number two is preventing the rising tide of anti-Israelism from being transformed into violent anti-Semitism.”

 

In other words, reading between the kines, and connecting the dots her and there in his latest articles, the real agenda is stopping the rising tide of anti-Israelism from being transformed into violent anti-Semitism

According to Debbie Manon: Fake ‘Anti-Semitism’ Charge Losing Its Edge, “and all we have to do now is wait until it buries itself in time, as the world will insist”.

So why Alan is so worried??  

And Why Alan created this term “anti-Israelism”, and avoiding the proper term “Anti-zionism”? 

To my best knowledge 20% of the so-clled israelis are arabs, the only remaining people of Semitic origins in the zionist entity.

Is Alan still frightened from the Anti-semitism Zionist sword?

My brother Gilad Atzimon hate to be called an Ex- ‘Israeli’ instead considers himself as a ‘Hebrew speaking’ Palestinian. (Check this great interview).

Last month, Gilad Atzmon spoke (video here) at the Stuttgart Conference on Palestine held in Germany on November 26-28, 2010.  

•“We all agree about one state –

•“The world “Shalom” doesn’t mean “peace” – in Jewish culture it mean “security of the Jewish peyour neighbor” is quite foreign to Jewish culture”.
•“The political ople”.

•“The “loving concept of Western is disastrous. Look at their actions in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

•“A few weeks ago a very brave Israeli came up with names of 200 Israeli war criminals in Gaza. Some Israeli media outlets blamed me for leaking that information.”
•“The Israel’s comparison with Nazi Germany is wrong because Israel claims to be a ‘democracy’ while Germany under Nazis was not. Israeli are worse than Nazis”.
•“Israel’s comparison with appartheid South Africa is wrong. South Africa never carried out the ethnic-cleansing of the Native Africans as Israelis are carrying-out against the Native Palestinians.”
•“Israelis are doomed. The US, Britain and Germany would not be able to save them. Ultimately, they are subject to Palestinians’ kindness”.

I am, the Arabic Speaking Palestinian, and Brither Gilad the Hebrew speaking’ Palestinian. who never met, are on the same page because for us, the core of conflict is Jewish racism…Jewish tribalism, chuvenim, supremacy and so on … therefore, we are a problem with Careful Activists who try to appease the Zionists, and call for equal rights for the Victims and war criminals. 

Obama to Netanyahu – “You win”

• December 8, 2010

Those of us who are associated with the truth of history as it relates to the making and sustaining of the conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel, and who call for justice for the Palestinians, now have reason to say “Thank you” to President Obama.

With his decision to abandon efforts to persuade Israel to renew a freeze on illegal settlement building on the occupied West Bank, he has proved that the makers of American policy for resolving the conflict are Israel’s leaders and their lobby in the U.S. (including its many stooges in Congress and the mainstream media), not the man who occupies the Oval Office in the White House.

Of course I know this has always been the case (actually since the departure from the Oval Office of General Eisenhower who was the first and the last American President to oblige Israel to act in accordance with international law), but for a sitting president to provide by default the absolute proof is quite something.
The implications are truly terrifying, obviously for the occupied and oppressed Palestinians but also for Americans; and why is not difficult to explain.

As all seriously well informed people know (sadly the very few, not the very many), unconditional American support for the criminal state of Israel is not in America’s own interests. It is the best recruiting sergeant for violent Arab and other Muslim extremism and the prime cause of the gathering, global storm of anti-Americanism at street if not yet government level.

The first responsibility of any American president is to protect the security of his own people. With his latest surrender to Netanyahu and the Zionist lobby, Obama is effectively saying to his fellow Amer
icans, “I’m sorry, I’m not allowed to do that.”

As things are, the name of the game from here on in my view is not the pursuit of peace, that’s a mission impossible.

Priority number one is preventing the final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
Priority number two is preventing the rising tide of anti-Israelism from being transformed into violent anti-Semitism.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Finkelstein interviewed by Alan Hart

>

Dreaming or spreading "Peace" Illusion??

>

My Comment:

Dreaming or spreading “Peace” Illusion”??

After considering Obama speaks at the UN…  A Goodbye to peace (I commented on that),

and

After his very late discovery: “Zionism and peace are incompatible” (I commented on that discovery).

Alan Hart still thinks Obama was naïve and  inexperienced, not programmed to enter the White House to do Zionism’s bidding, Therefore, Alan is dreaming that Obama may have the will and courage to play his ace card: tell Netanyaho the U.S. will NOT block a Palestinian attempt to obtain international recognition of statehood, and will NOT obstruct efforts to call and hold Israel to account for war crimes, 

I wonder a “smart and experienced man” may forget the the other ace cards  already used, and may be used by Zionist Lobby to programm that naïve and inexperienced President and put him on the right zionist track???

Answering Hart’s question: Obama-Clinton are playing Shalom Game, the same game you played with Arafat and Peres

–

What, really, is the Obama-Clinton game plan for Israel/Palestine?

• November 20, 2010

On the face of it the package of “incentives” Secretary of State Clinton offered Prime Minister Netanyahu to persuade him to buy and sell to his coalition government a one-time-only freeze of 90 days on settlement construction in the occupied West Bank could be summed up with one “c” word – criminal.

Criminal because by excluding occupied Arab East Jerusalem from the desired freeze, the Obama administration is not only going back on its own previous demands which were in accord with international law and various UN Security Council resolutions. It is effectively endorsing Israel’s illegal settlement activities there. Simply stated the U.S. is now openly complicit in Israel’s defiance of international law.
It doesn’t matter that Netanyahu may have said to Hillary Clinton in their seven or eight-hour conversation something like: “There’s no point in you asking for a freeze in Jerusalem. I couldn’t deliver it even if I wanted to, and I don’t.” What any Israeli prime minister can or cannot deliver because of the pathological mindset of most Israelis is not the point. It is that if peace is to have a last chance, the Zionist (not Jewish) state must be obliged to comply with international law (not to mention a host of UN Security Council resolutions).
In my analysis there are three possible readings of the Obama-Clinton game plan.

One is that terrified of offending the Zionist lobby too much, they are desperate and hoping that if they can develop a little momentum, something positive might happen.

Another is that Obama believes that, with the assistance of the Arab regimes, he will be able to bribe and bully Abbas and his quisling Palestinian Authority into accepting crumbs from Zionism’s table if negotiations can be re-started. (If the PA agrees to re-start talks with Israel while it goes on colonizing Arab East Jerusalem, Obama will imagine that he has a chance of earning his Nobel peace prize. He would, of course, be wrong – I really mean deluded – to think that).

It is interesting to note that there are Israeli leaders who believe that a way must be found to “force” the Palestinians back to the negotiating table. One who has said so openly is Defense Minister Ehud Barak. He said on Army Radio that Israel has two options. “Either we reach understandings with the Americans to find a way to force the Palestinians to sit around the negotiating table, or the Palestinians and the Arab world will reach understanding with the Americans and it will be us eating frogs.” (Whatever that means).
A third possibility – my speculation here will convince many that I have taken leave of my senses – is that Obama might have an ace up his sleeve.

Via Secretary of State Clinton, Obama told Netanyahu that if he put in place a 90-day moratorium on construction on the West Bank, he (Obama) will guarantee to continue the American presidential tradition of vetoing UN Security Council resolutions which are not to Israel’s liking. That would mean, among other things, blocking any Palestinian attempt to obtain international recognition of statehood on the West Bank including East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, and preventing Israel from being called to account for war crimes.

Probably Hillary Clinton did not say so to Netanyahu, but one possible implication of the American incentives package is that if Netanyahu fails to deliver a 90-day moratorium, or does and is still only playing games, the U.S. will NOT block a Palestinian attempt to obtain international recognition of statehood, and will NOT obstruct efforts to call and hold Israel to account for war crimes.

As regular readers of my contributions to informed and honest debate know, I do not believe Obama entered the White House programmed to do Zionism’s bidding. I think, as I have written, that he was naïve and inexperienced.

The question for the coming days is whether Obama has the will and courage to play his ace card if Netanyahu continues to humiliate him and demonstrate, with or without a 90-day moratorium, that he and virtually all of his leadership colleagues are not interested in peace on terms the vast majority of Palestinians and most other Arabs and Muslims everywhere could just about accept.
–

In Case you missed it, because it was ignored by many of the “Pro-Palestine” sites who care for the messenger , not the message: Who is trying to bluff Palestinians?

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

 

Obama and Jihad and how not to fight terrorism

>Alan Hart asked (I ask – How could he -OBAMA- be opposed if he is aware of its two real and true meanings in Islam? The Greater jihad is the inner struggle for self-improvement to become a good Muslim. The Lesser jihad is struggle against oppression – oppression as in Israel’s occupation and treatment of the Palestinians, for example). Who is trying to bluff Palestinians?

Alan Hart, in below article, reminds Western leaders that the cause of “terrorism” is injustice leading communities to embrance terrorists as if they don’t know, and as if the so-called terrorists are comming from another planet.

I ask Alan If you are aware that the “Lesser jihad is struggle against oppression” why you don’t support the Palestinian’s lesser Jihad, against the oppression of Jews, the Victims of Zionism,

Who are the terrorist you are taking about?? Hezbullah and Hamas? or Al Qaeda?

If you mean Al Qaeda, I believe you are aware that Al Qaeda is a CIA/ Mossad creation. Therefore, you should not be surprised with Tony Blair’s absolutely rejecting Sir Andrew Turnbull’s warning. Blair’s so-called War on Terror is nothing but a war on that Lesser Jihad against oppression. That war continued after Blair and After Bush.

It’s a war for Israel, against humanity, and it happened that Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims are the last fort. In calling the oppressed Palestinian (In Palestine and Diaspora) to surrender, because of Power balance, and Sampson’s option etc… You are part of that war in its soft form.

Nahida hit the nail in asking: Who is trying to bluff the Palestinians?

****************************************************

• November 9, 2010

In Mumbai President Obama was asked by an Indian student for his “take or opinion on jihad”. He began his answer with the observation that “the phrase jihad has a lot of meanings within Islam and is subject to a lot of different interpretations.” In its report of the discussion, The New York Times noted that Obama “carefully avoided saying that he was opposed to jihad”. (I ask – How could he be opposed if he is aware of its two real and true meanings in Islam? The Greater jihad is the inner struggle for self-improvement to become a good Muslim. The Lesser jihad is struggle against oppression – oppression as in Israel’s occupation and treatment of the Palestinians, for example).

Obama went on (my emphasis added): “I think all of us recognize that this great religion in the hands of a few extremists has been distorted to justify violence towards innocent people that is never justified. And so, I think, one of the challenges that we face is, how do we isolate those who have these distorted notions of religious war?“

He is, of course, right about the nature of the particular challenge. It is to isolate those who can be correctly labeled as Arab and other Muslim terrorists. The question is – How can that be done effectively?

Part of the answer is not the way President George “Dubya” Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair set about doing it, a counter-productive way with bombs and bullets.

Today there are few if any real experts who would deny that Bush and Blair’s approach to counter-terrorism made the two of them the best recruiting sergeants for violent Islamic fundamentalism in all of its forms and franchises. (In the past I have imagined Osama Bin Laden on his knees giving thanks to his god for the folly of the Bush-and-Blair approach).

There is, in fact, only one tried and tested way of defeating non-state terrorism. (State terrorism is that directed and executed by an agency of state such Israel’s Mossad and America’s CIA). In Volume Three of the American edition of my book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, I get it down to 146 words, which I would expect an averagely intelligent child to understand, as follows:

Terrorists cannot operate, not for long, without the cover and the practical, emotional and moral support of the community of which they are a part. When that community perceives itself to be the victim of a massive injustice, and if that injustice is not addressed by political means, the community will cover, condone and even applaud the activities of those of its own who resort to terror as the only means of drawing attention to the injustice, to cause it to be addressed. It follows that the way to defeat terrorism – the only successful and actually proven way – is by addressing the genuine and legitimate grievances of the host community. The community will then withdraw its cover and support for its terrorists; and if they continue to try to operate, the community will oppose them by exposing them – reporting them to the authorities if reasoning fails.

I go on to say there are many case studies to support this analysis. In Northern Ireland, for example, the British Army did not defeat Provisional IRA terrorism. The terrorists called off their campaign when they had no choice – because the Catholic host community would not cover and support them any longer. And that happened only because the British government summoned up the will, about half a century later than it should have done, to risk the wrath of militant Protestantism by insisting that the legitimate grievances of the Catholics of Northern Ireland be addressed.

It follows that the only effective way to defeat Arab and other Muslim terrorism is by addressing the legitimate grievances of its host communities. What are those grievances? The list is quite long but at the top of it is the double standard of Western foreign policy as manifest in its refusal to call and hold Israel to account for its defiance of international law, while at the same time making demands, often backed with punishment including war, for Arab and other Muslim regimes to act in accordance with international law.

It’s worth recalling that in May 2004, the most senior official at the British Foreign Office, Permanent Secretary Sir Michael Jay, wrote a letter to the Cabinet Secretary, Sir Andrew Turnbull. It was a warning to Prime Minister Blair and his ministers that Britain’s foreign policy was fuelling Muslim extremism. (We were not supposed to know about that letter but it was leaked to The Observer).

• It said that British foreign policy was a “key driver” behind recruitment by Muslim extremist groups.
• It said that a “recurring theme” among the underlying causes of extremism in the Muslim community was “the issue of British foreign policy, especially in the context of the Middle East peace process and Iraq.” (If written today Afghanistan would be added to the context).
• It said that “British foreign policy and the perception of its negative effect on Muslims globally plays a significant role in creating a feeling of anger and impotence among especially the younger generation of British Muslims.”

For a while it seemed that Prime Minister Blair was taking the Foreign Officer’s advice. But he subsequently demonstrated his total contempt for it and his absolute rejection of it. He said, “Muslims have a completely false sense of grievance against the West.“

At the time I wrote that if there was a prize for the most dangerously irresponsible statement of recent times, I would recommend it be given to Mr. Blair for that statement. In my view, the least that could be said about it was that it cut the ground – not all of it but a lot – from under the feet of moderate Muslim leaders who are trying to stop the drift to extremism in their communities caused in large part by British foreign policy – correction, by Blair’s foreign policy and in the American context Bush’s foreign policy.

A policy which despite his rhetoric (sometimes) to the contrary, Obama is continuing and, with targeted assassinations by drone attacks over Afghanistan, has escalated.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Who is trying to bluff the Palestinians?

>

A critical view of Alan Hart’s proposal to Palestinians

By Nahida the Exiled Palestinian

Alan Hart, a friend and supporter of Palestine, invited ALL Palestinians, at home and in Diaspora with all their political shades, factions and affiliations to unite and “call israel’s bluff”

July 27, 2010

He writes: (emphasis mine)

“They could do so with a joint Fatah-Hamas statement to something like this effect:

“We cannot and will not recognise Israel’s “right” to exist because it has no such right, but we are a pragmatic people and we hereby declare that we are prepared to recognise and live in permanent peace with the reality of an Israel inside its borders as they were on the eve of the 1967 war, with Jerusalem an open, undivided city and the capital of two states… We further declare that our pragmatism extends to accepting that the right of the dispossessed Palestinians to return must and will be confined to the Palestinian state, which means that many of those who wish to return will have to settle for compensation for the loss of their homes and their land.” 

Alan Hart recapitulates:

“The point of the article above is only that I believe the Palestinian leadership should now say, in the most explicit terms, that most Palestinians are still prepared to live in permanent peace with an Israel inside its pre-1967 borders.”

Our friend wants the Palestinians to attest their good-intention publicly, once and for all and demonstrate to the world and to the occupiers of their lands that they are only interested in peace, they “should” reassure their rapist murderers, “in the most explicit terms” that they want to “live in permanent peace” with a “Jewish state” encroached over 80% of their land!! In other words, Palestinians are strongly advised by our friend to pull their acts together, organize, unite and hurry up, sign the statement he prepared for them in which they sign off permanently their RIGHTS to their OWN historic land of Palestine. Furthermore, he wants the Palestinians to declare publicly and permanently that they are giving up their right of return!

These are precisely the demands of our enemy!

Total Surrender, nothing less nothing more, and that’s at a time when the Palestinian struggle and resistance are finally gaining global support and momentum.

By doing so, Mr. Hart reflects better his domain of interest and expertise; namely zionists and “israelis”, but not Palestine or Palestinians.

Had he any real knowledge of Palestinians, he would’ve known that Palestinians do NOT surrender.

More than a century of struggle, sacrifices and extreme anguish did not weaken their fortitude to resist, nor did it destroy or even abate their aim of return and of the liberation of all of Palestine.

Now, the question is:

Why Palestinians should NEVER recognize “israel”?

Furthermore

Why REAL friends of Palestine should NEVER insist or even ask that Palestinians recognize “israel”?

Amazingly enough, Alan Hart’s own articles prove that he knows perfectly well the answer to those questions; but he apparently assumes that Palestinians have a memory span of a fish!

On Oct 16th, 2009, he wrote: (emphasis mine)

“legitimacy was the only thing the Zionists could not and cannot take from the Palestinians by force.”

“The truth of the time was that the Zionist state, which came into being mainly as a consequence of pre-planned ethnic cleansing, had no right to exist and, more to the point, could have no right to exist UNLESS … Unless it was recognized and legitimized by those who were dispossessed of their land and their rights during the creation of the Zionist state. In international law only the Palestinians could give Israel the legitimacy it craved.”

http://palestinethinktank.com/2009/10/16/alan-hart-israels-right-or-not-to-exist-the-facts-and-truth/

On one hand, Mr. Hart acknowledges that “israel” has no right to exist unless explicitly recognized and legitimized by the Palestinians -ONLY the Palestinians, and he also acknowledges that “israel” is craving for this recognition.

On the other hand, Mr. Hart now volunteers, on the bases of his good name, to obtain that recognition by temptation and persuasion, regardless of the miscarriage of justice that would cause, and the irreversible harm this would inflect on Palestinians.

To this effect, it is with condescension that he makes the misleading demand that ALL Palestinians should on his say-so show pragmatism and unite to recognize and legitimize the Jewish state on 80% of their land.

What would Palestinians lose if they accept Mr. Hart’s proposal? what is in there in his scheme for Palestinians?

What would happen if ALL Palestinians including Hamas and the Diaspora are CONNED into recognising “israel” within the 1967 borders, (under the pretext of “calling israel’s bluff”)?

There are two outcomes:

At best; the conscience of the “israeli” occupiers would suddenly be awakened and they would accept the Palestinian offer, in which case the Palestinians would’ve signed off their right of return, and signed away 80% of their historic land of Palestine, forever!

And at worst; the zionists would just continue to ignore the Palestinians and their lawful demands, and would clutch onto the ONLY document that would give them the legal power to legitimize their entity, namely the surrender of the Palestinians to their occupiers to achieve complete and final take over the entire land of Palestine!

By being aware that “israel’s” legitimacy is unobtainable by force, and nevertheless suggest the Palestinians should call “israel’s” bluff, i.e. recognise it within the 1967 borders, Mr. Hart in effect volunteers to achieve for the zionists the “legitimacy” they are craving for, through a final and comprehensive declaration of recognition and legitimization of the Jewish state from those very oppressed and dispossessed, the ONLY ones who could grant that legitimacy to the criminal state.

Whether at best naïve, or at worst cunning and deceptive, Mr. Hart’s suggestion would leave all Palestinian losing everything with absolutely nothing to gain.

Furthermore, under the double pretext of realism and extreme disproportion of power, Alan Hart uses intimidation to blackmail Palestinians with his “knowledge” of the “seriousness” of the zionist threat of nuclear annihilation;

http://uprootedpalestinians.blogspot.com/2010/06/normal-0-false-false-false-en-gb-x-none.html

“Always in my own mind is what Prime Minister Golda Meir said to me in a BBC Panorama interview and from which I quote in my book – in a doomsday situation Israel “would be prepared to take the region and the whole world down with it.”” http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26662.htm

It appears that Mr. Hart uses the carrot and the stick to bring Palestinians to line and trap them to surrender their rights and land, once and for all.

Knowingly or unknowingly, Mr. Hart is doing a great job on behalf of our oppressors.

His proposal serves nothing but to finalize the zionist project by achieving the permanent Jewish conquest of Palestine.

Incidentally, terminating the Palestinian human right to return to their homeland, trampling over the souls of millions who raised the banner of freedom for over a century, trashing and thrashing their sacrifices is not much of a concern to Mr. Hart.

What he worries most about is to prevent the rise of anti-Semitism, and to secure the permanent presence of a Jewish state on the occupied land of Palestine, be it as it may at the cost of slaughtering justice at the alter of the “Chosen”, and extinguishing the candle of freedom in the service of the “Light unto nations”

Mr. Hart’s proposal would trap Palestinians to become an archetype of disintegration and worse, it would offer the jurisprudential grounds justifying future wars of conquest and aggression.

What a stark contrast with the pertinent, insightful and astute suggestion offered with great sincerity by Dr. Francis Boyle, expert in International Law

“The Palestinians must sign nothing and let Israel collapse!”

With all due respect, I wonder if by enticing Palestinians to “call israel’s bluff”, was Mr. Hart trying to bluff the Palestinians?

___________________________________________________________________________________

Nahida Izzat: “I am -Jerusalem born- Palestinian refugee living in exile for over 40 years. I was forced to leave my homeland, Palestine at the age of seven during the six-day war.
I am a mathematician by profession but art is one of my favourite pastimes, I love hand-made things, so I make dolls, cards, and most of my own clothes.
I also write poetry, and participate in dialogues with known and unknown friends as I believe that communication is the first step of understanding, I believe in building bridges not walls.
My shy and extra sensitive nature hinders me from public speaking, so I try to compensate for my shortcomings by writing! I started writing about three years ago when my friends insisted I should write about my memories, experiences, and my feelings as a Palestinian. So I self published two books (I Believe in Miracles and Palestine, The True Story) [Biographical information: Growing Gardens for Palestine]

Sayyed Nasrallah Calls for “Boycott” of International Investigators

>

The Vineyard of the Saker 

Vedio Click the Picture

In the Name of Allah, The Compassionate, The Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, The Lord of the World. Peace be on our Master and Prophet – The Seal of Prophets – Mohammad and on his Chaste Household, chosen companions and all prophets and messengers.

Peace be upon you and Allah’s mercy and blessing.

Though my speech today is related to a special topic which is the conduct and performance of the International Investigation Committee and the international investigators under the General Prosecutor of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, as a lead-in, I see that it is my duty to mention the dangerous and serious incident that took place in the city of Umm Al-Fahm in Occupied Palestine in the territories occupied since 1948. It is a flagrant brutal aggression against our Palestinian brethrens there which we must view in the general conduct pursued by Netanyahu’s cabinet starting with the Nationality Law to the demand of acknowledging Israel as a Jewish state. What took place is neither ordinary nor incidental. It rather comes in a framework that puts the Palestinians living in the territories occupied since 1948 in the cycle of great risk. This must be noticed by all the governments and peoples of the Arab and Islamic world and worldwide so that they assume their responsibilities. The international and Arab silence on this incident and on what is taking place is quite remarkable.

What called on me to talk tonight was what took place yesterday when a delegation from the international investigators under the General Prosecutor visited the clinic of a gynecologist in the Southern Suburbs of Beirut (Dahiyeh) and asked the concerned doctor to let them have access to her patients’ archives – who are all women – since 2003 up to this day.

I will tackle in a while the argument that took place between them and the details of the incident. Well this is what held me today to address you and all audiences and listeners. It is because I believe we have reached a sensitive and very dangerous stage which has to do with our honor and dignity and which calls on all of us to take a different stance.

In fact, I did not wish to talk today had it not been for the local and foreign reactions and from high levels which I watched and heard yesterday. Today also there were more reactions whether from the General Prosecutor or the head of the STL or the concerned international parties until reaching the US State Department which condemned with the most forceful terms of condemnation – as it said – what took place in Dahiyeh.

Indeed American eyes are blind and American ears are deaf on what is taking place in Palestine and in Umm Al- Fahm – and that was what took place on one day only. No word was said on what took place in Umm Al-Fahm, though the magnitude and circumstances of what took place in Dahiyeh are not to be compared to the magnitude, circumstances and aims of what took place in Umm Al-Fahm.

This increased my conviction to carry on and talk tonight. In fact, another thing came to light; the Lebanese judicial authorities regained its vitality. I was amazed by the haste with which the State Prosecutor moved and with astounding promptness he opened an investigation on this case after remaining silent for long years on false witnesses. I thought he opened an investigation to apply the Lebanese laws but I heard that it is against the law. Anyway, the door of jurisprudence is open on whatever is called laws. However, aside from laws, we thought he made haste to defend our dignity and honor.

Anyway, this atmosphere affirms that the industrious US attempts – whether through Filtman’s visit and the contacts of Mrs. Clinton – aim at ruining all the Saudi-Syrian attempts to preserve this country’s integrity and stability. These US attempts are provoked by local and regional political forces which we know very well. Before starting my speech, I would like to tell you that few minutes ago I received some information which I hope is not true. It says that there are great US pressures on the General Prosecutor to hasten in issuing the indictment before its due date in December.

Anyway, when you see all these reactions you realize that what took place was not an accidental incident. It rather deserves contemplation and dealing with it as a turning point. What I will present to you and what I will ask from you is a turning point in the track in this issue.

However before moving to the sensitive side which has to do with our honor and the gynecologic documents, I would like to reveal the truth to the Lebanese and to all people: Until 5 or 7 minutes before my speech to you, there was a definite statue quo and a truth that was taking place and which I like to acknowledge. As many of the Lebanese, we in Hezbollah used to know the magnitude of security violation made by the international investigation and the international prosecutors of everything in Lebanon since 2005 until this very day. Still we remained silent on that. However indeed we will not remain silent tonight. Until no more than 7 minutes ago we were silent as many of the Lebanese in the country. Was that a right thing to be done or not is another point of discussion.

Why did we remain silent? We remained silent so that it won’t be said that there are some who want to obstruct the international investigation and block the way before revealing the truth on who assassinated martyr PM Rafiq Hariri. So we remained silent as we tried to observe the national and local sensitivities. We remained silent on all of these violations for years. Still these violations were taking place. I will present to you some quick titles of what the investigation committees demanded when it used to be called investigation committee and before the Special Tribunal was formed and then what was demanded by the General Prosecutor after the STL was formed. I will mention some and not all of the titles because I have a long list. Some of what was demanded by the investigation committee (what it was furnished with as some sides offered data while other sides showed reservation and other sides did not have enough information to offer is another field of research) is known by the Lebanese while some are not known by them.

For example, the international investigation asked for the files of the students in the private universities in Lebanon from 2003 to 2006. At least they demanded that from private universities and I do not know if they asked that from public universities. So all the files of university students – whether Lebanese or not – are with them. Henceforth were these files go, I will tell you in a while.

All so called communication data in Lebanon since 2003 – phone calls, sms… – whether from MTC, Alfa or Ogero from 2003 till this very day was given to international investigation and is updated regularly.

They called for fingerprints from the Passport directorate in the Public Security. All the fingerprints for passports with fingerprints on them were demanded. Argument took place on the issue. They made a settlement and fingerprints for 893 Lebanese persons were submitted.

They asked for all the DNA documents available in Lebanon. They asked for all the geographic documents and the Geographic Information System (GIS) in Lebanon. They want all what has to do with the Lebanese geography from the borderlines to the opposite borderlines: mountains, valleys, sensitive points, important points… This has its own world and terminologies. What does it have to do with the assassination of PM Hariri is another point of research? They demanded for statements for the subscribers in Elecricité du Liban. They spared no domain but they had access to it – apart from who gave them information and who did not. This is another point of discussion.

For all of this period of time we did not say a word though we knew that such data are much broader from investigating an assassination and though we knew that and especially in the last years the investigators worked at collecting information about Hezbollah much broader than what is linked to accusing a group or groups in the assassination of PM Rafiq Hariri and though we knew that this data reaches western security bodies and Israel. Copies of whatever the international investigators collect are transferred to Israel. Still we remained silent. Anyone in Lebanon and even from among our masses has the right to say we were mistaken or not in that. However I am only depicting what took place up to this moment.

Why did we remain silent? We remained silent only and only for having no one saying there are impediments. We know that used to cause much sensitivity in the country. We remained silent to show respect to the family of martyr Hariri, to the movement and to the general atmosphere in the country. For many and various considerations, that was what took place.

However, now we reached a point on which I believe we can not tolerate staying silent under whatever political, local or foreign considerations. Never! We can’t remain silent for the sake of anyone. Allow me to say here; what has the international investigation to do with gynecologic files for our women?

I am hesitant. Shall I speak out or not? However there are details which I will talk about later. Why? What do they need that for? Why do they come and ask for files from a specialist in a clinic which is most frequented by the women, wives and daughters of leaders, cadres and officials in Hezbollah? It is a very active clinic. They asked for the files at least from 2003 till 2010. I asked about the number of files and was told that they are for more than 7000 ladies (not examinations but ladies). So each file is for a woman which includes all examination, re-examinations and details.

The doctor argued saying: How come you make this request? These files have their privacy. After argument their demand was limited to 17 files. However the doctor might not have argued them and they might have had access to the archives as what might take place and did take place in other places. Still what do they have to do with these 17 files? What has the investigation to do with having access to gynecologic files for our women, wives, daughters and sisters? I would like to address the Lebanese officials with a question (because I heard some officials making statements in the media). I would like to ask the presidents, ministers, deputies, judges and even all the Lebanese: Who among you accept that anyone has access to the gynecologic file of his wife, mother, sister or daughter? Were they files that have to do with ophthalmology or otolaryngology, it might be acceptable. But when it comes to gynecology, who accepts that? Whoever accepts that in the country let him show up and say we accept and tolerate that and you also must tolerate that too! Let us know who this great honorable person in Lebanon is who can tolerate such an issue with such a magnitude!

Everyone in Lebanon and the region know that this can’t be tolerated. We can’t remain silent on that under whatever condition. If we talked in terms of human norms – with those who are still human beings indeed -, moral norms, traditions, customs and culture as Lebanese, as Arabs and as Easterners, religious considerations whether as Muslims or Christians and moral and religious norms, who accepts – without prior knowledge, consent and permission – that that takes place? Even from legal and judicial perspectives, this is debatable. I did not have time in fact to see if the laws in Lebanon and the judiciary system do not defend our honor. We have deputies in the Parliament. Let’s go then and work and call for laws that defend our honor though today I heard more than one side saying that on the legal level this is unacceptable or at least debatable.

Brothers and sisters! This scandalous development takes us back to point zero, to all the security violation taking place in Lebanon under the title of international investigation. We would not have wished to reach this but you have led us to this point. You have led us here. Is it still acceptable to remain approving of this violation as Lebanese whether we were in the presidential, governmental or parliamentary posts or in state administrations or as Lebanese people?

What is taking place is a violation. The investigation is over. The indictment they say will be issued has been written since 2006. It is the very indictment as was published in Dir Spiegel. Soon you will see. It is the very indictment as was published in Le Figaro. It is written and I have been informed of it no more than a few months ago. I have been informed of it in 2008.

Now I will not go more into details not to trouble the country anymore. The issue is over. All the investigations that are taking place are to make use of this cover to collect as much data as possible which will in fact make no difference as far as the investigation is concerned because it was inked with words of oppression, falsification, fabrication and aggression. It has been written already. Is it possible anymore to accept this violation of everything in this country: universities, companies, communication and gynecology?

There are doctors – we did not talk about that – who were contacted and who supplied them with scores of names and not only 17 or 20 names. They went themselves with the files with them. I knew of that. Still I told our brethrens: Well let’s have patience. This is not a gynecologic file. But when it reaches this limit, we will say no. Allow us! The whole world must allow us before this scandalous development: This is a particular conduct pursued by the international investigators, those behind them, those who support them and those who cover them. What is the responsibility now?

First: I call on every official in Lebanon and on every citizen in Lebanon to boycott these investigations and not to cooperate with them. The violation that has taken place already is enough. Because everything that is submitted to them reaches the Israelis and all the data and information and addresses reaches the Israelis, enough with this violation.

Second: I would like to say with all love and faithfulness. Let’s depict our statue quo. Carrying on cooperating with these will help on one hand in more violation of the country in all domains. On the other hand, it helps in aggressing against the Resistance. Any cooperation from now on with the international investigators will help them in aggressing against the resistance.

Third: I call on every official and every citizen in Lebanon from now on to deal with the demands of these investigators pursuant to his conscience, dignity and honor because in the past few weeks it seems that the investigators are running out of time and they want to benefit from the remaining time. Several doctors were threatened. Several persons were threatened by the International Investigation Committee. This is documented. Before whatever threat, I tell the people: You are before a responsibility which has to do with your honor, dignity, nationalism, morals and the fate of this country. Here I am calling on everyone to assume this responsibility.

This is an outcry and I want to stop here. Perhaps I had more details to say.

One of the professors called and asserted the applications and files of students in all the Lebanese universities – whether private or public – are with them i.e. with the Israelis. So the files of all your sons and daughters who entered the universities in Lebanon are with the Israelis. What does this have to do with the assassination of PM Hariri?

Anyway, I will stop here. I call on all officials to assume their responsibilities. I call on all people to deal with the issue according to their honor, dignity and nationalism. It’s time this violation of everything in Lebanon is over as it touched our honor – i.e. to the point one can’t tolerate and on which one can’t remain silent at anytime and not even for one moment. Peace be upon you and Allah’s mercy and blessing.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

ALAN HART SPEAKS OUT ON ‘THE UGLY TRUTH’

>

October 25, 2010 posted by Debbie Menon ·

Alan Hart Esq, former reporter with the BBC, weighs in with Mark Glenn of The Ugly Truth, viz a viz the latest events taking place in his former stomping grounds–the Middle East and Palestine. Of the more important topics discussed— Zionism and Peace are Incompatable, the new piece written by Alan Hart where he makes clear the fact that we cannot serve two masters–either Zionism or peace, but not both.

An articulate Mark Glenn, has a rational and honest approach. I liked the phrase he used, “the poisoned well”. Weaning the Americans off the poisoned well is the job ahead.  The world needs a media capability called the ‘real press’ to do this.

Also some interesting comments by Alan Hart about JCS Michael Mullen’s one day visit to Israel, which needs further exploration.

WHAT’S NEXT? A new Congress, friendly to Israel and hostile to Obama, or something more “up close and personal” a la mode JFK?

He predicts they will lose power in both houses next month with Obama going in two years, if something doesn’t happen  to him before then.

He touches on the weakness of the Arab States. Regardless, it is the most vicious campaign in history, he calls for some activity by the impotent Arab states. How does one do this?

They talk about the outrageous comments by the Rabbis in Israel,  in recent weeks. The outrageous attitudes and their ability to say these things in public. Such confidence, such arrogance.

Alan Hart also likened Hassan Nasrallah to Gamal Abdel Nasser and expounded on ‘the Resistance,’ Iran and Ahmedinejad. An illuuminating and must listen to interview.

The Ugly Truth Podcast Oct 24, 2010

Listen Now(interview starts at 1:35):

http://www.podbean.com/wp-content/plugins/podpress/player.swf

http://theuglytruth.podbean.com/2010/10/24/the-ugly-truth-podcast-oct-24-2010/


Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East.  His Latest book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, is a three-volume epic in its American edition.  He blogs on www.alanhart.net and tweets on www.twitter.com/alanauthor.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Arab regime credibility hanging by its last invisible thread

>Dear Alan,
Once upon a time, an Arab Leader did it, turned off the oil taps for few weeks, and others followed, and you know what hapenned to that leader, and what hapenned to Saddam later.
Do you still support calling Netanyahu to visit Riyadh?
UP

Arab regime credibility hanging by its last invisible thread

By Alan Hart

 On 25 September I wrote a piece headlined Obama speaks at the UN… Goodbye to peace.

Since then I’ve seen no need for me to contribute to the debate about the farce that President Obama’s push for peace is and was always going to be. But the Arab League’s decision to give Obama a one-month deadline to rescue the direct talks between Abbas and his quisling administration and Netanyahu and his deluded coalition government demands a comment or two.

 Arab leaders know that with America’s mid-term elections fast approaching, there is no way a humiliated, increasingly desperate and isolated Obama can even think about applying real pressure on Israel.

(I am still of the opinion that he did not enter the Oval Office programmed to do Zionism’s bidding. His real problem was that he was too inexperienced and naïve. As a consequence of that he was bound to become the prisoner of the Zionist lobby and its stooges in Congress. At the time of writing, and given his counter-productive escalation of targeted assassinations by armed drones, I am beginning to wonder if Obama will go down in history as one of the worst presidents America has ever had).

 So why are they, Arab leaders, going through the motions?

 The short answer is that once again they are seeking to cover the ugly nakedness of their impotence.

The most relevant question, it seems to me, is what, in theory, could Arab leaders still do to give themselves a reasonable chance of countering Zionism’s influence on American policy for the Middle East?

 Prefaced by a summary statement of all the initiatives the Arabs including the Palestinians have taken for peace on terms which any rational government and people in Israel would have accepted with relief, they could threaten to 

• Sever their diplomatic relations with the U.S.
• Withdraw their financial support for America’s broken economy
• Turn off the oil taps 

As I have written and said on more than a few occasions in the past, Zionism’s key players know how to play the cards they were dealt and Arab leaders don’t.

 Zionism’s four main cards were and are the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust for blackmail purposes; money (virtually unlimited funds) and the influence it buys; the organized Jewish vote; and, more generally speaking, breathtakingly, brilliant organization and co-ordination.

 The Arabs have always had an ace that would trump all of Zionism’s cards. OIL.

 Imagine what would have happened in the immediate aftermarth of the 1967 war if Arab leaders had put their act together and sent one of their number secretly to Washington DC to say something very like the following to President Johnson behind closed doors: “If you don’t get Israel back behind its pre-war borders, we’ll turn off the oil taps.”

 If Johnson had believed that Arab leaders were united and serious, he would have replied with something very like the following: “I can’t guarantee swift action on Jerusalem but give me two or three weeks for the rest.”

 If the Zionists had been in the Arab position, that IS how they would have played their hand. And that is not pure speculation on my part. Over the years I have been told so by a number of Israeli leaders including former Directors of Military Intelligence.

 The main point I’m making is that if Johnson had believed that Arab leaders were united and serious, they would not have had to turn off the oil taps. A secret, credible threat to do so would have been enough to cause Johnson (or any president) to put America’s own best interests first.

 Will Arab leaders ever learn how to play their cards (if only to best protect their own longer term, real interests)?

 I fear not.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Alan Hart: Saudi King Abdullah Should invite Netanyahu to Riyadh? Commented by Uprooted Palestinian

Here Alan Hart, because of the reality of the existence of a nuclear-armed Zionist entity, after storming his brain, is calling the Saudi King to follow the advise of Thomas L. Friedman: “King Abdullah should invite Mr. Netanyahu to Riyadh and present it to him personally.”

My first response was to say to Alan, being the the first western correspondent to interview King Faisal, and having been a good friend of Mother Israel, most likely,  you have access to both Netanyaho and King Abdullah. Maybe they need a LINKMAN 

In case you got the JOB, I should remind you that King Abdulla’s initiative was approved by, an Arab League summit in Beirut only after adding the key words you mentioned. (THANKS MAINLY TO THE RESISTING LEBANESE PRESIDENT LAHOUD)

“… the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.”

In response that Peace Initiative Sharon, the MAN OF PEACE, invaded razed Jenin

A naive would expect King Abdullal would go that far, especially after the failure of the Zionist New Middle East.

A naive would expect Netanyaho, who refused to freeze settlements, to go back to 1967 borders.

Frightened with nuclear-armed Netanyaho, with the threat of Mother Israel to take the world down with Israel if it goes down, you are simply, calling for Palestinian’s, Arab’s, and Muslim’s complete surrender, a dream that shall never come true. Netanyaho may dare to nuke London, and that your problem, but he will never dare to nuke niether Gaza, nor, West Bak, nor South Lebanon.

So Alan, we are not afraid of Samson option

At the bottom of your post, I read: If you like it then….

I don’t like it Alan,

Neither Abbass, nor King Abdulla has the authority to neither to sell my right of Return to my birth place nor to sell Jerusalem,

Palestine shall never die and the it file shall be closed only if Netanyaho follow the advise of BRAVE Helen Thomas Resolution, and it happenned that though she has Photto’s will all USA presidents, she don’t have Alan’s the magic card, his photto with Mother Israel

Should Saudi King Abdullah invite Netanyahu to Riyadh?

By Alan hart

The suggestion that he should was made by Thomas L. Friedman in his column for the New York Times on 7 September.

My first response was to say to myself, “That proves Friedman doesn’t understand the complexities of the conflict and is at least a little bit bonkers.” But the more I thought about it, the more it seemed to me that King Abdullah should do what Friedman suggested.

In a moment I’ll get to what I think the Arabs and the Palestinians especially would have to gain without losing anything, but first here’s the essence what Friedman wrote.
He noted that eight years have passed since the Arab peace initiative pushed by Abdullah when he was Crown Prince was presented to, and approved by, an Arab League summit in Beirut.

(It offered a full and final peace, including the normalizing of relations between the entire Arab region and Israel, in exchange for a complete Israeli withdrawal from all territories occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem, and a “just solution” to the Palestinian refugee problem).

Friedman then commented that the plan has been “floating out there in the ether of diplomatic possibilities” ever since its approval in 2002. “It is time to bring it out of the air. King Abdullah should invite Mr. Netanyahu to Riyadh and present it to him personally.”

Friedman went on:

“Abdullah need not go to Jerusalem, as Anwar Sadat did, or recognize Israel. He can, though, still have a huge impact on the process by simply handing his plan to the leader for whose country it was intended. I can’t think of anything that would get these peace talks off to a better start. It feels to me as though Netanyahu is taking this moment seriously, but he is still very wary. By handing him the Abdullah plan, the Saudi monarch would unleash a huge peace debate in Israel. It would make it more difficult for Netanyahu to continue settlement building – and spur an Israeli public that is also still wary to urge Netanyahu to take risks for peace and support him for doing so. Netanyahu is the only Israeli leader today who can deliver a deal.

“The Saudis can’t just keep faxing their peace initiative to Israelis. That has no emotional punch. It actually says to Israelis: if the Saudis are afraid to hand us their plan, why should we believe they’ll have the courage to implement it if we do everything they suggest? Israelis are isolated. Seeing their prime minister received by the most important Muslim leader in the world in Riyadh would have a real impact.

“Both Israelis and Palestinians are going to have to do something really hard to produce a two-state solution. Saudi officials have developed a reputation in Washington for being experts at advising everyone else about the hard things they must do, while being reluctant to step out themselves. This is their moment – to do something hard and to do something important.”

Netanyahu has apparently said that he will go anywhere for peace, so let’s suppose for the sake of discussion that King Abdullah does invite him to Riyadh and he goes.

Either at his meeting with Abdullah to take personal delivery of the Arab peace plan or afterwards, Netanyahu would say there was one element of it that was completely unacceptable to all Israelis – the proposal that a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem should be on the basis of UN Resolution 194 of 11 December 1948. Its key words are the following:

“… the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.”

Down the years (and consistent with its Nakba denial), Israel has put two fingers up to Resolution 194 and denied the Palestinians a right of return, on the grounds that conceding the right would be an act of national suicide. As it was put, for example, by Likud spokesman Zalman Shoval in March 2007, “If 300,000-400,000, or maybe a million, Palestinians would invade the country, that would be the end of the state of Israel as a Jewish state.”

A truth, which all of Israel’s leaders have known for many years, is that the Palestinian right of return does not have to be an obstacle to peace unless they want it to be. Under the pragmatic Arafat’s leadership, the decision was taken to accept that in the event of a genuine and viable two-state solution, the right of return would have to be limited to the territory of the Palestinian state. Though they could not say so in public, Arafat and his leadership colleagues were completely aware this would mean that probably not more than 100,000 refugees would be able to return and that the rest would have to settle for compensation.

Another truth is that Jerusalem does not have to be an obstacle to peace unless Israel’s leaders want it to be. If they don’t want Jerusalem to be divided again, the Arabs will say, “Okay. Let it be an open, undivided city and the capital of two states.”

My point so far is that if Netanyahu did go to Riyadh, he would discover that the Arab peace plan of 2002, subject only to clarifications of the flexibility of the Arab position on the right of return and Jerusalem, actually offers what a rational Israeli government and people would accept with relief.

What would the Arabs and the Palestinians especially have to gain if King Abdullah did invite Netanyahu to Riyadh and he went?

In one scenario, and assuming that most Israelis are not beyond reason (an assumption I do not make), it might unleash what Friedman described as a “huge peace debate in Israel.” And that just might open the door to peace on terms virtually all Palestinians and most other Arabs and Muslims everywhere could just about accept.

In another scenario – continued Israeli rejection of the Arab peace plan of 2002 – it would enable King Abdullah and all of his Arab brothers at leadership level to say to the world, and America especially, something like: “Now you cannot be in any doubt about what the obstacle to peace is – Zionism. If you really want peace, you must now play your part and use the leverage you have to call and hold Zionism to account for its crimes.”

If that didn’t mobilize support in the Western world for an acceptable measure of justice for the Palestinians and peace for all, nothing ever will.

Footnote:

Some readers will say that a genuine and viable two-state solution, even if it was possible, is unacceptable because it would not provide the Palestinians with enough justice. My response is quite simple. One state for all is by far the best solution for all; but because of the reality of the existence of a nuclear-armed Zionist entity, the two-state solution is the best deal the Palestinians are ever likely to get.

If you liked this post, then…
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian