Archive | October 27th, 2014

Welcome aboard I$raHell apartheid bus


Defense Minister Ya’alon is kowtowing to the settlers at the expense of the image of the State of Israel internationally and its remaining shreds of morality.

Oct. 27, 2014
Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon arrives to attend the weekly cabinet meeting in Jerusalem

Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon arrives to attend the weekly cabinet meeting in Jerusalem, Sunday, Oct. 26, 2014.Photo by AP

Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon has instructed that Palestinian laborers be prohibited from using Israeli public transportation to travel between their homes in the West Bank and work in Israel. According to the report by Chaim Levinson in Haaretz on Sunday, Palestinian laborers will not be allowed to board buses traveling directly between central Israel and the West Bank at the end of their work day.

The minister’s decision comes despite the fact that the Israel Defense Forces see no security risk in Palestinians traveling on Israeli buses, because the only ones to do so are those with entry and work permits who undergo careful security checks when they enter Israel. Thus, Ya’alon’s decision is purely a result of his having given in to the longtime pressure exerted on him by settlers demanding that Palestinians not be allowed to board “their” buses.

The minister’s decision reeks of apartheid, typical of the Israeli occupation regime in the territories. One of the most blatant symbols of the regime of racial separation in South Africa was the separate bus lines for whites and blacks. Now, Ya’alon has implemented the same policy in the occupied territories. In so doing, he justifies the claims of those who brand Israel internationally as an apartheid state.

Ya’alon’s decision also means a heavier burden on the Palestinians in the West Bank. Few among them are allowed to work in Israel, and those who are allowed to work in Israel face an exhausting, humiliating and painful experience on their way to and from work. Now, Ya’alon is making it even harder on them.

The defense minister made it his goal a long time ago to satisfy the settlers; to dance to their tune and make almost all their wishes and demands come true. He does this out of cynical personal and political considerations – to reinforce his status as a leader of the extreme right. The saga of his murky relations with the American administration following his disparaging remarks about Secretary of State John Kerry and other senior officials shows how much Ya’alon longs for the settlers’ embrace.

This time, Ya’alon is kowtowing to the settlers at the expense of the image of the State of Israel internationally and its remaining shreds of morality. And all by abusing a few tens of thousands of Palestinians permitted to make a paltry living in Israel.

Ya’alon’s has instructed the Civil Administration to prepare for the implementation of his decision until it can be done in practice. It would be better for him to annul it immediately and remove this shame from Israel.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Welcome aboard I$raHell apartheid bus

Nazi National Action Rat: ‘Hitler Was Right’ Tweet


A 21-year-old Nazi British man was sentenced to four weeks in jail for sending an anti-Semitic tweet to a Jewish member of Parliament.

Racist Nazi National Action Garron Helm pleaded guilty Monday to sending the offending message to Labour Party member Luciana Berger. In addition to the jail sentence, Helm was ordered to pay Berger $128.

The tweet, which called Berger a “communist Jewess,” showed a photograph of her with a Holocaust yellow star photoshopped onto her forehead and the words, “You can always count on a Jew to show their true colours eventually.” It had the hashtag “Hitler was right.”

Racist Helm’s home contained Nazi memorabilia and a flag for an extremist right-wing group called National Action.

“This sentence sends a clear message that hate crime is not tolerated in our country,” Berger said in a statement. “I hope this case serves as an encouragement to others to report hate crime whenever it rears its ugly head.”

Posted in UKComments Off on Nazi National Action Rat: ‘Hitler Was Right’ Tweet

Zio-Wahhabi clerics financing terrorists in Syria: Nusra ex-commander

Posted by: Sammi Ibrahem,Sr
Zio-Wahhabi Adnan al-Aroor

A former commander of a Zio-Wahhabi Takfiri group in Syria has shed light on the financial resources of the militants fighting against the Syrian government.

Abu Leith al-Tabouki, who used to be a leader of the Zio-Wahhabi al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front, has said that some Zio-Wahhabi  clerics play a great role in providing the financial resources of the militants.

He specifically named Zio-Wahhani Salafi cleric,  Adnan al-Aroor, as the main supplier of al-Nusra militants.

Tabouki said the fund is funneled to the Zionist Contra via a mediator in an eastern region of Syria.

He also blamed the al-Nusra Front over its “corrupt structure,” adding that the group is operating under a weak and biased leadership.

Syria has been gripped by deadly violence since 2011. Zio-Western powers and some of their regional allies – especially Zionist Puppet regimes of Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey – are reportedly supporting the militants operating in Syria.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Zeid al-Hussein has said that more than 200,000 people have died in the Syrian conflict since March 2011.

Posted in Saudi ArabiaComments Off on Zio-Wahhabi clerics financing terrorists in Syria: Nusra ex-commander




Wikimedia Commons

This article will make you angry. The US Government is actively seeking those who criticize government, specifically Barack Obama, and arresting them without charging them. They are remanded to mental health institutions where they are given “training” on how to view the world.

Remind you of a little book that George Orwell wrote? It gets worse.
Most of the victims of the government’s kidnapping scheme are veterans.

From The Rutherford Institute:

In the four years since the start of Operation Vigilant Eagle, the government has steadily ramped up its campaign to “silence” dissidents, especially those with military backgrounds. Coupled with the DHS’ dual reports on Rightwing and Leftwing “Extremism,” which broadly define extremists as individuals and groups “that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely,” these tactics have boded ill for anyone seen as opposing the government.

One particularly troubling mental health label being applied to veterans and others who challenge the status quo is “oppositional defiance disorder” (ODD). As journalist Anthony Martin explains, an ODD diagnosis

“denotes that the person exhibits ‘symptoms’ such as the questioning of authority, the refusal to follow directions, stubbornness, the unwillingness to go along with the crowd, and the practice of disobeying or ignoring orders. Persons may also receive such a label if they are considered free thinkers, nonconformists, or individuals who are suspicious of large, centralized government… At one time the accepted protocol among mental health professionals was to reserve the diagnosis of oppositional defiance disorder for children or adolescents who exhibited uncontrollable defiance toward their parents and teachers.”

The case of 26-year-old decorated Marine Brandon Raub—who was targeted because of his Facebook posts, interrogated by government agents about his views on government corruption, arrested with no warning, labeled mentally ill for subscribing to so-called “conspiratorial” views about the government, detained against his will in a psych ward for standing by his views, and isolated from his family, friends and attorneys—is a prime example of the government’s war on veterans.


Tunisia Egypt Global Revolution Tribute ”VIDEO”

Posted by: Sammi Ibrahem, Sr

Anthony Lawson

Ken O’Keefe’s video (with my added opening voiceover) pays tribute to the revolutionaries of Tunisia, Egypt, along with the global revolutionaries yet to be identified. “Governments should fear their people!”



Posted in Middle East, USA, EgyptComments Off on Tunisia Egypt Global Revolution Tribute ”VIDEO”

BOOK REVIEW : ‘This Time We Went Too Far’ by Norman Finkelstein

Special for My Catbird Seat
“The Gaza invasion marked the climax of Israel’s descent into barbarism”
by Stuart Littlewood

Quite simply, this is a cracker of a book and very timely.

In explaining how Israel’s war on Gaza in 2008/9 was not the defensive action it is always painted, Norman Finkelstein recalls the 1947 UN partition of historic Palestine and remembers how, in 1957, US President Eisenhower forced Israel to withdraw from Gaza by threatening sanctions and in the 1967 war Israel re-occupied it.

The book then takes us through the warm-up for the 2008/9 war and the subsequent whitewash.

In the three years following Israel’s withdrawal to Gaza’s perimeter in 2005, we are reminded that about 1,250 Gazans, including 222 children, were killed by the Israeli army while 11 Israelis were killed by Palestinian rocket fire.

In January 2006 Hamas won the Palestinian elections fair and square, and the US and Israel reacted by imposing an economic blockade on Gaza, Hamas’s stronghold. In June 2007 Hamas foiled a putsch orchestrated by the US, Israel and elements of the Palestinian Authority. Hamas has been repeatedly accused of “seizing control” when it was correctly taking action to enforce its authority.

Israel tried to justify Operation Cast Lead, launched in December 2008, on the grounds of self-defence against rocket attacks but the main motives, we discover, were to restore Israel’s “deterrence capacity” and counter the threat posed by a new Palestinian “peace offensive”.

Deterrence capacity is about “keeping Arabs so intimidated that they could not even conceive of challenging Israel’s freedom to carry on as it pleased, however ruthlessly and recklessly”. The 1967 war had been unleashed for that same purpose.

“Israel’s problem is with international law not the Palestinians”

Finkelstein explains how Hamas’s acceptance of a two-state solution (on pre-1967 borders), and the June 2008 ceasefire brokered by Egypt, presented Israel with “a daunting challenge”. Israel would need to provoke Hamas into resuming its attacks “and then radicalize or destroy it, thereby eliminating it as a legitimate negotiating partner or as an obstacle to settlement on Israel’s terms”. Israel’s foreign minister Tzipi Livni wanted a period of calm but said any extended truce “harms the Israeli strategic goal, empowers Hamas, and gives the impression that Israel recognizes the movement”. Israel’s strategic goal, Finkelstein suggests, was to retain the valuable parts of the West Bank.

Israel is insistent that Hamas acknowledges the Jewish state’s right to exist. But Hamas, says Finkelstein, “draws a very clear distinction between Israel’s right to exist, which it consistently denies, and the fact of its existence, and it has stated explicitly that it accepts the existence of Israel as a fait accompli…”
Israel is neurotic on the question of its own legitimacy, which is hardly surprising given the manner in which a state of Israel was eventually allowed to come into existence and the arm-twisting by the US to push the partition plan through the UN. Up till then Britain, which took on the mandated responsibility for Palestine, had promised a Jewish homeland “within” Palestine, with all Jews living there as Palestinian citizens.

Did the UN act lawfully in giving away 56% of other people’s lands to racist interests that owned only 7%? Even if the UN partition was morally sound, which of course it wasn’t, Israel today refuses to define its borders, so the question for Hamas (and everyone else) is: what exactly are we supposed to acknowledge or recognize? Israel has expanded its 56% to 78% by land-grab and ethnic cleansing. Its snaking separation wall annexes even more.

Besides, a nation’s ‘right to exist’ is meaningless in law, so demanding recognition of it in Israel’s case is regarded by many as simply a ploy to fake legitimacy on whatever borders its brutal military can push to. Presumably Hamas is required to “legitimize” and sign away all Israel’s territorial gains – past, present and future.

Anyway, where is the reciprocal? Where is Israel’s recognition of the Palestinians’ right to exist in their homeland and their right to self-determination?

Finkelstein takes a slightly different tack. “Israel’s quarrel,” he says, “appears to be not with Palestinians but international law.” The terms of the international consensus for resolving the conflict do not require Palestinian recognition of the legitimacy of Zionism or the state of Israel. He quotes expert opinion that Israel’s admission to the United Nations did not confer political legitimacy. Indeed, the moral basis of the state of Israel is still a real cause for debate, but that does not affect Israel’s position as a state in the international community “entitled to the benefits and subject to the burdens of international law”.

Hamas, it would seem, is entitled to shrug its shoulders.

Israel had decided to attack Hamas as far back as March 2007 and only agreed to the June 2008 truce because the army needed time to prepare. Then it was just a question of finding a pretext to abort the ceasefire. It all fell conveniently into place when Israeli forces killed six Palestinians in air strikes and other attacks on 4 November. Hamas hit back and Israel had the excuse it wanted – it “could now enter a plea of self-defence to its willfully gullible Western patrons as it embarked on yet another murderous invasion to foil yet another Palestinian peace offensive”.

On the first day of the invasion – a day of infamy if ever there was one – 300 Gazans were killed in 4 minutes.

When the 22-day assault was over, besides Palestinian casualties (nearly 1,400 killed of whom four-fifths were civilians and 350 children) Israel had destroyed or damaged 58,000 homes, 280 schools, 1,500 factories, water and sewage installations and 80 percent of agricultural crops. The cost to Gaza’s civilian infrastructure was estimated at $660 to 900 million while the total economic cost is put at $3 to 3.5 billion.
It was really a non-war, says Finkelstein, and testimonies of Israeli soldiers included remarks like: “There was nothing there… nothing moved”; “No real resistance”; “Everyone was disappointed about not engaging anyone”.

Towards the end of the invasion Livni said: “Hamas now understands that when you fire on Israel’s citizens it responds by going wild – and this is a very good thing.” She later waxed proud of how Israel had “demonstrated real hooliganism” and said she would happily repeat her decisions because they were meant to restore Israel’s deterrence and had done so.

The book looks into Israel’s culture of lying, and the frequency with which it has been caught out, not least on the question of using white phosphorus, the so-called telephone warnings to Gazan residents of impending air strikes, and claims that Hamas used civilians as human shields. As Amnesty International pointed out, “the locations of confrontations were mostly determined by Israeli forces, who entered Gaza with tanks and armoured personnel carriers and took positions deep inside residential neighbourhoods”.

Amnesty found no evidence of Hamas using human shields but did find that Israeli soldiers used civilians, including children, as human shields by forcing them to remain in or near houses they used as military positions.
“Using massive lethal force against a defenceless society”

Finkelstein examines Israel’s insane and sustained attack on the Goldstone Report, which concluded among many other things that Israel engaged in wanton killing of Palestinian civilians for no other reason than it was “cool” – according to the post-invasion testimony of Israeli soldiers.

Although Israel’s propaganda machine worked overtime to minimise the damage caused by soldiers’ confessions, the criminal behaviour of individual soldiers was, as Finkelstein emphasizes, “the inexorable consequence and part and parcel of the criminal nature of the enterprise itself: to restore Israel’s deterrence capacity by using massive lethal force against a defenceless society.”

When people expressed disbelief that Israeli soldiers could have engaged in such behaviour, Gideon Levy is quoted as saying that it was “the natural continuation of the last nine years, when soldiers killed nearly 5,000 Palestinians, at least half of them innocent civilians, nearly 1,000 of them children and teenagers… Everything the soldiers described from Gaza, everything, occurred during those blood-soaked years as if they were routine events”.

Goldstone stated that “the repeated failure to distinguish between combatants and civilians appears… to have been the result of deliberate guidance issued to soldiers”. The operation had been aimed at destroying or incapacitating civilian property and the means of subsistence of the civilian population.
When Finkelstein visited Gaza (entering via Egypt since he’s banned from Israel) he found Hamas “earnest and willing to listen”. Interestingly, he urged them to put the Gaza government’s message across in the language of respected political and juridical institutions and the major human rights groups. Don’t say “Hamas says”, he advised, but “the UN General Assembly supported by 160 nations says”. Or “the International Court of Justice says”.

As he and his party were leaving Gaza, Hamas sent a letter to Obama partly reflecting their advice. Reproduced in the book it is an excellently crafted missive. The letter offered a welcome to the US President to see “our ground zero”. It quoted Amnesty International’s observation that “the invasion could not have happened without US-supplied weapons and US taxpayers’ money” and asked him point-blank: “Shouldn’t you see firsthand how Israel used your arms and spent your money?” Bullseye.
Did the great man reply? Did I read somewhere that Obama’s minions made sure the letter never reached him?

The time has surely come for Western supporters of the rogue state to begin to be afraid. “While official Western support of Israel held firm,” says Finkelstein. “the carnage set off an unprecedented wave of popular outrage throughout the world. Whether it was because the assault came on the heels of the devastation Israel wrought in Lebanon, or because of Israel’s relentless persecution of the people of Gaza, or because of the sheer cowardice of the assault, the Gaza invasion appeared to mark a turning point in public opinion reminiscent of the international reaction to the 1960 Sharpeville massacre in apartheid South Africa.”

Israel’s apologists attributed the anger to anti-Semitism, but Finkelstein suggests as a general rule that the lower the depths to which Israel’s criminal conduct sinks the higher the decibel level of the shrieks of anti-Semitism.

The book includes Gideon Levy’s description of “the surreal scene at the height of the brutal assault on Gaza when the heads of the European Union came to Israel and dined with the prime minister in a show of unilateral support for the side wreaking the killing and destruction”. To which Finkelstein adds: “Although it was Israel that broke the ceasefire and launched the invasion, European leaders parleyed with the US (and Canada) on how to thwart rearmament not of the perpetrators but of the victims.”
The British government, I seem to remember, even offered the services of the Royal Navy to halt arms smuggling into Gaza but couldn’t spare a ship to protect its own unarmed nationals, peacefully sailing with the Free Gaza humanitarian mission, from murderous assault by Israelis on the high seas.

The Goldstone Report sharply criticised Israeli actions that “deprive Palestinians in the Gaza Strip of their means of sustenance, employment, housing and water, that deny their freedom of movement and their right to leave and enter their own country, that limit their access to courts of law and effective remedies…”

More broadly it condemned Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians not only during the Gaza invasion but all through the long years of occupation. It went so far as to recommend that individual states in the international community “start criminal investigations in national courts, using universal jurisdiction, where there is sufficient evidence of the commission of grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949″.

What’s more, the Security Council should “refer the situation in Gaza to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court” and make Israel pay compensation for damages through a UN General Assembly escrow fund.”

And Goldstone didn’t stop there. The High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention, said the report, should convene to enforce respect for the Convention in the occupied territories and ensure Israel ends its blockade of Gaza, its strangulation of Gaza’s economy and general interference in Palestinian political life.

No wonder so many fine feathers have been ruffled. However, there’s nothing new in these demands. What’s new is that, at last, someone with the credentials and clout of Judge Richard Goldstone has said it.

The panic this has caused is typified by those in Westminster who are anxious to save Livni and her gruesome colleagues from the gallows and make them a protected species by abandoning our obligations under universal jurisdiction.

According to Finkelstein, “The Gaza invasion marked the climax of Israel’s descent into barbarism”, and the Goldstone report “catapulted Israel’s human rights record into the court of public opinion.” Consequently, says a director of Human Rights Watch, “the Israeli government is taking an active role in the smearing of human rights groups”.

Finkelstein rounds off his book by issuing a challenge “to hold on to the truth that Israel’s refusal, backed by the US, to respect international law and the considered opinion of humankind, is the sole obstacle to putting an end, finally, to [the Palestinians’] suffering”. A superb note to finish on.

“This Time We Went Too Far” is, I believe, a vitally important contribution at this critical moment in world affairs. It not only pulls together the facts surrounding Israel’s blitzkrieg on Gaza but also plots the long lead-up and the reverberating aftermath. It is painstakingly researched and comprehensively referenced, and therefore makes a valuable working document for anyone engaged in the struggle or just wishing to learn the truth.

  • It ought to be in every campaigner’s ammunition locker.
  • It should be compulsory reading for every Western politician and diplomat.
  • I’d like to see ministers and foreign policy chiefs made to sit an exam on it.

The other joy is that it’s written in an easy-flowing style combining precision and cool logic. It is also the work of someone with formidable research skills. I could find nothing to quarrel with. It will be interesting to see how Tel Aviv’s global army of propaganda scribblers respond to it.

Posted in LiteratureComments Off on BOOK REVIEW : ‘This Time We Went Too Far’ by Norman Finkelstein

WATCH: Two photographers shot by ‘Israeli’ rubber bullets in West Bank


AP photographer says border police fired directly at him while he was covering protest; shooting shows ‘outrageous disregard for the safety of journalists,’ news agency says.

Oct. 27, 2014 
AP photographer Majdi Mohammed

In this Sunday Oct. 26, 2014 photo, AP photographer Majdi Mohammed shows his bruised arm after he was shot with a rubber bullet by Israeli border police in the village of Silwad, West Bank. Photo by AP
Two photographers, including one working for The Associated Press, were struck by rubber-coated bullets fired at close range by an Israeli border policeman.

Neither photographer was seriously hurt in Sunday’s incident, which came during protests that followed the funeral of a 14-year-old Palestinian boykilled in a clash with Israeli soldiers.

It was the latest incident in which journalists have been injured by tear gas, stun grenades and rubber bullets fired by border police, a paramilitary unit often sent in to quell violent demonstrations.

The AP planned to send a protest to the Israeli government. John Daniszewski, the AP’s senior managing editor for international news, said the shooting showed “outrageous disregard for the safety of journalists.” The photographers, he said, “were doing their job in a lawful way when they were shot.”

AP photographer Majdi Mohammed said he was among several photographers who took up positions near the protests in the West Bank town of Silwad.

As he was taking pictures, an armored jeep pulled up behind him, a border policeman stepped out and fired directly at him from a distance of 10 to 20 meters (10 to 20 yards), Mohammed said.

“The impact was so strong that it made me fall to the ground,” he said. “The policeman aimed straight at us … even though we were clearly a group of media people and there were no protesters at all around us.”

Mohammed was bruised on his arm and experienced numbness in his hand after the shooting. He was also hit in the ribs, but was not injured there because he wore a protective vest.

Lazar Simeonov, a Swiss freelance photographer, was also hit by the same round — a canister that discharges several rubber-coated bullets at once.

Simeonov also said the photographers were set up to the side of the protest and about 20 meters from Israeli security forces when they were hit. He said one of his fingers was hurt and his camera was broken.

“After the incident I also tried to talk to the soldiers and asked them why they shot at us but they didn’t want to hear anything and just smiled and told me to go away,” Simeonov said.

Israeli police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said police “dispersed hundreds of rioters” in the area, and that demonstrators threw firebombs, stones and concrete blocks at security forces. He said it was not immediately clear why the border patrol officer had opened fire.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on WATCH: Two photographers shot by ‘Israeli’ rubber bullets in West Bank



Editor’s note: The Jewish people, for the most part, ignore and do not want to hear the truth or the facts about their own “history,” Israeli “history,” and the story of the “wars,” that are being fought in their name against the Palestinians whose country has been invaded and is being taken over, piece by piece,using massive and relentless force, all the while justifying it with lies, provocation and deceit.

They turn from the truth, and refuse to question, look or listen, out of fear.

Alan Hart’s epic three-volume — Zionism the Real Enemy of the Jews is a journey through the propaganda lies and the documented truth of history as it relates to the making and sustaining of what has come to be called the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. He blogs at, and tweets at

He questions: Will President Obama be allowed to deliver an acceptable amount of justice for the Palestinians in order to achieve peace for all and, if not, what’s the most likely future for the region and the world?

Journal of Palestine Studies (JPS 165), 2012
Excerpt from a review by Oren Ben-Dor

These three wide-ranging, highly readable, and extremely well-informed volumes are a real gem that should be read by every politically- and historically minded seeker of truth, justice, and enduring peace in historical Palestine. Alan Hart, a former ITN and BBC Panorama correspondent and a biographer of Yasir Arafat, gives us a seminal work whose great sophistication is matched by its moral courage and conviction.

The scale and ambition of the work is all-embracing,unlike many books on Palestine which focus on one aspect of the conflict at the expense of the panoramic insights and grasping of larger trends. Hart’s own personal encounters with key players in the conflict make for highly engaging reading that gives a sense of firsthand involvement with history as it happened. He also shows us the unknown and intimate sides of the politicians—the main actors in Hart’s books—while providing the reader many insightful anecdotes.Personal accounts are very well-informed by contemporary research and complimented by scholarly narration of  early Zionist involvement.

Broadly, Hart sets out to achieve three interlinked objectives. First, he attempts to give a multi-perspective historical and political account of political Zionism and its transformation into a militarist state that maintains its unity by constantly provoking violence against itself despite many opportunities for peace and compromise with its neighbors. He shows that what began as a movement to solve Europe’s “Jewish problem”—through the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine—became a complex mission to gain great power-recognition of Jewish statehood. He exposes the exploitation of the Holocaust which has ensured both Israel’s survival and the continuous rationalization of its militarist righteousness and expansionist behavior.

Second, Hart maintains an unambiguous moral criticism of political Zionism by exposing the oppressive core of the settler-colonial project that continues to take place in Palestine. Hart shows how the partition of Palestine,the seeds of which were sown into the thinking and words behind the Balfour Declaration, played into the hands of political Zionists for the last century. Perhaps Hart could more greatly emphasize the fact that international resolutions only address Israeli actions and not Israel’s nature, although the two are linked. The only way of complying with all these resolutions (i.e., ending the occupation and allowing for the return of the refugees) would require the replacement of the partition logic, and the resultant Jewish state, with an egalitarian,non-sectarian polity.

Third, and crucially, as the title conveys,Hart hammers home the message that there is no connection between Jewish being and thinking on the one hand and political Zionism on the other.Additionally, he contends that political Zionism is, arguably, the worst enemy of the Jews. Hart investigates Jewish opposition to political Zionism, arguing that anti-Zionist thought does not threaten Jewish thought. He argues, if political Zionism entails the exploitation of the Holocaust and sheer tribal pride in Israel’s military ‘successes’ it should not enjoy Jewish support. Hart accounts for how Jewish nationalism was opposed by both orthodox and modern Jews in Europe, Britain, and the United States for reasons ranging from pragmatic petitions to deep historical and philosophical convictions.

The tragedy is that through their political maneuvers and monopoly over Holocaust memory, political Zionists have managed to disempower opposition to political Zionism from within Judaism.Hart only condones Zionism that is spiritual in nature—one that espouses a focal point from which Jews around the world may adopt values and practices (Ahad Ha’am)—or simply advocates living in Palestine in full equality with indigenous Palestinians (Arendt, Magnes, Buber). Those who historically advocated for these strands of Zionism prophetically saw the kind of state Israel would become, alongside the rise of Palestinian nationalism. Volumes two and three provide detailed political commentary on how Israel’s internal politics have become increasingly hawkish and suppressive of any moderate voices calling for peace and reconciliation, essentially arguing that, indeed, David has become a Goliath. Hart’s masterful account points to the uncanny unity of ‘no choice’—the anxious righteousness that caused this oblivious drop in compassion effectively unites the seemingly more moderate Zionists with revisionist, right-wing Zionists.

The first volume accounts for the tactics to obtain political support for a Jewish state by Russian politicians, as well as allies in complicity with the imperial sentiment which led to the gaining of the Balfour Declaration. He shows how British and Zionist leaders deceive Hashemite Hussein through insincere promises of Arab independence and managing to keep President Wilson’s opposition to Zionism at bay. The declaration of a totally illegal mandate on Palestine was followed by an increased Zionist influence on the British Mandate. This followed the outbreak of the Arab Revolt and the British White Papers of the 1930s which sought to limit Jewish immigration to Palestine. Following the Holocaust, Zionism tragically achieved a prominent place in world politics and within Jewish hearts despite its incompatibility with Jewish values.

In the second volume, Hart exposes,in detail, the horrors Zionism has inflicted on the indigenous Palestinians—from their massive expulsion (carried out in order to enable the establishment of the Jewish state) to the daily horrors of military occupation suffered by Palestinians since 1967. In this volume, Hart follows the aftermath of the establishment of the Jewish state. He portrays how the Zionist project grew into a militarist state that subverts, manipulates, and marginalizes the moderate voices within it.

In the third volume, Hart continues to highlight the pathology of Israel: Its flagrant violation of UN resolutions and its near absolute control of U.S. policy by the pro-Zionist lobby in the United States, in addition to providing an overview of the Palestinian nationalist movement.The main objective of the books is to encourage and strengthen opposition to Zionism by “good Jews.” For Hart, to be a good Jew means opposing political Zionism and doing away with the very ethos of the colonial and entrenched, separatist ideology of the Israeli state. He calls for seeing theHolocaust for its universal humanist message, and for overcoming the victimbased mentality of anti-Semitism that is paradoxically nourished by the very Zionism that attempted to respond to it.

One of the book’s central claims is that the tragedy of political Zionism ultimately encourages anti-Semitism, and/or anti-Jewish violence (namely violent opposition to Jewish support for what is being done to Palestinians in the name of the Jews on a daily basis). Hart shows that not only is Israel not a haven for Jews, it has, in actuality, become the instigator of violence against Jews worldwide…

Posted in LiteratureComments Off on BOOK REVIEW: Alan Hart : ZIONISM, THE REAL ENEMY OF THE JEWS



The Jews did it, of that there is no doubt. Dr. Sabrosky is unimpeachable.



Video: UNRWA’s Chris Gunness demolishes anti-Palestinian activist on Fox


This is a video of UNRWA spokesperson Chris Gunness absolutely demolishing anti-Palestinian activist David Bedein on Fox News.

Bedein claims that two incidents during Israel’s summer attack on Gaza in which weapons were found in closed and empty UNRWA schools proved that the UN agency for Palestine refugees was helping Hamas.

As Gunness notes, it was UNRWA itself that brought these unprecedented incidents to light and condemned them as a violation of UN “neutrality.”

Moreover, while Bedein presents UNRWA as an agressor against Israel, it was of course Palestinians and UN personnel sheltering from Israeli bombardment in UNRWA schools who were repeatedly shelled and massacred.

Kahanist ties

So what is Bedein’s attack really about?

As McGill University political science professor Rex Brynen notes, Bedein, an American who settled in Palestine in 1970, has a long history of baseless and “poorly researched attacks against UNRWA, including drawing analogies between the UN humanitarian agency and the mass slaughter of Jews at Auschwitz.”

Bedein has been circulating a video alleging falsely that children in UNRWA-run summer camps are receiving “anti-Semitic indoctrination.”

This film, as Brynen points out in a blog post, includes what amount to fabrications against UNRWA.

It is one of several films Bedein has made attacking the UN agency and demonizing Palestinians. In the video above, Gunness rejects as nonsense the claims made in Bedein’s latest effort UNRWA Goes to War.

Gunness calls the credibility given to the film by Fox “joke journalism on a Noddy network.”


Samuel Sokol with gun and Kahane flag.

Brynen notes that Bedein co-wrote one of his films, For the Sake of the Nakba, with Samuel Sokol, “an apparent supporter of the violent racist group Kahane Chai (Kach), a designated foreign terrorist organization in the US, Canada, and most other Western countries.”

The Nakba is the name Palestinians give to their forced expulsion from their country by Zionist militias in 1947-48.

Kahane Chai was originally founded as Kach by the late Brooklyn-born Rabbi Meir Kahane who advocated for the expulsion of all Palestinians from their homeland to make room for Jewish settlers.

Brynen published this image of Sokol posing with a gun in front of a flag emblazoned with the Hebrew slogans “We are all Kahane” and “Kahane was right.”

In 2009, Bedein and Sokol jointly authored a hit piece on the I’lam Media Center, a Nazareth-based nonprofit organization founded by Palestinian journalists in present-day Israel.


David Bedein’s co-author Samuel Sokol allows a child to handle his weapon.

In its response debunking what it called a catalog of “slander and misrepresentation,” I’lam published this image of Sokol in an army uniform, allowing a small child to handle his weapon. This is certainly ironic given the Bedein film’s allegation that it is Palestinians who violently indoctrinate their children.

The armed and dangerous Sokol nowrevels in the title of “Jewish world” reporter for The Jerusalem Post, where he has continued to write Nakba denialist tracts.

UNRWA has also thoroughly debunked the Bedein-Sokol co-production.

Targeting refugee rights

It is important to understand that the attacks on UNRWA by Bedein and others are not motivated by simple hatred of Palestinians or the UN, though such sentiments are evident in their constant denigration of both.

Rather, they stem from a persistent theory among many anti-Palestinians that Palestinian refugees exist not because Israel expelled them from their homes and refuses to allow them to return, but because UNRWA itself keeps them in existence by providing health and education services to them in refugee camps.

Dismantling UNRWA, the logic goes, would make the Palestinian refugees disappear along with their troublesome demand to return home, which in the view of Zionists negates Israel’s so-called right to exist as a Jewish state.”

Much of Bedein’s propaganda, therefore, is aimed at pressuring US lawmakers to cut the American contribution to UNRWA.

Of course the logic that getting rid of UNRWA would eliminate Israel’s Palestinian refugee “problem” makes as much sense as believing that closing down all hospitals would eliminate disease.

The “disease” here is not Palestinians, but the denial of their rights.

When confronted with facts and logic from Gunness, it is no surprise that Bedein flounders.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, GazaComments Off on Video: UNRWA’s Chris Gunness demolishes anti-Palestinian activist on Fox

Shoah’s pages