Gaza is not lost ....

Source

Mahmoud Abbas wants to annex Gaza
but without Hamas.

Ehud Olmert wants to raze Gaza ,to uproot Hamas
and to replant it with Israeli settlers .

Husny Mubarak wants to dump and forget Gaza
otherwise the USA shall make him loose the next election.

The Arab Gulf States want to send yet another donation-cheque
just to keep Gaza on the Mediterranean Sea side .

Mummer Qaddafi wants to remind us of Gaza
so we forget who are his newest-friends.

The Western-Peace- Activist did not forget Gaza
because the Arabs have lost their balls .

Eng. Moustafa Roosenbloomsarcasmologue and cartographer
Posted by Raja at 6:03 PM

Jewish Newspaper Advocates Mass Murder of Innocent Muslim Civilians

Mark Glenn – The Ugly Truth Dec 17, 2008


While the ADL and Other Jewish Groups Remain Silent

Like the infamous three monkeys of the “See no evil/Hear no evil/Speak no evil” caricature, mainstream Jewish groups are pretending not to notice a recent piece appearing in an Orthodox newspaper calling for the slaughter of innocent civilians in Muslim countries.

Entitled “The Appropriate Response to Islamic Terror”, Lawrence Kulak writing in the 5 Towns Jewish Times opines that the “final solution” to the “Muslim Problem” the West faces today is simple–‘Kill ‘em all and let God sort ‘em out.’ In particular, he and the newspaper carrying the piece are calling for the deliberate killing of innocent women and children as a form of collective punishment (a war crime by international law) to those who would dare attack the apple of God’s eye–Israel–or any of those fighting her wars for her. As of the moment of this writing, the lone organization sounding the alarm over the piece is CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations while at the same time all major Jewish organizations (yes, the same ones lecturing everyone else on a daily basis on issues of hate, bigotry, extremism and terror) are doing nothing to protest or distance themselves from the piece, the writer or publication.

As far as the wording of the piece itself, it is a case study in typical Zionist hatred of Gentiles and the justification of any and all violence against them and more so against those in the Muslim world resisting Jewish fanaticism and extremism. By his own words and arguments the writer Kulak betrays the fact that he operates under a barbaric code of morality that has no place in a civilized world and which has been the sole cause of Jews being ‘persecuted’ and expelled from every place they have dwelt throughout history. Those political leaders who don’t see things his way with regards to bombing the hell out of innocent women and children are ‘incompetent’ and he uses quotation marks around the word “horror” when speaking of entire families being blown to bits with laser-guided bombs, indicating that he sees no horror in it at all.

Perhaps most disturbing of all though is how he begins his piece. Like a Nazi “mad scientist” character in a film describing in a measured, unemotional voice the extermination of those deemed “enemies of the New Order“, so too does Kulak go about the business of dispassionately describing his idea of slaughtering non-combatants in a seemingly sterile, soulless manner. In the opening words, he speaks of the “great discoveries” such as penicillin that have been made in the field of medicine that took place by accident, and then goes on to describe in the same manner how the “cure” for terrorism was accidentally discovered when the American military bombed a tent in Afghanistan, killing an entire family.

Of the many things obviously deserving mention here, the first is that such a program of deliberately targeting Muslim women and children for extermination HAS already been done. One need look no further than what has taken place in Palestine for the last 60 years that to date has resulted in over a quarter of a million innocent civilian deaths. Added to this are the massacres at places such as Deir Yassin and at refugee camps such as Sabra and Shatilla, just a few of the many living historical testimonies to murder on a mass scale fueled by Jewish hatred of gentiles and the extremism it has always produced.

Next–and more up to date–is the fact that over a million innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan have been murdered in the last five years as a result of the same process advocated by the writer, and those not dead today will certainly be dead tomorrow as a result of the depleted uranium left by the US and the destruction of infrastructure that unavoidably results in disease and starvation.

So as far as Kulak and the newspaper publishing his gospel of hate are concerned, what they are advocating is already a fait accompli. What all are left to conclude therefore is that what they are really driving it is an increase in the amount of civilian deaths than is already taking place. Possibly fearing that some readers MIGHT have a moral problem with what he is advocating, Kulak then goes on to dispel such possible (albeit unlikely, considering the readership for this particular paper) attacks of conscience by characterizing his idea as a “common sense” solution “etched in the Mosaic law”.

For those unfamiliar, what he is referencing here are the Old Testament tales of genocide committed by the Israelites–forerunners to today’s “Jews”–as they invaded village after village after village of peaceful, peaceable people and (at least by the biblical account) slaughtered every single man, woman and child. The only exceptions were those “young girls who had not slept with a man” who could then “be used” for whatever purposes “God’s chosen people” decided as well as those who resigned to live as slaves, or, in the biblical language ‘hewers of wood and carriers of water’.

By referencing the Mosaic law what Kulak is saying here in effect is that “The God of our forefathers–Yahweh, not only sanctioned this kind of behavior, He commanded it and we are therefore duty-bound to continue on in the ‘traditions’ left us by our patriarchs’.

As far as the worldwide backlash that would no doubt ensue from such a program, Kulak again betrays the fact he has no sense of universal decency and that the bottom line always deals with Israel and what benefit’s the Chosen People–‘Any and all collateral damage in the form of casualties to friends, relatives, or anyone connected to the lives of these terrorists should be swiftly ignored.’

His one-sided Jewish thinking also betrays the fact that he and his fellow chosenites are always ‘the victim’, pure as the wind driven snow and any untoward behavior that winds up in their neighborhood is the result of injustices done to them and never the result of their own evil actions. It is always ‘the other guy’s fault’ and more so, the world’s fault for not coming to grips with Islam in the proper context, meaning in the manner the Jews demand–

‘As for the Islamic terrorists themselves, there has been a universal ineptitude in understanding their mentalities and how they work. Primarily because of leftist leaders and public sympathy with revolutionary mindsets, which have in cancerous fashion infiltrated the efficient workings of Western governments and Israel, the tactics that are necessary to defeat Islamic terror have been suppressed and discarded as politically incorrect.’

What Kulak and his paper of course fail to mention is the ‘ineptitude’ under which the West has suffered in understanding the ‘mentality’ of his co-religionists who were the bringers of terrorism to the Middle East generations ago. Before the ghettos of Europe were flushed of the criminal filth holed up there for centuries and then collectively transported like a deadly flesh-eating bacteria into what was an otherwise healthy political/cultural eco-system the Middle East there was no such thing as terrorism. What he is advocating with his superior Jewish intellect therefore is that the very thing that led to Islamic extremism in the first place–meaning the murder of innocent women and children–be used as the cure for wiping it out. It does not take one of Einstein’s nieces or nephews to figure out that Kulak’s remedy is akin to trying to put out an already out-of-control fire by tossing a bucket of gasoline on it.

The truth is, had the West better understood the maniacal, genocidal and subversive nature of the ‘mentality’ produced in the corrosive, corrupting environment known as the synagogue, the various nations that today find themselves being blackmailed into fighting the war to end all wars for the benefit of Israel would not have fallen prey to this apocalyptic scheme, or at least not so easily. If there is any mentality that deserves study, it is the one that views itself as the embodiment of God on earth and which views all outsiders as having emanated from one of the ‘satanic spheres’ as Judaism teaches.

By now–5 years after the destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan that has resulted in unprecedented human misery affecting tens of millions–an article being penned by some sick Jewish supremacist as he perversely fantasizes about the genocide of Middle Easterners has no doubt lost its shock value. Within seconds of 9/11 taking place a floodgate of anti-Islamic hysteria was unleashed upon America’s airwaves as spies for Israel called for the mother of all holocausts–meaning the destruction of over a billion Muslims worldwide–on a minute-by-minute basis and therefore one more instance of this is not ‘news’ by any means.

What is noteworthy however is the obvious sense of hypocrisy permeating the entire circumstance. After all, this is the heyday of creatures such as Abe Foxman and Morris Dees who, along with their organizations ADL and Southern Poverty Law Center are constantly getting into the collective face of humanity and proselytizing about the dangers of “hate” and “intolerance.” Everytime an utterance is made by non-Jews of any stripe–be they Muslim, Christian or none of the above–where the idea of violence (real or imagined) is threatened against even ONE of God’s Chosen People and–BATTA-BOOM!!!–the presses are kicked into overdrive. Having said this then, where, oh were are the watchmen on the tower, warning of this impending storm of bloodshed and violence against the Semites of the Middle East as advocated by the 5 Towns Jewish Times? Where is their patented program of wailing, shrieking and gnashing of teeth, as well as their demands for a retraction, apology and the loss of employment for the offending writer?

Well, as usual, surprise-surprise, they and their fellow travelers are quiet as church mice, (or synagogue rats, whichever is more appropriate) and for reasons so obvious that a blind man could see them in a minute–the writer is Jewish and is advocating for Jewish interests.

In an age where all creatures great and small living in the land of the free and home of the brave are subjected to a concerted, ceaseless program of pogromophobia by an hysterical Jewish-owned/Jewish-controlled media whenever some eruption of “extremism” takes place from any other corner (be it Muslim, neo-Nazi or whatever) the fact that not a microbe of discussion or “in-depth” investigation has taken place surrounding this event speaks volumes about the agenda ruling America these days. It does not take the prophetic powers of Nostradamus to envision what would happen if such a piece appeared in some Muslim publication in Dearborn, Michigan rather than in a Jewish publication in NY, NY.

As of the moment of this writing, the reaction out there on the Jewish blogosphere to the protests of CAIR is to characterize CAIR’s action as –surprise, surprise, “anti-Semitic”. To think such a day would arrive, when disagreeing with the slaughter of women and children could be called such is “beyond the pale”, no pun intended.

And finally…

And yet, in this Orwellian age of doublespeak and doublethink, it is the Muslims, not the Jews, who are bloodthirsty, vengeful and cruel.

‘They killed our innocents, and unless we kill theirs, they will go on killing ours.’

(c) 2008 Mark Glenn

Correspondent, American Free Press Newspaper

www.americanfreepress.net

A whopping 100 pairs of shoes lined up in front of the White House ...

... to protest the arrest of Muntadar al-Zaidi, the TV reporter who threw his shoes at President Bush at a Baghdad news conference.

Posted by Karin at 4:07 AM

The emperor gets the boot

By Pepe Escobar

In the end, President George W Bush ended up finding his weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.



Munthather al-Zaidi, the 28-year-old Baghdad correspondent for the independent, anti-occupation, anti-sectarian, Cairo-based al-Baghdadiya satellite channel who sent Bush a "goodbye kiss from the Iraqi people" in the form of a flying pair of size 10s and instantly achieved folk hero status all over the Arab nation and across "the Internets" (copyright Bush), with a simple, graphically impeccable gesture brought to a close not only Bush's ultra-secretive last stop in Iraq (a press conference with sometime US puppet Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki) but managed to sum up the whole Iraqi tragedy. No wonder he has been dubbed “the new Saladin” across the Arab world.

From now on three historic images will forever sum up the Bush administration-generated Iraqi tragedy: Bush's “Mission Accomplished” stunt off San Diego harbor; the “black scarecrow” figure tortured at Abu Ghraib; and Iraq's leather-soled kiss to the man who destroyed the country. The toppling of Saddam's statue in Baghdad's Firdous Square in April 9, 2003, was nothing but a staged event for US networks.

Al-Zaidi called Bush, in Arabic, at the top of his lungs, ya kalb ("you dog") - now a legendary Youtube epithet that around the world has been largely interpreted as unfair to dogs, who for all their barking do not gang up and launch pre-emptive wars that cause more than 1 million deaths and displace more than 4 million people.

Before being taken down by US and Iraqi secret service ops, al-Zaidi still had time to yell, “This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq,” - a factual, journalistic response to the lies he had just endured from Bush, who in his prepared remarks pontificated on the "success" of the recent parliament-approved Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), a "success" Bush attributes to the troop "surge".

For the record: SOFA, negotiated after an extremely turbulent eight months, rules that the US military must totally withdraw from Iraq by December 2011 (a real timeline, always fought by the Bush camp); there will be no military bases left behind; and the US military cannot use Iraq to attack Iran or anyone else. For all practical purposes - and of course barring inexorable Pentagon pressure over president-elect Barack Obama - the neo-colonial Bush war/occupation will be over by the end of 2011. Bush's White House was so exultant with this "success" that it did not even publish a copy of SOFA in English.

The overwhelming majority of Sunni and Shi'ite Iraqis (but not the Kurds) want the end of the occupation - just like al-Zaidi. Before hurling his leather-soled missiles, al-Zaidi certainly had Bush's true legacy in Iraq in mind, which includes hundreds of thousands of dead and "disappeared", over 4 million internally and externally displaced, 70% unemployment, a lack of electricity, a lack of drinking water, a cholera epidemic, the balkanization of Baghdad - a shabby, dangerous collection of Sunni and Shi'ite ghettos separated by high blast walls - and the horrendously incompetent kleptocracy that calls itself the Iraqi parliament.

Everyone is guilty
These shoes also metaphorically hit the huge Bush administration army of advisers, analysts, sycophants, politicians, diplomats, generals, UN bureaucrats, businessmen, "human-rights" wags, media hacks and assorted profiteers that made the Iraqi tragedy possible. These shoes put to immense shame US public opinion, which overwhelmingly condoned the 2003 invasion and occupation and only turned against it when facts on the ground and horrific non-stop carnage spelled out that this was an "unwinnable" war.

For its part, US corporate media, with predictable inanity - or rather as still more evidence of its spinelessness in confronting the Bush administration - chose to endlessly dwell on Bush's cat-like reflexes ("I saw his sole") when he dodged al-Zaidi's flying size 10s.

Predictably adding (real) injury to the insult, and therefore amplifying its already formidable impact, Iraqi TV al-Sharqiya reported that al-Zaidi is for all practical purposes being tortured at Camp Cropper - the sinister, sprawling, US-controlled Baghdad airport prison; and his older brother, Dargham, told the BBC he has a broken hand, broken ribs, an eye injury and suffers from internal bleeding. Al-Sharquiya also points to signs of torture on his thighs and an immobile right arm. Al-Sharqiya has had firsthand experience on the matter - they just lost four reporters who uncovered and reported widespread torture in Green Zone prisons.

Before al-Zaidi's act became a global Internet sensation this past Monday, on Sunday al-Jazeera's news anchor Layla Al-Sheikhly, an Iraqi, was the only one to report it properly; other Arab networks - mindful of hurting American feelings - blacked out the crucial "you dog" bit. Asad AbuKhalil, professor of politics at California State University, Stanislaus and editor of the Angry Arab blog, quipped, "The fellow would have preferred rotten eggs and tomatoes if they were as easy to sneak through the tight security checks as ... shoes."

As has been extensively reported in the Arab world, al-Zaidi graduated in journalism from Baghdad University, was an active member of the Iraqi Student Union before the invasion and has always been anti-occupation. After he graduated, he worked at al-Qasim al-Mushterek newspaper, an Iraqi daily founded after the invasion, then at the al-Diyar satellite channel, and finally joined the al-Baghdadiya satellite channel. The fact that he may be technically a "leftist" is irrelevant; his act has been hailed all over Iraq and the Arab nation (after all, Iraq is considered by Arabs as the eastern flank of the Arab nation) by Sunnis and Shi'ites, seculars and Islamists alike. He had already been kidnapped and tortured - by a Shi'ite militia - before.

Mobilization for al-Zaidi's release before he is waterboarded to death is essential. Al-Jazeera's Arabic channel reported that up to 100 Arab lawyers have volunteered to defend him. Street protests against his detention have been held in Baghdad, Mosul, Sunni Fallujah and Shi'ite Nassiriya. Technically, he is being "investigated" by the military command in charge of Baghdad security, headed by the sinister Mowaffaq al-Rubaie, Iraq's national security adviser. He may face charges of insulting a foreign leader as well as Maliki, who was side-by-side with Bush - and get a maximum penalty of two years in jail.

I did it my way
Contrast the shoes targeting Bush with Bush's last throes - his mandated "Operation Legacy" conducted by Texan Macchiavelli Karl Rove (consisting of a two-page list of talking points now endlessly spun by outgoing Bush administration officials to gullible corporate media). Instead, a real-life "Operation Legacy" shortlist should include all the aspects of the Bush doctrine ("In what respect, Charlie?", as Sara "Barracuda" Palin would say); the destruction of Afghanistan and Iraq, with the option of illegal raids into the Pakistani tribal areas and a pre-emptive attack on Iran; the complete normalization of torture - and outsourcing of torture - as an "American value"; a monstrous national deficit that spells national bankruptcy; the destruction of the US economy; and a repressive police state which spies on its citizens - ripping the constitution and the Bill of Rights to shreds.

Only a few days before al-Zaidi's act, in an interview published in the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times, president-elect Barack Obama promised, "We've got a unique opportunity to reboot America's image around the world and also in the Muslim world in particular ... So we need to take advantage of that."

If Obama really wants to seize the "opportunity" and "reboot" America's image, he must convince the Muslim world that the US will renounce pre-emptive wars against Muslim countries; will stop demonizing them; will renounce the silly and misguided concept of "Islamofascism"; will practice an equitable foreign policy; and will not tolerate the slow-motion ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by the state of Israel. He could start with a speech in Baghdad. Not a Bush-style ultra-secretive appearance at a military base or in the Green Zone, but a speech in real-life, open-air Baghdad, in Firdous Square for instance.

Till then, this is what the US gets - a flicker of poetic justice still shining in the post-everything era: a little emperor cowering behind a lectern dodging a flying shoe.

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

A " Size 10 " memorabilia......

Show me your shoe
and I shall
surely show no shame.

George W. Bush has, indeed, declared after that shoe-incident
that this projectile ( The shoe) was actually a Size 10 shoe.

Size 10 means in European-standards, a size 45 shoe .
(No offence for our US colleagues and US readers
but here in Europe we are more advanced, we reached the 45 )

George Bush must have measured that shoe
because he obviously has kept it as "corpus delicti"
for the next invasion......of Malaysia or France.
or as a memorabilia to show it to his grand-children,later on.


And, symbolically ,
this pair of shoes are :
the only honest thing which George has got out of Iraq.
(or, also, the only thing which George has earned or deserved , so far )

The Smithsonian-Museum would like to have them too,
and Larry King shall interview them next Friday......

Oprah Winfrey declined them , due to some unpleasant odours
because that Journalist was very recently in a prison without showers
for 45 days , while being investigated by Black-Waters . (true!)

It is a bit ironic that The Neo-Cons brought to us democracy
and got back some used -smelly-old-shoes , in return !!!


Eng. Moustafa Roosenbloom
orthopaedic-hygienic-consultant

The weapon of the occupied

Matthew Cassel, The Electronic Intifada, 16 December 2008



A Palestinian boy holds a shoe during a demonstration in Gaza City calling for the release of Muntadher al-Zaidi, 16 December 2008. (Hatem Omar/MaanImages)

It's not surprising that since the George W. Bush shoe-dodging incident the US media has been recalling the infamous "shoeing" of the Saddam statue by a few Iraqis after American forces had brought it down.


These images were aired over and over in the international media to show that Iraqis celebrated the toppling of their former ruler. Reports later emerged that this event had been mostly staged by the American military and the media had not accurately shown how few the numbers of people who had actually been around to hit decapitated statue with their shoes. Most Iraqis did not celebrate the event because many were frightened in their homes, or packing their bags to leave their country and the extreme violence that their occupiers had brought with them to Iraq.

But others, especially many in the Arab world, might recall another event where flying shoes made the front pages.

It was 28 September 2000. Then opposition candidate to become Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, decided to take a "stroll" to the al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem, one of Islam's holiest sites. He claimed the move was not meant to be provocative, and that he was just taking a walk "to see what happens here." However, the previous decade, there had been at least two incidents during which Jewish Israelis threatened the mosque compound and Israeli forces carried out several mass killings of worshippers, and Palestinians revolted leading to the death of nearly 100 Palestinians by Israeli forces.

Sharon's provocation led to clashes between Palestinian worshippers and more than 1,000 of Sharon's occupation forces who just so happened to be in the area and armed with rubber coated steel bullets, tear gas and full riot gear. The Palestinian worshippers on the other hand were armed with their shoes. Images of this incident made it around the world as worshippers flung shoes at the Israeli occupation forces. The reaction to Sharon's visit quickly spread throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territories, as Palestinians en masse took to the streets. Israel's response, gunning down dozens of unarmed Palestinian protestors in a few days, led to years of violence. This incident, led to what many say was the incident that ignited the second Palestinian intifada, while after leaving al-Aqsa, Sharon arrogantly claimed, "There was no provocation here."

A move of such arrogance could only be matched by Sharon's good friend eight years later.

After five years of war that ousted a dictator and replaced him with blood-filled chaos and an American occupation more deadly than the invasion, war-maker Bush made a surprise final visit to Baghdad and claimed yet again that the war "is decisively on its way to being won." It was upon hearing these words that Iraqi journalist Muntadher al-Zaidi stood up and like those confronted with Sharon's provocation, threw whatever he had on him that could be easily made into a projectile. Al-Zaidi was also sure to send a verbal attachment with the shoes when he shouted in Arabic, "this is a goodbye kiss, you dog!"

Had more Iraqi civilians been allowed into the press conference, we can be sure that most of their shoes, keys, cell phones and whatever else they had on them would've also landed on the stage. But they weren't and instead they've taken to the streets of Baghdad and elsewhere around the country to demand al-Zaidi's release. Reports have also emerged of US military convoys, in the latest round of Iraqi insurgency, being shoed by Iraqi civilians.

What can a shoe do when thrown against the side of a heavily armored US military vehicle? Make a loud thud. Perhaps some dirt from the shoe might come off and stay on the vehicle.

Shoes are a weapon of the masses. The fact is that most do not have the means to defend against their foreign invaders equipped with superior American-made weaponry. Shoes, like stones and most other projectiles used by the masses, are not about defeating or causing physical damage to the enemy. It is a symbolic act, and one filled with anger. It is a clear and simple message from the people to the occupiers that they are not welcome. And it is a message that the occupiers and their media so arrogantly refuse to admit.

It was an image seen throughout the world as Iraqis and much of the world opposed to the US-led war applauded. On the following day in Cairo, a man walking through an outdoor cafe where I was sitting encouraged people to buy the newspapers on the back of his bicycle by shouting, "Al-Zaidi throws shoes at Bush!" Egyptians circled the man to purchase copies of the paper as they laughed and cheered at what have become historic images of al-Zaidi taking aim and Bush's blurred head dodging the flying shoe.

But why did Western media constantly explain that shoe throwing is considered offensive in Arab culture? Unlike the entire Western media, I'm not going to claim to know the answer to this great cultural phenomenon. Maybe it's not a phenomenon at all. Maybe it is what any of us would do if someone as arrogant as Ariel Sharon or George W. Bush visited the place that they've brutalized for years.

I would've liked an explanation then of the significance of eggs in American culture and what it meant when one was hurled at Bush's motorcade during his inauguration in 2001. Many hungry Palestinians or Iraqis might view an egg as too valuable a resource to waste by throwing at a despised politician. Or what about an explanation for the pie-in-the-face tactic commonly used by activists to humiliate someone they do not agree with? Or what about vegetables? I remember as a kid always watching cartoons or films in which performers would have vegetables, especially big juicy tomatoes hurled at them if they did a poor job. So why is it so hard for a culture that brings rotten vegetables to a theater in order to throw them in the event that the singer was off key, to need an explanation about why someone would remove his shoes and throw them at Bush?

Even Bush himself seems to have understood the gist of the message without the media's cultural interpretations when he responded to a reporter who asked about the incident, "It's like driving down the street and having people not gesturing with all five fingers."

Could it be that Iraqis and Palestinians aren't as armed and violent as they're portrayed, and that the shoe is just something that everyone is armed, or rather footed with, and can easily be thrown? Perhaps, but when described in the US it always has to be exaggerated to fit into Bush's simplistic equation that "they" are so much different than "us."

Like 2000 in Jerusalem or 2008 in Baghdad, shoeing incidents are most likely not premeditated. Forget the cultural differences when it comes to the meaning of shoes for a moment and focus on the real question: will an occupied people ever accept their occupiers? There is no more straightforward answer to this question than a shoe whizzing past the US president's head.

Matthew Cassel is Assistant Editor of The Electronic Intifada.

Elie Wiesel, Can a leopard change its spots?

By Gilad Atzmon • Dec 16th, 2008 at 11:48 • Category: Gilad's Choice, Israel, Newswire, Palestine, Zionism

Elie Wiesel, the ultimate symbol of Jewish suffering in the Holocaust, at times has been accused of ignoring the plight of the people of the world at large who suffer because of racism promoted by the laws of a State with the approval, indifference and collaboration of the population, and that would include the oppression of the Palestinian people.

In this short clip by Abu Fellini, Wiesel talks about Universal Values.

The Jews attempt to re-write history

The more you research Jewish history the better the understanding of why these people have been despised for millenniums.

I happened to chance upon the other day a Khazar website at http://www.becomingjewish.org/anti_semitism.html where they list every incident of Jews being killed, however minor, and refer to it as Pogroms or incidents of anti-semitism. I researched one of these where it mentions Cyprus in the years between 115 and 117 AD where it vaguely mentions "Murders". Of course it doesn't actually specify who was murdered but a little research revealed something of interest to me. It appears that these Jews attempted to form a "Jewish State" and it proved to be just another example of where a Jewish State has resulted in mass genocide. The best example being, for the moment at least, the attempt by the Russian Bolshevik Jewish Khazars to form a "Jewish State" in the Soviet Union. As we all know, Khazar Jewish control in the Soviet Union resulted in the premature deaths of at least 30 million Christians and 4 million Muslims, not to mention a further 8 million in the Ukraine.

My research revealed the reality.
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/12/unspeakable-narrative-review-of-william-a-cooks-tracking-deception/

The penultimate but culminating event actually took place in 115-17 A.D., two decades earlier, when Jewish refuges tried to establish a state of their own on the island of Cyprus, apparently having migrated there in large numbers after their earlier defeat by the Romans. Once they obtained a majority of the total population, they are said to have resorted to a surprise attack to kill all of Cyprus’s non-Jewish inhabitants, estimated to have been in the range of 240,000. The entire gentile population – men, women, and children – were supposedly dispatched in a single day, some of them horribly butchered. Another 220,000 were supposedly killed in the African city of Cyrene in order to secure a friendly mainland port, and countless others were killed in Egypt as well.

And here again another reference.

https://www.amazines.com/Kitos_War_related.html

Kitos War

The situation was pacified also in Cyprus, where Jews led by Artemion had taken control of the island. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, "Under the leadership of one Artemion, the Cyprian Jews participated in the great uprising against the Romans under Trajan (117), and they are reported to have massacred 240,000 Greeks (Dio Cassius, lxviii. 32)." [4] The Roman army reconquered the capital and the Jews were forbidden to live in the island.

Barghouthi: IOA released 900 prisoners and detained 5,000 others since Annapolis

Contributed By Lucia

[ 15/12/2008 - 06:24 PM ]

RAMALLAH, (PIC)-- MP Mustafa Al-Barghouthi, leader of the national initiative party, has described the Israeli release of 230 Palestinian prisoners as "pulling the wool on the eyes", adding that 11,000 other prisoners are still in captivity.

Barghouthi said in a statement that Israel released 990 Palestinian prisoners since Annapolis conference but rounded up 4,950 others in the same period, which is five times more than those released.

Israel is pursuing a "revolving door" policy and is deceiving the world public opinion with the release of few hundred prisoners who almost completed their terms while it is still detaining thousands others along with 47 parliament members, the MP charged.

In a related development, Israeli occupation forces at dawn Monday arrested 17 Palestinians in various West Bank areas including two teenagers, Hebrew press reported.

The 'Watan' TV station in Qalqilia reported that the IOF soldiers kidnapped its cameraman Ibrahim Hammad on Monday.

In the Gaza Strip, the ministry of agriculture said that IOF gunboats on Monday kidnapped two fishermen who were on a fishing boat off the northern Gaza city coast.

It added that the fishermen were brothers and were fishing in Gaza territorial waters.

In another related development, the mother of four Palestinian prisoners died of a heart attack on Monday when she realized that none of her sons were among those released by Israel.

Relatives of Ribhia Al-Kani, 52, said that the mother was suffering from diabetes and heart disease. She had five sons and a 15-year-old daughter.

Jihad warns of exploiting prisoners' issue to deep Palestinian rift

[ 16/12/2008 - 11:11 AM ]




GAZA, (PIC)-- The Islamic Jihad Movement has warned that Israel was exploiting the Palestinian prisoners' issue to deepen the inter-Palestinian rift, noting that most of the those released by Israel on Monday were Fatah affiliated.

The Movement said in a statement that Israel's release of 223 prisoners was a "media stunt" to deceive the world public opinion and to cover for its daily arrests in lines of hundreds of Palestinians in the West Bank. It explained that the number of those arrested over the past few weeks greatly surpassed the number of those released.

Jihad also criticized those who magnify the release while giving a blind eye to the suffering of 11,000 Palestinian captives in Israeli jails.

Meanwhile, Israeli occupation forces rounded up 22 Palestinians in a pre-dawn raid on Tuesday in various West Bank areas.

Remi Kanazi - The Failed Logic of Supporting the Troops

By Remi Kanazi • Dec 16th, 2008 at 9:00 • Category: Analysis, Counter-terrorism, No thanks!, Newswire, Resistance, Somoud: Arab Voices of Resistance, War

In the United States, a growing number of leftists are voicing their opposition to the Israeli occupation. They condemn the demolition of homes, the jailing of Palestinians without charge, and the confiscation of Palestinian land for settlements. They don't support the Israeli troops or their mission, nor do they give a free pass to those who are just "doing what they are told."

Nonetheless, many of these same individuals support the US troops in Iraq. Dangerously, most Americans put forth the notion that the troops' intrinsic heroism provides them with the impunity to destroy any bogeymen who stand in their way, cultivating a code of silence that strongly discourages dissent. It is under this premise that we support our "brave" and "noble" soldiers: we know their stories well, they miss their families, they are "just like us," and we should respect their service.

While one may comprehend the mindset of the troops, this understanding does not validate support for them. If the invasion of Iraq, the mission, and the occupation as stated policy are all wrong, then support for the armed forces carrying out the mission must also be wrong.

US soldiers are not a monolith and nearly everyone would argue that the majority of the troops are "good people." Yet, our emotional inclinations and the societal norm that tells us troops are good like bumper sticker slogans shouldn't serve as justification for supporting them and, by extension, the mission they are carrying out. We are led to believe that a soldier can either serve out the rest of his tour or be branded a disgrace and imprisoned for becoming a conscientious objector. In reality the choice is much starker: a soldier can refuse to serve or contribute to the death of a million Iraqis.

When people invoke the hardships our troops face, I think of the dead Iraqi mother, the splattered torsos painting the pavement, and the .50 caliber bullets that have hollowed out the bodies of Iraqi children. Each American has a distinct face and a tale that chokes us up, but our government and media have systematically dehumanized another people, whittling their presence in the world down to a nuisance that drains our budget, as though Iraq is a welfare state that strips our society of health care, education, and gas for cross country vacations.

Iraq is not Lehman Brothers pillaging our economy. Yet, even many self-described progressives deride the Iraqi people for their $79 billion surplus but make no mention of the fact that they lack proper access to electricity; Baghdad is still one of the most dangerous city in the world, and stability is nowhere in sight. Furthermore, a growing number among the mainstream left discuss Iraq in terms of "our" interests, criticizing the so-called ineptness of Iraqis and their unwillingness to embrace democracy (democracy that was never truly offered), all while five million have been made refugees, Baghdad has been cleansed of Sunnis, and each child, father, and mother live with horror stories we wouldn't wish upon our worst enemies. This is the result and reality of US occupation.

The assertion that troops are "just following orders" and that it is impossible to refuse once enlisted rings hollow. The US has not implemented a draft; on the contrary, each soldier chooses to fight in Iraq on behalf of the American government. This should not be applauded, nor should it be respected. Real courage would be abandoning this war—against orders, against the US administration—as a number of US soldiers have done (a phenomenon ignored by the mainstream media).

Staff Sergeant Camilo Mejia is a well known conscientious objector who served nine months in prison for refusing to return to Iraq. In a 2005 article on AlterNet, Mejia wrote:

"I say without any pride that I did my job as a soldier. I commanded an infantry squad in combat and we never failed to accomplish our mission. But those who called me a coward, without knowing it, are also right. I was a coward not for leaving the war, but for having been a part of it in the first place. Refusing and resisting this war was my moral duty, a moral duty that called me to take a principled action. I failed to fulfill my moral duty as a human being and instead I chose to fulfill my duty as a soldier."

Perhaps most importantly, many people fail to make the connection that supporting the troops enables the war and presents people who are against the occupation with a false reality: the ability to support the troops while rejecting the mission. Standing in solidarity with the troops facilitates funding for the occupation; it redresses the "intrinsic nobility" of the soldier, which further weakens congressmen who rhetorically reject the war, but support it through their votes. Occupation is dirty, and so too are the people who employ it. Following orders should not replace humanitarian law, and the excuse shouldn't serve to satisfy our consciences.

We are asked to support US troops when logic is absent. We look at the troops as victims who are forced to do things they would not otherwise do; we give them immunity and their crimes become unseen collateral damage. Yet, Iraqis are not monsters; they are the victims that face the gun's barrel. We should only support the troops as much as we support this war. Anything less supports the victimizer and not the victim.

Tagged as: Hasbara, Iraq, iraq war, patriotism, Propaganda, Remi Kanazi, US troops, War

Remi Kanazi is is a Palestinian-American writer, poet, and editor living in New York City. He is editor of the recently released collection of poetry, spoken word, hip hop and art, Poets For Palestine. For more information, please visit http://www.PoetsForPalestine.com .
Email this author All posts by Remi Kanazi

AVANTI POPULI

December 15, 2008 at 8:05 am (Corrupt Politics, Extremism, Israel, Palestine)

Avanti populi
By Gideon Levy

The Kadima primary this week is no more than the election of a condo committee. And this is the last chance: The condo is slated for demolition, an urban renewal project. Kadima will not survive. The ideological power of the new Dash has been exhausted, its leadership used up, its job over. The house that arose as an electoral exploit by Ariel Sharon will hardly manage to run one more time, and then it will be evacuated.

Living together happily in this condo are the representatives of the imaginary Israeli political center, which does not exist; residents who came from the right, but want to feel good about themselves, giving themselves a moderate and enlightened appearance. They are also the most mediocre of political hacks, they and their neighbors across the hall. The most captivating resident, Tzipi Livni, has already been elected chairwoman of the committee in place of the corrupt chairman, who was appointed in place of the elderly chairman who collapsed. Now the residents will put together a list of their friends.

In this condo you can find everyone: Kadima’s Moshe Feiglin in the form of Shaul Mofaz; a “moderate” settler at whose home you can spend the Sabbath in the form of Otniel Schneller; you can always borrow a drill from the friendly neighbor Yoel Hasson; Professor Yitzhak Ben-Israel from the top floor can fix the satellite dish; Ronit Tirosh will give private lessons and Ruhama Balila-Avraham can be on the decorating committee. More than that you will not find in this house in the Israeli center.

For a moment, this house looked attractive to many Israelis: A “model apartment,” all shiny from a distance, perfectly designed, like in the magazines. But it’s not real, only a virtual “model apartment.” The most senior tenant, Livni, is just like that, a product of her upbringing. Like most Israelis, Livni does not like extremism. She faithfully represents the residents of the house, terribly indifferent and anti-extremist. Human rights activists who oppose the occupation and dispossession, and the settler-pogromists who burn apartments and shoot Palestinians, they are all the same to the residents. More than anything else, they like to watch, on their high-definition televisions, pictures of peace negotiations. Thus they are amazingingly similar to their chairwoman, the leader of negotiations for negotiations’ sake.

Some have begun recently to hate the settlers - God forbid they should say so - and certainly that is not a reason to evict them. They will tell the pollsters who call that of course they are for a two-state solution, they are even for a Palestinian state, imagine that; but not now and not today.

“Conditions are not yet ripe,” conditions will never be ripe. They want peace, but more than that they want the Arabs out of sight, which is another way of saying “separation,” “disengagement” or “convergence” - take your pick. Of course, they are for the fence, part of which was built illegally on Palestinian land, but they are law-abiding. Respect for the law? They are pure as snow in their own eyes. Above all they are against corruption, but heaven forbid not against the biggest corruption of all, the violent and brutal control over another people.

They, too - how can we forget - are for the “settlement blocs,” not illegal like the outposts, which will remain forever in the territories where most of them have never gone, except for reserve duty, which went by with no unnecessary moral qualms whatsoever. Why “settlement blocs”? They may mumble something about security, their only religion, perhaps even something about heritage, a groundless claim for those who consider themselves secular, like these residents. The main thing is that they are for peace and the settlement blocs; two states, but not now; an end to the occupation, but not tomorrow.

In the politics of the occupation - for some reason the main issue in every one of our election campaigns, after which nothing happens in any case - there is no center. Either you are for the occupation or you are against it, that is the question and it has only two answers. Sharp, clear and unequivocal. Those who do not say “no” to the occupation immediately say “yes” to it, and thus are on the right, not in the center or anywhere else. Those who do not work to end it, those who love negotiations that lead nowhere, are also right-wing, and all the camouflage and disguises in the world will not change that.

Livni is the embodiment of this disguise: Reciting messages honed by shrewd consultants, she has yet to say anything significant since she was elected Kadima’s leader. Oh, yes, she is against Shas. And also, from time to time, she has right-wing slips of the tongue, like at the end of last week: You cannot always bring all the soldiers home, the national aspirations of Israeli Arabs will be met in the Palestinian state, and of course, in the competition with Ehud Barak, Livni is for bombarding Gaza. The residents of this condo are certainly pleased: That is what they want from the chairwoman of their committee: leading negotiations and bombarding. But this house cannot survive. It is devoid of ideas and a world view. Therefore, avanti populi - come on people, vote Kadima, for the last time.

Source

BOYCOTT AGAINST APARTHEID TAKING HOLD

December 16, 2008 at 6:49 am (Apartheid, Boycott Israel, Israel, Occupied West Bank, Palestine)

VIEWPOINT/ Boycott of Jewish industries beyond Green Line taking its toll

_{By Adam Keller}

Production lines in industrial zones in the West Bank have begun to deteriorate of late. The Barkan Winery has turned its back on the settlement after which it is named, and has moved to Kibbutz Hulda, within the Green Line, the pre-1967 border. Mul-T-Lock, which commands a near monopoly in the Israeli lock market, announced that it will also be leaving the Barkan industrial zone. In addition, Soda Club has promised its Swedish partner Empire that it will not export products produced in its plant in Mishor Adumim.

These days, factories located in settlements are becoming more risky and less profitable. This wasn’t always the case. Four years ago, Eti Alush, the man behind the Barkan industrial center, presented a rather rosy picture: “There is no ideology in economics. Entrepreneurs come here for the money, not for political reasons. Barkan is accessible and relatively cheap, and businesses pay discounted city tax (arnona). It’s an area under development, the Industry, Trade and Labor Ministry offers substantive assistance under the law for encouragement of capital investments, and Palestinian labor costs are low as well.”

Export to Europe didn’t seem like a problem for settlers back then, and Alush described the deception quite openly. “Companies that operate in the area have a number of factories, some of which are located within the ‘Green Line,’ aside from the one in Barkan. They label exports to Europe as coming from Kiryat Gat or Petah Tikva, not Barkan ¬ because of the European boycott, and also because of settlement boycotts by various groups, like Gush Shalom.”

A factory isn’t some toy that can be hidden under the carpet. It’s not difficult to enter, conduct surveillance and take pictures of trucks leaving the factory gates on their way to the port. European Union members don’t like to be duped, and Britain has recently upped its supervision and checking procedures on products “Made in Israel,” to ascertain where exactly they are coming from. A group of European citizens has begun investigating the businesses more thoroughly. Dutch beer giant Heineken, which was set to buy the Barkan wineries, faced a serious danger of a widespread consumer boycott on the streets of Amsterdam, and scrambled to make sure that its Israeli subsidiary left the area.

As for Mul-T-Lock, the firm boasts of being “part of the Swedish company Assa Abloy, the world leader in development and production of physical and electronic locking solutions,” since 2000. Certainly a productive business alliance, one that opens many doors all over the world, but doesn’t jive with production in the settlements. After Swedish religious and human rights organizations published an in-depth study of Sweden’s involvement in Mul-T-Lock, Assa Abloy hurried to apologize to the Swedish public and promised that the error would be corrected, and that Mul-T-Lock would leave Barkan.

The writing is on the wall. Anyone who wants to be part of the international community, and build global, long-term businesses, had better stay away from the settlements.

The writer is the spokesman for Gush Shalom and a member of the movement’s emergency settlements team.

Source

Israel denies entry to UN rights reporter

Press Release, Adalah, 15 December 2008

Today, Adalah: The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel sent an urgent letter to the Israeli Minister of Interior, Meir Shitreet and Attorney General (AG) Menachem Mazuz, demanding that they lift the ban imposed on Professor Richard Falk, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories, from entering these areas. At the order of the ministry of the interior, the border police denied Prof. Falk entry into Israel yesterday, 14 December 2008, on his way to the West Bank to carry out his official functions. He was deported from Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv this morning, 15 December 2008.

In March 2008, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) voted to appoint Prof. Falk to this position as UN Special Rapporteur for a six-year term. Prof. Falk's duties include preparing reports on human rights violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), informing the UN about his work and conclusions, and suggesting ways of alleviating these violations. Prof. Falk is an eminent expert in international law and works as a lecturer at several prominent universities in the United States, including the University of California at Santa Barbara and Princeton University. He has published several seminal books on the subject of international law and human rights.

Prof. Falk's arbitrary denial of entry into Israel is a severe blow to the rights of the Palestinian civilian population living under Israeli occupation, a population which must be afforded protection by the occupier under international humanitarian law. Denying Prof. Falk's entry also impairs the work of numerous human rights organizations and human rights defenders working in Israel and the OPT to protect and advance the human rights of Palestinians.

In the letter, Adalah Attorney Abeer Baker argued that it is Israel's obligation as a member of the UN and a signatory to various international human rights conventions to respect the work of UN representatives, to enable their human rights missions and to assist them in fulfilling their responsibilities without fear of repercussions. Further, it is Israel's responsibility to grant entry to Prof. Falk as part of its obligation to adhere to the principles of international law protecting the Palestinian residents of the OPT.

Prof. Falk last entered Israel in June 2008 in his capacity as a scholar to attend an academic conference. On the eve of his visit, the press reported that it was the intention of the ministry of the interior to prevent him from entering the country because of his sharp criticisms of Israel's human rights record in the OPT. Adalah sent a letter to the ministry at that time requesting clarification, following which Prof. Falk was permitted to enter Israel. It is therefore apparent that the reason for the denial of his entry on this occasion is due to the purpose of his visit, which is to prepare a report on the situation of human rights in the OPT. Refusing entry on these grounds is an illegitimate reason.


Related Links

Adalah: The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel

Financial terrorism

One of America's favourite adopted sons, a Khazar by the name of Bernard Madoff has cheated investors out of $50 billion, the fall out of which will affect everyone. What's the bet he will dissappear soon and resurface in Tel Aviv?


The $50bn scam: How Bernard Madoff allegedly cheated investors

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article5345751.ece

On Thursday, Bernard Madoff, millionaire businessman, Wall Street legend and respected philanthropist, was arrested for what the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the US regulator, called “a massive fraud – both in terms of scope and duration”.

Details are now emerging of how Mr Madoff was able to allegedly dupe a growing list of some of the world’s largest investors, including funds linked to Royal Bank of Scotland, HSBC and Santander, owner of Abbey.

Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities (BMIS), founded in 1960, was made up of three businesses: investment adviser services, market making services and proprietary trading.

It is the investment adviser services business that is at the centre of a scandal that came to light after Mr Madoff apparently confessed to "two senior employees" - believed to be his two sons - that he was “finished”, that he had “absolutely nothing” and “it’s all just one big lie”.

Apparently, Mr Madoff said the business had been insolvent for years, and from having $17 billion of assets under management at the beginning of 2008, the SEC said: “It appears that virtually all assets of the advisory business are gone”.

It has now emerged that Friehling & Horowitz, the auditor that signed off the annual financial statement for the investment advisory business for 2006, is under investigation by the district attorney in New York’s Rockland County, a northern suburb of New York City.

Friehling & Horowitz is a three-person operation based in the northern suburbs of New York City. It is run by one partner, David Friehling, who is in his seventies and is understood to live in Florida, and employs an accountant and a secretary.

The secretive Mr Madoff was able to orchestrate one of the biggest frauds in corporate history by operating the investment advisory business from a separate floor at his midtown Manhattan office.

According to Bloomberg, the investment advisory business was situated on the 17th floor, with the other divisions based on the 18th and 19th floors.

While there was interaction between the 18th and 19th floors, where the market making services and proprietary trading were situated, there was little or no engagement with the 17th floor. It is said, however, that Mr Madoff liked to visit the other floors in the evening to make sure that staff had left their desks tidy.

According to the SEC complaint against Mr Madoff, he kept financial statements for the firm “under lock and key” and was “cryptic” about the investment advisory business when discussing it with other employees.

However, early this month Mr Madoff apparently told a member of staff that clients had asked for a combined $7 billion, and he was struggling to find the money to meet his obligations. He then informed another employee he would pay bonuses in December, as opposed to February when staff usually received their annual perks.

Mr Madoff’s sons confronted their father about the early payment of bonuses last week, after perceiving he had been “under great stress in the prior weeks”.

At their father’s request, Mr Madoff’s two sons joined him at his apartment in Manhattan, after admitting that he “wasn’t sure he could hold it together” if they continued their discussion at the offices.

It was at the Manhattan apartment that Mr Madoff apparently confessed that the business was in fact a “giant Ponzi scheme” and that the firm had been insolvent for years.

To cap it all, Mr Madoff told his sons he was going to give himself up, but only after giving out the $200 - $300 million money he had left to “employees, family and friends”.

All the company’s remaining assets have now been frozen in the hope of repaying some of the companies, individuals and charities that have been unfortunate enough to invest in the business.

However, with the fraud believed to exceed $50 billion, whatever recompense investors could receive will be a drop in the ocean.

Iraqi Reporter Welcomes Bush By Throwing His Two Shoes At His Face And Calling Him DOG !!

BAGHDAD (AP) -- On an Iraq trip shrouded in ''secrecy'' and marred by dissent, President George W. Bush on Sunday hailed progress in the war that defines his presidency and got a size-10 reminder of his unpopularity when a man hurled two shoes at him during a news conference.

''This is a farewell kiss, you dog!'' shouted the protester in Arabic, later identified as Muntadar al-Zeidi, a correspondent for Al-Baghdadia television, an Iraqi-owned station based in Cairo, Egypt.

Bush ducked both shoes as they whizzed past his head and landed with a thud against the wall behind him.

''It was a size 10,'' Bush joked later.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2008/12/14/world/AP-Bush.html?_r=1