Lebanon and its bloody history up to 1983
By Habib Siddiqui Al-Jazeerah, August 1, 2006 This essay is based on a lecture delivered at the University of California, Santa Barbara in 1983. While another 23 years have passed, the current events show that history is repeating itself. The villains and victims remain the same. What was true about western complacency about Israel’s marauding activities back then and impotency with Muslim leadership, sadly, still remains so. Thus, once again we see slaughter and cleansing of Muslims in that part of the world, in which America and its western allies sanction the war crimes of the rogue and savage Israeli government. The history of Lebanon cannot be separated from that of Palestine (and Syria). Until 636 CE, Palestine and its vicinity (including Lebanon) were ruled by several groups - Israelis (Children of Israel under kings Dawud and Sulaiman (AS)), Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Ptolemies, Seleucids of Egypt, the Romans, the Persians under Khoshru again and later by Byzantines under Heraclius. Muslims defeated the Byzantines in the battle of Yarmuk in 636 CE. Under the leadership of Amar-ibn-al‘As, Muslims besieged the city of Jerusalem and Patriarch Sephoronius offered to surrender the city if Khalifah Umar (R) himself would come in person to ratify the terms of capitulation. |
The encounter between Umar (R) and the Patriarch was dramatic.
In the words of historian Anthony Nutting:
"Umar taught the richly caparisoned of Christian commanders and bishops a lesson in humility by accepting their surrender in a patched and ragged robe and seated on a donkey."
In November of 1093 CE, Pope Urban II delivered an evil speech at Claremont in France.
He urged all Christiana to cleanse the Holy Land of Muslims.
When on 1099 CE the crusaders entered the city, they began one of the bloodiest and cruelest massacres in history.
To quote again a western historian, Anthony Hutting:
"No reliable figures are available of the total number of Muslims who perished, but according to Ibn-al-Athir some seventy thousand were slaughtered in al-Aqsa alone, all of them non-combatants and some of them Imams and Professors of theology who had taken refuge in a sanctuary.
Christian analysts have confirmed this report and one of their Chaplains, called Raymond, exulted in print over the atrocities that were perpetrated.
'Wonderful sights rewarded our eyes', he wrote, 'Some of our men, and they the more merciful, cut off the heads of the enemies; others shot them with arrows, so that they fall from the towers; others tortured them 1onger by casting them into the flames.
Heaps of heads and hands and feet were to be seen in the streets of the city.'"
Jerusalem was forcibly transformed into a Christian city from 1099 until 1187 when Sultan Salahuddin Ayyubi (R), a Kurdish Muslim, stopped the process by liberating Palestine and its vicinity from the crusaders.
To compare his behavior to that of the Crusaders, Anthony Nutting writes:
"Strict orders were issued to all Muslim troops to protect Christian life and property and not a single Christian was molested on account of his religion - a remarkable contrast to the atrocities perpetrated by the Franks eighty years before.”
Sultan Salahuddin allowed the Christians to live in what is now called Lebanon.
Had he treated them differently, probably, the history of the Middle East would have been different.
Excepting the periods 1229-1239 and 1243-1244 when Jerusalem fell in the hands of the crusaders again, Palestine and Lebanon remained Muslim territories (as part of Greater Syria – al Shams) through all their lives.
Religious freedom and rights of worship for the Jews and the Christians were respected and protected.
|
|
After the Mongol invasion of the Islamic empire, Lebanon lost its importance as a major trading center.
But she was able to regain its status soon after the Ottoman Turks reunified the territories.
Lebanon was also able to win limited autonomy.
The first organized effort to introduce the factor of "Arab Nationalism" was undertaken by Syrian Christians under American patronage in 1847 in Beirut to divide Arabs from Muslims.
A more serious step was the formation of a clandestine society in Beirut by five Christian graduates of the Syrian Protestant College in 1875 (this college is now called the American University in Beirut).
Its aim was to "call upon the Arabs to fight the Turks".
And subsequently the British and the French used the myth of Arab Nationalism to meet their selfish desires.
In the mid-19th century, many Christian business and missionary organizations started settling in Syria, and especially in Lebanon, which led to increased tension between the Maronite (Catholic) Christians and the Druze people.
In 1880, taking advantage of a weaker Ottoman empire, France (a Catholic country) intervened and forced to appoint a Christian governor for Lebanon.
In 1918, General Allenby of Britain entered Palestine after the Turks were defeated in the World War I.
After entering the city of al-Quds, he declared, "Now the Crusade comes to an end".
In fact, modern crusade began with the infamous Balfour Declaration of 1917 by Britain promising the Zionists in Europe that a Jewish homeland would be established in Palestine.
That was the beginning of the troubling times for modern Middle East.
After World War I, France got the Mandate from the League of Nations to rule Syria, which included Lebanon.
In 1920 when the French curved up the Ottoman Empire and formed the Lebanon, much to the discontent of and opposition from Muslims, the idea was to ensure the continuance of Christian influence over the Muslim Arabs so as to make the country a permanent dependency.
|
|
On January 1, 1944, amid much controversy, Lebanon became an independent state.
In spite of the vast Muslim majority (which is now close to 70%), the French desire to retain Christian dominance, even after the independence, led to a form of government that is simply undemocratic and imbalanced. Lebanon’s 1926 constitution, dictated by the French, stipulates that the position of President, wielding real power, goes to a Maronite Christian (named after St. Maro, who died in 410 CE).
The National Assembly has equal number of Christian and Muslim members, and is elected every four years.
Under the constitution, the President, who appoints the Sunni Prime Minister, is elected by the legislature for a six-year term and cannot serve consecutive terms.
The vast majority Shi’a Muslims (representing almost half the population) are relegated to the less important Speaker of the Assembly position.
Important cabinet ministers and the position of Army chief of staff are all held by the Christians.
In the years that followed, the Christians of Lebanon looked west, instead of east, for their allegiance.
So, it is not difficult to understand why the minority Christians crave for keeping their privileged status-quo.
Zionist Conspiracy towards Eretz Israel:
The modern problem in the region goes back to the period of conspiracy against its Muslim population.
It was a conspiracy to uproot a people from their ancestral lands and implant outsiders, thereby creating a permanent outpost for occupation and oppression, humiliation and hypocrisy, death and destruction.
That is why to understand the current crisis, a grasp of this conspiracy, hatched up by outsiders, is very important.
In 1919, the World Zionist Organization submitted to the Versailles Peace Conference, held near Paris its official plan for the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.
The submitted map included the southern part of Lebanon to the Litani River, the Syrian Golan Heights, and the West and East banks of the Jordan River.
No wonder that we see today the Zionists of Israel are trying to fulfill their forefather’s dreams.
The stated objective of the ruling Herut Party (later called the Likud Party) of terrorists Begin-Shamir is that of "Eretz Israel” (Greater Israel) extending to the Litani River of Lebanon!
Theodore Herzl, the father of modern Zionism, said of his negotiation with the German Chancellor:
"He asked what territory we wanted to have, whether as far north as Beirut or even beyond that.
I said: We will ask for what we need - more immigrants, the more land."
That was probably in late 19th or early 20th century, before his death.
Now let us see what the founder of Zionist state of Israel, Ben Gurion, wrote in his diary on May 21, 1947:
(The Complete Diaries of Theodore Herzl, p. 701)
"The Achilles heel of the Arab coalition is the Lebanon.
Muslim supremacy in this country is artificial and can be easily overthrown.
A Christian state ought to be set up there, with its southern frontier on the river Litani.
We would sign a treaty of alliance with the state.
Thus, when we have broken the strength of the Arab legion and bombed Amman, we could wipe out Trans-Jordan; after that Syria could fall.
And if Egypt still dared to make war on us, we would bomb Port Said, Alexandria and Cairo.
We should thus end the war and would have paid to Egypt, Assyria and Chaldea on behalf of our ancestors."
Moshe Dayan told the Times of London (June 25, 1969) that:
"Our fathers had reached the frontiers which were recognized in Partition Plan.
Our generation reached the frontiers of 1949.
Now the Six-day generation (referring to those who participated in 1967 war) has managed to reach Suez, Jordan and the Golan Heights.
This is not the end.
After the present cease-fire lines, there will be new ones.
They will extend beyond Jordan - perhaps to Lebanon and perhaps to Central Syria as well."
It is not a mere coincidence today that we witness Israel's invading army near the Litani River.
Yet, Arab leaders are indifferent to what is going on.
Their sophisticated AWACS, F-15 and F-16 planes (bought from the USA) rust in the desert.
|
Lebanese Civil War
A major party to today’s crisis in Lebanon is the Falange.
It was formed in 1936 by the Christian Patriarch Pierre Gemayel (who was influenced by the Hitler Youth Movement in Germany and Franco's Fascism in Spain).
Initially, the Christians accepted the presence of Palestinian refugees.
But in 1970, the first clash between the Christians and the Palestinians took place, when Christians of the village Kahaleh ambushed a Palestinian funeral procession traveling Damascus.
As the tensions increased, the civil war of 1975-76 sparked off.
In Dec. 1975, a group of Falangists (Phalangists) killed about 200 Muslims in a reprisal attack for the deaths of four of their own men.
That is generally seen as the event that sparked the civil war.
Lt. Khatib defected from the Christian-dominated Army and led the Lebanese Muslims in its fight against the Falangists, while the Palestinians living in Lebanon strengthened him.
At the request of Lebanese president, Hafez al-Asad’s Syrian forces moved in on April 1976 on the side of the Christian forces and disarmed the Palestinians and the Lebanese Muslims when the latter were in a position to overrun the Falangists.
Then came the sorrowful event in the Beirut refugee camp of Tel-al-Zaatar, inhabited by some 20,000 Palestinian refugees from the 1948 Arab-Israel War, which fell to the Maronite militias on August 12, 1976.
Some 3,000 Palestinians were killed by the Falangists while the Syrians watched (or allowed) the slaughter.
Israel, as expected, armed the marauding Falangists and Saad Haddad's Christian militia forces.
Her motivation was to create a Maronite Republic in the south so that it would act as a buffer zone with Haddad’s militia acting as a proxy force, and thereby help turn Lebanon into a puppet state in the Arab world.
|
Others honked horns and waved Hamas flags from car windows.
Leaders around the world were shocked by Hamas' victory, with Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi reportedly calling it a "very, very, very bad result," and others insisting Hamas give up violence and recognize Israel's right to exist.
"You cannot have one foot in politics and another in terror," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said.
Hamas capitalized on widespread discontent with years of Fatah corruption and ineffectiveness.
Much of its campaign focused on internal Palestinian issues, while playing down the conflict with Israel.
Before the election, Hamas had suggested it would be content as a junior partner in the next government, thus avoiding a decision on its relationship with Israel.
Throughout the campaign, leaders sent mixed signals, hinting they could be open to some sort of accommodation with Israel.
Its apparent victory will now force it to take a clearer position on key issues, including whether to abandon its violent ideology.
Mushir al-Masri, a Hamas candidate who won election in the northern Gaza Strip, said peace talks and recognition of Israel are "not on our agenda" but the group is ready for a partnership — presumably with Abbas.
Senior Israeli security officials gathered Thursday to discuss the results and acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert scheduled talks with senior officials but made no public comment.
Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the opposition Likud Party, condemned the vote.
"Today Hamastan was formed," he said. Labor Party politician Ami Ayalon said Israel might have to change the route of its West Bank security barrier to take Hamas' victory into account.
|
Obviously, this idea still has tremendous appeal for the West, and the current support by the Christians in and around U.S. for Israeli invasion gives strong credence to such a hypothesis.
Israeli Invasion
Taking advantage of civil war inside Lebanon, Israel occupied south Lebanon in March 1978 but withdrew in June after transferring control of the territories to their surrogate Christian South Lebanese Army (SLA).
In 1981, fight broke out between Israeli-supported Christians and Syrian forces, and Beirut was heavily bombed by Israel.
In June 1982 in a genocidal mood, Israel invaded Lebanon to eliminate the PLO.
According to western analysts no fewer than 10,000 Muslims were killed, about a million rendered homeless, another half-a-million awaiting death in Israeli seized territories of south Lebanon.
The Israelis and their comrades from the Falangists were able to forcibly evict the PLO from Lebanon.
[No one cared to remember that Palestinian refugees would not be in Southern Lebanon today if the Zionists hadn’t evicted them from their ancestral homes and had allowed their return to their homes in compliance with the repeated U.N. Resolutions.]
Soon after PLO had moved out, Ariel Sharon, the architect of the war, let the Falangists seize the Sabra and Chatila refugee camps in Israeli-held areas.
Under watchful eyes of Israelis, in September, 1982 thousands of Palestinian Muslims were slaughtered by Israeli-supported Falangists.
After destroying much of Beirut and southern Lebanon, Israel partially evacuated from occupied Lebanon (holding onto territories in the south) and let multi-national forces from U.S., Britain, France and Italy to enter into the arena expecting them to complete her unfinished task of further humiliating Muslims.
The latter started pressuring the Lebanese government to accede to Israel’s haughty demands.
These so-called "peace keepers", instead of really preserving and working for peace as neutral arbiters, took the side of Israel and her surrogate forces among the Falangists.
Worse still, the U.S. Sixth Fleet fired mortars that killed hundreds of Muslim civilians, destroyed villages, towns and mountains that were lived by the Shi’a and Druze.
Such atrocities brought about attacks from Shi’a resistance fighters (children of victims) against the U.S. Embassy (April 1983), and French and U.S. Army headquarters (October 23, 1983) that killed nearly 300.
History once again showed that lasting peace cannot be expected from negotiators that are hypocritical and unjust.
Truly, the West has been hypocritical in its dealings with Muslims.
The Lebanese crisis should be a wake-up call for Muslims not to trust the West as a neutral arbiter.
What they are facing today is nothing new but a continuing crusade against them.
The sooner they learn and prepare against it the better.
Dr. Habib Siddiqui, October 1983. |
The US paid Israel Massacre of Lebanese Children in Qana |
The second Balfour Declaration
By Danny Rubinstein
President Bush's letter recognizing that Israel will not withdraw to the 1967 Green Line, and rejecting the Palestinian right of return, has helped bring about a rapprochement between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
|
|
The Balfour Declaration was mentioned by almost every Palestinian spokesman who commented at week's end on last Wednesday's press conference held by U.S. President George Bush and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon at the White House, in which Bush declared that America does not recognize the refugees' right of return and does not think it is realistic to expect Israel to return to the Green Line.
In Palestinian national history, the Balfour Declaration, issued on November 2, 1917, by the British foreign secretary, Lord Balfour, marks the advent of Zionism.
(The key phrase of the declaration asserted: "His Majesty's Government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.")
The original text of the Palestinian National Covenant (the founding charter of the Palestine Liberation Organization) states that the only Jews who will be allowed to remain in Palestine after its liberation will be those who arrived in the country before the Balfour Declaration.
The typical Palestinian statement concerning the injustice of the Balfour Declaration is: "Those to whom the country doesn't belong [Balfour and the British government] promised it to those to have no right to it [the Jewish people]."
There is hardly any Palestinian who has not heard about or read the Balfour Declaration, and it would be no great exaggeration to say that its content is better known to the Palestinian public than to the Israeli public.
Against this background, for example, the headline in the Palestinian newspaper Al-Ayyam last Thursday stated: "Second Balfour Declaration exempts Israel from full withdrawal from the occupied territories."
Bassem Abu Samiya, from the Palestinian Information Ministry and a columnist for another paper, Al-Hayat al-Jadida, suggested calling President Bush's statement the "Bushfour Declaration."
Statements issued by the Palestinian Authority and remarks by Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia (Abu Ala), cabinet ministers and members of the Palestinian Legislative Council [the parliament] in the past few days have invoked every possible dramatic metaphor: 'Dangerous turning point,' 'historic precedent,' 'regression of decades,' 'deterioration that will lead to terrible bloodshed,' 'erasure of the whole political process since the Madrid conference and the Oslo Accord,' and 'liquidation of the road map and its replacement with the Sharon plan.'
What do the Palestinians find so frustrating and frightening in the Bush statement?
There are four issues at stake:
|
1. The fact that the negotiations on the fate of the Palestinians are being conducted without them and without taking their position into account.
Some of the Palestinian spokesmen said that the Israeli government could have received a substantial part of Bush's promises in negotiations and an agreement with the Palestinians. However, the Sharon government preferred to humiliate and ignore them.
At the failed Camp David summit of July 2000, and in the formula that was afterward put forward in the Taba talks, the Palestinian representatives agreed to the presence of several settlement blocs; and both the Geneva Initiative of Yossi Beilin and Yasser Abed Rabbo and the accord of Ami Ayalon and Sari Nusseibeh contain understandings relating to the right of return.
However, Sharon was having none of that, because he never saw the Palestinians as partners, only - always - as enemies.
2. The Palestinians are furious, of course, at the historic precedent of American recognition of the settlement blocs in the West Bank, American support for Israel's not having to return to the Green Line and American rejection of the right of return. These are cardinal subjects that will have to be addressed in the final status agreement, and as such have to be discussed by the parties involved, but suddenly agreement has been reached on them in an American-Israeli understanding.
3. The Palestinians describe the Israeli political success as especially impressive because Ariel Sharon, in their perception, won American support without giving anything in return. "Who knows if and when there will be an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza?" said a teacher from Ramallah in a street interview to an Arab television network.
4. The Palestinians were grieved to hear Bush's announcement against the background of an earlier meeting with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. The U.S. administration ostensibly needs Arab assistance in the Iraq crisis - but in the end it turned out that it doesn't regard such assistance as important. In other words, the Arab world is so weak and pitiful that it is unable to stop the sharp pro-Israeli turn in Washington's policy.
What, then, can we expect now?
The talk in Ramallah over the weekend was that the major blow was suffered by the official Palestinian Authority - namely Yasser Arafat and his colleagues.
They were the ones who were surprised and hurt, not the circles that constitute the Palestinian opposition. Hamas spokesmen, for example, were almost exultant at Bush's remarks. Khaled Meshal, the head of Hamas's politburo, said, "At long last comes the Bush statement and puts an end to the illusion about a possible political agreement, under American auspices, between the Jewish state and the Palestinians."
A spokesman for Islamic Jihad added, "We always told you [referring to Arafat and the senior level of the Palestinian Authority] that armed struggle is the only way."
One result of the shift in American policy seems to be that the Palestinian public is pushing for the emergence of a united national leadership as quickly as possible.
At week's end circles in the West Bank and Gaza also marked the second anniversary of the arrest by Israel of Fatah-Tanzim leader Marwan Barghouti (Palestinian reports spoke of Barghouti's "abduction").
He was described as "the engineer of the intifada and the symbol of the struggle."
This was also the anniversary of the death of Khalil al-Wazir (Abu Jihad), who was considered the No. 2 figure in the PLO; he was killed by Israeli commandos in his home in Tunis in 1988.
Assemblies and meetings in honor of Barghouti and in memory of the "prince of the shaheeds," Abu Jihad, were held in the territories, and all of them emphasized the need for national unity.
The unity slogan currently in use by Hamas is "partnership in blood and partnership in decision-making."
That is, given the end of the Oslo process and the return to the violent struggle, they are ready to join the new leadership that will replace the existing institutions.
The official announcements emanating recently from Arafat's office also report meetings of "the PLO executive and representatives of the different factions" - meaning that Arafat is already implementing moves toward unity.
"It was only because of security problems that Hamas and Islamic Jihad did not attend the meetings," one communique stated, seeking to underscore the fact that the Islamic zealots, too, have stopped boycotting the Palestinian national institutions.
Arafat, in a public speech devoted to Abu Jihad that was broadcast by Palestinian television on Thursday, emphasized the theme of national unity along with declarations that the Palestinians have no intention of forgoing their rights, including the right of return.
The entire Palestinian public is thus united in its rejection of the Israeli-American understandings.
The situation was concisely summed up in a cartoon in Al-Ayyam showing a Palestinian family in which the father is reading the "Bush declaration" and asserts: "It will never happen."
|
| US Veto 42 for Israel | January 3, 2009 — US vetoes approval of a U.N. Security Council statement calling for an immediate cease-fire in the Gaza Strip and southern Israel and expressing concern at the escalation of violence |
| US Veto 41 for Israel | November 11, 2006 — US vetoes adoption of a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israel military operations in the Gaza Strip; vote: The United Kingdom, Denmark, Japan and Slovakia abstaining. 10-1 with four absentions, Britain, Denmark, Japan and Slovakia |
|
| US Veto 40 for Israel | July 13, 2006 — US vetoes UN Qatari-sponsored resolution in the UN Security Council condemning Israel military disproportionate force in the Gaza Strip; vote: 10-1 with four absentions, Britain, Peru, Denmark and Slovakia |
|
| US Veto 39 for Israel | October 5, 2004 — US vetoes UN condemning Israel military incursion in Gaza, causing many civilian deaths and extensive damage to property; vote: 11 to 1, with 3 abstentions, Britain, Germany, Romania |
|
|
|
|
| US Veto 38 for Israel | March 25, 2004 — US vetoes UN condemning Israel for killing Palestinian spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in a missile attack in Gaza; vote: 11 to 1, with 3 abstentions, Britain, Germany, Romania |
|
| US Veto 37 for Israel | October 14, 2003 — US vetoes UN raising concerns about Israel building of a securiy fence through the occupied West Bank; vote 10 to 1, with 4 abstentions, Britain, Germany, Bulgaria and Cameroon |
|
| US Veto 36 for Israel | September 16, 2003 — US vetoes UN reaffirming the illegality of deportation of any Palestinian and expressed concern about the possible deportation of Yasser Arafat; vote: 11 to 1, with 3 abstentions, Britain, Germany and Bulgaria |
|
| US Veto 35 for Israel | December 19, 2002 — US vetoes UN expressing deep concern over Israel killing of U.N. employees and Israel’s destruction of the U.N. World Food Program warehouse in Beit Lahiya and demanding that Israel refrain from the excessive and disproportionate use of force in the occupied territories; vote: 12 to 1, with 2 abstentions, Bulgaria and Cameroon |
UN President calls for sanctions against Israel
by Saed Bannoura — IMEMC News Thursday November 27, 2008
Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann said that the international community should engage in a 'boycott, divestment and sanctions' campaign against Israel, similar to those enacted against South Africa two decades ago."
Israel has engaged in a military occupation of the Palestinian territories since 1967, with an increase in military presence since the year 2000.
The people of Palestine continue to live under martial law, with no control of their land, sea or water.
In his remarks, d'Escoto said that Israeli policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territories appear similar to the apartheid of an earlier era, a continent away.
He said that the United Nations should not be afraid to use the term apartheid to describe what is happening in occupied Palestine.
Former US President Jimmy Carter came under fire for using the term 'apartheid' in reference to the Israel-Palestine conflict.
He was even prevented from speaking at the Democratic National Convention this year because of his position on the issue.
Inserted by TheWE.cc
More than Fifteen million US dollars is given by US taxpayers each day for the use of Israel, which presently involves the imprisonment of the remaining segregated ' Bantustan — Apartheid ' parcels of land occupied by millions of Palestinian people.
Palestinians were forced from their homes 60 years ago from what is now called Israel into refugee camps in Gaza and the West Bank, Jordan and Lebanon.
While attempts have been made by the Palestinians to create a better life for themselves, these refugee camps have been forced upon them to this day by American Taxpayer funding, and Anglo American, Europe backing and banking for Israel that has propped up the forced 'state' of Israel for more than fifty years.
Illuminati, New World Order elite have been at the forefront in protecting European and American settler people who stole the land and continue to steal the remaining few segments of land from the Palestinians, in essence taking away from the Palestinians piece by piece this land over these many years.
Funding by the US Taxpayer for the enslavement of the Palestinian people continues to increase, estimated now considerably more than the previous 4 billion US dollars per year.
© 2001-2008 IMEMC NEWS.
Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse reprint, and rebroadcast on the net and elsewhere. |
| US Veto 34 for Israel | December 14, 2001 — US vetoes UN condemning all acts of terror, the use of excessive force and destruction of properties and encouraged establishment of a monitoring apparatus; vote: 12-1, with 2 abstentions, Britain and Norway |
|
| US Veto 33 for Israel | March 26, 2001 — US vetoes UN calling for the deployment of a U.N. observer force in the West Bank and Gaza; vote: 9 to 1, with 4 abstentions, Britain, France, Ireland and Norway |
|
| Please take these images you see Please place them on your website Future generations need to know the monsters presently running our planet! |
|
| April 2004 Palestine click here |
How Israel sought to make this documentary illegal |
| It was made in 1997, except for Gaza settlers still in Gaza, could be written today. You’ll really like the scenes where Israelis speak of 'how to take care of the problem'. One American holds up a sign saying 'transfer all the Arabs to Oklahoma where there’s oil' Listen to settlers speak. Watch how uncomfortable they are with the camera facing them. 56 minutes long — so sit back or come back. See something that really does open your eyes to Palestine and the takeover now known as Israel. If you've never been there, observe this intensity and human cruelty. |
| 'People and the Land' (PDF file) by Tom Hayes — click here A 24 page article about how hard this film was to make. How Israel sought to make it illegal, doing all they could to prevent the film. |
Cluster bombs Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon US new generation of landmines called Spider |
Atrocities committed by Israel — graphic pictures What CNN nor the BBC ever shows you |
US used white phosphorus chemical and thermobaric fuel-air weapons War Crimes — Fallujah — Graphic Images |
| US ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES Israel Caused Holocaust Palestine Lebanon US Israel massacres — desire to kill one and half million people They keep sucking off the teat of America and the banking systems of Europe |
| ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES The horror of January 2009 Israel massacres — children bullets to the head I watched an Israeli soldier shoot dead my two little girls |
| US ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES February March 2008 US Israel massacres — desire to kill one and half million people The Story of Palestinians Childhoods |
| ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES January 19 - 21 Israel massacres — children bullets to the head Places flag on family home — East Gaza City |
| ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES January 14 - 18 2009 Israel massacres — desire to kill one and half million people They came up again with the Hamas-was-in-the-UN-school lie |
| ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES CONTINUE January 2nd week 2009 99% of US House joins 100% of US Senate in Supporting Israel with HRes34 The 42 vetoes of the US for Israel |
US Israel attack on Gaza City The Politics of Anti-Semitism 99 US Senators, 350 US House members attend AIPAC meeting |
| ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES CONTINUE January 2009 — Click here Israel killing — US paid army fires towards populations to cause death and injury The 42 vetoes of the US for Israel |
Resistance to US, UK, Bombing Resistance is response to foreign occupation Will stop once troops withdraw |
Last Victims of Hitler Holocaust — Click here He is just a helpless baby My son was killed He was peacefully sleeping in his cradle |
Twenty Questions Radio/TV interviewers avoid asking about Israel Which parts of the Declaration of Human Rights and Geneva Conventions don't Israelis understand? Why is Israel still stealing Palestinian land for more illegal construction? |
They walk past the graves Blood on wounded “She was happy because she could say English words.” |
Lest we forget — Ahmed and Asma, story of two children dying |
The Dark Side Initiates — Click here Dark path initiates depend on the denial The five-percent manipulator class is composed of those on the dark path |
|
For archives, these articles are being stored on TheWE.cc website.The purpose is to advance understandings of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. |