204 Why I Threw The Shoe: Iraq's 5 million orphans, million widows, hundreds of thousands of maimed

Re Flight 77 Cockpit Door Never Opened - Pilots for 9/11 Truth. The original story is at http://pilotsfor911truth.org/american_77_hijack_impossible.html

(1) Europe becomes Muslim
(2) Flight 77 Cockpit Door Never Opened - Pilots for 9/11 Truth
(3) Why I Threw The Shoe: Iraq's 5 million orphans, million widows, hundreds of thousands of maimed
(4) Jews as victims cf Jews' oppressive control - Philip Weiss
(5) Holocaust Studies, Antisemitism Studies elevate Jewish religion into a university qualification

(1) Europe becomes Muslim
From: Joe <joe@sott.net> Date: 15.01.2010 09:12 PM

What saddens me is not that "Europe is becoming Muslim" but rather than people are blithely assimilating such obvious scaremongering. Take a look around at the world these past 8 or 9 years. Have you noticed anything? What about that War on Terrorism thing? Has anyone noticed that it is underpinned by the idea of a 'clash of cvilisations', an idea that would not even exist if 9/11 had not happened? And has anyone noticed the overwhelming evidence that 9/11 was carried out by a cabal of politicians and bankers and other shady elite figures who have used 9/11 to justify the invasion and occupation of several Middle Eastern countries?

Now, connect the dots. Parroting the idea of a Muslim hoard overtaking the Western world, which is mainly promoted by American Neocon-types (like Daniel Pipes) and their comrades in Israel, is simply playing into the hands of those who would manufacture this clash of civilisations themselves, from whole cloth.

In 1990, Pipes wrote in the National Review that "Western European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene...All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most."

Now ask yourself again, where did you get that idea that "Europe is becoming Muslim"

Joe Quinn

(2) Flight 77 Cockpit Door Never Opened - Pilots for 9/11 Truth

9/11: PENTAGON AIRCRAFT HIJACK IMPOSSIBLE
FLIGHT DECK DOOR CLOSED FOR ENTIRE FLIGHT

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/american_77_hijack_impossible.html

Flight 77 Cockpit Door Never Opened - Pilots for 9/11 Truth

From: Palestine Remembered <palestineremembered@googlemail.com> Date: 16.01.2010 01:40 PM

The 911 stuff drags down all the good work you do because the people  presenting it are so obviously mad.

Can you or anyone seriously believe that Barbara Olson is still alive?  She can't possibly be alive - so why ask us to believe she was not  killed in the hijacked aircraft, but was murdered later by the  gubbermint? How many 1000s of Americans would have to take part in  such a conspiracy?

Why tell us there was no plane debris found around the Pentagon when  we've seen the pictures of it?

Similarly, the WTC towers cannnot have been brought down by  explosives, not least because such destruction inevitably leads to  debris full of the detonation cord. It's impossible to hide.

For a long time thought the 911 A & E (Architects and Engineers) might  be the only people with credibility - unfortunately, I've seen the  leader of that petition in a documentary along with other guys who are  obviously mad. Please don't associate yourself with them.

Did you ever hear from batnigi asking to be added? You can take the  toma link off your listing.

Reply (Peter M.):

Where does the article say that Barbara Olson is still alive? It doesn't.

On plane debris around the Pentagon: see Eric Hufschmid's video Painful Deceptions (the 2003 one, done by Eric himself). The bits are much too small for the claimed airliner, more the size of a Global Hawk.

Re Detonation Cord: Did you raise this matter with Steven E. Jones? He's the one who found thermite/thermate.

Re 911 A & E (Architects and Engineers): please supply the incriminating evidence.

(3) Why I Threw The Shoe: Iraq's 5 million orphans, million widows, hundreds of thousands of maimed

From: Gary Kohls <gkohls@cpinternet.com> Date: 16.01.2010 07:34 PM

Why I Threw The Shoe

By Muntazer al-Zaidi

23 September, 2009 - The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/17/why-i-threw-shoe-bush

I am free. But my country is still a prisoner of war. There has been a lot of talk about the action and about the person who took it, and about the hero and the heroic act, and the symbol and the symbolic act. But, simply, I answer: what compelled me to act is the injustice that befell my people, and how the occupation wanted to humiliate my homeland by putting it under its boot.

Over recent years, more than a million martyrs have fallen by the bullets of the occupation and Iraq is now filled with more than five million orphans, a million widows and hundreds of thousands of maimed. Many millions are homeless inside and outside the country.

We used to be a nation in which the Arab would share with the Turkman and the Kurd and the Assyrian and the Sabean and the Yazid his daily bread. And the Shia would pray with the Sunni in one line. And the Muslim would celebrate with the Christian the birthday of Christ. This despite the fact that we shared hunger under sanctions for more than a decade.

Our patience and our solidarity did not make us forget the oppression. But the invasion divided brother from brother, neighbour from neighbour. It turned our homes into funeral tents.

I am not a hero. But I have a point of view. I have a stance. It humiliated me to see my country humiliated; and to see my Baghdad burned, my people killed. Thousands of tragic pictures remained in my head, pushing me towards the path of confrontation. The scandal of Abu Ghraib. The massacre of Falluja, Najaf, Haditha, Sadr City, Basra, Diyala, Mosul, Tal Afar, and every inch of our wounded land. I traveled through my burning land and saw with my own eyes the pain of the victims, and heard with my own ears the screams of the orphans and the bereaved. And a feeling of shame haunted me like an ugly name because I was powerless.

As soon as I finished my professional duties in reporting the daily tragedies, while I washed away the remains of the debris of the ruined Iraqi houses, or the blood that stained my clothes, I would clench my teeth and make a pledge to our victims, a pledge of vengeance.

The opportunity came, and I took it.

I took it out of loyalty to every drop of innocent blood that has been shed through the occupation or because of it, every scream of a bereaved mother, every moan of an orphan, the sorrow of a rape victim, the teardrop of an orphan.

I say to those who reproach me: do you know how many broken homes that shoe which I threw had entered? How many times it had trodden over the blood of innocent victims? Maybe that shoe was the appropriate response when all values were violated.

When I threw the shoe in the face of the criminal, George Bush, I wanted to express my rejection of his lies, his occupation of my country, my rejection of his killing my people. My rejection of his plundering the wealth of my country, and destroying its infrastructure. And casting out its sons into a diaspora.

If I have wronged journalism without intention, because of the professional embarrassment I caused the establishment, I apologise. All that I meant to do was express with a living conscience the feelings of a citizen who sees his homeland desecrated every day. The professionalism mourned by some under the auspices of the occupation should not have a voice louder than the voice of patriotism. And if patriotism needs to speak out, then professionalism should be allied with it.

I didn't do this so my name would enter history or for material gains. All I wanted was to defend my country.

(4) Jews as victims cf Jews' oppressive control - Philip Weiss

From: IHR News <news@ihr.org> Date: 16.01.2010 01:00 AM

Israel's Crisis
Philip Weiss
http://mondoweiss.net/2010/01/the-israel-crisis.html

by PHILIP WEISS on JANUARY 11, 2010 · 80 COMMENTS

Just back from Israel/Palestine, the overwhelming sense I carry away is that the present state cannot last. Just how it goes down I have no idea. But conditions are so obviously discriminatory, and the knowledge of these conditions now so widespread– among the Christian pilgrims in my Jerusalem guesthouse, among European leaders, and now too among the Israeli elite and American left–that the situation is reminiscent of the delegitimizing of communism in the 70s and 80s. The period of apartheid struggle that Ehud Olmert warned of two years ago is upon us. So too his warning of possible “national suicide."

The surprise for me is that the indifference of American Jews to this injustice is more than matched by that of the mass of Israelis: They live inside the bubble of their opinion that Israeli society is fair. So this trip has left me pretty depressed, even as it has renewed my sense of ethnocentric purpose: I will do what I can to bring the American Jewish community into the world conversation about the reality of Israel/Palestine.
This will happen. A few weeks back Israeli activist Micha Kurz said that a war had begun between one part of Israeli society and another; and I come home knowing that that war is about to erupt inside American Jewish life. You might say that it has already erupted: J Street’s emergence and all the liberal Zionists in the New York Review of Books attacking the occupation are signs. But we ain’t seen nothing yet. We are on the verge of a Jewish intifada, and about time too.

Now why do I say that the current situation cannot last?

I use the words apartheid and Jim Crow on this site all the time, but it is something else to see these policies before your eyes and be overborne by the feeling (and over days to come, I will offer observations of such moments). And today there is no secret about these conditions. They are being discussed openly not just in the Palestinian community—and believe me, every Palestinian I met expressed hatred for this system–but in Israel and Europe, and even at the fringes of the American Jewish community. A week ago I got out of a taxi in the occupied West Bank at the Ofer prison for a demonstration against the arbitrary detainment of Palestinian human rights worker Jamal Juma’, and there were Mustafa Barghouti and Omar Barghouti leading the protest–and a dozen American Jews from the visiting group American Jews for a Just Peace, also several news teams from the Arab world and Europe. What all these people recognize, and what Mustafa Barghouti woke up to three years ago, is that the peace process has been meaningless. Israel is today “the worst country in the world” because of the system it has set up, Barghouti told me: he would be arrested if he used that road right there, he said, pointing at settlers road 443; and the Jews in the West Bank use 26 times the amount of water as the Palestinians and Palestinians pay twice the price that Jews do for water and electricity. And when Barghouti says that Israel is now the worst country in the world he means that there is at last international outrage over the fact that a country claiming to be a democracy in the 21st century is creating these conditions.

A couple of dozen Israelis I met echo the understanding that their society faces an existential crisis, in one year or ten years. Even Ynet has columnists who say it is apartheid, and even Zionists I met are filled with despair. They know that it is like South Africa, they know the world is paying attention, they know that the Palestinians hate the system. And meanwhile the country’s leadership is committing national suicide by expanding the realm of apartheid conditions even as Al Jazeera and Reuters train their cameras on the scene.

This is the war that Micha Kurz told me about. Zionism is today divided between those who want the Land of Israel and the more pragmatic Zionists who think that the landgrab is destroying the state; and the second group is joined by non-Zionists and anti’s. This division did not exist for most of the occupation; previously, Labor Zionists went along with the religious crazies and Revisionist fanatics who wanted to populate Eretz Israel. But today liberal Zionist Tom Segev writes in the New York Review of Books that Zionism was never about having the land, it was about maintaining a Jewish majority. And Yoel Marcus writes in Haaretz that Israel must do everything to stave off the “demographic dominance” of non-Jews.

The same war is visible in American Jewish life, between mainstream Jewish organizations like AIPAC that have pushed the messianic occupation and J Street which has opposed it, so far mildly. But in Israel the battle is raging openly, and of course the expansionists are winning, as they always have. Netanyahu’s settlement freeze means nothing when you consider that there are thousands of freshly-poured foundations across the West Bank and the settlers will now undertake to build houses on them during the freeze, and East Jerusalem continues to be ethnically cleansed.

What are they thinking? How does the right wing imagine that it can secure Israel’s future when it is consolidating a system in which 5 million Jews will govern a non-Jewish majority in the so-called Jewish homeland? The answer I got from Assaf Sharon and other activist Israelis is that the leadership is counting on miracles: that God will take care of the Jews so long as they are in Eretz Israel, or that somehow American Jews will be granted voting citizenship in the land and so Jews will continue to outnumber the Palestinians (p.s. dual loyalty is an antisemitic canard), or that the Palestinians will undertake voluntary transfer and clear out of the land on their own. The last would seem to be government policy, of making the Palestinians feel very, very unwelcome.

It is the weakness of the Israeli system, of course, that feverish people are now guiding government policy. Even Netanyahu must be afraid of them; and his recent efforts to try to break up centrist parties so as to capture some of their more conservative members for his coalition is seen by some as a pragmatic effort by the Prime Minister to provide himself a political base so as to take on the right wing.

The feverish have taken political cover from the Jewish-only bubble. I mean all the Jews, including Americans, who are swaddled in Holocaust consciousness of Jews as victims and have refused to develop any knowledge of a situation in which Jews exercise oppressive control. One of the most startling discoveries of my trip was learning from Mikhael Manekin, a leaders of the soldiers’ group Breaking the Silence, that the group had taken leading Israeli establishment figures, including government officials, on its tour of Hebron in recent months and they had come away disturbed and angry at the blatant apartheid conditions in the city, in which some Palestinians cannot walk on the street that they live on. The shock is that I took this tour nearly 4 years ago, but that even Israeli leaders have blinded themselves to a situation that has been an outrage for 40 years. Not to mention American Jewish leaders, here in the country where liberals attack you if you use the word apartheid.

This Jewish blindness will not last. There is too much stirring. Didi Remez is a Zionist, but he is using his Coteret blog to get facts to the American mainstream about the deadly occupation; and though he and I disagree about the necessity of the Jewish state, he doesn’t mind marching alongside me and BDS-supporting Jews in the fight against the occupation. I saw him at the Sheikh Jarrah demonstration Friday, against the ethnic cleansing of the East Jerusalem neighborhood so that Jerusalem will be Jewish Jewish Jewish; and who else should I see there but Hendrik Hertzberg of the New Yorker– so maybe the New Yorker will write about this at last and tell its readers what virulent Zionists are doing to old Arab neighborhoods.

I know that many of these Israeli activists are committed to the idea of a Jewish state. Even among Jews who oppose the occupation and are butting heads with soldiers in villages in the West Bank, there are many who are trying to preserve Israel as a national refuge for the Jews. They are like Daniel Levy of J Street, who has called for a return to the ’67 borders to preserve the Jewish state. Or Bernard Avishai, also at the Sheikh Jarrah demo, who wishes to maintain a Hebrew republic, presumably in a form of partition.

Can they bring about a wider awareness of the crisis come soon enough to save the Jewish state? I don’t know. Yet somehow I doubt that a Jewish state—an ethnocracy somehow redeemed by institutionalized respect for the rights of a minority population– will survive the crisis. The proliferation of settlements on strategic hilltops in the West Bank and the signs for Israeli businesses like Ahava a mile from the Jordan River, let alone the Warsaw-treatment of Gaza, would seem to have destroyed the prospect for a viable Palestinian state on the leftovers of Palestine; and without a real state that permits the self-determination of Palestinians, and some real accommodation of refugees’ rights, Palestinians will continue to agitate, and the international solidarity movement will continue to advocate for them.

My despair springs from the fact that while I saw Arab media everywhere I went, the larger Israeli Jewish community and the American Jewish one are in denial. They have little knowledge of what is going on, and enfolded in nationalist ideals of 100 years ago, are ill-prepared for the impending crisis. And I’m afraid that this hardened, self-righteous resistance to the truth– let alone to 21st century liberal values– will result in greater violence and draw in the United States.

The brightest hope I got on my trip came from young Jews. Standing on a hillside in the Palestinian village of Al-Walaje–which is being engulfed by the Israeli idea of greater Jerusalem embodied by the fortress-like presence of the settlement called Gilo that dominated the horizon a half mile away–I met two guys from my home town, Baltimore: Josh Levey and Michael Kaplan.

JOSH

They are just teenagers; but brace yourself– they attended an all-Jewish high school and are now working in a refugee camp outside Bethlehem for three months. As a boy, Levey told me, he yelled abuse at the anti-Zionist Jewish group Neturei Karta at pro-Israel demonstrations; but more recently, he has countered the hasbara in his own high school with vigorous opposition. Three months in a Palestinian refugee camp! These boys from my home town have no mental reservations about speaking of the Palestinians as human beings. So we are seeing a Jewish intifada at last, a shaking off of Zionism now that the ideology has sputtered out in ethnic cleansing and political prisoners and white phosphorus.

As we talked, an older American-Israeli woman, a Meretz/liberal Zionist type, who was also nobly demonstrating againt the landgrab, interrupted us to say that it is a simple matter to buy the settlers out; why, Naomi Chazan has said that is the case. As she talked with the boys about miraculously undoing the white stucco walls and red tile roofs of the elite settlement above us, it became clear that she regards the Jewish state as a necessity for Jews, but that somehow these young men do not. And in a couple of months, Josh Levey and Michael Kaplan will be coming home.

(5) Holocaust Studies, Antisemitism Studies elevate Jewish religion into a university qualification

From: ReporterNotebook <RePorterNoteBook@Gmail.com> Date: 14.01.2010 01:58 PM

Debunking Antisemitism Studies

And Yehuda Bauer In Particular Yad Va Shame On You!

By Gilad Atzmon 12-17-9

Holocaust studies is an emerging pseudo intellectual, academic trend. It basically allows rabid Zionists to elevate their discussions on 'what is really wrong with the goyim' into a university qualification. I recently learned about the 'Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Antisemitism'. I also learned about a similar institute at the University of London.

Antisemitism Studies has the potential to be a valuable field of research if it could, for example, elaborate and scrutinize Jewish culture and history in an attempt to grasp what it is that evokes anti Jewish feeling. It could try to establish if there is a Jewish ideological, political or cultural pattern that may be amended. In fact early Zionists(1) tried to dwell on the subject. They tried to diagnose the 'cause' of Antisemitsm so that they might learn why it invariably and repeatedly matured into host cultures regarding Jews as a parasitic force. Early Zionists insisted that Aliya would bring about a new productive, ethical and civilized new Jew.

However, contemporary Antisemitism scholars have a very different agenda in mind. They build their research on the axiom that Jews are categorically innocent. They then try to understand why the Goyim behave immorally and even murderously.

But here is a clear embarrassing catch: considering humanity is comprised of Goyim, Antisemitism scholars who attempt to grasp 'what is wrong with the Goyim' actually ask 'what is wrong with humanity?' This is in fact a legitimate question, unless we leave one conspicuous group out. As things stand, in the new Judeo-centric 'academic' field namely 'Antisemitism studies', a Zionist is there to review the Goy as a pathological case. This is slightly odd to say the least. It is even peculiar that such departments exist in Yale and at a London University. However, since academic institutes thrive on corporate donations and other funding sources, we can no longer expect the academic world to lead intellectual discourse or even commit itself to any form of ethical integrity.

One of the leading scholars of Antisemitim and the Holocaust is Professor Yehuda Bauer of Jerusalem University and a director at Yad Vashem, the Israeli Holocaust Museum. Prof. Bauer is a world expert in the hatred and destruction of 'one people,' namely the chosen. I have recently found this video and I would urge every humanist to watch it. It is a lecture about the origin of Antisemitism given by Professor Bauer in Hawaii in 2005.

Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqo9HyFMGFI&feature=player_embedded - t=1003

(Bauer's talk starts around 16 minutes and 30 seconds)

Bauer initially comes across as a charming and open minded person. He even makes some crucial observations. For the first twenty minutes it is possible to believe that one is witnessing a genuine authentic intellectual.

'Antisemitism', says Bauer, is a 'wrong term' there is no such animal for there 'are no Semites'. For Bauer there are no Semitic people and he acknowledges that the Jews are not exactly a homogenous racial group anyway. He agrees that the ideology that was brought to life by Wilhelm Marr in the late 19th century, is confusing. Antisemitism is nothing but 'anti Jewish' feelings or practice.

Where does Antisemitism start? Interestingly enough, Bauer goes back to the Book of Esther(2). He suggests it is an "allegory of fear of annihilation of the Diaspora Jew". Esther, according to Bauer, is a tale of Jewish fear of their surrounding environment. "The origin of anti Jewishness is the fact that Jewish civilization and culture is different to its surroundings". I myself would take it further and argue that the Book of Esther is where Jewish Lobbying and Jewish power matures into a vivid cultural paradigm. The moral of the story is rather clear. If Jews want to survive, they better infiltrate the corridors of power. With Esther in mind, AIPAC, Lord Levy and the Labour Friends of Israel look like an embodiment of a deep Biblical and cultural ideology.

Yet, Bauer, the exemplary Judeo-centric intellectual, fails to enlighten us on the specific ways in which Jewish civilization and culture is different. After all, if Antisemitism is a 'unique' form of hatred, then Jews must be 'uniquely' different from all the other 'minorities' that have endured prejudice across the centuries. I would expect an Antisemitism scholar to elaborate on this crucial issue and suggest some answers. Bauer fails to do so. The reason is simple. Bauer is a Zionist and Zionism is a solution for the Diaspora Jews. If you do not want to be different, just come home and dwell with us on Palestinian stolen land.

Bauer then moves on and asks: what are the types of crisis that lead towards Antisemitism? Christian Antisemitism is not too problematic to grasp. "Christianity had to differentiate itself from Judaism" says Bauer. However, Christianity is not a major problem. "Christianity doesn't like Jews, it discriminates against Jews yet due to its theology, it prevents genocide." In fact, according to Bauer, the genocidal tendency in Europe emerged with the secularization of Christian communities. One is left with Christian Antisemitism but a version lacking the theology that curtails murderous inclinations. Again, in Bauer's trivial world, the Jews are innocent. It is always the Goyim who fail morally and ethically.

Racism wasn't born in 19th century Europe, says Bauer, "there is some evidence of racism in the Iberian Peninsula from the 15th century". Someone better remind Bauer that, as far as Judaism is concerned, he can trace evidence of racism in every religious source whether it is the Torah or the Talmud.

"Racism turned against the Jews" says Bauer "because we are a different race" because we are the "paradigmatic Other". But then contradicting himself, he also insists on dismantling the notion of race in general. "There is no such thing as race, humanity comes from Africa, we are all Africans." Let's for a second agree with Bauer that race is a "pseudo scientific concept". Yet, the problem with race is not the attempt to divide the world into racial groups or trace people's anthropological origins. Race becomes a problematic issue when racism is introduced. Racism is the belief that one group of people is better than another. Devastatingly enough Judaism and Zionism are both saturated with racism. Bauer is right to argue that Jews are not a race, but Jewish ideology, both secular and religious, is racist and supremacist to the bone.

'The Israeli Palestine conflict, how important is it'? 'Very important' says Bauer. Would a resolution of the Israeli Palestinian conflict decrease Antisemitism? Yes, concludes Bauer, yet, Antisemitism won't disappear. Bauer is probably correct. According to his philosophy Antisemitsm is the product of Jewish otherness and this fact may never change. As long as Jews maintain their chosen tribal identity, they will always preserve their 'difference'.

Bauer is rather concerned with the "Antisemitism of the chattering classes, the media, intelligentsia, universities, the doctors". He contends that we have seen a "sudden rise 'of it' along with the 2nd Intifada". Obviously, the chances of Bauer winning an argument in intellectual circles, is rather limited. However, it is pretty reasonable that thinkers within the media, intelligentsia and academic circles would oppose the Jewish state, especially when evidence of Israeli genocidal barbarism is mounting.

It takes a few good minutes before Bauer, the proud owner of a rabid Zionist mind, shows his real colours. 'Is it okay to criticize Israel'? Yes, for sure, says Bauer. The Israeli press are the first to criticize Israeli politics. Condemnation of Israel is not Antisemitic unless one describes Israel as a 'Nazi state'. This is exactly where Bauer relinquishes his last drop of intellectual integrity. Are there any rules that we must employ when criticising the 'Jewish State'? Is there any intellectual obligation that we have to take into consideration when referring to a racist Jew-only, expansionist, murderous state? Surely, the 45% of Europeans who regard Israel as an exterminatory state do so for a reason. Israel and the Zionists better learn to take responsibility for their actions. They may then understand why almost half of the Europeans equate them with Nazis.

Bauer says political criticism is legitimate, yet when you turn the attack on the people and the state, you then shift into "genocidal territory". The truth of the matter is very simple. Within the Palestinian and anti Zionist discourse no one I can think of suggests annihilating any Jews. Many of us argue that the Jewish state doesn't have the right to exist at the expense of other people. Yet, we do not talk of or suggest the 'extermination' of anyone. We are talking about a change of political setting that will mature into a "state of its people". We believe in equal rights. We believe in the Palestinian right of return. If Jews want to form a Jew-only state, they should find a 'desert island' to do so, or even better a different planet.

How do you fight Antisemitism? "The ADL and the AJC are doing excellent work", says Bauer. But what about a hypothetical case of rising Antisemitism in a different territory, for instance the USSR? Could the ADL influence the Soviet Union? Bauer thinks not but Jews could make an impact "together with non Jews". Things changed in the Soviet Union because the USA mounted pressure on the USSR. "The Jews have to find allies and the allies will come when they understand that Antisemitism just starts with the Jews".

In some very simple words Bauer explains the current Zionist ideology. Jews must find new allies. They must bond with emerging powers. It is almost amusing that Bauer, an expert on Antisemitism, fails to see that this is exactly the root cause of resentment to Jewish power. This endless seeking of influence and domination is exactly where Jews buy enemies.

Bauer ends his talk with a fierce attack on 'radical Islam'. "Radical Islam is not just Antisemitic, it is Antisemitic in a genocidal way." He then reads the famous Hamas Charter (3). He brings to life the quotes about Jewish Power, world domination and so on. Some of the quotes are facts. Others sentences are accepted views. Some ideas are slightly over the top. But there is one thing Bauer fails to do: provide a single genocidal quote.

Bizarrely enough Bauer ends his talk saying "since 1982 I have tried to convince the Israeli government to find allies to fight that thing. Only now things start to happen." In fact Yehuda Bauer himself proves that the Hamas Charter is a genuine description of Jewish tribal activism. The 'seeking allies' which Bauer pushes for is exactly what the Hamas Charter refers to in the following lines:

"They took advantage of key elements in unfolding events, and accumulated a huge and influential material wealth which they put to the service of implementing their (Zionist) dream" (Hamas Charter 1988)

Is not finding 'new allies' a reference to seeking influence via media and political movements? The Hamas Charter describes it eloquently indeed:

"..take over control of the world media such as news agencies, the press, publication houses, broadcasting and the like. [They also used this] wealth to stir revolutions in various parts of the globe in order to fulfill their interests and pick the fruits." (Hamas Charter 1988)

Considering the lecture was given in 2005, four years into the 'war against terror', and 2 years into the Iraq war where American and British soldiers ended up fighting Zionist wars, combating the enemies of Israel, I think that by now we all have a glimpse of understanding of what Prof. Bauer refers to when he talks about 'allies'.

Prof. Yehuda Bauer is an academic adviser to the Israeli Holocaust Museum Yad Vashem. Maybe, Bauer should reflect on the fact that the Holocaust Institute he represents is located on Mt. Herzl on the lands of the Palestinian village of Ein Karem, 1,400 meters south of the Palestinian village of Deir Yassin, the scene of a Jewish atrocity against the native Palestinians. If Bauer contemplates this fact alone he will understand why as many as 37.4% of Europeans would find it hard to buy an old car from him, let alone his disingenuous Judeo-centric, pseudo academic ranting. (4) ***

(1) Here are a few examples of Early Zionists take on Antisemitism: Theodor Herzl, Max Nordau, Ze'ev Jabotinsky

(2) http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/purim-special-from-esther-to-aipac-by-gilad-atzmon.html

(3)"The enemies have been scheming for a long time, and they have consolidated their schemes, in order to achieve what they have achieved. They took advantage of key elements in unfolding events, and accumulated a huge and influential material wealth which they put to the service of implementing their dream. This wealth [permitted them to] take over control of the world media such as news agencies, the press, publication houses, broadcasting and the like. [They also used this] wealth to stir revolutions in various parts of the globe in order to fulfill their interests and pick the fruits. They stood behind the French and the Communist Revolutions and behind most of the revolutions we hear about here and there. They also used the money to establish clandestine organizations which are spreading around the world, in order to destroy societies and carry out Zionist interests. Such organizations are: the Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, Lions Clubs, B'nai B'rith and the like. All of them are destructive spying organizations. They also used the money to take over control of the Imperialist states and made them colonize many countries in order to exploit the wealth of those countries and spread their corruption therein. As regards local and world wars, it has come to pass and no one objects, that they stood behind World War I, so as to wipe out the Islamic Caliphate. They collected material gains and took control of many sources of wealth. They obtained the Balfour Declaration and established the League of Nations in order to rule the world by means of that organization. They also stood behind World War II, where they collected immense benefits from trading with war materials and prepared for the establishment of their state. They inspired the establishment of the United Nations and the Security Council to replace the League of Nations, in order to rule the world by their intermediary. (Hamas Charter Article 22http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/www.thejerusalem
fund.org/carryover/documents/charter.html)

(4) According to new research conducted by Bielefeld University "about 37.4% (Europeans) agree with the following statement: Considering Israel's policy, I can understand why people do not like Jews." (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3815828,00.html)