ZION USES FACEBOOK TO TARGET THE POETRY OF FREEDOM

 Facebook campaigns were run by professional Washington D.C. political operatives who work for a group called the Israel on Campus Coalition, according to promotional materials obtained by ProPublica and the Forward.

 

Pro-Israel Group Secretly Ran Misleading Facebook Ads To Target Palestinian-American Poet

This story was co-published with ProPublica, the investigative journalism organization.

 

In 2016, as Palestinian-American poet Remi Kanazi performed at college campuses around the United States, his appearances seemed to spark student protests.

Before his visit to John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City, a page called “John Jay Students Against Hate” appeared on Facebook with Kanazi’s face next to a uniformed cop, painting Kanazi as anti-police. When Kanazi crossed the country a few days later to visit San Jose State, a nearly-identical Facebook page popped up, this one called “SJSU Students Against Hate,” with Kanazi’s face superimposed over an image of military graves. Paid Facebook campaigns promoted both pages.

Despite their names, the Facebook campaigns were run by professional Washington D.C. political operatives who work for a group called the Israel on Campus Coalition, according to promotional materials obtained by ProPublica and the Forward.

In the materials, which the ICC distributed to its donors, the group describes each of the Facebook pages as an “anonymous digital campaign.” The group says it paid to promote the campaign, which reached tens of thousands of people.

The social media campaigns provide another example of how well-funded advocacy organizations are using deceptive strategies to promote their cause online. The ICC launched these campaigns during the 2016 election season, at the same time that entities linked to the Russian government bought misleading Facebook ads on a range of political issues.

The ICC didn’t respond to requests for comment. The group had a budget of $9 million in its fiscal year ending in June 2017, according to federal tax filings. Its funders include the foundations of billionaire Republican donor Paul Singer and philanthropist Lynn Schusterman.

Asked about the Israel on Campus Coalition pages, a Facebook spokesman said they “violate our policies against misrepresentation and they have been removed.”

In response to criticism of Russia-linked ads, Facebook recently created new rules requiring disclosure of who is paying for political ads on the site. How the company defines what is political remains murky.

Anonymous digital campaigns appear to be a central part of the ICC’s efforts to combat pro-Palestinian activism on U.S. campuses. This past spring, the ICC appears to have set up at least one anonymous website to oppose a George Washington University student government resolution that called on the school to divest its endowment from certain companies that students said were profiting from Israeli violations of Palestinian rights, the Forward reported.

The ICC’s leaders discussed their covert social media tactics in an unaired Al Jazeera documentary featuring hidden camera footage of Washington, D.C. pro-Israel advocacy officials.

“With the anti-Israel people, what’s most effective, what we found at least in the last year, is you do the opposition research, put up some anonymous website, and then put up targeted Facebook ads,” said the ICC’s executive director, Jacob Baime, in the Al Jazeera documentary, which was filmed in 2016. The film was viewed by ProPublica and the Forward.

Baime also said in the documentary that his organization’s work is based on a doctrine used to fight Al Qaeda and the Taliban. “It’s modeled on General Stanley McChrystal’s counterinsurgency strategy,” Baime said. “We’ve copied a lot from that strategy that has been working really well for us, actually.”

McChrystal, who led the U.S. military’s special forces and the NATO war effort in Afghanistan in 2009 and 2010, emphasized so-called “offensive information operations” to embarrass and discredit violent insurgents.

The Al Jazeera documentary, in which a journalist went undercover as an intern for a pro-Israel advocacy group in Washington, has been the subject of months of international intrigue and has never been aired by the network. Decrying the undercover tactics, pro-Israel groups and members of Congress have pushed back against the documentary series and Qatar, which funds Al Jazeera. The network, which has faced public criticism from its own journalists for not airing the documentary, said in April it did not buckle under pressure from a pro-Israel group in deciding not to broadcast the program. A spokesman didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Footage in the documentary also shows ICC officials describing their working relationship with the Israeli government.

Baime says in the documentary that ICC officials “coordinate” or “communicate” with Israel’s Ministry of Strategic Affairs, an Israeli government department that has become the hub of the Israeli government’s overt and covert efforts against the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement in the U.S. and around the world. A spokesman for the agency didn’t respond to requests for comment.

In the same hidden camera footage, Ian Hersh, the ICC’s director of operations, said that the Ministry of Strategic Affairs participates in the group’s “Operations and Intelligence Brief,” a regular strategy meeting.

In recent days, some aspects of the Al Jazeera documentary as well as a short clip have been posted on the website Electronic Intifada, a pro-Palestinian news site whose executive director, Ali Abunimah, appears as an interviewee in the film.

Baime and Hersh didn’t respond to requests for comment about the footage of them in the documentary.

The ICC’s online efforts against Kanazi, the Palestinian-American poet, began in November 2016 while he was touring college campuses to promote his book, “Before the Next Bomb Drops: Rising Up From Brooklyn to Palestine.”

According to the ICC’s donor materials, the group identified and worked with a non-Jewish military veteran and San Jose State University student to write a blog post critical of Kanazi. The precise nature of the group’s work with the student is unclear from the donor materials, and the student did not respond to requests for comment.

The ICC then created and paid to promote the “SJSU Students Against Hate” page, which linked to the blog post.

“Kanazi preaches hate on the campuses he visits,” the student wrote in the post, which appeared on the website Medium and has since been deleted.

Kanazi said that he does not recall being aware of the anonymous Facebook pages at the time. “These insidious tactics are part of a larger campaign to smear students, professors, and anyone who dares speak up for Palestinian human rights at universities,” he said in an email.

Here is but one example of Remi’s ‘threat to zion’

Remi Kanazi – Normalize This!

AM I WORSE THAN A NAZI? ~~ ONE ‘RABBI’ THINKS SO

Boteach says that the lesson of the Holocaust is that we have to be on guard at the first signs of genocide. But he doesn’t mention taking action against current genocidal emergencies in Sudan, Iraq, Somalia, the Central African Republic, Syria, Myanmar, and Yemen. In nearly all of those places Muslims are the targets.

Shmuley Boteach at Auschwitz Birkenau, from his twitter feed

Boteach likens Jews pushing for Palestinian state to Jews who helped Nazis

The headline and deck of this article by Rabbi Shmuley Boteach at Tablet are incredible.

Hitler’s Secret Weapon Was Coercing Jews to Destroy Themselves

Will we do it again?

When Hannah Arendt wrote about Jewish leaders who collaborated with the Nazis in her book Eichmann in Jerusalem (1963), she was pilloried by establishment Jews for blaming the Jews for their own destruction. Or as Arendt said, an “organized campaign… by certain interest groups” to say that “I allegedly had claimed that the Jews had murdered themselves.”

But this is unlikely to happen to Rabbi Shmuley, even though he goes well beyond Arendt’s criticism of the “leadership” toward a general description of Jews’ roles as accomplices.

The Nazis, I have come to understand, would eradicate the Jewish nation by always holding out the possibility that, against most of the evidence, some might still live. The Jews were led to believe that if they just cooperated, their children would survive…

At almost every step of the way, the Jews were forced into cooperating with the very plans drawn up to exterminate them. The Jews, the Germans thought, could provide the manpower the Nazis lacked only if they could be persuaded that if they went along with the program they would be put to productive work.

The Nazis forced the Jews to create their own self-administering councils, Judenrats, in the ghettos. When visiting the Lodz Ghetto, I stood at the exact spot where Chaim Rumkowski gave his notorious “Give Me Your Children” speech in September of 1942. As chairman of the Lodz Judenrat, Rumkowski had decided to turn the ghetto into a factory, believing that only by being useful to the Nazis could its inhabitants be spared…

In the camps themselves, the Jews were forced into Sonderkommando units, where Jewish inmates were put to work disposing of the millions of bodies left lifeless in the gas chambers. They too were threatened with constant death, yet were twinned with a chance at life so long as they complied with the Nazi program.

Boteach has an axe to grind: Jews are now collaborating in the destruction of Israel. Even Jews who support a Palestinian state!

With Iran calling for a second Holocaust in the state of Israel—threatening constantly as they do to raze Israeli cities to the ground and wipe Israel off the map—Israel must react to its threats before they can be realized. Genocidal rhetoric in our time must be something that is resisted completely. In Rwanda too, the Hutus called the Tutsis “cockroaches” well before launching their genocide campaign.

So too with regard to Hamas and even the Palestinian Authority. We cannot cede land for a Palestinian State in the hope of demographic survival when in doing so we might find ourselves in a three-front war from Gaza, Judea, and Samaria in the West Bank, and Lebanon aimed at Israel’s annihilation. Israel simply cannot afford even the slightest risk of being deceived into walking toward its own demise, all in the promise of peace by those who speak openly of a new genocide of the Jews.

Boteach says that the lesson of the Holocaust is that we have to be on guard at the first signs of genocide. But he doesn’t mention taking action against current genocidal emergencies in Sudan, Iraq, Somalia, the Central African Republic, Syria, Myanmar, and Yemen. In nearly all of those places Muslims are the targets.

In addition, it is funny that Boteach thinks he has singlehandedly discovered how the Germans got away with genocide– “I believe this journey has given me a clue. The Nazis, I have come to understand…”– when his insight about Jewish collaboration is one that many historians have documented before.

ISRAEL via YOUTUBE TRIES TO UNDERMINE PALESTINIAN HUNGER STRIKE

Zion’s mantra has always been “If the truth is hard to swallow, LIE!”

Following is their latest attempt, via YouTube, to undermine the heroic hunger strike of Palestinian prisoners and their leader, Marwan Barghouti.

What I see in the following video could be any man, anyplace, at any time going to the bathroom in what looks like a prison cell …..

BUT

Here is how the zionists describe the following ….

Arch-terrorist and mass-murderer Marwan Barghouti, who has led a hunger strike by jailed terrorists held in Israeli prisons, has been eating in secret while maintaining the pretenses of his own hunger strike, footage released Sunday reveals.

*

Here is the reality of the hunger strike via the pen of Carlos Latuff ….

Day 22: Palestinian Prisoners Striking for Dignity and Freedom

*

Today is the 22nd day, their bodies started to digest itself 6 days ago, now they can’t stand on their feet

Which of the above is the TRUTH? (Which has always been zion’s greatest enemy)

As can seen in this image, zion has ALWAYS hated the truth.

*

Here is what the wife of Marwan Barghouti had to say about the situation … (FROM)

Barghouti’s wife: ‘Recordings of Marwan breaking the strike are fake’
*
‘Fabricated,’ ‘despicable,’ and a ‘low point’ for Israel were the terms employed by Fadwa Barghouti—the wife of Marwan Barghouti—to describe recordings released by the Israel Prison Service allegedly showing her husband breaking his hunger strike in secret; says act is a sign of the beginning of Israel’s downfall.

Fadwa Barghouti, the wife of Marwan Barghouti, claimed on Sunday that the recordings of her husband secretly breaking his hunger strike, filmed and released by the Israel Prison Service (IPS), are fabricated and fake.

Marwan Barghouti was recorded on security cameras in his cell secretly breaking his hunger strike by eating, among other things, cookies and salted snacks.

Speaking at a press conference in Ramallah, Barghouti denounced the publication of the video as a “low” act by Israel that teaches about “the defeat of the occupation” in dealing with the hunger strike and was proof of the “weakness” that Israel is demonstrating against the prisoners’ determination.

“The prisoners are familiar with Israel’s lies and games and the video they released signals the beginning of its fall,” said Fadwa, adding that the Palestinian people are likely to pick up on these “despicable” methods after 70 years of oppression.

She summarized by saying that this video will only strengthen the prisoners’ resolve to continue the strike.

The footage of Marwan breaking the strike was presented by Minister of Public Security, Strategic Affairs and Minister of Information Gilad Erdan during a press conference.

Erdan claimed that the prisoners’ conditions, over which they allegedly launched their hunger strike, were not the real reasons behind it.

“The Palestinian prisoners’ hunger strike has nothing to do with their prison conditions, and everything to do with the political interest of Marwan Barghouti,” said Erdan during the press conference on Sunday, as the strike reached its 21st day. “Barghouti is a murderer and hypocrite who urged his fellow prisoners to strike and suffer while he ate behind their back.”

It is not the first time Barghouti has been caught red-handed sneaking a snack in the midst of a hunger strike. In 2004, Barghouti was filmed secretly breaking his strike, which was also launched by security prisoners.

THE TRUTH ABOUT SHIMON PERES’ LIES BEGIN TO EMERGE

Peres was a liar and cheater, he had no part in Operation Entebbe.’

For this he got the Nobel ‘Peace’ Prize …

Shimon Peres’ contributions to the Zionist project in Palestine and the sufferings of the Palestinians and Arabs have not stopped once since the Nakba, the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians in 1947-1949.

Shimon Peres’ contributions to the zionist project in Palestine and the sufferings of the Palestinians and Arabs have not stopped once since the Nakba, the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians in 1947-1949.

Senior commando unit officer: Peres was a liar

Reserve Major-General Amiram Levin, who was responsible for IDF elite commando unit Sayeret Matkal’s operational planning during Operation Entebbe, attacked the late former president Shimon Peres on television this weekend.

Peres was Defense Minister in 1976, when the Israeli army carried out one of its greatest feats, the famed July 4th rescue known as Operation Entebbe that freed 102 Jewish hostages whose plane was hijacked to Uganda by Arab terrorists. The prime minister’s older brother Yoni Netanyahu, who commanded the unit that carried out the operation was killed by a sniper’s bullet.

“He never met Yoni Netanyahu. His only part in the operation was that he served as Defense Minister. Peres never met Yoni Netanyahu, he’s a liar and he had no part in Operation Entebbe,” Levin told Ayala Sasson in an interview on Israel’s TV program Shishi.

“I’ve known him for years, as both Prime Minister and Defense Minister, and as a person, too. The story with Yoni, he never met him and never spoke to him, yet he said that Yoni ‘gave him confidence.'”

Levin attacked Peres for blaming then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin for opposing the operation, when in fact he had supported it.

“I was present during that conversation, that critical government discussion. [Peres] is a trickster, he played no part in the operation. His only connection is that he was serving as Defense Minister, but in fact he did absolutely nothing,” Levin emphasized.

“Peres was just a pipeline, [then-IAF Commander} Benny Peled was absolutely terrific – but Peres wrote the history and he was a liar,” concluded Levin, decrying what he called the “industry” of praising Peres after his passing.

Peres’ funeral was attended by thousands, including President Obama, Prince Charles of England and other important diplomatic and international figures.

 

Source

IRKS THAT MOVED THE JERKS

The latest attempt of Israeli ‘diplomacy’

Foreign Ministry spokesman Emmanuel Nachshon explained the decision to remove the short by saying that it was meant to “illustrate Hamas’ crimes in Gaza, but when it was interpreted differently, it was decided to remove it.

Foreign Ministry removes animated clip on Gaza that irked foreign press

Yet another lie …. the video was removed, but here it is 😉

 The Foreign Ministry on Sunday removed a satirical animated short on how Gaza is presented abroad following withering criticism from the foreign press that it was mocking them.

The 50-second short was placed on the ministry’s website last Sunday, along with Israel’s 277-page report on the events in Gaza last summer, in an apparent effort to preempt against what is expected to be a harsh, one-sided censure of Israel by the UN Human Rights Council’s committee investigating last summer’s activities.

The short featured a foreign correspondent painting a rosy picture of life in Gaza, with the terror tunnels portrayed as a “fascinating attempt by Hamas to build a subway system,” and people in Gaza just trying to “live quiet lives” in a Palestinian society that is “liberal and pluralistic.”

The reporter is blind to terrorists carrying and firing missiles. The short ends with the statement, “Open you eyes, terror rules Gaza.”

The Foreign Press Association protested the video, issuing a statement that it was “surprised and alarmed by the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s decision to produce a cartoon mocking the foreign media’s coverage of last year’s war in Gaza.”

“At a time when Israel has serious issues to deal with in Iran and Syria, it is disconcerting that the ministry would spend its time producing a 50-second video that attempts to ridicule journalists reporting on a conflict in which 2,100 Palestinians and 72 Israelis were killed,” the statement said. “Israel’s diplomatic corps wants to be taken seriously in the world. Posting misleading and poorly conceived videos on YouTube is inappropriate, unhelpful and undermines the ministry, which says it respects the foreign press and its freedom to work in Gaza.”

Foreign Ministry spokesman Emmanuel Nachshon explained the decision to remove the short by saying that it was meant to “illustrate Hamas’ crimes in Gaza, but when it was interpreted differently, it was decided to remove it.”

Another lie FROM

NETANYAHU’S LONG HISTORY OF CRYING WOLF ABOUT IRAN’S NUCLEAR WEAPONS

When Netanyahu gives his address to Congress, he can likely be counted on to say much the same things he’s been saying for the past two decades about an impending Iranian nuclear threat, and credulous pundits and politicians can be counted on to believe him.

Netanyahu outlining the Iranian nuclear danger via a cartoon drawing. (UN/file)

Netanyahu outlining the Iranian nuclear danger via a cartoon drawing. (UN/file)

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU’S LONG HISTORY OF CRYING WOLF ABOUT IRAN’S NUCLEAR WEAPONS

BY MURTAZA HUSSAIN FOR

*

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to address the U.S. Congress tomorrow about the perils of striking a nuclear deal with Iran.  Netanyahu, not generally known for his measured rhetoric, has been vociferous in his public statements about the dangers of such compromise, warning that it will allow Iran to “rush to the bomb” and that it amounts to giving the country “a license” to develop nuclear weapons.

It is worth remembering, however, that Netanyahu has said much of this before. Almost two decades ago, in 1996, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress where he darkly warned, “If Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons, this could presage catastrophic consequences, not only for my country, and not only for the Middle East, but for all mankind,” adding that, “the deadline for attaining this goal is getting extremely close.”

Almost 20 years later that deadline has apparently still not passed, but Netanyahu is still making dire predictions about an imminent Iranian nuclear weapon. Four years before that Congressional speech, in 1992, then-parliamentarian Netanyahu advised the Israeli Knesset that Iran was “three to five years” away from reaching nuclear weapons capability, and that this threat had to be “uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S.”

In his 1995 book, “Fighting Terrorism,” Netanyahu once again asserted that Iran would have a nuclear weapon in “three to five years,” apparently forgetting about the expiration of his old deadline.

For a considerable time thereafter, Netanyahu switched his focus to hyping the purported nuclear threat posed by another country, Iraq, about which he claimed there was “no question” that it was “advancing towards to the development of nuclear weapons.” Testifying again in front of Congress again in 2002, Netanyahu claimed that Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program was in fact so advanced that the country was now operating “centrifuges the size of washing machines.”

Needless to say, these claims turned out to be disastrously false. Despite this, Netanyahu, apparently unchastened by the havoc his previous false charges helped create, immediately went back to ringing the alarm bells about Iran.

A 2009 U.S. State Department diplomatic cable released by Wikileaks described then-prime ministerial candidate Netanyahu informing a visiting Congressional delegation that Iran was “probably one or two years away” from developing weapons capability. Another cable later the same year showed Netanyahu, now back in office as prime minister, telling a separate delegation of American politicians in Jerusalem that “Iran has the capability now to make one bomb,” adding that alternatively, “they could wait and make several bombs in a year or two.”

In statements around this time made to journalists, Netanyahu continued to raise alarm about this supposedly imminent, apocalyptic threat. As he told The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg in a 2010 interview, “You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs,” adding, “that’s what is happening in Iran.”

In 2012 Netanyahu said in closed talks reported by Israeli media that Iran is just “a few months away” from attaining nuclear capabilities. Later that same year, he gave a widely-mocked address at the United Nations in which he alleged that Iran would have the ability to construct a weapon within roughly one year, while using a printout of a cartoon bomb to illustrate his point.

Despite this heady rhetoric, Netanyahu’s estimates of an imminent Iranian nuclear bomb have consistently been at odds with analyses made by his own intelligence agency. In 2011, departing Mossad intelligence chief Meir Dagan said in his final intelligence summary that, contrary to Netanyahu’s repeated statements at the time, an Iranian nuclear weapon is in fact not imminent, and that any military action against the country could end up spurring the development of such a weapon.

Just last week, leaked intelligence cables reported by Al Jazeera revealed that at roughly the same time in 2012 that Netanyahu was brandishing his cartoon bomb and telling the United Nations that Iran was close to obtaining a nuclear weapon, Israeli intelligence had actually determined the country was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons.”

The conclusion from this history is inescapable. Over the course of more than 20 years, Benjamin Netanyahu has made false claims about nuclear weapons programs in both Iran and Iraq, inventing imaginary timelines for their development, and making public statements that contradicted the analysis of his own intelligence advisers.

Despite this, he continues to be treated by lawmakers and media figures as a credible voice on this issue.

When Netanyahu gives his address to Congress, he can likely be counted on to say much the same things he’s been saying for the past two decades about an impending Iranian nuclear threat, and credulous pundits and politicians can be counted on to believe him.

ZION GOING OVERBOARD TO DISCREDIT THE BDS MOVEMENT

As BDS gains support on nearly every major US Campus, the zionists move into ‘panic mode’ and fight back.

Internationally the Movement is gaining support in the Academic and artistic communities as well.

The following video produced by the zionists is typical of their tactics, lies, exaggerations and quoting out of context …. see for yourself.

Interesting to note that Israeli law forbids me to post a swastika on this Blogsite, but the zionists themselves are allowed to do it.

Also remember ….

Stand with US and help us break the silence! Image by Latuff

Stand with US and help us break the silence!
Image by Latuff

 

ANYTHING DUMMIES CAN DO FEMINISTS CAN DO BETTER ~~ INCLUDING PHOTOSHOPPING

Feminists prove that you don't have to be a dummy to Photoshop

Feminists prove that you don’t have to be a dummy to Photoshop

The extremists have a history of denying the existence of women as can be seen in the following photos … (as much as we might like to deny Hillary’s existence, there are better ways than cutting her out of a photo)

Hillary Before …
Was3901522--296x197
*
Hillary After …
6a00d83451b71f69e201543223a8d6970c-800wi
*
They even went as far as denying the role of women during the holocaust
The original …
b-sisterhood-warsaw-040113
*
Where are the two women in the photo? …
45376989921084408258yes1130

Two can play at the same game …. 

Feminist Paper Photoshops Male Leaders from Paris March Pics

Feminist paper’s novel response to hareidi papers photoshopping ‘immodest’ pictures of female leaders from publication…
*
The original
Embedded image permalink
*
The Feminist version
B7PummfCEAAN1j1 (1)
*
And finally, the extremist Hareidi version
img74404
*
Who ever said the camera does not lie?

JUST IN CASE YOU ARE WONDERING HOW YOUR US TAX DOLLAR$ ARE SPENT IN ISRAEL …

Among other things ...

Among other things …

Needless to say that a portion of those funds go to purchase drones. planes, bullets and bombs …

But the rest ???

It has been cleared for publication that the police have uncovered a massive corruption scandal involving top Israeli officials. 

The police’s anti-fraud unit 443 called in for questioning Wednesday a large number of top officials for their alleged involvement in a massive corruption scandal.

Sounds like a good enough reason for you to pressure Uncle Sam to STOP SENDING MONEY TO ISRAEL’S CRIMINAL REGIME!

Major corruption scandal involving over 30 public officials, politicians uncovered in Israel

Police say more than 30 officials involved, suspected of cronyism and illicitly transferring funds; group includes senior politicians, director-general of governmental office, as well as CEOs of a of top NGOs, political activists and union leaders.

Omri Efraim FOR

It has been cleared for publication that the police have uncovered a massive corruption scandal involving top Israeli officials.

The police’s anti-fraud unit 443 called in for questioning Wednesday a large number of top officials for their alleged involvement in a massive corruption scandal.

According to the police, a number of top ranking politicians from both national and local politics are involved, including MKs and a junior minister.

The group, which the police said numbered more than 30, is suspected of cronyism and illicitly transferring funds to NGO and includes a senior politician, a former minister, local council leaders, the director-general of a governmental office, as well as the CEOs of a number of NGOs, political activists and union leaders.

Some of the investigation’s details, like the suspects’ names, are still under gag order.

According to suspicions the senior politician transferred funds illegally to a certain NGO and worked to place friends and affiliates in key positions.

THE CLOSET ZIONISTS IN OUR MIDST

I like to know those things about writers. I think they’re important. It’s something I admire about Eric Alterman and Jeffrey Goldberg, they’ve always been out front about their Zionism. As I’ve been out front about my opposition to Zionism.

*

*

Journalists should tell their readers if they’re Zionists
 Philip Weiss

*

I take Roger Cohen seriously and so I’ve read a lot of his columns over the years, bought his book on the Balkans and read it. I leaped at the chance to debate the peace process with him in Qatar four years ago, and helped arrange his moderation of a debate over Israel with two congressmen in 2011.

But just a few months ago I learned something important about him. He’s a liberal Zionist. “I am one,” he said in confessing his “deep despondency” over Israel’s failure to end the occupation.

Shouldn’t I have known that before? I wondered. I regard Zionism as a core attachment, an intellectual/emotional/spiritual commitment that can be deeply binding. Back when Cohen was advocating the war in Iraq, for instance: Was his concern for Israel’s security part of his thinking?

I had the same feeling about Peter Beinart. He wrote a whole book about the need to liberate Iraq. The Good Fight: Why Liberals –and Only Liberals–Can Win the War On Terror and Make America Great Again. It doesn’t mention Israel once, per the index, and at the start, Beinart says he supported the war because it would

“help open a democratic third way in the Middle East between secular autocrats and their theocratic opponents–a third way that offered the best long-term hope for protecting the United States.”

Was that a sincere statement? We now know that Beinart cares deeply and passionately about Israel. He thinks about Israel almost as much as I do. He runs Open Zion, he has published a book called The Crisis of Zionism, he puts the Israeli flag on his boy’s wall, and he has published important pieces in the New York Review of Books on the failure of Jewish organizations in their support of Israel. So was he concerned about Israel when he was pushing the Iraq war? I think he was; and that he should have told his readers that.

Ian Lustick is someone else who’s declared lately. He wrote that he was once “spectacularly hopeful” about Zionism and it’s with “profound sadness” that he confronts the failure of the two-state solution. Lustick is an honest man and a realist, but I wish I’d known before now that he had such a profound attachment to the Zionist dream when I was reading all his excellent pieces.

Lustick himself pointed  out in Philadelphia the other day that writers and scholars are moved by passions, and have the duty to advance arguments that transcend those passions. Good point.

But I like to know about those passions.

I always felt that Ethan Bronner, the former Jerusalem bureau chief of the Times who had a son in the Israeli army, was a Zionist, but he never said so openly, and this created justifiable outrage in my community. In Philadelphia the other day, Max Blumenthal critiqued the claimed “objectivity” of the New York Times. He said that the present bureau chief, Jodi Rudoren, is married to an artist, Gary Rudoren, who’s “deeply immersed in Jewish Israeli society,” and she gets translation services from Myra Noveck, who works in the Times bureau, has two children in the Israeli army and is the wife of liberal Zionist Gershom Gorenberg. Blumenthal said:

“The idea that these people are objective is completely absurd to me but they’re operating under the veneer of objectivity when I’m completely out in the open with [my] quotidian beliefs… in a multicultural society where everyone has a fair shot regardless of ethnicity.”

I wonder about Rudoren. She comes out of the mainstream Jewish community, and I have found her to be culturally-bound, but is she a Zionist? She declined to answer that question a year back and then tweeted, “the only ist I use to describe self is journalist.” But I don’t think she’s being forthcoming. Rudoren also wrote proudly that she and her husband combined their last names because she refused to adopt a principle of the “patriarchy.” Surely that makes her a feminist.

I like to know those things about writers. I think they’re important. It’s something I admire about Eric Alterman and Jeffrey Goldberg, they’ve always been out front about their Zionism. As I’ve been out front about my opposition to Zionism.

Cohen, Lustick, and Beinart’s confessions are good. I want more journalists who write about the Middle East to declare on this question, in an acknowledgment of the public’s right to know. Zionism is a core component of the American Jewish relationship to Israel. It is a nationalist ideology involving religious identity, tribal concerns, and belief in the insecurity of Jews in the west. We all need to debate its premises and principles, Jews and non-Jews alike. It would help if those who subscribe to it told us so.

 

From Mondoweiss

ISRAELI CINEMA GONE HOLLYWOOD

This film, like many before it about the conflict, is guilty of the sins of distortion and concealment: the context is missing, as if it weren’t there. The film is meant to depict complexity – the misery of the collaborator; the humanity of the agent – but in reality, the film paints a picture without context, and without context there is no truth.
*
*

‘Bethlehem’ is yet another Israeli propaganda film

Before lavishing praise on co-director Yuval Adler, critics should stop to consider his film’s message: the Israelis are the good guys, the Arabs the bad guys.

By Gideon Levy
*
From the movie 'Bethlehem’
From the movie ‘Bethlehem.’ Photo by Vered Adir
*

Yuval Adler is a talented director, but he has made an outrageous film. “Bethlehem,” his debut feature, has garnered acclaim and prizes – a critics’ award in Venice, first prize at the Haifa Film Festival, six Ophir Awards (Israel’s national film awards) and high praise from The New York Times.

Along with his writing partner Ali Wakad, Adler created a very well-made action movie. He also created (another) Israeli propaganda film. Before everyone starts to praise him, they should pay heed to his messages – the overt, but, especially, the covert ones – and not just the direction, acting, editing and impressive attention to detail. But the plethora of details makes it so you can’t see the forest for the trees, and it’s the same poison forest. Or should we say enchanted sea – the Israelis are the good guys, the Arabs the bad guys.

This film, like many before it about the conflict, is guilty of the sins of distortion and concealment: the context is missing, as if it weren’t there. The film is meant to depict complexity – the misery of the collaborator; the humanity of the agent – but in reality, the film paints a picture without context, and without context there is no truth.

“Let’s make a movie that won’t deal with the political conflict,” Adler said to Wakad, according to an interview he gave to Mike Dagan in Haaretz’s magazine (September 28). But Adler’s refusal to make a “political movie” is deceit and sleight of hand. It is in itself a political statement unlike any other. Adler did not make a film about the Sicilian Mafia, but rather a film about the intifada, which has a political context that he deliberately ignores. This blurring is the movie’s powerful, outrageous statement.

What is the film about? [Warning: Spoilers] Violent, power-hungry intifada fighters, motivated by greed, and in conflict with one another; cynical, corrupt, lying Palestinian Authority figures; and European donation money going to terror, of course. There is not a single word about what they’re fighting against, what they are dying for. There’s no occupation, no oppression, only a Mafia, which this time speaks Arabic. Against it stands the Shin Bet security service, pure of heart, and its merciful agent with the support of his wife and secretary (which the Palestinians don’t have, of course). The agent always takes care of his pet informant, lying to save his life, until the latter rises up to kill him by shooting him and bashing his skull in, ungrateful wretch that he is. The Israelis will love this. They already do. All of the images they teach about are in this film. Black and white, with 50 shades of gray that just need to be accounted for – the collaborator.

Adler’s avoidance of the issue is abominable. An Israeli who makes an action movie about the intifada without taking a stand is a coward. He knows the subject will attract viewers at film festivals abroad, but at the same time doesn’t want to anger Israeli viewers.

It is impossible to make a movie about the intifada without revealing what motivated it. Adler, educated in philosophy, made an excellent gangster film, a spaghetti Western, but like a true Western movie, to hell with the historical truth. Of course such a film can be enjoyable, but in the 21st century it’s no longer possible to buy a story that paints the cowboys as good and the Indians as bad. That’s “Bethlehem” as well: the good, the bad, and the ugly. The Shin Bet agent, the collaborating terrorist, no Clint Eastwood, but with covert propaganda, which is worse than the overt kind.

In Bethlehem, the city, I met many armed and wanted men during the intifada. Some of them perhaps even fit the stereotypes presented in this film, but there were many others as well, who sacrificed their lives during their just struggle for freedom. None of them appear in “Bethlehem,” the film.

I’ve also met Shin Bet agents and heard about their exploits, and they certainly don’t look or sound like Razi from the film. Where’s the evil, torture, blackmail and lies? Adler acknowledges a few Shin Bet agents at the end of the movie; the Shin Bet should be grateful for this free promotional film. Adler chose to paint a one-dimensional picture, which will once again pat the Israelis on the back. Hey, look how right you are. Hey, look how they victimize you. Hey, look how hopeless the situation is. Go see “Bethlehem” and you’ll understand why.

Source

FALSIFYING LIFE IN GAZA

Rather than admit that life in the Gaza Strip was virtually destroyed by actions of the Israeli army, they now want you to believe that just the opposite is the case …. here is how they do it; 
*
A few questions came to mind after reading the following ….
1. Where are the building materials coming from (and how are they getting through the closed border)
2. Where are the goods on sale coming from seeing as the siege does not allow goods to enter the Strip?
Does the IDF really believe we are all stupid??
*

Israel army publishes fake image of huge “Gaza shopping mall”

Ali Abunimah
*

An enormous shopping mall the Israeli army claims is in the Gaza Strip. (Source: IDF Blog)

*

In one of its periodic efforts to deny the devastating effects of its siege of Gaza, the Israeli occupation army published a blog post on 12 August claiming that Palestinians in Gaza are “out in force, enjoying themselves in sparkling new malls, beautiful beaches and hotels, and doing their shopping in pristine grocery stores and markets heaving with fresh produce.” (Screenshot of entire “IDF blog” post).

The “IDF blog” includes the impressive photo above of a shopping mall where Palestinians in Gaza are supposedly shopping for the latest imported fashions.

I showed the photo to The Electronic Intifada’s correspondent in Gaza, Rami Almeghari. His reaction: “I can assure you that there is no such mall in Gaza.” Rami is quite right.

Fake image

If you do a Google Image search using the image from the “IDF” blog post, the same image turns up associated with the Metro Plaza shopping mall in Kolkata, India as well as several other places. 

 

*

kolkata

A Google image search turned up many examples, like this one, of the image associated with other malls.

*

Where is it really?

But the “Gaza mall” photo published by the Israeli army is actually an image of the Suria KLCC Mall in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, as numerous user-generated photographs on the travel review site TripAdvisor.com attest.

You can also see many people shopping at the mall – in Malaysia – in this video:

*

*

Israeli army sources: anti-Palestinian, Islamophobic blogs

Before publishing it on 12 August on its English-language website, the Israeli army published the same post in French on 4 August.

It was then published by the anti-Palestinian website Tribune Juive the same day.

But some of the material had already circulated on many other Islamophobic websites long before.

For example, the same Kuala Lumpur mall photo, purportedly in Gaza, appeared on a virulently Islamophobic blog called “Barenaked Islam” in April 2012, and was disseminated on Facebook by “Geert Wilders supporters,” a page dedicated to the Islamophobic Dutch politician.

It also appeared on “Religion of Peace,” another anti-Muslim hate site.

It would appear that the Israeli army gets its information about Gaza from Islamophobic hate sites.

Forced dependency

The Kuala Lumpur shopping mall is vastly bigger than any commercial facility anywhere in Gaza.

But another image, the supermarket shown on the “IDF” blog, appears to be the Metro supermarket in Gaza. I didn’t visit it, but I did visit the Abu Dallal supermarket in Nuseirat refugee camp.

I was told that Abu Dallal is one of largest supermarkets in Gaza. By American, European, or Jordanian standards it is not very big, smaller than an average CVS or Boots drugstore.

More important than its size, however, is that like other stores in Gaza, it is packed full of Israeli goods.

That’s one of the ways the Israeli blockade creates dependency: While Gaza industry and agriculture are devastated by the siege, Israel is happy enough to see its own companies profiting from people in Gaza, siphoning off what little income they have, whether from work, humanitarian aid or remittances abroad, by selling them Israeli goods.

Poverty and dependency are the real effects of siege

But Israel is much more restrictive when it comes to supplies that meet basic needs and could allow Gaza to move out of dependency. There is, for example, a shortage of 250 schools for Gaza’s children, which cannot be built due to the lack of building supplies.

And the reality is that while there is food in Gaza, “severe poverty has increased over years of closure and because of travel restrictions,” Gisha, an Israeli nongovermental organization that monitors the siege, noted in a recent factsheet.

More than 70 percent of the Gaza population receives some form of humanitarian aid, compared with one third in the year 2000.

For imports of raw materials and many basic goods, Gaza’s economy remains heavily dependent on underground tunnels to Egypt, as I saw myself during my visit, and as Gisha also documents.

Since the Egyptian military coup on 3 July, the Egyptian army, which works closely with Israel, has been instensifying its effort to destroy the tunnels.

Exports crushed

Israel continues to crush Gaza’s export industries. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Israel has allowed a total of 94 trucks out of Gaza in 2013 – that’s about a dozen a month from a population of almost 1.7 million people. Insignificant.

By contrast, in 2007, the year before the siege began to bite, more than 5,000 trucks were allowed out of Gaza. In 2001 it was 15,000.

Cynical propaganda

The Israeli army’s cynical propaganda is supposed to distract people from the fact that the vast majority of people in Gaza live in deep poverty and a very precarious economic situation, without electricity for 8-12 hours per day, and depend on humanitarian aid, due to Israel.

Gaza’s per capita annual GDP is just over $1,000 dollars. Compare that with $32,800 for Israel.

The lesson: learn the facts and don’t be taken in by Israeli army fabrications.

With thanks to Twitter user @sallyidwedar who initially spotted “IDF” fakery, and Omar Ghraieb for answering my queries about Gaza’s supermarkets.

Written FOR

WHO IS FUNDING THE N G O MONITOR AND WHERE ARE THOSE FUNDS GOING?

 Founded to monitor the funding of Human Rights and pro Palestinian advocacy groups, N G O Monitor is now being monitored itself.
*
101130-ngo-monitor (1)
**
NGO Monitor, which is itself funded among others by a US foundation that finances Israeli propaganda depicting Africans as monkeys, does not provide any evidence that the groups have done anything improper. It appears simply to object to any organizations that monitor Israeli abuses or disagree with its extreme anti-Palestinian policies existing.
*

In 2010, NGO Monitor, along with The Jerusalem Post was behind a campaign to smear The Electronic Intifada over funding received from the Dutch foundation ICCO, which The Electronic Intifada debunked in a detailed response at the time.

*

NGO Monitor stonewalls on use of tax-exempt funds to pay Gerald Steinberg’s legal costs in frivolous EU lawsuit

Submitted by Ali Abunimah
*

UK Ambassador to Israel Matthew Gould, NGO Monitor’s Gerald Steinberg, UK Foreign Office minister Alistair Burt, Jonathan Rynhold and Ruth Cohen at Bar-Ilan University, 10 January 2012 (source).

 (Yoni Reif / UK in Israel)

*

NGO Monitor, the far-right Israeli anti-Palestinian advocacy group that poses as a transparency watchdog, is stonewalling about whether it is using tax-exempt funds raised in the US and UK to pay off legal costs awarded against its director Gerald Steinberg in afailed, frivolous lawsuit against the European Union.

On 2 January, The Electronic Intifada wrote to Steinberg asking, “In the interests of transparency can you categorically state whether any funds raised via REPORT UK or REPORT in the US will be used toward the legal costs awarded against you in the [European Court of Justice] judgment?”

REPORT UK and REPORT (formerly American Friends of NGO Monitor) are respectively non-profit organizations established in the UK and US under charity laws in each country to raise and channel tax-exempt donations to NGO Monitor.

A reply today from an NGO Monitor email account ignored the question entirely, and simply stated, “Here is a link to our report on Dutch government NGO funding, which we thought would be of interest to you.”

The link provided goes to a completely irrelevant page on the NGO Monitor website which summarizes its various grievances against Palestinian and other human rights organizations which NGO Monitor alleges have received Dutch government funding.

NGO Monitor, which is itself funded among others by a US foundation that finances Israeli propaganda depicting Africans as monkeys, does not provide any evidence that the groups have done anything improper. It appears simply to object to any organizations that monitor Israeli abuses or disagree with its extreme anti-Palestinian policies existing.

In 2010, NGO Monitor, along with The Jerusalem Post was behind a campaign to smear The Electronic Intifada over funding received from the Dutch foundation ICCO, which The Electronic Intifada debunked in a detailed response at the time.

Human Rights Watch director raises questions about use of funds

The issue of how NGO Monitor is using charity funds was raised in a 2 January tweet by Kenneth Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch, who asked, whether “Israel defender” NGO Monitor was “deceptively raising tax-exempt funds to pay costs imposed on founder for frivolous suit?”

Is Israel defender @ngomonitor deceptively raising tax-exempt funds to pay costs imposed on founder for frivolous suit?trib.al/JGA6vtZ

Human Rights Watch has also been a frequent target of NGO Monitor smear campaigns. Roth linked to a 1 January post on the personal blog of Brian Whitaker, former Middle East Editor of The Guardian:

A vociferous campaigner against NGOs that criticise Israel is appealing for money following a disastrous legal action in the European Court of Justice. His supporters in Britain are being urged to make donations through a registered charity – in effect, with a subsidy from taxpayers.

Whitaker summarized Steinberg’s legal woes:

In 2008, Steinberg (who according to court documents is a UK citizen) wrote to the European Commission requesting “access to a series of documents relating to funding decisions for grants to Israeli and Palestinian NGOs under the ‘Partnership for Peace’ (PfP) programme and the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR).”

He was eventually granted partial access to the documents, with redactions. The European Commission claimed it was legally entitled to withhold some of the information on grounds of public interest, protection of individuals’ privacy and protection of the commercial interests of third parties.

Dissatisfied with this, in 2010 Steinberg began a legal action against the European Commission to force full disclosure (application document here). In remarks to the press at the time, he accused the EU of a lack of transparency in its funding of NGOs, many of which he said were “demonising” Israel.

At the end of November, the European Court of Justice threw out Steinberg’s case without an oral hearing. It ruled that his claim was “in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly lacking any foundation in law.”

The court accepted that the European Commission had valid reasons for withholding some of the information. In its ruling, the court said:  

Refusal of access to the blanked out passages of the requested documents is, in essence, based on the apprehension that the detailed information on the projects in question which they contain could be used to exert pressure on the persons concerned, which may range from the publication of newspaper or internet articles to hate-mail campaigns and even threats to their physical or moral integrity, and thus disturb public security.

It added that Steinberg had not “put forward the slightest argument to show that the Commission made a manifest error of assessment in finding that there was a high risk that the activities of the NGOs in question would attract hostile attention which could result in threats to the moral and/or physical integrity of the various persons concerned and thus disturb public security, with the result that it was necessary to blank out certain detailed information on the projects in question in the requested documents”. 

The full text of the court’s ruling is here, and there is also an article about it on the +972 Magazine website. Steinberg was ordered to pay his own legal costs as well as those incurred by the European Commission.

Appeal for funds

Whitaker noticed that coincident with this financially disastrous court judgment, NGO Monitor put out a vague appeal for funds by email and on a website:

In an appeal for funds via the NGO Monitor website, Steinberg does not directly state that he lost the case or provide a link to the court’s ruling. Nor does he mention that he is personally liable for the costs. Instead, he portrays the affair as “a major embarrassment” for the EU:

“The Court’s ruling highlighted the EU’s secretive support for political advocacy NGOs, thus increasing pressure for the release of the classified documents. Although the Court allowed the EU to continue hiding its NGO decision-making, this public admission of non-transparency is a major embarrassment.

“Help NGO Monitor lead a major political and media effort to compel the EU to release the documents exposing how 600 million euros in taxpayer funds have been spent on radical anti-Israel NGOs.

“We need $50,000 to crack the EU/NGO wall of silence. Your gift by December 31, 2012 will enable us to achieve this goal.”

Whitaker is careful to state:

There is no suggestion that any of the $50,000 will be used to defray Steinberg’s legal costs. Apparently it will be used for “a major political and media effort” to crack the EU’s “wall of silence” – though given the failure of the court case that may well be money down the drain.

But NGO Monitor’s subsequent refusal to answer a straightforward question about how the funds will be used leaves the question hanging.

That lack of transparency for the group is, alas, nothing new.

 

 

Written FOR

LIES AND MISDEMEANORS OF ZIONISM

If murderous criminality is the modus operandi of Israel ‘s treatment of its Palestinian victims, lying is Israel’s shield against international condemnation.
*
*

Zionism is murder and lies
Israel’s recurrent massacres of Palestinians are largely made possible because no one in power has the courage to challenge Zionist lies
Khalid Amayreh
*

In addition to plain murder, Israel has been indulging in outright propaganda based on lies in the attempt to justify its genocidal killing spree in the Gaza Strip. In the final analysis, killing and lying go hand-in-hand.  

A few years ago I spoke with an Israeli army spokeswoman, asking her how Israel could claim that it didn’t deliberately target Palestinian civilians when thousands of them were being killed, maimed and mutilated, often beyond recognition. With characteristic prevarication, the young woman answered: “We kill them knowingly but not deliberately.”

I asked what the difference was since killing knowingly is killing deliberately. Facing my persistent questions, the army spokeswoman eventually told me she was not an expert on linguistic sophistry, and that as far as she was concerned, the Israeli occupation army didn’t have an established policy of targeting innocent Palestinians.

The truth of the matter is that Israel does have a long established policy of targeting innocent civilians, whether in Gaza or the West Bank or South Lebanon.

License to kill

Israeli spokespersons claim that civilians are killed inadvertently or by mistake, while others fall as “collateral damage.”

But mistakes happen once, twice or 10 times. When “mistakes” occur numerous times and on every day and in every round of war, it means “mistakes” are an established policy pursued consciously.

In 2006, the Israeli air force reportedly dropped 2-3 million cluster bomblets on southern Lebanon. This huge number of deadly time bombs is enough, at least theoretically, to kill 2-3 million Lebanese children. This is half a holocaust by Zionist standards. Does Israel expect humanity to be so naïve to believe that this intended genocide of Lebanese civilians was planned and executed by mistake?

In reality, Zionists consider the rest of humanity too sheepish or gullible to discover their lies. This is why the bulk of Zionist rabbis believe in Jewish supremacy. Take, for example, Ovadia Yosef, the religious mentor of the Haredi Shas Party.

Two years ago, Yosef was quoted as saying during a Sabbath homily that Gentiles (non-Jews) are effectively donkeys that God created solely in order to serve Jews.

Yosef is not a demented or marginal rabbi. He is a former chief rabbi of Israel and has hundreds of thousands of loyal followers. Moreover, his party is a kingmaker within the Israeli political arena.

Reversing the truth

If murderous criminality is the modus operandi of Israel ‘s treatment of its Palestinian victims, lying is Israel’s shield against international condemnation.

Israel benefits from a huge network of Zionist-owned or Zionist-influenced media, extending from Sydney to California. These  mouthpieces of Zionist lies have a premier function to perform as far as Israel is concerned: to turn big lies into virtual truths glorified by thousands.

This week, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, a habitual and pathological liar, asked a German official the following: What would Germany do if its capital was hit with wave after wave of rockets?

Of course, the German minister didn’t have the courage to tell Netanyahu that Israel is founded on a pre-existing country, that its founders, including Zionist terrorists, destroyed Palestinian homes, obliterated Palestinian villages, murdered Palestinian children and expelled hundreds of thousands with no chance of return. This is the reason Palestinians fire rockets on Israeli towns and settlements.

Indeed, even if the German minister had the rectitude to challenge Netanyahu, he probably wouldn’t dare say what should be said lest he lose his job and be ejected from his party, or worse.

In truth, Zionist lies have a beginning but have no end. Zionists claim they didn’t expel the bulk of the Palestinian people from their ancestral homeland when Israel was established in 1948.

Listening to these obscene lies, a stranger who knows nothing about the conflict would probably think that the Palestinians left their homes because they got so bored that they needed an opportunity for recreational activities outside Palestine.

The Zionists also claim that they are only responding to Palestinian provocations, namely the firing of projectiles on Israeli towns and settlements.

Israeli spokespersons even dramatise these lies by asking Westerners how would they feel and react if their citizens were showered with thousands of rockets.

The truth, which much of the international media, including agenda setters such as CNN, the BBC, CBS along with The New York Times, The Washington Post, and even Le Monde, ignore is that these inaccurate projectiles are nearly innocuous and are absolutely no match for Israel’s state-of-the-art technology of death, such as F-15 and F-16 jets, Apache helicopters, unmanned predator drones, and laser-guided missiles fired from high altitudes on poor people’s homes, causing massacres and widespread destruction.

The world needs to know

The world needs to know the truth and stop being at the mercy of Zionist lies. So-called Palestinian missiles are the poor man’s weapon in the face of America and Israel’s most advanced arsenal.

Indeed, were these Palestinian rockets “real weapons,” they would enable Palestinians to protect their children who are slaughtered by the dozen per day. Indeed, a single bombing raid by an Israeli war plane, such as an F-15 or F-16, has more firepower and can inflict more damage and death than a thousand projectiles of the type fired from Gaza on Israel.

This is not propaganda. This is truth that is evident from the latest round of violence in Gaza. The Palestinians fired as many as 1100 “rockets” on Israel, leaving five Israelis dead and a few others injured.

In comparison, as many as 150 Palestinians were killed in little over a week, 90 per cent of them innocent civilians, including more than 30 babies and toddlers, with 1200 others — also mostly civilians — injured, many of them seriously. This is not to mention the destruction inflicted on the already bombed-out Gaza.

The Palestinians fire these projectiles because this is all they have to defend themselves and their children against a fascist enemy that is armed to the teeth and has the US government and Congress tightly under control.

The use of these so-called “missiles” is an expression of desperation and weakness on the Palestinians’ part. But it is also an expression of Palestinian determination to gain liberty from an evil entity that only understands the language of force.

Finally, the world should understand and internalise the historical fact that it was these terrorist thugs from Eastern Europe, such as Netanyahu and Barak, who invaded Palestine, terrorising and banishing its native people to the four winds. It is paramount to remember this fact everytime Israel claims it is only responding to Palestinian violence.

Besides, we should also understand what the American-English poet Auden said.

“I and the public know,

What all school children learn,

Those to whom evil is done,

Do evil in return”

IT’S OFFICIAL, THERE IS NO OCCUPATION OF PALESTINE (ACCORDING TO THE BBC)

How the BBC denies Israel’s occupation

Amena Saleem*

 

No occupation to see here, according to the BBC.

*

There is international law, and there is the world as Israel and the BBC see it. And if Israel claims the whole of Jerusalem as its territory, contrary to international law, then it is not for the BBC to dispute this — or so its coverage would have us believe.

In its country profile for Israel, the BBC’s website lists statistics including Israel’s size in square meters, its major languages and its main exports. Shying away from giving a capital, as it does for all other recognized countries featured in such profiles, the BBC’s online editors have opted instead to give Israel a “seat of government” (“Israel profile,” 11 September 2012).

And this seat of government, according to the BBC, is Jerusalem. All of it. This is despite the fact that international law is quite clear that East Jerusalem is Palestinian territory, illegally occupied and annexed by Israel. Israel, however, refuses to accept UN resolutions on Jerusalem and continues to claim it all, undivided, as its own. The BBC, it would appear, is backing Israel up on this.

This is how Israel’s claim to Jerusalem is presented on the BBC website: “Israel profile. Seat of government: Jerusalem, though most foreign embassies are in Tel Aviv.”

The Israeli government does not recognize Tel Aviv as Israel’s capital, and so the BBC obligingly does not give a capital for Israel in its country profile — noting, instead, in its specially-created “seat of government” category, that “most foreign embassies are in Tel Aviv.”

The website also runs a profile for “Palestinian territories” and this gives an “intended seat of government.” Under this category, BBC editors have written “Intended seat of government: East Jerusalem. Ramallah serves as administrative capital” (“Palestinian territories profile,” 31 August 2012).

Concealing the truth

There are no difficulties here for the BBC in making a distinction between East and West Jerusalem. Rather, the difficulty for the BBC lies in admitting that Israel occupies the “Palestinian territories.” Nowhere in the profile is the occupation mentioned, and the land is not referred to as the “occupied Palestinian Territories” — the wording used by the United Nations — but simply as Palestinian territories. And of course there is nothing to inform the reader of the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Jerusalem from 1947 onwards, and how the division of the city came about.

The UK-based Palestine Solidarity Campaign challenged the supposedly impartial BBC on its assertion that the whole of Jerusalem is Israeli territory, a falsehood which Israel is keen to propagate in its attempts to create facts on the ground.

The PSC pointed out over a series of email correspondences since July that it would be simple enough for the BBC to add the word “West” to let its audience know that Israel’s seat of government is not in Jerusalem, but in the western half of a divided city. This would also guarantee 100 percent accuracy, surely a priority for a major news organization.

Richard Hutt, complaints director at the BBC, sent a detailed email on 18 September to say: “It seems to me that the current content on the page for Israel acknowledges the Israeli view, but contextualizes it so that it is clear to readers that this is disputed.”

With no hint of irony, Hutt goes on to say, about a page that is subtitled “Facts”: “Although more information would have been helpful, I do not believe that the content would mislead readers as to the basic facts.”

Laughable

Hutt’s defense of the BBC position becomes laughable as he defies logical argument in his attempts to defend inaccuracy in the BBC’s news pages.

Explaining why the BBC refers to “Jerusalem” on the “Israel” profile and “East Jerusalem” on the “Palestinian territories” profile, he says: “I do not think that ‘due’ impartiality in this context would require that the language for one page mirror that of the other.”

Hutt then says he does not think readers would make the assumption that the whole of Jerusalem is Israeli territory from the BBC’s reference to the whole of Jerusalem being Israel’s seat of government.

He argues: “The only grounds I can see for reaching such a conclusion are that the content for the [Palestinian territories] page lists ‘East Jerusalem,’ whereas the reference to Jerusalem on the Israel page is not similarly qualified.”

That is the exact reason given by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign to the BBC in its request for the qualifier “West” to be added to “Jerusalem” on the Israel page. Bizarrely, Hutt appears to acknowledge that argument, before concluding that no alteration will be forthcoming.

Defending criminality

Israel’s claim to an undivided Jerusalem is not the only area where BBC terminology privileges Israeli occupation and colonization.

However, just as BBC reporting consistently fails to mention the fact of Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land, it is similarly coy about spelling out the criminality of its settlement building, despite UN Security Council Resolution 446’s clear definition of settlements as a “serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East.”

The Palestine Solidarity Campaign has not been alone in asking the BBC why, without fail, in all its online reports concerning settlements, as well as in television and radio broadcasts, it uses this line: “The settlements are considered illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this” (“Israel anger at S Africa ‘Occupied Territories’ labels,” 22 August 2012).

The line will be found buried at the end, or near the end, of any article about settlements and provides scant context for the preceding content.

What is interesting is the need the BBC feels to use this line. Settlements are not stated categorically as being illegal under international law, simply “considered” to be, and a disclaimer is added — “Israel disputes this” — as though international law is not the last word on what is legal for nations.

Tarik Kafala, the Middle East editor of BBC Online, replied to a Palestinian living in the UK, who had emailed him to question the use of this line. Kafala’s reply, sent in October 2011 and seen by this writer, explains the BBC’s reasoning for its caution, erring on the side of Israel.

“The contention that settlements are illegal … is hugely well founded in international law, but an opinion,” Kafala writes.

And then this: “We also feel that to simply state that the settlements are illegal under international law is potentially misleading. An untutored reader might wonder why, if Israel is so flagrantly breaking the law, such a criminal state is still a member of the UN, a favored ally of the US, a major trading partner of the EU and so on.”

It’s an astounding assertion from a senior BBC editor. It also lays bare the BBC’s policy on reporting on Israel and its daily violations of UN resolutions, Geneva conventions andInternational Court of Justice rulings. There is a softening, a tempering of the reality, if it is even reported at all, which is rare. An intellectual analysis for the BBC audience of why a “criminal state is still a member of the UN, a favored ally of the US, a major trading partner of the EU” is out of the question.

Such an analysis would require honesty about the political situation, not just in Palestine and Israel, but in the Middle East as a whole, and Kafala’s incredible revelation shows that the BBC is not capable of such honesty.

The resultant dishonesty, and the attempt to keep the truth about Israel’s illegal actions from its audiences, is spread across the whole of BBC programming, from news right through to entertainment.

Not interested in reality

An activist with Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods spent a year in correspondence with the BBC over “Top Gear Middle East Special,” an entertainment program for motoring enthusiasts broadcast on BBC Two in December 2010. It traced a trio well-known to UK TV audiences traveling from Baghdad to Bethlehem in a convertible sports car.

As presenters James May, Jeremy Clarkson and Richard Hammond drove through Syria, viewers were given the following information about the occupied Syrian Golan Heights: “For political reasons, this was Syria and is now Israel.”

In reality, the Golan Heights is Syrian territory, illegally occupied and annexed by Israel. UN Security Council Resolution 242 makes this clear and additionally calls for the withdrawal of Israel from the Golan Heights, the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza.

But the BBC isn’t interested in reality when it comes to Israel. What appears to be more important for this publicly-funded UK broadcaster is to shield Israel from criticism of its illegal actions by hiding the truth of those actions from its audiences. In this instance, the BBC was prepared to broadcast an outright lie about the status of the Golan Heights.

Wiped off the map

And to hide the existence of the Palestinian West Bank — where Bethlehem is located — the program used maps which named only Israel. Palestinian land was effectively wiped off the map by the BBC. This mirrors the maps used in Israeli schoolbooks and Israeli tourism guides, which show all the land which was once historically Palestine as being “Israel.” Gaza and the West Bank are not named.

To complete the deception, at no point during the drive to Bethlehem or on arrival did the presenters use the words “West Bank” or “Occupied Palestinian Territories.”

Instead, viewers were told that the “final border crossing” before arriving in Bethlehem would be from Jordan into Israel. The crossing from Israel into the West Bank, which has to be made in order to reach Bethlehem, was ignored by the BBC, and viewers were left to think that the city is in Israel. There was no indication of the existence of Palestinian land.

It is a narrative that would thrill the Israeli government. To justify its broadcast, the BBC’s Editorial Standards Committee ruled, in December 2011, that, because Top Gear is an entertainment program, there was no requirement to “make the location of Bethlehem explicit.” Why the location of Bethlehem had to remain hidden when the location of every other city visited by the presenters was marked clearly on the maps they used constantly throughout the program was not explained.

Nor was there any explanation for not marking the West Bank on any maps. Instead, the committee said “contrasting shading” used on the maps was sufficient to show the area as being separate from Israel. Why not just name it?

Finally, dealing with the Golan Heights reference, the committee said that it did not believe “the description used in the program was materially inaccurate or misleading, bearing in mind that the requirement [in the BBC’s editorial guidelines] is for due accuracy.”

Due accuracy, according to the guidelines, is accuracy that is “adequate and appropriate to the output.” Because Top Gear is an entertainment program, the level of accuracy displayed was, according to the committee, totally adequate. In other words, it was happy with the BBC broadcasting a falsehood.

Why, when it comes to Israel, can’t the BBC call a spade a spade? Why do the words “West Bank” and “Occupied Palestinian Territories” stick in the throats of BBC presenters, unable to see the light of day even when the presenters in question are standing on that very land? Why, if these are genuine mistakes, can’t the BBC correct them, put “West” in front of “Jerusalem” and admit that Israel illegally occupies the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights?

Rectifying these errors would be far simpler than concocting the tortuous and absurd explanations BBC employees spend so much time on to justify their misleading and biased output. But, then again, when it comes to the BBC and Israel, nothing is rational. 

*Amena Saleem is active with the Palestine Solidarity Campaign in the UK and keeps a close eye on the media’s coverage of Palestine as part of her brief. She has twice driven on convoys to Gaza for PSC. More information on PSC is available atwww.palestinecampaign.org.

 

Written FOR

“BLOOD LIBEL AGAINST ISRAEL MUST STOP”

  Or…. Israel’s lies and brutal occupation must be stopped!
*
“120 countries heard blood libel against Israel in Tehran today, and kept quiet,” Netanyahu said. “This silence must stop and for this reason I will go to the UN to tell the truth about the terror regime of Iran which poses the greatest threat to world peace.”
*
BUT, BUT, BUT …..
*

In his speech, Khamenei denounced what he said was Israel’s brutal suppression of Palestinian rights.

“Even now after 65 years the same kind of crimes marks the treatment of Palestinians remaining in the occupied territories by the ferocious Zionist wolves,” Khamenei was quoted by the Fars news agency as saying, adding that Israel commits “new crimes one after the other and create new crises for the region.”

The Supreme Leader added that the “Zionist regime, which has carried out assassinations and caused conflicts and crimes for decades by waging disastrous wars, killing people, occupying Arab territories and organizing state terror in the region and in the world, labels the Palestinian people as ‘terrorists,’ the people who have stood up to fight for their rights.”

*

Libel?  Sounds pretty true to me.
*

Netanyahu to deliver speech on Iran at UN General Assembly

PM to go to New York next month for 3-day visit; Netanyahu: I will go to the UN to tell the truth about the terror regime of Iran.

By Barak Ravid
*
N Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu - AP - Sept. 21, 2012.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, right, speaks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during the 66th session of the United Nations General Assembly, September 21, 2011. 
Photo by AP
*

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will give a speech about the threat of Iran’s nuclear program in an address to the United Nations General Assembly in New York next month, the prime minister’s office said Thursday.

According to the statement, Netanyahu will arrive in New York on September 27 for a three-day visit and deliver his speech that same day, during a special gathering in which various state leaders will also speak.

Thus far, a meeting between Netanyahu and U.S. President Barack Obama, who will also take part in the General Assembly event, has not been scheduled, but officials believe such a meeting will be set in the coming weeks.

Netanyahu on Thursday condemned a speech by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who launched a venomous attack against Israel in a speech inaugurating the Non-Aligned Movement conference on Thursday.

“120 countries heard blood libel against Israel in Tehran today, and kept quiet,” Netanyahu said. “This silence must stop and for this reason I will go to the UN to tell the truth about the terror regime of Iran which poses the greatest threat to world peace.”

In his speech, Khamenei denounced what he said was Israel’s brutal suppression of Palestinian rights.

“Even now after 65 years the same kind of crimes marks the treatment of Palestinians remaining in the occupied territories by the ferocious Zionist wolves,” Khamenei was quoted by the Fars news agency as saying, adding that Israel commits “new crimes one after the other and create new crises for the region.”

The Supreme Leader added that the “Zionist regime, which has carried out assassinations and caused conflicts and crimes for decades by waging disastrous wars, killing people, occupying Arab territories and organizing state terror in the region and in the world, labels the Palestinian people as ‘terrorists,’ the people who have stood up to fight for their rights.”

Written FOR

U.S.: ISRAELI PROBE INTO RACHEL CORRIE’S MURDER WAS BOGUS

Israel’s investigation into the death of American activist Rachel Corrie was not satisfactory, and wasn’t as thorough, credible or transparent as it should have been, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro told the Corrie family this week.
 *

U.S.: Israeli probe into Rachel Corrie’s death wasn’t ‘credible’

U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro tells Corrie family that Israel’s investigation into their daughter’s death was unsatisfactory; family is in Israel awaiting verdict in civil suit against Israeli government.

By Amira Hass
Craig and Cindy Corrie in Washington in 2003, with photographs of their daughter, Rachel.
Craig and Cindy Corrie in Washington in 2003, with photographs of their daughter, Rachel.   Photo by AP
*

Israel’s investigation into the death of American activist Rachel Corrie was not satisfactory, and wasn’t as thorough, credible or transparent as it should have been, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro told the Corrie family this week.

The bereaved family − parents Craig and Cindy, and sister Sarah − are in Israel awaiting the verdict in the civil suit they had filed two years ago against the State of Israel over their daughter’s death. The ruling by the Haifa District Court is expected on Tuesday.

The U.S. government’s position is not new to the Corries, but their attorneys said that hearing it only a few days before the verdict was “important and encouraging,” because it signals to the Corrie family that the U.S. government will continue to demand a full accounting from Israel about their daughter’s killing, regardless of how Judge Oded Gershon rules.

 In 2002 Rachel Corrie joined a group of International Solidarity Movement activists who had been living among Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, in areas that were subject to Israel Defense Forces incursions and attacks.

In Rafah, where Corrie spent the last few weeks of her life, the activists wanted to demonstrate against the systematic destruction of Palestinian homes for what the IDF called operational purposes.

On the afternoon of March 16, 2003, an IDF Caterpillar bulldozer crushed Corrie to death, when she and her friends were standing in front of it to prevent what they believed was the planned demolition of two occupied homes.

The IDF claimed that Corrie’s death was an accident, and that the driver of the bulldozer never saw her.

In 2005, after the military prosecutor closed the file, the family filed a civil suit against the Israeli government, accusing it of being responsible for Corrie’s death and for not conducting a full and credible investigation. The state responded that the IDF bulldozer driver had never seen Corrie, that she should not have been in a battle zone, and that the Military Police investigation had not found any violations of the law.

In May 2011, when Shapiro was questioned by the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee before his appointment as ambassador to Israel, he repeated the administration’s position regarding the Israeli investigation.

Sen. John Kerry asked Shapiro what steps the embassy, under his administration, would take that would be in keeping with the remarks of State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley. On June 30, 2010 Crowley had said, “We continue to stress to the government of Israel at the highest levels, to continue a thorough, transparent and credible investigation of the circumstances concerning [Corrie’s] death.”

Shapiro responded: “For seven years, we have pressed the government of Israel at the highest levels to conduct a thorough, transparent and credible investigation of the circumstances of her death. The government of Israel has responded that it considers this case closed and does not plan on reinvestigating the incident.”

Shapiro then noted that the case had gone to court in March 2010 and said, “We hope this venue will finally provide [the Corries] with the answers they seek. We will continue to work with and assist the Corrie family as appropriate.”

 

Written FOR

DESPITE THE COMA, ARIEL SHARON’S LIES CONTINUE TO HAUNT US

*
In 2002 the World Zionist Organization hired an architect to design and expand the neighborhood. In 2003, Sharon had undertaken, as part of the “road map” peace plan, to demolish Givat Sal’it and 25 other outposts built after March 2001. Only three of those outposts have been torn down since then.
*

Defense Ministry hires architect to resume construction of illegal West Bank outpost

Givat Sal’it is one of 26 communities the Sharon government had promised the United States it would tear down nearly 10 years ago.

By Chaim Levinson
The Beit El neighborhood of Ulpana.
The Beit El neighborhood of Ulpana. 

The government is stepping up construction in the West Bank settlements and acting to legitimize at least one illegal outpost it has pledged to demolish, Haaretz has learned.

The Defense Ministry recently contracted an architect to resume construction of the Givat Sal’it outpost in the Jordan Valley, in what is seen as a step toward legitimizing the outpost. Givat Sal’it is one of 26 communities the Sharon government had promised the United States it would tear down nearly 10 years ago.

The resumption of construction seems to be part of a current trend in settlements. The Defense Ministry’s Civil Administration is due this week to discuss advancing plans for building 475 housing units in the West Bank settlements of Yakir, Oranit and Etz Efraim. This is in addition to the housing units approved in settlements in exchange for the quiet evacuation of the illegally-built Ulpana neighborhood in Beit El.

Givat Sal’it was built in September 2001 near the Mehola settlement, in memory of Sal’it Shitreet who was shot to death by Islamic Jihad gunmen. Some 20 families live in it now.

Step toward legitimacy

In 2002 the World Zionist Organization hired an architect to design and expand the neighborhood. In 2003, Sharon had undertaken, as part of the “road map” peace plan, to demolish Givat Sal’it and 25 other outposts built after March 2001. Only three of those outposts have been torn down since then.

In 2004, the WZO retracted the deal with the architect to expand Givat Sal’it. That same year, a report on settlement construction commissioned by then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon found that Givat Sal’it is located on state land, but that the road to it and its fence are on private Palestinian land.

In the early days of Netanyahu’s current government, Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in a statement that it was necessary to keep Sharon’s commitment to tear down the 26 outposts. But defense officials say the Obama administration has lost interest in these commitments and as far as the U.S. president is concerned, there is no difference between an outpost and a settlement.

Two weeks ago, the Defense Ministry, acting in coordination with the WZO, hired an architect to resume the Givat Sal’it expansion plans. David Elhayani, head of the Jordan Valley regional council, told Haaretz that “10 years after the murder it’s time to legitimize the status of the outposts that were authorized by the government. Sal’it is on state land and I hope we start building there in a year’s time.”

Peace Now director general Yariv Oppenheimer said that “the government’s priorities remain loyal only to the settlements. Not to public housing, not to assistance to the homeless, only to expanding and legitimizing outposts and settlements in the territories.”

Source

SLANDERING THE ANTI APARTHEID MOVEMENT

Or …. The Protocols of Present Day zionism
*
*
I’ve written before about the infamous group in Israel calling themselves the NGO Monitor. As far as they are concerned, any group, specifically NGO’s, that might be to the left of Meyer Kahane should be monitored for the continued ‘safety’ of the State of Israel. That leaves just about everyone ‘suspect’ …
*
In an OpEd piece at Ynet, their President and founder, Gerald Steinberg, offers his slanderous views on those involved in the anti apartheid struggle in Israel. Normally I wouldn’t give  platform to the likes of a Steinberg, but I feel it is important for my readers to see first hand the dangerous mentalities we are up against here on a daily basis.
*
Here goes…
*
Slandering the Jewish state

Op-ed: Instead of criticizing ‘Israeli apartheid,’ rights group should focus on Syria, Saudi Arabia*

Over the past few weeks “Israeli apartheid week” events have occurred at a number of campuses throughout North America and Europe. This year’s timing is especially unfortunate: while this political warfare, accompanied by BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) campaign is happening, the Syrian regime is massacring its own people.
*
In light of this, it is especially sad that people who call themselves human rights activists waste their time and energy attacking Israel. It is clear that the campaign explicitly targets the existence of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. In the words of Professor Irwin Cotler, former Canadian attorney general, “Let there be no mistake about it: to indict Israel as an Apartheid State is prologue and justification for the dismantling of the Jewish State, for the criminalization of its supporters, and for the consequential silencing of their speech.”

This campaign immorally exploits the suffering of the real victims of apartheid and racism, and transforms a complex political dispute between the Palestinians and Israel into a racial conflict. The comparison was categorically rejected and denounced by Judge Richard Goldstone in The New York Times. Goldstone, who is a former justice of the South African Constitutional Court, wrote that, “In Israel, there is no apartheid. Nothing there comes close to the definition of apartheid under the 1998 Rome Statute…”

Goldstone added that “while ‘apartheid’ can have broader meaning, its use is meant to evoke the situation in pre-1994 South Africa. It is an unfair and inaccurate slander against Israel, calculated to retard rather than advance peace negotiations.”

Many others who had experienced the real apartheid expressed similar views. Benjamin Pogrund, who was a journalist in South Africa, wrote, “Use of the apartheid label is at best ignorant and naive and at worst cynical and manipulative.”


Infinite hypocrisy

This cynicism is especially prominent now that Assad’s regime is mercilessly massacring its own people. During the past month, hundreds of people were murdered just in the city of Homs. But in Syria, where an Alawite minority has been oppressing the Sunni majority for decades, the regime – like other dictatorships – was immune to criticism until the outbreak of brutal violence in the recent months, especially from groups claiming to promote human rights.

Does a state in which a small minority violently oppresses the majority not deserve a week (in Israel’s case, actually a month) of attention focused on its crimes? And what about Saudi Arabia, which bans members of other religions from entering parts of the country, and where women are not allowed to drive or leave their house without a family member accompanying them? Where is “Saudi discrimination week”? And we haven’t even mentioned the situation of Christians in Israel’s neighbors, in Gaza and in the West bank. The examples are infinite, as is the hypocrisy.

In the face of these blatant double standards, the power of the “apartheid” campaign is derived from resources that are available in both political and financial forms. Politically, as noted, this divisive agenda is supported by the Arab and Islamic blocs in the United Nations and associated institutions, with active support from Russia and China. They firmly reject any attempt to condemn real human rights violations, and use anti-Israel campaigns to divert criticism.

Financially, the availability of significant European government funding allows ostensible human rights organizations to actively promote the “apartheid” libel. At the same time, these organizations are embarrassingly silent when faced with human rights violations in the Muslim-Arab world in general and in Syria specifically. At most, they issue belated and half-hearted condemnations.

Finally, the crude exploitation of the “apartheid” libel and the accompanying BDS campaigns are the antithesis of the mutual acceptance required for peace, and serve the purposes of murderous dictatorships. As Judge Goldstone wrote, “The mutual recognition and protection of the human dignity of all people is indispensable to bringing an end to hatred and anger. The charge that Israel is an apartheid state is a false and malicious one that precludes, rather than promotes, peace and harmony.”


EIGHT MESSAGES TO THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY FROM ISRAEL

Timely messages for the Easter Season 😉
*
*
It is becoming a common occurrence in Israel to hear about Jews burning churches, spitting on Christian clerics, burning Christian Bibles and intimidating and harassing other Jews who believe in Jesus. Unfortunately this is almost unheard of from the Western media. If it was not for the internet this would be unknown to millions of people around the world.
Here I am presenting one example of the rampant discrimination and xenophobia against Christians that exists in the “Jewish state”. Please feel free to copy and post this video in other sites.
*
*
Yet…
*
The following is what the Israeli Ambassador to the US said just a week ago…. (is he dreaming?)
*

Israel is only Mideast state safe for Christians, envoy to U.S. says

In Wall Street Journal op-ed, Michael Oren compares what he calls the current repression of Christians in the Muslim world to the expulsion of Jews from Arab states.

Israel is the only country in the Middle East that is safe for Christians, Israel’s ambassador to the United States Michael Oren wrote in an op-ed column for the Wall Street Journal on Friday, comparing what he said was the suppression of Christian communities in Arab states to the twentieth-century expulsion of Jews from these nations.

In his article, Oren cited the continuing violence against Egypt’s Coptic Christians, the burning of Iraqi churches, a Saudi ban on Christian worship and the desecration of the Church of the Nativity in the West Bank as instances indicating a threat to Christianity in the Muslim world, adding that conversion “to Christianity is a capital offense in Iran, where last month Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani was sentenced to death.”

The Israeli official went on to compare what he called a sweeping action against Christian communities in the Arab world to the expulsion of 800,000 “from Arab countries, mostly following the Six-Day War.”

Ultimately, Oren concludes, the only place in the Middle East where Christians aren’t endangered, but are actually flourishing, is in Israel.

“Since Israel’s founding in 1948, its Christian communities (including Russian and Greek Orthodox, Catholics, Armenians and Protestants) have expanded more than 1,000%,” he added.

Oren concluded the article, in which he cites the exodus of Palestinian Christians from the West Bank and Gaza over increased pressure by Islamist groups such as Hamas, by syaing that the “extinction of the Middle East’s Christian communities is an injustice of historic magnitude.”

“Yet Israel provides an example of how this trend can not only be prevented but reversed. With the respect and appreciation that they receive in the Jewish state, the Christians of Muslim countries could not only survive but thrive,” Oren wrote.


Source

*

And let’s not forget these attitudes…

*

*

Perhaps this Oren guy should take a daytrip to the illegal settlements  (including Jerusalem) to see the reality he seems ignorant of.

« Older entries