fake peace

DECEMBER 21, 2014

(EDITOR’S NOTE:  Even in the midst of supposedly exposing a deception, another deception is engaged in simultaneously. Such is the schizophrenic nature of Jewishness. Instead of sticking to journalistic professionalism and focusing squarely on the fact that one of the most popular photos in the history of the criminal Zionist usurpation of Palestine is a gargantuan fraud, the piece below too often wades into what is tantamount to a nostalgic eulogy for the prospects of “peace” and a Jewish-Palestinian regime of friendship and coexistence governed by “Liberal” Zionism, which, for the record, never existed to begin with, as the most murderous, expansionist “Israeli” regimes came from “The Left”. A fantastical scenario in which Palestinians and “Israeli” occupiers sit around a campfire and sing songs of brotherhood, espoused by “Liberal” Zionists and their ilk to this moment, isn’t the only thing laid to rest with the following revelation, it is also the solutions of those seemingly good-intentioned  “solidarity activists” who just can’t shut up about a “one state” or “two states”. Jewish-Zionist usurpers and indigenous Palestinians cannot coexist;  the very suggestion of it is an affront to justice.

Why should the aboriginal people of Palestine, ethnically cleansed from their homeland in the Nakba and Jewish colonial purges before it going all the way back to the 1880s, have to throw away the keys to their homes they’ve been holding for decades and share their homes with squatting Jewish thieves?

Why should the aboriginal people of Palestine, made refugees by deranged Jewish terrorists decades ago, return to their homeland and be inconvenienced with the criminal, shaytanic presence of their tormentors? Because colonized Arab “solidarity activists” in the West are scared stiff of the vengeful replies of their Jewish “allies” who are more concerned with Jewish matters than the Palestinian cause they claim to be fighting for? No. Absolutely not.

What this story shows is that the liberation of Palestine isn’t going to come from scores of cutesy-wootsy photographs coupled with ultra-liberal tweets.

Al-Aqsa, Qoubbat al-Sakhrah and Holy Al-Quds as a whole aren’t going to be cleansed of colonizer filth through “solidarity” events with Jews who really haven’t disconnected their identities from the supremacy of their decadent culture. Al-Jalil isn’t going to be made pure again through write-ups on the “peace” and “security” that could commence via the implementation of a “one state solution” that sees Zionists maintaining their Jewish privilege as inhabitants of the Holy Land but insists they will be “sharing” it with Palestinians, the actual natives. Palestine will only be liberated through the righteousness of the Palestinian Resistance’s arms, and it is our job on the outside, especially those of us who have direct ethnic, national and religious ties to the Arab-Islamic region, to back this righteousness, and do all we can in the mean time to expose the Jewish Power Configuration in all its manifestations, whether it is presenting itself as a genocidal neocon, or, more subversively, a Jewish “anti-Zionist” activist. ~ Jonathan Azaziah)

by Naomi Zeveloff, The Jewish Daily Forward

One week into Israel’s war with Gaza this past summer, superstar Rihanna tweeted a photo of an Israeli boy and a Palestinian boy with their arms around each other facing away from the camera: “Let’s pray for peace and a swift end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict!” she wrote. “Is there any hope?….”

The photo was posted as damage control after the pop star tweeted — and then eight minutes later deleted — the hashtag #FreePalestine. That initial tweet provoked an immediate barrage from Israel advocates on Twitter asking if she supported Hamas. It’s not clear to what degree the photo mollified her critics. But what Rihanna didn’t know was that the photo is actually a fake.

The boys in the picture aren’t an Israeli and a Palestinian, but two Israeli Jews.

The 1993 photo, taken three months after the signing of the Oslo Accords, is one of the most iconic pictures from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In it, a boy in a red shirt with a yarmulke and a boy in a black shirt and a keffiyeh walk with their arms slung over each other’s shoulders. Though the background is blurry, they are clearly in the white and green environs of Jerusalem, meandering on a dirt path to an unknown destination. They appear to be lost in conversation, oblivious to the photographer behind them.

In addition to Rihanna’s tweet — which was retweeted by 46,000 people — the photograph has been reproduced hundreds of times on the Internet, appearing in the American Jewish magazine Tikkun, on the web site of the Israel advocacy group Jerusalem Institute of Justice, on various American and Israeli news sites and Facebook pages, and even on the blog belonging to Jack Kornfield, one of the most prominent Buddhists in America.

Yet unlike the other famous pictures documenting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — such as the 1967 photo of three Israeli soldiers at the Western Wall, or the 1993 shot of Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin shaking hands on the White House lawn — the photo of the two boys is purely allegorical. With their backs to the camera, the boys are anonymous stand-ins for all Israelis and Palestinians. Set against the backdrop of one of the oldest cities on earth, the picture has a timeless quality. It’s a depiction of what might have been, and what could be in the future, in spite of today’s moribund peace process.

It’s also completely staged.

“I think I felt awkward about it,” said the boy in the yarmulke, speaking now some 21 years later as an adult.

The Israeli boy in the yarmulke is Zvi Shapiro, the son of two secular American-Israelis. The Palestinian boy is Zemer Aloni, an Israeli Jew. The only real aspect of the photo is that the boys were indeed friends and that the picture was taken in their Jerusalem neighborhood ofAbu Tor, which straddles the 1949 armistice line and contains both a Jewish and an Arab section. The boys grew up on the Jewish side of the neighborhood, and while they both recall interactions with Palestinians, neither counted close friends on the other side of the line.

The picture was taken by Ricki Rosen, an American photojournalist who has been covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for 26 years. Rosen snapped the photo on assignment for Maclean’s, the national news magazine of Canada, for a cover story about the Oslo Peace Accords. Rosen said that the magazine’s art director was so specific in what he wanted that he even drew her a picture — one boy in a yarmulke, the other in a keffiyeh shot from the back walking down a long road, which was supposed to symbolize the road to peace. He didn’t care whether the boys were actually Israelis or Palestinians, nor did it occur to him that the Palestinian’s keffiyeh would be styled in a way more typical for elderly Palestinian men than for young boys.

“It was a symbolic illustration,” said Rosen. “It was never supposed to be a documentary photo.” She also took other real-life photos for the same article.

Rosen, who also lived in Abu Tor, asked her neighbor Haim Shapiro, then a reporter for the Jerusalem Post, if he would be willing to volunteer his young son for the Jewish boy in the assignment. “If there was any place to find a Palestinian kid who would agree to do this, it would have been Abu Tor,” said Rosen. “But I didn’t look because I thought it would be a very difficult thing. The relations had completely broken down after the first intifada, and Palestinians were very fearful of being seen as collaborating with Israelis because collaborators were being killed.” Instead, Zvi Shapiro’s best friend Zemer Aloni, who lived a block away, would wear the keffiyeh. Aloni said that the fact that he has “Eastern roots” — his father is an Iranian Jew — made him an appropriate choice for the job.

On the day of the shoot, Rosen brought a keffiyeh that she used to leave on her dashboard on reporting trips to the West Bank during the first intifada — a safeguard against her vehicle being pelted by stones and Molotov cocktails — and dressed 12-year-old Aloni in it. Zvi Shapiro, then 11, donned a yarmulke, and the two went for a walk on the nearby Sherover Promenade.

“Ricki told us to just talk to each other,” said Shaprio. “It’s also funny because I don’t think we would have necessarily put our arms around each other the way we are.” Rosen shot several images of the pair that day, including one from the front that is rarely reproduced.

In 2002, the photo was digitized as part of Rosen’s collection on Corbis Images, a Seattle-based company that manages licensing for editorial and creative photographs. On the Corbis web site, there is no indication that the photograph is fake; it is categorized as a stock image under “News.” Yet even though the photo is copyrighted, the vast majority of the reproductions online — Rihanna’s included — have occurred without Rosen’s or Corbis’s knowledge or permission. On some sites, such as that of Tikkun, the photograph is credited as Creative Commons, meaning anyone can use it — a categorization to which Rosen never agreed. Without control over where the image appears, Rosen said, she is unable to explain to those who would use it that the photo is staged. Nor has she been properly compensated for her work.

It wasn’t until after Rihanna tweeted the photo and Zvi Shapiro’s mother brought it to Rosen’s attention that she realized how many people were posting the image without her consent. She said that Corbis is looking into Rihanna’s usage on her behalf. If Rosen is not financially compensated, she said. “I want her to retweet it with my credit and say, ‘I am sorry for stealing the intellectual property of another artist.’” She would also like Rihanna to explain that the photo isn’t really of a Palestinian and an Israeli kid, but is meant to represent “the hopes then for peace down the road.”

After the photo shoot, Shapiro and Aloni remained close friends for a few years but began to drift apart in middle school. Shapiro said that the last time he saw Aloni was when they were both in the army and they ran into each other at a coffee shop, a meeting Aloni did not recall. Shapiro, now 32, said that his experience in the army — he was stationed in Jerusalem during the Palestinian suicide bombing campaign in the second intifada — left him wanting to go to a “place that was the least like Israel as I could find.” Rather than travel to India or South America, like many Israelis do after the army, he enrolled in Bowdoin College in Brunswick, Maine. He is now completing a doctoral program in child clinical psychology at Pennsylvania State University. Married to a woman who does not speak Hebrew, he does not know if or when he will return to Israel.

After Aloni’s army service, he was trained as an architect at Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design in Jerusalem. Now 33, he is working as an architect in Nahalal, near Haifa, where he lives with his wife. Aloni said that looking back on the photo, he had no qualms about appearing as a Palestinian. “I don’t see Arabs as the enemy,” he said. “If someone told me I looked like an Arab, I wouldn’t care. It’s not something to be ashamed of.” When asked whether some Palestinians might consider the outfit degrading — akin to blackface in America — he said he had never considered the issue in that light. “America is much more politically correct about stuff than here.”

Shapiro, on the other hand, said that the racial aspect of the photo now strikes him as “really, really strange.”

“I think it’s probably less acceptable today than it was then,” he said. Because he’s not religious, he also felt like a bit of an imposter wearing a yarmulke. “It’s really not me in the picture, but it’s even less him,” he said of Aloni.

“One of the things I feel about it is just kind of sad,” said Shapiro. “There was a brief period where it didn’t seem as far-fetched as it does now. And it could have just been my naivete as a child, but I felt it almost symbolizes something that we have lost and that I hope we can regain. I think there is a genuine belief that if there is a peaceful solution there can be not only peace but camaraderie and real friendship.”

Aloni called the image a “wishful thinking picture.” He added, “Then it was almost a reality, and now it is like a vision.”

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!


EU: Court decision to remove Hamas from terror list “legal” not “political”

Palestinian militants of the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas's armed wing, take part in a parade marking the 27th anniversary of the resistance movement's creation on December 14, 2014 in Gaza City. AFP / Mahmoud Hams

Published Wednesday, December 17, 2014

Updated at 3:24 pm (GMT +2): Palestinian resistance group Hamas must be removed from the EU’s terrorism blacklist, but its assets will stay frozen, a European court ruled on Wednesday, hours before the European Parliament overwhelmingly backed the recognition of a Palestinian state within 1967 borders “in principle.”

The original listing of Hamas in 2001 was based not on sound legal judgements but on conclusions derived from the media and the Internet, the General Court of the European Union said in a statement.

But it stressed that Wednesday’s decision to remove Hamas was based on technical grounds and does “not imply any substantive assessment of the question of the classification of Hamas as a terrorist group.”

The freeze on Hamas’s funds will also temporarily remain in place for three months pending any appeal by the EU, the Luxembourg-based court said.

Hamas, which has been in power in the Gaza Strip since 2007, had appealed against its inclusion on the blacklist on several grounds.

Hamas’s military wing was added to the European Union’s first-ever terrorism blacklist drawn up in December 2001 in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the United States.

The EU blacklisted the political wing of Hamas in 2003 after the group claimed responsibility for a spate of attacks on Israeli targets during the Second Intifada, a popular uprising that erupted in 2000 against Israel’s decades-long occupation.

Hamas was founded in 1987 shortly after the start of the first Palestinian Intifada.


The European Union said Hamas is still on its terror list despite Wednesday’s ruling.

“The EU continues to consider Hamas a terrorist organization,” European Commission spokeswoman Maja Kocijancic confirmed, saying the EU General Court’s decision “is a legal ruling, and not a political decision taken by EU governments.”

Hamas, meanwhile, hailed the decision, describing the move as a “victory for justice.”

“We thank the European Court for its decision. This is a victory for all advocates of liberation from all forms of occupation,” senior Hamas member Moussa Abu Marzouq said.

A lawyer for Hamas, Liliane Glock, told AFP she was “satisfied with the decision.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu demanded the EU immediately restore Hamas to its terrorism blacklist.

“We are not satisfied with the European explanation by which Hamas has been withdrawn from this list. We expect the Europeans to puts Hamas back on the list immediately,” Netanyahu said in a statement.

Palestinian state “in principle”

Meanwhile, the European Parliament overwhelmingly backed the recognition of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders “in principle” on Wednesday, following a series of votes on the issue in EU nations which have enraged Israel.

Lawmakers approved the non-binding motion by 498 votes to 88 with 111 abstentions, although it was a watered down version of an original motion which had urged EU member states to recognize a Palestinian state unconditionally.

The motion said the parliament “supports in principle recognition of Palestinian statehood and the two state solution, and believes these should go hand in hand with the development of peace talks, which should be advanced.”

The socialist, greens and radical left groups in the European Parliament had wanted an outright call for the recognition of Palestinian statehood.

But the center-right European People’s Party of European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker, the leading group in parliament, forced them into a compromise motion linking it to peace talks.

“There is no immediate unconditional recognition (of statehood),” EPP chief Manfred Weber said.

But his socialist counterpart Gianni Pittella insisted it was a “historic decision” and a “victory for the whole parliament.”

European politicians have become more active in pushing for a sovereign Palestine since the collapse of US-sponsored peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in April, and ensuing conflict in Gaza, where more than 2,000 Palestinians, at least 70 percent of them civilians, and on the Israeli side, 66 soldiers and six civilians were killed this summer.

EU’s vote follows Sweden’s decision in October to recognize Palestine and non-binding votes since then by parliaments in Britain, France, Ireland, and Spain in favor of recognition demonstrated growing European impatience with the stalled peace process.

The roots of the Israel-Palestine conflict date back to 1917, when the British government, in the now-infamous “Balfour Declaration,” called for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.”

Israel occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank during the 1967 Middle East War. It later annexed the holy city in 1980, claiming it as the capital of the self-proclaimed Zionist state – a move never recognized by the international community.

In 1988, Palestinian leaders led by Yasser Arafat declared the existence of a state of Palestine inside the 1967 borders and the state’s belief “in the settlement of international and regional disputes by peaceful means in accordance with the charter and resolutions of the United Nations.”

Heralded as a “historic compromise,” the move implied that Palestinians would agree to accept only 22 percent of historic Palestine in exchange for peace with Israel. It is now believed that only 17 percent of historic Palestine is under Palestinian control following the continued expansion of illegal Israeli settlements.

The Palestinian Authority (PA) this year set November 2016 as the deadline for ending the Israeli withdrawal from the territories occupied by Israel during the Six-Day War in 1967 and establishing a two-state solution.

It is worth noting that numerous Palestinian factions, including Hamas, as well as pro-Palestine advocates support a one-state solution in which Israelis and Palestinians would be treated equally, arguing that the creation of a Palestinian state beside Israel would not be sustainable and that it would mean recognizing a state of Israel on territories seized forcefully by Zionists before 1967.

They also believe that the two-state solution, which is the only option considered by international actors, won’t solve existing discrimination, nor erase economic and military tensions.

(AFP, Al-Akhbar, Anadolu)

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!

In case you missed it: Noam Chomsky exposes himself as a Zionist in an interview by Alison Weir

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!

Renouncing Judaism

Shlomo Sands
Decades of Israeli high crimes against peace are reason enough for all Jews for justice to do it. Shlomo Sand for one.
On October 10, he headlined his London Guardian commentary ” ‘I wish to resign and cease considering myself a Jew.’ ” More on this below.
Zionism harms Jews and non-Jews alike. Its roots date from the late 19th century. In his book titled “Overcoming Zionism: Creating a Single Democratic State in Israel/Palestine,” Joel Kovel said:
Zionism seeks “the restoration of tribalism in the guise of a modern, highly militarized and aggressive state.”
It “cut Jews off from (their) history…It “led to a fateful identity of interests with antisemitism the only thing that united them.”
It “fell into the ways of imperialist expansion and militarism…(It) show(s) signs of the fascist malignancy.”
If you accept “the idea of a Jewish state,” you mix its twin notions of “particularism (and) exceptionalism…” They’re “the bane of Judaism…”
They give “racism an objective, enduring, institutionalized and obdurate character.”
Doing so turns Israel “into a machine for the manufacture of human rights abuses…”
Three former prime ministers were former terrorists. Menachem Begin (1977 – 83), Yitzhak Shamir (1983 – 84 and 1986 – 92), and Ariel Sharon (2001 – 06) dispelled the illusion of Israeli democracy, morality and respect for rule of law principles.
Today’s “world would be a far better place without Zionism(‘s) corrosive effects,” Kovel stresses.
Shlomo Sand believes Zionist historiography turns truth on its head. Jews alone are entitled to Israel, it claims.
According to Sand, it’s not their historical right. Not earlier. Not now.
Calling Israel a Jewish state is like saying America is an exclusive Anglo-Protestant one, he says.
Organized Judaism opposed Zionism until Hitler, he explains. It feared what’s now Israel would replace God.
Talmudic ideology is against collective holy land emigration. Against the notion that it’s God’s will to possess land.
What God giveth, God taketh away. Eretz Israel (the land of Israel) theologically isn’t a homeland, Sand explains.
Nor is Christianity or Islam. Religions don’t have them. Sand hopes Western nations will pressure Israel to change.
End its longstanding obdurate character. Its militarized occupation. Its racist ideology. Its democracy in name only.
Its separate and unequal principles. Its persecution of Palestinians and Arab/Israeli citizens.
Sand supports a two-state solution. One based on pre-June 1967 borders. With most settlers removed. Living side-by-side on separate land in peace.
Without acknowledging Nakba reality, resolving Israeli/Palestinian conflict isn’t possible, he believes.
History can’t be changed, he says. It can be corrected. Democracy and Jewish exclusivity can’t co-exist. They’re incompatible.
Peace requires new thinking. The alternative is permanent conflict. It affects Jews and Muslims alike.
Sand’s writings dispel myths most Jewish children are taught. Biblical nonsense about wandering the earth rootless.
Enslaved, oppressed and tormented for centuries. Nonsensically believing God gave Eretz Israel to Jews alone.
Rubbish proclaiming “A land without people for a people without land.”
If Judaism is a religion, not a people, how can a Jewish state be justified, Sand believes?
Claiming otherwise justifies the unjustifiable. It spurns Palestinian self-determination. It does so to prevent it.
Understanding Zionism is essential. Its reliance on repression, violence and dispossession. Its belief in Jewish exclusivity, privilege and exceptionalism.
Jewish ethnocracy with predetermined structural inequalities. Institutionalized racism at its ideological core.
Judaization/Israelification and de-Arabization to preserve Jewish character. Democracy is pure fantasy. A convenient illusion.
In November 2004, the late Michael Mandel said:
“Israel’s West Bank and Gaza settlements are war crimes in Canada.”
“Under the Canadian Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act 2000, c. 24, Israel’s settlements in territories taken in the June 1967 war constitute war crimes punishable in Canada.”
Mandel cited Section 8, paragraph 2 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).”
“It prohibits “(t)he transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory.”
Israel isn’t party to Rome Statute law. Under Canadian law it’s irrelevant. Grave breaches constitute war crimes.
Israel and America are criminally liable. According to Mandel, “Israel denies it” irresponsibly.
It’s “an Occupying Power (under provisions) of the Geneva Convention, the Rome Statute, and the Canadian Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act.”
Claiming otherwise doesn’t wash. Accountability is long overdue. Sand’s commentary explained why he renounced Judaism.
He “never (was) a genuinely secular Jew,” he said. Its “existence is based on a hollow and ethnocentric view of the world.”
He “stubbornly remained” Jewish most of his life. He “accepted this identity on account of persecutions and murderers, crimes and their victims.”
He now recognizes the error of his ways. He “resign(ed) and cease(d) considering (himself) a Jew.”
He’s unconcerned about what others think of him. Less so what “antisemitic idiots think.”
In light of 20th century tragedies, he’s “determined no longer to be a small minority in an exclusive club that others have neither the possibility nor the qualifications to join.”
He wants his “future and that of (his) children (to be) guided by universal, open and generous principles.”
His beliefs run counter to dominant Jewish thinking. It’s “oriented towards ethnocentrism.”
He lives “in one of the most racist societies in the western world. (It’s) deep within the spirit of (Israeli) laws,” norms, standards and practices.
It’s taught in schools. From childhood through doctoral studies. Israeli and Western MSM spread it.
“(A)bove all and most dreadful,” Israeli racists “in no way (feel) obliged to apologize,” says Sand.
“This absence of a need for self-justification has made Israel a particularly prized reference point for many movements of the far right throughout the world, movements whose past history of antisemitism is only too well known.”
Living “in such a society (is) increasingly intolerable,” he says. At the same time, it’s hard imagining home elsewhere.
He can’t undo his heritage. He’s “part of the cultural, linguistic and even conceptual production of the Zionist enterprise.”
For better or worse, he’s an Israeli. He isn’t proud to admit it. He’s often ashamed.
Especially witnessing militarized occupation. Its defenseless victims. They’re not Israel’s “chosen people.”
Early in life he hoped Palestinian Israelis one day could “feel as much at home in Tel Aviv” as Jewish Americans feel in New York or other major US cities.
Living side-by-side with Israeli Jews in peace. Today he knows otherwise.
Zionists view equality as an attack on Jewish character, the state of Israel and anti-Semitism.
“Most important, Sand believes, is “put(ting) forward ideas on changing Israel’s identity policy…”
“(F)reeing ourselves from the accursed and interminable occupation that is leading us on the road to hell.”
Ending generations of separate and unequal. Abandoning long discredited policies. Lawless ones making Israel a pariah state.
Increasingly, things look too late, Sand believes. “(A)ll seems already lost…(S)erious approach(es) (to) political solution(s) (are) deadlocked.”
Israel can’t shake its colonial mentality. Its unjustifiable right to dominate another people.
Its refusal to accept 1948 borders. To obey core international laws.
“Does this mean I, too, must abandon hope,” Sand asked? He “inhabit(s) a deep contradiction,” he said.
He “feel(s) like an exile in the face of the growing Jewish ethnicisation that surrounds” him.
When traveling abroad, he looks forward to returning home. He meets people with “no interest in understanding what being Israeli means to” him.
His deep homeland attachment fuels pessimism he feels towards it. He’s despondent about today’s conditions. What he fears ahead.
At the same time, he’s not “completely fatalistic.” He believes if humanity survived 20th wars without nuclear armageddon, “anything is possible, even in the Middle East.”
“As a scion of the persecuted who emerged from the European hell of the 1940s without having abandoned the hope of a better life, (he) did not receive permission from the frightened archangel of history to abdicate and despair.”
“Which is why, in order to hasten a different tomorrow, and whatever (his) detractors say, (he) shall continue to write,” he says.
His Guardian piece is an edited extract from his book titled “How I Stopped Being a Jew.” On October 14, he’ll discuss it at SOAS, University of London.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at
His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”
Visit his blog site at
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

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!


Shlomo Sands

• This is an edited extract from How I Stopped Being a Jew by Shlomo Sand, published by Verso

During the first half of the 20th century, my father abandoned Talmudic school, permanently stopped going to synagogue, and regularly expressed his aversion to rabbis. At this point in my own life, in the early 21st century, I feel in turn a moral obligation to break definitively with tribal Judeocentrism. I am today fully conscious of having never been a genuinely secular Jew, understanding that such an imaginary characteristic lacks any specific basis or cultural perspective, and that its existence is based on a hollow and ethnocentric view of the world. Earlier I mistakenly believed that the Yiddish culture of the family I grew up in was the embodiment of Jewish culture. A little later, inspired by Bernard Lazare, Mordechai Anielewicz, Marcel Rayman and Marek Edelman – who all fought antisemitism, nazism and Stalinism without adopting an ethnocentric view – I identified as part of an oppressed and rejected minority. In the company, so to speak, of the socialist leader Léon Blum, the poet Julian Tuwim and many others, I stubbornly remained a Jew who had accepted this identity on account of persecutions and murderers, crimes and their victims.

Now, having painfully become aware that I have undergone an adherence to Israel, been assimilated by law into a fictitious ethnos of persecutors and their supporters, and have appeared in the world as one of the exclusive club of the elect and their acolytes, I wish to resign and cease considering myself a Jew.

Although the state of Israel is not disposed to transform my official nationality from “Jew” to “Israeli”, I dare to hope that kindly philosemites, committed Zionists and exalted anti-Zionists, all of them so often nourished on essentialist conceptions, will respect my desire and cease to catalogue me as a Jew. As a matter of fact, what they think matters little to me, and still less what the remaining antisemitic idiots think. In the light of the historic tragedies of the 20th century, I am determined no longer to be a small minority in an exclusive club that others have neither the possibility nor the qualifications to join.

By my refusal to be a Jew, I represent a species in the course of disappearing. I know that by insisting that only my historical past was Jewish, while my everyday present (for better or worse) is Israeli, and finally that my future and that of my children (at least the future I wish for) must be guided by universal, open and generous principles, I run counter to the dominant fashion, which is oriented towards ethnocentrism.

As a historian of the modern age, I put forward the hypothesis that the cultural distance between my great-grandson and me will be as great or greater than that separating me from my own great-grandfather. All the better! I have the misfortune of living now among too many people who believe their descendants will resemble them in all respects, because for them peoples are eternal – a fortiori a race-people such as the Jews.

I am aware of living in one of the most racist societies in the western world. Racism is present to some degree everywhere, but in Israel it exists deep within the spirit of the laws. It is taught in schools and colleges, spread in the media, and above all and most dreadful, in Israel the racists do not know what they are doing and, because of this, feel in no way obliged to apologise. This absence of a need for self-justification has made Israel a particularly prized reference point for many movements of the far right throughout the world, movements whose past history of antisemitism is only too well known.

To live in such a society has become increasingly intolerable to me, but I must also admit that it is no less difficult to make my home elsewhere. I am myself a part of the cultural, linguistic and even conceptual production of the Zionist enterprise, and I cannot undo this. By my everyday life and my basic culture I am an Israeli. I am not especially proud of this, just as I have no reason to take pride in being a man with brown eyes and of average height. I am often even ashamed of Israel, particularly when I witness evidence of its cruel military colonisation, with its weak and defenceless victims who are not part of the “chosen people”.

Earlier in my life I had a fleeting utopian dream that a Palestinian Israeli should feel as much at home in Tel Aviv as a Jewish American does in New York. I struggled and sought for the civil life of a Muslim Israeli in Jerusalem to be similar to that of the Jewish French person whose home is in Paris. I wanted Israeli children of Christian African immigrants to be treated as the British children of immigrants from the Indian subcontinent are in London. I hoped with all my heart that all Israeli children would be educated together in the same schools. Today I know that my dream is outrageously demanding, that my demands are exaggerated and impertinent, that the very fact of formulating them is viewed by Zionists and their supporters as an attack on the Jewish character of the state of Israel, and thus as antisemitism.

However, strange as it may seem, and in contrast to the locked-in character of secular Jewish identity, treating Israeli identity as politico-cultural rather than “ethnic” does appear to offer the potential for achieving an open and inclusive identity. According to the law, in fact, it is possible to be an Israeli citizen without being a secular “ethnic” Jew, to participate in its “supra-culture” while preserving one’s “infra-culture”, to speak the hegemonic language and cultivate in parallel another language, to maintain varied ways of life and fuse different ones together. To consolidate this republican political potential, it would be necessary, of course, to have long abandoned tribal hermeticism, to learn to respect the Other and welcome him or her as an equal, and to change the constitutional laws of Israel to make them compatible with democratic principles.

Most important, if it has been momentarily forgotten: before we put forward ideas on changing Israel’s identity policy, we must first free ourselves from the accursed and interminable occupation that is leading us on the road to hell. In fact, our relation to those who are second-class citizens of Israel is inextricably bound up with our relation to those who live in immense distress at the bottom of the chain of the Zionist rescue operation. That oppressed population, which has lived under the occupation for close to 50 years, deprived of political and civil rights, on land that the “state of the Jews” considers its own, remains abandoned and ignored by international politics. I recognise today that my dream of an end to the occupation and the creation of a confederation between two republics, Israeli and Palestinian, was a chimera that underestimated the balance of forces between the two parties.

Increasingly it appears to be already too late; all seems already lost, and any serious approach to a political solution is deadlocked. Israel has grown used to this, and is unable to rid itself of its colonial domination over another people. The world outside, unfortunately, does not do what is needed either. Its remorse and bad conscience prevent it from convincing Israel to withdraw to the 1948 frontiers. Nor is Israel ready to annex the occupied territories officially, as it would then have to grant equal citizenship to the occupied population and, by that fact alone, transform itself into a binational state. It’s rather like the mythological serpent that swallowed too big a victim, but prefers to choke rather than to abandon it.

Does this mean I, too, must abandon hope? I inhabit a deep contradiction. I feel like an exile in the face of the growing Jewish ethnicisation that surrounds me, while at the same time the language in which I speak, write and dream is overwhelmingly Hebrew. When I find myself abroad, I feel nostalgia for this language, the vehicle of my emotions and thoughts. When I am far from Israel, I see my street corner in Tel Aviv and look forward to the moment I can return to it. I do not go to synagogues to dissipate this nostalgia, because they pray there in a language that is not mine, and the people I meet there have absolutely no interest in understanding what being Israeli means for me.

In London it is the universities and their students of both sexes, not the Talmudic schools (where there are no female students), that remind me of the campus where I work. In New York it is the Manhattan cafes, not the Brooklyn enclaves, that invite and attract me, like those of Tel Aviv. And when I visit the teeming Paris bookstores, what comes to my mind is the Hebrew book week organised each year in Israel, not the sacred literature of my ancestors.

My deep attachment to the place serves only to fuel the pessimism I feel towards it. And so I often plunge into despondency about the present and fear for the future. I am tired, and feel that the last leaves of reason are falling from our tree of political action, leaving us barren in the face of the caprices of the sleepwalking sorcerers of the tribe. But I cannot allow myself to be completely fatalistic. I dare to believe that if humanity succeeded in emerging from the 20th century without a nuclear war, everything is possible, even in the Middle East. We should remember the words of Theodor Herzl, the dreamer responsible for the fact that I am an Israeli: “If you will it, it is no legend.”

As a scion of the persecuted who emerged from the European hell of the 1940s without having abandoned the hope of a better life, I did not receive permission from the frightened archangel of history to abdicate and despair. Which is why, in order to hasten a different tomorrow, and whatever my detractors say, I shall continue to write.


Introduction by Gilad Atzmon:

Back in November 2010, I briefly attended a One State Conference in Stuttgart.

In my address, I pointed out that unless we elaborate on Jewish culture within the context of Israeli politics, any discussion on ‘reconciliation’ or ‘One State’ would be a complete waste of time.

A few days after the conference, I learned that Palestinian activist Ali Abunimah was outraged by my comment.

He denounced me suggesting  that political actions ‘have nothing to do with culture or heritage.

Apparently, today’s Haaretz editorial is in full agreement with me. “Israel Must Undergo a Cultural Revolution,” it suggests. I genuinely want to believe that since 2010,  Abunimah and his friends within the Jewish ‘Left‘ (Mondoweiss & Co) have matured a bit and are now ready to grasp the real meaning of the conflict within the appropriate cultural context.

Haaretz Editorial –


The Israel Police was quick to label the murderers “Jewish extremists,” meaning they aren’t part of the herd, they are outliers, “wild weeds.” This is the police’s way of trying to justify a sin, to “make the vermin kosher.” But the vermin is huge, and many-legged. It has embraced the soldiers and other young Israelis who overran the social media networks with calls for revenge and with hatred for Arabs. The vermin was welcomed by Knesset members, rabbis and public figures who demanded revenge. Nor did it skip over the prime minister, who declared “Vengeance for the blood of a small child, Satan has not yet created.”

Abu Khdeir’s murderers are not “Jewish extremists.” They are the descendants and builders of a culture of hate and vengeance that is nurtured and fertilized by the guides of “the Jewish state”: Those for whom every Arab is a bitter enemy, simply because they are Arab; those who were silent at the Beitar Jerusalem games when the team’s fans shouted “death to Arabs” at Arab players; those who call for cleansing the state of its Arab minority, or at least to drive them out of the homes and cities of the Jews.

No less responsible for the murder are those who did not halt, with an iron hand, violence by Israeli soldiers against Palestinian civilians, and who failed to investigate complaints “due to lack of public interest.” The term “Jewish extremists” actually seems more appropriate for the small Jewish minority that is still horrified by these acts of violence and murder. But they too recognize, unfortunately, that they belong to a vengeful, vindictive Jewish tribe whose license to perpetrate horrors is based on the horrors that were done to it.

Prosecuting the murderers is no longer sufficient. There must be a cultural revolution in Israel. Its political leaders and military officers must recognize this injustice and right it. They must begin raising the next generation, at least, on humanist values, and foster a tolerant public discourse. Without these, the Jewish tribe will not be worthy of its own state.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish culture, Identity politics and Jewish Power in particular – available on  &


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!

Terminology and Palestine

Screen Shot 2014-05-01 at 17.12.16

I receive this email from Dr Gabi Weber 

Dear friends of Palestine,

In recent years, the discussion about alternative solutions in Palestine has intensified. At various conferences held, among other places, in Haifa, Ramallah, Munich, Stuttgart and Dallas, the subject of ODS – One Democratic State – was analysed as a viable solution, i.e. one state for all. This important discussion is now coming to Zurich. Why now? How could ODS be implemented? Where do the current political parties in the region stand?  What would this mean for the people and the region?  We invite you for an in-depth discussion of ODS on the 17-18th May for a two-day conference in Zurich:


ODS One Democratic State in Palestine / Israel

May 17th 2014: Public symposium at Volkshaus, Zurich: 10:00am to 9:30pm, Stauffacherstrasse 60, 8004 Zurich

–        with Ghada Kharmi, Ilan Pappe, Samir Abed-Rabbo, Rania Madi, Yoav Bar, Radi Jarai, Ofra Yeshua-Lyth and many more.      In the evening, open discussions with the speakers will be held

May 18th 2014: Workshops sessions for activists and speakers at Quartierzentrum Aussersihl Zurich: 11am to 4pm, Hohlstrasse 67, 8004 Zurich

–        with activists from solidarity groups from Switzerland, Germany, Austria & others

All lectures and discussions will be held in English, with little to no translation.

Tickets: will be sold at the door for CHF 35 (basic ticket) or CHF 70 (support ticket: includes donation for event). In cash only, allows access to all activities held on both days; food and drinks not included.

Ticket Reservation: via email to stating your full name, number of tickets, and whether you plan to attend the Saturday, Sunday or all sessions. Please RSVP by latest May 13th.

Presented by:

Further information about ODS can be found at: www.odspal.jimdo.comand

Please distribute this e-mail and flyer to other interested parties and please spread to your websites, Facebook pages, etc.

In Solidarity,

Shirine Dajjani, ODS Zurich

This was my response:

Dear Gabi

I would like to bring to the attention of the conference, to Palestinians who call for ODS and their supporters, the following points hoping that my concerns would be incorporated in the discussion and taken seriously:

The hidden dangers of the use of incorrect terminology in our struggle:

a) In calling “Israel” APARTHEID

b) In calling for Abolition of Zionism,

c) In calling for One Democratic State solution as opposed to LIBERATION

d) In the Obliteration of Concepts of Resistance and Liberation


1) Presenting “Israel” an Apartheid is a CONCEALMENT ofGENOCIDE

Calling the Zionist entity mere “apartheid”, i.e “separation”, would only serve inconcealing the true expansionist  GENOCIDAL nature of the Jewish state, thuswhitewashing and minimising its century old crimes of ethnic cleansing and slow genocide.Such perception diminishes the Palestinians alienable rights into some modest demands of betterment of treatment by simple changes and modifications to “Israel’s” laws, naively assuming that such aims could be achieved by campaigning to put pressure on “Israel”  in order to revise some of its policies.

“Apartheid” presents “Israel” as a “normal” and “legitimate” political system which contains only few holes, some racist laws, and wrong policies which can easily be changed and corrected. Such use would no doubt promote the legitimization of this entity.

From a legal aspect, crimes of apartheid does not carry the same weight under International Law as Crimes against Humanity, which “Israel” is guilty off, thus may be harder to prosecute.

Campaigning to demand that the existing Jewish state, would change some of its policies (rather than to call for its dismantling and delegitimisation, to end this entity, once and for all) would simply enable the total usurpation of historic Palestine.


2)   Abolition of Zionism is absolutely vacuous and meaningless


Zionism is “JEWISH NATIONALISM, an ideology needed at a certain time to BRING JEWS to Palestine and to create a homeland for Jews, and now a significant percentage of them are already there. Zionism has ACHIEVED ALL ITS GOALS. So as an ideology and a concept, it is not even needed anymore, because all its aims have been achieved and abandoning it is surplus.
Imagine if we had an aim and call it RFP (Rat Free Palestine), then in 5 years from now, we achieve that aim, how meaningful can it be if international groups for the rights of rats to come after we achieved our goal, and to demand that we abolish RFP ideology! Their campaign is not only meaningless and pointless but also stupid


3) Transforming “Israel” into one democratic state is sugar coated poison

This is a glaring call for:
a)  Legitimizing “Israel”, worse, it is a call for promoting the enlargement of its boundaries, to encompass the ENTIRE land of Palestine, by annexing what remains of Palestine.
b) Wiping out the Palestinian Identity by giving Palestinians “Israeli” citizenship, thus covertly calling for the “israelization” of what remains of Palestinians,
c) Fantasising the idea of “equal rights” under “Israeli” authority, without taking into consideration the root causes of the racist laws, namely the ideology of supremacy and the “chosen-mess” with all its abhorrent implications, is detrimental to the just cause of Palestine.

By defacto, and sheer reality on the ground, “Israel” holds and will continue to hold all the apparatus of power in all spheres; military, academia, financial, political, social, media.
The mirage of equality in an inherently supremacist society is one of the most deceptive baits Palestinians could contemplate it is beyond naive to think otherwise.Promoting a solution in which criminals, thieves and murderers for several generations, reap the fruits of their deeds and get rewarded with keeping the loot is a mockery of every ethical principle humanity ever developed.
It is a moral degradation which justifies and paves the grounds for more wars of conquests and genocide.After witnessing their ruthlessness and inhumanity for seven decades as well as witnessing the deeds of their lobby and powerful organizations in many countries, is not idiotic to embrace the idea of imposing foreign-terrorist-racist-supremacist invaders on our lives by our own freewill?


The one state means in plain language:

 1) Inviting the Zionist entity to ANNEX and OCCUPY what is left of Palestine.2) Blessing the invaders with the “right” to keep the LOOT of whatever they have captured through wars of conquest and aggression.

3) Enabling the invaders to ENLARGE and EXPAND their entity, a small step towards a “greater israel”.

4) Embracing the finalization of the Zionist project.

5) Campaigning to upgrade the Palestinians’ status from “occupied Palestinian” to “slave Israelis”, living under the boot of Jewish supremacists who see Palestinians and other goyim as animals created only to serve Jews.

6) Absolving war criminals, murderers and land grabbers of all responsibility before the law, nay, rewarding them for their crimes.

Lala-Land: Minimizing Genocidal “Israel” as mere Apartheid and the Myth of “One State”

 This poll which clearly concludes that “Most of the Jewish public in Israel supports the establishment of an apartheid regime in Israel if it formally annexes the West Bank

Is this “one-israeli-state” what Palestinians have been “yearning” for, for decades?Is this what they have been striving for and have sacrificed their lives for generations to achieve ?Is this what will fulfill their aspiration and make their sacrifices worthwhile?

  • Voluntarily legalizing the theft of their own Homeland !
  • Willingly aiding to finalize the Zionist project !
  • Submissively allowing the criminal Jewish-Zionist state to get closer to becoming “greater Israel” !
  • Gracefully helping the genocidal entity to expand even more, annexing what is left of Palestine!

4) The only fair and just solution is  FULL LIBERATION
 by all legitimate meas of resistance

Hereby, for the sake of historical truth, and for defending, preserving and protecting the rights of future Palestinian children, I call upon this conference, and upon my brothers and sister, Palestinians and supporters alike to unite under the banner of LIBERATION, affirming our Inalienable Rights and clarifying our aims and aspirations to ourselves and to the world by SIGNING  this  Declaration

There is also a realistic proposal for our Jewish supporters who are serious about helping Palestinians in regaining their rights 

Best regards
Nahida Izzat, aka Exiled Palestinian

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!

Concealment and Truth in Palestine and Beyond

By Gilad Atzmon

The following is the text of a talk I gave at the Seek, Speak and Spread Truth Conference in London last Saturday, 23 November, 2013.

History, we are told, is an attempt to narrate the past. But in reality, more than often history has little to do with revealing the past. It is instead an orchestrated and institutional attempt to shove the shame deep under the carpet.


Much Jewish history texts, for instance, are there to divert the attention from the peculiar and tragic fact that along their history, Jews have managed to bring on themselves an endless chain of disasters. But Palestinian history at large,  is no different. After more than a century of liberation struggle, the situation in Palestine is worse than ever, yet Palestinian scholarship, as we will soon see, is drifting away from any possible understanding of the circumstances that led to their ongoing disaster.

Although the Brits have many war crimes attached to their names, the British Imperial War Museum decided to allocate a whole floor to the Jewish Holocaust instead of featuring one of the British-made genocides. The Brits, like everyone else, prefer to conceal their shame.

Historical accounts are commonly there to suppress the truth and conceal our shame. Yet, it is far from clear who is in charge, who decides what must be covered up and which path must be taken in order to suppress the truth.

Apparently, restricting the terminology and limiting freedom of expression by means of (political) correctness are probably amongst the most popular methods. Sadly enough, Palestine solidarity discourse is a spectacular test case in that regard. 

A brief examination of each of the terminological pillars and the principles that shape our vision of the conflict, of its history and of its possible solution are there to conceal the obvious causes, ideologies and belief system that drive the crimes in the Middle East in general and in Palestine in particular.

Zoom in

We’ll now scrutinize the terminology and notions that are involved in the debate over Palestine and expose once again the deceitful nature that is unfortunately intrinsic to the contemporary progressive discourse.

Zionism – Palestinian solidarity members are required to avoid the ‘J’ word and to use the word ‘Zionism’ instead. I recently revealed that Ali Abunimah, one of my current arch detractors, advised me a few years ago to refer to Zion when I really think Jewish so he and I “might find grounds for a lot of agreement….” In fact  Abunimah was not alone. Jewish Voice For Peace approached me with a pretty much similar offer about the same time.

The truth of the matter is that Israeli politics has little to do with Zionism. Israelis  are hardly familiar with Zionist ideology, nor they are concerned or motivated by Zionist praxis.  Zionism is largely a Jewish Diaspora discourse that vows to establish a Jewish National home in Palestine  and to civilize the Jew by means of nationalism. Israel is obviously the product of the Zionist project; however, the Israelis see themselves as post-revolutionary subjects – they transformed the Zionist dream into a practical reality.

Thus, criticism of Zionism per se hardly touches Israelis or Israeli politics. If anything, it actually diverts the attention from the crimes that are committed by the Jewish State in the name of the Jewish people.

But then, why do we use the term Zionism instead of referring to Jewish power, Jewish politics or the Jewish State?  Simple: we do not want to offend the ‘anti-Zionist’ Jews and Jews in general. We consciously choose to let Israel off the hook. Apparently we much prefer to target a phantasmic imaginary object that means very little rather than simply calling spade a spade.

Colonialism – Palestinian solidarity activists are expected to pepper their sentences with different permutations of the word ‘colonial’ with the hope that the more they use it the more it is likely to stick eventually. Consequently, activists and scholars commonly refer to Israel and Zionism as a ‘colonial project’. But they are obviously wrong.

Colonialism is traditionally defined as a clear material exchange between a ‘mother State’ and a ‘settler State’. Israel is no doubt a settler state, yet, no one can suggest who exactly was or is her mother.*

So why do we refer to Israel and Zionism as a colonial project? Simple: it saves us from admitting that the Jewish national project is indeed a unique project with no precedent in history. It would save us from admitting that we do not understand this project nor do we know where it aims. The Left and the so-called ‘anti-Zionist’ Jews cling to the colonial paradigm because it locates Israel and Zionism within a model they and their audience are slightly familiar with. The colonial paradigm suggests that the Jewish national project is as vicious as the British or French colonialism. But the grave truth is that we are dealing here with a unique form of abusive nationalist, racist project.

Settler Colonialism – in recent years a new terminological spin popped up within the Palestine solidarity ranks, namely ‘settler colonialism.’ I guess that my criticism of the colonial paradigm has shaken a few of the so-called progressive and ‘anti’ Zionists intellectuals, and they were pushed to revise their theoretical narrative. Their effort brought to the world a new deformed dysfunctional theoretical baby. But sadly enough, ‘settler colonialism’ also hardly explains a thing. It is rather a desperate attempt to further conceal the truth of the Jewish National project.

Settler Colonialism refers to the situation in which Super Power ‘A’ facilitates the settlement of Ethnic Group ‘B’ on Land ‘C’. Such an event may lead eventually to some grave consequences as far as indigenous population ‘D’ is concerned.

But here is the problem. This historical scenario A-B-C-D has nothing in common with Zionism, Israel or the Israeli Palestinian conflict. In reality, it was Zionists (B) who actually persuaded Britain, at the time a super power (A), that a Jewish Homeland in Palestine (C) is the right way forward. It was also Zionists (B) who promised to help pushing America into World War One that led Lord Balfour to commit the British empire (A) to the Zionist cause. In short, instead of the A-B-C-D chain of events, when it comes to Zionism, what we easily detect is a B-A-C-D chronology. It is the ethnic group ‘B’ that pushes Super Power ‘A’ to act in its favour.

But then we may want to ask ourselves why is it that Palestinian solidarity activists such as Ben White are consciously lying when they speaks about “settler-colonial past and present.”  Unfortunately White is not alone, the list of academics and scholars who participate in the dissemination of this false narrative is pretty impressive.

Why do they deceive, is it because they are an ignorant bunch? Not at all, they are actually dedicated scholars, it is just intellectual integrity that they lack, and severely.

Spreading the ‘settler colonialism’  narrative is, once again, intended to divert the attention from the embarrassing fact that already in 1917 the Jewish Lobby was amongst the strongest lobbies in the land. Such an admission could easily offend many Jews within the Palestine solidarity movement. Seemingly, we really do not want to offend anyone but intelligence.

Apartheid – Solidarity activists are inclined to refer to Israel as an apartheid state. They obviously let the Jewish State off the hook. Apartheid is commonly defined as a racially driven system of exploitation. But Israel is not Apartheid, it is not interested in exploitation. Israel is far worse, it wants the Palestinians gone. Israel is a racially driven, nationalist ethnic cleanser. In that regard, Israel is very similar to Nazi Germany. But this is exactly the equation we are supposed to avoid because it may hurt the Jews and even confuse the Left.

Two State / One State Debate – The philosophy behind the ‘one state solution’ is obviously ethical and universal.  But there is one slight problem. It finds no political partners or supporters within the Israeli society. Why? Because Israel is the Jewish State and the notion of Peace is totally foreign to Israeli and Jewish culture. The word ‘Shalom’ that is commonly translated as peace, reconciliation and harmony, is understood in Hebrew as ‘security for the Jews’.

Accordingly, it was very embarrassing to read Palestinian prominent intellectual Joseph Massad make some gross mistakes misinterpreting the word ‘peace’ in the context of the Zionist ideology and Israeli politics.

In a recent article named Peace Is War: Israeli settler-colonialism and the Palestinians Massad wrote:  “Waging war as peace is so central to Zionist and Israeli propaganda that Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon, which killed 20,000 civilians, was termed ‘Operation Peace for Galilee’”.

If Massad had committed to proper scholarship he would probably find out that, as far as Israelis are concerned, operation ‘Shlom Ha-Galil’ really meant ‘security’ for the Galilee rather than ‘Peace for Galilee’. Massad could have saved himself this intellectual blunder if he had read The Wandering Who rather than attempting to burn the book, whose author actually delves into the topic occasionally.

Israelis would support the One State Solution as long as it is One Jewish State. As Paul Larudee suggested recently, the Israelis would also support the Two State Solution as long as it is Two Jewish States.   Yet the only question that bugs me is, why would a Palestinian blogger such as Ali Abunimah  go out of his way to stop us from looking into the tribal and racist culture that drives the Jewish State?

Is it possible that some of the prominent Palestine voices also do not want to offend the Jews? I will let you judge.

Palestinian Cause

Is it really the Right of Return?  or 1948? For many years I was convinced that the Nakba was at the core of the Palestinian plight. But then monitoring BDS Movement (Boycott, Divestment and Sanction of Israeli goods, culture and academia) politics taught me that I could have been deluded.

When BDS was formed in 2005 this was its first goal:

1. Ending its (Israeli) occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall; (2005)

But then, without any attempt to discuss the matter publicly, BDS headquarters in Ramallah changed its first goal. It now reads:

1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall;

Some efforts have been made to make sure that Palestinian organisations are aware of this crucial change. Adding the 1967 made it clear that BDS de facto accepted the existence of a Jewish State over Palestine.

Interestingly enough, not many Palestinians were really outraged by BDS dropping the 1948 and accepting Israel as a fact. I guess that the meaning of it is simple. As far as Palestinians in exile in the West  are concerned, 1948 and  the Right of Return are not the real topic. I guess that such an agenda is not driven by the concern for the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon or Syria. I assume that refugees in Gaza and Jenin may also be outraged but, as things stand,  we can hardly hear their voices anyway. I guess that BDS is there to appease the ‘Jews in the movement’ and even liberal Zionists. This is hardly surprising considering the embarrassing fact that liberal Zionist George Soros who funds the Light Zionist J-Street also funds BDS as well as many other Palestinian NGOs.

Zoom Out

As we can see; Zionism, Colonialism, Settler-Colonialism, Apartheid, BDS and even The One State Solution are all misleading concepts and they are shaped to not offend the anti Zionist Jews and even Jews in general. This surreal and macabre political act explains why the solidarity movement has failed to deliver on every and each front, except one of course. With the support of liberal Zionists such as Soros, Palestine solidarity is now a little industrial affair that is pretty successful in maintaining itself. The absurd outcome is that the newly emerging Palestine solidarity industry actually benefits from the constant escalation of the crisis in Palestine – the worse is the situation on the ground, the more funding is pumped through the industry.

I guess that if we want to grasp what is behind this constant regression, concealment and repression are obviously the key words.

Concealment and repression lead towards stagnation. This is exactly what we see in Palestine and for more than a while – 100 years of struggle that led to a complete failure. Palestinian Solidarity is now farther than ever from understanding Zionism, Israel and the conflict. The so-called ‘movement’ is entrenched within a muddy terminological swamp that results in intellectual and spiritual paralysis.

This is exactly the point where truth and truth seeking come into play. The role of the intellectual and the artist is to unveil the concealed. To look into the pain and to dig into the essence. This search for essentiality is similar to the role of the psychoanalyst who delves into the realm of the unconscious.

When it comes to Palestine we have to grasp, once and for all, what the Jewish State stands for. We have to understand what Judaism and Jewishness are. We have to grasp who are the Jews, what unifies them and vice versa. We must learn the relationships between these distinct categories and Zionism and only then may we be ready to form some pragmatic and practical thoughts on Zionism, the Jewish State and its lobbies. By the time we are ready to do so, we may as well grasp the role of Jews-Only groups within the solidarity ‘movement’. We may comprehend how they have been shaping the discourse and suppressing the truth by dominating our language and restricting our intellectual liberties. By the time we are familiar with Jewish tribal culture ideology and politics, we may as well grasp the role of the ‘Sabbath Goy’, the caretaker who performs the services Jews prefer to leave to the Goyim.

But our role doesn’t end there. We also must grasp what Palestine means. How is it possible that Palestine scholarship is withdrawing rather than progressing. How is it possible that in the 70’s Palestinians were the world’s leading guerrilla fighters but not anymore. What happened and why?   What is it that the Palestinians want?  Can we even talk about Palestinians or are they a fragmented society that is split geographically, culturally, spiritually, politically and ideologically? And if they are divided, who is it that keeps them divided? Is there anything that can unite them?

I believe that the Jewish progressive politics together with the non-dialectic Left are to be blamed for this political disaster and terminological impotence. We are dealing with a concealment apparatus that forsakes the future just to sustain a remote echo of a decaying 19th ideology. It is there to nourish the forgetting of Being. It is there to make us aloof to the grave reality we are living in by means of intellectual and spiritual suppression.

When 1984’s Orwell wrote about Newspeak, he had Britain in mind. He foresaw the devastating impact of the so-called progressive minds around him. He could predict where The Guardians of correctness might be leading us all. And, for a reason, he made Immanuel Goldstein, the imaginary false dissent icon.

My message to you today is simple – true liberation is the ability to learn how to think, to learn how to be intrigued and irritated. Liberation is to unveil the concealed, to think and re-think, to view, re-view and revise.  To think is to aim at the essence, at the bottom of things, at the categorical. To think is to be able to distinguish between the symptoms and the disease.  Liberation is to burn bridges compulsively and enthusiastically and to bear the consequences. Liberation is to pursue truth relentlessly. This is exactly the moment when pain becomes pleasure.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics – available on  &

*In his book Israeli Exceptionalism: The Destabilizing Logic of Zionism, probably the most important theoretical text on Israeli supremacy, Professor Shahid Alam manages to resolve this difficulty. He suggests that instead of a ‘mother State’, in the case of Zionism, we are actually dealing with a ‘surrogate mother.’ Yet, if Alam is correct, then the case of Israel and Zionism has no precedent in history. In other words, the colonial paradigm hardly teaches us a thing.

Alan Hart stil Worried and Dreaming: “Jews and Palestinians in peace and partnership could become the light unto nations”.

Alan Hart is still worried and dreaming:

  • anti-Israelism could be transformed into rampant and rabid anti-Semitism”.
  • “the Jewish state, which was intended to solve the problem of anti-Semitism, was to become a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism.
  • Israelis must be aware that the price of their misconduct is paid not only by them but also Jews throughout the world.

He is not sure and “wondering if honest future historians will conclude that one of the greatest ironies in all of human history, perhaps even the greatest, is in the fact that Zionism wanted and needed anti-Semitism in order to justify its criminal policies and actions to Jews everywhere and misinformed and therefore gullible gentiles in America and Europe.”

According to Alan, Zionism’s in-Israel’s leaders could tell an American president and the whole of the non-Jewish world to go to hell, they would not be stupid enough to say the same to the Jews of the world, Jewish Americans and Europeans especially.”

Allan can’t see that the zionist leaders, who can’t tell the jews of the world to go to hell, has send the Arab Jews of Iraq and other Arab countries to hell. They did the same to RABIN, the Israeli Dove of Peace (According Gilad Atzmon, the Hebrow speeaking Palestinian, “Shalom” = Peace and security for Jews only).

This video and the follwing pictures demontrate how Zionists deall with the ony real anti-zionist’s Jews, the “Paletinian Jews”.


Finally Alan, never tire of dreaming about the great prize he worked for as Arafat (Father Palestine) and Perez since late 70’s. The prize is still “available to the Jews of the world and Israeli Jews especially if they did allow justice-driven reason to prevail. Generally speaking, they are the intellectual elite of the Western world and the Palestinians are the intellectual elite of the Arab world. Together in peace and partnership, in one state with equal rights and security for all, they could change the region for the better and by so doing give new hope and inspiration to the whole world. Put another way, Jews and Palestinians in peace and partnership could become the light unto nations.”

“Dream on, Alan.” he said.

I would pass to Alan the question asked by a frustrated Palestinian: What came first ?? The Jews or the Ghetto

About 2 years ago, instead of assking,  you asked Palestine – What Next?
I answered you Nothing but full liberation

Keep dreaming Alan, we Palestinian, in Palestine and all over the world will not only dream on, we will keep on resisting until full liberation.
Get it Alan: No alternative to FULL LIBERATION

It took our common friend,  Gilad Atzmon many years to realize that the place he was born in was in fact occupied Palestine. He left that place and vowed not to return until its liberated.

The Real enemy of the Jews is not only the Zionism, its Jewishness. Get it Alan, and don’t be fooled by the so-called anti-zionists controlling the PSC. The are in fact anti-zionist-zionists. Here is a sample. 


The curse of Zionism and the Jewish paradox


By Alan Hart

I was inspired (perhaps I should say provoked) to write this piece by something US Vice-President Joe Biden said in his speech to the recent J Street national conference in Washington DC. He recalled visiting Golda Meir when she was Israel’s prime minister and he was a junior senator. Her parting words to him were, he said, these: “We Jews have a secret weapon in our conflict with the Arabs. We have no place else to go.”Taken a face value what Golda said was obviously not true because there were then, as there still are, many countries to which Israeli Jews can go to start a new life if they wish. For the  one million who have taken their leave of the Zionist (not Jewish) state for a better life elsewhere, America was and remains the first choice, but today Germany is also becoming popular.
So what, really, was Golda’s message to Biden by implication?

Zionism’s raison d’être

In very low key “Mother Israel” was giving voice to Zionism’s raison d’etre (reason for being). The logic of it can be summarized as follows.

The world always has been anti-Semitic (meaning anti-Jew because Arabs are Semites, too) and always will be. So, Zionism takes it as a given that holocaust II – shorthand for another great turning against Jews – is inevitable. Israel therefore exists to be a safe haven, a refuge of last resort, an insurance policy for all the Jews of the world when that day comes. That’s why Israel has an unsatisfied hunger for more Palestinian land, an unquenchable thirst for more Palestinian water and a lust for the oil that has very recently been discovered in Palestine that became Israel.

And that in turn is why Zionism’s in-Israel leaders, assisted by their lobby and its associates and allies in America, will stop at nothing to advance their cause; a cause which requires, among other things, consolidating Zionism’s hold on the occupied West Bank and not ruling out a final ethnic cleansing of it, and the creation of a pretext to go to war with Lebanon again to take for keeps the south of that country up to the River Litani. (In a recent article Franklin Lamb made reference to an Israeli document which contains the text of a speech made in 1941 by David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s founding father and first prime minister. One particular sentence is circled by hand. “We have to remember that for the Jewish state’s ability to survive it must have within its borders the waters of the [rivers] Jordan and Litani.”)

In passing I have to say that one of the greatest promoters of the Jewish fear of a new upsurge of anti-Semitism is Abe Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in America. (A more appropriate name for his organization would be DIC – Defame Israel’s Critics.) A decade ago, in his address to the ADL’s 90th annual meeting in New York, he said: “We currently face as great a threat to the safety and security of the Jewish people as the one we faced in the 1930s – if not a greater one.”

In addition to its elected traitor agents in Congress, the Zionist lobby’s associates and allies include the non-Jewish neo-cons in various departments of state and the security services, a host of think tanks and the mainstream media, and the leaders of the tens of millions of deluded, mad, Christian fundamentalists. (This fundamentalism is historically anti-Semitic but supports Israel right or wrong because it sees the Zionist state as the instrument for bringing about Armageddon. For their part, Israel’s right wing leaders and their lobby courted and welcomed Christian fundamentalism because the alliance with it gave them maximum influence in Washington DC.)

The Jewish paradox

As I note in my book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, the answer to the question of what Zionism would do in the event of mission failure was given to me by Golda Meir in one of my interviews with her for the BBC’s flagship “Panorama” programme. She said that in the event of a doomsday situation, Israel “would be prepared to take the region and the whole world down with it.”

Israel was created by Zionism to guarantee the wellbeing and existence of the Jews, but that wellbeing and perhaps even existence is most seriously threatened by Zionism’s policies and actions

The Jewish paradox comes down to this. Israel was created by Zionism to guarantee the wellbeing and existence of the Jews, but that wellbeing and perhaps even existence is most seriously threatened by Zionism’s policies and actions.

How can that possibly be true?

What we are witnessing today is a rising, global tide of anti-Israelism. It is not a manifestation of anti-Semitism, meaning that it’s not being driven by prejudice against or loathing and even hatred of Jews just because they are Jews. Anti-Israelism is being provoked by Israel’s arrogance of power, its sickening self-righteousness and its contempt for international law in general and the rights of the Palestinians in particular.

The danger for Jews everywhere is that anti-Israelism could be transformed into rampant and rabid anti-Semitism. The most explicit warning that this could happen was given voice by Yehoshafat Harkabi, Israel’s longest serving director of military intelligence. In his book, Israel’s Fateful Hour, published in English in 1988, he wrote this (my emphasis added):

Israel is the criterion according to which all Jews will tend to be judged. Israel as a Jewish state is an example of the Jewish character, which finds free and concentrated expression within it. Anti-Semitism has deep and historical roots. Nevertheless, any flaw in Israeli conduct, which initially is cited as anti-Israelism, is likely to be transformed into empirical proof of the validity of anti-Semitism. It would be a tragic irony if the Jewish state, which was intended to solve the problem of anti-Semitism, was to become a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism. Israelis must be aware that the price of their misconduct is paid not only by them but also Jews throughout the world.

Harkabi also noted that Israel’s biggest enemy was its own self-righteousness. If he was alive today I would suggest to him for comment that if “enemy” can be defined as a force with the ability and real intention to destroy Israel by military means, self-righteousness is the only enemy of the Zionist state.

The real enemy of the Jews

Harkabi was not the first Jew to warn of the danger of Israel becoming a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism, and he was in very good Jewish company. Prior to the Nazi holocaust most Jews everywhere were opposed to Zionism’s colonial-like enterprise. They believed it was morally wrong (which, of course, it was) and would lead to unending conflict with the Arab and wider Muslim world. But most of all they feared that if Zionism was allowed by the major powers to have its way, it would one day provoke anti-Semitism.

As I write I find myself wondering if honest future historians will conclude that one of the greatest ironies in all of human history, perhaps even the greatest, is in the fact that Zionism wanted and needed anti-Semitism in order to justify its criminal policies and actions to Jews everywhere and misinformed and therefore gullible gentiles in America and Europe.

At school I was given what I still believe to be the best definition of a paradox – “The truth standing on its head to attract attention.” One such truth is this. There is no such thing as a “Palestine problem”. There is only a Jewish problem in and over Palestine that became Israel.

The headline over an article by Bradley Burston in Ha’aretz on the first day of this year was “Will 2013 be the year American Jews secede from Israel?” One of his concluding paragraphs was this: “American Jews want to know what is being done in their name. In the name of Judaism. And if they think that it is self-destructive, oppressive, blockheaded and wrong, it stands to reason they would want it to stop.“

The gentile me has a problem with that expression of hope.

If reason prevailed…

The evidence is that while a growing but still smallish number of American Jews are publicly critical of Israel’s policies and actions, very many, still the majority, are remaining silent and don’t want to know what Zionism is doing in their name; and while that remains the case there is no prospect of reason prevailing in enough Jewish minds to change the course of history.

…while it is perfectly possible that Zionism’s in-Israel’s leaders could tell an American president and the whole of the non-Jewish world to go to hell, they would not be stupid enough to say the same to the Jews of the world, Jewish Americans and Europeans especially. How it could be changed if reason was assisted to prevail can be simply stated. If a majority of American and European Jews were prepared to openly acknowledge the wrong done to the Palestinians in Zionism’s name, and then insist that the wrong be righted on terms acceptable to the Palestinians, any Israeli government would have to change course and be serious about peace on terms the Palestinians could accept.

What I really mean is that while it is perfectly possible that Zionism’s in-Israel’s leaders could tell an American president and the whole of the non-Jewish world to go to hell, they would not be stupid enough to say the same to the Jews of the world, Jewish Americans and Europeans especially.
That stands to reason – doesn’t it?

On public speaking platforms (as in my book) I never tire of giving voice to my thoughts about the great prize available to the Jews of the world and Israeli Jews especially if they did allow justice-driven reason to prevail. Generally speaking, they are the intellectual elite of the Western world and the Palestinians are the intellectual elite of the Arab world. Together in peace and partnership, in one state with equal rights and security for all, they could change the region for the better and by so doing give new hope and inspiration to the whole world. Put another way, Jews and Palestinians in peace and partnership could become the light unto nations.
Dream on, Alan.


An indication that Netanyahu is alarmed by the possibility of a majority of Jewish Americans demanding or even requesting that Israel be serious about making peace on terms the Palestinians could accept is in the following.

The Israeli American Council recently commissioned the distribution of leaflets to thousands of Jewish Americans asking them where their allegiance would lie in the event of a real crisis between the US and Israel. The leaflet was originally endorsed by representatives of Israel’s Foreign Ministry. When Netanyahu learned of this endorsement he directed the ministry to disassociate itself from the questionnaire.

I think it’s reasonable to assume he was worried by the prospect of the survey indicating that in the event of a showdown between himself and President Obama, a majority of Jewish Americans would be Americans first and not Israel firsters.

No alternative to FULL LIBERATION

Promoting “one state” after the failure of the “two states” means in plain language:
1) Inviting the Zionist entity to ANNEX and OCCUPY what is left of Palestine.
2) Blessing the invaders with the “right” to keep their LOOT of whatever they have captured through wars of conquest and aggression.
3) Enabling the invaders to ENLARGE and EXPAND their entity, a small step towards a “greater israel”.
4) Embracing the finalization of the Zionist project.
5) Campaigning to upgrade the Palestinians’ status from “occupied” to “slaves”, living under the boot of Jewish supremacists who see Palestinians and other goyim as animals created only to serve Jews.
Are we so naive to engage promoting such insanity?
No alternative to the Algerian model of  FULL LIBERATION


Map of “greater Israel” engraved on 10 agorot coin

Two-state solution is a Zionist solution

by Blake Alcott

Wednesday, April 3rd, 2013


Many people who support equal rights for Palestinians also support some version of a two-state solution in historic Palestine, or are at least open to the idea of two states side by side. The simple point of this essay is that all two-state solutions are Zionist solutions and should therefore be rejected: if one of the states is Palestine, the other is the existing, ethnocratic Jewish state in Palestine. A Zionist state with everything that entails.

Before 1948 two-state proposals were known as Partition. British Mandatory Palestine was a single political entity, and why break it up? Non-Zionist Jews, Moslems and Christians had lived there together for centuries, and breaking it up could only be to establish a sovereign, ethnically-defined Jewish state peopled mainly by European immigrants. Had indigenous Palestinians been polled, a huge majority would have rejected the preposterous project.

Partition was fact between 1948 and 1967, when the West Bank was part of Jordan and Gaza part of Egypt, but since 1967 one single state is fact. The Zionist state rules over all of Palestine. Two-state advocacy by pro-Palestinians in this context has been an attempt to wrench at least part of Palestine out of the hands of the Jewish state, but leaving the rest either temporarily or permanently Zionist. Two-state advocacy is thus acceptance of the Zionist entity.

The imagined Palestinian state has been shrunken, cut up, and turned into a lot of open-air prisons, leaving the Zionist goal of Eretz Israel from the river to the sea unfulfilled only in its desire to be Araberrein. In recent years, therefore, the main pro-Palestinian argument against the two-state solution has been that no conceivable state is ‘viable’: too small at maximum 15% of Palestine 1947; not contiguous since Gaza and the West Bank are separated and the West Bank itself is an archipelago; without sovereignty over borders, infrastructure and air space; and without al-Quds. A few Bantustans, in short: a bad joke.

But again, there is this second – sufficient, older, and more important – reason against two-states, namely that it cements the fundamental injustice of a Jewish state on Palestinian land.

Tried and tested fighters for Palestinian rights can of course conclude that nothing more is in the cards, or that the costs of more in death and imprisonment are too high. Even as a permanent solution it can be bitterly swallowed while muttering that it is a poor compromise.

There are also those who see the two states as a temporary solution, as a stage in the battle for a single secular, democratic state. Some of these are soft Zionists with great sympathy for Palestinian rights and dignity such as Noam Chomsky, Oren Yiftachel or Charles Manekin. Within this broad tradition are various concepts of confederation or bi-nationalism, often compromising on the Right of Return. Before the colony’s establishment by the UN through Resolution 181 such bi-national thought culminated in 1947 with the concrete proposals of Judah Magnes and the IHUD group.

However plausible such indirect, complicated scenarios may or may not be, they all at least initially embrace the second of the two states – the Zionist one. Its injustices remain: its racist definition of itself, its apartheid, its continuing ethnic cleansing, and its rejection of the Right of Return. In other words, since agreeing to two states means recognising the Jewish state, it means accepting these injustices. As Amos Oz said, two states means ‘offering Israel the security guarantees it will need in return for renouncing the occupied territories.’ This, probably, is to chisel Israel in stone.

Statehood bids such as are now underway do not, strictly speaking, imply a two-state solution. They can be tactics for increased dignity, access to international courts, and in general the chance to fight as a formally equal state. As long as such a strategy avoids recognition of Israel and doesn’t compromise on the Right of Return, it can remain in rejection of two-state solutions.

Otherwise, the danger is that a recognised Zionist state would be even harder to bring to the negotiating table than the unrecognised, increasingly shunned one we now have to work on. If so, accepting two states would be a shot in the foot.

Of course this second, Zionist state, on 85 or 90% of historic Palestine, could transform itself in the direction of citizenship and equality for all residents – with a lot of encouragement from boycotts, divestment and sanctions (BDS). It would give up its ‘Jewish’ adjective and become a standard-issue democracy. But if the first, smaller, non-Jewish state were also secular and democratic, what would speak against merging them forthwith, ending Partition? We might as well have gone straight for one good state in the first place, one that moreover would finally bring security to Jewish Palestinians.

If you answer ‘Yes’ to two questions, you have embraced one state rather than two: Should Israel-the-existing-state be transformed into a real democracy? Should Palestinian refugees’ right to return be honored 100%? If this is your stance, partition on ethnic lines makes no sense.

If this argument for the older, simpler anti-Zionist position has any merit, the neutral position in the one-state/two-states debate of organisations like BDS, the British PSC (Palestine Solidarity Campaign) and JfJfP (Jews for Justice for Palestinians) is actually pro-Zionist by virtue of its openness to a lingering or even eternal Jewish state. These groups join the Quartet (Russia, US, EU and UN) and a large part of the PA (Palestinian Authority) in countenancing, in principle, a racist state on land belonging to other people.

It by the way seems to me a disservice to the memory and honour of the African National Congress when organisations that are neutral on this question and thus open to a Zionist state hold up the South African struggle as their template. The ANC did not entertain thoughts of partition. It had a simple, human-rights message.

Anything but blanket rejection of two states is moreover a diversion that strengthens the dominant discourse of ‘occupation’ in 1967 terms. This discourse diverts our attention not only from the apartheid and ethnic cleansing of the remaining Zionist state, but also from a deeper, oroginal root: the murders, expulsions and land theft since 1948 coupled with prohibition of return.

The Right of Return, enshrined in UN General Assembly Resolution 194, illustrates the problem. Unless the envisioned two-state solution (somehow) accomodates ROR it contradicts the aim of upholding Palestinians’ rights. ROR is the sine qua non of any vision of justice. I believe, moreover, that it should be envisioned concretely. The land or homes to be returned to are or were in what is officially now Israel. The numbers of refugees with the Right are so high that there is no room for them in the archipelago that would be passing itself off as Palestine. Therefore any one-state solution that recognises both the ROR and the right of Jewish immigrants to remain should be marked by extremely tough bargaining on behalf of the refugees’ rights.

The Right of Return for those now outside historic Palestine is the third of the three goals of the 2005 call to boycott and ostracise Israel sent out by around 170 Palestinian NGOs. The other two goals aim at justice for Palestinians in areas occupied in 1967 and for Palestinians with Israeli citizenship. While to me it is clear that a single, democratic state follows logically from these three BDS goals, BDS and other mainstream pro-Palestinian groups remain contradictorily open to two states.

Again, one can assume that an Israel that grants or is forced to accept ROR is a state ready to join the ranks of normal, nominally equitable states – rendering superfluous any talk of two states. And we should reject proposals like that of Daniel Gavron and some Palestinians to create one state but only after dropping both ROR and Israel’s Law of Return which grants citizenship to any Jew from anywhere. No solution is fair that cements the disenfranchised, insulted status of the millions of ethnically cleansed.

Time might lead us to the ‘best bad’ solution of two states, but it is dumb to compromise even before coming to the table. At the moment, from my perspective of someone who would not be entitled to vote in a single, human-rights-based state, but who does his bit to influence pro-Zionist governments to change their minds, I feel the need for a vision that is both clear and inspiring. Two-state proposals are never clear and, because they are Zionist, not inspiring.

Thus, if only for practical reasons, the pro-Palestinian organisations mentioned above might want to abandon their ‘neutral’ – and complicated, and pro-Zionist – positions in favour of a vision that can captivate world opinion. It is time for BDS, PSC and dozens of other groups to reject partition and support Palestinians and Jewish Israelis who support the 1960s PLO stance for one democratic state. Put bluntly, unless BDS gets off the one-state/two-state fence it is not formulating clear conditions for calling off the boycott.

We can call the two-state solution ‘dead’ because of the absurdity of Palestine-Lite, but we can also wish its death because of the immorality of Zionism. This essay has argued that yes, statelets presently envisioned as Palestinian are to be rejected because they lack size, continguity, sovereignty and al-Quds. But bigger and better ones, as well, would leave the Zionism problem unsolved. To be for two states in Palestine is to be for… two states. One of them is Zionist.

But not only by this process of elimination do we arrive at One Democratic State. The vision is positive: One person, one vote within a constitution protecting human rights – if necessary with some bi-national safeguards – in a country where people, history, economics and meaning are mixed together anyway.

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 this Blog!

“Vote-Giving”? – No Thank you. We Choose LIBERATION

Posted on by nahida the Exiled Palestinian

A Jewish “Israeli” woman messaged me to inquire why am I opposed to the idea of what she calls “vote-switching”.



This is my response:
The idea of “vote giving” is a pathetic one, in so far that it is primarily ineffective, and what is more it gives YOU, “Israeli” Jews, the impression that YOU are being “helpful” and “generous” by “giving” us “something”, on the other hand it stages Palestinians in the most undignified position at the receiving end of the occupier’s “charitable” deed. While in reality it is mere vacuous bubble, smoke in the air:
1) It gives the fake impression of legitimacy to an entity which is in reality ILLEGITIMATE, an attempt to “beautify” and “democratize” that which is heinously ugly and fundamentally undemocratic.
2) It is a form of normalization, where Palestinians under occupation and in exile are hoodwinked to believe that “they are voting”, when in reality they are “voting” in a system and for a system that is oppressing them.
3) “Giving” us YOUR vote CHANGES NOTHING ON THE GROUND, no matter how wild your imagination is, you know as much as I do that the outcome of such ridiculous move is NOTHING:

a) in terms of election results; knowing that you can only chose between two evils: evil and “lesser” evil as it is the case in all Western “democracies” but on a much deeper and worse level in the Zionist entity.

b) in terms of how “honest” are those “Israelis” who will vote for you as a Palestinian (not much confidence there).

c) in terms of the number of “Israeli” Jews who would be sooooo “generous” as to “give” us their vote. you know how pathetically insignificant your numbers are, no need to pretend otherwise.

4) If we really want to achieve REAL CHANGE on the ground, one needs clearly defined aims and objectives. My objective, which is irrefutably, the objective of the majority of Palestinians is the LIBERATION of Palestine. What is yours?
5) We are sick and tired of being told what to do to achieve our goals, what is good for us, how to resist, what should our future be like, or have occupiers vote on our behalf, we especially sick and tired to hear from those who caused our Nakba in the first place, YOU Jewish “supporters”. If you really are sincere in your desire to help, you really need to learn to be HUMBLE for once and accept to sit in the back seat and let the only LEGITIMATE Nation of Palestine DECIDE for ourselves without your “supervision”, “mentoring” and “steering”. You are NOT God’s “chosen”, your are NOT “superior” human-beings, NOR are you intellectually “superior” than anyone else. Our future is NOT entangled with yours because you have made a mess in an entire region of the world for almost a century in ever greater murderous genocidal criminality. Individually and collectively Jewish “Israelis” are accountable for past and ongoing Crimes Against Humanity. Legally and Historically you will have to bear the consequences. The “golden times” of warmongering, land theft and assassination of children will soon be over.
6) We need ACTION that brings CHANGE not just symbolic gesture which makes YOU feel good, while leaving us stagnating, like rabbits running till exhaustion in a cylinder only to stay still…
It is exactly like you coming to help building a demolished house only for it to be re-demolished again and again and again and again; useless “action” of alleged “resistance” only to deplete our time, energy and resources and achieve NOTHING on the ground but the illusion of “victory”.
If your really want to help then, go all the way and do the REAL STUFF.
7) The REAL STUFF is NOT a “Kum ba yah” song, oh let’s hug each other then miraculously your bullets would molest our babies less aggressively, your bombs would fall softer on our heads or our decades of excruciating pain of exile would suddenly taste sweeter. We do NOT need a “vote” from an “Israeli” OCCUPIER to elect another “Israeli” OCCUPIER, what we need is REAL ACTION of goodwill and sincerity that proves to us that you are genuinely sorry for what you have done and willing to put things right, i.e:

a) Total disengagement with the Zionist entity, abandon the so called “Israeli” citizenship, and think of ways to stop the illegitimate illegal flood of Jews who have nothing to do with Palestine.

b) If you really so love the land and so hate the crimes committed and so hate injustice, you can apply for Palestinian citizenship.

c) Work within the International Legal system to help Return all STOLEN LAND and PROPERTY and to facilitate the RETURN of ALL refugees.

d) Participate, collect information and help facilitate Law-suites against “israeli” criminals whether soldiers or settlers

e) Work within YOUR communities world wide to bring change in their supremacist attitude and criminal behaviour (for financing and supporting criminals)

f) Work through legal avenues to REVOKING ISRAEL’S UN MEMBERSHIP. The racist genocidal occupation entity, which was in breach of UN Charters, which has violated and defied more UN resolutions and charter principles than any other. This illegitimate entity has no moral or legal ground whatsoever to be a member of the UN. Its membership is a disgrace on the face of humanity and a mockery of International Law. Israel’s UN membership should have never happened in the first place.

Civilian Society ??

8) Insisting on squeezing the Palestinian struggle to fit the apartheid model of South Africa or black America is a double whammy:
Firstly, presenting the Zionist entity as a normal state with a few apartheid policies that can be changed is fundamentally false:

a) what is happening in Palestine is NOT mere segregation and apartheid, what is going on is ethnic cleansing, wiping a country off the map and slow genocide.

b) Racism in the “Jewish state” is ideological, grounded in “sacred” texts, cultural practices and the inherent concept of “chosen-ness”, unlike South Africa in which racism was a momentary convenience, reflecting opportunistic fulfillment of self-interest of a white minority.

Secondly, when activists are intoxicated with the deceptive mantra of “Equal rights, One State, Two People”, offered as the best formula and ideal model of solution rather than other successful models of Liberation, such as Algeria for example, that means the they participates in whitewashing and rewarding the century-ongoing Zionist crimes, such paradigm gives a lee-way to the thriving of an illegal genocidal expansionist racist entity. Such solution would mean blessing the EXPANSION of “Israel” and granting the Zionist occupier a comprehensive and “peaceful” take over, and unrestricted control over our land and our lives.
Like North America, South Africa was conquered and subsequently ruled by white Europeans several centuries ago, i.e. BEFORE International Law adopted through the Nuremberg Principles right after WW2, explicitly prohibited land acquisition through military conquest, and clearly defined Crimes Against Humanity, amidst them Wars of Aggression and Conquest , Genocide and Instigation of Wars & Crimes against peace, and War crimes to be the worst categories of crimes. All the latter Crimes having been, and still are in even worse manner, perpetrated by Jewish Israelis.
Furthermore, this “one-state, two people” approach fully ignores the unbalanced premise of the reality on the ground, and the implication such proposal would have – namely the finalization of the aims of the racist, expansionist and exclusionary Jewish Nationalist experiment called “Israel”. It would de facto annex all residual Palestinian post-1967 Bantustans, and attach them to what would inevitably be “Israel” no matter what convoluted name would be attached to. Because indeed, there is no need to be a rocket scientist to know full well who would keep the arsenal, who would keep the apparatus of power, judicial, military, executive, financial, etc.
All the while the demand granting equal rights to all, includes supremacists and invaders who have no historic or legal rights to the land, who are still flocking to Palestine as we speak, armed to the teeth by their support networks in US-America, in other words, these are active dangerous psychopathic criminals.
Zionist Jews did not come to Palestine with olive branches to begin with, they did not come with peaceful intentions of co-existence with the indigenous population. They gushed in like savages, terrorizing unarmed peaceful farmers and land tenders, they tortured and imprisoned, they came to destroy, “cleanse”, conquer and dominate.
A century on, their racist ideology, their use of terror, and their abominable psychopathic behaviour has only intensified, and drastically. The vast majority of that artificial “society” -and for very specific supremacist ideological reasons- are unwilling/ incapable of viewing the “other” as equal and over the passing of time they have shown to be unwilling to become modest or peaceful , let alone remain peaceful.
Would any decent human-being force a mother to marry the murderer of her child?
Would any decent human-being find it acceptable to force a child to live with his paedophile abuser?
Would any decent human-being accuse these people, child and mother of “immorality” or call them “unrealistic” for refusing to tie their future with their abusers?
Through the delusional “Equal Rights, One State, Two People” proposal, the FACTS ON THE GROUNDS would remain unchanged, and probably aggravated, since these FACTS, stock and barrel, would remain in the hands of SUPREMACISTS.
This is NOT a solution.
Make no mistake, the fate of Palestine will be the forbearing sign indicating the shape of the future of International Relatioships. By failing to liberate Palestine, we forfeit International Law, and that unambiguously opens the gates to an abyss. Any predatory group equipped with some military, would be vindicated to conquer and destroy whatever they want, wherever they want, on the primitive basis of military force. Basically a staggering regression back into the Stone Age methodology, expanded globally by contemporaneous weaponry’s range and effect, which is biocidal,and instantaneous .
In conclusion, in this war-ridden era it has become a matter of acute urgency and prime importance, that Nations reconvene as a Community, to fulfill its responsibility to Restore International Law, as well as to affirm universal principles of ethics, in order to stop the bloodshed and destruction of our beautiful planet, by stopping predators and warmongers by all means necessary.
The following are the aims of most Palestinians,
FULL LIBERATION of Historic Palestine. The Holy Land must be free from racists committing atrocities. A way must be found, to bring reason to the Holy Land, and there is no other way than to evict foreign criminals. Keep in mind that before the invasion by Jewish foreigners, Palestine was characterized by the harmonious coexistence between respectively a Palestinian Muslim majority, a Palestinian Christian minority and a Palestinian Jewish minority. To restore this harmonious cohesive fabric is the only way forward.
FULL SOVEREIGNTY of the Palestinian Nation over their ancestral country: Palestine, with a constitution and a political system of their own independent choice. For the sake of International Peace and Security.
PROSECUTION OF WAR CRIMINALS, plans of which should start without delay, A Palestinian JUDICIAL and IMMIGRATION System, will respectively prosecute former “Israeli” criminals and their associates, and/or grant or decline on an individual basis, a Right to Remain, based on criteria solely to be defined by said Immigration and Integration Services. Anyone who can prove non-participation in the ex-Israeli occupation apparatus, and who has demonstrated ability and willingness to a respectable and law-abiding conduct, will probably obtain a chance to gain unrestricted Palestinian citizenship, with equal rights.
RETURN, RESTITUTION and COMPENSATIONS: Palestinian refugees have the unconditional Right of Return. Palestine and the Palestinian Nation at large, are entitled to full and unconditional Restitution of their land and property whenever possible, assorted with appropriate Compensation for more than seven decades of deprivation and slow genocide, Cultural destruction, and a whole array of atrocities and usurpation. .
Would you or any “Israeli” Jew be interested to join us in our struggle for LIBERATION as one of us, as an EX-”Israeli” and a future Palestinian?

Be the first to like this.
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 this Blog!

Mleeta, Khiam, Sabra, Shatila and Resistance In General


By Gilad Atzmon

Lebanon is incredible – an intoxicating blend of natural beauty, rebellious spirit, pious clarity, tolerance, wild night life and unbelievable hummus. I landed in Beirut four days ago. The purpose of my visit wasn’t all that clear. I knew that a talk and a musical performance were scheduled by Almayadeen TV, but I never expected such a spiritually transforming experience.

It was my second visit to the country. 30 years ago I crossed the Lebanese border along with an IDF convoy escorted by tanks and armed vehicles.

Then I was an occupier, this time I came with only my saxophone and a desire to share my thoughts and deliver some beauty.

But it didn’t take me a couple of hours to realise that Lebanon is much more than just humus, shisha, the sea and some captivating rural scenery. Early on Friday we left Beirut for the south. Our first stop was Mleeta – a Hezbollah frontline outpost and a symbol of Lebanese defiance. Mleeta is located on top of a mountain, surrounded by the South Lebanese Massif which, until 2000, was controlled by the Israelis. From Mleeta, the Lebanese Mujahedeen launched daily attacks against the Israeli invader and gave the Israelis a true taste of their own medicine.

Now Mleeta is a Jihadi tourist resort, there to tell the story of the heroic Hezbollah, those brave paramilitaries that confounded the ‘best army in the world’. The truth is, though armed only with light weapons, they were well supplied with Shia, spiritual ammunition.

Mleeta provides an overview of three decades of Islamic resistance in Lebanon and, in exhibiting all that the fleeing IDF soldiers have left behind, it proudly demonstrates the reality of Israeli cowardice. Mleeta is a symbol of confidence – confidence that the IDF is gone, never to return. Because when, in the summer of 2006 Hezbollah routed the IDF, it also demolished their confidence forever. The Jewish state was taught a lesson it would never forget – their phantasmic expansionist dream had come to an end.

But Mleeta was just a beginning. South Lebanon is dripping with defiance – every village, house and person is an emblem of Shia’s heroic resistance with the villages bedecked with Hezbollah posters featuring Leader Hasan Nasrallah and the many martyrs who taught the IDF those very necessary lessons.

Like Mleeta, Khiam the notorious Detention Centre is also a monument to Israeli brutality. Khiam is where Israel detained and tortured its political opponents, in some cases, for as long as 14 years. My visit there reminded me of a devastating memory, which on occasion, I share with my audience. It concerns Ansar, an Israeli concentration camp located in South Lebanon. It was back in 1984, on a piece of flat land in the middle of the camp, I noticed a dozen concrete boxes with small metal doors, they looked like dog kennels being only about 80 cm high, 100 cm long and probably about 80cm wide. When I pointed out to the commanding officer that these concrete construction weren’t suitable for dogs, he told me not to worry: no one would even think of putting dogs in them.  “Put a Palestinian in one of those for 24 hours,” he laughed, “And he’ll come out singing the Hatikvah.”  They were solitary confinement units for Palestinian prisoners. That was it. Then and there, I realised that Israel was not my country.

In Khiam this week I saw the exact same Israeli torture facility where the Israelis would shove their political opponents into tiny metal boxes, lock them in for days and then occasionally hit the top with a heavy stone. This time I took a picture.

But someone in Israel must have felt some shame at what Israel was leaving behind in Lebanon. In 2006 the IDF attempted to erase all trace of the detention centre at Khiam. In a desperate attempt to hide Israeli brutality, Israel sent in its engineering squads to blow up the cells and all remaining evidence of torture. But that clumsy effort to conceal the true reality of Israeli inhumanity achieved only the complete opposite. It now only affirms that Israel has, indeed, a lot to conceal.

The journey to occupied Palestine’s Border is over the most beautiful, wild and rural terrain. But then, suddenly, we were there, faced with the Jewish ghetto walls, guarded by cameras, army posts and barbed wire. Israel clearly doesn’t even try to convince its neighbours that it belongs in the region. It looks different, it smells different, it sounds different – it is in fact, just one extended Jewish European shtetl that has matured into a neurotic, psychotic and murderous collective fuelled by PRE traumatic stress. In that regard, the Israelis indeed have great deal to keep under wraps.

Inspired by Lyotard’s “Heidegger and the Jews” and my visit to the south, I decided, in my talk in Beirut, to speak about ‘History as a form of concealment.’ Instead of telling us ‘what really happened’, I argued that history is there to hide our shame, to repress that which we cannot even utter. It is, in effect, there to make us forget. Jewish history, for instance, is there to suppress Jewish shame, to disguise that which Jews prefer to hide from themselves. Jewish history is an attempt to talk about the past while avoiding the horrendous and embarrassing fact that Jews, throughout their history, have been bringing on themselves one Shoa after the other.

But concealment wasn’t invented by the Jews. The Brits also find it hard to cope with their past chain of murderous imperial genocides. This may explain why they entrusted the writing of Churchill’s biography to Jewish Zionist Sir Martin Gilbert, and why their historians have dedicated a whole floor of the Imperial War Museum to the Nazi Holocaust. As if Brits do not have enough shoas and suffering inflicted on others to remember. One of those British-inflicted shoas is obviously the Palestinian Nakba. Britain should own up to this disaster and perhaps find a little room for it also in its Imperial Museums. And like Britain, the Israelis have yet to acknowledge their own role in the original sin of 1948.

Looking at the state of the refugee camps in Lebanon, it became very clear to me that the Lebanese also might engage in some soul searching. For 65 years Palestinian refugees have lived in Lebanon and in other Arab countries in unbearable conditions and have suffered terrible discrimination.

Palestinian refuge camps in Lebanon are nothing short of hell on earth. Palestinians cannot be naturalized. They are banned from certain professions and jobs such as medicine and law. In some ways, their situation is worse even than their brothers’ in Gaza or The West Bank, because for them there is not even any prospect of hope or change.

Those endless solidarity discussions about ‘One State’, ‘Two States’ or ‘BDS’ have zero significance or impact on their lives or their livelihoods. These displaced and dispossessed people need immediate change in their political status, but, being excluded from the political process, they lack the wherewithal to bring such change about.

Not able to travel, their voice is hardly heard within the Western solidarity discourse and the International Palestinian solidarity movement is hardly engaged, or even concerned with their tragedy. Even that most absolute of rights, the right to return to their land has been compromised by the BDS in Ramallah and other prominent Palestinian leaders.

On my last day in Beirut I visited Sabra and Satilla. I saw the mass graveyards, I saw the poverty, I saw the piles of rubbish in the streets, the outcome of the complete absence of even the most elementary municipal services. I have been traveling around the world for many years but this is, without doubt, one of the saddest sights I have seen. But, in those camps, I also saw some of the kindest people on this planet. People who against all odds, in spite of being crushed, humiliated and tortured from more than six decades, still look forward, still live their lives. They raise their kids and care about their education. They greet you in the warmest possible manner and, no sooner have you approached their shop, they have invited you for coffee. Surely, their suffering must be our primary concern.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics  or

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 this Blog!

Why Israel wants Muslim Brotherhood to replace the king of Jordan?

Sham times claimed the Israel and Brotherhood are pushing and preparing to replace the king of Jordan with Brotherhood. A translation is provided after my comment.

 More than 2 years ago Former Israeli National Security Adviser Giora Eiland wrote

“Forget a two-state solution, the way to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is to create a United States of Jordan that would include three states governed by a federal government in Amman: the East Bank, West Bank and the Gaza Strip,” former Israeli National Security Adviser Giora Eiland said in a study called “Regional Alternatives to the Two-State Solution,” released Thursday by Bar-Ilan University’s BESA Center.

And more than 2 years ago  Lamis Andoni wrote:

Over the years, two variations of the “Jordan option” have developed.

The first is based on “transferring” the Palestinian population of the East Bank and even Israel “proper” to Jordan, where the Palestinian homeland is to be established. The second scenario is based on establishing a Palestinian state in Jordan, which would also include the Arab-populated areas of the West Bank.

Both options have been rejected, but the proposals have remained alive as a stick with which to threaten the Palestinians and the Jordanians and to counter perceived threats or the international community’s verbal support for the establishment of a Palestinian state. In other words, Israeli leaders use the “Jordan option” whenever Israel is in time of crisis.” 

I don’t think Israel is in time of real crisis, thanks to the brotherhood’s spring and thier war on Syria and Iraq.

The Muslim Brotherhood has been active in Jordan ever since the Arab Spring. They have come to power in several nations, most notably Egypt. The U.S. and its allies demanded the annexation of the West Bank to Jordan, a move considered as selling Jordan out to the Brotherhood. The Qatari sheikh’s visit to Gaza signals a shift in perspective in the Arab world vis a vis the Palestinian Authority.

Jordanian authorities have started revoking the citizenship of thousands of Palestinians living in Jordan to avoid a situation in which they would be “resettled” permanently in the kingdom, Jordanian and Palestinian officials revealed on Monday.

Has the US Administration Decided to Get Rid of Jordan’s King Abdullah? Asked Khaled Abu Toameh

“This is the question that many Jordanians have been asking in the past few days following a remark made by a spokesman for the US State Department… Mark Toner” about “thirst for change” in Jordan and that the Jordanian people had “economic, political concerns,” as well as “aspirations.” The spokesman’s remark has prompted some Jordanian government officials to talk about a US-led “conspiracy” to topple King Abdullah’s regime….The US spokesman’s remark came as thousands of Jordanians took to the streets to protest against their government’s tough economic measures, which include cancelling subsidies for fuel and gas prices….for the first time, protesters in the Jordanian capital have been calling for overthrowing King Abdullah.

In an unprecedented move, demonstrators last week tried to march on the monarch’s palace in Amman in scenes reminiscent of anti-regime protests in Tunisia, Libya, Yemen and Egypt.

The Jordanian authorities claim that non-Jordanian nationals who infiltrated the border have been involved in the violence, the worst to hit the kingdom in decades. The authorities say that Saudi and Syrian Muslim fundamentalists are responsible for attacks on government offices and other institutions, including banks.

Some Jordanian officials have pointed a blaming finger at Saudi Arabia and Qatar for encouraging the anti-regime protests and facilitating the infiltration of Muslim fundamentalists into the kingdom.

The officials believe that Jordan is paying the price of refusing to play a larger and stronger role in Saudi-Qatari efforts to topple Syrian dictator Bashar Assad.

The talk about the involvement of Saudi Arabia and Qatar in the recent unrest in Jordan prompted Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour to issue a warning to all the Gulf states that their security would be severely undermined if the Jordanian regime collapsed. Ensour was quoted as saying that the Gulf states would have to spend half their fortune in defending themselves against Muslim terrorists who would use Jordan as a launching pad to destabilize the entire Gulf.

Thus, according to  As-Safir Newspaper,

the “change in Jordan must be tied to an alternative US plan, which could be represented by “political Islam” and the Muslim Brotherhood, in particular. Indeed, this was what actually happened in Egypt and Tunisia. Jordan is next, unless Americans preempted the situation and reconciled the Jordanian regime with the Muslim Brotherhood, Jordan’s most powerful opposition group.”

According to the Israeli economic Site Calcalist

“The regime in Ramallah has no chance of survival”  

On January 1, Mossad-connected DEBKAfile (DF) headlined was:

“IDF and Syrian rebel officers meet clandestinely in Jordan,”


Why Israel wants Muslim Brotherhood to replace the king of Jordan?

The mediator between the Palestinians Brotherhood in Jordan and the Israeli government is Fatin Baddad designated the Elimination of King Abdullah physically and helping the Israeli forces to put an end the one-state solution by: unification of East Jordan and ten percent of the West Bank. 

The fall of the Hashemite regime, the client Britain historically and the U.S. pragmatically, is an Israeli goal sought by Israel with all its power!!


The question comes to the mind of any beginner reader of political newspapers; even students in secondary grades in the Arab world as a whole know that the best Arab-Israeli relations and the most intimate are those linking Al-Saud and the rulers of Tel Aviv followed by the ruler of Transjordan Abdullah bin Al-Hussein.

The historical relationship between the two parties based on complete trust and a legacy of political and security cooperation severe relevant Israeli interests first and American second and Jordan tenth.

So why Netanyahu government and its security forces want to get rid of Abdullah bin Hussein??
Documented information, says the Israelis are following closely the spring Brotherhood in Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Tunisia and Libya.

The Zionist studies confirm that Brotherhood’s Egypt guarantees for Israel and demonstration of cooperation have waived all the worries of the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood to neighboring countries behind the back of the Zionist rulers of Tel Aviv.

Mohammed Mursi is following Mubarak acts in the interest of Israel’s security and strategic matters so there is no fear of the rule of brotherhood to Syria and accordingly East Jordan.

Studies say that the fall of the monarchy in the east of Jordan would turn that country into a paradise for Palestinians and thus the Palestinians living with Jordanian nationality would use the Brotherhood control over the power to open the country for the to Palestinian refugees from Syria and possibly Lebanon. But more important is that Jordan will be the main destination for the Palestinians of the West Bank, after annexing ten percent of its territory, which is rejected by the Hashemites not out of concern for the rights of the Palestinians, but out of concern for the interests of the royal family East Jordanian tribes, because the Brotherhood supporters are fully Palestinians. 

Sources say that the Muslim Brotherhood linkman with the Israelis is Fateen Baddad, assigned to persuade Israelis and Americans agree to drop the Hashemites. He is a

businessman and an Israeli agent. According to the sources, he would be the head of the first Brotherhood Government after the fall of the king and killing him and his family (according to the Israeli- Brotherhood plan) will make the transition easy.  

Fateen Baddad is the guy who starved the refugeesSyrians scandal inZaatari camp after he stole the UAE and Omani aid sent to the Syrians in the camp by transport companies owned by Baddad. His scandal led to popular unrestamong the refugeesand Jordanian police.

Baddad obtained his wealth through and playing the role of mediator between the Israeli settlements in the West and customers in the Gulf States and Iraq who buy Settlement’s agricultural and industrial production the grounds that it of Jordanian products.

But the most dangerous thing in his relations with the Zionists is his serious and important security role which. It is said that he provides the Zionists everything they need including logistical, and cover for Israeli security and military cells is Amman especially and in Jordan General to stir unrest security and helps Brotherhood to topple the regime and control government institutions.
Jordan is a friendly country to Israel who has opened all security and military secrets to the Zionists the center Mossad and Shin Bet and Aman are more active in Aman than in Washington. 

The safe houses being are prepared to accommodate hundreds of Israeli Special Forces elements that will help the Muslim Brotherhood in the zero hour to end the rule of the Hashemite by hitting their security forces and divide their intelligence to create a state of confusion to end the strong security control in the country.

In this regard, an American black convert born to an Israeli mother and African father is leading the coordination process with Baddad to complete the process of renting safe houses, stores and garages for Israeli special force.

The name of the Israeli agent responsible for the elimination of King Abdullah and his family with the help of Baddad is Victoria Haddatha known as Vikky, 40-year-old her with black skin color, holding U.S. citizenship. She has a New York address and resides permanently in Jordan.
Her phone number 12675746500  

During the war in the July she participated in security operations behind Hezbollah’s lines and carried out special operations forces in the interest of the elite Israeli forces, she have a brother in the IOF. She also works in favor of the agency HABASH recruiting Americans and Westerners in favor of Israel in America and the world.


‏الثلاثاء‏، 01‏ كانون الثاني‏، 2013

أوقات الشام

الوسيط بين الاخوان الفلسطينيين في الاردن وحكومة اسرائيل فطين البداد المكلف بالقضاء على الملك عبد الله جسديا بمساعدة قوات اسرائيلية لانهاء القضية الفلسطينية بحل الدولة الواحدة : توحيد شرق الاردن وعشرة بالمئة من الضفة الغربية

سقوط النظام الهاشمي العميل لبريطانيا تاريخيا وللاميركيين مصلحيا هدف تسعى اليه اسرائيل بكل ما اوتيت من قوة !!

لماذا ؟

سؤال يتبادر الى ذهن اي قاريء مبتديء للصحف السياسية ، فحتى طلاب الصفوف الثانوية في العالم العربي قاطبة يعرفون بأن افضل العلاقات العربية الاسرائيلية واكثرها حميمية هي تلك التي تربط ال سعود وحكام تل ابيب يليهم في القرب من الاسرائيليين حاكم شرق الاردن عبد الله بن الحسين .

العلاقة التاريخية بين الطرفين تقوم على الثقة التامة وعلى ارث من التعاون الامني والسياسي الشديد الصلة بالمصالح الاسرائيلية اولا والاميركية ثانيا والاردنية عاشرا وخمسين مئة.

اذا لماذا تريد حكومة نتناهو واجهزتها الامنية التخلص من عبد الله بن الحسين؟؟

تقول المعلومات الموثقة ان لدى الاسرائيليين رؤية تواكب الربيع الاخواني في مصر وسورية واليمن وتونس وليبيا. لذا تعتبر الدراسات الصهيونية ان ما قدمته مصر الاخوانية من ضمانات لاسرائيل وما اثبتته من تعاون يرمي كل المخاوف من حكم الاخوان المسلمين لدول الجوار الصهيوني خلف ظهر حكام تل ابيب. فما قام به مبارك من اعمال تصب في مصلحة اسرائيل الامنية والاستراتيجية هي امور لم تشذ عنها ادارة محمد مرسي لذا فلا خوف من حكم اخواني لسورية وتبعا لشرق الاردن .

الدراسات تقول ان سقوط الحكم الملكي في شرقي الاردن سيحول ذاك البلد الى جنة الفلسطينيين وبالتالي سيستغل الفلسطينيون الحاملين للجنسية الاردنية سيطرة الاخوان على السلطة لفتح البلاد بأوسع ابوابها للاجئين الفلسطينيين من سورية وربما من لبنان. ولكن الاهم هو تحول الاردن المقصد الرئيسي لفلسطينيي الضفة الغربية التي سيجري الحاق عشرة بالمئة من اراضيها وهي تجمعات سكنية اساسية بحكم الاخوان في عمان. امر يرفضه الهاشميون لا من منطلق الحرص على حقوق الفلسطينيين بل من منطلق الحرص على مصالح الاسرة العاشمية وقبائل شرق اردنية تدعمهم. في حين ان العامود الفقري وسقف البيت الاخواني وجدرانه في الاردن هي فلسطينية بشكل كامل وقلة قليلة جدا من الشرق اردنيين الاصليين ينتنمون الى الاخوان.

وتقول المصادر ان لدى الاسرائيليين اتصالات مع الاخوان المسلمين يتولاها من يعتبره الاخوان المسلمون حصان طروادة الفلسطيني لاقناع الاسرائيليين والاميركيين بالموافقة على اسقاط الهاشميين. فالرجل المعني رجل اعمال عميل للاسرائيليين ويرتبط معهم بعلاقات مالية وتنصيبه في رئاسة حكومة اول سلطة للاخوان المسلمين بعد اسقاط الملك وقتله وعائلته (بحسب المخطط الاسرائيليالاخواني ) سيجعل من عملية انتقال السلطة امرا سهلا. والشخص المقصود هو فطين البداد الفلسطيني العميل للأجهزة الاسرائيلية الذي ارتكب فضيحة تجويع اللاجئين السوريين في مخيم الزعتري بعد ان سرق المساعدات الاماراتية والعمانية التي ارسلتها حكومات البلدين للسوريين في المخيم عن طريق شركات نقل يملكها البداد فباع الاخير المساعدات ولم يصل منها الا ” اشانتيون ” اي عينات ما ادى الى الاضطرابات الشهيرة بين اللاجئين والشرطة الاردنية .

البداد فلسطيني حصل على ثروة من خلال ولعبه دور الوسيط بين المستوطنات الاسرائيلية في الضفة وبين الزبائن الذي يشتروا المنتجات الزراعية والصناعية لتلك المغتصبات حيث يبدل البداد عبر عماله ومصانعه تغليف البضاعة الاسرائيلية باخرى اردنية ويبيعها الى دول الخليج والى العراق على اساس انها من المنتجات الاردنية .

لكن اخطر ما في علاقات الرجل بالصهاينة هو عمله الامني الذي يقال بأنه خطير وهام فهو من يؤمن للصهاينة كل ما يحتاجونه من امور لوجستية ، وهو يقدم الغطاء لخلايا اسرائيلية امنية وعسكرية تتحضر في عمان خاصة وفي الاردن عامة لاثارة اضطرابات امنية تساعد الاخوان على اسقاط النظام والسيطرة على مؤسسات الحكومة. رغم ان الاردن دولة صديقة لاسرائيل فتحت كل اسرارها الامنية والعسكرية للصهاينة لا بل ان مركز الموساد والشين بيت وامان في عمان اكثر نشاطا من مثيله في واشنطن.
لكن للمصلحة الصهيونية العليا اولوية ، وانهاء القضية الفلسطينية بتوحيد شرق الاردن مع عشرة بالمئة من غربه لها مفعول السحر على قادة اسرائيللذا يبدو انهم مستعدون للتضحية بصديقهم الملك عبد الله الاردني لتنصيب الاخوان وصلتهم المشتركة مع الاسرائيليين سيكون له دور في حكومة ما بعد اسقاط الملك.

 وتقول معلومات اسرائيلية ان عددا من البيوت الامنة يجري اعدادها الان لتتسع لمئات من عناصر القوات الخاصة الاسرائيلية التي ستساعد الاخوان في ساعة الصفر على انهاء حكم الهاشميين من خلال ضرب قواتهم الامنية وشق استخباراتهم وادخالها في حالة بلبلة تنهي امساكها القوي بالامن في البلاد . وفي هذا المجال تقول المعلومات ان من تقود عملية التنسيق مع فطين البداد لاتمام عملية استئجار البيوت الامنة والمخازن والكراجات اللازمة للقوة الاسرائيلية الخاصة هي اميركية الاصل سوداء اللون اعتنقت اليهودية لانها مولودة لام اسرائيلية واب افرو – اميركي

وهي تتابع لحظة بلحظة عملية الترتيبات التي تتشارك فيها مع فطين البداد

واسم العميلة الاسرائيلية المكلفة بالقضاء على الملك عبد الله وعائلته بمساعدة فطين البداد هي

فكتوريا حداثا Victoria haddatha معروفة ب Vikky

تحمل الجنسية الأمريكية .

عمرها 40 سنة بشرتها سوداء اللون

عنوان سكنها نيويورك وتتواجد في الأردن بشكل دائم

 رقم هاتفها 12675746500

 خلال حرب تموز شاركت في عمليات امنية خلف خطوط حزب الله ونفذت عمليات خاصة لمصلحة قوات النخبة في اسرائيل ، كما أن لها شقيق في جيش الدفاع .

 تعمل أيضاً لصالح وكالة HABASH للتجنيد الاميركيين والغربيين لصالح اسرائيل في أميركا والعالم .

فضلا راجع فضيحة فطين البداد الذي اشترى ورقا مطبوعا وزعم انه حصل على الدكتوراة بالمراسلة !!

والفضيحة هنا هي عن سرقته لمساعدات ارسلها الخليجيون للاجئين السوريين في الزعتري

 وكالة بلاد الشام الإخبارية

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 this Blog!


Is Alan Hart Running Cover For AIPAC?? By Brother Nathanael Kapner

“Is Alan Hart Running Cover For AIPAC? IS ALAN HART A JEW?… “asked Brother Nathanael Kapner, “I don’t know if he is or not but he sure sounds like one.” he answered.

Like Brother Nathanael Kapner, idon’t know if Alan Hart is a Jew, but taking into consideration Alan’s claim that he probably the “only person on Planet Earth who enjoyed intimate access to, and on the human level friendship” with, both Arafat, “Father Palestine”, and Golda Maer, “Mother Israel”, I would agree with brother Nathanael Kapner, Mr. hart sounds like a Jew.

Mr. Hart has devoted his time and energy to get “Father Palestine” and “Mother Israel together”. For many, many years, as typed under the above picture obtained from Alan’s site, he was Arafat’s LINKMAN with Peres, and I claim that Arafat is a Jew and his  mission was nothing but liquidation the Palestinian cause as the Arab’s central cause under the banner of “Palestinian Independent decision”, then,  under the bannar of “O’ we are alone (YA WAHDANA)” he, in OSLO, sold out 78% of Palestinian land and ended the first Intifada. Read my full comment here 

Moreover, as written under the second picture signed by Golda Meir. Mr. Hart is a good friend of Golda, “Mother Israel”. For thirty two years Mr. hart used the above signed picture as a protective shield against anti-Semitism accusation.

When I was accused of anti-Semitism, I would hold up the picture, read out Golda’s inscription, and say to my accuser – “Do you think that old lady was so stupid that she couldn’t have seen through me if I was anti-Jew!” That always won me the applause of the audience and its contempt for my accuser.”


Many Pro-Palestinians Activists consider Mr. Hart as a “great friend” of Palestine, yes a “great friend”, who don’t dare to say Israel or Zionism is a cancer, Instead he wrote The Israeli-Palestinian crisis is a cancer at the heart of international affairs that has the potential to consume us all unless it’s cured. Every man, woman and child has a stake in it.”

Thirty two years ago, at a point frightened, Alan interrupted Mother Israel to say:

“Prime Minister, I want to be sure I understand what you’re saying… You are saying that if ever Israel was in danger of being defeated on the battlefield, it would be prepared to take the region and even the whole world down with it?” “Without the shortest of pauses for reflection, and in the gravel voice that could charm or intimidate American Presidents according to need, Golda replied, “Yes, that’s exactly what I am saying.” “

Therefor, to save the world, actually to save the dommed Zionism Enterprise, Palestinians and Arabs should surrender.  Surrender or face the Samson option

Israeli nuclear plant at Dimona, left. Two Mordechai Vanunu photos at right.

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


Nothing short of FULL LIBERATION of Palestine is acceptable to us, Palestinians” cried Nahida, the exiled Palestinian.

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

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

By doing so, Mr. Hart reflects better his domain of interest and expertise; namely zionists and “israelis”, but not Palestine or Palestinians.
Had he any real knowledge of Palestinians, he would’ve known that Palestinians do NOT surrender. Nahida the exiled  Palestinian
I disagree with sister Nahida, Mr. Hart have real knowledge of Palestinians, moreover he is an expert in Zionism, the real enemy of the Jews.
In his “own” Gentile take”, or may be his own Jewish take, Mr. Hard quoted Vladimir Jabotinsky saying:  

“Zionism is a colonizing adventure and therefore it stands or it falls by the question of armed force. It is important to speak Hebrew but, unfortunately, it is even more important to be able to shoot – or else I am through with playing at colonization. 

“To the hackneyed reproach that this point of view is unethical, I answer – absolutely untrue. This is our ethic. There is no other ethic. As long as there is the faintest spark of hope for the Arabs to impede us, they will not sell these hopes – not for any sweet words nor for any tasty morsel, because this (the Palestinians) is not a rabble but a people, a living people. And no people makes such enormous concessions on such fateful questions, except when there is no hope left, until we have removed every opening visible in the Iron Wall.”

Having read almost all Articles written by Alan Hart, I would say he is doing his best “to kill the faintest hope for the” Palestinians, and “remove every opening in the Iron Wall”. He like, Jabotinsky, knows that the zionist project “stands or it falls by the question of armed force”, and that is exactly what Nasser said: What was taken by force can only be restored by force 

Therefore, for Mr. Hart, the armed resistance is not an option, and Alan hart will never stop bluffing Palestinians.

Alan, the fake friend of Palestine and the good friend of Israel as “Mother Israel” called him, has shown his true face, he was for two state solution and when the “UN General Assembly recognized of Palestine as a non-member state, he found it, it does’t fit. 

As  the Palestinians are never going to surrender to Zionism’s will by accepting crumbs from its table,” Alan made a U-turn, and to avoid “a final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine” Abbas should announce winding up the Palestine Authority and handing responsibility for the occupation back to Israel, “ he could say to the world something like this”:

 “We are truly grateful for this recognition of our rights and claim for justice, but we must also be realistic. Zionism has no interest in a two-state solution so we must move on. One state with equal rights for all is the only way of preventing a catastrophe for all.”

 Finally, it seemes that Brother Nathanael Kapner hit the nail and explained the nightmare of Mr. Hart, and why he is desperate to educate the “brain washed Jews”, why he issists to call anti-zionism, anti-Israelism, and explains his panic of “the rising global tide of anti-Israelism” will turn into “classical anti-Semitism, setting the stage for Holocaust II, shorthand for another great turning against Jews everywhere, and starting quite possibly in America.”


Is Alan Hart Running Cover For AIPAC?
December 21, 2012

IS ALAN HART A JEW?…I don’t know if he is or not but he sure sounds like one.
In his latest piece, “Obama’s Hegel Test,” Hart just can’t bring himself to identify AIPAC as a “Jewish Lobby” but rather a group of individuals “made up of all faiths.”
I never knew that AIPAC was an ‘Inter-Faith Movement.’ Not once did I ever see an Episcopal priest or a Presbyterian minister pandering to the Jews on an AIPAC podium.
Hart would also have us believe that AIPAC enjoys the membership of Baptist Zionists, for these are the REAL so-called “Christian Zionists.”

What a joke! The Jews who fund, lead, and make up the operating body of AIPAC actually DESPISE Baptists dear Alan. I never saw Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson headlining a single AIPAC Conference.

And any ‘GOYS’ associated with AIPAC (believe me, they’re NOT part of the funding or operating body) are either useful idiots, Gentile window dressing, or CRASS opportunists.

ALAN HART is an inconsequential author who penned the book, “Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews.”

My immediate response to the title was, “Is Alan Hart running cover for the Jews?” For MOST would agree that Zionism is the enemy of the Palestinians, NOT Jews.

This is why I suspect that Alan Hart is a Jew himself.

For those few Jews who oppose Zionism, (Gilad Atzmon is an exception who has the guts to NAME the “Jewish Lobby” as a pernicious force), seem to care more about what’s good or bad for the Jews and NOT what’s good or bad for the Gentiles. (Gilad Atzmon recently did an article on this very theme.)

Hart’s central argument is that ‘Zionism is not Judaism.’ Again, is Hart running cover for the Jews?

Believe me, for I grew up as a Jew, Zionism IS Judaism and Judaism IS Zionism. If not, then why did we declare at every Passover meal, “Next Year in Jerusalem!”

And why did we sing, “Hatikvah,” Israel’s national anthem, at EVERY Sabbath service?

Was it because Judaism is NOT Zionism? No way! Mr Hart is fooling us all.

Alan Hart’s piece revolves around Obama’s pending nomination of Chuck Hegel as Secretary of Defense who once said, “the Jewish Lobby intimidates a lot of people in Congress.”

Hart quotes Jewish shill, Senator McCain, who in response to Hagel replied, “I know of no Jewish Lobby.” And neither does Hart. For Hart argues that AIPAC does not represent all Jews.

FACT IS, (for I grew up as a Jew), MOST Jews DO INDEED support AIPAC, if not overtly, then tacitly.

Your run of the mill Jew (if there is such a thing) is very careful not to let the Goyim know that his allegiance is FIRST to Israel and NOT to America.

And those few Jews who don’t agree with AIPAC’s agenda would rather keep their views to themselves.
Why offend their fellow tribe members? Why get kicked out of the synagogue? You can count on one hand courageous Jews like Gilad Atzmon who vociferously oppose the power of AIPAC, that is, the JEWISH Lobby.

BOTTOM LINE: The intimidating power of BILLIONS of dollars, media influence, and the organizational track, finds JEWS at the very center.

To advance the lie that AIPAC is only marginally connected to the Jewish community is a deceptive ploy to let American Jewry, whose loyalty is to a foreign nation, off the hook.

Corbett Report Radio – How to outgrow the government with Andrew Gavin Marshall

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 this Blog!

Alan hart bluffing Palestinians Again: "The Palestinians’ only option"

On July 27, 2010, Alan Hart, “a friend and supporter of Palestine”, invited ALL Palestinians, at home and in Diaspora with all their political shades, factions and affiliations to unite and “call israel’s bluff”. In his analysis the Palestinians now have only one option. Alan writes:

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

A week later, sister Nahida,ed Palestinian asked  Who is trying to bluff the Palestinians?
REAL friends of Palestine should NEVER insist or even ask that Palestinians recognize “israel”?
Read Nahida exposing Alan’s bluff here
Now, two years later, when Hamas leadership (Mishaal) backed by the international Brotherhood gave the (PA), the green light to go for vote on recognition of Palestine as a non-member state, the “brilliant magician, bases of his well known “good” name, drawn out of his sleeve, the one state solution card to obtain recognition by temptation and persuasion and close the so-called Palestinian file. 
The “UN General Assembly recognition of Palestine as a non-member state” does’t  fit, ansewred Alan arafat’s linkmam with Peres.


“As things are and look like going, and given that the Palestinians are never going to surrender to Zionism’s will by accepting crumbs from its table, the only alternative to one state for all is a final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine. That might buy Zionism some more time for the short term, but in the longer term it would most likely guarantee that the rising global tide of anti-Israelism was transformed into classical anti-Semitism, setting the stage for Holocaust II, shorthand for another great turning against Jews everywhere, and starting quite possibly in America.” 

Again, Alan, the fake friend of Palestine and the real friend of Israel as “Mother Israel” called him,  show his true face, “the rising global tide of anti-Israelism” will turn into “classical anti-Semitism, setting the stage for Holocaust II, shorthand for another great turning against Jews everywhere, and starting quite possibly in America.”
In other words, Alan’s concern is preventing Holocaust II, not the final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine. Again, as Nahida said two years ago, Mr. Hart uses the carrot and the stick to bring Palestinians to line and trap them to surrender their rights and land, once and for all.” AS if zionist would accept the one state solution proposed by PLO faction since 1967.
Alan said :

“When announcing that he was winding up the Palestine Authority and handing responsibility for the occupation back to Israel, he could say to the world something like this: “We are truly grateful for this recognition of our rights and claim for justice, but we must also be realistic. Zionism has no interest in a two-state solution so we must move on. One state with equal rights for all is the only way of preventing a catastrophe for all.”

In Alan’s proposal, like in his previous proposal there is place for diaspora Palestinians.
In his  anal-ysis the Palestinians now have only one option.

For starters it requires the PLO to recognize and declare that the two-state solution is dead (not least because no Israeli prime minister is going to trigger a Jewish civil war in order to end the occupation of the West Bank including East Jerusalem).

The next step should be winding up the Palestine Authority and handing total responsibility for the occupation back to Israel.
That would open the door to what I believe to be the only viable strategy for the Palestinians if they are ever to obtain justice.
With the two-state solution not only dead but formally buried, they could then campaign, with growing global support, for equal rights and security for all in one state (all of pre-1967 Israel plus all of the West Bank plus the Gaza Strip).

In one or two decades at the most, because the Palestinians would outnumber the Jews, one state would mean the end of Zionism, but it would also open the door to real security for the one state’s Jews.

 I shall not spoil more time on Alan’s brand new bluff, serving “nothing but to finalize the zionist project by achieving the permanent Jewish conquest of Palestine.”
Now read Francis Boyle a leading expert in International Law and a true friend of Palestine:

“After twenty-two years of getting nowhere but further screwed to Israel’s apartheid wall on the West Bank and strangulated in Gaza, it is now time for the Palestinians to adopt a new strategy, which I most respectfully recommend here for them to consider:

Sign nothing and let Israel collapse! Recently it was reported that the United States’ own Central Intelligence Agency predicted the collapse of Israel within twenty years. My most respectful advice to the Palestinians is to let Israel so collapse!

For the Palestinians to sign any type of comprehensive peace treaty with Israel would only shore up, consolidate, and guarantee the existence of Zionism and Zionists in Palestine forever.”

Why would the Palestinians want to do that?

“Without approval by the Palestinians in writing, Zionism and Israel in Palestine will collapse. So the Palestinians must not sign any Middle East Peace Treaty with Israel, but rather must keep the pressure on Israel for the collapse of Zionism over the next two decades as predicted by the Central Intelligence Agency.” 

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 this Blog!

"Do we quietly encourage ethnic cleansing?"

 Via FLC

(Walt in FP) “… The next president may also have to face up to the fact that there isn’t going to be a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians, and begin to think seriously about what an alternative U.S. policy should be. Obama has already learned that trying to pursue the 2SS is “just really hard,” and Romney famously told a group of fat cat GOP donors that he didn’t think that goal was achievable. I’ve always seen the 2SS as the best outcome given where we were, but it is no longer realistic to expect it to happen. The Israeli right has no interest in it, the Palestinians are too weak and divided to put meaningful pressure on them, and the United States is too compromised by the Israel lobby to be an effective mediator. The “two-state solution” has become a fig leaf for politicians to hide behind, while realities on the ground make it less and less likely by the day.

But sooner or later, it will be obvious to everyone that it simply isn’t going to happen. As I’ve argued before, that epiphany raises all sorts of awkward questions: In particular, what outcome should a liberal democracy like the United States favor if “two states for two peoples” is impossible? Do we abandon our commitment to “one person, one vote” and endorse permanent apartheid? Do we abandon our deep commitment to a Jewish state and support a one-state democracy for all the inhabitants of Israel/Palestine? Or do we quietly encourage ethnic cleansing?
No matter who the next president is, I’m sure they will try to avoid those awkward questions for as long as they can. But they may not be able to do so forever without looking like they are living in fantasyland.…”

Lala-Land: Minimizing Genocidal "Israel" as mere Apartheid and the Myth of "One State"

By Nahida Exiled Palestinian

This poll which clearly concludes that “Most of the Jewish public in Israel supports the establishment of an apartheid regime in Israel if it formally annexes the West Bank comes as a slap in the face of those so called “supporters” who want to trick Palestinians into accepting the so called “One State” solution as an alternative to liberating Palestine, thus inviting “Israeli” Jews to EXPAND and ANNEX the entire land of Palestine, while knowing that such fabricated “society” is rampant with supremacy and racism. Those who tirelessly advocate for “equal rights” for thieves and mass murderers conveniently “forget” that such “solution” would only help finalize the zionist project.

How can “equal rights” ever be achieved when 70% of “Israeli-Jews” believe they are the “chosen”.

It’s about time that our “supporters” took into consideration that ideological component which create such racist supremacist “society” and foment hatred and contempt of the “other”. It is crucial to understand such glaring factor -which they adamantly refuse to integrate into the equation, before suggesting “solutions” to Palestinians.

Promoting the one state solution – i.e the state of Israel – that will annex all the Palestinian land including those of 1967 and will grant equal rights to all, including supremacists and invaders who are still flooding to Palestine as we speak. Such solution would means that we give the occupier our blessing to finally their Zionist project and “peacefully” take full control over us.

They are and they still would be running full momentum the apparatus of power; military, social, financial, economic, logistic, legal, educational, basically FACTS ON THE GROUNDS as usual would remain in the hands of SUPREMACISTS.

“One State with equal rights for all” is allegedly the “great solution”, the carrot, the bait which has been swallowed by some SOROS Fellows Palestinian “intellectuals” to the delight of Zionists. One Land, Two people UNDER THE BANNER OF ISRAEL !

This is NO SOLUTION. The only acceptable solution is the FULL LIBERATION of PALESTINE. and PERPETRATORS MUST BE BROUGHT TO JUSTICE. Otherwise we will end up being slaves in our own land, because we are aware now of the supremacist ideology of our occupiers who -because of centuries of ideological indoctrination, lack the ability to view other non-Jews as equals.

Post-Zionist “Israeli” intellectuals and their supporters realize that time is running out for their entity, it is simply not possible for them to save and preserve their “Jewish state” without making a “deal” with Palestinians which would grant them legitimacy and absolve them from future prosecution for their crimes against humanity.
They understand that they need to reach a final settlement with Palestinians which would allow them to secure their permanent presence and control in Palestine, a land they illegally conquered and to polish their severely damaged reputation with the least possible “cost” and maximum gain.

Their “perception-management” experts approach fame-craved Palestinians, offer them platforms, open career-doors for them in return of promoting the sell-off  of the concept of liberation, and of preparing the ground so that Palestinians would give up on their rights and aspiration and voluntarily accept the final take over of their Homeland. They do so by presenting the illegitimate creation of the Jewish state i.e the theft of Palestine, the dispossession of Palestinians, ethnic cleansing and slow continuous genocide as mere “apartheid” comparable with South Africa, forgetting that the European occupation of South Africa occurred centuries before the establishing of International Law, Geneva Convention and Nuremberg Principles which declared genocide, wars of conquest and wars of aggression as illegal, all of which “Israel” is guilty of.

 For this reason, and to achieve their aim of minimizing the crimes of  the Zionist entity, by promoting South African Anti Apartheid model instead of say Algeria Liberation model, they have engaged in what they call “anti racist” campaign that has targeted Palestinians and pro Palestinian activists who dared to expose the deadly supremacist ideology of the majority of the occupiers of Palestine, and who exposed the global Jewish-Zionist role and influence. This vicious campaign attempts to marginalize any voice, -Palestinian or otherwise, who instead of succumbing to enslavement in their own Homeland, make the perfectly legitimate call for a perfectly lawful LIBERATION OF ALL PALESTINE.

Supporting the illegal state of Israel by presenting it as a normal state with some apartheid policies that can be changed, and by calling for the EXPANDING of the state to include what is left of Palestine. we simply sell our souls. 

Still live in La-La-land about “Israel”?

Time to wake up: The Map of the “Greater Israel” even is hammered on their currency

Palestine: One, Two or Three State Solution

The Three States 
“Israel”, Abbastan, and Hamastan

Palestine: One or Two State Solution

by Stephen Lendman

My PhotoOpinions vary. Why isn’t clear. Years ago, two states were possible. No longer. Israel controls over half the West Bank and much of East Jerusalem. More is added daily.

When completed, the apartheid wall will control over 10% of Palestine. Isolated ghettoized bantustans on worthless scrubland won’t work. Under those conditions, sovereign viability is impossible.

The Palestinian Authority (PA) claims otherwise. Its report titled “Moving Beyond the Status Quo: Safeguarding the Two-State Solution” endorses it.

Its action plan hopes to save it. It says the political and economic status quo isn’t sustainable. At the same time, a “new reality is being created on the ground by Israel, which is destroying” the possibility.

The PA is institutionally ready for statehood, it stresses. In fact, it was ready over a generation ago.

In 1987, in his capacity as PLO legal advisor, Law Professor Francis Boyle drafted its 1988 Declaration of Independence. He predicted it would be an “instantaneous success.” De jure UN membership would be achieved.

Palestine then met basic requirements needed for statehood. They include:
A determinable (not necessarily fixed) territory. Its borders are negotiable. The new state is comprised of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Palestinians have lived there for millennia. They rightfully deserve universally recognized sovereignty.

They have a fixed population. They’re a legitimate state with a functioning government. It’s peace loving. It accepts UN Charter provisions and can administer them. It’s willing to do so. In 1988, Arafat declared the PLO as Palestine’s Provisional Government.
It has the capacity to enter into relations with other states. On December 15, 1988, The General Assembly recognized Palestine’s legitimacy. It gave it observer status.

Then and now, Palestine satisfies essential criteria. All UN Charter states (including America and Israel) provisionally recognized Palestinians as independent in accordance with UN Charter article 80(1) and League Covenant article 22(4).
As the League of Nations’ successor, the General Assembly has exclusive legal authority to designate the PLO as the Palestinian peoples’ legitimate representative.
The Palestine National Council (PNC) is the PLO’s legislative body. It’s empowered to proclaim the existence of Palestine.
According to the binding 1925 Palestine Citizenship Order in Council, Palestinians, their children and grandchildren automatically become citizens. So do diaspora Palestinians.
Those living in Israel and Jordan have dual nationalities. Occupied Territory residents remain protected persons until a final peace agreement is reached.
If a new Palestinian state consisted of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza in their entirety (22% of original Palestine), a two-state solution would work.
Over half a million Israelis live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. They’re not leaving. Israel controls most of the land. It won’t relinquish it.
The only solution is one state comprised of Israel and the Territories. At this time, nothing else will work.
PA leaders call current conditions unsustainable. They right. They identified the problem, not the solution. “The international community and Palestinians together need to exercise all possible efforts to preserve the viability of the two-state solution – or consider the alternatives,” they say.
How? They’re right saying “the only viable solution….is bringing an end to Israel’s (45 year) occupation.” They stop short of a viable way to do it.
Abbas won’t seek full UN membership. He talks the talk but doesn’t walk it. He’s a traitor and a fraud. He’s more for Israel than Palestine. He’ll accept less than what Palestinians have deserved for decades.
He’s comfortable with defeat, not victory. Full UN membership is dependent solely on the General Assembly, not the Security Council. It’s irrelevant. It can’t prevent membership if Abbas seeks it.
Palestine already is a state. What’s left is getting official recognition and full de jure UN membership. Nothing prevents it. It hasn’t so far happened because Abbas won’t go for the gold. He’s more beholden to Israel and Washington than his own people.
That aside, reality on the ground dictates a one-state solution. Ali Abunimah endorsed it in his book titled “One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse.”
He explained the impracticality of partition. It doesn’t work. He presented another way that will – one nation for all its people at peace with equal rights. At this stage, it’s the only viable alternative if pursued and given a chance.
At the same time, no Israeli leader ever proposed it. Decades of peace negotiations have been entirely one-sided. Israel’s solution is take what we give you or no deal. Its most generous offer stopped short of sovereign viability.
Israel won’t relinquish Palestinian territory it controls. “It is not credible that a society would invest billions of dollars in road and housing that it truly intended to give up,” said Abunimah.
He’s right. He also said even the most liberal Israeli leaders “came to embrace Palestinian statehood in theory while undermining it in practice.” For decades, expropriation of Palestinian land and dispossessing its residents have been official policy. It still is.
Doves and hardliners concur. Only their rhetoric differs. “Creating a single state for Israeli Jews and Palestinians could in theory resolve the most intractable issues – the fare of Israeli settlements….the rights of Palestinian refugees, and the status of Jerusalem.”
The alternative assures occupation, continued conflict, land theft, dispossessions, inequality, a permanent non-Jewish underclass, instability, and avoidance of within reach justice. Abunimah is right saying:

“The main attraction of a single-state democracy is that it allows all the people to live in and enjoy the entire country while preserving their distinctive communities and addressing their particular needs.”

“It offers the potential to de-territorialize the conflict and neutralize demography and ethnicity as a source of political power and legitimacy.”

“The moment Israelis and Palestinians commit themselves to full equality, there is no rationale for separate states.”

Most Palestinians want it. Israel remains the stumbling block. Changing its decades-long mindset won’t be easy. It’s up to resolved internal and external resistance to nudge it.
Jeff Halper and Itay Epshtain co-direct the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD). Together they addressed the same issue. They co-wrote “In the Name of Justice: ICAHD Raises Key Issues Around a Single State as a Step Towards Resolving the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.”
Although not fair and just, they don’t reject a two-state solution in principle, especially if Palestinians prefer it. At the same time, conflict resolution must involve the entire region. One state “may represent only a stage, albeit an unavoidable stage, towards a more comprehensive solution.”
“If the state is to be inclusive, should it be a unitary democratic state, a bi-national one or a combination? Will the solution be one defined purely by politics, or will the rights and obligations of all parties be guided indeed by international law and human rights treaties?”

Israel wants occupation legalized and permanent. Palestinians want and deserve sovereign freedom. Democratic legitimacy requires one nation for all its people, irrespective of race, religion, ethnicity, or other differentiating characteristics.

It requires institutionalized equal rights, observance of international law principles, and ending decades of occupation, colonization and apartheid.

It requires ending what’s no longer tolerable and never was. It requires treating Arabs and Jews equally. It requires establishing binding statutes mandating it. It requires enforcing them. It requires commitment to do the right thing.

According to Halper and Epshtain:

“With the end of the two-state solution, only three options remain: apartheid, warehousing or a one-state solution.”

Israel is comfortable with the first. Under international law, it’s illegal. The second normalizes the status quo. It helps make the Palestinian issue disappear. So does focusing on Iran, other manufactured threats, and/or bread and circus distractions.

Resistance alone isn’t enough, say both writers.

“We must see ourselves as political actors, and following the lead of our Palestinian partners we must formulate and pursue solutions that will provide justice, peace and the full range of human rights – civil, political, social, economic and cultural – guaranteed by international law.”

ICAHD promotes a “rights-based approach.” It’s based on five fundamental principles, including:

(1) “A just peace and process leading up to it,” according to international law principles.
(2) It must be inclusive for Arabs and Jews alike – one nation with equal rights for all its people.
(3) It must equitably resolve the refugee issue. Under international law, the right of return is inviolable.
(4) “A just peace must address the security concerns of all in the region.”
(5) “A just peace must be regional in scope.” Otherwise it won’t work.

ICAHD endorses a one-state solution, “while still promoting the eventual emergence of a regional economic confederation.” Begin “with the idea that two peoples share the country.” A common political space must be created. Doing it won’t be easy.

For sure it won’t happen unless both sides try. At issue is turning around past failures. Palestinian, Israeli, and international civil societies “will play a decisive role in achieving justice, equality, peace, and reconciliation….” There’s no other way.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at

His new book is titled “How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War”
Visit his blog site at and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
posted by Steve Lendman @ 11:52 PM

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 this Blog!

WARNING . . . Palestinians, My Beloved, DO NOT Take the Bait

This is by far is the stickiest, most vile glue trap in the history of the Palestinian struggle for Liberation

 The campaigners of Post-Zionism  and cultural Zionism are the heirs of the Zionists serial killers. They are the godfathers of Morphing Zionism which I have already warned about.

This is the final push for cultural Zionists, to polish their product and repackage it in glitter, and to pretend that they are shedding off their “Zionism” which has already been defunct and obsolete anyway, after the achievement and fulfillment of all its aims (establishing a home land for the Jews in Palestine)

After the creation of the Zionist entity, the aims of the Zionist movement were fulfilled, but in order to finalize the dream and secure it forever, they divide themselves into two camps, who appear conflicting and at odds with each other, yet at heart they actually are two sides of the same coin, they are the two “heroes” in the same horror movie, dancing to the same Zionist tune;

The first players are the Zionist hawks who use their iron fist to crush Palestinians on the ground, assassinate their leadership, kill their potential think tanks, steal more land, imprison more people, neutralize their spirit of resistance, by doing so they aim to erase hope and aspiration of the entire nation.

The second players are the doves, who stealthily and sneakingly prepare the grounds for the last stage of conquest and take over of historic Palestine, wearing a “humanistic” mask, they provide the cover up needed for their brethren to complete their mission on the ground.

Now, after establishing their ugly reality on the ground, and feeling the wind f change, which most certainly not in their favour, the doves hasten and dress up in sheep clothing and “offer” us as a “solution” to “transform” the “Zionist Israel” into a “democratic Israel” (knowing all too well that democracy as a system is by now completely vacuous -a system where the rich and powerful elite rule the brainwashed malleable masses).

Let us watch one of their “doves” who undoubtedly has been groomed to play a significant role in the future “state” they are preparing their troops for:

Miko Peled on the trap of “One State”

ISRAEL” is already one state, there is no question about the fact that it is a bi-national state, because when everybody is governed by the same government, that is one state.”

“If the walls came down tomorrow, and people in Gaza were free, all the teachers, the lawyers, the educators, the social workers, the counselors, the doctors, the engineers, they all get a work. There is plenty of work for them. “ISRAEL” has a shortage of doctors, there is lots of doctors in Gaza”

Peled does not even mention the word PALESTINE, the “future democratic state” he talks about is “ISRAEL” greater, more expanded, more sinister, more hideous and ever more powerful with a shroud of impotent democracy..Those wolves in sheep clothing seek to legitimize and legalize their fake entity by luring Palestinians, wishing to obtain this legitimization through Palestinian “naivety”.

Not a word about restitution, compensation, right of return, giving back the 94% of the land of Palestine stolen by Zionist terror, and more importantly: no mention of the enforcement of JUSTICE by the indictment of ALL who verifiably have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity i.e. every single person who took part in perpetrating such crimes.

Is this what Palestinians have been “yearning” for, for decades?

Is this what they have been striving for and have sacrificed their lives to achieve This is what will fulfill their aspiration which they had for generations to achieve?

  • Voluntarily legalizing the theft of their own Homeland !
  • Willingly aiding to finalize the Zionist project !
  • Submissively allowing the criminal Jewish-Zionist state to get closer to becoming “greater israel” !
  • Gracefully helping the genocidal entity to expand even more, annexing what is left of Palestine!
  • Obediently live as “equals”, next to a cluster of some “chosen” supremacist, who are just a teeny weeny bit more equal than others !
  • Slavishly, bow down and submit in servitude to the “godly beings” who tortured, robbed and raped them!
  • Gratefully, live “side by side” next to the “humble” “nation of priests” for whom and for their sake alone, the entire universe was created !
  • Gleefully, share their homes with the “sons of kings” who stole their homes, orchards and entire Homeland in the first place!

Can this “light unto the nations” invented “nation” produce better ploy than this monstrous deal?

Can their “genius” minds come up with a more gluey trap than that?

Does this Miko Peled “chosen” settler, his ilk and his supremacists tribe really think that they can take us for a ride?

Do they take us for idiots?

Are these people really insane, simply criminals, atrociously evil, or utterly satanic with not one atom of humanity left in them??

  Let Miko Peled know that such “sweet” glue trap is not for us. NOT FOR PALESTINIANS.

%d bloggers like this: