Archive | May 19th, 2012

ISRAEL- PALESTINE: “Peace-making” without “Mediators”

By Nicola Nasser
A surplus of mediators have been around all the time, including the heavy weight Quartet of the UN, U.S., EU and Russia, as well as heaps of terms of reference of UNSC resolutions, bilateral signed accords and “roadmaps,” in addition to marathon bilateral talks that have left no stone unearthed, international as well as regional conferences were never on demand to facilitate the “peace process,” which has been lavishly financed to keep moving.
However the Palestinian – Israeli peace-making is still elusive as ever as Samuel Beckett’s “Waiting for Godot” has been, without a glimpse of light at the end of the endless tunnel of Israeli military occupation of Palestinian territory and people.
Palestinian – Israeli peace-making has been for all practical reasons on hold since 2000, and bilateral peace contacts have been dormant since Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu came to power in 2009 except for a failed five-round “exploratory” talks hosted by Jordan last January.
The latest indirect exchange of letters between Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and PM Netanyahu and the joint statement issued by their corriers pledging mutual commitment to peace are no less misleading: “No peace No War” is still the name of the only game in town, which is in fact the ideal prescription for the implosion or explosion of an unsustainable status quo in the Israeli – occupied Palestinian territories.
And the almost twenty-year old U.S.-led and EU-financed “peace process” is still a non-starter for any feasible, credible or sustainable peace-making in any foreseeable future.
Failure of the “peace process” to deliver is proof enough that it is inherently infertile, but most importantly it is proof enough that there has never been any serious mediation, or the mediators themselves were only either managing a process instead of trying to solve a conflict, were unqualified, or the parameters of their approach were the wrong ones.
The end result however is that all mediators have failed and it is the time to acknowledge their failure and to make room for other options, like sending back the file of the Palestinian – Israeli conflict to the United Nations, which was responsible for creating the conflict in the first place when the UN General Assembly adopted the non-binding resolution No. 181 for partitioning Palestine in 1947, which triggered a series of Arab – Israeli wars, thus undermining its own main mission as the organization created for the sole purpose of maintaining world peace.
Since 1947, the “two-state solution” has been on the agenda. Sixty five years on, none is closer to that end. The U.S. and EU conduct over those years has been in effect to reinforce the “one state solution”, i.e. Israel .
Olivia Ward speculated in the Canadian “The Star” on May 1 that the “one-state solution to Mideast peace may arrive by default,” but she might not have anticipated it to be a bi-national, bilingual and bi-religious one state for Israelis and Arab Palestinians, Arabic and Hebrew and Jews and Muslims, which is a recipe for apartheid in view of the prevailing balance of power in favor of Israeli Jews in historic Palestine.   
I wonder whether U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.) was completely out of touch with a major foreign-policy reality or was he satirically sarcastic when he responded to a constituent last April by a letter calling for peace negotiations between deceased Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who has been in a coma since 2006?!
The UN option is obviously what President Abbas is left to try now as the only option available for a man of peace like him, and this is exactly the door which the U.S. administration is determined to close; for this purpose, according to Esther Brimmer, the Assistant Secretary for International Organizations Affairs, in Miami on April 24 this year:
Over the past several months, we have engaged in a global diplomatic marathon to oppose the Palestinian” option, “because, … the United States strongly opposes efforts to address final status issues at the United Nations rather than in direct negotiations,” which Brimmer’s country failed to mediate, revive and resume through the terms of the last three presidents who collectively failed to deliver on their promises to the Palestinians to conclude negotiations on final status issues in 1999 (Bill Clinton), in 2005 (George W. Bush), in 2008 (G.W. Bush again) and within two years of his assuming office (Barak Obama).
Not to honor U.S. promises and pledges to Palestinians could only be interpreted as out of bad faith, bad management of the “peace process” or failure to deliver, which all dictate, as another option, a change of course and that the US monopoly of the sponsorship of peace-making should be discarded and replaced by more efficient peace makers, or that the current U.S.-led peace mediators should be replaced by peace enforcers.
Aaron David Miller of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars noted on May 11 that, “The only three breakthroughs in the history of Arab-Israeli peacemaking – involving Israeli deals with the Egyptians, Jordanians, and Palestinians – came about through secret diplomacy in which Washington wasn’t even involved.” Miller stopped short of saying that the U.S. and Quartet mediation is no more needed.  
The International Crisis Group, in an executive summary on May 7, 2012, concluded that the U.S.-led mediation efforts have “become a collective addiction, … And so the illusion continues,” adding: “All actors are now engaged in a game of make-believe: that a resumption of talks in the current context can lead to success; that an agreement can be reached within a short timeframe; that the Quartet is an effective mediator, …” On April 26, the American Jewish newspaper “Algemeiner” described the “Middle East Quartet” as “An Institutionalized Failure.”
Israel, U.S. and the Quartet mediators are all winners in this “make-believe” non-delivering mediation; the Palestinian people are the only losers.
Palestinians have had enough and now saying enough is enough: Peace is a mirage, peace-making is a failure, peace process is a sham, peace mediators are a fake, and if all the parties involved can enjoy the luxury of “addiction” to the status quo, Palestinians cannot; their survival is at stake.

Posted in Palestine Affairs2 Comments

The Pros & Cons of Bitcoins



Bitcoin, a privately controlled independent currency, is nothing short of revolutionary. Bitcoin, however, has a major drawback: it does not address the key issue of interest.

We recommend you watch this 100 second introductory video first. 

by Anthony Migchels 


Bitcoin was developed 

by Satoshi Nakamoto and launched in January 2009.

There are currently more than 8 million Bitcoins in circulation and after predictable initial price swings after its launch, they have traded at a fairly stable rate of about $5 for more than six months now.

Bitcoin basically is a debt free unit: it comes into circulation through ‘mining’: the solving of complex algorithms by clients yields new Bitcoins.

However, no more than 21 million can be mined so there will never be more than that in circulation.

Bitcoin is important and actually nothing short of revolutionary. It is the first notable independent internet currency.


Its key strength is its peer to peer design. The issuing organization’s sole function is to provide the client software and on-line market place where Bitcoins can be traded for other currencies. It plays no role in the creation of the money supply.

In this respect, it is a real assault on the Money Power’s stranglehold on our money supply.

It allows businesses and consumers to diversify their methods of payment, making them a little less dependent on the Government/Banking monopoly.

It also shows that a free market for currencies already exists. Of course regulators are inimical to them, but current legislation does allow for all sorts of units.

In fact, there is very little to stop free market currencies, provided those looking for opportunities are dedicated enough.


Furthermore, Bitcoin is the first free market unit in the world that creates convertibility to other units through a currency exchange. This is an innovation that is underrated by most commentators.

Mutual Credit-based barters can use Bitcoin technology to create convertibility without dollar/euro backing.

Unsurprisingly, legislators bribed by banks have already voiced ‘concern’ about Bitcoin’s independence.

Apparently some naughty drug dealers are using Bitcoin to finance their operation. Its peer-to-peer character makes it suitable for this kind of transaction. Just like cash.

And cash too, as we know, is under attack from Big Brother who would like to know everything we buy and sell, and make us completely dependent on his monopoly infrastructure.

So Bitcoin’s existence is very useful for all monetary reformers as it will allow us to gather information about the strategies that the adversary will use to disable it.


Notwithstanding these revolutionary breakthroughs, Bitcoin does suffer from a basic flaw.

It’s designed to behave like Gold. Nakamoto clearly believes Austrian Economics is the last word, including the idea that hyperinflation is the main threat to the system.

As a result Bitcoin suffers from the same problems as Gold: it is deflationary and expensive.

There is never enough of it. True, Bitcoins can be divided in ever smaller denominations, so ‘physically’ there will never be a shortage, but it means Bitcoin is designed to appreciate for ever and this is the definition of deflation.


Worse still, Bitcoin does not address the interest issue. There is no possibility for cheap credit and if the unit matures, a banking system will be necessary to provide credit based on deposits.

Not only will this exacerbate the scarcity of money, it will also lead to very high cost for capital.

Yet another problem is that with a full reserve banking system as required by Bitcoin (and Gold too, by the way) would allow the Money Power to mop up the money supply through compound interest within one or two decades, as you can find out here..

The basic conceptual flaw is, that Austrian Economics believes a currency should be a good store of value first and foremost. This is the fatal mistake: money is a means of exchange, and it is the agreement to use it as such that gives it value, not the other way around. This is even true of Gold today: the reason Gold is now expensive, is because many investors are speculating it will be currency again.

Because of this design flaw, Bitcoin is being hoarded by its users. They prefer to have it sit in their ‘account’, instead of spending it, hoping it will appreciate. As a result turnover is lower than it could be. The unit is already an object of speculation, hindering its primary function: to finance normal trade.


Bitcoin is a revolution and a badly needed bit of fresh air. Peer to peer and independent of banks and Government it is an example for all of us. Yes, we should press for reform at the Government level, but no, we should not await it. There is a free market for currencies and it is ours for the taking.

However, it is not credit based and it does not allow for interest free credit. Its deflationary by nature, which is very problematic.

Its decentralized peer-to-peer nature and its convertibility mechanism are its main strength. If these can be harnessed in interest free credit based units, they would be unstoppable. The Money Power would be really hard pressed.

Bitcoin is a shot heard far and wide, but it is only the proverbial first shot across the bow.



Why Gold is so strongly deflationary 
Mutual Credit, the Astonishingly Simple Truth about Money Creation
Mutual Credit for the 21st century: Convertibility
The Swiss WIR, or: How to Defeat the Money Power
Regional Currencies in Germany: the Chiemgauer 

The Problem with Gold

Posted in USAComments Off on The Pros & Cons of Bitcoins

This is a plea for help from Taiseer Khatib and his wife Lana from Acre, IsraHell.


Please circulate

This is a plea for help from Taiseer Khatib and his wife Lana from Acre, Israel.

The story of the plight of the Khatib family aroused a lot of attention after the High Court of Israel decided to extend the citizenship law that limits Palestinian immigration to Israel based on the argument that ‘the right to a family life does not necessarily have to be realised within the borders of Israel.’

Taiseer is a PhD student in Anthropology at the University of Haifa, a teacher at the Western Galilee College, and a conductor of creative writing workshops for young adults in the ‘Freedom Theatre’ at the Jenin Refugee Camp. Lana is from Jenin in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) and has completed a degree in Economics from the Al-Najah University in Nablus. She moved to Acre in 2005 in order to live with her husband and their two children (3 and 4 years old) in her husband’s home town.

Her residency in Israel completely depends on a yearly extension of her permission to stay within the 1967 borders. She has no legal rights, no health insurance, or any other form of security. She is neither allowed to drive a car nor to hold a job and is thus totally dependent on her husband. Naturally, this situation causes much frustration for Lana who is used to an independent life style having spent four years working for the Ministry of Health in Jenin.

The citizenship law was first passed in 2003 as a temporary security measure but has since been extended several times. The most recent decision of the High Court means that Lana can neither dream of being granted a citizen nor a permanent resident status. In the best case, she might receive a renewal of the permission that enables her to merely ‘visit’ her family. Unfortunately, this is a reality currently faced by thousands of people in Israel.

Adding to this, the Khatibs cannot choose to live in Nablus because Taiser, as an Israeli citizen and according to the laws introduced after the Oslo Accords, is not allowed to enter a Palestinian city within ‘Area A’ of the OPT.

Unfortunately, the renewed extension of the citizenship law seems to confirm the wide-spread assumption that the Israeli government aims to transform Israel into a purely ‘Jewish State’ – free of Palestinians.

I’m sending you the personal story the Khatib family on behalf of Isha L’Isha as well as a woman who is personally outraged and deeply concerned. I urge you to protest in any possible way – via Facebook, the press, to the nearest Israeli embassy or through an NGO.

Taiseer and his wife welcome any form of contact and support:

Taiseer’s „Open Letter“:





Thank you for your support!

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, Human RightsComments Off on This is a plea for help from Taiseer Khatib and his wife Lana from Acre, IsraHell.

Lest We Forget–A look back at Zionist “Break the Bones” Policy


Special to The New York Times
Published: July 12, 1990

Israel’s Parliament decided today not to investigate charges that former Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin ordered soldiers to break the bones of Arab militants at the beginning of the Palestinian uprising.

The house rejected a motion submitted by two Parliament members to set up a special commission to investigate whether Mr. Rabin had given soldiers orders to club, kick and hit arrested Palestinians as a form of punishment.

The proposal was prompted by testimony in recent courts-martial of several soldiers charged with beating Palestinians and breaking their bones. The soldiers have testified that they were simply following orders, and many Israelis have been saying they believe the men are being abandoned by the army’s top commanders.

Defense Minister Moshe Arens, Mr. Rabin’s successor, said he opposed the commission because he believed ”the political echelon has to account to the Knesset and the voters only during the elections.”

Mr. Rabin has steadfastly denied issuing ”an illegal order or one which went against the decision of the Government.” He did say, however, that soldiers were encouraged to subdue violent Palestinans with ”the use of clubs while trying as much as possible to avoid using live ammunition” at the beginning of the uprising.

The debate over Mr. Rabin’s role in the affair comes as the former defense minister is trying to wrest leadership of the Labor Party from his longtime rival, Shimon Peres.

A nationwide survey published in The Jerusalem Post today indicated that Mr. Rabin is more popular with Israelis than Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, Housing Minister Ariel Sharon, Mr. Peres or any other senior politician.

‘Force, Might and Beatings’

There is no indication that the controversy over the beatings has harmed Mr. Rabin politically.

At the start of the uprising, Mr. Rabin attracted wide attention when he said that Israeli soldiers would use ”force, might and beatings” to quash the Palestinian revolt.

Mr. Rabin and senior military commanders have maintained that the beatings were allowed only while soldiers were trying to overpower and arrest Palestinians throwing rocks and firebombs. Once an arrest was made, they said, no further hitting or clubbing was permitted.

But his account has been contradicted by testimony at the trial of one officer, Col. Yehuda Meir, who is being court-martialed for reportedly ordering his troops to arrest Arabs and then break their arms and legs.

Soldiers testifying at Colonel Meir’s trial said Mr. Rabin and other senior commanders told them privately that beatings should be used to punish Arabs known to be troublemakers.

Lieut. Eldad Ben-Moshe, a company commander under Colonel Meir, testified in April that he was told by Colonel Meir to ”break the arms and legs” of Arabs ”because the detention camps are full.”

Early this month another officer, identified only as Lieut. Col. Zvi, testified that in January 1988, Mr. Rabin ”told me to lash into them forcefully and beat them,” without restricting the beatings in any way.

In Parliament today, Mr. Rabin said, ”To the best of my memory, I never once said anywhere that bones should be broken.”

In calling for the Parliamentary investigation, Yossi Sarid, a legislator from the left-wing Citizens’ Rights Movement, said, ”The testimony from dozens of soldiers has made one thing clear: The soldiers and officers in the field heard the Defense Minister and top-ranking officers instruct them to beat Palestinians in a policy of punishment and deterrence.”

Posted in ZIO-NAZI1 Comment

Did You Serve in Iraq or Afghanistan?


Did you serve in Iraq or Afghanistan? (And have you registered for VA health care?)

OEF/OIF/OND combat Veterans can receive cost free medical care for any condition related to your service in your theater of operation for five years after the date of your discharge or release.

For this reason, combat Veterans are strongly encouraged to apply for enrollment within their enhanced eligibility period, even if no medical care is currently needed.

Your 5-year enrollment period begins on your discharge or separation date from Active Duty military service, or in the case of multiple call-ups, your most recent discharge date.

Comprehensive VA health benefits — including preventative care, mental health care, prescriptions, emergency and surgical care — are available to all Veterans (usually with a co-pay).

Posted in Afghanistan, IraqComments Off on Did You Serve in Iraq or Afghanistan?

Google following CIA’s path in confronting Iran

By Kourosh Ziabari


To Iranians, Persian Gulf is not simply a name referring to a geographical region on the world map. To Iranians, the name of Persian Gulf is interwoven with a sense of national dignity and honor which makes them a united and powerful troupe against the relentless attacks of the enemy. The name of Persian Gulf resembles a feeling of pride and decorum for them which cannot be replaced by any other gift or reward. It reminds them of the impressive days when the flag of ancient Persian Empire honorably fluttered and waved in the sky and there was no other competitor to supersede this mighty empire.

Of course Iranians’ attachment to Persian Gulf and the cultural heritage which it carries does not emanate from blind nationalistic sentiments. Iranians know well that today, they are the representative of a greater, broader union that is the Islamic Ummah. They know that it’s with the blessing of Islam that they can still take pride on being an unrivaled superpower in such a tumultuous and restless region as the Middle East. However, Iranians are extremely sensitive about those vicious, brutal powers who intend to undermine their national honor and solidarity by encroaching on their national belongings, including the Persian Gulf.

Aside from the naughty attempts by some Arab nations in the region for distorting the name of Persian Gulf, the American web giant Google has recently fueled an anti-Iranian campaign by removing the name of Persian Gulf from its online maps and Google Earth plans. No Google official was ready to give comments on this questionable move, and Iranians are still wondering what motives have caused the American company to take such a thoughtless action.

Albeit if we take a look at the documents and evidence which point to the fact that Google is in actuality a CIA subsidiary that takes orders from the White House and operates under the guise of a technology firm while serving the long-run interests of a circle of American policymakers, it will be no surprise that by removing the name of Persian Gulf from its maps, Google intends to contribute to the anti-Iranian agenda of the United States and Israel which are vehemently underway these days.

In a 2006 interview with “Alex Jones show,” Robert David Steele, a 20-year Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer and a former clandestine services case officer with CIA said that he had credible information attesting to the fact that Google was assisted and funded by CIA. “Google took money from the CIA when it was poor and it was starting up and unfortunately our system right now floods money into spying and other illegal and largely unethical activities, and it doesn’t fund what I call the open source world,” said Steele, citing “trusted individuals” as his sources for the claim.

“Let me say very explicitly – their contact at the CIA is named Dr. Rick Steinheiser, he’s in the Office of Research and Development,” said Steele.

And now that the United States is doing its best to convince Iran’s trade partners in Asia, Africa and Europe that they shouldn’t buy Iran’s crude oil anymore, launch chained covert cyber operations against Iran’s state-owned companies, facilitate the assassination of Iran’s nuclear scientists and impede the route of diplomacy for finding a solution to Iran’s nuclear standoff, asking Google to erase the name of Persian Gulf which is a tremendously strategic waterway in the Middle East and a symbol of Iran’s regional domination can be interpreted as a new phase of this complicated anti-Iranian plot.

But such unprofessional actions which are in sharp contrast to all the proclaimed principles and policies of companies like Google, including non-alignment to governments and independence in action, will do no harm to the regional superiority of Iran but give rise to anti-American sentiments among Iranians, discredit and bring into disrepute their fame and strengthen the national solidarity and unity of Iranians.
University professor and author Dr. Kevin Barrett believes that Google’s removal of the Persian Gulf name is part of a Zionist-directed plot against Iran: “Google’s idiotic removal of the Persian Gulf from its maps is part of a coordinated strategy by Zionist-dominated American policy-makers. Google is a CIA subsidiary. They are trying to foment hatred, strife, and violence between Iranian and Arab Muslims, as part of their imperial divide-and-conquer strategy.”

“This is part of what the US military calls its “total war,” meaning a genocidal war of extermination, against the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims. Their goal is to provoke Muslims to fight and kill each other. That way, the Israelis and Americans won’t have to suffer the blowback from committing genocide directly,” he added.

“This is only one example of the Zionist West’s genocidal efforts to provoke bloodshed between different groups of Muslims. The February, 2006 terrorist attack on the Golden Dome al-Askari mosque in Samarra by the U.S. forces is an example of the numerous false-flag attacks by Zionist-controlled terrorists designed to destroy Islam by fomenting schism and bloodshed (what Muslims call fitna),” wrote Barrett.

American journalist and radio host Stephen Lendman similarly believes that Google’s decision in removing the name of Persian Gulf from its maps is dictated from above: “Google is connected to the CIA. The agency provided startup funding. Its “mischievous attack” had to be CIA or political Washington connected. Why else would they do it? It provides Internet searches and other online related products and services. It’s a profit making business, not a political instrument unless directed to perform this type service.”

Famous British TV journalist and political commentator Yvonne Ridley is also against the seditious action of Google; however, she says that having a black record of mischievous actions by Google in mind, it would be no surprise that the American firm has removed the name of Persian Gulf from its maps: “Google has Jerusalem down as the capital of Israel so I wouldn’t get too upset by seeing this. It has its own political agenda and it is obviously under the thumb of the foreign policymakers in the United States.”

Ridley believes that Google is establishing a dangerous tradition by removing the name of Persian Gulf from its maps. She recommends Iranians to get united and take action against Google: “it might be worth Iranians mounting a campaign with online petitions, using the social networks and ridiculing Google for its silly attempt to erase the Persian influence in the region. If you stand by and let a search engine like Google erase your country’s history and culture it will set a dangerous precedent. Iranians should put up a resistance from the highest echelons of government to the kids in the street.”

Tim King, a former U.S. mariner and veteran journalist also believes that Google’s action is not justifiable by any standards and nothing but a political game: “In my mind, there is no question that we are watching the Google political, technical arm undermine and attempt to erase ancient history. I believe the U.S. and Israeli governments are absolutely carrying out another campaign against Tehran and this one is more shameful than most, as Americans are painfully unaware of world geography and the real history relating to the US, the UK and Persia. This is a Zionist program without question, we all know that.”

King believes that Google questions its already stained reputation with such moves: “I don’t see how this type of move will do anything but harm the reputation of Google, a company already known for its pro-Israel bias and its refusal to speak out over Israeli war crimes and apartheid politics. It is sad, I know so many Iranians who continually and expressly wish the war drums would die down.”

Nima Shirazi, Iranian political commentator and author says that there’s no dispute over the naming of Persian Gulf and that Google has started a political game over a scientific issue: “My impression is that Google’s decision to leave the Persian Gulf as an unnamed body of water on its maps is an example of a bad decision made in a misguided and misinformed effort to remain neutral on an issue that isn’t actually controversial or in dispute. Through its own ignorance and naïveté, Google made a decision that, in the absence of labeling the Persian Gulf by its historical and centuries-old internationally-accepted name, is actual a very political one.”

He further referred to the Iranian President’s visit to the Iranian island of Abu Musa which was widely protested by the Arab states of the Persian Gulf and also cited the example of the Gulf of Mexico, raising the question that what would happen if the Gulf’s name was changed to the Gulf of Cuba or Gulf of Texas: “additionally, coming on the heels of the absurd and manufactured outrage over Ahmadinejad’s recent visit to the Iranian island of Abu Musa, this is yet one more example of the deliberate disrespecting of Iranian sovereignty and recognition. Of course, no one would begrudge Mexicans for being confused and upset if “The Gulf of Mexico” were renamed “The Gulf of Cuba” or “The Gulf of Texas” or “The American Gulf.” And yet, Iranians are supposed to accept a similar offense without reaction.”

Shirazi believes that Google has showed its naiveté and ignorance by leaving the Persian Gulf unnamed on its maps: “first and foremost, I think it demonstrates Google’s ignorance and naïveté. Sometimes the attempt to remain “neutral” is itself a political act. By leaving the Persian Gulf unnamed on its maps, Google is essentially giving credence to the claim that such a title is disputed when, in fact, it is not. The United Nations, UNESCO, United States, United Kingdom and most other countries on the planet recognize the Persian Gulf as the accepted name of that body of water. The Persian Gulf has been so-called since antiquity. The Greek historian Herodotus utilized the term “Arabian Gulf” only in reference to what is now known as The Red Sea. The Greek travel writer and geographer Strabo repeatedly referred to the Persian Gulf in his seminal work Geographica.”

Persian Gulf’s legacy remains Iranian forever. By removing its name from the maps or faking other names for it, its reality cannot be changed. Those who intentionally make such attempts are advised to think twice and take a look at the world map and grasp Iran’s reality, and those who don’t know they are being tricked should remain alert to avoid plunging into the trap of American-Zionist alliance.

Posted in IranComments Off on Google following CIA’s path in confronting Iran

The Nakba: Before and After

by Stephen Lendman


May 15 marks Israel’s 64th independence day. This year’s Jewish calendar commemorated it on April 25.

For Palestinians, May 15 represents 64 years of Nakba suffering. Survivor testimonies bare witness. No words adequately explain their catastrophe. An unnamed Jew said:

“I am writing through tears. I wept when I saw the photo of the ruined village of al-Sanbariyya because it was my former brother-in-law who helped destroy the village and the lives of those who lived there.”

“My now deceased brother-in-law was born in Los Angeles and after World War II decided he wanted to live in Palestine. He met his wife-to-be at a training camp somewhere in the midwest.”

“While at the camp many of the people decided they wanted to build a kibbutz in then Palestine. I am not sure that they gave a thought to the fact that they would be taking the lands of others. But then, I don’t know. I wasn’t there.”

“As a Jew who was raised to believe in justice for all peoples, I believe that it is my obligation to speak out about Israel and to try in whatever way possible to bring about a better life in Palestine for the people who belong there… The people who were so cruelly evicted from their lands.”

A Palestinian also shared memories, saying:

“I cannot forget three horror-filled days in July of 1948. The pain sears my memory, and I cannot rid myself of it no matter how hard I try.”

“First, Israeli soldiers forced thousands of Palestinians from their homes near the Mediterranean coast, even though some families had lived in the same houses for centuries.”

“My family had been in the town of Lydda in Palestine at least 1,600 years. Then, without water, we stumbled into the hills and continued for three deadly days.”

“The Jewish soldiers followed, occasionally shooting over our heads to scare us and keep us moving. Terror filled my eleven-year-old mind as I wondered what would happen.”

“I remembered overhearing my father and his friends express alarm about recent massacres by Jewish terrorists. Would they kill us, too?”

“We did not know what to do, except to follow orders and stumble blindly up the rocky hills. I walked hand in hand with my grandfather, who carried our only remaining possessions-a small tin of sugar and some milk for my aunt’s two-year-old son, sick with typhoid.”

Survivors remember Deir Yassin. On April 9, 1948, Israeli soldiers entered the village violently. They machine-gunned houses randomly. Many inside were slaughtered.

Remaining villagers were assembled and murdered in cold blood. Among them were children, infants, the elderly and women who were first raped. Estimates place the death toll up to 120.

An eyewitness said:

“I was (there) when the Jews attacked….(They) closed on the village amid exchanges of fire with us. Once they entered the village, fighting became very heavy in the eastern side and later it spread to other parts, to the quarry, to the village center until it reached the western edge.”

“The Jews used all sorts of automatic weapons, tanks, missiles, cannons. They enter(ed) houses and kill(ed) women and children indiscriminately. The (village) youths….fought bravely.”

The ensuing fighting killed dozens more. Many other villages met the same fate. It was well planned, systematic slaughter. It was about seizing as much land as possible, leaving behind the fewest number of Arabs.

In December 1947, Palestinians outnumbered Jews more than two to one. David Ben-Gurion ordered them removed, saying:

“Every attack has to end with occupation, destruction and expulsion.”

He meant slaughter, displace, and depopulate. Erase a proud history. Replace it with a Jewish one.

Mass killing, dispossession, and destruction followed. From Jerusalem, Lifta ruins are visible. Rubble piles only were in Dayr Aban. Except for two houses, Barqa was destroyed.

Jura became Ashqelon. In al-Faluja, only wall fragments and the village mosque foundation remain. Hundreds of other Arab villages met similar fates. Jewish-only development replaced them.

Across Palestine, survivors recounted gruesome horrors. Arabs were shot in cold blood. Women were raped. Hundreds of thousands were displaced. One day they hoped to return. Those alive still wait.

The Nakba’s untold story reflects a cultural catastrophe. More on it below.

On May 15, Haaretz called Nakba “part of Israel’s history,” saying:

Netanyahu doesn’t understand that Israel’s national anthem “addresses only one people, the Jewish one.”

Few Israelis know or remember the Nakba catastrophe. For Palestinians, it reflects “the tragedy of hundreds of thousands of refugees and their millions of relatives, for whom May 15 – the day the establishment of the State of Israel was announced – symbolizes the day they lost their land, property and status.”

Israelis never accepted responsibility for Palestinian suffering. “But washing our hands….should not mean revoking the right to remember it. Nor is it supposed to prevent us from empathizing with the suffering of the other nation living in Israel.”

The effort put into “wiping out the Nakba’s memory is astonishing and outrageous.” It’s suppressed in textbooks. Israel’s Nakba Law bans commemorations.

Enacted as the Budget Foundations Law, Israel’s finance minister may reduce or eliminate funding for any institution or entity engaging in activities contrary to Israel’s definition as a “Jewish and democratic” state.

It also prohibits mourning Israel’s Independence Day. In other words, Arab history, culture, and right to express, teach, or disseminate it freely is violated. Discrimination faces anyone not Jewish.

Palestinians won’t forget. Neither should Jews. Something this important can’t be swept aside or forgotten. Nor can those with painful memories be denied the right to remember and mourn.

Nakba remains embedded in Palestinian consciousness. Israeli laws and ruthlessness won’t erase it.

On May 15, AFP headlined “Palestinians Mark NAKBA with protests, strike,” saying:

Early Tuesday, clashes broke out between police and demonstrators. Ramallah held a large rally. Others followed throughout the West Bank and Gaza.

“The Higher Arab Monitoring Committee (representing Israeli Arab communities) called for a general strike and for Arab-Israelis to visit the sites of former Palestinian villages.”

Extra Israeli security forces confronted demonstrators. In 2011, clashes caused deaths and injuries.

Maan News followed events throughout the day. Regular updates were posted. In Ramallah’s Clock Square, sirens commemorated the day. Thousands throughout the Territories demonstrated and marched. Palestinian flags were prominently displaced.

Israeli extremists clashed with Tel Aviv University students. They held a Nakba day memorial service in commemoration. On Sunday, efforts to stop it failed.

Hamas released a statement, saying:

“Countries which contributed to the Nakba of Palestine, namely Britain, must do penance for their sin by stopping Israeli aggressiveness.”

Clashes erupted outside Ofer Prison. Security forces fired tear gas and rubber bullets. Over 80 injuries were reported.

Nakba’s Untold Story

On May 15, the Palestine News Network published “Nakba – the Untold Story of a Cultural Catastrophe.” It remains an unhealed wound. Palestinians lost more than homes, land, and personal possessions. They lost their homeland and way of life.

Collective memory recalls pre-1948 days. Palestine’s culture thrived. Its economy was one of the region’s most prosperous. Tourism flourished. In 1944 and 1945, the Arab Bank paid shareholders a 24% dividend.

In 1919, Falastin became a daily newspaper. The same year, Miraat Al-Sharq was established. It was published until 1939 when British authorities shut it for printing an “inciting poem.” The Palestine Broadcast Service was relied on. By the mid-1940s, Jerusalem had 24 bookshops.

From 1911 to 1948, 161 newspapers, magazines, and other publications covered news, literary topics, the arts, humor, sports and medicine.

In 1914, Palestine had 379 private schools, including 95 elementary and three secondary ones. During the 1919-20 school year, 10,662 Palestinian students were enrolled in public schools. In 1922-23, it was 19,331.

By 1942, Palestine had the second highest regional elementary school enrollment. Lebanon ranked first. In 1947-48, 868 Palestinian schools, staffed by 4,600 teachers, taught 146,883 students.

Except for a law school and teacher’s college, Palestine had no universities. Instead, students went abroad for higher education. Thousands took advantage.

In 1927, 23 printing establishments published dozens of books. Topics included literature, history, economics, politics, the sciences, and other fields.

Palestinian musicians and singers performed. So did other regional ones and theater groups. In 1896, the French Lumiere brothers produced a film in Palestine. Other European filmmakers followed them.

In 1937, the Arab Cinema Company offered shares to the public. In 1945, Ibrahim Sirhan founded the Palestine studio. He and Mohamad Kayali established the Arab Film Company.

In 1935, the first Palestinian film was produced. It was a 20-minute documentary about the Saudi Arabian king’s visit to Palestine. Other productions followed.

From 1922 – 1948, at least 43 theater companies performed dozens of plays. So did schools. Jerusalem alone had around 30 theater groups.

Palestinian drama, literature, poetry, literary criticism, other writing, and arts productions flourished.

The Nakba catastrophe destroyed a vibrant, prosperous way of life. Besides slaughter, displacement, and destruction, soldiers, militias and civilian volunteers collected books and other culturally significant items.

The National Library of Israel documented them as AP (Abandoned Property). Access to them requires special permission. For Palestinians, it’s not easily obtained.

A project called “The Great Book Robbery” sought to include them in a virtual library. A documentary recounted the tragedy. It covered a 100 years from the mid-19th to 20th century. Topics include history, literature, poetry, language, religion, foreign books, technology, medicine, and a government report on the 1947 school curriculum.

For Palestinians, the Nakba reflects an ongoing journey of pain, loss and injustice. Collective memory remains. Fundamental rights weren’t restored. Daily life replicates a tortured past.

Assaulting Palestinian culture continues. In March and April 2002, Israeli forces destroyed at least 30 libraries and other information collections. Lost were government archives, public and academic libraries, and others belonging to NGOs and private institutions.

Palestinians once lived in peace with neighbors. Britain and Zionist extremists changed what’s so far not restored. A collective dream never died. It won’t until fulfilled.

Posted in Palestine Affairs2 Comments

Zio-Nazi Company Has FAA Permission to Fly Drones in U.S. Airspace!

2 year old Palestinian victim of Israeli droneThis two-year-old fell victim to an Israeli drone attack.

by Bob Johnson

The Israeli company Stark Aerospace of Mississippi is not so much from Mississippi as it is from Israel. Stark Aerospace of Mississippi is a subsidiary of Israel Aerospace Industries! And the Federal Aviation Administration has given them permission to fly their drones in American airspace!

Israel started its drone program with a contract in July of 1970 with the American company Teledyne Ryan. Since then it has moved to making its own drones which it uses to wage war with its neighbors as well as to keep Palestinians suppressed and under Jewish control. While being employed to control the Palestinians Israeli drones have been used in the direct killings of Palestinian children in Gaza.

The U.S. government promotes the use of drones to state and local governments. Already many state and local authorities have purchased drones for surveillance. As if this isn’t bad enough, some are thinking of arming them.

With U.S. politicians being so subservient to Israel and looking to the Jewish state for the advancement of their sickening and evil political careers, it is not surprising that American policy is mimicking Israeli policy. We’ve long since ceased to be a free Republic and are now merely a conglomerate of special interest groups with Israeli special interests at the top of the heap. In short, the American Republic has been replaced by a kosher plutocracy.

end result of Israeli drone attack on a two-year-old Palestinian child.This is the same child as above after the Israeli drone attack. What is in store for Americans who resist Israel running our country?

One of the most powerful weapons Israel has in its march to destroy freedom and to rule the world as its Hebrew Bible/Old Testament instructs it to do (one Bible quote in particular which seems to speak not only of Israel’s domination of its neighbors but also of its superior ruling relationship over America through its control of American politicians of both parties is Deuteronomy 11:23 which has God telling the Hebrews/Jews/Israel, “Then will the LORD drive out all these nations from before you, and ye shall possess greater nations and mightier than yourselves.”) is the belief of Gentiles that the Bible is the word of God. Since the Bible was written by ancient Hebrews/Jews it promotes them and Israel at the expense of everyone else. For example, the ancient Hebrews wrote in Deuteronomy 7:6 that God had chosen them “above all people that are upon the face of the earth.” And Leviticus 25:44-46 claims that God told the Hebrews/Jews that they could own Gentiles and our children as slaves forever “but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.” The list goes on and on.

This conflict Israel has with the rest of the world is a profoundly important problem that must be corrected. Especially since Israel has a stockpile of real nuclear, biological and chemical weapons along with multiple submarines to launch them. This conflict has been know for centuries as the battle between Jerusalem and Athens. Jerusalem represents alleged revelations and actual superstition. Athens represents God-given reason and the God honoring practice of following the evidence wherever it leads. (I wrote a chapter on this important topic in Deism: A Revolution in Religion, A Revolution in You.)  The American founder and Deist Thomas Paine made clear the deadly nature of ancient Israel when he wrote in The Age of Reason, The Complete Edition, “The Jews made no converts; they butchered all.”  This sick thinking is also embraced by modern Israel as is evident from its violent treatment of Palestinians, its promotion of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament which promotesJewish superiority and its rhetoric such as Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu stating that Jerusalem has been the Israeli capital for 3,000 years.  The more people realize the ungodly nature of the Abrahamic “revealed” religions and their “holy” books (the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament, New Testament [at Matthew 5:18 it says that Jesus said, “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”] and Koran), the sooner we can be free of the twisted thinking and the pain and misery they promote.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Zio-Nazi Company Has FAA Permission to Fly Drones in U.S. Airspace!

NDAA Authorizes War Against Iran


Rep. Dennis Kucinich

U.S. Representative from Ohio’s 10th District

This week, Congress is considering two pieces of legislation relating to Iran. The first undermines a diplomatic solution with Iran and lowers the bar for war. The second authorizes a war of choice against Iran and begins military preparations for it.

H.Res.568: Eliminating the Most Viable Alternative to War

The House is expected to vote on H.Res. 568. Read the resolution. Section (6) rejects any United States policy that would rely on efforts to contain a nuclear weapons-capable Iran. Section (7) urges the President to reaffirm the unacceptability of an Iran with nuclear-weapons capability and opposition to any policy that would rely on containment as an option in response to Iranian enrichment.

This language represents a significant shift in U.S. policy and would guarantee that talks with Iran, currently scheduled for May 23, would fail. Current U.S. policy is that Iran cannot acquire nuclear weapons. Instead, H. Res. 568 draws the “redline” for military action at Iran achieving a nuclear weapons “capability,” a nebulous and undefined term that could include a civilian nuclear program. Indeed, it is likely that a negotiated deal to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran and to prevent war would provide for Iranian enrichment for peaceful purposes under the framework of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty with strict safeguards and inspections. This language makes such a negotiated solution impossible.

At the same time, the language lowers the threshold for attacking Iran. Countries with nuclear weapons “capability” could include many other countries like Japan or Brazil. It is an unrealistic threshold.

The Former Chief of Staff of Secretary of State Colin Powell has stated that this resolution “reads like the same sheet of music that got us into the Iraq war.”

H.R. 4310: Authorizing War Against Iran and Preparing the Military for it

While H. Res. 568 undermines our diplomatic efforts and lowers the bar for war, H.R. 4310, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 begins military preparations for war. Section 1221 makes military action against Iran a U.S. policy. Section 1222 directs our armed forces to prepare for war.


(a) Findings- Congress makes the following findings:

(2) At the same time, Iran may soon attain a nuclear weapons capability, a development that would threaten United States interests, destabilize the region, encourage regional nuclear proliferation, further empower and embolden Iran, the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, and provide it the tools to threaten its neighbors, including Israel.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), as well as U.S. and Israeli intelligence, have all agreed that Iran does not currently have a nuclear bomb, is not building a nuclear weapon and does not have plans to do so. Both U.S. and Israeli officials also agree that a strike on Iran would only delay their nuclear program and actually encourage them to pursue a nuclear weapon.

Sustained, diplomatic engagement with Iran is the only way to ensure transparency and prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. Rejecting or thwarting any inspections-based deal we are currently seeking with Iran, even when analysts are expressing guarded optimism that a near term deal is achievable, makes pre-emptive military action against Iran more likely.

(7) In order to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, the United States, in cooperation with its allies, must utilize all elements of national power including diplomacy, robust economic sanctions, and credible, visible preparations for a military option.

Pursuing these non-diplomatic options, contrary to popular myth, does not help negotiations. U.S. policy toward Iran for the last three decades has primarily taken the form of economic sanctions, threats and isolation. None of these things has created meaningful change in the behavior of the Iranian government or achieved the transparency we seek. In fact, history has demonstrated that sanctions often preclude war; they do not prevent it. Sanctions hurt the same ordinary Iranians that we claim to support, and undermine their efforts to encourage democratic change in their country. Threatening military action against Iran can only undermine sensitive and critical diplomatic negotiations that could be our last chance to achieve the transparency and cooperation we seek from the Iranian government.

(8) Nevertheless, to date, diplomatic overtures, sanctions, and other non-kinetic actions toward Iran have not caused the Government of Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons program.

The United States, IAEA and Israel have all publically recognized that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons program. In a January 2012 interview on CBS’ Face the Nation, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta stated unequivocally that Iran is not trying to build a nuclear weapon. This clause further ignores that the U.S. and Iran have barely engaged in direct negotiations. Prior to last month’s negotiations, the U.S. and Iran had only engaged in 45 minutes of direct talks since 2009.

(b) Declaration of Policy- It shall be the policy of the United States to take all necessary measures, including military action if required, to prevent Iran from threatening the United States, its allies, or Iran’s neighbors with a nuclear weapon.

This is an authorization for the use of military force against Iran. It ignores the warnings of both current and former U.S. top military brass who have spoken in opposition to the use of military force against Iran, including former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and current Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.February 2012 poll demonstrated that less than 20% of the Israeli public supports an Israeli strike on Iran if approved by the United States. Congress must avoid the same mistakes it made in the Iraq war and reject any language that can be construed as authorizing war against Iran.


Section 2 (A) pre-positioning sufficient supplies of aircraft, munitions, fuel, and other materials for both air- and sea-based missions at key forward locations in the Middle East and Indian Ocean;

(B) maintaining sufficient naval assets in the region necessary to signal United States resolve and to bolster United States capabilities to launch a sustained sea and air campaign against a range of Iranian nuclear and military targets, to protect seaborne shipping, and to deny Iranian retaliation against United States interests in the region;

(D) conducting naval fleet exercises similar to the United States Fifth Fleet’s major exercise in the region in March 2007 to demonstrate ability to keep the Strait of Hormuz open and to counter the use of anti-ship missiles and swarming high-speed boats.

A plain reading of these provisions in H.R. 4310 taken together with H.R. 568 makes it clear: Congress is setting the stage for war with Iran.

Posted in USAComments Off on NDAA Authorizes War Against Iran

VIDEO: Brian Becker speaks on US and NATO War Plans for Syria


Watch and share this video

Brian Becker, national coordinator of the ANSWER Coalition, speaks to RT television on U.S. and NATO war plans in Syria. Share this six-minute video with friends who are trying to understand the issues in the current struggle raging in Syria. The U.S. and NATO forces and their proxies in the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia, are pumping weapons and finances into the armed insurgency against the Syrian government. What is driving the push for intervention and war?

Thousands of people are now taking to the streets of Chicago to protest during the NATO Summit. Buses, vans and car caravans have traveled from across the country to make these actions a success. A major rally and march will take place tomorrow, Sunday, May 20. See below for details.

Sunday, May 20: March on the NATO Summit
U.S./NATO Out of Afghanistan, the Middle East and Africa!
Money for Jobs and Education! Sunday, May 20, 2012
Assemble 12 noon: Petrillo Bandshell in Grant Park
(Corner of Jackson and Columbus)

It’s time to take to the streets. On May 20-21, the NATO powers are holding a pro-war summit in Chicago. Leaders from the world’s most powerful imperialist governments will be descending on the city to promote an agenda of conquest, genocide and plunder.

The ANSWER Coalition is joining with hundreds of other organizations in mobilizing people from the Chicago area, the Midwest and the entire country to come to Chicago for a mass march and rally to resist the war makers on Sunday, May 20.

NATO and the Pentagon are nothing more than an enforcement arm of the 1%—using military force to carry out the interests of capitalism, overthrowing and destroying independent governments. For instance, NATO—under the pretext of defending civilians—carried out the merciless bombing of Libya until the government fell. Now, in their drive to reconquer the entire Middle East, U.S. and NATO are promoting civil war and foreign intervention to overthrow the government of Syria.

The protest against the NATO Summit is being organized by the Coalition Against NATO/G8 War and Poverty Agenda (CANG8). The ANSWER Coalition, Occupy Chicago, Jesse Jackson, Chicago Teachers Union, National Nurses United, SEIU Healthcare Illinois and Indiana, SEIU Local 1, United Electrical Workers Western Region and many others have endorsed this important protest.

Why We’re Marching on the NATO Summit 

End the War on Afghanistan: Bring all the Troops Home Now!

The U.S./NATO war on Afghanistan is opposed by the people of the world. Tens of thousands of Afghans have been killed. Thousands of U.S. soldiers and marines have been killed or wounded. According to a New York Times poll, 69% of people in the United States think all U.S. troops should leave Afghanistan immediately. 

Jobs and Education, Not War and Occupation!

The Pentagon will spend $120 billion of taxpayer money this year to continue the war and occupation of Afghanistan. That is approximately $357 million each day to occupy Afghanistan. Meanwhile, 30 million people in the United States are unemployed or underemployed. Hundreds of thousands of teachers and public service workers are being laid off because the government says there is “no money.” College students are being forced out of school because of skyrocketing tuition. We are marching to demand money for jobs and education, not war and occupation. 

March on May 20 because change can only be made in the streets!

On May 20, march with veterans and GIs, students and youth from across the country, union members and community organizations to say no to the war machine!

Info: 773-463-0311

Posted in SyriaComments Off on VIDEO: Brian Becker speaks on US and NATO War Plans for Syria

Shoah’s pages