For archive purposes, this article is being stored on TheWE.cc website.
The purpose is to advance understandings of environmental, political,
human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues.

 
US Israel Murder
Jerusalem belongs to the Palestinians
The Israel military, including weapons: tanks, missiles, warplanes, artillery, shells, are all funded by the US taxpayer.
More than Fifteen million US dollars is given by US taxpayers to Israel each day for their military use.
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.

                          To rebel is right, to disobey is a duty, to act is necessary !
twenty
twenty
         Because We Are Jews           
Saturday 11th December 2004:
"Because We Are Jews"
by Rabbi Mordechi Weberman
There are those who ask us why we march with the Palestinians.  Why do we raise the Palestinian flag?  Why do we support the Palestinian cause?
“You are Jews!” they tell us.  "What are you doing?"
And our response is very simple:
It is precisely because we are Jews that we march with the Palestinians and raise their flag!
It is precisely because we are Jews that we demand that the Palestinian peoples be returned to their homes and properties!
Yes, in our Torah we are commanded to be fair.  We are called upon to pursue justice.  And, what could be more unjust then the century old attempt of the Zionist movement to invade an other people’s land, to drive them out and steal their property?
The early Zionists proclaimed that they were a people without a land going to a land without a people.
Palestinine family
under Israel occupation
Innocent sounding words.
But utterly and totally untrue.
Palestine was a land with a people.  A people that were developing a national consciousness.
If came not with the intention of dominating
We have no doubt that would Jewish refugees, have come to Palestine not with the intention of dominating:
Not with the intention of making a Jewish state
Not with the intention of dispossessing
Not with the intention of depriving the Palestinians of their basic rights
That they would have been welcomed by the Palestinians, with the same hospitality that Islamic peoples have shown Jews throughout history.
And we would have lived together as Jews and Muslims lived before in Palestine in peace and harmony.
To our Islamic and Palestinian friends around the world, please hear our message —
There are Jews around the world who support your cause.
We do not mean some partition scheme proposed in 1947
And when we support your cause we do not mean some partition scheme proposed in 1947 by a UN that had no right to offer it.
Tear gas
and other chemical weapons
When we say support your cause we do not mean the cut off and cut up pieces of the West Bank offered by Barak at Camp David together with justice for less than 10 % of the refugees.
We do not mean anything other than returning the entire land, including to Jerusalem to Palestinian sovereignty!
At that point justice demands that the Palestinian people should decide if and how many Jews should remain in the Land.
This is the only path to true reconciliation.
But we demand yet more
But we demand yet more.
WE demand that in returning the land back to its rightful owners we have not yet done enough.
There should be an apology to the Palestinian people which is clear and precise.
Zionism did you wrong.
Zionism stole your homes.
Zionism stole your land.
Its latest brutalities are the death rattle of the terminally ill
By so proclaiming we proclaim before the world that we are the people of the Torah, that our faith demands that we be honest and fair and good and kind.
We have attended hundreds of pro Palestinian rallies over the years and everywhere we go the leaders and audience greet us with the warmth of Middle Eastern hospitality.
What a lie it is to say that Palestinians in particular or Muslims in general hate Jews.
You hate injustice.
Not Jews.
Fear not my friends.
Evil cannot long triumph.
The Zionist nightmare is at its end.
It is exhausted.
Its latest brutalities are the death rattle of the terminally ill.
We will yet both live to see the day when Jew and Palestinian will embrace in peace under the Palestinian flag in Jerusalem.
Try to avoid
attack by US taxpayer paid
Israel soldiers
http://www.marchforjustice.com/Becausewearejews.php   
by : Rabbi Mordechi Weberman
Saturday 11th December 2004
Rabbi of Natorei Karta kissing Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Weiss, of Natorei Karta, said in a statement that:

'This will be the third time we're meeting with Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Every time, we stressed to the Iranian leadership that despite the declarations by Jews who don't understand the essence of the matter, we have found the Iranian people and their leaders friendly and respectful.'

Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Weiss added that Natorei Karta members believed Ahmadinejad was a very religious man who was dedicated to world peace based on mutual respect and dialogue.

Regarding Israel's relations with Iran, Weiss said that:

'Judaism seeks peace.

Unfortunately, many Jews who are influenced by Zionism — a philosophy less than 100 years old — feel that the proper response to their enemies, be they real or imagined, is aggression.

They call for violence and, to our great misfortune, try to drag other nations into war.'

Weiss expressed chagrin that few world officials had tried to talk with Ahmadinejad or to follow the real opinion of Iranian Jews, who, he said, live peacefully in the country.

'We want to meet with the man who has proven again and again that he is interested in the welfare of the Iranian Jewish community and that he has a deep respect for the Jewish world.

The Zionist attempt to isolate this man and his people is immoral and tragic.'

Photo: Mozybyte
Rabbi of Natorei Karta kissing Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Natorei Karta: Ahmadinejad man of peace
JPOST.COM STAFF
Sep 25, 2007
Natorei Karta spokesman Rabbi Yisroel Dovid Weiss on Tuesday called Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "an advocate of peace," prior to the group's meeting with the controversial leader in New York.
[Rabbi Yisroel Dovid] Weiss said in a statement that:
"This will be the third time we're meeting with [ Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad].
...Every time, we stressed to the Iranian leadership that despite ... the declarations by Jews who don't understand the essence of the matter, we have found the Iranian people and their leaders friendly and respectful."
He added that Natorei Karta members believed Ahmadinejad was a very religious man who was dedicated to world peace based on mutual respect and dialogue.
Regarding Israel's relations with Iran, Weiss said that:
"Judaism seeks peace.
Unfortunately, many Jews who are influenced by Zionism — a philosophy less than 100 years old — feel that the proper response to their enemies, be they real or imagined, is aggression.
They call for violence and, to our great misfortune, try to drag other nations into war."
Weiss expressed chagrin that few world officials had tried to talk with Ahmadinejad or to follow the real opinion of Iranian Jews, who, he said, live peacefully in the country.
"We want to meet with the man who has proven again and again that he is interested in the welfare of the Iranian Jewish community and that he has a deep respect for the Jewish world.
... The Zionist attempt to isolate this man and his people is immoral and tragic."
Ahmadinejad's visit to New York as part of the UN General Assembly has garnered harsh criticism from Jewish groups due to his frequent calls to "wipe Israel off the map."
[  These references to comments by Ahmadinejad are always completely mistranslated and are in gross error.
Ahmadinejad refers always to the assimilation of the present few and small pieces of Palestine land remaining for the Palestine people with the present day far larger area, and always increasing areas, of the accepted state of Israel.
This error of translation to Ahmadinejad statements is repeated endlessly by the Western Press, and by Israel media — TheWE.cc  ]
© 1995 — 2008 The Jerusalem Post.   All rights reserved.
People and The Land airdrops viewers into the universe of an occupied people, unreeling images of a new form of apartheid based on ethnicity.
Challenging U.S. foreign policy and the conventions of the documentary form itself, People and The Land examines the concrete realities of Israel's conduct in the West Bank and Gaza.
The level of U.S. support for that conduct through foreign aid, and the human cost of that aid in Palestine and the U.S.
YouTube also has it in 6 parts — part 6 deals with US involvement and payment to Israel
              Sands of Sorrow (1950) — click here        
       Documentary film of the Palestinian refugees
two years after they were forced from the present state of Israel.          
              UK Respect Party Clive Searle — click here        
       Manchester Emergency Demonstration July 21, 2006.          
Sunday, 2 November, 2003
Thousands at Israeli peace rally
Tel Aviv peace demonstrators.

The rally revived memories of Rabin's peace drive.
Tel Aviv peace demonstrators
The rally revived memories of Rabin's peace drive
Tens of thousands of Israelis have marked the eighth anniversary of the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin with a peace rally in Tel Aviv.
They gathered on the square where the prime minister was gunned down by a Jewish extremist on 4 November 1995.
Rabin's Labour Party comrade Shimon Peres told the crowd that Palestinian leaders wanted to make peace.
In the Gaza Strip, Israeli troops fired on a group of gunmen near a border fence, reportedly killing one of them.
Palestinian sources said two other gunmen were wounded in the incident at the fence which separates the strip from Israel.
In the West Bank, Israeli troops also shot a Palestinian motorcyclist after he reportedly ignored calls to stop.
Israeli soldiers at the checkpoint in Nablus administered first aid to the man who, they said, had a bullet wound in the leg, and then put him in a taxi to hospital.
However, he was later pronounced dead at the Palestinian hospital where doctors reported that he had been shot in the chest.
The Israeli army also reported that five of its soldiers had been lightly wounded by a bomb blast in the marketplace of Nablus on Saturday.
Palestinian 'partner'
Up to 100,000 people gathered on Tel Aviv's Rabin Square for the peace rally, according to one estimate.
Demonstrators, who included campaigners against the troop presence in the Palestinian areas, waved banners in support of the "Geneva initiative", an unofficial plan drafted by Palestinians and Israeli leftists.
Zvi Friedman, one of the rally's organisers, said the turnout was "reassurance of the desire for peace, reassurance for people against violence and reassurance of Rabin's way".
Mr Peres, who was with Rabin when he was killed, called for support for the new Palestinian Prime Minister, Ahmed Qurei, who is currently forming a new government.
"For his own people's good he is in favour of ending terrorism and we can consider him a partner," the Labour Party leader told the rally.
Ariel Sharon's government has been hostile towards the new Palestinian prime minister, seeing him as a close ally of Yasser Arafat, but Mr Sharon said on Friday he was prepared to hold talks with him.
New York Times promotes “escape” to Israel
By Bill Van Auken
10 March 2007
Foreign buyers of Israeli real estate, the Times notes, are “taking advantage of a decrease in terrorism and property prices still far below Western levels” to scoop up their luxury vacation homes.
The “decrease in terrorism” is factored in as one might list beach erosion in the Hamptons.
The word “Palestinians” is nowhere to be found in the article, though the expensive real estate deals and “gated communities” it touts are all founded upon land seized from a people who were violently dispossessed and turned into refugees nearly six decades ago.
The human suffering caused by the mass confiscation of Palestinian land that began in 1948 has only been intensified by the policies of the Israeli government, backed by Washington.
While the Times promotes lavish second homes in Israel to America’s wealthy, tens of thousands of Palestinians lack even a single roof of their own.
Millions remain refugees, denied the right to return and live in their own land.
Since 1967, the Israeli authorities have demolished tens of thousands of Palestinian homes in the occupied territories.
According to the Palestinian Bureau of Statistics, between 2000 and 2005 alone, 30,000 families were made homeless by demolitions carried out by Israeli forces.
Until 2005, it was a common practice to demolish the homes of those accused of terrorist acts, a form of collective punishment banned by international law. [Homes still being demolished regularly — TheWE.cc]
For the most part, these houses are destroyed on the pretext that they were built without first obtaining a permit, something that the bureaucracy of the Zionist state makes virtually impossible for Palestinian Arabs.
The demolitions have been accompanied by: the building and expansion of illegal Zionist settlements in the occupied West Bank
The construction of the so-called separation wall.
Seizing large new tracts of Palestinian territory.
Turning what is left into non-contiguous and unviable ghettoes.
Enforcing an oppressive system of checkpoints and roadblocks that effectively make the occupied territories into a massive open-air prison
.
Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh said he was unable to get to sleep after listening to Gore’s Sept, 23, 2002 address.   Robert Parry.
Underlying these brutal actions is an apartheid-style policy of population transfers and segregation aimed at carving out exclusively Jewish territories and annexing even more land.
While trampling on the rights of the Palestinians, the Israeli state has also presided over the deepening impoverishment of large sections of the population within Israel itself, including both Jewish immigrants and Arabs born within Israel’s boundaries.
According to Israeli government statistics released last September, fully 1.6 million people — a quarter of the population — live below the poverty line.
Long gone are the egalitarian and even “socialist” pretenses of Labour Zionism of an early epoch.
The present state and all major parties have abandoned any serious attempt to ameliorate poverty, instead embracing free market policies and imposing continuous rounds of budget cuts.
The result has been mounting social polarization, of which the real estate deals highlighted by the Times are a direct expression.
The gobbling up of ever-more-expensive properties by wealthy Americans in Israel has placed increasing pressure on Israeli working people, driving up housing prices beyond what they can afford.
Israel army destroy Bedouin homes
Hathaleen area south of Hebron,
West Bank
Houses near Jewish settlement
75 Palestinians displaced
Paid for by U.S. taxpayer
                          To rebel is right, to disobey is a duty, to act is necessary !
twenty
twenty
         As the Arabs see the Jews           
The American Magazine November, 1947:
His Majesty King Abdullah
"As the Arabs see the Jews"
I am especially delighted to address an American audience, for the tragic problem of Palestine will never be solved without American understanding, American sympathy, American support.
So many billions of words have been written about Palestine perhaps more than on any other subject in history that I hesitate to add to them.
Yet I am compelled to do so, for I am reluctantly convinced that the world in general, and America in particular, knows almost nothing of the true case for the Arabs.
We Arabs follow, perhaps far more than you think, the press of America.
We are frankly disturbed to find that for every word printed on the Arab side, a thousand are printed on the Zionist side.
There are many reasons for this.
You have many millions of Jewish citizens interested in this question.
Highly vocal in the ways of publicity
They are highly vocal and wise in the ways of publicity.
There are few Arab citizens in America, and we are as yet unskilled in the technique of modern propaganda.
The results have been alarming for us.
In your press we see a horrible caricature and are told it is our true portrait.
Israel army destroy huts
Hathaleen area south of Hebron,
West Bank
Houses near Jewish settlement
75 Palestinians displaced
In all justice, we cannot let this pass by default.
Our case is quite simple:  For nearly 2,000 years Palestine has been almost 100 per cent Arab.
It is still preponderantly Arab today, in spite of enormous Jewish immigration.
But if this immigration continues we shall soon be outnumbered minority in our home.
Palestine is a small and very poor country, about the size of your state of Vermont.
Its Arab population is only about 1,200,000.
Already we have had forced on us, against our will, some 600,000 Zionist Jews.
We are threatened with many hundreds of thousands more.
Exactly the same position you in America take
Our position is so simple and natural that we are amazed it should even be questioned.
It is exactly the same position you in America take in regard to the unhappy European Jews.
You are sorry for them, but you do not want them in your country.
We do not want them in ours, either.
Not because they are Jews, but because they are foreigners.
We would not want hundreds of thousands of foreigners in our country, be they Englishmen or Norwegians or Brazilians or whatever.
Think for a moment:  In the last 25 years we have had one third of our entire population forced upon us.
In America that would be the equivalent of 45,000,000 complete strangers admitted to your country, over your violent protest, since 1921.
How would you have reacted to that?
Israel army destroy Bedouin homes
Hathaleen area south of Hebron, West Bank
Homes near Jewish settlement
75 Palestinians displaced
Blind nationalists and heartless anti-Semites
Because of our perfectly natural dislike of being overwhelmed in our own homeland, we are called blind nationalists and heartless anti- Semites.
This charge would be ludicrous were it not so dangerous.
No people on earth have been less "anti-Semitic" than the Arabs.
The persecution of the Jews has been confined almost entirely to the Christian nations of the West.
Jews, themselves, will admit that never since the Great Dispersion did Jews develop so freely and reach such importance as in Spain when it was an Arab possession.
Lived in complete peace and friendliness with their Arab neighbours
With very minor exceptions, Jews have lived for many centuries in the Middle East, in complete peace and friendliness with their Arab neighbours.
Damascus, Baghdad, Beirut and other Arab centres have always contained large and prosperous Jewish colonies.
Until the Zionist invasion of Palestine began, these Jews received the most generous treatment, far better than in Christian Europe.
Now, unhappily, for the first time in history, these Jews are beginning to feel the effects of Arab resistance to the Zionist assault.
Most of them are as anxious as Arabs to stop it.
Most of these Jews who have found happy homes among us present, as we do, the coming of these strangers.
"Always been a Jewish land."
I was puzzled for a long time about the odd belief which apparently persists in America that Palestine has somehow "always been a Jewish land."
Recently an American I talked to cleared up this mystery.
He pointed out that the only things most Americans know about Palestine are what they read in the Bible.
It was a Jewish land in those days, they reason, and they assume it has always remained so.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
It is absurd to reach so far back into the mists of history to argue about who should have Palestine today, and I apologise for it.
Yet the Jews do this, and I must reply to their "historic claim."
Druze, village of Magdel Shams
Golan Heights
Demonstration against
US / Israel occupation
Seek return to Syrian rule
Strange sight of people claiming land because ancestors lived there 2,000 years ago!
I wonder if the world has ever seen a stranger sight than a group of people seriously pretending to claim a land because their ancestors lived there some 2,000 years ago!
If you suggest that I am biased, I invite you to read any sound history of the period and verify the facts.
Such fragmentary records as we have indicate that the Jews were wandering nomads from Iraq who moved to southern Turkey, came south to Palestine, stayed there a short time, and then passed to Egypt, where they remained about 400 years.
About 1300 BC (according to your calendar) they left Egypt and gradually conquered most "but not all" of the inhabitants of Palestine.
Philistines "not the Jews" gave their name to the country:  "Palestine"
"Palestine" is merely the Greek form of "Philistia."
It is significant that the Philistines "not the Jews" gave their name to the country:  "Palestine" is merely the Greek form of "Philistia."
Only once, during the empire of David and Solomon, did the Jews ever control nearly "but not all "the land which is today Palestine.
This empire lasted only 70 years, ending in 926 BC.
Only 250 years later the Kingdom of Judah had shrunk to a small province around Jerusalem, barely a quarter of modern Palestine.
In 63 BC the Jews were conquered by Roman Pompey, and never again had even the vestige of independence.
The Roman Emperor Hadrian finally wiped them out about 135 AD.
Israel army kills young boy playing football
Funeral February 29, 2008
Death caused by US taxpayers
Israel army killing expenses paid for by US taxpayers
He utterly destroyed Jerusalem, rebuilt under another name, and for hundreds of years no Jew was permitted to enter it.
A handful of Jews remained in Palestine but the vast majority were killed or scattered to other countries, in the Diaspora, or the Great Dispersion.
From that time Palestine ceased to be a Jewish country, in any conceivable sense.
This was 1,815 years ago, and yet the Jews solemnly pretend they still own Palestine!
How the map of the world would dance about
If such fantasy were allowed, how the map of the world would dance about!
Italians might claim England, which the Romans held so long.
England might claim France, "homeland" of the conquering Normans.
And the French Normans might claim Norway, where their ancestors originated.
And incidentally, we Arabs might claim Spain, which we held for 700 years.
Many Mexicans might claim Spain, "homeland" of their forefathers.
They might even claim Texas, which was Mexican until 100 years ago.
And suppose the American Indians claimed the "homeland" of which they were the sole, native, and ancient occupants until only some 450 years ago!
I am not being facetious.
All these claims are just as "or just as fantastic" as the Jewish "historic connection" with Palestine.
Most are more valid.
Great Moslem expansion
In any event, the great Moslem expansion about 650 AD finally settled things.
It dominated Palestine completely.
From that day on, Palestine was solidly Arabic in population, language, and religion.
When British armies entered the country during the last war, they found 500,000 Arabs and only 65,000 Jews.
If solid, uninterrupted Arab occupation for nearly 1,300 years does not make a country "Arab", what does?
The Jews say, and rightly, that Palestine is the home of their religion.
It is likewise the birthplace of Christianity, but would any Christian nation claim it on that account?
Wife grieves over husband killed
US Israel gaza attack
Death caused by US taxpayers
Israel army killing expenses paid for by US taxpayers
In passing, let me say that the Christian Arabs "and there are many hundreds of thousands of them in the Arab World "are in absolute agreement with all other Arabs in opposing the Zionist invasion of Palestine.
May I also point out that Jerusalem is, after Mecca and Medina, the holiest place in Islam.
Moslems prayed toward Jerusalem instead of Mecca
In fact, in the early days of our religion, Moslems prayed toward Jerusalem instead of Mecca.
The Jewish "religious claim" to Palestine is as absurd as the "historic claim."
The Holy Places, sacred to three great religions, must be open to all, the monopoly of none.
Let us not confuse religion and politics.
Inhumane and heartless
We are told that we are inhumane and heartless because do not accept with open arms the perhaps 200,000 Jews in Europe who suffered so frightfully under Nazi cruelty, and who even now "almost three years after wars end" still languish in cold, depressing camps.
Let me underline several facts.
Unimaginable persecution by a Christian nation in the West
The unimaginable persecution of the Jews was not done by the Arabs:  it was done by a Christian nation in the West.
The war which ruined Europe and made it almost impossible for these Jews to rehabilitate themselves was fought by the Christian nations of the West.
The rich and empty portions of the earth belong, not to the Arabs, but to the Christian nations of the West.
And yet, to ease their consciences, these Christian nations of the West are asking Palestine "a poor and tiny Moslem country of the East" to accept the entire burden.
"We have hurt these people terribly," cries the West to the East.  "Will you please take care of them for us?"
We are a generous people
We find neither logic nor justice in this. Are we therefore "cruel and heartless nationalists"?
We are a generous people:  we are proud that "Arab hospitality" is a phrase famous throughout the world.
We are a humane people:  no one was shocked more than we by the Hitlerite terror.
No one pities the present plight of the desperate European Jews more than we.
But we say that Palestine has already sheltered 600,000 refugees.
We believe that is enough to expect of us "even too much.
We believe it is now the turn of the rest of the world to accept some of them.
I will be entirely frank with you.
There is one thing the Arab world simply cannot understand.
America is most insistent that something be done for these suffering Jews of Europe
Of all the nations of the earth, America is most insistent that something be done for these suffering Jews of Europe.
US Israel attacks killing and maiming the people of Gaza continues
Death and injuries caused by US taxpayers
Expenses paid for by US taxpayers
This feeling does credit to the humanity for which America is famous, and to that glorious inscription on your Statue of Liberty.
And yet this same America "the richest, greatest, most powerful nation the world has ever known "refuses to accept more than a token handful of these same Jews herself!
I hope you will not think I am being bitter about this.
Mysterious paradox
I have tried hard to understand that mysterious paradox, and I confess I cannot.
Nor can any other Arab.
Perhaps you have been informed that "the Jews in Europe want to go to no other place except Palestine."
This myth is one of the greatest propaganda triumphs of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, the organisation which promotes with fanatic zeal the emigration to Palestine.
It is a subtle half-truth, thus doubly dangerous.
The astounding truth is that nobody on earth really knows where these unfortunate Jews really want to go!
You would think that in so grave a problem, the American, British, and other authorities responsible for the European Jews would have made a very careful survey, probably by vote, to find out where each Jew actually wants to go.
Amazingly enough this has never been done!
The Jewish Agency has prevented it.
Some time ago the American Military Governor in Germany was asked at a press conference how he was so certain that all Jews there wanted to go to Palestine.
His answer was simple: "My Jewish advisors tell me so."
He admitted no poll had ever been made.
Preparations were indeed begun for one, but the Jewish Agency stepped in to stop it.
Zionist pressure campaign
The truth is that the Jews in German camps are now subjected to a Zionist pressure campaign which learned much from the Nazi terror.
It is dangerous for a Jew to say that he would rather go to some other country, not Palestine.
Such dissenters have been severely beaten, and worse.
Not long ago, in Palestine, nearly 1,000 Austrian Jews informed the international refugee organisation that they would like to go back to Austria, and plans were made to repatriate them.
The Jewish Agency heard of this, and exerted enough political pressure to stop it.
It would be bad propaganda for Zionism if Jews began leaving Palestine.
12 years old
Shoukri Nasr Khoudair
Injured by US
Israel army attack
US Israel army wounding and killings paid for by US taxpayers
The nearly 1,000 Austrian are still there, against their will.
European Jews are Western in culture and outlook
The fact is that most of the European Jews are Western in culture and outlook, entirely urban in experience and habits.
They cannot really have their hearts set on becoming pioneers in the barren, arid, cramped land which is Palestine.
One thing, however, is undoubtedly true.
As matters stand now, most refugee Jews in Europe would, indeed, vote for Palestine, simply because they know no other country will have them.
If you or I were given a choice between a near-prison camp for the rest of our lives "or Palestine" we would both choose Palestine, too.
But open up any other alternative to them "give them any other choice, and see what happens!
No poll, however, will be worth anything unless the nations of the earth are willing to open their doors "just a little" to the Jews.
In other words, if in such a poll a Jew says he wants to go to Sweden, Sweden must be willing to accept him.
If he votes for America, you must let him come in.
Any other kind of poll would be a farce.
For the desperate Jew, this is no idle testing of opinion: this is a grave matter of life or death.
Unless he is absolutely sure that his vote means something, he will always vote for Palestine, so as not to risk his bird in the hand for one in the bush.
In any event, Palestine can accept no more.
The 65,000 Jews in Palestine in 1918 have jumped to 600,000 today.
We Arabs have increased, too, but not by immigration.
The Jews were then a mere 11 per cent of our population.
Today they are one third of it.
The rate of increase has been terrifying.
In a few more years "unless stopped now" it will overwhelm us, and we shall be an important minority in our own home.
Surely the rest of the wide world is rich enough and generous enough to find a place or 200,000 Jews "about one third the number that tiny, poor Palestine has already sheltered.
For the rest of the world, it is hardly a drop in the bucket.
For us it means national suicide.
Told Arab standard of living has improved
We are sometimes told that since the Jews came to Palestine, the Arab standard of living has improved.
US Israel attacks killing and maiming the people of Gaza continues
Death and injuries caused by US taxpayers
Expenses paid for by US taxpayers
US Israel empty bullet cartridges
This is a most complicated question.
But let us even assume, for the argument, that it is true.
We would rather be a bit poorer, and masters of our own home.
Is this unnatural?
The sorry story of the so-called "Balfour Declaration," which started Zionist immigration into Palestine, is too complicated to repeat here in detail.
It is grounded in broken promises to the Arabs "promises made in cold print which admit no denying.
We utterly deny its validity.
Great Britain to give away Arab land
We utterly deny the right of Great Britain to give away Arab land for a "national home" for an entirely foreign people.
Even the League of Nations sanction does not alter this.
At the time, not a single Arab state was a member of the League.
We were not allowed to say a word in our own defense.
I must point out, again in friendly frankness, that America was nearly as responsible as Britain for this Balfour Declaration.
Wilson approved, American Congress adopted it word for word
President Wilson approved it before it was issued, and the American Congress adopted it word for word in a joint resolution on 30th June, 1922.
In the 1920s, Arabs were annoyed and insulted by Zionist immigration, but not alarmed by it.
It was steady, but fairly small, as even the Zionist founders thought it would remain.
Indeed for some years, more Jews left Palestine than entered it, in 1927 almost twice as many.
But two new factors, entirely unforeseen by Britain or the League or America or the most fervent Zionist, arose in the early thirties to raise the immigration to undreamed heights.
One was the World Depression; the second the rise of Hitler.
In 1932, the year before Hitler came to power, only 9,500 Jews came to Palestine.
We did not welcome them, but we were not afraid that, at that rate, our solid Arab majority would ever be in danger.
But the next year "the year of Hitler" it jumped to 30,000!
In 1934 it was 42,000!
In 1935 it reached 61,000!
It was no longer the orderly arrival of idealist Zionists.
Rather, all Europe was pouring its frightened Jews upon us.
Then, at last, we, too, became frightened.
We knew that unless this enormous influx stopped, we were, as Arabs, doomed in our Palestine homeland.
And we have not changed our minds.
America responsible for the whole Zionist move and specifically for the present terrorism
I have the impression that many Americans believe the trouble in Palestine is very remote from them, that America had little to do with it, and that your only interest now is that of a humane bystander.
I believe that you do not realise how directly you are, as a nation, responsible in general for the whole Zionist move and specifically for the present terrorism.
I call this to your attention because I am certain that if you realise your responsibility you will act fairly to admit it and assume it.
Quite aside from official American support for the "National Home" of the Balfour Declaration, the Zionist settlements in Palestine would have been almost impossible, on anything like the current scale, without American money.
This was contributed by American Jewry in an idealistic effort to help their fellows.
The motive was worthy:  the result were disastrous.
Contributions were by private individuals, but they were almost entirely from Americans
The contributions were by private individuals, but they were almost entirely Americans, and, as a nation, only America can answer for it.
The present catastrophe may be laid almost entirely at your door.
Your government, almost alone in the world, is insisting on the immediate admission of 100,000 more Jews into Palestine "to be followed by countless additional ones.
This will have the most frightful consequences in bloody chaos beyond anything ever hinted at in Palestine before.
It is your press and political leadership, almost alone in the world, who press this demand.
It is almost entirely American money which hires or buys the "refugee ships" that steam illegally toward Palestine:  American money which pays their crews.
The illegal immigration from Europe is arranged by the Jewish Agency, supported almost entirely by American funds.
It is American dollars which support the terrorists, which buy the bullets and pistols that kill British soldiers "your allies" and Arab citizens "your friends".
Open advertisements in newspapers asking for money to finance these terrorists
We in the Arab world were stunned to hear that you permit open advertisements in newspapers asking for money to finance these terrorists, to arm them openly and deliberately for murder.
We could not believe this could really happen in the modern world.
Now we must believe it:  we have seen the advertisements with our own eyes.
I point out these things because nothing less than complete frankness will be of use.
The crisis is too stark for mere polite vagueness which means nothing.
We ask only that you know the full truth, not half of it
I have the most complete confidence in the fair- mindedness and generosity of the American public.
We Arabs ask no favours.
We ask only that you know the full truth, not half of it.
We ask only that when you judge the Palestine question, you put yourselves in our place.
What would your answer be if some outside agency told you that you must accept in America many millions of utter strangers in your midst "enough to dominate your country "merely because they insisted on going to America, and because their forefathers had once lived there some 2,000 years ago?
Our answer is the same.
And what would be your action if, in spite of your refusal, this outside agency began forcing them on you?
Ours will be the same.
He survived and in his old age became a campaigner for the moral principle that those who do not collaborate with a system of tyranny — those like himself, a serial deserter from the Wehrmacht — should be honoured.
It is a principle which is today as relevant as ever.
Saturday, 8 April 2006
Lost words of a German conscript
By Andrew Joynes
BBC News
The Bergen-Belsen memorial wall.

At least 50,000 people died in Bergen-Belsen before liberation.
The Bergen-Belsen memorial wall.
At least 50,000 people died in Bergen-Belsen before liberation
Next week sees the 61st anniversary of the liberation of Bergen-Belsen, the first of the Nazi death camps to be reached by British and American troops at the end of World War II.
During the last few months, Andrew Joynes has been piecing together the story of one man who survived the camp and whose story is now being told at the new memorial centre at Belsen.
Although it was a spring day there were no birds singing in the trees as I walked along the path which leads to the Bergen-Belsen memorial wall.
In front of the wall is a stone pillar, and behind the pillar a series of mounds cover the sandy heathland.
Each of them has a tablet inscribed "1945", with a bunch of fresh flowers placed on it.
In these mounds lie the Belsen dead, their names unknown, their stories untold.
Swastika mail
I had come to Belsen on this spring day because last autumn my wife and I decided to clear out the attic.
The envelope of Anton Igel's letter dated March 11 1945, marked with a swastika.

Prisoners were allowed to send very few letters from Belsen.
The envelope of Anton Igel's letter dated March 11 1945, marked with a swastika.
Prisoners were allowed to send very few letters from Belsen
Tucked away under the rafters was a box of papers, which had belonged to my wife's aunt, who died some years ago.
They dealt with her time in Germany at the end of the war, when she worked in a British Army office tracing displaced persons.
Among the photographs of ruined German cities there were two letters.
Both envelopes were marked with a Swastika, and both had the same postmark: "Bergen-Belsen".
The letters were in German, dated August 1944 and March 1945.
One of my colleagues at BBC World Service tried to translate them for me but the old-fashioned writing was difficult to decipher.
We could only make out the writer's name, Anton lgel, and the fact that he was a prisoner writing from Belsen's hut No 3 to his mother in Cologne asking for news of his family.
Paper trail
I got in touch with the German Embassy in London and, a few weeks ago, I heard from the director of the archives at Bergen-Belsen.
He not only recognised the name of the letter writer, who had come out of the camp alive in 1945, but had met Anton Igel on a number of occasions before the old man's death a decade or so ago.
This was, he explained, extremely unusual.
The problem for the archivists at Bergen-Belsen is the absence of precise records.
Most people who enquire about the fate of individual prisoners are told: "We're sorry.   We simply don't know what happened to them..."
The director went on to say that he would like to include the letters in an exhibition planned for Belsen's new documentation centre when it opens next year.
The text of Anton Igel's letter dated March 11 1945.

I decided to take the letters back to the place where they were written.
I decided to take the letters back to the place where they were written
So I decided to take the letters back to the place where they were written.
But I was not prepared for the story that I began to uncover.
The Igel file
In the archives there is an entire file on Anton Igel and in it, there is a memoir he wrote as an old man.
Its tone is at once both tragic and comic, like the novel Candide or The Good Soldier Schweik.
As a teenager, lgel was sent to a Nazi detention centre for delinquent youths.
He was drafted into the German army, and then embarked on a series of desertions which took him to Gestapo cells across Europe.
On his final escapade he ran away from a unit on its way to the Russian front and went to ground in the Warsaw Ghetto.
He avoided being shot by feigning mental illness and was finally sent from hospital to a labour camp.
From there he was transported to Belsen in 1944.
He survived and in his old age became a campaigner for the moral principle that those who do not collaborate with a system of tyranny — those like himself, a serial deserter from the Wehrmacht — should be honoured.
In a sense the letters have been reclaimed by the extraordinary coincidences of their discovery in a suburban attic in the south of England
It is a principle which is today as relevant as ever.
Permanent record
The file had photographs of him attending memorial celebrations in his striped camp uniform, carrying a banner embroidered with his prisoner number.
His two letters from Belsen were probably left at the British Army office where my wife's aunt worked when his family were trying to trace him at the end of the war.
They were never reclaimed.... until now that is, because in a sense the letters have been reclaimed by the extraordinary coincidences of their discovery in a suburban attic in the south of England.
The exhibition in which they will be displayed will deal with the fate of known individuals caught up in the inferno of Bergen-Belsen.
"Every human being should have their story told," the archive director said to me.
For most of the Belsen dead, there is no such means of telling a story
Silent messages
At about the time Anton Igel was writing his second letter, in March l945, one of his fellow-prisoners at Belsen, Anne Frank, was dying of typhus just a few hundred yards away from hut No 3.
Both he and she were able to tell something of their stories.
Hers came in a diary, kept before she entered the camps and cut short while she was still young.
His came in a memoir written in old age.
For most of the Belsen dead, there is no such means of telling a story.
Tens of thousands lie buried in the mass graves beside the pillar which points at the sky in commemoration and reproach.
Their message is in their silence.
 
  uruknet.info
  اوروكنت.إنفو
    informazione dall'iraq occupato
information from occupied iraq
أخبار منالعراق المحتلة
About the Nakba
IMEU
Sixty years ago, more than 700,000 Palestinians lost their homes and belongings, their farms and businesses, their towns and cities.

Jewish militias seeking to create a state with a Jewish majority in Palestine, and later, the Israel army, drove them out.

Israel rapidly moved Jews into the newly-emptied Palestinian homes.

Nakba means 'catastrophe' in Arabic, and Palestinians refer to the destruction of their society and the takeover of their homeland as an-Nakba, \The Catastrophe.'

Photo: www.uruknet.de/
"We thought it would be a matter of weeks, only until the fighting died down.   Of course, we were never allowed to go home."
   Nina Saah, Washington, DC
"My family's farm of oranges, grapefruits and lemons, centuries old, was gone."
   Darwish Addassi, Walnut Creek, California
"Those of us who left unwillingly in 1948 are plagued with painful nostalgia.   My house in West Jerusalem is an Israeli nursery school now."
   Inea Bushnaq, New York
"The people of New Orleans woke up one morning to complete devastation and had to flee.   The Nakba was our Hurricane Katrina."
   Abe Fawal, Birmingham, Alabama
Sixty years ago, more than 700,000 Palestinians lost their homes and belongings, their farms and businesses, their towns and cities.
Jewish militias seeking to create a state with a Jewish majority in Palestine, and later, the Israeli army, drove them out.
Israel rapidly moved Jews into the newly-emptied Palestinian homes.
Nakba means Catastrophe in Arabic, and Palestinians refer to the destruction of their society and the takeover of their homeland as an-Nakba:  The Catastrophe.
As of 2003
The land taken is much greater today
West Bank: Israeli settlements

Since 1967, Israel has pursued a policy of building settlements on the West Bank.

These areas of the West Bank are linked by US Israel controlled roads not accessible to Palestine people.

These roads and settlements separate towns and villages from each other causing great hardship for Palestinians trying to reach relatives and even to shop.

There are also large tracts of US Israel reserved land with military areas or 'nature reserves' labels applied by the occupying forces.

The Israel military, including weapons: tanks, missiles, warplanes, artillery, shells, are all funded by the US taxpayer.

More than Fifteen million US dollars is given by US taxpayers to Israel each day for their military use.

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.

Map: BBC
West Bank: Israeli settlements
Since 1967, Israel has pursued a policy of building settlements on the West Bank.
These areas of the West Bank are linked by US Israel controlled roads not accessible to Palestine people.
There are also large tracts of US Israel reserved land with military areas or 'nature reserves' labels applied by the occupying forces.
As of 2009
More than 600 checkpoints in West Bank
West Bank: US Israel checkpoints

Occupation military force checkpoints on West Bank roads allow US Israel to monitor and control travel in much of the West Bank allowing Israel settlers only to travel on specialy built high-speed roads.

US Israel troops routinely encircle and stage attacks on Palestine population centers, the occupation forces severely restricting the movement of Palestine people.

US Israel is increasingly isolating Palestine villages and towns by snaking an Apartheid wall barrier around Israel-restricted Jewish settlements through the West Bank.

The Israel military, including weapons: tanks, missiles, warplanes, artillery, shells, are all funded by the US taxpayer.

More than Fifteen million US dollars is given by US taxpayers to Israel each day for their military use.

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.
West Bank: US Israel checkpoints
Occupation military force checkpoints on West Bank roads allow US Israel to monitor and control travel in much of the West Bank allowing Israel settlers only to travel on specialy built high-speed roads.
US Israel troops routinely encircle and stage attacks on Palestine population centers, the occupation forces severely restricting the movement of Palestine people.
US Israel is increasingly isolating Palestine villages and towns by snaking an Apartheid wall barrier around Israel-restricted Jewish settlements through the West Bank.
An Israeli soldier's bullet
Paid for by US taxpayer
In the article below, substitute UK for Israel, US for Israel.
You will find this is 'journalism' in the West today.
The UK and now almost total TV, radio and print publications in the US, censorship is both as journalist self-censorship, and censorship at any point of editors up the communication chain.
The chain of censorship that culminates with Murdoch and similar cronies, the few elite who control what you read, hear and see today in mainstream media.
No wonder everything out of the mouths of your fellow citizens is a repeat of what these elite circulate in both your and your fellow citizen's brain.
Nothing of truth!
As the West abysmally sinks further into the sewage of destruction it has set for itself.
Not destruction by these poor people you see here.
Destruction by selfishness, greed, and hypocrisy — a sewage of destruction the West has set for itself.
How to Become an Israeli Journalist
The London Review of Books
3 March 2008
A year ago I applied for the job of Occupied Territories correspondent at Ma’ariv, an Israeli newspaper.   I speak Arabic and have taught in Palestinian schools and taken part in many joint Jewish-Palestinian projects.   At my interview the boss asked how I could possibly be objective.   I had spent too much time with Palestinians; I was bound to be biased in their favour.
I didn’t get the job.   My next interview was with Walla, Israel’s most popular website.   This time I did get the job and I became Walla’s Middle East correspondent.   I soon understood what Tamar Liebes, the director of the Smart Institute of Communication at the Hebrew University, meant when she said: ‘Journalists and publishers see themselves as actors within the Zionist movement, not as critical outsiders.’
Another child shot dead by Israeli bullet
US attack
Died February 29, 2008
More killing by US taxpayer
This is not to say that Israeli journalism is not professional.   Corruption, social decay and dishonesty are pursued with commendable determination by newspapers, TV and radio.
That Israelis heard exactly what former President Katsav did or didn’t do with his secretaries proves that the media are performing their watchdog role, even at the risk of causing national and international embarrassment.
Ehud Olmert’s shady apartment deal, the business of Ariel Sharon’s mysterious Greek island, Binyamin Netanyahu’s secret love affair, Yitzhak Rabin’s secret American bank account: all of these are freely discussed by the Israeli media.
When it comes to ‘security’ there is no such freedom.
It’s ‘us’ and ‘them’, the IDF and the ‘enemy’; military discourse, which is the only discourse allowed, trumps any other possible narrative.
It’s not that Israeli journalists are following orders, or a written code: just that they’d rather think well of their security forces.
In most of the articles on the conflict two sides battle it out: the Israel Defence Forces, on the one hand, and the Palestinians, on the other.
When a violent incident is reported, the IDF confirms or the army says but the Palestinians claim: ‘The Palestinians claimed that a baby was severely injured in IDF shootings.’   Is this a fib?
‘The Palestinians claim that Israeli settlers threatened them’: but who are the Palestinians?   Did the entire Palestinian people, citizens of Israel, inhabitants of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, people living in refugee camps in neighbouring Arab states and those living in the diaspora make the claim?
Why is it that a serious article is reporting a claim made by the Palestinians?   Why is there so rarely a name, a desk, an organisation or a source of this information?   Could it be because that would make it seem more reliable?
When the Palestinians aren’t making claims, their viewpoint is simply not heard.   Keshev, the Centre for the Protection of Democracy in Israel, studied the way Israel’s leading television channels and newspapers covered Palestinian casualties in a given month — December 2005.   They found 48 items covering the deaths of 22 Palestinians.
However, in only eight of those accounts was the IDF version followed by a Palestinian reaction; in the other 40 instances the event was reported only from the point of view of the Israeli military.
Another child killed by Israel forces
Mohammed al-Borai
Died Feb. 28, 2008
More death by US taxpayer
Another example: in June 2006, four days after the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was kidnapped from the Israeli side of the Gazan security fence, Israel, according to the Israeli media, arrested some sixty members of Hamas, of whom 30 were elected members of parliament and eight ministers in the Palestinian government.
In a well-planned operation Israel captured and jailed the Palestinian minister for Jerusalem, the ministers of finance, education, religious affairs, strategic affairs, domestic affairs, housing and prisons, as well as the mayors of Bethlehem, Jenin and Qalqilya, the head of the Palestinian parliament and one quarter of its members.
That these officials were taken from their beds late at night and transferred to Israeli territory probably to serve (like Gilad Shalit) as future bargaining-chips did not make this operation a kidnapping.   Israel never kidnaps: it arrests.
The Israeli army never intentionally kills anyone, let alone murders them — a state of affairs any other armed organisation would be envious of.
Even when a one-ton bomb is dropped onto a dense residential area in Gaza, killing one gunman and 14 innocent civilians, including nine children, it’s still not an intentional killing or murder: it is a targeted assassination.
An Israeli journalist can say that IDF soldiers hit Palestinians, or killed them, or killed them by mistake, and that Palestinians were hit, or were killed or even found their death (as if they were looking for it), but murder is out of the question.
The consequence, whatever words are used, has been the death at the hands of the Israeli security forces since the outbreak of the second intifada of 2087 Palestinians who had nothing to do with armed struggle.
The IDF, as depicted by the Israeli media, has another strange ability: it never initiates, decides to attack or launches an operation.   The IDF simply responds.
It responds to the Qassam rockets, responds to terror attacks, responds to Palestinian violence.
This makes everything so much more sensible and civilised: the IDF is forced to fight, to destroy houses, to shoot Palestinians and to kill 4485 of them in seven years, but none of these events is the responsibility of the soldiers.
They are facing a nasty enemy, and they respond dutifully.
The fact that their actions — curfews, arrests, naval sieges, shootings and killings — are the main cause of the Palestinian reaction does not seem to interest the media.
Because Palestinians cannot respond, Israeli journalists choose another verb from the lexicon that includes revenge, provoke, attack, incite, throw stones or fire Qassams.
Interviewing Abu-Qusay, the spokesman of Al-Aqsa Brigades in Gaza, in June 2007, I asked him about the rationale for firing Qassam missiles at the Israeli town of Sderot.
‘The army might respond,’ I said, not realising that I was already biased.   ‘But we are responding here,’ Abu-Qusay said. ‘We are not terrorists, we do not want to kill . . . we are resisting Israel’s continual incursions into the West Bank, its attacks, its siege on our waters and its closure on our lands.’
Abu-Qusay’s words were translated into Hebrew, but Israel continued to enter the West Bank every night and Israelis did not find any harm in it.   After all it was only a response.
At a time when there were many Israeli raids on Gaza I asked my colleagues the following question: ‘If an armed Palestinian crosses the border, enters Israel, drives to Tel Aviv and shoots people in the streets, he will be the terrorist and we will be the victims, right?
However, if the IDF crosses the border, drives miles into Gaza, and starts shooting their gunmen, who is the terrorist and who is the defender?   How come the Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories can never be engaged in self-defence, while the Israeli army is always the defender?’
My friend Shay from the graphics department clarified matters for me: ‘If you go to the Gaza Strip and shoot people, you will be a terrorist.   But when the army does it that is an operation to make Israel safer.   It’s the implementation of a government decision!’
Boy mourns for family shot dead by Israeli bullet
Motasem Abdrabo
Died February 29, 2008
More killing by US taxpayer
Another interesting distinction between us and them came up when Hamas demanded the release of 450 of its prisoners in exchange for Gilad Shalit.  
Israel announced that it would release prisoners but not those with blood on their hands.
It is always the Palestinians — never the Israelis — who have blood on their hands.
This is not to say that Jews cannot kill Arabs but they will not have blood on their hands, and if they are arrested they will be released after a few years, not to mention those with blood on their hands who’ve gone on to become prime minister.
And we are not only more innocent when we kill but also more susceptible when we are hurt.
A regular description of a Qassam missile that hits Sderot will generally look like this: ‘A Qassam fell next to a residential house, three Israelis had slight injuries, and ten others suffered from shock.’
One should not make light of these injuries: a missile hitting a house in the middle of the night could indeed cause great shock.
However, one should also remember that shock is for Jews only.
Palestinians are apparently a very tough people.
The IDF, again the envy of all other armies, kills only the most important people.   ‘A high-ranking member of Hamas was killed’ is almost a chorus in the Israel media.   Low-ranking members of Hamas have either never been found or never been killed.
Shlomi Eldar, a TV correspondent in the Gaza Strip, bravely wrote about this phenomenon in his book Eyeless in Gaza (2005).   When Riyad Abu Zaid was assassinated in 2003, the Israeli press echoed the IDF announcement that the man was the head of the military wing of Hamas in Gaza.
Eldar, one of Israel’s few investigative journalists, discovered that the man was merely a secretary in the movement’s prisoner club.   ‘It was one of many occasions in which Israel “upgraded” a Palestinian activist,’ Eldar wrote.   ‘After every assassination any minor activist is “promoted” to a major one.’
This phenomenon, in which IDF statements are directly translated into media reports — there are no checkpoints between the army and the media — is the result both of a lack of access to information and of the unwillingness of journalists to prove the army wrong or to portray soldiers as criminals.  
‘The IDF is acting in Gaza’ (or in Jenin, or in Tulkarm, or in Hebron) is the expression given out by the army and embraced by the media.   Why make the listeners’ lives harder?
Why tell them what the soldiers do, describing the fear they create, the fact that they come with heavy vehicles and weapons and crush a city’s life, creating a greater hatred, sorrow and a desire for revenge?
Four boys killed by US Israel
Killed while playing football
Died Feb. 29, 2008
More death by US taxpayer
Last month, as a measure against Qassam militants, Israel decided to stop Gaza’s electricity for a few hours a day. means to clear an area of potential hiding places for Palestinian gunmen.
Despite the fact that this means, for instance, that electricity will fail to reach hospitals, it was said that ‘the Israeli government decided to approve this step, as another non-lethal weapon.’
Another thing the soldiers do is clearing — khisuf means to clear an area of potential hiding places for Palestinian gunmen.
In regular Hebrew, khisuf means to expose something that is hidden, but as used by the IDF it means to clear an area of potential hiding places for Palestinian gunmen.
During the last intifada, Israeli D9 bulldozers destroyed thousands of Palestinian houses, uprooted thousands of trees and left behind thousands of smashed greenhouses. means to clear an area of potential hiding places for Palestinian gunmen.
It is better to know that the army cleared the place than to face the reality that the army destroys Palestinians’ possessions, pride and hope.
Another useful word is crowning (keter), a euphemism for a siege in which anyone who leaves his house risks being shot at. means to clear an area of potential hiding places for Palestinian gunmen.
War zones are places where Palestinians can be killed even if they are children who don’t know they’ve entered a war zone.
Palestinian children, by the way, tend to be upgraded to Palestinian teenagers, especially when they are accidentally killed. means to clear an area of potential hiding places for Palestinian gunmen.
More examples: isolated Israeli outposts in the West Bank are called illegal outposts, perhaps in contrast to Israeli settlements that are apparently legal.
Administrative detention means jailing people who haven’t been put on trial or even formally charged (in April 2003 there were 1119 Palestinians in this situation).
The PLO (Ashaf) is always referred to by its acronym and never by its full name: Palestine is a word that is almost never used — there is a Palestinian president but no president of Palestine.
‘A society in crisis forges a new vocabulary for itself,’ David Grossman wrote in The Yellow Wind, ‘and gradually, a new language emerges whose words . . . no longer describe reality, but attempt, instead, to conceal it.’
This ‘new language’ was adopted voluntarily by the media, but if one needs an official set of guidelines it can be found in the Nakdi Report, a paper drafted by the Israeli Broadcasting Authority.
First set down in 1972 and since updated three times, the report aimed to ‘clarify some of the professional rules that govern the work of a newsperson’. means to clear an area of potential hiding places for Palestinian gunmen.
The prohibition of the term East Jerusalem was one of them.
The restrictions aren’t confined to geography. means to clear an area of potential hiding places for Palestinian gunmen.
On 20 May 2006, Israel’s most popular television channel, Channel 2, reported ‘another targeted assassination in Gaza, an assassination that might ease the firing of Qassams’ (up to 376 people have died in targeted assassinations, 150 of them civilians who were not the target of assassinations).
Body carried into the family house during funeral
More killing by US taxpayer
Ehud Ya’ari, a well-known Israeli correspondent on Arab affairs, sat in the studio and said: ‘The man who was killed is Muhammad Dahdouh, from Islamic Jihad . . . this is part of the other war, a war to shrink the volume of Qassam activists.’
Neither Ya’ari nor the IDF spokesman bothered to report that four innocent Palestinian civilians were also killed in the operation, and three more severely injured, one a five-year-old girl called Maria, who will remain paralysed from the neck down.
This ‘oversight’, revealed by the Israeli journalist Orly Vilnai, only exposed how much we do not know about what we think we know.
Interestingly, since Hamas took over the Gaza Strip one of the new ‘boo’ words in the Israeli media is Hamastan, a word that appears in the ‘hard’ news section, the allegedly sacred part of newspapers that is supposed to give the facts, free from editorialising.
The same applies to movements such as Hamas or Hizbullah, which are described in Hebrew as organisations and not as political movements or parties.   means to clear an area of potential hiding places for Palestinian gunmen.
Intifada is never given its Arabic meaning of ‘revolt’; and Al-Quds, which when used by Palestinian politicians refers only to ‘the holy places in East Jerusalem’ or ‘East Jerusalem’, is always taken by Israeli correspondents to mean Jerusalem, which is effectively to imply a Palestinian determination to take over the entire capital city.
It was curious to watch the newspapers’ responses to the assassination of Imad Moughniyeh in Syria two weeks ago. means to clear an area of potential hiding places for Palestinian gunmen.
Everyone tried to outdo everyone else over what to call him: arch-terrorist, master terrorist or the greatest terrorist on earth.
It took the Israeli press a few days to stop celebrating Moughniyeh’s assassins and start doing what it should have done in the first place: ask questions about the consequences of the killing.
The journalist Gideon Levy thinks it is an Israeli trend: ‘The chain of “terrorist chieftains” liquidated by Israel, from Ali Salameh and Abu Jihad through Abbas Musawi and Yihyeh Ayash to Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Abdel Aziz Rantisi (all “operations” that we celebrated with great pomp and circumstance for one sweet and intoxicating moment), have thus far brought only harsh and painful revenge attacks against Israel and Jews throughout the world.’
Israeli correspondents on Arab affairs must of course speak Arabic — many of them indeed studied it in the security establishment’s schools — and they need to know the history and politics of the Middle East.
Brother killed
Died March 1, 2008
More death by US taxpayer
And they have to be Jews.
Strikingly, the Israeli-Jewish media prefer to hire journalists with average Arabic rather than native speakers, since they would be Palestinian citizens of Israel.
Apparently, Jewish journalists are better equipped than Arab Israelis to explain ‘what Arabs think’, ‘Arab aims’ or ‘what Arabs say’.
Maybe this is because the editors know what their audience wants to hear.   Or, even more important, what the Israeli audience would rather not hear.
If the words occupation, apartheid and racism (not to mention Palestinian citizens of Israel, bantustans, ethnic cleansing and Nakba) are absent from Israeli discourse, Israeli citizens can spend their whole lives without knowing what they have been living with.
Take racism (Giz’anut in Hebrew).
If the Israeli parliament legislates that 13 per cent of the country’s lands can be sold only to Jews, then it is a racist parliament.
If in 60 years the country has had only one Arab minister, then Israel has had racist governments.
If in 60 years of demonstrations rubber bullets and live ammunition have been used only on Arab demonstrators, then Israel has a racist police.
If 75 per cent of Israelis admit that they would refuse to have an Arab neighbour, then it is a racist society.
By not acknowledging that Israel is a place where racism shapes relations between Jews and Arabs, Israeli Jews render themselves unable to deal with the problem or even with the reality of their own lives.
The same denial of reality is reflected in the avoidance of the term apartheid.
Because of its association with white South Africa, Israelis find it very hard to use the word.
This is not to say that the exact same kind of regime prevails in the Occupied Territories today, but a country needn’t have benches ‘for whites only’ in order to be an apartheid state.
Apartheid, after all, means ‘separation’, and if in the Occupied Territories the settlers have one road and Palestinians need to use alternative roads or tunnels, then it is an apartheid road system.
If the separation wall built on thousands of dunams of confiscated West Bank land separates people (including Palestinians on opposite sides of the wall), then it is an apartheid wall.
If in the Occupied Territories there are two judicial systems, one for Jewish settlers and the other for Palestinians, then it is an apartheid justice.
And then there are the Occupied Territories themselves.
Remarkably, there are no Occupied Territories in Israel.   The term is occasionally used by a leftist politician or columnist, but in the hard news section it doesn’t exist.
In the past they were called the Administered Territories in order to conceal the actual fact of occupation; they were then called Judea and Samaria; but in Israel’s mass media today they’re called the Territories (Ha-Shtachim).
The term helps preserve the notion that the Jews are the victims, the people who act only in self-defence, the moral half of the equation, and the Palestinians are the attackers, the bad guys, the people who fight for no reason.
The simplest example explains it: ‘a citizen of the Territories was caught smuggling illegal weapons.’   It might make sense for citizens of an occupied territory to try to resist the occupier, but it doesn’t make sense if they are just from the Territories.
Israeli journalists are not embedded with the security establishment; and they haven’t been asked to make their audience feel good about Israel’s military policy.
The restrictions they observe are observed voluntarily, almost unconsciously — which makes their practice all the more dangerous.   Yet a majority of Israelis feel that their media are too left-wing, insufficiently patriotric, not on Israel’s side.
And the foreign media are worse.   During the last intifada, Avraham Hirschson, then the minister of finance, demanded that CNN’s broadcasts from Israel be closed down on the grounds of ‘biased broadcasting and tendentious programmes that are nothing but a campaign of incitement against Israel’.
Israeli demonstrators called for an end to ‘CNN’s unreliable and terror-provoking coverage’ in favour of Fox News.   Israeli men up to the age of 50 are obliged to do one month’s reserve service every year.
‘The civilian,’ Yigael Yadin, an early Israeli chief of staff, said, ‘is a soldier on 11 months’ annual leave.’   For the Israeli media there is no leave.
The London Review of Books
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v30/n05/mend01_.html
Yonatan Mendel was a correspondent for the Israeli news agency Walla. He is currently at Queens’ College, Cambridge working on a PhD that studies the connection between the Arabic language and security in Israel.
 
 
I would argue as forcefully as I can that since the Palestinians are facing Nazi-like State [Israel] terrorism, the holocaust narrative and its meaning belongs to them at least as much as it belongs to the Jews or anyone else.
I would argue as forcefully as I can that if the Palestinians are indeed the last victims of Hitler, then the holocaust and its meaning do belong to them more than anyone else.
 


          
Israeli banks profit from Holocaust
Tuesday 07 December 2004
By Jonathan Cook in Jerusalem
 
Banks object to how Holocaust assets have been calculated
Investigations by the Israeli parliament have dug up disturbing evidence that Israel has been profiting for decades from vast sums invested in local banks by European Jews who died in the Nazi death camps.
And even now the banks are delaying returning the money to their heirs.
But unlike a similar scandal that hit European banks in the mid-90s, almost no pressure is being brought to bear on the Israeli banks by the Israeli government or by Jewish reparation organisations representing Holocaust families, who were the main critics of the European banks.
The Israeli government is believed to be keeping quiet because it is deeply involved in the local banking scandal itself, and the Jewish organisations are reported to be concerned that exposure of the story will damage Israel's international reputation.
Instead the Knesset committee which unearthed the shocking revelations has been forced to sit on its unpublished report for the past 18 months as the banks dictate terms to the inquiry, largely supported by the government.
Tommy Lapid has been a sole voice speaking against the banks
One dissenting voice has been Tommy Lapid, who this month left his post as justice minister.  He called Bank Leumi, the bank believed to hold the lion's share of the Holocaust accounts, "the last bank in the world that refuses to pay money to Shoah survivors".
The Knesset committee was established under the chairmanship of Colette Avital in February 2000, in the wake of a settlement in which the Swiss banks agreed to pay $1.25 billion to Holocaust survivors and Jewish organisations.
After the Swiss affair, questions were raised about the difficulties faced by Holocaust families in tracing money deposited in Israeli banks before the second world war.
Denials
At the time, the banks fiercely denied that they held any money from Holocaust victims but after three years of auditing the banks' accounts, led by a former police anti-corruption officer, Yehuda Bar-Lev, the committee found thousands of dormant accounts, estimated to be worth some $220 million.
 
Colette Avital chaired the investigating committee
Bar-Lev has said that he cannot be sure if there is more money because the banks have been obstructing his team's work.  "There are still documents that the bank doesn't agree to show us," he said.  "According to the bank, they'll not be shown to us as they are against the bank's interests."
The banks have also refused fully to finance the audit.  The Swiss had to pay about $400 million to finance the work of the investigating accountants, whereas the Israeli banks have agreed to pay only $3 million, less than half the amount demanded by the Knesset committee.
"We're in a bind," said committee chairman Avital in September when the banks contested the report's publication yet again.  "The banks can keep delaying again and again and again."
Defence
The banks have defended their position on several grounds, including the claim that exposure will harm Israel's image.
At one closed meeting in December 2003 between the committee and Bank Leumi, the company's lawyer, Ram Caspi, warned that Israel would be painted as a hypocrite.
"The Wall Street Journal will say the Israeli banks also hide money, not just the Swiss," he told the committee members.
More recently the bank has been citing its commercial interests and secrecy rules.  "Bank Leumi is a publicly traded company," Caspi told the committee in November.  "It has to answer to stockholders.  It cannot simply pay as a result of a committee's recommendations."
Victim's story
His statement came during a meeting at which one woman identified only as "K" told the committee that her uncle, who lived in Bucharest, deposited £1000 in 1940 in the Anglo-Palestine Bank, which later became Leumi.  When Leumi finally admitted it still held the money in 1979, she received a tiny fraction of the original deposit.

“The Wall Street Journal will say the Israeli banks also hide money, not just the Swiss”


Ram Caspi, company lawyer for Bank Leumi

An Israeli lawyer, Roland Roth, said he was representing more than a dozen families with similar stories.  He has threatened a class action against the Israeli banks in the US courts.  An earlier legal campaign he waged in the Israeli courts was rejected.
Jewish groups which support Holocaust families, however, have mostly chosen to remain silent.  Israel Singer, chief negotiator of the World Jewish Restitution Organisation, who campaigned against the European banks, said his group would not be publicising the case.  Unlike the Swiss banks, which he called thieves, Israel's banks had got hold of the Holocaust accounts "incidentally", he said.
Secretive past
The bank's refusal to accept responsibility for the accounts is based on the murky period before and after Israel's founding in 1948.
It is known that thousands of wealthy European Jews stashed money away in the country during the 1920s and 1930s, as it was then Palestine and under British rule, in an attempt to hide it from the Nazis.  They also invested heavily in land and property to bring nearer their dream of a Jewish state.
During the war, Britain confiscated all assets belonging to citizens of enemy territories, including Jews living under Nazi occupation.  The assets were handed back after Israel's creation in 1948, with an official in the Israeli Justice Ministry known as the custodian-general charged with tracing the heirs.
Hidden sums
However, the Knesset committee found that the banks, particularly Leumi, had managed to hide many of the accounts from British officials and so were able to keep the money.  The investigators believe the banks have been profiting from the money ever since.
 
Land and belongings were sent to Zionist organisations
The government is also accused of not having done enough to trace survivors.
It passed many of the assets of Holocaust survivors, including land and property, to Zionist organisations such as the Jewish National Fund.
To the surprise of the committee, Bank Leumi was widely reported in the Hebrew media last month as having agreed to pay less than $10 million to Holocaust families, even though it is still publicly denying that it has any such accounts.  Separately, the government is also reported to be mulling the idea of paying some $15 million to the families.
Deal
The deal was struck last month by Lapid after the banks accused him of slandering them.  Lapid did not consult with the Knesset committee.
Avital responded angrily: "The banks can now claim that they bought Lapid with a bit of money and, in exchange, they are exempt from returning the Holocaust survivors' money."
The reduction agreed with Lapid follows several objections the banks have made to the way the Holocaust assets have been calculated.
Inflation
The Israeli banks have been resisting the efforts of the Knesset committee to work out the current value of the accounts using the same criteria applied to the Swiss assets.  There, the banks had to adjust the money by inflation and add 4% interest.
The Israeli banks, on the other hand, want inflation not to be taken into account until after the creation of Israel, omitting the war years when inflation reached more than 300%, and will fund only 2% interest.
In Israel, there is little sympathy with the banks' position.  For many years, Israeli banks have been running a cartel-like operation where they charge the same high commissions.
They are currently being investigated by the Anti-trust Authority.  In the first nine months of this year they racked up a $1 billion profit - their highest ever.
Avital suggests public pressure must be used against the banks: "If the banks don't want to pay, we will have to launch a public campaign, perhaps legislation.  It won't be easy.  The Knesset and government have done nothing about this for more than 50 years.  The heirs will have to go to court."
          Aljazeera
A group of Orthodox Jews against Zionism protest in The Hague July 9, 2004. 

Their testimonial was in advance of the public sitting of the International Court of Justice concerning the legal consequences of the construction of an Israeli wall in the occupied Palestinian Territory.

Orthodox Jews against Zionism draw attention to the Palestinian struggle ahead of the public sitting of the International Court of Justice where the court sat to rule on the legality of Israel's West Bank barrier in the Peace Palace July 9, 2004 in The Hague.

Picture: REUTERS/Maartje Blijdenstein
A group of Orthodox Jews against Zionism protest in The Hague July 9, 2004. 

Their testimonial was in advance of the public sitting of the International Court of Justice concerning the legal consequences of the construction of an Israeli wall in the occupied Palestinian Territory.

Orthodox Jews against Zionism draw attention to the Palestinian struggle ahead of the public sitting of the International Court of Justice where the court sat to rule on the legality of Israel's West Bank barrier in the Peace Palace July 9, 2004 in The Hague.

Picture: REUTERS/Maartje Blijdenstein
A group of Orthodox Jews against Zionism protest in The Hague July 9, 2004.
Their testimonial was in advance of the public sitting of the International Court of Justice concerning the legal consequences of the construction of an Israeli wall in the occupied Palestinian Territory.
Orthodox Jews against Zionism draw attention to the Palestinian struggle ahead of the public sitting of the International Court of Justice where the court sat to rule on the legality of Israel's West Bank barrier in the Peace Palace July 9, 2004 in The Hague.
Politicians of disgust
Senator Charles Schumer, D-N.Y Senator Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y

Photo: Photo/Osamu Honda
Kewe comment:
These are the people — including Bush and the Republicans — but especially these people, because they fawn and abase themselves in obsequious behaviour for the support of the pro-Zionist Israeli lobby within their constituency, taking the substantial reward of monies for the use of their political careers.
It is US Taxpayer money that props up the present Zionist Israli government, US taxpayer money used to supply the Zionist Israeli military with its supposed needs.
It is these people, these politicians of disgust — and if there is a hell there has to be a special place reserved for such — that have not only allowed but furthered and nurtured over these many years the attitude from the people of Israel, most not born to the land, that they have a legitimate right to exclude the people of Palestine from the farms and olive reserves who's fathers and mothers and grandfathers and grandmothers going back generation upon generation have maintained.
The US taxpayer has and is supplying the money for US made bulldozers to tear down the olive trees.
US taxpayer money has and is supplying the highest technical armaments that are perpetuating this human misery.  US taxpayer money is allowing one grouping of people to overlord in a most vicious way another grouping, a grouping who do have right to the land that they are now excluded from.
Bloomberg News   July 9, 2004
“This fence is a legitimate response by a sovereign nation, a democratic nation, to protect its citizens.   It is clear to me that this fence saves lives,” U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton, Democrat of New York, said in a speech near the UN today.   The court ruling is “not to be accepted by people who understand the legitimate needs of democratic nations to defend themselves.”
The judges of the International Court of Justice take their places in The Hague.

The Court ruled:

1) Israel's right to self-defense does not justify the infringement on Palestinian rights caused by its building of the wall barrier in the West Bank.

2) Construction of the Israeli wall was
The judges of the International Court of Justice take their places in The Hague.
The Court ruled:
1) Israel's right to self-defense does not justify the infringement on Palestinian rights caused by its building of the wall barrier in the West Bank.
2) Construction of the Israeli wall was "tantamount to annexation" and impeded the Palestinian right to self-determination.
3) Israel should compensate owners of land seized to construct the barrier and those harmed by the barrier.
4) All states are under obligation not to recognise the situation and ensure Israel's compliance with international law.
Israeli policemen secure a US made and paid for bulldozer working close to the east Jerusalem village of Sawahreh.

Picture: AFP/Eitan Abramovich
Israeli policemen secure a US made and paid for bulldozer working close to the east Jerusalem village of Sawahreh.
Palestine Farming equipment overturned by Israeli Army

Photo: AFP/Mohammed Abed
Farming equipment overturned by Israeli Army
March 2, 2006
Transparent Hatchet Jobs
The Attacks on Beyond Chutzpah
By NORMAN FINKELSTEIN
The Winter 2006 issue of Middle East Journal ran a scathing review by Professor Marc Saperstein of my book Beyond Chutzpah: On the misuse of anti-Semitism and the abuse of history.
Saperstein alleged that my book was a "prolonged diatribe," replete with "outrageous ad hominem attacks" and written in the "rhetorical style of the arrogant academic pit bull.
Before directly addressing these criticisms, it merits setting the broader context of Saperstein's review.
Attempt to block book
Readers of MEJ are undoubtedly aware that my publisher, University of California Press, was subject to an unprecedented and highly public campaign by Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard University, reaching up to Governor Schwarzenegger's office, to block publication of my book.
UCPress was accordingly at great pains to ensure that my book met the most stringent scholarly (and legal) standards.   Numerous editors, libel lawyers and leading scholars in the field from Israel, the United Kingdom and the United States were called upon to render judgment.
Palestinians run to avoid effects of tear gas
Thrown by US paid Israeli soldiers
Having concluded after this extraordinary peer review process that Beyond Chutzpah did indeed make a significant scholarly contribution, and notwithstanding brutal external threats and pressures, UCPress courageously went ahead and published it.
The Middle East Studies Association (MESA) subsequently commended UCPress for its principled stand.
Egregious blunder
Saperstein has now weighed in on Dershowitz's side, expressing puzzlement that UCPress should have committed such an egregious blunder.
This judgment in a prestigious academic journal constitutes a grave indictment not only of my own reputation but also that of a respected publisher, distinguished scholars and the main professional organization in the field.
Careful and sober scrutiny of the evidence Saperstein adduces is clearly warranted.
Should it prove that Saperstein's claims lack merit, it would seem that the responsible gesture of the journal's editors would be to retract their imprimatur from the review.
Ethnically cleansed Palestine
The central thesis of Beyond Chutzpah is that on crucial dimensions of the Israel-Palestine conflict little (if any) controversy remains among serious scholars and that what passes as controversy in public life is in reality a contrived discourse to deflect criticism of Israeli policy.   Paradoxically Saperstein's review, although intended to refute my thesis, lends further weight to it:
(1) To demonstrate that I have misrepresented the conflict's history, Saperstein cites as his one and only example my claim that Israel "ethnically cleansed Palestine in 1948."   Not only is this not true, according to Saperstein, but "the fact is the only ethnic cleansing that occurred in 1948 in Palestine was by Arabs of Jews from the West Bank and Gaza" (his emphasis)
In my book I cite the research of Ieading Israeli scholars Baruch Kimmerling, Benny Morris and Ilan Pappe.   (Each has used the descriptive "ethnic cleansing" in his respective writings on the topic.)
An unimpeachably mainstream figure like Shabtai Teveth, who is Ben-Gurion's official biographer, acknowledged long ago that once the Arab armies attacked on 15 May "one may properly speak of expulsion by Israel" of the Palestinians ("Charging Israel With Original Sin," Commentary, September 1989).

Indeed one might even cite former Israeli foreign minister and respected historian Shlomo Ben-Ami, who documents in his study Scars of War, Wounds of Peace (Oxford: 2006) that Palestinians were expelled in accordance with the Zionist "philosophy of transfer," which framed Ben-Gurion's "strategic-ideological" vision and "provided a legitimate environment for commanders in the field actively to encourage the eviction of the local population."
Demolition of Palestine homes
Jerusalem 2007
No Palestinians — none — were expelled in 1948 ? ?
Against this wealth of research by leading Israeli scholars across the political spectrum, Saperstein cites not a single academic authority but rather the avowal of an Israeli novelist (Amos Oz).
It is, or should be, cause for wonder that such a lone reference passes muster in a serious academic journal as scholarly rebuttal, and that the remarkable claim that no Palestinians — none — were expelled in 1948 passed editorial scrutiny.  
Will the editors now approve quotation of Leon Uris as a scholarly source?
Saperstein can perhaps be excused since his area of expertise is ancient Jewish texts (he's apparently never written professionally on the Israel-Palestine conflict).
But how did the explosion of scholarship on the birth of the Palestinian refugee question confuting the novelist's statement escape the notice of MEJ's editors?
Saperstein's only other evidence that Palestinians weren't ethnically cleansed is that of the 900,000 Palestinians living in the areas Israel conquered 150,000 managed to remain in situ at war's end.
Yet, apart from Holocaust deniers who would argue that Jews weren't subject to a genocide because of the 7,000,000 Jews living in the areas conquered by the Nazis 1,000,000 managed to survive at war's end? (For charity's sake I ignore Saperstein's argument that Israel couldn't have expelled Palestinians from the areas of Palestine it conquered in 1948 because they continued to live in areas of Palestine that Israel didn't conquer.)
Abir Aramin
Ten years old
Killed by US taxpayer paid Israel forces
Human rights reports
(2) To demonstrate that I have grossly misrepresented Israel's human rights record in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Saperstein takes me to task for relying on mainstream human rights organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and — what's yet more sinister in his view — Israeli human rights organizations like B'Tselem (Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories), which he derides as "useful rhetorically."
He further impugns the documentation I cite from these organizations as "facts" (his scare quotes) and waxes indignant that I didn't cast doubt on their judgments.
In researching Beyond Chutzpah I perused thousands of pages of mainstream human rights reports.   One surprising conclusion I reached was how uncontroversial Israel's human rights record was.
Although each of these human rights organizations has a fiercely independent research, legal and field staff, I came across only one instance over a 15-year period where two human rights organizations differed on a (tiny) point of fact.  
I then compared the uniform findings of these organizations with the claims of Professor Alan Dershowitz in his book The Case for Israel.
More often than not Dershowitz either cites no source whatsoever or, as I document, fabricates a source out of whole cloth.
Photo journalist Fadi Aruri, 24 shot several times by US paid Israel forces
Protest against Apartheid wall stealing and separating Palestians from their land
Torture
Consider torture and ill-treatment of Palestinian detainees.
In Beyond Chutzpah I cite the annual findings of Amnesty International over a ten-year period that "Palestinians were systematically tortured or ill-treated during interrogation"; the findings of a major Human Rights Watch report that "the number of Palestinians tortured or severely ill-treated while under interrogation during the [first] intfiada is in the tens of thousands"; and the findings of B'Tselem that "[S]ome eight-five percent of persons interrogated by the GSS were interrogated by methods constituting torture."
Against these findings I juxtapose Professor Dershowitz's unsourced counterclaim that Israel only "sometimes" employed what he calls a "modified form of non-lethal torture." 
Saperstein wonders why I regard the evidence and findings of human rights reports as valid.   The obvious answer would seem to be that if all mainstream human rights organizations reach identical conclusions and no contrary evidence exists, there's no rational reason to infer that their reports are false — unless one accepts the faith-based counterclaim that Amnesty, HRW and B'Tselem are part of a vast (anti-Semitic) conspiracy to malign Israel.
Saperstein appears to belong to the latter school since he characterizes my evidence, culled overwhelmingly from mainstream human rights reports, as "every anti-Israel argument in the arsenal of its opponents."
He wonders why I didn't engage in a "critical weighing of evidence on different sides of a controversial issue."
Again, the obvious answer would seem to be that Dershowitz doesn't supply any evidence to weigh, and there's no controversy among mainstream human rights organizations to adjudicate.
On a related matter Saperstein is appalled that I should treat as "self-evidently true" the allegation of all mainstream human rights organizations that Israel committed war crimes during its 2002 invasion of Jenin.
Should I have doubted this uniform conclusion because a notorious apologist for Israel asserted without any evidence that it wasn't so?
Ongoing protest
Nablus checkpoint
Anti-Semitism
The remainder of Saperstein's indictment can be more easily dispatched.
He deplores that I treat with "scorn and sarcasm" the claims of New Anti-Semitism authors that "Western-based international human rights organizations," "Jewish feminists," Associated Press, Reuters, Time, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, BBC, NPR, CNN and ABC are all anti-Semitic; that the creation of Israel was a plot by European governments to concentrate all Jews in Palestine in order to exterminate them; that it's only a matter of time before "a loudspeaker goes off and a voice says, 'All Jews gather in Times Square.'"
Among scholars who base their findings on evidence and conclusions on reason the obvious retort would seem to be, Why shouldn't these ravings be treated with "scorn and sarcasm"?
Saperstein wonders why I don't consider anti-Semitism in the Arab world.
Yet, although surely a significant phenomenon it's also surely not new, while the burden of my first chapters was to analyze the so-called New Anti-Semitism that allegedly now permeates the Western world.
Incidentally, Saperstein's recommendation of MEMRI as an objective source on the Arab world is of a piece with his recommendation of an Israeli novelist for the truth on the 1948 war.
Destruction of homes prevented by human shields
Destruction of entire Palestinian villages
Objecting to my comparison between the Nazi destruction of Lidice and Dershowitz's notorious policy prescription for the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Saperstein states that the Nazis killed adult male inhabitants whereas Dershowitz merely advocated the destruction of "empty houses in a particular village."
In my book I juxtaposed Dershowitz's deploring that "Hitler destroyed the entire Czech village of Lidice" with his own advocacy of the destruction of entire Palestinian villages.
To dispute this comparison Saperstein introduces an element not mentioned by Dershowitz, that beyond destroying the village the Nazis also killed adult males at Lidice.
However, is it even true that Dershowitz's proposal bears merely on "empty houses in a particular village"?
Although you wouldn't know it from Saperstein's disingenuous gloss, here's what Dershowitz actually advocated:
"[D]estruction of a small village which has been used as a base for terrorist operations.
The residents would be given 24 hours to leave, and then troops will come in and bulldoze all of the buildings.
The response will be automatic.
The order will have been given in advance of the terrorist attacks and there will be no discretion."
Dershowitz couldn't be clearer on the fate of residents who don't abandon their homes:
"...the response will be automatic there will be no discretion."
Saperstein also expresses perplexity that UCPress should have allowed me to document Dershowitz's plagiarism from a notorious hoax.
It's unclear why a serious allegation of professional malfeasance shouldn't be reported especially since Saperstein doesn't dispute a single word of the 25 pages of evidence I assembled.
Three Palestinian farmers
Child injured by US paid Israel military troops
Twenty years of sustained reflection
The "bottom-line" for Saperstein is that my book is the work of an "arrogant academic pit bull."
Beyond Chutzpah is the product of twenty years of sustained reflection and what all reviewers (including Saperstein) agree was prodigious research.
Saperstein consented to review the book although he's never written a single word on the main subject area.
But I am the arrogant academic.
Saperstein dismisses the accumulated research of Israeli historians by citing a statement of an Israeli novelist.
But I am the arrogant academic.
Saperstein mocks the cumulative findings of all mainstream human rights organizations as "facts" (his scare quotes).   But I am the arrogant academic.
In order to discredit my work Saperstein blots out existing scholarship, cites only preposterous sources, impugns the integrity of all human rights organizations and disingenuously quotes Dershowitz.   But I am the pit bull.
Saperstein accuses me of "getting carried away in his rhetoric" and of resorting to "outrageous ad hominems" and then labels me an "arrogant academic pit bull."
On a related note, MEJ's stated policy prohibits the use of "intemperate or abusive language" in its pages, which must mean that the editors don't consider the phrase "arrogant academic pit bull" intemperate or abusive.
Saperstein wonders why University of California Press published my book.
The obvious answer would seem to be that it both passed an unprecedentedly rigorous peer review process and met the press's rigorous publication standards.
Beyond Chutzpah by Norman Finkelstein

The author's commentary of the criticism by Professor Marc Saperstein as published in the Middle East Journal
Why did MEJ?
In a sane intellectual culture the only questions would be: Why did MEJ commission a review from Saperstein, and why did he agree to do it?
His only qualification for reviewing my book would seem to be that for many years he sat on the Board of Directors of Harvard Hillel and was a colleague of Dershowitz.
Readers of MEJ would have been better served if the editors had exercised minimum professional responsibility rather than let their pages be used for a transparent — not to mention slightly ridiculous — hatchet job.
Norman Finkelstein's most recent book is Beyond Chutzpah: On the misuse of anti-Semitism and the abuse of history (University of California Press).   His web site is www.NormanFinkelstein.com.
 
 
US Israel Missile strike
Paid for by US taxpayer
In the article below, substitute UK for Israel, US for Israel.
You will find this is 'journalism' in the West today.
The UK and now almost total TV, radio and print publications in the US, censorship is both as journalist self-censorship, and censorship at any point of editors up the communication chain.
The chain of censorship that culminates with Murdoch and similar cronies, the few elite who control what you read, hear and see today in mainstream media.
No wonder everything out of the mouths of your fellow citizens is a repeat of what these elite circulate in both your and your fellow citizen's brain.
Nothing of truth!
As the West abysmally sinks further into the sewage of destruction it has set for itself.
 
I would argue as forcefully as I can that since the Palestinians are facing Nazi-like State [Israel] terrorism, the holocaust narrative and its meaning belongs to them at least as much as it belongs to the Jews or anyone else.
I would argue as forcefully as I can that if the Palestinians are indeed the last victims of Hitler, then the holocaust and its meaning do belong to them more than anyone else.
  uruknet.info
  اوروكنت.إنفو
    informazione dall'iraq occupato
information from occupied iraq
أخبار منالعراق المحتلة
How Palestine became “Israel’s Land”
Sonja Karkar, Women for Palestine
They were there when the Israelites invaded the land, occupied it, and held it intermittently as wave after wave of other conquerors came and went
For Palestinians, theirs is not the land of conquest, but the land of their roots going back to time immemorial.
Such a lineage does not rely on a biblical promise like the Jewish claim that God promised the land to Abraham and his descendants, and is therefore, the historical site of the Jewish kingdom of Israel.
It belongs to the people of Palestine by the simple fact of their continuous residence repeated through birth and possession going back to the earliest Canaanites and even those people living there before recorded history.
They were there when the Israelites invaded the land, occupied it, and held it intermittently as wave after wave of other conquerors came and went, and they were still there when the Romans put an end to Jewish Palestine by destroying Jerusalem in 135AD.
If a religious basis is sought, then the Palestinians can lay claim to being the descendants of Abraham’s son Ishmael who is regarded the forefather of the Arabs.
But actually, Palestinian rights are enshrined in the universally accepted principle that land belongs to its indigenous inhabitants.
Thus, the modern day struggle for this land by European Jewish immigrants who have no connection with Palestine other than through their religion is a colonial enterprise that seeks sovereignty for an "external Jewish population" to the exclusion of the indigenous Palestinians who, regardless of faith — Jewish, Christian or Muslim — have lived together for centuries.
State of Israel created in violation of very resolution which Israelis now look to as giving them sovereignty
Although eager to accept the UN Partition Plan of 1947 which recommended that 56% of the land be set aside for a Jewish State, 42% for an Arab state and 2% for an internationalised Jerusalem and its surrounds, the world has not said a word about the land that was seized by Zionist terrorists before the State of Israel was proclaimed on 14 May 1948.
Through a series of shocking massacres, the territory assigned to the Jews suddenly became 77% resulting in more than 750,000 Palestinians being forcibly expelled and dispossessed of their homes, personal property and their homeland.
The Jewish State then came into being without waiting for the United Nations Commission — prescribed in the Partition resolution — to hand authority progressively over to the Jewish and Arab leaders for their respective states.
And after the 1948 war, Israel declared Jerusalem its capital in contravention of its internationally-recognised status of corpus separatum – a status that is still recognised.
Effectively, the new state of Israel was not only created in violation of, it continued to violate, the very resolution which Israelis now look to as giving them sovereignty.
The Arab state imposed by the UN Partition Plan without consultation and in contradiction to the UN charter — which should have upheld the majority indigenous Palestinians’ right to self-determination — has since been deliberately and methodically whittled away by Israel, leaving nothing but isolated non-contiguous parcels of land to some 4 million Palestinians.
Land Day
Around 170,000 Palestinians remained in what became Israel, the largest number of whom resided in the Galilee area, originally a designated part of the Arab state under the Partition Plan.
These Palestinians also became the victims of Israel’s land grab policy.
Over 438,000 acres, which was more than the total Jewish land holdings at the time, were confiscated and a further 400,000 acres were marked for confiscation.
After Israel won the 1967 war, the total territory of Palestine came under Israel’s rule.
It annexed East Jerusalem, despite the Holy City’s internationally recognised status and began implementing its Jewish settlement program with a vengeance.
The Palestinians in Israel were increasingly aware of their precarious position politically and declared a national strike, known as "Land Day" on 30 March 1976 against Israel’s continuing ruthless land expropriation.
An affinity was quickly felt between Palestinians everywhere and "Land Day" was adopted as a sort of national Palestinian day which is commemorated by Palestinians and their supporters around the world each year.
This awakening of national consciousness had an unequivocal political message: end the occupation and allow self-determination of the Palestinians in a sovereign state living in peace side by side with Israel.
Thirty-one years later, the message is till resonating, but the Palestinians are further away from seeing a solution than ever before.
Daily, Israel is taking a bit of land here and a bit of land there, to make all of Palestine "Israel’s Land".
The problem then will be, what to do with 5 million Palestinians with no land?
There are only a few possible, but criminal solutions — transfer, collective imprisonment, apartheid, and/or ethnic cleansing.
Alternatively, Israel can disengage from the West Bank to the 1967 borders or agree on a single, democratic state for all.
Without a just solution, the struggle for Palestine’s land will continue.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES CONTINUE
January 2nd week 2009
ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES CONTINUE
January 2009 — Click here
 
 
CIA Obama the acting president
Every facial movement, gesture of the hand, word enunciated by the 44th president turns out to be a complete charade
The CIA — Obama — Illuminati
A long-term strategic CIA plan to recruit promising candidates
and steer these individuals and their families into positions of influence and power
Behavior modification
Phenomenological — structures of consciousness — programs
US policy has even less regard for human rights both abroad and at home

 
 
 
For archive purposes, this article is being stored on TheWE.cc website.
The purpose is to advance understandings of environmental, political,
human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues.