On this issue there is total agreement with the West ... Image by Carlos Latuff

On this issue there is total agreement with the West …
Image by Carlos Latuff

Netanyahu is not a liar who thinks he is honest and telling the truth. He knows deep in his heart that he is dishonest and not telling the truth.

Netanyahu invokes Muslim extremism but ignores Jewish extremism 

By Khalid Amayreh in occupied Palestine

During a visit to the town of Affula, north east of Tel Aviv on Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu blamed Muslim extremism for “this wave of violence and terror that Israel is witnessing today.”

Netanyahu, a habitual liar who thinks mendacious PR comes first before everything else, ignored the legitimate causes that made Palestinians, especially youngsters, risk their lives and get murdered by trigger-happy Israeli soldiers and settlers.

Netanyahu is not a liar who thinks he is honest and telling the truth. He knows deep in his heart that he is dishonest and not telling the truth.

Otherwise, he would have alluded to Jewish extremism which not only produced his own government, evidently the most extremist in Israel’s history, but is morphing the entire region into a powder keg as a result of tampering with the sensitive issue of Jerusalem, especially the Aqsa Mosque.

No one is denying the existence of extremists among the followers of all religions.

However, blaming Muslim extremists for all the trouble in the world is beyond the pale.

In the final analysis, it is mostly Muslims who are being victimized, even exterminated, in many parts of the globe at the hands of those self-righteous states that claim to be fighting terror.

Just consider the genocidal anti-Muslim pogroms in places like Myanmar and the Central African Republic where Muslim civilians have been burned to death very much like Jews were in concentration camps in Europe in the mid-forties of the past century.

Or consider Afghanistan and Pakistan where civilians are haphazardly and blithely murdered under the rubric of fighting Taliban.

Or in Syria, where superpowers that are supposed to maintain world peace, are conducting a slow-motion holocaust against the people of Syria, triggering massive waves of refugees, fleeing death and terror.

Or in Iraq, where vengeful sectarian gangs are carrying out murderous ethnic cleansing against Muslims.

Or, indeed, in Palestine, where the grandchildren and great grand-children of the Holocaust victims and survivors are murdering (and burning alive) Palestinian children, on no other accounts than the victims want to be free from Zionist oppression and racism.

So, it is mainly Muslims, not Jews, or Christians or Buddhists, who are bearing the brunt of terror and religious intolerance in the world today.

True, with the help of modern media, a highlighted criminal act by violent groups such as ISIS might give impression that the group represents ultimate evil whereas truly criminal entities such Israel and the Assad regime stand out as more reasonable.

But this is not true.

In the final analysis, Israel stole Palestine from its legitimate owners, the Palestinians, murdered them, destroyed their homes, bulldozed their fields and then dispersed them to the four winds.

And at the top of this, Israel added insult to injury by calling its victims “terrorists.”

It is really sad and lamentable that Netanyahu leads Jews, a people who once valued truth, honesty and justice before Zionism led many them astray, transforming them into land thieves and child killers.

Today, the Netanyahu government is the biggest sponsor of extremism in Israel-Palestine.

The Netanyahu government is the sponsor, enabler and ultimate protector of Messianic Jewish thugs who are ganging up on helpless Palestinians on the hills of the West Bank.

Today, the Netanyahu government, which has effectively killed any remaining realistic chances for a just and durable peace in Palestine-Israel is encouraging Jewish fanatics and Gush Emunim gangs to trigger a religious war with the Muslim world by tampering with the delicate status quo at the Haram al-Sharif  (Noble Sanctuary) in Jerusalem.

Today, the Netanyahu government is suffocating or trying to suffocate every legitimate expression of Palestinian grievances, pushing them to the squares of despair, frustration and violence.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak was once quoted as saying that had he been born a Palestinian, he would probably have become a “terrorist.”

Barak was by means a paragon of honesty, but his unintended remark was a slip of a tongue that spelled volumes.

But Netanyahu is much worse. What else can be said of a leader whose policy is mendacity and whose shield is dishonesty?

Yes, the Palestinians are undergoing hard times. They have always found themselves facing hard times.

But Jews should also brace for harder times ahead.

Now, with the two-state solution practically dead, the consequences of decades of stone-walling, intransigence and arrogance of power will soon begin to reveal themselves. But it would be too late for Israel and the Jews.


Wiesenthal Center wants New Yorkers to give anti-Israel activist ‘the reception he deserves: an empty hall’, but nobody has asked for money back



No takers as NY theater offers refunds for Waters

A theater in Sag Harbor, New York has offered to refund tickets to a sold-out performance by Roger Waters over his support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement against Israel.

Waters, the former frontman of rock band Pink Floyd, has been vocal in his criticism of artists who perform in Israel. He is scheduled to perform Friday at the Bay Street Theater. Page Six reported Wednesday that the performance may face picketers in a protest organized by pro-Israel groups.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center in a statement issued on Tuesday called on New Yorkers “to give Roger Waters the reception he deserves: an empty hall. We urge people who may have been unaware of his hate-filled boycott campaign and bought tickets for his performance, to vote with their feet and instead stand in solidarity — outside of the theater — with the innocent victims of terrorism in The Holy Land.”

The theater’s executive director, Tracy Mitchell, on Wednesday told local news website that no one has requested a refund, and that the theater has people “begging for tickets.”

Earlier this month, in a much-publicized rant, radio personality Howard Stern ripped Waters for his support of the movement to boycott Israel.

Waters in an open letter to rocker Jon Bon Jovi ahead of his concert earlier this month in Israel, accused the artist of “standing shoulder to shoulder” with right-wing Israeli extremists.

In response, Bon Jovi said at his concert: “I’ll come here any time you want.”

Waters has published open letters calling on fellow musicians to join a boycott of Israel. He has also come under fire for using at in his concerts a huge inflated balloon in the shape of a wild boar with a prominently visible Star of David among other symbols, including a dollar sign and a hammer and sickle. He had used the gimmick for several years.

Having previously defended Roger Waters from accusations of anti-Semitism, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) in 2013 reluctantly acknowledged that “anti-Semitic conspiracy theories” have “seeped into the totality” of the former Pink Floyd frontman’s views.

“Judging by his remarks, Roger Waters has absorbed classic anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, and these have now seeped into the totality of his views,” Abraham H. Foxman, then the National Director of the ADL, told The Times of Israel. “His comments about Jews and Israel have gotten progressively worse over time. It started with anti-Israel invective, and has now morphed into conspiratorial anti-Semitism.”




Watch as Netanyahu publicly asserts that Adolf Hitler had no intention of exterminating Europe’s Jews until a Palestinian persuaded him to do it.

Just one of the many lies in the following video

(Which, BTW, were refuted by historians and politicians)

Full report by Ali Abunimah HERE

Why is Benjamin Netanyahu trying to whitewash Hitler?

Now take a look at MEMRI’S latest creation …. then look at who MEMRI is after you watch this …. FROM


  • Bernard Lewis, Professor of Near Eastern Studies Emeritus at Princeton University.
  • Elie Wiesel, Recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, Presidential Medal of Freedom, the U.S. Congressional Gold Medal, and the Medal of Liberty Award.
  • Gen. Michael V. Hayden, retired United States Air Force four-star general and former Director of the National Security Agency and Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
  • Jose Maria Aznar, former Prime Minister of Spain.
  • Stephen J. Trachtenberg, President Emeritus and University Professor of Public Service at George Washington University.
  • Donald Rumsfeld, Former US Secretary of Defense and US Representative (IL).
  • James Woolsey, Former Director of Central Intelligence Agency and Under-Secretary of the Navy.
  • John Bolton, Former US Ambassador to the United Nations.
  • John Ashcroft, Former US Attorney General and U.S. Senator (MO).
  • Ehud Barak, Former Prime Minister of Israel.
  • Irwin Cotler, former Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
  • Mort Zuckerman, Chairman and editor-in-chief, U.S. News & World Report.
  • Chin Ho Lee, former FBI Special Agent and Senior Executive of the Hyundai Corporation.
  • Peter Hoekstra, former Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and 9-term member of U.S. House of Representatives from Michigan.
  • Dorothy Denning, Distinguished Professor of Defense Analysis at the Naval Postgraduate School.
  • Norman Podhoretz, Former editor-in-chief of Commentary Magazine.
  • M.K. Narayanan, former Director of India’s Intelligence Bureau and former Indian National Security Advisor and Special Advisor to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
  • William Bennett, Former Secretary of Education.
  • Christopher DeMuth, Former President, American Enterprise Institute.
  • Anne Speckhard, Adjunct Associate Professor of Psychiatry at Georgetown University in the School of Medicine and of Security Studies in the School of Foreign Service.
  • Paul Bremer, Former Ambassador to the Netherlands; former Director of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance in Iraq (de-factor governor).
  • Lord George Weidenfeld, Former Vice-President, Oxford University Development Program.
  • Katrina Lantos Swett, Chairwoman of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom; President of the Lantos Foundation for Human Rights and Justice
  • Alfred Moses, Former Ambassador to Romania.
  • Herb London, President Emeritus of the Hudson Institute.
  • Stuart Eizenstat, former ambassador to the European Union.
  • Deborah Lipstadt, Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish and Holocaust Studies at Emory University.
  • Josef Joffe, Publisher of Die Zeit.
  • Natan Sharanksy, former Israeli Minister for Jerusalem and Diaspora Affairs, Minister without Portfolio.
  • Jana Hybaskova, former Member of the European Parliament and Chairperson of the European Democrats Party (Czech Republic).
  • Dr. Khaleel Mohammed, Professor of Religion at San Diego State University (SDSU) and faculty member of SDSU Center for Islamic and Arabic Studies.
  • Imam Hassen Chalghoumi, French-Tunisian Imam of the Drancy mosque, Paris.
  • Alan Dershowitz, Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, author of 27 works as well as over 100 magazine and journal articles.
  • Yehuda Bauer, Former Director of the International Institute for Holocaust Research at Yad Vashem.
  • Dr. Khaled Fouad Allam, Algerian sociologist at the University of Trieste (Italy).
  • Magdi Khalil, human rights activist and Executive Editor of the Egyptian weekly Watani International.
  • Faraj Sarkouhi, former editor of the Iranian literary monthly magazine Adineh.


The myth …

Leaving for UN, Benjamin Netanyahu Blames Palestinians for Jerusalem Violence

See full report HERE


The reality … it’s not just the Temple Mount … (click on links)

Israeli forces cross into Gaza, level land


Nablus police chief, 3-year-old daughter injured by Israeli fire


Israeli forces continue entry restrictions to Aqsa compound


New clashes as Israeli forces raid Al-Aqsa Mosque compound


Israel imposes lockdown on East Jerusalem neighborhoods


There are more examples, many more …. none of which you will read about in the Western Media.

That’s why WE ARE HERE!


How’s this for twisted logic?

“SodaStream should have been encouraged in the West Bank if [the BDS movement] truly cared about the Palestinian people.”


THIS is what BDS is all about .... NOT the BS below

THIS is what BDS is all about …. NOT the BS below

SodaStream Boss Blasts BDS — as Firm Quits West Bank

SodaStream’s chief executive called the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement anti-Semitic and maintained that his company gave West Bank Palestinian workers good pay and benefits.

In an interview with the Associated Press on Wednesday, two weeks before the West Bank factory is set to close, SodaStream CEO Daniel Birnbaum said his company’s critics did not have a grasp on the situation on the ground at the factory.

“It’s propaganda. It’s politics. It’s hate. It’s anti-Semitism. It’s all the bad stuff we don’t want to be a part of,” Birnbaum said. “SodaStream should have been encouraged in the West Bank if [the BDS movement] truly cared about the Palestinian people.”

SodaStream, a company that produces domestic soda-making machines, announced last fall that it would close its West Bank factory in the face of international pressure from the BDS movement, which seeks to hurt Israel’s economy over its policies towards Palestinians. The movement claimed that SodaStream discriminated against Palestinian workers and paid some less than Israeli workers.

Hundreds of Palestinian workers from the factory could lose their jobs in the company’s transition to a new plant in the Negev region because Israel will not grant them all work permits for security reasons. Up to 600 Palestinians worked in the West Bank, and Birnbaum said only about 130 have so far been granted work permits.

“All the people who wanted to close [the West Bank factory] are mistaken,” Ali Jafar, a shift manager from a West Bank told the AP. “They didn’t take into consideration the families.”

The commute for West Bank workers will now be a two-hour bus ride to the Negev plant that involves an Israeli border security checkpoint.

SodaStream’s revenue took a big hit in 2014. Birnbaum blamed the U.S. market’s movement away from sugary drinks, not the influence of BDS pressure.


The path never taken by zion

The path never taken by zion


Only to combat it with more lies !!

“The BDS is a group of celebrities and academics, pro-Palestinian anti-Semites who want to destroy Israel. We must not be timid in our approach to BDS, and we must fight it with all our might, just as if it were an army against Israel.”

Roger Waters  Reuters

Roger Waters Reuters

New York Councilor Petitions to Ban Roger Waters from US

Long Island councilman Bruce Blakeman says notorious anti-Israel musician’s actions would be a hate crime in the US.

“The UN can simply not be taken seriously.” So says Republican councilor Bruce Blakeman of Long Island, in the wake of the UN’s report condemning Israel’s activities during Operation Protective Edge in Gaza.

Blakeman, a former presiding officer of the Nassau County Legislature and ex-head of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, spoke to Arutz Sheva on Tuesday night at a dinner in honor of the Ateret Cohanim association of Jerusalem.

Asked about the latest UN report, he said, “The UN condemnations of Israel generally [stem from] some despots, who come from countries where women may not drive, where people are stoned, and where there are no free elections or freedom of the press. So it’s actually quite laughable, if it wasn’t so tragic… Israel is a democracy, with freedom of the press, religion and expression, and where women have full rights. This is basically an anti-Semitic [phenomenon]; they are quick to condemn anything that Israel does, even though Israel is always on the right side of the issues.”

Blakeman is also a strong supporter of Israeli rights in Judea and Samaria. In a visit last year, he stated, “As one who headed one of the largest aviation networks in the world, I feel that the U.S., after the events of 9-11, must understand Israel’s security needs regarding aviation. Having toured Samaria, it is clear to me that strategically, the State of Israel cannot cede this area.”

Blakeman has strong words against the BDS boycott-Israel campaign, which he feels must be treated like a military battle: “As a councilman in the largest township in America, I am writing to the Secretary of State to ask that Roger Waters not be allowed to enter the U.S.” Blakeman explained that Waters, one of the leaders of the BDS movement, commitsin Europe what the U.S. considers to be hate crimes against Jews.

“The BDS is a group of celebrities and academics, pro-Palestinian anti-Semites,” Blakeman affirmed, “who want to destroy Israel. We must not be timid in our approach to BDS, and we must fight it with all our might, just as if it were an army against Israel.”




This time from Britain …..

  • One question arises from the report below ….  If what they say is all true, WHAT ARE THEY SO WORRIED ABOUT?
Hoe zion views the BDS Movement

How zion views the BDS Movement

They see it as a failure …. but it’s far from the truth!

The BDS movement is failing.

The BDS campaign (boycotts, sanctions and divestment) against Israel represents a malevolent, reactionary political force which is antisemitic in effect if not intent, in that it singles out Israel (and only Israel), the world’s only Jewish state and the state in the region with the best human rights record. Additionally, despite claims in the media to the contrary, prominent BDS leaders support violence and openly oppose the continued existence of the Jewish state within any boundaries.

Fortunately, however, the campaign is by and large failing miserably, despite the oxygen campaigners are given by pro-Palestinian media outlets.  This blog’s new periodic review of BDS failures should provide the reader with rebuttals to routine claims by anti-Israel activists that the movement is gaining traction and achieving its desired result of isolating and economically crippling the state of Israel.

Political BDS failures

  • The Tennessee General Assembly became the first state legislature in the U.S. to formally condemn the BDS movement.
  • South Carolina became first US state to take action against anti-Israel boycotts.

  • The Illinois State House of Representatives unanimously passed a bill that prohibits state pension funds from including in their portfolios companies that participate in BDS.
  • US Congress is considering legislation that “would require U.S. negotiators to discourage trading partners from boycotting Israel or Jewish settlements in the West Bank”.
  • The Palestinian Football Association (PFA) dropped their bid to suspend Israel from Fifa in a dramatic u-turn.
  • French President Francois Hollande made it clear that France opposes the BDS movement.
  • Universities U.K. opposes the Academic Boycott of Israel.
  • New York State Assemblyman Dov Hikind is drafting a bill to combat BDS in New York.  The bill would ban the state’s pension fund from doing business with companies that boycott Israel.
  • 100 German business leaders are “preparing for a trip to Israel to meet with top businesspeople in an extraordinary show of support for the Jewish state”.

Economic BDS failures

  • Cathay Pacific Airways, which won the World’s Best Airline Award for the fourth time in 2014, is looking into launching a new route from Hong Kong to Tel Aviv.
  • Swedish supermarkets back out of Israel boycott after media campaign.
  • After BDS activists trumpeted an alleged boycott victory, Orange telecom’s CEO told Binyamin Netanyahu that the firm will deepen ties to Israel.
  • Jimmy Wales, Wiki co-founder: “I am a strong supporter of Israel”
  • Washington State justices reverse a 2012 decision protecting a food co-op from being sued over its boycott of Israeli products.
  • A prominent Israeli activist group threatened the Park Slope Food Co-op with a lawsuit if the supermarket adopts a boycott of Israeli products.
  • The British business and innovation secretary declared that the U.K. and Israel had entered a “golden era” for trade. British Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills Sajid Javid said that he expected bilateral trade and services– currently valued at about $6.9 billion, according to Javid — to continue to grow.

Cultural BDS failures

  • A neo-realist allegorical painting inspired by the biblical tragedy of Jephthah and his daughter by the Israeli artist Matan Ben-Cnaan has won the top prize in one of the world’s most prestigious portrait awards. Ben-Cnaan was named the first Israeli winner of the £30,000 BP portrait award at a ceremony at the National Portrait Gallery, London
  • Michael Douglas visited Israel to receive the $1 million Genesis Prize award, popularly dubbed the ‘Jewish Nobel Prize,’ for his efforts to promote Jewish culture.
  • The band One Republic came to Israel not only to rock Tel Aviv, but also to show support for the Jewish State by visitingIDF soldiers in the field.
  • Backstreet Boys return to Israel.
  •  Iconic Britpop band Suede are returning to Israel. Four years after its last visit, English alternative rock group will perform at Menora Mivtachim Arena in Tel Aviv on July 30.
  • Art Garfunkel, one half of the legendary duo Simon and Garfunkel, returned to Israel on June 10th for a solo show at Bloomfield Stadium.
  • Wildly popular American rock band Bon Jovi will perform in Israel in early Oct.

Just for fun

  • Jenna Jameson is converting to Judaism. Former adult film star has begun tweeting in Hebrew, buying Israeli products, and even cooking kosher for her Israeli fiancé.
  • Source


Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs ridicules foreign press in cartoon defending Gaza attack

This one was produced last August …. same actors …. same lies

This one is also from August

More from Mondoweiss about these videos …

By Allison Deger

Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs posted a satirical cartoon video today ridiculing foreign journalists and their coverage of the Gaza Strip for failing to report that “terror rules Gaza,”—not Israel.

The video opens with a blond broadcast correspondent filming a segment on Gaza, where “the people here are just trying to live quiet lives. There are no terrorists here, just ordinary people.” In the background, a masked Hamas militant is firing a rocket.

In the following scene the naive reporter is filming in front of a tunnel, dubbing it, “Gaza’s underground city, a fascinating attempt by Hamas to build a subway system.”

Next, the journalist is back above ground praising Gaza’s “liberal and pluralistic” society while another masked Hamas member bags and abducts a cartoon Gay Palestinian (he has a rainbow flag) in a sleeveless shirt who is selling fruit.

But the foreign journalists misses everything. “Wait, just a minute,” interrupts a female character, passing the reporter a pair of glasses. Voila! With the special eye-wear the journalist can “see the reality of life under Hamas rule.” Overcome, the reporter has a heart attack and keels over.

The video, produced in English, comes amid renewed focus on the 2014 summer war between Israel and Hamas. The United Nations is set to release a report outlining war crimes in the next few days, which the Palestinian Authority has said it will include in their dossier of charges against Israel at the International Criminal Court. Israel published its own lengthy legal inquiry absolving itself of misconduct under international law during the war on Sunday. A link to that report is on the government website to the right of the cartoon.

Over the past year Israel’s foreign ministry has produced similar cartoon videos about the summer war. The same blond-man-journalist character was also depicted as an activist in the video, “Who Occupies Gaza?” (Answer: not Israel, Hamas occupies Gaza according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs). As well the same computerized narrator voice of reason was previously employed in a video called, “There Is No Israeli Siege On Gaza.”


Do you wonder why Benjamin Netanyahu is declaring war on BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions), and Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban are holding a secret Las Vegas conference to fight it, and Yair Lapid is saying that the people behind BDS plotted 9/11, and Ari Shavit is calling the movement “evil and sophisticated”? 

Read below to see why

Netanyahu's declaration of war on BDS is its first major victory ...

Netanyahu’s declaration of war on BDS is its first major victory …

BDS could cost Israel $4.7 billion a year

By James North

Well, here’s why. The Financial Times has published a big, and somewhat balanced, article on the rapid rise of BDS that includes two stunning financial numbers showing how powerful the nonviolent movement for justice in Israel/Palestine is becoming.

The most important information is deep inside the FT article:

However, there are signs that Israel’s disquiet over BDS is genuine. This week an Israeli financial newspaper covered a leaked government report estimating that BDS could cost Israel’s economy $1.4bn a year. The estimate included lower exports from the settlements in keeping with the EU’s plans to begin labelling goods made there — not part of the BDS movement, although many Israelis lump the two things together. The Rand Corporation, the US think-tank, says the costs could be more than three times higher: $47bn over 10 years.

This is the true story of BDS. It’s having a giant impact. CNN covered that Rand study the other day — a $15 billion hit from BDS, largely because of its success in Europe — but the same day the New York Times runs a piece on the French telecom denying it supports BDS, and there’s not a word in the NY Times article about either the Rand study or the the leaked Israeli government figures. (Jodi Rudoren did write about the Rand study back on June 8, but somehow found its $47 billion cost-of-BDS estimate unworthy of mention.)  Rudoren’s slanted coverage of BDS — reporting on the Orange surrender, while leaving out the dangerous billion-dollar-numbers that created a stir in Israeli and other media — proves once again that there is no daylight between her “reporting” and Hasbara Central.


Expecting Netanyahu to work for peace would be very much like expecting a ship to sail on land. This is because Netanyahu and peace are an eternal oxymoron.

Is it too late for just peace in Palestine?

By Khalid Amayreh in Occupied Palestine
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu continues to adopt brazen mendacity and dishonesty as his modus operandi vis-à-vis the rest of the world.

In fact, one would exaggerate very little by saying that Netanyahu is probably the most dishonest political figure in Israel ever since the racist Jewish entity came into being in Palestine 67 years ago.

In the past two weeks, Netanyahu made a plethora of statements voicing his desire for the resumption of the moribund peace process with the weak Palestinian Authority.

This is of course not the first time Netanyahu makes such statements.

Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders have been making all sorts of mendacious statements expressing an ostensible desire for peace with the Palestinians.

However, these statements were always proven to be utterly false, which shows that Netanyahu is not just an ordinary liar, but rather a malicious one par excellence.

Just ask any European leader who has dealt with Netanyahu how he views the Israeli premier and if he thinks he has any credibility. The answer would be a clarion “No.”

Indeed, how can we possibly trust a man who voices a desire for peace with the Palestinians while doing everything in his ability to kill any remaining prospects for peace?

In fact, expecting Netanyahu to work for peace would be very much like expecting a ship to sail on land. This is because Netanyahu and peace are an eternal oxymoron.

There is no doubt that a country that has built hundreds of colonies on land that belongs to another people and transferred hundreds of thousands of its citizens to live on land that belongs not to them doesn’t have genuine peace on its agenda.

This is the truth Netanyahu is trying to conceal or blur by way of making all sorts of theatrical statements especially when meeting with visiting foreign dignitaries.

Unfortunately, many or most of these dignitaries, especially from Europe and North America, lack the moral courage to tell Netanyahu “you are a liar” either explicitly or implicitly.

But Netanyahu is a big liar in his own right.  What else can be said of a leader who claims to be working for peace while actually killing it with all strength and determination?

Red herrings

In his firewall of defense against  growing international awareness that Netanyahu and peace contradict each other, the Israeli premier, a visionless politician who thinks a more aggressive hasbara discourse can make up for  political wisdom, Netanyahu has been claiming that the international BDS (Boycott, Disinvestment, Sanctions) against Israel is actually making peace more distant.

Given Netanyahu’s malicious character, I have no doubt whatsoever that the Israeli prime minister knows deep in his mind that he is lying and that the BDS campaign and other forms of protest against Israel are mere reactions to Israeli recalcitrance and criminal persecution and oppression of  the largely unprotected Palestinians under Israel’s military occupation.

Yes, he knows it, but, since he views malicious dishonesty as an expression of political skill and cleverness, he just goes on and on, lying and lying and lying.

The fanatics in his quarter, who are undoubtedly numerous, would rather innately hail him and praise his genius in defense of Israel. But this is a shortsighted perception, utterly devoid of wisdom.

This is because, Netanyahu’s impetuousness, recklessness and recalcitrance, which also reflect the collective mindset of many Israelis, probably a majority, is what will eventually take Israel to the abyss.

But by then, it would be too late. It is very much like a heavily intoxicated driver making a fatal traffic accident under the influence of alcohol.

As a Palestinian, I am ambivalent about the course Netanyahu and his equally self-absorbed colleagues in government are taking.

And just as the proverbial drunk driver who would refuse to heed warnings against driving under the influence of alcohol, Netanyahu, Bennett, Shaked, etc., are in no mood to listen to a word of advice and reproach.

In the final analysis, megalomaniac arrogance has more or less the same influence on mental sanity. It often leads to fatal consequences.

I don’t know for sure if there is still any real chance for a dignified and lasting peace in Palestine/Israel. But whatever chances there may still be are vanishing very rapidly before our eyes.

In light of the grim realities on the ground, this view should actually be considered an overly auspicious perception rather than an expression of doom and gloom because otherwise the vast majority of serious observers and experts would  strongly deny the existence of any real chance for peace in this part of the word. Is it too late? I hope not.

But my hope may be proven too illusive to be realistic.



The anti BDS campaign continues in today’s Israeli press …. never before has Israel seemed as desperate as it is now to justify their policies of Apartheid and Occupation.

Click on the links below to see the reports

From the greatest BS'er of the all

From the greatest BS’er of them all


Israeli left must battle BDS


Israel to allocate NIS 100 million for BDS


Netanyahu tells Jpost Conference: Iran, BDS emerging as threats to Israel on world stage


This is their latest video


Gideon Levy has a positive take on the Boycott in today’s HaAretz

For the sins of occupation, boycotts are a light punishment

Orange or SodaStream, academic or artistic boycott, the penalties will grow worse the longer Israel persists in settling, exploiting and stealing Palestinian land.

What are you defending? What are you fighting for? Over what are Israelis entrenching themselves now, with the assaults of the nationalist politicians and the populist media fulminating against the world. Why are they patriotically covering up the orange flags of Orange with the blue-and-white national flag? Has anybody asked why? Why is the boycott starting to gnaw at Israel now, and is this all worth it?

As usual, there are questions that are not even asked. Soul-searching, after all, is a clear sign of weakness. And so an explanation has been invented that absolves us of responsibility: The boycott fell out of the sky, an unavoidable force majeure of Israel hatred, and the only way to fight it is to fight right back at them. Israel always has an abundance of fitting (and sometimes violent) Zionist responses, but it’s always about the outcome, never about the reasons. That’s how was with terror, that’s how it was with the position of the world that Zionist Union chairman MK Isaac Herzog, of all Israeli ultranationalists, rushed to label with the ridiculous name “terror of a new kind” (referring to thestatements by Orange SA CEO Stephane Richard). Never give in. That’s fine, but why? We are fighting the boycott, but why did it break out?

Israel is now defending the preservation of the status quo. It is fighting against the whole world to preserve its advanced school of brutality and cruelty, in which it is educating generations of young people to act brutishly toward human beings, old people and children, to tyrannize them, to bark at them, to crush and humiliate them, only because they are Palestinians.

Israel is defending the continuation of apartheid in the occupied territories, in which two peoples live, one of them without any rights. It is defending its entire system of justification for this — a combination of Bible stories, messianism and victimhood, accompanied by lies. It is defending “united Jerusalem,” which is nothing but a territorial monster where separation also exists. It is fighting for its right to destroy the Gaza Strip for as long as it cares to do so, to maintain it as a ghetto and to be the warden of the biggest prison in the world.

The Israelis are fighting for their right to persist in settling, exploiting and stealing land; to continue breaking international law that prohibits settlement, to continue to thumb its nose at the whole world, which does not recognize any settlements. They are now defending their right to shoot children who throw stones and helpless fishermen pursuing the crumbs of a livelihood in the sea off the coast of Gaza, their right to continue snatching people from their beds in the middle of the night in the West Bank; they are fighting for the right to detain hundreds of people without trial, to hold political prisoners, to abuse them.

That is what they are protecting, that is what they are fighting for — for an area that most of them have not been to for years, and don’t care what happens there, for conduct that is shameful even to some of them. These are the sins and this is the punishment. Does anyone think that Israel can go on without being punished? Without being ostracized? And to tell the truth, doesn’t Israel deserve to be punished? Hasn’t the world been unbelievably tolerant so far?

Orange or SodaStream, academic boycott or artistic boycott, these are light punishments. The penalties will grow worse the longer Israel avoids drawing the necessary conclusions. As opposed to attempts by Israel and the Jewish establishment to divert the discussion, at its heart is not anti-Semitism. At its heart is the occupation. That is the source of the delegitimization.

The nation can fight against the position of the whole world. It can stand up for its rights (which are not its rights) and think that it is fighting for its survival. But do the Israelis know what they are defending now? What they are not willing to surrender? Is all this worth it to them? That discussion has not even begun here.



The Israeli government and its spokesmen just won’t admit that the BDS Movement is not the enemy ….. they themselves are!

More headlines and Op-Eds from the ziopress appear daily with the intention of destroying and discrediting the Movement.

Following are the examples of today (Click on links to see reports)

Don't fall victim to the ziolies .... Support BDS .... It's the right thing to do!

Don’t fall victim to the ziolies …. Support BDS …. It’s the right thing to do!

Latest lies from the ziopress …

When will the free world realize Churchill was right?

Op-ed: The evil spirit of BDS is not only threatening Israel; it is wreaking havoc in the US and UK, threatening the free world, encouraging Palestinian terror and rejectionism and increasing hostility and hatred between Jews and Arabs.


Op-Ed: Who is Really Behind BDS? We Can Cut Off BDS at the Spigot

How can we fight the flow of finances to BDS?

Op-Ed: BDS on the March? Don’t Panic – Really

The series of hollow “victories” achieved by the boycotters over the past several days proves one thing only: BDS is a paper tiger, and only as dangerous as we allow it to be.
The latest trash from Psycho Gal herself … 

The new government’s war on BDS

The flagship of the diplomatic war against Israel is the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement


And from our resident idiot boi ‘rabbi’

Britain’s bizarre and dishonorable National Union of Students

Pardon my English, but there is no other way to describe the above reports

Pardon my English, but there is no other way to describe the above reports

Read the following to see what Mondoweiss has to say about the situation

A banner day for BDS — though you’d have to read the Jewish press to know it

And this interesting piece just published at The Times of Israel

When it comes to tackling BDS, Israel is all talk, no action

Despite their passionate rhetoric, MKs are using the latest uptick of boycotts for domestic political point-scoring, while the government’s counter-effort is dysfunctionally divided between two rival ministries, with almost no staff


Every day there is a new report …. every day there are new lies fabricated about the Movement. When will zion realise that BDS will not end because of these lies …. it will end when the occupation ends …. AND THAT’S NOT A LIE!

Here is the latest rubbish from today’s Ynet News

Image by Carlos Latuff

Image by Carlos Latuff

The global boycott of Israel is growing silently

European banks are cutting ties with Israeli counterparts, while supermarkets across the world are appeasing violent protesters who attack their Israeli produce.

In April 2012, the Co-operative, Britain’s fifth-largest food retailer, declared it would no longer be importing agricultural produce from the territories or any Israeli supplier linked to produce from there. Five years earlier, retail giant Marks & Spencer announced that it was boycotting products from the West Bank, while the Tesco supermarket chain stopped marketing dates from the Jordan Valley.

And they are not alone: Over the past few years, numerous other companies from various countries around the world have announced some kind of a boycott of Israeli goods or companies.

“A consumer boycott of Israeli goods primarily affects agricultural and fresh produce, as it is marked as made in Israel,” says Israel Export Institute chairman Ramzi Gabbay. “Most of the Israeli industrial exports are unmarked so even if there is a boycott, it’s an unofficial one imposed by an individual business that prefers not to work with Israel.”

“Many international companies purchase parts of products, such as electronic components, with the final customer for the device having no idea of their origin anyway. In most instances, businesses do the profitability math before considering politics,” Gabbay adds.

BDS campaign on an American university campus (Photo: AP)
BDS campaign on an American university campus (Photo: AP)

“We are being hit hard in Europe, where there is a large Muslim population,” a director at one of Israel’s agricultural exports companies said this week.

“Unlike in the case of many industrial products, we are required to stipulate the country of origin on the fruit so that the customer can tell where the produce comes from. During Operation Protective Edge, Muslim customers went into the retail chains, particularly in Scandinavia and France, and threw our produce on the floor and sparked unrest.

“In other places, they staged demonstrations outside supermarkets. Even if the chain holds our goods and their quality in high regard, the buyer apologizes and says that the chain doesn’t want any trouble and doesn’t want to upset its public, and therefore it won’t buy from us.”

Not only agricultural produce

The boycott of Israel is not being felt only in the field of agriculture. In the banking sector, for example, Denmark’s largest bank, Danske Bank, has announced a boycott of Bank Hapoalim due to the latter’s activities in the territories and its involvement in “violations of international law.”

Norwegian bank, Nordea, has demanded clarifications from Bank Leumi and Mizrahi-Tefahot Bank on the scope of their activities in the settlements. Dutch pension fund PGGM has also announced that it will stop investing in Israel’s major banks because they are “funding construction in the territories.”

Anti-Israel protesters target Woolworths in South Africa over its sale of Israeli products (Photo: AFP)
Anti-Israel protesters target Woolworths in South Africa over its sale of Israeli products (Photo: AFP)

Israeli real-estate companies and security firms are also taking a blow: In 2009, the Norwegian government’s pension fund, AP, sold its shares in Elbit Systems because of the Israeli company’s involvement in the construction of the separation barrier. AP also announced that it would not invest in the Housing and Construction Holding Company. And Norway’s oil fund, considered the largest in the world with assets of $810 billion, has decided not to invest in Africa Israel and Danya Cebus due to their involvement in construction in the settlements.

And in other areas: The world’s largest security company, G4S of Britain, has ended all its contracts with the Israeli government that are linked to security for the settlements; Germany’s national rail company, Deutsche Bahn, has pulled out of the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem train line project claiming that the project includes tunnels that pass through the territories; Dutch water company Vitens has severed ties with Israel’s Mekorot; and the list goes on.

Threats and demonstrations

And sometimes the boycott takes on violent dimensions too: Shopkeepers in Australia have received death threats for continuing to sell goods from Israel; pro-Palestinian students in Australia have staged loud demonstrations at shopping malls at which owners of stalls selling Ahava products from the Dead Sea were assaulted; Israeli commercial ships have been detained at various North American ports; and Irish BDS activists have stuck labels calling for a boycott on packages of dates from the Jordan Valley.

There are growing calls among the EU states for punitive measures against Israel if construction in the territories continues, with one of the moves on the agenda being the labeling products from the territories. South Africa has already decided officially to mark products made in the settlements. Ahava, for example, has already been forced to cease its activities in South Africa due to the boycott campaign.

The main problem for Israel remains Europe: In recent years, Britain, Spain and Italy have warned business executives not to invest beyond the Green Line as they would be “running the risk of violating international law.”

Can’t help thinking back to this old song …

Yup, Israel ‘got caught!’

See THIS related report by Ali Abunimah

After UK student union backs BDS, Netanyahu falsely claim it supports ISIS


Go to any Israeli newspaper’s site or to any zionist Website and you will surely find something about the growing BDS Movement in the headlines. It has become zion’s greatest dilemma since the creation of their state in 1948.

The latest appeared yesterday …. but the ‘war’ continues today with THIS from Ynet News.

The wring is on the wall!

The writing is on the wall!

The biggest problem with the BDS movement is that it isn’t an armed conflict but a conflict of the consciousness, an asymmetric war for public opinion, on the base of legitimacy and perceived support. The weapons are claims of human rights abuses – mostly construed, sometimes altogether fictional; the battleground is in the west – in the liberal states to which Israel belongs.


BDS is an asymmetric

war for world  opinion

On June 2, 1964, in one of the most beautiful places in Jerusalem- the seven arches hotel on the Mount of Olives – the PLO was established by Ahmed Shukri and the Arab nations.

This date is critical when dealing with the emergent threat of the global BDS movement. It was three years before the occupation of Judea and Samaria, three years before the State of Israel, in hindsight, turned into a cause of instability in the Middle East. Three years before the Palestinians (according to the anti-Israel narrative) became the nation being oppressed by Israel.

The purpose of the PLO was – among other things – to carry out an armed struggle against Israel. The aim this struggle was not to establish their own independent Palestinian state, but to eradicate the independent Jewish state that had survived the war of 1948, against all odds.

This story is the basis of the current battle against BDS. Anyone who thinks that this is a movement against the State of Israel is missing the point; this battle is against the Israeli phenomenon as a whole.

The biggest problem with the BDS movement is that it isn’t an armed conflict but a conflict of the consciousness, an asymmetric war for public opinion, on the base of legitimacy and perceived support. The weapons are claims of human rights abuses – mostly construed, sometimes altogether fictional; the battleground is in the west – in the liberal states to which Israel belongs.

The term asymmetric warfare was meant to explain what happens when a large military fights guerilla movements and terror organizations. The average Israeli knows the limits of strength; Hamas uses civilians and children as human shields – everything to keep the IDF from being able to shoot.

Terror organizations don’t have rules and moral boundaries in warm and we are seeing the same characteristics in the fight against BDS. In this battle there are no rules, no moral boundaries, no truths and no lies.

In May 2002, exactly 13 years ago, an IDF drone inadvertently captured a staged funeral procession in Jenin. On the stretcher lay a young Palestinian boy wrapped in a flag, surrounded by wailing women. It was another indictment against the IDF after Operation Defensive Shield, while Israel was undergoing a slurry of condemnation from around the world for a different massacre that never happened. At least this was the case until the stretcher fell and the young man tumbled off, jumped up and disappeared behind a corner – powered by his dead legs.

After this sad occasion came Jenin, Jenin, the duplicitous movie by Mohammed Bochri that claimed to tell the story of the massacre in the eponymous refugee camp, and which quickly became a hit with the organizations active within the BDS campaign. This popularity was akin to that for claims that Israel committed genocide against the Bedouins in the Negev in 2013, in reference to the resettlement plan. The same regard was held for Yasser Arafat’s claims that Israel was poisoning the water, or his wife’s claims that Israel had poisoned him. There are always claims that turn into facts when it comes to BDS supporters.

A sovereign, democratic state cannot lie, nor invent or claim facts without real proof. There are times when officials do make mistakes, there are times when we don’t talk about it, but Israel has boundaries – and you can’t play dirty in a battle for the conscience.

It’s a paradox but the vanguard of this battle against Israel is run by educated people, liberals with the theoretical ability to be self-critical.

Every year, more than 160 campuses worldwide mark Israeli apartheid week, targeting the horrendous Israelis, sometimes including comparisons to the Nazis, or pamphlets on invented genocides.

In the spring of 2010, Berkley became the first university in which the student senate tried to declare a boycott against companies trading with Israel. A year earlier, a Norwegian holding company became the first to pull investments from Israeli company Elbit systems; additionally a retirement fund pulled its money from shares in Africa Israel as part of the boycott.

A group of artists worried by the pull from Roger Waters decided to cancel shows in Israel. The success of the BDS movement is marginal in economic terms, however carries weight in that it creates a virtual world in which good is bad and bad is good.

Some of the members of the Palestinian organizations are Jews and even Israelis who want a different leadership – not seeing that the motivation behind BDS is to create a different state.

Israel is not perfect – there is room for improvement – but the distance between the delegitimizing claims and reality is the distance between a lie and the truth. We fight it primarily by being educated on what is really happening, and what really happened in the past.


Netanyahu says international community disproportionately singles Israel out and boycott campaign aims to to delegitimize Jewish state’s existence, regardless of policies.

(From an AP Report)



Here is a related OpEd from Ynet News 

BDS is a threat to Israel’s very existence

ISIS? Iran? North Korea? The industry of lies spun by the BDS movement is convincing more and more people that Israel is the source of evil in the world. Make no mistake: This is not a campaign against settlements. It’s a war on the legitimacy of the Jewish state. All reasonable forces, from right and left, must act against the economic, academic, and cultural boycott which has become a strategic threat. Yedioth Ahronoth is enlisting in the fight back.

For years the battle of the bagel has been raging in South Africa – another front in the massive campaign against Israel.

BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel) activists have been fighting the Woolworths supermarket chain, which has insisted on importing bagels from the Jewish state. The total value of the imported foodstuffs is a mere million dollars out of the chain’s nearly 10 billion dollars in revenues. Pocket change.

But the BDS activists are insistent. For a long stretch of time they protested and disrupted operations. Woolworths, for their part, are just as insistent. The chain petitioned the court and even won its trial.

The BDS activists, however, refuse to concede. The chamber of commerce, a youth league of the ANC (the largest and strongest faction in South Africa), and other institutions are part of the struggle.

Two weeks ago, on Nakba Day, they led some 10,000 students in a protest against Woolworths.

On the other side of the world, in Washington State, another much smaller supermarket chain, Olympia Food Co-op, voted to join the BDS movement and boycott Israeli products. When pro-Israel activists pursued a legal path to justice, they were dismissed out of hand.

Three years ago the state’s Supreme Court reversed the decision. In the past, it must be noted, there were other legal victories. French courts clarified that boycotting Israeli products was a hate crime. The State of Illinois passed a precedent-setting law a mere two weeks ago that forbids investments in companies that partake in the BDS effort.

The series of legal victories, however, could create a false impression, since BDS has been winning the battle for public perception. Those who claim that BDS will not affect the Israeli economy are correct. For now.

The BDS movement has been conducting a campaign for awareness on multiple fronts – on campuses, in workers’ unions, and in the media. It is amassing troubling victories. More and more student unions in the US are joining the boycott. Leading newspapers like the New York Times are providing a platform for boycott advocates.

Their influence has invaded the Hillel groups on campuses, as BDS supporters exploit the organization’s wish for openness to disseminate their campaign. When you tell a young student that “Israel expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in 1948” and he does not know that in those same years tens of millions underwent such expulsions – as that was once the norm – and that more Jews were kicked out of Arab lands… well, he might tend to believe that Israel was born in sin.

Some of the students then become BDS activists. In recent years, it has happened more and more.

Support for Israel in the United States is at its peak. But it’s an illusion. On campuses, at research institutes, and in media outlets, there has been a consistent, protracted, and dangerous erosion of support for Israel.

It is already invading politics. Sidney Blumenthal was a senior advisor to Bill Clinton. His son, Max Blumenthal, has become a prominent and venomous activist on campuses against Israel’s very existence. This isn’t what happens in every Jewish family. Far from it. But that’s the trend.

Israel is enduring one of the most systematic attacks against its existence. You don’t need to be part of the BDS movement in order to be on the anti-Israel front.

When a member of Breaking the Silence appears at events sponsored by BDS, that is not criticism. That is demonization.

When Peter Beinart, one of the leaders of the Jewish left in the United States, who defines himself as a Zionist and Orthodox, claimed that on Lag BaOmer of 2014 Jews committed a pogromagainst Palestinians, he was not working to criticize. He spread a blood libel.

When Richard Goldstone published the report bearing his name, he caused a propaganda hit to Israel, even though he recanted after some time. And the list is a long one.

The success of BDS is particularly impressive because it is a movement that uses the language of rights, but deals in practice with denying Israel’s right to exist. The result is a major deception.

Many good and innocent people fall into this trap. When the concept of “tikkun olam” becomes the central motif for the identity of Jewish students, those who are searching for a Jewish identity, then the slippery language of the BDS movement becomes a magnet. The fraud is effective.

This appears to be one of the greatest instances of fraud in our age. Because this is a campaign of demonization with dangerous similarities to propaganda lies against Jews.

The leaders of the campaign, Omar Barghouti and Ali Abunimah, have a lofty stated goal. “The idea of two states was unacceptable from the beginning,” said Barghouti in his response to a question on one campus, adding that ending Israeli control of Palestinian territories is only a step on the way to achieving the vision of dismantling Israel. Abunimah said that “the two-state solution is meant to save Zionism”.

Dr. Ilan Pappe, an ardent detractor of Israel, explained that the campaign is based on a way of thinking that believes in two sins: The first ingrained in the formation of Israel and the other ingrained in Israel’s very existence.

The fact that these are unrelenting lies is reminiscent of anti-Semitic propaganda. Almost everything the Nazis said about the Jews is said today by BDS supporters about Israel, through claims of a genocide that never occurred, or deliberate mass killing of innocents, or that the Jews and/or Israel are the main cause of violence in the world, a danger to humanity or to world peace.

We have become accustomed to the fact that Hamas and the Iranian regime openly support the denial of Israel’s right to exist. The problem is that those who were supposed to be enlightened, Judith Butler – a Jew, a professor of comparative literature at the University of California, Berkeley and Stephen Hawking to join the coalition of insanity, and a worldwide struggle against the very existence of one country of the all countries in the world. Israel. Not North Korea. Not Iran. Not Sudan. Only Israel.

Prominent BDS spokesmen for the BDS campaign use anti-Semitic motifs in their propaganda. For example, Roger Waters, the lead singer of Pink Floyd, talks about Jewish control of Hollywood as he compares Israel to the Nazis. One of the financiers of the flotillas to Gaza and of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), both part and parcel of the BDS, is Mahathir Mohamed, the former president of Malaysia and a proud anti-Semite.

Israel, needless to say, is far from perfect. It deserves criticism. It also knows itself how to do that perfectly well. It is doubtful that there is any other country in the West where the media and academia can publish anything and everything under the sun, including lies, including arguments against the very existence of Israel as a Jewish state.

But the BDS is increasingly becoming a strategic threat. Massive amounts of capital from the Gulf states, especially Qatar, is funding anti-Israeli propaganda, as recently revealed by Prof. Ofira Seliktar in research about to be published.

This funding also sponsors many faculties, where many BDS supporters are sprouting up. For example, the institute at Georgetown University headed by Prof. John Esposito received tens of millions of dollars from Saudi billionaire Al-Walid Bin-Talal. Can one really claim that there is no connection between these contributions and Esposito’s enthusiastic support for BDS?

The events of last weekend at the FIFA conference will be played out again in other forums in the coming months.

Israel cannot be defeated on the battlefield. But Israel can be defeated on the propaganda field. When the Foreign Ministry is split into six, because politicians need the honor, the war against this demonization absorbs a blow. But the war against BDS is not a political issue, it is a matter of national interest. All sane forces, left and right, must be enlisted in this fight against it.

There are those already in the wider world who are leading the struggle, and they are far from supporting the political right; indeed, we will come to them later. They have been recruited because they know that BDS does not deal with legitimate criticism, but demonization. Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper is also mobilizing for war, in the form of a series of exposes, articles and reports in the coming weeks and months.

A most fitting quote for this post

A most fitting quote for this post


zionism finds itself in a dilemma these days as more Jewish youth, especially university students. get involved in the BDS Movement and other progressive outlets.

Rather than change their policies, they prefer to attack those against them, much like the tactics used in the recent Israeli Election campaign, there were no issues raised but there were many attacks against opposing Parties and candidates.

In this video, zionists pathetically attempt to save their ‘wayward youth’.

It is a genuine act of desperation …

If they looked in the mirror they might see the actual causes of what appears to be a growth of anti-Semitism throughout Europe today. It obviously is a result of Israel’s policies towards the Palestinians. It is a growth of anti Israeli sentiments, nothing to do with anti-Semitism at all.

Norman Finkelsein recently gave a speech on “the new anti-Semitism” to the Students for Justice in Palestine chapter at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. For a short synopsis of what was said, see THIS report from Mondoweiss.It is worth your while to watch the following in its entirety ….

Israel Could Reduce Anti-Semitic Violence by Not Calling Itself the Jewish State, Finkelstein Says



In what appears to be a zionist copycat site of Anonymous, AnonGhost is claiming to have hacked the Website of Meretz, a zionist ‘left’ wing political party in Israel.

What seems to be the giveaway as to who is behind this group can be found on their FaceBook Page, in the form of this image …

This is a pro-Palestinian image?

This is a pro-Palestinian image?

No way, no how, would a pro Palestinian site allow such rubbish to appear on their pages.  Why, of all the Sites to be hacked in Israel would they chose one on the Left? Why also was  the only place their actions were reported is in the extreme right Israeli News Service.

Lots of questions with one answer …. it’s all BS!

And here is there so-called report

Meretz Website Hijacked by Pro-Palestinian Hackers

Targeting ‘Zionisme’ and ‘israhell,’ pro-Palestinian hacker AnonGhost attacks website of left-wing Meretz party on Saturday night.

The left-wing Meretz party’s website was virtually hijacked Saturday night by a group of pro-Palestinian hackers called AnonGhost.

The hackers left a statement greeting the “world” and announcing their intentions to “punish” people.

“We are the voice of Palestine and we will not remain silent! We are the sound of the forgotten people, the freedom fighter in the cyberworld and our main target is Zionisme (sic) and israhell (sic),” the group wrote.

Explaining why Meretz’s website was hacked, the group stated it wanted “to share our message and show the world who we are. We are not looking for fame but we have a goal to achieve.”

“We support all hackers teams and we support all the freedom movements in the world. Muslims are everywhere – We will enter to Palestine soon :) remember this.”

Another group of hackers issued threats against Jews and the Jewish state last week, calling for a massive cyber attack against Israel.

In a video statement posted by Anonymous, the international hackers threatened an “Electronic Holocaust” set for April 7 – one week before Holocaust Remembrance Day in Israel.

Anonymous threatened to take down “servers, government websites, Israeli military websites, and Israeli institutions” to “erase [Israel] from cyberspace in our electronic Holocaust.”

According to the group, the cyber attack was meant to avenge Israel’s actions during Operation Protective Edge last summer.



Despite Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s supposed apology for his incitement against Palestinian citizens of Israel during Israel’s recent election campaign, his government continues to spread anti-Arab hatred.

Israel’s verified Arabic-language Twitter account and Facebook account, titled “Israel speaks Arabic,” published the caricature below on Sunday, which asks “Which is better, relying on yourself, or relying on someone else?”

It includes two stereotyped and demeaning figures, one representing a Japanese person, and the other an Arab. The headline says “Attitudes to work.” The text next to each figure, respectively, states: The Japanese attitude to work: “If there is someone else who can do a job, then I can do it too. And if there is no one else to do the job, then without doubt I will do it.” The Middle Eastern attitude to work: If there is someone else to do a job, then let them do it. And if no one else can do it, then dude, how do you think I can do it?!”

It includes two stereotyped and demeaning figures, one representing a Japanese person, and the other an Arab.
The headline says “Attitudes to work.” The text next to each figure, respectively, states:
The Japanese attitude to work: “If there is someone else who can do a job, then I can do it too. And if there is no one else to do the job, then without doubt I will do it.”
The Middle Eastern attitude to work: If there is someone else to do a job, then let them do it. And if no one else can do it, then dude, how do you think I can do it?!”

Israeli government spreads racist caricature of Arabs on Facebook, Twitter


You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

Abraham Lincoln

Just remember, he did not speak for me or most of Israel

Just remember, he did not speak for me or most of Israel

“After my short visit to the United States, I return to Israel knowing that many around the world heard what Israel has to say about the impending deal with Iran.”

Netanyahu Returns to Israel ‘Knowing Israel Has Been Heard’

Prime Minister lands back in Israel following speech to Congress on the dangers of a ‘bad deal’ with Iran.

Following his high-profile speech to Congress last night, Prime MinisterBinyamin Netanyahu returned to Israel Wednesday.

In a statement shortly after landing, Netanyahu said he was satisfied with his address and its reception.

“After my short visit to the United States, I return to Israel knowing that many around the world heard what Israel has to say about the impending deal with Iran,” he said in a statement released by the Prime Minister’s Office.

In an apparent response to claims by US President Barack Obama that his speech did not offer “practical alternatives” to the deal with Iran currently under discuss, the prime minister added: “In my speech before theCongress, I presented a practical alternative, which would impose tougher restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program, extending Iran’s breakout time by years.

“I also called on the P5+1 to insist on a deal that would link the lifting of those restrictions to Iran’s ceasing its sponsorship of terrorism around the world, its aggression against its neighbors and its calls for Israel’s destruction.”

The responses he received were positive, he emphasized – from both sides of the isle.

“I heard encouraging responses from both Democrats and Republicans. They understood that the current proposal would lead to a bad deal and that the alternative is a better deal.”

The above is the extreme right viewpoint FROM

A more realistic view is presented by Jon Stewart

Bibi’s Congress Reception Was ‘Longest Blowjob a Jewish Man Has Ever Received’

The Editors at Mondoweiss added the following humour as well …. Click  HERE  to see report

Factchecking Netanyahu: An annotated guide to the Israeli P.M.’s speech to Congress


Full speech presented at end of this post


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.

« Older entries


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,235 other followers