Archive | October 28th, 2012

Mask of Zion Report


Mask of Zion Report Oct 25 2012

by crescentandcross

The Mask of Zion Report is back! The one and only Jonathan Azaziah introduces the program with the 65th anniversary of the criminal occupation of Kashmir and the ongoing NATO sieege of the Libyan town of Bani Walid before delving into the assassination of Wissam al-Hassan in Beirut last Friday and the Israeli-approved purchase of Hamas by Qatar. Must listen!       


Download Here


Posted in InterviewComments Off on Mask of Zion Report

IsraHell Officials Warned Not to Comments on US-Iran Talks


Netanyahu Wants All Comments Cleared Through Him

ed note–normally something like this would not necessarily raise alarms, but given who the players involved in this are, I’d say there is reason for concern here.
Given that the world is becoming exponentially aware day by day as to Israel’s MO and more importantly–to her use of state-sponsored terrorism and false flags in bringing about certain pre-ordained political outcomes, paired with Netanyahu’s recent threat to the world that if Israel does not get her war with Iran as she demands that she is going to blow the entire planet to kingdom come, a story such as this one is overly-pregnant with implications, the most obvious of which is that Netanyahu & Co want NO CHATTER coming out of Israel prior to something going ‘BOOM’, lest people make the connection between the event itself and possible Israeli involvement.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry has sent a message to all embassies and consulates across the world, warning all Israeli officials not to publicly comment on the possibility of direct US-Iran negotiations.

“We remind that the PM asked that all requests for interviews in the matter require his approval,” the message added at the end, underline the words “require his approval” for emphasis.

In comments earlier this week Netanyahu denied any knowledge of potential US-Iran talks, but was also very critical of the idea on general principle, saying that the real diplomatic way to halt Iran’s nuclear program was a military attack.

The Obama Administration has repeatedly publicly denied that such talks had been approved, but behind the scenes officials have suggested that the talks are likely after the US elections, and Western officials have already met to discuss even more unreasonable demands to levy against Iran if such talks take place.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on IsraHell Officials Warned Not to Comments on US-Iran Talks

Why Is Dan Senor Considered a Serious Foreign Policy Thinker?


Last night, shortly before the third presidential debate got underway, senior Mitt Romney adviser Dan Senor appeared on cable television, where he strained to explain the distinction between what his candidate would do regarding Iran and what Barack Obama actually has done. The struggle foreshadowed the debate itself, in which Romney offered hardly any specific ways to distinguish his foreign policy from the president’s.


And it also reflected the past several months of politicking on international issues, which has seen Romney almost completely abandon substantive critiques of Obama’s tenure in favor of temperamental posturing and grand but practically meaningless ideological gestures.

Which actually brings us back to Senor.

Dan Senor is not the Romney campaign’s highest-ranking senior national security advisor–Alex Wong holds that distinction–but he has become its most prominent. Senor is a regular presence on cable news and was the subject of a New York Times profile that focused on his elevated stature on Team Romney. He was Romney’s most visible aide during his summer trip to Britain, Israel, and Poland—the campaign’s most important foreign-policy showcase before last night. In August, he was staffed to Paul Ryan, in part to coach the congressman on international affairs. This month, he helped prep Romney for last night.

And if Romney wins, it’s likely Senor will get a job in the foreign policy apparatus commensurate to his powerful campaign rank: Politico reported in August that he may be national security adviser. That would be an extraordinary ascent, considering Senor’s experience lies almost exclusively as a political operator rather than a policy practitioner. Or perhaps it’s not so extraordinary, since so much of the Romney campaign’s foreign policy is nothing but messaging.


THE LAST REPUBLICAN administration’s foreign policy team has many errors to account for. But one accusation that cannot be fairly leveled against Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, and Paul Wolfowitz is that they were dilettantes in international politics. By contrast, Senor, 41, lacks a Ph.D and any time in executive-branch policymaking trenches. With a B.A. in history and a master’s in business, he began his political career as a foreign policy and communications advisor to Michigan Sen. Spencer Abraham, who sat on no foreign policy- or national security-related committees and was concerned primarily with immigration. 

“He was first and foremost in charge of the press operation,” Abraham told me of Senor, whom he praised, adding, “He was a little bit on the policy side, but his titles were principally on the media side.”

Senor’s main foreign-affairs credential derives from his 15-month stint in Iraq. Tellingly, he served not as a policy practitioner, but as a flack—he was the spokesperson for Coalition Provisional Authority chief L. Paul Bremer. It’s hard to blame Senor, the spin guy, for the policy disasters of Bremer’s tenure. The farcical efforts at messaging, on the other hand, were his.


In classic Bush administration fashion, Senor was good at explaining the grand question of Why We Were There, but he proved hapless at the rather more pressing task of explaining the occupation’s day-to-day activities and its responses to recent events. The Washington Post’s Rajiv Chandrasekaran has recounted an instance of Senor telling reporters, “Off the record: Paris is burning. On the record: Security and stability are returning to Iraq.” Associated Press reporter Jim Krane told me in an email that Senor once explained a suicide bombing by saying, “The reason we have bad days like this in Iraq is because we have had so many good days!” 


Senor stuck to his strategy even as it became apparent that the press was not buying what he was selling: CBS News’ Elizabeth Palmer remembered seasoned reporters laughing whenever newbies expressed bewilderment at the disconnect between the official line and the reality on the ground. A result was a rash of articles about how the CPA was stocked with Republican loyalists or was severely limiting media access: exactly the sort of process story that it was Senor’s job to squelch.

Support thought-provoking, quality journalism. Join The New Republic for $3.99/month.

Following his stint in Iraq, Senor went into the private sector—a series of financial endeavors, most recently at Republican donor Paul Singer’s hedge fund. “The real experience he got in New York was very helpful,” Bill Kristol, an early Senor mentor, told Tablet’s Allison Hoffman. “He really understands business and the business world in a way he might not have if he’d gotten a cushy job in the administration.” (It says something about the GOP foreign policy establishment’s respect for expertise when an administration job is “cushy” while making millions in the private sector represents dues-paying.)

Much of Senor’s additional claim to foreign-policy expertise derives from another private sector project. In 2009, he and his brother-in-law, the Israeli journalist Saul Singer, published Start-Up Nation, a compelling account of Israel’s outsize success as a venture-capital magnet. Hebrew University business professor Bernard Avishai—who in 1991 wrote a Harvard Business Review essay predicting what the book would report in retrospect, namely, that Israeli society was primed to become a high-tech hub—praised it.


But he also told me that the book felt a bit like cheerleading. The argument, he summarized, is that Israel “is not just our aircraft carrier in the Middle East, they’re also a kind of vanguard economy in a part of the world that needs it, and we should therefore double-down on our support for Israel and the people who are promoting this—especially Bibi.” (As prime minister and finance minister, Prime Minister Netanyahu has made Israel’s economy vastly more capitalistic.) “It was a piece of Bibi’s brand management,” Avishai added. 

Still, having a book on his CV helped cement Senor’s standing in the conservative elite. He’d started consulting with Romney in 2006, the same year that he married Campbell Brown, at the time a prominent CNN journalist. (Lobbyist Ed Rogers threw them an engagement party at his McLean, Virginia, mansion.) 


In 2008, he became a Council on Foreign Relations adjunct senior fellow; a year later, he joined GOP macher Kristol as co-founder of an outfit called the Foreign Policy Initiative. Senor flirted with challenging New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand in 2010, his main asset being his connections to very rich New York Republicans.

And now, this cycle, he is a face of the GOP campaign. “Campaigns propel people very quickly,” Rogers, a veteran of several Republican presidential campaigns, told me. “If somebody begins to assert themselves and other people begin to notice, they move up the ranks very clearly….Every campaign produces those people, and this campaign, that’s Dan Senor.”


SENOR’S MOST PROMINENT moment on the campaign to date encapsulated his strengths and weaknesses as an advisor. The middle leg of Romney’s foreign trip in July, in which he traveled to Israel, was probably the most successful segment of a generally negative week—and Senor planned it, tapping a vast network of friends and allies. But for all Senor’s value in setting the trip up, things went south when he turned to policy.


In Israel, he told reporters that Romney would declare Israel’s right to attack Iran—something Romney was not planning to do. The campaign quickly walked back the quote, with anonymous aides telling reporters that Senor got “a little ahead” of himself. The other Holy Land gaffe was also Senor-related, in a vague way: Romney drew flack for attributing the discrepancy between Israel’s and the West Bank’s economies to “culture,” a breezy, inapposite comparison borrowed from one of Start-Up Nation’s more pop-anthropological riffs.

Senor is ubiquitous because his default mindset is that most cliched of campaign imperatives: win the day. For instance, when the Arab Spring began to take a sour turn in newspaper headlines, Senor was quick to proclaim that the Bush-era “Freedom Agenda” just wouldn’t cut it any more—this despite the fact that, in the mid-2000s, Senor’s job involved selling said Agenda. (The Daily Show memorably lampooned the flip-flop.)


Senor’s quotes on behalf of Romney are similarly malleable. Rather than offering specifics, he makes broad, blurry charges about the president’s “leading from behind” and “unraveling” strategy. When in a recent interview Andrea Mitchell asked, “What would Governor Romney do differently than President Obama is planning to do?” Senor fell back on an ideological critique that managed to be at once grand and meaningless. “You have to take a step back and say, has this administration been an observer of events rather than a shaper of them?” Um, is that a multiple-choice question?

But what choice does the Romney campaign have? With a Democratic opponent who is, unusually, strong on national security issues, Republicans have no choice but to spin smaller criticisms into a broader temperamental case about Obama’s supposed lack of toughness. This, in turn, propels the campaign to place extra chips on the Middle East, which in U.S. politics most easily lends itself to Manichean framing.


Against that backdrop, Senor’s ideological certitude is more valuable than nuanced analysis. Not that the campaign’s PR apparatus would cop to that. Team Romney apparently believes policy expertise can be earned by working as a partisan foot soldier. And there, Senor has a compelling resume.

Posted in USAComments Off on Why Is Dan Senor Considered a Serious Foreign Policy Thinker?

Britain says opposed to strike on Iran “at this moment”


Britain said on Friday it was opposed to a military strike on Iran ”at this moment” over its disputed nuclear program, arguing sanctions were having an effect and diplomacy should be given time.

The comments followed a report by Britain’s Guardian newspaper which said Britain had rebuffed U.S. plans to use its bases to support the build-up of troops in the Gulf, due to legal advice warning that a pre-emptive strike would be illegal.

The legal advice says Iran currently does not represent a “clear and present threat”, according to the Guardian, which cited unnamed sources.

“The government does not believe military action against Iran is the right course of action at this moment, though no option is off the table,” Prime Minister David Cameron’s spokeswoman told reporters, declining to comment on the legal advice.

“We want to see the sanctions, which are starting to have some impact, working, and also engaging with Iran,” she said.

The Guardian said Britain had not received a formal U.S. request to use its bases for a military build-up.

Cameron and Western diplomats believe harsh sanctions imposed on Iran by the West are beginning to weaken Tehran’s resolve and to stoke public discontent, and that military action would reverse the trend and rally Iranians to the government.

Israel and the West believe Iran is trying to achieve nuclear weapons capability. Tehran says its program is for purely civilian, energy purposes.

Years of diplomacy and sanctions have failed to resolve the dispute, raising fears of Israeli military action against its arch foe and of a new Middle East war.

Talks between the West and Iran could take place after the November 6 United States presidential election, following three inconclusive rounds this year.

The appetite for conflict is low in cash-strapped Britain, as well as in the United States, after recent costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In Israel, support for unilateral military action soon against Iran is by no means universal, and several prominent public figures have spoken out against such a move.

Posted in Iran, UKComments Off on Britain says opposed to strike on Iran “at this moment”

Orthodox priest kidnapped in Damascus found dead



The body of the Greek-Orthodox priest Fr. Fadi Jamil Haddad, pastor of the church of St. Elias in Qatana, was found today in the Jaramana neighborhood (north of Damascus) not far from the place where he was kidnapped, on October 19, by Zio-NATO armed group (see Fides 24/10/2012). This was confirmed to Fides by Fr. Haddad’s Greek-Orthodox confrere, who asked for anonymity. “His body was horribly tortured and his eyes gouged out,” he told Fides. “It is a purely terrorist act. Fr. Haddad is a martyr of our church. “

With regards to the responsibilities of the terrible act there is an ongoing rebound of responsibilities between the opposition forces and government authorities, that accuse the armed gangs of armed rebellion in the army. According to Fides sources, the kidnappers had asked the priest’s family and his church a ransom of 50 million Syrian pounds (over 550 thousand euro). It was, however, impossible to find the money and meet this exorbitant demand. A source of Fides condemns “the terrible practice, present for months in this dirty war, of kidnapping and then killing innocent civilians.”

Among the various Christian communities in Syria, the Greek-Orthodox is the largest (with about 500 thousand faithful) and is concentrated mainly in the western part of the country and in Damascus.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Orthodox priest kidnapped in Damascus found dead

Netanyahu’s bombshell marks Liberman as his heir apparent… for now


by crescentandcross

The Yisrael Beytenu chief has always eyed the top job, and knew it required a return to the Likud. The prime minister has cleared a path for him, but at what cost?

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu bolstered his status as the “Mr. Surprise” of Israeli politics on Thursday afternoon.

Five months after he shocked the political establishment by concluding an alliance with the centrist Kadima Party to stave off elections — a partnership that collapsed less than three months later — he and Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman secretly hatched an alliance that will see their respective Likud and Yisrael Beytenu parties run together on a joint list in the elections, which were recently set for January 22.

But while Kadima’s Shaul Mofaz was emphatically a minor, privately derided player in that earlier brief alliance, Liberman, smiling and at ease in his joint press conference with Netanyahu on Thursday night, is now clearly the prime minister’s right-hand man and would-be heir apparent. At 54, Liberman is nine years Netanyahu’s junior; Thursday’s alliance, should it prove viable, paves the way for him to seek the top job, sooner or later.

A key motivation for their partnership may have been concern that former prime minister Ehud Olmert could return to politics — having resigned four years ago amid corruption allegations — and that a center-left party including Olmert, his former foreign minister Tzipi Livni, and others, might — however improbably — win more seats than the Likud come election day.

But the deeper context is that Netanyahu and Liberman, a 1978 immigrant from Moldova who lives in the settlement of Nokdim, have long been political allies, and that this partnership has been much discussed between them in the past few years. Liberman served as the director-general of Netanyahu’s office when the Likud leader was first prime minister in the late 1990s. Liberman then split away to form Yisrael Beytenu, a party with particular appeal to voters — like himself — from the former Soviet Union. But although he has charted a political course a little to the right of Netanyahu’s Likud in recent years, and although there have been suspicions and political disagreements between the two men — notably over Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, whom Liberman regards as a “political terrorist” but with whom Netanyahu says he would negotiate — they have become increasingly close in recent years.

The next few weeks will determine whether their parties are more attractive together than separately. Their aides claimed Thursday afternoon that internal polls indicate that the 42 seats they hold jointly at present — 27 for the Likud and 15 for Yisrael Beytenu — will swell to more than 50, out of the 120 in the Knesset, when they run together. But the arithmetic is not immediately persuasive. Twenty-seven plus 15 does not ordinarily add up to 50.

It is hard to identify the tens, even hundreds of thousands of new voters who those polls purportedly prove will be drawn to this alliance, and easier to envisage moderate Likudniks feeling they don’t quite belong under the expanded “Biberman” roof.

One thinks of that proportion, albeit small, of the Likud camp that sees itself as following dovish Likud “prince” Dan Meridor, for instance. What, one wonders, was Meridor thinking when the news broke?

Then there is the rather larger group of Orthodox Likud voters, for whom Liberman’s secular constituency and outlook — and his consequent pressure for ultra-Orthodox conscription and eased conversion processes — are anathema.

In party political terms, Netanyahu’s new marriage to Liberman would seem to signify divorce from Shas. And Shas has just celebrated the return of Aryeh Deri, who is certainly no hawk when it comes to the settlements and who might just, depending on the election results, want to whisper something into Rabbi Ovadia Yosef’s nonagenarian ear about Netanyahu’s betrayal of his loyal ultra-Orthodox coalition partners.

Leaders of the center-left opposition, having recovered from the shock of the news, unsurprisingly asserted that the gambit would backfire on Netanyahu, and whispered that the prime minister had panicked because the Likud’s poll numbers aren’t high enough. The merged parties would be “a North Pole of extremism,” claimed Labor’s Isaac Herzog. Those more moderate Likud voters, alarmed by the alliance with the hawkish Liberman, would abandon the new pairing, Herzog predicted, and plump for Labor.

Aides to Netanyahu were hinting that the prime minister has more political surprises up his sleeve. One issue, however, is whether an unpleasant surprise is awaiting Liberman. He has been the subject of an extremely long-lasting corruption allegation, which the attorney general’s office has reportedly promised to resolve — either by indicting him, or closing the case — before the elections.

Another potential obstacle to a soaring new alliance is the response of other would-be Likud prime ministers; the likes of Silvan Shalom and Moshe Ya’alon, self-regarded leaders-in-waiting, did not rush to laud the unexpected partnership on Thursday afternoon.

The announced joint list is also likely to add momentum for calls for a similar alliance on the center-left — perhaps bringing Labor, resurgent under Shelly Yachimovich, into some kind of partnership with the faltering Kadima, and with the new rising star of Israeli politics, Yesh Atid leader and ex-TV anchor Yair Lapid. Were these various players to put aside their differences, they might create some political momentum of their own, exposing a gamble Netanyahu did not have to take as one he should have avoided.

Reports Thursday night indicated that their deal allows Liberman to choose any post he wants in Netanyahu’s coalition. But Liberman’s eye has long been fixed on the top job, and he has always known that he could not become prime minister as head of a relatively minor faction like Yisrael Beytenu.

The route to the prime ministership for Liberman required a return to the Likud, where he served as director-general of the party under opposition leader Netanyahu in the early 1990s.

Now Netanyahu has opened a potential path for his longtime aide, ally and occasional rival to seek, sooner or later, to succeed him. Right now, as that short-lived alliance with Kadima underlined, it is still Netanyahu who holds most of the cards. Time will tell whether he will come to regret giving some of them to Avigdor Liberman.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Netanyahu’s bombshell marks Liberman as his heir apparent… for now



Introduction by Gilad Atzmon: As I explained in my latest book The Wandering Who, Jewish identity politics is driven by different tribal narratives. In many cases it is intolerant and even openly hostile towards open exchange and universal ideologies. This applies the Zionist and ‘anti’ Zionist alike.

The Jewish internet outlet Mondoweiss initially presented itself as a progressive pro-Palestine journal but it didn’t take long before it admitted to be a fig leaf dedicated to Judeo-centric gate-keeping. This week Mondoweiss changed its comment policy. No longer will it allow any criticism of Jewish politics, culture and identity politics.

But here’s the good news: Years ago, when some of us decided to write about the Jewish state in the context of Jewish culture, the AZZ (anti-Zionist Zionists) dismissed us as an ‘irrelevant marginal voice’. This week however, Mondoweiss admitted that we are actually “a lot of people” and “a significant part of the community.” A community Mondoweiss attempts to silence.

In the following piece Aletho News added the names of those who oppose freedom of speech and open discourse. These people have publicly disavowed me because of my recognizing the clear connection between Jewish identity politics and Zionist ideology. I’ll admit that I am actually happy to be at the centre of this battle for truth and liberation.

In the list you will find many Jewish activists. Yet, one may wonder why Palestinians such as Ali Abunimah and Omar Barghouti have so compromised their credibility by joining such a list and it would be interesting to find out what they got in return. But it would be even more interesting to find out what principle they were willing to sacrifice. Apparently, giving up on the Palestinian Right of Return was something they were quite happy to give away.  or

What shall we not talk about today?


“. . . a significant part of the community wants to talk about Israeli policy in the context of Jewish history and Jewish identity, and do so in a highly critical manner.Clearly a lot of people, including many in our community, want to have these conversations and regard them as necessary to resolving the Middle East conflict. We don’t. We are tired of serving as a platform for this discussion, including in the comment section, and don’t see the conversation as a productive one. From here on out, the Mondoweiss comment section will no longer serve as a forum to pillory Jewish culture and religion as the driving factors in Israeli and US policy.

We are making this change because this discussion makes for a toxic, often racist, discourse, and scares off others who would otherwise be drawn to the issues this site concerns itself with.”

Xymphora responds:

I look forward to the ‘Roots of Slavery in the Old South’ forum, which consists entirely of a discussion of the sufferings of the slaveholders, and how their actions derived entirely from the racism experienced by their Scots-Irish forefathers.

Of course, the deeper issue is that Zionism is based, not in Jewish suffering or the mythology of a universal irrational hatred of Jews, but in Jewish violent group supremacism.  This is easy to see in that Zionism waxes in times of Jewish group dominance (like now), and wanes in the relatively rare times of Jewish group oppression. The lite Zionists are always more skittish about hiding Jewish supremacism than the hard-core Zionists.


Aletho News adds the following list containing the names of those who have publicly disavowed Gilad Atzmon due to his recognizing a connection between Jewish cultural identity and Zionist ideology:

As’ad AbuKhalil, The Angry Arab News Service, Turlock, CA
Suha Afyouni, solidarity activist, Beirut, LEBANON
Max Ajl, essayist, rabble-rouser, proprietor of Jewbonics blog site, Ithaca, NY
Haifaa Al-Moammar, activist, stay-at-home mom, and marathon walker, Los Angeles, CA
Electa Arenal, professor emerita, CUNY Graduate Center/Hispanic & Luso-Brazilian Literatures and Women’s Studies, New York, NY
Gabriel Ash, International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, Geneva, SWITZERLAND
Joel Beinin, Donald J. McLachlan Professor of History, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA
Dan Berger, Wild Poppies Collective, Philadelphia, PA
Chip Berlet, Boston, MA
Nazila Bettache, activist, Montréal, CANADA
Sam Bick, Tadamon!, Immigrant Workers Center, Montréal, Québec
Max Blumenthal, author; writing fellow, The Nation, New York, NY
Lenni Brenner, author, Zionism in the Age of the Dictators, New York, NY
Café Intifada
Paola Canarutto, Rete-ECO (Italian Network of Jews against the Occupation), Torino, ITALY
Paulette d’Auteuil, National Jericho Movement, Albuquerque, NM
Susie Day, Monthly Review, New York, NY
Ali Hocine Dimerdji, PhD student at The University of Nottingham, in Nottingham, UK
Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, professor emerita, California State University
Todd Eaton, Park Slope Food Coop Members for Boycott/Divestment/Sanctions, Brooklyn, NY
Mark Elf, Jews sans frontieres
S. EtShalom, registered nurse, Philadelphia, PA
Benjamin Evans, solidarity activist, Chicago, IL
First of May Anarchist Alliance
Sherna Berger Gluck, professor emerita, California State University/Israel Divestment Campaign, CA
Neta Golan, International Solidarity Movement
Tony Greenstein, Secretary Brighton Unemployed Centre/UNISON, Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods, Brighton, UK
Andrew Griggs, Café Intifada, Los Angeles, CA
Jenny Grossbard, artist, designer, writer and fighter, New York, NY
Freda Guttman, activist, Montréal, CANADA
Adam Hanieh, lecturer, Department of Development Studies/SOAS, University of London, UK
Swaneagle Harijan, anti-racism, social justice activism, Seattle, WA
Sarah Hawas, researcher and solidarity activist, Cairo, EGYPT
Stanley Heller, “The Struggle” Video News, moderator “Jews Who Speak Out”
Mostafa Henaway, Tadamon!, Immigrant Workers Center, Montréal, CANADA
Elise Hendrick, Meldungen aus dem Exil/Noticias de una multipátrida, Cincinnati, OH
Doug Henwood, Left Business Observer, New York, NY
Ken Hiebert, activist, Ladysmith, CANADA
Elizabeth Horowitz, solidarity activist, New York, NY
Adam Hudson, writer/blogger, San Francisco Bay Area, CA
Dhruv Jain, Researcher at the Jan Van Eyck Academie and PhD student at York University, Paris, FRANCE
Tom Keefer, an editor of the journal Upping the Anti, Toronto, CANADA
Karl Kersplebedeb, Left Wing Books, Montréal, CANADA
Anne Key, Penrith, Cumbria, UK
Mark Klein, activist, Toronto, CANADA
Bill Koehnlein, Brecht Forum, New York, NY
L.A. Palestine Labor Solidarity Committee, Los Angeles, CA
Mark Lance, Georgetown University/Institute for Anarchist Studies, Washington, DC
David Landy, author, Jewish Identity and Palestinian Rights: Diaspora Jewish Opposition to Israel, Dublin, IRELAND
Bob Lederer, Pacifica/WBAI producer, Queers Against Israeli Apartheid, New York, NY
Matthew Lyons, Three Way Fight, Philadelphia, PA
Karen MacRae, solidarity activist, Toronto, CANADA
Heba Farouk Mahfouz, student activist, blogger, Cairo, EGYPT
Marvin Mandell and Betty Reid Mandell, co-editors, New Politics, West Roxbury, MA
Ruth Sarah Berman McConnell, retired teacher, DeLand, FL
Kathleen McLeod, poet, Brisbane, Australia
Karrie Melendres, Los Angeles, CA
Matt Meyer, Resistance in Brooklyn, New York, NY
Amirah Mizrahi, poet and educator, New York, NY
mesha Monge-Irizarry, co-director of Education Not Incarceration; SF MOOC City commissioner, San Francisco, CA
Matthew Morgan-Brown, solidarity activist, Ottawa, CANADA
Michael Novick, People Against Racist Terror/Anti-Racist Action, Los Angeles, CA
Saffo Papantonopoulou, New School Students for Justice in Palestine, New York, NY
Susan Pashkoff, Jews Against Zionism, London, UK
Tom Pessah, UC Berkeley Students for Justice in Palestine, Berkeley, CA
Marie-Claire Picher, Theater of the Oppressed Laboratory (TOPLAB), New York, NY
Sylvia Posadas (Jinjirrie), Kadaitcha, Noosa, AUSTRALIA
Roland Rance, Jews Against Zionism, London, UK
Danielle Ratcliff, San Francisco, CA
Liz Roberts, War Resisters League, New York, NY
Emma Rosenthal, contributor, Shifting Sands: Jewish Women Confront the Israeli Occupation, Los Angeles, CA
Penny Rosenwasser, PhD, Oakland, CA
Suzanne Ross, Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition, The Riverside Church Prison Ministry, New York, NY
Gabriel San Roman, Orange County Weekly, Orange County, CA
Ian Saville, performer and lecturer, London, UK
Joel Schwartz, CSEA retiree/AFSCME, New York, NY
Tali Shapiro, Anarchists Against the Wall, Boycott From Within, Tel Aviv, OCCUPIED PALESTINE
Simona Sharoni, SUNY, author, Gender & the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Plattsburgh, NY
Jaggi Singh, No One Is Illegal-Montreal/Solidarity Across Borders, Montréal, CANADA
Michael S. Smith, board member, Center for Constitutional Rights, New York, NY
Pierre Stambul, Union juive française pour la paix (French Jewish Union for Peace), Paris, FRANCE
Muffy Sunde, Los Angeles, CA
Bhaskar Sunkara, editor of Jacobin, Bronx, NY
Tadamon! (, Montréal, CANADA
Ian Trujillo, atheist, Los Angeles, CA
Gabriella Turek, PhD, Auckland, NEW ZEALAND
Henry Walton, SEIU, retired, Los Angeles, CA
Bill Weinberg, New Jewish Resistance, New York, NY
Abraham Weizfeld, author, The End of Zionism and the liberation of the Jewish People, Montreal, CANADA
Ben White, author, Palestinians in Israel: Segregation, Discrimination, and Democracy, Cambridge, UK
Laura Whitehorn, former political prisoner, NYS Task Force on Political Prisoners, New York, NY
Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi, founding member, Jews for Boycotting Israeli Goods (J-BIG)
Asa Winstanley, journalist for Electronic Intifada, Al-Akhbar and others, London, UK
Ziyaad Yousef, solidarity activist

and also:

  • Ali Abunimah
  • Naseer Aruri, Professor Emeritus, University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth
  • Omar Barghouti, human rights activist
  • Hatem Bazian, Chair, American Muslims for Palestine
  • Andrew Dalack, National Coordinating Committee, US Palestinian Community Network
  • Haidar Eid, Gaza
  • Nada Elia, US Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel
  • Toufic Haddad
  • Kathryn Hamoudah
  • Adam Hanieh, Lecturer, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), London
  • Mostafa Henaway, Tadamon! Canada
  • Monadel Herzallah, National Coordinating Committee, US Palestinian Community Network
  • Nadia Hijab, author and human rights advocate
  • Andrew Kadi
  • Abir Kobty, Palestinian blogger and activist
  • Joseph Massad, Professor, Columbia University, NY
  • Danya Mustafa, Israeli Apartheid Week US National Co-Coordinator & Students for Justice in Palestine- University of New Mexico
  • Dina Omar, Columbia Students for Justice in Palestine
  • Haitham Salawdeh, National Coordinating Committee, US Palestinian Community Network
  • Sobhi Samour, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), London
  • Khaled Ziada, SOAS Palestine Society, London
  • Rafeef Ziadah, poet and human rights advocate

Posted in CampaignsComments Off on WHAT SHALL WE NOT TALK ABOUT TODAY?



It is far from being a big surprise that Jimmy Savile, a ‘predatory sex offender’, found many friends amongst Zionists and Israeli leaders. Just a year ago, the UK Jewish Chronicle saw him as a dear friend of the Jewish people and their State.

Interestingly enough, JC’s  Jessica Elgot who wrote the following piece prefers  Zionist paedophile Savile over truth tellers such as prof’ John Mersheimer or myself*.

Jimmy Savile came to my batmitzvah

By Jessica Elgot
With the Bridge in Britain friends in Tel Aviv in 1975; John Levy is far right
With the Bridge in Britain friends in Tel Aviv in 1975; John Levy is far right

He claimed to have “invented the disco”, but Sir Jimmy Savile, the DJ and presenter who died last weekend, also claimed to have done his bit towards peace in the Middle East.

Sir Jimmy always said he had berated the Israeli Cabinet in 1975 for being too soft after the Six Day War.

The bling-loving Leeds-born presenter of Jim’ll Fix It and Top of the Pops, who once described himself as “the most Jewish Catholic you will ever meet,” was a strong supporter of Israel and through fun runs, marathons and personal appearances, raised funds for many charities including WIZO, Ravenswood, and the British Friends of the Laniado Hospital in Netanya.

His ten-day visit to Israel in 1975, when he met President Ephraim Katzir and Jerusalem mayor Teddy Kollek, was organised by John Levy of the Friends of Israel Educational Trust.

Trademark tracksuit
Trademark tracksuit

The trip was filmed for the BBC’s Jim’ll Fix It after nine-year-old Gary Merrie from Liverpool asked “to see the land where Jesus was born.”

Sir Jimmy recalled his advice to the Israelis: “I arrived at this reception. The president came to me and asked how I was enjoying my visit.I said I was very disappointed: the Israelis had won the Six Day War but they had given back all the land, including the only oil well in the region, and were now paying the Egyptians more for oil than if they had bought it from Saudi Arabia.

“I said: ‘You have forgotten to be Jewish’. He said: ‘Would you like to tell my cabinet that?’ Next morning, I went to the Knesset; they interrupted a cabinet meeting and I told them the same as I had told him.”

Mr Levy recalled: “He was a gorgeous, impish, creative character. Of course, he was an egomaniac, but he was incredibly generous. He wanted to film us walking from Jerusalem to Bethlehem, so there are these scenes trudging the Judean Hills. He had many close Jewish friends, he was a real philosemite. When we returned, I asked him to be a ‘Friend’ of the Trust and he insisted that I listed him as ‘Special Friend’.”

During his visit, Sir Jimmy spent time camping near the Sea of Galilee and at Kibbutz Lavi, where he recorded a discussion programme for his Radio 1 show “Speakeasy.”

Famous for his “clunk-click” road safety campaign advocating the wearing of seat belts, Sir Jimmy loved nearly everything in Israel, with one major exception – the driving. After his trip and a meeting with then Transport Minister Moshe Dayan, when he returned to London, he presented Israeli ambassador Gideon Rafael with two road safety films which he hoped would be shown on Israeli TV.

Mancunians Pearl Gruber and her late husband Harold were close friends of Sir Jimmy, and invited him to their daughter Sharon’s batmitzvah in 1968. Mrs Gruber said: “He was wonderful; he broadcast his radio show ‘Savile’s Travels’ from the batmitzvah party at the Yeshurun Hebrew Congregation in Cheadle. One of the boys at the party really wanted to be a disc jockey and nearly drove him mad.”

Sharon Gruber, who now lives in Mill Hill, recalled: “He came to my batmitzvah in a silver suit, and people were whispering ‘who does that man think he is, Jimmy Savile?’ They didn’t realise it was really him!”

One of his eight homes was a small flat in the heart of the Leeds Jewish community in Roundhay. He spent much of his time socialising at the Flying Pizza restaurant on Street Lane, a popular local haunt.

He was a regular at fundraising dinners at synagogues in Leeds and Manchester, particularly for the British Friends of Laniado, donating large sums to the organisation.

He told the BBYO group in Leeds: “I knew nothing about the Jewish community growing up”, but visiting Israel had made him realise that “the world owes the Jewish community a great debt.”

Manchester Laniado chair Dov Hamburger recalled Sir Jimmy’s appearance at the charity’s annual dinner, which he did for nothing. Mr Hamburger said: “I cannot recall a keynote speaker who has behaved so generously before.”

Former Norwood chief executive Norma Brier recalled Jimmy Savile’s visit to Ravenswood Village in 1989. “He came to open the Ravenswood fair and was a great hit, turning up in his gold Rolls Royce. He walked around chatting to the residents and spent lots of time there. We were very grateful for his support.”


To read Jewish Chronicle’s  Jessica Elgot on Gilad Atzmon:

Mearsheimer backs book by antisemite

Gilad Atzmon’s ‘antisemitic rhetoric’ denounced at film premiere

Posted in ZIO-NAZI1 Comment



Telling the truth about the Jewish state can be very dangerous for your career.  The following was published today by the Irish Independent:

Vincent Browne

I am not anti-Semitic, claims Vincent Browne

TV3 broadcaster Vincent Browne insists he is not anti-Semitic after branding Israel a “cancer” in foreign affairs.

But Israel‘s deputy ambassador to Ireland said she never believed the day would come when an Irish TV presenter would make “racist, anti-Semitic remarks”.

Mr Browne, pictured, had been complaining on his show about the lack of discussion of Israel during the last US presidential debate between Republican nominee Mitt Romney and US President Barack Obama.

“Israel is the cancer in foreign affairs. It polarises the Islamic community of the world against the rest of the world,” he said.

“Unless you deal with the problem of Israel and the Palestinians in that part of the world, there’s going to be conflict and disharmony. It’s a massive injustice — they stole the land from the Arabs.”

Mr Browne admitted that his choice of language could have been better but insisted that the criticism was justified.

“What I resent is the suggestion that because you’re critical of Israel, you’re automatically anti-Semitic. I don’t think that’s acceptable,” he said.

Mr Browne refused to apologise for his remarks, saying that Israel was founded in 1948 by taking land from the Arabs.

He said it was “blackmail” to try to brand everyone who was critical of Israel as anti-Semitic. “I don’t think I differ too much from Irish or European foreign policy,” he said.

But his remarks drew a strong reaction from Israel’s deputy ambassador to Ireland Nurit Tinari-Modai, who said her grandparents were brutally murdered during the Holocaust.

“I would have never believed that the day would come when a presenter on an Irish TV station would make racist, anti-Semitic remarks,” she said.

She made her comments to the ‘Jewish Chronicle’ newspaper, the most widely read Jewish newspaper in Britain.

TV3 spokeswoman said she was not aware of any complaints being made about Mr Browne’s remarks.

– Michael Brennan Deputy Political Editor

Irish Independent




Hassan was unusual in another way, which was his willingness to talk with the press. I met him when he came to Washington in late August to visit U.S. officials. His comments were off the record, but after his death, the person who arranged the interview said I could use the material.Hassan made several points: The first was that he hoped to keep Lebanon out of the Syrian war by sealing the border so that it wouldn’t be a supply conduit for the rebels, as Turkey has become.

[ed notes:the author of course attempts to lay blame on Syria and pro Syrian groups,(you will see why below)but that cited paragraph above really shows who would have motives to eliminate him!Also,who attacked lebanese military forces last month?Syrian rebels!!! 

FSA Terrorists Attack Lebanese Army inside Lebanon – YouTube

Those attacks against lebanese military were an embarassment for those supporting rebels in Lebanon and their western handlers..if indeed wissam did state what ignatious claims,then the us,and its proxies would definatly know that he would have to be eliminated in case he continued to state such things openly,because its no secret whos backing those rebels from Lebanon and west!!Who spoke with wissam morning he arrived in Lebanon first?

Hariri,see… Al-Hassan Probably Monitored in Paris, Berlin. Those who would want to kill and silence such future comments by wissam,would be Turkey,FSA rebels,Hariri (march 14),CIA,Israhell … i should also give you some backround on the journalist david ignatious who is leaning claiming it was Syria govt or its supporters…. Iran war drummer Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, comments on Ignatius: ”he’s a neocon-lite” The World Turned Upside Down  

also see… Some journalists are useful to disseminate non-identified, deniable, politically-useful information, a.k.a., leaks. David Ignatius has proven to be one of the establishment’s favorite means to disseminate politically-useful information, i.e., Ignatius is a favorite leakee  Don’t Get Your Hopes Up  DAVID IGNATIOUS IS ALSO AFFILIATED TO TWO GROUPS WICH PROMOTE WAR AGAINST SYRIA AND IRAN...

International Institute for Strategic Studies – US, Director About  German Marshall Fund of the United States, Trustee Trustees supplementation on these two groups.. THE NAKED FACTS REPORT…The Dire Effects of  brittish imperial commander of afghanistan admits – thenakedfacts This meeting was moderated by Dr. Constanze … – THENAKEDFACTS  Older Post – THENAKEDFACTS  WESTERN PUPPET,ZIONIST AND NATO … – THENAKEDFACTS


Shoah’s pages