Archive | August 15th, 2011

Norway attacker back on island for reenactment


Anders Behring Breivik taken back to Utoya island to reenact brutal murder of teens. Official: ‘Suspect didn’t show any remorse’

Restrained by a police harness, the Norwegian man who confessed to killing 69 people at an island youth camp reenacted his actions for police in a secret daylong trip back to the crime scene.

Police said Sunday they took Anders Behring Breivik back to the island of Utoya for a Saturday hearing about the July 22 terror attacks, when Breivik shot the victims dead on the lake island near Oslo after killing another eight people in the capital with a bomb.

The hearing took place amid a massive security operation that aimed to avoid escape attempts by Breivik and protect him against potential avengers.

Video images of the reenactment published by Norwegian daily VG show Breivik arriving at Utoya with the same ferry he used to get to the island last month. Breivik wore a bulletproof vest and a harness connected to a leash over a red T-shirt and jeans as he casually led police around the island.

“The suspect showed he wasn’t emotionally unaffected by being back at Utoya … but didn’t show any remorse,” Hjort Kraby told reporters. “He has been questioned for around 50 hours about this, and he has always been calm, detailed and collaborative, and that was also the case on Utoya.”

The hearing been arranged to avoid the need for a reenactment in the midst of the trial and to make Breivik remember more details, Hjort Kraby said.

The prosecutor also confirmed Norwegian media reports that police received several phone calls during the terror attack that were probably from Breivik himself, but wouldn’t say how police had reacted to the calls.

Norwegian media also reported that Breivik may have filmed parts of the massacre himself. Hjort Kraby said Sunday that a video camera had been discussed during the hearing on Utoya, but declined to elaborate.

Breivik’s lawyer has said he has admitted to the terror attacks, but denies criminal guilt because he believes the massacre was necessary to save Norway and Europe from Muslims and punish politicians who have embraced multiculturalism.

Breivik faces up to 21 years in prison if he is convicted on terrorism charges, but an alternative custody arrangement if he is still considered a danger to the public could keep him behind bars indefinitely.

Posted in CampaignsComments Off on Norway attacker back on island for reenactment

Mondoweiss Online Newsletter


Israel’s ‘social justice revolution’ extends to illegal mega-settlement of Ariel

Aug 14, 2011

Max Blumenthal

Many observers of the massive July 14 “social justice revolution” sweeping through Israel have been wondering when the protest movement would deal directly with the occupation of Palestine, or whether it would it all. On August 14, a month after the demonstrations began, the movement finally tackled the situation across the Green Line. But instead of connecting the concept of social justice to the rights of everyone living under Israeli control, July 14 officially endorsed (website is in Hebrew) a tent protest for “social justice” in the illegal West Bank mega-settlement of Ariel.

There is a lot to say about this move, but I will keep it brief for now: By officially ignoring the occupation, the July 14 movement is behaving as though the two state solution is a current fact on the ground — they are living in a walled-off fantasy world. And by embracing Ariel, July 14 has tacitly proclaimed its support for keeping and subsidizing the main settlement blocs.

All Israeli kindergarteners are required to sing the national anthem– except for ‘Arab sector’ children

Aug 14, 2011

David Samel

According to a July Haaretz article, Israeli education authorities have implemented a new rule that kindergarten teachers must have their classes sing the Hatikvah, Israel’s national anthem, every week. This generated some debate in Israel about forced patriotism that poses an interesting contrast with the US, where for many decades, classrooms have included dailyrecitals of patriotic songs and/or the Pledge of Allegiance. There was little or no attention to the uncontroversial exception made for the “Arab sector.”

According to the Education Ministry, the directives will not be implemented in the Arab sector….The ultimate goals of the plan are to strengthen the pupils’ Jewish and Zionist values, and to improve their scholastic achievements.

On its face, this makes perfect sense. The Hatikvah speaks of the yearning of the Jewish soul for return to and control over Zion. It would be incongruous and even cruel to compel non-Jewish youngsters to mouth such words sanctifying the spirit of their Jewish neighbors above their own, especially where that Jewish yearning is to control the land on which Palestinians have lived for many centuries.

Surely it would be appalling to prescribe this weekly dose of glorification of Jewish nationhood for those who cannot share in its meaning. But is it any less appalling that Palestinian children are unable to share in the national anthem of their own country? These children, like several generations before them, are destined to live their entire lives as citizens of a state dedicated to the aspirations of another people, a group from which they are excluded. It’s not just the ritual song-singing; the Hatikvah is the perfect national anthem, embodying the entire noble mythology of the state, from centuries of yearning for Zion to the 20th century realization of the dream.

Among all the indignities faced by non-Jewish citizens in Israel, the inability of their children to partake in this dubious “patriotic” exercise surely does not rank near the top. Nevertheless, it is the perfect symbol of the irreconcilable conflict between the “Jewish State” and the fundamental principle of equality for all citizens that is considered inviolable in every other national context.

Some Zionists simply deny the undeniable. Israel is a “Jewish State” that provides absolute equality for Jews and non-Jews. Even Israel’s founding document, the Declaration of Independence of 1948, guarantees “full and equal citizenship” to Arab citizens. Where’s the contradiction? Others acknowledge that Jewish citizens are “more equal than others,” to paraphrase Orwell, but insist that it is natural to bestow greater rights on Jewish citizens of a Jewish State. Those “Arabs” who don’t like it have 22 other Arab states they can move to.

Then there are the liberal Zionists, people like Peter Beinart and Jerome Slater, who regret having to adopt this singular exception to their liberal principles favoring equality for all, regardless of ancestry. I see no reason to question their sincerity, or their hope that the inevitable inequalities between Jews and non-Jews can be minimized, despite Israel’s failure to do so for 63 years and its current freight-train movement in the wrong direction. But even if liberal Zionists can justify, in this one instance, a state favoring some citizens over others based upon characteristics of birth, can they imagine any circumstances in which the victims of such inequality would accept inferior status as their unfortunate lot in life? Who among us would agree to live under such circumstances? Is it not unseemly to reluctantly accept privileges for one’s own ethnic group?

This kindergarten problem will remain as long as Israel remains a “Jewish State,” even if Israel’s military occupation over millions of Palestinian non-citizens ended tomorrow and a real Palestinian State emerged. Of course, the real debate there involves the question of precisely how many nails Israel has hammered into the coffin of the two-state solution. Israel’s Palestinian citizenry will continue to be a tolerated (some times more than others) minority living as a permanent underclass in a foreign country, even though their own roots to the land go back many centuries. Israel’s non-Jewish citizens will be outsiders, and their children will know it from an early age, whenever they hear their Jewish counterparts sing the national anthem that they cannot share.


What to make of the Israeli movement for social justice

Aug 14, 2011

Jerome Slater

It is very hard for an outsider to know what to make of the current wave of populist protest in Israel which, though advocating “social justice” in Israel has nothing to say about the occupation and repression of the Palestinians.

Over 300,000 people have come out into the streets in support of the goals of the movement, which were initially motivated by the unavailability or unaffordability of adequate housing but which have broadened to include the crippling overall cost of living, the growing inequality of wealth within Israeli society, and what the Israeli journalist Dimi Reider has described as “the parenting costs, the free-fall in the quality of public education, the overworked, unsustainable healthcare system, the complete and utter detachment of most politicians, on most levels, from most of the nation.”

Remarkably, polls show that up to 90% of the Israeli general public support the demands for economic reform, including many working-class hardline nationalists and Likud activists. In its broadest form, as the Israeli activist Jeff Halper writes, “the demonstrations currently roiling Israel constitute a grassroots challenge to Israel’s neo-liberal regime. Beginning as an uprising of the middle classes….it has spread to the working class, the poor and the Arab communities as well.”

Last Monday the leaders of the protest movement, as well as student leaders and representatives of various social organizations, issued a joint statement setting forth the movement’s goals in more detail. “For a number of decades, the various governments of Israel have opted for an economic policy of privatization that leaves the free market without reins…making our daily existence a war for survival to subsist with dignity,” the document begins. It goes on to demand that social inequalities be minimized; that the cost of living be lowered; that full employment be achieved; that action be taken to meet “the essential needs of the weaker population in the country, with an emphasis on the handicapped, the elderly and the sick;” and that the state invest in public education, health, transportation, and public infrastructures.

A most admirable set of demands. Indeed, they could be transplanted to this country with very few modifications—which is not at all surprising, since the triumph of the right in Israel and its Likudist “neo-liberal” economics is closely modeled on the greed-is-good and the devil-take-the-hindmost raw plutocracy of the Republican party hereabouts.

The problem is that the leaders of the protest movement have made a conscious decision not to include the demand that the occupation and repression of the Palestinians be brought to an end; indeed, even the demand that the various forms of discrimination against the Arab citizens of Israel be ended has the potential to badly split the movement. As the Haaretz columnist Akiva Eldar has recently caustically observed: “social justice, and justice in general, ends for a considerable number of the demonstrators at the outskirts of Umm al-Fahm [the largest Israeli Arab city]. Never mind the gates of Nablus.”

As might be expected, the decision to focus only on social justice for Israelis rather than on justice for the Palestinians has caused some division within the Israeli left, as illustrated by the contrasting positions taken by two of Israel’s most astute, outspoken, and morally admirable young analysts and journalists, Dimi Reider and Joseph Dana. Reider has made a powerful case:

“It should be admitted…that the Israeli left has utterly and abjectly failed to [persuade] Israelis in the project of ending the occupation. There was never a choice between a social struggle focused on the occupation and a social struggle temporarily putting the conflict aside, because the first attempt would have flopped. There was nothing to be gained by trying the same thing again for the Nth time.”

Dana concedes that “The sad reality is that if Israelis discuss Palestinian rights and specifically the rights of Palestinians under Israeli occupation they very quickly lose public support.…Had protesters connected their struggle for social justice to the occupation, many fewer Israelis would have joined the protests.” Even so, he is very uneasy about the strategy chosen by the protest leaders: “The protesters’ working definition of ‘social justice’ is unclear and full of contradictions. The rights of Israelis are inextricably tied with the rights of Palestinians, both inside the 1967 borders and in the Occupied Territories. The protesters, like most of Israeli society, are operating under the assumption that they are disconnected from the Palestinians who live under Israeli military occupation. But the fact is that one regime rules the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, and any discussion of the allocation of resources, not to mention social justice, must take into account the rights of everyone who lives under the regime.”

The moral as well as practical dilemma for the Israeli left is acute. Many of Israel’s bravest and most admirable opponents of the occupation—people like Halper, Bernie Avishai, Gideon Levy, Yitzhak Laor, and others—are enthusiastic about the protest movement. Others, like Akiva Eldar, Amira Hass, and Uri Avnery, while of course strongly supporting the social justice goals, are uneasy about the decision to exclude the occupation or skeptical about the likely outcome. For example, Hass writes: “In the coming months, as the movement grows, it will split. Some will continue to think and demand ‘justice’ within the borders of one nation, always at the expense of the other nation that lives in this land. Others, however, will understand that this will never be a country of justice and welfare if it is not a state of all its citizens.”

In light of divisions within the Israeli left and the persuasive arguments on both sides of the debate, an outsider is in no position to reach a confident assessment about the issue. Yet, I can’t help feeling uncomfortable about the current strategy of the protest leaders. First, there is an important difference between the social justice protests and the last mass protests in Israel, which were over Israel’s complicity in the 1982 Sabra and Shatilla massacres in Lebanon. The latter was unambiguously driven by moral considerations; the former, while certainly containing a moral component, is also driven simply by economic self-interest, especially since it has become a populist movement linking the Israeli right with the left. For that reason, there is little reason to be hopeful that the movement signals a moral transformation of Israeli society.

Social injustice in Israel is inextricably linked to the occupation. In the first instance, as a number of the protest leaders and their supporters have pointed out, the enormous public resources devoted to the settlements and the armed forces necessary to protect them are resources that are not available for the rest of society. Even more fundamentally, the occupation and repression of the Palestinians is so morally poisonous that it is impossible to imagine that a truly just society can be created –even if only for the Jews themselves—until it has ended.

This is a crosspost from Jerome Slater’s blog.


WASP society is disintegrating

Aug 14, 2011

Philip Weiss

Last weekend we had a houseguest, a member of my wife’s extended family in Philadelphia, and when we were sitting in the kitchen one morning he said, What happened to the WASPs? I asked him what he meant, and he said the following:

The WASPs ran the country for 3 or 4 centuries, but I am not talking about power, I’m talking about society. Society is really all that matters, and WASPs had a cohesive society. Now that is gone, and over. And in fact some of the things I see today inside what is left of that society are pathetic and sad. Young people with nothing to do, no path for them. So the drugs and the idleness– I think it’s all part of the end of that world.

Do you grieve for its passing? I asked.

No, he said. Things change. Orders change all the time. It’s the nature of society. And besides, we had a good run.

I told him about a man I know whose male forbears, for three generations, had been English professors. Then the rules changed for academic advancement, the meritocracy came in, my friend was completely intimidated by that new way, and he absented himself. He has frittered his life away, but the thing is, when you go over to his house, he can quote Shakespeare as well as anyone, and explain the meaning of the book of Genesis. He’s a scholar, but in drydock.

My wife’s relation nodded and said he saw it at a granular level. WASP society was built of many things, it was an entire fabric, like any society. There were neighborhoods, there were stores, and schools and clubs and churches and retreats. Everyone knew everyone, and kept up on the gossip. There was a set of distinct values that you could count on everyone having. And money was at the bottom of it; the trusts were at the bottom of it. The trusts kept families together and kept people coming back to their communities. Now even the trusts are dwindling. Many of them are used up. And that has helped to dissipate WASP society. There is nothing to come back to. And so the communities themselves are drying up and frittering away. The associations and values are breaking up.

Of course intermarriage has something to do with it. The clubs and retreats are still there, but they are not nearly so distinct any more. Not just ethnically. But the values and manners, and understandings, they are disappearing. And at the heart of it is an economic collapse.

I said, You do seem to grieve it a little.

I do, he said. It’s a world that is over. And there were many great things that came out of it. The founding fathers, the Constitution. The character of American society. But of course in the last few generations it was built around the military industrial complex. That really was the source of all the money. And the Vietnam War came out of that.

Then I told my wife’s relation my own theory of the Jewish rise. Much of the 60s rebellion had a political character, but some of it was social, too, against the WASP elite. At Columbia during the 60s rebellion, the students had researched their professors to find out how much of their income came out of the defense contractors. And a lot of those rebellious students were Jewish, their parents ran candy stores or other small businesses, and as SDS leader Mark Rudd said a few years ago, (in this piece on Why there were so many Jews in the SDS) the administration offices at Columbia were “dripping with goyishness.” So there was a social component to that too, it wasn’t just about power.

I wonder when people will begin to describe the new elite. We shy away from doing so because it engages issues of anti-semitism, but if you think of that self-contained WASP society, the only thing to contend with it, in term of social cohesion, is affluent Jewish society, the Jewish mandarins of New York and Washington. No one has given us a name– the media industrial complext? Writers like David Brooks avoid the subject because it would involve talking about the Israel lobby.

But I can tell you from my own life’s arc, from Harvard and New York media/politics, that my Jewish world has the cohesion that my friend remembers about that self-contained WASP society. We have geography and manners (liberal voting, the Hamptons, Paul Krugman’s latest column, Tom Friedman, the Upper West Side, brunches and book clubs), we have a politics (abortion rights, gay rights, Elena Kagan writ large), we have culture (I could go on and on), and yes we have money (hedge funds). And a war under our belt too.

Why do tent protesters ban the word ‘occupation’?

Aug 14, 2011

Philip Weiss

Alon Idan in Haaretz:

Why does the protest movement ban the word “occupation”? Because using that word would dramatically reduce the number of protesters; it would stir disagreement and splinter the movement. Such factionalism would turn the protest into a “political” entity and expunge its populist character.

The occupation… is not mentioned in the tent camps because it threatens to eclipse the protest. This ongoing paradox spells its ultimate demise.


Hen of the woods?

Aug 14, 2011

Philip Weiss

I’ve become a forager recently. My sister-in-law says that this is now a trend, so I’m only conventional, but three times in the last few weeks I’ve eaten mushrooms harvested by friends from New York forests. And I’ve started to keep my eye open. Yesterday I saw this chap in the woods near me– it’s12 inches across, and that’s dead oak– and went to get a picture of it this morning. A foraging friend, whom I emailed a verbal description last night, said it was likely sulfur shelf or hen-of-the-woods. And yes, that looks right. But I’d like to be sure, mincing garlic here.


Posted in Nova NewsletterComments Off on Mondoweiss Online Newsletter

Iran vows to protect nuclear scientists


In light of recent assassinations, Iran to implement safety measures to keep atom researchers safe

Iranian Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi announced last week that the regime will increase security around its research staff, according to the Iranian news agency. This is said to be a first step in a series of measures to protect Iran’s nuclear scientists.

The announcement is a first indicator that the regime is concerned about the fact that four key individuals involved in the development of the Iranian military’s nuclear program were assassinated over the past two years, Yedioth Ahronoth reported on Sunday.

The latest incident occurred on July 23, when Darioush Rezaei, who was identified by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as a physicist working on the development of components used in nuclear weapon systems, was shot dead by a motorcyclist in Tehran.

Despite international media reports on Rezaei’s background, the Iranian authorities claimed that it was a physics student who was mistakenly shot.

The Iranian media reported recently that the assassination was carried out by internal elements, further suggesting that the regime has been shaken by the incident, since admitting that a foreign body was behind the assassination would have caused a bigger embarrassment.

Past blunders concerning individuals working on Iran’s atom program include the 2008 execution of Ali Ashtari, a Tehran businessman convicted of spying for Israel. Ashtari confessed to making transactions with Mossad agents.

In January 2010, nuclear scientist Massoud Mohammadi was killed by a bomb-rigged motorcycle parked outside his home. Another nuclear scientist, Majid Shahriari, was killed when a bomb that was attached to his car detonated in November 2010. On the same day, another explosion injured Fridun Abbasi, Shahriari’s colleague.

Posted in IranComments Off on Iran vows to protect nuclear scientists

Zio-Nazi regime approves 227 new homes in West Bank illegal settlement of Ariel


Nazi Defense Minister Ehud Barak okays largest housing project in single settlement since establishment of the Naziyahu government.


Defense Minister Ehud Barak has approved the building of 277 apartments the West Bank settlement of Ariel, defying U.S. criticism of continued settlement construction.

Barak authorized the construction in Ariel, the core of the settlement bloc deepest inside the West Bank. One hundred of the apartments will house Israelis evacuated in 2005 from a Gaza Strip settlement.

The new housing units are set to be built in Ariel’s Noyman neighborhood. 100 homes are intended for evacuees of the Gaza settlement of Netzarim, while the rest of the housing units are set to be sold freely.

The building permits for the homes were handed out a while ago, but marketing the lands to contractors was delayed due to diplomatic considerations until now. The construction is expected to conclude in about three years.

This marks the largest construction project in a single settlement since the establishment of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had no immediate comment Monday on the diplomatically charged move.

Since the establishment of Netanyahu’s government, very few building permits were handed out. In 2009, 492 housing units were approved in various West Bank settlements. In March of 2011, following the murder of a family in the settlement of Itamar, Netanyahu announced his intention to construct 500 homes in the area, but the land has yet to be marketed to contractors.

In recent weeks, Israel has also moved ahead on two other construction projects in east Jerusalem, the Palestinians’ hoped-for capital. The U.S. was critical of those plans.

Posted in Human RightsComments Off on Zio-Nazi regime approves 227 new homes in West Bank illegal settlement of Ariel

Report: Zio-Nazi to deploy 6 drones in N. Iraq


Iran’s Press-TV claims aircraft to be deployed in addition to intelligence agents and military consultants; Ahmadinejad: US and Zionist wish to attack

Zio-Nazi has recently stepped up its operations in Iraq’s autonomous Kurdistan Region and is planning to deploy six unmanned aerial vehicles, intelligence agents and military consultants in the region, Iran’s Press-TV has reported.

According to the report, Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government President Massoud Barzani has agreed to the concession in return for the admission of a number of Iraqi Kurd students to IsraHell universities. Barzani has reportedly approved the deployment without the permission of the central government in Baghdad.

Tehran establishes new cyber command as Iranian technology minister vows to ‘block Zionist unmatched cyber terrorism’

Four of the aircraft will be stationed at the Khalidiyah airbase in the northern oil city of Kirkuk and two others will go to the airport in the city of Mosul, the report claimed. It further stated that Zio-Nazi intelligence agents and military advisers, equipped with special transmission devices, are also being sent to train security forces in Mosul.

Meanwhile, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has warned Zionist regime and the US against launching a war on Iran.

Speaking to Russia Today news network, the Iranian leader said, ““They wish to do it, they want to do it, but they know about our power. They know that we are going to give them a decisive response.”

According to Ahmadinejad, “We have a saying in our language: If someone throws a smaller stone (at you), you should respond with a bigger stone. We will defend ourselves within our capabilities.”

Posted in IraqComments Off on Report: Zio-Nazi to deploy 6 drones in N. Iraq

Egypt to charge Zionist Mossad agent with espionage


Egypt’s Attorney General on Sunday referred a Jordanian and Zionist to an emergency court on charges of “spying for a foreign country with the purpose of harming Egyptian national interests,” Egyptian media reported.

Bashar Ibrahim Abu Zeid, a Jordanian telecommunications engineer, was detained in Egypt last April after intelligence information allegedly showed he was spying for the Mossad, Zionist intelligence body. According to reports, Ofir Herari, who was named as a Mossad officer, is to be tried in absentia.

Herari had allegedly tasked Abu Zeid with recruiting Egyptians working in the telecoms sector, as well as tracking telephone calls in Egypt.

Their case was referred to the National Security Emergency Court. The Attorney General did not say when the trial would begin.

In June, Egypt arrested Ilan Grapel, an American-Zionist, and accused him of encouraging violent protests, stirring internal divisions and of spying for Zio-Nazi’s. He denied the charges.

Grapel’s story has fallen from the headlines in Egypt as it has become evident that he is probably not the serious spy that he was described as by the Egyptian press when he was arrested.

Egypt has claimed that Grapel was Zionist Mossad agent, and pictures of him in Zio-Nazi military attire were widely published in Egyptian papers.

Grapel has been accused of sedition and inciting Egyptians to clash with the country’s interim military leadership. Zio-Nazi regime has denied that 27-year-old Grapel is a spy.

Posted in EgyptComments Off on Egypt to charge Zionist Mossad agent with espionage

Now they have Maoist Communist Party, Manipur.


(It is a matter of pleasure  for us that the oppressed people of Manipur  have raised the flag of Marxism-Leninism and Maoism. We express our strong solidarity with them, who are fighting against the Indian reactionaries for their national sovereignty and liberation. Now they have their own party–Maoist Communist Party Manipur.  Recently  they have concluded the first political conference of the  party.

 We have the document of Maoist Communist Party, Manipur.  This document has focused on many issues regarding to the national as well as international communist movement. There are some questions to be discussed, but we appreciate the main spirit of this document. Thanks making this Historical Document available. Here is an extract from the document:

Maoist Communist Party, Manipur


The first political conference of the Kangleipak Communist Party (Maoist) has concluded with a historical success. The Conference unanimously adopted the party program.

That, the 1st political conference resolved to change the name of the Party as Maoist Communist Party of Manipur. Maoist Communist Party, Manipur bases itself on Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, principally Maoism with the creative application of this universal truth to the concrete conditions of the Manipur revolution under the collective leadership of the Party.

Maoist Communist Party-Manipur will be the vanguard of the proletariat in Manipur, which is part of the world proletariat, sworn the basic principles:
•  The masses are the makers of history, and “It is right to rebel;”

•   Contradiction, the sole and fundamental law of the incessant transformation of eternal matter;

•   Class struggle, the dictatorship of the proletariat, and proletarian internationalism;
•   The necessity of a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Communist Party which applies with firmness its independence, independent decision, and self reliance;
•   Smash Colonialism, imperialism, revisionism and reaction implacably and relentlessly;
•   Conquer and defend power through the People’s War;
•   Militarization of the Party and the concentric construction of the three instruments of the revolution;

•   Two-line struggle as the motive force of the Party’s development;
•   Constant ideological transformation and always putting politics in command;

•   Serve the people and the world proletarian revolution;

The Maoist Communist Party, Manipur is the consolidated political vanguard of the Manipur proletariat. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is the ideological basis guiding its thinking in all the spheres of its activities. Immediate aim or program of the Party is to carry on and complete the new democratic revolution in Manipur as a part of the world proletarian revolution by overthrowing the colonial, semi-feudal system and the three targets of the revolution—Colonialism, imperialism and Comprador-Bureaucratic-Bourgeoisie (CBB). The ultimate aim of the party is the establishment of communist society. This New Democratic Revolution will be carried out and completed through armed agrarian revolutionary war i.e. the Protracted People’s War with area wise seizure of power remaining as its central task.

The Protracted People’s War will be carried out by encircling the cities from the countryside and thereby finally capturing them. Hence the countryside as well as the Protracted People’s War will remain as the center of gravity of the party’s work from the very beginning. During the whole process of this revolution the party, army and the united front will play the role of three magic weapons. The party will play the primary role; where as the army and the united front will be two important weapons in the hands of the party. Because the armed struggle will remain the highest and main form of struggle and army as the highest form of organization of this revolution, hence armed struggle will play a decisive role. Whereas the united front will be built in the course of advancing armed struggle and for armed struggle. Mass organizations and mass struggles are necessary and indispensable but their purpose is to serve the war. The immediate and most urgent task of the party is to establish full-fledged people’s Army (PA) and base areas by developing and transforming the guerilla zones and guerrilla bases.

Just after completing the NDR the party will advance towards establishing socialism without any delay or interception. Because the NDR will already lay the basis for socialism and hence there will be no pause. Thereafter, the party will continue to advance towards realizing communism by continuing the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Socialist society covers a considerable long historical period. Throughout this historical period, there will be classes, class contradictions and class struggle. The struggle between socialist road and capitalist road will also continue to exist. Only depending on and carrying forward the theory of continuing the revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat can correctly resolve all these contradictions. In this context the GPCR initiated and led by Mao Tse-tung was a great political revolution carried out under the conditions of socialism by the proletariat against the bourgeoisie and all other exploiting classes to consolidate the dictatorship of the proletariat and there by fighting against the danger of capitalist restoration.

Party will also continue to hold high the proletarian internationalism and will continue to firmly contribute more forcefully in uniting the genuine M-L-M forces at the international level. While uniting the M-L-M forces, it will also establish unity with oppressed people and nations of the whole world and continue its fight together with them in advancing towards completing the world proletarian revolution against imperialism and all reaction, thereby paving the way towards realizing communism on a world scale.
To this end we proclaim the following objectives:

1.   Destruction of the colonial Manipur State which rule by the Indian colonialist.
2.   Demolitions of the present State apparatus, the dictatorship of the exploiters led by the Manipur Comprador bureaucrat bourgeoisie that make sustain and develop the Indian colonialism in Manipur.

3.   Sweep away colonial oppression, general confiscation of its monopolies, banks and all forms of its property.

4.   Destroy bureaucratic capitalism, both private and state; confiscate all of its economic properties, possessions and rights, along with those of imperialism, for the benefit of the new state.

5.   Liquidation of semi-feudal property and all of its subsistent modes, confiscating it to give the lands to the peasantry, primarily the poor peasantry, applying the principle of “Land to those who work it.”

6.   Fight to establish the People’s Republic of Manipur as a united front of classes based on the alliance of the working class and peasantry led its Communist Party; this is the formation of the New Democracy which will carry forward a new economy, a new politics, and a new culture.

7. Develop the people’s war which, through a revolutionary army of a new type under the absolute leadership of the Party, destroys part by part the old power, principally its armed and repressive forces, and serves to construct the new power for the proletariat and people.

8. Foster the development of the Manipur proletariat as part of the world proletarian class, the formation and strengthening of communist parties and their unification in a revived international communist movement guided by Marxism-Leninism-Maoism; all of this so that the proletariat can fulfill its great and historic mission as the final class.

9. Defend the liberties, rights, benefits and conquests that the working class and masses have achieved at the cost of their own blood, recognizing these and guaranteeing that they are really in force through a “Declaration of the Rights of the People.” Respect particularly the right to religious conscience, but in its exact dimensions, to believe as well as not to believe.
10.   Real equality for women; a better future for the youth; protection for mothers and children; respect and support for the aged.

11.   A new culture as a fighting weapon to concretize the new nationality that serves the popular masses and is guided by the scientific ideology of the proletariat. Give special importance to education.

12.  Support the struggles of the international proletariat, of the oppressed nations and peoples of the world; fighting against the superpowers, the United States and imperialism in general, international reaction and revisionism of every form; understanding the Manipuri revolution as part of the world proletarian revolution.

13.  Struggle tenaciously and heroically for the full and complete victory of the democratic revolution throughout the country, and, this stage completed, immediately and without any transition period, go over to the socialist revolution in order to, together with the international proletariat, the oppressed nations and the peoples of the world, through cultural revolutions, continue humanity’s march to its final goal, communism.

Posted in IndiaComments Off on Now they have Maoist Communist Party, Manipur.

BOO HOO HOO–Pollard’s ex-wife: “I’m starved for food”


Nine months after being flown in to IsraHell in poor financial, health state, Ann Pollard says she has been reduced to begging. PM’s Office: She receives monthly stipend, constant medical care

ed note–remember as you read this that this woman was convicted of waging espoionage against the United States, and that as a result of the collaborative efforts she performed in collusion with her husband Jonathon and the Zionist government of IsraHell, over 1,000 American intelligence operatives lost their lives. Does the Jewish press point all of this out? No. All we hear, day in and day out, is how pool wittle Jonathon is in ‘failing health’ and simply wants before dying and going to hell where he belongs is to go to IsraHell to live out his last years on earth as a ‘good Jew’.

The fridge is empty, the electricity turned off and the landlord has been waiting for his rent money for weeks. Ann Pollard, 51, the former wife of convicted Zionist spy Jonathan Pollard, was flown to IsraHell by the government in December 2010, after being reduced to poverty. Things do not appear to have improved, however.

Pollard says she spends the better part of her day walking around outside, claiming she has a hard time sleeping because instead of a proper bed to rest her head on – she sleeps on the sofa. She has no money to buy a couch.

Ann Pollard brought to IsraHell by government initiative due to dire financial, medical state. ‘We have moral, humanitarian obligation to her,’ says Prime Minister Netanyahu

She now lives in a 30 square meter (approx. 322 square feet) apartment at the corner of Nordau and Dizengoff in Tel Aviv. The cost: NIS 4,600 per month (approx. $1,296).

According to Pollard, the State provides her with NIS 4,500 per month (approx. $1,268). It’s not a small amount by any means, but Pollard is still not satisfied, complaining she lacks enough money to lead a proper life.

Pollard spends most of her days alone, with a cat as her only companion. She walks the streets as though she were a somnambulist, starving, she claims.

“I have no money left,” she says, claiming Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu promised to care for her when she arrived in IsraHell over nine months ago. But no one even honors her immigrant ID card, she claims. 

Before the Pollard affair became public, Ann worked in public relations in Washington. Since her release from prison her health has deteriorated making it impossible for her to hold down a full time job. Even her attempts to open her own business were unsuccessful as she lacks the required capital to start up.

After contacting the Zionist consul in New York in August 2010 to inform officials about her medical and financial condition, Ann disappeared. IsraHell representatives reported they were unable to reach her via phone. When they finally visited her apartment, officials found Pollard in poor health with her elderly father beside her.

Pollard, however, tells a different story. She claims that even before contacting the consul she tried to reach out for help through the Zionist embassy, but was “thrown out on the street.” Pollard insists that she was brought to IsraHell only after Netanyahu intervened, but states that she has not been looked after since.

Ann Pollard was arrested in 1986 together with her estranged husband Jonathan, and was charged with espionage. She was sentenced to five years in prison. Upon her release she made aliyah but returned to the US several years later. She claims her medical problems began in jail. “I keep begging to the welfare authorities but the State humiliates me,” she says.

Her bank account may be closed soon as she has overdrawn almost NIS 10,000.

Referring to her relationship with her estranged husband she says she has never been granted an official divorce and is unable to reach him on the phone.

The Prime Minister’s Office said in response: “Ann and her father are both receiving care from the absorption and welfare services ever since the government rushed to help them this past December, and made sure to bring them to IsraHell immediately.

“Ever since their arrival, Ann and her father have been given some NIS 15,000 (approx. $4,227) per month. Despite the fact that the two have a furnished apartment in Ramat Gan, which is being paid for in its entirety, Ann has refused to live with her father, opting to reside in the center of Tel Aviv.

“During the course of the first few months in IsraHell, Ann received a monthly stipend of NIS 6,000 (approx. $1,690) and at the same time her various debts amounting to more than NIS 20,000 were also covered, as well as medical care and welfare services. Recently the monthly stipend has increased to NIS 10,000 – covering the rent payments, bills and living costs. Her father, meanwhile, is also receiving an additional NIS 5,000 for his needs.”

A number of businessmen have decided to help Pollard by donating money to cover her debts and have her electricity turned back on. In return Ann thanked them for their help, but concluded it was a shame she had been reduced to begging for money in order to make through another month.

Posted in USAComments Off on BOO HOO HOO–Pollard’s ex-wife: “I’m starved for food”

Nazi promotes colonel who justified beating Palestinian detainees


Colonel Itai Virov, former commander of Kfir brigade, to be promoted to brigadier-general, will be head commander for infantry soldiers and paratroopers.

Zio-Nazi Defense Forces Chief of Staff Benny Gantz and the General Staff have recently decided to appoint several Nazi officers to senior field positions, among them a colonel who in the past justified hitting Palestinian detainees.

Nazi Colonel Itai Virov, former commander of the Kfir brigade, is to be promoted to brigadier-general and will be a head commander for infantry soldiers and paratroopers.

Virov was reprimanded in the past for justifying hitting Palestinian detainees under certain circumstances. Virov made his comments during the trial of one of his soldiers, who was accused of hitting a Palestinian during an arrest in the West Bank in 2009.

Then Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi called Yirov’s comments an “exception” to Nazi practice.

The head of the human rights organization Yesh Din, Haim Erlich, said that “the promotion of someone who justified the hitting of innocent citizens indicates that the IDF has not internalized the importance of its treatment of the civilian Palestinian populace.”

Erlich said Yariv’s advancement “legitimizes violence in the eyes of lower ranking soldiers.”

Posted in Human RightsComments Off on Nazi promotes colonel who justified beating Palestinian detainees

Palestine: national unity stalls


Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism!

At the beginning of May 2011, Hamas and Fatah signed a national unity agreement, brokered by the new regime in Egypt. This was supposed to see a new national government of technocrats, a unified security force across Gaza and the West Bank, and fresh elections within one year. In practical terms it seems nothing much has happened since then, with the main public stumbling block being the choice of Prime Minister. Mahmoud Abbas insists his main ally, Salam Fayyad, should continue as head of the interim government, while Hamas wants an independent figure. There is also disagreement over Abbas and the PLO’s determination to present a motion calling for recognition of an independent Palestinian state at the UN in September. On 17 July a leading member of Hamas, Ezzet Al Resheq, declared that Palestinian independence could only come through resistance and that Abbas’s insistence on continuing with the UN strategy was against the interests of national unity. He also condemned Fatah in the West Bank for continuing to arrest supporters of Hamas.

Abbas and Fatah have very little room to manoeuvre; they have been forced by events in the wider region, particularly Egypt, to respond to the growing demands within Palestinian society for a national unity agreement. On the other hand they are being squeezed by Israel and the imperialists to reject any notion of resistance and to agree to yet another round of ‘peace negotiations’ with Israel which will further weaken any basis for a Palestinian state. It seems that Abbas and Fatah see the UN option as the only card in their hands. However, US imperialism has threatened them with financial penalties if they persist in this strategy. At the beginning of July the US House of Representatives voted overwhelming 406-6 for a motion that warned the Palestinians that they risk cuts in US aid ‘if they pursue UN recognition of a future state not defined in direct talks with Israel’. The Palestinian Authority (PA) is completely dependent on foreign aid and is experiencing severe financial difficulties at the moment: Arab states have not given it promised funds, and PA employees are expected to receive only half their monthly pay in July. The Civil Servants Union in the West Bank has given the PA notice that if the situation is not sorted out soon then they could begin strike action. Whichever way Abbas and Fatah turn, they are facing serious difficulties.

Israel and imperialism extend siege of Gaza to Greece

It is just over one year since the Freedom Flotilla to Gaza was murderously attacked by Israeli military forces in international waters killing nine activists. A second Flotilla, Freedom Flotilla 2, was planned to set sail from Greek ports to Gaza at the end of June this year. In the run-up to its departure, Israel issued its organisers with several threats to which US imperialism lent its support. Hillary Clinton was open in her backing of further Israeli violence against the Flotilla, ‘Israelis have the right to defend themselves’ if ships ‘try to provoke action by entering into Israeli waters’. The Greek government, which is following an economic and political path directed by the IMF and is engaged in massive attacks on the living conditions of the working class in Greece, did all in its power to disrupt and block the Flotilla from sailing. Israeli divers have been allowed to operate in Greek docks sabotaging Flotilla ships and Greece has placed massive bureaucratic safety demands on the ships preventing their departure. At the time of writing only one ship, the French boat Dignity, had managed to set sail; on 18 May the Israeli navy seized it illegally in international waters and took it to the Israeli port of Adhdod.

The siege of Gaza continues with Israel continuing to deny the free passage of goods across the border. The Rafah crossing into Egypt, although now open for longer periods, is only normally a crossing for people, not heavy goods, and the flow of people allowed to leave Gaza is still severely restricted. The reality of life for ordinary people in Gaza remains one of grinding poverty. Chris Gunness, the spokesperson for the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the major aid agency for Gaza, described the situation to Noam Chomsky as desperate: ‘If there were no humanitarian crisis, if there weren’t a crisis in almost every aspect of life in Gaza, there would be no need for the Flotilla. 95% of all water in Gaza is undrinkable, 40% of all disease is water-borne… 45.2% of the labour force is unemployed, 80% aid dependency, a tripling of the abject poor since the start of the blockade. Let’s get rid of this blockade and there would be no need for a Flotilla.’

The Greek government, in a shameful attempt to excuse its craven behaviour, offered to deliver the humanitarian aid to Gaza instead. Over 60 Palestinian organisations signed an Open Letter rejecting this proposal, as the Flotilla, far from being just a collection of ships delivering aid, is making a political statement and is part of the international movement of solidarity with the Palestinian struggle:

‘The people of Gaza are only in need of humanitarian aid because we are prevented from building our economy. We are not allowed to import raw materials or to export; our fishermen and farmers get shot at when attempting to fish or to harvest their crops. As a result of deliberate Israeli policy, 80% of our people have become food aid dependent, our infrastructure is in shambles, and our children cannot imagine a day when they will know freedom. Your offer to deliver the cargo of the Freedom Flotilla entrenches the notion that humanitarian aid will solve our problems and is a weak attempt to disguise your complicity in Israel’s blockade.

‘We are so sorry not to accept your charity. The organizers and participants of the Freedom Flotilla recognize that our plight is not about humanitarian aid; it is about our human rights. They carry with them something more important than aid; they carry hope, love, solidarity and respect. Your offer to collude with our oppressors to deliver aid to us is strongly REJECTED.’

Sheik Raed Salah

On Saturday 25 June, Sheikh Raed Salah, the leader of the Islamic Movement in Israel and a participant in the 2010 Flotilla to Gaza, legally entered Britain to address a number of meetings across the country on the situation of Palestinians within Israel and the deteriorating situation of Palestinians in East Jerusalem. Three days later on the night of Tuesday 28 June he was arrested, detained and told he would be deported from the country. Theresa May, Home Secretary, said that Salah shouldn’t have been allowed to enter the country, and that the UK Border Agency had made a mistake allowing him in as ‘the Home Office had excluded him for his anti-Semitic views’. This ‘exclusion’ was news to Salah, his solicitors and the organisation that had invited him to Britain, The Middle East Monitor. The fact is that even in Israel Salah has never been found guilty of making any anti-Semitic comments.

As Palestinian solidarity activists and defenders of democratic rights demonstrated against Salah’s arrest and detention, the Labour Party, voicing its continuing unconditional support for Zionism, once more expressed its racist contempt, not just for the Palestinian people, but for all those, asylum seekers and others, attempting to enter Britain. Labour’s Yvette Cooper, the shadow Home Secretary, said the government’s rhetoric of being tough on border controls had been ‘exposed as an incompetent sham… The Home Secretary needs to urgently explain why an individual banned from this country was allowed to walk in and instead of being stopped at the border had to be pursued by the police instead’. She clearly did not care that Salah had never been banned and that May had been lying. Salah has now been released on bail after a successful appeal to the High Court against his detention. He will be fighting against the attempt to deport him.

In a significant defeat of Zionist and imperialist plans to keep Hamas isolated, on 3 May the new Egyptian government brokered a national unity agreement between Hamas and Fatah, the principal Palestinian factions. The response from Israel was outrage. Less than two weeks later, on 15 May, Nakba Day, which commemorates the expulsion of 750,000 Palestinians from their land in 1948, Zionist forces showed how they would respond to any ‘Arab Spring’ amongst the Palestinian people. As thousands of Palestinian refugees demonstrated on the Israeli borders with Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank and Gaza, Israeli soldiers used live fire to drive them back, killing many and injuring hundreds more. BOB SHEPHERD reports.

The killing began in Jerusalem on 14 May when Israeli forces shot dead a 17-year-old militant of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). The PFLP called on people to support the Nakba demonstrations and linked them clearly to the wider events shaking the region: ‘These rallies, and the movement of return, are part of the new horizon opening from the Arab youth movement and the process of democratic and popular transformation sweeping our Arab countries.’ Israel knew there would be an outpouring of anger on Nakba Day. Defence Minister Ehud Barak sealed off the West Bank for 24 hours from midnight on 14 May and deployed 10,000 border police and troops in Jerusalem, the West Bank and in the area of Haifa within Israel itself.

On 15 May hundreds of Palestinians gathered at the Qalandia checkpoint in the West Bank, the main checkpoint built into the Apartheid Wall separating Ramallah from Jerusalem. Israeli troops crossed into the Qalandia refugee camp using tear gas and firing rubber-coated steel bullets in their attempts to break up the demonstration. More than 80 demonstrators were injured with 20 hospitalised, including three paramedics. In Gaza demonstrators gathered by the Beit Hanoun border crossing in the north of the strip. Israel forces opened fire from watchtowers overlooking the area, and used artillery and tear gas to break up the demonstration. Over 100 Palestinians were wounded. According to Human Rights Watch, 70 had gunshot wounds to the lower body. A demonstration near Khan Younis in the south of the strip was also brutally broken up by the Israelis.

However it was in Lebanon and Syria that the unprecedented happened as tens of thousands of Palestinian refugees demonstrated at the Israeli border. In Lebanon, where there are around 270,000 Palestinian refugees, 40-50,000 people travelled to the southern border to protest. Around 2,000 broke through Lebanese army ranks and reached the electrified border fence. A Lebanese journalist, Moe Ali Nayed, quoted in Al Ahram Weekly described the Israeli response: ‘People were chanting and throwing stones and every once in a while the Israelis would shoot just three to five shots…it wasn’t random fire, it seemed to me they were shooting to kill.’ The Israelis killed ten or eleven unarmed Palestinian demonstrators and wounded over a hundred more. A Human Rights Watch report on 20 May corroborated Nayed’s account.

Independent activists had set up a committee with Hamas, Fatah and other Palestinian organisations to organise the demonstration. Hizbullah helped provide transport and facilitate the demonstration but did not mobilise its supporters to attend. One of the organisers said ‘the demonstration has put more focus on the right of return and gave the Palestinians the chance to express themselves directly right on the border…we’re not stopping, things won’t be the same after 15 May’.

In Syria on the Golan Heights thousands of Syrians and Palestinian refugees gathered in the morning of 15 May at a point near the fence where traditionally Syrian families separated by the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights shout greetings to their relatives across the border. On this day though, shouted messages were not enough. Hundreds of young refugees, ignoring the landmines planted along the border, climbed over the fences and reached the occupied Golan village of Majd Al Chams. Once again, the Zionists responded with live fire, murdering four Palestinians.

The determination of Palestinian refugees to reassert their right to return has unnerved the Zionists. Prime Minister Netanyahu declared that ‘these protests prove that the conflict with the Palestinians is not over the 1967 borders but rather over Israel itself’. The demonstrations, particularly in Lebanon and Syria, have been organised not just by the traditional Palestinian organisations but also by independent forces based among the youth who have drawn inspiration from the events in Egypt and across the region. As Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said: ‘Nothing of what you see would have been possible without the Arab revolutions, especially the Egyptian revolution.’

The momentous events in the region are also what lie behind the unity agreement reached by Hamas and Fatah in Cairo. In the last FRFI we reported that in March thousands of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank had come out on the streets calling for national unity against Israeli occupation. Significantly the new government in Egypt broke with former President Mubarak’s slavish support for Zionism and brokered an agreement between Hamas and Fatah which put the latter on the spot. Under the agreement a new government of independent experts and technocrats will be set up to run the West Bank and Gaza until new elections are held within one year. The security forces in the West Bank and Gaza are to be united and Hamas is also reported to have formally agreed to the ceasefire that is in place in the West Bank. In a further sign of independence, Egypt re-opened the Rafah border crossing on 27 May, ending a four-year closure.

How things will progress over the coming period is uncertain. The accord has not yet stopped Palestinian Authority (PA) security forces arresting resistance activists in the West Bank. Khalil Assaf, the representative of the ‘Gathering of the Independent Personalities’ in the West Bank, in a press release on 19 May said the PA security forces haven’t received any orders from the PA leadership to stop political arrests in the West Bank. He said that the PA security apparatus in the West Bank had told him that ‘they were part of a security institution that has no relation with any Palestinian faction and that it hasn’t received any orders from the political level to stop such policy’. As the PA security forces are trained, funded and run by the US in collaboration with Israel such a statement is not surprising.

The mass sentiment for national unity amongst the Palestinian people both within the West Bank and Gaza, and within Israel itself, as well as amongst the millions of refugees, is based on a desire to fight for basic Palestinian rights which include an end to the occupation and the right of return for all Palestinian refugees. Any unity agreement which fails to have this at its core will certainly collapse. The fact that craven, pro-imperialist bourgeois Palestinian collaborators such as Abbas and Fayyad, who lead the PA, are part of the new national unity agreement reflects the pressures on them from the Palestinian people.

The strategy of Fatah and the PA to which Hamas is now committed is to put a motion before the United Nations in September calling for recognition of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders. This is likely to get overwhelming support, and with the new-found unity of the Palestinian people together with the democratic struggles taking place in the region, it could create serious political difficulties for US imperialism. Normally, it would veto such a resolution in the UN Security Council. However, President Obama now has to consider how this relates to the new situation especially given continued Israeli intransigence.

Obama revealed some of US imperialism’s current strategic thinking on the Middle East and North Africa during mid-May with a speech on the ‘Arab Spring’, a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and an address to the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPEC). He underlined Israel’s importance in defending the interests of US imperialism in the region. On 20 May, after his meeting with Netanyahu at the White House he said:

‘We discussed, first of all, the changes that are sweeping the region and what has been happening in places like Egypt and Syria and how they affect the interests and security of the United States and Israel… We agreed that there is a moment of opportunity that can be seized as a consequence of the Arab Spring, but also acknowledge that there are significant perils as well, and that it’s going to be important for the United States and Israel to consult closely as we see developments unfold.’

In his speech to AIPEC on 22 May Obama declared ‘the bonds between the United States and Israel are unbreakable, and the commitment of the United States to the security of Israel is ironclad… A strong and secure Israel is in the national security interest of United States’. This would require closer military cooperation: ‘Because we understand the challenges Israel faces, I and my administration have made the security of Israel a priority. It’s why we’ve increased cooperation between our militaries to unprecedented levels. It’s why we’re making our most advanced technologies available to our Israeli allies. And its why, despite tough fiscal times, we’ve increased foreign military financing to record levels.’

However, US imperialism faces a major problem: how can it pretend to be the champion of human rights in the region while supporting an intransigent, thuggish and  racist Israeli state? Netanyahu’s sharp response to Obama’s ‘Arab Spring’ speech, rejecting any suggestion of a settlement based on the 1967 borders with land swaps to ensure Israeli security, is an indication of the problems US imperialism faces. If the Zionists don’t tone down their racist arrogance then the international campaign to isolate Israel will continue to advance. Obama expressed this concern when he told AIPEC:

‘But the march to isolate Israel internationally, and the impulse of the Palestinians to abandon negotiations, will continue to gain momentum in the absence of a credible peace process and alternative. And for us to have leverage with the Palestinians, to have leverage with the Arab States and with the international community, the basis for negotiations has to hold out the prospect of success.’

Not once did Obama call for an end to settlement construction or for the right of return of refugees, and nor did he condemn Israel’s indiscriminate killing of Palestinian refugees on Nakba Day. His only condemnation was reserved for Hamas’ refusal to recognise Israel. However, the imperialists are worried by events in the region, and this should give us encouragement. When he talked of ‘the march to isolate Israel internationally’, it is a march we need to accelerate with the building of the boycott and disinvestment movement.

Posted in Palestine AffairsComments Off on Palestine: national unity stalls

Shoah’s pages