Saturday, 1 October 2011

Richard Jones: The Ultimate Quiz

Richard Jones: The Ultimate Quiz

The noose is tightening.
It’s stolen my voice away.
Reduced to a feeble whisper,
But with so much left to say.
So many awkward questions
And only one answer,
So don’t go away.
The answers will not change,
However much you pray.
Q1. Which modern nation state justified
its existence on the graves of six million who died?
Q2. Which modern nation state came into being
with its own deliberate policy of ethnic cleansing?
Q3. Which modern nation state constantly expands
its boundaries, either by military conquest,
or the illegal settlement of occupied lands?
Q4. Which modern nation state brings to the feast
the largest arsenal of nuclear, chemical and biological
weapons in the entire Middle East?
Q5. Which modern nation state, in its own cause,
employs extra judicial execution and kidnapping
of opponents, wherever they seek refuge,
in defiance of all international laws?
Q6. Which modern nation state
routinely imprisons tens of thousands
without charge or trial?
The world stands idle all the while.
Q7. Which modern nation state openly abuses
internationally banned weaponry
against dense civilian populations?
Who needs excuses?
Q8. The leaders of which modern nation state,
since the day of its foundation,
have all been members of violent terrorist organisation,
or personally involved in the most brutal massacres.
Where do we hear a word of condemnation?
Q9. Which modern nation state, alone, defies
the laws of Economics with
a permanent balance of trade deficit?
while we must scrabble to make ends meet,
they get money manna from a bottomless pit.
Q10. Which modern nation state, my brother,
is in defiance of more UN resolutions
than any other?
How have you scored on this one track quiz?
Do you even care what the answer is?
Do you dare to leave us all alone,
or will you join with us to tear it down.
stone by bloody stone?
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

International Support for Palestinian Intifada in Tehran

Local Editor
The Fifth International Conference for Supporting the Palestinian Intifada was held in Tehran Saturday and its slogan was “the Palestinians are not looking for a home… their home is Palestine”.
Parliamentary representatives of over 170 states have joined the conference after receiving invitations from the Islamic Shura Council of Iran.

The parliament speakers of Lebanon, Iraq, Qatar, Kuwait, and Algeria have joined the first session of the conference that discussed the regional developments, the future of Palestine, and ways for lifting the Israeli siege that has been imposed on Gaza since 2008.

The conference was inaugurated by the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran Grand Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei, who assured that efforts should be made to liberate all Palestine, not just part of it, and that this requires work rather than just speech.

Head of Hamas political bureau Khaled Masheal delivered a speech after that in which he wondered till when will the Palestinians keep seeking recognition from the UN without making efforts to liberate the occupied territories.

He pointed out: “It is true that Mahmoud Abbas has confronted the US pressure and insisted on going further will his steps… this reveals a courage that we appreciate… but rationality urges us to think that even if we gained UN membership, we will find that the land that we could establish our state on is an occupied one that is planted with settlements. And so, the question that should be asked to all the Palestinian factions is: How could we liberate our land first, and then establish a true state on it.”

Masheal emphasized that “all the facts that took place throughout the conflict with the Zionist project require resistance, for occupation, killings, displacement, abducations, and crimes that the Israelis have been committing for over 60 years require resistance.

Building the settlements and the barriers, stealing the land and the water, as well as the sky, call for resistance. Imposing an oppressive siege on the Gaza strip and continuously attacking it, as well as taking control over the West Bank, all this requires resistance. The Judaization of Al-Quds, changing its demographic structure, and destroying its historical features also require resistance.”

“The Arab’s abandonment years ago to the military option and wagering on what is so called peace without any point of strength require resistance, so does the failing of any settlement process and the International Community, as well as the American efforts for negotiations call for resistance.”

Head of Hamas political bureau assured that “the Arab spring as well as the Iranian people’s strength that ousted the Shah are great signs to the source of power. The source of power is not in the weakness of the leaders and their failing wagers, it is in the people who struggle and resist.”

For his part, Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri made a statement during the conference recalling the old and new Israeli crimes and pointing out that the cruel entity seeks through the Arab weakness and the Palestinian division to go on with its crimes and dominate until building settlements in all Palestine.

Speaker Berri indicated that the Israeli settlements have duplicated in the last period, especially in locations that surround Al-Quds and that the number of settlers in these locations have exceeded 500,000, adding that “the Judaization of Al-Quds is the central target of this policy…"

Berri further indicated that Israel follows the policy that says “me or nobody” without being aware that the world has changed, as the Lebanese for example shall never allow anyone to take control over their wealth whether on land or in sea.

“In this context, we highlight that the US is responsible for arming Israel with the most advanced weaponry, the budget of its aid to Israel during this year reached $20 billion, and the right of VITO is always in support of Israel’s benefit,” the Lebanese Speaker added.
“All this assure that Israel does not want peace. However, we are seeing positive developments, as Israel can no longer claim that it is the only democracy in the Middle East, for the great changes in the demographic structure have revealed its ethnicity.”

Berri further pointed out that the developments were also portrayed in Egypt as the people have assured that their demands were not only internal, they were rather external ones that included cancelling the Camp David Accord.
Kuwaiti National Assembly Speaker Jassem Al-Kharafi as well as Iraqi Parliament Speaker Osama Abdul Aziz Al-Nujaifi also made a statement during the conference stressing the importance of Palestine to all the Arabs, and the importance of taking a united stance for supporting it.
Source: Al Manar TV

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Kevin Barrett: A joyous affirmation of the end of identity politics

Gilad Atzmon: Kevin Barrett offers here an Islamic interpretation of The Wandering Who. I am obviously very happy with Barrett's reading of my text. Barrett sets my work within the exact framework I wish it to be- a critical reading of contemporary West from a philosphical and universal point of view.

Gilad Atzmon's The Wandering Who - a joyous affirmation of the end of identity politics

As a recovering angry Muslim, I cannot help loving fully-recovered ex-Zionist Jew Gilad Atzmon's The Wandering Who: A Study of Jewish Identity of Politics...and the firestorm it has sparked.

It isn't just the joy of watching Atzmon say all the things about Jewishness that need to be said, but that hardly anybody has the guts to say.

It isn't just the fun of watching Atzmon and his defenders like John Mearsheimer and Jonathan Cook rip apart Zionist thugs like Jeffrey Goldberg and clueless gatekeepers like Andy Newman.

It isn't just the irrepressible voice of Gilad Atzmon, the inspired thinker and jazz artist whose words and ideas are almost as beautiful to listen to as his music.

Most of all, I love this book for its larger message: Identity politics is a dead-end.

For Jews, the end of that dead-end road is the cul-de-sac they're stuck in over in Occupied Palestine.

For Muslims, who stand at the beginning of the dead-end road, Atzmon's book is a stark warning and a wake-up call: Do not let Islam turn into just another version of secularized Western identity politics.

Identity politics always tends toward the kind of politics espoused by zio-nazi neocon guru Leo Strauss, and his nazi mentor Carl Schmidt: The politics of loving the Self and hating the Other. Schmidt, and the even more radical Strauss, defined politics as the realm of human relations defined by enmity. All "political" activity, according to nazis and neocons, is just people banding together against an enemy.

"Jews" define themselves by despising "the goyim" - and the tables naturally turn. The same process underlies all nationalisms and tribalisms, including such subcultures as "gays" and "feminists"...perhaps even the "leftists" these subcultures lump themselves with. (The leftists I know do spend a lot of energy despising "the right"...)

What would be a more authentic way of doing politics? A way prophetic in its insistence on truth and justice...universal in its refusal to divide humanity into artificial categories...spiritual or religious in its consciousness of the weight of ethics and morality in the face of the infinite. It would be an anti-nazism, an anti-neoconservatism, a politics in line with universalist ex-Jew Leopold Bloom's attempt to explain to an anti-Semite "Love. The opposite of hatred."

If we ever transcend neocon/neonazi politics, it will be in part thanks to Gilad's book. As I have said elsewhere: Gilad Atzmon is the Moses of our time, calling all of us out of the Egypt of our boneheaded nationalisms and racialisms and exceptionalisms and chosen-people-isms toward some form of humanistic universalism. My own is Islamic: One God, one humanity.

For God is the ultimate Other, and an orientation of absolute surrender to God (the correct orientation, the prophets tell us) amounts to an attitude of complete openness to the Other. Secular identity politics offers the opposite: A badly-disguised worship of self.

Today, on Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, Jews are supposed to reach out and ask for forgiveness from those they have wronged. They are supposed to reach out to the human Other, in obedience to the ultimate Other, God.

True Torah Jews like Rabbi Weiss are doing that.

Zionist secular Jews, for the most part, are not.

When will Zionist Jews ever finally reach out and beg for forgiveness from the people they have not just wronged, but are in the process of genociding?

As Alan Hart asks: Will God forgive?

Remember, Alan: God's mercy is limitless - like human stupidity.

If the stupidity that has produced Zionism and its toxic brood of identity politics ever gives way to wisdom, Gilad Atzmon will deserve much of the credit. For if Joshua at the battle of Jericho could knock down the enemy's walls with his trumpet, maybe Gilad can knock down the Wall (not just Israel's, but also Pink Floyd's) with his jazz saxophone...and his inspired writings.

Rock on, Gilad! Allah bless you, brother!

You can now order Gilad Atzmon's New Book on or
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
In case you missed it:

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

Shana Tova to Gene, Lenin, Harry's Place and all the rest

Friday, September 30, 2011 at 10:33PM AuthorGilad Atzmon

I feel obliged to correct myself and to apologize to 'Richard Lenin Seymour Tomb' and his allies within the Islamophobic Award Winning Harry's Place Blog.

Yesterday morning I exposed Richard Seymour as a Zionist collaborator and I even published this comic image.
Apparently Gene, Harry's Place's Zionist cheerleader, wasn't impressed. He was offended by the exposure of his little Lenin on Rosh Hashana eve. He wrote to me:

'Well, Mr. Atzmon, let me vouch for Richard Seymour's anti-Zionist credentials: I've been following his blog for years, and I can assure you that he hates Israel as much as anyone I've come across on the web'

I indeed regret my obvious mistake. How could i miss it myself? I hope that the following images of Richard Seymour depict the true meaning and scope of Lenin's dedication to the 'anti Zionist cause'.

I hope that this would keep Gene, Lenin & "comrades' happy at least till Yom Kipur.

Shana Tova from Gilad Atzmon

The Wandering Who Finds Its way to the top!!!

It looks as if yesterday the Judaic street on pulled some self reflective lost souls. No1 was Victor Frankl's Man's Search For Meaning. No 2 was my Wandering Who. The Talmud and the Torah were far behind.

You can now order Gilad Atzmon's New Book on or

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Egypt warns US of conditioning military aid on democracy

<p>US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks alongside Egypt's Foreign Minister Mohammed Kamel Amr during a joint press conference following meetings at the US State Department, Washington, September 28, 2011. </p>
Photographed by AFP
Egypt has warned the US not to pass a new Senate bill that aims to suspend military aid until Egypt certifies its full functions as a democracy, the Washington Post reported on Friday.

According to the report, 1.3 billion dollars in aid for 2012 will be suspended until Egypt holds democratic elections and guarantees civil liberties.
The Washington Post quoted an anonymous source who said that Egyptian Foreign Minister Mohamed Kamel Amr asked US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other US officials to intervene.

According to the source, the US officials “know the value of the partnership between the United States and Egypt and how much such conditions and language would be detrimental to future cooperation.”

The US has been pressuring the Egyptian government, saying it hoped the emergency law - widely seen as a tool of repression under ousted President Hosni Mubarak - would be scrapped sooner than the military foresees next year.

The military council said on Tuesday that parliamentary elections would start in stages from 28 November, and invited candidates to start registering for the poll from 12 October.
Egypt has been the second-largest recipient of US aid since it signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1979, and the military assistance has been viewed as near-sacrosanct.

According to the Washington Post’s report, Clinton assured her Egyptian counterpart that the administration opposes the Senate conditions, which the Appropriations Committee approved this month.

“We will be working very hard . . . to convince the Congress that that is not the best approach to take,” Clinton said at a news conference Wednesday.

“We support the democratic transition, and we don’t want to do anything that in any way draws into question our relationship or our support,” she said.
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Endorsements for Gilad Atzmon's The Wandering Who

DateFriday, September 30, 2011 at 7:52AM AuthorGilad Atzmon
‘Gilad Atzmon has written an absorbing and moving account of his journey from hard core Israeli nationalist to a de-Zionized patriot of humanity and passionate advocate of justice for the Palestinian people. It is a transformative story told with unflinching integrity that all (especially Jews) who care about real peace, as well as their own identity, should not only read, but reflect upon and discuss widely.’

Professor Richard Falk, Albert G. Milbank Professor of International Law Emeritus, Princeton University, author of over 20 books, and UN Special Rapporteur for Occupied Palestinian Territories.
‘Gilad Atzmon has written a fascinating and provocative book on Jewish identity in the modern world. He shows how assimilation and liberalism are making it increasingly difficult for Jews in the Diaspora to maintain a powerful sense of their 'Jewishness.' Panicked Jewish leaders, he argues, have turned to Zionism (blind loyalty to Israel) and scaremongering (the threat of another Holocaust) to keep the tribe united and distinct from the surrounding goyim. As Atzmon’s own case demonstrates, this strategy is not working and is causing many Jews great anguish. The Wandering Who? should be widely read by Jews and non-Jews alike.’

John J. Mearsheimer is the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago
‘Gilad Atzmon’s book, The Wandering Who? is as witty and thought provoking as its title. But it is also an important book, presenting conclusions about Jews, Jewishness and Judaism which some will find shocking but which are essential to an understanding of Jewish identity politics and the role they play on the world stage.’

Karl Sabbagh is a journalist, television producer and the author of several books including A Rum Affair, Power Into Art, Dr Riemann’s Zeros and Palestine: A Personal History. He is currently the publisher of Hesperus Press
‘Gilad Atzmon‘s The Wandering Who? is a series of brilliant illuminations and critical reflections on Jewish ethnocentrism and the hypocrisy of those who speak in the name of universal values and act tribal. Relying on autobiographical and existential experiences, as well as intimate observations of everyday life, both informed by profound psychological insights, Atzmon does what many critics of Israel fail to do; he uncovers the links between Jewish identity politics in the Diaspora with their ardent support for the oppressive policies of the Israeli state.
Atzmon provides deep insights into “neo-ghetto” politics. He has the courage - so profoundly lacking among western intellectuals - to speak truth to the power of highly placed and affluent Zionists who shape the agendas of war and peace in the English-speaking world. With wit and imagination, Atzmon’s passionate confrontation with neo-conservative power grabbers and liberal yea sayers sets this book apart for its original understanding of the dangers of closed minds with hands on the levers of power.
This book is more than a “study of Jewish identity politics” insofar as we are dealing with a matrix of power that affects all who cherish self-determination and personal freedom in the face of imperial and colonial dictates.’

Professor James Petras, Bartle Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York, author of more than 62 books including The Power of Israel in the United States.
‘Atzmon’s insight into the organism created by the Zionist movement is explosive. The Wandering Who? tears the veil off of Israel’s apparent civility, its apparent friendship with the United States, and its expressed solicitude for Western powers, exposing beneath the assassin ready to slay any and all that interfere with its tribal focused ends.’

Professor William A. Cook, Professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California, and author of The Rape Of Palestine.
The Wandering Who? features Gilad Atzmon at his delightful and insightful best: engaging, provocative and persuasive.’

Jeff Gates, author of Guilt By Association: How Deception and Self-Deceit Took America to War
The Wandering Who? is a pioneering work that deserves to be read and Gilad Atzmon is brave to write this book!’

Dr. Samir Abed-Rabbo, author and Professor Emeritus in the field of international law. He is director of the Center for Arabic and Islamic Studies in Brattleboro, Vermont and the former Dean of The Jerusalem School for Law and Diplomacy.
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Gilad Atzmon: May vs. Salah

Sheikh Raed Salah won a great victory in Britain High Court yesterday, Sheikh Salah (52) was detained on the orders of the home secretary, Theresa May who was obviously following instructions from the real rulers of this country (in Jerusalem). Salah was then imprisoned for funding Hamas and leading a violent demonstration. The High Court, however, ruled that Sheikh Salah was held unlawfully and is entitled to compensation.

Since his arrival on 25 June, it has emerged that no one informed Sheikh Salah that he was prohibited from coming to Britain and that a Heathrow immigration officer who scanned his passport ignored a live alert to exclude him. Three days after entering the UK Sheikh Salah was detained at his west London hotel, handcuffed and taken to Paddington Green police station. He had been due to address a series of public meetings, including one at the Houses of Parliament.

The home secretary subsequently served a deportation notice on him, on the grounds that his presence in the UK was "not conducive to the public good". It is indeed amusing that the same British Government that amended Britain's Universal Jurisdiction Laws last week just to allow Israeli War Criminals to visit this kingdom, insisted on banning an Islamic leader and a devoted peace activist from doing the same.

Sheikh Salah challenged his removal and obtained bail in July. He is appealing against the decision to deport him in separate proceedings before an immigration tribunal which continues next week.
Earlier this week, it emerged that senior officials at the UK Border Agency had opposed the home secretary's decision to deport the Palestinian, warning that the evidence against him was disputed, open to legal challenge and the case "very finely balanced".

Neil Sheldon, appearing for the home secretary, had argued that “she (Theresa May) had acted reasonably and was legally entitled to order Salah's detention pending deportation.” It is now clear that the High Court of Britain wasn’t at all impressed with May’s ‘reasoning power’. However, I would suggest home secretary May to appeal to the London Rabbinical Court, I am sure that they will appreciate the depth of her ‘reasoning’. After all she was following orders from Jerusalem.

The incident was highly embarrassing for the home secretary as Sheikh Salah was the first high-profile case under her policy of broadening the pathetically Zionised lame definition of "non-violent extremists who encourage terrorism” that she pledged to take pre-emptive action against.

In order to reinstate Western values of tolerance, pluralism and human liberties, Britain must drift away from Jerusalem immediately.

You can now order Gilad Atzmon's New Book on or

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

UK government conflates criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism in Salah trial

30 September 2011

Sheikh Raed Salah was arrested in the UK on 28 June and has been since been subject to deportation proceedings.
Renowned Palestinian activist and religious leader Sheikh Raed Salah was at the UK’s Sheldon immigration court in Birmingham this week. His appeal against the government’s decision in June to ban him from the country is now being heard in earnest, with testimonies from Salah and several expert witnesses on Monday and Tuesday. In a related development, the High Court in London today ruled that part of Salah’s dention in June was unlawful.

For the first time, the government named as a “principle source” in its case against Salah the Community Security Trust (CST), a registered British charity with a record of smearing critics of Israel as anti-Semitic, and the only non-government source named in court. A day-one promise to check on further sources was not fulfilled on the second day.

Leader of the northern branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel, Salah entered the UK legally on 25 June for a speaking tour that included the Houses of Parliament. While Home Secretary Theresa May later said she banned him on 23 June, the Home Office now admits it had not told anyone about the exclusion order — least of all Salah or his tour organizers.

Salah was arrested on 28 June and detained for almost three weeks until released by a High Court judge on restrictive bail conditions. The Home Office is seeking to deport him, but were initially blocked from doing so when Salah launched an appeal.

The Electronic Intifada was in Birmingham, closely following the two-day proceedings. A panel consisting of Senior Immigration Judge N.W. Renton and Immigration Judge C.J. Lloyd listened quietly as witnesses were called by the legal teams of Salah and the Home Office.

Day one: Government witness cross-examined at length

Acting for the government, barrister Neil Sheldon called a single witness: Jonathan Rosenorn-Lanng, a senior case worker with the UK Border Agency (or UKBA, a part of the Home Office). Acting for Salah, Raza Husain then spent almost the entire day Monday cross-examining Rosenorn-Lanng.
Rosenorn-Lanng was the case worker from the UKBA’s Special Cases Directorate who prepared the secret document presented to the Home Secretary used as the basis for the exclusion order against Salah. Although he repeatedly emphasized under cross-examination that he was just a case worker and “would not pretend to be an expert at all” on Israel and the Palestinians, he said evidence he presents to the Home Secretary in such cases is always checked by experts in the relevant country or by “community experts.”

Husain pressed him to reveal precisely who had first asked for Salah to be banned from the UK, and who were the sources. Rosenorn-Lanng said he didn’t know how the case first came to the attention of the Home Secretary, but he claimed “the Jewish community” had felt threatened by Salah’s presence. Husain asked who exactly he meant by “the Jewish community,” pointing to several passages from the document. Rosenorn-Lanng confirmed four specific portions were obtained either directly from the CST, or from the CST via the government’s Department for Communities and Local Government.
Husain then questioned the credibility of the CST, citing the testimony of their witness Dr. Robert Lambert, retired head of the Metropolitan Police’s Muslim Contact Unit. Dr. Lambert testified that the CST “often tends to be biased” when it comes to Muslim criticisms of Israel, regularly conflating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. Rosenorn-Lanng said the UK government considers the group to be “fair and balanced.” At one point he commented that “we haven’t used every single thing the CST sent to us” and also pointed to a “small [UKBA] research team that has access to a number of websites.”
Salah’s attorney pressed Rosenorn-Lanng on places the CST (and hence also the UKBA) had misquoted, misrepresented and taken out of context Salah’s words to make it appear as if he was an anti-Semite. The UKBA document even has quotes from Salah in which the word “Jews” is inserted, it was said in court. Husain asked if the witnesses considered it misleading that in one version of a quote he had rendered the words “you Jews” outside of quote marks whereas in another version it was inside quote marks. Rosenorn-Lanng said it wasn’t misleading, characterizing it as a different presentation based on updated evidence.

Husain said the actual target of Salah’s condemnation was not Jews in general but the Israeli state, saying he was clearly not referring to notable Jewish critics of Israel such as Noam Chomsky, Ilan Pappe or Geoffrey Bindman (a British lawyer who put up some bail money for Salah).
Rosenorn-Lanng attempted to defend the credibility of the CST, at one point making the Freudian slip of describing it as a “eminent Israeli organization” before correcting himself that he meant to say “eminent Jewish organization.”

Salah accuses his critics of deliberately misquoting him

On Tuesday, proceedings accelerated as Salah’s team squeezed three DVDs of video evidence and all four of its witnesses in before the end of the two-day slot allocated by the court system. Dr. Stefan Sperl, an expert in Arabic poetry from the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, gave an analysis of the original text of a poem by Salah called “A Message to the Oppressors” saying it was addressed to all “perpetrators of injustice,” whether Jews or not. He said a Jerusalem Post article characterizing it as anti-Semitic was deliberately misleading. A version with the words “you Jews” inserted into the poem seems to have been used in the UKBA document.

Dr. Lambert, the retired head of the Metropolitan Police’s Muslim Contact Unit, testified in person that while the CST had a good record in the realm of public safety in terms of its role in providing security for Jewish communities, it was difficult for it to understand that legitimate political grievances with Israel and anti-Zionism were quite distinct from anti-Semitism.

David Miller, a sociology professor from the University of Strathclyde in Scotland, submitted his report on the CST as part of the evidence, and provided a copy of that report to The Electronic Intifada. It gives a short history of the CST and its “controversial monitoring of pro-Palestinian activists,” summarizing that it has a “tendency to treat denunciation of Israel or Zionism as evidence of anti-Semitism.”

Although perhaps most famous for its role in recording anti-Semitic incidents, and providing security for the UK Jewish community, the CST has been accused by some in that community of having a deeply pro-Israel agenda. Tony Greenstein, an anti-Zionist activist and blogger with a strong record of criticizing anti-Semites, has written about occasions when CST security have removed or barred Jewish anti-Zionists from public meetings. Greenstein also says the CST refused to record an anti-Semitic attack left on his blog because the commenter was a Zionist (see “CST Thugs Violently Eject 2 Jewish People from Zionist ‘Environmental’ Meeting”, “Community Security Thugs Bar Jewish Opponents of Gaza War from Liberal Judaism Meeting” and “When is an anti-semitic attack not anti-semitic? When it’s a Zionist who is being anti-Jewish,” Tony Greenstein’s blog).

But the centerpiece of the second day was the testimony of Raed Salah himself. Confidently speaking through a court translator, Salah assertively challenged Sheldon’s cross-examination and the government evidence for misrepresenting his words. On several occasions, he challenged Sheldon to quote him more fully and in context, questioning why he stopped some quotationss short.

For example, the words “you Jews” had been inserted into the original text of Salah’s poem (without even square brackets), seemingly by the Israeli press (“Civil liberties, The Jerusalem Post,” 20 June 2009).

That Jerusalem Post article was cited by UK bloggers who campaigned against Salah, such as Michael Weiss, to misleadingly portray him as an anti-Semite. Rosenorn-Lanng had earlier admitted that the UKBA had not sought the original text of the poem, relying instead on Internet sources (“PSC comes to Parliament …,” The Telegraph politics blog, 29 June 2011).

But Salah was clear that the poem was addressed to all perpetrators of injustice, regardless of religion, race or group. He pointed out that his poem also addressed Arab oppressors with certain references to the Quran, and also addresses Pharaoh as an oppressor. Salah said according to a certain historical interpretation of the Biblical and Quranic stories, Pharaoh was an Arab. And that he had oppressed the followers of Moses. “God is not a racist,” Salah said.

Aside from the mangled version of his poem, the other main citation the government gave was a speech Salah gave in Jerusalem in 2007, in which he had talked about Israeli soldiers shedding the blood of Palestinians. The citation had reportedly included the line: “Whoever wants a more thorough explanation, let him ask what used to happen to some children in Europe, whose blood was mixed in with the dough of the holy bread.”

Hostile press coverage in Israel inserted the word “Jewish” in square brackets before the words “holy bread” (“Islamic Movement head charged with incitement to racism, violence,” Haaretz, 29 January 2008).

But Salah’s legal team argued that he was actually referring to the Spanish Inquisition.

When Sheldon accused Salah of invoking the classically anti-Semitic blood libel, Salah countered: “this interpretation is out of bounds, and has no origin in fact.” He then went into some detail, saying that his purpose had been to liken the Israeli occupation forces to the inquisitions in Europe that used to shed the blood of children, and which used religion to perpetuate injustice.

Another government accusation against Salah was that he had encouraged Palestinians to become “shahids” (martyrs) in defense of the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. Rosenorn-Lanng had repeatedly used the Arabic word instead of the obvious translation. Salah again patiently went into some detail to explain the meaning of the word martyr. He clearly stated that, should the Israelis ever demolish al-Aqsa Mosque, he and other Muslims would refuse to leave the mosque, even it it meant their martyrdom at the hands of the Israelis.

There was a similar government attempt to misrepresent the word “intifada,” which Sheldon classified as dangerous language. Salah explained he was referring to a civic uprising against injustice, and as proof of this pointed to his call in the relevant speech to lawyers, heads of state, scholars and political parties to join the intifada.

At the end of the second day, the hearing was adjourned until Monday, 3 October, when the two attorneys will sum up their cases. After that, a judgment is expected within ten days.
Meanwhile, Sheikh Raed Salah is still living in London on bail, and must regularly report to the authorities, wear an electronic tag, refrain from addressing the public and observe a night-time curfew. Salah could return to Palestine if he chooses, but is staying in order to clear his name, and challenge the government ban.

Asa Winstanley is a freelance journalist based in London who has lived in and reported from occupied Palestine. He edited the book “Corporate Complicity in Israel’s Occupation”, out in October. His website is
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Kudos Mr. Abbas‏, the "tragic hero": Security coordination between PA and IOF continues despite statehood bid

"Kudos" Mr. Abbas‏, the "tragic hero": "Abbas would "now implement quickly the reconciliation agreement...would act quickly and decisively to really promote popular unarmed resistance throughout Palestine." In other words, Hamas and resistance factions should willingly lay arms or othetwise."

Promoting popular unarmed resistance in Action: 

Security coordination between PA and IOF continues despite statehood bid
[ 30/09/2011 - 09:48 PM ]

RAMALLAH, (PIC)-- Israeli Brig. Gen. Moti Almoz, the head of the Israeli "civil administration" in the West Bank has asserted Thursday that the security coordination between the PA security forces and their Israeli counterparts continues without interruption.
He also added that the PA bid for statehood at the UN this month hasn’t affected the security coordination, describing it as "vital" and that it was the only way to bridle and fight the Palestinian resistance.
He also alleged that by virtue of the security coordination between the PA security forces and the IOF troops, a group of Hamas fighters were arrested in Al-Khalil city, south of the West Bank, before they carryout "lethal" military attacks against Israeli targets.
Moreover, the IOF officer made it clear that the PA bid for statehood at the UN has nothing to do with the security coordination being an independent activity that must be continued under "all circumstances".
In the West Bank, the PA security forces served dozens of summonses for Palestinian youths, students, and employees suspected of being sympathetic toward Hamas and put them in detention from morning till evening without interrogating them, an officer then comes and tells to come the following day. This situation continues for one or two weeks.
Hundreds of Hamas supporters were arrested and detained in the PA jails, many of them fathers and husbands, for nearly four years now without charge or trial despite the people's clamors to immediately release them.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Palestinian UN Membership Roulette - by Stephen Lendman

by Stephen Lendman

As Palestinian legal advisor in 1987, Law Professor Francis Boyle drafted its Declaration of Independence, creating a Palestinian state.

Palestinians now want and deserve official recognition and full de jure UN membership. Washington and Israel remain obstructionist.

Doing so further isolates both countries. Globally, Obama and Netanyahu are laughing stocks, more caricatures than leaders.

Their contempt for rule of law principles, democratic values, and equal justice is palpable.

On the Progressive Radio News Hour to air October 2, Boyle said 170 nations support Palestinian UN membership, according to the Financial Times.

If all 193 nations vote, only 129 are needed to admit Palestine as the UN's 194th member. According to Boyle, it's achievable by mid-October if Abbas follows proper procedures.

Nonetheless, diplomatic roulette continues. On September 23, Abbas petitioned the Security Council for membership.

It recommends new members. Only the General Assembly admits them by a simple two-thirds majority of voting member states minus those abstaining.

Moreover, the 1950 Uniting for Peace Resolution 377 empowers the GA to override SC rejection if Abbas requests its use.

Nine SC votes are needed to force Washington to veto. On September 29, Haaretz writer Jack Khoury headlined, "Palestinian FM: Eight UN Security Council members support statehood bid," saying:

"Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki told the Voice of Palestine on Thursday that eight members (pledged) to support (its) application, and that great efforts are being made to secure a decisive ninth supporter."

Colombia and Bosnia are two options. Given Bogata's ties to Washington, hopes lie mainly with Bosnia. It's unlikely undecided permanent SC members Britain and France will vote yes.

States now pledging support include Russia, China, India, Brazil, South Africa, Lebanon, Nigeria and Gabon.

On September 28, Haaretz headlined, "Palestinian statehood bid to be reviewed by UN committee," saying:

The Security Council "unanimously agreed to hand the Palestinian application" to a standing committee on admissions, composed of all 15 SC members.

Despite a customary 35 days allowed, diplomats believe tabling will leave resolution in limbo for months. America, of course, wants none to comply with Israel and its powerful US Lobby, having near total control over Washington policy.

Abbas said he wants review completed in weeks. It remains to be seen if he'll petition the General Assembly with or without SC resolution or if America vetoes a forced vote.

On September 30, Haaretz writer Jack Khoury headlined, "Palestinians press Security Council members to back UN statehood bid," saying:
Next week, Abbas plans to visit Colombia "in an attempt to convince officials (there) to support" UN membership.
According to an unnamed Palestinian official:

"(W)ithin the Security Council, there are nine nations who had already recognized a Palestinian state, so the Palestinians expect those countries to support the (UN) proposal too."
However, he added, Washington is exerting enormous pressure on Colombia "through states such as Brazil, Argentina, and Chile, as well as pressure from the (pro-Palestinian) side being exerted by Russia and Arab states on Bosnia."

European Parliament Backs Palestinian UN Membership

Consisting of 736 MEPs (Members of the European Parliament), it functions as the EU's elected parliamentary body together with the Council of the European Union and European Commission.

On Thursday, it adopted a resolution endorsing the legitimacy of Palestinian membership, saying:

"The right of Palestinians to self-determination and to have their own state is unquestionable, as is the right of Israel to exist within safe borders."

Supported by an overwhelming majority of its members, it called on EU members to adopt a united decision for it within 1967 borders with Jerusalem the capital of both states. It also wants new settlement construction halted.

On September 21, Quartet members America, Russia, the EU and UN proposed a timeline for "realistic and serious" negotiations to begin in a month. They hope for comprehensive proposals within three months, substantial progress in six, and a firm deal by end of 2012.

Notably, the proposal excludes key issues, including settlements, 1967 borders, East Jerusalem as Palestine's capital, Gaza's siege, diaspora Palestinians right of return, and their legitimate elected Hamas government, among others.

In other words, it's little more than old wine in new bottles to deny full membership and keep Palestine oppressively occupied. No responsible leader would accept it.

On September 29, Ma'an News said the PLO Executive Committee rejected the proposal until all settlement construction stops. According to PLO official Yasser Abed Rabbo:

"The Palestinian leadership stresses clearly that it cannot accept holding negotiations that lack the minimum limits of responsibility and seriousness amied the continuation of settlements and stealing of land."

Israel's announced plan for 1,100 new East Jerusalem Gilo neighborhood homes on stolen Palestinian land provides more proof of its insincerely. According to Rabbo:

"The new decision regarding the settlements and its timing, during the meeting of the General Assembly and the statement of the world Quartet, comes to assure that Israel is not ready to respect the international will and the basics of the peace process, and the decisions of the world Quartet."

Moreover, Washington and Israeli demands for making Palestinian UN membership dependent on successful peace negotiations is an unacceptable red herring.

For decades, Palestinians wanted peace. Israel and Washington reject it. Negotiations since 1978 proved futile. Israel wants new ones to obstruct, not achieve, peace, as well as prevent full Palestinian UN membership. Agreeing to another charade assures it, leaving Palestinians at square one.

Moreover, at least since 1988, the PLO expressed willingness to recognize Israel's legitimacy. Notably on December 8, 1988, New York Times writer Steve Lohr headlined, "Arafat Says PLO Accepted Israel," saying:

"Yassir Arafat said today that the Palestine Liberation Organization accepted the existence of the state of Israel. His statement, which he presented as a milestone, was immediately dismissed in Israel and greeted coldly by the United States."

At a news conference, Arafat said:

The Palestinian parliament (exiled in Tunisia at the time) "accepted the existence of Israel as a state in the region (and) declared its rejection and condemnation of terrorism in all its forms."

"We accept two states, the Palestine state and the Jewish state of Israel."

Moreover, Hamas also willingly accepts Israel's right to exist in return for its recognition of a viable Palestinian state within 1967 borders (22% of historic Palestine) with East Jerusalem its capital.

Israel flat refuses. It calls Palestine's legitimate government "a terrorist organization." Moreover, Netanyahu and previous Israeli leaders offer nothing in return for Palestinians unconditionally accepting their demands.

That position assures failure and continued Israeli instigated conflict to claim Palestinians reject peace and don't deserve UN membership.

It's high time world leaders called that bluff, sanctioned Israel for its lawlessness, and granted Palestinians what they want and deserve.

It's essential Abbas demand it by petitioning the General Assembly through the 1950 Uniting for Peace Resolution 377 to achieve what's easily obtainable by mid-October.

With overwhelming world body support, it's slam dunk certain if he proceeds. It's essential that PLO officials demand it. Given Washington and Israeli obstructionism, there's no other way. This way works easily.

Palestine's UN Membership Application

Petitioning for membership is "based on the Palestinian people's natural, legal and historic rights and based on United Nations General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947 as well as the Declaration of Independence of the State of Palestine of 15 November 1988 and the acknowledgement by the General Assembly of this Declaration in resolution 43/177 of 15 December 1988."

The application affirmed Palestine's "commitment to the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on the vision of two-States living side by side in peace and security...."

It also called the PLO "the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people."

"Further, the Palestinian leadership stands committed to resume negotiations on all final status issues - Jerusalem, the Palestine refugees, settlements, borders, security and water - on the basis of the internationally-endorsed terms of reference, including the relevant United Nations resolutions....the principle of land for peace," and others.

On the Progressive Radio News Hour to air October 2, Francis Boyle said all essential elements are included.

Among world nations, only Israel has no fixed borders, so negotiations must establish rightful Palestinian ones. At the same time, they want statehood based on pre-1967 territory with East Jerusalem their capital. Accepting less is failure and betrayal.

Moreover, international law affirms the right of diaspora refugees to return. Statehood assures automatic citizenship for all Palestinians. As a result, they're free to leave and return home. No nation can legally stop them. It's non-negotiable law.

In addition, resources on Palestinian land and its offshore waters belong solely to Palestine. Israel has no right to steal or use them.

Settlement construction must also stop. Henceforth, their residents have a choice either to remain ex-pats in a foreign country under its laws or leave. Further, Palestinians no longer will be prohibited from living anywhere in their own country under Israeli imposed apartheid.

Rights and obligations come with officially recognized statehood and full UN membership. Palestinians willingly accept them.

After 63 years of waiting, world affirmation must assure what no longer can be denied is granted. Abbas must petition the General Assembly through Resolution 377 to secure it. Palestinians must demand it be done.

A Final Comment

Supporting wrong over right, Washington, Israel and US major media scoundrels pull out all stops to scuttle justice.

The New York Times, Washington Post, other broadsheet editorial positions, and pro-Israeli op-ed writers deplore it.

Washington Post writer and Fox News regular Charles Krauthammer is one of the worst. On September 29, his op-ed headlined, "Land without peace: Why Abbas went to the UN," saying:

"According to the accepted narrative, Middle East peace is made impossible by a hard-line Likud-led Israel that refuses to accept a Palestinian state and continues to build settlements."

"It is remarkable how this gross inversion of the truth has become conventional wisdom. In fact, (Netanyahu's) recogni(zes) a Palestinian state (and) a two-state solution. He is the only prime minister to agree to a settlement freeze (for) 10 months...."

Fact check

Where to begin! Krauthammer knows but won't say that Israel keeps stealing Palestinian land lawlessly. No Israeli leader ever recognized a legitimate Palestinian state, let alone within 1967 borders with East Jerusalem its capital.

Netanyahu is Israel's most duplicitous, out-of-control leader, a man who deplores peace, who once called negotiations "a waste of time," and whose hardline extremism chooses conflict over diplomacy.

Palestinians never had a legitimate peace partner. It's truer than ever now under Netanyahu and his ultranationalist Foreign Minister/Deputy Prime Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

Moreover, during Netanyahu's "freeze," construction proceeded apace building 2,000 units on stolen Palestinian land.

Yet Krauthammer accused Abbas of "boycotting the talks for nine months, showing up in the 10th, then walking out when the 'freeze' expired."

Fact check

Abbas, in fact, stood by his willingness to negotiate if Israel stopped stealing Palestinian land, dispossessing its residents, and bulldozing their homes.

"Abbas unwaveringly insists on the 'so-called' 'right of return,' which would demographically destroy Israel by swamping it with millions of Arabs, thereby turning the world's only Jewish state into the world's 23rd Arab state. And he has repeatedly declared....'We shall not recognize a Jewish state.' "

Fact check

The right of citizens to leave and return home is enshrined in international law. Diaspora Palestinians wishing to return would come to Palestine, not Israel. Thousands, not millions, may do it.

Peace treaties don't include provisions to recognize another country's religion. Principles of the 1994 Israel-Jordan agreement included borders, normalization, security, defense, Jerusalem, water, and Palestinian refugees. Israel never demanded Jordan recognize a Jewish state. It likely never came up in negotiations nor would it with any Arab state.

Yet Krauthammer called "Palestinian rejectionism (historically) consistent...."

Again, he conveniently inverts truth to suppress decades of Israeli demands, offering nothing more than insisting Palestinians enforce their own occupation. In other words, be their own jailer!

He continued with a litany of lies and distortions, including saying Abbas went to New York for "land without peace....(a)n independent Palestine in a continued state of war with Israel."

According to Krauthammer and others like him, only Jews have rights, not Arabs. Whatever Israel wants, it deserves. It includes stealing all occupied land it wishes, imprisoning Palestinians who object, and terrorizing millions of people wanting only to live free in peace on their own land.

Not if racists like Krauthammer get their way!

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at

Also visit his blog site at and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
chemicals, harmed by stun

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian