Alan Dershowitz Pens Tirade Against U.S. Congresswoman Over Child Protection Bill

Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN) introduced the “Promoting Human Rights by Ending Israeli Military Detention of Palestinian children Act.”

By Richard Edmondson

Alan Dershowitz, former Harvard law professor and pro-Israel to the core, apparently thinks Rep. Betty McCollum has committed a cardinal sin–introducing a bill that calls for monitoring of Israel’s treatment of Palestinian child prisoners.

The bill, entitled “Promoting Human Rights by Ending Israeli Military Detention of Palestinian children Act,” or H.R. 4391, would require the U.S. State Department begin certification–on  an annual basis–that US funding to Israel is not going “to support the military detention, interrogation, abuse, or ill-treatment” of Palestinian children.

The bill was introduced by McCollum on November 14. Dershowitz’s hit piece, published on November 23 at the Gatestone Institute, appeared under the headline “How Ten Dem (Dumb) Members of Congress Encourage the Use of Child Terrorists.”

The former trial lawyer and now CNN regular asserts that McCollum’s bill has been co-sponsored “by nine other ‘progressive’ members of Congress,” though in reality the bill has now picked up a total of 12 co-sponsors.

Dershowitz doesn’t exactly accuse its backers of being anti-Semites–although he comes close.

He asserts that McCollum’s “hypocrisy” is “palpable,” and he accuses her and the co-sponsors of giving “terrorist leaders” (the term is used a total of 7 times) an incentive, in effect, to use children to attack Jews. The bill, he insists, “would further incentivize terrorist leaders to keep using children in pursuit of their key objective: wiping Israel off the map,” and he goes on to contend that:

“…rather than condemning the abhorrent and unlawful use of children as pawns in this deadly process, this group chose to single out only the nation-state of the Jewish people for punishment, as it tries to protect its own citizens from indiscriminate terror attacks. People of good faith on both sides of the aisle should call out this double standard for what it really is: an attack on Jewish victims of teenage terrorism and their state. For shame on this group of biased anti-Israel “progressive” Democrats…

The article seems to be a heavy-handed attempt at intimidating other members of Congress from supporting the legislation.

The Harvard legal scholar also informs his readers about the modus operandi of “Palestinian terrorist leaders,” asserting that it is “well established” that “recruiting and using young Palestinians to wage terror on Israeli civilians” is a part of this “modus operandi.”

He further asserts that these “terrorist leaders” (it’s not clear if he means Hamas or if he counts Mahmoud Abbas as a “terrorist leader” as well) “have been stirring up young people to wage war against the Jews and their nation state.” If this is the case, it would seem Israel makes their jobs easy for them. After all, how much external “stirring up” does it require when school kids see their classmates mass arrested, handcuffed, locked in cages, and blindfolded by squadrons of Israeli soldiers?

Heavily armed Israeli Occupiers kidnapping 18 Palestinian children. They were taken into one room and blindfolded, questioned with the blindfold on, and some were subjected to beatings and threats. while beating them.

Suppose the federal government had sent troops to arrest your students at Harvard in this manner, Mr. Dershowitz? How much “stirring up” do you think it would have taken to get the rest of the campus angry about it?

Rep. McCollum’s bill cites a UNICEF report released in 2013 which found that “ill-treatment of children who come in contact with the [Israeli] military detention system appears to be widespread, systematic and institutionalized throughout the process, from the moment of arrest until the child’s prosecution and eventual conviction and sentencing.”

Dershowitz, however, identifies what he believes is a major shortcoming in the bill, namely that it “fails to acknowledge that some of the most barbaric terrorist attacks against Jewish Israelis have been committed by Palestinian teens who have been recruited by terrorist leaders.” Actually, however, this is a bit disingenuous. While it doesn’t use the same inflammatory rhetoric seemingly favored by our Doctor of Jurisprudence (who, really, is “stirring up” whom, Mr. Dershowitz?), the bill does enumerate the problem of children being recruited by armed groups, this in section 2, paragraph 4:

Approximately 2,700,000 Palestinians live in the West Bank, of which around 47 percent are children under the age of 18, who live under military occupation, the constant fear of arrest, detention, and violence by the Israeli military, and the threat of recruitment by armed groups.

Of course, if Mr. Dershowitz insists on bringing up the subject of “barbaric terrorist attacks,” we should not omit to mention Israel’s periodic attacks upon Gaza. Take a good look at the girl in the photo below–she was killed in the Gaza attack of 2008-09 known as “Operation Cast Lead.”

Yes, she definitely looks like she’s had some lead cast at her, Mr. Dershowitz.

Or let’s look at this boy who fell victim to Israel’s “Operation Protective Edge” attack of 2014 when he and some friends were playing football on a Gaza beach:

Or these kids who died in the same 2014 conflict:

By the way, Israel investigated itself on the Gaza beach bombing and found that it had acted “legally.”

Barbarism. It is defined as: “1. absence of culture and civilization; 2. extreme cruelty or brutality.”

The attacks on Gaza would seem to meet that definition. This is not to say there haven’t been cruel and brutal attacks on Israelis. In his article, Dershowitz cites two examples:

Consider the terrorists attack that took place over this past summer in Halamish (an hour outside Jerusalem) where a Palestinian in his late teens — from a nearby PA-controlled village — chose a Jewish house at random;, and fatally stabbed three members of a family as they ate Shabbat dinner. The Palestinian “child” murderer also wounded several other family members, while one mother hid her young children in an upstairs room until the terrorist left. This scene of carnage is reminiscent of a similar attack that occurred only six years earlier when two Palestinian teens armed with knives broke into the Fogel family home in Itamar as they slept on Friday night; the teens butchered the mother, father and three of their children — including a three-month-old baby as she slept in her crib.

What he doesn’t mention is that both Halamish and Itamar, where the two attacks occurred, are Israeli settlements in the West Bank and are therefore illegal under international law. This does not excuse the murder of civilians. But it does supply us with some additional context in which to evaluate Mr. Dershowitz and his disingenuous opposition to H.R. 4391.

Moreover, Halamish is designated as a “community settlement,” that is to say it was formed out of a legal construct in Israel whereby residents are organized into a cooperative that “can veto a sale of a house or a business to an undesirable buyer.” Most community settlements in Israel are entirely Jewish, according to Wikipedia: “Some community settlements openly require applicants to be Jews (e.g., by declaring themselves a religious community), while other community settlements find more indirect ways to reject non-Jewish candidates, us usually claiming ‘lack of social compatibility.’ Another problem for non-Jews is that the Jewish National Fund, the owner of the land in many community settlements, views itself as a Jewish organization whose mission is to spread the Jewishpopulation, and therefore refuses to lease to non-Jews.”

Perhaps here we get down to the core of the problem–the illegal settlements and the apartheid, or separation, policies. In his article, Dershowitz tries to apply Israeli standards to America by asking the “what if” question. He writes:

So I ask: what do these members of Congress think Israel should do? If children as young as 13 or 14 were roaming the streets of New York, Los Angeles or Boston stabbing elderly women as they shopped at the supermarket or waited at a bus stop, would they protest the apprehension and prosecution of the perpetrators?

But he is comparing apples to oranges. Discrimination is against the law in the US. There are no neighborhoods or communities–in Boston, New York, Los Angeles or elsewhere in America–where people can be prohibited from purchasing homes or taking up residence on the basis of their race, religion, or ethnicity.

Another thing to consider is that discriminatory policies are applied in Israel not only with regard to home sales but also in the issuance of building permits. Back in August, I put up a post about Israel’s destruction of a Palestinian kindergarten as well as its seizure of mobile classrooms that were to have served as an elementary school. The official reason given in both cases was the lack of a permit. The seizure of the mobile classrooms took place on Tuesday, August 22–one day before the new school year was set to begin. A photo was published at the time of children who showed up on the first day of school only to find their classrooms missing:

Children arrive on the first day of school only to discover that their classrooms have been taken.

It seems rather mean-spirited to come and steal the classrooms one day before school is about to start. By the way, the kindergarten is in the village of Jabal al-Baba, east of Jerusalem; the elementary school in Jubbet al-Dib, near Bethlehem. Both villages are in the West Bank–both under military occupation.Occupation tends, by its very nature, to involve “extreme cruelty or brutality.” Destroying schools would seem to denote as well a certain “absence of culture and civilization.”

In order to maintain its occupation Israel apparently also employs torture–apparently even upon children. This we find in the text of McCollum’s bill, from section 2, paragraph 11:

In 2013, the annual Country Report on Human Rights Practices for Israel and the Occupied Territories (“Annual Report”) published by the Department of State noted that Israeli security services continued to abuse, and in some cases torture, minors, frequently arrested on suspicion of stone-throwing, in order to coerce confessions. The torture tactics used included threats, intimidation, long-term handcuffing, beatings, and solitary confinement.”

Additionally, paragraph 12 notes that the same report discusses “signed confessions by Palestinian minors, written in Hebrew, a language most could not read,” while paragraph 13 cites a later “Annual Report”–issued in 2016–and which noted a “significant increase in dententions of minors” that year. An additional quote from the 2016 report reads: “Israeli authorities continued to use confessions signed by Palestinian minors, written in Hebrew.”

The full text of H.R. 4391 is available here in PDF. You can also go here to access a list of its co-sponsors.

Given that it maintains all of these settlements, and given that they are built illegally on Palestinian land, one must ask the question: how does Israel go on credibly maintaining to the world that it is truly interested in seeking peace with the Palestinians? Perhaps part of the answer is that it gets lots of help from people like Dershowitz.

In essence painting McCollum as a terrorist sympathizer as well as an anti-Semite, Dershowitz accuses the Minnesota Democrat of refusing to “condemn the Palestinian leadership for perpetrating acts of child abuse by recruiting children to commit terror attacks on Jewish women and children.” And he adds that the co-sponsors of her bill “give a bad name to the Democratic Party, to the Progressive Caucus and to Congress.”

Broad brush strokes. Inflammatory rhetoric. Both seem to work like charms in curtailing criticism of Israel. Of course a standard argument we hear from Israelis is that the settlements don’t pose an obstacle to peace, but this is a load of hasbara hooey.

Maybe it all comes down to history and who is on the right or the wrong side of it. As someone once said, the path to peace is by learning to love your enemies. The same person also said that he who lives by the sword will die by the sword. It’s a lesson all of humanity needs to learn, and if Israel were led by truly enlightened people it would teach that lesson to humanity by setting aside its sword and making peace.

In either event, the bottom line is that if Israel wants to be a state for all its people it will build Palestinian schools. If it wants to go on being a state that gives political preference to one group of people only–the definition of apartheid–it will continue to tear them down.

What the rest of us can do in the meantime is provide our support for those truly seeking to advance the cause of peace. McCollum is such a person. She is, in other words, a peacemaker.

Peacemakers are said to be blessed, Mr. Dershhowitz. It’s a pity you chose to attack this one.

I have never expected to agree with Dershowitz

By Gilad Atzmon

In this video, Alan Dershowitz, the ethnic cleansing enthusiast, speaks against  Antifa and AltLeft’s hooliganism. His argument is, indeed valid! It is worth watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b40Wlv8YvsQ  

However,  let us not forget that Dershowitz is far from being a supporter of freedom of speech or the 1st amendment. Dershowitz has worked hard to silence many intellectual careers. He obliterated  Norman Finkelstein’s academic career. He struggled  to stop both  my music  as well as  literary careers mounting pressure on America’s leading scholars, humanists and intellectual institutes.

//www.youtube.com/embed/b40Wlv8YvsQ?wmode=opaque&enablejsapi=1″,”url”:”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b40Wlv8YvsQ”,”width”:854,”height”:480,”providerName”:”YouTube”,”thumbnailUrl”:”https://i.ytimg.com/vi/b40Wlv8YvsQ/hqdefault.jpg”,”resolvedBy”:”youtube”}” data-block-type=”32″>

So you ask yourself why Dershowitz opposes the Antifa?

It is probably not because he cares for America. The Antifa is funded  by George Soros and Dershowitz regards Soros as an enemy of Israel and Zionism.  At the end of the day, every crucial political debate is always reduced into a Jewish internal dispute. I guess that Dershowitz believes that it is better to keep the fight within  the shtetl.

cover bit small.jpg

To understand  Dershowitz and other ID political tactics read  Being In Time: A Post Political  Amazon.co.ukAmazon.com and gilad.co.uk.   

I Lament Dershowitz’ Defeat?

April 28, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

Alan Dershowitz, used to be my arch detractor. He chased, harassed and intimidated professors who endorsed my work. He campaigned against venues that hosted my music. Not that long ago Dershowitz saw me  as Israel’s most dangerous enemy. He even, at one stage, complained about my “obscure” sax playing.

He did it all in vain.  Dershowitz has been bitterly defeated on each and every battle he picked against me. Not a single scholar surrendered to his pressure, not even one withdrew his or her endorsement of my work. They practically just laughed to his face. Not a single institution bowed to his pressure either as he himself admits. Dershowitz has now learned the lesson. The ethnic cleanser enthusiast has raised a white flag.

Simon Hardy Butler, a NYC morbid character who writes for the Times of Israel (when he isn’t making ‘culinary videos’ that no one watches except his mother)  was stupid enough to report this week that Dershowitz ran away when he was asked to interfere against my appearance at Theater 80 on Sunday 30 April.

“What do you suggest I do” was Dershowitz’ answer to the Zionist call for action against the“notorious anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon.”

Simon Butler, himself a dubious pathological case, wasn’t impressed. He suggested to Dershowitz to write an editorial in a major New York publication, such as the New York Daily News. “He has done this sort of thing before. Why not do it again …” But Dershowitz declined. Unfortunately, he had enough.

The truth of the matter is that Dershowitz was an elementary part of my marketing strategy. We worked very well together.  He was my favourite  enemy. The man is  known to be a compulsive liar and easy to rebut. His constant frenzy is amusing on the verge of proper entertainment. Out of the Jewish media ghetto Dershowitz is largely perceived as a clown. The ardent Zionist has managed to sell thousands of copies of The Wandering Who?  The more he engaged in my destruction the more he made himself into the archetypical ‘wandering who’.  Dershowitz was my best publicity asset. He will be missed. I actually lament his defeat.

Watch Dershowitz making The Wandering Who  into a best seller

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdDJvJJsVsU

Jewish Neocons and the Deep State

Posted on March 24, 2017

[ Ed. note – AIPAC’s annual policy conference begins this Sunday in Washington. With that in mind I thought I would post the following commentary recently published by Philip Giraldi. In the article, Giraldi, a former CIA officer, makes two essential points: a) that “neocons are most definitely an integral part of the Deep State,” and, b) that “nearly all neocons are Jewish.” He also discusses efforts now to stigmatize even the very use of the words “neocon” and “deep state.” One writer for instance has recently claimed that the word neocon revives “a great many stupid and ugly myths about Jewish bankers orchestrating wars for profit.”

Of course, most if not all the wars we’ve gotten involved in over the past 20 years or so were waged in large part to advance the interests of Israel, and each one, without exception, was urged on by neocons. Nonetheless, a time when use of the word “neocon” will get you branded an anti-Semite may not be far off in the future.

Speakers at this year’s AIPAC summit will include two officials from the Trump administration, Vice President Mike Pence and Nikki Haley, US ambassador to the UN; two US senators–Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Chuck Schumer of New York; and four members of the US House of Representatives: House Speaker Paul RyanNancy Pelosi and Kevin McCarthy, both of California, and Steny Hoyer of Maryland. I wonder if all these people would fancy themselves “patriotic Americans”? They are of course going to be speaking before an organization whose goal is to advance the interests of a foreign nation. Can you imagine the hue and cry if Congress members were turning up to speak before a group dedicated to promoting Russian interests?

Additional speakers will include Isaac Herzog, Israeli politician and Knesset member, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who will speak live via satellite. But significantly not on the list (at least as far as I can tell) is Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii. Gabbard is the congresswoman who recently introduced the “Stop Arming Terrorists” bill. Perhaps people might give some thought to contacting Gabbard and encouraging her to introduce a bill to force AIPAC to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Such a bill almost assuredly would not pass, but it would be interesting observing how those in AIPAC’s hip pocket would stand up and argue against it. For those who might think it worthwhile to contact Gabbard, you can do so at: TulsiOffice@mail.house.gov  or  at (202) 225-4906. If you do contact her, please be sure and thank her for supporting the Stop Arming Terrorists Act, and ask her to please consider introducing a bill to require AIPAC to register as a foreign agent. ]

***

Neocons as Figment of Imagination: Criticizing Their Thuggery is Anti-Semitism?

By Philip Giraldi

We have a president who is belligerent towards Iran, who is sending “boots on the ground” to fight ISIS, who loves Israel passionately and who is increasing already bloated defense budgets. If one were a neoconservative, what is there not to like, yet neocons in the media and ensconced comfortably in their multitude of think tanks hate Donald Trump. I suspect it comes down to three reasons. First, it is because Trump knows who was sticking the knife in his back during his campaign in 2016 and he has neither forgiven nor hired them. Nor does he pay any attention to their bleating, denying them the status that they think they deserve because of their self-promoted foreign policy brilliance.

And second, Trump persists in his desire to “do business” with Russia. The predominantly Jewish neocons always imagine the thunder of hooves of approaching Cossacks preparing to engage in pogroms whenever they hear the word Russia. And this is particularly true of Vladimir Putin’s regime, which is Holy Russia revived. When not musing over how it is always 1938 and one is in Munich, neocons are nearly as unsettled when they think it is 1905 in Odessa.

The third reason, linked to number two, is that having a plausible and dangerous enemy like Russia on tap keeps the cash flowing from defense industries to the foundations and think tanks that the neocons nest in when they are not running the Pentagon and National Security Council. Follow the money. So it is all about self-interest combined with tribal memory: money, status and a visceral hatred of Russia.

The hatred of Trump runs so deep that a leading neocon Bill Kristol actually tweeted that he would prefer a country run by bureaucrats and special interests rather than the current constitutional arrangement. The neocon vendetta was as well neatly summed up in two recent articles by Max Boot. The first is entitled“Trump knows the Feds are closing in on him” and the second is “WikiLeaks has joined the Trump Administration.”In the former piece Boot asserts that “Trump’s recent tweets aren’t just conspiratorial gibberish—they’re the erratic ravings of a guilty conscience” and in the latter, that “The anti-American WikiLeaks has become the preferred intelligence service for a conspiracy-addled White House.”

Now, who is Max Boot and why should anyone care what he writes? Russian-born, Max entered the United States with his family through a special visa exemption under the 1975 Jackson-Vanik Amendment even though they were not notably persecuted and only had to prove that they were Jewish. Jackson-Vanik was one of the first public assertions of neoconism, having reportedly been drafted in the office of Senator Henry Jackson by no less than Richard Perle and Ben Wattenberg as a form of affirmative action for Russian Jews. As refugees instead of immigrants, the new arrivals received welfare, health insurance, job placement, English language classes, and the opportunity to apply for U.S. citizenship after only five years. Max went to college at Berkeley and received an M.A. from Yale.

Boot, a foreign policy adviser to Mitt Romney in 2012, networked his way up the neocon ladder, including writing for The Weekly Standard, Commentary, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post. He was a member of the neocon incubator Project for a New American Century and now sits on the heavily neocon Council on Foreign Relations. Boot characteristically has never served in the U.S. military but likes war a lot. In 2012 he co-authored “5 Reasons to Intervene in Syria Now.” He is a reliable Russia and Putin basher.

Max Boot’s articles are smears of Donald Trump from top to bottom. The “closing in” piece calls for establishment of a special counsel to investigate every aspect of the Trump Team/Russian relationship. Along the way, it makes its case to come to that conclusion by accepting every single worst case scenario regarding Trump as true. Yes, per Boot “Putin was intervening in the presidential election to help Trump.” And President Barack Obama could not possibly have “interfered with the lawful workings of the FBI.” As is always the case, not one shred of evidence is produced to demonstrate that anyone associated with Donald Trump somehow became a Russian useful idiot, but Boot assumes that the White House is now being run out of the Kremlin.

Max is certainly fun to read but on a more serious note, the National Review is working hard to make us forget about employing the expression “neocon” because it is apparently rarely understood by the people who use the term. Plus its implied meaning is anti-Semitic in nature, something that David Brooks in an article pretty much denying that neocons really exist suggested thirteen years ago when he postulated that it was shorthand for “Jewish conservative.”

National Review actually searched hard to find a gentile who could write the piece, one Kevin D. Williamson, who is described as a “roving correspondent” for the magazine. His article is entitled “Word Games: The Right Discovers the Deep State.” Williamson begins by observing that using “neocon” disparagingly in the post-9/11 context acts either “as a kind of catalyst enabling a political reaction that revived a great many stupid and ugly myths about Jewish bankers orchestrating wars for profit…” or serves as a standby expression for a “Jew with politics I don’t like.”

Interestingly, I have never heard the “Jewish bankers” theory or disparagement of Jewish “politics” from the many responsible critics who have been dismayed by the aberrant U.S. foreign policy that has evolved since 2001. I don’t know how much money Goldman Sachs has made since the World Trade Center went down and that is not really the issue, nor is the fact that Jews overwhelmingly vote Democratic, which is a party that I don’t particularly like. Williamson dodges the increasingly held view that America slid into the abyss when Washington declared war on the entire world and invaded Iraq based on a tissue of lies, in large part to benefit Israel, which is what matters and why the enabling role of the neocons is important.

And one might reasonably argue that U.S. policy since that time has nearly always deferred to Israeli interests, most recently declaring its prime mission at the U.N. to be protecting Israel, then acting on that premise by forcing the resignation of a senior official who had prepared a report critical of Israel’s “apartheid” regime. I recognize that relatively few American Jews are neocons and that many American Jews are in the forefront in resistance to Israel’s inhumane policies, but the reality is that nearly all neocons are Jewish. And they are in your face every time you turn on the television or pick up a newspaper. Abrasive and abusive Professor Alan Dershowitz recently proclaimed that Jews should never apologize for Jewish power, saying that it is deserved and granted by God, but I for one think it is past time for a little pushback from the rest of us to make Washington protect American interests instead of those of Israel.

The neocon cult has been behind the promotion of Israel as well as the serial foreign policy misadventures since 2001. Do the names Perle, Feith, Wolfowitz, Abrams, Edelman, Ledeen, Senor, Libby and Nuland in and around the government as well as a host of others in think tanks and lobbies like AIPAC, AEI, WINEP, PNAC, FPI, FDD, JINSA and Hudson ring a bell? And do the loud voices in the media to include Judith Miller, Robert Kaplan, Charles Krauthammer, Jennifer Rubin, Fred Hiatt, Bret Stephens, Bill Kristol, the Kagans and the Podhoretzes, as well as the entire Washington Post and Wall Street Journal editorial pages, suggest any connivance?

They are all Jews and many are connected in terms of their careers, which were heavily networked from the inside to advance them up the ladder, often to include moving between government and lucrative think tank and academic positions. They mostly self-identify as neoconservatives and all share some significant traits, notably extreme dedication to Israel and embrace of the doctrine that the U.S. should not be shy about using military force, so it is interesting to learn from Williamson that they really do not constitute a cohesive group with shared values and interests as well as excellent access to the media and the levers of power. When did you last see an “expert” on the Middle East on television who was not Jewish?

Having made his pithy comments and dismissed neoconservatism-phobes as bigots, Williamson then wanders off subject into the Deep State, which, like neoconism apparently is some kind of urban legend being propagated by the poorly informed, whom these days he identifies as Trump supporters. He argues that the entities that are frequently cited as the Deep State, including the neocons, actually have quite divergent interests and it is unlikely that those interests should become “identical or aligned” to enable running of the country in an essentially clandestine fashion.

It is perhaps inevitable that Williamson is confused as he does not recognize how the American Deep State differs from that in most other countries – it is perhaps better described as the Establishment. Unlike in places like Turkey, it operates largely out in the open and ostensibly legally along a New York-Washington axis that constantly revitalizes itself through the revolving door allowing the entry of politicians and high government officials who create and enforce the legislation that benefits Deep State interests. Its components do indeed have different motives, but they come together in preserving the status quo, which benefits all parties, while little dissent comes from the Fourth Estate as the process plays out, since much of the media and many of the proliferating Washington think tanks that provide Deep State “intellectual” credibility are also part of the same malignancy. And yes, quite a bit of today’s Establishment is Jewish, most particularly financial and legal services, the think tanks, and academia. Many of them support or are part of the neocon persuasion and frequently also of the Israel Lobby.

Continued here

Out in the Open: Jewish Power Rears Ugly Head in Censoring of UN Report

 photo netanyahuangry_zps27af2802.jpg

By Richard Edmondson

Recent developments at the United Nations–(with regard to the censoring of a report on Israeli apartheid and the resignation of a high-ranking UN official who had been ordered to repudiate it)–should be viewed in the context of remarks made earlier this month by Alan Dershowitz.

Speaking at an anti-BDS conference in Los Angeles, the former Harvard Law School professor and now CNN contributor offered the following advice to his fellow Jews:

People say Jews are too powerful, we’re too strong, we’re too rich. We control the media. We have too much this. We have too much that. And we often apologetically deny our strength and our power. Don’t do that. Don’t do that. We have earned the right to influence public debate.

As you can tell from the above video, the event where Dershowitz made those remarks was sponsored by Stand With Us, a Zionist lobby organization based in Los Angeles. Entitled, “Combating the Boycott Movement Against Israel,” the conference took place March 4-6 and was billed as “the crucial counter BDS conference.” Admission was $500 per person for “regular attendees” and $1,000 for “VIPs.”

“All registration levels include five gourmet kosher meals, all sessions, and materials,” reads the online promotional brochure. “VIP rates also include a private reception with Alan Dershowitz and other BDS experts, preferred seating throughout the conference, and valet parking.”

The conference is said to have been attended by more than 250 people. Less than two weeks later, on March 15, a UN organization, the Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, published a report concluding that Israel imposes a policy of apartheid against the Palestinians–hardly a controversial allegation in this day and age. Yet the New York Times described it as “a politically explosive assertion” and said that the release of the report had “led to furious denunciations by Israel and the United States.”

Two days later, on Friday, March 17, Rima Khalaf resigned as head of the ESCWA after being ordered by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres to withdraw the report. That same day, the report was removed from the UN’s website. The Israeli lobby had once again given the world a not-so-subtle demonstration of its power.

You can go here to read an analysis of the report by Stephen Lendman and here to access an archived copy of the full report (how long it will remain archived at the location is unclear). The report seems well grounded in international law, drawing upon the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid and other international agreements for the basis of its conclusions. Its authors, Richard Falk and Virginia Tilley, both come from a legal and scholarly background, and both were commissioned by the ESCWA to produce the report.

“Although the term ‘apartheid’ was originally associated with the specific instance of South Africa, it now represents a species of crime against humanity under customary international law and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court,” they write in the report’s executive summary. They then proceed to quote the pertinent section of the Rome statute:

“The crime of apartheid” means inhumane acts…in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.

As you can tell, the report was produced in a scholarly manner, but I’d like to return now to the comments of Dershowitz as shown in the video above. What he seems to be saying in effect is that Jews should no longer deny the power they hold. Better to be open about it, maybe even brag on it a little bit. The upside to this, presumably, is that it might help eliminate confusion about who really runs much of the world now. He also seems to feel that being open about Jewish power would enable Jews to more effectively use their power “in the interest of peace,” as he puts it.

Are Jews really using their power to promote peace in the world? In the paragraphs above I initiated what in essence amounts to a timeline beginning with the Stand With Us conference in L.A. That conference took place March 4-6. On March 15 came the UN report, followed by the resignation of Khalaf, on March 17, and the removal of the report from the UN’s website. That’s where I ended, but let’s expand the timeline a bit further and see what happens.

Also on March 17, Israeli war planes crossed into Syrian airspace and carried out a bombing raid at a site near the recently-liberated city of Palmyra. In response, Syria fired upon the Israeli planes using a Russian-supplied air defense system. Claims and counter-claims were made about the incident: Syria says it shot down one of the planes; Israel denies this.

But two days later, on March 19, Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman warned that Israel will destroy Syria’s air defenses if it fires on any more Israeli planes. The implication seems to be that Israel assumes to itself the God-given right (and you’ll recall Dershowitz speaking about the “strength” putatively given by the Old Testament god Yahweh) to cross into another country’s airspace and carry out a missile attack whenever it feels like it. This in fact is a point that was made by a writer at Russia Insider:

“The serious exchange of missile fire between Israel and Syria early Friday morning reflects the Assad regime’s attempts to change the unofficial rules of the game.”

So begins a column published in Israel’s Haaretz.

The newspaper is of course referring to the Israeli jets that “breached Syrian air space early in the morning and attacked a military target near Palmyra”, apparently in an attempt to “aid” Islamic State forces.

According to reports, it’s suspected that the Syrian Army responded to this “breach” by firing off a few S-200 missiles.

The writer, Rudy Panko, then goes on to supply a direct quote from the Haaretz opinion piece:

Presumably the Syrian anti-aircraft salvo was a signal to Israel that the regime’s policy of restraint in the face of the airstrikes will not remain as it was. President Bashar Assad’s recent successes – first and foremost the conquest of Aleppo – have seemingly increased the dictator’s confidence. Israel will have to decide whether the operational need – to thwart advanced weapons shipments to Hezbollah – also justifies the possible risk of the downing of an Israeli fighter jet and a broader conflict developing with Syria.

There is an interesting question as to whether the aircraft detection radar system was deployed by Israel’s new great friend, Russia, precisely one week after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu returned from Moscow after yet another successful visit to see President Vladimir Putin.

One can imagine that the intelligence community will also be interested to learn whether the Syrian decision to fire back was coordinated with Assad’s collaborators and partners: Russia, Iran and Hezbollah.

He then makes the point that “Syria’s decision to defend itself from hostile, foreign jets dropping bombs on Syria shows a lack of ‘restraint’ on Assad’s part, according to Haaretz.” A similar point was made by another writer at Russia Insider, who put it perhaps in an even more sarcastic vein:

The moral of this story is: Israeli military jets enjoy diplomatic immunity. Harming them under any circumstances is prohibited by the Geneva Convention, the U.N. Charter, and the U.S. Declaration of Independence.

Carrying the timeline a bit further–as far as we can carry it now–on March 19, the same day Lieberman threatened to destroy Syrian air defenses, an Israeli drone carried out an attack in Syria’s southern province of Quneitra, killing one person; on Monday, March 20, reports came out confirming that Russia had summoned the Israeli ambassador over the March 17 attack in Syria; and also today, news has emerged of yet another Israeli air attack inside Syria–the third in three days–said to have been carried out sometime during the night of March 19-20.

Does it appear, from all of this, that Jews are using their power in the interest of peace? Keep in mind, that the events cited here are from one 20-day period in but one month only. Let’s return to the words of Dershowitz:

“Never ever apologize for using our strength and our influence in the interest of peace,” he says, and then he cites “the psalmist” whom he quotes as saying, “God will give the Jewish people strength…only then will God give the Jewish people peace. Peace will come for the Jewish people and the Jewish nation only through strength. Never apologize for using your strength for peace.”

It’s hard to say which biblical passage Dershowitz is referring to (the word “Jewish” is not found anywhere in the Psalms), but I would venture a guess and say that perhaps it’s a reference to Psalm 118, which reads in part:

All the nations surrounded me, but in the name of the Lord I cut them down. They surrounded me on every side, but in the name of the Lord I cut them down. They swarmed around me like bees, but they were consumed as quickly as burning thorns; in the name of the Lord I cut them down. I was pushed back and about to fall, but the Lord helped me. The Lord is my strength and my defense; he has become my salvation.

The whole passage, and particularly the words “all the nations,” would suggest a tribe of people who are at war with the entire world. The notion that such people would use their power to bring about “peace” would seem preposterous and nonsensical.

When  the UN report was first released, Israel rushed to invoke the holocaust. According to a Reuters report, “Israel fiercely rejects the allegation and likened the [UN] report to Der Sturmer – a Nazi propaganda publication that was strongly anti-Semitic.” There are two ironies here that need to be pointed out. The first is that Falk, one of the authors of the report, is Jewish. The second has to do with Khalef, a Semitic woman of Arab descent–and that such a woman would be accused of “anti-semitism” by those claiming to be Jews but who are not even Semites. How do people who are descended from the Khazars of southern Russia, who are not semitic, get away with accusing actual, genuine Semites of being “anti-Semitic”? Does any of this make sense? It doesn’t have to.

The likening of the report to the Nazi publication  mentioned is a knee-jerk, emotional reaction that is devoid of logic–but this too is a manifestation of Jewish power: that accusations made by Jews don’t have to be logical. It is enough simply that it is a Jew making them. This alone renders them beyond question.

Below is a discussion on the issue of Israeli apartheid featured a couple of days ago on Press TV. You will note that one of the guests, Brent Budowsky, a columnist for The Hill, not only denies that Israel is an apartheid state, he even denies the existence of Jewish power.

Apparently Budowsky didn’t get the memo about Dershowitz’s speech at the Stand With Us Conference–or perhaps he did get it but had already previously internalized the unspoken principle that while it’s okay for Jews to discuss Jewish power, the same freedom of speech does not apply to Gentiles.

At any rate, Jewish power is real. It immerses us; we are swimming in it. A future awaits us in which we, Americans, could very well find ourselves facing jail time for criticizing Jews or Israel, much as Europeans now are jailed for questioning the holocaust.

But it could be even worse than that. Much worse. Israel is intent on expanding its boundaries from the Nile to the Euphrates, while Zionist Jews in America seem to have a fixation on an even larger goal: complete, total, unchecked and uninhibited global hegemony, and possibly, in the course of trying to achieve this ambition, nuclear war with Russia if it should come to that. Israeli apartheid, the “species of crime” now being committed against the Palestinians, could end up going global…unless we find a way to defeat it.

isrsldiers

Activist: ‘Let’s free England from Jewish control’

Posted on

As result of a vicious campaign by organized Jewry (Board of British Jewish Deputies, Campaign Against Antisemitism, etc.) the British Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has agreed to review it earlier decision not to prosecute pro-Palestine activist Jeremy Bedford-Turner over claiming in a 2015 speech that Jews were behind the French Revolution and both World Wars.

Bedford-Turner is alleged to have appeared at a pro-Palestine rally in Westminster, where he said: “All politicians are nothing but a bunch of puppets dancing to a Jewish tune, and the ruling regimes in the west for the last 100 years have danced to the same tune.”

He also allegedly said: Let’s free England from Jewish control while waving a Palestinian flag.

The CPS originally examined the allegations against Bedford-Turner by Jewish groups for five months, but decided in December 2015 that a jury was unlikely to convict him of incitement to religious or racial hatred.

Bedford-Turner didn’t accuse Jews wrongly. His problem is he is not Jewish – and in the West only Jews have the privilege to brag about their power. For example, Canada-born Israeli writer, author and blogger Barry Chamish (d. 2016) claimed in 2012 that Israel committed 9/11. American Jewish author and former GOP propagandist David Cole claims that Holocaust is a big lie. American famed Jewish journalist Carl Bernstein boasted in 2013 that Jew neocons were behind US-Iraq War. Billionaire Manny Friedman admitted in 2012 that Jews do control the media. In a recent speech at neo-Nazi group, Stand With US, Alan Dershowitz said;

people say Jews are too powerful, too strong, too rich, we control the media, we’ve too much this, too much that and we often apologetically deny our strength and our power. Don’t do that!”

All four British political parties are controlled by Jews through funds and media. UK’s longest member of House of Commons, Sir Gerald Kaufman (d. 2017) accused the ruling Tory party of being controlled by Jewish money in 2015.

Canadian award-winning Jewish author Naomi Klein in October 2009 interview had claimed that the Zionist regime create conflicts and wars to boost its economy through arms sale and more American aid. “I don’t think Israel’s politicians know how to not have a crisis,” she said.

On Friday, Lawrence Burns, 23, member of a White supremacist group was sentenced to four years in Jail for admiring Hitler and accusing Jews of having low IQ during a London rally last year.

Listen to Israeli-British writer, author, jazz-player and blogger Gilad Atzmon’s views on this Jewish episode below …..

Alan Dershowitz – The Key To Athens

 By Gilad Atzmon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rH1vaZXgbd0

In his recent address to the ultra-Zionist and war-mongering Stand With Us, Alan Dershowitz said;

people say Jews are too powerful, too strong, too rich, we control the media, we’ve too much this, too much that and we often apologetically deny our strength and our power. Don’t do that!”

Elder Zionist Dershowitz who acquired for himself the reputation of a “remarkable liar” (Chomsky) and a “serial plagiarist”  (Finkelstein) probably decided, just before he meets his creator, to give truth one last try.

In our world, no one can deny that Jews are “too powerful,” “too rich” or that they “control the media.” Yet no one can ignore that Jews themselves are rarely apologetic about their extensive and overblown power.  In fact, as with Dershowitz, most Jews tend to boast about the various facets of Jewish domination and, while boasting, use every trick in the book to silence anyone else who points to that power. As I have been arguing for several years, Jewish power is the ability to suppress the discussion on Jewish power.

Actually, Dershowitz’ approach here is rather refreshing. He admits that Jews are overwhelmingly powerful yet insists on presenting a rationale as to why Jews should never apologize about this overbearing and abusive power.

“WE (the Jews, presumably) have earned the right to influence public debate, WE have earned the right to be heard, WE have contributed disproportionately to success of this country.”

One may wonder who is included in that‘WE’ that has contributed so much to the ‘success’ of America. Is he referring to his client and close friend Jeffrey Epstein who pimped under-aged girls for the elites? Does Dershowitz’ ‘WE’ include Alan Greenspan who led the country to class genocide? Or perhaps his ‘WE’ denotes all those Wall Street Jewish bankers, like the Goldmans, the Sachs and  the Soroses – those who, on a daily basis, gamble on the American future and the global economy. And almost certainly, Dershowitz’ ‘WE’ includes Haim Saban and Sheldon Adelson who have managed to reduce American politics into merely an internal Zionist affair.

Don’t get me wrong, there is no doubt that some Jews have contributed greatly to America’s culture, science, finance and so on. Yet, the notion of the Jewish ‘WE,’ which Dershowitz is here pushing is highly problematic and must be questioned. While it is obvious that the Saban and Adelson lobbies for Israel and Jewish interests subscribe to Dershowitz’ ‘WE,’ it is far from clear whether the likes of Philip Roth have been contributing to American literature as an ordinary American or whether he also is part of the Dershowitz ‘WE.’

It didn’t take the old ethnic-cleansing enthusiast long to deliver his punch line.

“Never ever apologize for using our (Jewish) strength and influencein the interest of peace.”

Considering Dershowitz’ role as an advocate of wars and an apologist for a criminal state, I was perplexed by his pronouncement. I asked myself, “Who are those Jews who so use their strength and influence in the interest of peace?  Is it the Neocon school aka The Project for the New American Century, an immoral interventionist global-Zionist collective that managed to pull America and the entire West into a global war with no end? Or maybe it is the ‘pacifist’ Albert Einstein who practically launched the Manhattan Project and introduced our planet to the imminent danger of eradication? Or perhaps Dershowitz is referring to Sidney Blumenthal who enthusiastically lobbied Secretary of State Clinton into a Libyan imperial intervention while he himself invested in the rebuilding of that state. Or is it the Jewish lobby that pushes constantly for intervention in Syria and war with Iran?

I’d better admit that I’m not aware of many Jews who genuinely use their ‘influence in the interest of peace,’ but when such Jews do appear, Alan Dershowitz is always the first to throw mud at them – as Norman Finkelstein and Richard Falk can testify.

Like Dershowitz, I don’t think Jews should apologize for the crimes of their state – I’m not sure such an apology would mean anything at all.  I don’t know whether Jews should apologize for their power – for Greenspan, Wolfowitz, Madoff or Dershowitz – again, such an act would mean very little. But I do think thatwhenever you see or hearDershowitz spreading his lies, calling for wars or celebrating his usual legalist, non-ethical symptoms, bear in mind that he is a spokesperson for the Jewish national project. Everything that is wrong with choseness and tribal supremacy is personified in this man. As such, Alan Dershowitz is a valuable window into the heart of Jerusalem, there to remind us how painful the flight from Athens has been.

But at the same time, the rejection of Dershowitz and everything he stands for, is for the Western mind, a homecoming, a key to Athens, a return to forever.

The rejection of Dershowitz and everything he stands for, is the key to Athens...

The rejection of Dershowitz and everything he stands for, is the key to Athens…

Berri : Two golden equations برّي: معادلتان ذهبيتان

Berri : Two golden equations

فبراير 28, 2017

Written by Nasser Kandil,

From Tehran the Speaker of the Parliament Nabih Berri issued two golden equations one is Lebanese and the other is regional. Berri announced that the Arabs and the Muslims who meet on considering the threat of transferring the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem by Washington  a rude challenge of the feelings of the Arabs and the Muslims, a disgraceful infringement upon the identity of Jerusalem, and a step forward to Israeli escalation that is related with making Jerusalem Jewish and the completion of the displacement of its Arab citizens, as well as an encouragement of the occupation government to go on in further preemptive steps can disable each opportunity for the settlement and ignite the region. Berri wondered what the Arabs can do; he said: why the Arabs and the Muslims do not use the deterrence weapons which they have, which is the prior threat; that they can close their embassies in Washington in case Washington transfers its embassy to Jerusalem.

The deterrence weapon which is put by Berri in circulation has revealed that there are alternatives for the wailing and the begging, as revealing the oil weapons which were used as a deterrence weapon in October War 1973 and have proved their high effectiveness, but this time the fact proves that that the cause of the Arab and Islamic governments is not due to the absence of the alternatives but due to the absence of the wills and the determinations, therefore, the inciting function of Berri’s equation will embarrass the Arab and Islamic governments and will embarrass Washington once launched by Berri, and its turning into common equation in the public opinion, it asks the governments why do not you do that, and will make Washington observe the ability of the governments affiliated to it through bearing pressures of that magnitude, and considering the US interest in exposing these affiliated governments to instability and the fall, in addition, to what will be the consequences of Berri’s equation as launching civil and popular movements that carry the equation to the street as a demand, and turn it into a slogan for preemptive pressure movement against the governments, Washington, and Tel Aviv together.

The second golden equation which was issued by Berri was like drawing a separated line between the fair and the fake election law, by saying we need a law that ensures some of the ambiguity in the results, in response to his description of the situation, that each party tries to calculate his position from the formulas of the laws by measuring his parliamentary share in advance before making the elections. Berri’s equation in Politics is a condition for the correct and the fair law, because it is an election law not a decree of appointments and the going to the elections with expecting some surprises arouse the interest of the enthusiastic voters and will give a meaning for the electoral alliances and a justification for the competition. Because without the ambiguity in the results which stem from adopting any electoral law the law will turn into an ugly deal of partisan and sectarian quota that does not worth the debate and where the law of sixty will be equal to the relative variety on specified circles. This ambiguity grants the overall relativity according to one circle its superiority to the other projects and puts is in the lead as a guarantor of the political, partisan, and sectarian pluralism.

These are Berri’s two golden equations, while the Arab fact and the Lebanese one in particular are bronze.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

 

برّي: معادلتان ذهبيتان

ناصر قنديل

– من طهران أطلق رئيس مجلس النواب نبيه برّي معادلتين ذهبيتين، واحدة لبنانية والثانية إقليمية، فقد أعلن بري أن بإمكان العرب والمسلمين المُجمعين على اعتبار قيام واشنطن بنقل سفارتها من تل أبيب إلى القدس تحدياً فظاً لمشاعر العرب والمسلمين، واعتداء سافراً على هوية القدس، وفتحاً للباب «الإسرائيلي» على خطوات تصعيدية تتصل بتهويد القدس واستكمال تهجير مواطنيها العرب، وتشجيعاً لحكومة الاحتلال للسير بالمزيد من الخطوات الاستباقية لتدمير كل فرصة للتسوية والذهاب لإشعال المنطقة. وتساءل بري عمّا يمكن للعرب فعله، فقال: لماذا لا يستعمل العرب والمسلمون سلاح ردع بين أيديهم، وهو التهديد المسبق بأنهم سيُغلقون سفاراتهم في واشنطن في حالل إقدامها على خطوة نقل سفارتها إلى القدس؟

– سلاح الردع الذي وضعه بري في التداول كشف عن وجود بدائل للنحيب والتسوّل، يشبه الكشف عن سلاح النفط الذي استعمل كسلاح ردع في حرب تشرين عام 1973 وأثبت فعالية عالية، لكن الواقع يؤكد هذه المرّة أن قضية الحكومات العربية والإسلامية ليست بغياب البدائل بل بغياب الإرادات والعزائم، من دون أن تنتفي الوظيفة التحريضية لمعادلة برّي التي ستُحرج الحكومات العربية والإسلامية وتُحرج واشنطن بمجرد إطلاقها على لسان برّي وتحوّلها معادلة شائعة في الرأي العام، توجِّه للحكومات السؤال: لماذا لا تفعلون ذلك؟ وتضعها واشنطن أمام حساب قدرة الحكومات المحسوبة عليها على تحمّل ضغوط بهذا الحجم، وحساب المصلحة الأميركية في تعريض هذه الحكومات التابعة للاهتزاز والسقوط، عدا عما سيترتّب على معادلة بري من إطلاق لتحرّكات مدنية وشعبية تحمل المعادلة إلى الشارع كمطلب وتحوّله عنواناً لحراك استباقي ضاغط بوجه الحكومات وواشنطن وتل أبيب معاً.

– المعادلة الذهبية الثانية التي أطلقها برّي كانت ما يتصل برسم الحدّ الفاصل بين قانون الانتخاب العادل والمزيّف، بقوله، نحتاج لقانون يضمن بعض الغموض في النتائج، رداً على توصيفه للحال بقيام كل طرف بحساب موقفه من صيغ القوانين بمدى قدرته على احتساب حصته النيابية سلفاً قبل إجراء الانتخابات. ومعادلة بري هي في علم السياسة شرط القانون الصحيح والعادل، لأنه قانون انتخابات وليس مرسوم تعيينات، والذهاب إلى الانتخابات مع توقّع بعض المفاجآت هو الذي يمنحها حماسة الناخبين، ويجعل للتحالفات الانتخابية معنى، وللتنافس مبرراً، وبدون الغموض في النتائج التي ستترتّب على اعتماد أي قانون انتخابي يتحوّل القانون صفقة محاصصة حزبية وطائفية مقيتة لا تستحق النقاش ويتساوى فيها قانون الستين بالمختلط بالنسبي على دوائر مفصلة على المقاسات. وهذا الغموض هو الذي يمنح النسبية الشاملة وفقاً للدائرة الواحدة تفوّقها على سائر المشاريع، ويضعها في المقدمة كضامن للتعددية السياسية والحزبية والطائفية.

– معادلتا بري ذهبيتان، والواقع العربي واللبناني برونزيّ، إن لم يكن بعضُه «تنك».

(Visited 1٬513 times, 146 visits today)
ٌRelated Videos
Related Articles

Gary Spedding – Sabbos Goy or Israeli Agent?

July 24, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

“We in the Palestinian Solidarity Movement Have a Problem With anti-Semitism,” writes Gary Spedding, a pro Palestinian ‘lobbyist’ in the Israeli outlet Haaretz.   Spedding claims to be a Palestinian solidarity activist but his activism is better described as that of an ‘Israeli agent.’ Spedding’s article provides us with an extraordinary view of Left duplicity and its disastrous role in the solidarity movement.

“For me,” writes Spedding, “being equipped to recognize and call out anti-Semitism can only strengthen my Palestine advocacy.” And why? Because“having a clear definition of anti-Semitism helps to reassure the Jewish community.” The first question that comes to mind is why a ‘pro’ Palestinian wants to ‘reassure the Jewish community?’ If Spedding really wants to appease the Jews he should join AIPAC  or enlist in the IDF’s Unit 300.

Pro Palestinian pretender Spedding doesn’t want us to use “anti-Semitic Jewish power tropes” he doesn’t want us to ‘vilify’ those “Jews who do identify with Zionism.” The obvious next question is, ‘what in hell makes Spedding think that he is a Palestinian solidarity activist?’ This guy is a text book ultra Zionist merchant, probably an Hasbara agent.

Spedding’s criticism of the solidarity movement is identical to the British Jewish Lobby’s campaign against Corbyn.

“Some activists have tried to hide their intentions, again playing semantics, by replacing the word ‘Jew’ with ‘Zionist.’ It’s now ‘Zionists control the media’ or ‘Zionists already decided who the next US president will be’ instead of ‘the Jews.”

For once, I completely agree with Spedding. Instead of referring to ‘Zionist power’ and ‘Zionist control,’ which are, in fact, misleading terms, we must be honest and straightforward and refer more properly to the ‘Jewish lobby’, ‘Jewish power’ and ‘Jewish interests.’

In total congruence with ardent Zionist Alan Dershowitz,  Spedding argues that

“Anti-Zionist Jews are also not immune from being complicit in, and promoting, anti-Semitism. If a Jewish person is repeating an anti-Semitic trope it doesn’t suddenly make it kosher for others to repeat.”

Spedding confesses, “when people like me raise concerns about anti-Semitism we are often told that we are ‘useful idiots’ for the Zionists and their agenda.” Well, yes, Spedding is an idiot and a very useful one. He tells us everything we need to know about the dysfunctional Palestinian solidarity movement and the deceitful Left. He helps us to spot the enemy within.

Spedding meticulously repeats the Hasbara guidelines: “We must also stop using the Israel – Nazi Germany analogy.”   He support his inane call by quoting Israeli Zionist political commentator, Noam Sheizaf: “Saying someone is a Nazi means he represents the ultimate evil – something that shouldn’t be negotiated or compromised with, but only fought.”

Spedding needs to understand that for many of us Israel, its Lobby, the Neocons and their Zionist interventionist wars do represent the ultimate evil.

Spedding continues, “Activists should walk away from rhetoric that encourages the conflation of right-wing Zionism/Israel’s policies with Judaism and Jewish identity.” Spedding forgot to mention my name here. I claim some of the credit for this  ‘conflation’ and I am proud of it. Israel defines itself as the Jewish State, its tanks are decorated with Jewish symbols.  Accordingly, each of Israel’s crimes and its Lobby must be interpreted in light of Jewish culture, Jewish identity, Judaism and Jewish heritage!

Spedding insists that

“Palestine activists should stop obsessing over identifying whether someone is Jewish or not, with the assumption that Jews must be given a litmus test on whether they’re pro-Israel, and thus assumed to be untrustworthy.”

I wonder if Spedding would communicate the same advice to an anti Nazi group in the 1930’s.  Would he advise the group not to be suspicious of supporters who, for some peculiar reason, identify politically as ‘Aryans?’

“We on the left” says the presumptive Israeli agent, “must stop procrastinating about anti-Semitism.” And the reason: “The Jewish community is an oppressed group.”  I couldn’t agree more. Jews are amongst the poorest people, despite the fact that they are amongst the hardest working people. Jews make up 99% of the West’s population; but their representation in the media, politics, banking and academia is imperceptible. The Left must bring this discrimination to an immediate end. Jews must be proportionally represented once and for all.

Spedding continues, “by tackling anti-Jewish oppression on the left we actually strengthen our movement and allow it to grow.” Corbyn tried to do just that and saw his party reduced to dust. Instead of fighting Jewish power and emancipating his Party from it, Corbyn tried to appease Labour’s Jewish paymasters and the Jewish Lobby.  The outcome was disastrous. The British Left is now a nostalgic interest.

Spedding ends his horrendous rant by addressing his comrades:

“I urge my fellow activists to be sensitive to the concerns of Jewish individuals and communal groups whenever concerns about anti-Semitism are raised.” I recommend the complete opposite approach. Those who air the concerns of anti-Semitism, people like Spedding, Max Blumenthal, JVP and others, should be presumed to be tribal activists, Israeli agents and/or controlled opposition operatives.

Gary Spedding comes just short of admitting to being guilty of all the above. 

Elie Wiesel–Oy Vey!!! Who Can Replace Him???

ewiesel

Jewish Tribalism on Display in JTA Article

First off, let me say this is not satire. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency, or JTA, solicited the views of a number of prominent Jews on the question of who, if anyone, might be able to replace the late Elie Wiesel as a unifying force among American Jews.

Apparently it’s a burning question.

The JTA’s rather instructive article on the matter, posted Monday and available here, is written by Ben Sales, and opens with the following line:

Being an American Jew, more than anything else, means remembering the Holocaust.

Stop and think for a moment what that means. It would suggest, perhaps among other things, that self-identifying as a victim is a major part of what it means to be an American Jew. Could it perhaps also suggest a desire for evening the score? If you accept that 6 million Jews died in what is known as the “holocaust,” and if remembering this is a central part of who you are, then what are likely to be your feelings toward the non-Jewish world? Or at least toward those in the non-Jewish world who have been critical of Jews, Jewish lobbies, or the state of Israel?

The second paragraph of the story reads as follows:

That’s what nearly three quarters of Jewish Americans said, according to the Pew Research Center’s landmark 2013 study on American Jewry. Asked to pick attributes “essential” to being Jewish, more Jews said Holocaust remembrance than leading an ethical or moral life, caring about Israel or observing Jewish law.

Wait a minute! Did we read that right? Do an overwhelming majority of American Jews–nearly three quarters–believe that remembering the holocaust is more important, more “essential” to “being an American Jew,” than incorporating ethics or morality into one’s life? Is that what this is saying?

One normally wouldn’t think of the JTA as an “anti-Semitic website,” but what the article seems to be giving us is a full-on, frontal view of Jewish tribalism, warts and all.

Sales states that Wiesel “personified that consensus,” (i.e. the consensus that being Jewish “more than anything else, means remembering the Holocaust”) and goes on to describe him as the “survivor who through his writing and speaking turned himself into perhaps the leading moral voice of American Jewry.”

A few malcontents on the Jewish left “derided” Wiesel for being insufficiently concerned about the Palestinians, Sales avers, but overall he was “the closest thing American Jews had to a unifier.”

The author then hits us with another eye-opening paragraph:

Regardless of religious observance or thoughts on Israel, nearly all Jewish Americans agreed with Wiesel’s message of remembering the genocide and preventing another one.

Sales seems to be trying to make a case: that the reason Jews view holocaust remembrance as so important, and as such a central part of their identity, is due to their innate concerns over “preventing another one.” This begs the question: what do the words “preventing another one” exactly mean? Is it a reference to preventing any future genocide of any people? Or preventing “another” genocide only of Jews?

If it means preventing any genocide of any people at all, then certainly that would be a noble sentiment. But then why does the state of Israel refuse, to this day, to recognize the Armenian genocide?

And why on earth–if the genuine concern is over any genocide at all–do the vast majority of American Jews support the state of Israel?

As I’ve said on a number of occasions, Israel’s occupation of the Palestinians probably meets the legal definition of the crime of genocide.

Following Wiesel’s death on July 2, will another consensus leader rise to take his place? Or is the American Jewish community too divided to unite under any one person’s moral voice?

Sales then goes on to gives us views on this question from ten different prominent Jews, including attorney Alan Dershowitz, who is a long time associate of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Before I give you the quote from Dehshowitz, let me give you a quote about Dershowitz from journalist Rania Khalek, who wrote the following in January of 2015:

There are two groups of people Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz has spent his career resolutely defending. The first is Israeli war criminals. And the second is accused and convicted rapists.

As rape allegations against Dershowitz intensify, his increasingly bellicose denials, steeped in brazen hostility towards child victims of sexual abuse, are raising eyebrows.

With smear tactics that closely resemble the manner in which he attacks Palestinian victims of Israeli violence, Dershowitz rejected the latest allegations as fabrications, telling Local 10 News that his accuser, Virginia Roberts, is a “serial liar” and “prostitute.”

Dershowitz was later formally cleared of the allegations, and apparently in Sales’ mind, this makes his views (on morality, no less!) worth quoting:

“No one can replace Elie as the moral voice,” Dershowitz wrote in an email to JTA. “There will be new voices, but none represents the combination of tragedy and hope that Elie characterized.”

The article also includes quotes from Atlantic correspondent Jeffrey Goldberg, who describes Wiesel as “the closest thing we had to a saint,” and Abe Foxman who praised him for his unique ability to be “comfortable in our very, very partisan, unique Jewish world and experience.”

Reflections on Wiesel, though from a vastly different outlook, can also be found on another website–Elie Wiesel Cons the World. The site is dedicated to exposing the “inaccuracies and contradictions” about some of Wiesel’s claims, and is run by Carolyn Yeager, who in an article here offers an analysis of some previously unreleased photos of Wiesel that have come to light only since his death.

So what does it mean if Jews see themselves as inhabiting–in Foxman’s words–a “very, very partisan, unique Jewish world and experience”? Would this possibly account for why Israel stands in violation of so many UN resolutions? And could it also explain why the Jewish state finds it eminently acceptable to continue stealing Palestinian while at the same time professing to the world that it wants peace? The answers to these questions are not cut and dried, but they definitelyare worth exploring.

Another question in dire need of being place under the microscope for analysis is: why does the world let them get away with it?

_________________

UPDATE:

A little bit more on the adage that “being a Jew means remembering the holocaust.” Shortly after posting this article, I discovered a new post from blogger Richard Silverstein, whose latest revelation is that Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has appointed a rabbi named Eyal Krim to serve as the army’s new chief rabbi. Krim seems to be living in that “very partisan, unique Jewish world” that Foxman so eloquently described, having once proclaimed it would be acceptable for Israeli soldiers to rape non-Jewish women they may happen to find among the enemy.

“It is permitted to break the bounds of modesty…and to satisfy evil [sexual] urges through having sexual relations with attractive non-Jewish women against their will, out of consideration for the hardships of war and for the good of the whole [army’s objectives],” Krim wrote, as quoted by Silverstein.

How on earth could “the most moral army in the world” have such a man serving as it’s chief rabbi? Perhaps that’s what happens when we lose a major “moral,”  “unifying” voice like Eli Wiesel’s.

What Dershowitz, Prince Andrew and Maxwell Have in Common

March 18, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

The British socialite madam Ghislaine Maxwell (the daughter of) stands accused of recruiting Jeffrey Epstein’s “teen sex slaves.” Ms. Maxwell was ordered by a Manhattan judge to hand over any correspondence she has had with the billionaire pedophile.

The alleged madam will also have to produce any documents from between 1999 and 2016 that mention the sex-trafficking ring she and Epstein allegedly operated.

Victim Virginia Roberts has sued Maxwell in Manhattan federal court for defamation. Roberts, who is now 32, has also claimed Maxwell pimped her out to Epstein’s wealthy pals, including Prince Andrew.

Roberts escaped from the sex ring in 2002 after fleeing to Australia when Epstein and Maxwell allegedly sent her to Thailand to study massage.

Madam Ghislaine Maxwell is the daughter of the late ultra Zionist British media mogul Robert Maxwell. I do understand that famed pedophile Epstein, Alan Dershowitz and madam Maxwell have at least one thing in common: yet I refuse to believe that our Royal family mixes with these people. I prefer my imagery of our monarchy as slightly more aristocratic. I guess that as an immigrant I may be too idealistic about the kingdom and its rulers.

To learn  more about the above sex trafficking scandal

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/court-hear-jeffrey-epstein-alleged-sex-trafficking-article-1.2568619  

 

How to Avoid Incitement to Hate Accusations

Source

The trial of Arthur Topman has a lot of people worried, as well they should be. The laws in force in all European countries, including Rumsfeld’s “new Europe,” against “discrimination and incitement to hate” curtail the freedom of expression and stifle historical research. Prison terms have been imposed for years now in France on those who have taken issue, or even looked askance, at the official Holocaust narrative. More recently, criticism of Israel has been categorized as anti-semitism. But are these critics bona fide anti-semites?

Many, if not most, of those who level criticism at “Jewish power,” “Jewish behaviors,” “Jewish political identity,” zionism, and Israel, and who point to the malfeasance of Jews in global and national politics, war mongering, terrorism, banking, media and culture are not in fact anti-semites. They are quite likely merely victims of a logical fallacy and of constructing false syllogisms.

Consider this false syllogism (per Eugene Ionescu’s Bald Soprano): The cat has four legs, the table has four legs. Therefore, cats are tables. It is the very same mistake those logic-challenged people make when they isolate the Jewish ethnicity as the defining common trait of the malefactors.

Their fallacy arises from taking a minor, accidental and meaningless commonality (Jewishness, or four legs) as the defining trait (“specific difference”) of the given group.

Examine the photographs below and try to discern what this sample group of malefactors have in common, notably both men and women.

Is it that they are Jews? No, that would be the four-leg fallacy and legitimately make you the target of accusations of anti-semitism and incitement to hate.

Look again! They are all bald or balding. Netanyahu’s alopecia is poorly masked by his combover, Greenspan is even pointing with his index finger to where his hairline use to be, and as for Dershowitz, you don’t even need a photo: he is known for his bald lies. The young master, Nathaniel Rothschild, opts for a Napoleonic swirl, using what growth he can draw forward towards the areas of permanent deforestation. Bernie Madoff sported the winged look, a tonsorial trick of misdirection to  shift attention from the bald pate.

Benjamin Netanyahu

Alan Dershowitz

Alan Greenspan
Shimon Perez
Bernie Madoff

Natan Sharansky

Nathaniel Rothschild

Madeleine Albright

So, it’s not the Jews, it’s the Baldies! The link between Baldness and an indurated tendency to criminality and sociopathy has not been elucidated. It may be one of cause and effect without a known mechanism or simply one of association, in which baldness serves as a marker in the same way in which, for example, large, detached earlobes are associated with a predisposition to cardiac illness.

Is Baldness genetically inherited? Has it been systematically bred in by eugenics in the secrecy of cloistered Baldness enclaves in 19th century Russia, as Gilad Atzmon (a self-hating Baldie) maintains? (He claims that the baldest denizens of the enclaves were purposefully mated with rich females to create a Bald elite.)

Or is Baldness being just as systematically induced in the young by applying constant pressure on the skull with a device called “kippa”?

There are advocates of the “state of mind” theory, according to which to be truly Bald you have to adhere to the precepts of the ideology laid out in the hair-hating Book of  Bald (hence the name “people of the Book”).

What is important to remember when trying to avoid the peril of falling into anti-semitism (for which the condition of being a non-Jew is a marker) is that you can say with confidence and complete impunity, “It’s the Baldies!”

Nevertheless, don’t fall into the trap of unwarranted generalizations because there are exceptions (in turn only serving to confirm the rule):

Mordecai Vanunu

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

A Battle With No Front

November 14, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

Yesterday morning, the news was broadcast of extensive ‘heroic’ allied drone attacks in Iraq and Syria in support of the battle for Sinjar. We also learned about the assassination of Jihadi John. We were told some revenge might be on the way.  As promised, last night Paris was bathing in blood.

Welcome to World War III – a global conflict with unlimited battlefronts. We, as people of the world, are all caught in the middle in this disaster. We see that our universe is crumbling, we want peace, yet we don’t even know who the enemy is.

For some of us, this recent escalation is not a surprising development. We have been writing about it for years. We have been scrutinising the disastrous impact of the matrix of Ziocon immoral interventionist lobbies that have been relentlessly advocating more and more conflicts.  The CRIF in Paris, CFI in London and AIPAC in Washington all push for escalation of the battle against Arabs and Muslims in accordance with the Israeli plan for a new Middle East.

We are forced to accept the fact that extremist Muslims are very upset and they can hit hard and in a very short time. Russia saw one of its planes falling out of the sky, killing more than two hundred innocent holiday makers. Paris has again suffered. We must ask, is it necessary? Do we have to live in fear from now on? Is peace an option?

The terror is a message that we have to understand. What is its message? ‘Leave us alone’ is what these homicidal terrorists are trying to tell us. Is that too complicated for the Western subject to take in?  ‘Live and let others be,’ is what this is about. The pragmatic implication is obvious. The West must immediately stop serving Israeli and global Zionist interests. We must cease all operations in Arabia and the Mid East. For that to happen, and for a chance for peace, opposition to global Zionism and Israeli lobbying is imperative.

Here is some practical advice; next time Bernard Henri Levy, David Aaronovitch or Alan Dershowitz attempt to sell a new conflict-pack in the name of ‘human rights,’ we should politely advise them that we have learned our lesson – no more wars for Zion. Then, peace may prevail.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian 

  

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Alan Dershowitz’ Plight

June 06, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

Alan Dershowitz , the infamous ethnic cleansing enthusiast, has recently filed a  lawsuit against TD Garden in Boston, Massachusetts, for injuries he sustained during a slip and fall in the bathroom .  

(Dershowitz’s complaint alleges that “[t]he bathroom at this time — and plaintiff believes for at least 60 minutes before his entry into the restroom — had no paper towels to allow male patrons to dry their hands post washing of them. This dangerous condition allowed water from the recently washed hands of each of the myriad bathroom users to drip or be ‘shaken’ onto the floor, negligently creating a hazardous situation for all users.”) Oy Vey…

for more info click here

A Very Kosher Dishonesty (must read!!!)

March 21, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Paul Eisen

http://pauleisen.blogspot.com/

It’s now well known that the Royal Northern College of Music (RNCM) was pressured by Zionist lobbyists North West Friends of Israel (NWFOI) to cancel a concert by internationally acclaimed jazz saxophonist Gilad Atzmon. What is less well known is that the co-chair and spokesperson for NWFOI is one Anthony Dennison (Mr Dennison’s name and role in the organisation may be confirmed here). These machinations by the NWFOI and the leading role played by Mr Dennison were duly reported by the Jewish Chronicle

So far, so… well, if not exactly good, certainly understandable.

Less understandable is the fact (not mentioned by the JC) of Mr Dennison’s documented and well-known dishonesty. Because of his dishonesty, Anthony Dennison, once a lawyer closely associated with the no win, no fee scam was found by the High Court to be unworthy to practice law and was duly struck off

Everyone knew about it. The BBC knew about it, the Solicitor’s Journal knew about it, The Daily Telegraph knew about it, and The Manchester Evening News knew about it so it’s safe to say that the NWFOI and the JC certainly knew about it.

But Mr Dennison is not only an aficionado of white-collar dishonesty; in fact he’s not at all averse to getting down and dirty because it seems that Anthony Dennison is also a bit of a football hooligan. Perhaps you remember the incident from October 2014 when Mr Dennison’s all-Jewish football team (Maccabi) was about to be wiped out in a match (9:2 with only 10 minutes left to play) and Mr Dennison took his young players off the pitch claiming ‘anti-Semitic abuse.’ The fledgeling anti-Semite was duly disciplined but Dennison was also later banned and fined by the FA – for his “foul and abusive behaviour”. And yes, the incident was duly reported by the JC here and here

So are we entitled to conclude that Anthony Dennison is both dishonest and a hooligan? And if we are, is it then surprising that, when orchestrating the pressure on the RNCM, he should call to his support the now implicated in theJeffrey Epstein under-age sex scandal none other than fellow discredited lawyer Alan Dershowitz?

Leaving aside whether we should allow such a man as Anthony Dennison to bully a British artist and academic and a beloved cultural institution, there is another, wider question to be asked: How come a supposedly respectable lobbying organisation like NWFOI is happy to have as a prime representative a man known to be dishonest and also an occasional hooligan? And further, how come the premier Jewish media outlet representing mainstream Jewish opinion in this country has nothing to say on this matter?

How come?

Well, for us Jews, when something is legitimate and acceptable we say it is kosher. So, in the case of Anthony Dennison we have to admit that some dishonesty is well…kosher!

Packing Hasbara 2015, Targeting Gilad Atzmon, Loading Anti-Semite and Holocaust-denier attacks…

March 12, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

GA: This is a very interesting article by Shawn Robinson.  It delves into the methods in which criticism of the Jewish State, its ideology and culture are suppressed.

http://falastinews.com/

 Packing Hasbara 2015, Targeting Gilad Atzmon, Loading Anti-Semite and Holocaust-denier attacks…

By Shawn Robinson

So who is Gilad Atzmon the ant-Semite and Holocaust-denier de jour?

Well for one, he is a former Israeli and now British citizen living in London England; but his claim to fame is as a world renowned jazz saxophonist and writer on identity politics.

And he is no schmuck either. He has a Masters in Philosophy from the University of Essex in Colchester, England after being schooled in composition and jazz at the Rubin Academy of Music in Jerusalem.

Gilad Atzmon Video

As an Israeli you have guessed it, Atzmon is Jewish and therefore Semitic. So by definition he can be hardly an anti-Semite. But something needs to be said here, just as a point of reference that there are more than 50 groups that fall under the Semitic category. The commonality of this foundation is the derivations of the Semitic languages that relate and stem from the Hebrew dialect. Others often maligned as anti-Semites are the Arabs who too are of the 50 plus Semitic peoples.

It is absurd to continue this precept of anti-Semitism in its current construct. Hate directed towards the Jewish people is not acceptable and nor is discrimination or prejudice that Jewish people have experienced for thousands of years.

Knowing the origin of the term anti-Semite, which not that long ago was a construct that was considered normal in particularly the western Christian communities, it really needs to be released from the narrative of the Jewish community as it is not an appropriate term at all. As to refer to someone as ant-Semitic would by definition indicate that they are against a broader group of people beyond the Judaic population.

 

Furthermore… when someone makes a claim of anti-Semitism, it needs to be not presented as a conclusion ever. Clear and defined statements need to be presented that indicate and prove the construct of anti-Semitism before making such an allegation as these days allegations of anti-Semitism abound unfettered leaving the victim of this accusation with an indelible mark on their name and reputation.

 

But my personal favourite is the accusation of holocaust-denial.

What more sickening slander can be allocated on someone than to suggest the suffering and systematic mass murder of any people did not happen.

So with regards to Gilad Atzmon, and knowing that various reporters including Blake Alcott of the respected magazinecounterpunch actually read and evaluated the writings of Atzmon in 2013, concluded that he was NOT what he was accused of – being an anti-Semite or holocaust-denier can be reviewed, assessed and determined from that article:

To Shun or Bury the Hatchet? The Case of Gilad Atzmon by BLAKE ALCOTT

***

So moving on because there really is no basis on the accusations, but what must be clearly stated, is that Atzmon is being slandered with these accusations that have the potential to be socially deprecating career killing labels. What needs to be exposed is that the pro-Israeli lobbies who are able to falsely target people with impunity do so because of the silence of the masses including the media who could shut all this down in one day.

Yes, the pro-Israeli lobby is a machine that is backed up by lots of money, eager lawyers and the mentality of people to drain the victim financially and emotionally. This sends a loud message that sets the precedence to others to stay quiet, to not speak out, to not support the targeted person publicly or to criticize or demand Israel to account for its crimes.

With the various definitions of fascism, I would say this is a fascist mentality and action in the way of the State of Israel and its lobby groups go about organizing society that controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the State of Israel and its policies.

Latuff 2.gif

What is horrific is the media bolstered by the journalism community who are not doing their jobs which is to report the news, who with their complicity in silence maintain and further abrogate the denial of an important discussion including the crimes of the State of Israel, the slow genocide of the Palestinians and the persecution of those who come forward with evidence and knowledge to right terrible wrongs. Atzmon even takes it a step further by linking Jewish identity politics and their impact within world history. I would also add in how they have also been hi-jacked by the Zionist entity who fund these pro-Israeli lobby groups that in their missions, co-opt Judaism and its meanings.

Reflecting back we have the story of Dr. Norman Finkelstein. Yes he appeared on the AIPAC radar with his PhD thesis in the 1980s proving Joan Peter’s book “From Time Immemorial” was a fraud. He exposed the information that could not be substantiated are accepted within the scholarly construct that she presented herself as a respected journalist when she published her book.

Having read the Peter’s book and Edward Said’s “Blaming the Victim”, I have to agree with Dr. Finkelstein and I find it offensive that such a book is considered to be noteworthy never mind permitted as a source in other books including Dr. Alan Dershowitz’s “The Case for Israel”.

Dr. Finkelstein’s “crimes” however were to challenge the notions on subjects such as the holocaust money making industry that did not bring reparations or resolution of any meaning or value to the survivors or to the families of people systematically murdered in Europe. It should be noted that it took 350,000 employed Christian Europeans and various European governments between the 30s until the liberation of the thousands of camps within the massive concentration camp system in Europe by the Allies and Soviets in 1945.

latuff 4.jpg

But it really was Dr. Finkelstein’s exposure of another fraud, on Democracy Now, hosted by Amy Goodman on Dr. Dershowitz’s book “The Case for Israel”. One of the best recorded discussions ever I have to say, and it was Dr. Finkelstein who with his comprehensive knowledge, detailed facts and categorical evidence who was able to put the truth in perspective in spite of Dr. Dershowitz’s efforts to distract from his false claims.

This would be the undoing of Dr. Finkestein who dared to challenge Dr. Dershowitz, America’s appointed voice on Judaic and Israeli history, along with American foreign policy and America’s requirement to protect Israel from in my opinion itself, but according to Dr. Dershowitz’s statements, the forces that want to annihilate Israel.

So long story long, Dr. Finkelstein found himself the target of an odious and slanderous campaign by Dr. Dershowitz and others that would publicly result in Dr. Finkelstein’s denial of tenure at DePaul University. All I will say is that DePaul complied with the process of granting tenure, which by democratic process was going to give tenure to Dr. Finkelstein which was suddenly overturned by one individual who by Dr. Dershowitz’s good fortune, was in the position to ruin Dr. Finkelstein’s reputation and ability to work as an educator. Denial of tenure does not bode well for any scholar or professor of which Dr. Finkelstein found himself in with regards to his future employment. Never mind that he was a popular professor and that his classes were always filled to capacity.

Getting back to the Atzmon issue of free speech.

latuff 5.jpg.gif

There is something that people need to stand for no matter where, how or for whom, and that is the human right of freedom of speech also known as freedom of expression or right to free speech.

In the United Kingdom, this concept of free speech goes back to 1689 when the Bill of Rights granted parliamentary privilege for freedom of speech and debates along with proceedings in Parliament which is still in effect.

Yes, the United Kingdom is a member of the European Union, so just to be clear, it is also defined and justly so in 1998 when the United Kingdom accepted the European Convention, and the guarantee of freedom of expression which is contained in Article 10, integrating it into the United Kingdom’s domestic law under the Human Rights Act.

Freedom of expression does not include racial incitement, or threats or a list of other negative uses that attack or subjugate an individual or people. See below for links to texts and commentaries that identify specifically these concerns if you are so interested.

latuff 6

Atzmon does not incite or subjugate anyone. What he does in his texts is take on a difficult conversation as a former Israeli, former soldier of the Israeli Defense Forces, as a former Israeli nationalist, as a former Jew even, and does so philosophically and politically. His “mistake” seems to be to open a discussion on Zionism and the State of Israel outside of the defined parameters that Dr. Dershowitz and the pro-Israeli lobby groups have determined for all of us.

I will not speak for anyone, particularly a Jewish person and what they feel or think or have concluded about their ethno-religious culture slash identity, however I will fight the forces that deny them to write about it.

Which is in many international laws and decrees, these rights to free expression including the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights that granted formal recognition on the laws of most nations including the United Kingdom to preserve the inherent human right to voice one’s opinion publicly without fear of censorship or punishment.

To deny a voice is to censor the message.

phrases “ant-Semitic” and “holocaust-denier”, as members of all societies, we retreat and distance ourselves from such ideas and people which these pro-Israeli lobby groups well know.

These actions on Atzmon since mid-January have resulted in the cancellation of two performances at prestigious and well-known venues and now a third venue is being threatened with a public boycott by Jewish groups if they allow Atzmon and his ensemble to perform in their scheduled concerts.

The second venue that cancelled did so because they felt threatened and the need to be protective of their 800 students, which should be their priority.

How did that even happen, that they would feel insecure physically and that their students were at risk for the sake of a performance by a jazz saxophonist? Where is the Metropolitan Police? How is a Jewish lobby group allowed to threaten a world renowned concert venue and conservatory to cancel the performance of Atzmon and his ensemble, and nothing is investigated?

Even with the signing of almost 4000 signatures calling on the second venue, the Royal Northern Music College to reconsider and reschedule the performance which they are so stricken with silence due to fear of terror and being also hatefully labeled.

latuf 7

So what are we going to do about that and all this?

Because once Atzmon is 100% unable to schedule a performance, they will move on to their next target that they will victimize as systematically supported by our ears and eyes, looking the other way.

No one under attack is saying anything other than the truth. The State of Israel is committing war crimes whether they be illegal settlements or dropping phosphorus on an unarmed civilian population.

lattuf 8

Why does Israel and its supporters keep getting free passes to terrorize and harass people either collectively or individually? Even in my own country Canada, the current conservative government is trying to pass legislation that criticisms of Israel will be deemed anti-Semitic making the criticizer subject to legal charges

lattuf 9

Atzmon is not the only former Israeli Jew who has something to say. Others are also working hard to dispel the myths and propaganda. Are they next on the target list? Or what about human right activists who have no claim or stake in any of this, but to seek humanity for all in that region?

This I know. Many people want to support Atzmon but they are afraid of these pro-Israeli lobbies. They have mortgages to pay and mouths to feed and don’t want to risk their families’ futures. But silence is not justice, it is not an answer and is an important ingredient in this cocktail of propaganda that is disabling the world.

If a Jewish person can’t create a conversation on the Jewish religion and its identity within the political realm, who can? Ask yourselves that.

These pro-Israeli lobby groups need to be exposed. They receive tax advantages that help fund destructive campaigns like the ones that went after Dr. Finkelstein, Dr. Steven Salaita and the cartoonist Carols Latuff whose work is used in this article.

lattuf 10

Now they are currently attempting to derail Atzmon and his ability to work as a musician.

Look at your community. Are there any other lobby groups with the same missions?

These lobby groups are not only sustained through substantial funding but are in existence to promote the propaganda (hasbara) that continues the denial of the Palestinians and their suffering while elevating the Israelis as perpetual victims in a region that the majority of Israelis are being of European descent, and have no cultural ties or long term connection. Does that make sense?

lattuf 11

Because the pro-Israeli lobby groups are now very engrained in government policies and pro-Israeli individuals are able to work within these governments in positions in which they can influence foreign policy that makes our countries complicit in the crimes against humanity that are being inflicted on the Palestinian people, not only openly but with impunity which is sustained by our silence, and violates everything that we have in terms of international law and even the construct of the United Nations, which was to prevent genocide and war.

lattuf 12

So is Atzmon going to be the next victim or an example of why we worked so hard to have freedom of speech?

Maybe ask Dr. Steven Salaita?

lattuf 13

You decide.

*****

Like all mentioned in this article, I do not necessarily agree with all that they have to say but I will always stand for them to be able to express their views and understandings. I am sure that people do not necessarily always agree with me and I welcome the opportunity to be enlightened. For the record the basis of all my arguments and writings are human rights supported by international humanitarian law.

My Ode to Carlos Latuff: I am a fan of his work and I do at times blink hard when I see his latest cartoons however I give him my respect for also not shying away from creating a conversation on various subjects including anti-globalization, anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism, anti-racism, anti-fascism, anti-Americanism, anti-Zionism, Marxism, socialism, feminism, indigenous rights…

 

Sources on Freedom of Expression (UK):

Arab Press Freedom Watch

ARTICLE 19, Global Campaign for Free Expression

Committee to Protect Journalists

“Free Speech in the Age of YouTube” in the New York Times

Fundamental Freedoms: The Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Canadian Charter of Rights website with video, audio and the Charter in over 20 languages

Index on Censorship

International Federation of Journalists

International Freedom of Expression Exchange

International PEN

International Press Institute

OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media

 

  1. Klug, Francesca (1996). Starmer, Keir; Weir, Stuart, eds. The Three Pillars of Liberty: Political Rights and Freedoms in the United Kingdom. The Democratic Audit of the United Kingdom. Routledge. p. 165. ISBN978-041509642-3.
  2. Hensley, Thomas R. (2001). The Boundaries of Freedom of Expression & Order in American Democracy. Kent State University Press. p. 153. ISBN 9780873386920.
  3. Public Order Act 1986
  4. Section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988
  5. Joint Committee on Human RightsParliament of the United Kingdom(2005).Counter-Terrorism Policy And Human Rights: Terrorism Bill and related matters: Oral and Written Evidence. Counter-Terrorism Policy And Human Rights: Terrorism Bill and related matters 2The Stationery Office. p. 114.
  6. Sadurski, Wojciech (2001). Freedom of Speech and Its Limits. Law and Philosophy Library 38. p. 179. ISBN9781402002816.
  7. Crook, Tim (2010). Comparative Media Law and Ethics. p. 397. ISBN9780203865965.
  8. Lemon, Rebecca (2008). Treason by Words: Literature, Law, and Rebellion in Shakespeare’s EnglandCornell University Press. pp. 5–10. ISBN9780801474491.
  9. Emmerson, BenAshworth, Andrew; Macdonald, Alison (2012). Human Rights and Criminal Justice(3rd ed.). Sweet & Maxwell. p. 200. ISBN 978-1-847-03911-8.

I Was Born in Israel Many Years before I Realized Israel Was Palestine

February 14, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Whatsupic with 7sabah

I was born in Israel and it was many years before I realized that Israel was Palestine. I was relatively patriotic. I was looking forward to serving in the army and then I grasped that there was little truth in the Jewish historical narrative. I then gathered that I was living on someone else’s land. At the same time I discovered the saxophone.  By the age of 30, I left Israel and never went back.

Q: There is some kind of rebellion in your music; how do you explain this?

A:  My music can be very soft and reflective. Sometimes it is very funny and occasionally it is furious. There are too many reasons to be angry. I’m far from happy when I see Israel flattening Gaza. I’m furious when I find out 80 percent of British conservative MPs are ‘friends of Israel.’ I’m angry when I find out the Jewish lobby is pushing America into another World War and instead of becoming violent, sometimes I use music as a channel to express my anger.

Q: What type of music is close to your music in the world?

A: It’s very simple. I’m a jazz artist, a Bebop player. But I’m inspired by near east music whether it is Arabic, Turkish or Greek. I find my own way to fuse the Arabic Mawwal with John Coltrane…

Q: What do you think of the social and political state of Turkey?

A: Listen, I’m really against any forms of interventionism, so I’m definitely not the right person to judge the situation here. I can only talk about my impression, and it’s not an academic observation. I’m touring all over the world and I see a lot of sadness. I see impoverished countries, people with no work, with no prospect of production. I see youngsters who are third generation poor and in their deserted main street they don’t eat their own food anymore, they instead eat McDonalds, Burger King, Coca Cola, Starbucks. And I’m here in Turkey and see a lot of people on the streets, and I see fish from your sea, and tomatoes from your fields, and I see a lot of people working in the restaurants that have Turkish names and don’t even offer a menu in English, and it makes me happy for you. You have managed to maintain your authenticity and culture. This is a great victory. You are so lucky that Islamophobic Europeans didn’t accept you in the EU. Your country is now a superpower.

Q: You were born in Israel but you are against Israeli occupation and its politics. You are living in the West, how do you cope?

A: Let me tell you something and it is crucial. In my entire career, I have never been subject to abuse by the British government, never been subject to abuse by the American government. Although the infamous Alan Dershowitz, who is now implicated in a huge sex scandal with minors, labelled me ‘as the number one enemy of the Jewish people,’ I’ve never been subject to direct abuse by the Israeli government. Even the NSA doesn’t harass me. The only people who stalk me continuously are the Jewish left and the Guardian newspaper. I can say that it’s not a problem but I came to the realization that the biggest enemy of our elementary freedoms are the progressives and I’ll explain why.

In the West and maybe in Turkey as well, we have issues with political correctness. What is political correctness? Political correctness is politics that doesn’t allow political opposition. But this is clearly the definition we associate with dictatorship. But political correctness is far worse than dictatorship. Why? Because in the case of dictatorship you experience an opposition to a regime that is distinct from you, but in the case of political correctness it is you who silence yourself. Political Correctness is a form of self-censorship. The Jewish left and the progressives made us into a collective of impotents. Our task is to move on and to erect our resistance against this cancerous ideology.

Q: Can we separate Judaism from Zionism?

A: No. Israel isn’t called the ‘Zionist State,’ it defines itself as the ‘Jewish State.’ The parties in the government are called “Israel Our Home” and the “Jewish Home” not the “Zionist Home”*. Now the Israeli cabinet has approved the National Bill that defines Israel as the Jewish state not the Zionist state. Zionism from an Israeli perspective died in 1948. Zionism was a promise to erect a Jewish state in Zion (Palestine). Once, Israel was established, Zionism was finished with its role. The only people who maintain the Zionist nonsense are the Jewish left because they want to differentiate between Jewishness and Zionism.  This is why they call Israel colonialism. But Israel is not colonialism. Colonialism is a clear exchange between a mother state and a settler state. Israel is a settler state, yet there is no Jewish mother state. This is why they call it apartheid. Israel in not apartheid: Apartheid is a racist system of exploitation. But Israel doesn’t want to exploit the Palestinians, it wants them gone. Israel is a Hitlerian ethnic cleansing model. The Left uses the terms ‘Colonialism’, ‘Zionism’, and ‘Apartheid’ in an attempt to divert attention from the ‘J’ word. For solidarity with Palestine to be meaningful, we have to de-Judify our terminology. Not to kick out the Jews, but to prevent Jewish interests from defining the boundaries of the discussion.

Q: Can we see Israel and Palestine as two states?

A: No.

Q: Will the Palestinians be able to return to their county?

A: This is what they are fighting for. And any person who doesn’t accept the right of return is not a genuine supporter.

Q: What do you think about what Ahmadinejad said about the Holocaust?

A: I agree 100 percent with everything Ahmadinejad said about the Holocaust. Ahmadinejad basically said that Holocaust must be treated as a historical chapter. At the moment it is treated as a religion. And if it is a religion I want to maintain my right to be an atheist. In contemporary Judified reality it is OK not to believe in God but if you don’t believe in Auschwitz you will be penalised and severely. I don’t accept it.

Q: What does the US gain from supporting Israel?

A: We cannot think of America as an independent entity anymore. America’s political system is a Jewish occupied zone. America, Britain, France, [and generally] the West woke up one morning to realize that there was a loop hole in their legal system that facilitated the ability of invasive foreign lobbies such as AIPAC, CFI, CRIF to interfere with their foreign affairs. America has sacrificed its foreign interests on the Jewish alter. It is a disaster. But history teaches us that this Jewish political impunity always comes to an end in a totally tragic circumstance.

Q: Do you agree that a Holocaust is happening in Gaza?

A: I don’t know what the Holocaust is anymore. I’m like Ahmadinejad in that regard. When I was a kid they taught me that the Nazis made soap out of Jews. And then I grew up and realized it was all a fantasy. They taught me that the Arabs were going to throw us into the sea. And when I was mature enough to learn the history on my own I realized that it was actually the Jews who threw Palestinians into the sea. Then I realized that Jews (like everyone else) tend to project their cultural symptoms on others. The Jews are fearful of the Palestinians because the Jews witness their army engaged in murderous activity. They must believe the Palestinians are as murderous as the IDF happens to be.

I don’t want to talk in terms of the Holocaust because it is too Jewish. I don’t want to compare Israel with Nazism because Israel is bad enough.  From some perspectives Israel is worse than Nazism (Israel is a Jewish democracy it implies a collective responsibility). When I compare Israel with Nazism I reaffirm the Holocaust religion and sustain the primacy of Jewish suffering. We have to establish a new discourse where Israelis are the worst enemy of humanity and the Palestinians are the ultimate sufferers. Auschwitz was indeed bad, but not as bad as Gaza.

 Q: Iran is not after nuclear arms the whole world knows that. How do you explain the fuss around the Iranian nuclear project?

A: I have no problem with Iranian nuclear arms. I want Iran to have a bomb. Just One Iranian bomb will bring peace to the region. Because all this mess in the Middle Ease caused by Israel and America is because they know they can kill with impunity and endlessly. And my problem with the Shias is that they are too nice. They really don’t want to bomb anyone. An atomic bomb is Haram they say.

Q: What is your opinion about Iran’s role in the Middle East?

A: Iran is the most beautiful political power. It supports the Palestinians. It supports the resistance. Iran has developed very strong industry. This country that was a client state of America 34 years ago now produces submarines, airplanes, drones, very strong computers. It is beautiful.

Q: Obama is the first black president of America but statistics show scores of black people are shot dead every year. How do you analyze this contradiction?

A: We like to think in terms of racial division because this is the heritage of the left, but it is wrong. In the west and in the last 50 years there has been a collapse of manufacturing partially because of automation, machinery, and computerization but also because Milton Friedman taught us that is better to be a service economy. The meaning of it in America, Britain, France, etc. is that we don’t need working people. The people who used to be working class are now workless class, 8and they are doomed to poverty with no hope, they are called under-class. As things stand, existing jobs demand very high cognitive ability (very high I.Q.) such as engineers, financiers, bankers, PRs. This group of privileged people is what I call the ‘cognitive elite,’ and they are few in number. We live in a society where we witness the under-class growing rapidly and a small cognitive elite maintaining its power. Obama is well within the cognitive elite and not because he is black, but because he is clever and he clearly found his way to the top. When it comes to the under-class we realize that there are a lot of immigrants including many Hispanics and Blacks. They are the primary sufferers of the new cruel, merciless division not between the rich and the poor but between the able and the less able. It is very devastating.  This is why Turkey is so important. You manage your economy and currency in a manner that facilitates manufacturing.

(Reporting by Mehmet Gurhan).

Read the interview in Turkish on 7sabah.

*The Zionist Home party was formed a month after this interview was conducted.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Is Dershowitz Still Free? Pap and Seder on Epstein/Dershowitz (must watch)

 Pap and Seder: Epstein/Dershowitz’ Child Sex Scandal Only Beginning

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Shameless Dershowitz Campaigns For Israel

Shameless Dershowitz  Campaigns For Israel

January 31, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

Alan Dershowitz, recently implicated in a sex scandal, is campaigning for Israel. The shameless Harvard Professor is begging for Jewish support following recent Zionist leaders calls to dissociate from him and his acts.

Interestingly enough, Dershowitz is correct – the West Bank Settlements are not an obstacle as far as peace is concerned. If anything they make the One State Solution into the only viable resolution of the conflict. The real and only obstacle to peace is the embarrassing fact that the word ‘peace’ doesn’t even exist in the modern Hebrew language. The word shalom, usually translated into peace doesn’t really mean peace, harmony or reconciliation. Shalom actually means ‘security for the Jews.’ As such, Shalom is a non empathic judeo-centric notion sustained by blindness to otherness. The only obstacle to peace in the Middle East is the lack of the notion of peace within the Israeli and modern Hebraic culture. Once again, it is the comprehension of Jewish culture that enlighten us on the conflict and the prospect of its resolution.

Jews Are Turning Their Backs On Dershowitz

January 17, 2015  /  Gilad Atzmon

Introduction by GA: as it becomes clear that sex slave scandal  Alan Dershowitz is associated with,  is not going to clear up any time soon,  some Jews seem to be keen to expel this bogus character out of the Ghetto. In the following piece Ronn Torossian explains why Jews should regard their favorite spokesman as a liability. Pretty amusing I must admit.

http://www.heritagefl.com/

Defending Alan Dershowitz is not a Jewish issue

By Ronn Torossian

Well known rights advocate, celebrated criminal attorney and Harvard law Professor Alan Dershowitz is under attack. An under-age girl claimed in court proceedings that she had sexual relations with him while she was a “sex slave” by businessman Jeffrey Epstein. Dershowitz, who is truly a master of media, knows all too well that the the court of public opinion works much quicker than the court of law; and he is not wasting any time firing back at his accuser.

Time will tell whether or not he is guilty—but his character will be hurt regardless. The manner in which media and the public are drawn to certain issues, accusations such as these are harmful whether true or not.

Truth be told, I do not know him personally—but I have never been fond of Professor Dershowitz. I do not believe he is a good spokesman for Israel or the Jewish people. He talks of being Pro-Israel and Pro-Palestinian, he advocates for the discrimination of Jews when he proclaims that Jews should not live in Hebron, and has been an outspoken advocate for President Obama who has been a disaster for both America and Israel. Dershowitz is no more than a well-spoken uber-liberal American Jew. I find that he is always about what is good for Alan Dershowitz.

As a high-profile CEO of a major PR Agency, I find his claims, as well as the claims of others implying that accusations against Dershowitz are about Anti-Semitism or are somehow a Jewish issue to be quite absurd. Whether they are found to be true or not, this is simply not a Jewish issue.

When Bernie Madoff was arrested, I wrote at the time that “I don’t believe that the “Jewish Brand” was affected in any way by the Madoff scheme. The Madoff family is a clan of crooks—of which every race, religion and people has, and the Jewish people are no different. America is well beyond the Anti-Semitism of the USA of Henry Ford.” And that was true. Madoff was a crook—but he did not represent the Jews.

When Dershowitz claims that “Anti-Semites and anti-Israel “zealots” are having a field day over sexual abuse allegations leveled against him”, and “The anti-Semites are crawling out from under their rocks, they are loving this…,” he is inappropriate and wrong.

Working on countless high-profile issues, I would be amazed if Dershowitz received even 50 emails from anti-Semites as he claims. (Although it is smart PR—sympathy does help when you are accused of rape.)

Dershowitz’s assertion that Jews should support him, telling the Jerusalem Post, “I’m not only defending myself here but I am defending other values as well. I am defending the values that I have represented and stood for, for so many years” is, frankly, offensive. Maybe the values people are offended by include the fact that he got Michael Jackson, a long-suspected child molester, off the hook.

Perhaps other Jews feel as noted conservative Debbie Schlussel wrote in 2012, that Dershowitz is a “schmuck,” which she called him when she said he was a “plagiarist” who “misses no chance to support a Palestinian State and attack Jews’ rights to live where they want including in Jerusalem (which he derides as “illegal settlements”), all while he pretends to be a strong advocate for Israel, and supports Barack Obama.”

I have no idea whether Alan Dershowitz is or is not guilty. I simply know that defending him is not and should not be a Jewish issue. As a proud Jew, I find the argument that he should be protected because of his Jewishness, to be despicable.

Ronn Torossian is an entrepreneur, author and blogger for The Times of Israel.

%d bloggers like this: