Tuesday, March 13, 2012

473 Obama abandons his principles, for an illusory Second Term; illegal Settlers reach 650,000

Obama abandons his principles, for an illusory Second Term; illegal
Settlers reach 650,000

(1) Jersey to develop internet gambling, in partnership with Israel
(2) Why Google Earth Can't Show You Israel
(3) Israel doubles rate of Palestinian home demolitions
(4) Israeli parliament approves plans to transfer 30,000 Palestinian Bedouin
(5) U.S. conditions aid to Palestinians on repeal of their UN statehood bid
(6) US Congress blocks $200 Million aid for Palestinians, in wake of UN
statehood bid
(7) Obama abandons his principles, for an illusory Second Term; illegal
Settlers reach 650,000
(8) Israel's Gilo housing plan infuriates Merkel; she opposed Palestine
statehood bid
(9) Haaretz: Panetta arrives in Israel to head off attack on Iran
(10) Alan Dershowitz on Jewish mission to teach social values to non-Jews
(11) Kevin MacDonald: Jewish Revenge Fantasies
(12) Kevin Macdonald reviews Gilad Atzmon’s book “The Wandering Who?”
(13) Gilad Atzmon: Tzipi Livni is heading to Britain, after amendment of
Britain’s universal jurisdiction law

(1) Jersey to develop internet gambling, in partnership with Israel

From: "Sadanand, Nanjundiah (Physics Earth Sciences)"
<sadanand@mail.ccsu.edu> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011

Jersey is planning to develop e-gaming and clean technology industries
with the help of Israel in a move to diversify its economy.

By Sean O'Hare 13 Apr 2011


The Jersey government has formed a strategic partnership with UK Israel
Business, an organisation that encourages trade, industry and investment
between the UK, States of Jersey and Israel and will send ministers to
Tel Aviv at the end of May to discuss opportunities.

Jersey will hope to benefit from Israel's renowned expertise in e-gaming
software and water technology while Israeli firms expanding in Europe
will be invited to consider Jersey as an alternative option for basing
their operations. ...

During the visit to Israel, to take place at the end of May, Jersey
ministers will visit a number of key financial services and clean
technology businesses, and hold round table meetings with e-gaming
entrepreneurs. The spokesman from UK Israel Businesses added: "Israel is
considered expert when it comes to clean technologies, including water
efficiency and agricultural irrigation.

"Jersey has the agriculture and one of the world's best tidal flows, as
well as a government keen on improving its green credentials."

MInisters will also be meeting with the British Ambassador to Israel,
His Excellency Matthew Gould, and the Mayor of Jerusalem.

(2) Why Google Earth Can't Show You Israel
From:  Kristoffer Larsson <krislarsson@comhem.se> Date: 22 September
2011 16:11

By Hamed Aleaziz

Fri Jun. 10, 2011 10:16 AM PDT


Since Google launched its Google Earth feature in 2005, the company has
become a worldwide leader in providing high-resolution satellite
imagery. In 2010, Google Earth allowed the world to see the extent of
the destruction in post-earthquake Haiti. This year, Google released
similar images after Japan's deadly tsunami and earthquake. With just
one click, Google can bring the world—and a better understanding of
far-away events—to your computer.

There is one entire country, however, that Google Earth won't show you:

That's because, in 1997, Congress passed the National Defense
Authorization Act, one section of which is titled, "Prohibition on
collection and release of detailed satellite imagery relating to
Israel." The amendment, known as the Kyl-Bingaman Amendment, calls for a
federal agency, the NOAA's Commercial Remote Sensing Regulatory Affairs,
to regulate the dissemination of zoomed-in images of Israel.

When asked about the regulation, a Google spokeswoman said to Mother
Jones, "The images in Google Earth are sourced from a wide range of both
commercial and public sources. We source our satellite imagery from
US-based companies who are subject to US law, including the Kyl-Bingaman
Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act of 1997, which
limits the resolution of imagery of Israel that may be commercially

And it's not just Israel. The regulation also applies to the occupied
territories. It's why Human Rights Watch can't provide detailed imagery
of the Gaza Strip in its reports. Of course, this regulation cuts both
ways; one also cannot see the destruction in Sderot resulting from
rockets sent out of Gaza.

But, the impact of the regulation might be dwindling; after all, the US
can only regulate the actions of American corporations. Turkey recently
announced that its GokTurk satellite will provide high-resolution
imagery of Israel when it becomes operational in 2013. Israel is unhappy
with this possibility: An Israeli official told Al-Arabiya, "We try to
ensure that we are not photographed at high resolutions, and most
(countries) accommodate us." The official adds: "Should we request this
of the Turks? We won't ask for it. There is no one to talk to."

Hamed Aleaziz is an editorial intern at Mother Jones. For more of his
stories, click here.

(3) Israel doubles rate of Palestinian home demolitions

Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 23:47:37 +0100 From: leila stuart


OCHA Report: IOA demolished 400 homes in 2011 – Displaced 800 Palestinians

OCTOBER 2, 2011

By Occupiedpalestine

RAMALLAH, (PIC)– An international report said that the Israeli
occupation authority (IOA) had demolished 409 Palestinian homes in 2011
so far that led to the displacement of 804 Palestinian citizens.

The UN office for the coordination of humanitarian affairs in the
occupied Palestinian territory (OCHA) pointed to an obvious escalation
in the demolition streak of Palestinian homes at the hands of the IOA.

It explained that the IOA razed 290 Palestinian homes in 2010 that
displaced 375 Palestinian citizens.

The report published on Saturday also noted that 139 Palestinians were
injured in 326 Jewish settlers’ assaults since the start of 2011
compared to 202 Palestinians wounded in the same period last year in 202

It said that 85 Palestinians were killed in the first nine months of
2011 while 53 were killed in the same period last year at the hands of
the Israeli occupation forces (IOF).

OCHA noted that the IOF wounded 417 Palestinians so far this year while
in 2010 the figure was 194.

(4) Israeli parliament approves plans to transfer 30,000 Palestinian Bedouin

Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 23:47:37 +0100 From: leila stuart


Mansour Nsasra  The Electronic Intifada  1 October 2011

While attention is focused on the Palestinian Authority’s UN recognition
initiative, Israel is quietly taking hugely significant steps to
transfer 30,000 Palestinian Bedouin in the Naqab (Negev) desert from
their ancestral lands.

Recently, the cabinet of the Israeli government approved plans for
another large-scale cleansing of the Bedouin community in the Naqab. The
plan would “relocate” 30,000 of those who managed to remain on their
land after more than two thirds of all Bedouin were uprooted during the
establishment of Israel.

The Bedouin once were a flourishing community of some 90,000 persons who
lived around the city of Bir al-Saba (Beersheva). Yet the expulsions
that took place in 1948 were the prelude to their ongoing expulsion
since then.

After the establishment of Israel, military rule was imposed on the
Beersheva Bedouin for more than 18 years. Despite the end of the
military rule in 1967, the Bedouin story of dispossession continues
until today. Almost all their land was seized by the state using a set
of legal maneuvers such as the absentee property law and the land
acquisition laws of 1953.

Despite the expulsions that took place during the establishment of the
State of Israel on their land, today the Arab Bedouin population is
estimated to number more than 200,000 persons and constitutes one-third
of the Naqab’s population. Today, half of Bedouin citizens of Israel
live in 46 “unrecognized” villages. These are Bedouin villages in the
Naqab which Israel does not recognize as legal; the villages are
deprived of basic services like housing, water, electricity, education
and health care. The rest live in townships that the state established
for them in the 1970s in an aggressive policy of forced sedentarization.

Israel refuses to respect the rights of its own citizens; in this case
100,000 persons (the population of the 46 unrecognized villages) who are
part of the 1.5 million Palestinian national minority treated as
second-class citizens in Israel. Despite continuous policies since 1948
to Judaize the Naqab, Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, is currently
considering the possibility of a final push to modify the demography of
the region once and for all and hence tighten Israel’s control over it.
The recent Goldberg and Prawer Commission recommendations of
“relocating” 30,000 Bedouin from their native land was approved in
September by the Israeli government (Eliezer Goldberg is a former
Israeli high court judge; Ehud Prawer a senior Israeli civil servant;
both men have headed panels set up to study the status of Bedouins in
the Naqab).

(5) U.S. conditions aid to Palestinians on repeal of their UN statehood bid

Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 23:47:37 +0100 From: leila stuart


October 2, 2011

U.S. conditions aid to Palestinians on repeal of UN statehood bid

Congress follows through on earlier warnings issued before Palestinian
Authority President Mahmoud Abbas officially submitted application for
membership in United Nations.

By Natasha Mozgovaya

WASHINGTON - Prior to the Palestinian Authority's application last month
to the Security Council for full United Nations membership, members from
both sides of the U.S. Congress warned the PA leadership that attempts
to bypass negotiations with Israel would have implications on American
aid to the Palestinians. At a press conference opposite UN headquarters
in New York last Monday, members of Congress reiterated the message.

For his part, New York Congressman Gary Ackerman, who is the Ranking
Democrat on the House Middle East affairs subcommittee, said: "If [the
Palestinians] are willing to consider putting their future in the hands
of the United Nations, perhaps they should think about how much aid
their friends at the United Nations will provide to accompany whatever
meaningless, one-sided UN resolution they might pass." He added that the
move could lead to a complete cut-off of American funding.

A draft American budget for 2012 would condition aid to the Palestinian
Authority upon a certification by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
that the Palestinians are no longer attempting to secure unilateral
recognition of a Palestinian state. The British newspaper The
Independent has reported that Congress went a step further and in
August, even before the PA's formal application was submitted to the UN,
froze funding that had already been budgeted to the Palestinian
Authority for 2012.

The decision reportedly held up nearly $200 million, about third of the
annual allocation to the PA. The newspaper quoted Palestinian sources as
calling the step by Congress "collective punishment." For its part,
Saudi Arabia announced about a week and a half ago that it intended to
transfer $200 million to the Palestinian Authority in advance of a vote
at the UN on recognition of a Palestinian state.

Congress went into recess Wednesday and the move to withhold funding to
the Palestinian Authority was not officially announced, although the
funding was not transferred to the PA by last Friday, which was the last
day of the American fiscal year. Sources from the House Foreign Affairs
Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee have confirmed that
the funding has been suspended until the issue of the Palestinian
application to the UN is settled. ...

(6) US Congress blocks $200 Million aid for Palestinians, in wake of UN
statehood bid

From: "Ken Freeland" <diogenesquest@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011
15:20:09 -0500

US Congress blocks $200 Million in aid for Palestinians


US Congress blocks £128m in aid for Palestinians

Palestinian Authority accuses Congress of holding back funds to punish
Mahmoud Abbas' bid for UN statehood

     * guardian.co.uk, Saturday 1 October 2011 12.09 BST

       US Congress blocks £128m in aid for Palestinians

       This article was published on guardian.co.uk at 12.09 BST on
Saturday 1 October 2011. It was last modified at 14.44 BST on Tuesday 4
October 2011.

The Palestinian Authority has accused the US of "collective punishment",
after the US Congress blocked $200m (£128m) in aid in response to
President Mahmoud Abbas' bid for UN statehood.

The decision to freeze the payments was reportedly made by three
congressional committees on 18 August, before Abbas' planned bid for
statehood recognition at the UN the following month.

The funds, intended for food aid, health care, and infrastructure
projects, were supposed to have been transferred within the US financial
year, which ends today. The Obama administration is reportedly
negotiating with congressional leaders to unlock the aid. ...

(7) Obama abandons his principles, for an illusory Second Term; illegal
Settlers reach 650,000

From: "Adibsk" <adibk30@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 19:36:22 +0300

Abandoning principles for a seat in the White House

By: Gulamhusein A. Abba

(updated on Sept. 30, 2011)

No one told the Kuwaitis that the only way to end Iraq’s occupation was
for them to negotiate with Iraq.

Kosovo was unilaterally recognized by the United States three years
ago–even though its statehood did not come about through a negotiated
settlement with Serbia

One does not ask the robbed to negotiate with the robber as to which of
the robbed items s/he is going to return, when s/he is going to do it
and on what terms. The keepers of law and order step in and do the needful.

In this case particularly, more than in any other case, it is the duty
and responsibility of the international community to step in.  It is
they who created Israel

It is time for the international community to end this farce of direct
negotiations between the helpless occupied and the all-powerful
occupier. It is time for it to live up to its duty and obligations and
take action to end the illegal occupation

Obama has diminished himself, tarnished the image of America and, as
between Israel and Palestine, has aligned himself with the oppressor
against the oppressed.   **

The portion of Obama’s speech in the United Nations that referred to the
Palestinian bid for membership in the UN earned for him a “badge of
honor” from Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu (those are the
very words used by Netanyahu when he congratulated Obama on his
speech!). But, in the eyes of most of the world, it brought shame and
disgrace on Obama and the US and made a laughing stock of both.

There are three points he made in his speech. One was that the
Palestinian state cannot come into being through resolutions in the UN.
He forgets that but for a resolution of the UN, Israel would not be even
existing today. And it was a UN resolution that enabled NATO to actively
help the Libyan rebels get control of Tripoli and most of Libya. Again,
it was UN resolutions that resulted in the formation of the Alliance of
the Willing and launching of Desert Storm. Once again, it was a UN
resolution that enabled the launching of the war on Iraq purportedly to
find and destroy Weapons of Mass Destruction.

In Tunisia the US, along with the rest of the world, cheered the
Tunisian rebels when they got rid of their tyrannical government. In
Egypt the US supported, slowly, hesitatingly, cautiously and, at times,
seemingly reluctantly, the Egyptian people and applauded the departure
of dictator Hosni Mubarak, a long time and loyal ally of the US. In
Libya the US went one step further. It spent billions of dollars and
actively participated, along with NATO forces, in bombing Gaddafi’s
bases. But for the UN resolution  sanctioning  NATO intervention, the
Gaddafi regime would still be in power in Libya.

Not so long back, Iraq reclaimed Kuwait, which was once its province and
an integral part of Iraq, and would have remained so had not the
British, as was their common practice, drawn a line in the sand, carved
out from Iraq what is now Kuwait and put a puppet on its throne. There
are those who even today believe that Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait was
done with a nod and a wink from the then American ambassador to Iraq.

Even though it can be argued that Iraq did nothing wrong in reuniting
its severed province to the mainland, the international community chose
to interpret it as invasion of sovereignty of one nation by another and
thus an illegal occupation under international  law.  It demanded the
vacation of that occupation and when Iraq refused to comply, the
international community took military action to forcibly end that

The point is that in the case of Iraq and Kuwait, the US did not ask the
Kuwaitis to negotiate  with Iraq about vacation of what was interpreted
as an illegal occupation.It took action.

In none of the above cases were the desired results obtained through

More to the point is the recent prominent example Kosovo. It was
unilaterally recognized by the United States three years ago–even though
its statehood did not come about through a negotiated settlement with Serbia

It is ridiculous to ask Palestinians to negotiate with Israel. Israel is
the aggressor, the occupier and Palestinians are the victims of this
aggression, the occupied. Besides, there is no comparison between them.
Israel has the fourth largest army in the world and is heavily armed,
its arsenal including nuclear arms. Palestinians have no army at all.
They are completely asymmetrical.

Besides, one does not ask the raped to negotiate with the rapist or the
robbed to negotiate with the robber as to which of the robbed items s/he
is going to return, when s/he is going to do it and on what terms. The
keepers of law and order step in and do the needful.

In this case particularly, more than in any other case, it is the duty
and responsibility of the international community to step in. It is they
who, in 1949, ignoring the strong objections and protests of the
indigenous people, the Palestinians, and of all the neighboring Arab
states which surround Palestine, carved out a little more than 50% of
Palestine as it then exited, and gifted it to the Jewish community,
which promptly started its ethnic cleansing activities in the demarcated
area and its surroundings.

In the war that followed the attacks launched by the surrounding Arab
nations, chiefly to halt the massacre of the Palestinians, Israel went
beyond the area granted to it by the international community, and, the
truce lines at the end of that war added more territory to Israel.

Not satisfied, Israel in 1967 launched an attack on Jordan (which was
then in control of the West Bank and East Jerusalem), Egypt (which
controlled the Gaza Strip) and Syria (to which belonged the Golan
Heights).As a direct result of this aggression Israel gained control of
and occupied all the said territory in Palestine, thus fulfilling its
objective of establishing Eretz Israel, with Judea and Samaria, in all
of the land between the Jordan river and the sea to the west. It
continues this illegal occupation to this day, with impunity.

This occupation is the longest occupation in present history, and it is
a brutal and tyrannical one. Human rights violations and violations of
international law occur regularly in open sight of the whole world.
Massive transfer of population by the occupying power into occupied
lands, destruction of villages in the occupied territories, building
illegal constructions thereon – all violations of international law --
go on almost on a daily basis.

That this occupation and the Israeli settlements built on lands beyond
what was earmarked for Israel is illegal is recognized and accepted by
the whole world, including the USA. The international community, which
created the state responsible for these illegal acts, instead of doing
its duty and carrying out its obligations and responsibilities, asked
the Palestinians to negotiate with the aggressor, Israel!

Having no other alternative, the Palestinians did just that. Arafat even
signed, eighteen years back, the disastrous Oslo Accords, believing that
under its terms, within five years all the occupied territory would be
fully under the control of the Palestinians.

Israel used this agreement to expand exponentially its settlements in
the occupied territories. The expected transfer of power after five
years never happened. Instead fresh demands and conditions were put
forward by Israel. When the Palestinians refused to accede to these
preposterous demands, Israel shamelessly alleged that the Palestinians
had rejected peace and chosen the path of terrorism!

Notwithstanding all this, the Palestinians have persevered and
negotiated and negotiated and negotiated -- Madrid (1991), Oslo (1993),
Wye River (1997), Camp David (2000), Taba (2001), Quartet’s road map
(2002), Annapolis (2007), bilateral negotiations (2008) and on and
on.All to no avail. The grabbing of land, demolitions of Palestinian
homes and even entire villages,, uprooting of produce, building of
illegal Israeli settlements and “for Jews only” roads and highways has
continued unabated.

Even the powerful USA and strong ally of Israel could not get Israel to
at least cease and desist from further violation of international law by
putting a halt to the construction of illegal Israeli settlements in the
occupied territories.

All that these “negotiations” got for Palestinians is almost 6500
Palestinian civilians killed since September 2000 alone, over 45,000
Palestinians injured (some maimed for life), over 6,000 Palestinians in
Israeli jails, many with no charges (including over 250 females and
children under the age of 16), over 650,000 Palestinians detained and
imprisoned, over 25,000 Palestinian homes demolished since 1967 – over
half since 2003, including over 4300 during the Israeli military assault
on Gaza in 2008-2009.

The number of Israeli settlers has more than doubled during the last ten
years of “negotiations”, reaching a staggering figure of 650,000. There
are 236 illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
These occupy about 43 per cent of the land in the truncated West Bank
and East Jerusalem and have displaced thousands of Palestinians. There
are over four hundreds checkpoints and Jewish-only roads. And, of course
the monstrous separation and land grabbing Wall snaking through
Palestinian territories.

Clearly the sole beneficiary of these “negotiations” is Israel, which is
using the negotiations for this very purpose.  The Palestinians have
gained nothing. To the contrary.they have lost much from the meager
amount they had.

Under these circumstances, to say that the only course for the
Palestinians is to negotiate with Israel is, to say the least, cruel.

It is time for the international community to end this farce of direct
negotiations between the helpless occupied and the all-powerful
occupier. It is time for it to live up to its duty and obligations and
take action to end the illegal occupation.

The first step is to approve the Palestinians’ application for full

Regrettably, of all persons, Obama has threatened to veto any resolution
granting this request!

Coming from the man who started his presidency by choosing the
Palestinians to be the first to be called on phone, who gave the Cairo
speech so full of hope and promise to the Arab world, who not so long
ago snubbed Netanyahu, this stance by Obama is inexplicable and strange

But then, the President’s chair has magical powers. It changes men. Its
occupant becomes addicted to it. S/he will do anything to retain this seat.

Alas, Obama has obviously chosen this path. From being a world statesman
he has sunk to being a contender in the coming general elections in the
USA.  He used the international forum to speak to the electorate in the
USA. Aware of the power of AIPAC, desperate to shore up his sagging
popularity back home, he spoke what powerful donors and supporters
wanted to hear.

In doing so, he has shown a complete disregard for justice and
international law, has diminished himself, tarnished the image of
America and, as between Israel and Palestine, has aligned himself with
the oppressor against the oppressed.

(8) Israel's Gilo housing plan infuriates Merkel; she opposed Palestine
statehood bid

Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 23:47:37 +0100 From: leila stuart


October 2, 2011

Israel and Germany in unprecedented diplomatic crisis over Jerusalem

Merkel was incensed by the green light given to build beyond the Green
Line as she has been helping to thwart the Palestinian statehood bid on
Israel's behalf.

By Barak Ravid

German Chancellor Angela Merkel took Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
harshly to task Friday over last week's decision to approve 1,100
housing units in Gilo, precipitating an unprecedented diplomatic crisis.

A senior Israeli official said the move greatly angered Merkel, after
she had enlisted massive support of Israel over the past few weeks to
help in thwarting a Security Council vote approving Palestinian
membership in the United Nations.

Senior German officials told their Israeli counterparts that Merkel was
"furious" and "does not believe a word [Netanyahu] says."

At Netanyahu's request, Merkel had also put major pressure on
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to accept the Quartet's
initiative and renew talks immediately, the Israeli official said,
adding that Germany may now reconsider and support upgrading the PA's
status to that of a non-member state in the UN General Assembly.

Senior officials said Merkel was angry particularly because of the
timing, and because she felt the announcement on construction had
sabotaged efforts to return the parties to the negotiating table. ...

(9) Haaretz: Panetta arrives in Israel to head off attack on Iran


Haaretz: Panetta Arrives in Israel for ‘Urgent Consultations’ on Iran

{Hebrew headline} Headline: Panetta 'arrives for urgent consultation on
Iran' {end}

I have been writing for more than two years about the possibility of an
Israeli war against Iran (make no mistake, an Israeli attack on Iran
will notbe just a single discrete operation, but involve an ongoing, and
regional war).  And I’ve never felt closer to the idea it was going to
happen.  If it does, all of the political developments that led up to it
should be fodder for an international studies colloquim on national
conflicts, how they start, how to avoid them, and how needless and
futile they are.

Today, Haaretz blares a headline (Hebrew print edition only) for a story
by Amos Harel:

     Second Meeting in Two Weeks:
     U.S. Defense Secretary Arrives for Urgent Consultation on Iran

This is no ordinary meeting.  As Harel’s story notes, it’s the second
meeting between Panetta and Barak in two weeks.  His first was in
Washington DC, during which he also met with the new CIA director, David
Petraeus.  Tomorrow’s meeting threatens to be a make or break one,
during which Israel will argue for an attack and Panetta will
(hopefully) attempt to dissuade them:

     Barak and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are believed to favor
an Israeli strike on Iran, while the Obama administration has gone out
of its way to voice its objection to such a move. Panetta’s predecessor
at the Defense Department, Robert Gates, has repeatedly reiterated his
objection to an Israeli strike, claiming that such a move would have
severe consequences.

     Admiral Michael Mullen, who last month stepped down from his role
as chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, has passed numerous messages
to Netanyahu, clarifying that Israel does not have a “green light” to
attack Iran.

     Lately the administration has refrained from direct remarks about a
possible Israeli strike.

Gee, why do you think that is?  Because Obama, with falling popularity
ratings especially within the Jewish community, doesn’t feel strong
enough to step in front of this oncoming train (wreck).  And possibly
because he doesn’t oppose it nearly as strongly as he should.  Obama’s
seen his poll numbers rise with his lethal approach to alleged
anti-American terrorists.  Part of him at the least, must believe that
unleashing Israel on the Iranians can’t hurt him with security-hawk
voters.  Of course, Obama forgets or doesn’t care about the impact it
will have on his progressive-liberal base.  He either takes them for
granted, believes they have nowhere else to go, or thinks they’re

I’ve been reporting here on numerous Israeli media sources who’ve noted
the increasing apocalyptical rhetoric from both Ehud Barak and Bibi
Netanyahu concerning the Iranian threat to Israel.  Never have I read so
many Israeli commentators reporting virtually the same portraits of
leaders ready for war, and at the same time.  It’s ominous, I tell you.

Yaakov Katz, who is a veteran hawkish military correspondent for the
Jerusalem Post, also reports today:

     One of the last times Leon Panetta came to Israel was to stop the
country from attacking Iran.  It was May 2009 and the then-CIA chief was
reportedly sent to Israel to ensure the new government in Jerusalem was
not planning unilateral action against the Islamic Republic.

     …On Monday, Panetta will again arrive in Israel, although this time
as secretary of defense…When he sits down for talks with Defense
Minister Ehud Barak, Iran will again feature prominently on the agenda.
  What he will find, though, might not be to his liking.

     According to some estimations, the chances of an Israeli strike
against Iran might be growing…Former Mossad chief Meir Dagan’s recent
warning that with him, former IDF chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. (res.)
Gabi Ashkenazi and former Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) chief Yuval
Diskin no longer in office there is no one left capable of standing up
to Barak and Netanyahu if they should decide to take action.

     …Panetta will likely use this visit to try and [sic] ease Israeli
concerns and tensions…He will also look for assurances that Israel will
not surprise America.

Katz claims that Israel hasn’t yet given up on the efficacy of
sanctions.  But U.S. defense secretaries don’t meet their Israeli
counterparts twice in two weeks and fly half way around the world in
order to discuss sanctions.  I smell war in the air.  God, I hope I’m
wrong.  So many will die if I’m not, and needlessly so.

(10) Alan Dershowitz on Jewish mission to teach social values to non-Jews

From: Michael <RePorterNoteBook@gmail.com> Date: 3 October 2011 23:14
From: GiuseppeFurioso@aol.com

  I'm just started reading '' What Israel Means to Me '' edited by  Alan
Dershowitz...it really should be titled what it means to me to be a jew.
Here's what former Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman had to say:

"The nation of Israel, I believe was chosen by God to teach the world
about Himself. Like a controlled experiment, God separated the Jewish
people from the world so that his truth could be clearly understood
without intervening variables. Through the nation of Israel , the world
came to understand law, family, the social contract, public health,
caring for the  poor and so many other societal values." ...

(11) Kevin MacDonald: Jewish Revenge Fantasies

From: Michael <RePorterNoteBook@gmail.com> Date: 4 October 2011 07:20



Kevin MacDonald: A recent panel discussion of Quentin Tarantino’s
Inglourious Basterds had some interesting tidbits about Jewish revenge

     But [Dr. Amy] Kalmanofsky quickly put that argument [that Jews
should feel guilty about revenge]  to bed, noting that Jewish texts have
always embraced revenge fantasies, from the destruction of the Egyptians
in Exodus and Haman & Co. in Megillat Esther. And [Rabbi Jack] Moline —
echoing the message of one of his Yom Kippur sermons from earlier this
year — also praised the film, describing it as a way of helping American
Jews shed some of their Holocaust baggage and getting more comfortable
with their Zionist sides.

     Moline told his congregants: “To my surprise, my complete and utter
surprise, there was something cathartic and deeply satisfying watching
this revenge fantasy play out. It was as if something I did not dare
admit — my secret blood lust to do unto them what they did unto us — was
being acknowledged, permitted and validated. I was liberated from victim

For making Jews feel good about their blood lust, Tarantino’s future in
Hollywood is assured. The producer, Lawrence Bender, told Tarantino
“Quentin you are about to make your Bar Mitzvah movie, you are going to
be officially let into the tribe.”

This reminds me of Alison Weir’s wonderful recent article “Israeli Organ
Trafficing and Theft: From Palestine to Moldova.” She discusses the work
of Prof. Nancy Scheper-Hughes of the University of California-Berkeley:

     Scheper-Hughes discussed the two motivations of Israeli
traffickers. One was greed, she said. The other was somewhat chilling:
“Revenge, restitution – reparation for the Holocaust.”

     She described speaking with Israeli brokers who told her “it’s kind
of ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. We’re going to get every
single kidney and liver and heart that we can. The world owes it to us.’”

     Scheper-Hughes says that she “even heard doctors saying that.” ...

(12) Kevin Macdonald reviews Gilad Atzmon’s book “The Wandering Who?”

From: Michael <RePorterNoteBook@gmail.com> Date: 6 October 2011 06:14

A Dissident Meditation on Jewish Identity: A Review of Gilad Atzmon’s
“The Wandering Who?”

Kevin MacDonald


... For Atzmon, Zionism is all about Judaism as racial identity
politics, ethnic cleansing, and manipulating Western governments via the
Israel Lobby. As a child growing up in Israel, “supremacy was brewed
into our souls, we gazed at the world through racist, chauvinistic
binoculars. And we felt no shame about it either” (p. 2). He began his
journey of embracing the West as a result of immersion in jazz.
Eventually, “I somehow already yearned to become a Goy or at least to be
surrounded by Goyim” (p. 7).

For Atzmon, the racialism so fundamental to Zionism is an aberration
from Judaism the religion. He has no problem with people who “regard
themselves as human beings that happen to be of Jewish origin.” The
problem arises with “those who put their Jewish-ness over and above all
other traits” (p. 16). This sort of Jewish essentialism was central to
Zionism from the beginning, often with strong racialist overtones.
Quoting Vladimir Jabotinsky, the father of the Israeli right:

A Jew brought up among Germans may assume German customs, German words.
He may be wholly imbued with that German fluid but the nucleus of his
spiritual structure will always remain Jewish because his blood, his
body, his physical racial type are Jewish. ...

Atzmon reviews the data showing that Zionism began out of a concern that
Jews would lose their racial distinctiveness by assimilation (see also
here, p. 152ff)—a “tribal preservation project” p. 70). “Separation is a
strategy of ghetto-building, and Zionists have followed this strategy
since the late nineteenth century” (p. 41). This is certainly true, but
Atzmon seems unaware that in this regard, Zionism was simply building on
traditional Jewish separatism. Indeed, early Zionists were well aware of
this. As the early Zionist Elias Auerbach phrased it, “Zionism would
return Jews ‘back into the position they enjoyed before the nineteenth
century—politically autonomous, culturally whole, and racially pure’”
(Ibid, p. 158). The original enemy of the Zionists was the Enlightenment
and the assimilationist tendencies of Western civilization.

True Zionists are therefore Jews first and foremost—to the point that
they put the interests of Israel ahead of the interests of the countries
they live in. Atzmon thus cites the work of Victor Ostrovsky, the former
Mossad agent who described the huge network of Sayanim ready to help the
cause of Israel by aiding the Mossad. This of course is exactly the type
of behavior that has led to the loyalty issue of anti-Jewish attitudes
throughout history. Atzmon is quite clear that the loyalty issue applies
in spades to the neoconservatives and the rest of the Jewish
establishment with their constant drumbeat of wars for Israel—“the
neocons transform the American army into an Israeli mission force” (p.
70). Paul Wolfowitz (a central focus of Atzmon’s ire) as a Sayan.

Atzmon is quite aware that if anti-Semitism didn’t exist, strongly
identified Jews would have to create it: “Zionism is maintained by
anti-Semitism” (p. 33). The perception of anti-Semitism creates a bunker
mentality that justifies everything.

Atzmon has a nice chapter on the deceptive self-images of liberal
secular Jews who spout phrases of universalist humanism but in their
innermost beings are anything but universalist or humanist. This is
indeed the central masquerade of Jews in the post-Enlightenment West,
what he calls “the Jewish tribal left” p. 72). He traces this stance to
the very origins of the European Enlightenment when Moses Mendelssohn
advised Jews to “live in a dual, deceptive mode, if not practically in a
state of schizophrenia. … He must have realised that universalism and
tribalism are opposing categories. … This solution led to false and
deceptive behaviour. … This behavioural code, though very pragmatic,
happens to be non-ethical by definition. It is based on deception—both
self-deception and deceiving the other” (pp. 55, 57).

The result is that Jewish identity in the Diaspora is what Atzmon terms
a “negative identity”:

Rather than understanding who you are, one invests some effort in
differentiating oneself from the other and from the universal. Rather
than listening to one’s conscience and engage in an authentic ethical
judgment, the negating subject sets his or her relationships with his or
her surrounding environment, based on pragmatic and practical
decision-making and exchange. At most one may present a pretence of
ethical thinking, but no more than that. (p. 63).

Prime examples of this pragmatic veneer of ethics are neocon ideologues
who “always present a seemingly ‘ethical’ argument. They employ what
looks like a moral excuse in order to introduce a pretext for a war. …
Clearly the Palestinians and the Iraqis are paying a heavy price as
victims of the politics of negation, politics that convey a deceitful
image of righteousness” (p. 64). ...

It is this assault by the Jewish tribalist left masquerading as
enlightened universalists that was a major source of anti-Semitism
during and preceding the National Socialist era in Germany. For example,
in Mein Kampf Hitler wrote of the liberal Jew “while he seems to
overflow with ‘enlightenment,’ ‘progress,’ ‘freedom,’ ‘humanity,’ etc.,
he himself practices the severest segregation of his race ” (see here,
p. 150). Similarly, Atzmon notes “emancipated Jews insist on celebrating
the fruits of enlightenment; they celebrate their right to determine who
they are. On the other hand, Jewish politics is tribal, it is intolerant
of Jewish dissidence or any form of self-determination that may oppose
what it regards as Jewish political or tribal interests” (p. 105). ...

Throughout history, Jews have always been an elite, typically making
alliances with non-Jewish elites and often collaborating in oppression
of the peoples dominated by the elites. Here Atzmon traces the Jewish
preoccupation with making alliances with the powerful to the Book of
Esther, where Mordecai schemes to influence the king on behalf of the
Jews. Atzmon describes several modern examples, most interestingly Rabbi
Joachim Prinz’s 1934 letter to the NSDAP where he affirms the idea that
Jews are a race committed to maintaining racial purity, while seeking
common ground with the dominant power, the German government. ...

Atzmon creates a narrative in which traditional Jews living in European
societies “saw themselves as American, British or French people who
happened to be Jewish,” but then Zionists came along and eventually
convinced most Jews that they were Jews first and foremost — “the birth
of Zionist separatism” (p. 39). In general, Atzmon is far too eager to
paint Zionism as the original sin of Judaism. While it’s true that this
is a good description of what one might call the official public
ideology of Judaism in post-Enlightenment European societies, it is not
at all an accurate description of Jewish behavior. In fact the loyalty
issue long pre-dates Zionism. Jews have always had strong international
connections and interests that transcended where they happened to live.
Perhaps the most historically important example of this was the
worldwide campaign of the organized Jewish community against the Russian
government from the late 19th century up to the Bolshevik Revolution—a
campaign that at times opposed the national interests of the countries
where they lived (see here, p. 67ff). ...

Atzmon is at his best in dealing with the culture of the Holocaust. In
Chapter 16 (“Trauma queen”) he dismisses the reality of Jewish Holocaust
trauma among Jews who never actually went through the experience, noting
that whatever feelings they have are manufactured by what he calls the
“Pre-Traumatic Stress Syndrome” — where Jews are manipulated into
feeling trauma by media images of imminent destruction and by being
transported to Auschwitz for the purpose of “maturing into traumatised
Jewish adults” (p. 131), thereby suppressing any possible empathy for
the Palestinians. “The well-established Judeo-centric tendency to
interpret almost any political and ideological criticism as a
declaration of impending Judeocide is a severe form of collective
Pre-TSS” (p. 131). There is always a “Shoah to come” (p. 132) lurking
around the corner, likely to be set off by any criticism of Jews, no
matter how rationally based (see also here, pp. 11–12).

Atzmon notes that the Holocaust cult has all the features of a religion
and none of the features of a historical narrative:

It has priests (e.g., Simon Wiesenthal, Elie Wiesel, Deborah Lipstadt)
and prophets (… those who warn of the Iranian Judeocide to come). It has
commandments and dogmas (‘Never Again’) and rituals (memorial days,
pilgrimage to Auschwitz, etc). It has an established, esoteric symbolic
order (kapos, gas chambers, chimneys…). It also has a temple, Yad
Vashem, and shrines — Holocaust museums in capital cities worldwide. The
Holocaust religion is also financed by a massive global financial
network …. This new religion is coherent enough to define its
‘antichrists’ (Holocaust deniers) and powerful enough to persecute them
(through Holocaust-denial and hate-speech laws). (pp. 148–149)

The Holocaust has therefore achieved “meta-historical status” — beyond
factual inquiry, its “’factuality’ sealed by draconian laws, and its
reasoning secured by social and political institutions” (p. 149). It is
a powerful political force on behalf of Jewish interests—e.g., it “is
touted as a pretext for nuking Iran” (p. 152).

Many of these points have also been made by Peter Novick his The
Holocaust in American Life. Novick adds that the culture of the
Holocaust was promoted as the main source of Jewish identity and in the
effort to combat assimilation and intermarriage among Jews. An important
lesson is that “tolerance and diversity [are] good; hate [is] bad, the
overall rubric [being] ‘man’s inhumanity to man’” (pp. 258-259). The
Holocaust has thus become an instrument of Jewish ethnic interests as an
instrument to silence opponents of high levels of multi-ethnic
immigration into Western societies. And, regarding the metaphysical
uniqueness of the Holocaust, it would be hard to improve on Abe Foxman’s
comment, cited by Novick (p. 199) that the Holocaust is “not simply one
example of genocide but a near successful attempt on the life of God’s
chosen children and, thus, on God himself.”

Atzmon makes the interesting point that the Holocaust religion is simply
another version of age-old Jewish fear — the pre-traumatic stress
syndrome discussed above. It is a bunker mentality of impending doom
that rationalizes even the most extreme actions to prevent it. One might
also note that it functions as a modern version of Jewish chosenness —
that Jews are a special people whose sufferings are unique.

Atzmon is not so much a Holocaust denier as someone who denies the
metaphysical status that the Holocaust has achieved—its uniqueness, its
being beyond questioning, and its historical transcendence—all of which
have made it into an enormously powerful weapon for achieving Jewish
interests and in particular for making Israel’s behavior beyond
reproach. Thus, he does not deny that his great-grandmother died in
WWII, but he refuses to give her death any special status: Her death
“was indeed bad and tragic, but not that different from the fate of
millions of Ukrainians, on learning the real meaning of communism. …
[Her fate] was not so different from hundreds of thousands of German
civilians who died in deliberate, indiscriminate bombing, just because
they were Germans” (p. 175). ...

(13) Gilad Atzmon: Tzipi Livni is heading to Britain, after amendment of
Britain’s universal jurisdiction law

Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 11:14:08 +0100 From: leila stuart


Foreign Interests In Our Midst

Gilad Atzmon


The Jewish Chronicle reported yesterday that Israeli War Criminal Mrs
Tzipi Livni is heading to Britain following the amendment of Britain’s
universal jurisdiction

Under the old terms, ethically driven British citizens were able to
apply for an arrest warrant for suspected war criminals. That meant that
Israeli political and military leaders were strictly advised to stay
away from this kingdom.

Legislation has now brought a new requirement aimed at preventing the
courts from being used by morally driven individuals. The in-justice
secretary, Ken Clarke, outlined how changes would give the Director of
Public Prosecutions veto power over arrest warrants.

Mrs Livni was at a risk of being arrested due to her direct role in
Operation Cast Lead, 2009.

The recent change of Britain's Universal Law of jurisdiction was the
outcome of some relentless Israeli Lobby pressure. As it happens, the
Jewish Lobby in Britain promotes foreign interests in our midst but it
also damages the ethical scope of British legislation. It clearly
manages to derail Britain’s ethical stand.

What British citizens receive in return is indeed an open question. It
is about time Britain reinstated its independence. It is about time it
is run from London rather than from Jerusalem.

You can now order Gilad Atzmon's New Book on Amazon.com
  or Amazon.co.uk

No comments:

Post a Comment