Archive | October 2nd, 2012

U.S. wants to repeat Iraqi chemical weapons scenario in Syria: Muallem

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem remained vague on whether the Syrian regime possesses chemical weapons. (Reuters)

Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem remained vague on whether the Syrian regime possesses chemical weapons. (Reuters)


The U.S. wants to oust the Damascus regime by raising fears overs its chemical weapons stockpiles, creating a scenario similar to that which led to the invasion of Iraq, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem said in an interview broadcast Monday.

“This issue (chemical weapons) is an invention of the American administration,” Muallem told Beirut-based al-Mayadeen TV in excerpts of an interview to be broadcast in full later Monday.

But Muallem remained vague on whether President Bashar al-Assad’s regime possesses chemical weapons, despite Damascus acknowledging in July that it has such stockpiles.

“These chemical weapons in Syria, if they exist — and I emphasizse if — how is it possible that we would use them against our own people? It’s a joke,” he said in the interview excerpts of which were broadcast by the staunchly anti-American and anti-Israeli channel.

“But this definitely does not mean that Syria has a stockpile of chemical weapons or that it intends to use these weapons against its own people … it is a myth they invented to launch a campaign against Syria like they did in Iraq,” he said in the interview given on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly meeting in New York.

A U.S.-led coalition had invaded Iraq in March 2003, accusing Saddam Hussein of possessing weapons of mass destruction. No such weapons were ever found.

Damascus acknowledged for the first time in late July that it possessed chemical weapons. It threatened to use them if attacked by outside countries, but never against its own people.

The admission raised deep concerns among the international community, with the United States saying Damascus would be making a “tragic mistake” if it decided to deploy its chemical weapons arsenal.

Rebel fighters waging an armed insurrection against Assad’s regime claimed in July that the Syrian government had moved some of these weapons to the country’s borders.

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said on Friday that the Syrian regime had moved some chemical weapons to safeguard the material as it wages war against the rebels. He said the main storage sites for its arsenal remain secure.

According to experts, these stocks, which amount to hundreds of tons, date back to the 1970s and are the largest in the Middle East.

Muallem also said that “the United States is now beginning to taste the poison of terrorism that it has supported,” in reference to the Sept. 11 assault on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi that led to the death of the American ambassador to Libya.

“It seems that they (the Americans) have not learned their lesson in Afghanistan,” added the foreign minister, in reference to the losses inflicted on NATO by the Taliban.

The minister reiterated that the “key to success” for the mission of international peace envoy Lakhdar Brahimi is for countries which “harbor, arm and finance armed terrorist groups” to cease their activities.

“Qatar is spending billions of dollars in Syria to kill the Syrian people, to destroy the infrastructure … and to murder doctors and engineers,” he said.

Damascus accuses Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey of supporting the armed rebellion.

“Turkey is the source of most acts of violence in Syria,” Muallem said, warning that “terrorism will turn against those who export it.”

The minister, without elaborating, did not rule out a “general amnesty decree” aimed at “national reconciliation.”

He also noted that Syria has a “strategic stock of wheat, food and medical supplies, which can last for several months.”

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) says that three million Syrians are in urgent need of food and aid for grain crops and livestock.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on U.S. wants to repeat Iraqi chemical weapons scenario in Syria: Muallem

Russia bans showing of anti-Islam film



Associated Press 


A court in Moscow ruled Monday that an anti-Islam film that has sparked violent demonstrations around the world can no longer be shown in Russia.

Tverskoi court’s ruling follows a similar local decision taken last week by a court in Grozny, the provincial capital of Russia’s Muslim-dominated province of Chechnya.

In Moscow, Justice Ministry spokeswoman Marina Gridneva said the film was deemed extremist because it could incite ethnic and religious hatred.

Russia’s communications minister had warned that authorities would bar access to YouTube if its owner, Google Inc., failed to abide by a court order to block access in this nation to the U.S.-produced film, which mocks Muslims and the Prophet Muhammad.

Google in Russia has said it could restrict access to the video, if it received a court order outlawing it, but the company declined to discuss that issue with The Associated Press on Monday evening.

Outrage at the film has spiraled into violent protests across several countries across the Muslim world. Some two dozen demonstrators have been killed in protests that attacked vestiges of the U.S. and the West, including diplomatic compounds.

The low-budget film, “Innocence of Muslims,” was produced by a U.S. citizen and denigrated the Prophet Muhammad by portraying Islam’s holiest figure as a fraud, womanizer and child molester.

Two issues have fueled calls by Russian lawmakers for a new law banning religious offenses: this film and the case of rock band Pussy Riot’s punk performance February in Moscow’s Christ the Savior cathedral, which saw them be convicted of hooliganism and sentenced to a two-year jail term.

The RIA-Novosti news agency quoted mufti Shafig Pshikhachev, head of the Coordination Center of Muslims in the North Caucasus, as welcoming Monday’s court ruling in Moscow.

“This is a positive step in defense of believers,” Pshikhachev said. “Unfortunately, we are witnessing such events regularly, so I think the adoption of a law is good. We need a legal method of protecting the faithful and our holy places.”

Some Russian mobile telephone companies took the initiative last week by blocking access to a number of online resources, including YouTube, to its subscribers in the north Caucasus, large swathes of which are inhabited by mainly Muslim populations.

Posted in RussiaComments Off on Russia bans showing of anti-Islam film

TUT Broadcast: Joined by ‘Digger’ from the UK to discuss this and other issues

TUT Broadcast Oct 1, 2012

by crescentandcross

Bibi’s Bomb–a joke or a threat on Israel’s part to holocaust humanity if her wishes are not carried out?

We are joined by Digger’ from the UK to discuss this and other issues.


Download Here


Posted in InterviewComments Off on TUT Broadcast: Joined by ‘Digger’ from the UK to discuss this and other issues

Is This Not a Hunger Game?

By: Malaka Mohammed

I was sitting at the Gaza Beach with some of my friends including Mahmoud Sarsak and some of the Samouni kids who had had such a tragic experience during the last Israeli attack on Gaza in January 2009. That time, 100 or more of the same family were forced to stay in a small house for a day and a half until the Israeli Army eventually dropped missiles on them. Thus 29 of their beloved were dead and the rest were injured either psychologically or physically.

Our trip’s star, Palestinian national team footballer Sarsak, shared his experience of being imprisoned in “Israel” without any charge and his 95 day hunger strike.

“As it approached three months, many things tempted me to end my hunger strike. Before striking, ‏we used to throw the food given to us by the Israeli Prison Services; food that shouldn’t be given to animals let alone us. I, as well as all other detainees, ‏bought food from the prison cafeteria using our limited money that is transferred to our account by our families. But after commencing my strike, ‏they started offering me delicious healthy meals like fresh meat.”

In a boat, enjoying our trip with Sarsak, captured by Taj Saleem.

Sarsak also reminisced his moments of freedom, ‏”I am so happy to be released, ‏but at the same time my satisfaction is partial since there is a wave of hunger strikers continuing their revolution inside Israeli jails.” Sarsak went on, “I went on hunger strike as it is unfair to be kept as an administrative detainee with neither charge nor trial for more than 3 years.” instilled

A Message

While enjoying sitting at the beach, ‏I received a message that delighted and enlivened me and our gathering even more:

“Two Palestinian long-term hunger strikers have broken months of fasting once a deal expected to secure their release has been issued.”

Safadi is set to be released on October 29th ‏at the end of his detention period and Barq is waiting to be deported to Egypt. In Gaza, we had actually already heard about a possible deal at the end of last week. We knew that an appeal had been accepted, but “Israel” may appeal against it in one way or another though hardly have I heard the Israeli Courts re appeal! We can never trust this fake state! Nevertheless, ‏we have to expect the worst and hope for the best. Now, ‏it is a reality. How happiness hovered over Gaza just after this great news is indescribable!

It is ironic how unplanned actions so frequently impact my life far more than those that are planned. Personally, ‏I could not even expect the appeal to be accepted in such a hurry. Nonetheless, it seems that international campaigns have put much pressure on “Israel” to make this decision take place as quick as possible.

Usually, ‏when such a triumph is brought to the scene, ‏I strike while the iron is hot and congratulate one or more of the joyous families’ members. This time however, I made up my mind to phone Samir Issawi’s family.

Aymen Sharawna and Samer Issawi remain on hunger strike. Both were ex-detainees sentenced to 38 and 30 years respectively. They were both liberated under Wafa Al-Ahrar swap-deal, and then were re-arrested in the recent year!

“Up till now, ‏nine of the free detainees of the deal were re-arrested.” stated by Issawi’s father. Sharawna is now in a critical condition. He lost the sight of his right eye as well as the ability to move and one of his kidneys has failed.

Samir Issawi and Aymen Sharawna respectively.

Who is Samir Issawi?

Thirty-two-year-old Issawi is from the Issawiyeh to the north east of Jerusalem. On April 15th, ‏2002 while being in a tower near Al-Ram, ‏to the north of Jerusalem, he was captured during the attacks on several places there executed by Israeli “Operation Defensive Shield.” At that time, ‏he was sentenced to thirty years on charges of owning weapons and forming military groups in Jerusalem. Nearly 10 years after his captivity, ‏an Egypt-brokered deal between Hamas and “Israel” about the captured Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, had been brought to the spotlight after years of staying under the shadow of hot arguments and meetings lingering for more than five years. Consequently, 476 Palestinian prisoners were released including Issawi and Sharawna.

Wondering why he has been detained only after eight months of his last release, I planned to phone Samir’s family to delve more in their son’s case. I could not make a call at first; ‏I had a shaking voice and trembling hands and did not even know how to commence! It was too hard for me to utter a word since I knew he might be too sad seeing Safadi and Barq achieving triumph while his love is dying. I endeavored to pull my strength together and convinced myself to stop being hesitant. Bearing in mind that a call can make a difference as it is a kind of support, ‏I phoned the family. Samir’s father responded. I wish I could have talked to Samir’s mother but regretfully “She fainted and was taken to a hospital after his son’s arrest and hardly can she move or speak then!”

After hearing his gloomy voice, ‏I could sense how sad he is! I asked about his feelings after an appeal was set to release Safadi and Barq. “My son and I are very contented to see them smelling freedom” he uttered, after which his voice became gradually gloomier. I did not want him to cry so I swiftly changed the subject over to Samir and his current hunger strike; ‏

”My son is obsessed with peace and life, not hunger or thirst. It is left to his own dignity that should lead all of us to do everything to return to him his rights and freedom. We have been told that my son’s health is now deteriorating and he is unable to sleep ‏and instead falls unconscious so many times a day. He has also complained of severe pains in his kidney and back.”

Two days after the call, ‏I contacted ‏Shireen, a former detainee and Samir’s sister. I inquired about her mom’s health at first, “My mom’s physical and psychological condition is now more at risk than ever. She cannot endure seeing her own son dying. She spends more than 12 hours a day in hospitals and every single moment, she repeats the same question and demand “can’t I see my sweetheart only once?”

“Haven’t any of your family members visited Samir or even talked to him!” hesitantly, I wondered. “No one has met or spoken to him since his current arrest. Only once have I seen him while put in a court.” she answered with a sorrowful tone. “That time, he could not move due to the shackles all around his feet and hands. They were bigger and heavier given how weak and frail his body had become”

“My brother used to be put in the slaughterhouse of Ramleh Prison Hospital where there was no media coverage about his situation. Now, ‏in order to force him to end his strike, ‏he was transferred to solitary confinement.” Said the evidently distressed Shireen

May 2011, Shireen Issawi after a month of being tortured in the Russian Compound!

Solitary Confinement!

Think about what a permanent state of solitary confinement means. You are forced to stay in a two-meter-square room with neither dark nor light – just a silent void filled with your own fears and pain, a deafening silence. A long wait only for nobody to arrive, nobody, not even your loved ones. The only human contact is with the guards who are the lords and masters over every minute of your day. A sort of grave for living people where fears are unfolded. Having nightmares about being where there is no place to be. And yet no reason is given for your detention, and no process is outlined for your release.Just consider going without food yourself, but not just for the evening, for days and days, a feeling that does not get near to the reality of what they are feeling. The link between them and you will give them power and strength over their misery to overcome some of what they are facing now. They need every bit of our support.

Egypt and “Israel”

Nowadays, Samir is the only Palestinian detainee who is awaiting hearings in “two Israeli courts”; ‏Ofer Military Court in the occupied West Bank and Israeli Magistrates Court in Jerusalem. “The Egyptian ambassador in Tel Aviv paid a visit to these prisoners who were supposed to be released in accordance with the prisoner swap. He told them that there will be no restrictions on their movement. However, on July 7th, my brother was captured from a place named Kufr Aqab between the Palestinian village of Hizma and the Jewish-only settlement, Adam, a region within the boundaries of the municipality of Jerusalem.” Shireen also recounted that this area belongs to the Israeli authority but since Israeli courts do not have any charge to keep my brother detained, they claim that “Samir broke the deal as he was captured from a place that is not a part of Jerusalem but the West Bank!”

Samir’s father speculated “we do not know what Jerusalem is for us? Whenever “Israel” wants to change its boundaries, ‏it does it by deceit and under the false cover of security”

When asking Shireen about the Egyptian Representative response in regard to her brother’s issue, ‏she muttered sadly, “they always tell us that they have spoken many times with the Israeli government but ‏that is all, we get nothing that makes us believe that attempts to free my brother are bearing fruit”


“It is still disputed whether the location of the arrest was considered Jerusalem or the West Bank;” Labib Habib, Samer’s lawyer from Nazareth stated.

Habib added “the Israeli Military Committee will put on trial any person in Ofer Military Court for three main reasons; if they claim that they have covert proof of a security threat; ‏if the person has committed an offense the sentence for which is more than three months; ‏or in response to a claim the person has violated conditions signed upon release.” Habib added that the Military Committee has requested the Israeli Military Court to have Samer continue his remaining term of 20 years in jail from the original 30 years of his previous sentence as he broke the conditions of the deal by entering into the West Bank. Apart from this, ‏the Israeli Magistrates Courts in Jerusalem are trying to charge him with disobeying the Israeli Military Commander in the West Bank. If convicted, ‏he will be sentenced to more time in prison in addition to the ruling of the Military Committee in Ofer Military Court.

Samir Was Released

Shireen told me the story of her brother’s freedom in October 2011, It was such a relief for all of us and especially for Samir. That time, we made a nice family gathering around a dining table for the first time since 1987 but alas, again in 2012, the Israeli Army has arrested all the brothers and sisters of my family and put them in jail. My family has spent many years in the jails; ‏I spent 1 year; Medhat 19 years; ‏Ra’fat 8 years and ‏Firas 5 years. My brother ‏Fadi ‏was sentenced for a year when he was just 15 and after 3 months of his release, ‏he was shot dead (martyred) in Hebron by the Israeli Army.

October 2011, Samir hugged her mom for the first time since 2002.

Samer is obsessed by Nature and Children

Involved in community-based volunteer work, cherishing nature and children, Samir lived a full life. For Samir, Jerusalem offers the promise of happiness but “Israel” has forced him through the path of sadness. He was arrested many times since his childhood. For instance, in 2002, ‏he was captured then sentenced for a year and a half when he was about to apply for the General Secondary Exam. He had submitted an application to study in prison, but the Israeli Prison Service refused. Later in 2007, ‏he was allowed to sit for the exams and he passed with flying colors. He was however, banned from further applying for a university degree.

A Palestinian Mother Is Calling

At the end, I could hear Samir’s mother utter some words, “they had taken him and let me suffered alone! Isn’t there anybody to help him to be free and alive?”

Shireen Issawi concluded with some touching words in a message to the free world, “‏Put yourself in my brother’s position going without food for many days. Think of him as if he is your brother. At any moment his grave condition could deteriorate such that no help could save him. I don’t want to lose him! All your actions are so important to help him.”

“Samir remains a beloved member of the free world; ‏they love him and will never give up their fruitful solidarity as well as real actions. Samir and Aymen will both be released” I replied with my sound having grown harsh and depressed. No one can hear this story without feeling the hurt of this family.

I hung up the call. I cried!

Posted in GazaComments Off on Is This Not a Hunger Game?

Former 32nd Degree Freemason John Salza Interviewed, Pts 1-4


Nicene Truth Masonry Unmasked Former 32nd Degree John Salza Interviewed.

Posted in EducationComments Off on Former 32nd Degree Freemason John Salza Interviewed, Pts 1-4

What Freemason Dick Atkinson say ? The Secret İmparted At The 33RD Degree


Mr. Adnan Oktar Is Telling About Freemasonry, The Secret İmparted At The 33RD Degree

Posted in EducationComments Off on What Freemason Dick Atkinson say ? The Secret İmparted At The 33RD Degree

What Freemason Dick Atkinson Say ? about Minister Farrakhan Exposes The Secrets of Freemasonry (2 of 2)


Did you know that at least 9 of the 56 signatures on the Declaration of Independence were Freemasons? The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan reveals the true meaning behind the symbols of Freemasonry and exposes the #1 secret that the world rulers didn’t want you to know.

Posted in EducationComments Off on What Freemason Dick Atkinson Say ? about Minister Farrakhan Exposes The Secrets of Freemasonry (2 of 2)

How the BBC denies Israel’s occupation


By Amena Saleem

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

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

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

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

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

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

Concealing the truth

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

Defending criminality

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Not interested in reality

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

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

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

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

Wiped off the map

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted in Campaigns, UKComments Off on How the BBC denies Israel’s occupation

What Freemason Dick Atkinsons say about that? Minister Farrakhan Exposes The Secrets of Freemasonry (1 of 2)


Did you know that at least 9 of the 56 signatures on the Declaration of Independence were Freemasons? The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan reveals the true meaning behind the symbols of Freemasonry and exposes the #1 secret that the world rulers didn’t want you to know.

Posted in EducationComments Off on What Freemason Dick Atkinsons say about that? Minister Farrakhan Exposes The Secrets of Freemasonry (1 of 2)

Contradictions and Hypocrisy–Professor Obama Lectures the Muslim World


By Esam Al-Amin

On Sept. 25, Professor-turned President Barack Obama lectured the Muslim World and world leaders during his annual address before the United Nations.

The beautifully crafted speech of the Nobel peace laureate would have been believed – and better received—had it simply been genuine. The president’s appeal for rejecting violence, spreading peace among nations, while emphasizing the vital use of diplomacy in international relations, as well as his call for respecting the rule of law, due process, and cultural understanding were remarkable. But unfortunately, they were simply not credible.

In his speech, the president admonished the Muslim World by underscoring the important belief that people must “resolve their differences peacefully” and that “diplomacy” should take “the place of war.” Laudable words, but only if America practiced what it preaches.

In his seminal work “A Century of U.S. Interventions,” based on the Congressional Records and the Library of Congress’ Congressional Research Services, Zoltan Grossman chronicled 133 U.S. military interventions by the most active military in the history of the world, between 1890 and 2001. Similarly, William Blum’s study “A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower,” covered 67 interventions between 1945 and 2000 that, according to him, resulted in the deaths of 13-17 million people.

In his book “The Fall of the U.S. Empire – And Then What?,” European intellectual Johan Galtung listed 161 incidents of American overt political violence between 1945 and 2001, including 67 military interventions, 25 bombings, 35 political assassinations (or attempted ones), 11 foreign countries that were assisted with torture, and 23 interferences with elections or the political process abroad. And all that was before the 9/11 attacks.

Since then, the U.S. military has been extremely busy, invading Iraq in 2003 under false pretenses and causing hundreds of thousands of casualties while creating millions of refugees. Before that, it invaded Afghanistan in 2001, causing tens of thousands of casualties in the longest war in U.S. history while still maintaining to this date over 70,000 soldiers on the ground.

The U.S. has also been waging open warfare with the whole world as its theater of operations in the so-called “war on terror.” This endless war allowed the U.S. military to engage in undeclared military operations, violating the sovereignty of many countries in Asia and Africa including Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Djibouti, and numerous Sub-Saharan and West African countries. So much for peaceful conflict resolution and mutual respect between nations.

During that period, the Bush administration allowed (and the Obama administration has since refused to prosecute) the CIA to violate the sovereignty of allied countries including in Europe by authorizing the use of prison black sites, rendition, and torture. In one case, Italy tried and convicted in absentia twenty-three CIA operatives who violated its sovereignty when they kidnapped and rendered an Egyptian cleric to be tortured by the former Egyptian regime. Likewise, Germany condemned the U.S. intelligence agency for kidnapping and torturing one of its citizens of Lebanese descent.

While Canada regretted and apologized for its role in rendering one of its citizens of Syrian descent, the U.S. – the country that actually carried out the rendition knowing that the subject would be tortured by the Syrian regime that it now enthusiastically condemns- still refuses to acknowledge its role, let alone apologize for the gross violation of its human rights obligations under international treaties.

Moreover, no American senior officials were ever held accountable for the Abu Ghraib prison scandal and torture in Iraq, or for waterboarding and other “harsh interrogation techniques” (read: torture) used against Muslim prisoners (the overwhelming number of whom were innocent bystanders according to legal and human rights organizations) at Guantanamo, Bagram, or elsewhere.

President Obama further stated in his scolding of Muslim world leaders that they needed to emulate the behavior of civilized nations that respect “the rule of law and due process that guarantees the rights of all people.” But such lofty rhetoric from the president might be very difficult to accept since he himself acted as prosecutor, judge, and executioner when he ordered the murder of several American citizens, including a cleric of Yemini descent and a magazine editor of Pakistani descent with a drone attack in Yemen.

People across the Muslim world wondered why the rule of law was absent in these cases and why their due process rights did not apply. Even two weeks after their death, the cleric’s sixteen-year old son, also an American citizen with supposedly constitutional protections, and a child by international standards, was also assassinated in a separate drone attack. So much for due process or respect for human rights.

In fact, since Obama became president in 2009, dozens of innocent civilians in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and else where have been killed each year. But rarely does the civilized nation apologize for killing innocent Muslim civilians because “America does not apologize” as many American politicians repeatedly love to say.

Furthermore, Obama’s commendable call for mutual respect among nations may have fallen on deaf ears because it was considered by many as disingenuous. As noted above, for years the U.S. has disrespected the sovereignty of Pakistan and Yemen as it assassinated many individuals, including U.S. citizens, on their soil without any regard for the national sovereignty of the host countries, which are not at war with the U.S. But Obama could not have dared to use a drone attack in the U.K. to kill a cleric of Egyptian descent, who the U.S. has been after for years. In the U.K., the U.S. simply asked the British to extradite him so that he could be tried on U.S. soil. So the U.K. gets every consideration while the administration only shows contempt for Yemen or Pakistan.

In his speech, the president lauded the “enshrined” American values of constitutional protections and freedom of speech, as he reminded his world audience that “citizens cannot be thrown in jail because of what they believe,” and that they should be allowed to “speak their minds and assemble without fear.” He then emphatically stated that in the U.S. “our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.”

Yet Muslims around the world wondered where were these protections of freedom of speech when several American Muslims were indicted and sentenced to as much as life in prison in the U.S. for exercising First Amendment activities, including an American Muslim pharmacist of Egyptian descent in Boston who was sentenced to seventeen years in 2012 for translating passages and uploading videos to the internet, and a cable operator of Pakistani descent who was sentenced to almost six years in 2004 for connecting his New York customers to Hezbollah’s satellite channel.

In many of these cases, government prosecutors speculated that the speech of the Muslim defendants was not protected because it could have led to violence even though no evidence was ever presented to support such a theory. Contrast that with the proven record of hate speech spewed by numerous American Islamophobes, many of whom were quoted extensively by anti-Muslim extremist Anders Breivik, who deliberately killed in cold blood 77 people in Norway in July 2011. In his 1500-page manifesto, Breivik cited many American anti-Muslim haters such as Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes, Pamela Geller, Martin Kramer, and others. They apparently inspired him to commit the atrocious killings, though none were ever held, even morally, accountable, or subsequently condemned for their hateful inciting anti-Muslim speech.

Moreover, President Obama proudly affirmed his belief in “freedom and self-determination” and expounded that such concepts are “not unique to one culture,” since they are “not simply American values or Western values; they are universal values.” But these words ring hollow as the American president failed to explain to peoples around the world why the U.S. and its Western allies while steadfastly declaring that they “believe in these values” have continuously blocked freedom and self-determination, even symbolically at the United Nations, to the Palestinian people who have been suffering for over six decades either under brutal military occupation or in squalid refugee camps.

He further failed to justify why America has continued to fully arm and finance the tools that maintain and sustain the Israeli military occupation for decades, while shielding Israel’s atrocious policies against the unarmed Palestinian civilian population. Or why it protects Israel from any accountability for its illegal settlement activities and occupation in flagrant violations of international law and the Geneva conventions.

Towards the end of the speech, President Obama accused the Iranian government of supporting “terrorist groups” in the Middle East (none of which is known to have targeted the U.S.), while his administration has just delisted the Iranian terrorist group MEK, which has a bloody history and in recent years has been responsible for many terrorist attacks and assassinations inside Iran including the targeting of government officials, scientists, and academics.

Overlooking the fact that he started his speech by emphasizing peace and diplomacy, the president ended it by implicitly threatening Iran with war unless it accepts the dictates of the West as he stated that “the United States will do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon” since “it has failed to take the opportunity to demonstrate that its nuclear program is peaceful.”

Most Americans might simply be deceived by Israeli propaganda in regard to the Iranian nuclear program, but most of the citizens of the world are not oblivious to the facts or the double standard applied to this issue by the American administration and its Israeli ally. So here are the facts that the president is fully aware of but conveniently decided to totally ignore.

Israel is the only country in the Middle East that actually possesses nuclear weapons- over 300 nuclear warheads along with their delivery systems. Israel is not a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), while Iran is. Under the NPT, Iran not only has the right to have a robust civilian nuclear program, but the five recognized nuclear power countries have the obligation to help Iran develop one.

Moreover, Iran’s nuclear facilities have been fully and are currently under the IAEA inspection regime. Iran has repeatedly disavowed the use of nuclear arms and has only enriched its uranium stockpile to the civilian use level of twenty percent- not the ninety eight percent needed for weaponization. Moreover, since at least 2007 the consensus of the sixteen U.S. intelligence agencies has been that Iran abandoned any steps towards building a nuclear arms program.

Finally, it was Iran that accepted the conditions set by President Obama in 2010 in his communication with the president of Brazil and prime minister of Turkey for Iran to prove its civilian use intentions. But it was Obama who subsequently backed away from the diplomatic solution as soon as Iran agreed to it, the same plan that he himself outlined to the world leaders.

When Obama arrived on the world stage in 2009, people the world over including many in the Muslim World had high hopes for real and genuine change. People were ready to turn the page on the painful years of the arrogant behavior of George W. Bush. But apparently the empire’s inertia overpowers the raised hopes of any false prophets.

Regrettably, with such self-aggrandizing posture, Obama’s tenure, whether it ends in four months or four years, will not conclude in celebration or optimism. Rather, in all likelihood its ending may follow T. S. Eliot’s words: “This is the way the world ends. This is the way the world ends. This is the way the world ends. Not with a bang but a whimper.”

Posted in USAComments Off on Contradictions and Hypocrisy–Professor Obama Lectures the Muslim World

Shoah’s pages