The World We Swim In

The Drone War is Obama’s War

2012-06-01T20:46:00.011-07:00

♫ …America is a tune…
it must be sung together... ♫

The drone war is a predatory war on the Muslim world.

gulfnews.com
More than a decade after George W. Bush launched it, the “war on terror” was supposed to be winding down. US military occupation of Iraq has ended and Nato is looking for a way out of Afghanistan, even as the carnage continues.

But another war — the undeclared drone war that has already killed thousands — is now being relentlessly escalated.

From Pakistan to Somalia, CIA-controlled pilotless aircraft rain down Hellfire missiles on an ever-expanding hit list of terrorist suspects. They have already killed hundreds, perhaps thousands, of civilians in the process.

At least 15 drone strikes have been launched in Yemen this month, as many as in the whole of the past decade, killing dozens. In Pakistan, a string of US attacks has been launched against supposed “militant” targets in the past week, incinerating up to 35 people and hitting a mosque and a bakery.

The US’s decision to step up the drone war again in Pakistan, opposed by both government and parliament in Islamabad as illegal and a violation of sovereignty, reflects its fury at the jailing of a CIA agent involved in the Osama Bin Laden hunt and Pakistan’s refusal to reopen supply routes for Nato forces in Afghanistan. Those routes were closed in protest at the US killing 24 Pakistani soldiers last November, for which Washington still refuses to apologize.

Wajid Shamsul Hassan, Pakistan’s High Commissioner in London, described the latest US escalation as “punitive”. But then Predators and Reapers are Barack Obama’s weapons of choice and coercion, deployed only on the territory of US allies like Pakistan and Yemen — and the drone war is Obama’s war.

In his first two years in office, the US president more than tripled the number of attacks in Pakistan alone. For their US champions, drones have the advantage of involving no American casualties, while targeting the “bad guys” that Bush lost sight of in his enthusiasm to subjugate Iraq. Enthusiasts boast of their surgical accuracy and exhaustive surveillance, operated by all-seeing technicians from thousands of miles away in Nevada.

But that’s a computer-game fantasy of clinical war. Since 2004, between 2,464 and 3,145 people are reported to have been killed by US drone attacks in Pakistan, of whom up to 828 were civilians (535 under Obama) and 175 children. Some Pakistani estimates put the civilian death toll much higher — plausibly, given the tendency to claim as “militants” victims later demonstrated to be nothing of the sort.

The US president insisted recently that the civilian death toll was not a “huge number”. Not on the scale of Iraq, perhaps, where hundreds of thousands were killed; or Afghanistan, where tens of thousands have died. But they gruesomely include dozens killed in follow-up attacks after they had gone to help victims of earlier strikes — as well as teenagers like Tariq Khan, a 16-year-old Pakistani boy decapitated in a strike last October after he had travelled to Islamabad to protest drone attacks.

These killings are, in reality, summary executions and widely regarded as potential war crimes by international lawyers — including the UN’s special rapporteur on extra-judicial killings, Philip Alston. The CIA’s now-retired counsel, John Rizzo, who authorised drone attacks, himself talked about having been involved in “murder”.

A decade ago, the US criticised Israel for such “extra-judicial killings”, but now cites self-defence as the logic to justify the war against Al Qaida. However, these are attacks, routinely carried out on the basis of false intelligence in countries such as Pakistan where no war has been declared and without the consent of the elected government.

Lawyers representing victims’ families are now preparing legal action against the British government — which carries out its own drone attacks in Afghanistan. Parallel cases are also being brought against the Pakistani government and the drone manufacturer General Electric — whose slogan is “we bring good things to life”.

Of course, drone attacks are only one method by which the US and its allies deliver death and destruction in Afghanistan and the wider Middle East, from night raids and air attacks to killing-sprees on the ground. The day after the Al Houla massacre in Syria, eight members of one family were killed at home by a Nato air attack in eastern Afghanistan — one of many such atrocities barely registered in the western media.

While support for the war in Afghanistan has fallen to an all-time low in all Nato states, the drone war is popular in the US. That’s hardly surprising as it offers no danger to American forces — the ultimate asymmetric warfare — while supposedly “taking out” terrorists. But these hi-tech death squads are creating a dangerous global precedent which will do nothing for US security.

A decade ago, critics warned that the “war on terror” would spread terrorism rather than stamp it out. That is exactly what happened. Obama has now renamed the campaign “overseas contingency operations” and is switching the emphasis from boots on the ground to robots.

The drone war is a predatory war on the Muslim world, which is feeding hatred of the US — and fueling terror, not fighting it.

Confessions of an Economic Hit Man

2012-06-01T12:55:00.007-07:00

Perkins convinced a key player within the House of Saud, a man he calls Prince W., that these projects would benefit his country as well as him personally. Perkins was able to eventually persuade Prince W. by arranging for a beautiful prostitute to live with him. By arranging for the prostitute to live with Prince W., Perkins was able to gain his trust and eventually convinced him of the value of the deal. "The deal between the United States and Saudi Arabia transformed the kingdom practically overnight." It also marked the beginning of an ongoing relationship between the House of Saud, the bin Laden family and the Bush family, which benefited greatly from a financial standpoint thanks to the deal.

General Overview:

[The Rothschild Chain]:

Confessions of an Economic Hit Man is John Perkins' fast-paced autobiography, which reveals his career as an economist for an international consulting firm. Perkins says he was actually an "Economic Hit Man." His job was to convince countries that are strategically important to the United States to accept enormous loans for infrastructure development and to make sure that the lucrative projects were contracted to U.S. corporations.

Perkins takes the reader through his career and explains how he created economic projections for countries to accept billions of dollars in loans they surely couldn't afford. He shares his battle with his conscience over these actions and offers advice for how Americans can work to end these practices which have directly resulted in terrorist attacks and animosity towards the United States.

What Is An Economic Hit Man?

Perkins defines economic hit men as "highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars. They funnel money from the World Bank, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other foreign ‘aid' organizations into the coffers of huge corporations and the pockets of a few wealthy families who control the planet's natural resources. Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization."

In Perkins' case, he was hired as an economist for the international consulting firm of Chas. T. Main, Inc. (MAIN). He was told in confidential meetings with "special consultant" to the company Claudine Martin that he had two primary objectives:

1. He was supposed to justify huge loans for countries. These loans would be for major engineering and construction projects, which were to be carried out by MAIN and other U.S. companies such as Bechtel, Halliburton, Stone & Webster and Brown & Root.

2. He was supposed to help bankrupt the countries that received these loans after the U.S. companies involved had been paid. This would make sure that these countries would remain in debt to their creditors and would then be easy targets when the U.S. needed favors such as military bases, UN votes and access to natural resources like oil.

Perkins' job was to produce economic growth projections that would make the case for a variety of major projects. If the U.S. decided to lend a country money, Perkins would compare the economic benefits of different projects such as power plants or telecommunications systems. He would then produce reports that showed the economic growth the country would experience due to these projects. These economic growth projections needed to be high enough to justify the loans. Otherwise, the loans would be denied.

The gross national product (GNP) was always the most important factor in these economic projections. The project expected to increase the GNP the most would be chosen. In the cases where there was only one project under consideration, it needed to be shown that the project would greatly benefit the GNP. Luckily for the economic hit man, GNP figures can be quite deceptive. "For instance, the growth of GNP may result even when it profits only one person, such as an individual who owns a utility company, while the majority of the population is burdened with debt."

All of these projects were meant to make huge profits for the contractors. The U.S. engineering and construction companies involved would be assured of great wealth. At the same time, a few wealthy families and influential leaders in the receiving countries would become very happy and very rich thanks to these loans. The leaders of these countries would also have bolstered political power because they were credited with bringing industrial parks, power plants and airports to their people.

The problem is that these countries simply cannot handle the debt of these loans and their poorest citizens are deprived of health, education and other social services for several decades as these countries struggle economically to overcome their huge debts. Meanwhile, the huge American media conglomerates portray these projects as favors being provided by the United States. American citizens in general have no trouble believing these messages, and in fact are led to perceive that these actions are unselfish acts of international goodwill.

Ultimately, due to the large debts, the U.S. is able to draw on these countries for political, economic and military favors whenever desired. And of course, the U.S. corporations involved with the expensive projects become extremely wealthy.

The U.S. Government's Role

Economic hit men [EHM] don't actually work for a United States government organization such as the Central Intelligence Agency. The risk with such a direct association is obvious. For example, if an EHM was working to put a country in debt to the U.S. with the main reason being for favorable military and political positions against the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union would be quite likely to take military action against the U.S. if that EHM were found to be working for the U.S. government. In the 1960s, America found a way to use economic hitmen without directly implicating Washington.

It was during the 1960s that we saw the empowerment of international corporations and multinational organizations such as the World Bank. This allowed for governments, corporations and multinational organizations to form mutually beneficial relationships. United States intelligence agencies were able to use these relationships to their advantage.

Government organizations such as the National Security Agency (NSA) were now able to screen for potential economic hitmen (as they did with Perkins) and then have them hired by international corporations such as MAIN.

"These economic hitmen would never be paid by the government; instead, they would draw their salaries from the private sector. As a result, their dirty work, if exposed, would be chalked up to corporate greed rather than to government policy. In addition, the corporations that hired them, although paid by government agencies and their multinational banking counterparts (with taxpayer money), would be insulated from congressional oversight and public scrutiny, shielded by a growing body of legal initiatives, including trademark, international trade, and Freedom of Information laws."

Perkins' Story of Being Recruited as an Economic Hit Man

Perkins married a former college classmate in 1967. A good friend of her father's, referred to as "Uncle Frank", was a top-echelon executive at the NSA. Uncle Frank immediately took a liking to Perkins and informed him that a job with the NSA would make him eligible for draft deferment, meaning he could avoid fighting in the Vietnam War.

After extensive interviews with the NSA, Perkins was offered a job, but declined it to instead join the Peace Corps. Surprisingly, Uncle Frank supported this decision, largely because it meant that Perkins would have the opportunity to go to Ecuador and live with the indigenous people of the Amazon region.

It was with the Peace Corps in Ecuador when a vice president of Chas. T. Main, Inc. approached Perkins about working for MAIN. The man explained that he sometimes acted as an NSA liaison, which made this job opportunity a perfect fit for Perkins, who had intended on accepting the NSA job when his Peace Corps tour was over.

Upon returning to the U.S., Perkins was hired as an economist for MAIN. He was told that MAIN's primary business was engineering, but that their biggest client, the World Bank, had insisted that the company keep economists employed in order to produce the "critical economic forecasts used to determine the feasibility and magnitude of engineering projects."

Shortly after being hired, Perkins was trained confidentially by Claudine Martin, a special consultant to MAIN. It was Martin who explained to Perkins what his real job was. It was Martin who explained that he was now an "Economic Hit Man" and that once he accepted this job, he could never leave it.

Read On...

Drone hunting craze to replace weekend skeet shoots

2012-05-31T23:53:00.006-07:00

Small border towns create revenues, tourism and sports franchises from new hobby

Uvalde, TX -- Gun owners and skeet shoot enthusiasts are buzzing over the latest in what locals believe to be a pre-paid craze. License applications for hunting Predator B and police UAV drones have skyrocketed since FOX commentator Judge Napolitano announced Drone Shoots as the new race to an American Patriot declaration.

“It’s just something we’ve never seen before. I brought the kids to watch what it looks like when their Dad shoots an $8 million piece of American war machinery out of the sky,” said Dana Jones, proudly holding out what appeared to be a piece of drone fuselage.

Local municipalities are welcoming the boost in tourism and revenues as licensed drone hunting commences. The Drones Shoots are a newly celebrated sight. Excited enthusiasts gather from across the nation, making purchases from a number of discount ammo tables, funnel cake vendors and taco trucks providing tailgate service at shooting sites.

Flannel clad men and women are collecting in droves at the US-Mexican border range toting very large weapons and protective ear guards. Many were encouraged to stand afar from the flaming downfall of drone parts.

Good times and noodle salad!

“I bought this bazooka 2 years ago on sale. Never had a chance to use it. I travelled all the way down here from Kentucky, just to try it out. Hell, I paid for those drones with my taxes anyway,” said James Smith, a 42 year old father of three as he aimed the launcher at a Predator B drone trolling nearby.

While the hobby is only weeks old, it has attracted many gun sports sponsors and related media as an emerging event franchise worth promoting.

“Yeah, I really like my new Drone Shoot beer kozy I got from the magazine people over there,” said Arnold Cargil, a 54 year old border warbird watcher from Amarillo, TX.

Drone hunting applications start at $15 with a registered weapon and are issued on first come first serve basis with approval from local Wildlife and Game bureaus.

“The way our county sees it, this is 100% win-win for everyone. Every border town could could be making as much as we are within weeks. By the way things are going, we won’t run out of drones any time soon,” said Lila Green, a newly hired City worker fielding the mountain of new license applications.

There is no slowing down for this exciting new sport creating both revenue and jobs in a sparse economy at the US borders.

Satire By Sheila Dean 24 May 2012

Obama vetoed Assad assassination attempt

2012-05-31T13:50:00.005-07:00

French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Saudi Prince Salman

Along with Saudi Defense Minister Prince Salman, Sarkozy hoped that President Obama would provide supplemental forces that would be required to destroy Assad’s palace and, in turn, execute the Syrian leader, his family and the top leaders of his government.
++++++++

New reports filed this week suggest that the an attempt to assassinate Syrian President Bashar al-Assad orchestrated by French and Saudi governments was recently abandoned after US President Barack Obama refused to involve America in the attack.

Sources reporting to the Debka news agency in Israel say that a Franco-Saudi plan to oust Assad from his rule in Syria was all but implemented in recent weeks, but the White House’s reluctance to offer US assistance eventually eroded what chance existed for ending Assad’s rule.

According to military and intelligence sources reporting to Debka, a complex plan relying on air strikes and bombardment from the sea was believed to be on the table. When prompted to add US manpower to aid in the attack, however, President Obama repeatedly refused to get involved.

Debka’s sources say that, before being voted out of office, French President Nicolas Sarkozy “spent his last days in the Elysée Palace in long telephone conversations with the White House” in which he attempted to persuade the US president to align American troops in the attack. Along with Saudi Defense Minister Prince Salman, Sarkozy hoped that President Obama would provide supplemental forces that would be required to destroy Assad’s palace and, in turn, execute the Syrian leader, his family and the top leaders of his government.

Specifically, the Franco-Saudi plan called for 12 hours of air strikes on Assad’s presidential palace northeast of Damascus that would be accompanied by American fighter jets launched from a US aircraft carrier stationed in either the Mediterranean or Red Sea with their sights set on the Syrian air defense system. Additionally, Obama was asked to approve US warplanes to keep the Syrian Air Force grounded and perhaps even call upon America’s cyberwarfare capabilities to keep Assad’s radar systems and anti-missile programs offline, reports Debka.

The sources say that the White House refused to involve American forces in an anti-Assad military assault because it would “increase the carnage,” but no one in the Obama administration formally refused to engage in future operations in Syria.

Earlier this week, it was reported that, along with Saudi Arabian and several European allies, US troops participated in a mock-invasion of Iran during a training exercise in the Middle East. Around 12,000 troops from more than 19 nations participated in the Eager Lion 2012 exercise, and spectators and experts suggest that the drills carried out were met to emulate an assault on either Iran or Syria. Major General. Awni el-Edwan of the Jordanian Operations and Training Armed Forces refused to confirm those allegations, however, telling reports, “The exercise is not connected to any real world event,” reports CNN. “This has nothing to do with Syria. We respect the sovereignty of Syria. There is no tension between the Syrians and us. Our objectives are clear.”
Days earlier, the US was linked to a shipment of anti-tank missiles believed to be sent to anti-Assad rebels in Syria.

Source EndtheLie.com

Not to forget the víctims of torture

2012-05-31T11:37:00.009-07:00

The US (never forget the Jewish hidden hand in all large scale, heinous crimes on earth) has been responsible for literally millions of deaths throughout the 20th century via illegal coups, establishing dictatorships in 3rd world countries and CIA-backed private wars.

Manuel E. Yepe

"Despite the impressive legal and institutional framework established to prevent torture, it remains a widely tolerated or even used by governments, and there is still impunity for its perpetrators."

This was admitted by the Secretary General of the United Nations in the call, as every year, gives the world body since the General Assembly in its resolution 52/149 of 12 December 1997, proclaimed 26 June as International Day Support of Victims of Torture.

It was long an indigenously attributed to the practice so widespread and uniform cruel repressive methods, particularly the torture of detainees in prisons and military barracks in Latin America during the second half of last century.

Today no doubt left where the actions and concepts that divorced American peoples of their soldiers and converted into everyday practice of torture against the people.

When public opinion transcended international-news-photos included on torture and other inhuman treatment of prisoners that U.S. forces had been applied in prisons in Iraq and the detention of suspects who are in the area Guantanamo Bay who illegally occupy in Cuba, began to gain credit the old complaints that indicate the origin of the phenomenon in the School of the Americas established in 1946, in Panama.

At that time, in 1947, also created the CIA, Central Intelligence Agency, shadowy criminal organization official U.S. government has written to the region and the world, one of the dirtiest stories of abuse, barbaric and terror that humanity has ever known.

Until 1963, the School of the Americas was called Land of the Latin American Division of Training (Latin American Training Center-Ground Division), and should be used for training military leaders acting and training of new leaders requiring armies continent.

From the triumph of the Cuban Revolution in 1959, the School of the Americas took a more precise responsibility, issued by the failure that occurred on the island had been for the strategy embodied the heart: now should serve to train cadres called to prevent the Cuban example spread across the continent.

The space for the "representative democracy" diminished significantly and the establishment of military dictatorships throughout Latin America proliferated. Not respected democratic traditions such as Chile and Uruguay, or the dimensions of mega countries like Argentina and Brazil.

The School of the Americas accounted for an important role in this tough policy that had its most dismal in "Operation Condor", which provided training cadres, organizing death squads against insurgents and design interrogation techniques and torture.

Several dictators, torturers and police chiefs who played prominent roles connoted in Operation Condor came from the School of the Americas. Many of their teachers and advisers involved in this dirty war on Latin America.

In 1984 the School of the Americas was transferred to Fort Benning in Columbus, Georgia, following Torrijos-Carter agreements and the signing of the Panama Canal.

2001, because of the sheer volume of complaints since 1999 were coming to the U.S. Congress for the content of the manuals of torture that were training students in the School of the Americas, was denied permission to operate the School.

The Pentagon "disciplined" changed the name to the institution, which was renamed Institute for Security Cooperation Western Hemisphere (Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation) and made some cosmetic changes called to cover the most serious violations of human rights that took place there.

Today in America there is debate about whether the cases of torture in secret prisons should be treated as confidential and the world is witnessing the unusual fact that Richard Cheney, vice president of the nation in the Bush administration, openly advocate the use of torture against prisoners and even ask for more publicity for the achievements that result for the country of such inhuman treatment, to seek greater public acceptance for these torments.

Beyond the complaint and protest against the phenomenon, the world must also worry about save another victim of torture: the U.S. population being morally degraded through the crowd of young soldiers of that nation who are forced to apply torture other human beings, or trained.

Manuel E. Yepe leading journalist, diplomat and Cuban lawyer. He was President of the Prensa Latina news agency. He serves as Professor of the Institute of International Relations in Havana

Read Also The Secret Kill List by Andrew P. Napolitano

One State Conference at Harvard’s Kennedy School

2012-05-31T01:19:00.002-07:00

[Before the first intifada brought in journalists with pen, paper and cameras, many Americans were unaware that a place called Palestine existed. This black out was by Zionist design, giving the colonial state the time it needed to systematically erase Palestine and the Palestinians before anyone discovered it and the genocide blueprint. The Intifada foiled the plot and it has been downhill for Israel ever since.
With the internet it is hopeless for Israel cover ups. The horror is exposed. Anyone who wants to know will know and does know.
Israel itself will not survive the light. Not a two state, not a one state. One way or another, public pressure is going to crush Israel, the whole of it.]

March 14, 2012
Bo Fauth, one of PIN’s founders and co-chair of FOSNA in New England, attended the One State Conference at Harvard’s Kennedy School and wrote this review:
On the first weekend in March, students at the Harvard Kennedy School held a conference on Israel/Palestine and the One-State Solution. The conference was designed to help expand the range of academic debate and to educate “about the possible contours of a one-state solution and the challenges in the way of its realization.” Like the first conference on this topic held three years ago at the University of Massachusetts in Boston, pressure was put on the sponsoring university to cancel the conference. In a statement to the Boston Globe, Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown, calling upon Harvard to cancel the conference, said that he wanted “to condemn in the strongest possible terms Harvard’s sponsorship of a conference exploring a “one-state solution” to the Israel-Palestinian conflict… This is dangerous thinking that gives comfort to Israel’s enemies who view the ‘one-state solution’ as a euphemism for eliminating Israel as a Jewish state.”
Despite the pressure Senator Brown, the Anti-Defamation League, and others put on Harvard, the conference was held and was sold out. In front of the entrance, a small group of picketers handed out sheets equating Anti-Zionism with Anti-Semitism. Inside the Kennedy School, a panel of Ali Abunimah, Eve Spangler and Stephen Walt addressed the question of what has happened to the two-state solution. The answer, according to Walt, lies in the demographics and Israel’s settlement building. Israel, which has settled 600,000 Israelis in the West Bank despite promises to halt settlements, has never believed in two states. The settlement expansion in the last twenty years leaves no viable two-state solution, although Walt believes that a one-state solution will result in further ethnic cleansing and apartheid.
Abunimah suggested that people’s fervent belief in two states is akin to a belief in the tooth fairy. He never thought a two-state solution was just, because it never addressed the needs of the Palestinians. The question will be resolved through raw struggle from the grass roots. BDS (which a later panelist urged should be stated in full as Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions and repeated often as the politics of repetition) is a greater threat to Israel than Iran.
Eve Spangler noted that Zionists have never been reticent about their territorial ambitions, and she faulted the negotiations for having always been entered on the basis of Israel’s needs and wants, rather than on international law. The defense of Israel as a Jewish state is driven by an ideology of exclusion and privilege, but the absolute bedrock should be the human and civil rights of all.
The conference featured two keynote speakers: Ali Abunimah and Ilan Pappe. Abunimah credited Edward Said for the idea of a single state and said that the two-state solution ignores the facts on the ground and the unequal power of the parties. We must not be afraid to talk about whether Israel has a right to be a Jewish state. Abunimah has no sympathy for the fictional narrative of a land without a people for a people without a land; the reality is that Israel is a colonial state. Political rights alone cannot redress the injustice of the occupation; there must be economic justice and a regime of equality, as well.
Ilan Pappe sees more urgency in 2012 in that we have witnessed two funeral processions: one for the death of the two-state solution, as evidenced by the non-vote at the UN, and the other for the death of liberal Zionism. Israel can be a Zionist Jewish Apartheid state or a democratic one, but it cannot be both. Palestine has become the world’s largest mega-prison, with the West Bank as an open-air prison and Gaza as a maximum security prison, both of which require a huge staff to run. Journalists should report on the cumulative, daily atrocities which result in collective punishment for those who have not committed a crime. Pappe, however, feels that with the Arab Spring and the many one-state conferences, we’re at the dawn of a new era. We need to change the framing and shift the paradigm of peace to the paradigm of decolonialism and of ending occupation.

Analysis | What Israel’s anti-African pogroms tell us about Zionism

2012-05-30T12:41:00.008-07:00

If we follow the path of Zionism we see it is the root of evil (Rothschild)

By Robert Kazandjian, Ali Hocine Dimerdji, and Samantha.Asumadu

A week ago, on the night of Wednesday 23rd May, South Tel Aviv erupted, becoming the epicentre of an attack by an angry, violent mob against members of the city’s African migrant population, deliberately targeted because of no other reason than their ethnicity.

African-owned businesses and homes were destroyed and looted. There were no fatalities but many were injured. Social media was alive with images and information regarding the attacks, pointing out the absolute apathy, even complicity, of the authorities.

This attack on the African minority in Tel Aviv is not an isolated event. Wednesday night’s violence was the culmination of a series of racist attacks, including the firebombing of homes and a kindergarten in south Tel Aviv neighbourhoods. In fact, these attacks illustrate the prevalent high level of racial tension within the city and in Israel as a whole.

One cannot fully understand the events of Wednesday without an understanding of the various contexts at play, historical, political and ideological. Steven Salaita writes in The Electronic Intifada that Zionism is ‘an ideology that can accommodate liberal and humanistic discourses, (but) cannot be practised without a concomitant abrogation of the rights of those who are not Jewish.’

Zionism, in other words, dictates racial and religious supremacy. Israel, a state built on ethnically cleansed land, thus operates under the veil of a democracy in which the Jewish population is the exclusive beneficiary of the democratic process.

However, Israel’s Jewish population is itself stratified within an ethnic hierarchy, where the prosperous Ashkenazi (white Jews of European descent) dominate the economy, media and politics. In comparison, the Mizrahi and Sephardi (Jews of Middle Eastern and North African descent) suffer socio-economic hardship.

Ethnic and religious minorities are uniformly oppressed, from Palestinian Muslims and Christians to African migrants. The disparity is well-documented. Human Rights Watch states that in Israel’s segregated school system ‘Palestinian Arab children get an education inferior to that of Jewish children, and their relatively poor performance in school reflects this.’

Discrimination continues into higher education, employment, healthcare and housing. If we consider the core principle of Zionism, the construction of a Jewish homeland in order to preserve Jewish identity and ensure Jewish security, this oppression is inevitable. However, it is the treatment of black Jews that reveals most about the racism ingrained in Israeli society.

The interest of the American people [the racist white population] in the return of the Jews to the Land of Israel long precedes the establishment of the [racist] Jewish state.

Hanan Chehata writes, in the Race and Class journal, that ‘the Falasha, Ethiopian Jews … brought to Israel in mass transfer operations, have found themselves relegated to an underclass.’ Chehata argues that black Jews are not only racially discriminated against but are also used to bolster the populations of illegal settlements.

In 2010, the Israel lobby group FLAME (Facts and Logic About the Middle East) ran an advertisement in Jewish American newspapers in an attempt to refute claims that Israel is an apartheid state. The advertisement argued that ‘Israel has brought in about 70,000 black Ethiopian Jews, who despite their backwardness have become fully integrated citizens of Israel.’ The advertisement perpetuates the image of the uncivilised savage; we might expect to find such language in nineteenth century European colonial texts.

Jonathan Cook wrote an extensive piece for The National, an English language newspaper, published daily in Abu Dhabi, that examines Israel’s treatment of Ethiopians. Cook writes that ‘Health officials in Israel are subjecting many female Ethiopian immigrants to a controversial long-term birth control drug.’ He further states that ’57 per cent of Depo Provera users in Israel are Ethiopian, even though the community accounts for less than two per cent of the total population.’

The drug has a wide range of damaging side effects and was used by the South African apartheid government to limit the fertility of black women. Yali Hashash, a researcher at Haifa University said similar practices were used against Mizrahi and Sephardi Jews in the 1950s and 1960s because ‘Israel’s leading gynaecologists regarded Arab Jews as ‘primitive’ and incapable of acting ‘responsibly’.’ The evidence is difficult to refute and presents a compelling conclusion: the preservation of Jewish identity in the eyes of the state appears only to encompass white Europeans.

Although oppression takes on many guises, the language of oppression is universal. From the top down, prominent Israeli parliamentarians have fanned the flames of racial hatred and undoubtedly incited violence. In a cabinet meeting last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described African migrants in Israel as ‘illegal infiltrators flooding the country … threatening our existence as a Jewish and democratic state … our national security and our national identity.’

Indeed, the Israeli interior minister Eli Yishai has played a vocal role in the vitriolic rhetoric. On Wednesday May 16th, he warned, in an interview on Israeli Army Radio, that the majority of African migrants in Israel are “criminals” and must be detained, stating:

‘I would do something harsh, but simple, put all of them, without exception, in prisons or detention centres, or divide them up and put the ones who don’t commit crimes in detention centres.’

In an attempt to sugar coat his racism, Yishai invoked a distinction between “asylum seekers” and “genuine refugees”, arguing that only an extremely small number of African migrants are genuine refugees. He also tried to temper his original claim by further adding:

‘I believe that most of them don’t (engage in criminal activity), but perhaps I’ll be criticized for that too, and the ones who commit even the smallest crime: to jail. From there, they will get a departing grant, or a deportation grant, call it whatever you want, and sent back to the countries they came from. We are losing the country. These incidents everyone is talking about now, I heard about them three years ago when I toured south Tel Aviv.’

The Zionist Dream

In the same interview, Yishai warned that ‘the migrants are giving birth to hundreds of thousands, and the Zionist dream is dying.’ As mentioned earlier, the Israeli state appears to be taking direct action to preserve the ‘Zionist dream’ that Yishai refers to.

This was not the first time Yishai publicly aired anti-African racist sentiments. Speaking at a conference in Ramle on April 15, 2012, he reiterated his belief that African migrants should refrain from having children. He recounted the story of a disabled Jewish Israeli woman who employed an African migrant caregiver. According to Yishai, ‘The (disabled Israeli) woman had a foreign worker taking care of her, that foreign worker got pregnant.’

Indeed, the African woman did become pregnant and requested maternity leave. Yishai found her request, and the subsequent ruling by the Israeli Supreme Court that affirmed it, scandalous. In response, he said ‘[He] would have ordered her to be sent back to her country of origin,’ arguing that:

‘Foreign workers may enter the country… But if a woman decides to stay here, build a home here, and get pregnant here – that was not our intention. Therefore if she decides to get pregnant, I feel that it’s only right for her to return to her country of origin.’

If it is not the state’s intention for foreign migrants to assimilate themselves into the very fabric of Israeli society then we can only assume their sole collective purpose is to be exploited, to have their labour power extracted before being removed.

In a democratic system, the words of politicians are expected to influence our own actions and attitudes. The racist mistruths and scaremongering perpetuated by Israel’s high-ranking parliamentarians have undoubtedly ignited anger and hate towards the African migrant community, inciting the pogrom in south Tel Aviv.

Wednesday night’s violence followed an angry protest-rally, during which high-ranking members of the ruling Likud party delivered racist, vitriolic speeches. MK Miri Regev, echoing pre-genocidal rhetoric, described African migrants as ‘a cancer in our body’, blaming ‘leftists’ for the fact that the government has not pursued a policy of mass expulsion. MK Danny Dannon, also spoke and later posted on Facebook that ‘Israel is at war. An enemy state of infiltrators was established in Israel, and its capital is south Tel Aviv’, referring to African migrants, a significant proportion of whom live in the district.

Upon the conclusion of the rally, a mob of an estimated 1000 Israelis approached the African migrant neighbourhood in south Tel Aviv. Police halted the mob’s progress, stopping them from crossing a bridge that leads into the heart of the residential area and arguably avoiding a massacre.

The mob proceeded to rampage through the Hatikva neighbourhood, attacking African men and women they encountered. An Eritrean woman was assaulted with bottles on Hanoch Street. The baby she was carrying dropped to the floor. A Sudanese man was set upon as he sat in his car and the windows were shattered.

The mob chanted slogans like ‘The people want the Sudanese deported’ and ‘Infiltrators get out of our homes’ as they careered through the streets. The violent rampage continued for several hours through the night, resulting in a surprisingly low amount of arrests, between 11 and 17 depending on sources.

+972 Magazine, an independent, non-profit publication generally regarded as representing leftwing, progressive views did publish eyewitness accounts of the pogrom. However, they also published a vitriolic piece written by Larry Derfner that tows the Likud party line, contributing to the hatred and violence towards African migrants. In his piece, Derfner, who identifies himself as ‘an ultra liberal Zionist’, wrote:

‘…with at least 60,000 here and 2,000 to 3,000 more arriving monthly, all of them crowding into a few neighbourhoods of poor, conservative, frightened Jews, they are a threat to the fabric of this society. Given their numbers, there’s a limit to how much compassion Israel can show them. At this point, we have to worry about our own first.’

Derfner’s comments validate the argument that while Zionism can accommodate liberal and humanistic discourses, it cannot be practised without the abuse and disregard of the rights of those who are not Jewish.

In the aftermath of the rampage, Danny Dannon, speaking to Haaretz, called for the forced expulsion of African migrants from population centres in Israel. He also demanded the acceleration of the building of detention centres where African migrants would be held, stating:

‘the infiltrators must be distanced immediately, … We must expedite the construction of temporary detention facilities and remove Africans from population centres.’

The Israeli media have been quick to emphasise that impoverished, working class Mizrahi Jews have carried out the attacks on African migrant communities. This reinforces the ethnic hierarchy and creates a space in which the Israeli authorities can deflect responsibility for both the violence and the conditions in which the Mizrahi subsist.

Predictably, the old colonial tactic of divide and rule is all too evident here. The ruling class are the cause of the hardship that the Mizrahi and Sephardi suffer. Through rhetoric and vitriol they are able to redirect anger toward African migrant communities who are victims of greater oppression themselves.

If the Israeli authorities continue to downplay and ignore what happened in Tel Aviv last week, there will undoubtedly be a repeat. If the men and women who govern Israel continue to fuel the fires of racial hatred, the severity of the violence will increase and the scale will spread.

Robert Kazandjian is a London-based freelance journalist and researcher. He has previously been published by The Independent and The Guardian, and writes on class, gender, race and international affairs. He's on Twitter at @RKazandjian.

Ali Hocine Dimerdji is a French Studies PhD student at the University of Nottingham, and an Algerian citizen who has lived both in Algeria and Lebanon. Follow him on Twitter @hocinedim.

Lieberman: Israel will not allow its "officers" to be terrorized by Turkey

2012-05-29T22:13:00.000-07:00

Settler foreign minister of rogue entity calls Turkish attempts to secure justice for murdered citizens "provocations"

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, right, with German President Joachim Gauck, Jerusalem, May 29, 2012. Photo by Yossi Zamir

Zionist=Aliens from another planet.

By Amos Harel | May.29,2012

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Tuesday in a meeting with German President Joachim Gauck that despite Turkey's vicious tongue-lashing against Israel over the past few years, Jerusalem has been behaving with "maximum restraint toward the Turkish provocations."

Lieberman added that despite Israel's restraint, it will not allow its officers and soldiers to be terrorized, for they acted completely justifiably and in accordance with international law, as was also determined by the UN's international investigatory committee into the Gaza flotilla.

"We hope that the European nations will not cooperate with the Turkish provocation of baseless indictments against the former Israel Defense Forces chief of staff and other senior officers," Lieberman told Gauck, who is visiting Jerusalem. "We hope the European nations will put Turkey back in its place and prevent wild behavior by the NATO member that has gone off course and is behaving contradictorily to all acceptable international laws."

"Israel will continue behaving responsibly and will not be drawn into counter-provoking (Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip) Erdogan, out of a care for peace and stability in the Middle East," said Lieberman.

The foreign minister's comments came after a Turkish court formally pressed charges on Monday against four former top IDF officers over the killing of nine people aboard a Turkish ship trying to break Israel's blockade of Gaza in 2010.

The court in Istanbul voted unanimously to approve an indictment against Israel's former military chief Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, along with the former heads of its navy, air force intelligence, and military intelligence, Eliezer Marom, Amos Yadlin, and Avishai Levi, the Anadolu Agency said. They face nine consecutive life terms in prison for "inciting to kill monstrously, and by torturing," according to Turkey's state-run news agency.

It is unlikely Israeli military members will be brought before Turkey's judicial system, since Israel does not regard them as criminals. If they are convicted in absentia at the end of the trial process, which could take months if not years, the Turkish court could issue an order for their arrest, but such a move would be symbolic and not binding.

Israel did not respond officially to the submission of a Turkish indictment, but a foreign ministry official stated anonymously on Monday that the indictment reflects a tailspin in relations between Ankara and Jerusalem. "Erdogan is systematically killing relations between the two states," the official said.

Former Chief of Staff Ashkenazi released a response saying that "Turkey is an important state, and it shares with Israel a common interest in stability in the Middle East, and I am sure that in the end common sense will prevail."
Ashkenazi added that "from the start of this affair I chose to appear in every forum, and defend IDF soldiers and the IDF itself; the soldiers and the army carried out its mission in the field, for the benefit of the state."

Turkish newspaper prints names of Zionist bred serial killers involved in Mavi Marmara killings

Turkish newspaper Sabah has printed a list of 174 names of Zionist bred serial killers it says were involved in the Mavi Marmara massacre:Agai Yehezkel, Aharon Haliwa, Alex Shakliar, Amir Ulo, Amir Abste, Amir Shimon Ashel, Anna Strelski, Anton Siomin, Aram Zehavi, Ariel Brickman, Ariel Karo, Ariel Rifkin, Ariel Yochanan, Arnon Avital, Assaf Bryt, Avi Balut, Avi Bnayahu, Avi Mizrakhi, Avi Peled, Aviad Perri, Aviel Siman, Avihay Wizman, Avihu Ben Zahar, Avishay Levi, Avishay Shasha, Aviv Edri, Aviv Kochavi, Aviv Mendelowitz, Baruch (Barry) Berlinsky, Basam Alian, Ben-Zion (Benzi) Gruver, Bnaya Sarel, Boaz Dabush, Boaz Rubin, Boris Schuster, Dado Bar- Kalifa, Dan Dolberg, Dan Harel, Daniel Kotler, David Shapira, David Slovozkoi, David Zini, Eden Atias, Eden Atias, Efraim Aviad Tehila, Efraim Avni, Eitan Ben-Gad, Elad Chachkis, Elad Itzik, Elad Shoshan, Elad Yakobson, Eli Fadida, Eli Yafe, Eliezer Shkedi, Elik Sror, Eran Karisi, Erez Sa'adon, Eyal Eizenberg, Eyal Handelman, Eyal Zukowsky, Gil Shen, Gur Rozenblat, Gur Schreibmann, Guy Givoni, Guy Hazut, Haggai Amar, Hanan Schwart, Harel Naaman, Hila Yafe, Ido Nechushtan, Ilan Malka, Itay Virob, Liran Nachman, Michelle Ben-Baruch, Miki Ohayon, Moshe Tamir, Nadav Musa, Nathan Be'eri, Nezah Rubin, Nimrod Schefer, Nir Ben-David, Nir Dupet, Nir Ohayon, Niv Samban, Noam Keshwisky, Ofek Gal, Ofer Lahad, Ofer Levi, Ofer Winter, Ofer Zafrir, Ofir Edri, Ohad Girhish, Ohad Najme, Omer Dori, Omri Dover, Or Nelkenbaum, Oren Bersano, Oren Cohen, Oren Kupitz, Oren Zini, Pinkhas Buchris, Raz Sarig, Ron Asherov, Ron Levinger, Ron Shirto, Ronen Dan, Ronen Dogmi, Roi Elkabetz, Roi Oppenheimer, Roi Weinberger, Sahar Abargel, Shai Belaich, Shaked Galin, Sharon Itach, Shaul Badusa, Shay Unger, Shimon Siso, Shiran Mussa, Shlomit Tako, Tal Alkobi, Tal Bendel, Tal Kommemi, Tal Ruso, Tamir Oren, Tamir Yadai, Tom Cohen, Tomer Meltzmann, Geva Rapp, Tslil Birbir, Udi Sagie, Uri Ron, Yair Keinan, Yair Palay, Ya'akov(Yaki) Dolf, Yaniv Zolicha, Yaron,Finkelman, Yaron Simsulo, Yehosua (Shuki) Ribak, Yehu Ofer, Yehuda Fuchs, Yehuda Hacohen, Yigal Slovik, Yigal Sudri, Yizhar Yona, Yoav Galant, Yoav Gertner, Yoav Mordechai, Yochai Siemann, Yochanan Locker, Yom-Tov Samia, Yonathan Barenski, Yonathan Felman, Yoni Weitzner, Yossi Abuzaglo, Yossi Bahar, Yossi Beidaz, Yotam Dadon, Yishai Ankri, Yishai Green, Yuval Halamish, Zion Bramli, Zion Shankour, Ziv Danieli, Ziv Trabelsi, Zuf Salomon, Zvi Fogel, Zvi Yehuda Kelner.

1984 is Now

2012-05-29T13:26:00.000-07:00

Is Mark Zuckerberg Mossad?

Roy Tov

The life story of Mark Zuckerberg looks slightly different from what mainstream media claims. He was born into a Jewish family; his compromise to Judaism was so big that he had a Bar Mitzvah at the age of 13. Don’t laugh at this; this isn’t just a familiar event with good food. A Bar Mitzvah is the formal acceptance of Judaism from those born into Jewish families. It isn’t a familiar obligation, but an act of choice. Growing up in a Communist Kibbutz, I must tell that only a minority of its kids chose to participate in such a questionable event. Yet, Mark was happy to participate.

“That means Mark Zuckerberg was in an excellent position to become a formal ‘sayan’ of the Mossad. Did he become one? Let’s see. He entered Harvard, and violated its computers, robbing an important database. He belonged to Alpha Epsilon Pi, a Jewish fraternity. Then, Harvard students Cameron Winklevoss, Tyler Winklevoss, and Divya Narendra accused Zuckerberg of intentionally making them believe he would help them build a social network called HarvardConnection.com (later called ConnectU); in such a way, Mark Zuckerberg stole the technology that allowed him to build Facebook.

“One could claim that Mossad wanted to get formal access HarvardConnection.com technology. It is useful for monitoring and controlling social networks, as I recently discovered after opening a Facebook account. Spotting Zuckerberg as a cooperative individual wasn’t hard. Giving him an informal tip on how to break into Harvard’s computers was even easier. Explaining him how to trick out the technology from Cameron Winklevoss, Tyler Winklevoss, and Divya Narendra – none of them would have cooperated with Mossad – was also easy. Afterwards, the marketing of Facebook against other social media networks was easy due to the Harvard connection, everybody wanted to share the splendor.

“Facts speak for themselves: Zuckerberg stole technology in a method not unknown to Mossad. It belongs to the most faithful recruitment base of that organization. Let me ask you, Mr. Zuckerberg: are you Mossad?”

Syria carnage funded, fueled by US led Al- Zio-CIAduh

2012-05-29T11:59:00.002-07:00

Syrian al-ZIO-CIAduh-linked rebels (file photo)

Tue May 29, 2012 5:56PM GMT PRESSTV

Syria is bracing for more political chaos as all antagonistic forces appear to have entered into an unholy alliance to bring the government to its knees by ingeniously choreographing massacres and attributing them to Syrian government, thereby turning the country into fertile soil for US-led invasion”

Dr. Ismail Salami, analyst and author

An “unholy alliance” of US-led Zionists and Wahhabis (imperialist puppet Gulf Arabs) is funding and fueling the deadly unrest in Syria, trying to “bring the Syrian government to its knees”, a political analyst says.

“Syria is bracing for more political chaos as all antagonistic forces appear to have entered into an unholy alliance to bring the government to its knees by ingeniously choreographing massacres and attributing them to Syrian government, thereby turning the country into fertile soil for US-led invasion,” wrote Dr. Ismail Salami in an article published on the Global Research website on Tuesday.

Pointing to the deadly clashes in the township of Houla in the Western Syrian city of Homs, which, according to the UN observer mission in Syria, left 108 people dead, he added that “What deserves due attention in the carnage that happened in Houla is that many were shot dead at close range, many were Shia Muslims and many were women and children.”

“In other words, these atrocities are conjectured to have been carried out at the hands of the extremist Wahhabis and al-CIAda elements who are notorious for targeting women and children in their terrorist operations,” the political analyst further elaborated.

The analyst also explained that the fact that those murdered in Houla were mainly Shia Muslims reinforces the conjecture that the massacre was perpetrated by the “Wahhabis” who “nurse inveterate loathing” toward Shia Muslims.

Salami pointed out the role of Washington in sponsoring Syrian rebels, referring to a recent report by The Washington Post that they “have begun receiving significantly more and better weapons in recent weeks, an effort paid for by Persian Gulf nations and coordinated in part by the United States’”.

"Washington is pressing Qatar and Saudi Arabia to fund and provide the rebels with heavy weaponries," he added.

The writer also highlighted London’s financial support for the al-Qaeda-affiliated anti-Damascus forces in Syria, noting that “The government of al-Assad is losing ground thanks to the influx of the extremist Wahhabis and al-Qaeda members and on account of the financial and military support the rebels receive from the West and the Persian Gulf regimes.”

“Although these groups may ostensibly be at daggers drawn over different issues, they share one common point: the fall of al-Assad and therefore turning the situation to their own benefit,” he further explained.

Salami finally pointed to the key role of the Israeli regime which, in his words, “is silently and ironically funneling millions of dollars to the rebels in Syria” and “is capitalizing enormously on the collapse of Bashar al-Assad government.”

"Syria has now turned into a nightmarishly humanitarian catastrophe lavishly brought about by the regional Arab puppet regimes, extremist Wahhabis, al-Qaeda, Washington and Israel," he concluded.

Israeli terrorist mastermind slams indictment in Turkey for role in flotilla murders

2012-05-28T21:48:00.008-07:00

“Israel may have the right to put others on trial, but certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial.”

-- Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
What comes to my mind is:"The natives are getting restless" which comes from the H.G. Wells book "The Island of Doctor Moreau" and it implies that the indigenous population is about to rise up and attack the people who don't belong there. Harkens to racism, imperialism and Anglo-Saxons going into the lands of others and trying to exploit/oppress the native people. In this case it would refer to US/Israel ruling elite vs everyone else. The examples that "the natives are getting restless" are everywhere and multiplying.
US/Israel is arrogant, over exposed, and over ripe. Pride goes before destruction, and haughtiness before a fall.

A court in Turkey has approved an indictment seeking multiple life sentences for four Israeli military commanders over their role in the 2010 killing of nine Turkish activists on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla.

Following Turkey's indictment against top IDF commanders for involvement in Marmara raid, former IDF chief stands by soldiers; says 'if price for standing my ground is not visiting Turkey – I'll pay the price'

Israel News

05/28/2012

Former IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi has reacted on Monday to the indictment which was filed in Turkey against him and other senior IDF officers who were involved in the overpowering of the Marmara ship in 2010.

"Israel's relationship with Turkey is important as both countries have common interests which include maintaining stability in the Middle East. I'm sure that eventually common sense will prevail," Ashkenazi said.

"From the moment the affair broke out, I chose to stand up in every forum, often alone, to defend the IDF soldiers who performed their duty on the field for the Israeli nation," the former chief of staff noted. "If the price for standing my ground is that I can't visit Turkey – I'll pay that price too."

In addition to Ashkenazi, the Turkish court formally pressed charges against former Navy commander Eli Marom, former Air Force official Avishai Levy and former Military Intelligence chief Amos Yadlin all involved in the raid.
According to the Turkish court, the senior officials face 10 consecutive life terms in prison for "inciting to kill monstrously, and by torturing."

Marmara raid (Photo: IDF Spokesperson's Unit)

The 144-page indictment has been prepared after testimony from some 600 people, including 490 passengers from the six-ship flotilla and relatives of those who had died. The charges against the military officers include four counts of first-degree murder, intentional assault and torture of 114 pro-Palestinian activists.

The indictment which was prepared by Istanbul state prosecutor Mehmet Akif Ekinci, suggests that should the four arrive in Turkey they would be immediately arrested.

Israeli officials had no immediate comment.

Judge Yaakov Turkel who headed the inquiry committee into the events of the Gaza flotilla said that "Israel acted in accordance with international law." The commission cleared the soldiers of any use of unnecessary violence, stating: "It is possible to determine that the IDF soldiers acted professionally and with great presence of mind in light of the extreme violence which they hadn't expected."
A United Nations probe into the incident found Israel's naval blockade of Gaza legally imposed "as a legitimate security measure" but added that the killing of eight Turkish activists and a Turkish-American was "unacceptable."
Turkey has rejected the Palmer report findings, saying Israel had no right to raid the ship in international waters and said it would never recognize the blockade's legitimacy.

Turkey has also slapped a series of sanctions on Israel – once a top military trading partner – that included expelling senior Israeli diplomats and suspending all military deals.

Israel imposed a blockade on Gaza after Hamas seized control of the coastal territory from their Fatah rivals in 2007. Israel allows humanitarian aid and goods into Gaza via land crossings after inspection for weapons.

'Mainly a declaratory act'

Meanwhile, law experts said that the chances of the commanders actually being put on trial are slim to none. Prof. Ruby Seibel, the former legal adviser to the Foreign Ministry and a Hebrew University law expert, warned that Turkey may ask other countries to extradite the four IDF officers.

"Such an occurrence seems unlikely as no rational country would extradite the Israeli officials to Turkey. It's obvious that Turkey's actions are political and derive from utter frustration over Israel's refusal to apologize to Ankara for seizing the flotilla," said Seibel.

Seibel added that "Turkey's decision to indict the top officials is mainly a declaratory act, seeing as it never demanded the officials be handed over. However, I would advise the officers not to travel to Turkey in the near future, because if the Turkish government does issue out an arrest warrant, it is likely the police will abide by it."

Attorney Irit Kahn, former head of the International Department at the State Prosecutor's Office claimed that Ankara knows that Israel is unlikely to extradite the officers to Turkey. She further noted that the likelihood of other countries handing over the officials was "far-fetched."

America's Shame: Forgotten Warriors on Memorial Day

2012-05-28T20:58:00.002-07:00

^{[This is a rewritten version of a diary first posted for Memorial Day 2008.]}
My stepfather's brother died with other Marines on the beach at Guadacanal during World War II.
My best friend in my high school days, Manny Miller, was killed in the early days of the Vietnam War.

These men will be honored on Monday in Memorial Day ceremonies along with nearly a million of their soldier, sailor, marine, coast guard, air force and militia compatriots who gave their lives in military service. Technically, Memorial Day is a remembrance of all who lived before us, those who gave their lives in military service or not. But its origins among formerly enslaved African Americans as Decoration Day and long-standing tradition continue to make it a day to take special note of those who lost their lives while in the military.
No distinction is made between the hundreds of thousands who died fighting in wars most Americans would consider righteous and the hundreds of thousands who were killed in the furtherance of bad causes or died in vain because their criminal or reckless leaders sent them into harm's way for greed, stupidity or empire. Those who fought in gray uniforms in a war of secession are given the same reverence, the same moments of silence, the same commemoration of sacrifice as those who wore blue into battle.
It doesn't matter whether they were white boys from the First Tennessee Infantry Regiment who fell in the land-grabbing war with Mexico in 1847, black soldiers of the 93rd Infantry Division fighting Germans in the war to end all wars, or Japanese-Americans of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team slugging their way through Italy while their relatives lived incarcerated in camps back home.
It doesn't matter whether their name was Hernández, or Hansen, or Hashimoto. It makes no never mind whether they caught enemy shrapnel or a bullet from friendly fire. No difference if they were drafted or volunteered. Nor whether they died fighting for liberty more than 200 years ago at

Ve'ho'enohnenehe
Southern Cheyenne
(1839-June 25, 1876)

Meteor Blades :: America's Shame: Forgotten Warriors on Memorial Day

Bunker Hill or crushing it more than 100 years ago in the boondocks of the Philippines. On Memorial Day all American warriors who lost their lives are honored because they did lose their lives. With one exception.
My great-great-great-great-great uncle was killed by U.S. soldiers during the Second Seminole War. Other distant relatives were killed during the Third Seminole War. Killed for trying to hold onto freedom, land, the right to self-determination. They get no recognition on Memorial Day.
On the hand, whether they killed warriors and women on the banks of the Pease River in Texas, the Washita River in Kansas, Sand Creek in Colorado or Wounded Knee Creek in South Dakota; whether they fought Shawnee in Indiana, Asakiwaki in Wisconsin, Lakota and Cheyenne in Montana, Chiricahua in Arizona, Nez Perce in Idaho or Modocs in California, the men in blue who were killed in the Indian Wars are among those who will be honored Monday.

"Peace through Unity" sculpture at the Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument
(Photo: Richard E. Miller)

But the thousands of warriors they killed - the ancestors of us "original" Americans - aren't counted for the ultimately futile but unhesitating sacrifice they made fighting to keep their people free. On Memorial Day, they are invisible. Monuments to the Rebel dead can be found in practically every town of the Confederacy. Memorials to Indian resistance are next to non-existent.
Many Americans of Indian ancestry are, of course, interred in military cemeteries. As far back as the Revolutionary War, Indians have fought in uniform under the Stars and Stripes. But those who died in the century of armed resistance from 1790 to 1890 get no recognition, even though the battlefields where they resisted can be found in nearly every state of the union.
Attempts have been made to correct this. In 2002, the 1909 memorial on the Denver Capitol grounds that honored the 22 soldiers killed as they and their compatriots massacred the southern Arapaho and Cheyenne at Sand Creek got a new plaque to replace the one calling that slaughter a Civil War victory for the Union.
And 19 years ago, after years of vicious racist attacks from foes of the switch, the Custer Battlefield National Monument was renamed Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument. Now, intermixed with the 249 white marble 7th Cavalry gravestones are a double handful of red granite gravestones placed at the site since 1999 for fallen Lakota and Cheyenne warriors. An innovative Indian memorial was designed on the theme of "Peace through Unity" and includes a haunting sculpture (see photo). Steps in the right direction. But not nearly enough.

The marker for the Southern Cheyenne battle
chief known as Ve'ho'enohnenehe is one
of a few red granite gravestones added
at the Little Bighorn Battlefield National
Monument since 1999 to honor the fallen
Lakota and Cheyenne warriors there.
(Photo by MB)

Scores of sites throughout America could display memorial statues commemorating events with succinct plaques: From this site in 17-- or 18--, the Anishinaabe (or Comanche, or Alibamu) were removed to reservations far from home in ------- after 50 (or 120, or 350) of their number were killed in a surprise attack by the U.S. soldiers, some of whom cut off breasts or scrota for use as trophies and tobacco pouches. Their lands were turned over to settlers, miners and railroad builders and the city of ------ was built on their burial grounds.
Monday, when the nation's war dead are remembered, when we are supposed to put aside political and ethnic divisions for a few moments of introspection, many of our politicians still won't take a break from the lies - past and current lies - for which too many men and women went prematurely into the ground. Monday, we will hear plenty from many politicians about liberty, freedom and sacrifice associated with American wars, but nothing about the plunder, rapine and imperial machinations associated with some of those wars, the Mexican War, the Philippines War, the Vietnam War, the Iraq War, and, of course, the Indian Wars.
Let me be crystal clear. I'm for moving ahead, for transcendence, Indians and non-Indians alike. We live in the 21st Century, and people alive now bear no responsibility and should carry no guilt for what was done more than a century or two ago.
But Monday is Memorial Day, memory day, and, just as we do not forget the men who froze at Valley Forge or took bullets at Fort Wagner or were blown up at Khe Sanh, there is no excuse for the nation to retreat into convenient amnesia and forget the deaths of those who resisted the theft and genocide led by leaders masquerading as divinely inspired messengers of freedom in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Until the nation remembers all its dead warriors, you'll pardon me if my Memorial Day reverence is tempered with an undercurrent of rage.

Israel tried to silence Flotilla victims

2012-05-24T23:48:00.002-07:00

presstv
A Turkish lawyer for the victims and the relatives of the victims of Israel’s 2010 assault on Mavi Marmara, the Turkish vessel, which was leading a Gaza-bound humanitarian fleet, says Tel Aviv had made a secret offer to silence his clients, Press TV reports.

On Thursday, Ramazan Ariturk, one of the lawyers representing 465 victims and victims’ relatives, revealed Israel’s proposal to pay his clients a lump sum of USD six million (American taxpayer$).

He said the Israeli regime had made the offer to him through an intermediary foreign ambassador in Ankara just over a month ago.

He said the money would have been paid to a Jewish foundation in Turkey for distribution followed by an “apology” from Tel Aviv in order to settle lawsuits against the Israeli military.

Ariturk said he had told the unnamed ambassador that he would not accept the offer as it was not moral.

The lawyer added that he had informed the Turkish Foreign Ministry of Israel’s proposal and his rejection, adding that officials with the ministry said his decision had been appropriate and thanked him for the refusal.

On May 31, 2010, Israeli forces attacked the humanitarian Freedom Flotilla in international waters in the Mediterranean Sea, killing nine Turkish nationals and injuring about 50 other activists, who were part of the six-ship convoy.

A Turkish national, Suleyman Soylemez, who was injured during the attack, is still in coma, according to Turkish media.

A Tel Aviv-imposed siege has been depriving 1.6 million Palestinians in the Gaza Strip of food, fuel, medicine, and other necessities since mid-June 2007.

The report reveals that Dogan, the 19-year-old US citizen of Turkish descent, was filming with a small video camera on the top deck of the Mavi Marmara when he was shot twice in the head, once in the back and in the left leg and foot and that he was shot in the face at point blank range while lying on the ground.

The report says Dogan had apparently been "lying on the deck in a conscious or semi-conscious, state for some time" before being shot in his face.

Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal

2012-05-24T11:43:00.003-07:00

Israel's main international airport, Ben Gurion International Airport (previously known as Lydda Airport, RAF Lydda, and Lod Airport)

By YOUSEF MUNAYYER
May 23, 2012

I’M a Palestinian who was born in the Israeli town of Lod, and thus I am an Israeli citizen. My wife is not; she is a Palestinian from Nablus in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. Despite our towns being just 30 miles apart, we met almost 6,000 miles away in Massachusetts, where we attended neighboring colleges.

A series of walls, checkpoints, settlements and soldiers fill the 30-mile gap between our hometowns, making it more likely for us to have met on the other side of the planet than in our own backyard.

Never is this reality more profound than on our trips home from our current residence outside Washington.

Tel Aviv’s Ben-Gurion International Airport is on the outskirts of Lod (Lydda in Arabic), but because my wife has a Palestinian ID, she cannot fly there; she is relegated to flying to Amman, Jordan. If we plan a trip together — an enjoyable task for most couples — we must prepare for a logistical nightmare that reminds us of our profound inequality before the law at every turn.

Even if we fly together to Amman, we are forced to take different bridges, two hours apart, and endure often humiliating waiting and questioning just to cross into Israel and the West Bank. The laws conspire to separate us.

If we lived in the region, I would have to forgo my residency, since Israeli law prevents my wife from living with me in Israel. This is to prevent what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu once referred to as “demographic spillover.” Additional Palestinian babies in Israel are considered “demographic threats” by a state constantly battling to keep a Jewish majority. (Of course, Israelis who marry Americans or any non-Palestinian foreigners are not subjected to this treatment.)

Last week marked Israel’s 64th year of independence; it is also when Palestinians commemorate the Nakba, or “catastrophe,” during which many of Palestine’s native inhabitants were turned into refugees.

In 1948, the Israeli brigade commander Yitzhak Rabin helped expel Lydda’s Palestinian population. Some 19,000 of the town’s 20,000 native Palestinian inhabitants were forced out. My grandparents were among the 1,000 to remain.

Lydda Palestine 1920

They were fortunate to become only internally displaced and not refugees. Years later my grandfather was able to buy back his own home — a cruel absurdity, but a better fate than that imposed on most of his neighbors, who were never permitted to re-establish their lives in their hometowns.

Three decades later, in October 1979, this newspaper reported that Israel barred Rabin from detailing in his memoir what he conceded was the “expulsion” of the “civilian population of Lod and Ramle, numbering some 50,000.” Rabin, who by then had served as prime minister, sought to describe how “it was essential to drive the inhabitants out.”

Two generations after the Nakba, the effect of discriminatory Israeli policies still reverberates. Israel still seeks to safeguard its image by claiming to be a bastion of democracy that treats its Palestinian citizens well, all the while continuing illiberal policies that target this very population. There is a long history of such discrimination.

In the 1950s new laws permitted the state to take control over Palestinians’ land by classifying them “absentees.” Of course, it was the state that made them absentees by either preventing refugees from returning to Israel or barring internally displaced Palestinians from having access to their land. This last group was ironically termed “present absentees” — able to see their land but not to reach it because of military restrictions that ultimately resulted in their watching the state confiscate it. Until 1966, Palestinian citizens were governed under martial law.

Today, a Jew from any country can move to Israel, while a Palestinian refugee, with a valid claim to property in Israel, cannot. And although Palestinians make up about 20 percent of Israel’s population, the 2012 budget allocates less than 7 percent for Palestinian citizens.

Tragically for Palestinians, Zionism requires the state to empower and maintain a Jewish majority even at the expense of its non-Jewish citizens, and the occupation of the West Bank is only one part of it. What exists today between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea is therefore essentially one state, under Israeli control, where Palestinians have varying degrees of limited rights: 1.5 million are second-class citizens, and four million more are not citizens at all. If this is not apartheid, then whatever it is, it’s certainly not democracy.

The failure of Israeli and American leaders to grapple with this nondemocratic reality is not helping. Even if a two-state solution were achieved, which seems fanciful at this point, a fundamental contradiction would remain: more than 35 laws in ostensibly democratic Israel discriminate against Palestinians who are Israeli citizens.

For all the talk about shared values between Israel and the United States, democracy is sadly not one of them right now, and it will not be until Israel’s leaders are willing to recognize Palestinians as equals, not just in name, but in law.

Yousef Munayyer is executive director of the Jerusalem Fund.

Defending Israel’s borders from ‘climate refugees'

2012-05-23T14:49:00.010-07:00

Identity Crisis

Build a wall around the bubble...

“We are an island – we don’t belong to this region, and we have to defend Israel from waves of migration from Egypt from Jordan and maybe from Syria. If we want to keep Israel a Jewish state, we will have to defend ourselves from what I call ‘climate refugees,’ exactly as Europe is doing now,” he said.
Europe is not a band of pirates trying to hold onto their loot...

Experts recommend complete enclosure of Israel to prevent migration, in report on adaptation to climate change.

JPost.com
To combat increased waves of illegal migration that will likely accompany climate change, Israel must secure its borders with impassable barriers, including “sea fences” along the Mediterranean and Red seas, experts have concluded.

“The lack of water, warming and sea-level rise, even if it will occur on a different schedule, will bring migration movements from all impoverished regions to every place where it is possible to escape this,” wrote a team of academics, led by Prof. Arnon Soffer and Dr.
Related:

Danny Danon: Send African migrants to Australia
Mayor to PM: Deal with migrants before it's too late

Anton Berkovsky of the University of Haifa’s Geography Department.

The team’s conclusions appeared in just one “geo-strategy” chapter in a nearly 200- page report of recommendations toward adapting to climate change, submitted collectively by about 100 experts at the Israel Climate Change Knowledge Center to Environmental Protection Minister Gilad Erdan on Monday.

Established in 2011 by the ministry, the center aims to gather scientific knowledge in seven areas: regional climatic forecasting, affects of climate change on the water sector, urban planning and building, public health, biodiversity, the economy, and regional geo-strategic issues, according to the ministry.

After receiving analyses by expert teams, who had already submitted a preliminary report in December, the ministry would then intend to incorporate the information into its policy documents in order to formulate a national plan toward adapting to climate change.

Among its suggestions for how to handle the geo-strategic implications of climate change, the team led by Soffer called for a complete enclosure of Israel from all directions, including establishing sea fences along the Mediterranean and Red seas.

Moreover, the experts said that additional law enforcement resources will be required to deal with the ramifications of securing the Egyptian and Jordanian borders, as an economic crisis might ensue for Negev Beduin who trade across those lines. While securing Israel from all sides, however, the authorities must ensure the safe passage of animals and plants.

“The migration wave is not a problem for the future. It is today; it is going on now,” Soffer told The Jerusalem Post on Monday evening. “It will just increase from day to day.”

He explained that the most troublesome spot in terms of migration to Israel is the Nile basin area, where a mixture of drastic climate changes and demographic explosions are pushing people northward. They recognize that “Europe is completely under siege by the navies,” so they cannot move in that direction, he said.

“In India, they shoot; in Nepal, they shoot; in Japan, they shoot,” Soffer said, adding that in Israel, the refugees know they can find welcome.

Due to climate change, during the 1970s and the 1980s alone, the water in the Nile basin fell from 84 billion cubic meters to 51 billion cubic meters, and while its waters returned to normal for the decade that followed, since 2000, catastrophe has ensued, according to Soffer.

Likewise, in the past decade, about 800 lakes have dried up completely in Africa, including Chad’s largest one – a phenomenon that has led to “terrible tragedies,” he explained.

“Millions perished along the Sahel,” he said, referring to a semiarid zone that stretches from Senegal to Eritrea, bordered by the Sahara on the north and a savannah on the south.

“It’s the deterioration of Africa,” the professor said.

Also trying to penetrate Israel’s borders due to intense climate change will be Jordanians, Palestinians and perhaps some Syrians, according to Soffer.

“I can see how the desert will penetrate slowly to Kiryat Gat, Gaza and Hebron – everywhere,” he said. “If you accept what the scientists are saying, then there will be no question that people will be forced to leave the Negev.”

Within Israel proper, many Beduin communities have moved en masse out of the Negev and to the country’s center, a shift that many people along Israel’s borders might replicate as their climates become unbearable, Soffer explained.

“Why are they coming to the North? Either because of population explosion or because of water loss,” he said. “This is a microcosm of what is going on between the border of the Mediterranean climate and the semiarid zone.”

In Syria, there is a direct correlation between the areas where the rebellions began and places where there is shortage of water, Soffer added.

“I am one that fights for building fences all around Israeli borders,” he said.

“We are an island – we don’t belong to this region, and we have to defend Israel from waves of migration from Egypt from Jordan and maybe from Syria. If we want to keep Israel a Jewish state, we will have to defend ourselves from what I call ‘climate refugees,’ exactly as Europe is doing now,” he said.

As Israel continues to increase its desalination of water, however, Soffer stressed the importance of providing the Palestinians and the Jordanians with sources of water, saying that “maybe this will bring peace.”

While the fences around Israel are necessary, according to Soffer, so too are corridors to allow the free passage of animals.

Such passages could be monitored by soldiers for days at a time to allow the animals, such as snakes, to cross both ways.

Soffer said he was not worried about the global response to physically securing Israel’s borders, and stressed that Europe has been making entrance to immigrants extremely difficult for quite some time.

“I have to satisfy the Israeli citizens, to be human as much as I can,” he said. “Whatever I do, we will not be as cruel as Europe. They have huge navies; they sink boats; they send them back.”

Other expert teams call for requiring that buildings meet green standards when their owners purchase insurance policies, as well as putting in place an energy-rating system for buildings during their sale.

Other teams called for increased use of recycled gray water, while still others recommended preparing treatment regimens for victims of future cold and heat waves. Experts wrote of increased temperatures, decreased precipitation, southern desertification and extreme flooding.

“Climate change is already here and requires comprehensive preparations,” Erdan said, upon receiving the report.

“These changes have social, economic, security and ecological implications that require changes in behavioral patterns of individuals, industry and the state in order to minimize the potential damage.”

Newt Gingrich’s private ventures going bankrupt

2012-05-22T16:04:00.006-07:00

How do you say sayonara in Palestinian?

There were many during former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R-GA)’s ill-starred run for the presidential nomination who speculated that the candidate was never serious about running, but was rather using the platform to sell books and make money. If that was actually the case, then that plan was as spectacularly unsuccessful as his presidential run, because, according to Reuters, the Georgia politician’s private ventures are rapidly going bankrupt.

Bankruptcy hearings in Atlanta on May 9 showed that not only is the erstwhile candidate in personal debt to the tune of $4.8 million, the health care consulting company he part-owned is now mired in debt to a private plane company, its landlord and other creditors. His political nonprofit group American Solutions for Winning the Future went bankrupt in July, 2011, mired in debt and unable to attract clients.

In what Reuters called a “remarkable reversal of fortune of the half-dozen organizations associated with Gingrich,” the decline began shortly after the former Speaker announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination. As far back as 2010, Center for Health Transformation head Nancy Desmond said, corporate clients, some of whom paid as much as $200,000 per year in dues to belong to the organization, began to pull away for fear of being perceived as political.

“There were a lot of stories that began to appear in the paper,” she said, “and (members) didn’t necessarily want to be mentioned in a political story because they weren’t political people. They were business people.”

Last year, Politico noted that as of March, Gingrich had yet to disengage himself from the snarl of interwoven money-making schemes in which he was involved. “Untangling the web of business and political groups Gingrich is involved in has proven complicated,” wrote Politico‘s Alexander Burns, “and he’s not in a position just yet to take a more formal step toward running.”

Part of that process involved having his three partners at the health consulting firm buy him out of his share of the company for $6.4 million. Gingrich was able to convince Desmond, longtime political adviser Joe Gaylord and retired professor and longtime friend Steve Hanser that in spite of the fact that clients were leaving and revenues plunging, the firm would somehow recoup and become financially solvent again.

Such was not the case. In spite of pulling in some $59 million since it opened in 2003, by March of this year the company was no longer able to pay the rent on its Atlanta facility and was forced to close its doors.

“In April it declared bankruptcy, leaving almost $600,000 in debts to outside vendors,” Reuters reports, “The company also owes the $6.4 million to Gingrich and his wife, Callista, neither of whom could be reached for comment.”

Among its debts, the center owes $84,000 to creditor McKenna Long, $31,000 to private airline Moby Dick Airways, Ltd. (Gingrich personally owes Moby Dick $6.5 million), $894 to the state of Missouri in income taxes, $283,000 to boutique political lender Chain Bridge Bank and nearly $55,000 to Atlanta luxury hotels the St. Regis and the Ritz Carlton.

The May 9 hearing was the first step in a reorganization and repayment process to determine which creditors will be repaid and how much. The Center for Health Transformation’s combined assets, including office supplies and thousands of unsold books and films, come to an estimated $78,000.

Israeli Forces Demolish Restaurant in Beit Jala--Photos

2012-05-21T12:09:00.017-07:00

Outside at Beit Jala - suburb of Bethlehem

Famous bbqed chicken at restaurant in Beit Jala

In the early morning of Thursday, 3 May, representatives from several human rights organizations were scheduled to have breakfast in the popular al-Makhrour restaurant near Bethlehem.
The purpose for the scheduled workshop was to discuss house demolitions and property confiscation by Israeli forces in Area C, a zone comprising 60 percent of the West Bank that is under full Israeli control.
As people arrived for the meeting, though, the first thing they saw was a bulldozer leaving the site, alongside some Israeli officials. The restaurant — which is located beside the village of Beit Jala — had been demolished two hours earlier.
“It was bizarre,” said Mohammad Zeidan, director of the Arab Association for Human Rights. “The timing … we couldn’t really believe what we were seeing.”
Just before dawn on that day, Israeli soldiers surrounded and sealed off the area, and proceeded to destroy the restaurant and an adjacent building owned by the Qesieh family. The demolition was carried out under the pretext of a demolition order issued in 2005.
“The restaurant was already gone,” said Odna Copty of the Association for the Rights of the Internally Displaced in Israel. “It is always sad to hear about these things, and to read about them. But when you expect it to be there, and it’s gone, that’s always something different.”
For the Qesieh family, the destruction of their restaurant was a violent reminder of the complete Israeli control over their basic rights and only source of income.
“I’m still paying debt from when they destroyed it in 2000,” said Ramzi Qesieh, owner of al-Makhrour. “How am I to rebuild when I can’t make any money? When they can destroy it again at any time?”
electronicintifada.net

Photography
occupiedpalestine.wordpress.com

Who the f*ck do "Israelis" think they are?

Flashback: Israeli Prime Minister Olmert Says He Made Rice Change Vote

2012-05-20T02:46:00.010-07:00

top photo: Beirut 2007- bottom photo: Gaza city 2009 after Israeli airstrikes ordered by Ehud Olmert.

2009:Former Israeli Prime Minister Olmert brags about how he only has to snap his fingers to let C. Rice and Bush obey:

Rothschild Jewry thugs

WASHINGTON January 13, 2009— In an unusually public rebuke, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel said Monday that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had been forced to abstain from a United Nations resolution on Gaza that she helped draft, after Mr. Olmert placed a phone call to President Bush.

“I said, ‘Get me President Bush on the phone,’ ” Mr. Olmert said in a speech in the southern Israeli city of Ashkelon, according to The Associated Press. “They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said I didn’t care: ‘I need to talk to him now,’ ” Mr. Olmert continued. “He got off the podium and spoke to me.”

Israel opposed the resolution, which called for a halt to the fighting in Gaza, because the government said it did not provide for Israel’s security. It passed 14 to 0, with the United States abstaining.

Mr. Olmert claimed that once he made his case to Mr. Bush, the president called Ms. Rice and told her to abstain. “She was left pretty embarrassed,” Mr. Olmert said, according to The A.P.

The State Department disputed Mr. Olmert’s account. “Her recommendation was to abstain; that was her recommendation all along,” said an official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the delicate nature of the matter.

After the vote, Ms. Rice said the United States “fully supports” the resolution, which called for “an immediate, durable and fully respected cease-fire leading to the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza,” but opted to abstain to see the outcome of an Egyptian-French peace initiative.

Ms. Rice did not respond to Mr. Olmert’s remarks, which were unusual even in the context of the secretary’s occasionally bumpy relationship with the prime minister, according to the official.

Privately, Mr. Olmert has said Ms. Rice sometimes had to be reined in for getting ahead of the president on policy. “They have a good relationship, but there have been some ups and downs,” the State Department official said.

An unnatural thing: Israel

2012-05-19T16:24:00.005-07:00

Never forget what the Christian Zionists opted for.

Israeli occupation plans to cut trees in the name of natural preservation
Charlotte Silver 05/19/2012

Since coming to Palestine, I have visited many beautiful villages, groves and valleys (wadi). But I have had the fortune of being able to return numerous times to Wadi Qana, a valley so integral to the village of Deir Istya, that when you speak to people from there, they tell you, “it’s a part of my body.”

When spring breaks, villagers pile their barbecue equipment, food and arghilas (water pipeps), on top of everyone they can fit into one car and drive the few kilometers to spend Fridays in the valley. There is a small reservoir and stream, where men and women can wash their hands and the little ones can keep cool. The valley is full of citrus trees of all kinds, and during the winter the oranges are so abundant that the laden trees keep the ground and themselves full at the same time.

Each time I visit the valley, I meet Abu Nafez. He is a short and sturdy man, who can always be found among his citrus grove. He has tended to these trees for most of his life. He has five sons, all of whom selected a different political party in which to become active. Abu Nafez has no political affiliation. Over the years, he has witnessed the seven settlements that tower above Wadi Qana expand and the various tactics of destruction employed by the settlers and Israeli army against his land.

Five years ago, Abu Nafez discovered that the settlements Revava and Immanuel had started depositing their raw sewage into the valley, contaminating the once drinkable reservoir and threatening the crops.

Abu Nafez has had his trees cut, burned and vandalized by the nearby settlers as well.

“They are looking for any excuse to take this valley from us”

All of this damage and destruction has taken place amidst the Civil Administration classifying Wadi Qana as a “natural reserve”. Under this most unwelcome gesture of paternalism, now the Civil Administration — the name Israel gives its occupation — has ordered the uprooting of 1700 trees in the valley in the name of “natural balance”.

“They have no right to tell us how to take care of this land,” says Abed Settar, a political leader in the Salfit region, where Wadi Qana is positioned.

Settar came to valley for the Friday demonstration, a new weekly event, to protest against the army’s decision and protect the valley. Around 30 men came to the demonstration, where an imam led the Friday prayer. Villagers want to popularize the Friday demonstrations but are concerned that if any violence breaks out, the Israeli army will put a gate at the entrance of the valley and throw away the key.

“They are looking for any excuse to take this valley from us,” one villager warns.

Wadi Qana is exceptional. On Fridays, the neighboring settlers often armed with rifles or guarded by plainclothes security men, also come to enjoy the idyllic landscape. Palestinians share the space with these families, pretending to ignore their incommodious presence.

The Salfit area is one of the most densely settler-populated areas in the West Bank. Here, the settler population equals that of the Palestinian and Israel just approved the addition of 2100 housing units to the settlement stronghold of the area, Ariel.

This Friday, I finally met Abu Nafez’ son. Nafez was the mayor of Deir Istya until 2005, and villagers remember him with fondness and respect. While not noticeable at first, he lost his right eye during the second intifada when a settler threw a stone at him.

When I sat next to him, he greeted me with a joyful smile. He spoke ardently about his attachment to the land and its importance to his village.

But as we continued speaking, Nafez became more solemn.

Born in the valley

He, like hundreds of others, was born in the valley and used to live there until the Israeli army forced them to leave in 1986. He remembers walking the five kilometers to Deir Istya everyday for school. He also remembers being a child and swimming in the reservoir that is now too shallow and filthy.

Nafez then spoke of his time as mayor and the second intifada. He slowed his speech as he recalled the past, his left eye filling with tears as he remembered.

“I know what occupation means. I know it very well. It’s a horrible thing, it’s an unnatural thing.”

Nafez looks into the future as he does to the past, with grief and fear. He has seen Palestine get consumed by Zionism, and now this beloved land, his beloved home, is teetering on the same fate.

Nafez has travelled to many countries and studied in Istanbul for several years.

“But this area is a part of my character, part of my soul.”

Applying the Six-Day War to Iran

2012-05-18T23:48:00.003-07:00

by Ray McGovern, May 19, 2012

With the 45th anniversary of the Six-Day War of June 1967 coming early next month, pro-Israel pundits like syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer are again promoting Israel’s faux narrative on the reasons behind Israel’s decision to attack its neighbors.

The Krauthammers of our domesticated, corporate media seem bent on waging pre-emptive war against an accurate historical rendering of the actual objectives behind that Israeli offensive that overwhelmed Arab armies and seized large swaths of Arab territory, land that hard-line Zionists refer to as "Greater Israel," i.e. rightly theirs.

With its surprise attacks on June 5, 1967, Israel rapidly defeated the armies of its Arab neighbors. It gained control of the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt, the West Bank and East Jerusalem from Jordan, and the Golan Heights from Syria.

The Sinai was returned to Egypt in 1979 as a result of the Camp David peace accord, a land-for-peace swap that U.S. President Jimmy Carter demanded and that then-Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin deeply resented.

Jewish settlement has proceeded apace on other territories conquered in the Six-Day War, particularly in the Palestinian West Bank, which Israel’s ruling Likud Party refers to by its Biblical names Judea and Samaria.
Likud’s charter declares that "the Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel. … The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."

In other words, in the Six-Day War, Israel seized land that hard-line Zionists consider to be part of their ancestral legacy. The surprise attack in 1967 was the means to that end. The Likud Party emerged several years later with the explicit intent of consolidating that control through a settlement policy called "changing the facts on the ground."

Time to Worry

Yet, despite Israel’s continued expansion into those Palestinian lands, pro-Israel pundits are in a defensive mood these days, and with good reason. They see a particular need this year to whitewash Israel’s surprise attack on its Arab neighbors 45 years ago – not only because the anniversary is likely to draw more than the usual attention – but also because Israel’s strategic position has deteriorated markedly in the past year.
For instance, the 80 million-plus Egyptians are no longer neutered by the joint Mubarak-Israel-U.S. effort to repress them and co-opt them into passivity vis-à-vis the Palestinians. Serious contenders in the upcoming Egyptian election have said they would reconsider the Egypt-Israel Treaty of 1979.

Some leading Egyptian politicians have added that they would fling wide open Egypt’s border with Gaza, where about 1.5 million Palestinians live in what amounts to an open-air prison. These Egyptians also are saying strongly sympathetic things about the widespread suffering in Gaza and the West Bank.

Equally important, Egypt’s present government has already nullified the sweetheart arrangement under which Egypt was providing natural gas to Israel at bargain basement prices. (That alone is a very big deal.)
And, in sad contrast to the deafening silence of senior American officials regarding Israel’s reckless killing of U.S. citizens, such as Rachel Corrie in 2003, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan continues to demand an apology for Israel’s killing of Turkish citizens aboard the Mavi Marmara on May 31, 2010.

The result of that dispute is a sharp diminution in what used to be very close military ties between Turkey and Israel — not to mention a lot of ill will, which can be very corrosive over the longer run.

Misinformed Americans

Regarding the events of 1967, America’s pro-Israel pundit class knows only too well that Egyptians, Turks, Syrians, Jordanians and other audiences in the Middle East will not buy Israel’s faux-history of the Six-Day War — many having been on the receiving end of it.

Thus, it is abundantly clear that the primary targets of the disinformation are Americans like those who subscribe to the neoconservative Washington Post, whose editors in recent decades have been careful to keep their readers malnourished on the thin gruel of watered-down (or unreliable) facts about the Middle East (think, Iraq’s WMDs).

So, it would be simply too much to acknowledge, as former Israeli Prime Minister Begin did 30 years ago, in an uncommon burst of hubris-tinged honesty, that Israel’s attack on its neighbors in 1967 was in no way a defensive war — or even a "pre-emptive" war (there being no really dangerous Egyptian or other threat to pre-empt).

While Prime Minister in 1982, Begin declared: "In June 1967, we had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches (did) not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him."

Such real history would lift the veil now shrouding Israel’s version that plays up the "threat" posed by Egypt and disguises the grand enterprise to expand Israel’s borders and — in double-contravention of international law — to colonize the occupied territories.

To bolster Israel’s heroic rendition of the Six-Day War – and to apply its supposed lessons to Israel’s current plans to bomb Iran – Krauthammer reprised that triumphal version of Israel masterfully defending itself against imminent destruction by the Arabs.

"On June 5 (1967), Israel launched a preemptive strike on the Egyptian air force, then proceeded to lightning victories on three fronts," Krauthammer wrote, cooing: "The Six-Day War is legend."
He then overlaid that gauzy history onto today’s confrontation with Iran: "Israelis today face the greatest threat to their existence — nuclear weapons in the hands of apocalyptic mullahs publicly pledged to Israel’s annihilation — since May ’67. The world is again telling Israelis to do nothing as it looks for a way out. But if such a way is not found — as in ’67 — Israelis know that they will once again have to defend themselves, by themselves."

Noting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent coalition with the rival Kadima Party, Krauthammer also mocked the importance of former Israeli intelligence chiefs cautioning against a rush to war with Iran.
He wrote: "So much for the recent media hype about some great domestic resistance to Netanyahu’s hard line on Iran. Two notable retired intelligence figures were widely covered here for coming out against him. Little noted was that one had been passed over by Netanyahu to be the head of Mossad, while the other had been fired by Netanyahu as Mossad chief (hence the job opening). …

"The [new] wall-to-wall coalition demonstrates Israel’s political readiness to attack, if necessary. (Its military readiness is not in doubt.) Those counseling Israeli submission, resignation or just endless patience can no longer dismiss Israel’s tough stance as the work of irredeemable right-wingers."

After reading this Krauthammer op-ed in the May 10 Washington Post, I decided, against my better judgment, to invest a half-hour writing a letter to the editor, trying to make it as factual as possible. Several days after its submission, I have given up any meager hope I may have harbored that the Post would actually print it.

Perhaps that half-hour investment will not have been a complete waste of time if I can share the result with you:

Letter to the Editor, Washington Post, May 13, 2012

In his May 10 op-ed column, "Echoes of ’67: Israel unites," Charles Krauthammer refers to May 1967 as "Israel’s most fearful, desperate month" and compares it to today, claiming that Iran poses "the greatest threat" to Israel’s existence.

It ain’t necessarily so. In August 1982, then-Prime Minister Menachem Begin admitted publicly: "In June 1967, we had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches (did) not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him."
Today’s "threat" from Iran is equally ephemeral. Krauthammer, though, warns ominously about "nuclear weapons in the hands of apocalyptic mullahs publicly pledged to Israel’s annihilation."

The allusion is to an illusion — the alleged threat by Iranian President Ahmadinejad to "wipe Israel off the map." But he never said that, an inconvenient reality reluctantly acknowledged by Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor early last month. And in January, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and his Israeli counterpart both publicly affirmed the unanimous assessment of U.S. intelligence that Iran is not working on a nuclear weapon.
Who, then, is being apocalyptic? Krauthammer’s agenda is so transparent that a rigorous Fact Check should be de rigueur.

House Passes Stealth Legislation

2012-05-17T22:53:00.010-07:00

When will Pewresearch be doing a poll on what people in the world think of a nuclear armed Israel?

by Philip Giraldi
Go to Google and type in “H.R. 4133.” You will discover that, apart from a handful of blogs and alternative news sites, not a single mainstream medium has reported the story of a congressional bill that might well have major impact on the conduct of United States foreign policy. H.R. 4133, the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012, was introduced into the House of Representatives of the 112th Congress on March 5 “to express the sense of Congress regarding the United States-Israel strategic relationship, to direct the president to submit to Congress reports on United States actions to enhance this relationship and to assist in the defense of Israel, and for other purposes.”

5th column, anti-Castro Jewess Ros-Lehtinen

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) reportedly helped draft the bill, and its co-sponsors include Republicans Eric Cantor and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Democrats Howard Berman and Steny Hoyer. Hoyer is the Democratic whip in the House of Representatives, where Cantor is majority leader. Ros-Lehtinen heads the Foreign Affairs Committee.

The House bill basically provides Israel with a blank check drawn on the U.S. taxpayer to maintain its “qualitative military edge” over all of its neighbors combined. It requires the White House to prepare an annual report on how that superiority is being maintained. The resolution passed on May 9 by a vote of 411–2 on a “suspension of the rules,” which is intended for non-controversial legislation requiring little debate and a quick vote.

A number of congressmen spoke on the bill, affirming their undying dedication to the cause of Israel. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas was the only one who spoke out against it, describing it as “one-sided and counterproductive foreign policy legislation. This bill’s real intent seems to be more saber-rattling against Iran and Syria.” Paul also observed that “this bill states that it is the policy of the United States to ‘reaffirm the enduring commitment of the United States to the security of the State of Israel as a Jewish state.’ However, according to our Constitution, the policy of the United States government should be to protect the security of the United States, not to guarantee the religious, ethnic, or cultural composition of a foreign country.” Paul voted “no” and was joined by only one other representative, John Dingell of Michigan, who represents a large Muslim constituency.

It is interesting to note what exactly the bill pledges the American people to do on behalf of Israel. It obligates the United States to veto resolutions critical of Israel, to provide such military support “as is necessary,” to pay for the building of an anti-missile system, to provide advanced “defense” equipment (including refueling tankers, which are offensive), to give Israel special munitions (i.e., bunker-busters, which are also offensive), to forward deploy more U.S. military equipment to Israel, to offer the Israeli air force more training and facilities in the U.S., to increase security- and advanced-technology-program cooperation, and to extend loan guarantees and expand intelligence-sharing (including highly sensitive satellite imagery). Actually, there’s even more included, and I may have missed the kitchen sink. But the objective is to provide Israel with the resources to attack Iran, if it chooses to do so, while tying the U.S. and Israel so closely together that whatever Benjamin Netanyahu does, the U.S. “will always be there,” as our president has so aptly put it.

But the scariest bit of the bill is its call for “an expanded role for Israel within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), including an enhanced presence at NATO headquarters and exercises.” If Israel becomes part of NATO, which is clearly Congress’s intent, the U.S. and other members will be obligated to come to the aid of a nation that is expanding its borders and is currently engaged in hostilities with three of its neighbors. Israel has also initiated a series of regional wars. Whether NATO membership for Israel would benefit anyone is questionable, but it is something the neocons have been seeking for years, to turn Israel’s wars into a new crusade against the Muslim world.

And then there is the congressional propensity to conceal additional spending in legislation that is normally passed without a great deal of debate. It is perhaps no coincidence that on May 7 the Republican spokesman, the redoubtable Howard “Buck” McKeon, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, released his party’sproposal for increased defense spending (yes, increased) for 2013. McKeon, who has never served in the military and who was holds a bachelor of science degree in animal husbandry from Brigham Young University, is an uber-hawk who relies heavily on campaign contributions from the defense industry. Perhaps “Buck” should consider changing his sobriquet to “Warbucks,” but as he probably lacks a sense of humor, it would be wasted on him.

Included in the proposed defense bill is a cool $1 billion for Israel to upgrade its missile defenses. Money for Israel inserted in the U.S. defense budget suggests that Congress believes that defense of the U.S. and defense of Israel are pretty much conjoined at the hip. That’s on top of the $3 billion Tel Aviv already receives and the numerous defense co-production programs that it benefits from, which will clearly be expanded if 4133 is any indication. The media predictably underreported the largesse for Israel with a couple of lines hidden away in a story in The Washington Post about overall defense spending.

Many who follow the issue have known for some time that Congress, generally speaking, will unhesitatingly do anything to benefit Israel and its supporters, be damned the consequences for the rest of us. That they do it without any public scrutiny is unforgivable and is as much the fault of the media as it is of the devious ways of America’s legislature. If Congress wants to give Israel the type of guarantees that would require Washington to support Tel Aviv’s foreign and security policy, there should be a free and open debate with the American people understanding clearly what such a commitment means in terms of costs and consequences, not a “suspension of rules” stealth legislative package.

If Buck McKeon and his friends on the House Armed Services Committee want to give Israel a billion dollars and actually believe it serves the U.S. national interest, why do they hide it in a procurement bill for the defense of the United States? If historians 100 years from now seek to explain how a great power committed seemingly intentional national suicide, they will have to look no further than the voting record of the U.S. Congress.

Children of the Nakba

2012-05-17T13:17:00.008-07:00

They traveled from Europe to "liberate" a country foreign to them? It was by definition an "invasion". The same con artists who sold us this invasion and occupation of Palestine as "liberation"
also sold us the Jewish holocaust script. No "outsiders" are allowed to investigate it. One has to say hmm...(follow the money)

1948 Nakba

Kamel Shraydeh, a 76-year-old retired teacher living in Bourj el-Barajneh, was born in the Palestinian village of Safsaf, a few kilometres from the northern city of Safed in present-day Israel. In October 1948, dozens of villagers, including ten members of the Shraydeh family, were massacred by Israeli soldiers.

Israel refuses to take responsibility for creating the Palestinian refugee crisis.

Shraydeh was 13 years old at the time, but he was tall and looked older than his age. Israeli soldiers, he said, were seizing, and in some cases executing, boys as young as 14 and 15. His parents, fearing for his life, cut off the bottom of his pants so he would appear shorter and younger.

“My mother told me to carry my younger brother on my soldiers. Before I knew it, an Israeli soldier pointed a rifle to my chest. We managed to run away and hide among the olive branches. But soon after, they moved us to another house in the north. Right next to it, there was a well that that the townspeople used,” he said.

"We climbed up a hill and we could see all those who were killed. My brother, who was three and a half years old, started pointing at the bodies and said ‘That’s our neighbour. That’s our friend.’ I told him to be quiet so the soldiers would not shoot us.”

Shraydeh eventually escaped to Lebanon, thinking he would be there for a few short days before returning to Safsaf. But that day never came, and he has spent his entire life since in refugee camps in Tripoli and Beirut.

1967 Nakba

General Shlomo Goren, military chaplain, was one of the first Israelis to reach the Temple Mount in 1967. Two years later, he became Israel’s chief rabbi (1969–79). On June 7th he blew the shofar and prayed intensely. He also suggested to Major General Uzi Narkiss that the latter could go down in history by taking a hundred kilos of explosive and destroying the Muslim shrine, the Dome of the Rock.
This was revealed thirty years later when Narkiss was dying and told a newspaper reporter the story. The power of identity and the power of the historic moment possessed Goren. He said to Narkiss: “You don’t grasp the immense meaning of this. This is an opportunity that can be exploited now, this minute. Tomorrow it will be impossible.”

"Ur" is an Aramaic word for city. "Shalim" means peace. Salam in Arabic. "Ur-Shalim" is then the "City of Peace" (Madinat al Salam). It is the ancient name of Jerusalem or Al-Quds.

UrShalim will always be Al Quds / The Holy.

Why the Circus is Not Welcome in Our Town

2012-05-16T11:12:00.001-07:00

The Friends of Jordan Festival Society announced that it will be hosting the world-renowned circus troupe “Cirque du Soleil” in Amman next month (26-30 June). This should normally be exciting news. Who doesn’t like a circus? And one as brilliant as Cirque du Soleil? Had things been different, I would’ve been the first in line. The problem in this case is that Cirque du Soleil is planning another show in Israel in August.

The problem is that there is nothing fun about occupation. This week, we are commemorating Nakba; and 64 years on, we have not liberated Palestine, the refugees have not returned, Gaza is under siege and the West Bank is under a two-fold occupation. On top of all that, we witnessed a hunger strike probably unprecedented in history in terms of size and duration that leaves us humbled before the resilience and greatness of these prisoners of war.

Some have told us to put politics aside and enjoy the show. It is just logistics. International bands organize their tours in the “Middle East” and to them Israel is part of it. First of all, putting politics aside is a luxury we cannot afford; and it is naïve to think that by ignoring politics, its impact on every little detail of our lives will disappear. Second of all, there are still those who refuse to consider Israel part of our region. The majority of this region’s people reject this alien entity even if some Arab regimes, along with some organizations and individuals, are falling over themselves trying to get on its good side, presuming it has one.
I believe that when there’s confusion, you go back to the basics. The basics are that Israel is an enemy. Rejecting it is not, and will never be, out of fashion. We need to resist its existence with whatever means were have at our disposal. One way is to challenge this narrative of normalcy and revive the historical stigma associated with the word “Israel” as an occupation state. Each one of us needs to be personally offended, and threatened, when we come across their products in our markets, their representatives in our conferences, and their voices and music on our airwaves. These are forms of invasion and we must fight back.

For us outside Palestine, we fight back through active means by helping our people in Palestine resist and fight, and also through somewhat more passive means, like boycott and non-normalization. This is one line of defense, to remind and prove to the world, and sadly to ourselves sometimes, that the “Israeli state” is a malicious, colonial occupation that has thrived on the misery of millions, dispossessing them and appropriating their culture and heritage and then claiming to be capable of cultural and artistic appreciation.
For those who say that it is not for us to dictate who visits or deals with the occupation, and who question the impact boycott has, we say, there is a global campaign to isolate Israel; and this move to boycott Cirque du Soleil is part of this global grassroots effort. The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Campaign (BDS) has made significant achievements worldwide. And it does work. Many groups have cancelled shows and refuse to perform in Israel, citing as a reason the occupation’s practices, like the Gorillaz, or simply declining to perform there without giving any reason, like Bono, U2, Bjork, Snoop Dogg, and Vanessa Paradis (for a full list, visit the BDS movement website). Let us be part of this voice of justice. And if we do not want wish to be part of it, let us at least not undermine it.

We call on Cirque du Soleil to cancel their show in Israel. If they fail to do so, we call on Friends of Jordan Festival to cancel the event and on Umniah to withdraw their sponsorship. This Circus is not welcome in our town.

Madeleine Albright Gets Humanitarian Award

2012-05-15T16:00:00.005-07:00

'There is a special place in hell for women who don't help other women.' (Madeleine Albright, 1937 - )

As the anniversary of probably one of the most infamous responses in broadcasting history approaches, the woman who uttered it is shortly to be awarded “the highest honour” that America bestows upon civilians: the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Jewess Madeleine Albright, Iraq’s “Grim Reaper”, of course confirmed on “Sixty Minutes” (12th May 1996) that the deaths of half a million children as a result of the absolute, all-embracing deprivations of the UN embargo were: “A hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it.”

Her comment also further endorsed the extent to which the United Nations had soiled its own founding affirmation to: “Save succeeding generations from the scourge of war..” by declaring a new method of warfare, the withdrawal and denial of all life-sustaining necessities. Albright, at the time of her astonishing statement was US Ambassador the UN (1993-1997).

Ironically, as a child she and her Czechoslovak family, her father a diplomat, lived in London during the 1939-’45 war, and whilst there she appeared in a film on the plight of children in war.
In her autobiography, she describes how her experience and knowledge of the horrors and repercussions of war were also shaped by the terrible consequences for a small state when it collides with the ambitions of interests of a big one. Iraq’s twenty five million population and America’s three hundred and fifty million again come to mind.

She enjoined in further heaping misery on Iraq’s most vulnerable as US Secretary of State (1997-2001.) Perhaps, as many, for good or ill, she was shaped by her childhood. When her family returned to Prague after the war, controversy was caused by their being given a home owned by a wealthy German family. Germans were expelled from the country, by Prime Ministerial decree after the war.

At least it was only a house. The government she had served went on to take over - and comprehensively ruin plunder and further impoverish - two countries and their peoples.

For the annals of: “You Could Not Make It Up”, Ms Albright’s current positions include being Co-Chair of the United Nations Development Programme’s Commission for Legal Empowerment of the poor, which: “works to make real improvements in people’s lives (fostering) economic growth, poverty reduction, human development” and making the: “law work for everyone.”

In Sept 2006 she received Menschen in Europe Award for furthering the cause of international understanding. Orwell strikes again.

On 26th April, announcing the thirteen recipients of the 2012 Presidential Medal of Freedom Award, President Obama commended Madeleine Albright for her efforts to bring peace to the Middle East …. Reduce the spread of nuclear weapons, and for her role as a longtime champion of democracy and human rights all over the world. (The Daily Beast, April 26)

“These extraordinary honorees (have) challenged us … inspired us, and they’ve made the world a better place”, said the President.

The Medal honours those who have significantly contributed to: “world peace.”
Reading this “Adventures of a Heroine” fantasy story, the memories of the Iraqi mothers I have held, their tears mingling with mine, or dampening my shoulder, as they watched helplessly as their children faded away in front of us, for want of medications, denied by Albright’s country and the UN she served, flooded back.
The funerals, with the litany of coffins, so small, the impossibly little grave sites beyond counting, throughout Iraq, witness to unique wickedness.

But Madam Albright is right on one thing. There is indeed: “a special place in hell, for women who don’t help other women.” Her Award may yet haunt her to become the ultimate poisoned chalice. Here’s hoping.

PalestineChronicle.com.

Illuminati, Nazis & the Illegal State of Israel

2012-05-15T13:03:00.009-07:00

Baron Edmond de Rothschild

By Dean Henderson
If we wish to end the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, we need to know who created Israel and why. In 1917 British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour penned a letter to Zionist Second Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild in which he expressed support for a Jewish homeland on Palestinian-controlled lands in the Middle East. This Balfour Declaration justified the brutal seizure of Palestinian lands for the post-WWII establishment of Israel.

Israel would serve, not as some high-minded “Jewish homeland”, but as lynchpin in Rothschild/Eight Families control over the world’s oil supply. Baron Edmond de Rothschild built the first oil pipeline from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean to bring BP Iranian oil to Israel. He founded Israeli General Bank and Paz Oil and is considered the father of modern Israel.

The Rothschilds are the planet’s wealthiest clan, worth an estimated $100 trillion. They control Royal Dutch/Shell, BP, Anglo-American, BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto, Bank of America and scores of other global corporations and banks. They are the largest shareholders in the Bank of England, the Federal Reserve and most every private central bank in the world. They needed a footprint in the Middle East to protect their new oil concessions, which they procured through Four Horsemen fronts like the Iranian Consortium, Iraqi Petroleum Company and Saudi ARAMCO.

Rothschild’s Shell and BP formed these cartels with the Rockefeller half of the Four Horsemen- Exxon Mobil and Chevron Texaco. This new alliance required a “special relationship” between Great Britain and the US, which still exists today. Rothschild and other wealthy European shareholders could now utilize the United States military as a Hessianized mercenary force, deployed to protect their oil interests and paid for by US taxpayers. Israel would serve the same purpose in closer proximity to the oilfields. The Israeli Mossad is less a national intelligence agency than it is a Rothschild/Rockefeller family security force.

The Rothschilds exert political control through the secretive Business Roundtable, which they created in 1909 with the help of Lord Alfred Milner and Cecil Rhodes- whose Rhodes Scholarship is granted by Cambridge University, out of which oil industry propagandist Cambridge Energy Research Associates operates. Rhodes founded De Beers and Standard Chartered Bank.

The Roundtable takes its name from the legendary knight King Arthur, whose tale of the Holy Grail is synonymous with the Illuminati notion that the Eight Families possess Sangreal or holy blood- a justification for their lording over the people and resources of the planet.

According to former British Intelligence officer John Coleman, who wrote Committee of 300, “Round Tablers armed with immense wealth from gold, diamond and drug monopolies fanned out throughout the world to take control of fiscal and monetary policies and political leadership in all countries where they operated.”
Rhodes and Oppenheimer deployed to South Africa to launch the Anglo-American conglomerate. Kuhn and Loeb were off to re-colonize America with Morgan and Rockefeller. Rudyard Kipling was sent to India. Schiff and Warburg manhandled Russia. Rothschild, Lazard and Israel Moses Seif pushed into the Middle East. At Princeton, the Round Table founded the Institute for Advanced Study (IAS) as partner to its All Souls College at Oxford. IAS was funded by the Rockefeller’s General Education Board. IAS members Robert Oppenheimer, Neils Bohr and Albert Einstein created the atomic bomb.

In 1919 Rothschild’s Business Roundtable spawned the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) in London. The RIIA sponsored sister organizations around the globe, including the US Council on Foreign Relations. The RIIA is a registered charity of the Queen and, according to its annual reports, is funded largely by the Four Horsemen. Former British Foreign Secretary and Kissinger Associates co-founder Lord Carrington is president of both the RIIA and the Bilderbergers. The inner circle at RIIA is dominated by Knights of St. John Jerusalem, Knights of Malta, Knights Templar and 33rd Degree Scottish Rite Freemasons.

The Knights of St. John were founded in 1070 and answer directly to the British House of Windsor. Their leading bloodline is the Villiers dynasty, which the Hong Kong Matheson family- owners of the HSBC opium laundry- married into. The Lytton family also married into the Villiers gang.

Colonel Edward Bulwer-Lytton led the English Rosicrucian secret society, which Shakespeare opaquely referred to as Rosencranz, while the Freemasons were symbolized by Guildenstern. Lytton was spiritual father of both the RIIA and Nazi fascism. In 1871 he penned a novel titled, Vril: The Power of the Coming Race. Seventy years later the Vril Society received ample mention in Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf. Lytton’s son became Viceroy to India in 1876 just before opium production spiked in that country. His good friend Rudyard Kipling introduced the swastika to India and later worked under Lord Beaverbrook as Propaganda Minister, alongside Sir Charles Hambro of the Hambros banking dynasty.

Children of the Roundtable elite are members of a Dionysian cult known as Children of the Sun. Initiates include Aldous Huxley, T. S. Eliot, D. H. Lawrence and H. G. Wells. Wells headed British intelligence during WWI. His books speak of a “one-world brain” and “a police of the mind”. William Butler Yeats, another Sun member, was a pal of Aleister Crowley. The two formed an Isis Cult based on a Madam Blavatsky manuscript, which called on the British aristocracy to organize itself into an Aryan priesthood. Blavatsky’s Theosophical Society and Bulwer-Lytton’s Rosicrucians joined forces to form the Thule Society, out of which the Nazis emerged.

Rothschild, Rockefeller and the rest of the Illuminati bankers backed the Nazis. Max and Paul Warburg sat on I. G. Farben’s board, as did H. A. Metz, who was director at the Warburg Bank of Manhattan- later Chase Manhattan. Bank of Manhattan director and Federal Reserve Board member C. E. Mitchell sat on the board of I. G. Farben’s US branch. In 1936 Avery Rockefeller set up a combination with the German Schroeder family, who served as Hitler’s personal bankers. Time magazine called the new Schroeder, Rockefeller & Company “the economic booster of the Rome-Berlin Axis”. Morgan Guaranty Trust and Union Banking Corporation (UBC) also funded the Nazis. UBC board member Prescott Bush is W’s grandfather.

In 1933 at the home of banker Baron Kurt von Schroeder, a deal was cut to bring Hitler to power. Attending the meeting were brothers John Foster and Allen Dulles- Rockefeller cousins and partners at law firm Sullivan & Cromwell, which represented Schroeder Bank. Schroeder, managing director T. C. Tiarks, was a director at the Rothschild-controlled Bank of England. In the spring of 1934 Bank of England Chairman Montagu Norman convened a meeting of London bankers who decided to covertly fund Hitler.

Royal Dutch/Shell Chairman Sir Henri Deterding helped in this effort. Even after the US went to war with Germany, Exxon Chairman Walter Teagle remained on the board of I. G. Chemical- the US I. G. Farben subsidiary. Exxon was integral in supplying the Nazis with tetraethyl lead, an important component of aviation fuel. Only Exxon, Du Pont and GM made the stuff. Teagle also supplied the Japanese with his product.

Exxon and I. G. Farben were such close business associates that by 1942 Thurman Arnold- head of the US Justice Department’s Anti-Trust Division- produced documents that showed, “Standard and Farben in Germany had literally carved up the world markets, with oil and chemical monopolies established all over the map.”

1912 railroad magnate Edward Harriman’s widow joined John D. Rockefeller in funding a eugenics research lab at Cold Spring Harbor, NY. That same year the First International Congress of Eugenics was convened in London with Winston Churchill presiding. In 1932 the conference was held in New York. Hamburg-Amerika Shipping Line, owned by George Walker and Prescott Bush, brought the German contingent to the gene-fest. One member of the German delegation was Dr. Ernst Rudin of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Genealogy in Berlin. He was unanimously elected president for his work in founding the German Society of Race Hygiene- a forerunner to Hitler’s race institutes.

As of 1998 there were still scores of lawsuits pending against Ford, Chase Manhattan, J.P. Morgan, Deutsche Bank, Allianz AG and several Swiss banks for their dealings with the Nazis.

At the heart of Hitler’s inner circle were the secret societies Germanordern (brothers of Yale’s Skull & Bones), the Thule Society, and Vril. The concepts “Great Masters”, “Adepts” and the “Great White Brotherhood”, which the Nazis used to justify their idea of Aryan superiority, were ancient ideas carried forth from the Egyptian Mystery Schools by the Teutonic Knights, the Illuminati, and Hebrew Cabalists. These same concepts can be found in today’s New Age Movement, whose New Age magazine was first published by the Grand Orient Masonic Lodge of Washington, DC. Henry Kissinger was an early supporter.

Nazi occultists believed ancient German tribes were the true keepers of the Ancient Mysteries which had their origin in Atlantis, when seven races of God-men were introduced to Earth. Thule was a Teutonic Atlantis believed by the Nazis to house these long-vanquished races, who lost their godly Annunaki powers by interbreeding with humans. At the inner core of the Thule Society were Satanists who practiced black magic.

Hitler was once described as a “child of Illuminism”.
According to Dr. Walter Langer, who did a war-time psychoanalysis of Hitler for the CIA-predecessor OSS, Hitler was also a Rothschild. Langer uncovered an Austrian police report proving Hitler’s father was an illegitimate son of a peasant cook named Maria Anna Schicklgruber, who at the time of her conception was a servant in the Vienna home of Baron Rothschild.

In May 1941 Rudolf Hess parachuted into the estate of the Duke of Hamilton, saying a supernatural force told him to negotiate with the British. Hitler was ostensibly visited by this same apparition and suddenly turned vehemently against occultism. He ordered a crackdown against Freemasons, Templars and the Theosophical Society. Suddenly the international banker crowd pulled the plug on Hitler’s finances and began to denounce him. Six months later the Hessianized US military entered WWII.
Hitler’s fate was no different than that of Saddam Hussein or Manuel Noriega. The Illuminati bankers’ modus operandi is to use men of low integrity to do their dirty work, before conveniently discarding and distancing themselves from them.

The horrific Holocaust that ensued assured sympathy for the already-planned state of Israel. Towards the end of WWII, the murderous Haganah and Stern Gangs were deployed by the Rothschild bankers to terrorize Palestinians and steal their land. Jews who escaped Hitler’s gas chambers were those of means who bought into Zionism. For a fee of $1,000- lots of money at that time- these right-wingers bought passage to Israel and escaped the fate of the poor Jews, Serbs, communists and gypsies. The whole bloody affair was a massive eugenics project. It had more to do with culling the herd along class lines, than it did with ethnicity or religion.

key to this historic puzzle is to understand that the Rothschild/Rockefeller sangreal international bankers supported both the rise of the Nazis and the creation of Israel. None of this has anything to do with religion. It has everything to do with oil, arms, drugs, money and power. The Rothschilds say they are Jewish. The Rockefellers claim to be Christian. These are irrelevant smokescreens. Any demagogue- who blames injustice a religion or race of people- is sadly misinformed. Throughout history the Illuminati Satanists have sacrificed people of all race and religion to further their agenda of total planetary control.

Israel is not a “Jewish homeland”. It is an oil monopoly lynchpin. Its citizens are being put in harms way- used by the Four Horsemen and their Eight Families-owners as geopolitical pawns in an international resource grab. No peaceful solution is possible until the stolen land is returned to its rightful Palestinian owners.
Israel is an illegal entity. Viva Palestine!

About the author:
Dean Henderson was born in Faulkton, South Dakota. He earned an M.S. in Environmental Studies from the University of Montana, where he edited The Missoula Paper and was a columnist for the Montana Kaimin. His articles have appeared in Multinational Monitor, In These Times, Paranoia and several other magazines.
A life long political activist and traveler to fifty countries, Henderson co-founded of the University of Montana Green Party and the Ozark Heritage Region Peace and Justice Network. He is former Vice-President of the Central Ozarks Farmer’s Union and former President of the Howell County Democrats.
In 2004 he won the Democratic nomination for Congress in Missouri’s 8th District.
Dean’s Books Available in print and e-book formats:
Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf…
https://www.createspace.com/3476183
http://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/DeanHenderson

The Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries
www.createspace.com/3477016
www.smashwords.com/profile/view/DeanHenderson
Dean Henderson is the author of Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network and The Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries.
His Left Hook blog is at http://deanhenderson.wordpress.com/category/left-hook-columns/
Dean Henderson is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Dean Henderson: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=listByAuthor&authorFirst=Dean&authorName=Henderson