BEX ALERT ~~ FALSE FLAG ‘KIDNAPPING’ IN WEST BANK

Idiot boy in the land of idiots!

“His girlfriend broke up with him several days ago and there’s a possibility he’s doing it to provoke. I think he’s hiding somewhere and he’ll turn up somewhere in the end.”

Niv Asraf

Niv Asraf

Israeli missing in West Bank found in Kiryat Arba

22-year-old Niv Asraf and his soldier friend staged kidnapping, police says after Asraf is found with canned food and sleeping bag

After Israeli security forces searched the Hebron area for him for 10 hours, 22-year-old Niv Asraf from Be’er Sheva, who was feared kidnapped, was found alive in Kiryat Arba on Friday overnight. IDF Spokesman Moti Almoz said Asraf’s soldier friend fabricated the kidnapping.

Asraf was found in a wadi in Kiryat Arba with canned food and a sleeping bag, a Judea and Samaria Police spokesman said.

“The ‘missing man’ and his friends staged a kidnapping. We’ll investigate the reasons behind this and will handle this to the full extent of the law,” the spokesman said.

Israeli security forces were first alerted to Asraf’s disappearance when his friend called the police at 4:17 pm, saying he and Asraf were stranded with a flat tire on their way to pray at the Cave of the Patriarchs. The caller said Asraf went to find tools to replace the tire but never returned.

However, when the IDF arrived at the scene, troops found no flat tires in the vehicle and after other questions arose from the friend’s story, he was taken for questioning.

“At first the friend told us (Asraf) went in a particular direction, and then it turned out it was somewhere else, but it might not have been maliciously,” Almoz said.

The two stopped their vehicle near HaOkfim Junction on Highway 60 between Bayt Einun and Hebron.

Hundreds of policemen and soldiers from the IDF’s Judea and Samaria division were deployed to the area to search for Asraf, including Special Unit soldiers. The troops were searching houses and cars in Bayt Einun.

Forces were searching the area between Halhul north of Hebron and Bani Na’im south of Hebron. The IDF also launched drones and observation balloons into the air to for a bird’s eye view of the area.

The army closed roads around Bayt Einun on Highway 60 and Highway 35 as part of the search effort and declared the entire area a closed military zone.

A friend of Asraf told Ynet before he was found that “this isn’t the first time he’s gone missing.”

“His girlfriend broke up with him several days ago and there’s a possibility he’s doing it to provoke. I think he’s hiding somewhere and he’ll turn up somewhere in the end,” the friend added.

After Asraf was found, IDF troops returned to their routine activity, while the investigation into the incident was passed on to the police.

 

Maps and video at SOURCE

TODAY’S TOON ~~ #JeSuisPresidentObama

How the extreme Israeli right sees the US President

They fail to see the 30 Billion Dollar$ he'll be sending to Israel this year

They fail to see the 30 Billion Dollar$ he’ll be sending to Israel this year

Our local Psycho Gal adds the following … ‘Make Palestine pay for Obama’s policies on Iran’

 

Meanwhile, the ‘other’ psycho in our midst plans the following …

(be sure to click on link regarding his wife’s ‘liquid diet’)

*******Netanyahu to stage hunger 
*******strike against world peace

In a last ditch effort to block an impending nuclear deal between Western powers and Iran, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced today, April 1, he will immediately begin an open-ended hunger strike against world peace.

During his strike Netanyahu will only be eating fresh fruit. His wife Sara will join him, choosing a completely liquid diet.  The move is widely popular in Israel where a Channel 2 poll taken Monday shows Jewish Israelis are against world peace almost 6 to 1. An unnamed Florida-born Netanyahu confidant, who requested anonymity because he is not authorized to comment due to his history of generally fucking things up, explained the move, “He’s tried everything else, you have any other ideas?”

See the full report by Adam Horowitz HERE

BIBI’S LATEST BEX ALERT ~~ WORLD IS DEAF TO ISRAEL’S WHINES ABOUT IRAN

Prime Minister says looming nuclear deal amounts to rewarding Iran for its aggression in the region

The moderate and responsible countries in the region, especially Israel and also many other countries, will be the first to be hurt by this agreement.” 

Israel is moderate and responsible?

(See link at end of this post)

bibibomb (1)

Netanyahu: World Closing its Eyes to Iranian Aggression

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has once again waved the red flag regarding the deal currently in discussion with Iran over its nuclear program.

“The agreement being formulated in Lausanne sends a message that there is no price for aggression and on the contrary – that Iran’s aggression is to be rewarded,” the prime minister said in a statement at a ceremony honoring outstanding Prime Minister’s Office employees.

“The moderate and responsible countries in the region, especially Israel and also many other countries, will be the first to be hurt by this agreement,” he added.

Admonishing western powers for what he claimed amounted to willful blindness to Iran’s real intentions, he continued:

“One cannot understand that when forces supported by Iran continue to conquer more ground in Yemen, in Lausanne they are closing their eyes to this aggression,” he said, referring to Tehran’s backing of Shia Houthi rebels.

“But we are not closing our eyes and we will continue to act against every threat in every generation, certainly in this generation.”

It comes as the P5+1 talks with Iran over its nuclear program go down to the wire, with just a day to go until the latest deadline on March 31.

On Sunday, reports surfaced suggesting a provisional deal had been made with Iran, as all the negotiating teams sat for their first-ever joint session. Iran later denied those reports.

Earlier Sunday Netanyahu had claimed the deal under discussion was even worse than he had feared.

“The dangerous accord which is being negotiated in Lausanne confirms our concerns and even worse,” Netanyahu said in remarks at a meeting of his cabinet broadcast on public radio.

“Even as meetings proceed on this dangerous agreement, Iran’s proxies in Yemen are overrunning large sections of that country and are attempting to seize control of the strategic Bab-el-Mandeb straits which would affect thenaval balance and the global oil supply.

“After the Beirut-Damascus-Baghdad axis, Iran is carrying out a pincers movement in the south as well in order to take over and conquer the entire Middle East. The Iran-Lausanne-Yemen axis is very dangerous for humanity and needs to be stopped.”

Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon also was quick to react to the disputed reports of a deal later that day, warning such an agreement, if true, would merely embolden Iran to be more aggressive.

“Iran is receiving a reward,” Yaalon tweeted Sunday afternoon. “The West is letting Iran into the family of nations, through the front door. The Iranian appetite to export the revolution through terror will only grow.”

“A very bad deal could be signed in Switzerland with Iran, a country with a radical and out-of-control regime that succeeded in hoodwinking the entire western world,” he added.

“Iran uses subversive and murderous terror and is involved on the wrong side of every Middle Eastern conflict,” he continued, “and turning it into a nuclear threshold state as will happen after the agreement is signed could be no less than a tragedy for the moderate regimes in the Middle East and for the entire Western world.”

 

From BEX Press

*

Click on link to see just how moderate and responsible Israel is …

ISRAEL’S NUCLEAR BACKLASH

BIBI’S BEX ALERT

Full speech presented at end of this post

download

11 Lies Netanyahu Told

Congress on Iran

Getty Images / Lior Zaltzman

Getty Images / Lior Zaltzman

The long awaited for speech is now a part of the anus of history …. but the following points are the ones to be remembered according to Americans For Peace Now

11 Bogus Arguments Bibi Will Likely Be Making Against an Iran Deal

Prepare for Netanyahu’s Washington Speeches:
Listen for these 11 Bogus Arguments against an Iran Deal

Meir Dagan quoteOn March 3rd, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will address a joint session of Congress, where he is expected to make the case against a nuclear deal with Iran, at least a deal that could result from the current negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 (the U.S., France, Germany, the Russian Federation, the People’s Republic of China, and the United Kingdom).  During this visit to Washington, Netanyahu will make other speeches and find other occasions to speak to the media in which he will no doubt, make the same case.  In anticipation of these speeches and statements, it is important to “un-pack” and debunk the bogus arguments against an Iran deal that Netanyahu is most likely to be making.  The eleven most prominent of those arguments are examined here.  The full document can be printed/downloaded here.

—————————————————————————————-

Additional sanctions and credible threats of military action can secure a better deal with Iran than current negotiations.

  • Decades of U.S. sanctions targeting the Iranian regime failed to achieve the goal of either compelling that regime to give up its nuclear program or causing it to fall.  Likewise, years of U.S. sanctions targeting the Iranian people have failed to achieve the goal of mobilizing Iranians to either force their government to change course or to overthrow it and replace it with a more pro-West alternative.
  • In recent years, multilateral, international sanctions have contributed to convincing the Iranian government to come to the negotiating table and offer real compromises with respect to its nuclear program. More U.S. sanctions today are far more likely to result in Iran’s abandoning the negotiating table than to result in Iran suddenly becoming amenable to a purported “better” deal – i.e., one involving elements that no Iranian regime would ever accept.
  • In such a case, it would be the U.S., not Iran, that would likely be blamed for the collapse of talks, leading to an erosion of international consensus on Iran sanctions that undermines the existing sanctions regime without achieving tangible Iranian compromises in return.
  • In such a case, Iranian hardliners who oppose any compromise with the West would be strengthened, with new U.S. sanctions and the collapse of talks bolstering the argument that the U.S. and its allies are not truly interested in a deal, but want regime change.  In such circumstances, it is far more likely that Iranian leaders will conclude that the urgent development of Iranian nuclear weapons is a necessary deterrent against such attack.

 —————————————————————————————-

The only good deal with Iran is one that leaves Iran with zero enrichment capacity.

  • Zero enrichment – the demand that not a single centrifuge is left spinning in Iran – is neither an achievable nor a necessary goal of negotiations.
  • It’s not achievable because just as P5+1 negotiators must get a deal they can “sell” to their constituencies, Iranian negotiators must be able to sell a deal to their own constituencies as meeting their own red lines (most notably, sufficient capacity for legitimate domestic energy production and legitimate R&D purposes, preserving what Iran views as a sovereign right to enrich, and assuring that Iranian pride in the nation’s scientific advances is left intact).
  • It’s not necessary because assuming “zero enrichment” is genuinely shorthand for “the best possible guarantee that Iran’s nuclear program will remain peaceful,” this goal can be achieved through a nuclear agreement that includes strict limits on Iran’s enrichment capacity and stringent safeguards and transparency with respect to Iran’s nuclear facilities and materials.
  • Insisting on “zero enrichment” guarantees that such limits and safeguards are absent.  Demands for zero enrichment as a condition for a deal are tantamount to rejecting any agreed-upon, negotiated solution with Iran.  Alternatives offered by advocates of a zero-enrichment red-line consist of fantasy and wishful thinking (“more pressure and Iran’s government will give in or be overthrown) and war-mongering (“military action can remove the threat of a nuclear Iran”).  Both approaches would likely exacerbate, rather than curb, the Iranian nuclear threat.

—————————————————————————————-

Any deal with Iran is a bad deal, because the mullahs can’t be trusted.

  • A nuclear deal with Iran would be grounded in ongoing rigorous inspections and verification mechanisms – not trust.  It is those rigorous inspections and verification mechanisms that would ensure that Iran lived up to its end of a deal.
  • Should Iran interfere with those inspections and verification mechanisms, or should those inspections and verification mechanisms reveal Iranian malfeasance, the international community would know immediately and have ample opportunity to prepare its response.
  • Without an agreement, those rigorous inspections and verification mechanisms would be absent.  The international community, recognizing that Iran cannot be trusted, would be left to worry and try to come up with policies and actions based on incomplete information.
  • Even with an agreement in place, the U.S. and international community will doubtless prepare and maintain contingency plans to address the possibility that Iran will renege on the deal – including planning for military action.

—————————————————————————————-

It would be wrong to make any nuclear deal with Iran unless that deal also held Iran accountable for its support for terrorism and extremism, in the region and beyond.

  • Achieving and implementing an agreement acceptable both to the P5+1 and Iran will require that some sanctions imposed on Iran – sanctions imposed as a direct consequence of concerns about Iran’s nuclear program – be removed.
  • However, an Iran nuclear deal would not change U.S. policy or impact U.S. sanctions with respect to Iran’s support for terrorism.  U.S. anti-terrorism legislation is for the most part separate from Iran nuclear legislation; anti-terrorist provisions that apply to countries around the world would continue to apply equally to Iran, even with a nuclear deal in place.
  • A nuclear deal with Iran could, potentially, open the door for improved U.S.-Iran relations – relations – which could eventually lead to improvements in other areas of concern to the U.S., including concerns linked to Iran’s support for terrorist organizations.
  • Those seeking to derail Iran talks or scuttle a nuclear deal with demands related to other issues are sending a message that their true goal is not mitigating the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran, but regime change in Iran.  Such a message will likely strengthen hardliners, increasing the threat that Iran will indeed seek to acquire nuclear weapons and worsening Iranian behavior in the other spheres, including with respect to support for terrorism outside Iran’s borders.

—————————————————————————————-

It would be wrong to make any nuclear deal with Iran unless that deal also held Iran accountable for its terrible record with respect to human rights and civil liberties inside Iran.

  • An Iran nuclear deal would not change U.S. policy or impact U.S. sanctions with respect to Iran’s record on human rights abuses, democracy, or other non-nuclear-related matters.
  • By improving the conditions of Iranians overall, an Iran nuclear deal could strengthen domestic groups engaged in promoting human rights and civil liberties.  It could also strengthen Iranian political forces that are more open to change.  For these reasons, a nuclear deal is widely supported by human rights and democracy advocates within Iran.
  • The failure of Iran diplomacy – and what this failure would mean in terms of discrediting some of Iran’s more moderate political voices – could open the door to greater repression domestically.

—————————————————————————————-

A deal with Iran over its nuclear program will only strengthen and enrich an odious, extremist regime, and in doing so increase the threat of extremists everywhere.

  • The U.S. and its P5+1 partners are pursuing a nuclear agreement with Iran not as a gift to Iran, but because curtailing the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran is in the vital interests of the U.S. and the international community, including Israel.
  • A deal with Iran over its nuclear program would in no way imply U.S. approval for Iranian policies or acquiescence to Iranian bad behavior in any sphere.  A deal likewise would in no way limit the ability of the U.S. and the international community to criticize or pressure Iran – just like any other country.
  • Derailing talks or undermining a deal with Iran over its nuclear program will only strengthen those in Iran who believe that the West will not be satisfied with anything short of the overthrow of the current regime, and who view the militarization of Iran’s nuclear program as necessary to deter an attack.

—————————————————————————————-

One-year “breakout” time for Iran to become a nuclear state is way too short. If Iran decides to dash to get a bomb, it will already be too late.

  • “Breakout” time does NOT refer to the time required for Iran to become a nuclear-armed state.  It refers only to the time needed for Iran to produce enough weapons-grade uranium to fuel a single nuclear bomb.
  • To represent a threat as a nuclear-armed state, Iran would first have to produce sufficient weapons-grade uranium to fuel at least two bombs – one to test (to prove its nuclear capabilities) and the other to hold as a deterrent against retaliation. It would also have to build both bombs, build a working delivery system, and carry out a test.
  • An agreement would impede Iran’s ability to “dash” to become a nuclear-armed state by extending “breakout” time from the current 2-3 months to at least one year.  It would achieve this by prohibiting Iran from enriching uranium to a level (20%) at which it could be converted into weapons-grade uranium, and by imposing limits on the number and type of centrifuges Iran would be permitted to operate, as well as on the size of Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium.
  • An agreement would also impede any future Iranian nuclear weapons “dash” by extending the time required for Iran to build actual bombs and a delivery system. It would achieve this by imposing international oversight and inspections that would diminish, in an unprecedented way, Iran’s ability to pursue nuclear activities with potential military dimensions, even covertly.
  • Absent an agreement, there will be no limits on Iran’s ability to build up its stockpile of enriched uranium. Absent an agreement, the U.S. and international community will revert to the longstanding status quo in which they have extremely limited and often imperfect information about what is going on inside Iran’s nuclear program.
  • Should Iran renege on a nuclear deal and pursue weaponization, a one-year “breakout” time ensures that the U.S. and the international community would have ample time and opportunity to respond.

—————————————————————————————-

The real issue isn’t “breakout” but “sneak-out.”  It doesn’t matter how many limits or safeguards you put into place – Iran will cheat and we will wake up one day to find Iran armed with nuclear bombs. 

  • “Sneak-out” is a danger with or without an agreement.
  • An agreement will put into place inspection, oversight and verification mechanisms – with respect to facilities, equipment and supplies – that ensure that a “sneak-out” would be far more difficult for Iran to achieve and far more likely to be detected.
  • Without an agreement, these inspection, oversight and verification mechanisms will not be implemented, ensuring that any “sneak-out” effort would be far more likely to go undetected.

—————————————————————————————-

The current negotiations are leaving in place too many Iranian centrifuges.  The more centrifuges left spinning, the greater the threat Iran poses.

  • Viewed in isolation, the number of centrifuges Iran is allowed to operate under an agreement does not provide a clear measure of breakout time.  It thus fails to adequately calculate the threat Iran would pose should it renege on a nuclear deal and shift to a militarized nuclear program.
  • To truly measure this threat requires examining the number of centrifuges, the types of centrifuges, and the size of Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium under an agreement.
  • Consistent with the interim deal that gave birth to the current negotiations, Iran has already eliminated its stockpile of 20 percent enriched uranium gas – the feedstock required to produce weapons grade uranium.  By doing so, the immediate threat of Iranian “breakout” has been dramatically reduced by, in effect, emptying the cartoon bomb that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu displayed at the UN in 2014.
  • A nuclear deal with the P5+1 can be expected to significantly reduce and cap the number of centrifuges spinning in Iran.  A deal likewise can be expected to limit the type of centrifuges left spinning and to limit Iranian enrichment, such that Netanyahu’s cartoon bomb will not be refilled and such that weapons-grade uranium remains out-of-reach.
  • Without an agreement, the number of Iran’s centrifuges can be expected to grow, and the level at which uranium will be enriched can be expected to return to 20 percent, or go even higher.

—————————————————————————————-

A nuclear deal with Iran will leave Iran as a threat to the world and an existential threat to Israel, will sell out our allies in the Gulf, and will fuel a nuclear arms race in the region.

  • The prospect of Iran armed with nuclear weapons is indeed alarming, particularly to Israel, which exists in close proximity to Iran and which has over the years been the target of harsh threats from various Iranian political and religious figures.  It is also alarming to many countries in the Middle East, who see Iran as seeking regional dominance and meddling in their affairs.
  • Neither diplomacy nor military action can guarantee that Iran will not someday decide to pursue nuclear weapons. Iran long ago acquired the knowledge and expertise to do so.  International pressure and sanctions have impeded Iran’s nuclear program for years, but more importantly, leaders in Iran today have decided not to pursue an active nuclear weapons program.
  • A negotiated deal can bolster this decision, while further rolling back Iran’s nuclear capacity such that if Iran’s leaders someday have a change of heart, the U.S. and international community – including our friends and allies in the region – will have ample time and opportunity to take action.
  • A negotiated deal with Iran would not imply U.S. endorsement of Iranian bad behavior elsewhere in the region, nor would it imply that the U.S. was abandoning traditional allies in favor of warmer ties with Iran.
  • Rejecting a negotiated deal out-of-hand in favor of hardline demands for the complete eradication of Iran’s nuclear capacity is virtually guaranteed to have the oppose effect.  Making the complete elimination of any Iranian nuclear capacity the end goal of U.S. policy is tantamount to demanding that the U.S. go to war, and is likely to strengthen those in Iran who view the acquisition of nuclear weapons as necessary to deter such military action.  Such a policy would, in fact, be far more likely to fuel regional instability and an arms race than a negotiated deal would.

—————————————————————————————-

A deal that “sunsets” after 10 or 15 years is no good – it just means that Iran will wait and ready itself and then go nuclear the minute a deal ends.

  • Just as there is no possibility of a “zero enrichment” deal with Iran, there is no possibility of Iran agreeing to a “permanent” deal on its nuclear program.  Iran is in trouble right now because it has repeatedly violated the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), resulting in sanctions.  Negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program are grounded in the understanding that by demonstrating compliance with all of its NPT obligations, Iran will no longer be in violation of the NPT and Iran’s tenure in the international doghouse – at least with respect to its nuclear program – can come to a close (at least so long as Iran remains in compliance).
  •  An Iran nuclear agreement – whether its provisions are in place for 10 years, or 15 years, or however many years are agreed on – would dramatically mitigate the threat of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons. For the period of the deal, the agreement would dramatically curtail Iran’s nuclear program, extending breakout time from a couple of months to a year, making it much harder for Iran to shift course and making the path to weaponization far longer than it would be without an agreement.
  • At the time that an agreement sunsets (and different provisions would likely sunset at different times), Iran would still remain a member of the NPT and subject to the requirements of that treaty.  Iran would also remain bound by an Additional Protocol to the treaty, granting UN inspectors greater authority in monitoring Iran’s nuclear program.  Following a decade or more of intrusive inspections and other oversight mechanisms, the U.S. and international community would at that time also be in a far stronger position to judge Iran’s actions and intentions vis-à-vis its nuclear program than they would have been without a deal. If, subsequent to a deal “sunsetting,” they determine that Iran’s leaders are shifting course and pursuing weaponization, the U.S. and international community will have ample time and opportunity to take action – and their decisions at that time will benefit from more than a decade of insights into Iran’s nuclear program and more than a decade of improved planning based on those insights.
  • Optimally, by the time a deal sunsets Iran would recognize the tangible benefits of continued curtailment of its nuclear program – benefits that would be imperiled if, in the period after an agreement “sunsets,” Iran decided to shift course and pursue weaponization of its nuclear program.

In case you missed the speech, here it is in full. As I side-note I must tell you that I always get a chuckle thinking about something my brother once told me. he was fascinated that the Prime Minister of Israel speaks a better English than I do ;)

*

And here’s what Ali Abunimah had to say about the speech … 

See video below

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made his much trailed and politically divisive speech to the US Congress today, forcefully denouncing a possible international agreement that would place Iran’s civilian nuclear energy program under strict supervision.

Immediately afterwards, I spoke to The Real News Network’s Paul Jay to analyze the speech, including Netanyahu’s appeal to Biblical myths and Islamophobia in his attempt to derail US diplomacy.

Netanyahu’s speech came as US Secretary of State John Kerry and his Iranian counterpart, Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, were in Switzerland to close the deal at high stakes negotiations backed by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany.

President Barack Obama dismissed Netanyahu’s speech as offering nothing new and said the Israeli leader offered no alternatives to his efforts to reach a diplomatic agreement.

Approximately fifty Democratic members of Congress skipped Netanyahu’s speech, some after intense lobbying efforts by Palestinian rights advocates.

EVERYTHING YOU WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT ANTI-SEMITISM BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK

The only people who can stop the transformation of anti-Israelism into anti-Semitism gathering momentum are the Jews themselves, with those who are citizens of the European nations and America taking the lead.

 

It was Israel's policies that guaranteed that the sleeping giant would not die in its sleep. (Latuff)
It was Israel’s policies that guaranteed that the sleeping giant would not die in its sleep. (Latuff)
*
There will always be some Jew haters and Nazi holocaust deniers. So what I mean when I say the sleeping giant of anti-Semitism might well have died in its sleep is that it would not have come back to life again as a force capable of seriously threatening the well being and security of the Jews.

Anti-Israelism vs. Anti-Semitism: The Truth We Should All Know

By Alan Hart FOR

 

Much is currently being written and broadcast about what a headline in the Wall Street Journal proclaimed to be The Return of Anti-Semitism (loathing and hatred of Jews). It was over an article by Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks, the former chief rabbi of Britain. According to him “An ancient hatred has been reborn.” He went on:

“Some politicians around the world deny that what is happening in Europe is anti-Semitism. It is, they say, merely a reaction to the actions of the state of Israel, to the continuing conflict with the Palestinians. But the policies of the state of Israel are not made in kosher supermarkets in Paris or in Jewish cultural institutions in Brussels and Mumbai. The targets in these cities were not Israeli. They were Jewish.”

In an article for TIME under the headline: It’s Time To Stop Ignoring the New Wave of Anti-Semitism, Michigan born-and-based Rabbi Jason Miller quoted Sacks and was more explicit in his assertion that an ancient hatred has been reborn. (As well as being a rabbi Miller is the president of an IT and social media marketing company). He wrote:

“I certainly have the capacity and amplification to voice my concerns about the threat of anti-Semitism, this time around emanating not from Nazism, but from Islamism… As Rabbi Sacks makes perfectly clear, the rise of anti-Semitism in the 21st century is not about anti-Israel sentiment… Plain and simple, 21st-century anti-Semitism is the continuation of the same Jewish hatred that has raised its ugly head for centuries. It is the same anti-Semitism that we saw 70 years ago in Europe as 6 million Jewish men, women and children were exterminated.”

In my view Rabbis Sacks and Miller and all who think like them are in complete denial of the link between Israel’s actions which sometimes amount to state terrorism and the transformation of anti-Israelism into anti-Semitism.

What this link is was put into words more than a quarter of a century ago by Yehoshafat Harkabi, a long-serving Director of Israeli Military Intelligence. (I have quoted his warning in several of my previous posts but what he wrote bears repeating, again and again and again). In his book Israel’s Fateful Hour, which contained his call for Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories, and his statement that the biggest real threat to Israel is its self-righteousness, he wrote the following.

“We Israelis must be careful lest we become not a source of pride for Jews but a distressing burden. Israel is the criterion according to which all Jews will tend to be judged. Israel as a Jewish state is an example of the Jewish character, which finds free and concentrated expression within it. Anti-Semitism has deep and historical roots. Nevertheless, any flaw in Israeli conduct, which initially is cited as anti-Israelism, is likely to be transformed into empirical proof of the validity of anti-Semitism. It would be a tragic irony if the Jewish state, which was intended to solve the problem of anti-Semitism, was to become a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism. Israelis must be aware that the price of their misconduct is paid not only by them but also Jews throughout the world. In the struggle against anti-Semitism, the frontline begins in Israel.”

Another way of saying that an ancient hatred has been reborn is that what used to be called the “sleeping giant” of anti-Semitism is waking up. Putting it that way makes understanding possible and here’s why.

After the Nazi holocaust, and because of it, this giant went back to sleep and might well have died in its sleep if Zionism had not been allowed by the major powers to have its way and Israel had been required to be serious about peace on the basis of an acceptable amount of justice for the Palestinians and security for all.

To avoid being misunderstood I must qualify that statement.

There will always be some Jew haters and Nazi holocaust deniers. So what I mean when I say the sleeping giant of anti-Semitism might well have died in its sleep is that it would not have come back to life again as a force capable of seriously threatening the wellbeing and security of the Jews.

The evidence which gives great weight to that analysis can be obtained from just a few moments of reflection about the history of the whole of the second half of the 20th century and much if not all of the first decade of the 21st. What stands out with regard to the Jews is the wellbeing of those who were/are citizens of the Western nations. They were not only secure, they had influence in political, economic and many other spheres out of all proportion to their numbers. (Which is why, generally speaking, I have always regarded the Jews as the intellectual elite of the Western world. And that in turn is why I am amazed that most Jews allowed themselves to be brainwashed by Zionist propaganda and are beyond reason on the matter of justice for the Palestinians as a consequence).

It was Israel’s “misconduct” (what a charming Harkabi euphemism for defiance of international law, on-going colonization and ethnic cleansing by stealth!) that set in motion the rising, global tide of anti-Israelism which, as he warned, is showing signs of a creeping transformation into anti-Semitism.

Put another way, it was Israel’s policies and actions which guaranteed that the sleeping giant would not die in its sleep and would wake up to go on the prowl again.

In its recent report the Community Service Trust (CST) said the number of anti-Semitic incidents in the UK doubled in 2014 – up from 513 in 2013 to 1,168, of which 81 were violent. The non-violent ones included what the CST described as a widely shared image of Hitler with the caption “Yes man, you were right.”

What was the biggest factor behind the rise in the number of anti-Semitic incidents in the UK? In the CST’s own words it was “anti-Semitic reactions to the conflict in Israel and Gaza.” In its own way that finding is surely an indicator that Israel’s policies and actions are the prime cause of the transformation of anti-Israelism into anti-Semitism. It also underlines Harkabi’s point that Jews need to understand “that foreigners’ criticism of Israel stems not only from opportunism, hatred and anti-Semitism, but from what they may see as fair and moral considerations.”

My conclusions?

The only people who can stop the transformation of anti-Israelism into anti-Semitism gathering momentum are the Jews themselves, with those who are citizens of the European nations and America taking the lead.

How could they do it?

Short answer – by declaring that Israel does not speak for or represent them and that they condemn its defiance of international law and denial of justice for the Palestinians.

If they don’t do that there will most likely be a final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine followed at some point by a wide awake giant of anti-Semitism going on the rampage again.

If it really is the case that the sleeping giant of anti-Semitism is waking up, it’s time for European and American Jews to wake up to the fact that the title of my book – Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews – is what Ilan Pappe described it as being… “THE truth in seven words.”

BIBI’S FALSE FLAGS AT HALF MAST

Slowly but surly the world is waking up to the lies of zionism

Slowly but surly the world is waking up to the lies of zionism

But we should not forget what France, the first European country to bestow full legal rights on Jews, still offers them: vibrant Jewish institutions and a government that sees their presence as integral to the French future. The French president and prime minister, along with the mayor of Paris, have been steadfast in their support of Jews on French soil.

Don’t Believe Hype of ‘Anti-Semitic’ France

By Richard H. Weisberg*

A woman holds a sign reading “I am Jewish from France” / Getty Images

(JTA) — Three weeks ago, my wife and I were shopping in a Parisian kosher butcher store several miles west of the supermarket where four Jews were murdered on Jan. 9. The shop in our neighborhood was well patronized, with lines stretching out to the sidewalk before Shabbat.

We were staying in an apartment in Paris’ 12th district while I promoted a new book about the treatment of Jews in France during World War II. During our stay, we spoke with dozens of our Parisian friends, including some who are Jewish, about whether the year 2015 evokes for them at least some of that dark anti-Semitic history. It was a time when a French government that became known as Vichy promulgated 200 anti-Semitic laws — with little German pressure — that eventually sent some 75,000 Jews “to the East” and almost certain death in the concentration camps.

In those weeks of what we now know was the “calm before the storm,” our friends confessed to some fears about a combined resurgence of both old and new forms of anti-Semitism in France. The far-right National Front party under Marine Le Pen barely hid its old-style anti-Semitism under the ugly mask of anti-Arab xenophobia. And the party was gaining strength in the polls.

Meanwhile, individual Jews were sporadically attacked, frequently by disaffected French Muslims. In some areas of Paris, one friend said, it might be unwise to wear a yarmulke outdoors. But in their own neighborhood, in the 15th district, they said they would have no such fears and did not counsel their nephew, an observant Jew in his 20s, against wearing a kippah.

In fact, a cross-section of my Parisian friends agreed that American talk of France having become anti-Semitic was grossly exaggerated. So in polite conversations back in the States, my wife (a French teacher in Manhattan) and I had already noted what we felt were overstatements, given our own experiences and observations during frequent visits in various parts of France. We chalked up some of the feverish American talk to the persistent Francophobia that too often marks political commentary about France in the United States. The French, after all, have long been targeted for American criticism.

We tried to curb this talk of French anti-Semitism, the supposed droves who were leaving for Israel — some 7,000 French Jews in a population of approximately 500,000 made the move last year, though some have since returned for economic and other reasons — and what we knew were exaggerated American images of French Jews living in constant fear. We did this, recognizing that Europe is perennially at some risk of returning to its traditional anti-Semitism — a risk I consider more fundamental even than Muslim extremism fueled by events in the Middle East.

My attitude about France has not changed even since the latest spate of deadly violence. There is nowhere in the world that is safe. But in many ways it is as safe for Jews in Paris as it is in Tel Aviv or Brooklyn, or Budapest.

Of course the prudent increase in security, as long as it does not turn France into a police state, will be necessary for a while, as it has been periodically for the past few decades. French schoolchildren need to be protected (and, truthfully, the same could be said for American kids). The kosher butcher shop we patronized now is on high alert. This makes sense.

But we should not forget what France, the first European country to bestow full legal rights on Jews, still offers them: vibrant Jewish institutions and a government that sees their presence as integral to the French future. The French president and prime minister, along with the mayor of Paris, have been steadfast in their support of Jews on French soil.

During my recent trip, we saw a performance at a 100-seat theater of a French version of Shakespeare’s “The Merchant of Venice.” The audience, a broad cross-section of ordinary Parisians, seemed immensely sympathetic to the plight of Shylock the Jew as a representative of the persecuted European “other” through the centuries.

Attitudes toward Jews are changing for the better in France. There will be tragic eruptions to the contrary. But France is not an anti-Semitic country. It remains, as it finally comes to grips with its Vichy past, a bastion of equality and hope for its Jewish population.

*Richard H. Weisberg is Floersheimer Professor of Constitutional Law at the Cardozo Law School of Yeshiva University. For his work in righting some of Vichy’s wrongs, he won the Legion of Honor in 2009. His recent book, “In Praise of Intransigence,” and his “Vichy Law and the Holocaust in France” both discuss French anti-Semitism.

You can see here what French Jewry thinks of Bibi’s pathetic attempts to get them to immigrate to Israel…

Read THIS post where that video was published

*

Here you will find reports on recent lies made by Netanyahu publicly (Click on links)

Netanyahu’s AIPAC Speech: 5 Lies

*

A couple of Netanyahu’s not-so-white lies to Americans

*

Whether Lies or B.S., Netanyahu’s Interviews Pose Special Challenges for Journalists

What makes him think the US Congress or the French Jewish Community would believe him now? ‘The wolf is obviously out of the bag.’

ISRAEL EXPLOITS THE EVENTS IN PARIS

Image ‘Copyleft’ by Carlos Latuff

Needless to say, the ADL was quick to deny any 'Jewish' involvement

Needless to say, the ADL was quick to deny any ‘Jewish’ involvement

While Netanyahu was certainly playing to a domestic audience, his presence in Paris is also part of Israel’s swift move to capitalize on the horror in France on a number of fronts: to attack the Palestinians, to sharpen the dangerous discourse of a “war of civilizations” and to speed up the population transfer of Jews from Europe.

Israel moves quickly to exploit Paris attacks

After hesitations reportedly over cost and security, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu finally decided to attend the “solidarity” march in Paris on Sunday, ostensibly in support of “free expression” and other “Western values.”

The march had been called in the wake of the attacks in Paris last week in which two gunmen murdered twelve people at the offices of the magazine Charlie Hebdo, and a third murdered four people at a Jewish grocery store.

Netanyahu evidently could not resist the publicity given that it is election season in Israel, and he would not want to risk being upstaged by political rivals who had announced their attendance, including such violent racists as foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman and economy minister Naftali Bennett.

(Update: Israeli media are reporting that Netanyahu gatecrashed the march, defying a request from French President François Hollande that he stay away –– more below).

Many people circulated images like the one above of world leaders linking arms with Netanyahu, noting the perverse irony of a march for such things as “freedom” and against “terrorism” being led by such figures, including the man who ordered the bloodbath in Gaza last summer.

As people in the Gaza ghetto continue to die of cold as a direct consequence of the destruction and ongoing siege, one observer in Gaza, Dima Eleiwa, had a wry explanation for why the leaders embracing Netanyahu have kept silent about their ordeal:

on Twitter  (Click HERE to see the Tweets)

Gaza writer Ayah Bashir asked poignantly:

on Twitter

While Netanyahu was certainly playing to a domestic audience, his presence in Paris is also part of Israel’s swift move to capitalize on the horror in France on a number of fronts: to attack the Palestinians, to sharpen the dangerous discourse of a “war of civilizations” and to speed up the population transfer of Jews from Europe.

Jews out of Europe?

As I’ve written previously, Israel has a long-term goal of transferring France’s half-million-strong Jewish population to Israel as part of its effort to counter the so-called “demographic threat” from Palestinians.

In this context, the horrifying anti-Semitic murders in the Jewish supermarket, like previous attacks on Jews, are a boon for Israeli officials “excited” by the resulting exodus of some Jews who fear remaining in France.

Netanyahu immediately seized on the attacks to press the message home, tweeting: “To all the Jews of France, all the Jews of Europe, Israel is not just the place in whose direction you pray, the state of Israel is your home.”

on Twitter

Israeli politician Yair Lapid, upped the ante, declaring, “I don’t want to speak in terms of Holocaust, but … European Jewry must understand that there is just one place for Jews, and that is the State of Israel.”

Netanyahu, Israeli daily Haaretz reported, is setting up a “special ministerial committee” that “will convene next week to discuss steps to encourage immigration from France and from Europe in general.”

Understandable fear

The horror and fear that attacks like the ones in Paris and the 2012 murders at a Jewish school in Toulouse generate are real. Jewish communities in France understandably want to put their safety first.

But to leap from these – thankfully rare – attacks to the conclusion that all Jews must leave France and even Europe is not an obvious step. And it is a dangerous and drastic one.

When is it anti-Semitism?

Recall that immigrants and their European-born descendants from Muslim-majority countries are routinely accused by those who hate and fear them of “refusing to integrate” in Europe – this was an accusation leveled by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, among many others.

on Twitter

By the same token, those who say that Jews must leave Europe for their own safety are saying in effect that it is impossible for Jews to integrate and ever be safe in their home countries.

The idea that Jews are always alien and that hatred against them is eternal and immutable – as opposed to being created and conditioned by contemporary politics and racist discourses in which Israel, among others, participates – is a fundamentally anti-Semitic one.

If French President François Hollande said that France is not the home of the Jews and they should leave to their “real” home, people would correctly understand that as anti-Semitic.

But when Netanyahu makes the same declaration, it is called Zionism.

It is not just critics of Israel who understand – at least implicitly – the tacit alliance between anti-Semitism and Zionism – but many European Jews themselves.

Rabbi Menachem Margolin, the director of the European Jewish Association, described byHaaretz as “the largest advocate for the Jewish organizations and communities in Europe,” sharply criticized Netanyahu’s latest exhortations on Jews to abandon France.

Margolin said he regretted that “after every anti-Semitic attack in Europe, the Israeli government issues the same statements about the importance of aliyah [immigration to Israel], rather than employ every diplomatic and informational means at its disposal to strengthen the safety of Jewish life in Europe.”

(Update: An Israeli official source told Israel’s Channel 2 that the French had wanted Netanyahu to stay away from Paris precisely out of fear that, as Haaretz put it, the Israeli prime minister “would take advantage of the event for campaign purposes and make speeches, especially about the Jews of France. Such statements, the Elysée Palace feared, would hurt the demonstration of solidarity the French government was trying to promote as part of dealing with the terror attacks.” Netanyahu’s defiance, according toHaaretz, has deeply angered Hollande, who “got up from his seat and made an early exit” when Netanyahu rose to speak at a memorial ceremony at the Paris Grand Synagogue.)

Another future

Israel promotes a future in which the possibility of coexistence and transcending current political and politico-religious antagonisms is impossible, and in which Jews have no future in Europe. Instead it invites them to decamp to a region where, Israel insists, they will be surrounded by hostile and bloodthirsty Palestinians, other Arabs and Muslims.

Yet we did not have to peer into a crystal ball to see the alternative to Zionism’s dystopic future. It was tragically embodied in the words of the brother of Ahmed Merabet, the French police officer – a Muslim – slain by the Charlie Hebdo attackers.

“I am now telling all racists, Islamophobes and anti-Semites that one must not confuse extremists with Muslims,” an emotional Malek Merabet told a press conference on Saturday.

“Stop mixing things up, starting wars, burning mosques and synagogues.”

The alternative, then, is solidarity in the face of the racism and bigotry that are generated and perpetuated by the murderous global wars the leaders marching in Paris insist are necessary for our safety.

This solidarity was also embodied in the exemplary actions of Lassana Bathily, the Muslim immigrant worker from Mali, who saved lives at the Jewish supermarket.

Bathily has been hailed as a hero for leading customers in the Hyper Cacher Jewish supermarket to hide in a cold store where they were safe from the murderer.

Bathily’s religion and national origin ought not to have to be remarked upon, but in this moment where once again Muslims are being collectively blamed, his action was an important reminder that human solidarity can and does cross all artificial lines of division.

Smearing Palestinians

Sadly, Israel is unlikely to get the message. Its propaganda apparatus immediately went into action to tar Palestinians with the Paris attacks.

On Saturday, the Israeli Government Press Office sent out an email to journalists in the name of the “Prime Minister’s Media Adviser.”

It included this screenshot from the Facebook page of the Palestinian publicationAlresalah.

The Israeli government email claimed that the screenshot “is a post from the Facebook page of ‘Al-Rasalah,’ [sic] a Hamas publication from yesterday evening … featuring photographs of the three terrorists who were eliminated in Paris. The caption reads: ‘The shahidim [martyrs] who were dispatched by God, the heroes of the raid in Paris.’”

In fact, Arabic speakers who look at the screenshot will note that across the image in barely legible red script are indeed words praising the three killers. But there is absolutely no indication that these were the words or opinions of Alresalah.

The caption provided by Alresalah states only the following, making clear they were not the authors of the montage: “Image disseminated on social media sites of those who carried out the attack on the French publication and who were killed this evening. From right to left, Amadou Coulibaly, Cherif and Said Kouachi.”

Alresalah, in its own words, pointedly does not call the men “martrys” or “heroes.” This is not surprising since Hamas itself strongly condemned the attack in Paris.

But the misleading Israeli propaganda is part of an ongoing effort to justify oppression of Palestinians by demonizing them. This is similar to Israel’s infamous “Hamas is ISIS” propaganda as Israeli warplanes were slaughtering civilians in Gaza.

Alresalah has apparently removed the post from its Facebook page.

Israel’s dangerous and exploitative antics recall the words of Netanyahu on 11 September 2001, when asked what the attacks on the United States that day meant for US-Israeli relations.

It’s very good,” he said, hoping that the unfolding horror in New York, Washington, DC, and Pennsylvania would “generate immediate sympathy” for Israel.

WHY I AM NOT CHARLIE

Since the brutal attack at the offices of Charlie Hebdo there have been vigils throughout the world simply stating ‘I AM CHARLIE’.

That one of those murdered happened to be a Jewish ‘cartoonist’ gave call to the zionists to pull their anti-Semite card and raise the false flag to the top of the pole as can be seen HERE.

Satire is meant to be funny, not hateful. Mad Magazine has kept us laughing for decades and never has there been an attack at their offices. Charlie Hebdo has a history of offending people, especially Muslims. There is definitely nothing funny about hatred or racism.

I am one of many that state without hesitation that I AM NOT CHARLIE!

What happened was wrong. There is no argument that could convince me otherwise,   BUT

(Continue reading this post after the image)

Cartoon by Sudanese artist Khalid Albaih, from Aljazeera.com

Cartoon by Sudanese artist Khalid Albaih, from Aljazeera.com

There is no “but” about what happened at Charlie Hebdo. Some people published some cartoons, and some other people killed them for it.  Words and pictures can be beautiful or vile, pleasing or enraging, inspiring or offensive; but they exist on a different plane from physical violence, whether you want to call that plane spirit or imagination or culture, and to meet them with violence is an offense against the spirit and imagination and culture that distinguish humans. Nothing mitigates this monstrosity. There will be time to analyze why the killers did it, time to parse their backgrounds, their ideologies, their beliefs, time for sociologists and psychologists to add to understanding. There will be explanations, and the explanations will be important, but explanations aren’t the same as excuses. Words don’t kill, they must not be met by killing, and they will not make the killers’ culpability go away.

To abhor what was done to the victims, though, is not the same as to become them. This is true on the simplest level: I cannot occupy someone else’s selfhood, share someone else’s death. This is also true on a moral level: I cannot appropriate the dangers they faced or the suffering they underwent, I cannot colonize their experience, and it is arrogant to make out that I can. It wouldn’t be necessary to say this, except the flood of hashtags and avatars and social-media posturing proclaiming #JeSuisCharlie overwhelms distinctions and elides the point. “We must all try to be Charlie, not just today but every day,” the New Yorker pontificates. What the hell does that mean? In real life, solidarity takes many forms, almost all of them hard. This kind of low-cost, risk-free, E-Z solidarity is only possible in a social-media age, where you can strike a pose and somebody sees it on their timeline for 15 seconds and then they move on and it’s forgotten except for the feeling of accomplishment it gave you. Solidarity is hard because it isn’t about imaginary identifications, it’s about struggling across the canyon of not being someone else: it’s about recognizing, for instance, that somebody died because they were different from you, in what they did or believed or were or wore, not because they were the same. If people who are feeling concrete loss or abstract shock or indignation take comfort in proclaiming a oneness that seems to fill the void, then it serves an emotional end. But these Cartesian credos on Facebook and Twitter — I am Charlie, therefore I am — shouldn’t be mistaken for political acts.

Among the dead at Charlie Hebdo: Deputy chief editor Bernard Maris and cartoonists Georges Wolinski, Jean Cabut (aka Cabu), Stephane Charbonnier, who was also editor-in-chief, and Bernard Verlhac (aka Tignous)

Among the dead at Charlie Hebdo: Deputy chief editor Bernard Maris and cartoonists Georges Wolinski, Jean Cabut (aka Cabu), Stephane Charbonnier, who was also editor-in-chief, and Bernard Verlhac (aka Tignous)

Continue reading this at Mondowiess

ISRAEL SEEMS PLEASED WITH THE RISE OF ‘ANTI SEMITIC INCIDENTS’ IN EUROPE

Principled anti-racists should not be less vigilant about fighting anti-Semitism just because Israel and its Zionist affiliates habitually exaggerate, exploit and on occasion fabricate reports of hatred directed against Jews.

But they should be prepared to call it out and refuse to play along.

Fighting racism means fighting Zionism and anti-Semitism.

Protestors defying a ban on Palestine solidarity demonstrations in Paris hold a banner saying “Stop the blackmail: Anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism,” 26 July 2014. (Alain Bachellier/Flickr)

Protestors defying a ban on Palestine solidarity demonstrations in Paris hold a banner saying “Stop the blackmail: Anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism,” 26 July 2014. (Alain Bachellier/Flickr)

As threats to Jews said to mount in Europe, Israeli minister gets “excited”

ZION RECREATES LIES ABOUT ISLAM

Two months ago I posted the following …..

THE CIA AND MOSSAD COMBINE FORCES TO ‘FIGHT’ TERRORISM

Just one way the US  and the West keeps the truth hidden

Just one way the US and the West hides the truth

Here’s another way ….

Ever hear of MEMRI? (Middle East Research Institute)

The institute was co-founded in 1998 by Yigal Carmon, a former Israeli military intelligence officer and Meyrav Wurmser, an Israeli-born, American political scientist. MEMRI states that its goal is to “bridge the language gap between the Middle East and the West”. Critics charge that it aims to portray the Arab and Muslim world in a negative light, through the production and dissemination of inaccurate translations and by selectively translating views of extremists while deemphasizing or ignoring mainstream opinions. (FROM)

Emphasis on Critics charge that it aims to portray the Arab and Muslim world in a negative light, through the production and dissemination of inaccurate translations and by selectively translating views of extremists while deemphasizing or ignoring mainstream opinions.

Consider me one of those ‘critics’!

From their own Site

MEMRI’s work directly supports fighting the U.S. War on Terror. Highly trained staff thoroughly translate and analyze open-source materials that include television programming, radio, newspapers, textbooks, and websites.

Every single day, MEMRI receives requests from members of the U.S. government, military, and legislature. Since September 11, 2001, the demand for this material has significantly increased – providing thousands of pages of translated documents of Arab, Iranian, Urdu, Pashtu, Hindi, Dari, and Turkish print media, terrorist websites, school books, and tens of thousands of hours of translated footage from Arab and Iranian television.

This video takes you from the halls of government to the briefing rooms of the U.S. military to the frontlines of counter-terrorism efforts, and demonstrates just how MEMRI has become – A Vital Component in the U.S. War on Terror.

Members of MEMRI’s Board of Advisors and Directors are bi-partisan and have honorably served Presidents Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama. Read more…

They even operate their own TV Network …. The Palestinian Authority often broadcasts clips on their own TV Network in their attempt to justify the occupation and ethnic cleansing policies of their zionist brothers. 

Regarding a recent video clip, British zionists are campaigning with it in an attempt to discourage a YES Vote in Parliament as to whether or not  recognise a Palestinian State.

In the clip, which was recently posted to the internet, Palestinian Sheik Omar Abu Sara in a sermon given in the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem asks the following of those Arab countries currently helping NATO to attack Islamic State:

“Whom are they fighting? Are they fighting the Jews? The Russians? The Hindus? They are fighting our brothers. These planes are bombing our brothers. Is the Al-Aqsa Mosque too far for them? Is Jerusalem too far for them? Are the Jews too far for them?”

It is sentiments like these that persist not just throughout Hamas but throughout the more respected Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas.

Here is a clip that was broadcast on Palestinian Authority television in which the PA Mufti of Jerusalem Muhammad Hussein urges his followers to kill Jews.

Could we expect a combination of the CIA and Mossad to portray the honest aspirations of the Palestinian people?

Hope you noticed that none of those passing by stopped to listen to this guy.

Apparently their video didn’t reach the audience they were hoping for …. (only 30,847 viewers) so they are trying again in desperation.

Here’s their ‘remake’ … (Only 301 views at this posting)

Tens of Arabs can be seen sitting or standing, watching the preacher. 

PATHETIC!

Full report from ziocrap file HERE

INTIFADA MOVES FROM THE STREETS OF JERUSALEM TO THE INTERNET

57364760100010012882

At least that’s what the zionists want you to believe …. none of the following was reported in the Palestinian press leading me to believe that the ‘terrorists’ behind this are actually the zionists themselves.

The zionists have an ‘army’ of hackers who monitor pro Palestinian sites and render them ‘offline’ via DOS Attacks or other methods. My question is why have the sites reported about below not been targeted? Again, in my opinion, the answer is obvious.

Palestinians are taking to social media encouraging a car intifada against Israel.

Palestinians are taking to social media encouraging a car intifada against Israel.

The following is what the zionists want us to believe …. as reported at Ynet

(Be sure to notice the frequent usage of the word PALESTINIAN)

The younger generation of Palestinians has learned well from Islamic State’s staggering success when it comes to sowing the seeds of fear, and has moved the focus of its resistance to the social networks. The blogger has joined forces with the muezzin; the talkbackers are in cahoots with the stone-throwers; and the “share” buttons are working alongside the incitement leaflets. 

The social network is the new mosque, and there’s no need to remove one’s shoes when entering; there are Border Police and there’s no tear gas; and the police don’t impose an age restriction on worshipers.

Palestinian terrorists have gone online

With little oversight, Palestinian extremists are recruiting online and publishing unfettered propaganda; the effects are already been felt on the ground in the form of a spate of recent ‘lone wolf’ terror attacks.

Everyone’s looking for the third intifada out on the streets, but it’s not only there; it has active and threatening offshoots on the Internet too.

The younger generation of Palestinians has learned well from Islamic State’s staggering success when it comes to sowing the seeds of fear, and has moved the focus of its resistance to the social networks. The blogger has joined forces with the muezzin; the talkbackers are in cahoots with the stone-throwers; and the “share” buttons are working alongside the incitement leaflets.

The social network is the new mosque, and there’s no need to remove one’s shoes when entering; there are Border Police and there’s no tear gas; and the police don’t impose an age restriction on worshipers.

In recent months, this protected expanse has allowed the Palestinians to establish a new terrorist infrastructure. Instead of recruiting activists on the ground and worrying about them getting picked up on the radar of the Shin Bet security service, they’ve moved over to online recruitment via popular campaigns designed to sow hatred and covey the sense that the Al-Aqsa Mosque is under threat – in the hope of prompting a terror mission carried out by a lone attacker, one who is not affiliated with any terrorist organization.

Online Palestinian incitement, referring to the recent terror attack at a Jerusalem synagogue and the purported threat to the al-Aqsa mosque.
Online Palestinian incitement, referring to the recent terror attack at a Jerusalem synagogue and the purported threat to the al-Aqsa mosque.

Such was the case with the recent terror attacks in Jerusalem; and such was the case, too, with the death of the construction worker in Petah Tikva in September. We’re no longer dealing with a wave of religious suicide attackers who are waiting to be received by 72 virgins. The new martyrs fall on the network, and get flooded with Likes.

Orit Perlov, a social media analyst at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) who monitors and analyzes the discourse on the social networks in Arab states, says that the Palestinian Internet is currently running a number of incitement campaigns at the same time.

“One of the leading campaigns calls for running down Jews with vehicles,” Perlov says. “It uses the word, ‘Idaas,’ which is ‘run down’ in Arabic, alongside a picture of a car running down ultra-Orthodox Jews. Immediately after the shooting of Yehuda Glick, the networks began a more focused campaign that called for running down Knesset members who have encouraged pilgrimages to the Temple Mount.

“And there’s also the popular ‘Atan’ campaign, which simply gives the instruction, ‘Stab;’ and there’s the ‘Atbah’ – ‘Slaughter’ – campaign, in which you see a masked Palestinian youth beheading someone. And there are Palestinians who are replacing their Twitter profile picture with a picture of an ax. This doesn’t mean that these people are going to go out tomorrow and take action, but that they identify with the notion and promote it.”

Who posts this kind of material? Who’s behind it?

“Individuals in the West Bank and East Jerusalem who understand the psychology of the Net, who know what works.”

Gilad Shiloach, a network analyst who works at the American news website, Vocativ, which monitors social network activity, says that Palestinian Web users respond quickly to developments on the ground. Such was the case, for example, in the affair of the dead Egged bus driver, Yusuf al-Ramouni, who Israel determined had committed suicide, whereas his family claims he was murdered.

“Shortly after he was found hanged, activists from East Jerusalem sent out a Tweet with the heading, ‘Yusuf was strangled,'” Shiloach relates. “Within a few hours, we were seeing it in the thousands. Graphic designers used Photoshop to prepare a beautiful design of Yusuf on the backdrop of the Temple Mount, with slogans like ‘The Jews are sullying Al-Aqsa.’ This is how a blood libel spreads on the social networks; and this happened two days before the terror attack at the synagogue in Har Nof.”

Prof. Yair Amichai-Hamburger, the director of the Research Center for Internet Psychology at the Interdisciplinary Center’s School of Communication in Herzliya, explains that the discourse on the Internet functions as a breeding ground for extremists.

“The Internet group is actually feeding your mind with its messages all the time, and then there’s a kind of escalation,” he says. “The group becomes a hotbed for an idea of a certain nature, and the individuals take it to the extreme in order to play a significant part in it. For the next terrorist, the Internet creates a media ghetto of sorts. He sees what is happening on the social networks, and it becomes his reality.”

What does he experience there?

“The propaganda is absolute. We are perceived there as Satan’s earthly representatives, who can take on the form of a Border Policeman, a 25-year-old woman or a baby of a few months. For him, every Jew represents a part of the threatening mechanism.

“Once the message has seeped in, the sense of solidarity becomes absolute, and the attacker’s personal existence becomes meaningless. He turns into the long arm of Islam. This gives rise to a new profile of a terrorist, one who perhaps just a few days earlier had no intentions of driving his car into a group of soldiers or people at a train station, but ends up saying to hell with the world.”

Online poster refers to recent vehicular terror attacks in Jerusalem.
Online poster refers to recent vehicular terror attacks in Jerusalem.

With its pants down

For many in Israel, up until a month or so ago, Yehuda Glick was an unknown figure; but he’s been a target on the Facebook pages of Palestinian activists for the past two years. “You’ll be dead soon,” said the caption alongside his picture on pages that dealt with visits by Jews to the Temple Mount.

Glick complained, but nothing was done; and one Internet surfer who internalized the message eventually shot him. Today, the social networks are carrying calls for another attempt on the life of the right-wing activist.

Glick now has bodyguards, and the same goes for others associated with efforts to visit the Temple Mount and who also star on the social networks; but the big question is can the Shin Bet foil the plans of the next terrorist – a terrorist who doesn’t yet know he is one.

“The defense establishment has been caught unawares by the new kind of attacker that has emerged; it’s been caught with its pants down,” says Prof. Amichai-Hamburger. “The thought that a regular man with a family and children might suddenly carry out an attack doesn’t fit its profile.”

The Palestinian masses aren’t the only ones taking advantage of this security vacuum; the terror organizations, too, are entering the fray. “These organizations are using the networks to try in fact to find those who do not necessarily fit the classic profile – the introverted attacker, an individual on the margins of society,” Prof. Amichai-Hamburger continues. “And it could be just about anyone from among this very large group. That’s the scary thing.”

Daniel Cohen, an expert in cyber terrorism at the INSS, names Hamas as one of these organizations. “The organization is trying to join the masses and to encourage the lone perpetrator by means of incitement campaigns,” Cohen says.

“We’re talking about popular terror attacks of sorts, ones for which the organization doesn’t have to claim responsibility and have less chance of being thwarted. Once you used to be able to monitor the phone calls of activists and try to identify the individual who would be going out to perpetrate an attack; now, however, the activity has moved to the Net and is directed at the masses, and you have no way of knowing which one it will be.”

According to social media analyst Perlov, “Today, all the security mechanisms have software that monitors content on the Net, so you can see if there is a mass of activity and how many people support the campaign. But there is still no computer program that can analyze sentiment – in other words, the intentions of a specific person. Furthermore, the two terrorists at the synagogue, for example, were not key figures who were active on the Net. People like that won’t make an impression on the security mechanism’s that are monitoring the Internet activity; they’re small fry.”

Despite the fact that the defense establishment has little chance of laying its hands on the lone terrorist, it still sees value in monitoring the social media sites – digging through the Facebook statuses and Twitter messages can at least offer an understanding of the mood among the Palestinians in the territories.

“There’s something called ‘public intelligence’ – intelligence that is gathered with the purpose of studying the public,” explains an Israel Defense Forces intelligence officer. “The bottom line is that we want to have our finger on the pulse of the Palestinian public; and in the age of the social media networks, you can’t not add this piece of the puzzle to the picture.

“It has great value because it shows which way the wind is blowing among the public and allows you to know what pains it. ‘How is the issue reflected on the Palestinian social media sites’ is a question that will always be asked in the relevant forums. Sometimes, by the way, it’ll be the first question.”

While the IDF merely monitors the Palestinian social media sites without actually taking any action against the incitement campaigns and the like, the Palestinian Authority adopts a more active approach, shutting down Facebook pages and conducting arrests when efforts are made to organize and affect change on the ground.

“During Operation Protective Edge, for example, one of the campaigns that went viral called for the assassination of Mahmoud Abbas,” Perlov says. “He was dubbed “the Zionists’ dog,’ ‘a traitor’ and ‘a collaborator.'”

With attorney approval

Just in case you were wondering, Israelis are no saints either. “Only live ammunition saves lives,” “Jews, revenge,” “Arabs are murdering you,” “Enemies aren’t given jobs” – these are just a few examples from numerous incitement campaigns that have appeared in recent months on the social network sites in Israel.

The Jewish public has not sat by idly and has also reached the Internet boiling point. It happened this week with regard to the deliberations on the proposed Nationality Law, after the attacks in Jerusalem, during the 50 days of Protective Edge, and at the time of the search for the three teenagers who were abducted in Gush Etzion.

And while the Israeli public isn’t swept along to the same extent as the Palestinian public, we are seeing racist and provocative campaigns on the part of right-wing groups, threats against the left, and the undermining of fundamental values of a democratic state. It turns out that this open expanse is actually closing the most mouths.

“If radical right-wing groups were once on the margins of the margins of the Israeli public, hidden deep on the Net, the opinions of such organizations today have become legitimate,” Shiloach says.

“Their presence on the social networks has grown at least four to fivefold in relation to the period prior to the abduction of the boys. It was very noticeable during the war; we saw the emergence of groups such as ‘I’m also in favor of death to terrorists’ or ‘I also support killing the Arabs of Israel.'”

Israeli extremist online propaganda. The caption reads: Only live bullets save lives.
Israeli extremist online propaganda. The caption reads: Only live bullets save lives.

One of the major sources of the fire that has spread through the Israeli social media networks is the extreme right organization, Lehava. Its principal agenda is to prevent marriages between Jewish women and Arabs; but in the wake of the recent terror attacks, it has embarked on a new campaign against the employment of Arabs. “Don’t hire enemies,” Benzi Gopstein, head of the organization, corrects me. “Saying ‘Arabs’ is racism; there are Arabs who aren’t enemies and they can be employed.”

In the framework of the campaign, Lehava posted an announcement with pictures from terror attacks under the slogan, “Fire tomorrow’s terrorist today,” and the organization has also distributed stickers bearing the slogan, “Firing the enemies.”

Gopstein says they block left-wingers who curse them. “So most of the comments are positive, and some things get 80-90 thousand views,” he says. “Many stores are firing their workers thanks to this. Sometimes they want us to publicize them, but not on Facebook, so as not to face legal action, so it gets around on WhatsApp. I have 60 WhatsApp groups. And there’s Instagram too.”

Facebook has shut down a number of your pages because of content you have posted.

“We had 40,000 members on the Lehava page; we’re now at 23,000 and I assume this page will also be closed down in the next week or two,” Gopstein says. “We’ll open a new one. The more they torture us, the bigger we will grow.

“There are many people who sit on our page and complain about a specific picture and then Facebook takes us down. I’ve only been questioned about one of my posts: There was a story about Naftali Bennett saying he was in favor of bringing Arab into the hi-tech world, and I wrote that I’m in favor of sending them into the next world. But it was all in humor.”

Humor?

“Like you see on comedy shows. That’s what I was questioned about. I’m at the police once a week or two; we have talks; but the only connection to Facebook was about the Bennett post. I’d prefer to see them entering the world to come – not that I would put them there. Freedom of expression is very infuriating, but sometimes stands on our side. We are very careful, and every post I put up is checked by a lawyer.”

Who?

“Attorney Itamar Ben-Gvir and several others. When it comes to the more problematic posts, we ask Itamar; he knows all about it.”

*

Also reported HERE

WHO WILL PROTECT US FROM THE ARABS IF THE KNESSET DISBANDS?

Panic on the streets of Jerusalem [sic]

fearfactorpic

How will the government continue its fear factor policies if that happens?

In my neighbourhood of French Hill the spy balloon I wrote about earlier in the week seems to have found a permanent resting place right outside the student dorms of Hebrew University. Before the disbandment, Knesset discusses dangers to Jewish students in Jerusalem’s Mount Scopus campus from neighboring Arabs.

If you read THIS post from the archives, you will see that it is NOT the ‘Arabs’ who are the problem in French Hill. Then read THIS post from yesterday about ‘Arabs’ in general.

I found the following dribble in my ziocrap file this morning …. It will give you a pretty good idea what problems we are facing in French Hill  …. BECAUSE OF THE WHITE MAN!

Hebrew University Students’ ‘Lives are in Danger’

Knesset discusses dangers to Jewish students in Jerusalem’s Mount Scopus campus from neighboring Arabs.
*

Hebrew University protest on security collapse (file)

Hebrew University protest on security collapse (file)
Uri Lenz/Flash 90 (Banner says ‘No Security’)

A Knesset Committee on Tuesday discussed the threat of terrorist attacks felt by Jewish students at Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

The Knesset Committee on Public Complaints, headed by MK Adi Kol (Yesh Atid), heard testimony from students who say they feel that “their lives are in danger.”

Hebrew University’s Mount Scopus campus is located adjacent to several Arab neighborhoods, and is connected to French Hill, where Arab residents have recently rented apartments. In addition, many of thestudents commute to their studies via the light rail, which in recent months has seen countless attacks by Arab assailants, culminating in several car attacks on rail stations by Arab terrorists.

“Many students have filed complaints about this,” said Kol. “Security in the Mount Scopus area is not good, to say the least, and students are expecting the security establishment to take action to ensure their safety. Many students also say they have complained to the University, which has not been sufficiently responsive.”

In response, Shmulik Dahan, head of security at the University, said that it was the responsibility of police to deal with the problems. When asked what campus security was doing to keep criminals and terrorists off the school grounds, he said that “we have between 5,000 and 15,000students at the University each day, and the administration spends tens of millions of shekels on security. I cannot examine every single person entering the campus when there is a long line of people waiting to get in.”

Dahan added that in recent months, campus security had beefed up its activities, and as a result there was a drop of between 50% and 70% inthe number of complaints filed by students in October, compared to the same month a year earlier.

Police official Yuval Reuven, speaking at the meeting, said that police “needed to ensure a balance between the security needs of students and the civilian population. We utilized a number of methods, including technological ones, to ensure safety.”

“In recent months we have made sure that hundreds of police are on duty, enforcing the law. I believe that the campus will soon return to its previous state of quiet,” he added.

*

Meanwhile, the Palestinian Parties in Israel are planning a merger for the upcoming elections …

Arab MKs meet to discuss joining forces

UAL-Ta’al, Balad and Hadash considering running as one party in 2015 elections, fearing separately they will not pass the threshold.

The expected announcement on elections in 2015 galvanized the Arab parties and Hadash into action on Tuesday, when representatives of the three factions met to discuss the possibility of running as one party.

United Arab List-Ta’al, Balad and Hadash are concerned they will be left out of the next Knesset after the threshold was raised from 2 percent to 3.25 percent in March 2014.

“Now, more than any elections in the past, we must act with the utmost responsibility and create a united Arab list that will keep the unique political platforms for each party, while raising the level of Arab representation from 11 seats to 16,” Balad MK Hanin Zoabi said. “There is no way to deal with the rising racism without uniting the Arab parties.”

*

Read the full report HERE

IF HE LOOKS LIKE A MUSLIM HE MUST BE A TERRORIST

Assistant to head of security for Israeli embassy in Brussels mistakenly identifies young man carrying cricket bat covered in sweatshirt as possible terrorist yielding gun, causing man and his family to be expelled from country.

The photo of Abbassi that appeared in Belgian media outlets.

The photo of Abbassi that appeared in Belgian media outlets.

 

Israeli security guard mistakenly identifies ‘terrorist’ in Belgium

Assistant to head of security for Israeli embassy in Brussels mistakenly identifies young man carrying cricket bat covered in sweatshirt as possible terrorist yielding gun, causing man and his family to be expelled from country.

A security guard from Israel’s embassy in Belgium sparked controversy after he mistakenly identified a young man carrying a cricket bat covered in a sweatshirt as a possible terrorist yielding a gun.

The assistant to the head of security in the embassy was on a stroll with his baby son in mid-August on a street in Brussels when he noticed a suspicious man.

He later described the man as a “Middle-Eastern-looking young man holding a weapon covered in cloth,” a description that started a chain of events which eventually led to the expulsion of the young man from Belgium – through no fault of his own.

After the security guard noticed the “suspicious man,” he took a picture of him on his phone but avoided confronting him because the security guard was holding his baby son.

The security guard then proceeded to run to the house of one of the Israeli ambassadors (Israel’s ambassador to Brussels Jack Revach and Israel’s ambassador to the European Union David Waltzer both live in Brussels) out of fear he had detected a potential assassin.

The security guard issued emergency procedure and instructed the ambassadors not to leave their homes. After leaving his son in the care of someone else, the security guard attempted to return to the scene in order to seize the suspect.

However, by the time the security guard returned to the scene the suspect had left the area.

The security guard sent the pictures he had taken of the suspect to the Brussels police, which led to the publication of the picture in the media under the headline “Armed Anti-Semite” and called for individuals to send in any information about the man.

The day after the publication of the picture, 22-year-old Assim Abbassi from Pakistan called the police and identified himself as the man in the photograph.

Abbassi said that the described “weapon” was a cricket bat that was wrapped with his sweatshirt to protect it from the rain, and added that he was on his way to practice the sport.

His explanation was accepted by the police.

It was also revealed that Abbassi was the son of a manager at the Pakistani embassy in Brussels and had been living in Belgium for the past four years.

After the publication of the photo and the suspicions surrounding Abbassi, Abbassi’s father was allegedly fired from his management role at the Pakistani embassy.

The entire family was allegedly told to return to Pakistan within a week because of “the fear they harmed the reputation of Pakistan in Belgium.”

“They denied me and my family the right to live here,” said Abbassi in a campaign to cancel the decision.

“I lost my education. I lost everything and nobody apologized to me,” he added.

Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry spokesman refused to comment.

The spokesman for Pakistan’s embassy in Brussels denied Abbassi’s father was fired because of the incident and claimed that his contract had expired.

Israeli sources confirmed that it was later revealed that Abbassi was innocent and in fact not a terrorist. They also said his version of events was found credible.

Source

LUMPING HAMAS WITH ISIS ~~ IT’S JUST PLAIN WRONG!

And we all know that CNN never lies ....

And we all know that CNN never lies ….

*

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is notorious for making theatrical attempts to find “distractions” or “red herrings” in order to divert attention from his unceasing efforts to decapitate all chances for the establishment of a viable Palestinian state in the West Bank.

 
 
What makes Israel so hell-bent on lumping Hamas with ISIS?

By Khalid Amayreh in occupied Palestine

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is notorious for making theatrical attempts to find “distractions” or “red herrings” in order to divert attention from his unceasing efforts to decapitate all chances for the establishment of a viable Palestinian state in the West Bank.

Netanyahu has effectively tripled the building of Jewish colonies in the West Bank. He has also allowed millenarian Jewish settlers to carry out almost daily provocations against Islam’s third holiest sanctuary, namely Jerusalem’s al-Aqsa Mosque. This could trigger a worldwide conflagration that would put an end to peace efforts in the region.

Netanyahu hopes to desensitize any semblance of Western, especially American, opposition to Israel’s lebensraum policy in the West Bank and the Jewish states’ unrelenting efforts to kill any remaining prospects for the establishment of a Palestinian state.

However, Netanyahu’s diversionary tactics seem to have been blunted by two main recent developments: The Swedish decision to recognize a future Palestinian state and the British Parliament vote to do the same.

None the less, the news from London and Stockholm is not expected to make Netanyahu change his mind or rethink his policy. After all Netanyahu is more of a dishonest demagogue and pathological liar than a straight, honest statesman who would value truth and rectitude.

Netanyahu would insist and swear that Israel wants peace and aspires for peace. He would go as far as making all sorts of solemn testimonies and eloquent statements underlining Israel’s desire for peace. But the truth of the matter is that all of his declarations are sanctimonious and mendacious.

In the final analysis, however, a country that truly desires peace doesn’t build hundreds of settlements on its neighbor’s territories. A country that truly desires peace doesn’t transfer hundreds of thousands to live on a land that doesn’t belong to them.

Netanyahu and the other shipyard dogs of Israeli hasbara would never cease invoking old lies that the settlers are simply returning to their fathers’ land.

But would anyone under the sun give up his home and land if a stranger showed up, insisting that the property belonged to him and claiming that his ancestors owned or occupied the area five thousand years ago???

Needless to say, this analogy more or less epitomizes the entire Palestinian question.

Red herring policy

Israel’s “red-herring policy” is not new. During Egypt’s Gamal Abdul Nasser’s rule, Israel argued that if only Nasser would stop rotating in the Soviet orbit, peace would be around the corner.

In the 1970s and the 1980s, Israel argued that if only the PLO and its leader Yasser Arafat would recognize Israel and revoke the PLO charter that called for Israel’s destruction, peace would be within reach very soon.

In fact, Netanyahu himself repeatedly blamed the lack of progress in talks with the PA on Palestinian disunity, namely the rift between Fatah and Hamas. In numerous TV interviews, he argued that the “the Palestinians are not speaking in one voice.  Let them get united first.”

However, when Hamas and the PA finally agreed to reconcile, Netanyahu got quite hysterical and convulsive. He warned that the PA would have to either make peace with Hamas or Israel, claiming that Palestinian national unity was the ultimate antithesis to peace.

Now, Netanyahu is playing the same Hasbara game once again. And the reasons for this game of make believe remain unchanged, namely morbid Israeli efforts to distract attention from Israeli recalcitrance, intransigence, and rejectionism.

The ISIS Mantra

Having failed to destroy Hamas militarily and liquidate the Palestinian people’s enduring struggle for freedom and independence from Israel’s Nazi-like occupation, Netanyahu is now trying to lump Hamas with ISIS.

His ultimate goal is to make the international community demonize Hamas and therefore distract the world’s attention from Israel’s nefarious occupation.

But Hamas, a national Islamic liberation movement that appeared on the Middle East’s political horizon after winning transparent democratic elections in 2006, is simply something different.

Hamas’s strategic goal is liberty, not domination, or hegemony or anything of this nature.

Hamas’s ultimate goal is to enable the thoroughly tormented Palestinians to live a normal life. like the rest of the peoples of the world, free from Nazi-like Jewish Zionist roadblocks and checkpoints, enable them to travel freely,  pray freely in their mosques, especially in Jerusalem’s Aqsa Mosque, to harvest their olive fields freely and be able to move and commute freely from one locality to the other.  Is this too much?

Hamas wants the Palestinian people to live in dignity and be able to do the sort of things that other peoples around the world take for granted.

Hamas would like to see the Palestinian people free from the specter of fear and terror, including arbitrary arrest at the hands of Gestapo-like Israeli soldiers who routinely raid Palestinian homes in the quite hours before dawn.

In brief, Hamas is not evil. That is why at least 50% of the Palestinian people back Hamas.

In fact, Israel doesn’t hate Hamas because Israel believes Hamas is evil.  As far as evilness is concerned, even Satan himself learns from Israel.

Israel hates Hamas for an entirely different reason, namely the conviction that Hamas is the main hurdle that prevents or impedes the realization of Israel’s ultimate goal: the liquidation of the Palestinian cause.

It is not true that Hamas stands in the road to peace between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA). Israel has been negotiating with the PA (not in good faith) for over 20 years, but to no avail.

The failure of peace talks between Israel and the PA cannot be attributed to Hamas. Those claiming it was are simply not telling the truth.

The real cause is Israel’s adamant insistence on retaining the spoils of the 1967 war.

THE CIA AND MOSSAD COMBINE FORCES TO ‘FIGHT’ TERRORISM

Just one way the US  and the West keeps the truth hidden

Just one way the US and the West hides the truth

Here’s another way ….

Ever hear of MEMRI? (Middle East Research Institute)

The institute was co-founded in 1998 by Yigal Carmon, a former Israeli military intelligence officer and Meyrav Wurmser, an Israeli-born, American political scientist. MEMRI states that its goal is to “bridge the language gap between the Middle East and the West”. Critics charge that it aims to portray the Arab and Muslim world in a negative light, through the production and dissemination of inaccurate translations and by selectively translating views of extremists while deemphasizing or ignoring mainstream opinions. (FROM)

Emphasis on Critics charge that it aims to portray the Arab and Muslim world in a negative light, through the production and dissemination of inaccurate translations and by selectively translating views of extremists while deemphasizing or ignoring mainstream opinions.

Consider me one of those ‘critics’!

*

From their own Site

MEMRI’s work directly supports fighting the U.S. War on Terror. Highly trained staff thoroughly translate and analyze open-source materials that include television programming, radio, newspapers, textbooks, and websites.

Every single day, MEMRI receives requests from members of the U.S. government, military, and legislature. Since September 11, 2001, the demand for this material has significantly increased – providing thousands of pages of translated documents of Arab, Iranian, Urdu, Pashtu, Hindi, Dari, and Turkish print media, terrorist websites, school books, and tens of thousands of hours of translated footage from Arab and Iranian television.

This video takes you from the halls of government to the briefing rooms of the U.S. military to the frontlines of counter-terrorism efforts, and demonstrates just how MEMRI has become – A Vital Component in the U.S. War on Terror.

Members of MEMRI’s Board of Advisors and Directors are bi-partisan and have honorably served Presidents Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama. Read more…

They even operate their own TV Network …. The Palestinian Authority often broadcasts clips on their own TV Network in their attempt to justify the occupation and ethnic cleansing policies of their zionist brothers. 

Regarding a recent video clip, British zionists are campaigning with it in an attempt to discourage a YES Vote in Parliament as to whether or not  recognise a Palestinian State.

In the clip, which was recently posted to the internet, Palestinian Sheik Omar Abu Sara in a sermon given in the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem asks the following of those Arab countries currently helping NATO to attack Islamic State:

“Whom are they fighting? Are they fighting the Jews? The Russians? The Hindus? They are fighting our brothers. These planes are bombing our brothers. Is the Al-Aqsa Mosque too far for them? Is Jerusalem too far for them? Are the Jews too far for them?”

It is sentiments like these that persist not just throughout Hamas but throughout the more respected Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas.

Here is a clip that was broadcast on Palestinian Authority television in which the PA Mufti of Jerusalem Muhammad Hussein urges his followers to kill Jews.

Could we expect a combination of the CIA and Mossad to portray the honest aspirations of the Palestinian people?

Hope you noticed that none of those passing by stopped to listen to this guy.

 

SELF INFLICTED ANTI SEMITISM

Image ‘Copyleft’ by Carlos Latuff

The zionist Thought Police have mastered the art of "linguistic warfare" and have buried many with their Orwellian weaponry.

The zionist Thought Police
have mastered the art of
“linguistic warfare” and have
buried many with their
Orwellian weaponry.

*

The event reported in yesterday’s post seems to have rocked the foundations of zion. The last thing Israel wants is to be publicly criticized, especially by American Jews. Even worse is when those very same Jews endorse the BDS Movement.

As always, Israel’s only defense is to lie about the situation and to use their latest tactic of artificial anti Semitism as is reported below …

*

The following made headline news in the Israeli press ….

*

Pro-Palestinian protesters chanted anti-Semitic statements in the arena when there was a call for donations to the IDF before the game. Other protesters also tried to disrupt the game by unfurling Palestinian flags on the court – they were removed by security.

*

NY Jew assaulted outside Maccabi TA game in Brooklyn

Local community leader beaten by pro-Palestinian protesters after Israeli basketball champions lose to Brooklyn Nets.
Ynetnews
*

Leonard Petlakh, a local Jewish leader in New York City, was assaulted by pro-Palestinian protesters at the Barclays Center on Wednesday.

Petlakh, a 42-year-old who runs one of the largest sports centers in the community, was rushed to the hospital with a broken nose and required eight stitches.

He was beaten by the demonstrators in front of his children, 10 and 14, who were accompanying him to cheer on Maccabi Tel Aviv in their loss to the Brooklyn Nets.

Pro-Palestinian protesters in Brooklyn (Photo: AP)

Pro-Palestinian protesters in Brooklyn (Photo: AP)

*
According to the Jewish Daily Forward, Petlakh was upset that his sons witnessed the violence, but said that he hoped “it sends a strong message to them to stand up for their values as proud Americans and as those who will eventually volunteer to serve in the Israel Defense Forces.”

Pro-Palestinian protesters chanted anti-Semitic statements in the arena when there was a call for donations to the IDF before the game. Other protesters also tried to disrupt the game by unfurling Palestinian flags on the court – they were removed by security.

The incidents continued after the game, when Petlakh was assaulted. The Jewish leader filed a complaint with the police, which has launched a hate-crime investigation, and called for increased police presence at sporting events connected to Israel.

According to American media outlets, the incident was captured on closed-circuit cameras and the police is reviewing the footage.

*

The American zionist Jewish Daily Forward had a slightly different report …. a wee bit more believable

*

Pro-Palestinian Group Condemns Beating of Jewish Leader at Brooklyn Nets Game Protest

Jewish Voice for Peace Says ‘Horrified’ by Attack

*

DIRECT ACTION FRONT FOR PALESTINE

By Gabe Friedman

*

A pro-Palestinian organization expressed ‘horror’ at the attack on Jewish leader Leonard Petlakh during a demonstration after a Nets basketball game at the Barclays Center in Brooklyn Tuesday night — and called for an investigation into the incident.

Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), which supports Palestinian causes and often criticizes Israel, was one of the primary organizers of the protest, which slammed the Nets for holding a fundraiser with a group that supports the Israeli miltary.

It said the protest ended after the start of the exhibition game between the Brooklyn Nets and Maccabi Tel Aviv. Petlakh, director of the KIngs Bay Y, a Jewish community group, was punched in the face after the game while leaving the arena and suffered a cut that required eight stitches.

*

Leonard Petlakh

Leonard Petlakh
*

“If something happened after the game, which would have been several hours after the protest ended, it had nothing to do with us or the demonstration,” said JVP New York member Pam Sporn.

“(We) express our horror at the injuries that Mr. Petlakh suffered,” the group added in a press release. “We hope to know soon the full details of what happened.”

About 100 protestors, JVP and several other organizations, such as Adalah New York and Direct Action Front for Palestine, demonstrated outside the Barclays Center because the Nets were holding a fundraiser for Friends of the IDF.

As the JVP press release explains, these organizations expressed the view that “honoring the IDF only a few weeks after Israel’s attack on Gaza has ended contradicts our values as Jewish New Yorkers.”

Petlakh, 42, says he was attacked by demonstrators holding Palestinian flags as he walked out of the arena with his sons, ages 14 and 10, and a group of friends.

Police are investigating the attack. A police spokesman said Thursday that no arrests have been made.

ILLUSIONS AND REALITIES IN ISRAEL/PALESTINE TODAY

WHY DID THE WEST CREATE ISIS WHEN THEY ALREADY HAD ZIONISM?

Even Jon Stewart can’t take the ISIS ‘threat’ seriously …. why should we? More and more people are waking up to the fact of who the real enemy really is.

*

ISIS: ‘American-Zionist Tool’ for Dismembering Iraq (Sotal Iraq, Iraq)

*

 If America had been truly serious about putting Iraq on the right path and instituting a genuine democracy, it would have issued legislation to protect human dignity and the right of the people to live within a framework of liberty, peace, security and safety! Instead, the United States did just the opposite, disrupting Iraq’s civilizational project.

“Strangely enough, America today is fighting ISIS, and has sent experts to Iraq for that very purpose. For whom? For the love of Iraqis? And for whose benefit does America support ISIS and provide it with weapons in Syria? For whose benefit does it support the al-Nusra Front? … Today it is essential for us to stand against, pay careful attention to, and analyze carefully, all American and Israeli plans. We must all join to defeat their criminal designs for undermining Iraq, and their tool of implementation, ISIS.”

*

Globe & Mail, Canada

Globe & Mail, Canada

*

By Ali Abed Al Ghazzi 

Translated By Lina Barakat-Masroujeh

*

No observer of events can justifiably describe America’s role in the Middle East as one of a neutral advocate of liberty and peace, because the U.S. shows no concern for Arabs or Islamic interests. It is entirely concerned with securing its hegemony over the entire region to ensure the protection of its own economic interests and the security interests of Israel.

Following the 2003 occupation of this ancient society, which has well-established roots and stretches far back in history, America employed a reckless and cunning policy of spreading sectarianism in order to dismember and dissociate Iraq’s social and intellectual fabric.

The United States knew how to sow its malicious ideas with the rules and regulations imposed by the notorious [U.S. Proconsul] L. Paul Bremer. Bremer dissolved the Army, and his de-Baathification allowed militias to integrate into the armed forces, which fostered sectarianism and religious, ethnic and racial strife, establishing a system that encouraged the division of Iraq. Ultimately, that was the key objective.

If America had been truly serious about putting Iraq on the right path and instituting a genuine democracy, it would have issued legislation to protect human dignity and the right of the people to live within a framework of liberty, peace, security and safety! Instead, the United States did just the opposite, disrupting Iraq’s civilizational project.

Strangely enough, America today is fighting ISIS, and has sent experts to Iraq for that very purpose. For whom? For the love of Iraqis? And for whose benefit does America support ISIS and provide it with weapons in Syria? For whose benefit does it support the al-Nusra Front?

Everyone should be aware that America, with its policies of double standards, its purely demagogic methods, and its changing of colors in the region, are in place only to serve its own special interests. What does America and its Zionist and Freemason allies want from Iraq after the catastrophes of Mosul and Tikrit? [ISIS overran both cities and continues to occupy them].

Today it is essential for us to stand against, pay careful attention to, and analyze carefully, all American and Israeli plans. We must all join to defeat their criminal designs for undermining Iraq, and their tool of implementation, ISIS. And we much take special care not to exclude any of Iraq’s religions, ethnicities, or races. Iraq is in dire need of a nation that stands with our armed forces to deter these traitors and ISIS scum.

For the sake of protecting Iraq’s land, sky, and water, and maintaining the cohesion of the nation, remember that Allah never forsakes those who believe in Him, and that defending the homeland is a sacred duty in all religions.

 

Original report in Arabic HERE

 

Source

9/11/14 ~~ THE BAR MITZVAH OF ISLAMOPHOBIA

Goldstone barred from grandson's Bar Mitzvah Published in Mail & Guardian on 22 Apr 2010

Goldstone barred from grandson’s Bar Mitzvah
Published in Mail & Guardian on 22 Apr 2010

*

Actually, the demonization of Islam started earlier than 13 years ago, but 9/11/01 was the official date that it became America’s ‘proud baby boy’. Islamophobia took its place in history to replace the Cold War which ended shortly before the demise of the Soviet Union itself. America needed a new enemy so it created one, with a little help from its friends.

*

'Demonization of Islam' "Copyleft' by Carlos Latuff

‘Demonization of Islam’
“Copyleft’ by Carlos Latuff

*

Some of those friends were even caught dancing in the streets of New York in celebration of the Twin Towers’ attack …

*

The mentally challenged US President at the time of the attack was seen reading a book to children … UPSIDE DOWN!

Duh!

Duh!

*

We still do not have the answers to the role he played in the attacks … but he had enough warning  not to be in the White House when they occurred.

*

"Copyleft' by Carlos Latuff

“Copyleft’ by Carlos Latuff

There are still over 100 unanswered questions that can be found HERE

*

Why does America refuse to admit that others are victim to the same forces of hatred and terrorism that attacked them thirteen years ago today? Worse yet, why does America continue to hide the fact that it is they who are orchestrating those very forces?

*

al-qaeda-taliban-isis

'Copyleft' by Carlos Latuff

‘Copyleft’ by Carlos Latuff

 

*
Thirteen years ago today America was attacked. Civilians died. Thirteen years later it is still making headline news….
*
Gaza is attacked every day. Civilians die every day. It never makes headline news in the West. It’s as if it never happens…. BUT IT DOES.
*
A pro Palestinian blogger posted the following a few years ago, it says it all!

Dear America, your 9/11 is our 24/7.

Sincerely, Palestine.

That’s the entire post, short and very much to the point.
*
The plight of those in Gaza and the rest of Palestine is not only omitted in the media, it is hidden from the eyes of the Western population altogether. Palestine, Gaza in particular, simply does not exist.
*
To date, one of the best reports I have seen regarding 9/11 was written by my son Peter six years ago …
*

I am Not a Conspiracy Theorist: 9/11 Facts or Fictions?

By Peter Amsel

*

Living in the world today can be quite difficult, especially if you feel the need to avoid the moral and intellectual pitfalls that “modern” life provides. However, this is something that only becomes difficult if you feel a need to avoid compromising your moral compass (assuming such exists), otherwise it should not be a serious impediment. There are many things about myself and my character that I like to believe are true and reasonably noble, amongst that list would be that I am willing to take correction from others when I make mistakes and that I try to be as generous of my time, energies and resources as much as I am able. While these are not the only traits that I would like to trumpet, humility is also a trait that I am aware that I have, but am in need of more.

Having said that, there is one thing that I am truly thankful that I possess, and that is the ability to reason. This is by no means a unique gift as it defines our species in our ability to look at information and make decisions based on the facts that have been presented to us. Being reasonable means that we are able to look at information and ideas even if they come to us from people and sources that we may not immediately trust and assess that information. We look at material without prejudice, allowing the truth to be revealed, allowing the obfuscations and machinations of the special interest groups, lobbyists and anyone else with something to gain by the perpetration of lies to be shut out through the acknowledgement that the truth shall, indeed, set you free.

Unfortunately, alas, that is not how the “real world” seems to operate. Alas, that seems to be just the opposite as to how things work. Before anything else is said, there is one other trait that I am very proud to possess: I am not, in any way, shape or form, a conspiracy theorist. I believe that men walked on the moon. I believe that a lone man, using a single rifle (having been trained as a Marine by the United States and having attained sharp shooter status) assassinated JFK. I believe that Area 51 is, in fact, a Top Secret (UMBRA) Military Base used for the testing and development of new aircraft for the USAF (including the U2, SR71, B1, B2, F117, F22, F35, and the UCAV’s that are currently being deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan).

I am not a believer in conspiracies.

We have not been told the truth about 9/11; we have been lied to and the people that have told the lies know that the truth has been concealed from the public; furthermore, they know that the truth is not “out there”, it has been examined by experts in their field, experts that are willing to openly dispute the “findings” of the “9/11 Commission”, a work of fantasy and fiction that fed the American people a pile of obfuscation that stank of the stench of the rotting corpses trapped in the rubble of Ground Zero.

I will never be able to forget that morning; I was in the basement working on the computer when the phone rang. My step-father’s frantic voice told me to turn on CNN; a plane had just crashed into the WTC. The rest of that day I watched. I watched, prayed, wept, cried, sobbed, prayed, and cried some more. My parents are from New York and I spent the majority of my summer vacations visiting family there; even though I had been born and raised in Canada, this felt like an attack on my own home. I was talking to a friend in Toronto when the first tower collapsed. It seemed wrong then, too fast, too symmetrical … too … perfect. Then the second tower fell.

 

Continue reading this at his BLOG

*

There are still other unanswered questions …. WHERE HAVE ALL THE FLOWERS GONE?

*

Uncle Sam still wants us to believe that 9/11 is a thorn in his side

'Copyleft' by Carlos Latuff

‘Copyleft’ by Carlos Latuff

#OperationForeverThreat ~~ THE IMMINENT ATTACK ON IRAN THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN

Still, the persistent false narrative that military strikes by either the United States or Israel may follow any potential failure to reach a deal continues to be repeated in the press. Of course, the fact that any such attack would be unequivocally illegal under international law is rarely noted in these assessments.

*

The Forever Threat: The Imminent Attack on Iran That Will Never Happen

Compiled by Nima Shirazi AT

 *

“Israel has drawn up plans for a combined air and ground attack on Iranian nuclear installations if diplomacy fails to halt Tehran’s atomic program…”

Toledo Blade, March 14, 2005

*
Last month, amid the Israeli bombardment of Gaza, accomplished lunatic Louie Gohmert, a Republican congressman from Texas, took to the House floor and called for Iran to be attacked.

After insisting it is “time to cut off every dime of American money going to anyone who has any kind of relationship with Hamas or those killing in the Middle East, and especially in Israel,” Gohmert added, “It is time to bomb Iran’s nuclear capabilities. It is time for the United States, if we are not going to stop Iran’s nukes, then let Israel do it. A friend will not put another friend in this kind of jeopardy.”

Never mind that Iran has no “nukes” for anyone to “stop,” since it’s not actually making any and never has made or acquired any. Never mind that Iran has beenconsistently complying with the prescriptions of the multilateral deal agreed to last November by Iran and six world powers. Never mind that a number of recent articles in widely-read media outlets have addressed the myriad falsehoods and mythsresponsible for the past three decades of fear-mongering and propaganda about Iran’s civilian nuclear program.

Still, the persistent false narrative that military strikes by either the United States or Israel may follow any potential failure to reach a deal continues to be repeated in the press. Of course, the fact that any such attack would be unequivocally illegal under international law is rarely noted in these assessments.

Pronouncements that Iran is close to having a nuclear bomb, or close to being bombed, are ubiquitous in the media. Threats against Iran – by both the United Statesand Israel – have been made for decades, despite routine Iranian dismissal of such rhetoric as mere bluster.

The frequency of such threats – always reported with fever-pitched alacrity by a dutiful and prostrate press – is alarming.

Not only is an American or Israeli attack on Iran always just around the bend – regardless of the state of diplomacy or intelligence assessments – but the media consistently provides fantasy scenarios by which its audience can imagine, replete with maps and graphics, just how such war crimes would take place.

Over twenty years ago, a report in the Independent (UK) published on June 23, 1994 revealed that the Pentagon had inked a deal to provide Israel with advanced F-15I fighter jets, designed to “enable the Israelis to carry out strikes deep into Iraq and Iran without refuelling.”

Three years later, on December 9, 1997, a The Times of London headline screamed, “Israel steps up plans for air attacks on Iran.” The article, written by Christopher Walker, reported on the myriad “options” Israel had in confronting what it deemed “Iran’s Russian-backed missile and nuclear weapon programme.”

Such reports have been published ever since. Of course, neither the United States nor Israel will attack Iran, regardless of the success or failure of negotiations, but such reports (often the result of strategically timed “leaks” by anonymous government officials) serve to not only to intentionally torpedo diplomacy but also mislead the public  into believing the absurdly false narrative surrounding the Iranian nuclear program; that is, either Iran must be bombed or it will acquire a nuclear arsenal. This is nonsense.

Below are some of the constant headlines we’ve seen over the past dozen years promoting such propaganda. When will this madness – this pathological obsession with the false necessity of dropping bombs and the righteous inevitability of killing people – stop?

The Times of London, November 5, 2002:

AFP, October 11, 2003:

The Scotsman, November 22, 2003:

New York Daily News, November 23, 2003:

The New York Times, August 21, 2004:

Los Angeles Times, October 22, 2004:

The Jerusalem Post, January 21, 2005:

The Independent, January 27, 2005:

Toledo Blade, March 14, 2005:

Associated Press, December 4, 2005:

The Straits Times, December 17, 2005:

Associated Press, January 22, 2006:

Fox News, June 4, 2006:

The Telegraph, February 24, 2007:

Associated Press, March 21, 2007:

Newsweek, December 19, 2007:

The Daily Star (Lebanon), May 30, 2008:

USA Today, June 6, 2008:

The Telegraph, June 7, 2008:

The Age, June 9, 2008:

Fox News, June 20, 2008:

The Telegraph, June 23, 2008:


ABC News, July 1, 2008:

Ha’aretz, July 2, 2008:

AFP, July 30, 2008:

Associated Press, August 7, 2008:

CBS News, August 7, 2008:

Wired, April 2, 2009:

Salon, April 14, 2009:

The Times of London, April 18, 2009:

The Wall Street Journal, June 12, 2009:

The Washington Post, July 2, 2009:

CBS News, July 27, 2009:

Los Angeles Times, August 30, 2009:

Talking Points Memo, August 31, 2009:


Fox News, September 21, 2009:

Huffington Post, September 28, 2009:

Ynet, October 9, 2009:

The Washington Times, October 22, 2009:

Ha’aretz, November 6, 2009:

The New York Times, December 23, 2009:

Newsmax, April 2, 2010:


The Wall Street Journal, April 21, 2010:

AFP, June 12, 2010:

TIME, July 15, 2010:

The Weekly Standard, July 26, 2010:


Christian Science Monitor, August 12, 2010:

The Spectator (UK), August 12, 2010:


Christian Science Monitor, August 13, 2010:

The Weekly Standard, August 14, 2010:

The Week, August 17, 2010:

New York Daily News, August 17, 2010:

The Atlantic, August 18, 2010:

Newsmax, September 2, 2010:

The Atlantic, November 28, 2010:

AFP, November 29, 2010:

The Australian, November 30, 2010:

The Washington Times, December 3, 2010:

The Australian, January 13, 2011:

Associated Press, May 30, 2011:

Ha’aretz, September 28, 2011:

Associated Press, November 2, 2011:

The Daily Beast, November 2, 2011:

The Guardian, November 2, 2011:

The Telegraph, November 6, 2011:

Reuters, November 9, 2011:

Arutz Sheva, November 10, 2011:


Chicago Tribune, November 13, 2011:

Arutz Sheva, December 1, 2011:

The New York Times, January 25, 2012:

Foreign Affairs, January/February 2012:

The Washington Post, February 2, 2012:

Reuters, February 3, 2012:

Foreign Affairs, February 23, 2012:

Congressional Research Service, March 27, 2012:


CNN, March 30, 2012:

Salon/GlobalPost, May 9, 2012:


The Telegraph, May 17, 2012:

CBN News, May 24, 2012:


The Blaze, July 8, 2012:

Reuters, August 10, 2012:

The Times of Israel, August 11, 2012:

The Daily Mail, August 21, 2012:

The Jewish Chronicle, August 27, 2012:

Forbes, September 30, 2012:

National Journal, October 9, 2012:


The Telegraph, October 9, 2012:

Voice of America, December 19, 2012:


The New York Times, January 26, 2013:

The Times of Israel, March 14, 2013:

Newsmax, April 13, 2013:

The Wall Street Journal, May 2, 2013:

Ha’aretz, May 3, 2013:

The Times of Israel, May 9, 2013:

Al Jazeera English, July 17, 2013:

The Atlantic, August 1, 2013:


Washington Examiner
, September 18, 2013:


Gatestone Institute, October 7, 2013:

Financial Times, November 17, 2013:

CNN, November 19, 2013:

The Times of London, November 26, 2013:

Defense News, December 4, 2013:


CBS News, December 6, 2013:


ThinkProgress, January 2, 2014:

Foreign Affairs, January 7, 2014:

Ha’aretz, March 19, 2014:

Associated Press, March 21, 2014:

The National Interest, April 16, 2014:

Iran Times, May 16, 2014:


Defense News
, June 8, 2014:

Jewish Telegraph Agency (JTA), June 12, 2014:

The Raw Story, July 23, 2014:

 

« Older entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,209 other followers