The day Palestine was infected by a virus called Israel

The victims of Europe and the Holocaust decided that they want a state of their own, somewhere, anywhere in the world.

After considering many options (at the expense and with total disregard to whoever may have already lived in the selected lands), Palestine was chosen. Among the Jewish Zionist options were such countries as Argentina, Ghana and other countries.

The Zionist movement arose in late nineteenth-century Europe, influenced by the nationalist ferment sweeping that continent. Zionism acquired its particular focus from the “ancient Jewish longing” for the return to Zion and received a strong impetus from the increasingly intolerable conditions facing the large Jewish community in Tsarist Russia. The movement also developed at the time of major European territorial acquisitions in Asia and Africa, and benefited from the European powers’ competition for influence in the shrinking Ottoman Empire.

One result of this involvement with European expansionism, however, was that the leaders of the nascent nationalist movements in the Middle East viewed Zionism as an adjunct of European colonialism. Moreover, Zionist assertions of the contemporary relevance of the Jews’ historical ties to Palestine, coupled with their land purchases and immigration, alarmed the indigenous population of the Ottoman districts that comprised Palestine. The Jewish community (yishuv) rose from 6 percent of Palestine’s population in 1880 to 10 percent by 1914. Although the numbers were insignificant, the settlers were outspoken enough to arouse the opposition of Arab leaders and induce them to exert counter pressure on the Ottoman regime to prohibit Jewish immigration and land buying.

As early as 1891, a group of Muslim and Christian notables cabled Istanbul, urging the government to prohibit Jewish immigration and land purchase. The resulting edicts radically curtailed land purchases in the Sanjak (district) of JERUSALEM for the next decade. When a Zionist Congress resolution in 1905 called for increased colonization, the Ottoman regime suspended all land transfers to Jews in both the Sanjak of Jerusalem and the Wilayat (province) of Beirut.
After the coup d’etat by the Young Turks in 1908, the Palestinians used their representation in the central parliament and their access to newly opened local newspapers to press their claims and express their concerns. They were particularly vociferous in opposition to discussions that took place between the financially hard-pressed Ottoman regime and Zionist leaders in 1912-13, which would have let the world Zionist Organization purchase crown land (Jiftlik) in the Baysan Valley, along the Jordan River.

The Zionists did not try to quell Palestinian fears, since their concern was to encourage colonization from Europe and to minimize the obstacles in their path. The only effort to meet to discuss Palestinian and Zionist aspirations occurred in the spring of 1914. Its difficulties illustrated the incompatibility in the aims of both sides aspirations. The Palestinians wanted the Zionists to present them with a document that would state

• Zionists precise political ambitions,
• Zionists willingness to open their schools to Palestinians, and
• Zionists intentions of learning Arabic and integrating with the local population.

The Zionists rejected this proposal.

The proclamation of the BALFOUR DECLARATION on November 2, 1917, and the arrival of British troops in Palestine soon after, transformed the political situation. The declaration gave the Zionist movement its long-sought legal status. The qualification that: nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine seemed a relatively insignificant obstacle to the Zionists, especially since it referred only to those communities’: civil and religious rights, not to political or national rights. The subsequent British occupation gave Britain the ability to carry out that pledge and provide the protection necessary for the Zionists to realize their aims.

Chaim Weizmann, president of the World Zionist Organization, placed maximalist demands before the Paris Peace Conference in February 1919. He stated that he expected 70,000 to 80,000 Jewish immigrants to arrive each year in Palestine. When they became the majority, they would form an independent government and Palestine and would become: “as Jewish as England is English”

Weizmann proposed that the boundaries should be the Mediterranean Sea on the west; Sidon, the Litani River, and Mount Hermon on the north; all of Transjordan west of the Hijaz railway on the east; and a line across Sinai from Aqaba to al-Arish on the south. He argued that:

“the boundaries above outlined are what we consider essential for the economic foundation of the country. Palestine must have its natural outlet to the sea and control of its rivers and their headwaters. The boundaries are sketched with the general economic needs and historic traditions of the country in mind.”

Quite an expansionist dream for a Russian Jew!

The irony is that all most Jews living in Israel today are Europeans. Those born in Palestine since 1948 cannot claim the land as theirs. They are Palestinians but of Jewish faith. Does the fact that, say, American Muslims who were born and raised in the USA, have any right to claim America as a “Muslim State?”

Thank You!

The map above (Palestine 1946), published as a United Nation Map number 93 (b) in 1950, clearly proves – when compared to present-day Israelis maps,  that the Nazi-like Zionist simply occupied, terrorized and continue to ethnic cleanse the land of Palestine.

The seven well equipped Arab armies who attempted to destroy the poorly armed and newly founded ‘Jewish State’!

he baseless myth, of how the Arab armies wanted to destroy the ‘Jewish State’, has been propagated in all sectors of the Israeli society, especially in its school system, military boot camps, and media. As it will be proven below, this myth was deemed necessary by most Zionists to legitimize their continued USURPATION of the Palestinian people’s political, civil, and economic rights.

Often when Israelis and Zionists are confronted with facts contrary to their liking, they counter by accusing the sources of fabrication or being part of the “anti-Semitic” Arab propaganda. To avoid such a “confusion”, we’ll directly quote two of the most prominent pro-Israeli historians, Martin Van Creveld (the renowned Israeli military strategist and historian) and Martin Gilbert, who wrote:

• “In the Event of invading [Arab] forces were limited to approximately 30,000 men. The strongest [consider this fact while reading the next quote] single contingent was the Jordanian one, already described. Next came Egyptians with 5,500 men, then the Iraqis with 4,500 who ….. were joined by perhaps 3,000 local irregulars. The total was thus around eight rather under strength brigades, some of them definitely of second-and even third-rate quality. To these must be added approximately 2,000 Lebanese (one brigade) and 6,000 Syrians (three brigades). Thus, even though the Arab countries [population] outnumbered the Yishuv by better then forty-to-one, in terms of military manpower available for combat in Palestine the two sides were fairly evenly matched. As time went on and both sides sent reinforcements the balance changed in the Jews’ favor; by October they had almost 90,000 men and women under arms, the Arabs only 68,000.” (The Sword And The Olive, p. 77-78)
  
• “Senior Hagana commanders met with committee [UN Special Committee On Palestine-UNSCOP] members in Jerusalem’s Talpiot quarter in similarly surreptitious circumstances to express confidence that Jewish forces, which they numbered at 90,000, including 35,000 reservists, could overcome any Arab assault should it come to war.” (Jerusalem Post)
  
• “Ben-Gurion made serious efforts, shortly before the United Nations vote on the Partition proposal, to seek the neutrality of King Abdullah of Transjordan, whose British trained and officered army, the Arab Legion, was the STRONGEST fighting force in the Middle East. The king had long been at loggerheads with Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, for the moral leadership of the Arabs of the whole region. Abdullah’s secret interlocutor was to be Golda Meir:”‘ …… He [King Abudullah] soon made the heart of the matter clear: he would not join in any Arab attack on us. He would always remain our friend, he said, and like us, he wanted peace more than anything else. After all, we had a common foe, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini.’”(Israel: A History, p.149-150)

• “As for Abdullah’s Arab Legion, it had fought better than any other Arab force. Yet on scarcely any occasion had the Arab Legion attempted to conquer territories allotted to the Jews by the partition plan, preferring to stay on the defensive.” (The Sword And The Olive, p. 95)
  
• “…. there was no common military headquarters, no attempts at coordinating the offenses of the Arab armies, and … not even a regular liaison service for sharing enemy intelligence.” (The Sword And The Olive, p. 83)
  
• “Perhaps the most important [of the Arab armies problems] was a crippled shortage of ammunition, owing to the international arms embargo …, in the case of the Iraqis and Egyptians, long lines of communications. For example, after February 25, 1948, the Arab Legion received no new ammunition for its 20mm guns. Some of the ammunition used by the Iraqi artillery was more than thirty years old; the Syrians had no ammunition for their heavy 155mm guns. Whereas Jewish stockpiles were growing all the times [especially the big arms shipment from Czechoslovakia in May 1948], the enemies were so depleted they stole ammunition shipments for each other. In addition, they were ill-coordinated, technically incompetent, slow, ponderous, badly led, and unable to cope with night operations that willy-nilly, constituted the IDF’s expertise.” (The Sword And The Olive, p. 95-96)
  
• Soon after the execution of Operation Dani in the first half of July 1948, Yigal Allon wrote a Palmach (Haganah’s strike force) report stating that the expulsion of Lydda‘s and Ramla‘s inhabitants had:
  

  “clogged the routes of the advance of the [Transjordan Arab] Legion and had foisted upon the Arab economy the problem of “maintaining another 45,000 souls . . . Moreover, the phenomenon of the flight of tens of thousands will no doubt cause demoralization in every Arab area [the refugees] reach . . . This victory will yet have great effect on other sectors.” (Israel: A History, p. 218 & Benny Morris, p. 211)

Although we disagree with the Arab armies’ statistics (30,000 men) that was presented by Mr. Creveld, the reader could conclude the following:

• The strongest Arab army to enter Palestine was in cahoots with the Israelis from the start. Based on H.M. King Abdullah‘s orders (who also commanded the Iraqi Army in addition to Transjordan’s), the strongest Arab armies did not even encroach on the areas allotted to the Jewish state by the 1947 UN GA Partition plan. On the contrary, the truth was the exact opposite, for example:
  
  1- Lydda, Ramla, and the Triangle Areas were handed over to the Israelis without a fight. Although Transjordan’s Army withdrew based on the orders of H.M. the King, the Iraqi Army (which was positioned few kilometers north in Ras al-’Ayn) was given explicit orders not to intervene (their motto in Arabic was: maku ‘Awamer). It should be noted that these areas used to be densely populated with Palestinians, were fertile, and were strategically located for both Arab and Israeli supply lines.
  
  2- When the Israeli Army attacked the Egyptian (south) and Syrian (northeast) armies in mid-October, 1948, the Iraqi and Jordanian armies were forbidden from opening a third front in the middle and south. The Iraqi Army was capable of splitting Israel in half if it was given the orders, and the Jordanian Army watched from the sidelines as the Israeli Army mauled the Egyptians in southern Hebron and Beersheba areas (Righteous Victims, p. 244). Note that the Iraqi Army was well positioned in the Tulkarm-Jinin areas (southeast of Haifa) which is only 12-14 kilometers from the Mediterranean, click here for a map illustration.
  
• The other strongest Arab armies, Egyptian and Iraqi, had long supply and communication lines away from their bases in their respective countries.
  
• Saudi Arabian and Sudanese armies contributed few thousand soldiers in the middle of the war to shore up the exhausted Egyptian army in southern Palestine.
  
• Under American and French pressure, the Lebanese Army was sidelined from the start, and it did not even cross the international borders. At the most, the Lebanese army provided a mediocre artillery cover to some ALA [Arab Liberation Army] volunteers at the beginning of the war. (Righteous Victims p. 233-234)
  
• When the Arab armies entered Palestine on May 15, 1948, close to 400,000 Palestinian refugees were already ethnically cleansed out of their homes, and they clogged the roads, burdened local economies, and demoralized the Arab populations and armies, as it was admitted by Yigal Allon. In other words, the Palestinian refugees were used as a weapon against Israel’s enemies.
  
• The Arab armies neither coordinated their military operational plans, nor shared military intelligence among themselves. In fact, it wasn’t until April 30, 1948 that the Arab armies’ chiefs of staff met for the first time to work out a plan for military intervention. It’s worth noting that this plan was later wrecked by H.M. King Abdullah, when he made last minute changes just before the entry of any Arab army into British Mandated Palestine. (Simha Flapan, p. 133 & Iron Wall, p. 35)
  
• According to a Jewish Agency assessment of the Arab intentions and capacities, submitted in March 1948, reported that the Arabs chiefs of staff had warned their government against an invasion of Palestine and any lengthy war because of the internal situation in most of the Arab countries. For example, revolt in Yemen kept the Saudis at bay and there was a mass riot in Iraq against the Anglo-Iraqi treaty, (Simha Flapan, p. 123-124)
  
• Yochai Sela of Tel-Aviv University, has provided the following breakdown for the number of Israelis killed during the 1948 war:

Fatality Category	Value	Percentage of Total
Civilians killed*	1,150	20.15%
Military killed	4,558	79.85%
Total	5,708	100%
Soldiers killed between Nov. 30, 1947 – May 15, 1948	1,345**	23.56%
Soldiers killed between May 15, 1948- March 10, 1949	3,213**	56.29%
Killed within the areas designated by the UN	1,581	27.70%
Killed outside the areas designated by the UN	2,759***	48.33%
Killed defending Jewish settlements	984	17.24%
Killed attacking Arab settlements	1,212	21.23%

Source: Simha Flapan, p. 198-199.
* Majority died in Jerusalem
** The number of Israelis killed while fighting the Arab Legion 1,367; the Palestinians, 1,092; the Egyptians, 910; the Syrians, 238; the Iraqis, 241; the Lebanese 129; Qawukji’ ALA, 336, the British 30.
*** Mostly soldiers, non-civilians.

• These statistics clearly show that the number of Israeli soldiers killed in offensive actions were well over 60% (2,759/4,558) of the total Israeli soldiers killed between November 30, 1947 and March 10, 1949. So from the Israeli prospective, the so called “War of Independence” was more offensive than defensive in nature.
  
• The Israelis maximally exploited the rivalry between H.M. the King Abdullah of Transjordan and al-Hajj Amin al-Husseini. For example, before the entry of any Arab armies to Palestine on May 15th, 1948, al-Hajj Amin (who resided at the time in Tyre-southern Lebanon) wanted to declare a provisional Palestinian government in the Galilee, with Safad being its capital. To preempt such a plan, H.M. the King pulled out Transjordan’s irregulars troops out of Safad on May 11th, 1948, which was the primary reason for its falling into Israeli hands few days later (Benny Morris, p. 105). Another good reason that enticed H.M. the King to collaborate with the Jewish Agency was the promise of future payments of $4 million a year for the next subsequent 5 years. (Simha Flapan, p. 138)
  
• Although there was an arms embargo on the warring parties in the Middle East, the embargo negatively affected the Arabs more than the Israelis. While the Arab armies were depleting their arms and ammunitions, the Israeli army was stockpiling weapons and ammunitions from a huge arms shipment from Czechoslovakia that arrived in early May, 1948.
  
• By October 1948, the Israeli army had 90,000 armed men, while the Arab armies had 68,000 armed men.
  
• It’s a fabricated myth that seven well equipped, organized, and coordinated Arab armies attempted to PUSH the poorly armed Jews into the sea, click here to read our rebuttal to this myth.

Ben-Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister, recognized that Palestinian nationalism created the very danger he was most afraid of. He knew that the victory in 1948 was achieved not because the Israeli Army was more heroic but because the Arab armies were corrupt and the Arab world was divided. He became obsessed with the fear that a charismatic leader would modernize Arab education, their economies, and unite all the Arab states. He wrote on November 11, 1948:

“The Arab people have been beaten by us. Will they forget it quickly? Seven hundred thousand people beat 30 million. Will they forget this offense? It can be assumed that they have a sense of honor. We will make peace efforts, but two sides are necessary for peace. Is there any security that they will not want to take revenge? Let us recognize the truth: we won not because we performed wonders, but because the Arab army is rotten. Must this rottenness persist forever? The situation in the world beckons towards revenge: there are two blocs; there is fear of world war. This tempts anyone with a grievance. We will always require a superior defensive capability.” (Simha Flapan, p. 238)

Finally, directly quoting the famous Israeli historian Avi Shlaim who stated in his famous Iron Wall book:

• “This popular-heroic-moralistic version of the 1948 war has been used extensively in Israeli propaganda and is still taught in Israeli schools. It is a prime example of the use of a nationalistic version of history in the process of nation building. In a very real sense history is the propaganda of the victors, and the history of the 1948 war is no exception.” (Iron Wall p. 34)

• “Despite all the political miscalculations and failures of those who planned the Sinai Campaign, it is their version that became firmly entrenched in the mind of the overwhelming majority of Israelis. The popular perception of the 1956 war in Israel is that it was a defensive war, a just war, a brilliantly executed war, and a war that achieved nearly all of its objectives. This version of the war was propagated not only by members of the Israeli defense establishment but by a host of sympathetic historians, journalists, and commentators. However deeply cherished, this version does not stand up to scrutiny in the light of the evidence now available. It is a striking example of the way in which history can be manipulated to serve nationalist ends. The official Israeli version of the 1956 war, like that of the 1948 war, is little more than the propaganda of the victor.” (Iron Wall, p. 185)

The Israeli virus that infected a region of 300,000,000 Arab Semites has no room for such foreign and Nazi-like criminals. It is time these “people” move back to their countries of origin (except the descendants of the original Jews who lived in Palestine prior to Zionism’s arrival) or face the erupting Arab revolutions sweeping the Arab world. There will be no mercy then.

Remember: the Jewish “good book” demands that its followers kill with NO MERCY! So, an Eye for an Eye!

And that’s probably  why the Jewish teachings and prophecies expect the demise of “Israel” in the near future!

Our absurd obsession with Israel is laid bare

The Middle East meant only Israel to many. Now the lives of millions of Arabs have been brought to Europe’s attention

Nick Cohen The Observer, Sunday 27 February 2011

The Arab revolution is consigning skip-loads of articles, books and speeches about the Middle East to the dustbin of history. In a few months, readers will go through libraries or newspaper archives and wonder how so many who claimed expert knowledge could have turned their eyes from tyranny and its consequences.

The Map erroneously includes Turkey, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan as part of the Arab World.

To a generation of politically active if not morally consistent campaigners, the Middle East has meant Israel and only Israel. In theory, they should have been able to stick by universal principles and support a just settlement for the Palestinians while opposing the dictators who kept Arabs subjugated. Few, however, have been able to oppose oppression in all its forms consistently. The right has been no better than the liberal-left in its Jew obsessions. The briefest reading of Conservative newspapers shows that at all times their first concern about political changes in the Middle East is how they affect Israel. For both sides, the lives of hundreds of millions of Arabs, Berbers and Kurds who were not involved in the conflict could be forgotten.

If you doubt me, consider the stories that the Middle Eastern bureau chiefs missed until revolutions that had nothing to do with Palestine forced them to take notice.

• Gaddafi was so frightened of a coup that he kept the Libyan army small and ill-equipped and hired mercenaries and paramilitary “special forces” he could count on to slaughter the civilian population when required.

• Leila Ben Ali, the wife of the Tunisian president, was a preposterously extravagant figure, who all but begged foreign correspondents to write about her rapacious pursuit of wealth. Only when Tunisians rose up did journalists stir themselves to tell their readers how she had pushed the populace to revolt by combining the least appealing traits of Imelda Marcos and Marie-Antoinette.

• Hearteningly, for those of us who retain a nostalgia for the best traditions of the old left, Tunisia and Egypt had independent trade unionists, who could play “a leading role”, as we used to say, in organising and executing uprisings.

Far from being a cause of the revolution, antagonism to Israel everywhere served the interests of oppressors. Europeans have no right to be surprised. Of all people, we ought to know from our experience of Nazism that antisemitism is a conspiracy theory about power, rather than a standard racist hatred of poor immigrants. Fascistic regimes reached for it when they sought to deny their own people liberty. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the forgery the far-right wing of the decaying tsarist regime issued in 1903 to convince Russians they should continue to obey the tsar’s every command, denounces human rights and democracy as facades behind which the secret Jewish rulers of the world manipulated gullible gentiles.

Syrian Ba’athists, Hamas, the Saudi monarchy and Gaddafi eagerly promoted the Protocols, for why wouldn’t vicious elites welcome a fantasy that dismissed democracy as a fraud and justified their domination? Just before the Libyan revolt, Gaddafi tried a desperate move his European predecessors would have understood. He tried to deflect Libyan anger by calling for a popular Palestinian revolution against Israel. That may or may not have been justified, but it assuredly would have done nothing to help the wretched Libyans.

In his Epitaph on a Tyrant, Auden wrote:

“When he laughed, respectable senators burst with laughter
And when he cried, the little children died in the streets.”

Europe’s amnesia about how tyranny operated in our continent explains why the Libyan revolution is embarrassing a rich collection of dupes and scoundrels who were willing to laugh along with Gaddafi. His contacts in Britain were once confined to the truly lunatic fringe. He supplied arms to the IRA, funded the Workers’ Revolutionary Party, Vanessa Redgrave’s nasty Trotskyist sect, and entertained Nick Griffin and other neo-Nazis. We should not forget them when the time comes to settle accounts. But when Tony Blair, who was so eloquent in denouncing the genocides of Saddam, staged a reconciliation with Gaddafi after 9/11, his friendship opened the way for the British establishment to embrace the dictatorship.

It was not only BP and other oil companies, but British academics who were happy to accept his largesse. The London School of Economics took £1.5m from Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, money which by definition had to have been stolen from the Libyan people, despite being warned to back away by Professor Fred Halliday, the LSE’s late and much-missed authority on the Middle East, who never flinched from looking dictators in the eye.

“I’ve come to know Saif as someone who looks to democracy, civil society and deep liberal values for the core of his inspiration,” purred the LSE’s David Held as he accepted the cheque.

Human Rights Watch, once a reliable opponent of tyranny, went further and described a foundation Saif ran in Libya as a force for freedom, willing to take on the interior ministry in the fight for civil liberties. Meanwhile, and to the surprise of no one, Peter Mandelson, New Labour’s butterfly, fluttered round Saif at the country house parties of the plutocracy.

Last week, Saif, the “liberal” promoter of human rights and dining companion of Mandelson, appeared on Libyan television to say that his father’s gunmen would fight to the last bullet to keep the Gaddafi crime family in business, a promise he is keeping. The thinking behind so many who flattered him was that the only issue in the Middle East worth taking a stand on was the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and that the oppression of Arabs by Arabs was a minor concern.

 

 

The longevity of the regimes presided over by the Gaddafi, Assad and Mubarak families and the House of Saud ought to be a reason for denouncing them more vigorously, but their apparent permanence added to the feeling that somehow Libyans, Syrians, Egyptians and Saudis want to live under dictatorships.

The European Union, which did so much to export democracy and the rule of law to former communist dictatorships of eastern Europe, has played a miserable role in the Middle East. It pours in aid but never demands democratisation or restrictions on police powers in return. That will have to change if the promise of the past month is to be realised. If it is to help with democracy-building, Europe will need to remind itself as much as the recipients of its money that you can never build free societies on the racist conspiracy theories of the Nazis and the tsars. They are and always have been the tunes that tyrants sing.

Related Articles

• Our absurd obsession with Israel is laid bare | Nick Cohen (guardian.co.uk)
• UN: 100,000 Libyan Refugees Fled East and West (israelnationalnews.com)
• Gaddafi: I love revolts – when they occur somewhere else (hotair.com)

Israeli Economy For Beginners

 

Tuesday, 08 February 2011 00:41, Gilad Atzmon

We learn from the press and  political analysts that, against all odds and in spite of the global financial turmoil,  Israel’s economy is booming. Some even suggest that Israel is one of  the strongest economies around.‘How come?’ you may ask; besides maybe avocado, oranges, and some Dead Sea beauty products, none of us has actually ever seen an Israeli product on the shelves. They don’t make cars; nor do they make electric or electronic appliances, and they hardly manufacture any consumer goods. Israel claims to be advanced in high-tech technologies but somehow, the only Israeli advanced software ever to settle within our computers have been their Sabra Trojan Horses.  In the land they grabbed by force from the indigenous Palestinians, they are yet to find any lucrative minerals or oil.

So what is it? How is it that Israel is impervious to the global financial disaster? How can Israel be so rich?

Israel may be rich because, according to the Guardian, “out  of the seven oligarchs who controlled 50% of Russia’s economy during the 1990s, six were Jewish.” During the last two decades, many Russian  oligarchs have acquired  Israeli citizenship. They also secured their dirty money by investing in the kosher financial haven; Wikileaks has revealed lately that “sources in the (Israeli) police estimate that Russian organised crime (Russian Mafia) has laundered as much as US $10 billion through Israeli holdings.”[1]

Israel’s economy is booming because mega swindlers such as Bernie Madoff have been channeling their money via Zionists and Israeli institutions for decades.[2]

Israel is ‘doing well’ because it is the leading trader in blood  diamonds. Far from being surprising, Israel is also the fourth biggest weapon dealer on this planet. Clearly, blood diamonds and guns are proving to be a great match.

As if this is not enough, Israel is also prosperous because, every so often, it is caught engaged in organ trafficking and organ  harvesting.

In short, Israel is doing better than other countries because it runs one of the dirtiest- non -ethical economies in the world. In spite of the Zionists’ initial promise to bring about a civilised ethical Jew, Israel has, instead, managed to develop an outstanding level of institutional  dismissal of international law and  universal values. It operates as a safe haven for money made in some horrendous global criminal activities. And it employs one of the world’s strongest army to defend the wealth of just a few of the wealthiest Jews around.

Increasingly, Israel seems to be nothing more than a humongous  money laundering haven for Jewish oligarchs, swindlers, weapons dealers, organ traffickers, organised crime and blood diamond traders.

Such a realization can  certainly explain why Israel is totally impervious to social equality within its borders.

Poor Israelis

Since Israel defines itself as the Jewish state, one may expect the Jewish people to be the first to benefit from their country’s booming economy. This seems to be not at all the case. In spite of the economy’s strength, Israel’s record on social justice is appalling. In the Jewish state 18 families control 60% of the equity value of all companies in the land. The Jewish State is shockingly cruel to its poor. As far as the gap between rich and poor is concerned, Israel is listed right at the top of the scale.

The meaning of all of that is pretty devastating; though Israel operates as an ethno-centric  racially orientated, tribal setting, it is proving to be totally careless of the members of its own tribe – In fact, in the Jewish state, a few million Jews are serving the darkest possible interests, the fruits of which, are to be enjoyed by just a very few rich  villains.

Smoke Screen

But there is a deeper and far more devastating meaning implicit within it all.  If my reading of the Israeli economy is correct, and Israel is indeed a monstrous cash haven for the dirtiest money around,  then the Israeli Palestinian conflict is, at least, from the Israeli-elite’s perspective ,  nothing but a smoke screen.

I hope that my readers and friends will forgive me for saying it –  I hope that I will  forgive myself for saying it — But it seems to me that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and Israel’s horrendous crimes against the Palestinian people, actually serves to divert attention away from Israel’s complicity in some colossal and global crimes against vast populations around the world.  Instead of addressing the above relentless greed-driven attempt to grab wealth on the expense of the rest of humanity, we are all focusing on a single territorial conflict, that actually brings to light just one devastating criminal side of the Jewish national project.

It is more than likely that the vast majority of Israelis also fail to detect the deceitful role of the Israeli Palestinian conflict. The Israelis are indoctrinated to look at every possible issue from a national security perspective. They have failed to realise that along the intensive militarization of their society, their Jewish state has become a money laundering haven and a refuge for villains from all over the world.

But here is some bad news for Israel and its corrupted elite.  It is just a question of time before the Russians, Americans, Africans, Europeans, all of humanity, begin to grasp it all — We are all Palestinians and we all share one enemy.

I would even take it further, and argue that it is possible that, not before too long – some  deprived Jews and Israelis will also begin to realise how deceptive and  sinister  Israel and Zionism truly are.

---

[1] For more information about global organized crime connections with Likud or other major Israeli political parties. Please follow this link http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/php/topic.php?tid=147

[2] Also, it is rumoured that, prior to its collapse, Lehman Brothers transferred 400 billion dollars to Israeli banks. I am not in a position to substantiate any of these theories – but I would strongly suggest that it is of some urgency to find out how truthful these accusations are.

Source: Gilad Atzmon

Russian Jews: Not Jewish Enough?

Ain’t this sweet… in the only democracy of the Middle East!!!

Russian Jews defy Israeli rabbis’ ban on marriage

Jonathan Cook, Foreign Correspondent<!–

• Send to friend
• Print
• Have your say
• Comments(0)

–>

Olga Samsovatov and Nico Tarosyan at their symbolic public wedding ceremony held because Mr Tarosyan cannot legally marry in Israel. Alexei Kidel for The National

TEL AVIV // Two immigrants from the former Soviet Union staged a very public wedding in the streets of central Tel Aviv this week to highlight the plight of hundreds of thousands of Jews barred from lawfully marrying in Israel.

Nico Tarosyan and Olga Samsovatov chose to tie the knot in a special ceremony on Tuesday – watched by family, friends and curious passers-by – after Orthodox rabbis had denied them the right to wed.

The rabbinate says that Mr Tarosyan cannot prove he is Jewish according to its strict standards and therefore should not marry Ms Samsovatov, who is considered a proper Jew.

Mr Tarosyan, aged 34, who moved to Israel from Moscow in 1995, called his treatment by the rabbis “humiliating”.

“In Russia we were hated because we were Jews and here in Israel we are discriminated against as Russians,” he said.

An underclass of Jews has emerged in Israel since the early 1990s, when more than one million immigrants began pouring into Israel following the collapse of the former Soviet Union. Many were entitled to emigrate to Israel under the Law of Return, which requires only that they have a single Jewish grandparent. But the authorities – keen to bolster the number of Jews in Israel’s demographic battle with the Palestinians – also allowed some to arrive with little documentation or faked papers.

The Law of Return NaZionist style: it applies to Jews regardless where they were from but the same is not even considered to Palestinians who were born in Palestine and still have property there!

This set the new immigrants on a collision course with Israel’s Orthodox rabbis, who regard themselves as guarding the Jewish people’s ethnic and religious purity, said Ofer Kornfeld, the chairman of Havaya, an organisation that officiates at unrecognised weddings like the one conducted in Tel Aviv this week.

“Civil marriages are not possible in Israel,” he said. “So the rabbis get to decide who can marry and who cannot.”

Israel has passed control of all matters relating to personal status – births, marriages and divorces, and deaths – to rabbis belonging to the strictest stream of Judaism, Orthodoxy.

Havaya, said Mr Kornfeld, offered unrecognised, secular and non-Orthodox Jews the chance to marry in a ceremony that retained Jewish rituals while tailor-making the event to their own convictions.

Official figures show that as many as 350,000 Jews are classified by the rabbinate as having “no religion”, and are therefore unable to marry in Israel. Their only option is to wed abroad – the marriage is then recognised on their return.

These immigrants face major hurdles in seeking to prove their Jewishness to the rabbis’ satisfaction. They must produce evidence that they have a Jewish mother or grandmother in a procedure that can be upsetting to those affected, said Mr Kornfeld.

“Many don’t even try because they know it’s a difficult and humiliating process that can take months or even years to complete and there is no guarantee of success.”

For a man, the rabbis demand that he prove he is circumcised and produce a birth certificate stating that his mother was a Jew, a proof many immigrants from the former Soviet Union have difficulty providing.

“It may help if you can prove that your mother spoke Yiddish or, if she is dead, supply a photo of her gravestone with a Magen [Star of] David,” said Mr Kornfeld.

Mr Tarosyan, a computer engineer, said that, although he failed to impress the rabbis, both his parents were considered Jews in Russia. In Moscow, he said, neighbours had daubed anti-Semitic graffiti on the family’s door.

Ms Samsovatov, 29, who immigrated from Ukraine with her mother when she was 15, said although the couple considered this week’s wedding in Tel Aviv to be the true ceremony, they were saving to travel to Prague later in the year to conduct a recognised wedding.

Mr Kornfeld said they would be following in the path of a growing number of Israelis. “About 6,000 couples wed abroad each year, often in eastern Europe. That’s about a fifth of all marriages.”

It is not only Jews classified as without a religion who are forced to leave the country, he said. Many recognised but secular Jews, who do not wish to submit to an Orthodox ceremony, tie the knot abroad, as do those marrying across religious divisions.

Israel’s Muslim, Christian and Druze citizens – comprising nearly a fifth of the population – have their own separate religious authorities who are given exclusive oversight of weddings.

Demands to reform the law have been growing for more than a decade, but every parliamentary bill on civil marriage has been defeated, usually following stiff resistance from the religious parties.

However, a new bill, approved by a ministerial committee last month, seems more likely to become law. It allows for a limited form of civil marriage that applies only to couples where both lack a religious status. Mr Tarosyan and Ms Samsovatov would not qualify as the rabbis consider one of them a Jew.

The religious parties were forced to agree to the Civil Marriage Bill as a condition for entering the government of Benjamin Netanyahu in the spring. The compromise was needed because civil marriage was the key platform of another coalition partner, the far-right Yisreal Beiteinu party of Avigdor Lieberman, the foreign minister, who is now facing corruption charges. The party draws heavy support from the Russian-speaking population.

The liberal Haaretz newspaper welcomed the bill as a “first crack in the religious monopoly” on marriage, but other observers have doubts.

Avirama Golan, writing in the same paper, warned that the law would apply only to a tiny number of couples and would in practice entrench the power of the rabbis, who before approving a wedding would still force couples to submit to lengthy and humiliating investigations to ensure that neither was a Jew.

She added that such couples would be forced into a ghetto, giving “birth to their shunned children who will marry among themselves and be registered separately in the communal records”.

The rabbis’ agreement to the reform, analysts point out, was possible because the bill maintains barriers preventing assimilation between the majority designated as real Jews and those the rabbis consider “without religion”.

Mr Kornfeld said the rabbis’ grip on marriage has continued even though nearly 70 per cent of Israeli Jews defined themselves as secular. Even among the religious, some regard themselves as belonging to the more moderate Reform and Conservative streams of Judaism.

Conversion to Orthodoxy is tightly restricted by the rabbinate, with only a few hundred people approved each year. Those converting are forced to adopt a strictly observant lifestyle for themselves and their children.

A general lack of sympathy for the problems of recent Russian immigrants was reflected in a survey conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute this week. It found that half of all Israelis polled believed that only those born in Israel could be a “true Israeli”. Conversely, only 28 per cent of Russian-speaking immigrants in their 30s saw their future in Israel.

Former Nazi camp guard charged 29,000 times

AMUSING, ISN’T IT?

Who’s hunting the hunters’ bosses? While these so-called hunters are seeking what they call “justice,” they continue to massacre and murder Palestinians, demolish their homes and replace Palestinians with Jewish settlers thugs! THIS IS Nazism!

Former Nazi camp guard charged 29,000 times

By DAVID RISING, Associated Press Writer

BERLIN – German prosecutors said Wednesday they have charged retired Ohio auto worker John Demjanjuk with more than 29,000 counts of accessory to murder for his time as a guard at the Nazis’ Sobibor death camp, and will seek his extradition from the U.S.

Demjanjuk (dem-YAHN’-yuk) is accused of participating in the murders while he was a guard at the Nazi camp in occupied Poland between March and September 1943.

“In this capacity, he participated in the accessory to murder of at least 29,000 people of the Jewish faith,” Munich prosecutors said in a statement.

The 88-year-old Demjanjuk, who lives in a Cleveland suburb, denies involvement.

Demjanjuk’s son, John Demjanjuk Jr., said in an e-mailed statement to the AP in Cleveland that his father is suffering from a blood disorder and acute kidney failure, and is not fit for international travel.

“Whatever the Germans decide to do, we will continue to fight for justice in this sad case as there has never been any credible evidence of his personal involvement in even one murder, let alone thousands,” Demjanjuk Jr. said. “He has never hurt anyone — before, during or after the war. He is a good person as his family, grandchildren, friends and neighbors have always maintained.”

Efraim Zuroff, the top Nazi hunter at Israel’s Simon Wiesenthal Center (Museum of Intolerance), said he was “very pleased that the German authorities have taken this step.”

“We hope that the process can be expedited to ensure that this Holocaust perpetrator will finally be appropriately punished,” Zuroff told the AP in a telephone interview from Jerusalem. “We’re on our way to a victory for justice today.”

Efraim Zuroff was also quoted to have said:

The writing was on the wall. This is what happens when you have laws that allow immediate citizenship to people with little connection to Jewish history, the Jewish people, the Jewish religion and Jewish culture.

Efraim Zuroff, Director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center (Musuem of Intolerance)

One person had this to say about the above quote:

If you repeated that sentence in the UK, but replaced ‘Jewish’ with ‘British’, wouldn’t you get called a Nazi?

A native of Ukraine, Demjanjuk emigrated to the U.S. in 1952 and gained citizenship in 1958.

In denying involvement in war crimes, he has said he served in the Soviet army and became a prisoner of war when he was captured by Germany in 1942.

Demjanjuk was extradited to Israel in 1986, when the U.S. Justice Department believed he was the sadistic Nazi guard known as Ivan the Terrible from the Treblinka death camp.

He spent seven years in custody before the Israeli high court freed him after receiving evidence that another Ukrainian was that Nazi guard.

Demjanjuk’s U.S. citizenship was restored in 1998, but the U.S. Justice Department renewed its case, saying he was another Nazi guard and could be deported for falsifying information on his entry and citizenship applications in the 1950s.

A December 2005 U.S. court ruling determined that he could be deported to his native Ukraine or to Germany or Poland, but Demjanjuk spent several years challenging that ruling.

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court chose not to consider Demjanjuk’s appeal against deportation, clearing the way for the Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations, which oversees cases against former Nazis, to seek his removal from the United States.

But it was unclear which country would take him — his native Ukraine, Poland or Germany.

Now, the Munich prosecutor’s office, which is handling the case because Demjanjuk spent time at a refugee camp in the area after the war, said it was working on the extradition request with the German government.

Justice Ministry spokeswoman Eva Schmierer said it was still not clear whether the U.S. would deport Demjanjuk, or whether it would be necessary to formally seek his extradition.

Munich prosecutors credited help from the U.S. Office of Special investigations in clarifying the validity of Nazi-era identity papers in enabling them to file charges against Demjanjuk.

They said Demjanjuk will be formally charged in front of a judge once he is extradited to Germany.

Georgia should have hired Hizbollah!

Israel Plans to Kill Hezbollah Chiefs: Nasrallah

Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah on Thursday accused Israel of seeking to eliminate the Lebanese Shiite movement’s leaders, in a televised speech on the second anniversary of the summer war with Israel.

“We know you are planning to assassinate leaders of the resistance… but you do not frighten us,” he said in the broadcast on the group’s Al-Manar television station.

Nasrallah made no comment about Israeli charges that Hezbollah was rearming other than to say that “no one should expect us to say whether we have new weapons or not.”Israel’s 34-day summer war two years ago with Hezbollah resulted in the deaths of more than 1,200 Lebanese civilians, a third of them children, as well as 160 Israelis, mostly soldiers.

The conflict destroyed more than 25,000 homes and 50,000 other buildings, notably in the country’s south, before ending with a U.N.-brokered ceasefire on August 14, 2006.

On Thursday Nasrallah likened the current Russia-Georgia conflict to what he called Israel’s failure in the 2006 war sparked when Hezbollah captured two Israeli soldiers in a deadly cross-border attack.

“Israel sent one if its generals… to Georgia and its unfortunate government told him to train Georgian special forces,” he charged. “Relying on Israeli experts and weapons, Georgia learned why the Israeli generals failed” against Hezbollah, he said.

“What happened in Georgia is a lesson to all those who take on American training for risky adventures and are then abandoned by the U.S.,” Nasrallah said of Georgia’s pro-Western President Mikheil Saakashvili.

In his address the Hezbollah chief also hailed the visit to Syria, which backs his movement, by Lebanon’s President Michel Suleiman, calling it “a new stage” in relations between Beirut and Damascus.

He also called Wednesday’s deadly bomb attack in the northern Lebanese city of Tripoli in which 14 people were killed — among them nine soldiers — “a criminal act.”

Source: