Archive | May 4th, 2015

Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given

NOVANEWS

Image result for vaccine PHOTO

Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity?

Neil Z Miller and Gary S Goldman

Abstract

The infant mortality rate (IMR) is one of the most important indicators of the socio-economic well-being and public health conditions of a country. The US childhood immunization schedule specifies 26 vaccine doses for infants aged less than 1 year – the most in the world – yet 33 [out of 34] nations have lower IMRs.

Using linear regression, the immunization schedules of these 34 nations were examined and a correlation coefficient of r = 0.70 (p < 0.0001) was found between IMRs and the number of vaccine doses routinely given to infants. Nations were also grouped into five different vaccine dose ranges: 12-14, 15-17, 18-20, 21-23, and 24-26. The mean IMRs of all nations within each group were then calculated. Linear regression analysis of unweighted mean IMRs showed a high statistically significant correlation between increasing number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates, with r = 0.992 (p = 0.0009).

Using the Tukey-Kramer test, statistically significant differences in mean IMRs were found between nations giving 12-14 vaccine doses and those giving 21-23, and 24-26 doses. A closer inspection of correlations between vaccine doses, biochemical or synergistic toxicity, and IMRs is essential.

Study Shows Vaccines Cause Infant Deaths

Compare the infant death rates in the left column above with the number of vaccines given to infants listed in the right row. The graph below shows the strong overall correlation with few exceptions.

Study Reveals Vaccines Cause Infant Deaths

Conclusion

The US childhood immunization schedule requires 26 vaccine doses for infants aged less than 1 year, the most in the world, yet 33 [out of 34] nations have better IMRs. Using linear regression, the immunization schedules of these 34 nations were examined and a correlation coefficient of 0.70 (p < 0.0001) was found between IMRs and the number of vaccine doses routinely given to infants. When nations were grouped into five different vaccine dose ranges (12-14, 15-17, 18-20, 21-23, and 24-26), 98.3% of the total variance in IMR was explained by the unweighted linear regression model. These findings demonstrate a counter-intuitive relationship: nations that require more vaccine doses tend to have higher infant mortality rates.

Efforts to reduce the relatively high US IMR have been elusive. Finding ways to lower preterm birth rates should be a high priority. However, preventing premature births is just a partial solution to reduce infant deaths. A closer inspection of correlations between vaccine doses, biochemical or synergistic toxicity, and IMRs, is essential. All nations – rich and poor, advanced and developing – have an obligation to determine whether their immunization schedules are achieving their desired goals.


Note: See all charts and read the full study on this webpage of the website of the U.S. National Institute of Health’s National Library of Medicine. The study was published in Sept. of 2011.

Posted in USA, HealthComments Off on Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given

NON-ALIGNED MEDIA: False Flags & Charlie Hebdo

NOVANEWS

With Brandon Martinez and Kevin Barrett

Non-Aligned Media speaks with Dr. Kevin Barrett, an Islamic scholar, radio host, author and fearless researcher who has written a series of books on false flag terrorism and government deception with a keen focus on the synthetic terror of 9/11.

nam1In recent years Barrett has become more outspoken on the role and impact of organized Jewish Zionism in geopolitics and history, earning his place as one of the world’s foremost critics of the extremist, terrorist forces that populate that movement and ideology.

During the show I asked Barrett about his newly published book We Are NOT Charlie Hebdo!: Free Thinkers Question the French 9/11, which is a collection of essays from multiple contributors. In the book Barrett and others analyze the infamous Paris shooting in January 2015 which reinvigorated the neocon-contrived “clash of civilizations” between the West and Islam, an artificial dogma that was fostered in Israel in the 1980s.

In this talk Barrett highlighted some of the holes and inconsistencies in the official Charlie Hebdo shooting narrative, such as the many indications that the Kouachi brothers were intelligence assets that were cultivated and cajoled by rogue elements in French and possibly US and Israeli intelligence to fill the patsy role in this scenario.

Despite being on terror watch lists, under state surveillance and having been convicted for terrorism-related offences years earlier, the Kouachi brothers were somehow able to travel to and from the Middle East where we are told they linked up with al-Qaeda and ISIS. Miraculously the brothers were able to make their way back into France without any interference from authorities.

Barrett explained that the establishment story rests on the dubious assertion that one of the terrorist brothers left behind an ID card in the get-away car after allegedly murdering a dozen cartoonists and a police officer. Such sloppy behaviour casts doubt on the whole story, Barrett insists, pointing out the parallels with previous ‘official stories’ where ID cards and passports turn up at the crime scene which are then immediately brandished by authorities as ‘proof’ of Muslim culpability.

Other points of discussion include:

  • Hypocrisy of the French establishment on ‘free speech’
  • The methodology of false flag terrorism and the cultivation of patsies for fabricated attacks
  • The hijacking of Western foreign policy by neocon and Zionist elements
  • The Western-Globalist-Zionist assault on Islam in general
  • ISIS, Al Qaeda and other Takfiri tools of the Zio-American empire
  • Remedies to the Zio-American imperium and its global tentacles

Posted in USA, FranceComments Off on NON-ALIGNED MEDIA: False Flags & Charlie Hebdo

Why NATO is terrified of Russia

NOVANEWS

Posted by Pepe Escobar

Think about NATO picking a fight against the constantly evolving, complex Russia-China strategic partnership…

The twin-pronged attack – oil price war/raid on the ruble – aimed at destroying the Russian economy and place it into a form of Western natural resource vassalage has failed.

Natural resources were also essentially the reason for reducing Iran to a Western vassalage. That never had anything to do with Tehran developing a nuclear weapon, which was banned by both the leader of the Islamic revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini, and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.

The ‘New Great Game’ in Eurasia was always about control of the Eurasian land mass. Minor setbacks to the American elite project do not mean the game will be restricted to a mere “war of attrition”. Rather the contrary.

All about PGS

In Ukraine, the Kremlin has been more than explicit there are two definitive red lines. Ukraine won’t join NATO. And Moscow won’t allow the popular republics of Donetsk and Lugansk to be crushed.

We are coming closer to a potentially explosive deadline – when EU sanctions expire in July. An EU in turmoil but still enslaved to NATO – see the pathetic “Dragoon Ride” convoy from the Baltics to Poland or the “Atlantic Resolve” NATO show-off exercise – may decide to expand them, and even try to exclude Russia from SWIFT.

Only fools believe Washington is going to risk American lives over Ukraine or even Poland. Yet let’s plan a few steps ahead. If it ever comes to the unthinkable – a war between NATO and Russia in Ukraine – Russian defense circles are sure of conventional and nuclear superiority on sea and land. And the Pentagon knows it. Russia would reduce NATO forces to smithereens in a matter of hours. And then would come Washington’s stark choice: accept ignominious defeat or escalate to tactical nuclear weapons.

The Pentagon knows that Russia has the air and missile defense capabilities to counter anything embedded in the USPrompt Global Strike (PGS). Simultaneously though, Moscow is saying it would rather not use these capabilities.

V-600 missiles on the S-125 quadruple launcher -EU TIMES

V-600 missiles on the S-125 quadruple launcher -EU TIMES

Major General Kirill Makarov, Russia’s Aerospace Defense Forces’ deputy chief, has been very clear about the PGS threat. Moscow’s December 2014 new military doctrine qualifies PGS as well as NATO’s current military buildup as the top two security threats to Russia.

Major General Kirill Makarov, Russia’s Aerospace Defense Forces’ deputy chief.

Major General Kirill Makarov, Russia’s Aerospace Defense Forces’ deputy chief.

Unlike non-stop Pentagon/NATO bragging/demonizing,what Russian defense circles don’t need to advertise is how they are now a couple of generations ahead of the US in their advanced weaponry.The bottom line is that while the Pentagon was mired in the Afghanistan and Iraq quagmires, they completely missed Russia’s technological jump ahead. The same applies to China’s ability to hit US satellites and thus pulverize American ICBM satellite guidance systems.

The current privileged scenario is Russia playing for time until it has totally sealed Russia’s air space to American ICBMs, stealth aircraft and cruise missiles – via the S-500 system.

This has not escaped the attention of the British Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) – as it gamed sometime ago whether Washington might launch a first strike against Russia.

According to the JIC, Washington might go rogue if

“a) an extreme government were to take over in the United States, b) and there was increased lack of confidence by the United States in some if not all of her Western allies owing to political developments in their countries, c) and there was some sudden advance in the USA in the sphere of weapons, etc. that the counsels of impatience may get the upper hand.”

US ‘Think Tankland’ spinning that Russian military planners should take advantage of their superiority to launch a first strike nuclear attack against the US is bogus; the Russian doctrine is eminently defensive.

Yet that does not exclude Washington doing the unthinkable the next time the Pentagon thinks of itself to be in the position Russia is now in.

SWIFT changes

The whole game used to be about who ruled the waves – the geopolitical gift the US inherited from Great Britain. Control of the seas meant the US inheriting five empires; Japan, Germany, Great Britain, France, the Netherlands. All those massive US carrier task forces patrolling the oceans to guarantee “free trade” – as the hegemonic propaganda machine goes – could be turned against China in a flash. It’s a mechanism similar to the carefully choreographed “leading from behind” financial op to simultaneously crash the ruble/launch an oil war and thus smash Russia into submission.

Washington’s master plan remains deceptively simple; to “neutralize” China by Japan, and Russia by Germany, with the US backing its two anchors, Germany and Japan. Russia is the de facto only BRICS nation blocking the master plan.

This was the case until Beijing launched the New Silk Road(s), which essentially mean the linking of all Eurasia into a “win-win” trade/commerce bonanza on high-speed rail, and in the process diverting freight tonnage overland and away from the seas.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg (Reuters / Francois Lenoir)
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg (Reuters / Francois Lenoir)

So NATO’s non-stop Russia demonizing is in fact quaint. Think about NATO picking a fight against the constantly evolving, complex Russia-China strategic partnership. And in a not so remote future, as I indicated here, Germany, Russia and China have what it takes to be the essential pillars of a fully integrated Eurasia.

As it stands, the key shadow play is Moscow and Beijing silently preparing their own SWIFT system while Russia prepares to seal its air space with S-500s. Western Ukraine is doomed; leave it to the austerity-ravaged EU – which, by the way, doesn’t want it. And all this while the same EU tries to handicap the US commercially with a rigged euro that still doesn’t allow it to penetrate more US markets.

As for an irrelevant NATO, all it can do is cry, cry, cry.

 

Posted in USA, Europe, RussiaComments Off on Why NATO is terrified of Russia

Iran: The Aggressor or the Aggressed Upon?

NOVANEWS

Posted by Stephen Sniegoski

Iran: The Aggressor or the Aggressed Upon?The fact of the matter is Iran has neither a nuclear bomb nor an actual nuclear weapons program.

American Establishment Combats Resurgent ‘Isolationist’ Threat

American Establishment Combats Resurgent ‘Isolationist’ ThreatWith communism gone, the conservative coalition should have fractured long ago. This was delayed by Sept. 11 and the rise of radical Islam. But now, 12 years into that era — after Afghanistan and Iraq, after drone wars and the NSA revelations — the natural tension between isolationist and internationalist tendencies has resurfaced.

The Ukrainian Crisis: The United States, Russia, and Israel

The Ukrainian Crisis: The United States, Russia, and IsraelSo while the United States will suffer, along with the other countries involved in the Ukrainian crisis, Israel’s situation will have improved both in terms of a harder position by the United States toward Israel’s major enemy, Iran, and better relations with Russia.

Neocons, Selective Democracy, and the Egyptian Military Coup

Neocons, Selective Democracy, and the Egyptian Military CoupCiting influential analyst Jim Lobe, Sniegoski emphasizes that It is not democracy but rather “protecting Israeli security and preserving its military superiority over any and all possible regional challenges” that is “a core neoconservative tenet.”

The Hagel Nomination, Israel, and the Neocons

The Hagel Nomination, Israel, and the NeoconsThe neoconservatives have been in the forefront in attacking Hagel while AIPAC has stayed in the background. Should the neocons ultimately stop Hagel, it would be an amazing success. A perceived enemy of Israeli interests would be defeated without any negative political ramifications for Israel or the Israel lobby

Obama’s Purpose for Picking Chuck Hagel

Obama’s Purpose for Picking Chuck HagelA major issue in Washington pertaining to foreign policy and national security affairs is the fight over President Obama’s nomination of Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense. Why is it so important?

Norman Finkelstein and Neocon Denial

Norman Finkelstein and Neocon DenialDespite denying that neocons had an effect on US Middle East policy, Finkelstein does grant that “Jewish neocons pushed long and hard for an attack on Iraq.”

Saudi Arabia: The Neocons’ Once and Future Target

Saudi Arabia: The Neocons’ Once and Future TargetShiites in the Gulf have already become enraged against the Saudis, so this element could serve as an invaluable propaganda instrument to intensify anti-Saudi feeling in the West in order to bring down Israel’s final powerful adversary, whose very existence precludes Israel’s achievement of total regional hegemony.

The Yinon Thesis Vindicated: Neocons, Israel, and the Fragmentation of Syria

The Yinon Thesis Vindicated: Neocons, Israel, and the Fragmentation of SyriaAmerica’s removal of Saddam in a war spearheaded by the pro-Israel neoconservatives served to intensify Sunni-Shiite regional hostility and, in a sense, got the destabilization ball rolling. Iran is targeted now, and Israel and its neocon supporters seek to make use of dissatisfied internal elements, political and ethnic—the radical MEK, democratic secularists, monarchists, Kurds, Arabs, Baluchis, and Azeris— to bring down the Islamic regime.

Would Romney Pursue a Neocon War Agenda?

Would Romney Pursue a Neocon War Agenda?Romney is noted for his “flip-flops” on issues depending on the audience. He is currently surrounding himself with neocon foreign policy advisors. But would he follow such a policy as president?

Washington Is Worth a War: Obama, Iran, and the Israel Lobby

Washington Is Worth a War:  Obama, Iran, and the Israel LobbyWright notes that “There are things Obama could do to greatly increase the chances of a negotiated solution to the Iranian nuclear problem, but he seems to have decided that doing them would bring political blowback that would reduce his chances of re-election.”   By Stephen J. Sniegoski   When, in 1593, Henry of Navarre […]

Has US Support for Israel Reached a Tipping Point?

Has US Support for Israel Reached a Tipping Point?That support for Israel continues to reign supreme in the US Congress, as Giraldi acknowledges, would seem to illustrate that the American populace is not sufficiently concerned about the issue as to make it politically significant.

Posted in IranComments Off on Iran: The Aggressor or the Aggressed Upon?

UK: Transformation of anti-Israelism into anti-Semitism

NOVANEWS

How Western policy assists the transformation of anti-Israelism into anti-Semitism

 

Posted by Alan Hart

Britain’s Home Secretary Theresa May has declared that “We must all redouble our efforts to wipe out anti-Semitism here in the United Kingdom.”

gg_007By Alan HartIn her view and that of her government colleagues this means more must be done to combat violent Islamic fundamentalism in all of its manifestations. The problem with this way of thinking and policy making, which all Western governments have in common, is that it ignores the fact that the prime cause of the transformation of anti-Israelism into anti-Semitism is Israel’s defiance of international law and brutal rejection of the Palestinian claim for justice.A warning that anti-Israelism could and most likely would be transformed into anti-Semitism was sounded more than a quarter of a century ago by Yehoshafat Harkabi, a former Director of Israeli Military Intelligence. In his book Israel’s Fateful, published in English by Harper and Row in 1986, he wrote this:

“Israel is the criterion according to which all Jews will tend to be judged. Israel as a Jewish state is an example of the Jewish character, which finds free and concentrated expression within it. Anti-Semitism has deep and historical roots. Nevertheless, any flaw in Israeli conduct, which initially is cited as anti-Israelism, is likely to be transformed into empirical proof of the validity of anti-Semitism. It would be a tragic irony if the Jewish state, which was intended to solve the problem of anti-Semitism, was to become a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism. Israelis must be aware that the price of their misconduct is paid not only by them but also Jews throughout the world.”

The Israeli “misconduct” of Harkabi’s warning can be seen today for what it is – on-going colonization of the occupied West Bank which includes the theft of more and more Palestinian land and water and the demolition of more and more Palestinian homes and olive trees; plus the on-going process of making life hell for the Palestinians of the besieged Gaza Strip.

It is this “misconduct” that has provoked and propelled the rising, global tide of anti-Israelism which is now showing early signs of being transformed into anti-Semitism.

The conclusion invited, in my view an irrefutable conclusion, is that by their refusal to call and hold Israel to account for its defiance of international law. all the governments of the Western world are assisting the transformation of anti-Israelism into anti-Semitism.
Prime Minister Netanyahu has every reason to be grateful for this assistance because he knows better than anybody else that Zionism needs anti-Semitism to justify Israel’s policies and actions.

Footnote
Harkabi’s warning was, in fact, an echo of fears expressed by very many Jews of the world before the Nazi holocaust. Prior to it most Jews, American and British Jews in particular, were opposed to Zionism’s colonial enterprise. They knew it was morally wrong. They believed it would lead to unending conflict. But most of all they feared that if Zionism was allowed by the major powers to have its way it would one day provoke anti-Semitism.

It was the Nazi holocaust that caused most Jews to throw away their moral compass.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on UK: Transformation of anti-Israelism into anti-Semitism

Campaign against anti-semitism or else…

NOVANEWS

Posted by Stuart Littlewood

Amnesty International browbeaten by pro-Israel propaganda outfit

antisemitism

Here’s a petition that just landed in my Inbox:

Amnesty International’s annual conference has rejected a motion to fight the rise of violent anti-Semitism in Britain. Studies show violent anti-Semitic attacks rose 48 percent in Britain in 2014. The resolution was the only one defeated during the entire conference.

According to its mission statement, Amnesty is a “worldwide movement of people campaigning to protect human rights… Around the world we protect people and communities who come under attack.” What about the human rights of Jews? What about the Jews who have been the victim of attacks across Europe?

Sign your name to tell Amnesty: Jews have human rights, too.

Amnesty was founded by the late Peter Benenson — a Jewish man who saved German children during the Holocaust when he was only 16 years old. What would Peter Benenson say about Amnesty today?

The conference resolution urged Amnesty to “campaign against anti-Semitism in the UK and lobby the government to tackle the rise in attacks.” It seems Amnesty UK’s Board supported the resolution but the majority of members didn’t.

Jews probably enjoy more rights here than they would in their very own Jewish state. There are already enough organisations fighting anti-semitism and the UK government is pouring £millions of our tax money into the effort. If Amnesty doesn’t want to join the fight and perhaps feels there are other issues it should concentrate on, who’s to quarrel with that?

Besides, across large swathes of the country anti-semitism, violent or otherwise, is unheard-of. I sense that the British people are becoming weary of the incessant bleating about anti-semitism, the way it is continually used to silence debate, and how the government indulges a section of the public whose tribal brethren commit endless atrocities in the Holy Land and cruelly deny our Palestinian friends their rights.

It’s The Israel Project, again

The petition against Amnesty has been got up by TIP – The Israel Project – which describes itself as “a non-partisan American educational organization dedicated to informing the media and public conversation about Israel and the Middle East. TIP does not lobby and is not connected to any government. TIP informs, providing facts, access to experts and keen analysis.”

Oh really? Not long ago TIP produced a training manual to help the worldwide Zionist movement win its propaganda war, keep their ill-gotten territorial gains in the Holy Land and persuade international audiences to accept that their crimes are necessary and actually conform to “shared values” between Israel and the civilised West.
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/8303274/The-Israel-Projects-2009-Global-Language-Dictionary

The manual teaches how to justify the slaughter, the ethnic cleansing, the land-grabbing and the blatant disregard for international law and UN resolutions, and makes it all smell sweet with a liberal squirt of persuasive language. It is designed to hoodwink us ignorant and gullible Americans and Europeans into believing that we actually share values with the racist regime in Israel and that its abominable behaviour is deserving of our support.

It wouldn’t surprise me if this manual still serves as a media communications primer for the army of cyber-scribblers that Israel’s Ministry of Dirty Tricks has recruited to spread Zionism’s poison across the internet.

Its first words set the tone: “Remember, it’s not what you say that counts. It’s what people hear.”

The manual’s numerous teachings, a small handful of which are reproduced here, are aimed at the mass of “persuadables” primarily American but also British. There is great emphasis from the start on isolating and demonising democratically-elected Hamas.

 “Peace can only be made with adversaries who want to make peace with you. Terrorist organizations like Iran-backed Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad are, by definition, opposed to peaceful co-existence, and determined to prevent reconciliation. I ask you, how do you negotiate with those who want you dead?”

Hamas and Hezbollah are organisations created out of necessity to resist Israeli aggression and only regarded as terrorists by the Washington-Tel Aviv axis and by US-Israeli stooges in London and some other capitals.

Bush used this definition: “The term “terrorism” means an activity that —
(i) involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, property, or infrastructure; and

(ii) appears to be intended —

(A) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

(B) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

(C) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, kidnapping, or hostage-taking.”

The joke is that it describes the antics of Israel perfectly.

“There is NEVER, EVER, any justification for the deliberate slaughter of innocent women and children. NEVER…. there is one fundamental principle that all peoples from all parts of the globe will agree on: civilized people do not target innocent women and children for death.”

Indeed. Civilised people don’t. Defence for Children International Palestine and UN agencies agree that around 548 children were slaughtered and well over 3,000 injured in the Jewish state’s assault on Gaza last summer. What, I wonder, would Peter Benenson have made of that? I imagine he’d be rescuing Palestinian children and urging British Jews to intervene firmly with their kin in Israel. There have been many warnings from Jews themselves that resentment of Israel’s atrocities would be felt by Jewish communities around the world, so the rise in anti-semitism is no surprise.

“Humanize Rockets: Paint a vivid picture”

The manual pumps out trashy advice galore:

“Successful communications is about pointing out a few core principles of shared values — such as democracy and freedom — and repeating them over and over again…. You need to start with empathy for both sides, remind your audience that Israel wants peace and then repeat the messages of democracy, freedom, and peace over and over again…. we need to repeat the message, on average, ten times to be effective.”

Is democracy a shared value? Hardly. Israel is an ethnocracy. Is freedom a shared value? The world is still waiting for Israel to allow the Palestinians their freedom. Israel wants peace? Israel has never met its peace agreement obligations. Every action is directed at keeping the conflict going until the Israelis have stolen enough land and established enough ‘facts on the ground’ – Jews-only settlements, highways, disconnected Palestinian bantustans – to enable them to redraw the map and make the occupation PERMANENT.

“When talking about a Palestinian partner, it is essential to distinguish between Hamas and everyone else. Only the most anti-Israel, pro- Palestinian American expects Israel to negotiate with Hamas, so you have to be clear that you are seeking a ‘moderate Palestinian partner’.”

Where are the moderate Israeli partners?

“The fight is over IDEOLOGY – not land; terror, not territory. Thus, you must avoid using Israel’s religious claims to land as a reason why Israel should not give up land. Such claims only make Israel look extremist to people who are not religious Christians or Jews.”

If the fight isn’t about land, why did Israel steal it at gunpoint? And why won’t they give it back when told to by the UN?

“Many on the left see an “Israel v. Palestinian” crisis where Israel is Goliath and the Palestinians are David. It is critical that they understand that this is an Arab-Israeli crisis and that the force undermining peace is Iran and their proxies Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. You must not call Hamas just Hamas. Call them what they are: Iran-backed Hamas. Indeed, when they know that Iran is behind Hamas and Hezbollah, they are much more supportive of Israel.”

By the same token we must call the racist regime what it is: US-backed Israel.

“The situation in the Middle East may be complicated, but all parties should adopt a simple approach: peace first, political boundaries second.”

The correct approach is for the international community to first insist that Israel complies with international law and the many UN resolutions it has contemptuously ignored. The boundaries are already defined. Whatever issues remain to be decided, Palestinians should not have to negotiate under occupation and with a gun to their heads.

The manual gives a long glossary of terms. Here’s a sample….

  •  “Deliberately firing rockets into civilian communities”: Combine terrorist motive with civilian visuals and you have the perfect illustration of what Israel faced in Gaza and Lebanon. Especially with regard to rocket attacks but useful for any kind of terrorist attack, deliberate is the right word to use to call out the intent behind the attacks. This is far more powerful than describing the attacks as “random.”

Israelis know all about deliberately bombarding civilian targets. And they are careful not to mention that Sderot, until recently the only Israeli township within range of Gazan rockets, is built on the ruins of an ethnically cleansed Palestinian village whose inhabitants were forced from their homes by Jewish terrorists.

  • “Humanize Rockets”: Paint a vivid picture of what life is like in Israeli communities that are vulnerable to attack. Yes, cite the number of rocket attacks that have occurred. But immediately follow that up with what it is like to make the nightly trek to the bomb shelter.

Would Israel (or TIP) care to tell the world how many bombs, rockets and shells (including the illegal and prohibited variety) its F-15s, tanks, armed drones, helicopter gunships and navy gunboats have poured into the densely-packed humanity that is Gaza? And how many Palestinian homes they have destroyed?

The TIP’s propaganda manual, which runs to 116 pages, is a squalid piece of work which recycles many of the discredited techniques used by the advertising industry before standards of honesty, decency and truthfulness were brought in to protect the public.

It seeks to undermine with clever words and disinformation the inalienable rights pledged by the UN and the world’s civilized nations to all peoples, including the Palestinians. Amnesty has no need to hear lectures or accept petitions on human rights from TIP.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Campaign against anti-semitism or else…

40 Holocaust survivors condemn ‘massacre’ of Palestinians

NOVANEWS

Call for BDS against I$raHell

Posted by VNN

40 survivors of the Holocaust signed the letter and 287 descendants of victims also added their names.

by Alex Kane

Holocaust survivors printed an ad in the New York Times condemning Israel's attacks on Gaza. (Photo: Alex Kane)

A group of Holocaust survivors and descendants of those targeted by Nazi Germany have harshly criticized Israeli actions in Gaza and called for boycotts, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel.

Following a letter from survivors of the Holocaust printed in the New York Times on Saturday, the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network, which helped coordinate the letter, organized a press call Monday, where some of those who signed the letter spoke out against the assault on Gaza.

Participants in the press call included Edith Bell, whose parents died in concentration camps and who was taken to four camps herself; Suzanne Weiss, whose mother was murdered in Auschwitz and who was hidden by French peasants; and Liliane Kaczerginski, whose father Schmerke was a Jewish fighter against the Nazis in Lithuania. Also joining the call were Monadel Herzallah and Hani Jamah, two Palestinians with family in Gaza who expressed appreciation at the descendants’ and survivors’ efforts.

40 survivors of the Holocaust signed the letter and 287 descendants of victims also added their names.

“I resent anybody who will use those events as an excuse to exterminate Palestinians,” said Bell, who said she survived concentration camps by “pure luck.”

The letter printed in the New York Times has garnered international media attention from the likes of the BBCand Ha’aretz. “As Jewish survivors and descendants of survivors and victims of the Nazi genocide we unequivocally condemn the massacre of Palestinians in Gaza and the ongoing occupation and colonization of historic Palestine,” the letter says. “We call for an immediate end to the siege against and blockade of Gaza. We call for the full economic, cultural and academic boycott of Israel. ‘Never again’ must mean NEVER AGAIN FOR ANYONE!”

The advertisement cost $18,000. The funds were raised by some of the signatories.

“I applaud your courage for doing such a statement like that, that speaks from the heart,” said Herzallah, a member of the US Palestinian Community Network whose family was expelled from what is now Israel into Gaza. “I’m not surprised when I see these courageous statements by Holocaust survivors and their families…Our children and grandchildren will learn together in Gaza and all over Palestine that never again truly means never again for anyone.

hajo meyer 2

The impetus for the letter came from Holocaust survivors and descendants of victims of the Nazis who were outraged that Israel used their histories to justify assaults on Palestinians. One of the signatories who helped organize the letter was Dr. Hajo Meyer, a German-Dutch physicist who survived Auschwitz and who died the day before the letter was printed in the Times. Meyer was an outspoken critic of Israel, telling the Electronic Intifada that he “had to quit grammar school in Bielefeld after the Kristallnacht…Therefore, I can fully identify with the Palestinian youth that are hampered in their education. And I can in no way identify with the criminals who make it impossible for Palestinian youth to be educated.”

The letter calls out Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, who was the author of another advertisement that ran in the New York Times calling on Hamas to reject “child sacrifice” and casting the Israel/Palestine conflict as a “battle of civilization against barbarism.”

“Reading the Elie Wiesel ad made me literally sick to my stomach,” said Maia Ettinger, whose mother and grandmother survived the Holocaust by escaping the Warsaw ghetto. “The ad is an act of towering and transparent projection because what is barbaric is collective punishment, and what is barbaric is indiscriminate bombing.

The International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network says that much of the response they have received has been positive, though there have been violent messages sent to their e-mail address. +972 Magazine’s Ami Kaufman reported that some Israelis have expressed revulsion at the letter on Facebook.

“It’s a shame Hitler didn’t finish the job,” one Israeli named Asher Solomon said, while another, Katy Morali, added that “Holocaust survivors who think like this are invited to go die in the gas chambers.”

See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/holocaust-survivors-palestinians.html


Related post:

Jews supporting Palestine & protesting against Israeli Zionist crimes against humanity.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on 40 Holocaust survivors condemn ‘massacre’ of Palestinians

Israeli Scholar Disputes Founding Myth

NOVANEWS

Posted by VNN

There has been no serious rebuttal to Sand’s book, which has been a bestseller in I$raHell and Europe.

What does Shlomo Sand have to say about the land of Israel? BBC InterviewWhat does Shlomo Sand have to say about the land of Israel? — BBC Interview

From the Archive: Twin myths undergird the claim by Israeli hardliners that they own the land of Palestine: the Biblical stories about the Exodus and the ancient kings of Israel and the claim that the Romans forced the Diaspora of Jews to Europe, a fiction that a brave Israeli scholar exploded, as Morgan Strong reported in 2009 — Consortium News

By Morgan Strong

The founding narrative of the modern State of Israel was born from the words of Moses in the Old Testament, that God ordered the Jewish people to conquer the land of Israel and that it was to be theirs for all time (a promise supposedly given originally to Abraham).

Then, there was the story of the Diaspora – that after Jewish uprisings against the Romans in the First and Second centuries A.D., the Jews were exiled from the land of Israel and dispersed throughout the Western world. They often were isolated from European populations, suffered persecution, and ultimately were marked for extermination in the Nazi Holocaust.

Finally after centuries of praying for a return to Israel, the Jews achieved this goal by defeating the Arab armies in Palestine and establishing Israel in 1948. This narrative – spanning more than three millennia – is the singular, elemental and sustaining claim of the State of Israel as a Jewish nation.

Shlomo_Sand-The-inventionof-the-jewish-people

But a 2008 book by Israeli scholar Shlomo Sand challenges this narrative, claiming that – beyond the religious question of whether God really spoke to Abraham and Moses – the Roman-era Diaspora did not happen at all or at least not as commonly understood.

In When and How Was the Jewish People Invented?, Dr. Sand, an expert on European history at the University of Tel Aviv, says the Diaspora was largely a myth – that the Jews were never exiled en masse from the Holy Land and that many European Jewish populations converted to the faith centuries later. (Sand’s book was published in English as The Invention of the Jewish People.)

Thus, Sand argues, many of today’s Israelis who emigrated from Europe after World War II have little or no genealogical connection to the land. According to Sand’s historical analysis, they are descendents of European converts, principally from the Kingdom of the Khazars in eastern Russia, who embraced Judaism in the Eighth Century, A.D.

The descendants of the Khazars then were driven from their native lands by invasion and conquest and – through this migration – created the Jewish populations of Eastern Europe, Sands writes. Similarly, he argues that the Jews of Spain came from the conversion of Berber tribes from northern Africa that later migrated into Europe.

The Zionist Narrative

Sand, himself a European Jew born in 1946 to Holocaust survivors in Austria, argues that until little more than a century ago, Jews thought of themselves as Jews because they shared a common religion, not because they possessed a direct lineage to the ancient tribes of Israel.

However, at the turn of the 20th Century, Sand asserts, Zionist Jews began assembling a national history to justify creation of a Jewish state by inventing the idea that Jews existed as a people separate from their religion and that they had primogeniture over the territory that had become known as Palestine.

The Zionists also invented the idea that Jews living in exile were obligated to return to the Promised Land, a concept that had been foreign to Judaism, Sand states.

Like almost everything in the Middle East, this scholarship is fraught with powerful religious, historical and political implications. If Sand’s thesis is correct, it would suggest that many of the Palestinian Arabs have a far more substantial claim to the lands of Israel than do many European Jews who arrived there asserting a God-given claim.

Indeed, Sand theorizes that many Jews, who remained in Judea after Roman legions crushed the last uprising in 136 A.D., eventually converted to Christianity or Islam, meaning that the Palestinians who have been crowded into Gaza or concentrated in the West Bank might be direct descendants of Jews from the Roman era.

Despite the political implications of Sand’s book, it has not faced what might be expected: a withering assault from right-wing Israelis. The criticism has focused mostly on Sand’s credentials as an expert on European history, not ancient Middle Eastern history, a point that Sand readily acknowledges.

One critic, Israel Bartal, dean of humanities at the Hebrew University, attacked Sand’s credentials and called Sand’s thesis “baseless,” but disagreed mostly over Sand’s assertion that the Diaspora story was created as an intentional myth by Zionists seeking to fabricate a direct genealogical connection between many of the world’s Jews and Israel.

“Although the myth of an exile from the Jewish homeland (Palestine) does exist in popular Israeli culture, it is negligible in serious Jewish historical discussions,” Bartal wrote in the newspaper Haaretz. “Important groups in the Jewish national movement expressed reservations regarding this myth or denied it completely. …

“The kind of political intervention Sand is talking about, namely, a deliberate program designed to make Israelis forget the true biological origins of the Jews of Poland and Russia or a directive for the promotion of the story of the Jews’ exile from their homeland is pure fantasy.”

In other words, Bartal, like some other critics, is not so much disputing Sand’s historical claims about the Diaspora or the origins of Eastern European Jews, as he is contesting Sand’s notion that Zionists concocted a false history for a cynical political purpose.

But there can be no doubt that the story of the Diaspora has played a key role in the founding of Israel and that the appeal of this powerful narrative has helped the Jewish state generate sympathy around the world, especially in the United States.

“After being forcibly exiled from their land, the people remained faithful to it throughout their Dispersion and never ceased to pray and hope for their return to it and for the restoration in it of their political freedom,” reads the preamble to the Israeli Declaration of Independence.

Reality from Mythology

In January 2009, as the Israeli army bombarded Palestinians in Gaza in retaliation for rockets fired into southern Israel, the world got an ugly glimpse of what can result when historical myths are allowed to drive wedges between people who otherwise might have a great deal in common.

After the conflict ended – with some 1,400 Palestinians dead, including many children and other non-combatants – the Israeli government investigated alleged war crimes by its army and heard testimony from Israeli troops that extremist Rabbis had proclaimed the invasion a holy war.

The troops said the Rabbis brought them booklets and articles declaring: “We are the Jewish people. We came to this land by a miracle. God brought us back to this land, and now we need to fight to expel the non-Jews who are interfering with our conquest of this holy land.”

In his book – and in an interview with Haaretz about his book – Sand challenged this core myth. In the interview, he said:

“I started looking in research studies about the exile from the land – a constitutive event in Jewish history, almost like the Holocaust. But to my astonishment I discovered that it has no literature. The reason is that no one exiled the people of the country.

“The Romans did not exile peoples and they could not have done so even if they had wanted to. They did not have trains and trucks to deport entire populations. That kind of logistics did not exist until the 20th Century. From this, in effect, the whole book was born: in the realization that Judaic society was not dispersed and was not exiled.”

The True Descendants Asked if he was saying that the true descendants of the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Judah are the Palestinians, Sand responded:

“No population remains pure over a period of thousands of years. But the chances that the Palestinians are descendants of the ancient Judaic people are much greater than the chances that you or I are its descendents.

“The first Zionists, up until the Arab Revolt [1936-1939], knew that there had been no exiling, and that the Palestinians were descended from the inhabitants of the land. They knew that farmers don’t leave until they are expelled.

“Even Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, the second president of the State of Israel, wrote in 1929 that, ‘the vast majority of the peasant farmers do not have their origins in the Arab conquerors, but rather, before then, in the Jewish farmers who were numerous and a majority in the building of the land.’”

Sand argues further that the Jewish people never existed as a “nation race” but were rather an ethnic mix of disparate peoples who adopted the Jewish religion over a great period of time. Sand dismisses the Zionist argument that the Jews were an isolated and seminal ethnic group that was targeted for dispersal by the Romans.

Although ruthless in putting down challenges to their rule, the Romans allowed subjects in their occupied territories a great many freedoms, including freedom to practice religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly.

Thousands of Jews served in the Roman legions, and there was a sizable Jewish community in Rome itself. Three Jewish descendants of Herod the Great, the Jewish Emperor of Jerusalem, served in the Roman Senate.

Jewish dietary laws were respected under Roman law, as well as the right not to work on the Sabbath. Jewish slaves – 1,000 carried to Italy by Emperor Titus after crushing the first Jewish rebellion in 70 A.D. – were bought and set free by Jewish families already long settled into Roman society.

After the final Jewish rebellion, the Bar Kokhba revolt of 132-136 A.D., historians say the Romans placed restrictions on Jews entering Jerusalem, which caused other areas, such as Galilee in northern Palestine, to become centers of Jewish learning. But there is little or no evidence of a mass forced relocation.

Sand says the Diaspora was originally a Christian myth that depicted the event as divine punishment imposed on the Jews for having rejected the Christian gospel.

Genetic Evidence

There has been no serious rebuttal to Sand’s book, which has been a bestseller in Israel and Europe. But there were earlier genetic studies attempting to demonstrate an unbroken line of descent among Ashkenazi Jews in Europe from the Hebrew tribes of Israel.

In a genetic study published by the United States National Academy of Sciences, the Y chromosomes of Ashkenazi, Roman, North African, Kurdish, Near Eastern, Yemenite, and Ethiopian Jews were compared with 16 non-Jewish groups from similar geographic locations. It found that despite long-term residence in different countries and isolation from one another, most Jewish populations were not significantly different from one another at the genetic level.

Although the study also demonstrated that 20 percent of the Ashkenazim carry Eastern European gene markers consistent with the Khazars, the results seemed to show that the Ashkenazim were descended from a common Mid-Eastern population and suggested that most Jewish communities have remained relatively isolated from neighboring non-Jewish communities during and after the Diaspora.

However, a monumental genetic study entitled, “The Journey of Man,” undertaken in 2002 by Dr. Spencer Wells, a geneticist from Stanford University, demonstrated that virtually all Europeans males carry the same genetic markers found within the male population of the Middle East on the Y chromosomes.

That is simply because the migration of human beings began in Africa and coursed its way through the Middle East and onward, stretching over many thousands of years. In short, we are all pretty much the same.

Obsessive Delusion

Despite the lack of conclusive scientific or historical evidence, the Diaspora narrative proved to be a compelling story, much like the Biblical rendition of the Exodus from Egypt, which historians and archeologists also have questioned in recent years.

It is certainly true that all nations use myths and legend for sustenance; some tales are based on fact, others are convenient self-serving contrivances. However, when myth and legend argue for excess, when they demand a racial, ethnic or religious purity to the exclusion of others – so that some prophecy can be fulfilled or some national goal achieved – reason and justice can give way to extremism and cruelty.

The motive for creating the state of Israel was to provide respite for the Jews of Europe after World War II, but that worthy cause has now been contorted into an obsessive delusion about an Israeli right to mistreat and persecute Palestinians.

When right-wing Israeli Rabbis speak of driving non-Jews out of the land that God supposedly gave to the Israelites and their descendants, these Rabbis may be speaking with full faith, but faith is by definition an unshakable belief in something that taken by itself cannot be proven.

This faith – or delusion – also is drawing in the rest of the world. The bloody war in Iraq was an appendage to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as is the dangerous rise of Islamic fundamentalism across the region.

There is also now the irony that modern Israel was established by Jews of European origin, many of whom may be ethnically unconnected to Palestine. Another cruel aspect of this irony is that the descendants of the ancient Israelites may include many Palestinians, who are genetically indistinct from the Sephardic Jews who were, like the Palestinians, original and indigenous inhabitants of this ancient land.

Yasir Arafat told me quite often that the Israelis are really cousins of the Palestinians. He may have been wrong; they are more likely brothers and sisters.

 

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Israeli Scholar Disputes Founding Myth

Amnesty International browbeaten by pro-I$raHell propaganda outfit

NOVANEWS
The Israel Project

By Stuart Littlewood

Here’s a petition that just landed in my inbox:

Amnesty International’s annual conference has rejected a motion to fight the rise of violent anti-Semitism in Britain. Studies show violent anti-Semitic attacks rose 48 per cent in Britain in 2014. The resolution was the only one defeated during the entire conference.

According to its mission statement, Amnesty is a “worldwide movement of people campaigning to protect human rights… Around the world we protect people and communities who come under attack.” What about the human rights of Jews? What about the Jews who have been the victim of attacks across Europe?

Sign your name to tell Amnesty: Jews have human rights, too.

Amnesty was founded by the late Peter Benenson – a Jewish man who saved German children during the Holocaust when he was only 16 years old. What would Peter Benenson say about Amnesty today?

The conference resolution urged Amnesty to “campaign against anti-Semitism in the UK and lobby the government to tackle the rise in attacks”. It seems Amnesty UK’s Board supported the resolution but the majority of members didn’t.

I sense that the British people are becoming weary of the incessant bleating about anti-Semitism, the way it is continually used to silence debate…

Jews probably enjoy more rights here than they would in Israel. There are already enough organisations fighting anti-Semitism and the UK government is pouring millions of pounds of our tax money into the effort. If Amnesty doesn’t want to join the fight and perhaps feels there are other issues it should concentrate on, who is to quarrel with that?

Besides, across large swathes of the country anti-Semitism, violent or otherwise, is unheard-of. I sense that the British people are becoming weary of the incessant bleating about anti-Semitism, the way it is continually used to silence debate, and how the government indulges a section of the public whose tribal brethren commit endless atrocities in the Holy Land and cruelly deny our Palestinian friends their rights.

It’s The Israel Project, again

The petition against Amnesty has been got up by The Israel Project (TIP), which describes itself as “a non-partisan American educational organisation dedicated to informing the media and public conversation about Israel and the Middle East”. TIP, it says, “does not lobby and is not connected to any government. TIP informs, providing facts, access to experts and keen analysis.

Oh really? Not long ago TIP produced a training manual to help the worldwide Zionist movement win its propaganda war, keep its ill-gotten territorial gains in the Holy Land and persuade international audiences to accept that its crimes are necessary and actually conform to “shared values” between Israel and the civilized West.

The manual teaches how to justify the slaughter, the ethnic cleansing, the land-grabbing and the blatant disregard for international law and UN resolutions, and makes it all smell sweet with a liberal squirt of persuasive language. It is designed to hoodwink us ignorant and gullible Americans and Europeans into believing that we actually share values with the racist regime in Israel and that its abominable behavior is deserving of our support.

It wouldn’t surprise me if this manual still serves as a media communications primer for the army of cyber-scribblers that Israel’s Ministry of Dirty Tricks has recruited to spread Zionism’s poison across the internet (see this and this).

Its first words set the tone: “Remember, it’s not what you say that counts. It’s what people hear.”

The manual’s numerous teachings, a small handful of which are reproduced here, are aimed at the mass of “persuadables” primarily American but also British. There is great emphasis from the start on isolating and demonizing democratically-elected Hamas.

  • “Peace can only be made with adversaries who want to make peace with you. Terrorist organisations like Iran-backed Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad are, by definition, opposed to peaceful coexistence, and determined to prevent reconciliation. I ask you, how do you negotiate with those who want you dead?”

Hamas and Hezbollah are organisations created out of necessity to resist Israeli aggression and only regarded as terrorists by the Washington-Tel Aviv axis and by US-Israeli stooges in London and some other capitals.

George W. Bush used this definition: “The term “terrorism” means an activity that:

(i) involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, property, or infrastructure; and
(ii) appears to be intended –
(A) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(B) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(C) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, kidnapping, or hostage-taking.”

The joke is that it describes the antics of Israel perfectly.

  • “There is NEVER, EVER, any justification for the deliberate slaughter of innocent women and children. NEVER. …there is one fundamental principle that all peoples from all parts of the globe will agree on: civilised people do not target innocent women and children for death.”

Indeed. Civilised people don’t. Defence for Children International Palestine and UN agencies agree that around 548 children were slaughtered and well over 3,000 injured in the Jewish state’s assault on Gaza last summer. What, I wonder, would Peter Benenson have made of that? I imagine he would be rescuing Palestinian children and urging British Jews to intervene firmly with their kin in Israel. There have been many warnings from Jews themselves that resentment of Israel’s atrocities would be felt by Jewish communities around the world, so the rise in anti-Semitism is no surprise.

“Humanise rockets: paint a vivid picture”

The manual pumps out trashy advice galore:

  • “Successful communications is about pointing out a few core principles of shared values – such as democracy and freedom – and repeating them over and over again… You need to start with empathy for both sides, remind your audience that Israel wants peace and then repeat the messages of democracy, freedom and peace over and over again… we need to repeat the message, on average, 10 times to be effective.”

Is democracy a shared value? Hardly. Israel is an ethnocracy. Is freedom a shared value? The world is still waiting for Israel to allow the Palestinians their freedom. Israel wants peace? Israel has never met its peace agreement obligations. Every action is directed at keeping the conflict going until the Israelis have stolen enough land and established enough “facts on the ground” – Jews-only settlements, highways, disconnected Palestinian bantustans – to enable them to redraw the map and make the occupation permanent.

  • ”When talking about a Palestinian partner, it is essential to distinguish between Hamas and everyone else. Only the most anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian American expects Israel to negotiate with Hamas, so you have to be clear that you are seeking a ‘moderate Palestinian partner’.”

Where are the moderate Israeli partners?

  • ”The fight is over IDEOLOGY – not land; terror, not territory. Thus, you must avoid using Israel’s religious claims to land as a reason why Israel should not give up land. Such claims only make Israel look extremist to people who are not religious Christians or Jews.”

If the fight isn’t about land, why did Israel steal it at gunpoint? And why won’t it give it back when told to by the UN?

  • “Many on the left see an “Israel v. Palestinian” crisis where Israel is Goliath and the Palestinians are David. It is critical that they understand that this is an Arab-Israeli crisis and that the force undermining peace is Iran and their proxies Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. You must not call Hamas just Hamas. Call them what they are: Iran-backed Hamas. Indeed, when they know that Iran is behind Hamas and Hezbollah, they are much more supportive of Israel.”

By the same token we must call the racist regime what it is: US-backed Israel.

  • “The situation in the Middle East may be complicated, but all parties should adopt a simple approach: peace first, political boundaries second.”

The correct approach is for the international community to first insist that Israel complies with international law and the many UN resolutions it has contemptuously ignored. The boundaries are already defined. Whatever issues remain to be decided, Palestinians should not have to negotiate under occupation and with a gun to their heads.

The manual gives a long glossary of terms. Here’s a sample:

  • “Deliberately firing rockets into civilian communities”: Combine terrorist motive with civilian visuals and you have the perfect illustration of what Israel faced in Gaza and Lebanon. Especially with regard to rocket attacks but useful for any kind of terrorist attack, deliberate is the right word to use to call out the intent behind the attacks. This is far more powerful than describing the attacks as “random”.

Israelis know all about deliberately bombarding civilian targets. And they are careful not to mention that Sderot, until recently the only Israeli township within range of Gazan rockets, is built on the ruins of an ethnically cleansed Palestinian village whose inhabitants were forced from their homes by Jewish terrorists.

  • “Humanise rockets”: Paint a vivid picture of what life is like in Israeli communities that are vulnerable to attack. Yes, cite the number of rocket attacks that have occurred. But immediately follow that up with what it is like to make the nightly trek to the bomb shelter.

Would Israel (or TIP) care to tell the world how many bombs, rockets and shells (including the illegal and prohibited variety) its F-15 warplanes, tanks, armed drones, helicopter gunships and navy gunboats have poured into the densely-packed humanity that is Gaza? And how many Palestinian homes it has destroyed?

The TIP’s propaganda manual, which runs to 116 pages, is a squalid piece of work which recycles many of the discredited techniques used by the advertising industry before standards of honesty, decency and truthfulness were brought in to protect the public.

It seeks to undermine with clever words and disinformation the inalienable rights pledged by the UN and the world’s civilised nations to all peoples, including the Palestinians.

Amnesty International has no need to hear lectures or accept petitions on human rights from TIP.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on Amnesty International browbeaten by pro-I$raHell propaganda outfit

Memories of Empire: Remembering the Fall of Saigon

NOVANEWS
Global Research
vietnam

Despite sharing the same diplomatic table as the United States, and forging ahead with trade agreements, Vietnam still remembers. Remembers, that is, those countless barbarous crimes, as the countrys prime minister calls them, committed by the United States during the long wars of the 1960s and 1970s. On April 30, 1975, Saigon was stricken by scenes of evacuation and panic. Our homeland, explained Nguyen Tan Dung, had to undergo extremely serious challenges.

Both countries provided mirrors of violent change, a form of toxic exchange that seemed share more with disease than nutrition. A distant country that was supposedly off the radar of American homes became a round-the-clock transmission feast of gore and depravity. Then came the battlefield traumas and the counter-cultural response.

The words from President Gerald R. Ford a week before the fall of Saigon before an audience at Tulane University spoke of America regaining the sense of pride that existed before Vietnam, but it cannot be achieved by refighting a war that is finished as far as America is concerned. The crowds began gathering for the evacuation 130,000 Vietnamese leaving the South that April, a projection that made State Department predictions woefully inadequate. Bing Crosbys White Christmas did the rounds on radio on April 29, triggering the airlift evacuation Operation Frequent Wind.

An all to quiet theme behind the commemorations has been one of waste. Waste of life, of resources. In Tim OBriens words on the fall of Saigon and a slew of images, it was the waste of it all. The dead, the wounded, the money, the psychic energy and the moral energy […] just everything. Poor planning for the evacuation also saw a prolonging of suffering the separation of families, the special, God-like power of who would join in the evacuation and who could not. We separated families in a wink, remembers Frank Snepp, one of the CIAs top strategists working in Vietnam, because we hadnt planned adequately.

But a response to defeat and trauma tends to be that of the reassuring fairy tale, the inventive scribe who finds better ways of reimagining horror. Think of them, suggests Bill Moyers, as silver-lining tributes to good intentions and last-ditch heroism that may come in handy in the years ahead.[1] Hence the fall of Saigon being deemed humanitarian and worthy of remembrance in its tragic meter. American aggression, noted Christian Appy, was given a different pigmentation: that of a tragic humanitarian rescue mission.[2]

The very idea of defeat that somehow masquerades as honourable exit started the show. The peace accords of 1973 served as a masking agent. The brutality began to disappear from the screens beaming into the homes. But scores were going to be settled, and vacillation before the advancing North Vietnamese forces would see compromising records fall into the hands of the victors. The CIA, as tends to be the usual pattern, could not be trusted to be reliable on this one those on their payroll were found in undestroyed records, captured, sent for re-education, be it through ideological patching up or traditional execution.

As Moyers notes, a response of selective remembrance reverberates in the halls of quaint, if somewhat dangerous delusion. Spin doctors with dusters and gloves have gone back into the archives, reshaping defeats as strategic wind downs and exists. America, after all, cannot lose, and certainly cant be seen to sport a broken nose. Corrupt regimes installed by the grace of superpowers become mechanisms of stability. Gambles pay off even when they are ignominious failures. That is the modern legacy of Vietnam, visible in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.

Euphemistic bureaucracy thrived in South Vietnam, and has given birth to some terrifying monsters. The language of body counts and free fire zones entailing practical desserts have not lost their appeal in any shape or form. They have found shape in the broader objectives of the modern American Republic.

Vietnam also provided another pertinent reminder in the context of refugees. The first makeover of anniversary thought was to neglect the enormous internal displacement created by US operations those arising from the strategic hamlet program designed to pacify local populations. In a technique all too reminiscent of British strategy towards the Boers in South Africa, millions were forced off their land, herded, encamped. I never flew refugees back in, remembers flight chief Jim Soular. I always flew them out.

Refugees arising from the conflict chose the sea as a means of passage. They were the boat people snaking their way in danger via the Mekong and the South China Sea to make it to countries like Australia. Many were ethnic Chinese that formed the bulk of those expelled by the Vietnamese government in 1979. Government policy to them from Australia, an ally of the southern government, resisted cultural and racial angst. There was no Pacific or extra-territorial repulsion, despite the fear in some circles that white purity was being muddied. But tens of thousands would languish for years in refugee camps in Southeast Asia.

Even now, as the fall of South Vietnam is being remembered, it is providing moments of selective reflection. Whatever happens at these points, the strategists and the dream factory merchants should be kept away from the planning rooms about military interventions. Any reference to Vietnam as precedent is bound to be foolish and misguided, because the wrong questions are bound to be asked.

Posted in USA, Far EastComments Off on Memories of Empire: Remembering the Fall of Saigon

Shoah’s pages

www.shoah.org.uk

KEEP SHOAH UP AND RUNNING