Israel’s Chief Rabbis Yona Metzger and Shlomo Amar have called the Israeli Jews to fight the abortion epidemic, which is delaying the arrival of the ‘Promised Jewish Messiah’.
Interestingly, in 1974, Zionist Jews like Henry Kissinger and Z. Brzezinski have lead this epidemic among the non-western countries via food, abortion and other means of birth control. These measures are killing an average of one million female children in India (popl. 1.1 billion). In United States (popl. 300 million), over 1.2 million abortions were officially reported in 2005.
The two Zionist Rabbis have sent a letter to all the Rabbis in the Zionist entity to fight this epidemic, based on the teachings of the Jewish Bible (Torah). They have decided to form a committee to fight the 50,000 Jews who practice abortion each year in Israel (highest rate in the world based on country’s Jewish population of 5 million only).
In 2009 – Metzger and Amar had claimed that “abortion kills thousands of Israeli babies a year and delays the coming of the Messiah”.
They Jewish leaders also said abortions “delay the redemption” by postponing the coming of the Messiah and they based the teaching on the Babylonian Talmud in Tractate Niddah which says each baby that is born brings the Jewish people closer to redemption.
With the exception of a few dozen members of the ‘House of Israel’ – the rest had rejected Jesus as the ‘Promised Jewish Messiah (pronounced Moshiach in Hebrew)’ because he failed to bring them into power as the Jewish Messaih was expected to. The present-day, Khazarian and African Berber Jews also believe that Jesus was an “imposter” and not the promised Jewish Messiah.
The Tanakh gives several specifications as to who the messiah will be. He will be a descendent of King David (2 Samuel 7:12-13; Jeremiah 23:5), observant of Moses’ law (Isaiah 11:2-5), a righteous judge (Jeremiah 33:15), and a great military leader. Jesus fulfilled all except being a military leader.
Jerry Rabow in his book ’50 Jewish Messiahs’ (published in 2002) has documented the stories of 50 Jewish religious leaders who claimed to be the “Promised Jewish Messiah” since the crufication of Jesus of Nazreth. Most prominents among them was the 17th century Jewish Messiah, Shabbatai Tzvi, whose followers, the ‘Crypto-Jews’ are still found among Turkish secular elites and in the West, faking as ‘Christians’.
Muslims believes Jesus to be a Messiah for the House of Israel – but not divine as the Christians believe him to be. Furthermore, earlier Church Fathers have written that there will be a time in the future in which the Jews will mistake the Antichrist (Dajjal) for the Messiah.
here
vendredi 31 décembre 2010
Zionist spy satellite over Sudan
A member of powerful Jewish think tank, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) head by Zionist Jew Dr. Richard Haass – actor George Clooney has sponsored a CIA version of political spying satellite to track down some new ‘smoking gun’ against Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who some day maybe dragged to appear in front of the Zionist occupied International Criminal Court which had issued a warrant for his arrest for war-crime in 2009. However, ICC has refused to investigate the leaders of Israel for their war-crimes against Palestinians and Lebanese.
The satellite surveillance of southern Sudan went live on December 30, 2010. According to TIME magazine (December 28, 2010), the Satellite Sentinel Project – a joint experiment by the U.N.’s Operational Satellite Applications Programme, Harvard University, the Enough Project and Clooney’s posse of Hollywood funders – will hire private satellites to monitor troop movements starting with the oil-rich region of Abyei.
The collection of satellite imagery were devised by Jewish Trellon and Google. The Harvard Humanitarian Initiative run by Jennifer Leaning and Michael Van Rooyen will be in charge of deciphering them, while the Enough Project headed by Gayle Smith and John Prendergast (who formerly steered the South Sudan separation project within the US National Security Council) will supply the political analysis.
The campaign against the government in Khartoum run by organizations like ‘Save Darfur’, ‘Not On Our Watch’, etc. are loaded by pro-Israel Jews and Christians. Israeli media has admitted that the ‘Save Darfur’ organization is a brain-child of 15 Jewish organizations in America which wants to save the lives of Christians (5%) and Pagans (20%) in Southern Sudan but not the victims of their fellow Jews in Palestine, seven million of whom are forced to live in refugee camps or as immigrants in foreign lands. Furthermore, funds (US$50 million) from the ‘Save Darfur’ have already been used to to settle foreign Jews on Arab lands in occupied Palestine.
George Clooney and John Prendergast (a human rights activists who never spoke a word about Palestinians’ human-rights), is a member of ‘Save Darfur’, had visited Southern Sudan in October 2010. John Prendergast is frequent speaker at functions sponsored by Jewish lobby groups.
In June 2010 – American Zionist Vice-president Joe Biden made a trip to several African nations to finalise the secession of South Sudan, which could occur in the first half of 2011.
CFR and Obama administration are like husband and wife. The great majority of their members are either Jewish or have Jewish spouses.
The leaders of the pro-America Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) have recently made several statements on the future of Southern Sudan, indicating clearly that Southern Sudan is proceeding towards secession, which is exactly what the American Zionist groups have been scheming for.
“The story of displacement and death in the Darfur region of Sudan is indeed horrific. And, since Sudan is one of the few countries in Africa which has been off-limits to US oil deals and capital penetration, the crimes of the Sudanese government have a special resonance in U.S policy-making circles. Although it is rare that the Darfur tragedy is put into context, please permit me to try,” Peter Erlinder, past-President, National Lawyers Guild, NY,NY.
The situation in South Sudan and Darfur is tragic but it’s not genocide if one compare its with native Muslims and Christians under Jewish occupation.
here
Poll: Americans worry for Iranian threat to Israel
How much American public has been duped by the pro-Israel mainstream media lies about Israel’s fear of Iran’s civilian nuclear program – can be judged by results of a recent poll conducted by the Angus Reid Public Opinion.
The results of the poll taken among 1,005 Americans and released on December 29, 2010 – show that a great majority of them have ‘unfavorable’ opinion of Iran (75%) while a very ‘favorable’ opinion of Canada (83%) under anti-Iran Stephen Harper Zionist government.
The results also show that Americans’ distorted opinion about Iran’s nuclear program has not changed during 2010.
“Americans also continue to be highly suspicious of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, with 70 per cent of respondents agreeing with the notion that the Government of Iran is attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Only 11 per cent of Americans do not believe that Iran is pursuing a nuclear program, while one-in-five (19%) are not sure. These findings are consistent with a similar poll conducted by Vision Critical/Angus Reid Public Opinion at the start of 2010,” says the poll report.
The results also show that Republicans are more loyal to Israel than the Democrats when it comes to dealing with Iran. Republicans (40%) want US military strikes against Iran while Democrats (56%) want more sanctions but no military strikes.
However, the good news is that only one out of four Yankee would like Ben Obama to attack Iran to stop Iranian nuclear program and save the Zionist-regime – which reminds me of the good-old Zionist Jewish reporter and ‘political adviser’ at The Atlantic magazine, Jeffrey Goldberg, famous for yelling in support of the Zionist-regime on top of his lungs and bashing Islamic-regime in Tehran. In his December 27, 2010 article, the poor chaps seems to have accepted the truth: “Israel is doomed to be a civilized and democratic society”.
Jeffrey Goldberg, unlike other Israeli hasbara authors such as Daniel Pipes or David Horowitz or Robert Spencer or Michael Savage or Rev. Pat Robertson or Mark Steyn – is a very powerful voice in the Jewish Lobby. His iportance could be viewed by the fact that in order to improve US-Cuban relations – Fidel Castro invited him for an interview in Havana a few months ago. Jeffrey Goldberg quoted Castro being critical of Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s views on Holocaust and, like Rupert Murdoch said: “no one has been slandered more than the Jews”. Benji Netanyhau and Shimon Peres were so pleased with Castro’s anti-Ahmadinejad rant that both Zionazis thanked Castro in public for his ‘moral support’ for Israel. Their actions were so laughable that Israel’s most-circulated English daily Ha’aretz in its September 27, 2010 editorial “Israel’s flirtation with Castro smacks of desperation”, called that “Castro remains Castro – and Bibi and Peres remain liars”.
Jeffrey under the heading “What if Israel cease to a democracy?”, wrote:
“Is it actually possible that one day Israelis — Jewish Israelis — would choose to give up democracy in order to maintain Israel’s Jewish voting majority? Some people, of course, argue that Israel has ceased to be a democracy, because there is nothing temporary about the 43-year-old occupation of the West Bank. I believe it is premature to talk about the end of Israel as a democratic state — mainly because the disposition of the West Bank is still undecided — but I can’t say that the thought hasn’t crossed my mind that one day Israelis will make the conscious, active decision to preserve the state’s Jewish character instead of its democratic character (I use the word “Jewish” in the demographic sense, not the moral sense, obviously)”.
Interestingly, an American Jew, Jack Bernstein who lived and got married in Israel – and gave his life for exposing the myth of Israel being a ‘democracy’, several decades ago.
here
The results of the poll taken among 1,005 Americans and released on December 29, 2010 – show that a great majority of them have ‘unfavorable’ opinion of Iran (75%) while a very ‘favorable’ opinion of Canada (83%) under anti-Iran Stephen Harper Zionist government.
The results also show that Americans’ distorted opinion about Iran’s nuclear program has not changed during 2010.
“Americans also continue to be highly suspicious of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, with 70 per cent of respondents agreeing with the notion that the Government of Iran is attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Only 11 per cent of Americans do not believe that Iran is pursuing a nuclear program, while one-in-five (19%) are not sure. These findings are consistent with a similar poll conducted by Vision Critical/Angus Reid Public Opinion at the start of 2010,” says the poll report.
The results also show that Republicans are more loyal to Israel than the Democrats when it comes to dealing with Iran. Republicans (40%) want US military strikes against Iran while Democrats (56%) want more sanctions but no military strikes.
However, the good news is that only one out of four Yankee would like Ben Obama to attack Iran to stop Iranian nuclear program and save the Zionist-regime – which reminds me of the good-old Zionist Jewish reporter and ‘political adviser’ at The Atlantic magazine, Jeffrey Goldberg, famous for yelling in support of the Zionist-regime on top of his lungs and bashing Islamic-regime in Tehran. In his December 27, 2010 article, the poor chaps seems to have accepted the truth: “Israel is doomed to be a civilized and democratic society”.
Jeffrey Goldberg, unlike other Israeli hasbara authors such as Daniel Pipes or David Horowitz or Robert Spencer or Michael Savage or Rev. Pat Robertson or Mark Steyn – is a very powerful voice in the Jewish Lobby. His iportance could be viewed by the fact that in order to improve US-Cuban relations – Fidel Castro invited him for an interview in Havana a few months ago. Jeffrey Goldberg quoted Castro being critical of Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s views on Holocaust and, like Rupert Murdoch said: “no one has been slandered more than the Jews”. Benji Netanyhau and Shimon Peres were so pleased with Castro’s anti-Ahmadinejad rant that both Zionazis thanked Castro in public for his ‘moral support’ for Israel. Their actions were so laughable that Israel’s most-circulated English daily Ha’aretz in its September 27, 2010 editorial “Israel’s flirtation with Castro smacks of desperation”, called that “Castro remains Castro – and Bibi and Peres remain liars”.
Jeffrey under the heading “What if Israel cease to a democracy?”, wrote:
“Is it actually possible that one day Israelis — Jewish Israelis — would choose to give up democracy in order to maintain Israel’s Jewish voting majority? Some people, of course, argue that Israel has ceased to be a democracy, because there is nothing temporary about the 43-year-old occupation of the West Bank. I believe it is premature to talk about the end of Israel as a democratic state — mainly because the disposition of the West Bank is still undecided — but I can’t say that the thought hasn’t crossed my mind that one day Israelis will make the conscious, active decision to preserve the state’s Jewish character instead of its democratic character (I use the word “Jewish” in the demographic sense, not the moral sense, obviously)”.
Interestingly, an American Jew, Jack Bernstein who lived and got married in Israel – and gave his life for exposing the myth of Israel being a ‘democracy’, several decades ago.
here
Newsweek: Talmud is a ‘Business Guide’ in China
n December 29, 2010 – The Jewish-owned Newsweek pupblished an article by Isaac Stone Fish under the heading Selling the Talmud as a Business Guide.
Newsweek in its December 2008 issue had published an article by Lisa Miller, titled “Our Mutual Joy” – in which she tried to prove that the Bible is “pro-gay”. In 2010, British singer, Sir Elton John, added his support to Lisa’s claim by calling Jesus “a super intelligent gay man”.
Isaac Stone Fish’s knowledge of Jewish Talmud reminds me of my Chinese senior engineer, who once told me that there were more than 25 million Jews in China (out of the total world Jewish population of 13 million!).
Isaac says his Chinese friend believes that Jews are “Very smart, very clever, and very good at business”. Now, who could challenge that considering how the Jews at Wall Street sucked US$11.6 trillion from US taxpayers as bail-outs. Not to mention US$3 trillion USAID to Israel since 1970s.
One of the other success stories attributed to Talmud, by Isaac is that even a hotel in Tiawan is named Talmud. One of a similar hotel success stories was an Israeli hotel Paradise Mombassa in Kenya which was the venue of “total abuse of the local impoverished population and daily rape of struggling African women”. When the Israeli media published the immoral activities carried out by Israeli tourists and rabbis in that hotel – Mossad bombed the hotel and blamed Al-Qaeda.
“The ancient Jews and today’s Chinese face a lot of the same problems, such as immigration and isolation,” – says Issac. Now, how could China be “isolated” when Israel sell US technology worth billions of dollars to China and the US owes China more than US$960 billion? I hope Isaac doesn’t insinuate that Chinese are a nation of gays, because that’s what the Jewish gay writer and blogger, Simon Jones, called his people Jews and gays – birds of a feather?
saying: “Like Jews, gays have ancient roots of persecution and have been mostly outcasts since the rise of Christianity (though the roots of persecution, ironically, are in Torah). The persecution complex – I know it first-hand – leaves an endelible mark on one’s character – defiance of a hypocritical, unjust society, a desire for revenge, a feeling of superiority, a lack of patriotism. So gays automatically emphasize with Jews. At the same time, gays often crossed path with Jews professionally – in the arts, as writers, philosophers, councilors, etc……”
“And the apparent affection for Jewishness has led to a surprising trend in publishing over the last few years: books purporting to reveal the business secrets of the Talmud that capitalize on the widespread impression among Chinese that attributes of Judaism lead to success in the financial arts,” wrote Isaac.
Now, anyone who has read late Professor Israel Shahak’s famous book Jewish History, Jewish Religion would know what the Israeli historian would be calling Isaac in his grave! Israel Shahak believed that Talmud is the most hateful religious literature in the world.
“Despite Jewish attempts to persuade us to extract wisdom from the Talmud, it never evolved into an essential part of western intellectual thought. Its polemical image disguises a tradition of chewing ready-made disputes, in which the views and opinions of previous scholars are faithfully preserved verbatim citing the rabbi who first uttered them. Hence, whilst grieving the forgotten wisdom of the Talmud, Jewish scholars disguise its formal judicial nature. Jewish Law is not founded in a moral or an ethical conception of man; but rather as a set of regulations which grew out of social conditions and cultic motives obsolete and no longer understood,” Ariella atzmon PhD.
here
Newsweek in its December 2008 issue had published an article by Lisa Miller, titled “Our Mutual Joy” – in which she tried to prove that the Bible is “pro-gay”. In 2010, British singer, Sir Elton John, added his support to Lisa’s claim by calling Jesus “a super intelligent gay man”.
Isaac Stone Fish’s knowledge of Jewish Talmud reminds me of my Chinese senior engineer, who once told me that there were more than 25 million Jews in China (out of the total world Jewish population of 13 million!).
Isaac says his Chinese friend believes that Jews are “Very smart, very clever, and very good at business”. Now, who could challenge that considering how the Jews at Wall Street sucked US$11.6 trillion from US taxpayers as bail-outs. Not to mention US$3 trillion USAID to Israel since 1970s.
One of the other success stories attributed to Talmud, by Isaac is that even a hotel in Tiawan is named Talmud. One of a similar hotel success stories was an Israeli hotel Paradise Mombassa in Kenya which was the venue of “total abuse of the local impoverished population and daily rape of struggling African women”. When the Israeli media published the immoral activities carried out by Israeli tourists and rabbis in that hotel – Mossad bombed the hotel and blamed Al-Qaeda.
“The ancient Jews and today’s Chinese face a lot of the same problems, such as immigration and isolation,” – says Issac. Now, how could China be “isolated” when Israel sell US technology worth billions of dollars to China and the US owes China more than US$960 billion? I hope Isaac doesn’t insinuate that Chinese are a nation of gays, because that’s what the Jewish gay writer and blogger, Simon Jones, called his people Jews and gays – birds of a feather?
saying: “Like Jews, gays have ancient roots of persecution and have been mostly outcasts since the rise of Christianity (though the roots of persecution, ironically, are in Torah). The persecution complex – I know it first-hand – leaves an endelible mark on one’s character – defiance of a hypocritical, unjust society, a desire for revenge, a feeling of superiority, a lack of patriotism. So gays automatically emphasize with Jews. At the same time, gays often crossed path with Jews professionally – in the arts, as writers, philosophers, councilors, etc……”
“And the apparent affection for Jewishness has led to a surprising trend in publishing over the last few years: books purporting to reveal the business secrets of the Talmud that capitalize on the widespread impression among Chinese that attributes of Judaism lead to success in the financial arts,” wrote Isaac.
Now, anyone who has read late Professor Israel Shahak’s famous book Jewish History, Jewish Religion would know what the Israeli historian would be calling Isaac in his grave! Israel Shahak believed that Talmud is the most hateful religious literature in the world.
“Despite Jewish attempts to persuade us to extract wisdom from the Talmud, it never evolved into an essential part of western intellectual thought. Its polemical image disguises a tradition of chewing ready-made disputes, in which the views and opinions of previous scholars are faithfully preserved verbatim citing the rabbi who first uttered them. Hence, whilst grieving the forgotten wisdom of the Talmud, Jewish scholars disguise its formal judicial nature. Jewish Law is not founded in a moral or an ethical conception of man; but rather as a set of regulations which grew out of social conditions and cultic motives obsolete and no longer understood,” Ariella atzmon PhD.
here
mercredi 29 décembre 2010
New Policy PAC Raises $12,000 for Congresswoman Edwards
Remarks by Congresswoman Edwards at New Policy PAC fundraiser:Good afternoon everyone and thank you for being here. As many of you know already, my attendance here today has caused quite a stir within the Jewish community and on the blogosphere.
Let me begin by saying that I am a long-time, dedicated advocate of a two-state solution and supporter of an engaged peace process in the Middle East. I am committed fully to a peaceful and secure democratic state of Israel that is a home for the Jewish people that exists in harmony and security with an independent and autonomous state which is a secure home for the Palestinian people. I have been involved in issues of Israel/Palestine and peace in the Middle East for over fifteen years. My position in support of a two-state solution is clear and has always been so; to say or imply otherwise is simply incorrect.
What is also clear is that the issues at play to establishing lasting peace in the region are numerous and complex in nature. I witnessed these issues first hand on a trip to the region in June of 2009. It was a privilege to have the opportunity to travel to Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza with two of my colleagues Representatives Brian Baird (D-WA) and Peter Welch (D-VT), and the New America Foundation to further my understanding of the situation in the region. I look forward to returning. During my tenure in Congress, I have also travelled in the greater region with other colleagues — to Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Oman, the UAE, and Turkey. I’ve made two trips to Afghanistan to better understand and assess our involvement there and the larger political and security frame in which we live and make decisions. Speaking with religious and governmental leaders, civil society leaders and others has helped me tremendously to gauge the nuances throughout the region – the interplay of regional, national, security, and strategic interests. Here in the United States I have met publicly and privately with many individuals on issues of the Middle East and the broader region. As a Christian, I have deepened my understanding of Judaism and Islam – faith, culture and history. These experiences have given me a more complete understanding of the beauty and challenges of all our communities as we struggle to make this American experiment work.
I am more committed now than ever before to the belief that we have no hope of achieving peace unless everyone – everyone — is willing to at a minimum engage in open and honest debate and discussion of these complex issues that have perplexed generations before us. That debate must take place internationally and domestically. This is a tall order that, in my view, will be met only by courageous leaders who are willing to step outside of their comfort zones – every great leader faces a point at which he or she must stand alone or apart for the greater good, the common good. I hold the leaders in the region and our President in my prayers for their courage. Every day of negotiation, even on the difficult days of offers and counteroffers, is a day that provides another opportunity for courageous leaders to develop the trust that will be required for a lasting peace. For the world’s sake, for the sake of Israelis and Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims and Jews, we need courageous leaders.
Some have acted deliberately to interfere with the slim hopes for peace — they should be condemned. Some have posited that peace in the Middle East will never be achieved – they should be ignored. Others have speculated as to the motives and motivations of the various parties and leaders – they should be discouraged. I am not one of those naysayers. Despite the current challenges, I am more hopeful than ever before that two states will be realized in the context of the current negotiations. I have expressed on more than one occasion, in public and in private, my gratitude that the United States has been fully engaged since the beginning of this Administration as a demonstration of our commitment as Americans for a secure Israel and an independent state for the Palestinian people. I believe that resolving the outstanding issues in this march towards two states is in the interests of Israelis, Palestinians, the region and, importantly, the security interests of the United States.
I remain concerned about the ongoing violence on both sides that may be an effort to derail the peace process. I remain concerned that Israeli and Palestinian families suffer as a result of this violence. And, I remain concerned about the tragic and ongoing humanitarian situation in Gaza. I hope that none of these issues, nor the lifting of the settlement moratorium, will prove to be insurmountable obstacles to continuing the fragile negotiations at hand. I hope that the parties continue to exercise the courage and leadership that are required in order to achieve a lasting peace.
During my trip to the region in 2009 through reading the newspaper, watching television, and above all talking to people, I was also struck by the incredible range of dialogue that occurs in Israel on issues of peace and security – a breadth of dialogue that we need desperately in the United States. It is disturbing to me that my clearly defined position regarding a two-state solution was questioned so quickly and intensely simply because I agreed to speak before a group of my constituents about these issues, not all of whom share the entirety of my views, nor I theirs. These allegations ensued even before I had spoken a single word to all of you, perhaps in an effort to chill my thoughts, perhaps to censor my words, or perhaps to even discourage me from speaking to you at all. That is disappointing. All too frequently, these issues are seen as black and white. This over-simplified approach does not reflect realities on the ground among Israelis and Palestinians. It was important and interesting to hear Jewish settlers speak of the passion they have and the deep connection they feel to the land. Equally important and interesting was hearing similar passions expressed by Palestinians. Understanding the deeply held beliefs on both sides is at the crux of understanding and solving this conflict.
During my tenure in Congress, I have met with constituents with whom I agree and disagree in whole or in part in relation to the Middle East peace process. And I am proud and humbled to say that I have learned tremendously even from those with whom I disagree.
As a member of Congress representing people with a wide range of viewpoints on these and other issues, I do not agree always with many individuals or organizations with whom I meet. Nonetheless, it is critical for me to maintain an opportunity for open debate and discussion. Thus, I find it aggravating to insinuate that by engaging simply in a discussion or speaking before an organization, or even being supported by an organization or individual, is an endorsement of a particular position or of all the positions or viewpoints espoused by an organization or an individual. I’ve met with and spoken before business organizations and disagreed with them on financial regulation and reform; with health insurers and pharmaceutical companies and disagreed with them on health care reform; with diplomatic representatives and disagreed with them on human rights issues in their countries; with telecommunications companies and disagreed with them on Internet freedom. In a mature democracy, it is critical that we take great lengths to maintain an open, honest, and respectful dialogue even with those with whom we have disagreements in policy or philosophy. This is how I choose to conduct myself in Congress whether the discussion is about Middle East, transportation, or economic policy; and this is how I plan to continue to conduct myself throughout my time in office.
Thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak with all of you here today, and for attending today’s event. I look forward to speaking with many of you if not today, then in the future.
Why Members of Congress Oppose a Unilateral Palestinian Declaration of Independence
As House Resolution 1765, formerly 1731 and 1734, passed in the House by a voice vote enjoining the Obama administration to oppose a unilateral Palestinian declaration of independence, the peace camp looked disheveled and mystified. With every loss in the halls of Congress we reassure ourselves that the tide is changing, that soon members of Congress will see the right of Palestinians to statehood, that the next president will not succumb to the intransigence of Congress.
Today there are hundreds of organizations educating the American public about the facts of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They raise the public’s awareness about the plight of Palestinians in the besieged Gaza strip. Some organizations highlight the importance of resolving the refugee crisis and yet others underline Israel’s apartheid regime in the West Bank, undergirded by Jewish-only settlements and Jewish-only infrastructure.
Almost all existing organizations focused on a just resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are 501(c)(3) educational organizations. Many of these organizations address congressional representatives by asking their members to sign petitions or letters to Congress. However, what is lost on, or neglected by, these organizations is the fact that members of Congress are almost entirely beholden to a powerful pro-Israel lobby whose fabled success stems primarily from its ability to fund congressional campaigns.
When the time for a vote comes, whether it is a symbolic nonbinding resolution such as H. Res. 1765 or a crucial bill funding Israel’s occupation, the vast majority of members of Congress will invariably vote on the side of Israel. The reason is quite simple: a member of Congress cannot listen to pro-peace organizations as hard-line pro-Israel PACs (political action committees) fund their campaigns, no matter how sympathetic the member is to the Palestinian cause.
The exception to this scenario would be a broadly mobilized campaign of pro-Palestinian activists. However, if financial regulation and healthcare reform, which impact every American citizen, cannot garner enough public support to thwart opposing lobbies, the Palestinian cause will not mobilize a broad national movement in the foreseeable future. To most Americans uninformed on the issue, it is seemingly too remote, too inconsequential, and too tangential to American interests, although the realty couldn’t be further from the truth.
By abdicating our responsibility to lobby Congress and fund congressional campaigns, we have relegated ourselves to fighting a formidable opponent while blindfolded with both hands tied behind our collective back. Hard-line pro-Israel PACs not only help elect members of Congress but they indirectly appoint administration officials through Senate confirmation hearings, as was painfully evident during the Chas Freeman debacle. We have been effectively shut out from the halls of power in the United States with grave consequences for all involved.
Under Federal Election Commission rules, only a political action committee can fund the campaign of a member of Congress. As of last year, there was not a single political action committee funding members of Congress who support a just resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, until the establishment of New Policy PAC. I, along with other pro-peace activists (please view board members at www.newpolicy.org), founded New Policy PAC a year ago as an alternative source of funding for members of Congress who push for an end to Israel’s occupation and an American troops withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, while opposing any attack on Iran.
As educational organizations increase the pool of informed Americans, New Policy PAC is decidedly singing to the choir: informed, engaged Americans who are ready to fund the campaigns of elected officials. As educational organizations work to strengthen the BDS (boycott, divestment, sanctions) movement, New Policy PAC works to establish a Congressional Peace Caucus.
Even as Israel’s most ardent apologists struggle to justify its actions and its position becomes increasingly untenable, members of Congress continue to endorse one-sided resolutions in support of a prolonged occupation. Sometimes to avert a public debate, slapdash resolutions, as in the case of 1765, are introduced, their names changed repeatedly confounding public tracking and their hurried passage is implemented by a voice vote.
While this may signal the tenuous moral and political grounds these resolutions stand upon and the embarrassment of Congress at their passage, it also highlights the power of the pro-Israel PACs. They are most likely to retain their firm grip on our Capitol until we provide an alternative source of funding.
* Sama Adnan, Ph.D. is executive director of NewPolicy.org and New Policy PAC, an American lobby for Middle East peace.
Israeli Foreign Ministry Plans New Hasbara Effort Against Palestinians
Haaretz reports that the Israeli Foreign Ministry has officially launched a diplomatic campaign to dissuade the international community from recognizing an independent Palestinian state along 1967 borders and possibly catalyzing the passage of a UN Security Council resolution against settlement building.
Efforts will include "an immediate public relations campaign on the matter at the bureaus of the premiers, foreign ministers and parliament in each respective country" as well as the dissemination of a "legal position paper" expressing that "only direct negotiations could end the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and not unilateral actions that subvert past accords."
According to Director-General Rafael Barak, "[Seeking a UNSC resolution on settlement activity] can only hurt attempts to renew talks." Seemingly unbeknownst to Barak are the myriad of pre-existing Security Council resolutions aimed at settlement activity. From a previous post:
- Operative paragraph one of UNSC Resolution 242, in which the Security Council unanimously "affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of…the following principles: Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict"
- UNSC Resolution 446 explicitly denouncing settlement activity (three abstentions)
- UNSC Resolution 452 explicitly denouncing settlement activity (one abstention)
- UNSC Resolution 465 explicitly denouncing settlement activity (unanimous)
- UNSC Resolution 471 explicitly denouncing settlement activity (one abstention)
- Portions of UNSC Resolution 252, passed with two abstentions, in which the Security Council "considers that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, including expropriation of land and properties thereon, which tend to change the legal status of Jerusalem are invalid and cannot change that status; [and] Urgently calls upon Israel to rescind all such measures already taken and to desist forthwith from taking any further action which tends to change the status of Jerusalem"
- UNSC Resolution 267 explicitly denouncing annexation and settlement of East Jerusalem (unanimous)
- UNSC Resolution 298 explicitly denouncing annexation and settlement of East Jerusalem (one abstention)
- UNSC Resolution 476 explicitly denouncing annexation and settlement of East Jerusalem (one abstention)
- UNSC Resolution 478 explicitly denouncing annexation and settlement of East Jerusalem (one abstention)
With these new efforts, Israel makes the claim that Palestinians are illegally sabotaging the entire peace process. This is utter hyperbole. Outside of allegations that the PA has surpassed the legal limitations imposed by Oslo, which can be more thoroughly examined once the Ministry's position paper is made public, even Barak himself admits that Palestinian actions are "processes that could take place alongside negotiations and a settlement freeze."
The fact of the matter is Palestinian jockeying in the international community cannot unilaterally end the conflict on Palestinian terms. Since the Palestinian National Council's 1988 declaration of statehood, more than 100 countries have recognized an independent Palestine. To think that recognition of a Palestinian state along 1967 borders by the majority of the international community will substitute for Israeli withdrawal of the occupied territories is a ridiculous position. Israel knows this. So why go to such lengths to subvert recognition?
Barak plainly states the reason Israel is embarking on its hasbara effort. In his words, "Palestinians were hoping that their proceedings would encourage Barack Obama's administration to take certain steps in their future, including dealing with the 1967 borders and increasing pressure on Israel." To the Ministry, the realization of such hopes is simply unacceptable. In Barak's view, all issues must be settled through negotiations which pressure Israel and Palestinians to make equal concessions. This is because Palestinians already have legitimate, established rights to almost all of their demands –rights that Israel is unwilling to accept, and therefore hopes to escape the burden of by "negotiating."
- Palestinians are already entitled to their Right of Return as enshrined in UNGA Resolution 194, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
- Israel has never been legally allowed to settle any land in the West Bank or East Jerusalem, as evidenced by the numerous UNSC resolutions mentioned above as well as the decision rendered by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the Geneva Conventions
- Israel's siege of Gaza was already determined illegal by a UN Fact Finding Mission and must be lifted without condition
- Portions of Israel's partition wall that cut into the West Bank (85% of the wall) should already be demolished or re-routed per the ICJ's decision
- Palestinians' (unilateral) right to self-determination is already guaranteed by the UN Charter, the UDHR, the ICCPR and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
If the international community would simply enforce its decisions, the negotiation process would be a very different one. Palestinians would negotiate only on issues that are not already settled, e.g. the sharing of natural resources and security arrangements, or on the best application of internationally recognized principles rather than arguments about whether they are even valid. In this way, Israel would stand to lose much more than in the current situation. Consequently, the Foreign Ministry will fight with all of its power to maintain the status quo.
* Maggie Sager is currently a student at Mills College in Oakland, California. You can find her work at Resisting Occupation.
WikiLeaks and the press
The press is down on WikiLeaks and Julian Assange for all the wrong reasons.
They ought to be after Assange for giving governments reasons for censorship – just the opposite effect of the transparency he presumably wanted to promote.
What is the press after him for? Whatever happens to suit the politics or niche of their publication or network.
Scandal sheets are going after Assange for an alleged sexual offence in Sweden, where a couple of his consensual sex partners admitted that they wouldn't have pressed charges if Assange had willingly been tested for HIV.
The gossip sheets have been denigrating Assange for social ineptitude. Stories about his dictatorial rudeness seem to abound in these rumour mills.
A story appearing in one of the gossip sheets reports that an American journalist said: "Mr Assange was unusually rude, and when he offered him a copy of his recent, well-reviewed book, he said: ‘Don’t bother. I’d only throw it away.’ After that, he says Mr Assange ignored him, focusing intently on his girlfriend instead."
Another newspaper has been trying to bring Andy Coulson to book for his alleged role in the News of the World phone hacking affair but has no compunction in revealing nuggets of gossip and information to the world obtained illegally by WikiLeaks.
Other reporters have questioned Assange's belief in total openness, saying that national security is at risk and should be a consideration.
Some of those same newspapers enjoy adding that Assange "delights in asking politicians what they have to hide" but doesn't believe in total openness for himself.
The Daily Mail claims: "He preaches openness but demands privacy. He reveals 'secrets' but 99 per cent are prurient gossip. He's accused of rape but won't face his accusers. Why do the left worship the WikiLeaks 'god?"
The Jerusalem Post doesn't seem to think Assange is such a bad guy. None of the cables from WikiLeaks about Israel embarrassed or irritated Israelis.
Judith Levy asks: "How has Israel responded to the WikiLeaks information dump? Mostly with a shrug."
She adds: "What revelations there were about us are mostly positive, and they fall predominantly in the ‘Friends You Didn’t Know You Had’ category."
Could it be that those who send cables know that Israelis spy on everything? Diplomats don't dare expose uncomfortable truths about Israel.
Dutch Business Insider SAI, as might be expected, revealed concern about WikiLeaks that affect business.
"Two young Dutch hackers," they relate, "who attacked sites like Visa in protest at actions against WikiLeaks were arrested, and now one of them gave an interview."
The Wall Street Journal reports that "Bank of America Corporation, thought to be a potential target of WikiLeaks, became the latest US company to ban transactions of any type that we have reason to believe are intended for WikiLeaks."
Yahoo News claims: "Assange really didn't like last month's New York Times profile of him – so much so, apparently, that he opted against giving the Times an advanced look at the State Department cables his organization began publishing…"
Adds Yahoo: "It's not the first time Assange has cut off a news organization following a WikiLeaks profile that he didn't consider to be completely accurate."
Investigative historian and journalist Gareth Porter, writing in Counterpunch, revealed how Russians challenged the existence of a mystery missile the US claims Iran acquired from North Korea.
But readers of the two leading US newspapers never learned key facts about the document. According to Porter, WikiLeaks revealed how the press has been complicit in cover-ups by the government.
That alone should justify WikiLeaks’ efforts to expose cover-ups and promote transparency – even in the press.
* Paul J. Balles is a retired American university professor and freelance writer who has lived in the Middle East for many years. He’s a weekly Op-Ed columnist for the Gulf Daily News. Dr. Balles is also Editorial Consultant for Red House Marketing and a regular contributor to Bahrain This Month.
The U.S. needs to get tough with Israel
When diplomatic sources revealed that the United States was abandoning efforts for an Israeli settlement freeze, many surely did not know whether to laugh or cry. The first two years of U.S.-Israeli relations under the Obama administration has been a debacle. For the next two, what is learned from that failure, and how it's applied, will be of utmost importance.
The failure to get a freeze is not only about the settlements – a colonial enterprise expanding on occupied Palestinian territory that a new Human Rights Watch report called a "two-tier system" that is both "separate and unequal"- but also a test of America's commitment to evenhanded mediation. So-called core issues, including the return of Palestinian refugees and the disposition of Jerusalem, are every bit as difficult as the settlements, maybe more. But obtaining the freeze was a tone-setter, one that would have shown that the U.S. could fairly enforce obligations by both parties.
This didn't happen. Instead, during the earlier, temporary 10-month freeze, the Israeli settlements were still being expanded – only new-home construction was frozen – and settlements around Jerusalem were accelerated.
When the Oslo peace process began – a process that was based on the principle of a two-state solution – there were 200,000 settlers in occupied Palestinian territory. Over the years, as Israel has claimed it sought peace, it increased the number of colonists to well over 500,000 today, according to the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics.
No legitimate Palestinian leader can negotiate with Israel while it continues to colonize Palestinian land.
The U.S. strategy began to fail when it expected the Israelis to freeze settlements upon request. What the Obama administration apparently didn't realize was that Israel would not change its behavior without an incentive. When that finally became clear, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton made an offer that amounted to a bribe.
Generally, the incentive to rectify bad behavior in the international community – behavior like expanding settlements despite road map obligations and international law – is delivered by sticks, not carrots. But the deal offered to Israel, which included billions of dollars' worth of advanced F-35s in exchange for a 90-day freeze, was all carrot and no stick.
And it didn't work. Despite American prostrations, the Israelis continued with settlement expansion, and provocative announcements about settlements around Jerusalem were made just as the offer was reported. All hope for a freeze disintegrated.
The message this sent to Palestinians was that the United States was simply incapable of being an evenhanded broker. The U.S. never misses an opportunity to reward bad Israeli behavior, and Israel never misses an opportunity to squeeze its principal world ally.
Ultimately, we discovered that Israel's near-insatiable desire for American carrots is outweighed only by its insatiable desire to colonize Palestinian land.
Will Washington learn from this and apply the lessons in the next stage of mediating this conflict?
The Obama administration should not expect the Israelis to do anything without pressure, and this pressure – economic, diplomatic – has to be real, tangible and biting. A brazen Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, undoubtedly emboldened by what he and his right-wing coalition view as a victory in a standoff with President Obama, needs to be presented with a decisive and harsh response to Israel's bad behavior.
Some suggest that abandoning a freeze gives the United States an opportunity to put forward its own plan. But if Washington couldn't muster the strength or the will to press Netanyahu on settlements, can anyone believe it can press the Israelis to accept a deal on the rest of the core issues? It's highly unlikely.
The biggest mistake the United States has made in the last two years was not its focus on settlements but its failure to use leverage to get the Israelis to stop building them.
Has Washington learned the lesson? Perhaps the answer came earlier this month when Clinton delivered a major policy speech at the Brookings Institution. Though she expressed her frustration with the peace process, she didn't signal any change in the U.S. approach. Clinton's message can be summed up succinctly: We will keep doing what we have done and hope for a better outcome.
At a moment when the world needed to hear a change in direction, we instead were told that the United States is committed to repeating the same failed policies of the past. This is precisely why Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil recently determined they wouldn't wait for the bankrupt American-led process and recognized the state of Palestine.
America's political response? Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Valley Village) rushed a resolution to the House floor expressing opposition to such declarations of Palestinian statehood. The resolution, which passed, is a timely reminder of the increasing gap between Washington and the international community on this issue.
If there is no change in the U.S. approach to Israeli violations, no one will take this administration seriously: not the Israelis, certainly not the Palestinians, and presumably not the international community. Who can blame them?
Christmas and New Year's Eve: More Homeless Palestinian children
The children gathered around what was, moments ago, their safe haven, the reservoir of their memories, the focus of their happiness, the link between them and their fathers and grandfathers, to see with their innocent eyes every brick of their house turn into rubble. The metal head of the American-made bulldozer moved from one wall to another until the roof swaggered and fell. The children cried and asked with tears down their checks, "Where shall we go? Where shall we sleep?" They ran and tried to recover their books and toys, while their tears watered the torn pieces of their house destroyed by typical Israeli brutality in the usual way it has been killing and torturing Palestinians for the past sixty years with the support of the American administration and funding from the US Congress.
Those children have Israeli nationality and live with their families in the Palestinian city of Iled, occupied since 1948. But the problem is that they are Arabs living in an entity ruled by Zionists engaged in ethnic cleansing against them with the support of European and American governments which persist in depriving them of freedom, human rights and justice by preventing the establishment of an independent Palestinian state under different pretexts. After insuring the submission of the Obama administration and Europe and their silence regarding its crimes, the Netanyahu government started to demolish the houses of Arabs in the parts of Palestine occupied since 1948, in the same way it destroyed thousands of Palestinian houses in Jerusalem and the West Bank.
Those Palestinian children will spend Christmas and New Year's Eve homeless and refugees on their own land.
The White House receives children and gives them gifts without pausing and thinking for one minute of the question: Why do Palestinian children have their houses destroyed by bulldozers donated by the US Congress? Why is the world watching the Israeli oppression and occupation machine while it is robbing Palestinians of their childhood and filling their eyes with tears and their hearts with sorrow for missing a warm bed, a hot drink and a house sheltering them, their families and loved ones.
Yusuf Az-Ziq (20 months) The youngest prisoner in the world: he is in Israel of course.
Western disregard for this human suffering is not the result of ignorance. It is rather the result of deliberate political omission, on the part of American and European politicians, resulting from their absolute support to the Netanyahu government. After the United States abandoned its demand that Israel freeze settlement building, the 'peace' envoy returned to 'bridge' the gap between Israelis and Palestinians. In other words, and since American pressure on Israel is completely lifted, it will fall in its entirety on the victims of the occupation. It means that achieving 'proximity' between the two parties, can be only achieved through pressure on the unarmed Palestinian party, which does not have the Jewish money, the influence of this money on the US Congress, media and administration in order to abandon the rights of the Palestinian people in freedom, justice and human rights. The latest publications of WikiLeaks show that the United States has agreed right from the beginning not to stop settlements and all the American show about peace negotiations was for media consumption.
Amidst this human suffering resulting from the policy of ethnic cleansing, the EU foreign ministers met and issued a statement in which they 'threatened' Israel to recognize a Palestinian state 'in due time'. The question is: when is this time due? Palestinians have been deprived of their freedom for more than six decades! Do these ministers feel for a people tortured and deprived of human rights and freedom? Children are growing deprived of their basic children rights? Can we tell these ministers, "you will not go back home, see your children and celebrate except 'in due time'"?
On Christmas Eve, those who reminisce on the suffering of Jesus Christ should make a stand against this gross Israeli injustice against Palestinian civilians, those whose existence in Palestine precedes the days of Jesus. The history of Jesus' suffering is now repeating itself there. Those celebrating Christmas in Europe and the White House support Israeli injustice and turn their back on the Palestinian victims. What does celebrating Christmas mean if our brothers in humanity, living in the holy land chosen for the cradle of Jesus, are being subjected to forms of suffering which are a disgrace to humanity? What does it mean when the 'civilized' and 'Christian' West does not pause, on Christmas, and take a position against Israeli brutality and in favor of justice, freedom and human rights? Has the time, put off by European and American leaders for more than sixty years, come for the 'civilized' world to answer this question? Or, are leaders of the United States and the European Union still waiting the success of Israeli ethnic cleansing by eliminating the last Palestinian civilian so that there is no need to recognize a Palestinian state, something they have been postponing because 'the time has not come yet'?
* Prof. Bouthaina Shaaban is Political and Media Advisor at the Syrian Presidency, and former Minister of Expatriates. She is also a writer and professor at Damascus University since 1985. She's got Ph.D. in English Literature from Warwick University, London. She was the spokesperson for Syria. She was nominated for Nobel Peace Prize in 2005.
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)