Wednesday, March 7, 2012

173 Berkeley Daily Planet's advertising revenue falls 60% over criticism of Israel

(1) White House sends Jewish envoy to China on a "special mission" with regards to Iran
(2) Obama says 900 extra housing units in East Jerusalem settlement "dangerous"
(3) Israel Brushes Off Obama Criticism Over Jerusalem
(4) Rejecting Obama, U.S. Jews push W.Bank settlement
(5) Israel issues temporary freeze, but approves 28 new buildings in settlements
(6) Sanctions on Settlers would restart Arab-Israeli peace process
(7) Sarah Palin Urges Israel Settlement Expansion
(8) NYT protects its readers from a small newspaper’s criticisms of Israel
(9) Berkeley Daily Planet's advertising revenue falls 60% over criticism of Israel
(10) Gaza babies being born with birth defects
(11) Deformed babies in Fallujah (Iraq) blamed on Depleted Uranium & White Phosphorous

(1) White House sends Jewish envoy to China on a "special mission" with regards to Iran

From: Mark MacCuish <markmaccuish@hotmail.com> Date: 28.11.2009 12:55 PM

The White House sends middle-east envoys to China on a "special mission" with regards to Iran.  Is this for America's security or Israel's ?

It should come of absolute no shock to anyone that Dennis Ross, "a special adviser for the Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia (which includes Iran)" is Jewish and has founded synagogues.

Can you imagine if Mr. Ross was Persian or Arab ? Would this have any effect on the particularities of the proceedings? Of course it would.

I find it mind boggling.  This is not a coincidence, this is the norm; For the past few decades (at least) most of the President's "special envoys" and middle-east "advisors" from Kissinger to Brzezinski to Madelene Albright, to Ross to many, many more -- they are all almost ALWAYS Jewish.

The question that begs to be answered then, of course, is this:

How does such a scenario come about? In all honesty, HOW does this happen? Is it a coincidence? If not, is it a planned conspiracy? Is it because American Jews have more "knowledge" within these matters?

Does no one take personal bias into account? Could you even imagine if these "advisors" had been Palestinian or Persian instead of almost always being Jewish ? The American public, whipped into a fervor by the mass media, would go mental.

Remember when the Dubai group wanted to purchase the failing U.S. ports system after 9/11 ? The US media told everyone to go mental -- and they did -- over the thought of "Arabs" owning the U.S. ports.  However if Israel wanted to purchase such things, there would not be one peep.

Un-believable.

I think China and Russia support Iran for the most obvious of reasons:

1) Iran is innocent and there is no evidence of any weapons program (as the IAEA already knows)
2) Iran provides an anti-American presence in Russia/China's backyard (the middle-east)
3) Iran provides China/Russia with oil/gas.

Iran is what intelligence analysts call a "Game Changer".  The price of oil would double within a week of Iran being attacked -- and thus the price of food world wide would slowly being to increase.

This is just what this shattered world economy needs at this time: psychotic paranoid Jews bombing innocent Iranians for making peaceful, civilian nuclear energy, which is their guaranteed right under the NPT.

Mark from Canada

(2) Obama says 900 extra housing units in East Jerusalem settlement "dangerous"
From: IHR News <news@ihr.org> Date: 20.11.2009 06:00 PM

President Obama Warns Israel on Settlements
BBC News
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8366596.stm

Page last updated at 17:20 GMT, Wednesday, 18 November 2009

Obama warns Israel on settlements
The Israeli government considers Gilo an integral part of Jerusalem

US President Barack Obama has said Israel's approval of 900 extra housing units at a settlement in East Jerusalem could lead to a "dangerous" situation.

Mr Obama told Fox News that additional settlement construction made it harder for Israel to make peace in the region and "embitters the Palestinians".

The settlement of Gilo has been built on land Israel captured in 1967.

The Palestinians have refused to attend peace talks until Israel stops building settlements on occupied territory.

The Israeli government disputes that East Jerusalem is occupied territory, and therefore refuses to include annexed areas as part of any accommodation of Mr Obama's past calls for "restraint" in settlement construction.

Nearly 500,000 Jews live in more than 100 settlements built on occupied territory.

The settlements are illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this.

In the interview with Fox News, Mr Obama stressed that Israel's security was "a vital national interest to the United States", but warned that its policies were complicating his administration's efforts to revive the peace process.

"I think that additional settlement building does not contribute to Israel's security, I think it makes it harder for them to make peace with their neighbours," he said.

"I think it embitters the Palestinians in a way that could end up being very dangerous," he added. ...

(3) Israel Brushes Off Obama Criticism Over Jerusalem

From: IHR News <news@ihr.org> Date: 20.11.2009 06:00 PM

The Associated Press
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ml_israel_palestinians

Israel broke ground on a new housing complex for Jews in east Jerusalem on Wednesday, brushing off President Barack Obama's criticism that construction in the disputed part of the holy city undermines efforts to relaunch Mideast peace talks. The groundbreaking came a day after Israel defied American, European and Palestinian demands to stop settlement activity by announcing it will press forward with construction of 900 apartments in another Jewish area in east Jerusalem. Speaking to Fox News in Beijing on Wednesday, Obama criticized the plan to build hundreds of homes in Jerusalem's Gilo neighborhood, saying such moves make it harder to achieve peace in the region and embitter the Palestinians in a way he said could be dangerous.

(4) Rejecting Obama, U.S. Jews push W.Bank settlement

Wed Nov 18, 2009 4:53pm EST

By Tom Perry

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSMAC875263

JERUSALEM, Nov 18 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama may be telling Israelis that building settlements round Jerusalem risks dangerously fuelling Palestinian anger, but some of his fellow Democrats brought the opposite message to the city on Wednesday.

Dov Hikind, a member of New York state's assembly, looked out over Jerusalem's Old City and dismissed the "extreme" view on the matter taken by his party's president.

He urged fellow American Jews to buy homes on occupied land rather than in traditional U.S. vacation spots.

"I'm trying to get a whole bunch of my friends to actually buy," said Hikind during a tour of settlement housing projects for several dozen potential U.S. investors.

"Rather than buying second homes in Florida, we want people to buy in Israel," he said, having watched a foundation stone laid for an extension to the Nof Zion, or Zion View, settlement.

Palestinians, whose leaders declared this week's Israeli government approval for more settlement building near Jerusalem a killer blow to peace, reject Hikind's description of Nof Zion as "Israel", as it lies on occupied land they want for a state.

But his views, shared by significant numbers of American Jews, many of them Democrat voters, are an indication of Obama's difficulties in holding to his demands that Israel halt its expansion of settlements in the interests of a peace agreement.

Hikind's active participation in the settlement policy that has seen Israel move close to a tenth of its Jewish population onto land captured from the Arabs in the 1967 war is not very common among Jews in the United States. But financial support from Americans, some benefiting from U.S. tax relief on charity, is a significant source of funding for West Bank settlements.

A small group of Israeli peace activists staged a protest against Hikind's tour on Wednesday. Israeli left-wingers echo Obama's line that expanding settlement for ideological and religious reasons is jeopardising Israel's security.

Settlements, home to significant numbers of immigrants from the United States, also benefit from support from fundamentalist American Christians -- like Republican former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee.

"The thing that prompted me to organise this group is being so angry at the Obama administration," said Hikind.

"I WANT TO LIVE HERE"

As he looked out across the valley toward the Old City, where the gilded Dome of the Rock marks out the Muslim holy site that Jews revere as the site of their ancient Temple, he said:

"I don't want to displace anyone. I don't want to kick anyone out of their homes. I have no hate, no malice in my heart. I want to live here and I am trying to work that out."

Yet Palestinians in the city feel that is exactly what Israel and its international supporters are trying to do, displacing today's inhabitants with foreign-born Jews who claim an ancestral and religious right to land going back 2,000 years. ...

(5) Israel issues temporary freeze, but approves 28 new buildings in settlements

From: Kristoffer Larsson <kristoffer.larsson@sobernet.nu>  Date: 27.11.2009 09:00 PM

Israel okays 28 new settlement buildings, despite freeze

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1131124.html

Last update - 06:24 27/11/2009

Israel okays 28 new settlement buildings, despite freeze

By Chaim Levinson, Barak Ravid, Amos Harel and Yanir Yagna

Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Thursday ordered the IDF to issue a temporary freeze order, but at the same time allowed the construction of 28 new public buildings in settlements.

Meanwhile, Haaretz has learned that the state is expected to ask the Supreme Court for more time to evacuate illegal outposts. The State Attorney's Office is expected to update the Supreme Court by next week on three court rulings that have not been carried out, for the evacuation of outposts at Eli, Horsha, and Netiv Ha'avot, as well as six other locations in the West Bank.

Haaretz also learned that in discussions on the matter between security and law officials, the state intends to ask the court for more time in order to prepare a suitable policy for razing the illegal outposts, in view of the developments related to the freeze in settlement construction.

For its part, efforts were underway Thursday to maximize the impact of the freeze on the international arena. So far, the Israeli announcement had not had a warm reception in the international community. French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said the decision to freeze settlements "is a step in the right direction, and its implementation would be a positive contribution to peace."

Similar statements were issued by the German government, while the government of Britain emphasized in its statement that it was displeased by the fact that the freeze was not absolute - in other words does not include East Jerusalem. The Russian Foreign Ministry also issued a statement calling on Israel to freeze settlement construction completely.

On Thursday, Israel relayed messages to members of the European Union and other western countries, calling on them to pressure the Palestinian Authority and the Arab states to resume negotiations with Israel. In its message, Israel also called on friendly countries to help convince the Arab world to avoid unilateral steps in light of the government decision to freeze settlement construction for 10 months.

(6) Sanctions on Settlers would restart Arab-Israeli peace process

From: WVNS <ummyakoub@yahoo.com> Date: 19.11.2009 06:45 PM

Effective, targeted sanctions against the symbols of Israeli occupation could break the deadlock of the stalled Arab-Israeli peace process

Time for sanctions
Ezzedine Choukri Fishere *
http://jnoubiyeh.blogspot.com/2009/02/time-for-sanctions.html

In July 2006, after a meeting of Arab foreign ministers, Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa declared the Middle East peace process dead. Some found his statement premature and argued that the peace process was only "frozen". A few months later, in fact on Christmas Eve, the US administration intervened in order to resuscitate the ailing process, moving it to what would become the "Annapolis intensive care unit". The peace process was kept there on life support until the end of 2008, and then left to die quietly as the key actors exited the stage. Now that Israel has brought back the master of ceremonies, it is time to bury the dead. ...

The best peaceful way to raise the cost of occupation is through imposing sanctions against the nexus of Israel's occupation: the settlers, their products, their sponsors and their financial institutions. Such sanctions are not directed against Israel as a whole; they target Israeli occupation of Arab lands. This would send a clear message to all Israeli citizens that the international community -- while it continues to support Israel's right to live in peace and security -- will not tolerate Israel's occupation of Arab territories for much longer. Such sanctions would raise the cost of the occupation without triggering the Masada Complex Syndrome, pushing Israel further into extremism.

Such sanctions should include: a ban on travel against those who reside in settlements built beyond the Green Line (i.e. the territories occupied in the 1967 war); a ban on importing settlement products; a ban on companies to do business in settlements (including construction companies and their suppliers); and pressure exerted on the government of Israel to curtail its financial assistance to settlement councils and the credit facilities it extends to settlers, with a potential deduction of sums spent in that regard from its foreign assistance.

Sanctioning occupation is right and wise at the same time. It is right, because the international community can no longer maintain the intolerable duplicity in its standards. Standing up against occupation by adopting concrete and fair measures to penalise the settlement enterprise would affirm -- better than a thousand speeches by Obama in a Muslim country -- the universality of human rights standards and international law. At the same time, imposing sanctions against settlers and their support network is a wise policy decision: it helps those in Israel who are fighting for its soul by showing the public the possible cost of slipping down the slope of hatred and extremism.

And sanctioning the Israeli occupation is the least that Arab states should demand from their international partners. Arab states have cooperated with every international effort aimed at finding a political settlement to their conflict with Israel, since the armistice agreements of 1949 to the ill-fated Annapolis process. They have extended hand after hand to Israel, offered peace and normalisation for a state whose legitimacy they contested. And yet because occupation continues to be a relatively low cost option, its continuation remains a preferred choice for the majority of Israeli voters. There is nothing much the Arabs can do to alter that -- it is now the turn of the international community to step in and help raise the cost of that seemingly endless occupation. Alternatively, we can all stand before the deceased peace process, listen to the master of ceremonies, and -- why not -- say a prayer.

* The writer is professor of international relations at the American University in Cairo and former adviser to the Egyptian foreign minister and to the UN envoy to the Middle East.

(7) Sarah Palin Urges Israel Settlement Expansion

From: IHR News <news@ihr.org> Date: 20.11.2009 06:00 PM

The Christian Science Monitor

http://features.csmonitor.com/globalnews/2009/11/18/sarah-palin-urges-israel-settlement-expansion-attacks-barack-obama/

Sarah Palin urges Israel settlement expansion, attacks Barack Obama

Sarah Palin calls for an expansion of Israel settlements – challenging 40 years of US policy – in an interview with Barbara Walters. Palin also criticizes Barack Obama for urging an Israeli halt.

By Dan Murphy | Staff writer 11.18.09

Former Vice Presidential candidate and Alaska governor Sarah Palin has been something of a news generating machine of late, thanks to the publicity tour for her recently released memoir, “Going Rogue.”

Whether a minor public spat with Levi Johnston (father of her grandson), her appearance with daytime talk show queen Oprah Winfrey, describing Katie Couric’s interview style as “badgering,” or describing Newsweek’s photo choice for a recent cover on her as “sexist,” she’s been able to cause gallons of ink to be spilled over almost all of her comings and goings (this news organizations is a guilty as anyone).

But while most of her comments and coverage have been about personalities, or campaign styles, or whether she was comfortable with her $150,000 wardrobe during the presidential campaign, she is also beginning to provide glimpses into her policy beliefs, as supporters continue to urge her to run for the Republican nomination and challenge President Barack Obama in 2012.

Her latest bombshell: to effectively call for an end to 40 years of official government policy on Israel in an interview with ABC’s Barbara Walters. In teasers the network is releasing before the interview airs tonight, ABC quotes Gov. Palin as saying Obama is wrong to oppose settlement expansion, an ongoing issue that is dimming the chances for progress on peace between Palestinians and Israelis.

“I disagree with the Obama administration on that,” Palin said. “I believe that the Jewish settlements should be allowed to be expanded upon, because that population of Israel is, is going to grow. More and more Jewish people will be flocking to Israel in the days and weeks and months ahead. And I don’t think that the Obama administration has any right to tell Israel that the Jewish settlements cannot expand.” ...

(8) NYT protects its readers from a small newspaper’s criticisms of Israel

by Philip Weiss on November 28, 2009

http://mondoweiss.net/2009/11/nyt-protects-its-readers-from-a-small-newspapers-criticisms-of-israel.html

I’m sorry to go after the Times so much, but I’m at my parents, and I love reading the actual newspaper. Today there’s a long piece in the Times about the Berkeley Daily Planet newspaper being accused of anti-Semitism because of its criticisms of Israel and Jews. The editor of the paper, Becky O’Malley, 69, a veteran journalist, is plainly in my camp on the Israel lobby. She says, Why of all subjects in the world is Israel off-limits? Why can’t we talk about this vital issue? "Frankly the term that crossed my mind was ‘protection racket,’" O’Malley says. Right.

And what are the examples that the reporter, Jesse McKinley, offers of this taboo speech? Two vile anti-Semitic comments in letters that the editor published because she believes so much in free speech.

In short: Not a word about the anti-Israel criticism that the Daily Planet is publishing. I’m sure a lot of it is close to stuff we publish here. Why, Henry Norr writes for the Daily Planet, and I believe he’s an anti-Zionist Jew.

When you are reading the Times article, notice that this is not some casual business. No: businesses are waging a war against the Daily Planet, it has lost 60 percent of ad revenues because of the stance that the brave editor has taken. She has laid off reporters and is doing a fundraising drive.

A protection racket– and how far does it go? Shouldn’t the Times have told us anything about that stance? Shouldn’t the Times pass along at least a taste of the criticism of Israel so that its readers can make up their minds about how whacky that editor is? Walt and Mearsheimer called the Israel lobby a "loose coalition" of partisans of the Jewish state, and included some Times coverage. This story is an example why.

(9) Berkeley Daily Planet's advertising revenue falls 60% over criticism of Israel

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/28/business/media/28paper.html?_r=1

In a Home to Free Speech, a Paper Is Accused of Anti-Semitism

By JESSE McKINLEY
Published: November 27, 2009

BERKELEY, Calif. — For the last six years, The Berkeley Daily Planet has published a freewheeling assortment of submissions from readers, who offer sharp-elbowed views on everything from raucous college parties (generally bad) to the war in Iraq (ditto).

Becky O’Malley, front, is the editor of The Berkeley Daily Planet, a California weekly that critics accuse of publishing too many letters and other commentary critical of Israel. Ms. O’Malley, 69, denies any personal or editorial bias. “I have the old-fashioned basic liberal thing of believing that the remedy for speech you don’t like is more speech,” she said.

John Gertz, editor of dpwatchdog.com, a site containing what it calls anti-Semitic writings published in The Planet. He says his goal is not to close the paper.

But since March, that running commentary has been under attack by a small but vociferous group of critics who accuse the paper’s editor, Becky O’Malley, of publishing too many letters and other commentary pieces critical of Israel. Those accusations are the basis of a campaign to drive away the paper’s advertisers and a Web site that strongly suggests The Planet and its editor are anti-Semitic.

“We think that Ms. O’Malley is addicted to anti-Israel expression just as an alcoholic is to drinking,” Jim Sinkinson, who has led the campaign to discourage advertisers, wrote in an e-mail message. He is the publisher of Infocom Group, a media relations company. “If she wants to serve and please the East Bay Jewish community, she would be safer avoiding the subject entirely.”

Ms. O’Malley denies any personal or editorial bias, and bristles at the suggestion that she should not publish letters about Israel in a city like Berkeley, which has a sizable Jewish community and a populace — and City Council — that often weigh in on Middle East and international affairs.

“Frankly, the term that crossed my mind was ‘protection racket,’ ” Ms. O’Malley said. “I think that is unusual to say the least that anybody would think that they could dictate a whole area of the world that is simply off limits for discussion.”

Whether right or wrong, Mr. Sinkinson’s campaign has left The Planet — a weekly already hammered by the recession — gasping for breath. Advertising sales revenue is down some 60 percent from last year, Ms. O’Malley says. In October, the paper trimmed its skeleton crew of full-time reporters to one from three, and has begun a fund-raising drive to keep publishing.

Still, she says she has no intention of stopping the publication of submitted letters, citing a commitment to free speech that is a legacy of the city where the Free Speech Movement was born in the 1960s.

“I have the old-fashioned basic liberal thing of believing that the remedy for speech you don’t like is more speech,” said Ms. O’Malley, 69, a veteran local journalist who bought the paper in 2002 as a retirement project with her husband, Michael, now 72. “If somebody says something you don’t like, say what you think. And I felt it a privilege here in my middle age to be in a position to make that happen.”

The paper has published unpopular opinions on other subjects, including a commentary from a local activist arguing that the murder of four Oakland police officers — none of whom were black — by an African-American parolee in March was “karmic justice” for past police killings of civilians. But such pieces are in a section of the paper that clearly states they “do not necessarily reflect the views of the Daily Planet.”

Mr. O’Malley, the paper’s publisher, said he thought The Planet’s critics were confusing letters from unaffiliated writers — the paper says it prints anything that is not libelous or obscene, with a preference for local writers — with official editorial positions.

“We publish things from people that we can barely stand to be in the same room with,” he said.

In addition to the letter-writing campaign, the paper has faced online criticism from dpwatchdog.com, a site that contains pages of what it calls anti-Semitic writings published in The Planet. The site’s editor, John Gertz, says his goal is not to close the paper, but “reform” it.

“The object is not to attack the press,” said Mr. Gertz, the president and chief executive of Zorro Productions, which owns the trademark and copyrights on the Zorro franchise. “The object is to turn the press into something responsible.”

Mr. Gertz complains that The Planet does not fact-check reader submissions, something Ms. O’Malley says is well beyond its resources.

(10) Gaza babies being born with birth defects

From: Sadanand, Nanjundiah (Physics Earth Sciences) <sadanand@mail.ccsu.edu> Date: 25.11.2009 03:59 PM

Interview with Doctor Thabet El Masri
Gaza: A Death Camp? By Silvia Cattori
October 15, 2009

http://www.silviacattori.net/article987.html

Thabet El Masri is the Director of the Intensive Care Unit at the Shifa Hospital, a public institution in the Gaza Strip. He replies here to the questions of Silvia Cattori about the recent increase in the number of babies being born with birth defects.

Silvia Cattori: In June, you started to be concerned by an increase in the number of babies born with birth defects. We would be very interested to have your medical assessment and to know the result of the study you made of this troubling phenomenon. Can you tell us the ratio of prenatal and postnatal birth defects ten months after the attacks on Gaza in comparison with the same period in 2008, in terms of the number of cases involved?
Thabet El Masri: Yes I have been following the continuing phenomenon of babies born with a birth defect. I have calculated the number of babies with congenital defects born in July, August, and September, 2009. I have compared these three months with the same months in 2008.

Here are the figures: In July 2009, there were in Shifa Hospital 15 such cases, compared to 10 in 2008; in August 2009, there were 20 cases, compared to10 in 2008 ; and in September 2009, 15 such babies were born, compared to 11 in 2008. The average number of births in Shifa Hospital is about 1100 per month.

Silvia Cattori: When this report came out it caused a lot of emotion and concern. Many people immediately attributed the increase in birth defects in aborted foetuses and newborns to the Israeli army's use of white phosphorous shells. Do they have a case?

Thabet El Masri: We can suspect, but we cannot confirm, that it is the use of chemical weapons by Israel that caused this increase in birth defects.

Silvia Cattori: Are the babies with birth defects all from the refugee population subjected to Israeli shelling? Which area do the mothers come from?

Thabet El Masri: The babies suffering from birth defects come from all over the strip. But half of the women who gave birth to babies with problems come from the Jabaliya refugee camp. ...

(11) Deformed babies in Fallujah (Iraq) blamed on Depleted Uranium & White Phosphorous

From: CAMPAIGN <peace@peaceinspace.org> Date: 19.11.2009 06:39 PM

Deformed babies in Fallujah

Article nr. 60083 sent on 15-nov-2009 04:44 ECT
http://www.uruknet.info/index.php?p=60083

Iraq LETTER TO THE UNITED NATIONS
Various undersigned

Fatima Ahmed was born in Fallujah with deformities that include two heads

November 14, 2009

H.E. Dr. Ali Abdussalam Treki
President of the Sixty-fourth Session of the United Nations General Assembly
United Nations
New York, NY 10017

October 12th 2009

Your Excellency,

RE DEFORMED BABIES IN FALLUJAH

Young women in Fallujah in Iraq are terrified of having children because of the increasing number of babies born grotesquely deformed, with no heads, two heads, a single eye in their foreheads, scaly bodies or missing limbs. In addition, young children in Fallujah are now experiencing hideous cancers and leukaemias. These deformities are now well documented, for example in television documentaries on SKY UK on September 1 2009, and on SKY UK June 2008. Our direct contact with doctors in Fallujah report that:

In September 2009, Fallujah General Hospital had 170 new born babies, 24% of whom were dead within the first seven days, a staggering 75% of the dead babies were classified as deformed.

This can be compared with data from the month of August in 2002 where there were 530 new born babies of whom six were dead within the first seven days and only one birth defect was reported.

Doctors in Fallujah have specifically pointed out that not only are they witnessing unprecedented numbers of birth defects but premature births have also considerably increased after 2003. But what is more alarming is that doctors in Fallujah have said, "a significant number of babies that do survive begin to develop severe disabilities at a later stage". ...

The use of certain weapons has tremendous repercussions. Iraq will become a country, if it has not already done so, where it is advisable not to have children. Other countries will watch what has happened in Iraq, and imitate the Coalition Allies' total disregard of the United Nations Charter, The Geneva, and Hague Conventions, and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Some countries, such as Afghanistan, will also come to experience the very long term damage to the environment, measured in billions of years, and the devastating effect of depleted uranium and white phosphorous munitions. ...

Yours faithfully,

Dr Nawal Majeed Al-Sammarai ( Iraq Minister of Women's Affairs 2006 -2009)

Dr. David Halpin FRCS (Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgeon)

Malak Hamdan M. Eng in Chemical and Bioprocess Engineering.

Dr Chris Burns-Cox MD FRCP

Dr. Haithem Alshaibani (Environmental Sciences)

Yasmin Alibhai-Brown (Author and Journalist)
Nicholas Wood MA, RIBA, FRGS ...

No comments:

Post a Comment