Archive | October 9th, 2019

Palestine: Six prisoners continue their hunger strike to refuse administrative detention

By: Sammi Ibrahem,Sr


Illegally Nazi occupied Ramallah: Six prisoners continue their hunger strike in Nazi detention centers, in refusal of their administrative detention, the oldest prisoner Ahmad Ghannam has been on hunger strike for 85 days..

The Prisoner Club said in a statement on Sunday that Ahmed Ghannam, 42, from Dura, south of Hebron, has been on strike for 85 days. He has been detained since June 18, and a former prisoner who spent a total of nine years and suffered from cancer. He is in need of medical attention because of his weak immunity. He is married and has two children. During his hunger strike, the Nazi regime issued an administrative detention order for two and a half months..

The statement added that Ismail Ali, 30, from Abu Dis town, has been in detention for 75 days. He has been detained since February. He is a former prisoner who has spent a total of seven years in Israeli detention.  Prisoner Tariq Qadan (46 years) from Jenin governorate has been on strike for 68 days. He is a former prisoner who spent a total of 11 years in prison between the Israeli occupation and administrative detention. Two months after the expiry of the sentence, the Israeli occupation authorities issued an administrative detention order against him days before his release. He is married and has six children..

Ahmed Zahran, 42, from Deir Abu Mash’al town in Ramallah, has been on a strike for 15 days. He is a former prisoner who has spent a total of 15 years in Israeli jails. He is married and has four children. He has been detained since March. This year, he went on a hunger strike that lasted for 39 days in exchange for ending his administrative detention.However, the Israeli authorities issued a new administrative detention order against him, and accordingly announced his hunger strike.This is the second strike he is going through this year.

The captive club pointed out that Prisoner Musab al-Hindi (29 years) from the town of Tal in the governorate of Nablus has been on strike for 13 days. He was arrested on September 4 for six months. He was arrested several times previously, including several administrative arrests. An administrative detention order, a father of two children, is noteworthy that the Indian prisoner went on a hunger strike lasted for 35 days last year and ended after an agreement to release him.He was released on September 9, 2018..

Hiba al-Labadi, 24, who holds Jordanian nationality along with the Palestinian nationality, has been detained for 13 days. ) And then ended her hunger strike on 24 September, and is now in al-Jalameh detention center.

After the threats of the coordinator .. Government: We reject the threats and we have the right to diversify our sources

16 killed in an attack on a mosque in Burkina Faso

Calls for the Authority to intervene .. Saudi Arabia has been detaining a Palestinian from Tulkarm for 80 days

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, Human RightsComments Off on Palestine: Six prisoners continue their hunger strike to refuse administrative detention

Zionist have shown Naziyahu the door. Can he inflict more damage before he exits?

Israelis have shown Netanyahu the door. Can he inflict more damage before he exits?

End of Netanyahu
By Jonathan Cook in Nazareth

For most Israelis, the general election on 17 September was about one thing and one thing only. Not the economy, nor the occupation, nor even corruption scandals. It was about Binyamin Netanyahu. Should he head yet another far-right government, or should his 10-year divisive rule come to an end?

… Israelis have made their verdict clear: Netanyahu’s time is up.

In April’s inconclusive election, which led to this re-run, Netanyahu’s Likud Party tied with its main opponent in the Blue and White Party, led by retired general Benny Gantz. This time Gantz appears to have nudged ahead, with 33 seats to Netanyahu’s 31 in the 120-member parliament. Both parties fared worse than they did in April, when they each secured 35 seats.

But much more significantly, Netanyahu appears to have fallen short of the 61-seat majority he needs to form yet another far-right government comprising settler and religious parties.

Ugliest campaign ever

His failure is all the more glaring, given that he conducted by far the ugliest – and most reckless – campaign in Israeli history. That was because the stakes were sky-high.

Only a government of the far-right – one entirely beholden to Netanyahu – could be relied on to pass legislation guaranteeing him immunity from a legal process due to begin next month. Without it, he is likely to be indicted on multiple charges of fraud and breach of trust.

So desperate was Netanyahu to avoid that fate, according to reports published in the Israeli media on election day, that he was only a hair’s breadth away from launching a war on Gaza last week as a way to postpone the election.

Israel’s chief law officer, Attorney-General Avichai Mendelblit, stepped in to halt the attack when he discovered the security cabinet had approved it only after Netanyahu concealed the army command’s major reservations.

Netanyahu also tried to bribe right-wing voters by promising last week that he would annex much of the West Bank immediately after the election – a stunt that blatantly violated campaigning laws, according to Mendelblit.

Facebook was forced to shut down Netanyahu’s page on two occasions for hate speech – in one case after it sent out a message that “Arabs want to annihilate us all – women, children and men”. That sentiment appeared to include the 20 per cent of the Israeli population who are Palestinian citizens.

Netanyahu incited against the country’s Palestinian minority in other ways, not least by constantly suggesting that their votes constituted fraud and that they were trying to “steal the election”.

He even tried to force through a law allowing his Likud Party activists to film in Arab polling stations – as they covertly did in April’s election – in an unconcealed attempt at voter intimidation.

The move appeared to have backfired, with Palestinian citizens turning out in larger numbers than they did in April.

Trump’s failed rescue

US President Donald Trump, meanwhile, intervened on Netanyahu’s behalf by announcing the possibility of a defence pact requiring the US to come to Israel’s aid in the event of a regional confrontation.

None of it helped.

Netanayhu’s only hope of political survival – and possible avoidance of jail time – depends on his working the political magic he is famed for.

That may prove a tall order. To pass the 61-seat threshold, he must persuade Avigdor Lieberman and his ultra-nationalist Yisrael Beiteinu Party to support him.

Netanyahu and Lieberman, who is a settler, are normally ideological allies. But these are not normal times. Netanyahu had to restage the election this week after Lieberman, sensing the prime minister’s weakness, refused in April to sit alongside religious parties in a Netanyahu-led government.

Ultra-right kingmaker

Netanyahu might try to lure the fickle Lieberman back with an irresistible offer, such as the two of them rotating the prime ministership.

But Lieberman risks huge public opprobrium if, after putting the country through a deeply unpopular re-run election, he now does what he refused on principle to do five months ago.

Lieberman increased his party’s number of seats to eight by insisting that he is the champion of the secular Israeli public.

Most importantly for Lieberman, he finds himself once again in the role of kingmaker. It is almost certain he will shape the character of the next government. And whoever he anoints as prime minister will be indebted to him.

The deadlock that blocked the formation of a government in April still stands. Israel faces the likelihood of weeks of frantic horse-trading and even the possibility of a third election.

Nonetheless, from the perspective of Palestinians – whether those under occupation or those living in Israel as third-class citizens – the next Israeli government is going to be a hardline right one.

On paper, Gantz is best placed to form a government of what is preposterously labelled the “centre-left”. But given that its backbone will comprise Blue and White, led by a bevy of hawkish generals, and Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu, it would, in practice, be nearly as right wing as Netanyahu’s.

Gantz even accused Netanyahu of stealing his idea in announcing last week that he would annex large parts of the West Bank.

The difficulty is that such a coalition would depend on the support of the 13 Joint List legislators representing Israel’s large Palestinian minority. That is something Lieberman has rejected out of hand, calling the idea “absurd” early on 18 September as results were filtering in. Gantz appears only a little more accommodating.

Uncertain future

The solution could be a national unity government comprising much of the right: Gantz’s Blue and White teamed up with Likud and Lieberman. Both Gantz and Lieberman indicated that was their preferred choice on 18 September.

The question then would be whether Netanyahu can worm his way into such a government, or whether Gantz demands his ousting as a price for Likud’s inclusion.

Netanyahu’s hand in such circumstances would not be strong, especially if he is immersed in a protracted legal battle on corruption charges. There are already rumblings of an uprising in Likud to depose him.

One interesting outcome of a unity government is that it could provoke a constitutional crisis by making the Joint List, the third-largest party, the official opposition. That is the same Joint List described by Netanyahu as a “dangerous anti-Zionist” party.

Ayman Odeh would become the first leader of the Palestinian minority to attend regular briefings by the prime minister and security chiefs.

Netanyahu will continue as caretaker prime minister for several more weeks – until a new government is formed. If he stays true to form, there is plenty of mischief he can instigate in the meantime.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Zionist have shown Naziyahu the door. Can he inflict more damage before he exits?

Naziyahu on Steroids: What a Gantz-led Government Means for Palestine

Netanyahu on Steroids: What a Gantz-led Government Means for Palestine

Benny Gantz, head of the Blue and White (Kahol Lavan) alliance. (Photo: File)

By Ramzy Baroud

Experience has taught Palestinians not to pay heed to Israeli elections. But to every rule, there is an exception.

Although it is still true that no Israeli Zionist leader has ever been kind to the Palestinian people, the dynamics of the latest Israeli elections on September 17 are likely to affect the Occupied Palestinian Territories in a profound way.

Indeed, the outcome of the elections seems to have ushered in a new age in Israel, ideologically and politically. But the same claim can also be made regarding its potential influence on Palestinians, who should now brace themselves for war in Gaza and annexation in the West Bank.

Former chief of general staff of the Israeli army, Benny Gantz, who had orchestrated the destructive war on the besieged Gaza Strip in 2014, is likely to be tasked with the job of forming Israel’s new government. Gantz had recently boasted about sending “parts of Gaza back to the Stone Age”.

There is little discussion in Israeli, and, by extension, western media of Gantz’s numerous war crimes during the Gaza war. The focus is mainly placed on the fact that he seems to have finally dislodged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from a position he had held for nearly 13 years, a scenario that was, until recently, deemed inconceivable.

The leader of the Kahol Lavan (Blue and White) party had plotted the ouster of Netanyahu back in January 2018, when he formed the Israeli Resilience Party. Following several political mergers and a strong showing in the previous elections in April, the centrist politician has finally edged past Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud party in the most recent elections.

With 33 seats in the Israeli Knesset – compared to Likud’s 32 seats – Gantz now needs a broad coalition to rule Israel. The vehemently anti-Palestinian politician has made it clear that he will not enter into a coalition with the Joint List, the alliance of various Palestinian Arab political parties. The latter has managed to achieve an outstanding 13 seats, making it the third-largest political force in Israel.

But, according to Gantz’s previous statements, the inclusion of Arab parties in the coalition is out of the question, despite the fact that Ayman Odeh, the leader of the Joint List, had indicated his willingness to join a Gantz-led government.

It is now likely that Gantz will seek a coalition government that includes the Likud, along with Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu. The country’s former ultra-nationalist defense minister, Lieberman, with 8 seats, has restored his previous “kingmaker” status. He, too, is keen on such a coalition. Gantz is open to such a scenario, with one condition: Netanyahu should stay out.

While the “king of Israel” has finally been dethroned, however, Palestinians have little to rejoice over. True, Netanyahu has destroyed any chance of a just peace in Palestine through the entrenching of the illegal military occupation and inhumane siege of the West Bank and Gaza. However, future possibilities are equally, if not even more, grim.

Once upon a time, outright discussions of annexing large parts of the Occupied Palestinian Territories were relegated to the margins of Israel’s political discourse. This is no longer the case. The call for annexing major illegal settlement blocs, along with the Jordan Valley, is now a common demand made by all of Israel’s main political parties, including Gantz’s own.

Gantz, possibly Israel’s next prime minister, has repeatedly made it clear that he would be strengthening, rather than dismantling, the illegal settlements in the West Bank, and has even attempted to take ownership of Netanyahu’s pledge to annex the Jordan Valley.

“We are happy that the Prime Minister has come around to adopt the Blue and White plan to recognize the Jordan valley,” Gantz’s party said in a statement shortly before election day.

The annexation of these areas would amount to illegally seizing more than 60 percent of the West Bank.

Given that Israel has successively normalized the concept of annexation in its own, political discourse, and that it has already received an American nod on the matter, it is then a matter of time before such a step takes place.

The likelihood of it taking place sooner than later is that a broad, center-right-ultranationalist coalition would serve as an insurance to Israel’s leadership, in case of a political or security fallout once the decision is taken and enforced.

That political insurance simply means that no single party or official would bear the blame or shoulder the consequences alone, should Palestinians rebel or the international community push back against the flagrant Israeli violation of international law.

The same logic is applicable to the case of a future war on Gaza.

Israel has been itching for a major military campaign in Gaza since its last onslaught of 2014. Since then, Gaza has been bombed numerous times, and hundreds of innocent lives have been lost. But Netanyahu steered clear of an all-out war, fearing a high death toll among his soldiers and the blame game that often follows such military misadventures.

Mandated by a large coalition, bringing together Israeli army generals, right-wing politicians and ideologues, Gantz would feel far more empowered to go to war, especially since the former military chief has repeatedly accused Netanyahu of being “weak” on Gaza, “terrorism” and security.

If a future war goes as planned, Gantz would be happy to claim the accolades of victory; if it does not, due to Gaza’s stiff resistance, the political damage is likely to remain minimal.

When it comes to war, Gantz is Netanyahu on steroids. He has participated, orchestrated or led many military campaigns, including ones aimed at suppressing any resistance in Gaza, in Lebanon and during the previous popular uprisings.

For Gantz, war is the answer, as indicated by one of his campaign slogans, “Only the strong survive.”

While it is typical, and understandable, to dismiss all Israeli governments as one and the same, a Gantz-led government will possess the needed political legitimacy, popular mandate and strategic tools to achieve a job that Netanyahu himself couldn’t finish: a war on Gaza, and annexation of the West Bank.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Naziyahu on Steroids: What a Gantz-led Government Means for Palestine

Murderer Amber Guyger gets a hug from judge and racist media

By Christopher Banks

Murderer Amber Guyger gets a hug from judge and racist media

After a high-profile murder trial, a Texas jury surprised many on Oct. 1 by convicting Dallas ex-cop Amber Guyger of murder in the off-duty-officer’s shooting of 26-year-old Botham Jean, a native of the Caribbean nation St. Lucia. One day later, the same jury turned around and sentenced Guyger to 10 years in prison, a relatively light sentence in the context of U.S. “criminal justice.”

The background

Jean worked at one of the world’s biggest accounting firms, PricewaterhouseCoopers. He was a religious man who sang at church and mentored young people.

Jean was in the comfort of his own home on Sept. 6, 2018, watching television and eating ice cream when white officer Guyger unlawfully entered his apartment. After getting off duty that day, Guyger returned to the Southside Flats apartments in Cedars neighborhood and entered the wrong apartment on the wrong floor. Guyger lived in unit number 1378 on the third floor but entered unit 1478 on the fourth floor. Failing to notice an entire room full of furniture and wall decorations different from her own, Guyger, somehow believing she was in her own apartment, killed the unarmed Black resident inside within seconds.

One minute later, she texted her former partner, “I f–ed up.”

Going into cover-up mode, the Texas Rangers, who have jurisdiction statewide to investigate police shootings, and the District Attorney’s office decided not to issue an arrest warrant. It wasn’t until after three days of preferential treatment and careful consideration of the terrible optics at play that Guyger was finally arrested and charged (by a department with a decades-long history of police violence) with manslaughter, setting the stage for a closely watched and rare criminal proceeding against a killer cop.

A racist cop and her defense

Guyger and her defense team must have been thinking, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” when they decided to go with the reliable I-feared-for-my-life cop defense, which functions as a virtual license to kill. This time, they would see if it works for off-duty cops too!

And who can blame them. When an officer takes the stand and says “I feared for my life,” usually that’s the end of the story. Those few words work magic when uttered by agents of state violence, so much so that while 900-1,000 people are shot and killed every year by police, only three officers have been convicted of murder and seen their convictions stand since 2005!

Sticking to the script, Guyger concocted a defense story where she was the one in danger, explaining that she mistakenly thought Jean’s apartment was hers, that Jean was a burglar, and that there was no reasonable alternative at the time other than placing two fatal bullet holes in his chest as he sat on his own couch, in his own apartment.

A collection of text messages entered into evidence during the trial revealed Guyger to be an open and verifiable racist who joked with other Dallas cops about the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., proposed using violence against MLK Day parade attendees because the civil rights celebration apparently takes too long, and woefully complained about having to work with Black colleagues.

It comes as no surprise then that Guyger would cling to a defense dripping with white supremacist notions that Black people have no rights that white people are bound to respect. According to the defense presentation, Jean’s right to peacefully reside in his own home and, ultimately, his right to life, were lesser than the right of Amber Guyger to kill with intent based on what was going on in her head after trespassing.

The unlikely conviction

A 12-person jury, five Black, five Latino or Asian, and two white, didn’t buy it. After deliberating for about six hours, they courageously convicted Guyger of murder and not the lesser charge of manslaughter, meaning they determined that no reasonable person would have believed their life to be in danger, and there was an intent to kill.

The decision of the jury shows they did not believe Guyger’s concocted story, full of lies as it was.

After illegally entering Jean’s apartment, Guyger stated that she yelled out, “Let me see your hands,” but neighbors heard no shouts, only shots. Guyger claimed that Jean began walking quickly toward her yelling in an aggressive tone, causing her to fear for her life. The trajectory of the bullets tell a different story. The fatal bullets were shot downward. For Guyger (5’3”) to fire off bullets with a downward trajectory into Jean’s torso, Jean (6’1”) would either have to be sitting or in a defensive posture.

After shooting Jean, Guyger testified that she tried performing “a little CPR.” However, the prosecution showed that even though Jean was bleeding heavily from two gaping chest wounds, Guyger’s uniform was spotless, without a single drop of blood. In the critical moments before first responders arrived, with Jean’s life hanging in the balance, Guyger hadn’t bothered opening up and using the police first-aid bag in her possession at the time, even though it had items designed to control traumatic bleeding. Instead, Guyger was photographed texting outside of Jean’s apartment.

Stripped down to its bare essentials, the picture that comes together is simply one of a white police officer seeing a Black man, automatically assuming he is dangerous, shooting and killing him, and then becoming overtaken with panicked concern for herself rather than concern for saving the life of her victim.

The Jean murder fits squarely into a long pattern of state violence against Black communities, of which police terror is but a single part. One in 1,000 Black men and boys can expect to die as a result of police violence, a new study finds. As stated earlier, virtually zero police officers suffer any repercussions.

So, there was ample precedent to assume that killer-cop Guyger would walk free, especially when Judge Tammy Kemp went out of her way to hand Guyger a last minute get-out-of-jail-free card. Prior to deliberation, Judge Kemp ridiculously instructed the jury that they could consider the “castle doctrine,” part of Texas law that allows someone to use deadly force to defend themself in their own home. Of course, Guyger was not in her own home, but that didn’t stop Judge Kemp from issuing the instruction anyway, thereby changing the law and expanding it to include what Guyger perceived to be her home! Jean’s right not to be killed by an armed intruder in his actual home flew out the window.

To their credit, the jury didn’t go for it.

A controversial sentencing

Guyger’s murder conviction came with a sentencing guideline of 5-99 years. The prosecution recommended nothing less than 28 years, the age Jean would have been had he not been gunned down. In the end, Guyger was sentenced to 10 years and will be eligible for parole in five.

Whatever satisfaction the conviction aroused was severely undermined by a sentence that screamed out implicit racial bias. Countless Black men are doing longer sentences than Guyger for non-violent crimes. A 2013 study by the ACLU found that 3,278 people were serving life sentences without parole for nonviolent offenses like stealing winter coats or selling marijuana, and that 65 percent of them were Black.

That’s why moments after the sentence was announced, community members in the courthouse hallways began angrily chanting, “No justice, no peace!”

The special treatment for Guyger was captured in the stunning moment when the judge left the bench to come give her a hug, shortly after she was convicted of first-degree murder.

Not satisfied!

The terrible message sent by the sentence wasn’t the only thing on protesters’ minds. The resignation of those that tried shielding Guyger from prosecution and demands of justice for other victims of police murder fueled a nighttime march of around 200 people through downtown Dallas.

Protesters temporarily shut down a busy intersection by forming a circle and linking arms. When Dallas police showed up in riot gear, the people moved back to the courthouse and occupied the jail lobby, continuing to chant all the while. The protest finally made its way back downtown to Dealey Plaza, where one arrest was made, a young woman by the name of Safiya Paul. Paul was a childhood friend of Botham Jean, and like Jean, a native of St. Lucia. She was carrying a St. Lucia flag when witnesses say Dallas police grabbed her, brutally slammed her into the street, and took her away to county jail.


This marathon protest attended by Jean’s childhood friend and its demands to widen the scope of accountability did not grab the corporate news headlines. What did snag major media headlines was the public act of forgiveness by Brandt Jean, younger brother of Botham Jean, toward his brother’s killer.

The Jean family’s forgiveness of Guyger for reasons of religion and personal mourning was instantaneously seized upon by establishment media, prosecutors and judges alike, all tripping over themselves at the sight of Guyger’s tears. They presented the courtroom “forgiveness” spectacle as some sort of instruction to Black people collectively on how to deal with white supremacy. They passed over in silence the brave actions of Safiya Paul, confronting and challenging unjust authority in the streets.

The corporate media message (and preference) was clear: Unconditionally offer forgiveness even when it is not premised on meaningful change and lasting justice. Do not rise up and demand justice.

But no one is falling for it. Any student of history knows that the forces for substantive change emerge from rebellion.

Posted in USAComments Off on Murderer Amber Guyger gets a hug from judge and racist media

Ecuador’s masses rise up against neoliberal policies

By Kim Barzola

Ecuador’s masses rise up against neoliberal policies

Photo: Telesur

On October 2, Lenín Moreno, President of Ecuador, signed a series of economic austerity measures to drastically cut back on social spending in order to access a 4.2 billion dollar loan from the International Monetary Fund. The Decree 883 eliminates state funded fuel subsidies, a staple program for the past 45 years, as well as major cuts to public sector salaries, benefits and pensions. The prices of gas, the major fuel source across the country, immediately spiked up over 123 percent unleashing a wave of protests in response to calls from major trade unions and transport workers to strike just one day after the measures were announced. 

With high fuel prices affecting Ecuador’s most poor and working class most sharply, thousands of working people came out to the streets of Quito, the nation’s capital, calling for the reinstatement of the fuel subsidy. However, support for the protests and outcry over the decree quickly swelled to encompass a broad front of student, labor, and political organizations, including Citizen’s Revolution, the United Front of Workers (FUT), and indigenous organizations like the Confederation of Indigenous Nations of Ecuador (CONAIE). Demands quickly widened beyond concerns of the hike in fuel costs. By early last week, a wholesale rejection of all the measures in the decree also known as “El Paquetazo” culminated in a call for a national strike this past Wednesday. The tens of thousands of people of Ecuador made clear that their country will not be sold off to foreign powers at the expense of the poor and oppressed. 

A rightward shift

Decree 883 was the catalyst for Ecuador’s ongoing mass mobilizations, and yet another example of a stark rightward shift in Ecuador under President Moreno. Decree 883 closely resembles the neoliberal policies held by the country prior to the election of Rafael Correa in 2007. Under Correa, the country began to improve substantially, with poverty decreasing from 37.6 percent to 22.5 percent nationally. The GINI coefficient, a measure of economic inequality fell, from .54 to .47. as reported by the World Bank, signaling a decrease in wealth disparities. 

Regionally, Correa aligned Ecuador with countries such as Cuba, Bolivia and Venezuela – all major players of the Bolivarian Revolution, championed by the late Hugo Chavez. They oriented themselves towards socialist construction and the creation of a progressive bloc in Latin America which refused to bow to the demands of U.S. economic and military power.

After Correa stepped down in 2017, his former vice president, Lenín Moreno, took office. Not soon after, it quickly became clear that Moreno’s government was not only uninterested in continuing to improve the conditions of Ecuador for working people, but was aligning itself with foreign imperial powers and appeasing the demands of the United States and its allies. This was notably evident when in April, Moreno allowed UK officials to remove Julian Assange, co-founder of Wikileaks, from the Ecuadorian embassy in London where he sought political asylum. He now serves a 50 week sentence and the U.S. government has already begun its case of extradition for his role in releasing documents that exposed the criminal actions of the U.S. ruling class. This move prompted a denouncement of Moreno’s administration by Correa calling his actions a betrayal to the country and the entire region. 

Moreno’s cooperation with the IMF, an institution that continues the historic process of underdevelopment of countries in the Global South as well as recent affirmations of support from the Organization of American States for Moreno’s government will continue to create the conditions for the mass mobilizations and political unrest seen today.

Government repression and retreat

In an attempt to quell the growing consciousness around the impact of the austerity measures, Moreno declared a nation-wide state of emergency for 30 days on October 3, ushering in increased police and military repression with the use of tear gas, rubber bullets and water cannons against protesters in Quito. Independent progressive media outlets have also increasingly been a target of the government which has thwarted access to signals and the internet. Radio Pichincha Universal, a radio station providing consistent coverage on the protests and reports on the police brutality faced by protesters, was shut down by Ecuadorian state police on behalf of the Attorney General’s office citing “attempt to sow disaccord” amongst citizens of the country. This was yet another attempt by Ecuador’s ruling class to stifle mobilizations and break up crucial communication across major cities and states.

Despite these efforts, by October 7, Moreno’s government was forced to move their operations from Quito to the coastal city of Guayaquil. This decision which was quickly followed by the occupation of the Congress building by protesters, signaling Moreno’s rapidly weakening legitimacy. 

The movement spreads

Across the world, the Ecuadorian people’s refusal to accept the IMF austerity measures has inspired international solidarity from indigenous and Ecuadorian diaspora communities in places including England, Mexico, and the United States. On October 8 in New York City, colloquially known to some as “Ecuayork”, members of Chicha Radical, and Kichwa Hatari, a Kichwa community radio station, alongside other supporters held a demonstration outside the IMF buildings in solidarity with the people of Ecuador and the national strike echoing the calls to reverse the decree and reject the IMF loan in its entirety. 

Although Moreno has called for peaceful dialogue with protesters and leaders of CONAIE, the irony of this request is not lost on the people as government repression has continued throughout the day with the raiding of a cultural house and university in Quito where women and children were resting and the imposition of a 3 pm curfew as of October 12. The recent killing of indigenous leader Segundo Inocencio Tucumbi Incubio of the Cotopaxi province signifies the ongoing state violence towards the protesters, who according to the human rights watch group INREDH, was surrounded by police cavalry and beaten to death in an act of  “excessive repression.” 

Despite the mounting state sanctioned backlash and ongoing media war against protesters by private news outlets with close ties to Moreno and Ecuador’s ruling class, the people in the streets show no signs of backing down. While some are calling for new elections in January of 2020, the vast majority of those in the streets have vowed to stay until all of Moreno’s economic measures are all reversed as seen in this excerpt from an October 11 statement by CONAIE: 

”The dialogue that the National Government publicizes during this process of resistance which is also one of the worst massacres in the history of Ecuador, is an exacerbating violence reinforced by the public and military forces, with direct responsibility by the Government ministers of defense, Maria Paula Romo and Oswaldo Jarrin, who until this moment, leave us with 554 wounded, 929 detained, 5 dead and many others missing, which we understand as a crimes against humanity. We will be open to dialogue when the decree 883 is repealed.”

For those of us here in the United States, we must stand with Ecuador’s working class people who are fighting to reject institutions and solutions that reinforce and serve the imperialist ruling class. 

Posted in EcuadorComments Off on Ecuador’s masses rise up against neoliberal policies

Will the U.S. start a war for Saudi Arabia?

By Mazda MajidiSep 17, 201925412

Will the U.S. start a war for Saudi Arabia?

Trump and Mohammed bin Salman are comrades in arms. (Public domain photo)

On Sept. 14, two oil facilities in Saudi Arabia were attacked, causing a major disruption in that country’s oil production, impacting the world supply of crude oil. Up to 50 percent of Saudi Arabia’s oil production has been cut and it may take months to fully restore the capacities of the facilities. On Sept. 16, the first day the markets were open after the attacks, US oil futures jumped 14.7 percent, the biggest spike in a decade, going up to $62.90 a barrel.

Yemen rebels take responsibility

The Houthi movement fighting the Saudi-led occupation of Yemen took responsibility for the attack. The spokesperson for the movement’s armed forces said that they had successfully carried out a “large-scale” operation with 10 drones targeting oil facilities in Abqaiq and Khurais. The spokesperson called the operation a “legitimate and natural” response to “the enemy’s aggression and blockade” of Yemen. “We promise the Saudi regime that the next operation will be wider and more painful if the blockade and aggression continues.”

This was not the first time the Houthi rebels launched a drone attack on Saudi Arabia. There have already been at least 200 cases, likely more. Drone attacks from Yemen have grown more effective and farther reaching in range over time.

U.S. blames Iran

Within hours, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated unequivocally that the attacks were carried out by Iran: “Tehran is behind nearly 100 attacks on Saudi Arabia … Iran has now launched an unprecedented attack on the world’s energy supply. There is no evidence the attacks came from Yemen.”

Of course, Pompeo did not trouble himself with presenting any evidence on Iran carrying out the “nearly 100 attacks,” or this particular one. Some Western media reports in the early hours suggested that “preliminary indications are that the attacks Saturday that disrupted about half of the kingdom’s oil capacity did not originate from Yemen and likely originated from Iraq.” One source pointed to the bases of the Hashd al-Shaabi — a coalition of militias originally created to combat ISIS — in southern Iraq as where the attacks originated. True or not, ultimately this possibility did not fit the purposes of the United States.

Iraq’s Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi said on Sept. 16 that Mike Pompeo had called him, telling him that “the information they have confirms the Iraqi government’s statement that its territory was not used to carry out this attack.”

Much like the “evidence” for Iraq’s supposed stockpile of weapons of mass destruction in the lead up to the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, the “evidence” in this case has not been public and conveniently follows the political agendas of the investigators.

We are already seeing a long list of officials authoritatively stating that they have seen evidence of Iran being behind the attacks but presenting no real evidence. There is nothing impartial about those investigating this case. It is officials from countries hostile to Iran, many of which have long been lobbying the U.S. to bomb Iran. The speed by which the investigations are being concluded is mind boggling. When U.S. police officers shoot and murder unarmed people, it takes their most decorated investigators weeks or months to complete the investigation, even when there is video evidence. But when it comes to investigating the wreckage of oil facilities that have been burned and destroyed, which should be extremely difficult, within hours investigators have determined which country was responsible for the explosions!

Who are the “bad actors?”

Pompeo’s swift accusation that Iran was to blame prompted U.S. Senator Chris Murphy to comment: “This is such irresponsible simplification and it’s how we get into dumb wars of choice. The Saudis and Houthis are at war. The Saudis attack the Houthis and the Houthis attack back. Iran is backing the Houthis and has been a bad actor, but it’s just not as simple as Houthis=Iran.”

Murphy’s reference to Iran backing the Houthis and being a “bad actor” highlights the severe limitations of the Democratic Party’s critique of the Trump administration’s ultra-reactionary policy towards Iran, Saudi Arabia and Yemen. According to the UN and other sources, during the first two and a half years of the occupation, “from March 2015 to December 2017, between 8,670–13,600 people were killed in Yemen, including more than 5,200 civilians, as well as estimates of more than 50,000 dead as a result of an ongoing famine due to the war.”

What the Saudi-led alliance has done is nothing short of carrying out a genocide. Yemenis suffer from starvation, spread of diseases and a severe drop in living standards. Tens of thousands of Yemeni children have died of malnutrition. When they are not busy bombing schools and weddings, the Saudis are blockading the people of Yemen, keeping essential supplies from coming into the country.

Why does the U.S. unconditionally support Saudi Arabia?

Washington unconditionally supports Saudi Arabia, as it has for decades. Even the grisly murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, ordered by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (or MBS, the darling of the U.S. government), did not change that reality. Saudi Arabia, probably the most reactionary state on the face of the earth, continues receiving U.S. support. The Saudi invasion of Yemen, its continued bombing and blockade of Yemen, is rarely covered by the mainstream media.

The U.S. government and corporate media often call the Houthis a proxy of Iran, even though it is an independent rebel force grown out of the political and social conflicts in Yemen. The extent to which Iran provides direct support to the rebels has not been factually established. But whatever that level of support may be, it is instructive that U.S. media outlets can constantly bemoan Iran’s interference in Yemen’s affairs while almost never mentioning the obvious fact that Saudi Arabia is occupying the country and bombing it on a daily basis!

If Iran is providing support to the Houthis, that support is justified. Supporting a rebel movement against an ultra-reactionary occupying force is not being a “bad actor.” The bad actors are the ones occupying, bombing and killing. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, often referred to as “allies” by the U.S. media, are allies in genocide.

Even if real evidence does emerge that Iran was behind the bombing of Saudi oil facilities, why would that justify a U.S. “retaliation”? To state the obvious, an attack on Saudi Arabia is not an attack on U.S. soil! Why would nearly five years of Saudi occupation of Yemen and atrocities against its people not prompt even a verbal condemnation, but an attack on Saudi oil facilities requires an immediate military response? Why would the U.S. not need to retaliate for the thousands of bombs that the Saudis have dropped on the Yemeni people but need to retaliate against bombings of Saudi Arabia? The fact is that the ultra-reactionary Saudi princes, these arrogant, corrupt parasites, are U.S. clients that the U.S. government would go to any lengths to prop up, while the people of Yemen do not count in imperialist calculations.

For its part, Iran has denied involvement and characterized the U.S. accusation as going from a policy of “maximum pressure” to a policy of “maximum deception.” Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Abbas Mousavi stated: “It has been around 5 years that the Saudi-led coalition has kept the flames of war alive in the region by repeatedly launching aggression against Yemen and committing different types of war crimes, and the Yemenis have also shown that they are standing up to war and aggression.”

Why the hostility towards Iran

After John Bolton’s dismissal from the White House, one might have expected a slow down in the murderous drive for another criminal U.S. war in the Middle East. However, while individual politicians may be more or less willing at a given time to project U.S. military power, the fact remains that U.S. imperialism uses its powers, including its formidable military might, to remove obstacles to corporate dominance over the resources and markets of the world. States and forces standing in the way of imperialist dominance of the globe need to be removed, by military force if necessary.

What has made the Trump administration so far, and the Obama and Bush administrations before that, hesitant to bomb Iran is Iran’s ability to defend itself and possibly strike back. In a full scale military confrontation, the Iranian armed forces won’t be able to defeat the United States. It will, however, likely be able to deliver some blows.

We are facing an extremely dangerous situation with a real possibility of the U.S. bombing Iran. Whether or not Washington decides to attack Iran depends on the estimate of the political and military establishment of how effectively Iran can strike back. For the imperialist ruling class, it comes down to a costs and benefits analysis — although the fact that Donald Trump occupies the presidency adds an additional element of uncertainty.

In addition to the military costs, the U.S. ruling class absolutely does not want a resurgence of the anti-war movement. For this reason, anti-war activists in the U.S. should do whatever we can to organize and mobilize against the very real possibility of another U.S. war in the Middle East. U.S. Hands off Iran!

Posted in USA, Middle East, Saudi ArabiaComments Off on Will the U.S. start a war for Saudi Arabia?

A great day for Zion: UK Labour panders to Zionist terror networks and major bookstore censors the truth

Zion strangles UK
Gilad Atzmon writes:
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” – George Orwell

At the moment, the Jewish State is experiencing growing political instability while exploring its ability to defy Binyamin Netanyahu’s alleged criminality and his racial incitements against Arabs. Meanwhile, the UK has been reduced to a dutiful remote Israeli colony.

Two day ago, the Zionist lobby scored three significant victories that are indicative of Britain’s descent into an Orwellian dystopia. It is now an unfit habitat for intellectuals, artists and humanists, and their exodus has begun.  

In a statement astonishing for its obsequiousness, Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn praised the police for tearing down a poster depicting, in cartoon style, an uncanny portrayal of Corbyn under “attack” by Netanyahu, who is shown piloting an Israeli air force plane named “The Lobby” and dropping bombs of “defamation” with the words “anti-Semite, anti-Semite, anti-Semite”.

Corbyn tweet

By his response, Corbyn was kind enough to reveal to the British people that he could be many things, but acting as a prime minister isn’t really among them. And not just because of his clumsy and unprincipled action against a legitimate political cartoon, but because the man publicly displayed that he can’t handle elementary freedoms. Somewhere, there exists a positive interpretation that would make Corbyn’s shameless groveling seem sophisticated: his response did put the cartoon in national news so that every citizen is now aware of the poster and its message.

On 24 September we also learned that Israel’s stooges managed to cancel a literature event in Brighton. Bad News for Labour – Anti-Semitism, the Party and Public Belief is, according to its publisher, a ground breaking study on the reality behind the headlines on anti-Semitism and the British Labour Party”. I have not seen a ‘ground breaking’ text from Pluto for years; nonetheless, someone within the Hasbara [Israeli propaganda] army decided that the British are unfit to digest the book. Waterstones’s Brighton bookstore rapidly surrendered and cancelled the event. One more piece of evidence that Britain doesn’t really need enemies, it has become an authoritarian society voluntarily. I wonder how long it will be before Corbyn tweets that it was he and the Labour Party who begged Waterstones to cancel the event!

Zionist censorship in UK

However, the Zionist tour de force did not end there. We learned on 24 September that singer, songwriter and political activist Alison Chabloz was once again sent to jail: this time for eight weeks. The Zionist Campaign Against Antisemitism’s (CAA) website reports that “District Judge Jonathan Taaffe found Ms Chabloz guilty of breaching the conditions of her suspended sentenceafter blog posts that she published since June 2018 were found to constitute a breach of a social media ban”. Apparently, the definition of social media in Britain underwent a dramatic expansion this week in order to fit the Zionist call. The CAA was pleased to let us know its part in this fiasco, claiming “the trial in Chesterfield today follows contact between Campaign Against Antisemitism’s lawyers and the National Probation Service.” 

In 1917 Lord Balfour issued a declaration in the name of the British government announcing support for the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, then an Ottoman province with a tiny Jewish population. In 1917 Britain was an empire, although Palestine at the time wasn’t a British colony. Just over one hundred years later not much is left of the empire and even less remains of British dignity. Britain has allowed itself to be reduced to an Israeli colony, even to the point that it willingly sacrifices its most sacred values when asked to do so by one right-wing ethnic lobby that is largely committed to foreign interests.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on A great day for Zion: UK Labour panders to Zionist terror networks and major bookstore censors the truth

Why the Zionist State is Hitler’s Bastard Offspring

Why the Israeli State is Hitler’s Bastard Offspring

Shock-Horror at the Jewish Chronicle as I Tell the Truth about the Israeli State

It must have been a shock to the Zionist spy in Palestine Expo 2019 this summer when I stated, in a workshop, that Israel was Hitler’s bastard offspring.  Even worse I was applauded and commended by the Chair! The problem is that it’s true. 

Zionism never had any principled disagreement with the Nazi conception of a racially pure, ethno-nationalist state nor that of similar ethnically based states in Europe such as Hungary and Romania. That is why Israel has swung to the far-Right politically and why every single opinion poll confirms the popular racism and anti-Arab sentiments of Israeli society.

According to that political and intellectual lightweight, Labour’s Shadow Attorney General Shami Chakrabarti, Zeev Sternhell, a child survivor of the Holocaust, is an anti-Semite. In her report on racism in the Labour Party, Chakrabarti argued that

it is always incendiary to compare the actions of Jewish people… to those of Hitler or the Nazis or to the perpetration of the Holocaust.’ [The Shami Chakrabarti Inquiry]. 

In Chakrabarti’s mind ‘Jewish people’ translates as Israel and Zionism. Chakrabarti provided no reasoning and it is doubtful if she could. The most obvious response would be that Israel as a state is not a Jewish person and in any case Jews are perfectly capable of behaving like Nazis

Like the Nazis?  According to Chakrabarti, no

Sternhell is a retired professor at the Hebrew University. He is also a world authority on fascism and a child survivor of the Holocaust having been smuggled out of the Przemysl ghetto in Poland. He was also injured in a terrorist attack by the Zionist underground some years ago.

In In Israel, Growing Fascism and a Racism Akin to Early Nazism Sternhell wrote that:

The left is no longer capable of overcoming the toxic ultra-nationalism that has evolved here, the kind whose European strain almost wiped out a majority of the Jewish people. … we see not just a growing Israeli fascism but racism akin to Nazism in its early stages.

One can only imagine the look on the face of the Jewish Chronicle’s Political Correspondent, ‘Liar’ Lee Harpin’s, who was arrested but unfortunately not charged by the Police in the Mirror hacking affair, as he heard a tape recording of my impromptu speech at Palestine Expo 2019.

I turned up late to the fringe meeting and I hadn’t intended to speak until someone mentioned Ha’avara, the trade agreement between the Nazi state and the Zionist movement which destroyed the Jewish and Labour movement Boycott of Nazi Germany.

Israel’s neo-Nazi Rabis Cashtiel and Radler instructing their yeshivah students in Jewish morality

Today Zionists pretend that the aim of Ha’avara was to help rescue Germany’s Jews. This is a complete fabrication. In 1933 no one seriously thought that Nazi Germany would built extermination camps to murder millions in.  

However most Jews did realise that the Nazi state, a fascist state, was different from previous anti-Semitic regimes. This was a state that officially declared the Jew as the enemy. It openly stated that Jews were not part of the national collective, although it took until the 1935 Nuremburg Law for Jews to be stripped of German citizenship.

From the very beginning of its rule the Nazis had moved to begin the process of stripping Jews of their political, social, civil and economic rights. The first law passed, The Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service led to the dismissal of anyone who is Jewish from the civil service, apart from Jewish war veterans (at least for a time).

Jews and socialists realised from the start that this would be a state of violence and brutality, not just towards Jews. The first concentration camps established, Dachau in March 1933 and Sachsenhausen soon after, were intended mainly for communists, socialists and trade unionists.

The Zionist movement never, at any time, condemned the Nazis. You will search in vain for any resolution at any World Zionist Congress for any condemnation of the Nazis.

From the very start the Zionist movement sought to do business with and establish a working relationship with the Nazi state. Not in order to make the life of German Jews easier but in order to help built their state-in-the-making. The Zionist attitude to the Nazi state was the same as its attitude to anti-Semitism had always been. To use it to its advantage. 

That was why on June 21 1933 a letter was written from the Zionist Federation of Germany to Adolf Hitler.  The letter was never answered. It can be found in Lucy Dawidowicz’s Holocaust Reader.

The memorandum agreed with the Nazis that Germany’s Jews were not part of the German nation.

Our acknowledgement of Jewish nationality provides for a clear and sincere relationship to the German people and its national and racial realities. Precisely because we don’t wish to falsify these fundamentals, because we too are against mixed marriages and are for maintaining the purity of the Jewish group

It is important to understand that the Zionist Federation was not forced into saying this.  There was no coercion. They sincerely believed this. They were trying to win the favour of the Nazis vs the non-Zionist Centralverein which represented 95%+ of German Jews.

The Zionists had been saying this for years and anti-Semites had been quoting them against their Jewish detractors for years.  The important part of the letter was the final paragraph of part IV:

The realisation of Zionism could only be hurt by resentment of Jews abroad against the German development. Boycott propaganda… is in essence fundamentally unZionist, because Zionism wants not to do battle but to convince and to build.

The Zionists did not see the Nazis as an enemy to be fought. At the 18th Zionist Congress in Prague in 1933 they refused to even condemn the Nazis or their treatment of German Jewry.

Berl Katznelson, a founder of Mapai, the Israeli Labour Party and second only to David Ben Gurion, saw the rise of Hitler as “an opportunity to build and flourish like none we have ever had or ever will have”. [Francis Nicosia, Zionism and Anti-Semitism in Nazi Germany, p.91.] Ben Gurion expressed similar sentiments.

The main reason for Ha’avara was in order to save the wealth of the Jews of Germany, not the Jews themselves.  The Zionist Federation gave out relatively few immigration certificates to German Jews, preferring Polish Jews instead.

Werner Senator, a member of the Jewish Agency Executive even warned his counterparts in Germany that 

‘if it did not improve the quality of the “human material” it was sending, the Agency was liable to cut back the number of certificates… set aside for the German capital.

Some 60% of capital investment in the economy of Jewish Palestine between 1933 and 1939 came from Nazi Germany. [David Rosenthall, Chaim Arlosoroff 65 Years After his Assassination.

It was literally Nazi Germany which built the Zionist state. Ha’avara benefited the richest Jews who could take out the equivalent of £1,000 in cash (those with £1K could enter Palestine as capitalists without the need for an immigration certificate).

The Nazis greatly feared the Boycott since Germany was heavily dependent on exports. It was the fear of Boycott that that made the Nazis reign in the SA’s violence against Jews.  The Zionists however were unconcerned about the effect of Ha’avara.

However when I called Israel ‘Hitler’s bastard offspring’ I didn’t have Ha’avara in mind so much as the Israeli state now. I was thinking of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians as the untermenschen.

There is this idea abroad that people should be tread very carefully when it comes to Israel and watch what they say because it is a Jewish state. I disagree. Israel is one of the most vicious militaristic states in the world.  It is one of the few countries that supplies the Burmese regime with the weapons it needs to massacre the Rohinga people. It is the state that broke the sanctions on arming South Africa and it supplied it with nuclear technology. It is the state that trained and helped the Guatemalan military murder 200,000 Mayan Indians in the 1980’s.

Israel has maintained an open air concentration camp in Gaza for the past 11 years as it punishes the Palestinians for having voted the wrong way.

But above all the concept of a Jewish racial state began with European anti-Semitism. The idea of a state based on a religious/racial ethnicity originated in the Europe of the 1930’s.

Hitler sought to build an Aryan state. Israel’s aim is to maintain a Jewish racial state based on the same principles. To that end it opposes mixed marriages. Israel likes to claim it is part of the West but its refusal to have civil marriage is indicative of the fact that Israel strives to maintain the purity of the Jewish nation/race in Israel. That is why you have fascist groups like Lehava which patrol the streets of Jerusalem and other cities attacking Arabs who are seen as a threat to Jewish women. They use slogans such as ‘ “Arab, watch out, my sister is worth more!” and “The daughters of Israel belong to the people of Israel!”  The belief that Arab males are a sexual threat is no different to the idea in Nazi Germany of the lecherous Jew.

Although nominally citizens, Palestinians are essentially resident aliens in Israel. They are limited to just over 2% of the land despite forming 20% of the population. In the past 70 years their numbers have increased 10 fold yet there hasn’t been the creation of a single Arab village or town.  In that period Jewish communities have multiplied.

When Netanyahu said of the Black African refugees in Israel, who he calls ‘infiltrators’, that they are threatening ‘the security and identity of the Jewish state.’ he is speaking in terms of racial demographics.  Netanyahu went on to say that

“If we don’t stop their entry, the problem that currently stands at 60,000 could grow to 600,000, and that threatens our existence as a Jewish and democratic state… and our national identity.’

When Netanyahu spoke of ‘our national identity’ he meant Israel’s Jewish identity. An identity of Jewish racial supremacy. There is no Israeli national identity because there is no Israeli nationality. Israel’s population is 7.8 million. There isn’t even the pretence that this is about social facilities, jobs or employment. It is a crude appeal to racial demographics. Too many non-Jews threaten the Jewish demographic majority of Israel. It is quintessentially racist.,”

Yet at the very same time as trying to deport its non-Jewish African refugees Israel is trying its best to increase the number of Jewish immigrants. So it’s not a question of numbers, as racists in this country often pretend the immigration debate is about, but the racial/national composition of Israel’s population. [Israel PM: illegal African immigrants threaten identity of Jewish state]

Culture Minister Miri Regev described the African refugees as ‘a cancer in the body of the nation’ and when criticised apologised to cancer patients for having compared them to refugees. [52% of Israeli Jews agree: African migrants are ‘a cancer’ 7.6.12.]. 52% of Israeli Jews agreed with her.

Deputy Defence Minister Rabbi Eli Ben-Dahan, the Head of the Civil Administration (actually the military administration) on the West Bank explained that “[Palestinians] are beasts, they are not human.” Dahan also explained that “A Jew always has a much higher soul than a gentile, even if he is a homosexual.” Menachem Begin described the Palestinians as “beasts walking on two legs.” [ “Begin and the Beasts”, New Statesman, 25.6.82]. Netanyahu described the purpose of a wall around Israel as being to protect it from the ‘wild beasts’. How is this different from the Nazis’ description of Jews as ‘human cattle.’?

In response to TV presenter Rotem Sela’s statement:

 “this is a country of all its citizens, and all people are born equal. The Arabs are also human beings. And also the Druze, and the gays, and the lesbians and… gasp… leftists.”

Netanyahu explainedthat with the Jewish Nation State Law ‘Israel is the state of the Jewish people — and belongs to them alone,”. In other words Israel is now officially an apartheid state.  The important caveat is ‘officially’ because Israel has always been a Jewish state.

Comparing Israel to Nazi Germany

According to the IHRA definition, anti-Semitism could, taking into account the overall context, include, ‘Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis’. Zionists nearly always miss out this qualifying clause. However even assuming that we follow their dishonest omission let us examine this argument. 

Is it really the case that comparing a state, a racist state, to Nazi Germany is anti-Semitic ? Does that apply to all states or just the ‘Jewish’ state? If so then we are entitled to ask what is Jewish about Israel in anything other than a racial sense.

There are a host of comparisons that can be made between Israel and Nazi Germany. This doesn’t mean that Israel is the same as Nazi Germany but that they have certain things in common, not least a shared view of the other as sub-human. In Germany the other was the Jew, in Israel it is the Palestinian.

For example Israel’s Admissions Committees Law 2011 permitted 434 Jewish communities, 43% of all residential areas, (subsequently increased) to reject Arab members of these communities. How is this different from Nazi policies to exclude Jews from Aryan housing? [‘Israeli Supreme Court upholds “Admissions Committees Law’]

This law was passed in reaction to the 2000 Supreme Court ruling that the Ka’adan family could not be refused housing solely on the grounds that they were not Jewish. It was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2014. [Contradicting its own ruling, Israel’s Supreme Court legalises segregated communities] , +972 Magazine, 18.9.14.]  The purpose of the law was openly declared to be to prevent Arabs moving into ‘Jewish’ towns.[Israel builds town to ensure “the Arabs won’t rear their heads”, +972 Magazine, 28.3.11.]

The Jewish National Fund was formed in 1901. It was given official recognition under the 1953 JNF Law. Its role is to purchase and administer land on behalf of Jews. The land it controls, 93% of Israel, is held on behalf of the ‘Jewish people’. Non-Jews cannot gain access to that land. Land in Nazi Germany was also reserved for the use of Aryans.

Today there is the phenomenon of marches in Israel where the main slogan is ‘Death to the Arabs’.  How can it be anti-Semitic to compare such marches to similar marches in the Europe of the 1930s when the slogan was ‘Death to the Jews’? [Far-right Activists Chant ‘Death to Arabs,’ Assault Passersby in Jerusalem After Terror Attack, Ha’aretz, 4.10.15.

We have had the pleasure of hearing Rabbis Kashtiel and Radler, in the prestigious Eli pre- military school declaring that Hitler was right. According to Radler ‘Hitler was completely right but he was on the wrong side, meaning against the Jews.

Zionists argue that because Israel has not exterminated the Palestinians, comparisons cannot be drawn with Nazism. But during the period 1933-41, the Nazi policy was discrimination against and the expulsion of the Jews not genocide.

Despite protesting any comparison between themselves and Nazi Germany, Zionists don’t hesitate to make such a comparison themselves. Menachem Begin told a group of holocaust survivors that ‘We do not want the Arab Nazis to come and slaughter us.” [Tom Segev, The Seventh Million, p.369.

Begin’s ostensible reason for the mass bombing of Beirut in 1982 was to “destroy Arafat/Hitler in his bunker in Beirut/Berlin”.

Deputy Defence Minister Matan Vilnai threatened to give “Gaza a taste of the ‘shoah’ “[Israeli minister warns of Palestinian ‘holocaust

Eliezer Livner, a former Knesset member for Mapai, wrote in the period before the 6 Day War that ‘We must crush the machinations of the new Hitler at the outset, when it is still possible…’  As Tom Segev observed:

‘During those weeks of drumbeating, the newspapers continually identified Nasser with Hitler. The proposals to defuse the crisis by any means other than war were compared with the Munich agreement forced on Czechoslovakia before World War II.’  [Segev, The 7th Million, pp. 390-391. Ha’aretz 31.5.67].

Today many on Israel’s far-Right identify with the Nazis. In the words of a member of Lehava, a group campaigning against miscegenation, “Hitler was right, but got the nation wrong. We’re the chosen race.’ David Sheen

When a group of far-right thugs attacked an anti-war demonstration in Tel-Aviv in 2014, they wore the insignia of the neo-Nazi right in Europe – ‘Good Night left Side’. [Ha’aretz 15.7.14. Right Wing Demonstrators in Tel Aviv Wore Neo Nazi Shirts:] Amos Oz, the Israeli novellist and a left-Zionist who has always been extremely tolerant of the Zionist right, nonetheless termed those who indulged in so-called ‘price-tag’ attacks as Hebrew neo-Nazis. [Amos Oz calls perpetrators of hate crimes ‘Hebrew neo-Nazis Haaretz May 10, 201]

The late Professor Amos Funkenstein, Head of the Faculty of History at Tel Aviv University referring to the refusal of soldiers to serve in the Occupied Territories, comparing them to soldiers in the German army who refused to serve in concentration or extermination camps. To those who asked how it was possible to compare the actions of Nazi soldiers with Israelis, Funkenstein replied

 “As a historian I know that every comparison is limited. On the other hand, without comparisons, no historiography is possible. Understanding a historical event is a kind of translation into the language of our time. If we would leave every phenomenon in its peculiarity, we could not make this translation. Every translation is an interpretation and every interpretation is also a comparison.”

Funkenstein reminded his critics that the leaflets and publications of the Zionist terror groups, Etzel, Lehi and Haganah, talked of the Nazi-British occupation. [Tony Greenstein, Holocaust Analogies Return 2 citing Ha’aretz 9 December 1988, Ronit Matalon]. Funkenstein compared the lack of rights of the Palestinians under occupation to the status of Jews in Germany in the mid-1930’s. [Renaissance man Amos Funkenstein dies at age 58,

The moral is that any people, given the right set of circumstances, can become racists and even genocidalists. Jews are not excluded, as Israel’s murder of over 2,200 people in Gaza during Operation Protective Edge in 2014 demonstrated. How else would you characterise the mob who marched through Tel Aviv on 26th July 2014 chanting 

‘”There’s no school tomorrow,there’s no children left in Gaza! Oleh!” 

after Israel’s bombing other than Judeo-Nazis?

It is Israelis and Jews who make the comparison between Israeli practices and those of Nazi Germany precisely because the Holocaust and the Hitler period is used as the justification for the racist abominations of Zionism. Shlomo Shmelzman, a survivor of the Warsaw ghetto, wrote a letter to the Israeli press announcing his hunger strike against the Lebanon War.

“In my childhood I have suffered fear, hunger and humiliation when I passed from the Warsaw Ghetto, through labor camps, to Buchenwald. Today, as a citizen of Israel, I cannot accept the systematic destruction of cities, towns, and refugee camps. … I hear too many familiar sounds today, sounds which are being amplified by the war. I hear “dirty Arabs” and I remember “dirty Jews.”I hear about “closed areas” and I remember ghettos and camps. I hear “two-legged beasts” and I remember “Untermenschen.” Too many things in Israel remind me of too many things from my childhood.”  [Beyrouthy’s  review of Noam Chomsky’s Fateful Triangle]

According to the IHRA and disgusting racists such as Eric Pickles, Britain’s delegate to the IHRA, Shmelzman is an anti-Semite. And who makes this declaration?

Prof. Moshe Zimmerman compared the children of the Hebron settlers to those of the Hitler Youth. In reaction to an amendment to the Citizenship Bill, requiring non-Jews seeking citizenship to pledge allegiance to Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, Israeli educational psychologist, Gavriel Solomon, compared Israel to Germany in the 1930s:

“The idea of Judenrein (Jew free zone) or Arabrein is not new. . . . Some might say ‘how can you compare us to Nazis?’ I am not talking about the death camps, but about the year 1935. There were no camps yet, but there were racist laws. And we are heading forward toward these kinds of laws.” [Israeli Academic: Loyalty Oath Resembles Racist Laws of 1935]

Some on the left are also reticent about comparing Zionism to Nazism. Gilbert Achcar for example found it a ‘terrible comparison’ [Arabs and the Holocaust, pp.228. 234]. By Chakrabarti’s logic it is anti-Semitic to compare the settlers of Hebron, who daub the walls of Palestinians with the slogan ‘Arabs to the gas chambers’ with the Nazis.[ See Donald Macintyre, Breaking silence over the horrors of Hebron,] Only Zionists should be allowed to make such comparisons.

Israel, as an ethno-religious state is no different in principle to Nazi Germany which was also a state based on a racially defined section of the German people. The definition of a Jew under the Israel’s 1950 Law of Return is extremely similar to the definition of a Jew under the 1935 Nuremberg Laws. 

There are numerous examples of how Israelis not only compare Palestinians to Nazis but often see themselves in the role of the Nazi.  Before the massacre in Jenin, an Israeli officer said that it is justified and in fact essential to learn from every possible source…. ‘the commander’s obligation is to … analyse and internalise the lessons of earlier battles – even, however shocking it may sound, even how the German Army fought in the Warsaw Ghetto.”  [Yitzhak Laor, London Review of Books, After Jenin, 9.5.02.]

In 2002, Fox News reported how an Israeli lawmaker and Holocaust survivor expressed outrage over Israeli troops writing identification numbers on the foreheads and forearms of Palestinian detainees awaiting interrogation during an army sweep of a West Bank refugee camp. Holocaust survivor Tommy Lapid told army chief of staff Lt. Gen. Shaul Mofaz and Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer that the practice must cease immediately. “As a refugee from the Holocaust I find such an act insufferable.”…. During World War II, concentration camp inmates had numbers tattooed on their forearms. [Fox News, Israel Blasted for Writing Numbers on Arabs, 13.3.02]. A similar scheme to place numbers on the ID card of Palestinians in Hebron ‘immediately drew comparisons to the Nazi era, when authorities forced Europe’s Jews to bear tattooed numbers on their arms.’ IDF halts proposal to number Palestinian IDs in Hebron after criticism, Jerusalem Post 6.1.16.]

Indeed it is just such comparisons which forced the Israeli military to back down. According to idiots like Chakrabarti we must not make such a comparison!

Tony Greenstein

Infamous anti-Israel activist Tony Greenstein called Jewish state ‘Hitler’s bastard offspring’

Tony Greenstein, pictured at a rally outside Labour HQ (Photo: the JC)

Exclusive: Chair of event responded: ‘That was an excellent contribution and thank God it was a Jew that said it’

Infamous anti-Israel activist Tony Greenstein called the Jewish state “Hitler’s bastard offspring” at an event dubbed the biggest celebration of Palestinian culture in Europe.

Mr Greenstein, who was expelled by Labour over his repeated use of  the word “Zio”, spoke at a session at last weekend’s Palestine Expo event at London’s Olympia entitled Britain, Zionism and Jewish Resistance to Israel chaired by Latifa Abouchakra, International Officer for the National Education Union.

Also on the panel were author and journalist David Cronin and Leah Levane, co-chair of pro-Corbyn fringe group Jewish Voice for Labour (JVL) and a Labour Councillor.

In a recording, heard by the JC, Mr Greenstein says: “Nazi Germany in a sense built the state of Israel at a crucial time and you can actually say that the state of Israel today is Hitler’s bastard offspring because the ideology, the ideology that permeates Israel, Jewish racial supremacy, originated in the fascist states of Europe.”

Mr Greenstein, who is also an activist with the Labour Against The Witch-hunt group, adds: “What is Zionism?

“Zionism is a movement for Jewish racial supremacy. It imposes the needs of a Jewish racial state to the needs of Jews and that was what Haavara [Agreement] was about.

“When Haavara came in 1933 no one believed that it was going to end up in extermination, no one believed it, the view of the Zionists.”

He was roundly applauded for his comments by around 50 people in the room. Chair Ms Abouchakra then says: “Can I just say that that was an excellent contribution and thank God it was a Jew that said it.”

Spotted on the front row were Jackie Walker, who was expelled by Labour over her comments about antisemitism and blogger Asa Winstanley, whom the party has suspended.

Ms Walker made an impromptu speech, saying “For any of the other people campaigning about the Labour Party and the issue of antisemitism they’ll all tell you that it appears that a disproportionate amount of Jews have actually been expelled and sanctioned by the Labour Party in an apparent attempt to quash antisemitism because of course this is not about race, this is not about race, this is about Zionism, antisemitism that is deep within the heart of the Labour Party is the antisemitism against anti-Zionist Jews and it’s really about time that we said this very clearly…

“I’d also like if there was any kind of historical aspect on this I’d like your comments.”

In one question from the floor to Ms Levane, an audience member rambled about the Haavara Agreement of 1933 and the formation of the Stern Gang in 1940, referring to “a Zionist settler gang” and how it was “helping fascists win the war” before asking: “So my question is could you help me with the parallels of Zionism and Fascism?”

Ms Levane responded saying: “I’m not an expert. Tony [Greenstein] however is, go see Tony he knows a lot more than I do.”

Ms Abouchakra later said to the panellists: “Zionism and fascism, can you make comments?”

The annual Palestine Expo event featured culture and heritage stalls, food and activities for children including a mosaic art stall to create a “beautiful images of Palestine using colorful  mosaic pieces” and a theater event on the storytelling of “the popular Prophets in Palestine.”

There were also talks and panel discussions on numerous subjects including the Nation-State Law, the Great Return Marches taking place in Gaza and “decolonsing Palestine”.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Why the Zionist State is Hitler’s Bastard Offspring

The Bloody Betrayal of the Kurds by Trump and the United States is Nothing New

By: Sammi Ibrahem,Sr

Background to the Kurdish Struggle and the American Betrayal in 1963

The betrayal of the Kurds of Syria by Donald Trump and the United States is only the latest such betrayal. After having provided the foot soldiers in the fight against ISIS, losing 11,000 fighters in the process, Donald Trump has unceremoniously betrayed them to the Turkish dictator Recep Erdogan, whose forces have been fighting an undeclared war in Turkish Kurdistan since the breakdown of a ceasefire in July 2015. In essence there have been a continuing series of wars against the Kurds of Turkey since 1978

The destruction of Cizre in Turkish Kurdistan is similar to Israel’s destruction in Gaza

Turkish armed forces, which we should not forget are an integral part of NATO, have laid waste to substantial parts of the main Kurdish cities of Diyarbakır, Şırnak, Mardin, Cizre, Nusaybin, and Yüksekova. See Blood on Erdoğan’s hands and Palestinian solidarity cannot ignore the oppression of the Kurds in Turkey

In 1975 the Algiers Agreement between the Shah of Iran and the Iraqi Baathists was the latest betrayal when the Iranian state, at the behest of the United States agreed to withdraw support for the Kurdish fight against the Iraqi state.

During the Iran-Iraq war a genocidal war was waged by Saddam Hussein against Iraqi Kurdistan. Hundreds of villages were destroyed in Operation Al-Anfil. The most infamous attack was that on Halabja when some 5,000 Kurds were murdered with mustard gas and nerve agents after the town fell to the Iranian army

Kurdish women in the Peoples Fighting Units are unique in the Middle East

At the time the West poured scorn on the suggestion that the massacre had taken place because the West supported Iraq against Iran. Indeed the West had supplied these chemical weapons, which were the later pretext for the invasion of Iraq in 2003, to the Batthist regime.

It would appear that the PYD and SDF have reached an agreement with Syria’s Assad regime which will allow Syrian troops enter Kurdistan in order to prevent the Turkish invasion. It is a bitter pill to swallow. The Kurds go from the frying pan into the fire given the bloody record of Assad.

Below is an article by Jabra Nicol in Matzpen, the magazine of the Socialist Organisation in Israel on the background to the fighting with the Iraqi army commanded by the Baathists.

Why the Kurds Should Be Supported ‒ by A. Sa’id (Jabra Nicola)

October 10, 1963[This is a translation of an article that was published in Hebrew in Matzpen no. 11, October 1963]The bloodshed in Iraqi Kurdistan is still ongoing; the bloody and terrorist regime of the Ba’ath party has mobilised two-thirds of the Iraqi army – three out of five divisions – with half of its armoured force, along with heavy artillery and jet aircraft, in its dirty war against the Kurdish people fighting for its freedom

Turkey’s Destruction in Cizre matches Israel’s in Gaza

This dirty war began back at the time of Qassem’s rule in 1961.

The Kurdish people is one of the most ancient peoples in western Asia. For more than 5,000 years, it has inhabited a territory known as Kurdistan, at present divided between Turkey, Persia, Iraq, Soviet Armenia and Syria. As early as 1639, Kurdistan was partitioned between the Ottoman Empire and Persia; and after World War I, it was re-partitioned by the imperialists. At present there are two million Kurds in Iraqi Kurdistan, two million in Iran, another two million in Turkey, more than half a million in Syria and close to 15,000 in the Soviet Union.

Posted in Middle East, USA, Syria, TurkeyComments Off on The Bloody Betrayal of the Kurds by Trump and the United States is Nothing New

NASUWT leader should be removed, tribunal told

NASUWT admits breach of trade union law by leaving Chris Keates in post for longer than five years without re-election

By Dave Speck

Leadership dispute: Chris Keates has led the NASUWT teaching union for 15 years

A tribunal has today been asked to make an enforcement order “forthwith” to prevent Chris Keates being in post as leader of the NASUWT teaching union.

Richard Harris, former regional organiser at the union,  told a hearing at the Certification Office, in Fleet Street, central London, that Ms Keates had breached trade union law by being in post longer than five years without standing for re-election.

He said the union’s senior members  had been informed almost a year before of the need to hold an election but had failed to do so.

ReadChris Keates standing down as NASUWT general secretary

Watch: Chris Keates on the ‘callous’ cuts harming pupils’ mental health

Exclusive: Restorative behaviour policies ‘leading to teacher-blaming’

He said: “It is absurd that an organisation that focuses on employment and trade union law had a failure of understanding of this.”

NASUWT leadership dispute

The union’s former Northern Ireland president, Susan Parlour, who brought the complaint, criticised the fact that Ms Keates had been made “acting general secretary”.

She said: “You can cannot act up for yourself. For example, I’m head of English and when I was off someone came in for me and acted as me  – I did not act for myself.

“If someone was to act up perhaps it should have been the deputy general secretary.

“She has rebranded herself and is doing the same job and is doing the same function she did, and  she has simply relabelled herself.”

Acting for the union, Stuart Brittenden QC said the union admitted the breach, but that Ms Keates had officially “stood down” shortly afterwards and at a meeting on 5 July she became “acting general secretary”.

Arguing against an enforcement order, he said case law recognised that there was “a difference between holding a post and acting in a post”.

He said: “The key question is whether the union genuinely considers whether Chris Keates is acting on a temporary basis and, if it does, this is not a sham, but a  temporary arrangement.”

Certification Officer Sarah Bedwell said she would make a decision within three weeks.

Any penalty for the breach would not be financial, but there could be a declaration on the Certification Office website and possibly an enforcement order to remedy it.

The union has declined to comment on the matter. Chris Keates is not attending the meeting.

Posted in UKComments Off on NASUWT leader should be removed, tribunal told

Shoah’s pages


October 2019
« Sep   Nov »