Archive | August 11th, 2018

Colombia recognizes Palestinian state

NOVANEWS

Colombia recognizes Palestinian state, then abruptly vows to review the move amid Nazi regime outrage.

Image result for Colombia PALESTINE FLAG CARTOON

After it emerged that the former president Juan Manuel Santos recognized Palestine as an independent state just before leaving office, Colombia’s new government has pledged to “cautiously” review the decision and its implications.

Palestine was described as a “free, independent and sovereign state” in Santos’ August 3 letter to the Palestinian representative in Colombia, which was only made public on Wednesday. “Just as the Palestinian people have a right to constitute an independent state, Israel has a right to live in peace alongside its neighbors,” it added.

The Palestinian representative welcomed the announcement, expressing hope it will “contribute significantly to generating the necessary conditions in the search for peace in the Middle East.” Palestine is currently recognized as a sovereign state by the UN, the International Criminal Court and at least 137 countries.

Israel, however, immediately slammed the last move by the outgoing Colombian administration, urging the new government to reverse the decision, which, according to Israeli embassy in Bogota, “contravenes the close relations, extensive cooperation in vital areas and interests of both countries.”

Apparently facing some pressure, the new Colombian Foreign Minister Carlos Holmes said in a statement later on Wednesday that, given “possible omissions that could come to light about the way in which this decision was taken by the outgoing president, the government will cautiously examine its implications and will act according to international law.”

Colombia’s new president, Ivan Duque, took office on Tuesday in an inauguration ceremony attended by visiting US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley. Colombia was one of the few states that abstained from voting on a US General Assembly resolution that urged the US to rescind its recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital last December.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, ColombiaComments Off on Colombia recognizes Palestinian state

Meet The “Existential Threat” to Jews in Britain…

NOVANEWS

Posted by: Sammi IbeaheM,Sr

So the Labour Party is now “an existential threat” to Jews in Britain…? Really? I mean, think about what that language is actually supposed to imply or evoke.

We’re not just being told about ananti-semitism crisis anymore, but an existential threat“.

An existential threat suggests something with the potential to grow into the Nazi movement. I mean, that has to be the intended implication – that the Labour Party in Britian could end up the new Nazi Germany in terms of its treatement of – or attitude towards – Jewish people and that Jeremy Corbyn (the most consistent anti-racism campaigner of his time) could potentially be a new Hitler-type figure in the future.

Granted, he has made some bad decisions and, granted, he’s quite bad at PR (actually he’s pretty awful at PR) – but this is surely the most over-the-top, ridiculous chapter yet in this overwrought Anti-Semitism Crisis‘.

On the matter of the “existential threat” meme, there is another, bigger reason this language is being deliberately evoked and it has nothing to do with Corbyn or the Labour Party – I’ll come back to that at the end, because it provides a much bigger context to all of this that most commentary always misses.

And there also doesn’t seem to be much Corbyn can do or say to shake off the recurring onslaught of anti-Semitism accusations – and there probably never will be.

That’s probably the point.

I’ve gotten bored of writing about the ‘Anti-Semitism’ crisis in the Labour Party (see herehere, and here): but it just won’t go away. To date, about 150 members of the Labour Party have been expelled for alleged anti-Semitism: and Corbyn himself has on multiple occasions issued statements condemning anti-Semitism within the party. But it doesn’t seem to be enough.

They also never, ever mention the Jewish Labour Party members who support Corbyn and don’t buy the Anti-Semitism thing: and, as was clear years ago, many of the left-wing activists who were subject to the earliest complaints were themselves Jewish.

I was noting that two years ago: but that trend of ignoring some Jewish people in order to focus on the complaints of other Jewish people has continued to this day. Note, for example, that when the highly publicised protest against Corbyn by select Labour Party members and members of the Jewish community was garnering so much media coverage a few months ago, hardly any coverage was given to the *counter protest*, which was also by Jewish members of the Labour Party – and, according to some sources, was a lot bigger than the anti-Corbyn gathering.

As some pointed out, the MSM was basically being highly anti-Semitic in its dismissal of certain Jewish voices.

One of the earlier cases, for example, was Jackie Walker – a black British Jewish activist in the Labour Party, who was labelled an anti-Semite and suspended because she wanted to debate the issue of Zionism and had also talked about including discussion of other tragedies alongside the Holocaust during Holocaust Remembrance. She was also disparagingly referred to as a “court Jew” – which denotes a kind of second-rate Jew in the eyes of more superior-minded Zionists: and which, frankly, sounds pretty racist to me (and if she is Jewish, shouldn’t it also qualify as Anti-Semitism anyway?).

 

Given examples like that, it’s obvious how much bullshit is in play here, with the media falling into line with Israeli lobbyists’ policy of presenting an entirely one-sided view of Jewish opinion by pretending that the entirety of the Jewish population in Britain is somehow of one mind and are all outraged by Jeremy Corbyn.

I’ve written here multiple times about how so much of this is in fact designed to bait Jewish people who aren’t invested in Israel or who aren’t passionate Zionists: first by excluding them from the equation entirely as if they don’t exist, and second, by trying to play up the perceived Anti-Semitism so that non-Zionist Jews eventually feel threatened by Anti-Semitism.

That Corbyn has been targeted for smear campaigns is fairly obvious and was reinforced by the Al-Jazeera programmes that exposed Shai Masot and the Israel lobbyists’ campaign to undermine the Labour Party leadership – a scandal that Emily Thornberry had requested an investigation into. As Wall of Controversy noted in his piece earlier this year on this anti-Semitism scandal (which is much better than mine): ‘The media has since shown no interest whatsoever in digging deeper and following the trail of evidence for what now ought to be known as ‘Israelgate’…’

In fact the media mostly seems intent on ignoring as much as possible any evidence of Israeli interference in British politics.

The Jewish Labour Movement has been the key player in maintaining the attacks on Corbyn’s leadership, but it is improtant to note that the JLM is closely tied to the Israeli Embassy, which renders it completely unreliable.

And so every few months the established meme simply gets rebooted. A few months ago it was over Corbyn having expressed support (back in 2012) for a piece of street art – a piece of street art that, in my opinion, wasgenuinely Anti-Semitic. But it was from three years before Corbyn was elected leader of the Labour Party and it was an incredibly easy, casual mistake to make if someone isn’t paying enough close scrutiny to something. Also, someone was clearly digging far back to find something – anything – to bring to the fore in the anti-Corbyn operation.

But go back far enough on any politician’s timeline and you’re bound to find something questionable or ill-advised they did, said, tweeted or liked. Give Boris Johnson a try.

 

The current assault on the Labour leadership stems from the Labour Party last week publishing its code of conduct against Anti-Semitism, which was formally adopted by the national executive.

The problem is that, while the new rules adopt most of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definitions of Anti-Semitism, it rejects the one clause that was designed to label as ‘Anti-Semitic’ anything that accuses Israel of being a racist state or criticism of the Zionist ideaolgy.

Rather than obediently swallowing the whole IHRA rule-book on what qualifies as Anti-Semitism, the Labour Party under Corbyn has adopted its own version which maintains the right to criticise Israel state policy or Zionist extremism without acknowledging such criticism to be Anti-Semitic – unless there is a clear evidence of Anti-Semitic ‘intent’.

Hence, the renewed outrage over Corbyn and the rampant Anti-Semitism in the Labour Party – simply because Corbyn isn’t playing ball.

While I personally believe there is genuinely a trend of uncomfortably Anti-Semitic tropes among some sections of the Labour membership, it’s always been clear that the attacks on Corbyn in particular were part of a long-playing plot against the Labour leadership – with the whole thing also being a strategy to stifle or demonise any non-racist criticism of the Israeli government, the Zionist extremists or events in Gaza or the Occupied Territories, by lumping them all together and making people wary of ever addressing the subject.

 

Of course, what most coverage hasn’t bothered to point out is that 40 Jewish organisations from various countries – including the Jewish Voice for Labour – have also openly rejected the IHRA definition of Anti-Semitism, which makes it patently ridiculous to cite Corbyn’s interpretation of the IHRA as an anti-Semitic action.

You can see Jewish Voice for Labour’s analysis of the IHRA here.

Coming back to the initial point: about Corbyn’s party being labelled “an existential threat” to Jews in Britain. That kind of extreme language is without doubt intended to evoke certain historic alusions and thus either scare people away from Corbyn or just generally discredit his leadership.

JVL coverage of the current campaign highlights the contrived, very selective nature of the propaganda: ‘Jewish newspapers harmonised their front pages this week to condemn Labour… Jewish groups have claimed a Corbyn government would be an ‘existential threat’… Many Jewish people have spoken out against these claims… Mainstream media have largely ignored those voices in their presentation of the issue… A Jewish professor spoke four months ago predicting this ‘MSM’ treatment and said the media would be treating all Jewish people as if they are the same – a common antisemitic trope…’

But it’s not just about Corbyn, it’s also serves another key purpose and it is this: any contemporary campaign to portray the ‘Jewish community’ (as if it is one all-encompassing community that represents all Jews somehow) as being under existential threat in any country is designed to reinforce the necessity of Zionism, the need for the ‘Jewish State’ and a contrived, urgent need for Jewish people to abandon their place of residence and go to Israel.

That’s what it’s about: and note that I said contemporary – I’m not talking about the past, only what’s going on in the present. You could see this clearly three years ago, when all the talk was of the rampant Anti-Semitism in France: and where, immediately following on from the Charlie Hebdo false-flag operation, Benjamin Netanyahu inserted himself into France’s public mourning and public solidarity events – despite having been specifically told by the French government not to come to Paris at that time.

I covered some of this back then hereNetanyahu was immediately calling for French Jews to leave France and emigrate to Israel, where it would be safe for them.

Some French Jews did, while others seemed to resent the whole thing. But the point was that the perceived threat to Jewish people was a massive boost for the Israeli government and for the idea that Jews belong in Israel and not anywhere else.

The fact is also that it gave more power to the contnuing illegal settlement constructions in the Occupied Territories, because the state could claim it needed to build more settlements for newly-arriving Jewish settlers who were fleeing ‘persecution’ in other countries.

Thus, it becomes a perfect circle or cycle: shift your focus from France to Britain and we’ll probably see the same thing playing out here eventually – you can see the way being paved here clearly.

The more this sense of “existential threat” to British Jews gets amplified, the more Israeli agencies can urge non-Israeli Jews to abandon their lives elsewhere and come to Israel where they’ll never suffer Anti-Semitism again.

The more that happens, the more the Israeli government can justify both its actions and its need to provide sanctuary. In other words, the more perceived Anti-Semitism there is in Britain – or the more perceived hostile environment for Jewish people there is – the more power is fed directly into the veins of the Likud Party and the Zionist-nationalist fanatics who currently hold power in Israeli government.

The fact that, in this case, a known critic of Israel – Jeremy Corbyn (who they certainly don’t want to see as a future PM) – happens to be the focal point just makes it a double-incentive to keep pushing this agenda forward.

The other problem, one suspects, is that this IHRA system, far from stopping Anti-Semitism or anti-Semitic perceptions, is just as likely to inflame them further: since the particular stipulations in question (the ones the Labour Party omitted) are so obviously designed to stop criticism.

Professor David Feldman, an expert in historical Anti-Semitism and prejudices faced by Jewish communities in different countries, writing in The Guardian in 2016, was wary of the IHRA attempt to set in stone the classifications of Anti-Semitism: ‘I am sceptical,’ he wrote. ‘Here is the definition’s key passage: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred towards Jews.” This is bewilderingly imprecise. The text also carries dangers. It trails a list of 11 examples. Seven deal with criticism of Israel. Some of the points are sensible, some are not. Crucially, there is a danger that the overall effect will place the onus on Israel’s critics to demonstrate they are not antisemitic…’

And that’s exactly the problem the Labour Party had in mind when it adopted its amended version of the IHRA.

Jeremy Corbyn will now find himself permanently in a position where any criticism he makes of any present or future Israeli state policy or action will be automatically spun as stemming from his innate Anti-Semitism. There is no way out of that anymore.

But Corbyn probably knows that by now himself: which might be why a lot of his response now tends to be luke-warm.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on Meet The “Existential Threat” to Jews in Britain…

‘Farmer terrorism’ is the new Jewish Nazi settler slogan justifying the destruction of crops

NOVANEWS

By Ramona Wadi | MEMO 

In less than three months, Jewish settlers have destroyed over 2,000 trees and grapevines in the occupied West Bank. Rights group B’Tselem has issued a detailed report on this destruction, including testimony from Palestinian farmers. Bales of hay and barley fields were also destroyed. The destruction wrought by Israel’s settler-colonists equates Palestinian agriculture to terrorism; slogans sprayed on Palestinian property following the destruction included “No to farmer terrorism”.

The personal testimonies show that Israel has once again refused to act in order to deter settler violence against Palestinians and their land. Ultimately, the aim is to displace Palestinians forcibly by terrorising those seeking access to their own land. “This process has erected invisible walls throughout the West Bank, which Palestinians know crossing will expose them to violence and even danger to their lives,” says B’Tselem.

Israel is using complementary forms of violence: direct destruction by targeting crops and using the same destruction to levy a psychological threat against the colonised population. In the documented cases, the destruction was so severe that new plants have to be cultivated, thus having a negative impact on the sliver of economic independence that Palestinians can gain from agriculture. There is an outcome of resilience mingled with imposed resignation; the farmers will still tend to their fields yet the threat of another round of settler violence fuelled by impunity is always imminent. No matter how well rights organisations document the violations, though, the Palestinians have no recourse other than awareness. This is partly because Israel has moved ahead in terms of normalising colonial expansion.

Hassan ‘Issa discovered that 168 out of 250 grapevines in his fields had been destroyed by settlers. “What happened to my vines feels like a terrible injustice, and I feel incredibly frustrated and sad.” It is painful to read this. Compare the vagueness of ‘Issa’s statement — made in the knowledge that there are no rights for the colonised in apartheid Israel — with the threat left by the settlers: “No to farmer terrorism.” The value of people and land is misplaced to set the accelerated pace for forced displacement and a re-enactment of the image of Palestine being barren, one of the false premises behind Palestine’s colonisation by Israel. The only difference is that Israel now prefers sustained acts of violence that are documented and discussed almost routinely.

“Farmer terrorism” is, of course, a complete falsehood, yet it is on such premises that expansion has been facilitated. The more that Israel utilises such absurd claims, the further it is removed from reprimand by the international community. This lends Israel ample time and space — and total immunity — to construct its variety of “terror” narratives to make such purported threats endemic to its settler-colonial presence. Why would anyone even seek to challenge the notion of “farmer terrorism”? At first glance, it is void of any logic; a second reading flaunts its depravity, embodied by state and settlers alike.

Palestinian resilience has always laid bare the Zionist myths. Having no other means to sustain itself, Israel is eager to create the conditions for myths to become a manifested reality, even if it means acknowledging Palestinian existence through accusations which serve to embellish its purported “security concerns”. Nothing, though, justifies the wanton destruction of crops by illegal Jewish settlers or anyone else.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on ‘Farmer terrorism’ is the new Jewish Nazi settler slogan justifying the destruction of crops

Debunking A Century of War Lies ‘Video’

NOVANEWS

Image result for War Lies CARTOON

corbettreport

In the modern age of democracy and volunteer armies, a pretense for war is required to rally the nation around the flag and motivate the public to fight. That is why every major conflict is now accompanied by its own particular bodyguard of lies. From false flag attacks to dehumanization of the “enemy,” here are all the examples you’ll need to help debunk a century of war lies.

TRANSCRIPT AND MP3: https://www.corbettreport.com/warlies/

Posted in USAComments Off on Debunking A Century of War Lies ‘Video’

Yemen: Saudi Zio-Wahhabi-led coalition ‘victories’ achieved by striking deals with Al-Qaeda in Yemen

NOVANEWS

Image result for WAR IN YEMEN CARTOON

An investigation has found that the US-backed, Saudi-led intervention in Yemen has cut secret deals with jihadists from al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), paying them to leave cities rather than dislodging them by force.

The startling revelations come in stark contrast to the long-running US policy of trying to eliminate the jihadist organization with the help of allies from the Arabian peninsula, however, the more pressing aim of defeating Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen has seen AQAP effectively be on the same side as the Saudi-led coalition — and, by extension, the US, according to Associated Press (AP).

AP based their findings on reporting from the war-torn nation and interviews with two dozen officials, including Yemeni security officers, militia commanders, tribal mediators and four members of al-Qaeda’s branch. All but a few of those sources spoke on condition of anonymity, fearing reprisals. Emirati-backed factions, like most armed groups in Yemen, have been accused of abducting or killing their critics.

The US and their allies have maintained that the last two years has seen them dislodge AQAP from their strongholds in Yemen and limiting their capability to launch attacks on the West.

What the investigation reveals, however, is that this was often done without firing a shot, with key participants saying the US was aware of the arrangements and held off on any drone strikes.

Due to the lack of reliant and effective partners on the ground, coalition partners have also reportedly hired al-Qaeda militants, or at the very least recent members, to fight in militias due to their reputation as “exceptional fighters,” AP said. They added that AQAP members have intertwined with the “dizzying mix of militias, factions, tribal warlords and tribes with very local interests.”

While there is no evidence to suggest that the US itself has given money to AQAP militants, partners involved in the Saudi-led coalition have. The aide of one militia commander recently added to Washington’s terrorism watch list for al-Qaeda ties told AP that the UAE continues to fund his operation.

Another militia commander who has an al-Qaeda figure as his closest aide was recently given $12 million by Yemen’s President Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi.

While the US does not fund the Saudi-led coalition, it along with the UK, have sold billions of dollars in weapons to Arab partners, as well as providing logistical and targeting support.

While there is awareness and “angst” by “elements of the US military” that its activities in Yemen is strengthening AQAP, “supporting the UAE and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia against what the US views as Iranian expansionism takes priority,” Michael Horton, a fellow at the analysis group Jamestown Foundation, told AP.

In an email to AP about their investigation, a Pentagon spokesperson denied any US support for AQAP or that they have been soft on drone strikes, and backed up its Arab allies’ commitment to tackling extremism.

“Since the beginning of 2017, we have conducted more than 140 strikes to remove key AQAP leaders and disrupt its ability to use ungoverned spaces to recruit, train and plan operations against the US and our partners across the region,” spokesman Navy Cmdr. Sean Robertson wrote.

“Our regional partners have a proven track record of aggressively pursuing terrorist organizations and denying them safe haven in Yemen and DOD does not have any reason to doubt their resolve,” he added.

Saudi Arabia meanwhile says it has continued its commitment to combating extremism and terrorism. The UAE did not respond to AP’s request for comment.

Posted in Saudi Arabia, YemenComments Off on Yemen: Saudi Zio-Wahhabi-led coalition ‘victories’ achieved by striking deals with Al-Qaeda in Yemen

Palestinian Teen Dies From Serious Wounds He Suffered On March 30th

NOVANEWS

The Palestinian Health Ministry has reported that a teen died, Sunday, from serious wounds he suffered on the first day of the Great Return March procession, on March 30th, which also marks the Palestinian Land Day.

The Health Ministry said the teen, identified as Ahmad Jihad al-Aydi, 17, from Gaza city, was seriously injured when an Israeli army sharpshooter shot him with a live round in the head, near the eastern border in central Gaza.

Accompanied by his father, the teen was eventually transferred to a Palestinian hospital in Ramallah, on April 24th, but he remained in a critical condition until he succumbed to his wounds.

In related news, the soldiers shot, on Sunday evening, three Palestinians with live fire, and caused many others to suffer the effects of teargas inhalation, east of the al-Boreij refugee camp, in central Gaza.

Also on Sunday, an Israeli army drone fired a missile at a site, north of Beit Lahia in the northern part of the coastal region, wounding four Palestinians.

On Saturday, August 4th, the Health Ministry in Gaza said a child, identified as Moath Ziad Soori, 15, died from serious wounds he suffered a day earlier, after Israeli soldiers shot him with live fire, during the Great Return March procession, east of the al-Boreij refugee camp, in central Gaza.

On the same day of his injury, the soldiers killed a Palestinian, identified as Ahmad Yahia Atallah Yaghi, 25, after shooting him east of the Zeitoun neighborhood, east of Gaza city, and injured 220 Palestinians, including 90 who were shot with live fire, in the Gaza Strip.

Their deaths bring the number of Palestinians, who were killed by Israeli army fire in the Gaza Strip since March 30th, 2018, to 158, while 17259 have been injured; 9071 of the wounded were moved to hospitals and 8188 received treatment in field clinics; 3279 of the injured are children, and 1553 are women.

Twenty-three of the slain Palestinians are children, in addition to three women, including a medic, identified as Razan Ashraf Najjar, 22.

There are 404 wounded Palestinians who are still in critical conditions, while 4141 suffered moderate wounds and 4354 suffered mild injuries.

The soldiers also killed another medic, identified as Mousa Abu Hassanein, 36, and caused damage to 59 Palestinian ambulances.

Furthermore, the army killed two journalists, identified as Yasser Mortaja, 30, and Ahmad Abu Hussein, 25, and wounded 144 others.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, GazaComments Off on Palestinian Teen Dies From Serious Wounds He Suffered On March 30th

San Fransisco Jews Menace Women in Black

NOVANEWS

Image result for Jewish Voice for Peace CARTOON

By Cicilie Surasky 

On June 6th, 2010, peace activists including members of Bay Area Women in Black and Jewish Voice for Peace held a silent vigil outside the main entrance to the San Francisco Jewish Community Federation’s annual “Israel in the Gardens” celebration. The peace activists called for an end to Israel’s occupation of Palestinian Territories and an end to the siege on Gaza. Their silent, dignified march was greeted by members of StandWithUs/SF Voice for Israel and other affiliates who called them “kapos” (concentration camp prisoners who carried out Nazi orders on other prisoners) and suggested that Israel should “sink the next flotilla with you on it.”  One man made repeated explicit threats against the peace activists and their families and used a camera to take pictures. No one from StandWithUs/SF Voice for Israel intervened. Rather, they kept up their vicious and abusive chants which included, according to multiple witnesses:

“Nazi, Nazi, Nazi!” – this done as a group chant
“You’re all being identified, every last one of you…we will find out where you live. We’re going to make your lives difficult..we will disrupt your families…”, all on above video.
“Sink the flotilla—and you on it!”
“Terrorists, terrorists, terrorists.”
One man yelled (to someone who may have looked heat exhausted) “I hope you stroke out, old man!”
“Ugly bitches” said to older women.
“You’re not a Jew! you gave up your Jewishness!”
“Witches in black! Bitches in black!” (hard to tell which one it was, or whether they alternated the chant)
“You fucking…!”
“Bin Laden loves you! you support terrorism!”
“Is there a coroner in the house? Women in Black are dead!”
“Is there a doctor in the house? Women in Black are sick!”
“End the occupation of our sidewalk.”
“Remember 9/11, they were dancing in the streets.”
“Asshole!”
“Anti-Semite!”
“Bigot!”
“Sharmuta!” this was chanted for a while (means “slut” or “whore” in Arabic and which was particularly shocking for Arabic speakers to hear)
“Commit suicide!”
“Anti-women, anti-gay, why support Hamas today!”
They were also lesbian-baiting, even though they were chanting “Anti-women, anti-gay, why support Hamas today?” One guy yelled “lesbian” at me and my friend (correctly assessing our sexual identity) and maybe the same guy yelled at someone else, “When’s the last time you dated a man?”

One guy kept saying “you’re looking at real people now (meaning Stand with Israel folks); you are not people.”

Signs said: “JVP, Proud to be ashamed to be Jewish.”
and “Don’t fuck with the Jews”.

An 88-year-old woman reported being told, “You’re halfway in your grave already’.
“Jihad!” chanted repeatedly at Muslim peace activists.

They also had signs that read, “JVP cons the world”, etc.

One woman waved the end of the large stick of her Israeli flag in a very threatening manner, as if to hit one of us (it happened to me several times as i walked by her), directed especially to those of us who carried signs identifying ourselves as Jews.

At an earlier demonstration last week at the consulate, there was a huge sign on the Stand with Us side (which Stand with Us later condemned). On one side it said “Until Gaza is destroyed, the job is not complete.” On the other, it said “God is great. It’s Islam that sucks.”

Over the years, members of Bay Area Women in Black chapters (a group started in Israel to protest the occupation), many of them older women including physically tiny Jewish grandmothers, have reported equally terrible encounters with StandWithUs/SF Voices with Israel- they’ve been called 4-letter words, had cameras violently thrust in their faces. At least one person had her home chalked.

That’s why threats on people’s families that you can hear in the video are being taken seriously. A few weeks ago, liberal rabbi Michael Lerner, a resident of Berkeley across the bay from San Francisco, awoke to discover he was the target of a hate crime: his house had been surrounded with threatening posters permanently affixed with glue.

StandWithUs/SF Voices with Israel hosted a booth at Israel in the Gardens and is an approved charity at the San Francisco Federation’s Jewish Community Endowment Fund, unlike Jewish Voice for Peace and other peace groups which were banned from the Federation’s acceptable charity list.

Are StandWithUs/SF Voices with Israel values the values the Federation promotes?

Posted in Palestine Affairs, USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on San Fransisco Jews Menace Women in Black

Nazi Jewish Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu: Leave No Palestinian or Arab Alive

NOVANEWS
Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu: Leave No Palestinian or Arab Alive

By Jonas E. Alexis | Veterans Today 

Israeli Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu seems to have picked up where the late Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef left off. The Israeli army, Eliyahu said, must slaughter the Palestinians and leave no one alive.” The Palestinians, the good rabbi continued, must be “destroyed and crushed in order to end violence.” Here is Eliyahu’s algorithm:

If they don’t stop after we kill 100, then we must kill 1,000. And if they do not stop after 1,000, then we must kill 10,000. If they still don’t stop we must kill 100,000, even a million.”

There is more to this “logic” than meets the eye and ear. Eliyahu even postulated that the Israeli army ought not to get involved in arresting Palestinians because “If you leave him alive, there is a fear that he will be released and kill other people. We must eradicate this evil from within our midst.”

You may say that this is just an isolated case. No Israeli official believes that, right?

Wrong. Listen to Israeli politician and Minister of Justice Ayelet Shaked: “Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started…” Shaked had more interesting things to say:

“The Palestinian people has declared war on us, and we must respond with war. Not an operation, not a slow-moving one, not low-intensity, not controlled escalation, no destruction of terror infrastructure, no targeted killings. Enough with the oblique references. This is a war. Words have meanings. This is a war.

“It is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. These too are forms of avoiding reality. This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started…

“Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support.

“They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there.”[1]

Not a single Zionist outlet has condemned Shaked for saying disgusting things like that, despite the fact that Israeli officials have been regurgitating these kinds of perversions for decades. Former IDF Chief of Staff Raphael Eitan declared way back in the 1980s:

We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel….Force is all they do or ever will understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours.”

In a similar vein, David Ben Gurion said: We must expel the Arabs and take their place and if we have to use force, to guarantee our own right to settle in those places – then we have force at our disposal.” This again is consistent with what many rabbis have been saying. Rabbi Ido Elba declared:

“If every single cell in a Jewish body entails divinity, and is thus part of God, then every strand of DNA is a part of God. Therefore, something is special about Jewish DNA…If a Jew needs a liver, can he take the liver of an innocent non-Jew to save him? The Torah would probably permit that. Jewish life has an infinite value. There is something more holy and unique about Jewish life than about non-Jewish life.”[2]

Stephen Steinlight, former Director of National Affairs for the American Jewish Committee (one of the most powerful Jewish organizations in the United States), stated bluntly,

“I’ll confess it, at least: like thousands of other typical Jewish kids of my generation, I was reared as a Jewish nationalist, even a quasi-separatist…I was taught the superiority of my people to the gentiles who had oppressed us. We were taught to view non-Jews as untrustworthy outsiders, people from whom sudden gusts of hatred might be anticipated, people less sensitive, intelligent, and moral than ourselves. We were also taught that the lesson of our dark history is that we could rely on no one.”[3]

Michael Chabon of the New York Times concurs:

“As a Jewish child I was regularly instructed, both subtly and openly, that Jews, the people of Maimonides, Albert Einstein, Jonas Salk and Meyer Lansky, were on the whole smarter, cleverer, more brilliant, more astute than other people. And, duly, I would look around the Passover table, say, at the members of my family, and remark on the presence of a number of highly intelligent, quick-witted, shrewd, well-educated people filled to bursting with information, explanations and opinions on a diverse range of topics.”[4]

Chabon now pokes fun at what he referred to as “nonsense” and “our own stupidity as a people,”[5] but this just shows how ingrained the smarter-than-thou attitude is.

In 2010, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef unapologetically declared,

“Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world—only to serve the People of Israel. In Israel, death has no dominion over them…With gentiles, it will be like any person—they need to die, but [God] will give them longevity…Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat. That is why gentiles were created.”[6]

Many rabbis, according to Jewish scholars Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, see that “Jews killing non-Jews does not constitute murder according to the Jewish religion and that killing of innocent Arabs for reasons of revenge is a Jewish virtue.”[7]

Rabbi Menachem Mendel Scheerson, known as Lubovitcher Rebbe and the seventh of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement, came close to believing in something similar, saying that “a non-Jew should be punished by death if he kills an embryo, even if the embryo is non-Jewish, while the Jew should not be, even if the embryo is Jewish.”[8]

The great Rabbi expanded on this view in 1965:

“The difference between a Jewish and a non-Jewish person stems from the common expression: ‘Let us differentiate.’ Thus, we do not have a case of profound change in which a person is merely on a superior level. Rather, we have a case of “let us differentiate” between totally different species. This is what needs to be said about the body: the body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of [members] of all nations of the world…

“The Jewish body ‘looks as if it were in substance similar to bodies of non-Jews,’ but the meaning…is that the bodies only seem to be similar in material substance, outward look and superficial quality. The difference of the inner quality, however, is so great that the bodies should be considered as completely different species.

“This is the reason why the Talmud states that there is an halachic difference in attitude about the bodies of non-Jews [as opposed to the bodies of Jews] ‘and their bodies are in vain’…An even greater difference exists in regard to the soul. Two contrary types of soul exist, a non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres, while the Jewish soul stems from holiness…

“The body of a Jewish embryo is on a higher level than is the body of a non-Jew…We therefore ask: Why should a non-Jew be punished if he kills even a non-Jewish embryo while a Jew should not be punished even if he kills a Jewish embryo?

“The answer can be understood by [considering] the general difference between Jews and non-Jews: A Jew was not created as a means for some [other] purpose; he himself is the purpose, since the substance of all [divine] emanations was created only to serve the Jews.

“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” means that [the heavens and the earth] were created for the sake of the Jews, who are called the “beginning.” This means everything, all developments, all discoveries, the creation, including the “heavens and the earth—are vanity compared to the Jews. The important things are the Jews, because they do not exist for any [other] aim; they themselves are [the divine] aim.”[9]

In 2010, Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira wrote that “according to true Jewish values, [the Jews’] lives come before those of the enemy, whether he is a soldier or a civilian under protection.”[10]

If you challenge that racist ideology, you almost certainly will be viewed as an anti-Semite and a wicked person. This also gives Israeli officials like Benjamin Netanyahu a license to say or do wicked things. You remember what Netanyahu said a few years ago? Take it from him:

“I know what America is. America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction. They won’t get in [our] way.”[11]

Well, this man has been moving America “very easily” for years. This has allowed him to brag about illegally attacking Iran “dozens of times” in Syria.[12] But since Netanyahu does not understand what Hegel calls “the cunning of reason,” he cannot see that he is setting up his own doom by conjuring one lie after another.


[1] Ishaan Tharoor, “Israel’s new justice minister considers all Palestinians to be ‘the enemy,’” Washington Post, May 7, 2015.

[2] Shahak and Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, 43, 62

[3] Stephen Steinlight, “The Jewish Stake in America’s Changing Demography: Reconsidering a Misguided Immigration Policy,” Center for Immigration Studies, October 2001.

[4] Michael Chabon, “Chosen, but Not Special,” NY Times, June 4, 2010.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Jonah Mandel, “Yosef: Gentiles Exist only to Serve Jews,” Jerusalem Post, Oct 18, 2010.

[7] Shahak and Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, 43.

[8] Ibid., 59.

[9] bid., 59-60.

[10] “Leading rabbi encourages IDF soldiers to use Palestinian human shields,” Haaretz, October 20, 2010

[11] Quoted in “Netanyahu In 2001: ‘America Is A Thing You Can Move Very Easily,’” Huffington Post, May 25, 2011.

[12] Aria Bendix, “Netanyahu Admits Israel Struck Iranian Convoys ‘Dozens of Times,’” Atlantic, July 19, 2017.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Nazi Jewish Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu: Leave No Palestinian or Arab Alive

Nazi minister urges assassination of Hamas leaders

NOVANEWS

Image result for Nazi minister CARTOON

Nazi culture and sport minister has called for the assassination of the leaders of Hamas Palestinian resistance movement, stressing that Israel should reinstate its policy of targeted assassinations.

Nazi Miri Regev told a recent meeting of local leaders of Zionist communities near the Gaza Strip that the Palestinian resistance movement’s senior officials should “live in fear”.

“We must go back to the policy of targeted assassinations of leaders of this murderous terrorist group,” she added, referring to Hamas.

Other Nazi politicians likewise called on the Nazi leadership to come down harder on Hamas, which controls Gaza and has defended the enclave against three Nazi Holocaust.

Leader of Nazi party Zionist Union Avi Gabbay, who was visiting the city of Sderot in the west of Negev Desert, was recently quoted by media as saying that Israel had “a strong army and weak politicians,” who would not intensify the regime’s aggression.

The current regime “doesn’t know how to deter a terrorist organization or to negotiate,” he added.

Nazi Gestapo  has assassinated many Hamas figures over the past years.

Last March, it assassinated Mazen Fuqaha, one of the group’s senior figures, in Gaza. The victim was shot with four bullets to his head.

In 2010, Nazi regime had itself embroiled in an international scandal when its operatives used false European and Australian passports to assassinate senior Hamas figure Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in the United Arab Emirates.

Oren Hazan, an Nazi lawmaker from Likud Party, also recently said, “We are not hitting Hamas hard enough for fear of an ongoing conflict, even though we are deep inside one”.

“If we would have hit them, they wouldn’t have allowed themselves to shoot 200 rockets in one day. So enough with the stories that we hit them hard. The public isn’t stupid, and neither is Hamas,” he added.

Besides staying prepared to take the territory under wholesale warfare, Nazi regime regularly strikes Gaza, saying it needs to target Hamas.

Earlier in the week, Nazi raids on the coastal enclave killed three Palestinians who included a pregnant mother and a toddler.

Nazi regime ramped up attacks on March 30, shortly after Gazans began weekly rallies near the territory’s fence in support of their right to return to their homeland.

The demonstrations and Nazi offensives especially hiked on May 14, the anniversary of the Nakba Day in 1948, when Israel claimed existence after a deadly war against Arab territories.

Nearly 160 Palestinians have been killed and some 17,500 others wounded during the Nazi military’s attacks targeting the March of Return protests, the Palestinian Health Ministry says.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, Gaza, Human RightsComments Off on Nazi minister urges assassination of Hamas leaders

Meet Gustavo Petro, Colombian Former Guerilla and Leftist Who Mounted Historic Campaign for Presidency

NOVANEWS

Image result for Gustavo Petro PHOTO

In Colombia, right-wing politician Iván Duque has been sworn in as Colombia’s new president. Duque was hand-picked by former right-wing President Álvaro Uribe and has vowed to roll back key parts of Colombia’s landmark peace deal with FARC rebels. Just before Duque’s inauguration, Democracy Now! spoke to Gustavo Petro, who placed second in this year’s presidential race, receiving 8 million votes in his attempt to become Colombia’s first leftist president. In the 1980s Petro was jailed and tortured for being a member of the M-19 guerrilla movement. He later went on to lead efforts in Colombia’s Congress to investigate ties between paramilitary death squads and top politicians.

TRANSCRIPT

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, Democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman.

In Colombia, the right-wing politician Iván Duque has been sworn in as Colombia’s new president. Duque was handpicked by former right-wing President Álvaro Uribe and has vowed to roll back key parts of Colombia’s landmark peace deal with FARC rebels. US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley met with Duque ahead of his inauguration Tuesday to discuss US-Colombia relations and the US-backed drug war in Latin America. Duque also opposes drug legalization. Protesters gathered across Colombia to protest his inauguration and to demand an end to the wave of assassinations of human rights leaders.

Just before Duque’s inauguration, I spoke to Gustavo Petro. He placed second in this year’s presidential race, receiving eight million votes. That would have been the largest number of votes ever received by a leftist candidate for Colombia’s presidency. In the 1980s, Gustavo Petro was jailed and tortured for being a member of the M-19 guerrilla movement. He later went on to lead efforts in Colombia’s Congress to investigate ties between paramilitary death squads and top politicians. Petro is the former mayor of Bogotá and has just rejoined the Colombian Senate.

I began by asking Gustavo Petro in Bogotá about the news from Venezuela, Colombia’s neighbor to the east. On Saturday, Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro was uninjured in an apparent assassination attempt when drones loaded with explosives detonated above his head as he gave a nationally televised speech. Maduro blamed right-wing opponents and the Colombian government for the attack. It is the first drone attack, attempted assassination, on a sitting head of state. I asked Gustavo Petro for his response to what happened.

GUSTAVO PETRO: [translated] In general, I believe that governments try to resolve their own internal conflicts, often time their inabilities, by blaming it on external actions or foreign actions. And even though there is no question about it that there is external action, that no government operates absolutely independent of international contexts and interests and forces that are outside of a given society, what is true is that a government does not do very well by delegating blame for any event on those outside forces. There is always an internal situation that makes possible different actions.

I believe that President Maduro has to examine in depth the internal situation of the country. There is an absence of a real dialogue. There is an absence of a clear program for a transition to a productive economy given that Venezuela can no longer live off of oil, and these plans are not seen either in the opposition or in the government. A philosopher by the name of Gramsci called this a long time ago an integral crisis. The problem is not with Santos; it has to do with the integral crisis that Venezuelan society is experiencing.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about what is happening today in Colombia, the inauguration of Iván Duque, your opponent, the man you ran against for president in Colombia, the significance of his victory?

GUSTAVO PETRO: [translated] Today is a day of many questions in Colombia, alongside the inauguration of the new president whose campaign was a sort of anthem or hymn to President Uribe, who represents the far right-wing forces in Colombia and who is being judged and investigated for his ties to the paramilitary groups, which resulted in a genocide in Colombia. At the same time in hundreds of communities and cities around Colombia, in their plazas and in more than 40 cities worldwide, there are demonstrations today that are shouting out to the new government, telling it that decisions need to be made about life, about peace and about justice in Colombia.

About life because they have assassinated more than 330 grassroots leaders. In recent months, they have threatened thousands of opposition political activists. In terms of peace, because during the campaign, the current president, the new president, announced that he would destroy essential aspects of the peace agreement reached by President Santos and the FARC guerrilla movement. And justice because Former President Uribe has been called to give testimony in a judicial proceeding for having bribed witnesses in an effort to hide his own ties to the paramilitary groups and he has unleashed from the Senate, where he is a senator, a campaign to discredit the Supreme Court, a campaign that he had already waged when he was president. Indeed, he illegally wiretapped the communications of the justices of the Supreme Court, the highest court in Colombia.

AMY GOODMAN: Gustavo Petro, can you talk about Iván Duque’s relationship with Uribe, how far back it goes, what they worked on together and what you are most concerned about, especially for an audience not from inside Colombia, but outside who may not be as familiar with Colombian politics?

GUSTAVO PETRO: [translated] Well, very few of us know Duque; I don’t know him, either. He was really an unknown figure until four or five months ago. It is the power of Uribe’s leadership over a part of the right-wing of Colombian society that has allowed Duque to become president. Before being a senator, without popular election, Duque was living in Washington where he organized concerts to entertain the staff of the Inter-American Development Bank. Not much more about him is known.

What we do know is the discourse that has brought him to the presidency, which is exactly the same as the discourse of former President Álvaro Uribe. And it is in this connection that there are concerns and fears. This is what led eight million people to vote for me in the effort to win the office of president of Colombia. There is fear that the little bit of peace and democracy that has been constructed in Colombia would be destroyed, of public liberties, of judicial independence and respect for differences.

If you examine, for example, the resume of the person who is going to be the representative of Colombia before the Organization of American States, Mr. Alejandro Ordóñez, you will find the resume of a person who is an anti-Semite, who is a homophobe and who acts on that and whose ideology is fascist. He is the one who is going to be representing us at the Organization of American States.

If you analyze a bit the latest speeches of the person who today becomes the president of Colombia regarding anti-drug policy, you will find one very worrisome fact, which you have already noted in your own investigations: Colombia is one of the most violent countries in the world. It is one of the most socially unequal countries on earth, the most unequal country in Latin America. And those have been the causes of the rise of a very powerful drug trafficking interest around cocaine.

The construction of a policy that was born in Washington of military confrontation and the repressive approach to put down drug trafficking has made Colombia this violent country and has turned a large part of the geography of the Americas, including several cities of the United States, among the 50 most violent cities in the world. The crisis is paid for in Colombia in the form of hundreds of thousands of deaths, the destruction of Colombia’s democracy, as is happening in Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, in Central America, in Venezuela, in Brazil, in Ecuador. But the price is also paid in the United States, with the new statistic of deaths from overdoses from drugs that are much more harmful than cocaine, more than 60,000 deaths. So this is the balance sheet of a failure.

Mexico is moving towards a progressive policy regarding drugs, to stop confronting the drug problem from a military and repressive angle and to build a social path to emerge from the drug problem. Colombia has taken steps in that direction. When I was mayor of Bogotá, we took correct steps showing — and the statistics showed that the new strategy was working. President Uribe has announced once again fumigation, jailing drug users, stepping up the military and repressive policy, following the advice of President Trump, and that path could lead our society to even greater violence.

Today, we have new actors in the violence. It is not the FARC guerrillas who have disarmed. It is not the insurgent guerrillas of the time of the Cold War. It is no longer the paramilitary leaders who were extradited to the United States not to be judged for the genocide they carried out in Colombia, but merely for drug trafficking. But there is an Americas-wide strategy directed by the cartels with roots in the United States, Mexico, Central America and Ecuador trying to capture the production of coca leaf and cocaine in Colombia that could lead to even greater violence than we have experienced to date. Duque doesn’t appear to realize this, and in that ignorance or lack of knowledge, trying to construct a FARC in arms that does not exist today as a way of maintaining political power of Colombian society, they may — imitating Trump’s policy, they may condemn Colombia to new era of violence.

And that is the danger we are talking about. That is why there has been a growth in the assassination of grassroots leaders; it has been 330 in the last months. That is why the threats against the judicial system. And for this reason there is an internal struggle within the Army and within the police to try to vet those forces, trying to clear out those who are allies of the peace process and trying to lead into the top positions the hard-line hawks who might lead Colombia to a new dirty war.

AMY GOODMAN: Colombian Senator Gustavo Petro. He placed second in this year’s presidential election in Colombia. We will be back with him in Bogotá in a moment.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, Democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, as we return to my interview with Colombian senator Gustavo Petro. He placed second in this year’s presidential race in Colombia, receiving eight million votes, more than any left presidential candidate in Colombia’s history. The inauguration took place on Tuesday, when we spoke to Gustavo Petro — the inauguration of Colombia’s new right-wing President Iván Duque.

Your own aide, Ana María Cortés, was also assassinated in the last weeks of the campaign.
Can you talk about her? Do you think this was a message to you?

GUSTAVO PETRO: [translated] Not only was one of our activists assassinated, several of the activists of Colombia Humana were assassinated. In just one province, Cesar, one of more than 30 of the administrative regions of Colombia, 72 activists from our movement have been assassinated. And my brother just received a death threat at his home. My communications with the Office of the Prosecutor have been intercepted for the last year and a half. My family is in exile. There are millions of Colombians who are fearful today, who are afraid. That is why we are calling them into the streets. Because in the public plaza, one can overcome fear and at least not allow oneself to become paralyzed. But that is the reality today in Colombia, and that is what the new president Iván Duque will have to answer to.

AMY GOODMAN: While you lost, Gustavo Petro, you also made history with eight million votes to Duque’s 10 million. You garnered more votes than any left politician in Colombian history. Can you talk about your vision for Colombia and why you think that vision did not succeed in ultimately winning?

GUSTAVO PETRO: [translated] I no longer divide politics into left and right. I think that was a relatively logical way and a relatively realistic way to describe politics in the 20th century, but today, politics is divided between the politics of life and the politics of death. Climate change worldwide separates us into two major sides. On the one hand, you have Trump, Maduro, Duque, and on the other side, you have those of us who want to respond and adapt as quickly as possible to climate change by bringing about changes in Colombian society and Colombian politics. It’s life or death.

What we were preaching in Colombia is that; we need to build the movement of life from the standpoint of respect for nature, from the standpoint of moving from an extractive-based coal exporting economy. We are the fifth leading coal exporter in the world. That is to say we have a lot of responsibility for climate change, and we want to move to a productive economy in agriculture and industry based on knowledge, so as to be able to live together with nature. We want to move to a zero carbon economy. These are the kinds of proposals that we put forward as the main agenda in our election campaign. That is what we want.

AMY GOODMAN: It’s very interesting that you put together Trump, Duque, and Maduro. Maduro of Venezuela. I wanted to go back to this issue of the assassination attempt. On Sunday, Bolivian president Evo Morales tweeted, “Within the last 12 months, US Vicepresident Mike Pence made 3 trips to Latin America to meet at least 8 presidents from whom he demanded support for military intervention against our brother president of Venezuela Nicolás Maduro. Those are the Empire’s coup attempts.” Do you feel the US was involved in some way in what looks like an assassination attempt on Maduro’s life?

GUSTAVO PETRO: [translated] I reject any type of violence for resolving social conflicts in Latin America. I believe that we have experienced 30 years of revolutionary wars in Central America, in Colombia. I myself was a protagonist of that effort as a member of the M-19 movement, which laid down its weapons in 1989, and then it became a majority through popular vote and played a very important role in the 1991 Constitution of Colombia, a profoundly democratic Constitution.

We experienced years of military dictatorships, exile. The word “democracy” practically vanished from Latin America. It was really just at the beginning of the 21st century that a sort of spring began with progressive, popular electoral victories, and we began to see new paths emerging. We cannot go back to the past — the dictatorships that exist, for example, in Brazil, as I believe exist in Venezuela and a threat thereof, in Nicaragua and Honduras, a threat of this in Colombia, nor can we go back to the revolutionary wars trying to resolve conflicts through violence.

I think we need to preserve and persevere along the nonviolent paths in order to work out our own conflicts. That does not mean that there’s not a violent attack against Maduro. That doesn’t mean that there are not interests who would like to see Venezuelan society collapse. But the same interests who brought about the collapse of the society of Libya, Iraq, Syria — behind that there is a dark and dirty game all around oil interests and the world oil market. I know that the collapse of Venezuela would immediately mean the collapse of Colombia because millions of Colombians who in years past went into economic exile in Venezuela would come back. And as Pope Francis says, these kinds of exoduses just create new situations of slavery and violence.

I know that there is also a tough, hard-line, racist, xenophobic, imperialistic sector in US society who, with their allies in Europe, believe they can dominate the world and accommodate the different visions of hundreds of human cultures into their exclusive way of thinking and acting, but I am totally convinced that it’s the peoples themselves who transform society.

The issue that I have raised of climate change — well, I propose to the Colombians and to Colombia that this should be the fundamental line of our international policy, and based on that, we should determine who are our allies and who are on the other side. Together in a single political party, speaking in general, global terms, someone like Maduro and someone like Trump are together because the progressive wave in Latin America that began in the early 20th century consolidated its role by greater income distribution, the genuine desire to reduce inequality in the most unequal region of the world based on the rents that were generated by the rise in international oil prices as well as coal and gas prices. It is an unsustainable way forward which is being shown in Venezuela, and the governments of Ecuador and Bolivia and in part Brazil followed that same path. I think that this has brought about a crisis, violating their own democratic principles. We see this in Venezuela and we now see it in Nicaragua.

A new progressivism is emerging. Graphically speaking, we could say there is a new axis between Mexico, Bogotá and São Paulo. Now an important force has won the presidency of Mexico. We almost did the same thing in Colombia with eight million votes and it may happen in Brazil if the current dictatorship there allows it. That new axis should propose for Latin America a new role in the international order. Reject being assigned, being mere exporters of raw materials, of fossil fuel raw materials. That alone would bring an end to Colombia. And we need to have a new role. Production based on knowledge. Production without carbon. A decarbonized production, and therefore, a new democracy. This is what we propose to the world.

And this new progressive axis would have very powerful allies, humankind itself, and would display its moral and political superiority, its superiority of arguments based on science. That I believe is what we are now building in Colombia and in Latin America. That is the way forward that we are going to be trying to insist on in coming months and coming years.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re speaking to now-Senator Gustavo Petro. He ran for president of Colombia, got more votes than any previous opposition left-leaning presidential candidate in Colombian history. Nikki Haley, the US Ambassador to Colombia, is leading the delegation for Iván Duque’s inauguration as we speak. Ambassador Haley wrote in the Miami Herald, “The United States stands unequivocally with the people of Venezuela and Nicaragua against their corrupt governments. Colombia presents a model for their democratic aspirations. We look forward to working with the new government in Bogotá to ensure that the freedom model endures for all of the Americas.” The Washington Post quotes one unnamed US official saying “Now Colombia will have the most pro-US president in all of Latin America.” Your thoughts?

GUSTAVO PETRO: [translated] I think that all of the Colombian presidents have been the most pro-US presidents of Latin America, whatever US policy has been, back to the 1950s. Colombia was one of the few countries that joined the United States in the Korean War. The same brigade that was in Korea came back to kill insurgents in Colombia, giving rise to the FARC. That was at the orders of the president at the time who had made speeches favorable to Hitler and Mussolini. They had been defeated in the Second World War, so before having a sort of — rather than facing some sort of Nuremberg trial, they decided to become the chief allies of the United States so long as they would not be tried for genocide. And that has been history of the presidents of Colombia. The current conduct of incoming president Duque has been traditional.

But the ambassador of the United States to the United Nations makes a mistake when she talks about Colombia. First of all, she does not recall the analysis and statements of her own ambassador a few years back, Myles Frechette, who said publicly that Uribe’s government was a government that was an ally of the drug trafficking interests, and that the Uribe government made peace with the paramilitary groups, and rather than having them become subjected to justice, instead it was really the consolidation of an alliance with drug traffickers.

And the representative coming to — the one who becomes — she says that here we have liberty, the liberty one would like to see throughout Latin America. No, I’m sorry, Ambassador. They have killed 330 leaders in recent months. I don’t think that that is the liberty that the United States wants for Latin America. That is not freedom. I myself am threatened. Is that the freedom that the United States would like to see?

But getting into a specific and fundamental issue as presidential candidate, I had a dialogue with the current ambassador of the United States. And if the United States really wants to stop the exodus from Latin America to the United States, if it really wants a serious relationship based on friendship, it has to begin by changing its own drug policy. The anti-drug policy of the United States government has found its highest expression in military struggle and repression that is directed against drug users and against the peasants who produce coca leaf, and this is now making all of Latin America bleed. It is leading to the violent death of Latin American society. But at the same time, it is leading to the death through overdose by not mitigating damages by a more scientific-based policy in the US society itself.

I would invite the ambassador of the United States to the U.N., now that she is coming to Bogotá, to re-examine with scientists and objectively a drug policy that has been profoundly criminal and ineffective throughout the Americas.

AMY GOODMAN: Gustavo Petro, you said your own life is threatened. Have you received death threats?

GUSTAVO PETRO: [translated] Yes. The last one I received was two weeks ago. There was a pamphlet circulating against the main opposition leaders in Colombia by a group called the Black Eagles. They have threatened thousands of people throughout Colombia in the last couple of months. The grotesque content of these death threats, well, they always say that we should not be the opposition to Duque.

Not a single member of the Black Eagles is in prison. There has never been any combat. There is no record of the real existence of an organization independent of the state called the Black Eagles. They carry out threats from the far north in the Guajira Peninsula to the far south of Colombia, Leticia, in the Amazon. There is no organization that has such a capacity to cover all of Colombia’s geography other than the state.

The threats are actually made by public officials, officials of the Colombian state who create internal, clandestine groups, and those who are at the command are struggling to become the top commanders of the police, the Army, and the intelligence bodies in the new Duque administration. That is what the Águilas Negras or Black Eagles are. Those are the ones who have been carrying out most of these threats.

AMY GOODMAN: Colombian Senator Gustavo Petro. He placed second in this year’s presidential race, receiving eight million votes, more than any left presidential candidate in Colombia’s history. I spoke with him in Bogotá on Tuesday just before he left for the inauguration of Colombia’s new right-wing President Iván Duque. We will play the second half of the interview next week on Democracy Now! Special thanks to Charlie Roberts. When we come back, the Media Enabled Musketeers, a group of American and Russian filmmakers with disabilities collaborating on telling their own stories. Stay with us.

Posted in ColombiaComments Off on Meet Gustavo Petro, Colombian Former Guerilla and Leftist Who Mounted Historic Campaign for Presidency

Shoah’s pages

www.shoah.org.uk

KEEP SHOAH UP AND RUNNING