Terrorist Sympathiser Set to Become Israeli Prime Minister?

Remember those images of people celebrating when the two towers collapsed on 11th September? Despicable wasn't it? And yet Israel appears to be on the verge of voting in one of those flag waving terrorist supporters. Yep Binyamin Netanyahu is one of those people. Not only a terrorist sympathiser, but a sympathiser of a terrorist attack on the UK:

The rightwingers, including Binyamin Netanyahu, the former Prime Minister, are commemorating the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, the headquarters of British rule, that killed 92 people and helped to drive the British from Palestine.

They have erected a plaque outside the restored building, and are holding a two-day seminar with speeches and a tour of the hotel by one of the Jewish resistance fighters involved in the attack.

Simon McDonald, the British Ambassador in Tel Aviv, and John Jenkins, the Consul-General in Jerusalem, have written to the municipality, stating: “We do not think that it is right for an act of terrorism, which led to the loss of many lives, to be commemorated.”

In particular they demanded the removal of the plaque that pays tribute to the Irgun, the Jewish resistance branch headed by Menachem Begin, the future Prime Minister, which carried out the attack on July 22, 1946.

BBC & Gaza - Just Not Right-wing Enough

Good work by the chaps at the BBC to prevent aid agencies getting the airtime that is desperately required to help the people of Gaza:

The BBC has refused to broadcast a national humanitarian appeal for Gaza, leaving aid agencies with a potential shortfall of millions of pounds in donations.

The Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC), an umbrella group for 13 aid charities, launched its appeal yesterday saying the devastation in Gaza was "so huge British aid agencies were compelled to act".

But the BBC made a rare breach of an agreement dating to 1963, saying it would not give free airtime to the appeal. Other broadcasters followed suit. Previously, broadcasters had agreed on the video and script to be used with the DEC, to be shown after primetime news bulletins.

The BBC, which has been criticised in the past over alleged bias in its coverage of the Middle East, said it did not want to risk public confidence in its impartiality. A BBC spokesperson said: "The decision was made because of question marks about the delivery of aid in a volatile situation and also to avoid any risk of compromising public confidence in the BBC's impartiality in the context of [a] news story."

Impartiality before humanitarian aid? Clearly the BBC is a hotbed of radical leftism.

Gaza Twitter....

Do you have a Twitter account??  If so, ultimatejosh and AliveinGaza are taking questions via Twitter to pass on to their correspondent in Gaza.  If you have any questions, simply send them to their Twitter accounts which I have conveniently hyperlinked above!  One load of submitted questions have already been answered here.

The War on Gaza - The Finest Propaganda Campaign in History

The war on Gaza is not only a humanitarian disaster of massive proportions, it has also witnessed a propaganda campaign on a scale not witnessed before. The amount of mis-information, half-truths and, let's be frank, lies that have emerged over the past few weeks has meant that the casual viewer has been presented with an incomplete picture of the events in Gaza and what led up to them. This is the direct result of an attempt by the Israeli government to win the media battle and convince the international community that their assault on the innocent people of Gaza was entirely justified. It is a media battle that the world's media has been happy to play along with.


Ever since the start of the campaign, Israel has ensured that a spokesperson is free to talk to as many of the networks as possible to put their side of the story across. Barely a day has gone by without either Mark Regev or Major Avital Leibovich bombarding us with their 'truth' about the assault on Gaza. And yet, most of their words have been accepted as fact, without much in the way of interrogation. They have been able to make their accusations and claims entirely unchecked without providing a shred of evidence to support anything they have said. And the reason why they have been able to get away with this is down to the methods that the Israeli government has used to manage their message.


Take the reporting from Gaza. Or rather, the lack of reporting from Gaza. Since the beginning of the war on Gaza, journalists have not been allowed to provide independent verification of the claims of the Israeli government. Every time a claim is made by the Israeli state, there is no way to verify their accuracy. We only have the word of Israeli state officials to go on, and since when has a mouthpiece of the state been trustworthy? Of course, the Israeli government has been extremely pleased with the way the propaganda campaign on the media has been waged. They were said to be delighted with certain aspects of the BBC's coverage. The appearance of a BBC correspondent in a flak jacket in Israel certainly did much to convey the idea that Israel was under siege. Little wonder the Israeli government was so pleased.


One of the greatest fallacies about the war on Gaza has been the accusation that Hamas broke the terms of the ceasefire and have been launching hundreds of rockets into Gaza every day. Whilst it is true that rockets have been launched into Israel on a regular basis, there was a noticeable difference in the number of rockets fired from Gaza before the ceasefire and during. During the ceasefire, the number of rockets launched into Israel dropped dramatically. Hamas largely adhered to the terms of the ceasefire and ensured that their military arm did not fire rockets into Israel. There were, however, various other groups in Gaza who continued to fire rockets across the border, groups that are essentially hostile to Hamas and were keen to provoke Israel into launching an assault in the hope it would weaken Hamas. However, these groups were dealt with and those responsible for the launching of rockets were locked up. Despite the fact that Hamas were observing the ceasefire, on November 4th Israel launched a raid into Gaza and killed six Hamas 'militants'. It was after this point that rocket fire into Israel reached pre-ceasefire levels. And this is the point often neglected by the media. I have observed many BBC correspondents say to Israeli officials that no-one argues that Hamas broke the ceasefire, when it is entirely the case that Israel broke the terms of the ceasefire. But such is the power of the propaganda machine, this has been accepted as fact.

And not only has this been accepted as fact, but various little details seem to have been ignored by much of the media. For example, on 23rd December, Hamas offered to renew the ceasefire but, as Israel had already drawn up their plans to assault Gaza, it was rejected. Not only was that offer ignored, but it is barely mentioned that Ismail Haniyeh offered a ten year ceasefire with Israel. There may well be competing voices within Hamas but, like all political groups, there are a wide range of viewpoints. But, again, such things are barely worthy of mention in the West, particularly given the idea that has been spread around that Fatah and Fatah alone are worthy of our support. Given the West's habit of supporting corrupt and incompetent parties across the globe, this support for Fatah is perhaps unsurprising. Fatah, after all, had done very little for the Palestinian people before their election defeat, a defeat mainly as a consequence of the corruption that ran throughout Fatah.

But this is not the worst of the mis-information put out by the media and the Israeli state. Take the attacks on the UN buildings in Gaza. After the first schools were hit, Israeli representatives went on TV and claimed that the responsibility for these crimes lay with Hamas, not with Israel. Now, it would appear, the victims of the crime are responsible for what happened to them. Compare this with standard right-wing rhetoric that is hostile to what it sees as the perpetrator being the ‘victim’. Remember all the times they have treated that idea with disdain and then wonder how they can claim (straight faced) that the murder of civilians by their bombs, their rockets, their military, is somehow not their fault, but that of Hamas. Strange, no?


Not only did they claim that the fault of their military murdering innocent civilians was not there fault, they also went on to claim that Hamas were using installations such as the schools to launch attacks on Israel. One spokesperson even claimed they 'booby-trapped' a building containing civilians. The spokesmen showed no remorse, no pity. And then what do we discover a few days later, when more than forty innocent people have died? That there were no Hamas fighters there and it was a 'mistake'. Too late for all those brothers who lost sisters, mothers who lost children, children who lost parents. Just a shrug of the shoulders from the Israeli government and then they move on. The dead becoming merely an inconvenient statistic that undermines their rhetoric about not wanting a war with the Palestinian people. What is this if it is not?


Despite their unfounded accusations, it is not as if Israel has abided entirely by international conventions. Whilst largely ignored or dismissed by much of the media, there is growing evidence that war crimes have been committed by the IDF. These crimes include:

• attempting to bulldoze houses with civilians inside;
• killing civilians trying to escape under the protection of white flags;
• the use of indiscriminate force in a civilian area and the firing of white phosphorus shells.
• using powerful shells in civilian areas which the army knew would cause large numbers of innocent casualties;
• holding Palestinian families as human shields;
• attacking medical facilities, including the killing of 12 ambulance men in marked vehicles;
• killing large numbers of police who had no military role.

Even the United Nations’ most senior human rights official suggested that Israel may have to answer for war crimes in the wake of their assault on Zeitoun. Of course, the chances of Israel actually being prosecuted for these war crimes is minute. Especially as the propaganda campaign by the Israeli government has been so successful in pushing out its message. Will there seriously be any support for an independent inquiry into Israeli war crimes? And, if there is an inquiry, what are the chances of Israel being censored as a result? Zero. Because, as always, the United States will ride to the rescue and ensure that the Israeli government are well protected. Besides, by then the assault will be forgotten about by the media and will make little difference for those in Gaza who have suffered at the hands of the IDF. And as for the change of government in America, is there anyone who seriously believes that Obama will launch a radical shift in foreign policy? With a Clinton as Secretary of State? The suffering of the Palestinians will continue and the Israeli propaganda machine will continue unabated.

Israel Using Human Shields

From The Guardian:

Amnesty International says hitting residential streets with shells that send blast and shrapnel over a wide area constitutes "prima facie evidence of war crimes".

"There has been reckless and disproportionate and in some cases indiscriminate use of force," said Donatella Rovera, an Amnesty investigator in Israel. "There has been the use of weaponry that shouldn't be used in densely populated areas because it's known that it will cause civilian fatalities and casualties.

"They have extremely sophisticated missiles that can be guided to a moving car and they choose to use other weapons or decide to drop a bomb on a house knowing that there were women and children inside. These are very, very clear breaches of international law."

Israel's most prominent human rights organisation, B'Tselem, has written to the attorney general in Jerusalem, Meni Mazuz, asking him to investigate suspected crimes including how the military selects its targets and the killing of scores of policemen at a passing out parade.

"Many of the targets seem not to have been legitimate military targets as specified by international humanitarian law," said Sarit Michaeli of B'Tselem.

Rovera has also collected evidence that the Israeli army holds Palestinian families prisoner in their own homes as human shields. "It's standard practice for Israeli soldiers to go into a house, lock up the family in a room on the ground floor and use the rest of the house as a military base, as a sniper's position. That is the absolute textbook case of human shields.

"It has been practised by the Israeli army for many years and they are doing it again in Gaza now," she said.

Israel Using White Phosphorus?

That is certainly one accusation doing the rounds:

Israel is believed to be using controversial white phosphorus shells to screen its assault on the heavily populated Gaza Strip yesterday. The weapon, used by British and US forces in Iraq, can cause horrific burns but is not illegal if used as a smokescreen.

As the Israeli army stormed to the edges of Gaza City and the Palestinian death toll topped 500, the tell-tale shells could be seen spreading tentacles of thick white smoke to cover the troops’ advance. “These explosions are fantastic looking, and produce a great deal of smoke that blinds the enemy so that our forces can move in,” said one Israeli security expert. Burning blobs of phosphorus would cause severe injuries to anyone caught beneath them and force would-be snipers or operators of remote-controlled booby traps to take cover. Israel admitted using white phosphorus during its 2006 war with Lebanon.

The use of the weapon in the Gaza Strip, one of the world’s mostly densely population areas, is likely to ignite yet more controversy over Israel’s offensive, in which more than 2,300 Palestinians have been wounded.

The Geneva Treaty of 1980 stipulates that white phosphorus should not be used as a weapon of war in civilian areas, but there is no blanket ban under international law on its use as a smokescreen or for illumination. However, Charles Heyman, a military expert and former major in the British Army, said: “If white phosphorus was deliberately fired at a crowd of people someone would end up in The Hague. White phosphorus is also a terror weapon. The descending blobs of phosphorus will burn when in contact with skin.”

Medical Aid For The Palestinian People

Two good shouts from Ten Percent:

1. You can donate money to be used as medical aid for the Palestinians here
2. And a story that has been missed by large sections of the media....is the Israeli action part of an attempt to secure gas supplies?

The War on Palestinians

So, Israeli propaganda dominates the airwaves. Israeli officials are wheeled out to proclaim that their murder of nearly 500 Palestinians and the launch of over 800 strikes is a 'defensive action'. It is barely possible to watch the news as these officials trundle out lie after lie with straight faces, apparently convinced of their own lies. The lie that Israeli action is defensive being just one of a whole pack of lies which the Israeli government know will be almost impossible to disprove. Still, if nothing else, the propaganda offensive has been 'impressive'.

One thing must be kept in mind when watching any news coverage of this murderous attack on Gaza. International journalists are not allowed into Gaza to verify any of the claims of the Israeli government. Even though the Supreme Court has ruled that the government cannot ban foreign correspondents, they remain banned. As a result, it makes it impossible to verify the claims of the government, a fact they are all to aware of. Take this morning's attack on a mosque in Gaza. On various networks, officials have been interviews and claimed that the strike was unfortunate, but that munitions are routinely stored in civilian locations across Gaza and, this implies, the strike was justified. One question is never asked: where is the proof? If the mosque contained munitions, why not provide the proof? Why not tell us where exactly these munitions were stored? Why? Because it is part of a blatant attempt to convince the people of the world that this mass murder, this attempt at ethnic cleansing, is in someway justified.

Every civilian death is seen as suspicious. Every civilian death is blamed on the Palestinian people. Oh, they say they blame Hamas, but by claiming that the Palestinians allow munitions to be stored on their properties, they are essentially saying that any Palestinian civilian that is killed is responsible for their own murder. It is ironic, nay perverse, that so often, the very same people who claim that the Palestinians (the victims) are at fault and that the Israelis (the perpetrators) are deserving of our sympathy, are the very same ones that proclaim that individuals should take the responsibility for their actions and not blame external factors. Why are Palestinians not deserving of this? Why, in this case, should the murderers not take responsibility for their actions? Which the victim suffer whilst the perpetrator has excuses made in their favour? It is the great double standard at the heart of much of the rhetoric that emanates from certain sections of the political spectrum.

And why should we believe what the Israeli government says anyway. Their propaganda has already been exposed for what it is only this morning. Footage that was uploaded on YouTube to prove the accuracy of the Israeli assault has now been revealed as a disgraceful piece of propaganda. Instead of missiles being loaded onto the targeted truck (as the Israeli government claimed), oxygen cylinders were being prepared for distribution. As a result of this action, eight Palestinians were killed. And yet, this video clip is being used as an example of how the Israelis are so careful in their targeting. And, given the lack of journalists in Gaza, one wonders how many other examples are waiting to emerge from the woodwork.

Despite the horrors that are being conducted in Gaza, one must remember that these are the actions of a corrupt elite that are in power in Israel. They are not representative of the people of Israel. The Communist Party of Israel and Hadash have been organising demonstrations in Tel Aviv in protest against the assault on Gaza and the continuing siege. There have been reports that over 10,000 people have taken to the streets in protest against Israeli action. And their bravery in expressing their right to free speech is underlined when considering the disgusting language of some of the extreme elements in Israeli political life:

Israel Beiteinu chairman Avigdor Lieberman said that "in the same way that the Israeli government knows that it is impossible to stop the operation in Gaza until Hamas is eradicated, [the government] must act against those Israeli citizens who are not loyal to the State of Israel."

"The demonstration in Sakhnin in which ten thousand protesters are participating proves that their loyalty is to Hamas and to those who want to destroy Israel."

Ironically those that really seek to destroy Israel are quite possibly the Israeli government themselves. After all, does anyone seriously believe that these attacks will put a stop to the extremists in Gaza? Does anyone really believe that the children who witness the deaths of their mothers, fathers, brother, sisters at the hands of Israeli rockets, will not turn their hatred on Israel? It would be foolish to think that they wouldn't. Each rocket that lands in Gaza produces another extremist. Another person intent on destroying Israel. Another suicide bomber intent on killing Israeli civilians. Until the Israeli government realises this simple fact, the cycle will continue. Unless, of course, that is what they want. To keep the people of Israel living in fear. Well, they may just get their wish.

Palestine - Still a Dirty Word

It's amazing to think that it is considered a slur on your character if you have too much sympathy with the plight of the Palestinians:

Republicans in south Florida predict a 10% spike for McCain in the Jewish vote over the 24% polled by Bush in 2004. Their campaign line is that if Obama wins he will be the first pro-Palestinian US president since the foundation of the state of Israel. The Democrats hit back with leaflets showing Obama by Jerusalem's Wailing Wall wearing a yarmulka.

The fact that any candidate accused of showing sympathy with the impoverished and dispossessed still feels the need to distance himself from the most needy and align himself with the most powerful tells you all you need to know about the race for the presidency. 

Jewish Terrorists Attack Academic

'Self-hating' Jew is often a term applied to those that criticise Israeli policies, so why not also apply it to those ultra-rightist Jews that attack their fellow Jews? Like the nasty characters that carried out this attack:

A well-known Israeli critic of Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank, Zeev Sternhell, has been slightly wounded in a bomb attack.

Police suspect ultra-nationalists Israelis were behind the attack.

Professor Sternhall has also strongly opposed the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip, describing it as immoral and ineffective.

Earlier this year, Professor Sternhall was awarded the prestigious Israel Prize for political science.

Mr Sternhell suffered minor shrapnel wounds in one leg.

Israeli police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said several assailants were waiting for Mr Sternhell shortly after midnight on Wednesday outside his home in Jerusalem.

Reports say police investigators found posters in Mr Sternhell's neighbourhood offering a reward of $320,000 to anyone who kills a member of Peace Now, an Israeli group that campaigns against settlement building to which the academic belongs.

Palestinian Journalist Abused By Israeli Agents

This taken from John Pilger's piece in today's Guardian on the treatment of Palestinian journalist Mohammed Omer on his return to Gaza following his acceptance of the 2008 Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism in London:

Last Thursday, on his return journey, he was met at the Allenby Bridge crossing (to Jordan) by a Dutch official, who waited outside the Israeli building, unaware Mohammed had been seized by Shin Bet, Israel's infamous security organisation. Mohammed was told to turn off his mobile and remove the battery. He asked if he could call his embassy escort and was told forcefully he could not. A man stood over his luggage, picking through his documents. "Where's the money?" he demanded. Mohammed produced some US dollars. "Where is the English pound you have?"

"I realised," said Mohammed, "he was after the award stipend for the Martha Gellhorn prize. I told him I didn't have it with me. 'You are lying', he said. I was now surrounded by eight Shin Bet officers, all armed. The man called Avi ordered me to take off my clothes. I had already been through an x-ray machine. I stripped down to my underwear and was told to take off everything. When I refused, Avi put his hand on his gun. I began to cry: 'Why are you treating me this way? I am a human being.' He said, 'This is nothing compared with what you will see now.' He took his gun out, pressing it to my head and with his full body weight pinning me on my side, he forcibly removed my underwear. He then made me do a concocted sort of dance. Another man, who was laughing, said, 'Why are you bringing perfumes?' I replied, 'They are gifts for the people I love'. He said, 'Oh, do you have love in your culture?'

"As they ridiculed me, they took delight most in mocking letters I had received from readers in England. I had now been without food and water and the toilet for 12 hours, and having been made to stand, my legs buckled. I vomited and passed out. All I remember is one of them gouging, scraping and clawing with his nails at the tender flesh beneath my eyes. He scooped my head and dug his fingers in near the auditory nerves between my head and eardrum. The pain became sharper as he dug in two fingers at a time. Another man had his combat boot on my neck, pressing into the hard floor. I lay there for over an hour. The room became a menagerie of pain, sound and terror."

Almost as revolting is the reaction of the Israeli government:

An Israeli spokesman told the Reuters news agency that Mr Omer received "fair treatment" during his detention at the Allenby Bridge crossing.

He said officials carried out the body search because they suspected the journalist of smuggling.

He says two officers dragged him by his legs, with his head on the floor, in front of other passengers. He says he then vomited and fainted.

The Israeli official said at the end of the search Mr Omer "lost his balance and fell, for some reason unknown to us".

"A team of medics, an ambulance and a paramedic were summoned and he was transferred for treatment to Jericho".

A disgusting example of the utter disregard the Shin Bet have for basic human rights and dignity. As long as both the Shin Bet and Hamas continue this cycle, there will be no hope for Jew or Muslim in the Middle East.

Bulldozer Rampages in Jerusalem - Terrorist Attack??

From the BBC:

A Palestinian man has driven a bulldozer into a bus and several cars in Jerusalem, killing three people, before being shot dead.

Dozens of people were hurt, at least seven critically, in the rampage on Jaffa Road, in the city centre.

A police officer shot the driver of the bulldozer dead after a struggle in the vehicle's cab.

Police said the attacker was a 30-year-old from east Jerusalem, with no known affiliations to militant groups.

The BBC's Tim Franks, who witnessed the attack, said that within a few minutes a stretch of Jerusalem's city centre had been turned into a blood-soaked mess.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert called the incident a terrorist attack, and condemned it as "an act of senseless murderous violence".

Once the initial shock of such an incident sets in, a few things started to bother me about this incident and the way it has been reported by the media.

1) The report of this as an act of terrorism particularly bothers me. There is no evidence whatsoever that this was a terrorist attack. A horrendous incident no doubt, but an act of terrorism? The official US definition of terrorism is as follows:

The calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear.

There is no evidence that the above definition fits this incident. There is no evidence that the perpetrator was linked to any terrorist organisation and there is no evidence that he had planned a terrorist attack, certainly not as yet. Despite the rhetoric of the media and the politicians it is dubious whether this was a terrorist act at all. In fact, an Israeli police chief claimed the following:

"It looks as if it was a spontaneous act."

Spontaneous, not 'calculated' as the definition above sets out. The reports that I have read suggest that he had recently divorced from his Jewish wife and had no links to any terrorist organisations. I would suggest that his actions are the result of a mental breakdown as opposed to an outright terrorist attack. Obviously it is difficult to judge at this stage but, with the limited information in the public domain, it seems a little rash to cry 'terrorism' regarding this incident when even the police claim it was a 'spontaneous act'.

2) There seems to be little comment on the fact that the police entered is cab and shot him dead. Sure, it was a repulsive act that he committed but he could have been 'neutralised' without resorting to cold blooded murder. I see no reason why the driver could not have been incapacitated in some way, arrested, charged and then imprisoned. Surely this was preferable to a man being murdered in the street by the state? The death penalty should be condemned in all its forms, and this is no exception.

Maybe we will discover that this was part of a calculated attempt to incite fear in the populace for political gains. With the information available at this moment in time, it is difficult to make such a case stick.

Two Arrested For Attacks On Settlers On The Susiya Settlement

You may remember seeing these images recently of Palestinians being apparently attacked by Israeli settlers:

The pictures were captured as a result of B'Tselem's 'Shooting Back' scheme that provided video cameras for Palestinians to record the abuses they suffer at the hands of settlers. Amazingly, these pictures were posted on the BBC, amazing because it is very rare for a major media organisation to reproduce such footage. Usually such incidents are portrayed as mythical events in the imagination of so-called anti-Semites and are therefore disregarded.

In this instance, however, it would appear that the Israeli police have actually arrested two settlers that they suspected were responsible for the attack. B'Tselem reports [this link also provides further links to individual testimonies and further videos]:

Today [17 June 2008], the Israeli police arrested two settlers suspected of attacking Palestinians in the Southern Hebron Hills. On 8 June 2008, four masked settlers with clubs attacked three members of the Nawaj’ah family who were grazing their flock on private Palestinian land south of the Susiya settlement. The victims suffered severe injuries and required hospitalization. A fourth member of the family documented the beginning of the assault with a video camera she had received from B'Tselem.

The Nawaj’ah family lives in Khirbet Susiya, a small encampment in the Southern Hebron Hills just south of the Susiya settlement. They live in tents and support themselves by grazing their flock and working their land. As they are the object of frequent attack by settlers, B'Tselem has given the family a video camera as part of its "Shooting Back” project.

On 8 June 2008, ‘Imran a-Nawaj’ah, 32, went with two of his children to graze his flock south of the settlement, on a plot of land belonging to a resident of the nearby Samu’ Village. Although an Israeli court has declared the land a military zone closed to Israelis, two settlers drove up to the shepherds on a tractor and tried to drive them off the land. When a-Nawaj’ah refused and told the settlers he had court permission to be on the land, they threatened him and then drove off toward the settlement. Fearing an attack, A-Nawaj’ah sent his son to the encampment to call for reinforcement. Khalil, 61, Tamam, 60, and Rabiha A-Nawaj’ah, 29, came quickly to the spot along with Muna, 25, who managed to film the settlers leaving the site....

If you want to find out more about the 'Shooting Back' scheme, click here and see what other materials have been captured here. Sadly, most of these incidents will not be replayed on the BBC. Such exposure is clearly an isolated incident to provide 'balance' rather than to broaden understanding of the tensions in the region.

That's The Spirit

Congratulations to the Bush administration for throwing their support behind the peace deal:

The Bush administration has reacted sceptically to news of an Egyptian-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.

"We'll see first of all whether there is actually an agreement," Tom Casey, a US state department spokesman, told reporters in Washington on Tuesday.

"Even if this is a true report, I think unfortunately it hardly takes Hamas out of the terrorism business," Casey added, referring to the Palestinian group that controls the Gaza Strip.

US officials have rejected contact with Hamas because they view it as a terrorist organisation.

Egypt and Hamas said earlier the ceasefire would come into effect on Thursday.


Nice one.

Israeli Terrorist Escapes Justice.....For Now....

And what would have happened if the man in question was a Muslim one wonders?

A notorious Israeli mercenary has successfully appealed to the European court of human rights to postpone his extradition from Russia to Colombia, where he faces an 11-year jail sentence for training rightwing paramilitaries and a private army for the drug barons of the Medellín cartel.

Yair Klein, 64, a reserve lieutenant colonel in the Israel defence forces (IDF)and a veteran of the six-day and Yom Kippur wars, has done business with armed groups in Latin America and Africa for 25 years. He has spent nine months in a Moscow prison but last week the Russian supreme court ordered that the extradition go ahead. Klein's Russian lawyer turned to the human rights court for a temporary stay on the grounds that he could suffer ill-treatment if sent to Bogotá. There were also concerns about the fairness of the 2001 trial, which sentenced him in absentia. During the hearing he said: "Extradition to Colombia would mean a death sentence."

While the court deliberates - which could take months - Klein's supporters in Israel, who consider him a war hero, will continue to campaign for his return. His Israeli lawyer, Mordechai Tsivin, said: "In Israel his arrival would be great joy."

Yet another example of the Israeli government's support for terrorism. Perhaps their activities are not surprising when considering that their biggest backer is the world's biggest terrorist state.

The Role of The West in the Establishment of Hamas

Despite dominating the world media for many years, many aspects of the Israel/Palestine conflict remain hidden from view. Quite often, contemporary events are not placed in context. No background is given, no explanation is outlined. Large chunks of the history of the conflict are ignored or cast aside as irrelevant. As is the case in reporting of many events across the world, what is left out is nearly always as interesting as what is left in.

Take the rise of Hamas, for example. Hamas is frequently referred to as a terrorist organisation that has a destabilising influence across the Middle East. Western critics often refer to the organisation as an impediment to peace rather than an aid. However, the history of Hamas is clouded in mystery and obscured from any discussion relating to progress in the region. It is, of course, obscured for very good reason - it underlines the duplicity of Western foreign policy within the region. A duplicity that goes some way to explaining why the conflict is so complex and remains some distance from resolution.

Arab nationalism was seen as a threat to Western hegemony throughout the region in the 1950s and 60s. Suddenly Arab leaders were gaining confidence and seeking to reclaim their resources. Underpinned with a nationalist, secular ideology, these leaders declared their refusal to bow to Western demands. The rise of Gamal Abdal Nasser in Egypt and the nationalisation of the Suez Canal, gave many Arabs hope that they were about to witness a new era of dignity and freedom. This, of course, scared the West. A populist movement that sought to reclaim its natural resources? They could see that the emergence of Arab nationalism would have a massive impact on oil supplies and thus a situation could emerge whereby the Arab nationalists would hold all the cards, rather than the West. Alongside his nationalist agenda, Nasser also played an important role in the establishment of the PLO, a secular organisation reflecting Nasser’s own particular brand of Arab nationalism. If the PLO were to be successful in negotiating a deal with the Israelis, it would have been a massive victory for Arab nationalism and would have represented a serious threat to Western hegemony. Being the Palestinians sole representative on the world stage, it also united the Palestinian people, at least until the establishment of Hamas in 1987.

However, Nasser was not without his enemies within his own country. Despite initially supporting Nasser’s coup, The Muslim Brotherhood became disillusioned with Nasser’s secularist brand of politics and, in 1954, an attempt was made on his life. After the failed assassination attempt, the Islamists who were not rounded up and arrested subsequently left to settle in Saudi Arabia where they were welcomed as an important bulwark to the rise of ‘godless Communism’. The Saudi regime was particularly disturbed by the rise of Nasser as it threatened their fundamentalist form of government and consequently threatened their influence in the region. If an alternative form of government were to gain momentum, the Saudi regime would surely fall. Consequently, during this period, the Saudi government (alongside its ally the US) continued to provide financial backing to the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood continued to agitate in Egypt and engaged in ‘radical activity’ led by one Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. Under Yassin’s leadership, longtime Muslim Brotherhood activists were simply redirected from promoting Islamic observance to engaging in violent anti-Israel activities. Yassin had, by this stage, established his violent anti-Israeli credentials and was clearly pursuing a more radical Islamic course compared to the more secular PLO. However, this did not prevent the Western powers from pursuing a course of engagement with Yassin and his colleagues in the Brotherhood.

During the 1980s, Yassin focused on developing a ‘charitable organisation’ within Gaza that developed a network of social-welfare organizations, mosques, and schools. It was also at this time that the US and Israel provided financial support to Yassin and his organisation, despite Yassin’s previous anti-Israeli agitation in Egypt. Ostensibly, his organisation was supported as a counter-balance to the PLO and its secular Arab nationalism, which was seen as a massive threat to Western hegemony in the region (due to the loss of control of natural resources). According to Tony Cordesman, Middle East analyst for the Center for Strategic Studies, Israel:

"...aided Hamas directly -- the Israelis wanted to use it as a counterbalance to the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization)."

A resurgence of Arab nationalism in the region was of deep concern to the United States and the growth of a radical Islamic organisation would be a useful counter-weight to the rise of nationalist secularism. This was further demonstrated by the support of radical Islamists in Afghanistan (including Osama Bin Laden) during the conflict with the Soviet Union. With a radical alternative to Arab nationalism, the Arab people would remain divided and consequently allow the US to maintain influence in the region. As one former CIA official put it, Israel's support for Hamas :

"...was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative."

Furthermore, according to US officials:

....funds for the movement came from the oil-producing states and directly and indirectly from Israel. The PLO was secular and leftist and promoted Palestinian nationalism. Hamas wanted to set up a transnational state under the rule of Islam, much like Khomeini's Iran.

Consequently, whether it was intentioned or not, it would appear that the growth of Hamas as a power bloc within the region was directly attributable to the United State and her allies. Concerned by the growth of Arab nationalism and the problems that would cause for the West in the region, the US threw in its lot with radical Islamists who would prove to be a useful barrier to the rise of Soviet supported, secular regimes within the region. Despite the background of Yassin in Egypt, both Israel and the US had no problem with supplying funds and offering their support to Yassin’s ‘charitable organisation’. Thus the combination of Israel and the US managed to ensure that the Palestinian people were divided between a secular organisation prepared to do business with Israel (the PLO recognised Israel in 1993 as part of the Declaration of Principles), and a radical Islamic organisation that took a less compromising position regarding peace in the region. And yet, the covert support by the US government for radical Islamic groups over the years has remained firmly outside of the scope of the mainstream media’s assessment of the situation in the Middle East. Yet how can we understand the situation in the Middle East if we do not understand how it was created? The rise of Islamic fundamentalism is tied to the West’s attempts to assert hegemony throughout the region and ensure it remains the dominant force on the global stage. Ironic that the forces they utilised to ensure their dominance are now the very forces that threaten to demolish it.

Bush Attacks Obama - Making Political Capital from Holocaust

What better way to make political capital out of the death of millions of Jews at the hands of the Nazis, than to make the following remark (in Israel no less) on Obama's foreign policy:

"Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before."

"As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is -- the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

Nothing like a good genocide to utilise a bit of cheap point scoring, eh? Although having said that, it is a bit of a cheek come from a member of a family that gave a fair amount of assistance to the Nazis. Somewhere, 11 million Jews weep.

Besides which, appeasement is very different to talking to your enemies. Appeasement implies giving in to demands. Talking most certainly does not.

A Meeting of Minds?

So what do war criminals eat at a birthday party?

'We're not celebrating Israel's anniversary'

The following is a letter published in today's Guardian regarding the upcoming 60th anniversary of the creation of Israel.

In May, Jewish organisations will be celebrating the 60th anniversary of the founding of the state of Israel. This is understandable in the context of centuries of persecution culminating in the Holocaust. Nevertheless, we are Jews who will not be celebrating. Surely it is now time to acknowledge the narrative of the other, the price paid by another people for European anti-semitism and Hitler's genocidal policies. As Edward Said emphasised, what the Holocaust is to the Jews, the Naqba is to the Palestinians.

In April 1948, the same month as the infamous massacre at Deir Yassin and the mortar attack on Palestinian civilians in Haifa's market square, Plan Dalet was put into operation. This authorised the destruction of Palestinian villages and the expulsion of the indigenous population outside the borders of the state. We will not be celebrating.

In July 1948, 70,000 Palestinians were driven from their homes in Lydda and Ramleh in the heat of the summer with no food or water. Hundreds died. It was known as the Death March. We will not be celebrating.

In all, 750,000 Palestinians became refugees. Some 400 villages were wiped off the map. That did not end the ethnic cleansing. Thousands of Palestinians (Israeli citizens) were expelled from the Galilee in 1956. Many thousands more when Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza. Under international law and sanctioned by UN resolution 194, refugees from war have a right to return or compensation. Israel has never accepted that right. We will not be celebrating.

We cannot celebrate the birthday of a state founded on terrorism, massacres and the dispossession of another people from their land. We cannot celebrate the birthday of a state that even now engages in ethnic cleansing, that violates international law, that is inflicting a monstrous collective punishment on the civilian population of Gaza and that continues to deny to Palestinians their human rights and national aspirations.

We will celebrate when Arab and Jew live as equals in a peaceful Middle East.

Seymour Alexander
Ruth Appleton
Steve Arloff
Rica Bird
Jo Bird
Cllr Jonathan Bloch
Ilse Boas
Prof. Haim Bresheeth
Tanya Bronstein
Sheila Colman
Ruth Clark
Sylvia Cohen
Judith Cravitz
Mike Cushman
Angela Dale
Ivor Dembina
Dr. Linda Edmondson
Nancy Elan
Liz Elkind
Pia Feig
Colin Fine
Deborah Fink
Sylvia Finzi
Brian Fisher MBE
Frank Fisher
Bella Freud
Catherine Fried
Uri Fruchtmann
Stephen Fry
David Garfinkel
Carolyn Gelenter
Claire Glasman
Tony Greenstein
Heinz Grunewald
Michael Halpern
Abe Hayeem
Rosamine Hayeem
Anna Hellman
Amy Hordes
Joan Horrocks
Deborah Hyams
Selma James
Riva Joffe
Yael Oren Kahn
Michael Kalmanovitz
Paul Kaufman
Prof. Adah Kay
Yehudit Keshet
Prof. Eleonore Kofman
Rene Krayer
Stevie Krayer
Berry Kreel
Leah Levane
Les Levidow
Peter Levin
Louis Levy
Ros Levy
Prof. Yosefa Loshitzky
Catherine Lyons
Deborah Maccoby
Daniel Machover
Prof. Emeritus Moshe Machover
Miriam Margolyes OBE
Mike Marqusee
Laura Miller
Simon Natas
Hilda Meers
Martine Miel
Laura Miller
Arthur Neslen
Diana Neslen
Orna Neumann
Harold Pinter
Roland Rance
Frances Rivkin
Sheila Robin
Dr. Brian Robinson
Neil Rogall
Prof. Steven Rose
Mike Rosen
Prof. Jonathan Rosenhead
Leon Rosselson
Michael Sackin
Sabby Sagall
Ian Saville
Alexei Sayle
Anna Schuman
Sidney Schuman
Monika Schwartz
Amanda Sebestyen
Sam Semoff
Linda Shampan
Sybil Shine
Prof. Frances Stewart
Inbar Tamari
Ruth Tenne
Martin Toch
Tirza Waisel
Stanley Walinets
Martin White
Ruth Williams
Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi
Devra Wiseman
Gerry Wolff
Sherry Yanowitz

US Talks Up Link Between North Korea and Syria

Remember the story about the Israeli air raid in Syria? It now appears that the US and Israel are suggesting that North Korea was aiding a Syrian nuclear programme. From CNN:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Members of Congress will learn during closed-door briefings Thursday about North Korea's possible role in building a suspected nuclear facility in Syria, according to a source familiar with internal administration discussions.

U.S. intelligence officials will demonstrate that North Korea was helping Syria build the facility that Israeli warplanes bombed last year, the source said.

The United States and Israel have refused to comment on the target of September airstrike.

Some members of Congress have demanded to know what information the administration has about the incident.

Thursday's briefings to intelligence, foreign relations and armed services committees in both chambers of Congress are intended to show that the building hit was a North Korean-designed reactor being built with assistance from Pyongyang, the source said.

It is less clear whether North Korea had provided or was about to provide essential fuel components to Syria, according to the source.


The action itself was, of course, highly illegal. No nation has the right to invade a sovereign nation, whatever their 'justification'. It appears to be a desperate measure by a US government that is eager to pull the trigger on yet another nation in the Middle East in order to spread it's influence across the region. Anyone who believes that there is the remote possibility of this actually being true is very sadly mistaken. And, even if it is true, Syria has just as much right to develop a civilian nuclear programme as any other nation (much as I despise nuclear power). Sabres are being rattled and propaganda is coming thick and fast. Do not be surprised if there is an escalation in the rhetoric.