Archive | January 19th, 2012


TUT Podcast Jan 18, 2012

by crescentandcross


A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself.

For the traitor appears not a traitor—he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation—he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city—he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared…….Cicero, 42 BC

We are joined by co-host Mark Dankof to discuss the latest ‘scandal’ involving Israel’s Mossad posing as American CIA agents and contracting with known terrorist groups to murder innocent civilians around the world and yet NOT ONE of the Reublican candidates using the issue of ‘American security’ as one of the campaign planks has discussed it.


Download Here







Posted in PoliticsComments Off on SOME JEWS ARE OFFENDED BY THE TRUTH!!! (MUST WATCH)


As a Jew….A letter to Sarah Colbourne

November 2011

Sarah Colbourne is General Secretary of the PSC.

Dear Sarah

As you know, I resigned from the PSC about five years ago. This was not my choice. The PSC were discussing my expulsion at the time and, for family reasons, I just couldn’t risk the inevitable publicity and abuse.

Since then, friends of mine and also of Palestine, Francis Clark-Lowes and Gill Kaffash have suffered similar fates and both for the same ‘crimes’ – Holocaust denial and/or anti-Semitism. You’ll also be aware of the number of similar cases where good Palestine solidarity activists have been pressured, and in some cases, hounded out of the PSC. For a list of these activities, you only have to go to the Engage website.

Personally, I can’t accept that having a certain point of view about a period of twentieth century history should carry such stigma and specifically, why it should render someone unfit to participate in Palestinian solidarity. And the same goes for a challenge to Jewish political ideology or activism. Of course I could be accused of being a bit disingenuous – after all, everyone knows the baggage that such opinions carry – but if you look at it a little dispassionately, can you not see that the baggage is itself part and parcel of Zionist power?

In all these cases the pressure on the PSC came from openly Zionist sources such as Engage, Harry’s Place and the Jewish Chronicle, and also from equally Jewish, but in this case, ‘anti-Zionist’ activists. Again, the crimes were alleged Holocaust denial and/or anti-Semitism (whatever they may mean) and in all cases, the definitions were supplied and enforced by the accusers.

Forgive the rhetoric, but who the hell are these people, and what do they stand for? Do they stand for the Palestinian people and do they have their best interests at heart? And Francis Clark-Lowes, Gill Kaffash and all the others who have been targeted; what do they stand for? Do they have the interests of the Palestinian people at heart?

And what has the PSC response been to these horrible and unfair assaults? In every case, it has been to meekly bow its head and comply with these demands. This submission has taken the form of formal statements, informal answers to questions and, in the end, expulsions. Not once has the PSC questioned the right of these abusive people to define, always in their own terms and interests, what the boundaries of the solidarity discourse may be.

And what does the future hold? I think Gill Kaffash speaks prophetically when she asks: “How long do you think it will be until the Jewish Chronicle demands the PSC unreservedly condemns Hamas? And how long before PSC complies?”

You could argue, (and I can understand the argument) that the PSC has to take the position it takes for tactical reasons and that failing to kow-tow to these Zionist demands serves only to provide weapons for those who would secure the oppression of the Palestinians. But again, the act of submission itself is increasing the power of those who oppress Palestinians. And anyway, where has your caution got you? Marc Ellis, that great ‘Jew of Conscience’ used to say “Abandon strategy!” And to some extent, I agree. Abandon strategy. Forget, “if I do this will they do that?” Forget “If we say this will they say that?” And, most of all, forget“If we do this will they call us that?” Those times are over. It’s time to resist, to defy and to speak out.

Sarah, I have some understanding of the horrible situation you and the PSC are in and I won’t presume to tell you what you should or should not do. But if I may, I’d like to offer a piece of (unsolicited) advice. It begins with a phrase I loathe and which up till now, I have studiously avoided…As a Jew,

As a Jew, I can tell you, you don’t have to bow to this kind of pressure. It’s largely (not totally) a bluff – the same kind of bluff that enabled a few thousand Brits keep down millions of Africans and Asians in the days of Empire. It’s a clear case of the Emperor’s New Clothes – call the bluff and, I promise you, the Emperor will be left standing – stark, naked.

So, Sarah, the next time the Jewish Chronicle contacts you for a reaction, why not say somewhat frostily: ‘No comment’?

Best wishes


Paul Eisen
November 2011


* PSC: Palestine Solidarity Campaign

Posted in Campaigns1 Comment

Vulgarity to Blame for Marines Urinating on Dead


Two US Marines in abuse video identified.  No Heroes Here!  Just Shameless and Pathetic Vulgarity


by Johnny Punish


YouTube – Veterans Today –

Is this what America is all about? 

Two of the four US Marines seen in a videoappearing to urinate on dead Afghan bodies have been identified, a Marine Corps official told the Reuters news agency today.  The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that the Marines believed the video was authentic.

The two that were identified are still part of the 3rd Battalion, 2nd Marines, based out of Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, according to the official who spoke to reporters on Thursday. That unit served in Afghanistan’s Helmand province from March until September of 2011, the official said.

Earlier on Thursday, Afghan President Hamid Karzai condemned the video.

“The government of Afghanistan is deeply disturbed by a video that shows American soldiers desecrating dead bodies of three Afghans,” said a statement from Karzai’s office on Thursday.

“This act by American soldiers is simply inhuman and condemnable in the strongest possible terms.”

The footage, first posted on the Live Leak website, shows four men in military uniforms urinating on three bloodied bodies on the ground, apparently aware that they were being filmed.

In a phone call to Karzai, Leon Panetta, the US defence secretary, expressed his regret over the incident and promised an investigattion.

“I have seen the footage, and I find the behaviour depicted in it utterly deplorable. I condemn it in the strongest possible terms,” Panetta said in a statement.

Panetta ordered the Marine Corps and General John Allen, the US commander of international forces in Afghanistan, to immediately and fully investigate the incident.

“This conduct is entirely inappropriate for members of the United States military … Those found to have engaged in such conduct will be held accountable to the fullest extent,” he said.

Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, also expressed “dismay” and condemned the “deplorable behavior”.

The international coalition forces in Afghanistan, as well as the US embassy in Kabul, have also strongly condemend the video.

About 20,000 marines are deployed in Afghanistan, mostly in Kandahar and Helmand provinces, in the south of the war-ravaged country.

Taliban reaction

Al Jazeera’s Rosiland Jordan, reporting from Washington, said the video will make the work of US forces in the country much more difficult.

“The timing could not be more difficult. The US is trying to work out efforts to engage in direct peace talks with the Taliban, it is trying to support the Afghan government’s efforts to promote reconciliation,” she said.

In a statement, the Taliban said the incident was “against all international human rights” but “not the only example of the horrific actions that the Americans have done in Afghanistan”.

“American soldiers are trained to spread horror and this is one of the examples,” the Taliban said.

However, the group’s statement added that the incident would not affect negotiations with the US after US officials said Washington would send an envoy to Afghanistan to prepare the ground for direct peace talks between the two sides.

Lieutenant Colonel Jay Stout, a former US Marine Corps pilot,  said he found the incident “disturbing”.

“Look, marines kill to win, and sometimes they kill a lot and that’s good, that’s fine, that’s war,” he said.

“But in victory we are trained to be compassionate, we are trained to be respectful and this incident was neither of those.”

The US military has been prosecuting soldiers from its army’s Fifth Stryker Brigade on charges of murdering unarmed Afghan civilians while deployed in 2010 in Kandahar province.

In that case, photographs published last March by two magazines – Der Spiegel and Rolling Stone – showed soldiers posing with the bloodied corpse of an Afghan boy they had just killed.

YouTube – Veterans Today –

A Final Comment

Truly saddened, I must say that the now long standing collective culture of vulgarity where we are collectively conditioned to arrogantly hate and view others as less than not only those outside the USA but within is the culprit.

These soldiers are victims of this engrained vulgarity. Whatever motivated these young men to think that pissing on dead humans is something to do for kicks shines a horrible reflective light on the sickness that is the U.S. culture; from top to bottom.

It’s time to stop blaming everyone in the world for our own collective falling from grace or just admit that we are no longer a leader and take our place in the long line of pathetic cultures and bottom tier nations that neither influence or have standing in the minds of those of us who live and aim high in the 21st century.

In my view, the US has many wonderful people seeking wonderful things.  But this collective downward spiral of our conscienceness is appalling and really needs a massive overall.  It’s everything!  It’s making fun of people with towels on their headsd or calling someone of color “hey boy” or  laughing at our working man neighbors in Mexico who only seek to feed their families.

It’s many things! And first and foremost among them is re-learning how to respect our fellow man and not merely piss on them.  I remain embarrassed as I should be! And you?

Posted in USAComments Off on Vulgarity to Blame for Marines Urinating on Dead

Nuclear Assassinations: The Unholy Marriage of Spy Agencies


By Dr. Ismail Salami


“I saw a motorcycle. They were wearing ski masks — black ski masks. They were two people. I saw the motorcycle speed by. I saw them. It seemed as if they had something in their hands,” this is how a female witness described the scene of the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan.

As the blade of blame is being directed against the CIA and Mossad for orchestrating the brutal assassination of the 32-year-old Iranian scientist in broad daylight in Tehran on Wednesday morning, the duo have preferred to feign ignorance as to the identity of the main perpetrator of the crime.

“I want to categorically deny any United States involvement in any kind of act of violence inside Iran,” US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told reporters on Thursday.

Also, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the US had nothing to do with the assassination.

“We were not involved in any way — in any way — with regards to the assassination that took place [in Iran],” he said. “I’m not sure of who was involved…But I can tell you one thing: the United States was not involved in that kind of effort. That’s not what the United States does.”

The US is not the only party which has chosen to be in denial.

Israeli President Shimon Peres also denied on Thursday that Israel was involved in the assassination of the Iranian nuclear scientist. In an interview with CNN, Peres was asked if Israel was involved in the nuclear assassination, to which he answered: “Not to the best of my knowledge.”

“I know that it is fashionable that whatever wrong happens in Iran, it is the United States and Israel. There is nothing new in this approach,” said Peres.

What kind of answer would the viewers expect from Peres to such a native question? The question is indeed as unwise in substance as the answer given by Peres.

In order to find out who really killed the Iranian scientist, one needs to put together the factual pieces.

Just two days after Iran sentenced to death CIA operative of Iranian descent Amir Mirzaei Hekmati, two unidentified men on a motorcycle attached a magnetic bomb onto the car of Iranian nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, a senior official at Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility, and detonated it on Wednesday, killing the young scientist and his driver.

It does not seem unreasonable to say that there was a link between the two incidents.

And in comes a third party e.g. Britain which bears as equal responsibility for the crime as the other two. British Middle East minister Alistair Burt has recently visited Israel and demanded all nations intensify pressure on Tehran to stall its nuclear program. Proudly he announced that “a few weeks ago the British government imposed tough new financial restrictions against Iran. These new sanctions make it illegal for any financial institution in the United Kingdom to have any dealings with any institution in Iran. They are the toughest of their kind. And we will build on them, getting others to follow suit.”

A close friend of Israel, Mr. Burt described the Iranian nuclear program as “the major issue at the top of our shared agenda,” saying that Israel can serve as a partner in a common cause against a regime dangerously loose.”

Lavishing pearls of British wisdom on the audience while speaking at Bar-Ilan University’s Feldman International Conference Center, Mr. Burt said Iran “does not just threaten Israel,” and sycophantically described Israel as the “bastion for stability in the region.”

Also contributing to the shared agenda of Israel and Britain in nuclear assassinations and sabotage activities in Iran is the remark of the Israel Defense Forces’ Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz who said on Tuesday in an address to a closed Knesset committee that Iran should expect more “unnatural” events in 2012.

While the hawks in Washington have already declared a nuclear war on Iran in a metaphoric sense i.e. the assassination of the Iranian nuclear scientists, some of them avail themselves of a kind of literature in their reference to the nuclear assassinations which indicates the abyss of human degeneration. An impetuous example of this was reflected in a video circulated on the internet in which Rick Santorum, who is a sad excuse for a human being and a politically bankrupt White House aspirant, has unfeelingly described the assassination of Iranian scientists as “wonderful.”

“On occasion, scientists working on the nuclear program in Iran turn up dead. I think that’s a wonderful thing, candidly,” said Rick Santorum addressing an election campaign in Greenville, South Carolina.

He added that, “I think we should send a very clear message that if you are a scientist from Russia, North Korea, or from Iran and you are going to work on a nuclear program to develop a bomb for Iran, you are not safe.”

The assassinated Iranian scientist Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan posing next to his son.

There are times when one wonders how on earth all these politically, ethically and intellectually Lilliputian-minded people have turned up together in this world.

All these facts aside, examples for the animosity of the UK, US and Israel towards the Islamic Republic are legion. However, this is just the tip of the iceberg of the myriad crimes orchestrated, funded and carried out by the trio.

There is no doubt that the recent assassination has caused a lot of intellectual anguish, emotional pain and political wrath in Iran.

In a stern warning, Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, lashed out at the United States and Israel for orchestrating the assassination of Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan. In a message of condolence to his family, Ayatollah Khamenei said the assassination was carried out under the unholy auspices of the CIA and Mossad.

“This act of cowardice, whose perpetrators and architects will never dare to confess to their foul and appalling crime or assume responsibility for it, has been engineered and funded by the CIA and Mossad [spy] services,” he said, adding, “The assassination shows that the global arrogance spearheaded by the US and Zionism has arrived at an impasse in their encounter with the determined, devout, and progressive nation of Islamic Iran.”

Central to the circle of the prime suspects in the nuclear assassinations is the IAEA itself. About two weeks ago, Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan had reportedly met the agency inspectors.

Isn’t it strange that the nuclear scientist was killed only two weeks after his meeting with the IAEA inspectors?

Another point which actually strengthens the speculation is that the names and identities of Iranian nuclear scientists who have so far been assassinated have been published in the list of sanctions issued by the IAEA.

Israel Defense Forces’ Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz has said, Iran should be expecting more “unnatural” events in 2012.

Iran is certainly prepared for the worst but the enemies of the Islamic Republic should for their part await devastating consequences of colossal proportions if they wish to persevere in their path of mischief.

Posted in IranComments Off on Nuclear Assassinations: The Unholy Marriage of Spy Agencies

Alan Dershowitz’ Attempt to Destroy a Memorial to Martin Luther King


By Gilad Atzmon


A year ago I was invited to attend a celebration of Martin Luther King Jr. at the Friends Meeting House, NYC. The Meeting House Orchestra was due to play music from my award winning Exile album – an album created to celebrate the prospect of peace and harmony in the Middle East and beyond.

Yesterday, the concert took place. Friends Meeting House was packed to capacity. The atmosphere was electric. Though I have performed at, and attended music events pretty well every night for the last thirty years, what I saw yesterday was one of the most moving events that I have ever attended or participated in.

However, one particular Zionist ethnic-cleansing advocate, seemed a little less than happy. Just hours before the event, the infamous Alan Dershowitz decided to destroy the party. In shame and desperation he attempted to pressure the organizers to cancel this concert.  Perhaps the Hasbara mouthpiece truly believed that destroying a Martin Luther King Memorial was good for Israel and/or the Jews.  He was wrong. Again, as ever, he overestimated his own power and influence.

As I opened my eyes today I learned that a humiliated Dershowitz had spread his vile demagoguery in the New York Daily News.  As he now does at least once a week, again he calls me an anti-Semite and a Holocaust denier. Again, he stitches together sentences and half-quotes completely out of context.

Again, he attacks my many and distinguished academic endorser – He tried it with  Professor John Mearsheimer and he tried it with Professor Richard Falk – but again, always he fails. The painful truth is that over the years Dershowitz has earned himself a reputation as a compulsive liar – and, save for a few noisy Zionists, no-one takes him very seriously any more.

Recently, I exposed Dershowitz’s  Lies and Glitches in a comprehensive  deconstruction of his duplicitous tactics, so I see little point in doing it again. But I do understand why Dershowitz is so upset about my latest book ‘The Wandering Who’. In the book, I present some harsh criticisms of Jewish identity politics. I don’t criticise Jews and I don’t criticise Judaism – but I most certainly do criticise the Dershowitzes of this world. I expose their lobbying tactics, their aggressive and deceitful behaviour and their advocacy of wars and global conflicts. So, I guess that Dershowitz must have now grasped the personal consequences for him of the success of ‘The Wandering Who’.

Dershowitz knows all his campaigns have been in vain. He knows that my book is endorsed and praised by the leading humanists of our time. And he knows that not a single endorser of my work has bowed their head or bent their knee to his relentless pressure. In effect, Dershowitz knows the tide has changed. For him at least, the game is over.

Unfortunately, winning a battle against Dershowitz doesn’t always achieve that much. The man has no dignity, no sense of worth. He is completely unable to do the decent thing and just drift away. So, I guess I’m stuck with him forever.

But I’ve learned to make the most of it.  What I do is to allow Dershowitz to handle all my PR on this side of the pond. And you know what? The boy’s doing good. In fact, following today’s article in the Daily News, I’m looking forward to quite a surge in book sales.


And sooner than you think.


Gilad Atzmon’s New Book: The Wandering Who? A Study Of  Zionist tricks and Dershowitz in particular. Available on  or


Posted in PoliticsComments Off on Alan Dershowitz’ Attempt to Destroy a Memorial to Martin Luther King

Pissed off Marines


“National Veterans Hotline gets hundreds of calls about the pissed off Marines”


 … by  Ken Smith


As many of you already know, I volunteer at the “National Veterans Hotline” a few nights per month.  The hotline website can be found at     Last night, I was on duty for close to four hours and during that time I talked to over twenty callers.  90% of the callers had something to say about the story of Marines pissing on the dead Taliban.  Here are some of the comments I heard and then some of the emails I recieved since the incident of Marines pissing on Taliban.  

Pissed off Marines

Let me begin with some of the emails.  Here is one from a Navy corpsman, combat wounded in Vietnam named Bill.

O.K. it was pretty dumb for the Marines to demonstrate their contempt to the dead Taliban insurgents even more so because someone was stupid enough to video the event. But here’s my thoughts:  First of all FU*K the Taliban!  These Taliban assholes are responsible for providing shelter and resources to the 9/11 terrorists who planned  and executed thousands of Americans in the worst attack on the USA since December 7th 1941. These same Taliban sick religious extremists torture and murder their own people and continue to do so.  Marines haven’t beheaded anyone on TV!  Or beat the crap out of families for woman not wearing socks (and showing their ankles) or educating their daughters.  The Taliban have perverted, desecrated and destroyed the very own historic cultural symbols and history of their country.  Remember Hitler and the burning or books and art that the Nazi’s disagreed with?

What makes them any different?  The Taliban pay for their insurgency and weapons by fostering and encouraging the production and sale of heroin and opium.  This continues to destroy thousands of lives in their country and through out the world, including the United States.  It’s time these religious political extremists who hate – and want nothing more then to destroy our way of life and every single American- soldier or civilian – that there is pay back.   Show them the same respect they show their own kind and the coalition forces.  O.K. it’s not what we expect from the all volunteer professional armed forces, but I say in this case the hell with political correctness.

As a combat Vietnam Veteran I “understand” why the Marines did what they did.  I say chalk it up to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.  Give them the counseling they need to understand what they did was not in our best interest and was pretty damn stupid.  Perhaps even a VA disability rating and let them go.  WE SENT THEM THERE AND THEY ARE US!  There is no doubt in my mind that secretly deep down every American political and military person involved in the war, as well as those Americans who have lost someone on 9/11 – or – in the War On Terror, including Afghanistan families, have the same feeling towards the Taliban that the Marines showed to these dead criminals.  FU*K THEM.

Here is another email from another Marine named Jim.

Jar-heads, christ, what the hell were they thinking?  I saw the video and while at first it made me mad, there was another part of me that said Yeah, get some.  I know two Marines who bought it in Iraq and its the same thing in Afghanistan, these Taliban yahoo’s kill anything, do anything and when we get um, well, we piss um off I guess.

I have maybe another thirty or so emails, and most reflect the above sentiment.

In the calls I took while working the hotline, the general concensus was that while the act was deplorable, the hatred of the Taliban by the callers overpowered the act by the marines.  Here are some of the comments I wrote down as I was speaking to veterans and family members of veterans.

  • I think that the reason these guys did this was that they have seen first hand what the Taliban have done to the people who live there.  I don’t think they should have done it, but its not like they cut off their heads and screamed “Ali Akbar” or whatever it is that they scream.

  • “It’s better to be pissed off than pissed on” said one marine caller.

  • Marines.  You kidding me?  They are killers.  Better they are on our side then theirs.

  • I betcah that other Marines are saying “Yeah, bout time.  Get some”

  • I was in the infantry in Nam in the Army.  We would put smokes in the mouths of dead gooks just like you saw in the movies.  It was our way of dealing with the shit.

  • Let them get what they deserved (the Taliban), it was done for all the little girls in gan that they have killed and raped.

Now, there were some other callers who were outraged.

  • OMG.  Can you believe that?  These Marines are animals.

  • I am embarrassed that these Marines did this in my name.

  • Wow, pissing on dead enemy.  Who woulda thought?

  • Do they teach them that at Paris Island?


I have seen the video myself a couple of times and have my own feelings about what happened.  Take a look yourself and tell me your thoughts.


YouTube – Veterans Today -Pissed off Marines

Posted in AfghanistanComments Off on Pissed off Marines

Should the EU Break with IsraHell

Palestinian workers passing through checkpoints…

The imprisonment and collective punishment inflicted on the civilian population in the overcrowded enclave of Gaza continues without let-up.


by Stuart Littlewood


Murder, stonewalling and strangulation

For example, those whose children were killed or maimed by Israel’s murderous blitzkrieg 3 years ago (Operation Cast Lead), and whose homes were destroyed, have received no response to the criminal complaints submitted on their behalf by the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights. Not only that. They are still subjected to air-strikes, shelling or sniper fire on an almost daily basis, and live in constant fear.

1,419 Palestinians were killed during Operation Cast Lead, 82 percent civilians. A further 5,300 were injured. Israeli forces directly targeted and attacked private homes and civilian institutions, including hospitals and schools. PCHR says it has submitted 490 criminal complaints to the Israeli authorities on behalf of 1,046 victims. “To-date, only two substantive replies have been received. The overwhelming majority of complaints have been simply ignored.”

How would that sit with you if the same thing were to happen in the leafy suburbs of London, Paris, Berlin or New York?

CHECKPOINT STRIPS : every day–every single day, year in and year out–thousands of Palestinians are delayed, harassed, detained, or turned away at checkpoints that impede and sometimes prohibit travel to and from their homes.Travel to work, to hospitals, to schools, to their relatives, travel for any reason whatsoever.

The strangulation also continues. In theory there are four crossings through which vital supplies can be brought in from Israel and beyond (including the occupied West Bank) — Sufa, Nahal Oz, Kerem Abu Salem and Karni. Only Kerem Abu Salem, a small crossing in the south of Gaza, has been allowed by Israel to operate on anything like a normal basis, say reports. Elimination of crossing tightens noose on Gaza

IDF abducted Saturday night five young Palestinian men. Motives behind the operation remain a mystery.

Since the closure of Karni last March, the Israelis have made sure that all goods brought into the Gaza Strip have to go through the Kerem Abu Salem crossing. The capacity of this crossing, as you might have guessed, is insufficient for needs and its location means longer distances, longer journey times, higher fees and higher costs for Gaza’s merchants. And of course those extra charges have to be passed on. Now I read that the Karem Abu Salem crossing is to be demolished.

As for the movement of Gaza’s people, Oxfam’s latest Gaza Blockade Factsheet (December 2011) reports:

OXFAM The Big Uneasy Gaza Factsheet December 2011.pdf there are only 2 crossings, one between Gaza and Israel, and one between Gaza and Egypt. Israeli security clearance is still required to use either crossing.

The Erez crossing (to Israel) remains open but most traffic has been moved to Rafah crossing (to Egypt), reducing natural movement between Gaza and the West Bank. The overall ban on exit and entry is still in place.

For UN local humanitarian staff Israel is approving fewer permits than before the promised “easing”, while permit policy for aid workers and medical patients remains arbitrary, unpredictable and time consuming.

The report also says the near-total ban on exports continues, with 2011 exports running at less than 1% of pre-blockade levels. “In 2011 to date, only 196 trucks of exports have left Gaza. This is only 14 more trucks than in 2010 and far below the 25,480 truckloads of goods needed annually to meet pre blockade export levels. It is also significantly less than the 400 trucks of exports promised each day under the 2005 Agreement on Movement and Access.  4 truckloads of strawberries recently left Gaza between the 27- 29 November 2011. Before that, there have been no exports since May 2011 when 1 truckload of flowers was allowed to be exported to the Netherlands.”

Berlanty Azzam: arrested and taken to Gaza in the middle of the night, just two months before graduation.

For a long time Israel’s intention has been to impose a final separation between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, even though the two are internationally recognized as one integral territory. Under international law everyone has the right to freely choose their place of residence within a single territory.

Israel’s separation policy includes not only a block on travel for work, for trade, for family reunion, for medical attention and for worship in Jerusalem, it also targets higher education by making it virtually impossible for Gaza students to reach the eight Palestinian universities in the West Bank. I’m reminded of Berlanty, a Christian girl from Gaza who was living in the West Bank and studying for her degree at Bethlehem University. She was about to sit her finals when she was detained at the Israeli checkpoint between Bethlehem and Ramallah after attending a job interview.

The self-styled “most moral army in the world” blindfolded and handcuffed Berlanty, loaded her into a military jeep and drove her from Bethlehem to Gaza, where she was dumped in the darkness late at night and told: “You are in Gaza.”

The West Bank remains cruelly occupied with dead-of-night raids and arrests, even of children. The Israel government continues to instal armed squatter-thugs in hundreds of illegal ‘settlements’, from where they swoop down to terrorise local Palestinian communities and destroy their crops and other property.

Israel as usual acts in defiance of all law and standards of decency. And as usual the international community does nothing except wring their hands and turn their backs in a funk.

It’s simple to understand. Play dirty and you get sent off.

If western governments weren’t so corrupt the answer would be obvious. Suspend Israel from the 1995 EU-Israel Association Agreement. The purpose of the Agreement is to promote (1) peace and security, (2) shared prosperity through, for example, economic co-operation, free trade and free movement of capital, and (3) cross-cultural rapprochement. It governs not only EU-Israel relations but Israel’s relations with the EU’s other Mediterranean partners – including the Palestinian National Authority.

To enjoy these privileges Israel undertook to show “respect for human rights and democratic principles” set out as a general condition in Article 2, which says:

“Relations between the Parties, as well as all the provisions of the Agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this Agreement.”

This clause allows steps to be taken to enforce the contractual requirement regarding human rights and to dissuade partners from policies and practices that disrespect those rights. The Agreement also requires respect for self-determination of peoples and fundamental freedoms for all.

Even the Israelis must know that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the UN in 1948, Article 13, states: (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state, and (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

But Israel, with its racist and territorial ambitions, shows the same contempt for the rules of association as it does for international law.

From the outset it had no intention of playing the game. It relies on the power of the lobby’, the obedience of its stooges and the cowardice of the political ‘élite’ to deflect criticism, overcome objections and lean on the referee.

In 2002 the EU Parliament did actually vote to suspend the Agreement on the grounds of Israel’s violations of human rights. The resolution called for an arms embargo against Israel and Palestine, and condemned the “military escalation pursued by the Sharon government” and the “oppression of the Palestinian civilian population by the Israeli army.” The fat slugs in the EU Commission ignored the will of Parliament, and consequently there has been no improvement in Israel’s behaviour.

It’s time to try again, and to stomp on the unelected Commission if need be. Israel relies heavily on exports to Europe where it enjoys ‘favoured nation’ trading terms. So the EU could, at a stroke, end the evil occupation, the murder and the land theft, and perhaps resolve the whole problem in the Holy Land, by pulling the plug – as provided for under Article 2 of the Agreement – instead of continuing to reward Israel for its crimes.

Editing: Debbie Menon

Posted in EuropeComments Off on Should the EU Break with IsraHell

Media Assault on Ron Paul Indefensible


By Kevin Barrett


Henry Blodget of Business Insider claims he “told the truth about Ron Paul” when he said the media is right to ignore or disparage Dr. Paul, because Dr. Paul’s ideas are non-mainstream, which makes the good Doctor unelectable.  He is running a selection of emails he got in response. Unfortunately none of them succeeds in showing how ridiculous Blodget’s position actually is. So here goes:

Dear Henry Blodget,

You argue that the media has every right to ignore and/or disparage Ron Paul, because Paul’s positions are “non-mainstream” which makes him unelectable.

Your central premise is not just faulty, but absurd. Is it really the media’s business to determine what is “mainstream,” and to censor or attack anything that is not? What objective evidence determines what is “mainstream”? Public opinion polls? If so, why does the media label “mainstream” the 16% of Americans who believe the government is telling the truth about 9/11, while consigning the 84% who have doubts to the margins? (source) Obviously the media has created – not reported – the perception that 9/11 truth is “fringe” while acceptance of the official story of 9/11 is “mainstream.”

The same is even more true of Ron Paul’s foreign policy. Dr. Paul’s thesis is that the US should defend its borders, not police the world. This has been the mainstream position of the vast majority of Americans since the founding of the Republic. A tiny activist minority has labeled the majority opinion “isolationist,” and worked hard to create the perception that the minority of activists (or, to put it less kindly, warmongers) represent mainstream opinion, while the vast majority who are “isolationists” are somehow on the fringe. This mendacious project recalls the way the Bolsheviks, when they were a fringe minority, usurped the term for “majority party.” The difference is that the Bolsheviks really did become the majority party, whereas the war party in the US has always been a tiny minority that can only get its way by telling lies to the majority. (Such lies include Pearl Harbor – google “eight-point plan” – as well as Operation Northwoods, the Gulf of Tonkin, the Kuwait baby incubator hoax, 9/11, and so on.)*

Given the above, I am sure you will admit that the notion of what is “mainstream” has little to do with majority opinion. What, then, are the relevant criteria? I challenge you to produce a method, based on marshaling objective evidence, that can separate “mainstream” from “fringe” positions. Remember, there are literally thousands of issues out there; and the way each issue is framed, as well as the relative importance of each issue, is a subjective matter that varies wildly from person to person.

If you cannot produce an objective, fact-based method to determine what is “mainstream” – and I am certain that you cannot – perhaps you will admit that the media’s job is to report honestly, with fairness and balance. Specifically, in covering the election process, big media should treat all candidates equally. If candidate W is getting X percentage of votes, winning Y number of delegates, raising Z amounts of money, competing in Q number of states, etc., that candidate should be taken equally seriously as a contender based on these tangible criteria. To the extent that the candidates’ ideas are considered – a very small extent in current practice – they ought to be considered fair-mindedly, carefully and in scrupulous detail.

If the media were reporting responsibly, Paul and Romney would nearly be in a dead heat; and Paul would wear the “over-achieving underdog” mantle and be in a commanding position to win the nomination. After all, Paul won more Iowa delegates than Romney, is ahead of everybody but Romney in fund-raising, delegates, and votes, and most importantly has essentially taken over the Republican Party at the grassroots level across the nation. Finally, Dr. Paul is the only candidate with ideas that really are ideas, whether or not one agrees with them. (I personally agree with his foreign policy, but not his domestic policy.) The other candidates, by contrast, are dishing out pablum without any real substance.

The media’s attempt to destroy Dr. Paul’s candidacy, allegedly because it has some magical ability to determine what is “mainstream,” is so absurd that it raises the question: What is the real reason behind the smokescreen? I submit that the answer is obvious: The media is essentially owned and run by three overlapping special-interest groups: The Zionists, the military-industrial complex, and the big bankers who profit from massive military-spending-induced deficits.  Each of these three groups would see its pet project, and its power, collapse if Paul’s utterly mainstream foreign policy were ever implemented. That is why the media is trying to verbally assassinate Dr. Paul, while lying about its reasons for doing so.

Please consider the possibility that you have been thoughtlessly repeating a lie.

And if you disagree, please explain, with a reasonable degree of specificity, what objective criteria lie behind the “mainstream” shibboleth.


Dr. Kevin Barrett

* If you somehow believe that there is a real “extremist Muslim terror threat” out there, please provide your snailmail address and I will send you a free copy of my book Questioning the War on Terror, which proves the contrary.

Posted in USA1 Comment

Investigation: Gaddafi and Brits in Torture/Rendition Duo


Police to investigate MI6 over rendition and torture of Libyans

The deputy prime minister says the government will co-operate with a Scotland Yard investigation into secret MI6 rendition operations

Editor’s note:   Top Brit agents face prosecution for working with Gaddafi torture ring, again totally debunking Gaddafi backers.  New chemical warfare plants in Southern Libya, everything in Hebrew, evidence across Libya indicts Gaddafi regime as tied to Bush, Blair and Israel


Ian Cobain,, Thursday


Scotland Yard has opened a criminal investigation into secret MI6 rendition operations that resulted in leading Libyan dissidents being abducted and flown to Tripoli where they were subsequently tortured in Muammar Gaddafi’s prisons.

The announcement came as police and the director of public prosecutions, Keir Starmer, said there was insufficient evidence to prosecute any individual MI5 or MI6 officers following lengthy investigations into allegations of British complicity in the torture of terrorism suspects in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The new investigation is to focus on Abdul Hakim Belhaj and Sami al-Saadi, who lodged complaints with the police last November after the chance discovery of a cache of classified documents in an abandoned Libyan government office laid bare the role that MI6 played in their rendition.

Saadi was detained in Hong Kong in 2004 and then forced on to a plane to Tripoli with his wife and four children in an operation that MI6 mounted in co-operation with Gaddafi’s intelligence chief, Moussa Koussa. Saadi says he suffered years of torture.

Belhaj was detained in Bangkok along with his pregnant wife after an MI6 tip-off, and allegedly tortured by American agents for several days before being flown to Tripoli where he says he was tortured and detained for several years. His wife, who was detained for several months, has not spoken publicly about the manner in which she was treated. British officials have not sought to deny the involvement of MI6 in either rendition.

Instead, they have stressed that each resulted from what they describe as “ministerially authorised government policy”, raising the possibility that the new Yard inquiry will require the questioning of ministers of the last Labour government. In addition, the police and the Crown Prosecution Service announced that they were establishing a joint panel that would examine other allegations of UK complicity in torture and rendition levelled by a number of former Guantánamo inmates and others detained in the so-called war on terror.

These complainants include Shaker Aamer, the last British resident still held at Guantánamo. The panel will decide whether the allegations should be examined first by the official inquiry that was established by David Cameron 18 months ago, and which is waiting to start hearing evidence, or whether police should investigate immediately.

A statement issued on Thursday by Starmer and Lynne Owens, an assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan police, said the panel would consider “whether there is any significant risk that any available evidence would not be available or would be weakened” if an investigation did not take place immediately, or whether “the allegation in question is so serious that it is in the public interest to investigate it now”.

This panel advised on the Libyan cases, and the police decided that “the allegations raised in the two specific cases concerning the alleged rendition of named individuals to Libya and the alleged ill-treatment of them in Libya are so serious that it is in the public interest for them to be investigated now rather than at the conclusion of the detainee inquiry”.

Scotland Yard detectives have spent 30 months investigating allegations that the UK’s intelligence agencies had become so close to the torture inflicted by overseas governments that their officers had committed serious criminal offences. One inquiry, codenamed Operation Hinton, focused on the events surrounding MI5′s interrogation of Binyam Mohamed in May 2002, several weeks after he had been detained in Pakistan, and later events in Morocco.

Proceedings brought on Mohamed’s behalf showed that MI5 knew he was being mistreated before an officer was sent to Karachi to question him. The CPS decided more than a year ago that that officer – identified only as Witness B – should not face charges, but Operation Hinton continued while detectives pursued what Starmer described as a “wider investigation into other potential criminal conduct”. This involved attempting to trace responsibility for Witness B’s actions up MI5′s chain of command and beyond.

The investigation showed that “members of the Security Service provided information to the US authorities about Mr Mohamed and supplied questions for the US authorities to put to Mr Mohamed while he was being detained between 2002 and 2004″, the statement said.

However, the CPS has also concluded that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute any individual on the basis that they “knew or ought to have known that there was a real or serious risk that Mr Mohamed would be exposed to ill treatment amounting to torture”.

The statement added: “Nothing in this decision should be read as concluding that the ill-treatment alleged by Mr Mohamed did not take place or that it was lawful.” A second investigation, codenamed Operation Iden, concentrated on events in 2002 at Bagram airfield north of Kabul, where the US military had established a prison, and where both MI5 and MI6 officers interrogated a number of suspects after being given written instruction from London that “the law does not require you to intervene to prevent” the mistreatment they were witnessing.

That investigation was triggered after MI6 referred one of its own officers to the attorney general in September 2009. “The offences considered were aiding and abetting torture, aiding and abetting war crimes, false imprisonment, aiding and abetting assault, and misconduct in public office,” the statement said. That investigation foundered on unsuccessful attempts to take a statement from a particular individual who was said to have been mistreated in the presence of an MI6 interrogator. It is thought that this was because it was not possible to be certain about the identity of the individual.

In addition, US officials who were thought to have been present refused to be interviewed by police. “On the account that has been given by the member of the Secret Intelligence Services and taking into account all other available evidence, there is insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of convicting him of any criminal offence,” the statement concluded. It is unclear when the official inquiry, chaired by Sir Peter Gibson, a former appeal court judge, will begin hearing evidence.

In a statement on Thursday, the inquiry panel said: “The detainee inquiry panel will now carefully consider its next steps and Sir Peter Gibson will make an announcement in due course.” Most major human rights groups are boycotting the inquiry, claiming that it will be too secretive and is insufficiently independent of government, but the Foreign Office is mounting a renewed effort to persuade them back on board. The head of MI6, Sir John Sawers, said he welcomed the decision not to charge any of his officers at the conclusion of the twin investigations and said that the “courageous individual” at the centre of Operation Iden would now be able to continue his work in support of national security. He added that MI6 would co-operate with the Libyan investigations.

“It is in the service’s interest to deal with the allegations being made as swiftly as possible so we can draw a line under them and focus on the crucial work we now face in the future.” Detectives are thought to have already begun examining the documentation that was uncovered in Tripoli last month by an investigator with Human Rights Watch, the New York-based NGO. The documents will also form the basis of civil claims that Saadi and Belhaj and their families are bringing against the British government. It is not yet clear which ministers may have authorised the secret Libyan rendition operations in the way that well-placed Whitehall sources have asserted.

After the documents were discovered, Tony Blair, who was prime minister at the time, insisted he knew nothing about them. Similarly, Jack Straw, who was then foreign secretary, said in a radio interview: “The position of successive foreign secretaries, including me, is that we were opposed to unlawful rendition, opposed to torture or similar methods and not only did we not agree with it, we were not complicit in it, nor did we turn a blind eye to it.” He added: “No foreign secretary can know all the details of what … intelligence services are doing at any one time.”

Shortly after Blair and Straw issued their denials, Sir Richard Dearlove, who was head of MI6 at the time, said: “It was a political decision, having very significantly disarmed Libya, for the government to co-operate with Libya on Islamist terrorism. The whole relationship was one of serious calculation about where the overall balance of our national interests stood.” The year after the joint UK-Libyan operations were mounted, Straw told MPs they must disbelieve allegations of UK involvement in rendition “unless we all start to believe in conspiracy theories and that the officials are lying, that I am lying, that behind this there is some kind of secret state which is in league with some dark forces in the United States”.

Asked following Dearlove’s statement whether he still maintained that he was unaware of the Libyan rendition operations, and whether he knew which ministers Dearlove could be referring to, Straw said he had no further comment to make. Blair also declined to make any further comment.

Posted in LibyaComments Off on Investigation: Gaddafi and Brits in Torture/Rendition Duo

Shoah’s pages