No Spring in Palestine

Despite the uptick in violence, it’s going to require something truly nasty or spectacular to put the Israeli-Palestinian issue on the front burner again.

MARCH 24, 2011

The fact is that there is truth to both narratives; but, both have now been overtaken by another reality — an Arab spring and winter that have captured the attention and imagination of the peoples of this region and the world. These profound changes have created a new set of priorities and agenda that has set the Palestinian issue in a new light, reducing to a much tinier scale the grim, rather hopeless shepherd’s war we call the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — whether it’s waged with rockets or knives. The empty promises of the peace process have done the rest.

To put this in perspective, look at the three-week-long Israeli-Hamas war in 2008-2009. It was short, cruel, and brutal; and it changed absolutely nothing. By contrast, the Arab spring/winter has been profound and transformative; it has changed much, with much more yet to come. Arabs and Muslims will certainly continue to be compelled by the power of the Palestinian issue, but the days when manipulative leaders can use Palestine as a rallying cry to mask their own abusive behavior may be numbered. For those countries that have peace treaties with Israel (Egypt, Jordan) Arab publics will finally have to own those relationships — rather than leave them in the autocrats hand — and decide for themselves whether or not they make sense.

Do Arab springs reflect the end or the erosion of the resonance of the Palestinian issue in Arab politics? Hardly. In emerging democratic and semi-democratic polities, new voices will abound and demand to be heard. Secularists and Islamists — not to mention extremists of all stripes — will keep Palestine alive as a rallying cry. But this time, it’s going to require something truly transformative to put it back on the front burner. Across the Arab world, the focus is now on elections, constitutions, and the revolutions yet to come. To paraphrase the British rock group The Who, the Arab public won’t get fooled again by some chimerical quest to redeem Palestine.

The same old, same old isn’t good enough anymore. Conventional diplomacy or conflict won’t be enough to re-energize the Arab world — or the Israelis and Palestinians, for that matter.

You’d need a confrontation so volatile that it forces Israelis and Palestinians to reassess, or a peacemaking initiative so grand that it shakes up calculations in a dramatic way. Neither is likely. The other potential? A Palestinian spring that harnesses people power as effectively and as peacefully as those that have occurred in the Arab world. Always an option, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

Instead, I’d put my money on an Arab spring, as messy as it is, which is proving to be one of the most extraordinary political developments of this century — not on a tired, stalemated conflict that lacks visionary leadership, smart political tacticians, and new generational spirit. That’s an old movie, a rerun actually; and nobody — not even the Arabs — are watching.

( / 26.03.2011)

Libyan woman bursts into hotel to tell her story of rape

Breakfast at a Tripoli hotel housing international journalists took a decidedly grim turn Saturday when a desperate Libyan woman burst into the building frantic to let the world know she had been raped and beaten by Moammar Gadhafi’s militia.

Her face was heavily bruised. So were her legs. She displayed blood on her right inner thigh.

She said her name was Eman al-Obeidy. She was well-dressed and appeared to be a well-to-do middle-aged woman. She spoke in English and said she was from the rebel stronghold of Benghazi and had been picked up by Gadhafi’s men at a checkpoint east of Tripoli.

She sobbed and said she was held against her will for two days and raped by 15 men. She showed the journalists how she had been tied at her wrists and ankles. She had visible rope burns.

CNN could not independently verify al-Obeidy’s story but her injuries appeared consistent with what she said.

Government officials quickly closed in to stifle her. But she persisted, wanting the journalists, staying at the Rixos Hotel, to see Gadhafi’s brutality firsthand.

International journalists, including CNN’s staff, are not allowed to move freely in the Libyan capital and are escorted out of the hotel only on organized outings by government minders. This was the first time a Libyan opposed to Gadhafi attempted to independently approach the journalists here.

What followed was a disturbing scene of how Gadhafi’s government operates.

Security forces moved to subdue the woman. Even a member of the hotel’s kitchen staff drew a knife. “Traitor!” he shouted at her in contempt. Another staffer tried to put a dark tablecloth over her head.

One government official, who was there to facilitate access for journalists, pulled a pistol from his belt. Others scuffled with the journalists, manhandling them to the ground in an attempt to wrestle away their equipment. Some journalists were beaten and kicked. CNN’s camera was confiscated and deliberately smashed beyond repair.

Security men said al-Obeidy was “mentally ill” and was being taken to a “hospital.” They dragged her unceremoniously to a waiting white car.

She kicked and screamed. She insisted she was being carted off to prison.

The journalists believed al-Obeidy’s life to be in danger and several of them demanded to see her. At a news conference later, they challenged Libyan Deputy Foreign Minister Khaled Kaim on what they had experienced.

Kaim told them that authorities were investigating the incident. “We will let you know,” he said.

The incident served as stark reminder of Gadhafi’s pervasive grip on Libyan society. A woman who dared to speak against him was quickly silenced. Journalists who dared to tell her story paid a price.

It was one tale that perhaps went a long way in illuminating the need to protect Libya’s people.

( / 26.03.2011)

Yemen president says he is ‘ready to step down’

Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh told an Arab television network that he is “ready to step down with respect and dignity, even within a two hours notice.”

But Saleh, speaking to Al Arabiya television on Saturday, also warned that some leadership factions have a “foreign agenda.”

The interview came one day after after the Yemeni president spoke to thousands at a pro-government demonstration in an effort to underscore his intentions to have a dialogue with anti-government protesters and make concessions to avoid bloodshed.

Saleh told the crowd that while he is ready to hand over authority, he won’t do so to “gangs,” “drug dealers” or the Houthi rebels fighting the government

Protesters have called for the ouster of Saleh, who has ruled Yemen since 1978.

The country has been wracked by a Shiite Muslim uprising, a U.S.-aided crackdown on al Qaeda operatives and a looming shortage of water.

Protesters cite government corruption, a lack of political freedom and high unemployment that have fueled much of the anger among a growing young population steeped in poverty.

Saleh had promised not to run for president in the next round of elections. But Yemen’s parliament this week approved a 30-day extension of emergency powers Saleh declared last week in response to protests.

The emergency law expands the government’s powers of arrest, detention and censorship.

( / 26.03.2011)

Opstandelingen Libië heroveren stad

De opstandelingen in Libië hebben de strategisch belangrijke olieplaats Ajdabiya heroverd. Het is hun eerste succes sinds de troepen van Kadhafi hen ver naar het oosten terugdrongen.

De internationale coalitie heeft de opstandelingen geholpen door tanks en artillerie rond de stad te bombarderen. Het regime zegt dat de coalitie zich daarmee niet aan haar VN-mandaat houdt.

Rond de stad Misrata die in handen is van de opstandelingen wordt zwaar gevochten. Ook daar voert de coalitie luchtaanvallen uit. In Misrata zijn de afgelopen week zeker 115 doden gevallen, zeggen ooggetuigen.

( / 26.03.2011)

Traangas tegen demonstranten Syrië

In Syrië hebben ordetroepen traangas gebruikt tegen jonge demonstranten die een sit-in houden op het centrale plein in de stad Daraa. De honderden betogers eisen het vertrek van president Assad.

Ook staken ze een politiebureau en een kantoor van de regerende Baath-partij in brand. De afgelopen week zijn Syriërs massaal de straat opgegaan. Via Facebook is opgeroepen tot nieuwe demonstraties.

Gisteren liet de regering 200 politieke gevangenen vrij om de betogers tegemoet te komen. In minstens acht steden werd gedemonstreerd uit woede over eerder gedode betogers. Het leger greep in en daarbij vielen zeker 23 doden.

( / 26.03.2011)

81 Reasons Why Gaza has the right to Self Defense

81 Reasons Why Gaza has the right to self-defense

By Julie Webb-Pullman

Seventy-nine of them can be found in United Nations Security Council Resolutions “directly critical of Israel for violations of U.N. Security Council resolutions, the U.N. Charter, the Geneva Conventions, international terrorism, or other violations of international law.” (1)

Number 80 can be found in the Goldstone Report (2), the recommendations of which have yet to implemented some 18 months after its submission to the Human Rights Council, and Paragraph 1912 of which stresses “all States parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 have in addition the obligation, while respecting the United Nations Charter and international law, to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian law as embodied in that Convention.”

Has that happened? Clearly not. (3)

The most compelling reason number 81, can be found in the United Nations Charter, Article 52 which states: “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” (4)

There would also be a Reason 82, but for the United States power of veto exercised in the Security Council in February 2011. (5)

If the international community has abandoned its responsibilities towards Palestinians, and particularly towards Gaza, as the above examples over the last 63 years plus this map of Palestinian territories so graphically illustrate, what else is left to Gaza but self-defense?

Click for bigversion


Israel and its chorUS disingenuously cite Israel’s right of “self-defense” to justify not only Israel’s disproportionate military response to Gaza – and Palestinians’ – genuine right to self-defense, but also to attempt to disguise Israel’s blatant land-theft from existing citizens.

Contrast the “newcomers” in Israel, for example, to many of those who in recent years have arrived in Australia. The latter have been considered illegal immigrants and incarcerated in off-shore islands or desert detention camps –the subtle distinction being that (i) those latterly arriving in Australia sought refuge from repressive regimes whereas the Israeli immigrants came from European and North American democracies…(enough said, perhaps) and (ii) unlike Australia’s (and New Zealand’s) immigrants, who now accept the existing population’s rights to their existing property, culture and citizenship, Israel’s immigrants bulldoze and destroy the homes of existing residents to build their own in their place, not only rendering thousands homeless but also destroying historic, economic and culturally-important sites such as religious buildings, olive groves, farms, and cemeteries – and now legislating that they also be of the jewish religion in order to have citizenship.

Is not our perception of the wrongness of such actions why New Zealanders, for instance, just spent thirty years redressing such wrongs in their own country, through the Waitangi Tribunal? Is not our perception of the wrongness of such discrimination why we all fought to end similar structural apartheid in South Africa?

In the past week, Israel has killed at least 10 people and seriously wounded scores more in in Gaza in sustained military attacks with sophisticated weaponry targeted at civilians, a week in which so-called ‘rocket’ attacks from Gaza (into traditional Palestinian territory) have not caused any Israeli deaths, or physical injury. Yet Israel on Wednesday threatened “After barrage of rocket and mortar fire, Vice Premier Shalom says Israel may have to consider wide operation in Gaza; Minister Limor Livnat: Operation Cast Lead 2 may be in order.” (6)

After a cosy telephone chat to US President Obama, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu on Thursday said from Moscow that “Israel’s reaction to rocket attacks will be measured” (7) – but by what, is the question…caesium, perhaps?

US Secretary of Defense Robert now waits in Israel for Netanyahu’s return, discussing with his Israeli counterpart Barak how to ensure Israel maintains its ‘qualitative military edge’ in ‘a period like now when Israeli-US security relations were so strong.’ (8)

Obama in South America while his troops hammer Libya, insisting that the US role will be minor, Netanyahu in Moscow proclaiming the same for Gaza…this arms’ length war-mongering to give an appearance of moderation makes me very suspicious – to paraphrase Shakespeare, “Methinks they doth protest too much.”

A quick glance at the map reveals US, British and EU troops in the midst of massive military operations in oil-rich Libya from the west, Israel launching sustained military attacks against a potentially-unified Gaza/Palestine from the east and north – and slap bang in the middle, a very desirable waterway in the middle of a country which recently overthrew its USrael-friendly president, but which has yet to establish a categorically different regime…and whose military rulers have not opened the Rafah Crossing into Gaza, but today reiterated their prior commitment “ to Egypt’s international treaties in an early message to reassure Jerusalem and the United States,” according to the Jerusalem Post’s reporting of Thursday’s meeting in Cairo between Egyptian Foreign Minister Nabil Elaraby, and Rafi Barak, a senior Israeli Foreign Ministry official.

Yes, on any reading of the situation, Gaza certainly does have good cause for concern about their security and territorial integrity.

In the face of continuing military attacks against civilian targets and the absence of any meaningful and/or enforceable UN Security Council Resolution to protect them, and of any meaningful assistance from the international community in preventing Israel’s ongoing use of force, they have every legitimate reason to resort to self-defense, under Article 52 of the UN Charter.

References (1)


(3) Amnesty International UK et al (2008) The Gaza Strip: A Humanitarian Implosion, and Amnesty International UK et al (2010) Dashed Hopes: Continuation of the Gaza Siege Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (2010) The illegal closure of the Gaza Strip: Collective Punishment of the civilian population UNICEF, UNRWA and Minister of Education and Higher Education (2010) Palestinian children deprived of basic rights to education ; UNDP (2010) One Year After GAZA Early Recovery and Reconstruction Needs Assessment; OCHA (2010) Farming without Land, Fishing without Water: Gaza Agriculture Sector Struggles to Survive

(4) Charter of the United Nations Chapter V11 Article 52





( / 26.03.2011)


It is true that jihad is one of the most important teachings of Islam. But jihad is not synonymous with war. In Islam another word is used for war and fighting. This word is ‘qital.’ When the Qur’an refers to war or fighting, it uses the word qital and not jihad.

…Jihad literally means to strive or to struggle. So jihad actually means peaceful struggle, especially for da‘wah work. The Qur’an says:

Do great jihad with the help of the Qur’an. (25:52)

The Qur’an is simply a book, and not a sword, so “do great jihad with the Qur’an” means do great jihad with the ideological power of the Qur’an. In fact, jihad is only another name for peaceful activism. And peaceful activism is the only weapon by which Islam wants to achieve all its aims and objectives.

The Qur’an has this to say of the mission of the Prophet Muhammad:

We have not sent you forth but as a mercy to mankind. (21:107)

In the Qur’an and the Hadith, there are many such references that go to prove that Islam is a religion of peace, love and human brotherhood. However, it is also a fact that in later times the image of Islam has altered drastically. Now Islam has come to be regarded as a religion of violence rather than as a religion of peace. It is not the media that has produced this transformation in the image of Islam. The responsibility for this falls on latter-day Muslims, who have failed to maintain the original image of Islam.

And if any strive ( with might and main), they do so for their own souls: for Allah is free of all needs from all creation (al-Ankabut: 6)

Nowadays, the meaning of jihad is identical with qital. It is a long with the issue that face by Islamic world especially conflict in Middle East. It’s point of view, emphasize jihad to fight people or nation whose doesn’t suitable with Islamic teaching. It cause them framed in horrible meaning of jihad, where jihad means “execution’s project” toward government suspected thaghut, included the official of military, police etc. Later on, their attitude become sectarian’s attitude and it triggers a new war between nation and kind of Islamic sect, that cause many victim from civilian.

It’s the new face of jihad, but however Islam refuse it and even it’s not suitable with the actor’s imagine. For that reason, we have to back the real meaning of jihad and qital.

Meaning of Jihad
Jihad is debatable and interpretable terminology. Generally there are two ways in seeing the meaning of jihad namely exoterically and esoterically. Exoterically means the holy war while esoterically means the real effort to get close to Allah SWT. Terminology of Ijtihad derived from j-h-d, means the ability to analyze and conclude the teaching’s law.

Some experts see, the meaning of jihad as holy war influenced by Christian concept. Based on Al Quran and Hadist jihad and war have different meaning. Where Allah SWT permit war to defend our self from the infidel’s disturbance. As stated in holy Quran al-Baqarah: 190-194, and an-Nisa: 75-78.

Based on Hadist there are some ethics in war. First, war in the path of Allah has to invite the rival to pious toward Allah SWT. Second, don’t kill the children. Third, before attack the rival, we have to use diplomatic ways and ask them proves into Islam. Fourth, if they refuse to prove Islam asks their tax for security and life guarantee, and they are in Islamic protection. Muslim has to keep and respect their right.

The same spirit-avoid physic’s confrontation- can be seen from hijrah command to Muslim in Mecca that fill tyranny from the infidel. (see an-Nisa’: 97-100). Dealing with the verse the Prophet Muhammad SAW saying, “ there is no hijrah after Fath Mecca, but jihad and commitment only. When you asked to do jihad, please go a head”. (HR. Bukhari)

When war couldn’t be avoided, it is better for you to do diplomatic rather than military approach. The prophet saying, “ war is trick/strategy/diplomatic. Dealing with the Hadist, Ibnu Hajar al-‘Asqalany explain “war” with diplomacy is better than physical war. it is better to be implemented at recent time since many people suspect physical war is better than diplomacy.

Generalizing Jihad and Qital is a Mistake
There is a mistake in generalizing jihad and qital. According to Gamal Al-Banna (Jihad, 2006) the mistake caused by: First, people who talk about jihad use the verse of holy Quran without seeing the background of the verse sent down. Actually we couldn’t learn al Quran partially, since Al Quran sometime talking about a theme in certain verse. So collaborate all verses that dealing with qital is a must and decide a law based on conclusion from it collaboration.

Second, they suspect that jihad and qital have the same meaning, without seeing the real meaning of jihad and qital. Finally they conclude that “sacrifice our self” is the highest position in jihad.

Third, they don’t understand that qital in Islam is not purposed to get loot of war, sectarianism, racism or to get world’s happiness. Fourth, they use qital as too in spreading the teaching and invite people become Muslim by introducing the God’s kingdom. It is a danger paradigm that threats the freedom of faith, and plunge us into radicalism.

Fifth, they tend to use Hadist rather than holy Quran, since Hadist explains more about jihad and qital. Sixth, there is a role of Ulama that generalize qital with jihad, where it followed by their dare that jihad is similar with qital.

Jihad Solution Problem of Ummah
Jihad and qital is not the same. Jihad means the serious effort to get Allah’s pleasure. Jihad is contrary with violence even terrorism. In holy Quran stated qital used in certain condition. In holy Quran, war license is always followed by the saying wa la ta’tadu (do not over limit and law of Allah SWT).

Degradation the meaning of jihad would bring the decline of Islam. So, jihad is not a holy war, but jihad means the optimal effort to answer the problem of Ummah go to rahmatan lil alamin. Wallahu’alambishawab

(Find on Facebook / 26.03.2011)

The Ongoing Plot To Create “Greater Israel”

“Greater Israel”–from the Nile to the Euphrates–from the Bible, of course..

“Our task consists of preparing the Israeli army for the new war approaching in order to achieve our ultimate goal, the creation of an Israeli empire.” -Moshe Dayan, 1952, Israeli Defense (War) Minister
by Zen Gardner
Yes, this U.S.-hosted parasitic pagan creation of the Illuminati called Is-ra-el (read Is=Isis, Ra=sun god, El=Saturn deity) is working to metastasize in order to so-called “fulfill a promise given to Abraham”, their purported ancestor.

Hebrew scholar Levnoch Osman said when defining the aims of Zionism:

“In our eternal Book of Books (the Torah), the lofty ethical teachings of which are cherished by all mankind [give me a break-Z], the land of Israel is described not as a long, narrow strip of land with wavy, crooked borders, but as a state with broad natural borders. God has promised to Patriarch Abraham the following:

“I give unto them the land where they have sown their seed, from the river of Egypt unto the great river of Euphrates’ (Genesis 15:18). And so, in order to realize the words of this prophecy, the Israeli state had to continue, not in the borders it has today but within its broad historical boundaries.”

Right. Might start to have an argument if you were “Abraham’s seed”, if you even believe the origins of that “promise”.

Who are these people that claim to be so special?

Future IDF Chief of Staff, Moshe Dayan, as a ‘Noter’ and wearing a metal emblem of the ‘Ghaffir’ (early Zionist police force) on his Slavic kolpak hat. Clear Turkish and East European derivation.
Let’s look at some true history you’ll never get in school today.

The vast majority of people who call themselves Jews today are Ashkenazi Jews.  Unlike the Sephardim, who are Jews descended by blood through Abraham, the Ashkenazim are actually a Turkic people descended from Khazars who had converted to Judaism in the Middle Ages, prior to their westward migrations centuries later into eastern and central Europe and eventually on to Palestine.  This, in a nutshell, is the main theme of Arthur Koestler’s book The Thirteenth Tribe.

The Turkic roots of the Ashkenazim undermine their claims of entitlement in the Holy Land according to scriptures in the Holy Bible.  And so the very idea that most modern day “Israelis” are not even of the blood of Abraham is considered a national security threat to the Zionist state because their pretensions of being racial heirs of the Almighty’s promises and blessings to Abraham have been annihilated by an extensive historical record.

Looks like we’re back to square one, as their answer to this and any challenge on any level is always ultimately the same old accusatory mantra that’s been deliberately burned into the human psyche and sends the sheeple running for cover:
” href=”″>

Another problem–they’re not Semites either.

In spite of all this screaming, Zionists are the true anti-semites, murdering their truly Semitic Palestinian population for decades. They even persecute their own minority of true Sephardic Jews of Israel, many of whom are anti-Zionist. Remember, there’s a difference between a Jew and a Zionist. Many Zionists are not Jews, and many Jews are not Zionists. They use their “Jewishness” for a cover, to the serious detriment of the very ethnic group they supposedly champion, the sly devils.

So too, the term “anti-semitism” is rendered void of meaning and useless, at least insofar as it is employed by the Turkic Ashkenazim as propaganda.  Ironically, their Palestinian Arab victims are real Semites along with the Sephardic Jews, Arabs in general and a few other groups, all of the blood of Abraham.  At best, the Turkic Khazar-derived Ashkenazim are very long lost cousins of the Semitic folk, and have limited commonality with them in their genes along with the common house-fly and a host of other creatures of the Almighty’s vast creation. (source)

Israel Born and Bathed in Blood

Israel’s history, both old and new, is bathed in blood. More insidious, Zionist Talmudic teachings and doctrines tell its adherents that they are superior to all others, and that killing the inferior “goyim” is completely justified and nothing to feel any compunction about.
They will do anything, commit any atrocity, and all in the name of Zionism. But no, no. To question them is to commit the most heinous act of treason against humanity.
Talk about reversing the truth. And all this has been engineered by decades of propaganda.

The goal of modern propaganda is no longer to transform opinion but to arouse an active and mythical belief” -Jacques Ellui

The Plot Towards ‘Greater Israel’

The author of the following point wrote about these things in 1968. Since then, to make things worse, warring Israel has amassed billions of dollars of US-supplied state of the art weaponry including a huge nuclear arsenal–all while screaming about its neighbors being the threat. Typical.

By guile, treachery and bloodletting, the Zionists plot to annex all of Jordan, virtually all of Syria, half of Iraq and a large part of Saudi Arabia and all of the rich cotton lands of the Nile Valley. It would be a simpler matter then to grab Yemen, Aden, Muscat, Qatar and Oman with their rich oil development. Israel is already well advanced in the development of its first nuclear warhead. Source

” href=””>

Enter Egypt and Libya

Let’s look at this map of “greater Israel”. Remember, Libya just west of Egypt is considered the gateway to Egypt throughout history, while Egypt is considered the heart of the Arab world.
Here’s Libya’s very strategic position. I wonder why the NWO is invading? Gain, or neutralize with “friendly governments”, these territories and the rest will follow.
” href=””>
The U.S. is already occupying Iraq and Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia is an American/Zionist puppet, as is Jordan. Lebanon’s been neutered and Syria surrounded.
All while well-armed, American-backed and UN sanctioned Israel is smack in the middle causing all the problems.

Now let’s see where the U.S. air and military bases are…
” href=””>

Looks like their imaginary boundaries are moving even farther east…

Over 50 U.S. airbases…insane…and this was in 2008! Remember, the U.S. is Israeli Zionism’s puppet so you can pretty much count that Israeli territory in the making in a sense. The US and Israel have become one and the same. Just ask a fundamentalist Zionist Christian who’s proud to send American youth to die for this mythical cause.
How bamboozled can you get.

Iran clearly in the way

Let’s see how the U.S. was positioned even then to wage war on Iran. The days are counting down.
” href=””>

U.S. military bases circa 2008. Imagine now, plus the US Fleet

Is “Greater Israel” just another smokescreen justification?

Perhaps the Zionists are using this “Greater Israel” concept as an interim step of some sort. It certainly works the same old religious guilt justification synapses that rallies Zionist Jews and brain-washed conservative Christians alike.  Hell, “God told me do it. Expand, dammit!” (Isn’t that was mass murderers often say? Just ask the Jesuits–same wicked credo as Mossad.)
Nothing like a “Holy Crusade” to get the blood flowing.
As is the case with all of these manufactured myths and ideologies such as the “chosen people”, the idea of a “greater Israel” is in effect nothing new. It’s really just another excuse to keep striking out, another Zionist religious smokescreen to justify anything and everything Zionist.

And they’ll stop at nothing, including staged terrorist events which they’ve done for decades, their greatest feat to date being 9/11. But we’re not done yet.
(And no, they don’t need to inhabit these lands for them to be Israeli, any more than Romans had to populate the lands ruled by Caesar.)
” href=”″>
But it does add to the justification to keep arming themselves to the teeth. Much like the U.S. fake “cold war” threat to arm themselves for this world-wide takeover, and now the phony war on terror to justify the NWO militarization and clampdown on their real enemy–the world population.


The U.S. is the main military arm of the NWO, at least for now. They answer to the globalist cabal of which Zionism is an integral part, for occult, satanic reasons. A nasty bloodline runs strong among the Khazarian Ashkenazis, but it is not the only powerful bloodline lineage, such as that of the European so-called royals running through history right on down to today’s monarchies, premiers and American presidents.
The march towards global domination by these elites is on. It is accelerating, and we’re seeing the outcropping of these powerful forces at work in the Middle East, concurrent to a manipulated global financial meltdown, drastic earth changes, and a worldwide societal awakening happening in parallel.
But don’t hand me this BS that these are God’s Chosen people. These wicked Zionists don’t even believe in a true creator God…they believe in lust, power, hate and greed. Many well intentioned people, Jews and non-Jews, are deceived by this ploy.
But don’t you be deceived– these full blown Zionist manipulators advancing this phony cause are Satan’s own spawn with nothing but the worst of intentions for humanity.

“By their fruits shall you know them.” – Jesus
” href=””>

Case in point: Horrific “anti-personnel” weapons being unleashed on defenseless Palestinians

They will reap what they sow. The law of karma cannot be escaped.
Please do your part to help expose them and the NWO agenda and bring the light of Truth to the world.

by Zen Gardner at

( / 26.03.2011)

Palestine And The Egyptian Revolution: A View From Gaza

By Haidar Eid

24 March, 2011
The Electronic Intifada

When I was asked by a solidarity activist about the impact of the end of the Mubarak regime on the Gaza Strip, my immediate answer was that it would definitely mean the end of the deadly siege that has been imposed on Gaza since 2006. Yet, we in Gaza are still waiting.

The deposed Egyptian regime made it its duty to make sure that the Palestinians of Gaza be kept within the walls of the Israeli-guarded concentration camp. The foreign minister of the former regime, Ahmed Abou Elgheit, in whose presence Israel’s winter December 2008-January 2009 war on Gaza was symbolically declared by the presence in Cairo of his then Israeli counterpart Tzipi Livni just days before the attack, became obsessed with “breaking the bones of those who trespass against Egypt’s national security.”

He was referring to the starving children, men and women of Gaza who, in an act of unprecedented heroism in January 2008, tore down the wall on the Egypt-Gaza border and flooded the streets of the Egyptian town of al-Arish to buy food, milk and medicine, and then went peacefully back to their homes. The old regime’s spokespersons and political analysts shamelessly made it their duty to demonize Gazans in order to justify the closure of the Rafah Crossing, the only official border crossing between Gaza and Egypt. Accusations of “terrorism,””vandalism” and “threats to national security” were thrown around.

So fearful of his Gazan neighbors was Egypt’s ex-minister of interior Habib el-Adly, who is now behind bars, that he indulged in the hysterical charge that the recent popular Egyptian revolution was caused by “some Hamas infiltrators.” The same ruthless minister had also accused Palestinians from Gaza of being behind the bombing of a Coptic church in Alexandria on New Year’s Eve, which killed 21 persons. Indeed now it is el-Adly himself, and Egypt’s state security police, who are under suspicion and investigation of carrying out that and other sectarian attacks.

The Egyptian revolution has brought that political farce to an end. No one can deny that this uprising is a social revolution par excellence, one against corruption, despotism and tyranny. But this is Egypt after all, the heart of the Arab world, the pole of pan-Arabism. If Egypt revolts, then the Arab world holds its breath: the repercussions are immeasurable and will be felt for decades to come.

But Egypt itself is also “haunted” by the Palestinian question. One here tends to disagree with the prevailing view that the Tunisian revolution was the only catalyst inspiring the revolt in Egypt. This ahistorical approach ignores some social and geo-political facts about the cumulative nature of the factors leading to revolutions. The protests and strikes by workers at Mahalla undoubtedly played a crucial role in revolutionizing Egyptian consciousness, a consciousness that is known to be characterized by a very rich legacy of rebellions against oppression.

And the Mubarak regime relied heavily on tools of oppression provided by the United States. Not a single pro-democracy movement in the Arab world had been supported by the US, hence the confusion and contradictory statements made by US officials about the Egyptian revolution. It is, then, a revolution for democracy, personal and collective dignity, and against notorious levels of corruption and nepotism.

And yet, no matter how much the Mubarak regime and the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority tried to silence and suppress the links of sympathy and affinity between the Palestinian and Egyptian peoples, these links have always been there.

And here is where I part company with those analysts who take the great Tunisian revolution as the catalyst behind the Egyptian uprising. When one-third of the Palestinian people — those living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank — went to the polling stations in 2006, and voted against the Oslo accords and the racist two-state solution, and against the deformed mini-Arab regime to be created by these accords, in what most international observers considered the most fair and transparent elections to take place in the Middle East, bringing Hamas into office, questions were raised about the long-held orientalist idea of the incompatibility of democracy with Arab culture.

In a revealing climb-down from his June 2009 Cairo speech, US President Barack Obama has since spoken of democracy without ever affirming the right of the Palestinians to freely choose their leaders. But more serious debates and soul-searching questions had started in the Arab world itself, especially in the surrounding countries: if Palestinians, under occupation, could vote freely, why not us, then?

Needless to say, the outcome of the 2006 Palestinian elections was not what Israel, the US and their Arab allies were hoping for. Hence the imposition of an unprecedented tight siege on Gaza, out of existential fear of the spread of real democracy a la Latin America — a democracy in which people are free to elect parties whose ideologies do not necessarily coincide with US and Israeli interests.

The fiercest rejection came from so-called “moderate” Arab regimes headed by the deposed Egyptian government. Israel decided to close the six gates to Gaza, and the Egyptian regime followed suit by closing Rafah, the only exit Gaza has to the external world. This blockade has, so far, caused the death of more than 600 terminally-ill individuals whose lives could have been saved had they been allowed entry into Egypt, not to mention the devastation it has caused to Gaza society and economy in so many ways.

But the siege failed to force the Palestinians of the Gaza open-air prison to surrender, leading Israel to launch the genocidal war that was foreshadowed by Livni’s presence in the heart of Cairo. None of the objectives of the war were achieved, to the dismay of “moderate” Arab regimes.

After the war, Egypt began to build with American supervision a monstrous underground steel wall blocking tunnels beneath the border, the only lifeline Palestinians of Gaza managed to create.

Attempts by the Egyptian regime to cover its collusion with Israel and the US were, alas, supported by the Palestinian leaderships’ acceptance to start endless rounds of national dialogue in Cairo, again, sponsored by the Egyptian government. The failure of the Palestinian leaderships of all factions to dissociate themselves from the Egyptian regime and stick to the demands of the Palestinians of Gaza by declaring that, after the end of the war on Gaza, any national dialogue should be held in Gaza as long as it is under siege, helped, indirectly, to prolong the Egyptian regime’s life.

This is a reflection of the elitist nature — not to say short-sightedness — of the Palestinian leaderships with their long-held belief that ties with regimes, rather than popular forces and civil society, are the way forward. Hence the suppression of all signs of solidarity with the Egyptians in both Ramallah and Gaza in the early days of the revolution.

The Mubarak regime did not only close the Rafah crossing and erect the Wall of Shame, but also prevented any sign of solidarity and support coming from international solidarity activists determined to break the siege. The Viva Palestina convoy and the Gaza Freedom March were treated brutally by Egyptian security.

The only way for some supporters to reach Gaza was by sea, and nine Turkish activists lost their lives as a result of the cold-blooded massacre committed by Israel last May aboard the Mavi Marmara, one of the ships in the Gaza Freedom Flotilla.

But the question raised was about Egypt’s indirect responsibility: had the crossing been open for all, those nine precious lives would have been saved. The massacre led to the Egyptian decision to “partially” open the Rafah gate without ending the siege altogether. This step, ironically, coincided with Israel’s decision to “ease” the blockade by allowing more Swiss chocolate into Gaza!

The Egyptian people, with their lively grassroots movements, youth, syndicates and unions watched helplessly and with dismay as their Palestinian brethren endured a siege that UN Special Rapporteur to the Occupied Territories, Richard Falk, described as “a prelude to genocide,” with the complicity — if not direct participation — of the Egyptian regime. But they also saw Palestinian steadfastness in the face of this assault.

The Egyptian regime’s complicity undoubtedly played a crucial role in radicalizing Egyptian consciousness. The catalytic nature of Mubarak’s collusion with Israeli oppression has, for understandable reasons, been ignored by mainstream media. The concept of dignity, collective and personal, as we grew up understanding it, was inspired by the fiery sayings of the late Egyptian revolutionary leader Gamal Abdel Nasser after the 1952 revolution against a corrupt monarch, King Farouk, and his allies, British colonialism.

The slogan “Raise your head, brother, for the age of subjugation is over,” formed not only modern Egyptian consciousness and sense of national dignity, but that of the entire Arab world, in general, and of Palestinians in particular. Moreover, Palestine, for most Egyptians, is part of Egypt’s national psyche, a deep wound that is yet to heal, in spite of all the babble about “peace” and “reconciliation,” a fundamental part of the national self.

That, however, was supposed to change with former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat’s gamble — the 1979 peace treaty with Israel — that left Egypt firmly in the American camp. Official Egyptian discourse laid the blame for many of Egypt’s problems at the door of Palestinians, hence the unprecedented maltreatment of Palestinians, Gazans in particular, at the hands of Egypt’s notorious state security. No wonder, then, that the last decision taken by the deposed government was to ban all Palestinians from entering Egypt.

Now the question that begs for an answer is about the future of the Egyptian-Palestinian relationship. The Rafah Crossing is “partially” open for a few passengers but no goods, food or medicine are allowed. Some Palestinians are turned back every day, and the decision taken by the previous government not to grant Gazans entry via Cairo airport is still in force. The sentiment on the streets of Palestine has, naturally, been supportive of the revolutions in the Arab world and this is in spite of the position taken by the two controlling parties in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank to ban all solidarity demonstrations.

Radical change in Egypt should mean radical change in Palestine as well: a pro-Palestine Egypt should mean the end of the siege. But when will we see that? Is it too much to ask? Do we have to “understand” the difficulties the new rulers of Egypt have to deal with, while we are starving and still besieged in Gaza? If this is the case, why do we, Palestinians of Gaza, have to pay the price? Are all other Egyptian crossings and border posts “partially” open like the Rafah gate? And are we, by posing such questions, still considered “a threat to Egypt’s national security?”

Haidar Eid is Associate Professor of Postcolonial and Postmodern Literature at Gaza’s al-Aqsa University and a policy advisor with Al-Shabaka, the Palestinian Policy Network.

( / 26.03.2011)

‘ANTI-SEMITISM’ as a political weapon

Lasse Wilhelmson

MAY-25-2005 Criticising Israel´s mistakes is acceptable. But questioning whether Israel is a Jewish state with a racist apartheid system that renders non-Jews second rate citizens that is not acceptable. It makes little difference whether the criticism is based on facts. Few people who cannot claim Jewish descent would dare to criticize publicly. They are afraid of being accused of ‘anti-semitism’.

There is much talk of disarming countries with nuclear weapons. Not the US and its allies, but the so-called `rogue states؟, especially Iran, which doesn´t yet have any weapons. Israel is hardly ever mentioned as a nuclear power although it has been for a long time. In spite of its advanced plans to bomb Iran, Israel is not seen as a threat to the surrounding world. The media regularly criticizes severely various religions, especially Islam, but never Judaism. Catholic pressure through lobbying, or the Pope´s speeches on political issues are discussed and criticized. The fight in South Africa against the Boers involved a whole world. Not because they were a ‘race’ with undesirable characteristics, but because they were the social group who in their own interests formed and administrated a racist apartheid system. The same sort of criticism was aimed at the followers of Cecil Rhodes in Rhodesia.

All types of social, ethnic and religious groups defend their own special interests. It is considered quite legitimate for their spokesmen to do their best to promote these interests; just as it is quite legitimate to criticize the same. But the moment Jewish spokesmen and their organisations are criticised, the legitimacy vanishes into thin air. The mention of ‘Jewish power’ makes most people´s blood run cold, but it is quite alright to discuss ‘gypsy power’ or rather the lack of it. ‘Jewishness’ has become taboo. This applies particularly to the combination of ‘Jewish’ and of ‘power’ . All kinds of power can be examined and discussed, questioned or rejected, but not the Jewish kind which is generally presented as non-existent.

There is growing anxiety in the Palestinian movement in Sweden about using ‘Jewish’ as a prefix to the settlements, the state of Israel or the apartheid system, albeit the use is quite correct. The settlements for example are ‘Jewish settlements’ simply because only Jews are allowed to live there. They are not Israeli because non-Jewish citizens are forbidden access to them. Neither are they Zionist as many Zionists are not Jews. It has now got to the stage where a leading spokesmen for the Palestinians in Sweden denies that Jews and Palestinians have disagreements, despite the law giving Jews all over the world the right to return to Israel, thus making them potential enemies of the Palestinians. Having a Jewish mother gives the right to live in the country taken from the Palestinians. One would be hard put to find a more fundamental disagreement. The issue of blood-relationship renders it, moreover, racist.

A reluctance to discuss Judaism´s significance for Zionism in Israel of today makes it impossible to understand why Israel was not content with fifty per cent, later eighty per cent, of Palestine. Or why a social democratic prime minister ordered his soldiers to break the bones of children throwing stones? And how can one understand why Jews in Jerusalem throw their garbage onto the roads and back yards of their Palestinian neighbours, spit at them, or why masked Jewish settlers during the ‘cease fire’ launched pogroms on unarmed Palestinian farmers, women and children? Or why the Israeli ‘peace movement’ and ‘left’ do not question the Jewish apartheid system? Just and lasting peace can never be achieved without its transformation. Few people think that all this is a result of the Jews being an ‘evil race’. But if it cannot be explained by any other means, the few risk becoming too many. A racially-based hate of Jews is helped along by the label of ‘anti-semitism’ pasted on nearly all criticism of Israel, not to mention criticism of Judaism.

Zionism, through its Jewish organisations, is the dominant interpretation of Judaism today. This is a renaissance of national Judaism of the Middle Ages and the judicial system Halakha with its extreme animosity towards non-jews who were seen rather as subhuman. This revival is seen as very beneficial by most Jewish organisations worldwide. They demand of their members positive commitment to the state of Israel. This is the context in which the behaviour mentioned above can be understood. Most Jews in the diaspora are, however, ‘happily’ unaware of this and are being used by their Zionist leaders and rabbis.

Politics and religion have merged in the state of Israel today. A person speaking out for a secular democracy to replace the Jewish state, is accused of, in fact, wanting to ‘drive the Jews into the sea’. Most Jews today identify themselves not with Israel but with Israel as a Jewish state. This creates a fundamental contradiction for many Jews: supporting the Jewish apartheid state while promoting democracy in the countries where they actually live. Denying or whitewashing Israel´s politics, becomes a way of keeping one´s identity intact. Violent, groundless attacks with ‘anti-semitism’ as a weapon is the method used against any attempt to lay bare this contradiction. A well known example is how Israel´s former ambassador to Sweden vandalised the art installation Snow White last year.

The risk of being labelled ‘anti-semitic’ if you are not a Jew or of ‘self-hatred’ if you are, creates self-censorship among those who are critical of Israel´s policies or dislike the successful lobbying carried out by Jewish and Christian Zionists, influencing US foreign policy. The so- called Friends of Israel, most of them spokesmen for Jewish organisations, have taken it upon themselves to be the foremost interpreters of the term ‘anti-semitism’. Few question this role as they run the risk of being tainted themselves if they do. The term ‘anti-semitism’ is taking on new nuances all the time. Of late the slightest implication, as in ‘almost anti-semitic’ or an ‘anti-semitic point of interest’ has been enough to invoke self-censorship. The mention of these circumstances is often felt to be ‘dangerous’ as it could lead to the growth of ‘anti-semitism’. All this in a western world where islamophobia is a considerably greater problem.

Jews are rightly proud of their success in almost all corners of society. In art and science and, not least, the media and politics. Israeli newspapers tell of the successful ‘likudification’ of the Bush administration and delight in the fact that the Israeli minister for the diaspora is Bush´s new favourite author and pet in the White House. Russian oligarchs with Israeli citizenship take breakfast there. There is a culture of boasting about this among Jews. But should a critic of Israel point to these exact same circumstances, he would immediately be accused of spreading ‘anti-semite theories of conspiracy’ and thus be barred from any further discussion.

The Jews have for many years had total entrepreneurship of ‘God´s chosen People’ with a ‘biblical right’ to Palestine. Zionism has been politically successful in reducing the Holocaust to Nazi war crimes against Jews. By presenting themselves as the major (the only?) victims in the history of humanity they expect to claim special moral rights. The method is used favourably to justify and cover up the genocide of the Palestinians. ‘Anti-semitism’ is being used to stop criticism of Israel´s way onwards to achieve the Zionist goal of a Jewish state in the whole of Palestine. Before this goal can be realised, ‘peace’ must be reached with the creation of a few Palestinian reservations on ten per cent of what was originally Palestine, walled-in and gradually wasting away. We are almost there now.

( / 25.03.2011)