Latest News


Your financial support what ever amount helps us sustain our activities as well as grow!

Slider Area



Wednesday, October 19

UK anti-Semitism report tries to whitewash Zionism
- 0

The Home Affairs Select Committee of the House of Commons, the lower house of the British parliament, has just issued its report, “Anti-Semitism in the UK”, in response to concerns about “an increase in prejudice and violence against Jewish communities” and “an increase in far-right extremist activity”. It was also prompted by allegations of anti-Semitism in political parties and university campuses.

The following observations are based on the report’s Conclusions and Recommendations, which is as far as most people will read.
  • Israel is an ally of the UK government and is generally regarded as a liberal democracy.
Hardly. It is no friend of the British people. Nor is it remotely a Western-style liberal democracy. We share few if any values.
  • Those claiming to be “anti-Zionist, not anti-Semitic”, should do so in the knowledge that 59 per cent of British Jewish people consider themselves to be Zionists. If these individuals genuinely mean only to criticise the policies of the government of Israel, and have no intention to offend British Jewish people, they should criticise “the Israeli government”, and not “Zionists”. For the purposes of criminal or disciplinary investigations, use of the words “Zionist” or “Zio” in an accusatory or abusive context should be considered inflammatory and potentially anti-Semitic.
The Israeli regime’s inhuman policies are driven by Zionist doctrine. I doubt if justice-seekers are in the least swayed by how many Jews consider themselves Zionists. Or how many Christians do, for that matter.
  • Universities UK should work with appropriate student groups to produce a resource for students, lecturers and student societies on how to deal sensitively with the Israel-Palestine conflict, and how to ensure that pro-Palestinian campaigns avoid drawing on anti-Semitic rhetoric. 
For the sake of evenhandedness, who will ensure that pro-Israel campaigns avoid drawing on hasbara lies and false claims to Palestinian lands and resources?
  • Jewish Labour MPs have been subject to appalling levels of abuse, including anti-Semitic death threats from individuals purporting to be supporters of Mr Corbyn. Clearly, the Labour leader is not directly responsible for abuse committed in his name, but we believe that his lack of consistent leadership on this issue, and his reluctance to separate anti-Semitism from other forms of racism, has created what some have referred to as a “safe space” for those with vile attitudes towards Jewish people.
The abusers, and others with vile attitudes, may well be provocateurs bent on making Corbyn look bad. In any case, why should he or anyone else feel obliged to “separate” anti-Semitism from other forms of racism?
  • The Chakrabarti Report is clearly lacking in many areas; particularly in its failure to differentiate explicitly between racism and anti-Semitism… [its recommendations] are further impaired by the fact that they are not accompanied by a clear definition of anti-Semitism, as we have recommended should be adopted by all political parties. 
Who needs a special definition or actually cares about differentiating anti-Semitism from racism? They are two of the same stripe, and I suspect most of us regard them with equal distaste and have no reason to put one above the other. In short, we know racism when we see it and that’s enough.
  • The Labour Party and all political parties should ensure that their training on racism and inclusivity features substantial sections on anti-Semitism. This must be formulated in consultation with Jewish community representatives, and must acknowledge the unique nature of anti-Semitism.
Unique? Racism is racism.
  • The acts of governments abroad are no excuse for violence or abuse against people in the United Kingdom. We live in a democracy where people are free to criticise the British government and foreign governments. But the actions of the Israeli government provide no justification for abusing British Jews.
We tend to take a dim view of those who support states that terrorise others. Jews themselves have warned that Jews everywhere may suffer as a result of the Jewish state’s unacceptable behaviour. This is unfortunate as many Jews are fiercely critical of the regime’s misconduct and, to their great credit, actively campaign against it. By the way, how does the Select Committee suggest we treat those inside our Parliament who promote the interests of a foreign military power with an appalling human rights record?
  • In an article for The Daily Telegraph in May, the chief rabbi criticised attempts by Labour members and activists to separate Zionism from Judaism as a faith, arguing that their claims are “fictional”. In evidence to us, he stressed that “Zionism has been an integral part of Judaism from the dawn of our faith”. He stated that “spelling out the right of the Jewish people to live within secure borders with self-determination in their own country, which they had been absent from for 2,000 years – that is what Zionism is”. His view was that “If you are an anti-Zionist, you are anti everything I have just mentioned”.
The chief rabbi is flatly contradicted by the Jewish Socialists’ Group which says:
Anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism are not the same. Zionism is a political ideology which has always been contested within Jewish life since it emerged in 1897, and it is entirely legitimate for non-Jews as well as Jews to express opinions about it, whether positive or negative. Not all Jews are Zionists. Not all Zionists are Jews.
Criticism of Israeli government policy and Israeli state actions against the Palestinians is not anti-Semitism. Those who conflate criticism of Israeli policy with anti-Semitism, whether they are supporters or opponents of Israeli policy, are actually helping the anti-Semites. We reject any attempt, from whichever quarter, to place legitimate criticism of Israeli policy out of bounds.
On the chief rabbi’s other point, what right in law do the Jewish people have to return after 2,000 years, forcibly displacing the Palestinians and denying them the same right? Besides, scholars tells us that most returning Jews have no ancestral links to the Holy Land whatsoever.
  • CST [Community Security Trust – a Jewish vigilante and disinformation and propaganda body with close links to the Israeli security service Mossad] and the JLC [Jewish Leadership Council – an Israeli stooge organisation] describe Zionism as “an ideological belief in the authenticity of Jewish peoplehood and that the Jewish people have the right to a state”. Sir Mick Davis, Chairman of the JLC, told us that criticising Zionism is the same as anti-Semitism, because: “Zionism is so totally identified with how the Jew thinks of himself, and is so associated with the right of the Jewish people to have their own country and to have self-determination within that country, that if you attack Zionism, you attack the very fundamentals of how the Jews believe in themselves.” 
The Select Committee is careful to say that “where criticism of the Israeli government is concerned context is vital”. The committee therefore need to understand that the so-called Jewish state is waging what amounts to a religious war against Christian and Muslim communities in the Holy Land. Ask anyone who has been on pilgrimage there. And read The Jerusalem Declaration on Christian Zionism, a joint statement by the heads of Palestinian Christian churches. It says:
We categorically reject Christian Zionist doctrines as false teaching that corrupts the biblical message of love, justice and reconciliation.
We further reject the contemporary alliance of Christian Zionist leaders and organisations with elements in the governments of Israel and the United States that are presently imposing their unilateral pre-emptive borders and domination over Palestine. This inevitably leads to unending cycles of violence that undermine the security of all peoples of the Middle East and the rest of the world.
We reject the teachings of Christian Zionism that facilitate and support these policies as they advance racial exclusivity and perpetual war rather than the gospel of universal love, redemption and reconciliation…
In seeking to defend Zionism the Select Committee fails to put the opposing case – for example, that many non-Jews regard it as a repulsive concept at odds with their own belief. There is no reason to suppose that Zionist belief somehow trumps all others.
  • Research published in 2015 by City University found that 90 per cent of British Jewish people support Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state and 93 per cent say that it forms some part of their identity as Jews…
Did researchers ask British Muslims and Christians about the Palestinians’ right to their own state?
This research sounds like a swipe at people who are accused of “delegitimising” Israel by questioning its right to exist. Actually, Israel does a very good job of delegitimising itself. The new state’s admission to the UN in 1949 was conditional upon honouring the UN Charter and implementing UN General Assembly resolutions 181 and 194. It failed to do so and repeatedly violates provisions and principles of the charter to this day.
Israel cannot even bring itself to comply with the provisions of the European Union-Israel Association Agreement of 1995, which makes clear that adherence to the principles of the UN Charter and “respect for human rights and democratic principle constitute an essential element of this agreement”.
In 2004 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) at The Hague ruled that construction of what’s often referred to as the Apartheid Wall breached international law and Israel must dismantle it and make reparation. The ICJ also ruled that “all states are under an obligation not to recognise the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall and not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by such construction”. Israel nevertheless continues building its hideous wall with American tax dollars, an act of hatred against the Palestinians and a middle-finger salute to international law.
Here at home powerful Friends of Israel groups are allowed to flourish in all three main parties in the UK. Their presence at the centre of government and in the fabric of our institutions is considered unacceptable by civil society campaign groups and a grave breach of the principles of public life. The backlash to growing criticism of Israel’s stranglehold on its neighbours and increasing influence on Western foreign policy is mounting intolerance, Hence the Inquisition, which lately has been directed against Labour’s new leader, Jeremy Corbyn, an easy target for orchestrated smears given his well known sympathy with the Palestinians’ struggle and his links to some of Israel’s (not our) enemies.
The shortcomings of the Select Committee’s inquiry are obvious. Its report doesn’t properly consider the opposite view. It is half-baked. It is lopsided. It is written in whitewash.
Stuart Littlewood

Please help us grow, any contribution big or small goes along way and is greatly appreciated!
Read More

Israel Arresting Palestinian Children For Facebook Posts
- 0

Israel has been interrogating and imprisoning dozens of Palestinian minors for months without any legal representation or a parent's presence.

As Facebook gives the Israeli government more access to posts deemed as “incitement,” occupation forces have been raiding the homes of Palestinians children and detaining them for months over posts on the social media site, a report by the Defense for Children International-Palestine said Monday.
The group spoke with several Palestinian minors who were arrested for their Facebook posts, interrogated for hours and then kept in prison for months without charges under the Israeli policy of “administrative detention.”
“Israeli authorities must immediately stop using administrative detention against Palestinian minors,” attorney and international advocacy officer at DCIP Brad Parker, said in the organization’s report.
“Inability to file charges against children due to lack of evidence should never be grounds for holding them indefinitely without charge or trial.”
The group said this the first time that Israel has used administrative detention against Palestinian children since 2011, a policy that allows Israeli authorities to keep Palestinians in jail for an indefinitely without charges.
Ahmed, a 17-year-old Palestinian who was only identified by his first name in the report, said he was arrested in August and interrogated for hours over pictures of he had posted on Facebook. “He asked for my Facebook password,” Ahmed told DCIP recalling his first interrogation in an Israeli prison. “I gave it to him. He logged in and said it had inciting photos.”
Ahmed had also been arrested in April over posts on Facebook. “I told (the interrogator) of my arrest earlier in April 2016 for 10 days, when I was interrogated (at Shikma prison) in Ashkelon about my Facebook account. I told him I deleted everything upon my release and the account is clean. I told him to check it.”
Three days later, Israeli authorities placed Ahmad under administrative detention for six months. The report warned that more than 19 Palestinian children, arrested since October 2015, did not have any legal representation or a parent’s presence during the interrogations, which is internationally illegal.
Last month, Facebook and the Israeli government agreed to set up joint teams in order to fight what they call “incitement” posts on the social media website, which critics slammed as policies to target Palestinians and Arab-Israelis.
The report highlighted that “Israel has the dubious distinction of being the only country in the world that systematically prosecutes between 500 and 700 children in military courts each year that lack fundamental fair trial rights.”
Despite these policies being part of the legal code of the country that should presumably apply to all of Israel and the occupied territories, Israelis seem to be spared from such laws by the police and army.
Israeli Jews and settlers, as well as government officials and politicians, have repeatedly and publicly incited violence against Arab and Palestinian men, women and children. Very few extremist members within the illegal Jewish settler community have been penalized over their calls for violence, or indeed the carrying out of such violence.

Please help us grow, any contribution big or small goes along way and is greatly appreciated!

Read More

Record US Aid to Israel Reflects Growing Influence of Military-Industrial Complex
- 0

Israel is likely to increase its arms exports now that it cannot use the aid on its own weapons industry, says Col. Lawrence Wilkerson.

Please help us grow, any contribution big or small goes along way and is greatly appreciated!

Read More

Zionism and the Jewish Lobby
- 0

Ryan Dawson of the ANC Report returns to discuss Zionism and the power of the Jewish lobby. We talk about the historical influence Zionists and the Israel Lobby have had on American life and the U.S. government's foreign policy. 

Please help us grow, any contribution big or small goes along way and is greatly appreciated!

Read More

How Israel seeks to erase the region’s history
- 0

It was presumably intended as an Israeli history lesson to the world. A video posted to social media by Israel’s foreign ministry shows an everyday Jewish couple, Jacob and Rachel, in a home named the “Land of Israel”. A series of knocks on the door brings 3,000 years of interruptions to their happiness. First it’s the Assyrians, followed by the Babylonians, Hellenists, Arabs, Romans, Crusaders, Mamluks, and Ottomans – all straight out of Monty Python central casting.
Jacob and Rachel are forced by the warring factions to relocate to ever smaller parts of their home until finally they have to pitch a tent in the garden. Their fortunes change only with the arrival of a servant of the British Empire, who returns the title deeds. A final knock disturbs their celebrations. On the doorstep are a penniless Palestinian couple, craning their necks to see what goodies await them inside.
The chauvinism in portraying Jacob and Rachel as the only normal folk, stoicly enduring barbarians butchering each other in their living room, is ugly enough. But it is harder still to take seriously an account in which the Palestinians suddenly appear out of nowhere in 1948, as Britain departs.
A mile from my home in Nazareth are the ruins of Saffuriya, a centuries-old Palestinian town until the Israeli army expelled the inhabitants in 1948 andblew up their homes. More than 500 villages were similarly razed.
In places where buildings were left untouched, it is Jews – not Palestinians – who squat in someone else’s home. But the falsification runs deeper.
Next to the rubble of Saffuriya lies the much older Roman city of Sephoris, where Jews settled nearly 2,000 years ago after their failed revolts against the Roman empire. A surviving synagogue’s mosaic floor reveals that the Jews of Sephoris worshipped the sun, so close had they grown to the area’s pagan population.
Other entanglements abound. In Nazareth’s old city is the world’s only “synagogue church”, where Jesus reputedly delivered his first sermon. It is a reminder that many local Jews would soon be calling themselves Christians, and later Muslims. Farther north, in the town of Bokaya, an ancient synagogue can be found next to churches and mosques. For centuries the Abrahamic faiths lived alongside each other in a communal harmony unknown in Europe.
In fact, contrary to Israel’s version of history, the most violent clashes – aside from the Jewish revolts – coincided with invasions by Europeans, whether the aggressive sectarianism of the Crusaders, or the British-backed creation of an ethno-religious “Jewish state” by Zionists. More usually, Palestine’s past was marked by cultural tolerance and genetic diversity. Conversions and intermarriages meant the region was a melting pot of identities and beliefs.
Israel, of course, prefers to obscure that history, because it leads to an obvious conclusion: the region needs less, not more, tribalism and dogma of the sort Israel favours.
The Jewish majority in Israel lives almost entirely apart from the Palestinians who stayed on their land and are today nominally citizens. Meanwhile, in the West Bank – known to Israelis as the Biblical kingdoms of “Judea and Samaria” – Jewish settlers lord it over a ghettoised Palestinian population subject to military rule.
Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been drafting a basic law defining Israel as belonging to a globalised “Jewish nation”, not the country’s citizens. And he insists that peace talks take place only once the Palestinians under occupation recognise Israel as such a Jewish state – a condition that, once viewed as risible, has now been adopted by Washington.
In a sign of the prevailing mood, Israel’s education ministry has recently banned from the curriculum two novels featuring romantic attachments between Jews and Arabs. At the same time, the “green line” that once demarcated the occupied Palestinian territories has been erased from Israeli classroom maps, implying instead that it is all Greater Israel.
Faced with Israel’s zero-sum policies and diplomacy, Palestinians have grown increasingly anxious about the future.
Last week a resolution from Unesco, the UN’s scientific and cultural body, gave voice to their concerns. It highlighted Israeli threats to the most important Muslim and Christian heritage sites under occupation.
Recognising the importance of Jerusalem “for the three monotheistic religions”, the resolution nonetheless warned that Israel was exploiting its illegal control to erase the Palestinians’ connection to such sites, especially Al Aqsa mosque.
Hoping to deflect attention away from these criticisms, Israel railed against the UN for denying primacy to its narrative. Al Aqsa must be billed equally as Temple Mount, Mr Netanyahu insisted, referring to a long-lost Jewish temple believed to be buried under the Jerusalem mosque.
But the ruined temple’s likely location leads to the opposite conclusion Mr Netanyahu has reached: not that the Jews have a stronger claim to sovereignty, but that the region’s peoples and religions are impossibly intertwined.
That should be the chief lesson for the current Jacobs and Rachels, many of them living in armed and relentlessly expanding colonies on stolen Palestinian territory.
This land was always shared, and there will be no peace until it is again.
Jonathan Cook

Please help us grow, any contribution big or small goes along way and is greatly appreciated!

Read More

Monday, September 12

Could Hamas’s Haniyeh steer a course to Palestinian freedom?
- 0

Palestinians have truth and justice on their side. Their story must be told with greater energy, amplification and persuasion.

By Stuart Littlewood

A leadership change in Hamas offers a glimmer of hope for Gazans, and possibly all Palestinians, stuck in that Holy Land hell.
At least, that how I view the news that Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh appears to have thrown his hat in the ring for chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau, a position held by Khaled Meshaal since 1996. To that end Haniyeh is reported to have left the Gaza Strip for the Muslim pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia and may remain abroad until the election. The position of Hamas chief requires residency outside the Palestinian territories to allow free movement and cut the risk of assassination by Israel.

Degrees galore

Many Hamas leaders have had a tough upbringing in refugee camps and done time in Israeli jails or exile. But they have overcome. Haniyeh is a product of the refugee camp and was a leading figure in the student movement before graduating from the Islamic University and entering politics. Arrested three times by the Israelis, they deported him to South Lebanon in 1992. He became director of the office of Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, a co-founder and the spiritual leader of Hamas who was assassinated by the Israelis in 2004.
Looking through the list of Hamas ministers after their election victory in 2006, I noticed that many had professional qualifications and were better equipped for office than their Western counterparts. Writing about this in 2009 I remarked that Hamas’s foreign minister, hardliner Mahmoud al-Zahar, brought up in Egypt, was a surgeon and headed the nursing department at the Islamic University. He was deported along with Haniyeh to South Lebanon. Targeted for assassination, Al-Zahar’s home was bombed in 2003 by an Israeli F-16, murdering his eldest son and seriously injuring his wife. In 2008 an Israeli air raid killed a second son.
Dr Basem Naim, the health minister, had a degree in medicine from Germany and a PhD in surgery. The minister of national economy had a degree in civil engineering. The deputy prime minister and education minister was Dean of Islamic Studies and Law at Al-Najah University and had a PhD in Middle East Studies from Manchester University. The finance minister had a PhD from Iowa University.
There was even a minister for women’s affairs, a mother of seven with a PhD in Islamic Law. The minister of public works had a degree in civil engineering from Alabama University. The minister of culture graduated from teacher training college in Ramallah and held a master’s in Islamic Law. The minister of planning held a PhD in urban planning from the University of Pennsylvania and was a visiting professor at several US universities. The minister of agriculture had a PhD in Environment and Water from Manchester University and was a fellow of the American Society for Science Advancement.
So, Hamas clearly has a pool of talent that might have governed wisely and peacefully had they been given the chance after winning free and fair election in 2006. But the pro-Israel alliance went flat out to thwart this fledgling Arab democracy and crush it.

Rewriting the charter would be smart

Hamas’s popularity stems largely from its social, educational and healthcare programmes. Armed resistance to Israel’s illegal occupation is of course its right. Meaningful negotiations, it says, will come only after Israel withdraws behind its internationally-recognised 1967 borders, as required by international law and United Nations resolutions. The land of Palestine is regarded as an Islamic waqf (trust) consecrated for future Muslim generations. It cannot be negotiated away by political leaders. Hamas therefore rejects peace moves that involve more territorial concessions.
In his 20 years as Hamas’s political chief, and 40 years in exile, it is hard to see what Meshaal has actually achieved for the Palestinian people. He seems to speak only to other Arabs and not Western politicians and activists, although in 2008 he met with US President Jimmy Carter and reached agreement that Hamas would accept the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip subject to it being ratified by the Palestinian people in a referendum. But even Carter couldn’t bring that one off.
Meshaal should long ago have rewritten the Hamas charter, especially where it says: “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.” Admittedly, it doesn’t state that a Hamas government is sworn to destroy Israel, but it includes a hadith (reported saying of the Prophet Muhammad) about killing Jews hiding behind rocks. Such reports handed down from the 8th or 9th century cannot be taken seriously today. And yes, the charter was written well before Hamas had pretensions to government. Nevertheless, inflammatory language has no place in any mission statement of a modern ruling administration hoping to succeed in diplomacy. Hamas’s continued failure to remove it does it no credit and makes it easy for Israel and its allies to dismiss an otherwise legitimate resistance movement as terrorists.
Having said that, the charter is no worse than the outrageous mission statements of Israel’s political parties and racist laws. But why descend to their level? And while the regime in Tel Aviv continues, with impunity, to obliterate Palestine to clear the way for a Greater Israel, Western leaders require Hamas to disarm, renounce violence and accept Israel’s right to exist.
Palestinians of course elected Hamas to uphold their own rights to freedom and self-defence.
And as Omar Abdul Razek, Hamas’s finance minister, said when interviewed by Aljazeera in May 2006:
Which Israel would you want me to recognize? Is it Israel from the Nile to the Euphrates? Israel with the occupied Golan Heights? Israel with East Jerusalem? Israel with the settlements? I challenge you to tell me where Israel’s borders lie.
[Interviewer] …the 1967 borders.
[Razek] Does Israel recognize the 1967 borders? Can you tell me of one Israeli government that ever voiced willingness to withdraw to the 1967 borders?
So, is it reasonable to expect Hamas to renounce violence against a foreign power that violently occupies the Palestinians’ homeland, bulldozes their houses at gun-point, uproots their beautiful olive groves at gun-point, sets up hundreds of armed checkpoints to disrupt normal life, batters down villagers’ front doors in the dead of night at gun-point, builds an illegal “separation” wall to annex their lands, steals their water and isolate their communities, and blockades exports and imports to cause economic ruin?

Topping the terrorist league

The Palestinians had no history of violence until their country was partitioned by the UN and overrun by a brutal intruder whose greed is never satisfied. Demands for Palestinians to cease their terror campaign cannot be taken seriously unless linked to demands for Israel to do the same.
Israel’s demolition of thousands of Palestinian homes for so-called administrative and planning reasons, the wholesale destruction of businesses and infrastructure, the excessive violence against non-combatants, the abductions, imprisonments and assassinations, and especially the programme of blitzkriegs on Gaza slaughtering thousands, including many hundreds of children, wounding or maiming tens of thousands and reducing the whole place to rubble – none of these crimes can be justified on grounds of defence or security. They are so disproportionate as to constitute grave violations of human rights and possibly war crimes; and they add up to terrorism even in Netanyahu’s language. His book, Terrorism: How the West Can Win, defines terror as the “deliberate and systematic murder, maiming and menacing of the innocent to inspire fear for political ends”.
In an interview with Jennifer Byrne in February 2002, Netanyahu spectacularly shot himself in the foot again: “Terrorism is defined by one thing and one thing alone: the nature of the act. It is the deliberate, systematic assault on civilians that defines terrorism.”

Hamas must do better

The burden of leadership in Gaza has fallen not on Meshaal but Haniyeh who has operated under the constant bombardment and other horrors inflicted by Israel on that overcrowded strip of land. In 2006, within days of being elected, he offered long-term peace if Israel recognised Palestine as an independent state on 1967 borders. Previously, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), which officially represents all Palestinians, had “recognised” Israel without requiring any reciprocity by Israel. The Oslo accords were supposed to end the occupation and give Palestinians independence, but all they got was “more settlements, more occupation, more roadblocks, more poverty and more repression”.
Hamas’s win at the polls was not only unexpected, it was highly inconvenient to Israel’s plans and the West’s designs on the Middle East. Obstruction was their immediate response. And when Hamas finally ejected bad losers Fatah from Gaza to secure their right to rule at least that tiny coastal enclave, the blockade was cruelly tightened.
In late 2007 I was lucky enough to be with a small group that met Ismail Haniyeh and some of his senior colleagues in Gaza City. It was useful to have such a close-up view of the man in those early days of Gaza’s siege, which has now lasted 10 years (and still counting) while the international community stands idly by. Ordinary men would have crumbled. But not these Palestinians. They are forged in the white heat of resolute resistance.
At the other end of Palestine’s political spectrum, in the West Bank, sits wobbly Mahmoud Abbas, boss of Fatah, whose term as president of the Palestinian National Authority (and now the nebulous state of Palestine) officially ended in 2009. His election in the first place was farcical and probably illegal, and he has overstayed his welcome by seven years, his backside super-glued to the presidential throne. Elections have just been postponed, thanks most probably to backroom deals preventing Abbas losing his grip and thus his position as the West’s useful idiot. Let us not forget that the rest of the occupied Palestinian territory (the West Bank and East Jerusalem, including the Old City) is also under permanent blockade: nothing and no-one can come or go unless Israel says so, and the people are caged within Israel’s evil Matrix of Control and subject to arrest and imprisonment without trial. Abbas’s people do much of Israel’s dirty work.
Meshaal’s successor needs to do a much, much better job. Why do I feel optimistic at the prospect of Haniyeh taking charge and roaming free? He struck me as an approachable man and not without charm, yet a hard-boiled patriot; also a moderate in Islamic terms and respectful of the Christian community in Hamas’s midst. After our meeting he told the cameras: “We are Palestinians first, and Christians and Muslims second. We face a common enemy together.”
He has a reputation for being pragmatic. If that’s the case, he will waste no time in turning Hamas’s charter into a document fit for purpose in the 21st century. He might go further with reform and open proper communication channels to the West. Palestinians have truth and justice on their side. Their story must be told with greater energy, amplification and persuasion. Rivals Fatah, who control the Palestinian Authority and the PLO, fail miserably in this duty as in so many others.
How will the West receive Haniyeh if he takes the job? In a saner world he’d most probably be welcomed as a hero into the diplomatic drawing rooms of London, Washington, Paris and Berlin.

Please help us grow, any contribution big or small goes along way and is greatly appreciated!
Read More

Israeli Black Operations in the USA – Operation Honeypot
- 0

They usually target anyone who they deem to be antithetical or non-supportive of Israeli domestic and foreign policy.

It is well known that the Israeli Mossad using their Sayanim network in the United States routinely engage in Black Operations (“Black Ops”) against US Citizens here in the United States.
They usually target anyone who they deem to be antithetical or non-supportive of Israeli domestic and foreign policy.
They routinely target senators, congressmen, politicians, celebrities, CEOs, academics, intellectuals, journalists, diplomats, or anyone of relative importance in American society.
Their favorite mode of operation against male targets is to hire prostitutes to engage in “honey-pot” operations wherein that hooker links up with the target romantically/ sexually, and then uses the VAWA Laws enacted by Joe Biden and Bill Clinton to ensnare that target in a false domestic violence case, sexual assault case, extortion or blackmail case, or even worse, a false rape allegation or even murder.
Once the male has been ensnared and entrapped, the Israeli/Zionist-controlled media begins to blast, 24/7, 365 days a year, the defamatory, slanderous, and libelous allegations against their target, effectively convicting and destroying their target in the online and written press.
These women, considered protected and supported by society at large, are then encouraged to destroy the target by various Feminist groups, also on the payroll and integrally intertwined with Israeli Intelligence, and together they prosecute and torture that target using Sayanim-friendly detectives, judges, child protective workers, and prosecutors.
“Are you sure the Mossad didn’t contact you, Madame Lewenski?”

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) rarely if ever gets involved because they are thoroughly infiltrated by Israeli Intelligence from the top on down, and 99% of the time, they actively support these clandestine Israeli operations on US Soil because of the tight grip Israeli lobbying has on the jugular of the American Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branches of the US Government, as well as both organizations were created and funded by the Freemasons.
There is virtually no escape from this type of black op once a target has been selected.

Please help us grow, any contribution big or small goes along way and is greatly appreciated!
Read More

Netanyahu’s Land-Grab Strategy
- 0

Behind the smokescreen of the broader Mideast chaos, Israel pursues a strategy of gobbling up Palestinian lands to establish de facto control of the West Bank while confining indigenous Arabs to isolated cantons, explains Alon Ben-Meir.

By Alon Ben-Meir

Israel’s continued settlement activity — whether retroactively approving “unauthorized” outposts or advancing plans for new units as was recently announced — represents yet another nail in the coffin of the peace process. The settlements have become nothing but Israel’s self-entrapment, threatening its very existence.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his coalition partners, however, are not concerned about the prospective dire repercussions of settlement activity. They put the sanctity of the land above any other consideration, and view the settlement enterprise as the prerequisite to repossessing the entire historic “land of Israel.”

Netanyahu is not deterred by the criticism and condemnation from the international community. He takes the position that building new housing units is largely in settlements that will eventually be part of a final status deal in exchange for land swaps, as if he has the right to unilaterally decide which settlements will be incorporated to Israel proper without an agreement with the Palestinians.

As he sees it, Israel has been building settlements for nearly five decades, and in spite of that it has not suffered any adverse consequences for its defiance of the international consensus against the settlements. Why should he worry about it now, when the international community is preoccupied with so many other conflicts in the Middle East and is unlikely to take any punitive measure against Israel other than expressing the usual indignation?
Netanyahu is even less concerned about the Palestinians’ claim that Israel’s creeping annexation of their territory creates irreversible facts on the ground that would deny them a state of their own under a two-state solution.

Netanyahu counters this argument by repeating his slogan that Israel is prepared to enter negotiations unconditionally, and that the settlements do not represent any obstacle to peace. In the same breath, however, he publicly and repeatedly states that the Jews have an inalienable historic right to the entire “land of Israel,” especially the West Bank. As such, he asserts, Israel is not an occupying power and has the inherent right to establish settlements on any part of its historic land.

Divided Arabs

Netanyahu is also not bothered by the reaction of the Arab states, particularly Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, as on the surface settlement activity puts them on the defensive precisely when they are reaching out to Israel.
This is not the case, Netanyahu insists. The Arab states are more concerned about Islamic radicalization and in particular the prospective Iranian nuclear threat. In fact, he claims the Arab states are seeking cooperation with Israel in spite of ongoing settlement expansion. They share a common cause with Israel and are focused on their own problems, viewing the Palestinians as nothing but an added burden.

Netanyahu’s message to the Israelis, especially the settlers, is that the construction of illegal outposts will retroactively be legalized, thereby signaling that they can continue this practice with impunity.
It takes Netanyahu’s typical chutzpah to call for demolishing Palestinian villages like Susiya and other housing units built on their own land while retroactively legalizingillegal Jewish settlements on Palestinian land that were expropriated by Israel, which is nothing less than a travesty.

What message does that send to the international community, and how does that square with Israel’s presumed moral standing among the community of nations? This does not seem to bother him in the least.

Netanyahu dismisses the prospect that his policy would inadvertently lead to one state, as Israel will then face two choices: one, maintain its democratic form of government by granting the Palestinians full citizenship, but in the process lose its Jewish majority and its national identity as a Jewish state; or two, deny the Palestinians citizenship, whereby Israel becomes a de-facto apartheid state, reviled and potentially sanctioned by the international community.

This, however, is not how Netanyahu and company see it. From their perspective, settling a million Jews in Israel will indeed create irreversible facts on the ground, but this is precisely what they want to realize as that would not translate to giving Palestinians Israeli citizenship and equal political rights.

Confining the Palestinians

What Netanyahu has in mind is for the Palestinians to establish their own cantons in Ramallah, Bethlehem, Jenin, Jericho, and other cities, governing themselves as they see fit as long as they accept their lot quietly while Israel maintains overall security throughout the West Bank.

In so doing, Israel will indefinitely remain in control of the West Bank, managing the conflict on a day-to-day basis and dealing with Palestinian violence as it occurs. For him, a state of constant tension is preferred over relinquishing the land.

Netanyahu, however, is totally blinded by his messianic mission, ruling out the possibility that the Palestinians will sooner than later rise, as they are willing to die because they have little left to lose.
In the illuminating new book The Suicide of the Jews (a must read), the futurist Tsvi Bisk describes how the various Zionist branches rationalized the occupation and eventual annexation of all Palestinian land because they truly believe “that compromise on the land issue would not only endanger Jewish redemption but the redemption of all humanity. … For religious Zionists, fidelity to the land was a divine directive and even talk about dividing the land with another people was sacrilegious.”

Netanyahu is a willing hostage to coalition partners he assembled that include staunch proponents of the settlements, such as Education Minister Naftali Bennett and Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

Leave it to him to use his coalition government to provide him with the perfect excuse to continue with his policy; tragically, he is inviting disaster by putting the land above Israel’s national security, if not its very existence.

Repeated polls strongly suggest that a vast majority of Israelis and Palestinians want to end their conflict based on a two-state solution. Yet, as long as the opposition political parties cannot unite with a specific and coherent political framework based on the Arab Peace Initiative to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Likud may well form the next government in 2019.

Likewise, as long as the Palestinians remain divided, with many of their leaders steeped in corruption, they play directly into Netanyahu’s hand. They, more than anyone else, will destroy their own prospect of realizing a statehood.

To be sure, unless Israel’s opposition parties coalesce and create a popular movement for peace, and the Palestinians organize their political affairs and negotiate with Israel in unison, it may well be too late to save them both from their own self-inflicted deadly wounds.

Dr. Alon Ben-Meir is a professor of international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at NYU. He teaches courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.           Web:

Please help us grow, any contribution big or small goes along way and is greatly appreciated!
Read More