Archive | October 13th, 2013

How Pharmaceutical Companies Hide the Dangers of Vaccines from Parent

  • Vaccines are “Safe and Effective” – How do they do it?

Vaccine horror stories are everywhere these days: Stories of young girls fainting in the doctor offices after receiving the HPV vaccines. Stories of mothers taking a healthy child for a round of shots to their pediatrician returning home with a severely sick or dead child. Stories of children receiving the chicken pox vaccine and experiencing severe cases of chicken pox months later. A 1:50 rate of autism in the United States, increasing autoimmune disorders, seizures, allergies and many other illnesses and disorders. Despite all this, your pediatrician, health officials, governments and pharmaceutical companies proclaim that vaccines are very safe. Did you ever wonder how they derive at such faulty conclusions?

Scientifically Wrong Vaccine Safety Studies

Any trained scientist or statistician understands that you want to use a null hypothesis to disprove a possible causal relationship between two correlated events. The null hypothesis in this case would be: There is no causal connection between vaccinations and their alleged adverse short-term and long-term side effects.

If we were going to test this hypothesis, I would randomly sample research subjects (a large sample size of perhaps 100,000 would help exclude other factors) and divide the subjects into two groups. One group will get the vaccine, and the other group would receive a saline shot. Both groups would then be monitored for at least four weeks to observe whether short-term side effects were more prevalent in the vaccinated group than in the placebo group.

To determine whether or not there is a causal link between vaccinations and longterm medical complications would be a little more difficult. Nonetheless, if one group of subjects has received a placebo and the other has received the vaccine, it would be possible to mail a questionnaire to randomly selected parents who have chosen to immunize their children and to an equal-sized group of those who haven’t. A phone interview could also take place. This would be a good starting point to see whether there are differences in the long-term health and development of vaccinated children versus that of non-vaccinated children. If no significant differences are found between the two groups in either the short term or long term, then the pro-vaccine factions can rejoice, because they’ve disproven the anti-vaccinators’ claims and proved that the vaccine in question does not cause short-term or long-term complications.

If researchers wanted to know the truth about vaccines’ effects, it would be easy enough to discover. Let’s take a look at what methodology the pharmaceutical industries use to obtain the results they desire. Here it is, as explained in the package inserts for the hepatitis B vaccine by GlaxoSmithKline:

Ten double-blind studies involving 2,252 subjects showed no significant difference in the frequency or severity of adverse experiences between ENGERIX-B and plasma-derived vaccines. In thirty-six clinical studies, a total of 13,495 doses of ENGERIX-B were administered to 5,071 healthy adults and children who were initially seronegative for hepatitis B markers and healthy neonates. All subjects were monitored for four days post-administration. (1)

What the pharmaceutical company should have done is inject one group with the vaccine and the other group with a non-vaccine placebo (i.e., saline). What the pharmaceutical company did, instead, was inject one group with the hepatitis B vaccine, and the other group with a different vaccine. Then they monitored both groups and found that the recipients of their vaccine had “no significant difference in the frequency or severity of adverse experiences” as compared to the recipients of other vaccines. Which tells us nothing, really. Imagine McDonald’s touting their Big Macs as being “no more lethal than the Whopper.”

This is exactly what the pharmaceutical company has done here—they’ve avoided the real question about adverse reactions to vaccinations by announcing that their vaccine causes no more adverse reactions than…other vaccines. But make no mistake about it… adverse reactions occurred in both groups.

Let’s take a close look at the package inserts of various drug companies and the vaccines they manufacture. More importantly, let’s look at how the pharmaceutical companies manipulate safety results.

Sanofi Pasteur and the HIB Vaccine

In a randomized, double-blind US clinical trial, ActHIB vaccine was given concomitantly with DTP to more than 5,000 infants, and hepatitis B vaccine was given with DTP to a similar number. In this large study, deaths due to sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) and other causes were observed, but were not different in the two groups. In the first forty-eight hours following immunization, two definite and three possible seizures were observed after ActHIB vaccine and DTP in comparison with none after hepatitis B vaccine and DTP. (2)

In order for us to know how safe the HIB vaccine is, the vaccine should have been compared to a placebo. Only then would we know how safe the vaccine truly is. But in order to muddy the results, not only did they not compare the HIB vaccine to a placebo, but they combined the HIB vaccine with another vaccine, and then tested it against two other combined vaccines. Imagine a drug company testing the safety of infant Tylenol by mixing it with another drug and then comparing it to a mixture of two other drugs. How would we ever be able to tell whether Tylenol is safe to give to our children?

Merck and Hepatitis B Vaccine

In the pivotal, randomized, multicenter study, 882 infants were assigned in a 3:1 ratio to receive either COMVAX or PedvaxHIB plus RECOMBIVAX HB at separate injection sites at 2, 4, and 12–15 months of age. Children may have also received routine pediatric immunizations. The children were monitored daily for five days after each injection for injection-site and systemic adverse experiences. During this time, adverse experiences in infants who received COMVAX were generally similar in type and frequency to those observed in infants who received PedvaxHIB plus RECOMBIVAX HB. (3)

In this study, Merck figured it would be best to compare its hepatitis B vaccine to a mixture of two other vaccines. Why would they do this? Because if a single vaccine is compared to a mixture of vaccines, the likelihood of adverse reactions in the “mixture of vaccine group” is likely to be higher, therefore making the hepatitis B vaccine look relatively safer. This is manipulation at its best.

Sanofi Pasteur and the Polio Vaccine

In earlier studies with the vaccine grown in primary monkey kidney cells, transient local reactions at the site of injection were observed. Erythema, induration and pain occurred in 3.2%, 1% and 13%, respectively, of vaccinees within 48 hours post-vaccination. Temperatures of ≥39°C (≥102°F) were reported in 38% of vaccinees. Other symptoms included irritability, sleepiness, fussiness, and crying. Because IPV was given in a different site but concurrently with diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis vaccine adsorbed (DTP), these systemic reactions could not be attributed to a specific vaccine. However, these systemic reactions were comparable in frequency and severity to that reported for DTP given alone without IPV. Although no causal relationship has been established, deaths have occurred in temporal association after vaccination of infants with IPV. (4)

It is interesting to know that the vaccine grows in monkey kidney cells. I wonder what impact this has on our children. In this study, the pharmaceutical company tells us that the experienced side effects can’t be attributed to the polio vaccines, as it was tested by mixing the polio vaccine and then comparing it to the mixture of two other vaccines. This is simply beyond words.

All the package inserts can be accessed by going



In order to show how ridiculously vaccine safety studies are designed, here is a comparison: I want to find out whether eating huge quantities of Hershey kisses can lead to a bellyache. What I should do is get two groups of large sizes together and give one group large amounts of Hershey kisses and the other group a placebo. If there are significantly more bellyaches in the Hershey kiss group, I can confidently say that it isn’t safe to eat large quantities of Hershey kisses. Instead, I randomly sample two large groups and give one group large quantities of Hershey kisses and the other group large quantities of gummy bears or, perhaps, as some study designs by the pharmaceutical industry suggest, the placebo group receives large quantities of gummy bears and ice cream at the same time. Now I have belly aches in both groups (as we all know eating too much chocolate or gummy bears isn’t good), however, because I have an equal amount of reactions in both groups, I argue that it is therefore safe to eat large amounts of Hershey kisses, as there are not significantly more bellyaches in the Hershey kiss group.



Most middle school students are familiar with the design of a cause and effect study. The pharmaceutical companies are getting around ethically and fairly designed studies by claiming that it would be unethical to withhold a lifesaving medical intervention such as vaccines. This despite the fact that short term studies never included a ‘true’ placebo and vaccinated children have never been compared to non-vaccinated children in long term studies.

As you now are familiar with faulty research designs falsely concluding vaccines are safe for your children and protect your children from illness you may want to question the entire notion of vaccination. Many parents to vaccinated and non-vaccinated children will attest to the fact that the non-vaccinated child claims superior health to the vaccinated child. If large and correctly designed studies were conducted it is likely that pediatricians, health officials, government and pharmaceutical companies would derive at the same conclusion. This of course would expose them and therefore those choosing to vaccinate their children will have to continue to rely on studies proving a pre-determined outcome.

– See more at:

Posted in HealthComments Off on How Pharmaceutical Companies Hide the Dangers of Vaccines from Parent

US BACKED-FSA Terrorists Hide Explosives in a Food Can to Kill Civilians


Posted in USA, SyriaComments Off on US BACKED-FSA Terrorists Hide Explosives in a Food Can to Kill Civilians


 The military examining magistrate issued on Thursday an arrest warrant against a dissident Syrian colonel for forming an armed gang to carry out terrorist activities. The warrant was issued after Judge Fadi Sawan interrogated the suspect identified as Ahmed Amer, a Syrian Army colonel who has defected.He referred him to the military prosecution to take the appropriate action. On Wednesday, the State Commissioner to the Military Court, Judge Saqr Saqr, charged 12 people, including a Lebanese and 2 Syrians who are in custody, with plotting terrorist activities and planning assassinations. The three suspects were arrested by the General Security Department. But LBCI TV said Amer is not linked with the 12-member network. He was seeking to recruit fighters to send them to Syria, it said.

 Report: Telecom Data Analysis Finds Link between 12-Member Terror Cell and Fatah al-Islam

Twelve suspects charged with planning terrorist activities in Lebanon, including assassinations, have been in contact with members of Fatah al-Islam terror group in Roumieh prison, al-Joumhouria daily reported on Thursday.The newspaper said that analysis of the so-called telecommunications data revealed that the members of the network had contacted several Fatah al-Islam inmates in the prison.The examination of the calls is ongoing to know the connection between the two sides, it said.The State Commissioner to the Military Court, Judge Saqr Saqr charged on Wednesday the 12 suspects, including a Lebanese and 2 Syrians who are in custody, with plotting terrorist activities and forming an armed gang to carry out terrorist operations.The charges include buying arms, rockets and bombs to plant them throughout Lebanese territories, and plotting assassinations against personalities in northern Lebanon who back the Syrian regime.
The suspects were also planning to booby-trap vehicles.Security and judicial sources told al-Joumhouria that two personalities from the Syrian opposition were on the assassination list of the 12-member network, in addition to several Sunni clergymen in the northern city of Tripoli who are supporters of the regime in Syria.The daily identified the clergymen as Bilal Shaaban and his brother, in addition to another Sunni man – Kamal Kheir, who heads a political association and a charity in northern Lebanon.

The General Directorate of General Security on Tuesday announced dismantling a “terrorist cell” that was plotting assassinations and bombings in several Lebanese regions.
“Three people of Lebanese and Syrian nationalities have been arrested on charges of belonging to a terrorist cell that was plotting acts of sabotage across Lebanon through bomb attacks and assassination operations,” a General Security statement said.“The detainees were interrogated and referred to the military judiciary together with the seized material, which include explosives, communication devices and silenced weapons,” it added.The directorate stressed that it “will not hesitate to pursue terrorist groups, subversive gangs and illegal emigration networks — in coordination with the rest of the security agencies – in order to preserve the safety of citizens and the security and stability of the country.”NNA later said two of those arrested were Syrians and a third was Lebanese.The announcement comes after a wave of arrests by the various security services in the wake of four deadly bombings that rocked Lebanon – two in Beirut’s southern suburbs and two in Tripoli.


I$raHell’s Politics of Fragmentation


Background  If the politics of deflection exhibit the outward reach of Israel’s grand strategy of territorial expansionism and regional hegemony, the politics of fragmentation serves Israel’s inward moves designed to weaken Palestinian resistance, induce despair, and de facto surrender. In fundamental respects deflection is an unwitting enabler of fragmentation, but it is also its twin or complement.
 The British were particularly adept in facilitating their colonial project all over the world by a variety of divide and rule tactics, which almost everywhere haunted anti-colonial movements, frequently producing lethal forms of post-colonial partition as in India, Cyprus, Ireland, Malaya, and of course, Palestine, and deadly ethnic strife elsewhere as in Nigeria, Kenya, Myanmar, Rwanda. Each of these national partitions and post-colonial traumas has produced severe tension and long lasting hostility and struggle, although each takes a distinctive form due to variations from country to country of power, vision, geography, resources, history, geopolitics, leadership.
 An additional British colonial practice and legacy was embodied in a series of vicious settler colonial movements that succeeded in effectively eliminating or marginalizing resistance by indigenous populations as in Australia, Canada, the United States, and somewhat less so in New Zealand, and eventually failing politically in South Africa and Namibia, but only after decades of barbarous racism.

In Palestine the key move was the Balfour Declaration, which was a colonialist gesture of formal approval given to the Zionist Project in 1917 tendered at the end of Ottoman rule over Palestine. This was surely gross interference with the dynamics of Palestinian self-determination (at the time the estimated Arab population of Palestine was 747,685, 92.1% of the total, while the Jewish population was an estimate 58,728, which amounted to 7.9%) and a decisive stimulus for the Zionist undertaking to achieve supremacy over the land embraced by the British mandate to administer Palestine in accordance with a framework agreement with the League of Nation. The agreement repeated the language of the Balfour Declaration in its preamble: “Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”(emphasis added) To describe this encouragement of Zionism as merely ‘interference’ is a terribly misleading understatement of the British role in creating a situation of enduring tension in Palestine, which was supposedly being administered on the basis of the wellbeing of the existing indigenous population, what was called “a sacred trust of civilization” in Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, established for the “well-being and development” of peoples ”not yet able to stand by themselves under the strenuous conditions of the modern world.”  The relevance of the politics of fragmentation refers to a bundle of practices and overall approach that assumed the form of inter-ethnic and inter-religious strife during the almost three decades that the mandate arrangements were in effect.*

At the same time, the British was not the whole story by any means: the fanatical and effective exploitation of the opportunity to establish a Jewish homeland of unspecified dimensions manifested the dedication, skill, and great ambition of the Zionist movement; the lack of comparable sustained and competent resistance by the indigenous population abetted the transformation of historic Palestine; and then these  developments were strongly reinforced by the horrors of the Holocaust and the early complicity of the liberal democracies with Naziism that led the West to lend its support to the settler colonial reality that Zionism had become well before the 1948 War. The result was the tragic combination of statehood and UN membership for Israel and the nakba involving massive dispossession creating forced refugee and exile for most Palestinians, and leading after 1967 to occupation, discrimination, and oppression of those Palestinians who remained either in Israel or in the 22% of original Palestine. 

It should be recalled that the UN solution of 1947, embodied in GA Resolution 181, after the British gave up their mandatory role was no more in keeping with the ethos of self-determination than the Balfour Declaration, decreeing partition and allocating 55% of Palestine to the Jewish population, 45% to the Palestinians without the slightest effort to assess the wishes of the population resident in Palestine at the time or to allocate the land in proportion to the demographic realities at the time. The UN solution was a new rendition of Western paternalism, opposed at the time by the Islamic and Middle Eastern members of the UN. Such a solution was not as overbearing as the mandates system that was devised to vest quasi-colonial rule in the victorious European powers after World War I, yet it was still an Orientalist initiative aimed at the control and exploitation of the destiny of an ethnic, political, and economic entity long governed by the Ottoman Empire. 

The Palestinians (and their Arab neighbors) are often told in patronizing tones by latter day Zionists and their apologists that the Palestinians had their chance to become a state, squandered their opportunity, thereby forfeiting their rights to a state of their own by rejecting the UN partition plan. In effect, the Israeli contention is that Palestinians effectively relinquished their statehood claims by this refusal to accept what the UN had decreed, while Israel by nominally accepting the UN proposals validated their sovereign status, which was further confirmed by its early admission to full membership in the UN. Ever since, Israel has taken advantage of the fluidity of the legal situation by at once pretending to accept the UN approach of seeking a compromise by way of mutual agreement with the  Palestinians while doing everything in its power to prevent such an outcome by projecting its force throughout the entirety of Palestine, by establishing and expanding settlements, the ethnic cleansing of Jerusalem, and by advancing an array of maximalist security claims that have diminished Palestinian prospects.  That is, Israel has publicly endorsed conflict-resolving diplomacy but operationally has been constantly moving the goal posts by unlawfully creating facts on the ground, and then successfully insisting on their acceptance as valid points of departure. In effect, and with American help, Israel has seemingly given the Palestinians a hard choice, which is tacitly endorsed by the United States and Europe: accept the Bantustan destiny we offer or remain forever refugees and victims of annexation, exile, discrimination, statelessness.

Israel has used its media leverage and geopolitical clout to create an asymmetric understanding of identity politics as between Jews and Palestinians. Jews being defined as a people without borders who can gain Israeli nationality no matter where they live on the planet, while Palestinians are excluded from Israeli nationality regardless of how deep their indigenous roots in Palestine itself. This distinction between the two peoples exhibits the tangible significance of Israel as a ‘Jewish State,’ and why such a designation is morally and legally unacceptable in the 21st century even as it so zealously claimed by recent Israeli leaders, none more than Benyamin Netanyahu.  
 Modalities of Fragmentation
The logic of fragmentation is to weaken, if not destroy, a political opposition configuration by destroying its unity of purpose and strategy, and fomenting to the extent possible conflicts between different tendencies within the adversary movement. It is an evolving strategy that is interactive, and by its nature becomes an important theme of conflict. The Palestinians in public constantly stress the essential role of unity, along with reconciliation to moderate the relevance of internal differences. In contrast, the Israelis fan the flames of disunity, stigmatizing elements of the Palestinian reality that are relevantly submissive, and accept the agenda and frameworks that are devised by Tel Aviv refusing priorities set by Palestinian leaders. Over the course of the conflict from 1948 to the present, there have been ebbs and flows in the course of Palestinian unity, with maximum unity achieved during the time when Yasir Arafat was the resistance leader and maximum fragmentation evident since Hamas was successful in the 2006 Gaza elections, and managed to seize governmental control from Fatah in Gaza a year later. Another way that Israel has promoted Palestinian disunity is to favor the so-called moderates operating under the governance of the Palestinian Authority while imposing inflicting various punishments on Palestinians adhering to Hamas.

–Zionism, the Jewish State, and the Palestinian Minority. Perhaps, the most fundamental form of fragmentation is between Jews and Palestinians living within the state of Israel. This type of fragmentation has two principal dimensions: pervasive discrimination against the 20% Palestinian minority (about 1.5 million) affecting legal, social, political, cultural, and economic rights, and creating a Palestinian subjectivity of marginality, subordination, vulnerability. Although Palestinians in Israel are citizens they are excluded from many benefits and opportunities because they do not possess Jewish nationality. Israel may be the only state in the world that privileges nationality over citizenship in a series of contexts, including family reunification and access to residence. It is also worth observing that if demographic projections prove to be reliable Palestinians could be a majority in Israel as early as 2035, and would almost certainly outnumber Jews in the country by 2048. Not only does this pose the familiar choice for Israel between remaining an electoral democracy and retaining its self-proclaimed Jewish character, but it also shows how hegemonic it is to insist that the Palestinians and the international community accept Israel as a Jewish state.

This Palestinian entitlement, validated by the international law relating to fundamental human rights prohibiting all forms of discrimination, and especially structural forms embedded in law that discriminate on the basis of race and religion. The government of Israel, reinforced by its Supreme Court, endorses the view that only Jews can possess Israeli nationality that is the basis of a range of crucial rights under Israeli law. What is more Jews have Israeli nationality even if lacking any link to Israel and wherever they are located, while Palestinians (and other religious and ethnic minorities) are denied Israeli nationality (although given Israeli citizenship) even if indigenous to historic Palestine and to the territory under the sovereign control of the state of Israel.   

A secondary form of fragmentation is between this minority in Israel and the rest of the Palestinian corpus. The dominant international subjectivity relating to the conflict has so far erased this minority from its imaginary of peace for the two peoples, or from any sense that Palestinian human rights in Israel should be internationally implemented in whatever arrangements are eventually negotiated or emerges via struggle. As matters now stand, the Palestinian minority in Israel is unrepresented at the diplomatic level and lacks any vehicle for the expression of its grievances. 

–Occupied Palestine and the Palestinian Diaspora (refugees and enforced exile). Among the most debilitating forms of fragmentation is the effort by Israel and its supporters to deny Palestinian refugees and Palestinians living in the diaspora) their right of return as confirmed by GA Resolution 184? There are between 4.5 million and 5.5 million Palestinians who are either refugees or living in the diaspora, as well as about 1.4 million resident in the West Bank and 1.6 million in Gaza.

The diplomatic discourse has been long shaped by reference to the two state mantra. This includes the reductive belief that the essence of a peaceful future for the two peoples depends on working out the intricacies of ‘land for peace.’ In other words, the dispute is false categorized as almost exclusively about territory and borders (along with the future of Jerusalem), and not about people. There is a tacit understanding that seems to include the officials of the Palestinian Authority to the effect that Palestinians refugee rights will be ‘handled’ via compensation and the right of return, not to the place of original dispossession, but to territory eventually placed under Palestinian sovereignty.

Again the same disparity as between the two sides is encoded in the diplomacy of ‘the peace process,’ ever more so during the twenty years shaped by the Oslo framework. The Israel propaganda campaign was designed to make it appear to be a deal breaker for the Palestinian to insist on full rights of repatriation as it would allegedly entail the end of the promise of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Yet such a posture toward refugees and the Palestinian diaspora cruelly consigns several million Palestinians to a permanent limbo, in effect repudiating the idea that the Palestinians are a genuine ‘people’ while absolutizing the Jews as a people of global scope. Such a dismissal of the claims of Palestinian refugees also flies in the face of the right of return specifically affirmed in relation to Palestine by the UN General Assembly in Resolution 194, and more generally supported by Article 13 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Two Warring Realms of the Occupation of Palestine: the Palestine Authority versus Hamas. Again Israel and its supporters have been able to drive an ideological wedge between the Palestinians enduring occupation since 1967. With an initial effort to discredit the Palestine Liberation Organzation that had achieved control over a unified and robust Palestine national movement, Israel actually encouraged the initial emergence of Hamas as a radical and fragmenting alternative to the PLO when it was founded in the course of the First Intifada. Israel of course later strongly repudiated Hamas when it began to carry armed struggle to pre-1967 Israel, most notoriously engaging in suicide bombings in Israel that involved indiscriminate attacks on civilians, a tactic repudiated in recent years.

Despite Hamas entering into the political life of occupied Palestine with American, and winning an internationally supervised election in 2006, and taking control of Gaza in 2007, it has continued to be categorized as ‘a terrorist organization’ that is given no international status. This terrorist designation is also relied upon to impose a blockade on Gaza that is a flagrant form of collective punishment in direct violation of Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The Palestine Authority centered in Ramallah has also, despite occasional rhetoric to the contrary, refused to treat Hamas as a legitimate governing authority or to allow Hamas to operate as a legitimate political presence in the West Bank and Jerusalem or to insist on the inclusion of Hamas in international negotiations addressing the future of the Palestinian people. This refusal has persisted despite the more conciliatory tone of Hamas since 2009 when its leader, Khaled Meshaal, announced a shift in the organization’s goals: an acceptance of Israel as a state beside Palestine as a state provided a full withdrawal to 1967 borders and implementation of the right of return for refugees, and a discontinuation by Hamas of a movement based on armed struggle. Mashel also gave further reassurances of moderation by an indication that earlier goals of liberating the whole of historic Palestine, as proclaimed in its Charter, were a matter of history that was no longer descriptive of its political program.

In effect, the territorial fragmentation of occupied Palestine is reinforced by ideological fragmentation, seeking to somewhat authenticate and privilege the secular and accommodating leadership provided by the PA while repudiating the Islamic orientation of Hamas. In this regard, the polarization in such countries as Turkey and Egypt is cynically reproduced in Palestine as part of Israel’s overall occupation strategy. This includes a concerted effort by Israel to make it appear that material living conditions for Palestinians are much better if the Palestinian leadership cooperates with the Israeli occupiers than if it continues to rely on a national movement of liberation and refuses to play the Oslo game.

The Israeli propaganda position on Hamas has emphasized the rocket attacks on Israel launched from within Gaza. There is much ambiguity and manipulation of the timeline relating to the rockets in interaction with various forms of Israeli violent intrusion. We do know that the casualties during the period of Hamas control of Gaza have been exceedingly one-sided, with Israel doing most of the killing, and Palestinians almost all of the dying. We also know that when ceasefires have been established between Israel and Gaza, there was a good record of compliance on the Hamas side, and that it was Israel that provocatively broke the truce, and then launched major military operations in 2008-09 and 2012 on a defenseless and completely vulnerable population.

Cantonization and the Separation Wall: Fragmenting the West Bank. A further Israeli tactic of fragmentation is to make it difficult for Palestinians to sustain a normal and coherent life. The several hundred check points throughout the West Bank serious disrupt mobility for the Palestinians, and make it far easier for Palestinians to avoid delay and humiliation. It is better for them to remain contained within their villages, a restrictive life reinforced by periodic closures and curfews that are extremely disruptive. Vulnerability is accentuated by nighttime arrests, especially of young male Palestinians, 60% of whom have been detained in prisons before they reach the age of 25, and the sense that Israeli violence, whether issuing from the IDF or the settlers enjoys impunity, and often is jointly carried out.

The Oslo framework not only delegated to the PA the role of maintaining ‘security’ in Palestinian towns and cities, but bisected the West Bank into Areas A, B, and C, with Israeli retaining a residual security right throughout occupied Palestine. Area C, where most of the settlements are located, is over 60% of the West Bank, and is under exclusive control of Israel.
This fragmentation at the core of the Oslo framework has been a key element
in perpetuating Palestinian misery.

The fragmentation in administration is rigid and discriminatory, allowing Israeli settlers the benefits of Israel’s rule of law, while subjecting Palestinians to military administration with extremely limited rights, and even the denial of a right to enjoy the benefit of rights. Israel also insists that since it views the West Bank as disputed territory rather than ‘occupied’ it is not legally obliged to respect international humanitarian law, including the Geneva Conventions. This fragmentation between Israeli settlers and Palestinian residents is so severe that it has been increasingly understood in international circles as a form of apartheid, which the Rome Statute governing the International Criminal Court denominates as one type of ‘crime against humanity.’  

The Separation Wall is an obvious means of separating Palestinians from each other and from their land. It was declared in 2004 to be a violation of international law by a super majority of 14-1 in the International Court of Justice, but to no avail, as Israel has defied this near unanimous reading of international law by the highest judicial body in the UN, and yet suffered no adverse consequences. In some West Bank communities Palestinians are surrounded by the wall and in others Palestinian farmers can only gain access to and from their land at appointed times when wall gates are opened.

Fragmentation and Self-Determination  The pervasiveness of fragmentation is one reason why there is so little belief that the recently revived peace process is anything more than one more turn of the wheel, allowing Israel to proceed with its policies designed to take as much of what remains of Palestine as it wants so as to realize its own conception of Jewish self-determination. Just as Israel refuses to restrict the Jewish right of return, so it also refuses to delimit its boundaries. When it negotiates internationally it insists on even more prerogatives under the banner of security and anti-terrorism. Israel approach such negotiations as a zero-sum dynamic of gain for itself, loss for Palestine, a process hidden from view by the politics of deflection and undermining the Palestinian capacity for coherent resistance by the politics of fragmentation.

* There are two issues posed, beyond the scope of this post, that bear on Palestinian self-determination emanating from the Balfour Declaration and the ensuing British mandatory role in Palestine: (1) to what extent does “a national home for the Jewish people” imply a valid right of self-determination, as implemented by the establishment of the state of Israel? Does the idea of ‘a national home’ encompass statehood? (2) to what extent does the colonialist nature of the Balfour Declaration and the League mandate system invalidate any actions taken?

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on I$raHell’s Politics of Fragmentation



By Gilad Atzmon

We were informed this week that the four major female founders of the Ashkenazis show roots in Europe 10,000 to 20,000 years ago. So do most of the minor founders, the study found. Only 8% of the mitochondrial DNA shows signs of being from the Near East.

Gil Atzmon, of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, who led the research, argued that there had been some evidence of mass conversions, especially of women, to Judaism throughout the Mediterranean in the past. That resulted in about 6 million citizens, or a tenth of the Roman population, who were Jewish.

The practical meaning of this information is simple and far from being new. Ashkenazi Jews are not Semitic and have no roots in Palestine. Needless to say that neither Alan Dershowitz nor Max Blumenthal or myself look particularly oriental. So if Jews are neither a race nor Semitic what is it that bonds them together? The answer is an extreme form of tribal ethnocentrism AKA racism. In short, Jews are not a race but Jewish secular culture is racist to the bone.

Both Zionists and the so-called ‘anti’ are operating within ethnocentric and racially exclusive cells. Israel is the Jews-only State, but it opponents the JVP, IJAB, Jewish Socialist Group etc. are similarly Jews-only political gatherings.

But if Jewish politics is racist, exclusive and often abusive, what exactly legitimizes its anti-racist mantra?




Turkish human rights activists called on the government to improve conditions for sick inmates and address human rights violations. According to a report by the Human Rights Association (IHD), there were “526 sick political prisoners in Turkish prisons,” and, “154 of them in need of extremely urgent treatment,” as of September 10. Raci Bilici, head of the  Diyarbakir branch of the IHD said, “The history of prisons in Turkey is filled with deaths, torture and violations of rights. The Turkish state has had the same mentality against political prisoners for years.”
Bilic also commented on the recent democratization package proposed by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. He said, “No package that has been issued so far has offered a solution for the violations of human rights in prisons. Necessary regulations should be made so that sick inmates could be released.” Bilici is one of many to comment on the reform package. In the International Herald Tribune, Andrew Finkel argues the reforms “lack the quality of real democracy,” but are rather “a slight of hand” because “giving  Kurds or Alevis more rights risked alienating his core supporters among Sunni and Turkish nationalists.” In an op-ed in the New York Post, Amir Tehari asserts Erdogan’s package “seems bent on abolishing that republic in all but name” by re-energizing his Islamist base and giving few concessions to Alevites and Armenians. In contrast, Semih Idiz argues in Al-Monitor that one “glaring aspect of the package that is beyond despite” is that “whatever it may do – or not do – for minorities, it lifts major restrictions on devout Sunnis imposed by previous secular governments. The Islamist section of society, which largely supports Erdogan, is therefore happy– a fact that is reflected in the warm reception the package got from pro-government media.”Meanwhile, Turkish authorities arrested a group of students that visited Iran for 20 days on an exchange program on allegations of espionage against the Turkish state. Turkey also began constructing a wall on its border with Syria in order to “stop people from illegally bypassing its checkpoints and prevent smuggling,” according to Reuters.

Posted in Middle East, USA, TurkeyComments Off on THE U.S.’s TURKISH MODEL FOR MIDDLE EAST








“Lexiphile” is a word used to describe those that have a love for words, like: you can tune a piano, but you can’t tuna fish, or:
To write with a broken pencil is . . . pointless.
When fish are in schools, they sometimes . . . take debate.
A thief who stole a calendar . .. . got twelve months.
When the smog lifts in Los Angeles , . . . U.C.L.A.
The batteries were given out . . . free of charge.
A dentist and a manicurist married. . . . They fought tooth and nail.
A will is a . . . dead giveaway.
With her marriage, she got a new name . . . and a dress.
A boiled egg is . . . hard to beat.
When you’ve seen one shopping center . . . you’ve seen a mall.
Police were called to a day care where a three-year-old was . . . resisting a rest.
Did you hear about the fellow whose whole left side was cut off? . . . He’s all right now.
A bicycle can’t stand alone; . . . it is two tired.
When a clock is hungry . . . it goes back four seconds
The guy who fell onto an upholstery machine . . . was fully recovered.
He had a photographic memory . . . which was never developed.
Those who get too big for their britches will be . . . exposed in the end.
When she saw her first strands of gray hair, . . . she thought she’d dye.
Acupuncture: . . . a jab well done
Posted by 



Posted in Campaigns, PoliticsComments Off on CARTOONS OF THE WEEK

1.2 Million American Non-Jews Feel ‘Jew-ish’

By By Tia Ghose

They may not be Jewish, but they certainly feel Jew-ish.

Despite having no direct familial or religious ties to Judaism, about 1.2 million Americans feel they have a “Jewish affinity,” with many reporting an attachment to Israel and a strong draw to Judaism’s cultural practices, according to new research.

A survey of American Jews, conducted by the Pew Research Center, also analyzed the nearly 0.5 percent of the U.S. population that consider themselves to be Jewish in some way, even though they belong to a religion other than Judaism and most have no Jewish ancestors or family members. [8 Ways Religion Impacts Your Life]


On political matters, this cohort looks different from both secular and religious Jews. About 40 percent are politically conservative, compared with only 19 percent of Jews. Almost 42 percent of the “Jews by affinity” are Republican or Republican-leaning, compared with 41 percent Democratic or Democratic-leaning. In contrast, about 70 percent of Jews are affiliated with or lean toward the Democratic Party, with only 22 percent identifying as Republican or Republican-leaning.

This group of Jews by affinity is also strongly tied to the concept of Israel as the Jewish homeland — as strongly as those who are actually Jewish. They are also about as likely as American Jews to believe the United States doesn’t support Israel enough.

Mixed group

A small minority feels connected to the culture through the practice of Jewish traditions or shared Jewish values. The largest portion, or 60 percent, said religious reasons underpinned their sentiment, with more than half saying they feel Jewish because Jesus was a Jew.

That dovetails with other Pew research showing strong support for Israel from Evangelical Christians, 82 percent of whom believe that God gave the Jewish people Israel, compared with only 40 percent of American Jews.

Only a minority, or about 25 percent of this group, has any Jewish family ties, often through a Jewish spouse or grandparent. About 7 percent feel culturally and ethnically Jewish, but not religiously so.

Their draw to Judaism, however, doesn’t translate into support for actual Jewish institutions. Only 4 percent of households had family members who belonged to a synagogue, and only 7 percent belonged to any Jewish organizations. That’s about the level of involvement that secular American Jews show, but much lower than that of religious Jews.

About a quarter of the Jewish-by-affinity group donated to a Jewish charity in the past year, compared with more than two-thirds of religiously observant Jews.

Posted in USAComments Off on 1.2 Million American Non-Jews Feel ‘Jew-ish’

Ex-EDL leader Tommy Robinson apologises for ‘causing fear’ to Muslims


In Guardian interview, Robinson says he will talk to police to help them investigate dangerous racists in far-right group

The former leader of the English Defence League, Tommy Robinson, has apologised for causing fear among British Muslims and for issuing bigoted, anti-Islamic statements during his time with the group.

In an interview with the Guardian, Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, said he was sorry for helping to create a culture of “us and them” and for frightening the UK Islamic community.

Pressed as to whether he now believed it was wrong to blame “every single Muslim” for “getting away” with the 7 July bombings, and for calling Islam a fascist and violent religion, he held up his hands and said: “I’m sorry, I’m sorry.”

Robinson, 30, who this week dramatically quit as leader of the extreme rightwing group known for thuggish street protests and openly racist followers, also said he would now talk to police to help them investigate dangerous racists in the organisation.

“I apologise for [creating] that fear,” he said, “but there’s fear in my house too.” The people he had represented in the EDL and his home town of Luton were afraid of what they perceived to be growing Islamic radicalisation, he said.

Explaining past inflammatory statements, Robinson said they had often been fuelled by alcohol and the adrenaline rush of “leading the biggest street protest movement in Europe”, as well as by anger over the murder of drummer Lee Rigby.

Sitting beside Maajid Nawaz, a former prominent member of the radical Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir, Robinson said he had been sobered by his stint in prison and would now work to stem such angry and “ill-judged” outbursts.

Nawaz, who heads the deradicalisation thinktank the Quilliam Foundation, and is also a prospective Lib Dem MP, said he had refused to sit with Robinson after being approached during the filming of a BBC documentary last week.

“I shook his hand and said I’m sorry, I’m not going to sit with you … until you’re ready to talk about leaving the EDL. I can’t give legitimacy to the EDL.”

Nawaz revealed that, off-camera, Robinson indicated that he was willing to depart, and last weekend they began a series of lengthy conversations.

“We spent the weekend talking over the phone, and then he came in [to the foundation] all day Monday and all day Tuesday.”

That Tuesday night, Quilliam held a hastily arranged press conference at which Robinson announced his departure. However, until Thursday’s Guardian interview, Robinson had refused to express any remorse for his past behaviour.

Asked to define the concept of “Englishness” he had professed to defend during city street protests that often descended into brawls with police, Robinson said it was a feeling that people had about being attached to the nation and that he was passionate about his country.

Prompted by Nawaz, Robinson appeared to agree with a vision of multiculturalism inclusive of a variety of ethnic and religious groups, but said he did not want to see some groups receiving “special treatment”.

Nawaz said he would work to introduce Robinson to his own contacts in government and the Home Office in an attempt to procure government funding. Robinson said his future work would involve taking on radicalism on all fronts, although he could not support anti-fascist groups because they also subscribed to “communism” or were “anarchists”.

When pressed as to whether he would work with the police to root out criminal racists in the group he helped form four years ago, he agreed he would now talk to the authorities.

Robinson, whose financial assets have been frozen because of ongoing criminal proceedings for public order offences, said he did not doubt he would be successful again in any endeavour he pursued as long as he was passionate about it.

“Fascists and Islamists, they are both sides of the same coin,” he said.

Posted in Campaigns, UKComments Off on Ex-EDL leader Tommy Robinson apologises for ‘causing fear’ to Muslims

Key Syria Zio-NATO Rat’s refuses Geneva peace talks

Syrian National Council (SNC) president George Sabra addresses a press conference in Istanbul, on May 30, 2013


A key group within the Syrian opposition National Coalition said Sunday it would not attend proposed peace talks in Geneva and would quit the Coalition if it participated.

The decision deals a potential blow to international efforts to convene a peace conference in Geneva, which was first proposed for June but has been pushed back multiple times.

The Syrian Red Crescent meanwhile said it had evacuated around 1,500 people from a suburb of the capital Damascus that has been under a regime siege for months.

The president of Syrian National Council, the biggest member of the opposition Coalition, told AFP on Sunday that it was impossible to carry out negotiations given the suffering of people on the ground.

“The Syrian National Council, which is the biggest bloc in the Coalition, has taken the firm decision… not to go to Geneva, under the present circumstances (on the ground),” George Sabra told AFP.

“This means that we will not stay in the Coalition if it goes” to the peace talks, he added.

Western nations and Russia have been pushing the regime and the rebels to meet for talks on a negotiated solution to the two and a half year-old conflict, which has killed some 115,000 people.

US Secretary of State John Kerry flew to London on Sunday for talks that will include discussion of the Geneva conference with Lakhdar Brahimi, the UN-Arab League envoy for Syria.

But Sabra said the international community had failed to punish the regime for an August 21 sarin attack on the outskirts of Damascus that reportedly killed hundreds of people.

Washington threatened to carry out military strikes in response to the attacks, which the United States and the Syrian opposition blamed on the regime.

View gallery.”

Crisis in Syria

A Free Syrian Army fighter, with an amputated hand, inspects his weapon, at the Jabal al-Akrad area  …

But the punitive strikes were averted by a US-Russian deal under which Syria is turning over its chemical arsenal for destruction.

“The international community has focused on the murder weapon, which is the chemical weapons, and left the murderer unpunished and forgotten the victims,” Sabra said.

“The regional and international context does not give the impression that Geneva 2 will offer anything to the Syrians,” he added.

“We will not participate in a conference that is intended to hide the failure of international politics.”

He also invoked the plight of Syrians in neighbourhoods besieged by regime troops, including in the Damascus suburb of Moadamiyet al-Sham, where he said residents were “dying of hunger.”

Evacuees ‘very scared’: Red Crescent.

The suburb southwest of the capital is largely controlled by rebels and has been under an army siege for months.

On Sunday, the Syrian Red Crescent said it had evacuated 1,500 people from the neighbourhood since the day before.

“Around 1,500 people, most of them women and children, were evacuated from a point on the outskirts of Moadamiyet al-Sham and taken to shelters,” Red Crescent head of operations Khaled Erksoussi told AFP.

He said the evacuated civilians “were in a state of major fatigue and were very scared.”

View gallery.”

A Syrian rebel stands with his weapon in a room of …

A Syrian rebel stands with his weapon in a room of a damaged house in the Jubaila neighbourhood of D …

Regime forces regularly bomb the area and the opposition accuses the government of starving residents by sealing off the district.

Moadamiyet al-Sham was also one of the areas targeted in the August 21 sarin attack.

The Syrian government says the opposition is holding residents of the district hostage and described the evacuation as part of its “efforts to protect citizens from terrorists.”

A video distributed by state news agency SANA showed hundreds of people, mostly women and children, streaming towards a convoy of buses, assisted by officials from the Red Crescent.

State television showed Social Affairs Minister Kinda Shmat and soldiers welcoming the evacuees as they arrived.

Erksoussi said Red Crescent officials were unable to enter Moadamiyet al-Sham “to provide treatment to the wounded, who we were not able to evacuate.”

He would not say whether the evacuation was the result of an agreement between the rebels and the regime, saying only that the Red Crescent “received guarantees that it could carry out this operation.”

Elsewhere in the country, the Observatory said regime war planes bombed the town of Sfeireh in northern Aleppo province as they pressed a bid to reclaim the town from rebels.

Sfeireh is near a site believed to hold chemical weapons, and the regime bombardment in recent days has provoked an exodus.

In the southern Daraa province meanwhile, rebels brought down a regime warplane in the Atman region, the Observatory said.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Key Syria Zio-NATO Rat’s refuses Geneva peace talks

Shoah’s pages