Saturday, 28 March 2009

NETANYAHU’S FIG LEAF: Trying to Turn Labour Party into Yisrael Beiteinu





NETANYAHU’S FIG LEAF
March 27, 2009 at 6:05 am

Even more than Lieberman, we should worry about Barak, warns Khalid Amayreh from occupied Jerusalem

Defence Minister Ehud Barak is being courted by prime minister-designate Benyamin Netanyahu to stay on in his new coalition government

Israeli prime minister-designate Benyamin Netanyahu and Labour Party leader Ehud Barak have reached an understanding that would pave the way for the latter to join the Likud-led government, expected to be sworn-in next week.

According to the agreement, Barak will remain defence minister and his party will receive a number of other less important portfolios, including agriculture, infrastructure, industry, trade and labour and one minister without portfolio.

Politically, the understanding stipulates that Israel will formulate a comprehensive plan for Middle East peace and cooperation, continue peace negotiations with the Palestinians and commit itself to peace accords already signed.

The agreement also speaks of “acting against illegal Arab and Jewish building” in the West Bank which may suggest that the next government will step up the virulent practice of demolishing Palestinian homes.

Israel has demolished as many as 20,000 Arab homes under a variety of pretexts since it occupied the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip in 1967. The Israeli government is also planning to destroy hundreds of homes in occupied East Jerusalem in what one Palestinian leader has described as “a decapitation of Arab demographic presence” in the city. The Palestinian Authority still hopes to make Jerusalem the capital of a prospective Palestinian state.
Israeli commentators argue that the Likud- Labour understandings are too generalised to give a clear picture as to the exact partnership between the two parties. However, the “constructive ambiguity” should give both sides a feeling that they got what they want.

Barak had said repeatedly that he wouldn’t join a right- wing coalition. However, in recent days, he apparently changed his mind despite stiff opposition within his party to joining the Likud coalition, which observers here already label the most right-wing government in Israel’s history.
The understanding between Barak and Netanyahu is not final, as it must be approved by the Labour Party general assembly which was due to meet to vote on the deal.

A solid plurality, perhaps a majority, within Labour is firmly against joining the Likud-led government for ideological reasons, and also because many traditional Labourites see Barak’s acceptance to play a “second fiddle” to Netanyahu as an expression of cheap opportunism.

This, labour leaders calculate, would seriously harm Labour’s image as a progressive party and prospective alternative to right-wing demagogy. Barak himself used to condemn Likud as representing “swinish capitalism”.

Ophir Pines-Paz is one of the most ardent opponents of Barak and any partnership with the Likud. He says that Netanyahu will only use Barak and whoever will join him from the Labour Party as “a mere fig leaf” to blur and hide the true nature of the next government.

“It is completely natural for Barak to want to join the Bibi-Lieberman government,” says Pines-Paz, the only MK who left Olmert’s government after Yisrael Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman joined it. “He doesn’t have a problem with their ideology. Perhaps you can remind me how many outposts Barak has evacuated so far and how exactly he abided by the Talia Sasson on settlement expansion,” he said, referring to an official government report published on 8 March 2005.

The report, commissioned by former prime minister Ariel Sharon, was headed by the former head of the State Prosecution Criminal Department, Talia Sasson.

On 23 March, Barak’s opponents within the Labour Party accused him of “trying to turn Labour into Yisrael Beiteinu” and of “acting as if he got 50 seats in the Knesset, rather than suffering an electoral defeat.”

According to Haaretz, seven Labour lawmakers including Pines-Paz sent an unprecedented letter to Netanyahu and his foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, in which they declared that they won’t be bound by the understandings reached between Barak and the Likud leader.

“This is the first time in the history of the Labour Party that the chairman has set up a coalition negotiating team without a thorough and extensive discussion within the party and without getting the approval of any of the party’s organs. It is a gross violation of the party’s constitution.”

The rebels also warned Netanyahu of the consequences of Barak’s actions. “You should know that the negotiating team established by the Barak faction within the Labour Party does not enjoy our backing or the backing of any authorised party official. It is unfortunate that the party chairman chose to manage party matters in this way. Given the circumstances, we must inform you that you can’t count on our support regarding any agreement that you may reach with Ehud Barak.”

Seeking to justify his decision to join the Netanyahu government, Barak told fellow Labour lawmakers that his membership in the government would guarantee that it won’t go too far to the right.

However, this argument is viewed as largely disingenuous and lacking in rectitude.

Barak has already shown he agrees with Likud on expanding settlements. Under his authority as defence minister in the last government, settlement expansion in the West Bank continued unabated despite commitments made to the Americans to freeze expansion. According to prominent Israeli journalist Akiva Eldar, several new settlements created recently were marketed as “merely new neighbourhoods of existing settlements”.

In some cases, the new neighbourhoods are more than five kilometres away of the mother settlement. “Who wants to send his children to a kindergarten on the other side of the fence, not to mention the cost of the infrastructure and the services.” Eldar asked.

In addition, there are signs that Barak is already trying to endear himself to the extreme right-wing parties, such as the settler party, Habayt Hayahudi (Jewish Home) as well as Shas and United Torah Judaism, formerly known as Agudat Yisrael.

His role is clearly to act as a facilitator to the fascist- minded and pro-settler parties, to “launder” their manifestly illegal settlements (illegal even by Israeli standards) built on stolen Arab land.

Last week, Barak, as defence minister, decided to legalise a new settlement Sansana in the southern Hebron hills, which even the Israeli courts declared to be illegal. Similarly, he refused to uphold a court order to dismantle houses built on stolen Palestinian land in the Ofra settlement in the northern West Bank.

In light of this, it is not hard to predict how the Netanyahu-Lieberman-Barak government, backed by settler and extreme religious parties, will function.

Using the words of one Israeli journalist, the next government will have a modus operandi based on deception, subterfuge and prevarication. “It will be a government that will claim to be committed to peace while in reality do everything it can to make peace as elusive and as distant as ever.”


28/03/2009 Labor Chairman Ehud Barak caused uproar in his party by leading a move to suspend its legal advisor, attorney Yoram Avrahami. Labor's secretary-general, MK Eitan Cabel, criticized Barak on Friday and said he was attempting to "turn Labor into Yisrael Beiteinu".

Attorney Haim Cohen, who is affiliated with Israeli Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, will take Avrahami's place until then. Cabel was absent from the Labor's secretariat meeting Friday, during which the decision was made to suspend Avrahami pending a hearing on his case.

Attorney Avrahami was suspended Friday by Labor's central committee after he had allegedly published legal advice without consulting with Barak.

Cabel said the measures against the legal adviser "are a continuation of various measures implemented by the Labor party chairman in recent days with the purpose of attempting to turn Labor into Yisrael Beiteinu."

Cabel's mentioning of Yisrael Beiteinu was apparently a reference to its leader Avigdor Lieberman, against whom an investigation into alleged corruption is underway.

Avrahami had said that the party's emergency convention on Tuesday contravened the party's regulations, which require a three-week period after the elections before a convention could be called. The convention was called at Barak's behest to vote on his proposed motion to join a Likud-led government.

Cabel, formerly a stalwart Barak ally but now one of the party's most vocal opponents to entry into the coalition, said the decision was legally invalid.

"A gathering of friends in the chairman's room at the Defense Ministry is not a legal gathering of the party secretariat, and in any case there is no validity to a decision made at a bizarre gathering in which even the secretary general is not present," said Cabel, who did not attend the meeting in which Avrahami was suspended.

"The chairman must also know that Labor is not Yisrael Beiteinu - it has a constitution and institutions."

Cabel added that Barak had broken a promise made on Thursday in which the Labor Party leader had pledged to work for party unity.

Cabel was not the only one to criticize the decision. Labor's youth movement also issued a statement to this effect. "The chairman Barak has begun to quickly cleanse anyone who would stand in his way, as was the manner in many a dark regime," the statement said, referring to the decision, led by Barak, to join the Likud's government.

Attorney Haim Cohen has been brought in as a temporary replacement for Avrahami.


Cheney War Crimes




Cheney War Crimes

Matthew Rothschild – The Progressive
March 25, 2009

President Obama needs to tell Attorney General Eric Holder to indict Dick Cheney, right now, for war crimes.

Just look at the statute, Title 18 of the U.S. Criminal Code, Section 2441. It says that someone is guilty of a war crime if he or she commits a “grave breach of common Article 3” of the Geneva Conventions. And then it defines what a grave breach would be.

One such breach is torture, or the conspiracy to commit torture, which Cheney was clearly in on, as when he repeatedly defended waterboarding and talked about the need to go to the “dark side” Here’s the language from the statute: “The act of a person who commits, or conspires to commit, an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering . . . upon another person within his custody or physical control for the purpose of obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation, coercion, or any reason based on discrimination of any kind.”

Another grave breach is “cruel or inhuman treatment,” or the conspiracy to inflict such treatment. Again, Cheney was supervising such treatment in the White House, which would qualify as committing this crime. One time, it got so ghoulish that Attorney General John Ashcroft asked the other principals, “Why are we talking about this in the White House? History will not judge this kindly.”

Here’s the language on “cruel or inhuman treatment”: “The act of a person who commits, or conspires or attempts to commit, an act intended to inflict severe or serious physical or mental pain or suffering . . . including serious physical abuse, upon another within his custody or control.”

An additional breach is “mutilation or maiming.” Since some detainees say they no longer have the complete functioning of arms or limbs, Cheney may be on the hook here, too. “The act of a person who intentionally injures, or conspires or attempts to injure, or injures whether intentionally or unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under this subsection, one or more persons . . . by disfiguring the person or persons by any mutilation thereof or by permanently disabling any member, limb or organ of his body, without any legitimate medical or dental purpose.”

“Intentionally causing serious bodily harm” is yet another grave breach. The statute defines this as: “The act of a person who intentionally causes, or conspires or attempts to cause, serious bodily injury to one or more persons, including lawful combatants, in violation of the law of war.”

For each of these offenses, Cheney could receive life in prison, according to the statute.

That is where he belongs.

And it’s time for Obama to stop pussyfooting around. He should indict, arrest, and prosecute Cheney.

“There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes,” said Major General Antonio Taguba, USA (Ret.), in the preface to the Physicians for Human Rights report, “Broken Laws, Broken Lives”. “The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account.”

That question is now firmly on Obama’s desk.

And if he continues to dodge it, he’ll make a sick joke of the pious claim that we are a nation of laws, not men.

Rights orgs: Infighting jeopardizes our cause and our rights

Link

Statement, various undersigned, 27 March 2009

The following letter was sent on 24 March 2009.

Leaders and representatives of Palestinian political factions, parties, and movements,

Based on our faith in our national, moral, and legal responsibility and recognizing our duty to work towards building and strengthening the democratic edifice of the prospective Palestinian state -- which must be grounded on political, intellectual and cultural pluralism; on the principle of peaceful succession of power; on promotion of the values of justice, equity, tolerance, and equality; on respect for human rights and freedoms; on the right of all Palestinians to security and safety; and on application of the rule of law without any undue discrimination -- we, the undersigned Palestinian human rights organizations, hereby and articulate our demands of the Palestinian political authorities for measures to be taken in order to overcome the pains and agonies of the crisis generated by internal fragmentation and conflict.

We appreciate the Palestinian political factions' recourse to the principle of dialogue and peaceful settlement as an approach to solving and exterminating disputes. Not only have they jeopardized our national cause and legitimate right to self-determination, but the contentions of recent times have also exerted an adverse, destructive impact on individual Palestinian rights. Due to infringements and violations, these rights have witnessed a sharp setback that has effectively rendered them meaningless. Innumerable human rights have been breached during the period of internal division, including the right to life; the right to physical safety and security; the right to immunity against arbitrary detention, torture, inhuman, cruel and degrading treatment or punishment; the right to freedom of opinion and expression; the right to participation in political life; the right to employment in the public service; the right to freedom of association; as well as other rights that have been divested of their inclusive content. In both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, one's ability to enjoy and exercise these fundamental human rights has been contingent on political and partisan affiliation.

Undoubtedly, political and intellectual disagreements, and divergence of opinion, are the essence and spirit of democracy. They are a positive indicator of how advanced the social, cultural, and intellectual mobility is in a society. Intellectual and political differences and debates have been a source of pride for all Palestinians over the decades. Multiple intellectual and political opinions, beliefs and tendencies are an embodiment of deep-rooted awareness and faith in Palestinian tradition of free expression. Unfortunately, however, we have deviated from this approach. We have inclined towards intellectual unilateralism as well as adopting policies of alienation and rejection of the other. We have further invoked force and violence as a tool to impose particular measures, thereby adversely impacting our national interests. Moreover, citizens' rights and freedoms have been at the mercy of political debates. Individual rights and freedoms have been valueless; whether they exist or not is weighed by political affiliation.

As Palestinian human rights organizations, and as we renew our support of the current dialogue which we regard as the only avenue towards Palestinian unity, we do hope that all participants in the Cairo Summit consider seriously the tragedies and atrocities generated by internal political divisions. To move forward from this painful era in a sensible and objective manner, the following measures must be approved and implemented:
  • Full apologies to be offered victims and their families, as well as reparations for damage and pain inflicted on them as a result of the violation of their rights and freedoms, including all acts of murder, torture, arbitrary detention, and other encroachments on human rights and freedoms safeguarded by the Palestinian Basic Law.
  • Apologies to be offered to the Palestinian people as a whole for the atrocities committed. Murder, destruction, and sabotage caused to Palestinian people, institutions and properties have negatively affected the development, and progress of our citizens' lives. All Palestinians, not a single faction or group, are duly entitled to these resources.
  • Pursuance of accountability in order to ensure that no leader, official, or individual who ordered or perpetrated any crimes or violations of human rights and freedoms is immune from punishment or benefits from a policy of impunity. Anyone convicted for the perpetration of such crimes should be removed from any political or security position in the Palestinian National Authority.
  • The establishing of an independent, impartial committee to investigate all crimes and encroachments committed throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The committee will have a clear mandate and comprise persons with relevant professional experience.
  • Accountability and prosecution of perpetrators of crimes and violations of Palestinian rights and freedoms is the sole measure that can prevent the repeated invocation of violence and desire to take revenge for reported atrocities.

Respectfully yours,

Al-Haq
Al-Mezan Centre for Human Rights
Al-Quds Centre for Legal Aid and Human Rights
ADDAMEER Prisoners Support and Human Rights Association
AL-DAMEER Association for Human Rights
Defence for Children International - Palestine Section
Women's Centre for Legal Aid and Counselling
INSAN Association
Ramallah Centre for Human Rights Studies

"The best outcome for Washington would be that the summit in Doha ... fails to resurrect SYRIA"

Source

David Schenker, at WINEP, here
"...Despite appearances, however, differences -- particularly regarding Iran and support for "resistance" -- persist. Syria continues to refuse suggestions that it change the strategic nature of its relationship with Iran and is pressing Egypt and Saudi Arabia to adopt a more sympathetic stance toward "resistance groups." In an interview with al-Safir on March 25, Syrian president Bashar al-Asad downplayed progress on reconciliation, likening the process to an airplane that "took off . . .[but] if the engines power subside[s], the plane will collapse....

...Perhaps not surprisingly, given Syria's improved status within the Arab League, the topic of Lebanese elections does not appear on the agenda. Syria, however, did manage to insert two items into the program: a reaffirmation of Arab opposition to U.S. economic sanctions on Syria and a condemnation of "the attempts aimed at politicizing the principles of justice." The second point reflects Syria's rejection of the Hariri Tribunal, echoing al-Asad's recent threat that if the tribunal were politicized, "Lebanon would be the first to pay the price." ...

....the best outcome for Washington would be that the summit, which almost certainly will lend its imprimatur to an indicted Sudanese war criminal, will not further legitimize Hamas"
Posted by G, Z, & or B at 5:31 PM

Anti-Semites on the Rise in Europe

Source


Oi God please help us. It is a disaster. This meshegine klezmer Atzmond is appearing at Oxford University! Just next week he will be talking about anti-Semitism with one of our most committed media zuker pushke, David'le Aaronovitch. At first i thought it was a joke. I was sure Atzmond was there so everybody can practice throwing West Bank tomatoes at his head, but then I saw his picture all over their web site. And they don't even mention the other 2 speakers, just Atzmond! I can’t believe it.... I know what will happen. This sax-loving, self-hating meshigine will tell all those clever-clog, big brains that Jews better look in the mirror, as if he doesn't know this is what we hate the most! Oi oi oi…after everything we suffered, why must he do it?

It is amazing this Azmond, every time we are sure we finished him off, he just grows bigger and bigger. He is like a cultural Schwarzenegger, totally indestructible. We tried to get him branded a racist in the Goydian, but they devote half a whole page on him. Everywhere I look I see his ugly, self-hating, watermelon face smiling back at me. Even the Turkish Prime Minister want to kiss his t*****es…..

And now this?! Oxford, the most famous Yeshiva in the planet!? Someone told me Oxford is even more clever than Brighton polytechnic.

United Against Oxford

Meshigine -Lunatic
Klezmer - sounds like folk music with no beauty.
Zuker Pushke -sweetie pie
Yeshiva- University open for male Jews only

T******es - something too rude for an Auntie to say

Posted by Auntie Ziona at 2:32 PM

The Impact of the Coming U.S.-Iran Detente

Source

Patrick Seale in the Middle East Times, here

"...Israel has expressed great unease. Its greatest fear is that a U.S.-Iran detente will erode its own position as America's closest regional ally, and might even threaten its monopoly of nuclear weapons. It is pressuring the United States to make its dialogue with Iran short - if dialogue there must be - and to redouble its sanctions against Tehran, in order to compel it to end its nuclear program. In turn, Saudi Arabia and Egypt are alarmed at Iran's rise as a regional rival and will need reassurance from Washington that their interests will not be ignored in any U.S.-Iranian deal...

Obama has understood that Iran's help will be needed to stabilize Iraq; to curb the Taliban in Afghanistan; to moderate hardline Palestinian factions in the search for an Arab-Israeli settlement; and to contribute to Lebanon's political harmony. Iran has become a regional power that can no longer be isolated or ignored, since its influence extends into all the interconnected conflicts in the area.

Today, there is a glaring contrast between Obama's words of conciliation addressed to Tehran and the continued attempts by U.S. Treasury officials - Stuart Levey prominent among them - to broaden financial sanctions against Iran, starve its foreign trade of finance, and force international banks to suspend all business with Iranian banks. As recently as this month, the U.S. blacklisted 11 companies linked to Iran's Bank Melli. In addition, Dennis Ross, the recently appointed Obama administration's point-man on Iran, has long been closely associated with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), a think-tank dedicated to influencing America's Middle East policy in a pro-Israeli direction. WINEP continues to campaign stridently for sanctions against Iran, and for military action if sanctions fail. ..

Obama will need to resolve these contradictions if he is to be heard in Tehran, and if the dialogue he is seeking is not to be sabotaged by officials and special interests in his own government..."

Posted by G, Z, & or B at 9:37 AM

Saudis bend over,... while Mubarak fails to grasp the Damascene moment,,,"

Source

In AP, here

At the same time, Saudi Arabia and Egypt have an ulterior motive. With Obama also pursuing dialogue directly with Iran, Washington's Arab allies want to make sure their interests are not left out if the United States and Iran reach any reconciliation........

During the meeting, oil-rich Saudi Arabia offered Assad a financial package to offset Iranian aid to Syria, if it breaks with Tehran, a Saudi royal adviser told The Associated Press. Abdullah also promised Assad that the kingdom will mobilize Arab support to back Syria in negotiations for a peace deal with Israel, aimed at winning back the Golan Heights, seized by Israel in 1967.

"What we said was, 'Come back to the Arab fold, and after that everything you need can come,'" said the Saudi official, who was briefed on the March 11 meeting. He spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the closed-door talks.

Assad had a further condition: Arab help to ensure than an international tribunal does not name Assad or his close associates in the case of the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, the Saudi adviser said......

Holding out, Assad proposed that the sides find a way to manage their differences - basically, agree to disagree civilly.

But Egypt's Mubarak took a tough tone, pressing for Assad to commit immediately to Egyptian and Saudi demands. He bluntly warned Assad that there would be no generous Arab overtures until Syria shows a real change of behavior, an Egyptian official said, also speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the closed-door talks.

The mini-summit appeared on the verge of collapsing. But the emir of Kuwait, who was also attending, stepped in and persuaded the two sides to continue talks in the coming weeks, said the Egyptian official, who was also briefed on the meeting. So far, there has been no sign of a breakthrough. ...... the Egyptian-mediated talks with Hamas have since broken up without an agreement. "

Posted by G, Z, & or B at 3:12 PM

An Army of Extremists






An Army of Extremists

Christopher Hitchens - Slate
March 25, 2009

How some military rabbis are trying to radicalize Israeli soldiers.

Recent reports of atrocities committed by Israeli soldiers in the course of the intervention in Gaza have described the incitement of conscripts and reservists by military rabbis who characterized the battle as a holy war for the expulsion of non-Jews from Jewish land. The secular Israeli academic Dany Zamir, who first brought the testimony of shocked Israeli soldiers to light, has been quoted as if the influence of such extremist clerical teachings was something new. This is not the case.

I remember being in Israel in 1986 when the chief army "chaplain" in the occupied territories, Rabbi Shmuel Derlich, issued his troops a 1,000-word pastoral letter enjoining them to apply the biblical commandment to exterminate the Amalekites as "the enemies of Israel." Nobody has recently encountered any Amalekites, so the chief educational officer of the Israeli Defense Forces asked Rabbi Derlich whether he would care to define his terms and say whom he meant. Rather evasively—if rather alarmingly—the man of God replied, "Germans." There are no Germans in Judaea and Samaria or, indeed, in the Old Testament, so the rabbi's exhortation to slay all Germans as well as quite probably all Palestinians was referred to the Judge Advocate General's Office. Forty military rabbis publicly came to Derlich's support, and the rather spineless conclusion of the JAG was that he had committed no legal offense but should perhaps refrain in the future from making political statements on the army's behalf.

The problem here is precisely that the rabbi was not making a "political" statement. Rather, he was doing his religious duty in reminding his readers what the Torah actually says. It's not at all uncommon in Israel to read discussions, featuring military rabbis, of quite how to interpret the following holy order from Moses, in the Book of Numbers, Chapter 31, Verses 13-18, as quoted from my 1985 translation by the Jewish Publication Society. The Israelites have just done a fairly pitiless job on the Midianites, slaughtering all of the adult males. But, says their stern commander-in-chief, they have still failed him:

Moses, Eleazer the priest, and all the chieftains of the community came out to meet them outside the camp. Moses became angry with the commanders of the army, the officers of thousands and the officers of hundreds, who had come back from the military campaign. Moses said to them, "You have spared every female! Yet they are the very ones who, at the bidding of Balaam, induced the Israelites to trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, so that the Lord's community was struck by the plague. Now, therefore, slay every male among the children, and slay also every young woman who has known a man carnally; but spare every young woman who has not had carnal relations with a man."

Moses and Eleazar the priest go on to issue some complex instructions about the ritual cleansings that must be practiced after this exhausting massacre has been completed.

Now, it's common to hear people say, when this infamous passage and others like it come up, that it's not intended to be "taken literally." One also often hears the excuse that some wicked things are done "in the name of" religion, as if the wicked things were somehow the result of a misinterpretation. But the nationalist rabbis who prepare Israeli soldiers for their mission seem to think that this book might be the word of God, in which case the only misinterpretation would be the failure to take it literally. (I hate to break it to you, but the people who think that God's will is revealed in scripture are known as "religious." Those who do not think so must try to find another name for themselves.)

Possibly you remember Dr. Baruch Goldstein, the man who in February 1994 unslung his weapon and killed more than two dozen worshippers at the mosque in Hebron. He had been a physician in the Israeli army and had first attracted attention by saying that he would refuse to treat non-Jews on the Sabbath. Now read Ethan Bronner's report in the March 22 New York Times about the preachments of the Israeli army's latest chief rabbi, a West Bank settler named Avichai Rontzski who also holds the rank of brigadier general. He has "said that the main reason for a Jewish doctor to treat a non-Jew on the Sabbath … is to avoid exposing Diaspora Jews to hatred." Those of us who follow these things recognize that statement as one of the leading indicators of a truly determined racist and fundamentalist. Yet it comes not this time in the garb of a homicidal lone-wolf nut bag but in the full uniform and accoutrement of a general and a high priest: Moses and Eleazar combined. The latest news, according to Bronner, is that the Israeli Defense Ministry has felt compelled to reprimand Rontzski for "a rabbinal edict against showing the enemy mercy" that was distributed in booklet form to men and women in uniform (see Numbers 31:13-18, above).

Peering over the horrible pile of Palestinian civilian casualties that has immediately resulted, it's fairly easy to see where this is going in the medium-to-longer term. The zealot settlers and their clerical accomplices are establishing an army within the army so that one day, if it is ever decided to disband or evacuate the colonial settlements, there will be enough officers and soldiers, stiffened by enough rabbis and enough extremist sermons, to refuse to obey the order. Torah verses will also be found that make it permissible to murder secular Jews as well as Arabs. The dress rehearsals for this have already taken place, with the religious excuses given for Baruch Goldstein's rampage and the Talmudic evasions concerning the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin. Once considered highly extreme, such biblical exegeses are moving ever closer to the mainstream. It's high time the United States cut off any financial support for Israel that can be used even indirectly for settler activity, not just because such colonization constitutes a theft of another people's land but also because our Constitution absolutely forbids us to spend public money on the establishment of any religion.

hristopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair and the Roger S. Mertz media fellow at the Hoover Institution in Stanford, Calif.

Friday, 27 March 2009

Obama Pulling Karzai's Strings

Obama Pulling Karzai's Strings

Ron Jacobs – Antiwar
March 26, 2009

In November 1963, the US-sponsored president of southern Vietnam, Ngo Dinh Diem, was murdered by members of that country's military. The murder was (at the least) tacitly supported by Washington and was partially due to Diem's attempts to operate independently of Washington in regards to the war his military was fighting against Washington's enemies – the National Liberation front and the northern Vietnamese army. After a series of political machinations that included a stint by Nguyen Cao Ky as prime minister, a general named Nguyen van Thieu was named president after a show election in 1967. He was chosen because he would do Washington's bidding. His administration was known for its corruption and acquiescence to Washington.

In the middle of March 1970, while Prince Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia was out of his country, the United States government engineered his removal from power. He was replaced by military strongman and CIA puppet Lon Nol. Sihanouk had consistently refused to allow US troops to operate in Cambodia. Simultaneously, he ignored the presence of Vietnamese troops fighting the United States military in Vietnam. Of course, this angered the Pentagon. Indeed, the United States Air Force had been illegally bombing the country of Cambodia for close to a year without telling the US public and much of Congress. Within weeks of the CIA coup in Cambodia, Richard Nixon ordered a ground invasion of Cambodia. That invasion was met with a massive wave of public protest across the US and much of the rest of the world. The protests resulted in the deaths of six students in the United States, untold numbers of injuries, and a national crisis that was only calmed after Nixon agreed to withdraw the ground troops.

Since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, the United States has put in place a number of men to lead that nation according to Washington's desires. Some of these men were appointed and were clearly pawns of Washington, while others came to power wearing a pretend cloak of legitimacy provided by elections controlled by Washington's occupation authority. All of their governments were known for their corruption. The current leaders exist at Washington's pleasure, even though they pretend otherwise. This is obvious from the backtracking done by the current Prime Minister al-Maliki regarding the withdrawal of US forces from his country. Back in December, much was made of the fact that he was insisting on a complete and unconditional withdrawal from Iraqi cities by June 2009 and a total withdrawal from the country by 2011. Recent statements by Mr. al-Maliki indicate that he is no longer insisting on this timetable.

I mention these governments and their fates in light of recent news coming out of Kabul, Afghanistan. According to many news reports over the past few months, Washington is growing frustrated with the regime of Hamid Karzai. If one recalls, the government of Mr. Karzai is a creation of Washington as much as those of Nguyen Van Thieu or Lon Nol. In other words, he owes his current position of power to powerful elites in DC, not to any people or factions in Afghanistan. Yet, he has spoken out repeatedly against US air raids in Afghanistan that indiscriminately kill civilians. Like the governments mentioned above, Mr. Karzai's government is rampant with corruption. History tells us that Washington is quite willing to look the other way when it comes to corruption as long as the crooks under their control do its bidding. Indeed, the very presence of US forces and money is part of the dynamic which encourages such corruption.

Apparently, Mr. Karzai is no longer considered to be playing by those rules and attempts to unseat him are growing. According to reports out of European capitals, Washington intends to create a new appointed position in the Afghan government – a chief of staff or prime minister – that will be given the real power to carry out Washington's goals for the Afghanistan it wants to create. By creating this position and filling it with a man willing to do Washington's bidding, Mr. Karzai's presidency will be rendered politically impotent. Reports about these and other changes in Washington's Afghan strategy are currently being dismissed by Obama administration spokespeople. As for Karzai, he responded by saying (without irony) "Afghanistan will never be a puppet state."

I suppose Mr. Karzai should be grateful that he isn't being murdered like Mr. Diem.

US, NATO Wage World's Largest and Longest War


Rick Rozoff - Global Research
March 26, 2009


Stop NATO

On October 7 it will enter its ninth calendar year and with the projected deployment of at least 30,000 more American and thousands of more fellow NATO nations' troops this year it promises to go on indefinitely.

It is the second longest war, both on the air and ground fronts, in United States' history, with only its protracted involvement in Indochina so far exceeding it in length.

The Afghan war is also the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's first armed conflict outside of Europe and its first ground war in the sixty years of its existence. It has been waged with the participation of armed units from all 26 NATO member states and twelve other European and Caucasus nations linked to NATO through the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, the Partnership for Peace and the Adriatic Charter with the first-ever invocation of the Alliance's Article 5 mutual military assistance provision.

The twelve European NATO partners who have sent troops in varying numbers to assist Washington and the Alliance include the continent's five former neutral nations: Austria, Finland, Ireland, Sweden and Switzerland.

The European NATO and partnership deployments count among their number troops from six former Soviet Republics - with Azerbaijan, Georgia and Ukraine tapped for recent reinforcements and the three Baltic states represented disproportionately to their populations - although Western officials and media refrain from using words like invasion, empire and occupation that were tossed around so profligately in the 1980s.

The conflict marks the first time since the Vietnam War that US, Australian, New Zealand and South Korean troops have fought in the same campaign in the same theater. (Although all four also had troops in Iraq after March of 2003, only American forces were engaged in combat. In Afghanistan, however, over 1,000 Australian troops, including special forces, participate in counterinsurgency operations and ten of their soldiers have been killed.)

In all, 42 nations have military contingents ranging from a handful to thousands of troops serving under NATO in a war nearly as far removed from the North Atlantic as could have been imagined and embroiled in an endless engagement because of a 1949 commitment by the major Western powers to render each other military aid in the event of a conflict in Western Europe or North America.

Over a thousand US, NATO and NATO partner nations' soldiers have been killed in the war, including servicemen from all three Baltic States, Australia and South Korea.

From the beginning of the invasion of and war in Afghanistan in early October of 2001 under the aegis of so-called Operation Enduring Freedom, which commenced with US and British air and missile attacks, the model used seventeen months later in Iraq, the conflict has not been limited to Afghanistan itself but rather has exploited the nation's alleged and highly tenuous connections to the September 11, 2001 attacks on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington to situate US and other NATO military forces in several neighboring and nearby nations, including airbases and troop and naval deployments in Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan and the Indian Ocean (where the Japanese navy has been assisting Operation Enduring Freedom).

The Russian press wire agency Itar-Tass reported last December that 120,000 US and NATO soldiers passed through the Manas airbase in Kyrgyzstan in 2008.

2009 has brought the Pentagon and NATO the bad news that the government of Kyrgyzstan may close the base to warplanes used for the war in Afghanistan, a base that since 2001 has hosted military personnel from the United States, Australia, Denmark, Norway, New Zealand, Poland, Turkey, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, France and South Korea.

The Pentagon officially defines Operation Enduring Freedom's area of responsibility as encompassing fifteen nations: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Cuba (Guantanamo Bay Naval Base), Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Jordan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, the Philippines, the Seychelles, Sudan, Tajikistan, Turkey, Uzbekistan and Yemen.

After the invasion of Afghanistan in October of 2001, the US and its NATO allies obtained from the United Nations of ever-obliging Secretary-General Kofi Annan (who in 1995 held the posts of Special Representative of the Secretary General of the United Nations to the former Yugoslavia and special envoy to NATO and was installed as Secretary-General after the US deposed his predecessor Boutros Boutros-Ghali and browbeat the other 14 Security Council members in 1997 to accept him) a resolution authorizing the establishment of an International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), initially to oversee Afghanistan's occupation, but later to wage a full-blown counterinsurgency campaign inside the country and across the border into Pakistan.

There was and is nothing international about ISAF. It is a NATO operation entirely.

From December of 2001 until August of 2003 command of ISAF was held in six month rotations by major NATO nations. At the end of that period it passed to NATO collectively. Initially its mission was limited to the capital of Kabul, but by 2003 its mandate was extended beyond the capital and by 2006 to all of Afghanistan's provinces.

To deploy combat forces to a nation that was bombed and invaded and to conduct aerial and ground assaults throughout its territory is as good a working definition of the words war and occupation as could be devised.

Afghanistan has become a permanent training ground and firing range for providing the US and its NATO allies and candidate members opportunities to test out new weapons systems, wage 21st Century counterinsurgency operations and integrate so-called niche deployment military units from over 42 nations to achieve weapons and warfighting interoperability.

Polish military officials among others have openly stated that in Afghanistan NATO has provided them with the conditions to modernize their armed forces, which had not been employed in war zone and combat operations since the beginning of World War II. Coupled with recent statements by Polish and Baltic officials that NATO should renew its focus on "defending" Europe, the Greater Afghan war theater is a laboratory for preparing Eastern European and South Caucasus nations for actions on Russia's eastern and southern borders.

Last month the US signed an agreement with Poland to train their special forces (comparable to what the Pentagon has already done with Georgia), citing Afghanistan as the immediate locale for its joint implementation.

The comparative size of each NATO nation's contribution is less important than the fact that several tens, perhaps hundreds, of thousands of NATO troops have been rotated through Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan over the past seven and a half years and in the process gained experience in serving under the command of major NATO powers.

Earlier this year the US's Central Command chief David Petraeus began focusing on the Caucasus nations of Georgia and Azerbaijan as military transit routes for the expanding war in Afghanistan and visited the former Soviet Central Asian republics of Kazakhstan and Tajikistan to also incorporate them into the ever-widening South Asian war vortex.

Late last year General Nikolai Makarov, chief of the General Staff of Russia's Armed Forces, warned that "American military bases are dotted throughout the world. The U.S. has opened bases in Romania and Bulgaria, and according to our information plans to establish them in Kazakhstan
and Uzbekistan."
....
Much is made in Western official circles and in the obedient media about the pretexts under which the US and NATO attacked and invaded Afghanistan, took over all its strategic Soviet era airbases (as was done most recently with the Shindand airbase in 2005 in Herat Province, near the Iranian border) and installed a compliant puppet government to rule over the nation and its people.

At first as the memory of the attacks of September 11, 2001 were still freshly burned into America's and the world's imaginations, the rationale for Operation Enduring Freedom was to hunt down and "bring to justice" - or kill - Osama bin Laden, Mullah Omar and several of their top associates in a lex talionis punishment for the deadly attacks on New York's financial center and the headquarters of the US Defense Department.

As the years proceeded and not only weren't bin Laden and Mullah Omar apprehended but their whereabouts couldn't even be determined, emphasis was shifted to the fight against Taliban for having hosted the above two.

That fallback position was belied by the fact that Washington in the person of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld right after 9/11 asserted that as many as sixty nations, almost a third of the world's, were harboring terrorists and as such were fair game for missile and other attacks, but conspicuously left off the hit list the only three nations that had recognized, funded and no doubt armed the Taliban: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Nor was the Taliban argument helped by US-installed President Hamid Karzai being quoted regularly on the US's Voice of Afghanistan (an offshoot of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty) applauding "our Taliban" who "fought shoulder-to-shoulder with us in the jihad against the Soviets."

The US and NATO tact was then to adopt an ex post facto humanitarian guise to justify their fanning out into Afghanistan's provinces in 2003 (in addition to the original in Kabul, NATO launched North, South, East and West commands): Establishing so-called Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs).

Invading armies with their bombers, cruise missiles, 15,000 pound Daisy Cutter bombs and long-range artillery are designed to destroy and not construct buildings and the PRTs would be better termed provincial pacification teams, with the model being the Strategic Hamlet Program in South Vietnam in the early 1960s.

More reasons would be devised to explain the West's continuing and growing presence and intensifying military operations in Afghanistan and its environs.

Four years of Taliban power had at least accomplished one objective; it had curbed opium cultivation.

However, after a few years of NATO occupation Afghanistan became the world's largest producer and exporter of opium and so last autumn the Alliance announced that it was planning to conduct armed raids against opium and "drug traffickers," however the West decided to define the second.

The ongoing and endless war in Afghanistan - and now Pakistan - has metamorphosed from a hunt for bin Laden, to a fight against Taliban to a drug war modeled after the US's murderous Plan Colombia initiated in 1999. There are reports that 300 Colombian troops are slated for deployment to Afghanistan to replicate that model.

Notwithstanding recent talk by US President Barrack Obama about an Afghan exit strategy, it's not apparent that Washington and its allies ever intend to leave the country and the broader South-Asia/Central Asia/Caspian Sea Basin/South Caucasus circumference whose center Afghanistan is.

Two weeks ago the Russia Novosti website featured this observation: "Central Asian states think the U.S. started the Afghan war to change the regional regimes into local analogues of Georgia's Saakashvili and Ukraine's Yushchenko, and that it began with Afghan President Hamid Karzai. Iran, China and Russia think the war could be Washington's attempt to reduce their influence in Central Asia to zero."

Less than four months before the invasion of Afghanistan China, Russia and four of the five former Soviet Central Asia republics - Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan - founded the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a mutual security grouping that would later include India, Iran, Mongolia and Pakistan as observers.

It's purpose is to provide regional security and to address the issues of trans-border crime, including narcotics smuggling, armed extremism and separatism.

Since its inception it has also increasingly focused on joint development projects in the spheres of energy, transportation, trade and infrastructure.

With the breakup of the Soviet Union, Central Asia was seen by the SCO's founding members and since by its observers as a mechanism for fostering mutually beneficial relations among the nations of Central Asia and Russia, China, Iran, India and even Turkey eventually.

Afghanistan has been hurled into interminable turmoil, with hundreds of thousands of its citizens displaced; almost daily bombing runs, drone missile attacks, middle-of-the-night commando raids, indiscriminate shooting of civilians at checkpoints; mass-scale drought and famine; an explosion of opium cultivation and trafficking; expansion of that destabilization by setting Pakistan aflame with the potential for its fragmentation and dismemberment and heightened tensions with its - fellow nuclear - neighbor India.

This is the current, grave situation seven and a half years after the invasion of Afghanistan.

With the deployment of another 30,000 US troops and thousands more from NATO's ranks (recently Italy, Poland, Georgia, Azerbaijan and other nations have announced increases) Western troop strength will soon approach 100,000.

This is pouring fuel on fire. Taliban has become as amorphous a term as al-Qaeda has been; anyone in Afghanistan, even in the non-Pushtun North and West of the nation, who takes issue with Western warplanes and combat troops dealing out death and destruction in their nation and their villages is now a Talib. An enemy.

The more US and NATO troops that arrive in Afghanistan, the more resentment, resistance and violence will ensue. Inevitably.

The US and NATO have arrogantly spurned offers by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the post-Soviet Collective Security Treaty Organization to assist in bringing a regional - and non-military - resolution of the myriad crises afflicting Afghanistan, its long-suffering people and the region.

NATO is not a nation-building, peacekeeping or humanitarian outfit - it is an aggressive military bloc. When it and its individual member states' military forces leave South and Central Asia then healing, reconstruction and lasting peace can begin.

Radwan: Egyptian delegation to meet Hamas leadership in Damascus over "THE HAPPY FAMILY"

Radwan: Egyptian delegation to meet Hamas leadership in Damascus over dialog

[ 27/03/2009 - 02:57 PM ]

GAZA, (PIC)-- Hamas political leader Dr. Ismail Radwan has disclosed on Thursday that an Egyptian delegation headed by Lieutenant General Omar Al-Qinawi would meet Hamas leadership in Damascus on Friday to discuss the inter-Palestinian dialog.

In a statement to the PIC Thursday night, Radwan pointed out that the two parties would discuss ways and means to make the inter-Palestinian dialog in Cairo succeed.


Hamas's spokesman in Gaza Strip Fawzi Barhoum earlier revealed that his Movement had received an official invitation from Cairo to resume the Palestinian national dialog in Cairo by the end of next week.

Bardawil: A number of obstacles hindered the progress of dialog

[ 26/03/2009 - 11:30 AM ]

NUSEIRAT, (PIC)-- MP Dr. Salah Al-Bardawil, a prominent Hamas leader, stated Wednesday that his Movement went to the inter-Palestinian dialog with sincere hearts and showed very high flexibility during the meetings of the reconciliation committees, pointing out that a number of obstacles hindered the progress of dialog.

At a symposium organized by Hamas in Al-Nuseirat refugee camp in Gaza, Dr. Bardawil underlined that Fatah placed obstacles to the national reconciliation including its insistence on linking the reconstruction of Gaza to recognizing international resolutions and Israel, the thing which is rejected by Hamas and most of the Palestinian factions.

The Hamas leader added that Fatah deliberately ignores the results of the legislative council won by Hamas, noting that during the dialog process, Fatah rejected any action taken in the West Bank and called for changes in the Gaza Strip only.

The MP also referred to some of the differences that occurred in the committee on elections, saying that Fatah insisted on the system of full proportional representation, while the Movement rejected this proposal for two reasons that the independents would no longer be able to participate in elections and secondly Hamas candidates in the West Bank would be vulnerable to kidnappings by Israel if this system was applied.

Bardawil noted that Arab states informed the Movement frankly and clearly that other parties plan at this stage to liquidate Hamas and want to form a Palestinian government away from the national constants and able to coordinate with Israel. A government according to the American standards, he elaborated

The Hamas leader stressed that Hamas is hard to obliterate because it is rooted in the Palestinian people and entrenched in the Arab and Muslim Ummah (Nation), and any attempts to eliminate the Movement would make it more popular and stronger.




Zahhar: We want Cairo dialog to avoid repetition of previous experience

[ 27/03/2009 - 03:08 PM ]

DAMASCUS, (PIC)-- Senior Hamas political leader MP Dr. Mahmoud Al-Zahhar has stressed that his Movement wants the Cairo dialog not to allow repetition of previous experiences, including disavowal of certain parties of their obligations.

Zahhar's remarks were uttered during a speech in the Palestinian refugee camp of Al-Yarmouk in the Syrian capital Damascus, where he also underlined that Hamas possesses more power than the one it had during the Israeli war on Gaza.

"This time, the (inter-Palestinian) negotiations will not give a chance to any party to disavow its obligations, and we won't allow repetition of what had happened in the past….. we want genuine political partnership and not political monopoly that would finish off the resistance program as the case is in the West Bank", Zahhar underscored.

He explained, "We discussed the election law so as not to allow anyone to tamper with the choice of the Palestinian people, and we are talking about the PLO in a bid to restore it to the resistance path".

Furthermore, Zahhar stressed that his Movement wasn’t fighting for political positions, underlining that Hamas was and still is striving to unite the Palestinian ranks and unite the Palestinian decision, and that it wants to "build and not to demolish".

Reacting to the Israeli suggestion of excluding a number of Palestinian captives on Hamas's list, and of deporting other captives out of Palestine, Zahhar underlined, "We won't allow the Israelis to empty the prisoners' swap deal of its essential demand".

The Hamas official pointed out that during the Israeli war on Gaza, the Israeli slogan was "we must win the war in Gaza", and they (the Israelis) targeted Gaza based on their belief that it was the weakest point, and that they could easily achieve victory and regain their deterrence; but, he added, the result was the opposite as they failed in Gaza, and Hamas wasn’t defeated.

Egypt, USA at odds over next PA government

SO IT'S CARIO COMMING TO MEET "THE STILL DREAMING" MASHAAL IN DAMUSCUS


Flashback:

[TONI'S COMMENT: Keep dreaming, Mr. Mishaal. From one illusion to the next. This is so Yasser Arafat, it is not even funny!]........"

Stay tuned Tony "will write a longer comment about all these "peace" and "reconciliation" moves breaking out all over, and what could be behind them.

The more things change, the more they stay the same: Hamas wants recognition and a place at the Table and the


Pharaoh will deliver a domesticated Hamas.

# posted by Tony : 2:58 AM

Stephen Harper & Whores For Israel reaffirms support for Israel

Stephen Harper & Whores For Israel reaffirms support for Israel

Prime Minister Stephen Harper passionately vowed Thursday night that his government would always stand behind Israel, at the same time denouncing what he called “a rising global tide of anti-Semitism.”
More like a rising global tide of outrage towards the murderous racist Natzi State of Israel.

Harper’s speech to members of the Jewish community in this Toronto suburb came amid planned court action by a British MP George who was banned from entering Canada.


I won't even bother to quote the Zionist propaganda shit dribbling from the mouths of Harper's weasel puppet government.Suffice it to say that Canada is an embarrassing disgrace on the world stage.

Harper’s speech didn’t mention his government’s refusal to allow British MP George Galloway from entering Canada.


Canada

Amos Gilad: Egypt Our Ally against Iran, Hamas


Amos Gilad: Egypt Our Ally against Iran, Hamas
Readers Number : 54

27/03/2009 Egypt-Israel relations are "a cornerstone in Israel's national security," said Amos Gilad, head of the Israeli Defense Ministry's Security-Diplomatic Bureau, at a ceremony marking 30 years to Israel's peace agreement with Egypt on Thursday.

"We have very profound dialogue with them. It's important for Israel to know how to preserve these relations and deepen them," he said, while mentioning Egypt's "tolerant stance" during the Israeli occupation army's recent military offensive in Gaza that killed over 1400 Palestinians, including 420 children and injured more that 5300 others.

According to Gilad, "Hamastan is viewed by the Egyptians as a substantial threat to its national security." "I think Hamas erred in allowing its men to cross into Egypt and remain in Sinai for two weeks. All of the Arab TV networks broadcasted the Egyptian humiliation. Cairo took the necessary steps to prevent this from happening in the future," he said.

Addressing the negotiations between rival factions Hamas and Fatah on the establishment of a unity government, the senior Israeli defense official said he believed such a government would in fact be forged "in defiance of the Quartet's demands, among them the recognition of Israel.

"If I understand the situation correctly, Egypt is in favor of a unity government, but not if it has a negative effect on (Palestinian President Mahmoud) Abbas' status."

During the ceremony Gilad also said Egypt was Israel's "partner" in the struggle against Iran's nuclear program, adding that President Hosni Mubarak has made it clear that Cairo would not accept a nuclear Iran.

Jews Attack Press Conference

Foreign Army Shoots US Peace Activist; US Does Nothing


“There is no respect for the grieving” Barghouthi shocked by the Israeli assault on the press conference with injured American’s parents.

Ramallah: Mustafa Barghouthi, the Secretary General of the Palestinian National Initiative condemned heavily yesterday Israeli aggression consisting in shutting down and beating Palestinian activists and journalist during the press conference held by the parents of Tristan Anderson, the American peace activist who was shot in Ni’lin last week.

"The boundaries of minimum respect for the victims have been crossed once again. We feel that there are no limits in the Israeli troops behaviour, no respect for the grieving of Tristan’s family", the deputy said, shocked.

Tristan Anderson, 37 years old, an American citizen and peace activist, had an Israeli high velocity gas canister shot at his head in Ni’lin on the 13th of March. His skulls shattered several injuries and he was left in a very critical state at Tel Aviv hospital.

On Monday, during a press conference held by Tristan’s parents, a woman and a journalist were beaten by the Israeli troops. 11 persons were detained including 3 foreign peace activists.

The press conference was held in a very symbolic place, known as the 'protest tent’, in Sheikh Jarrah, where the Al Kurd family has taken up residence for months after being evicted from their home.

Several journalists were reported being prevented to attend the conference. The Israeli army demanded that the event will be shut down. As several refused, they assaulted the audience, beating and detaining activists, media crews and officials.

"Such a raid leaves me speechless", condemns the Deputy. 'But we have to stand up loud. The Anderson family has the right to tell the world what Tristan has endured and express solidarity and their indignation and feelings regarding the shooting of their son. America is a country where freedom of speech is a core value. But once entering the Israeli controlled territory, nothing prevails anymore. Israeli soldiers have no shame and this should be reported. Loudly."

Contacts:
Dr. Mustafa Barghouthi: 0599/ 201 528
Or: 0599/ 940 073
Follow-up of the site's activity RSS 2.0 Private area SPIP
http://www.uruknet.de/?p=m52918&hd=&size=1&l=e




Jewish Harems in Talmud Law


Jewish Harems in Talmud Law

ZARAH — A co-wife, a married woman in relation to the other wives of her husband.


Soncino Talmud Glossary

Polygamy is a Jewish institution. It is practiced, albeit underground, in Israel today. If the present trend to Orthodoxy among Jews continues, we can expect open polygamy to return soon.

Even for the most Westernized Jews, polygamy (polygyny) is difficult to confront. They obviously feel uncomfortable with the subject: we see them minimize it, excuse it, and defend it (for example, see The Jewish Encyclopedia, Appendix A).

Writing about marriage, the Very Reverend the Chief Rabbi of the British Empire, the late Dr. Joseph H. Hertz, states:

The Biblical ideal of human marriage is the monogamous one. The Creation story and all the ethical portions of Scripture speak of the union of a man with one wife. Whenever a Prophet alludes to marriage, he is thinking of such a union — lifelong, faithful, holy. Polygamy seems to have well-nigh disappeared in Israel after the Babylonian Exile. Early Rabbinic literature presupposes a practically monogamic society; and out of 2800 teachers mentioned in the Talmud, one only is stated to have had two wives.

Monogamy in Israel was thus not the result of European contact. As a matter of fact, monogamy was firmly established in Jewish life long before the rise of Christianity …


— Rabbi Dr. Hertz (1)

The Talmud Challenges Rabbi Dr. Hertz

Most rabbinical scholars (including Rabbi Dr. Hertz) attribute the organization of the Mishnahs to Judah the Prince. The year of his birth is given as 132 or 135 A.D. A number of these Mishnahs organized by Judah the Prince address legal problems that arise from the practice of polygamy. That suggests that polygamy was very much alive in the centuries before and after the birth of Jesus.

That polygamy was an ordinary part of Jewish life is also suggested by Rev. Dr. Israel W. Slotki's Introduction to the Tractate Kethuboth. Rev. Dr. Slotki states this of Chapter X:

CHAPTER X determines the priority of the claims to the recovery of their kethubahs and to exemption from oath of two or more wives who were married to the same husband, the relative rights of their respective heirs, and the legal position in the event of the surrender by one of the women of her claim to distrain on the buyer of her deceased husband's estate.

— Rev. Dr. Slotki (17)

(Note: When excerpting quotations from the Talmud, we sometimes omit non-germane text and footnotes. Omission of text is indicated by an ellipsis (…). To see the full text and footnotes, follow the hot link at the end of the excerpt. It is our pleasure to make available on line a number of Talmud tractates, so that you can see the excerpt in full context. We indicate unprintable Hebrew characters, words, and phrases with the symbol [H].)

This Mishnah addresses a man with two wives: More


Posted @ 21:28