Friday, January 25, 2008
Gilad Atzmon - Two Jewish Jokes (and a Hain in the Middle)
A story is told of a Londoner, a Jewish man who was riding on the London Underground reading an Arab newspaper. A friend of his, who happened to be riding in the same underground car, noticed this strange phenomenon. Very upset, he approached the newspaper reader."Moishe, have you lost your mind? Why are you reading an Arab newspaper?" Moishe replied, "I used to read the Jewish newspaper, but what did I find? Jews being persecuted, Israel being attacked, Jews disappearing through assimilation and intermarriage, Jews living in poverty. So I switched to the Arab newspaper. Now what do I find? Jews own all the banks, Jews control the media, Jews are all rich and powerful, Jews rule the world. The news is so much better!"
Truth must be said, Moishe, is telling the truth here. The Jewish press in Britain is panicking lately and they have good reason, too. While the British papers are filling their mouths with water hiding the real story behind the huge Labour donation sleaze, the UK Jewish press is overwhelmingly concerned with the unveiling saga. We have already learned about Lord ‘cash machine’ Levy who acted as ‘No 1 Labour fund raiser’. We have learned recently about David Abrahams who donated his money to the party by proxy. Both Levy and Abrahams were overwhelmingly active at the time Britain was taken into an illegal war by the Labour government. David Abrahams already admitted in an interview to the Jewish Chronicle that he donated money by proxy to “to quell conspiracy fears”.
Interestingly enough, the ‘Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 ’ introduces some clear regulations concerning donation to political parties in Britain. According to the 2000 Act, donators have to report donations worth more than £1,000 from permitted donors (individuals on the UK electoral register, or UK-registered companies) and donations worth more than £200 from unidentified or impermissible donors. The 2000 act is there to protect Britain’s political world from being subject to any criminal or foreign interests. The act is there to protect Britain from conspiracy or anything that may even look like a conspiracy.
Levy and Abrahams were prominent activists in the ‘Labour Friends of Israel’ and ‘Jewish Labour’. They both operate as Israeli lobbyists. It is more than possible that their interests as openly rabid Zionists do not exactly match the British interests. I am not here to suggest that this is indeed the case. However, Abrahams’s confession to the JC is there to suggest that at least Abrahams himself thought that his donation to the Labour party could be interpreted as a conspiracy.
Yesterday, Peter Hain, a senior British Cabinet minister resigned. Once again following a row over political donations and guess what, once again it is Zionist donators who put money into his campaign by proxy.
Hain, who served as Work and Pensions Secretary said he was leaving to clear his name after electoral authorities referred questions to the police about the funding of his unsuccessful campaign to become deputy Labor Party leader. Clearly, the British press avoids questioning the identity of the donators, and more crucially there is the disturbing question: what was it that they tried to buy? But as Moishe confesses in the joke above, Jewish newspapers are there to spread the depressive news.
Last week Jewish Chronicle’s report on the Hain affair is indeed very revealing yet concerning.
“International diamond broker Willie Nagel, 83 — one of two Jewish benefactors to Mr Hain’s campaign through the Progressive Policies Forum — told the JC he had donated and loaned money to PPF and had “no objection that this money [had been] used to support Peter Hain’s campaign”.
Seemingly, Mr. Nagel changes league quite easily. As much as was happy to donate to Labour candidates in power, he was delighted to donate to the Tories at the time when they ran this country.
Here is the JC report:
“Mr Nagel, a member of St John’s Wood Synagogue, was also known to be close to the Conservatives during the premierships of Baroness Thatcher and John Major. He reportedly donated to Mr Major’s Huntingdon constituency, giving rise to reports in the media that he had attempted to interest the then-prime minister in Israeli-made unmanned aircraft at a time when the UK maintained an arms embargo on Israel.”
Clearly, Mr Nagel operates here as a foreign lobbyist for Israeli interests and even military interests. As much as Peter Hain was happy to receive Mr Nagel’s money, it does raise big questions as to whether Mr. Nagel was a ‘permissible’ donator. Though, he is a UK citizen, he clearly represent some foreign interests.
The JC continues. Mr Nagel “has been a vice-chairman of Israel Bonds UK, and played a major role in the Balfour Diamond Jubilee Trust and the British Overseas Trade Group for Israel. He is also a life-long supporter of both the Labour and Conservative Friends of Israel and appears regularly in the JC “Guest List” pages alongside leading Israeli and communal figures.”
Clearly Mr Nagel was there to buy Israeli interests and it is NO coincidence that Peter Hain ‘forgot’ to report of his voluntary contribution. I ask myself whether there are many donators in this country who openly send money to the two rival parties. I guess the answer is no. There are not many, there are just very few.
However, Mr Hain’s other benefactor is another prominent Zionist named Isaac Kaye. Mr Kaye is a South African-born multi-millionaire who was known for his support of the South African Apartheid regime.
Mr Kaye, 78 year old a man with dubious past “is the former chairman of Norton Healthcare, which was investigated by police looking into an alleged £400 million price-rigging of pharmaceuticals sold to the NHS.” Mr Kaye is obviously a rabid Zionist and a major Israeli Lobbyist. Again the JC report that Mr Kaye “has backed the Community Security Trust, UJIA and other Jewish and pro-Israel organisations. He is on the board of Bicom, the Britain-Israel Communications and Research Centre, and is a governor and major benefactor of the Hebrew University, where he has endowed the Kaye Research Awards.”
Interestingly enough, the Tories here do not do much to expose the identity of the Labour proxy donators. The reason is simple, they are backed by the very same people. We have read about Mr Nagel swinging between the two parties. Recently Parliament's sleaze watchdog has launched an inquiry into complaints made against shadow chancellor George Osborne. Mr Osborne allegedly received money from some of the wealthiest people in Britain, including banking heiress Lady Serena Rothschild, believed to have donated £190,000 to Mr Osborne.
Moishe is correct, the JC report is very concerning. The truth of Israeli lobbying in Britain is totally revealed in the Jewish Chronicle paper, God bless them. Interestingly enough, the British press wouldn’t touch the crux of the matter yet.
From Moishe’s point of view, the Guardian and the Independent are not a major concern for the time being. This might be the biggest asset of Britain and its tolerant culture. However, bearing in mind the genocide in Iraq, Britain has been led into its most devastating colonial phase ever by the Labour party. At a certain stage the question will be raised and it won’t be too long before the names Levy, Abrahams, Kaye, Nagel and a few others to pop up. This is very depressing and may even be very worrying as far as Moishe is concerned. I understand Moishe’s concerns and even feel for him.
However, since we have launched this article with Moishe’s joke it would be rather appropriate to end it with just another very short one,
A Jewish Telegram:
‘Begin worrying, details to follow.’
Labels: Atzmon, Israel, journalism, lobbying, UK, Zionism
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Omar Barghouti - Never Aganist!! European Collusion in Israel's Slow Genocide
The European Union, Israel's largest trade partner in the world, is watching by as Israel tightens its barbaric siege on Gaza, collectively punishing 1.5 million Palestinian civilians, condemning them to devastation, and visiting imminent death upon hundreds of kidney dialysis and heart patients, prematurely born babies, and all others dependent on electric power for their very survival.
By freezing fuel and electric power supplies to Gaza, Israel, the occupying power, is essentially guaranteeing that "clean" water -- only by name, as Gaza's water is perhaps the most polluted in the whole region, after decades of Israeli theft and abuse -- will not be pumped out and properly distributed to homes and institutions; hospitals will not be able to function adequately, leading to the eventual death of many, particularly the most vulnerable; whatever factories that are still working despite the siege will now be forced to close, pushing the already extremely high unemployment rate even higher; sewage treatment will come to a halt, further polluting Gaza's precious little water supply; academic institutions and schools will not be able to provide their usual services; and the lives of all civilians will be severely disrupted, if not irreversibly damaged. And Europe is apathetically watching.
Princeton academic Richard Falk considered Israel's siege a "prelude to genocide," even before this latest crime of altogether cutting off energy supplies. Now, Israel's crimes in Gaza can accurately be categorized as acts of genocide, albeit slow. According to Article II of the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the term is defined as:
"[A]ny of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ..."
Clearly, Israel's hermetic siege of Gaza, designed to kill, cause serious bodily and mental harm, and deliberately inflict conditions of life calculated to bring about partial and gradual physical destruction, qualifies as an act of genocide, if not all-out genocide yet. And the EU is suspiciously silent.
But why accuse Europe, in particular, of collusion in this crime when almost the entire international community is not lifting a finger, and the UN's obsequious Secretary-General, who surpassed all his predecessors in obedience to the US government, is pathetically paying only lip service? In addition, what of the US government itself, Israel's most generous sponsor that is directly implicated in the current siege, especially after President George W. Bush, on his recent visit, gave a hardly subtle green light to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to ravage Gaza?
Why not blame the Palestinians' quiet Arab brethren, particularly Egypt -- the only country that can immediately break the siege by reopening the Rafah crossing and supplying through it the necessary fuel, electric power and emergency supplies? And finally, why not blame the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority, whose subservient and visionless leader openly boasted in a press conference its "complete agreement" with Bush on all matters of substance?
After Israel, the US is, without a doubt, the guiltiest party in the current crime. Under the influence of a fundamentalist, militaristic, neo-conservative ideology that has taken over its helms of power and an omnipotent Zionist lobby that is unparalleled in its sway, the US is in a category by itself. It goes without saying that the PA, the UN, as well as Arab and international governments maintaining business as usual with Israel should all be held accountable for acquiescing, whether directly or indirectly, to Israel's crimes against humanity in Gaza. It is also true that each one of the above bears the legal and moral responsibility to intervene and apply whatever necessary pressure to stop the crime before thousands perish. But the EU commands a unique position in all this. It is not only silent and apathetic; in most European countries Israel and Israeli institutions are currently welcomed and sought after with unprecedented warmth, generosity and deference in all fields -- economic, cultural, academic, athletic, etc. For instance, Israel was invited as the guest of honor to a major book fair in Turin, Italy. Israeli government-funded films are featuring in film festivals all over the continent. Israeli products, from avocados and oranges to hi-tech security systems, are flooding European markets like never before. Israeli academic institutions are enjoying a special, very lucrative, association agreement with the relevant organs in the EU. Israeli dance groups, singing bands and orchestras are invited to European tours and festivals as if Israel were not only a normal, but in effect a most favored, member of the so-called "civilized" world. Official Europe's once lackluster embrace of Israel has turned into an intense, open and enigmatic love affair.
If Europe thinks it can thus repent for its Holocaust against its own Jewish population, it is in fact shamefully and consciously facilitating the committal of fresh acts of genocide against the people of Palestine. But Palestinians, it appears, do not count for much, as we are viewed not only by Israel, but also by its good old "white" sponsors and allies as lesser, or relative, humans. The continent that invented modern genocide and was responsible for massacring in the last two centuries more human beings, mostly "relative humans," than all other continents put together is covering up crimes that are reminiscent in quality, though certainly not in quantity, of its own heinous crimes against humanity.
In no other international affair, perhaps, can the European establishment be accused of being as detached from and indifferent to its own public opinion. While calls for boycotting Israel as an apartheid state are slowly but consistently spreading among European civil society organizations and trade unions, drawing disturbing parallels to the boycott of South African apartheid, European governments are finding it difficult to distinguish themselves from the overtly complicit US position vis-a-vis Israel. Even European clichés of condemnation and "expressing deep concern" have become rarer than ever nowadays. Moreover, Israel's relentless and defiant violation of Europe's own human rights laws and conditions are ignored whenever anyone questions whether Israel should continue to benefit from its magnanimous association agreement with the EU despite its military occupation, colonization and horrific record of human rights abuse against its Palestinian victims. If this is not complicity, what is?
Morality aside, sinking Gaza into a sea of darkness, poverty, death and despair cannot bode well for Europe. By actively propping up an environment conducive to the rise of fanaticism and desperate violence near its borders, Europe is foolishly inviting havoc to its doorstep. Instead of heeding -- or at least seriously considering -- calls for boycott, divestment and sanctions against apartheid Israel, adopted by virtually the entire spectrum of Palestinian civil society, it may soon have to reckon with uncontainable forces of irrational and indiscriminate violence and its resulting chaos.
It seems European elites are currently determined never to oppose Israel, no matter what crimes it commits. It is as if the bellowing -- and increasingly hypocritical -- slogan upheld by Jewish survivors of European genocide, "Never Again!", is now espoused by European elites with one difference: the two letter, 's' and 't', are added at the end.
Omar Barghouti is an independent Palestinian political analyst and founding member of the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (www.PACBI.org)
Source: http://www.miftah.org/Display.cfm?DocId=15978&CategoryId=5
By freezing fuel and electric power supplies to Gaza, Israel, the occupying power, is essentially guaranteeing that "clean" water -- only by name, as Gaza's water is perhaps the most polluted in the whole region, after decades of Israeli theft and abuse -- will not be pumped out and properly distributed to homes and institutions; hospitals will not be able to function adequately, leading to the eventual death of many, particularly the most vulnerable; whatever factories that are still working despite the siege will now be forced to close, pushing the already extremely high unemployment rate even higher; sewage treatment will come to a halt, further polluting Gaza's precious little water supply; academic institutions and schools will not be able to provide their usual services; and the lives of all civilians will be severely disrupted, if not irreversibly damaged. And Europe is apathetically watching.
Princeton academic Richard Falk considered Israel's siege a "prelude to genocide," even before this latest crime of altogether cutting off energy supplies. Now, Israel's crimes in Gaza can accurately be categorized as acts of genocide, albeit slow. According to Article II of the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the term is defined as:
"[A]ny of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ..."
Clearly, Israel's hermetic siege of Gaza, designed to kill, cause serious bodily and mental harm, and deliberately inflict conditions of life calculated to bring about partial and gradual physical destruction, qualifies as an act of genocide, if not all-out genocide yet. And the EU is suspiciously silent.
But why accuse Europe, in particular, of collusion in this crime when almost the entire international community is not lifting a finger, and the UN's obsequious Secretary-General, who surpassed all his predecessors in obedience to the US government, is pathetically paying only lip service? In addition, what of the US government itself, Israel's most generous sponsor that is directly implicated in the current siege, especially after President George W. Bush, on his recent visit, gave a hardly subtle green light to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to ravage Gaza?
Why not blame the Palestinians' quiet Arab brethren, particularly Egypt -- the only country that can immediately break the siege by reopening the Rafah crossing and supplying through it the necessary fuel, electric power and emergency supplies? And finally, why not blame the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority, whose subservient and visionless leader openly boasted in a press conference its "complete agreement" with Bush on all matters of substance?
After Israel, the US is, without a doubt, the guiltiest party in the current crime. Under the influence of a fundamentalist, militaristic, neo-conservative ideology that has taken over its helms of power and an omnipotent Zionist lobby that is unparalleled in its sway, the US is in a category by itself. It goes without saying that the PA, the UN, as well as Arab and international governments maintaining business as usual with Israel should all be held accountable for acquiescing, whether directly or indirectly, to Israel's crimes against humanity in Gaza. It is also true that each one of the above bears the legal and moral responsibility to intervene and apply whatever necessary pressure to stop the crime before thousands perish. But the EU commands a unique position in all this. It is not only silent and apathetic; in most European countries Israel and Israeli institutions are currently welcomed and sought after with unprecedented warmth, generosity and deference in all fields -- economic, cultural, academic, athletic, etc. For instance, Israel was invited as the guest of honor to a major book fair in Turin, Italy. Israeli government-funded films are featuring in film festivals all over the continent. Israeli products, from avocados and oranges to hi-tech security systems, are flooding European markets like never before. Israeli academic institutions are enjoying a special, very lucrative, association agreement with the relevant organs in the EU. Israeli dance groups, singing bands and orchestras are invited to European tours and festivals as if Israel were not only a normal, but in effect a most favored, member of the so-called "civilized" world. Official Europe's once lackluster embrace of Israel has turned into an intense, open and enigmatic love affair.
If Europe thinks it can thus repent for its Holocaust against its own Jewish population, it is in fact shamefully and consciously facilitating the committal of fresh acts of genocide against the people of Palestine. But Palestinians, it appears, do not count for much, as we are viewed not only by Israel, but also by its good old "white" sponsors and allies as lesser, or relative, humans. The continent that invented modern genocide and was responsible for massacring in the last two centuries more human beings, mostly "relative humans," than all other continents put together is covering up crimes that are reminiscent in quality, though certainly not in quantity, of its own heinous crimes against humanity.
In no other international affair, perhaps, can the European establishment be accused of being as detached from and indifferent to its own public opinion. While calls for boycotting Israel as an apartheid state are slowly but consistently spreading among European civil society organizations and trade unions, drawing disturbing parallels to the boycott of South African apartheid, European governments are finding it difficult to distinguish themselves from the overtly complicit US position vis-a-vis Israel. Even European clichés of condemnation and "expressing deep concern" have become rarer than ever nowadays. Moreover, Israel's relentless and defiant violation of Europe's own human rights laws and conditions are ignored whenever anyone questions whether Israel should continue to benefit from its magnanimous association agreement with the EU despite its military occupation, colonization and horrific record of human rights abuse against its Palestinian victims. If this is not complicity, what is?
Morality aside, sinking Gaza into a sea of darkness, poverty, death and despair cannot bode well for Europe. By actively propping up an environment conducive to the rise of fanaticism and desperate violence near its borders, Europe is foolishly inviting havoc to its doorstep. Instead of heeding -- or at least seriously considering -- calls for boycott, divestment and sanctions against apartheid Israel, adopted by virtually the entire spectrum of Palestinian civil society, it may soon have to reckon with uncontainable forces of irrational and indiscriminate violence and its resulting chaos.
It seems European elites are currently determined never to oppose Israel, no matter what crimes it commits. It is as if the bellowing -- and increasingly hypocritical -- slogan upheld by Jewish survivors of European genocide, "Never Again!", is now espoused by European elites with one difference: the two letter, 's' and 't', are added at the end.
Omar Barghouti is an independent Palestinian political analyst and founding member of the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (www.PACBI.org)
Source: http://www.miftah.org/Display.cfm?DocId=15978&CategoryId=5
In Spanish On Rebelion: http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=62211
Labels: EU, Gaza, hasbara, holocaust, human rights violations, Israel, lobbying, NATO, occupation, Palestine
Thursday, January 17, 2008
No Hain, No Gain: More UK Sleaze Scandals for Israel
From Peter Hain’s Website:"I also believe in a society based upon the principles of mutual co-operation and mutual aid, not one reliant on personal greed in which affluent elites grow still more powerful and rich, whilst the weakest go to the wall, hence our socialist commitment to spreading wealth and ownership more evenly and our belief in high quality public services which we must all be prepared to fund through fair taxation. And also our policies for combating world poverty through record levels of international development assistance and providing debt relief for the poorest countries.
Our socialist vision is of a Britain that stands for justice, freedom and morality both at home and abroad."
Peacepalestine receives many documents to be published. This author is unfamiliar to me, but I thought the document interesting enough to publish.
Personal Greed and Political Ambition in the Shadow of Friends for Israel
By Anton Shalom Chertoff
How much more can the British electorate swallow? Once again the Labour party is caught in a donation scandal, and guess what, yet again it is Zionist benefactors who have been exposed trying to buy some dubious favors by proxy. While British journalists are muted by political correctness and mumble politely about the logistics of party-politics funding, an unmentionable truth is emerging into the public forum, a truth that is fast becoming as undeniable as the Holocaust: all these donators are Zionists and they are all attempting to exploit the British parliamentary system to profit the Jewish state of Israel. They realize their conduct is immoral and illegal so they hide their identities, employ proxy donators and in the most recent incident, fabricate an entire company so that they may channel funds without public scrutiny. And these are just the ones we know about.
We had more or less two weeks or so without learning about a prominent Jew trying to buy a state, a war or a politician but alas, the same story is unfolding upon us again. The plot is so familiar it’s verging on being boring.
This time it is Labour Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Peter Hain who is accused of sleaze. Apparently, Hain failed to report who financed his failed campaign for the Labour deputy leadership to the tune of ₤103,000. I am sure that you have guessed already, Hain’s main backers are no others than two hardcore Zionists of the worst order.
Peter Hain, now 57, first caught the public eye in the late 1960s as a young radical opponent of apartheid in South Africa. Hain’s reputation as an anti apartheid activist lasted for more than three decades. Not anymore however, Hain has now been exposed sleeping with the devil. He was receiving money from no other than Isaac Kaye, a former supporter of the National Party in apartheid-era South Africa. Like proxy donator Abrahams, Kaye is a major investor in Israel and used a sophisticated tactic to hide his identity; a ‘think tank’ of reputed left-wing persuasion entitled the ‘Progressive Policy Forum’ which was established for the sole purpose of concealing the identity of Kaye and his cohorts.
While debate in Britain centers on how ethically malleable and reprehensible Mr Hain must be to accept such a gift, Andreas Whittam Smith of the Independent yesterday suggested that the criminal inquiry into the donation scandal “must start with the business donors”. It is indeed all about the backers and that which they try to buy. Whittam Smith then referred to Issac Kaye’s involvement in a suspected £400 fraud against the NHS and to his participation in the “gifts of influence” scandal in South Africa during the 1980’s. However, this relatively courageous journalist falls short of revealing the most devastating crux of the matter; Issac Kaye is a proud Zionist campaigner.
Indeed Kaye wasn’t the only one to donate money to Hain. Willie Nagel, 82, a prominent diamond broker has a long history of backing politicians regardless of their ideological league. A decade ago, the chameleon millionaire Nagel sent £2,000 to John Major. He was then invited to join the PM in a trade mission in Israel and Jordan. According to the Independent, Nagel attempted to interest John Major in an unmanned aircraft developed in Israel, even though there was an arms embargo regarding Israeli equipment at the time.
Seemingly, Whittam Smith is well informed about Hain’s affairs. Clearly Whittam Smith knows enough about how the Israeli Lobby is currently operating in Britain, sending money to parties and blatantly ignoring the UK donation laws. Whittam Smith is courageous enough to suggest that the inquiry into the donation scandal “must start with the business donors”. Yet, Whittham Smith falls short of pointing at the continuum established between Nagel, Kaye, Lord Levy, Abrahams, Mendelsohn and the Labour Friends of Israel. He wouldn’t stand up and ask what is it that these proud Zionist are trying to buy.
Levy, Medehlsson, Abrhams, Nagel, Kaye and others are prominent, successful people. They are far from being stupid. I wondered yesterday while reading the Guardian cover of the topic what they think to themselves. Surely they realise that their criminal conduct can be exposed, surely they realise how badly it can all reflect on British Jews. The only answer I could come up with was that these prominent Zionists must believe the Goyim around them are stupid. But are they stupid? Not at all, yet no one can stand up and say, “Enough is enough”. No one in the British media is willing to stand trial in a kangaroo court. As I write this, yet another debacle is unfolding regarding the Tory shadow chancellor George Osborn and his acceptance of various funds including ₤200,000 gift from Lady Serena Rothschild. I ask myself how many scandals will it take before the unmentionable question is finally asked?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7185622.stm
Within a politically correct Liberal discourse dominated by Holocaust memorial and a severe dollop of post-colonial guilt, no one in Britain can stand up and say the obvious. Unfortunately, if issues in Iraq are not resolved soon and the Brits will land at their next ‘post colonial’ regret phase, they will once again have to identify their crimes against humanity. They will no doubt remember the ‘Levy’s and the ‘Abrahams’s that financed warmonger Blair. They will remember who rallied for the war, who legalized the war and they will reflect on that dubious ‘think tank’ that preaches murderous interventionism in the name of democracy and liberalism.
Saturday, January 5, 2008
Welcome to Brighton, Gilad!
The lovely ladies in their summer attire are preparing a warm welcome for Gilad Atzmon at Brighton on Monday. But, would it really be an event if there weren't some fuss around it? Those who have been following this blog know the sad saga of Tony Greenstein. Yes, the man who spends at least 3 hours a day posting comments in various blogs complaining that other people should shut up, has been working overtime to keep Gilad out of his turf (or surf, if we are to judge by the bevvy of bathing beauties at the left). No. It wouldn't be an event and for those who have read this post knew that there had been a well-informed person who declared that Tony has been tainting the truth and bending it to suit his personal agenda yet again.
Summing it up: Gilad was booked for an speaking and musical event. It was to take place at a public venue. Tony didn't like that and decided he had to act. I really hope he puts just as much effort into every event that a Zionist holds in his town, just to be consistent. He contacted a journalist friend so that an article could be written that was admittedly a cut and paste job of an article that Tony has been recycling himself for over a year. Tony was found sticking flyers to the walls of the venue (a church) and threatened that there would be a picket should the event take place. Not wanting to cause undue stress to the venue, the organiser himself decided to move the performance to another place, a private residence, so that the organiser would bear all the burden of the harassment himself. (That the harassment should cease is simply not to be considered, knowing the subject involved, and it will be interesting to see if Tony decides to picket a private residence!!!). There was no pressure exerted upon the organiser, as it was his own choice to assume all the burden coming from harassment and spare others. It is easy to lie when you believe people won't find out the facts. But, Peacepalestine likes facts and has no trouble finding them. Rotten things tend to smell, and when Tony sells his fish, they stink.
Things should have ended with the change of venue, the harassment and the lies should have ended, shouldn't they? No. Tony does not want Gilad to speak in his town, and he takes the venue change as a personal victory. He's been gloating and bragging that his battle is won.
Tony, all you have been doing is spreading false information! THIS is the letter that you sent around to dozens of individuals. Obviously, not all of them agree with you, and some of them are absolutely disgusted at what you are doing and the way you are doing it. Some of them are fed up with your tactics and the damage you bring to any kind of unity that people should have regarding speaking out on the issues. Some people don't take things sitting down, and they will not tolerate your lies, insinuations and fabrications. Permission was given for the publication of this exchange by one of the recipients. I was not asked to hide identities, email addresses, private phone numbers and other reserved information that is contained on the email either. But since I have scruples, I am obscuring the specific names. Some people will be able to figure out who the other interlocutor is on their own, but I'll hint that he signed the Euston Manifesto (which is a lobby group in the UK to protect Israel interests from the "left" ahahahahaha!) and is a regular commenter of Engage. He doesn't even support the boycott against Israel, but none of this bothers Tony. It is Gilad who is the danger to the Palestinian people..... BEWARE OF THE LIES AND FABRICATION! Most of what Tony has written is untrue and not factual. Privvy to a bit of inside info, I'll mention a few details in RED
Date: 2008/01/05 Sat AM 01:50:41 GMT From: tony greenstein
> >> To: xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> cc:
> >> Subject: Re: FW: Anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon Meeting on Monday 7th January
> >> Cancelled
> >>
> >> I went for a meal with my kids and the journalist and her child tonight. Apparently Atzmon has been bombarding her with phone calls, (Gilad made one phone call to the journalist) threatening libel etc. Clearly he's very upset at what's happened in Brighton. Tee hee. I gather he wasn't very complimentary about me or Sue Blackwell (Jean didn't know who she was (Tony, what kind of Boycott campaigner are you if a journalist in your own town doesn't know about the academic boycott that was supposedly lead by Sue Blackwell? And this kind of shows the "impact" of Sue's campaign. I don't know if this news will make her happy) but that didn't stop Atzmon venting his spleen). I felt sorry for her because Atzmon is vile beyond comparison. Georgina Henry, editor the Guardian's CIF had a similar experience of this man. (So now Georgina is your Heroine? But at least she realised that journalistic deontology would obligate her to have a person who was being falsely quoted and taken out of context to present his defense to the accusations, which she then did. Either that, or her paper would face a lawsuit. She is far from stupid). But I feel pleased at a good week's work. (And I'm sure those in Gaza are thanking you).
> >> Yes I know it was tongue in cheek but then churches today are somewhat
> >> different places to their counterparts in the Middle Ages.
> >>
> >> cheers
> >>
> >> Tony
> >>
> >> XXXXXXXXXXXX wrote:
> >> "as church premises are probably the least appropriate venue for a meeting of this kind" - with my tongue firmly in my cheek, indeed both my cheeks, I'm going in for a spot of mischief making but only in this email (no further) ... I couldn't help reflecting that not all that long ago (e.g. middle ages, or Martin Luther &c) church premises were EXACTLY the sort of venues ... &c &c ..... But I appreciate you have to be diplomatic, and anyway, all that sort of thing is now behind them ... er.... except for a few very odd diehards and Christian Zionists playing their own games prior to Armageddon ... Anyway, congratulations, the message is getting through, loud and clear (as loud as Atzmon's sax I guess).
> >>
> >> My tongue is back in its place now, so I can:)
> >>
> >> cheers
> >> XXXXX
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: tony greenstein
> >> Sent: 04 January 2008 16:18
> >> To: Brighton Unemployed Workers Ct
> >> Subject: Re: Anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon Meeting on Monday 7th January
> >> Cancelled> >>
> >>
> >> PRESS RELEASE
> >>
> >> 'Despite his abhorrent views, we did not call for the meeting to be cancelled as wanted him to face as large a protest demonstration as possible in order that he should understand the depth of opposition to his views. Nonetheless we welcome the fact that Brighthelm has cancelled this meeting (They did no such thing. The organiser spared them being harassed by you. Most people are not used to the fascist control tactics you use, because gatherings between individuals is a guaranteed right, or so they thought. But Francis was being kind to them and assuming the harassment full on and personally. You only have him to thank, and the meeting goes on, there is nothing you can do to stop it) as church premises are probably the least appropriate venue for a meeting of this kind.
> >>
> >> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX wrote: Just had this
> >> email from Tony.
> >> XXXXXX
Summing it up: Gilad was booked for an speaking and musical event. It was to take place at a public venue. Tony didn't like that and decided he had to act. I really hope he puts just as much effort into every event that a Zionist holds in his town, just to be consistent. He contacted a journalist friend so that an article could be written that was admittedly a cut and paste job of an article that Tony has been recycling himself for over a year. Tony was found sticking flyers to the walls of the venue (a church) and threatened that there would be a picket should the event take place. Not wanting to cause undue stress to the venue, the organiser himself decided to move the performance to another place, a private residence, so that the organiser would bear all the burden of the harassment himself. (That the harassment should cease is simply not to be considered, knowing the subject involved, and it will be interesting to see if Tony decides to picket a private residence!!!). There was no pressure exerted upon the organiser, as it was his own choice to assume all the burden coming from harassment and spare others. It is easy to lie when you believe people won't find out the facts. But, Peacepalestine likes facts and has no trouble finding them. Rotten things tend to smell, and when Tony sells his fish, they stink.
Things should have ended with the change of venue, the harassment and the lies should have ended, shouldn't they? No. Tony does not want Gilad to speak in his town, and he takes the venue change as a personal victory. He's been gloating and bragging that his battle is won.
Tony, all you have been doing is spreading false information! THIS is the letter that you sent around to dozens of individuals. Obviously, not all of them agree with you, and some of them are absolutely disgusted at what you are doing and the way you are doing it. Some of them are fed up with your tactics and the damage you bring to any kind of unity that people should have regarding speaking out on the issues. Some people don't take things sitting down, and they will not tolerate your lies, insinuations and fabrications. Permission was given for the publication of this exchange by one of the recipients. I was not asked to hide identities, email addresses, private phone numbers and other reserved information that is contained on the email either. But since I have scruples, I am obscuring the specific names. Some people will be able to figure out who the other interlocutor is on their own, but I'll hint that he signed the Euston Manifesto (which is a lobby group in the UK to protect Israel interests from the "left" ahahahahaha!) and is a regular commenter of Engage. He doesn't even support the boycott against Israel, but none of this bothers Tony. It is Gilad who is the danger to the Palestinian people..... BEWARE OF THE LIES AND FABRICATION! Most of what Tony has written is untrue and not factual. Privvy to a bit of inside info, I'll mention a few details in RED
Date: 2008/01/05 Sat AM 01:50:41 GMT From: tony greenstein
> >> To: xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> cc:
> >> Subject: Re: FW: Anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon Meeting on Monday 7th January
> >> Cancelled
> >>
> >> I went for a meal with my kids and the journalist and her child tonight. Apparently Atzmon has been bombarding her with phone calls, (Gilad made one phone call to the journalist) threatening libel etc. Clearly he's very upset at what's happened in Brighton. Tee hee. I gather he wasn't very complimentary about me or Sue Blackwell (Jean didn't know who she was (Tony, what kind of Boycott campaigner are you if a journalist in your own town doesn't know about the academic boycott that was supposedly lead by Sue Blackwell? And this kind of shows the "impact" of Sue's campaign. I don't know if this news will make her happy) but that didn't stop Atzmon venting his spleen). I felt sorry for her because Atzmon is vile beyond comparison. Georgina Henry, editor the Guardian's CIF had a similar experience of this man. (So now Georgina is your Heroine? But at least she realised that journalistic deontology would obligate her to have a person who was being falsely quoted and taken out of context to present his defense to the accusations, which she then did. Either that, or her paper would face a lawsuit. She is far from stupid). But I feel pleased at a good week's work. (And I'm sure those in Gaza are thanking you).
> >> Yes I know it was tongue in cheek but then churches today are somewhat
> >> different places to their counterparts in the Middle Ages.
> >>
> >> cheers
> >>
> >> Tony
> >>
> >> XXXXXXXXXXXX wrote:
> >> "as church premises are probably the least appropriate venue for a meeting of this kind" - with my tongue firmly in my cheek, indeed both my cheeks, I'm going in for a spot of mischief making but only in this email (no further) ... I couldn't help reflecting that not all that long ago (e.g. middle ages, or Martin Luther &c) church premises were EXACTLY the sort of venues ... &c &c ..... But I appreciate you have to be diplomatic, and anyway, all that sort of thing is now behind them ... er.... except for a few very odd diehards and Christian Zionists playing their own games prior to Armageddon ... Anyway, congratulations, the message is getting through, loud and clear (as loud as Atzmon's sax I guess).
> >>
> >> My tongue is back in its place now, so I can
> >>
> >> cheers
> >> XXXXX
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: tony greenstein
> >> Sent: 04 January 2008 16:18
> >> To: Brighton Unemployed Workers Ct
> >> Subject: Re: Anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon Meeting on Monday 7th January
> >> Cancelled> >>
> >>
> >> PRESS RELEASE
> >>
> >> 'Despite his abhorrent views, we did not call for the meeting to be cancelled as wanted him to face as large a protest demonstration as possible in order that he should understand the depth of opposition to his views. Nonetheless we welcome the fact that Brighthelm has cancelled this meeting (They did no such thing. The organiser spared them being harassed by you. Most people are not used to the fascist control tactics you use, because gatherings between individuals is a guaranteed right, or so they thought. But Francis was being kind to them and assuming the harassment full on and personally. You only have him to thank, and the meeting goes on, there is nothing you can do to stop it) as church premises are probably the least appropriate venue for a meeting of this kind.
> >>
> >> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX wrote: Just had this
> >> email from Tony.
> >> XXXXXX
> >> ======
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: tony greenstein
> >> Sent: 04 January 2008 16:18
> >> To: Brighton Unemployed Workers Ct
> >> Subject: Re: Anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon Meeting on Monday 7th January
> >> Cancelled (LIE AND FABRICATION)> >>
> >>
> >> We are pleased to announce that Brighthelm Church & Community Centre
> >> have confirmed that the meeting that was going to be held with award
> >> winning jazz player Gilad Atzmon, a well-known anti-Semite, has been
> >> cancelled as being inappropriate for the venue in question. (The meeting has not been cancelled and especially NOT for that reason! Fabrication!!)
> >>
> >> When the Brighthelm management became aware of the article in the local
> >> Argus of 29-30th December 07, they immediately decided to cancel the
> >> booking. (FALSE!!!! Ask them yourself how it went. Or better yet, re-read the email from Francis. If you lost your copy, there is one on Peacepalestine to read).
> >>
> >> It should be noted that at no stage did we ask the Brighthelm to cancel
> >> the event or indeed want them to do so as we would have preferred that
> >> Atzmon was brought face to face with the overwhelming hostility of people
> >> to his ideas of Jewish conspiracy theories etc. (NO COMMENT IS POSSIBLE. now MY tongue is in my cheek)
> >>
> >> Tony Greenstein
> >>
> >> PRESS RELEASE
> >> Anti-Semitic Speaker Gilad Atzmon Banned (Banned? Learn your terms.. it's called gig changes venue)
> >> Brighthelm Community Centre Cancels Meeting
> >>
> >> Gilad Atzmon, the notorious anti-Semite and award winning jaz player, (Is this a subliminal blunder, shall you ask your interlocutor, as I thought YOU were a JAZ player)
> >> highlighted in the Brighton & Hove Argus article by Jean Calder on
> >> December 29-30th was due to speak at the Brighthelm Church & Community
> >> Centre on Monday January 7th 2008.
> >>
> >> After being made aware of the controversy, the authorities at
> >> Brighthelm have decided that it would not be appropriate for such a
> >> meeting to go ahead at the Centre.
> >>
> >> Tony Greenstein, Secretary of Brighton & Hove Unemployed Workers Centre
> >> and a founding member of Palestine Solidarity Campaign locally and
> >> nationally stated:
> >>
> >> 'Gilad Atzmon has been widely criticised in the media for his
> >> anti-Semitic comments. He was reported in the Guardian of 17th April 2005
> >> as saying that ''I'm not going to say whether it is right or not to burn
> >> down a synagogue, I can see that it is a rational act.'
> >> http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1461699,00.html
> >> Atzmon has consistently attacked all Jews, whether or not they are
> >> supporters of the Israeli state, as 'crypto-Zionists' and openly
> >> advocated the idea of a world Jewish conspiracy as well as justifying the
> >> Nazi holocaust. (The lies, bullshit, fabrication and falsification are simply too many here to list individually. Those familiar with this blog know what they are, in detail!)
> >>
> >> 'Despite his abhorrent views, we did not call for the meeting to be
> >> cancelled as wanted him to face as large a protest demonstration as
> >> possible in order that he should understand the depth of opposition to
> >> his views. Nonetheless we welcome the fact that Brighthelm has cancelled
> >> this meeting as church premises are probably the least appropriate venue
> >> for a meeting of this kind.
> >>
> >> '
> >> For Immediate Release
> >> For further information contact: Tony Greenstein
> >> PHONE
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: tony greenstein
> >> Sent: 04 January 2008 16:18
> >> To: Brighton Unemployed Workers Ct
> >> Subject: Re: Anti-Semite Gilad Atzmon Meeting on Monday 7th January
> >> Cancelled (LIE AND FABRICATION)> >>
> >>
> >> We are pleased to announce that Brighthelm Church & Community Centre
> >> have confirmed that the meeting that was going to be held with award
> >> winning jazz player Gilad Atzmon, a well-known anti-Semite, has been
> >> cancelled as being inappropriate for the venue in question. (The meeting has not been cancelled and especially NOT for that reason! Fabrication!!)
> >>
> >> When the Brighthelm management became aware of the article in the local
> >> Argus of 29-30th December 07, they immediately decided to cancel the
> >> booking. (FALSE!!!! Ask them yourself how it went. Or better yet, re-read the email from Francis. If you lost your copy, there is one on Peacepalestine to read).
> >>
> >> It should be noted that at no stage did we ask the Brighthelm to cancel
> >> the event or indeed want them to do so as we would have preferred that
> >> Atzmon was brought face to face with the overwhelming hostility of people
> >> to his ideas of Jewish conspiracy theories etc. (NO COMMENT IS POSSIBLE. now MY tongue is in my cheek)
> >>
> >> Tony Greenstein
> >>
> >> PRESS RELEASE
> >> Anti-Semitic Speaker Gilad Atzmon Banned (Banned? Learn your terms.. it's called gig changes venue)
> >> Brighthelm Community Centre Cancels Meeting
> >>
> >> Gilad Atzmon, the notorious anti-Semite and award winning jaz player, (Is this a subliminal blunder, shall you ask your interlocutor, as I thought YOU were a JAZ player)
> >> highlighted in the Brighton & Hove Argus article by Jean Calder on
> >> December 29-30th was due to speak at the Brighthelm Church & Community
> >> Centre on Monday January 7th 2008.
> >>
> >> After being made aware of the controversy, the authorities at
> >> Brighthelm have decided that it would not be appropriate for such a
> >> meeting to go ahead at the Centre.
> >>
> >> Tony Greenstein, Secretary of Brighton & Hove Unemployed Workers Centre
> >> and a founding member of Palestine Solidarity Campaign locally and
> >> nationally stated:
> >>
> >> 'Gilad Atzmon has been widely criticised in the media for his
> >> anti-Semitic comments. He was reported in the Guardian of 17th April 2005
> >> as saying that ''I'm not going to say whether it is right or not to burn
> >> down a synagogue, I can see that it is a rational act.'
> >> http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1461699,00.html
> >> Atzmon has consistently attacked all Jews, whether or not they are
> >> supporters of the Israeli state, as 'crypto-Zionists' and openly
> >> advocated the idea of a world Jewish conspiracy as well as justifying the
> >> Nazi holocaust. (The lies, bullshit, fabrication and falsification are simply too many here to list individually. Those familiar with this blog know what they are, in detail!)
> >>
> >> 'Despite his abhorrent views, we did not call for the meeting to be
> >> cancelled as wanted him to face as large a protest demonstration as
> >> possible in order that he should understand the depth of opposition to
> >> his views. Nonetheless we welcome the fact that Brighthelm has cancelled
> >> this meeting as church premises are probably the least appropriate venue
> >> for a meeting of this kind.
> >>
> >> '
> >> For Immediate Release
> >> For further information contact: Tony Greenstein
> >> PHONE
Labels: activism, anti-Semitism, Atzmon, gatekeeping, journalism, lobbying
Friday, December 28, 2007
Christians United For Israel Summit ...(and some say there ain't no lobby?)
Click over the image to enlarge it. Well worth the effort!What follows is a very strange document. It is page 22 of the October edition of the glossy booklet by Christians United for Israel, a lobby that claims it has 50 million members and 5 million Jewish sympathisers. Now, there are many who say, "Lobby? NO WAY!" I ask them to read this document which is the (claimed) testimonial of a young Jewish university student who attended their DC Summit. I have a few doubts that it's bona fide, because the grammatical errors you see - such as a comma before 'and' in a three part clause - are carried through in the rest of the booklet, which has as its publisher John and Diana Hagee and its writers people like David Brog (executive director of CUFI, executive at AOL, proud Jew and author of the article about Randy Travis and Joe Lieberman, "Separated at Birth" and Gary Bauer.) The young man has a secret identity, or else he's not in the habit of signing his name when making a testimonial, highly irregular! But, there are some very interesting elements in this letter, fake or not.
1) The student does not say he is an Israeli citizen, but a Jew, and he wanted to go with a Kippah just to show his "gratitude for all the support these people were giving us". Us. Hmm...
2) He says the place turned into a Mega-Church. I wonder if he's ever been in one. First of all, generally Jewish people do not enter into Christian churches, and if they do, wouldn't they expect there to be prayer and not political rallies? Instead we have this:
3) American and Israeli flags, the name of Jesus not mentioned even once the entire night. Although he contradicts himself later!! (They need a professional "proofreader and fact checker", methinks).
4) It is a lobby. This is stated very clearly, and every Congressman and Senator will get a visit from these people. "lobbying in support of Israel and the Jewish people". It is explicitly stated.
5) There is an evident racism in all of this. People treat him like he is a carnival freak, and he's glad to play the part. They hug him "because I'm Jewish... asking me to pray for them, telling me I was blessed by God".
6) The voice of the Jewish people in America (yes, Jewish) is the Church of Jesus Christ. What church is that? I'd like to know. Sounds like a strange Church if it's got American and Israeli flags and no crosses or turns the teachings of Jesus (oops, Yehoshua) on its head. Jesus would never have said, "let us pray for the destruction of our enemies". Quite the opposite. It's in their Bibles, if they know how to read.
7) The usage of the term GOYIM (all caps in the original, in fact, no changes were made to the original, as anyone can see from the image), and the other derogatory self-reference of the Christians.
8) The comparison of Iran to Germany and Ahmedinejad to Hitler needs no further comment. Just note it there and see how it is used in propaganda of all the lobbies, as well as being the foreign policy of Israel based on its usage of these images.
If that ain't a lobby, I will eat my hat, scarf and gloves.
mary
ONE MORE INTERESTING ELEMENT! Thanks to the attentive readers of Peacepalestine, more strange things jump out. James Bowen, the dedicated webmaster of Palestine Information with Provenance clicked on the image and was more careful and attentive than I was in transcribing. He wrote:
Mary
There is an interesting little detail on the picture you mentioned in your blog. Look at the signature given for the piece:
--Shalom - Student at Yeshira University
Note -- YeshiRa, not YeshiVa.
There is no such place as Yeshira University, although there is a Yeshiva University in New York.
Whoever compiles the stuff for the CUFI newsletter seems to be quite ignorant.
Christians United for Israel
Washington, D.C. Israel Summit
Testimonial
Last night was one of the most amazing nights of my life… I wish every Jewish person could have witnessed what I did… it was unreal.
On a whim, I grabbed two friends and attended “A Night to Honor Israel” hosted by “Christians United for Israel” at the Washington Convention Center. My main goal was simply to show up wearing a kipah and show my gratitude for all of the support these people were giving us. The room was filled with over 3,000 people. There were priests, rabbis, songs, prayers, awards, and speeches (Bibi Netanyahu, Newt Gingrich, Dore Gold, Sallai Meridor and many more). The room essentially turned into a Mega-Church, with thousands of Christians shouting and praising God, praying for the protection, safety, and prosperity of Israel and the Jewish people, and for the destruction of the enemies of America and Israel, while waving American and Israeli flags and listening to the sound of shofars being blasted. And yet the name “Jesus” was not mentioned once the entire night. (Yehoshua of Nazareth was said ONCE at the very end of the event)
As I write this there are thousands descending on the Hill, in the offices of every Congressman and Senator, thousands of Christians lobbying in support of Israel and the Jewish people – and you thought AIPAC was strong, the numbers of Christians United for Israel around America is quoted at being over 50 MILLION people!
By the end of the night, I had met so many people who just were hugging me because I was Jewish, giving me their names and asking me to pray for them, telling me I was blessed by God. I also met the Executive Director of CUFI, who said he would love to come and speak at Yeshiva University. What is contained in this email is just a small drop in a very large sea of awe and emotion from one of the most incredible events I have ever been to in my life. Here are just a few quotes:
“The sleeping giant has awakened and the Jewish people have a new voice in America – the Church of Jesus Christ… 50 million Bible Believing Christians and 5 million American Jews are a match made in heaven.”
“The Bible Belt is Israel’s Safety Belt!”
“We former pagans, former idol-worshipping heathen GOYIM now stand united with the Jewish people. Hashem has done great things, is doing great things, and will do great things for Israel! Baruch Hashem!”
“We are currently in 1936, Iran is Germany and Ahmadinejad is Hitler. The silence of the Christian Church during WWII was inexcusable. Today, gather with me and say, ‘Never again, not on our watch!’ This time the Church will not be silent!”
“Jimmy Carter has accused us of having a ‘hidden agenda.’ We have operated for years under the eyes of the Jewish community and I am proud to say that there are Jews here tonight! How much money from terrorists goes to your Fund For Peace Mr. Carter? If anyone has a hidden agenda, it is you!”
Never before have I seen such a sanctification of God’s name, a kiddush hashem, and I was so proud to be a part of something so warm, wonderful, and amazing. It was worth coming to DC just for this event – it was life altering.
--Shalom – Student at Yeshiva University
Labels: hasbara, holocaust, Iran, Israel, journalism, lobbying, propaganda, US, Zionism
Thursday, December 13, 2007
"Save Darfur" Campaign is a PR Scam
Ten Reasons Why "Save Darfur" is a PR Scam to Justify the Next US Oil and Resource Wars in Africa by Bruce Dixon
Global Research, December 12, 2007
blackagendareport.com - 2007-11-27
The star-studded hue and cry to "Save Darfur" and "stop the genocide" has gained enormous traction in U.S. media along with bipartisan support in Congress and the White House. But the Congo, with ten to twenty times as many African dead over the same period is not called a "genocide" and passes almost unnoticed. Sudan sits atop lakes of oil. It has large supplies of uranium, and other minerals, significant water resources, and a strategic location near still more African oil and resources. The unasked question is whether the nation's Republican and Democratic foreign policy elite are using claims of genocide, and appeals for "humanitarian intervention" to grease the way for the next oil and resource wars on the African continent.
The regular manufacture and the constant maintenance of false realities in the service of American empire is a core function of the public relations profession and the corporate news media. Whether it's fake news stories about wonder drugs and how toxic chemicals are good for you, bribed commentators and journalists discoursing on the benefits of No Child Left Behind, Hollywood stars advocating military intervention to save African orphans, or slick propaganda campaigns employing viral marketing techniques to reach out to college students, bloggers, churches and ordinary citizens, it pays to take a close look behind the facade.
Among the latest false realities being pushed upon the American people are the simplistic pictures of Black vs. Arab genocide in Darfur, and the proposed solution: a robust US-backed or US-led military intervention in Western Sudan. Increasing scrutiny is being focused upon the "Save Darfur" lobby and the Save Darfur Coalition; upon its founders, its finances, its methods and motivations and its truthfulness. In the spirit of furthering that examination we here present ten reasons to suspect that the "Save Darfur" campaign is a PR scam to justify US intervention in Africa.
1. It wouldn't be the first Big Lie our government and media elite told us to justify a war.
Elders among us can recall the Tonkin Gulf Incident, which the US government deliberately provoked to justify initiation of the war in Vietnam. This rationale was quickly succeeded by the need to help the struggling infant "democracy" in South Vietnam, and the still useful "fight 'em over there so we don't have to fight 'em over here" nonsense. More recently the bombings, invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq have been variously explained by people on the public payroll as necessary to "get Bin Laden" as revenge for 9-11, as measures to take "the world's most dangerous weapons" from the hands of "the world's most dangerous regimes", as measures to enable the struggling Iraqi "democracy" stand on its own two feet, and necessary because it's still better to "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here".
2. It wouldn't even be the first time the U.S. government and media elite employed "genocide prevention" as a rationale for military intervention in an oil-rich region.
The 1995 US and NATO military intervention in the former Yugoslavia was supposedly a "peacekeeping" operation to stop a genocide. The lasting result of that campaign is Camp Bondsteel, one of the largest military bases on the planet. The U.S. is practically the only country in the world that maintains military bases outside its own borders. At just under a thousand acres, Camp Bondsteel offers the US military the ability to pre-position large quantities of equipment and supplies within striking distance of Caspian oil fields, pipeline routes and relevant sea lanes. It is also widely believed to be the site of one of the US's secret prison and torture facilities.
3. If stopping genocide in Africa really was on the agenda, why the focus on Sudan with 200,000 to 400,000 dead rather than Congo with five million dead?
"The notion that a quarter million Darfuri dead are a genocide and five million dead Congolese are not is vicious and absurd," according to Congolese activist Nita Evele. "What's happened and what is still happening in Congo is not a tribal conflict and it's not a civil war. It is an invasion. It is a genocide with a death toll of five million, twenty times that of Darfur, conducted for the purpose of plundering Congolese mineral and natural resources."
More than anything else, the selective and cynical application of the term "genocide" to Sudan, rather than to the Congo where ten to twenty times as many Africans have been murdered reveals the depth of hypocrisy around the "Save Darfur" movement. In the Congo, where local gangsters, mercenaries and warlords along with invading armies from Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Angola engage in slaughter, mass rape and regional depopulation on a scale that dwarfs anything happening in Sudan, all the players eagerly compete to guarantee that the extraction of vital coltan for Western computers and cell phones, the export of uranium for Western reactors and nukes, along with diamonds, gold, copper, timber and other Congolese resources continue undisturbed.
Former UN Ambassador Andrew Young and George H.W. Bush both serve on the board of Barrick Gold, one of the largest and most active mining concerns in war-torn Congo. Evidently, with profits from the brutal extraction of Congolese wealth flowing to the West, there can be no Congolese "genocide" worth noting, much less interfering with. For their purposes, U.S. strategic planners may regard their Congolese model as the ideal means of capturing African wealth at minimal cost without the bother of official U.S. boots on the ground.
4. It's all about Sudanese oil.
Sudan, and the Darfur region in particular, sit atop a lake of oil. But Sudanese oil fields are not being developed and drilled by Exxon or Chevron or British Petroleum. Chinese banks, oil and construction firms are making the loans, drilling the wells, laying the pipelines to take Sudanese oil where they intend it to go, calling far too many shots for a twenty-first century in which the U.S. aspires to control the planet's energy supplies. A U.S. and NATO military intervention will solve that problem for U.S. planners.
5. It's all about Sudanese uranium, gum arabic and other natural resources.
Uranium is vital to the nuclear weapons industry and an essential fuel for nuclear reactors. Sudan possesses high quality deposits of uranium. Gum arabic is an essential ingredient in pharmaceuticals, candies and beverages like Coca-Cola and Pepsi, and Sudanese exports of this commodity are 80% of the world's supply. When comprehensive U.S. sanctions against the Sudanese regime were being considered in 1997, industry lobbyists stepped up and secured an exemption in the sanctions bill to guarantee their supplies of this valuable Sudanese commodity. But an in-country U.S. and NATO military presence is a more secure guarantee that the extraction of Sudanese resources, like those of the Congo, flow westward to the U.S. and the European Union.
6. It's all about Sudan's strategic location.
Sudan sits opposite Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, where a large fraction of the world's easily extracted oil will be for a few more years. Darfur borders on Libya and Chad, with their own vast oil resources, is within striking distance of West and Central Africa, and is a likely pipeline route. The Nile River flows through Sudan before reaching Egypt, and Southern Sudan has water resources of regional significance too. With the creation of AFRICOM, the new Pentagon command for the African continent, the U.S. has made open and explicit its intention to plant a strategic footprint on the African continent. From permanent Sudanese bases, the U.S. military could influence the politics and ecocomies of Africa for a generation to come.
7. The backers and founders of the "Save Darfur" movement are the well-connected and well-funded U.S. foreign policy elite.
According to a copyrighted Washington Post story this summer
"The "Save Darfur (Coalition) was created in 2005 by two groups concerned about genocide in the African country - the American Jewish World Service and the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum...
"The coalition has a staff of 30 with expertise in policy and public relations. Its budget was about $15 million in the most recent fiscal year...
"Save Darfur will not say exactly how much it has spent on its ads, which this week have attempted to shame China, host of the 2008 Olympics, into easing its support for Sudan. But a coalition spokeswoman said the amount is in the millions of dollars."
Though the "Save Darfur" PR campaign employs viral marketing techniques, reaching out to college students, even to black bloggers, it is not a grassroots affair, as were the movement against apartheid and in support of African liberation movements in South Africa, Namibia, Angola and Mozambique a generation ago. Top heavy with evangelical Christians who preach the coming war for the end of the world, and with elements known for their uncritical support of Israeli rejectionism in the Middle East, the Save Darfur movement is clearly an establishment affair, a propaganda campaign that spends millions of dollars each month to manufacture consent for US military intervention in Africa under the cloak of stopping or preventing genocide.
8. None of the funds raised by the "Save Darfur Coalition", the flagship of the "Save Darfur Movement" go to help needy Africans on the ground in Darfur, according to stories in both the Washington Post and the New York Times.
"None of the money collected by Save Darfur goes to help the victims and their families. Instead, the coalition pours its proceeds into advocacy efforts that are primarily designed to persuade governments to act."
9. "Save Darfur" partisans in the U.S. are not interested in political negotiations to end the conflict in Darfur.
President Bush has openly and repeatedly attempted to throw monkey wrenches at peace negotiations to end the war in Darfur. Even pro-intervention scholars and humanitarian organizations active on the ground have criticized the U.S. for endangering humanitarian relief workers, and for effectively urging rebel parties in Darfur to refuse peace talks and hold out for U.S. and NATO intervention on their behalf.
The slick, well financed and nearly seamless PR campaign simplistically depicts the conflict as strictly a racial affair, in which Arabs, generally despised in the US media anyway, are exterminating the black population of Sudan. In the make-believe world it creates, there is no room for negotiation. But in fact, many of Sudan's 'Arabs", even the Janjiweed, are also black. In any case, they were armed and unleashed by a government which has the power to disarm them if it chooses, and can also negotiate in good faith if it chooses.
Negotiations are never a guarantee of anything, but refusal to participate in negotiations, as the U.S. appears to be urging the rebels in Darfur to do, and as the "Save Darfur" PR campaign justifies, avoids any path to a political settlement among Sudanese, leaving open only the road of U.S and NATO military intervention.
10. Blackwater and other U.S. mercenary contractors, the unofficial armed wings of the Republican party and the Pentagon are eagerly pitching their services as part of the solution to the Darfur crisis.
"Chris Taylor, head of strategy for Blackwater, says his company has a database of thousands of former police and military officers for security assignments. He says Blackwater personnel could set up perimeters and guard Darfurian villages and refugee camps in support of the U.N. Blackwater officials say it would not take many men to fend off the Janjaweed, a militia that is supported by the Sudanese government and attacks villages on camelback."
Apparently Blackwater doesn't need to come to the Congo, where hunger and malnutrition, depopulation, mass rape and the disappearance of schools, hospitals and civil society into vast law free zones ruled by an ever-changing cast of African proxies (like the son of the late and unlamented Idi Amin), all under a veil of complicit media silence already constitute the perfect business-friendly environment for siphoning off the vast wealth of that country at minimal cost.
Look for the adoption of the Congolese model across the wide areas of Africa that U.S. strategic planners call "ungoverned spaces". Just don't expect to see details on the evening news, or hear about them from Oprah, George Clooney or Angelina Jolie.
Global Research Articles by Bruce Dixon
Please support Global Research Global Research relies on the financial support of its readers.
Your endorsement is greatly appreciated
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization.To become a Member of Global ResearchThe CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com© Copyright Bruce Dixon, blackagendareport.com, 2007
The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7594
Labels: activism, Africa, Arab countries, Darfur, lobbying, military
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Gilad Atzmon - Proxy and Proximity
When the Levy Breaks: in the photo, Tony Blair and Lord Levy enjoying a carefree moment.Back in October 2003 the Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad gave a speech at the Organization of the Islamic Conference summit wherein he said that “Jews rule the world by proxy…. they get others to fight and die for them."
These very alarming, yet explicit, statements made by a head of state drew some harsh criticism from state leaders as well as from influential Jews around the world who warned that it could spark more violence against Jews.
Clearly, the anticipated anti-Semitic tidal wave has yet to make it to any recognized shore. However, we have recently learned that more or less around the same time PM Mahathir that was speaking to his fellow Islamic leaders, in another continent, located at pretty much the other side of the planet, in a country that was already engaged in some fierce fighting to maintain Israel’s regional interests and hegemony, two prominent Zionist tycoons met the British Prime Minister for a ‘drink’. According to the Daily Telegraph, at a central London Hotel “David Abrahams, the property developer…entered a room already packed with Cabinet ministers and the party's most prized donors. Moments after arriving, Mr Abrahams was spotted across the crowded room by Lord Levy, the party's chief fundraiser. The Labour peer immediately left his group and swept over to greet Mr Abrahams like a long-lost friend with none other than Tony Blair in tow.”
We learned as well that David Abrahams, who had been affiliated then with the two rabid Zionist lobbies (‘Labour Friends of Israel‘ as well the ‘Jewish Labour‘) had donated £650.000 to the Labour Party by proxy, using other people’s names. This happened around the time the Labour Party took Britain into an illegal war based on a ‘sexed up’ WMD dossier, that according to some reports was partially put together in Israel.
Some would have liked to think that the time proximity between Abrahams’ unlawful activity and the Iraq invasion were a coincidence but then, last week Abrahams admitted to the JC (Jewish Chronicle) that “he had made his donations secretly so as to avoid accusations of his being part of a ‘Jewish conspiracy’.” Abrahams foolishly admitted that he was aware that his conduct could have been interpreted as a ‘Jewish conspiracy’. In fact, I myself think that it is far worse. In a recent piece I have argued that considering the British people’s public opposition to the war, and taking into account the scale of devastation this war brought on the Iraqi people, Abrahams’, Levy’s and their friends’ interference with British politics is no less than a ‘plot against the British People’.
And yet, I must admit that David Abrahams is a charming geezer. If he weren’t there, someone would have had to invent him. Being a chatterer, he just cannot stop himself from speaking his mind and sharing his authentic concerns with the rest of the world. Abrahams is probably one of the best glimpses we have ever had into the mind of a Zionist lobbyist.
Following Abrahams’ JC confession, we probably are entitled to deduce that unlawful conduct is OK as long as no one really knows about it. Abrahams, obviously succumbed to the most literal pragmatic interpretation of the liberal legalistic understanding of innocence: ‘One is innocent until proved otherwise’. This interpretation is commonly used by criminals and gangsters in their first press conferences.
However, gangsters tend to cling to this argument before they are fully indicted or confronted with real evidence related to their crimes. In most cases, gangsters are aware of the notion of ethics and its implications. Though they tend not to employ or follow ethical judgments, they recognize the possibility that other beings may do just that. Abrahams, on the other hand, seems to be totally foreign to the notion of ethics and any form of moral thinking. As he himself revealed in the JC article, it wasn’t the non-ethical behavior that concerned him, but rather what the Goyim may say. Rather than trying to explain why he unlawfully shoved money to a political party, he attempted to tell us why he did it in secrecy. The only way to interpret Abrahams’ strange confession is to remember that the sleaze master tycoon was talking to the leading British Jewish weekly. It is rather possible that he was trying to calm his fellow Jewish brothers down by addressing their serious and justified concerns. Abrahams spoke to the JC believing that the Goyim (Guardian, Independent and the BBC) may never notice what he had to say. He was evidently wrong. At the moment, for some obvious reasons, the Jewish press is closely monitored. In fact, the Guardian reported about Abrahams’ confession to the JC a day before JC made it to the news shops.
However, now Abrahams has been exposed, and as we learn from the Daily Telegraph’s article above, the Sadchen (matchmaker) in this disastrous affair was no other than Lord Levy, the Labour ‘honorary cash machine’. This all happened at the early days of the Iraqi invasion at the time British soldiers were fighting and giving their lives to reduce the last defiant enemies of Israel into dust.
I have good reason to believe that Back in October 2003, Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad didn’t know much about Lord Levy and Tycoon Abrahams, thus when he said that “Jews rule the world by proxy” he was just guessing and exaggerating. Let’s face the facts PM Mohamad: Jews do not run the world by proxy, they just run the Labour Party (by proxy).
***
Interestingly enough, amongst my many sins, back in May 2003, a few days after Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” speech I was performing a short musical set in a Bar Mitzvah in Northwest London. Just before my set a Rabbi performed a Torah spiritual oratory spectacle in which he said:
“Never in our (Jewish) history have we endured such a great victory with such a little effort.”
The Rabbi’s moral was rather clear yet at the same time devastating: ‘once again we (the Jews) have managed ‘to get others to fight and die for us’. Like PM Mahathir, the Rabbi was obviously misinformed, in fact he was guessing. At the time the he couldn’t know about the serious ‘efforts’ made by Lord Levy and Proxy donator Mr Abrahams. He didn’t know that some Jewish tycoons invested big money in secrecy towards what was mistakenly seen at the time as ‘effortless victory’.
In an old paper of mine I tried to grasp the metaphysics of Zionist global lobbying:
“…there is no geographical centre to the Zionist endeavour.” I said there. “It is hard to determine where the centre of Zionist decision making is. Is it in Jerusalem? In the Knesset? …. In the Mossad? Or maybe in the Anti-Defamation League offices in America? It might as well be somewhere in Wall Street. Who knows?”
But then, it is of course more than possible that there is no decision making process at all. The beauty of a network operative system is that not a single operator within the network is fully familiar with the full scope of the network but is only aware of his personal role within it. This is probably the biggest strength of the Zionist movement.”
Abrahams and Levy probably didn’t conspire, it is even possible that they themselves didn’t know what they were buying. They acted separately and autonomously within a network. This network is very powerful and it is capable of achieving a lot, yet, when things go wrong, they can as well go terribly wrong. This is exactly the kind of concerns Abrahams shared with the JC the other day. It is the fear of the ‘other’, the deep sense of genuine Jewish guilt. When Abrahams told the JC “I didn’t want Jewish money and the Labour Party being put together”, it was clear that at least in his Jewish symbolic universe ‘Jewish money’ had some bad connotations while the Labor Party was associated with some glamorous power.
Deep in his heart, Abrahams didn’t feel good. Unfortunately, it wasn’t morality that concerned him but rather being seen as a conspirator by one Goy or another. Abrahams probably knows that Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad wasn’t guessing or following the anti-Semite devil within him. ‘There was a proxy operation in place’ …. and at least momentarily other people happen to fight and die in the Zionist wars. In Abrahams’ favour it should be said that it seems as if he genuinely feels bad about it.
A new audio interview: http://ourmedia.org/node/372292
Labels: Atzmon, Israel, lobbying, UK
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Gilad Atzmon - A Plot against Britain?
Something Sleazy This Way Comes
Once again the London Jewish Chronicle happened to be well ahead of any other British media outlets. In the main article of its Friday edition, David Abrahams, the leading protagonist in the current Labour donation fiasco, tried to explain why he donated money to the Labour party by proxy.
Abrahams, who insists upon presenting himself as a charitable being, claimed that he “had made (his) donations secretly so as to avoid accusations of being part of a ‘Jewish conspiracy’.”
Yet, one may wonder why this renowned philanthropic millionaire was so concerned with issues having to do with ‘Jewish conspiracy’. I may try to offer a simple explanation. The Labour Party is not exactly a charity and Abrahams was at the time of the donation to them, a prominent activist in two major Zionist lobbies (‘Labour Friends of Israel’ and ‘Jewish Labour’).
Furthermore, four years ago, when Abrahams was donating money in secrecy via other people’s accounts, the British Labour Party was led by a warmonger who, together with his American ally, raged an illegal war against Iraq based on forged documents and false WMD accusations. It is not a secret anymore that the only country that benefited from this tragic bloodshed was Israel. Thus, it shouldn’t take us by surprise that Abrahams, at the time a Zionist campaigner, preferred to operate behind a wall of secrecy. Abrahams donated money to a party that took Britain to a war against the will of the British people.
However, Abrahams wasn’t the only philanthropist. Lord Levy, a close friend of Israel as well as an ‘honorary cash machine’ was at the time ‘No 1 Labour fund raiser’. As if this wasn’t enough to make things very complicated, Lord Goldsmith, then the Attorney General, surrendered to Blair’s pressure and gave the legal green light to war. I do not know whether Lord Goldsmith has ever been affiliated with ‘Labour Friends of Israel’ or ‘Jewish Labour’, yet, Abrahams who was affiliated with both, had good reason to be concerned. He knew that Blair’s war was designed to defeat the last pocket of Arab resistance. He knew that the illegal war was serving Israeli interests. Hence, financing its architects had better be kept hidden.
Abrahams, bless him, can’t keep his mouth shut. In the JC he continues, “The real reason I wanted to remain anonymous was that I didn’t want Jewish money and the Labour Party being put together because this is what I feared would happen. People would say there’s a Jewish conspiracy. I didn’t come into Labour just to give them money. I give money to many good causes, to Jewish charities, not just to Labour.”
Clearly the comparison between the Labour Party and ‘Jewish charities’ is interesting enough. However, one may wonder what Abrahams means when he refers to ‘Jewish money’. Is there such a thing? Is it a new currency we should get familiar with? What is the current exchange rate of this new ‘Jewish money’? While writing these lines I have noticed that in my left pocket I have a twenty pound note. Bearing in my mind my Jewish origin, I wonder whether I should regard the pounds in my pocket as ‘Jewish money’? Not really. I assume that that which makes money into Jewish is not the racial or ethnic orientation of its holder but rather the interests that are promoted with the given money.
Should Abrahams donate money to an orphanage in Baghdad or another war zone, he wouldn’t have to hide his identity and to use proxies. If he would donate his money to a universal cause, the money might cease being ‘Jewish’. Yet he donated money to a party that was carrying out an illegal war, a war that already left more than a million Iraqi civilian fatal casualties.
The political instincts of Abrahams were correct. He was sensitive enough to know how bad his donation may reflect on him and his people. However, it is now all in the open. And I may have to correct you, Abrahams, it doesn’t look like a Jewish conspiracy. If to use Philip Roth’s fictional expression, this was a ‘plot against the British people’.
New Audio Interview: http://ourmedia.org/node/372292
Once again the London Jewish Chronicle happened to be well ahead of any other British media outlets. In the main article of its Friday edition, David Abrahams, the leading protagonist in the current Labour donation fiasco, tried to explain why he donated money to the Labour party by proxy.Abrahams, who insists upon presenting himself as a charitable being, claimed that he “had made (his) donations secretly so as to avoid accusations of being part of a ‘Jewish conspiracy’.”
Yet, one may wonder why this renowned philanthropic millionaire was so concerned with issues having to do with ‘Jewish conspiracy’. I may try to offer a simple explanation. The Labour Party is not exactly a charity and Abrahams was at the time of the donation to them, a prominent activist in two major Zionist lobbies (‘Labour Friends of Israel’ and ‘Jewish Labour’).
Furthermore, four years ago, when Abrahams was donating money in secrecy via other people’s accounts, the British Labour Party was led by a warmonger who, together with his American ally, raged an illegal war against Iraq based on forged documents and false WMD accusations. It is not a secret anymore that the only country that benefited from this tragic bloodshed was Israel. Thus, it shouldn’t take us by surprise that Abrahams, at the time a Zionist campaigner, preferred to operate behind a wall of secrecy. Abrahams donated money to a party that took Britain to a war against the will of the British people.
However, Abrahams wasn’t the only philanthropist. Lord Levy, a close friend of Israel as well as an ‘honorary cash machine’ was at the time ‘No 1 Labour fund raiser’. As if this wasn’t enough to make things very complicated, Lord Goldsmith, then the Attorney General, surrendered to Blair’s pressure and gave the legal green light to war. I do not know whether Lord Goldsmith has ever been affiliated with ‘Labour Friends of Israel’ or ‘Jewish Labour’, yet, Abrahams who was affiliated with both, had good reason to be concerned. He knew that Blair’s war was designed to defeat the last pocket of Arab resistance. He knew that the illegal war was serving Israeli interests. Hence, financing its architects had better be kept hidden.
Abrahams, bless him, can’t keep his mouth shut. In the JC he continues, “The real reason I wanted to remain anonymous was that I didn’t want Jewish money and the Labour Party being put together because this is what I feared would happen. People would say there’s a Jewish conspiracy. I didn’t come into Labour just to give them money. I give money to many good causes, to Jewish charities, not just to Labour.”
Clearly the comparison between the Labour Party and ‘Jewish charities’ is interesting enough. However, one may wonder what Abrahams means when he refers to ‘Jewish money’. Is there such a thing? Is it a new currency we should get familiar with? What is the current exchange rate of this new ‘Jewish money’? While writing these lines I have noticed that in my left pocket I have a twenty pound note. Bearing in my mind my Jewish origin, I wonder whether I should regard the pounds in my pocket as ‘Jewish money’? Not really. I assume that that which makes money into Jewish is not the racial or ethnic orientation of its holder but rather the interests that are promoted with the given money.
Should Abrahams donate money to an orphanage in Baghdad or another war zone, he wouldn’t have to hide his identity and to use proxies. If he would donate his money to a universal cause, the money might cease being ‘Jewish’. Yet he donated money to a party that was carrying out an illegal war, a war that already left more than a million Iraqi civilian fatal casualties.
The political instincts of Abrahams were correct. He was sensitive enough to know how bad his donation may reflect on him and his people. However, it is now all in the open. And I may have to correct you, Abrahams, it doesn’t look like a Jewish conspiracy. If to use Philip Roth’s fictional expression, this was a ‘plot against the British people’.
New Audio Interview: http://ourmedia.org/node/372292
Labels: Atzmon, Israel, lobbying, UK
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Gilad Atzmon - Some People Never Learn the Lesson
Abrahams, Lord Levy and Mendelsohn: Some People Never Learn the LessonOn Thursday afternoon, Gordon Brown learned that he was to become only the second sitting British Prime Minister to be subject to a police investigation.
This is happening less than six months after Tony Blair had left Downing Street under the severe cloud of a police probe into the Cash for Honours affair.
For Blair it was No 1 Labour fundraiser, the Zionist Lord Levy who got him into serious trouble, for Brown it is Mr David Abrahams (in the photo, Abrahams is on the right, with an MP friend) , just another ‘Friend of Israel’ and a provincial chairman of Jewish Labour, who may be the one to finish off his political career.
Once again, the Labour Party had to admit that it erred by accepting donations from dubious sources. '”The money was not lawfully declared, so it will be returned,” said the Prime Minister, after the disclosure that Labour had benefited to the tune of more than £600,000 from a bizarre funding scheme arranged by David Abrahams, an eccentric property tycoon who decided to donate his money by proxy.
Apparently, Lord Levy and David Abrahams were not alone in dragging Labour towards yet another political disaster. The third corner in this disastrous triangle is Mr Jon Mendelsohn, a man who grasps the power of money and politics. Mr Mendelsohn, an ex-chairman of Labour Friends of Israel, is the current chief fundraiser of the Labour Party.
Seemingly and shamefully, the Labour Party did not learn its lesson following the Lord Levy ‘Cash for Honours’ scandal. Once again they let the supporters of Israel take care of their material needs.
I find myself wondering how come Labour is so heavily entangled with those ‘Friends of Israel’? However, the most crucial issue here is actually the fact that not a single British media outlet dares to ask the most important questions: what is this cabal of self-declared ‘Friends of Israel’ trying to achieve by pouring money into political parties? What is it that it is trying to buy? Where is the money coming from? Is it their own money or is it delivered by their ‘friends’ in the Israeli embassy or another Zionist apparatus?
British society is a multicultural society, this means that very many people of different ethnic and racial origins live together in peace and mutual respect. This is probably the greatest asset that the British culture can offer momentarily, a multi-ethnic society made of communities of people who treat each other with respect and tolerance. Many British Jews benefit and contribute to the British multi-ethnic society. However, within the liberal multi-cultural discourse it is ‘politically incorrect’ to associate ethnicity and unlawful acts, something that our ‘Friends of Israel’ and ‘Jewish Labour’ exploit beyond belief. Though they operate as an ethnic lobby, promoting some radical, exclusive Jewish National interests, they wouldn’t like to be exposed as such, definitely not in reference to their overwhelmingly disclosed unlawful activity.
A quick glance into the ideological fundaments the ‘Labour Friend of Israel’ makes it clear that we are dealing here with some ardent Zionist Neo-conservative worldviews: “We are fundamentally sympathetic to Israel’s position as a liberal democracy facing constant security dilemmas and existential threats”. For those who fail to understand: Israel is indeed a democracy as long as you are Jewish. Within the Israeli controlled territories, the vast majority of the Palestinians are not even citizens. Strictly speaking, the ‘Labour Friends of Israel’, “fundamentally” supports an apartheid racist Jewish state i.e. Israel. If this is not bad enough, they do just that at the heart of British politics. Moreover, they do just that without even respecting the elementary British ethical political norms.
Amid British multi-culturalism, no one in Britain dares question the clear cabal of Zionists who were fully engaged in transforming British politics into a Zionist internal affair. British press and the media is fully aware of the complexity entangled with those ‘Friends of Israel’ and their ‘fundamental sympathy’, yet, they are filling their mouths with water. Instead of standing up against this dangerous lobby that acts to ally Britain with an apartheid state, they use some sticky language, leaving the conclusions to the readers, if they are able to make up their minds on their own. They refer to Jon Mendlesohn’s affiliation within the ‘Labour Friends of Israel’, they refer to David Abrahams being a “provincial vice-chairman of the Jewish Labour Movement”.
I think that British media should be brave enough to stand up and report that there is an Israeli lobby in Britain acting under the name of “Jewish Labour” as well as ‘Labour Friends of Israel’. There is no German lobby in Britain acting under the name ‘Aryan Labour” operating as well as ‘Friends of Germany’. Nor there is a ‘Black Labour’ organisation also lobbying as the ‘Friends of Zimbabwe’. Seemingly, Zionist lobbyists are the only ones who get away with their unique form of ‘racially orientated’ lobbying activity.
Funnily enough, the only press outlet in Britain that was brave enough to confront the severe implications of the current Jewish affair was actually the leading British Jewish weekly, the JC (Jewish Chronicle).
“Fears were growing this week of an antisemitic backlash following the latest Labour Party cash scandal involving two prominent Jewish activists”, said the JC in its main article last Friday.
The JC does realise that the affair would eventually affect the community. Seemingly, the JC does not doubt the truth behind the current revelation. “The two main figures in this week’s controversy are Jon Mendelsohn, the Prime Minister’s election campaign fundraiser, and property magnate David Abrahams, who is accused of breaking the law by using third parties to disguise donations of £600,000 to Labour”, said the JC.
Yet, being the leading Jewish press outlet and addressing mainly British Jewish audience, the paper offers as well an ‘Elder of Zion’ like pretext just to try to cheer its readers. There is a “whiff of antisemitism about it”, says MP Andrew Dismore to the JC. “People are looking for links to Jewish interests and evidence of a Jewish conspiracy. The press are turning every stone to find one.”
I find myself wondering how the JC can report some clear unlawful conduct in one paragraph and then suggest a ‘Jewish conspiracy’ in the next. For those who do not realise, Abrahams and Mendelsohn are not a hidden conspiracy, their acts have been exposed in broad daylight, they are mainstream news on the front of each paper in this country, subject to police scrutiny.
“The Hendon MP said he did not believe the case would have received such intensive coverage if it did not involve Jews. The undercurrent of antisemitism is worrying.”
May I assure the ignoramus Hendon MP that an exposed cabal of Saudi businessmen trying to buy a leading British party would get at least as much attention.
Paul Usiskin, another Labour supporter and co-chair of Peace Now UK, said: “It doesn’t do the reputation of people communally linked to Israel any good to find themselves willingly or unwillingly at the centre of matters to do with politics and money.”
Once again, I find myself bewildered, this Usiskin sees things through, yet he himself involved in some Judeo- centric political activity as a lobbyer for the Zionist Peace Now UK.
“I hope,” adds Usiskin, “that in contrast to previous issues of this kind, people do not link historical relations between Jews and financial affairs.”
And I find myself wondering again, why shouldn’t they? In fact, every British citizen in general and British Jews in particular must reflect just about that because this is the crux of the issue.
Jon Benjamin, the Chief Executive of the notorious Board of Deputies, the Jewish Lobby that recently tried to shatter the career of the democratically elected Mayor of London, was there to say, “there is wide concern in this story and clearly there is a potential for it to turn against us. We have been there before.”
For a change, I agree with Jon Benjamin. Indeed you had been there before and more than once, yet somehow you never learn your lesson.
See also: GILAD ATZMON - A PLOT AGAINST BRITAIN?
Listen to Gilad Atzmon in an audio interview where he mentions this scandal and much more:
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2007/12//387156.mp3
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2007/12//387157.mp3
Another audio interview! http://ourmedia.org/node/372292
Labels: Atzmon, Israel, lobbying, UK, Zionism
Monday, November 12, 2007
What's it all about, Indy?
What's it all about, Indy? Is it just for the moment we live?
What's it all about when you sort it out, Indy?
Are we meant to take more than we give?
Or are we meant to be kind?
And if only fools are kind, Indy,
Then I guess it's wise to be cruel.
And if life belongs only to the strong, Indy,
What will you lend on an old golden rule?
Yup, I suppose some thought I would be able to finally post about events in Palestine. I even thought I would finish my study on racism issues in Italy and how it all relates to maintaining an established order of things so that power remains in the hands of the few and everyone feels insecure. I even had some other things on the back burner, Palestinian poetry and an analytical piece. Nope, it seems that those who would censor and determine the agenda for all "solidarity campaigning" have been working fulltime. As they say, the Devil never sleeps. That means that those who are committed to Palestinians, but are being vilified by this motley crew either have to allow their names to be slurred and their ideas to be buried, or they are in some way compelled to react. So, react we must.
Indymedia's discussion list has been the latest setting of a long series of ritual hangings of Gilad Atzmon, of Peacepalestine, of DYR, of the SWP, of any person, venue or container that does not cave into the pressure of a small and noisy lobby. As pointed out in previous posts on this blog, Tony Greenstein has instigated his pathological pressure (throwing the kitchen sink in there as well, with references to David Duke, the KKK, NeoNazis.... anything he can pull out of his magic hat, as if Gilad or I have EVER had any affiliation or shown any support for these entities, knowing FULL well that is is libellous bullshit, but hell, he'll try anything to get his way, hoping no one will EVER investigate) on the Indymedia list. While he as yet has not been able to have the post he and Moshe Machover have decided must be pulled taken down, despite trying to somehow influence people by the presence of "absolute solid Jewish Anti-Zionists" like Lenni Brenner, he's busy as a bee in trying to involve even other boards in the IM network. It also is sad to see the attempts at some sort of name dropping, and the fautly orchestration of it all that somehow rather than strengthening his case, makes him look more desperate.
I'd like to point out a blog that captures the highlights of the proceedings: Saying NO to the hunters of Atzmon by Ftp, one of the Indy moderators who is bravely dealing with this madness, obviously, not used to it quite yet. This is the first post, of which quite a few follow. This first post of that blog is probably the best place to start in order to follow the situation.
In addition to that, I would like to present the letter Gilad Atzmon posted to Indy, which has decided to moderate right now all the discussion on the issue, and by freezing it, is not allowing the response that someone who is being attacked at least should be granted out of courtesy. I can't determine how they run their board, but it does seem a bit odd to me that the protagonist of the dispute is not being given his chance to discuss. It's not the most regular of ways to run things. Following that, is a link to the Nov archives where some of the discussion continues, and in the end, one of my posts to their board which was sent after their freeze imposition, which asks them to investigate this Tony Greenstein and to wonder if this is the kind of person who should be telling Palestinians what is good for them. In my view, he is certainly the last person I would want "in a solidarity campaign". In coming days, some other "campaigners" will be exposed by their own words. Nothing needs to be invented. We have the truth on our side, we have their own words. They have lies and slander, and the distortion of our words and a disinformation campaign that seems to be closer to the ADL than to the PLO. May the truth prevail.
GILAD ATZMON'S LETTER TO INDYMEDIA UK (AS YET NOT ONLINE)
Dear Indymedia list members
I think that you are now having a close range opportunity to learn about the world of aggressive Zionist lobbying. You are a subject to some major assault led by ethnic campaigner Mr. Tony Greenstein. I understand those amongst you who feel as if their private lives had been torn apart. I am totally familiar with this man’s lack of manners and lack of respect for others’ privacy. I know all about it. The man has been stalking others and me for years. As a rule, I would suggest to you that if you decide to address Greenstein’s ranting seriously, you better follow the links he kindly provides and read the original quotes within their context. As far as my writings are concerned, I always do my best to differentiate between people and ideology. I do harshly criticise Jewishness, yet I avoid any form of criticism of Jewish people or of Judaism.
As you are probably aware of by now, Greenstein and his ilk have been trying to cleanse me from the Palestinian Solidarity discourse for three years. So far all they managed to do is to marginalise themselves probably beyond repair. The reason is simple. Although they insist upon suggesting that I am a “racist”, in the entirety of my work there is not a single reference whatsoever to race. I oppose any form of racial categorisation and I restrict myself to politics, ideology and identity. Indeed, I do oppose any form of secular Jewish politics and Jewish ideology in general. It may be important to mention that unlike Greenstein, who was banned from several institutes for accusations of anti -Semitism as well as violence against Jews, I have never been banned from anywhere nor have I ever criticised Jews as people or a race! As you may realize, Jews do not form a race, yet Jewish identity is somehow racially orientated.
In my writings I am highly critical of Jewish politics (Left, Centre and Right) just because I am against any form of Jewish politics because it insists that it is racially orientated. I wonder whether you realise the devastating fact that the gentiles amongst your Indy media moderators cannot join Greenstein’s ‘Jews Against Zionism’ (JAZ) because you are not ‘racially or ethnically qualified’. As well, you are not welcome at ‘Jews For Palestine’ or any other exclusive “Jewish Progressive” political group just because you fail to be listed amongst the ‘chosens’. If you find the time and energy to do it, just ask Greenstein how many Goyim or Palestinian members he has on his JAZ list… So as it seems, a bunch of five subjects who operate solely in a racially segregated political cell are calling me a racist. I honestly cannot make up my mind whether this is funny or sad. I would say both.
However, I indeed believe that Zionism and Israel are just part of the problem in Palestine. I do believe that if Israel would be left alone to face its very many enemies in the region it would be very, very quick to change its spot and become a peace-seeking nation. However this is not going to happen because some very powerful lobbies around the world support Israel. It would be fair to say that Israel’s regional power is the outcome of its support by the majority of institutionalised Jewish political bodies. Hence, if we genuinely want to address the Palestinian suffering we must scrutinise that which makes Israel so powerful. We must learn in detail the amalgam of Zionist pressure groups. But then what a miracle, once we try to do that, a group of so-called ‘progressive Jews’ insists upon silencing the topic. I think that by now you know a bit about the subject. You know how this mechanism works: a tiny group of irrelevant ethnic campaigners, people who didn’t contribute a single intellectual text to the Palestinian discourse for decades have managed to put pressure on you. They are trying to split you, to make you do things against your beliefs; this is very depressing to see; yet this is how the Jewish political world operates. Being myself an ex Jew, I am rather embarrassed to admit it.
I will try to open your eyes with a very simple analysis of the Jewish political identity. Let us assume that X is a Jewish political entity. X obviously feels free to act politically under a Jewish banner e.g. Jews for peace, Jews against Zionism, Jews for Zionism etc’. Yet, X would refuse to be criticised as a Jew. In other words, X assumes a lucid identity with a meaningful content yet he doesn’t allow anyone else to criticise this very identity. Isn’t it bizarre?
Dear list members, if you didn’t get it yet, I may make it very simple for you. This is the real meaning of Jewish ‘chosenness’; this is the essence of Jewish racial supremacy. It lets the political Jew believe that he is indeed better and far beyond criticism: Greenstein and his clan are operating as Jews, assuming that there is something in their Jewishness that allows them a special exclusive entitlement e.g. Jews against Zionism or Jews for Peace. This is obviously fine, yet once you criticise them as being an exclusive racially orientated setting they outrageously accuse you of being racist. In Short: Greenstein entitles himself to act as a Jewish political activist but he insists as well upon banning anyone else, whether a gentile or even me (an ex Jew) to question what his Jewishness may stand for.
Questions concerning Judaic Worldview
I think that you are now having a close range opportunity to learn about the world of aggressive Zionist lobbying. You are a subject to some major assault led by ethnic campaigner Mr. Tony Greenstein. I understand those amongst you who feel as if their private lives had been torn apart. I am totally familiar with this man’s lack of manners and lack of respect for others’ privacy. I know all about it. The man has been stalking others and me for years. As a rule, I would suggest to you that if you decide to address Greenstein’s ranting seriously, you better follow the links he kindly provides and read the original quotes within their context. As far as my writings are concerned, I always do my best to differentiate between people and ideology. I do harshly criticise Jewishness, yet I avoid any form of criticism of Jewish people or of Judaism.
As you are probably aware of by now, Greenstein and his ilk have been trying to cleanse me from the Palestinian Solidarity discourse for three years. So far all they managed to do is to marginalise themselves probably beyond repair. The reason is simple. Although they insist upon suggesting that I am a “racist”, in the entirety of my work there is not a single reference whatsoever to race. I oppose any form of racial categorisation and I restrict myself to politics, ideology and identity. Indeed, I do oppose any form of secular Jewish politics and Jewish ideology in general. It may be important to mention that unlike Greenstein, who was banned from several institutes for accusations of anti -Semitism as well as violence against Jews, I have never been banned from anywhere nor have I ever criticised Jews as people or a race! As you may realize, Jews do not form a race, yet Jewish identity is somehow racially orientated.
In my writings I am highly critical of Jewish politics (Left, Centre and Right) just because I am against any form of Jewish politics because it insists that it is racially orientated. I wonder whether you realise the devastating fact that the gentiles amongst your Indy media moderators cannot join Greenstein’s ‘Jews Against Zionism’ (JAZ) because you are not ‘racially or ethnically qualified’. As well, you are not welcome at ‘Jews For Palestine’ or any other exclusive “Jewish Progressive” political group just because you fail to be listed amongst the ‘chosens’. If you find the time and energy to do it, just ask Greenstein how many Goyim or Palestinian members he has on his JAZ list… So as it seems, a bunch of five subjects who operate solely in a racially segregated political cell are calling me a racist. I honestly cannot make up my mind whether this is funny or sad. I would say both.
However, I indeed believe that Zionism and Israel are just part of the problem in Palestine. I do believe that if Israel would be left alone to face its very many enemies in the region it would be very, very quick to change its spot and become a peace-seeking nation. However this is not going to happen because some very powerful lobbies around the world support Israel. It would be fair to say that Israel’s regional power is the outcome of its support by the majority of institutionalised Jewish political bodies. Hence, if we genuinely want to address the Palestinian suffering we must scrutinise that which makes Israel so powerful. We must learn in detail the amalgam of Zionist pressure groups. But then what a miracle, once we try to do that, a group of so-called ‘progressive Jews’ insists upon silencing the topic. I think that by now you know a bit about the subject. You know how this mechanism works: a tiny group of irrelevant ethnic campaigners, people who didn’t contribute a single intellectual text to the Palestinian discourse for decades have managed to put pressure on you. They are trying to split you, to make you do things against your beliefs; this is very depressing to see; yet this is how the Jewish political world operates. Being myself an ex Jew, I am rather embarrassed to admit it.
I will try to open your eyes with a very simple analysis of the Jewish political identity. Let us assume that X is a Jewish political entity. X obviously feels free to act politically under a Jewish banner e.g. Jews for peace, Jews against Zionism, Jews for Zionism etc’. Yet, X would refuse to be criticised as a Jew. In other words, X assumes a lucid identity with a meaningful content yet he doesn’t allow anyone else to criticise this very identity. Isn’t it bizarre?
Dear list members, if you didn’t get it yet, I may make it very simple for you. This is the real meaning of Jewish ‘chosenness’; this is the essence of Jewish racial supremacy. It lets the political Jew believe that he is indeed better and far beyond criticism: Greenstein and his clan are operating as Jews, assuming that there is something in their Jewishness that allows them a special exclusive entitlement e.g. Jews against Zionism or Jews for Peace. This is obviously fine, yet once you criticise them as being an exclusive racially orientated setting they outrageously accuse you of being racist. In Short: Greenstein entitles himself to act as a Jewish political activist but he insists as well upon banning anyone else, whether a gentile or even me (an ex Jew) to question what his Jewishness may stand for.
Questions concerning Judaic Worldview
I was rather surprised to learn that Greenstein, once a religiously educated boy, fails to know what the Judaic worldview is all about. Seemingly, I will have to remind him as well as enlighten you about the subject. In the ‘Judaic worldview’ there is no room for grey areas. Instead there is a clear black and white division between: RIGHT and WRONG, KOSHER and TAREF. God and false idols. In the Judaic worldview clear binary oppositions are set to differentiate between Good and Bad: One God/many idols; Truth/false; West/ the rest; Left/fascists; Us/the others. Within the Judaic worldview it is always us who are right and they who are wrong. As I mention in my paper, the Judaic worldview is an ideology, it is a mindset. Many Jews do not succumb to this ideology, thank God for that. It is rather concerning to find out how many non-Jews succumb to this ideology. For those amongst you who fail to see, it is this very element of self-centred righteousness that made Neo-conservatism into such a threatening movement.
Along the years very many Jewish intellectuals and humanists stood against the Judaic Worldview and the 3 first names that come to mind are obviously: Jesus, Spinoza and Marx. Astonishingly enough, Greenstein and his ilk are nothing but orthodox followers of the most extreme manifestation of Judaic Worldview in its ugliest form. As you can read, Tony Greenstein ‘knows what Racism is’ if you do not agree with him, you are nothing but a racist and a fascist. As his ideological twin Roland Rance wrote in an offlist email to FTP, if you are not with us, you are not in the ‘left’ - as if five British racially orientated political activists know better than you what left is all about.
As we all know, the extreme form of this very binary opposition leads towards crucifixion. As sad as it may sound, the group of people who assault you at the moment are doing nothing but nailing intellectuals and Palestinian solidarity institutions to the wood. They did it to Jeff Blankfort, one of the prominent American Palestinian Solidarity activists, they do the same to Mary Rizzo, probably one of the most adorable activists in Italy, they did it to Paul Eisen and Israel Shamir, these people have managed to crush DYR, probably the most successful Palestinian gathering in this country. These people had tried to divert the Palestinian solidarity movement and to turn it into a Judeo centric witch-hunt crusade. They believe that fighting anti-Semitism is a Palestinian priority.
I myself believe that 70% starvation in Gaza is the real issue to address. If this turns me into a Holocaust denier I can easily live with it. A few months ago this bunch of people were spat out humiliatingly at the PSC AGM (http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2007/03/report-on-2-failed-motions-by.html). The Palestinian solidarity movement around the world is a dynamic fueled by genuine empathic feelings. It changes and shapes by events. It is now concerned more and more with the tragedy that is taking place in front of our eyes rather than the Jewish Holocaust, which occurred more than 60 years ago. I do realise that the Greensteins of this world are devastated by it. It seems as if their racially exclusive political identity is losing its validity.
Along the years very many Jewish intellectuals and humanists stood against the Judaic Worldview and the 3 first names that come to mind are obviously: Jesus, Spinoza and Marx. Astonishingly enough, Greenstein and his ilk are nothing but orthodox followers of the most extreme manifestation of Judaic Worldview in its ugliest form. As you can read, Tony Greenstein ‘knows what Racism is’ if you do not agree with him, you are nothing but a racist and a fascist. As his ideological twin Roland Rance wrote in an offlist email to FTP, if you are not with us, you are not in the ‘left’ - as if five British racially orientated political activists know better than you what left is all about.
As we all know, the extreme form of this very binary opposition leads towards crucifixion. As sad as it may sound, the group of people who assault you at the moment are doing nothing but nailing intellectuals and Palestinian solidarity institutions to the wood. They did it to Jeff Blankfort, one of the prominent American Palestinian Solidarity activists, they do the same to Mary Rizzo, probably one of the most adorable activists in Italy, they did it to Paul Eisen and Israel Shamir, these people have managed to crush DYR, probably the most successful Palestinian gathering in this country. These people had tried to divert the Palestinian solidarity movement and to turn it into a Judeo centric witch-hunt crusade. They believe that fighting anti-Semitism is a Palestinian priority.
I myself believe that 70% starvation in Gaza is the real issue to address. If this turns me into a Holocaust denier I can easily live with it. A few months ago this bunch of people were spat out humiliatingly at the PSC AGM (http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2007/03/report-on-2-failed-motions-by.html). The Palestinian solidarity movement around the world is a dynamic fueled by genuine empathic feelings. It changes and shapes by events. It is now concerned more and more with the tragedy that is taking place in front of our eyes rather than the Jewish Holocaust, which occurred more than 60 years ago. I do realise that the Greensteins of this world are devastated by it. It seems as if their racially exclusive political identity is losing its validity.
Blaming The Jews
“You useless piece of shit. And you complain of bullying tactics whilst betraying a woeful ignorance of racism. What a wanker you are, whoever you are.”
(Mark Elf Jews Sans Frontieres, on an offlist email to Indy media Moderator FTP)
The above leads us to the Holocaust and questions concerning its real meaning. What is its real meaning? Is there just a single meaning? Within the Zionist worldview in which Greenstein, Machover, Rance and Elf apparently succumb to, ‘European Jewry were a bunch of wonderful innocent subjects who fell victims to a vicious regime who picked on them out of the blue’. In fact I do not aim to interfere with such an interpretation. Instead I suggest that every historical event (Nazi Judeocide included) may entail far more than just a single interpretation and meaning.
I, for instance, would expect Jews to learn a lesson from their destruction. I would expect Jews to ask themselves how come people employ so many vicious tactics against us, why is it that people hate us so much? As sad as it may sound, the abuse performed by Israel in Palestine is no different categorically to the abuse performed by Mr Mark Elf, against FTP. Indeed FTP survived it while a Palestine kid is probably far less lucky, yet it is the ultimate negligence of the Other that strikes me. I may admit that I’ve been living in the UK for 14 years, and it is only the Jewish cyber cells (which I monitor regularly) where I find the ultimate possible violent verbal expression.
As I learn from reading your thread, Greenstein has being assaulting each of you for the last days interfering with your privacy. May I suggest that is this very vicious campaigning and total intolerance that makes Zionist lobbies so hated and this applies to Zionists as well crypto Zionists such as JAZ (who aim at silencing any criticism of the Jewish Lobby in America). For me, every Historical chapter is a message in a bottle. We have to open and re open the bottle, we have to let the historical chapters reshape themselves and we have to let ourselves be reshaped by them. History is meaningful as long as it reflects on our present and future. If Greenstein would exhaust his limited intellectual capacity and read the entire paragraph (that he wants so much to hide) he may have learn something:
“Clearly, the Zionist interpretation is engaged with nothing more than the concrete symptom, with the simplest manifestation of the animosity that surrounds it rather than with the core of the problem itself. Hitler was indeed defeated, Jews are now more than welcome in Germany and in Europe, yet, the Jewish state and the sons of Israel are at least as unpopular in the Middle East as their grandparents were in Europe just six decades ago. Seemingly, it is the personification of WW2 and the Holocaust that blinded the Israelis and their supporters from internalising the real meaning of the conditions and the events that led towards their destruction in the first place…” (Gilad Atzmon The Hunters of Goliath)
I, for instance, would expect Jews to learn a lesson from their destruction. I would expect Jews to ask themselves how come people employ so many vicious tactics against us, why is it that people hate us so much? As sad as it may sound, the abuse performed by Israel in Palestine is no different categorically to the abuse performed by Mr Mark Elf, against FTP. Indeed FTP survived it while a Palestine kid is probably far less lucky, yet it is the ultimate negligence of the Other that strikes me. I may admit that I’ve been living in the UK for 14 years, and it is only the Jewish cyber cells (which I monitor regularly) where I find the ultimate possible violent verbal expression.
As I learn from reading your thread, Greenstein has being assaulting each of you for the last days interfering with your privacy. May I suggest that is this very vicious campaigning and total intolerance that makes Zionist lobbies so hated and this applies to Zionists as well crypto Zionists such as JAZ (who aim at silencing any criticism of the Jewish Lobby in America). For me, every Historical chapter is a message in a bottle. We have to open and re open the bottle, we have to let the historical chapters reshape themselves and we have to let ourselves be reshaped by them. History is meaningful as long as it reflects on our present and future. If Greenstein would exhaust his limited intellectual capacity and read the entire paragraph (that he wants so much to hide) he may have learn something:
“Clearly, the Zionist interpretation is engaged with nothing more than the concrete symptom, with the simplest manifestation of the animosity that surrounds it rather than with the core of the problem itself. Hitler was indeed defeated, Jews are now more than welcome in Germany and in Europe, yet, the Jewish state and the sons of Israel are at least as unpopular in the Middle East as their grandparents were in Europe just six decades ago. Seemingly, it is the personification of WW2 and the Holocaust that blinded the Israelis and their supporters from internalising the real meaning of the conditions and the events that led towards their destruction in the first place…” (Gilad Atzmon The Hunters of Goliath)
And here is the lesson: Would Tony Greenstein understand the real meaning of the Holocaust, he and his 5 Racially exclusive comrades would prevent themselves from the humiliation that occurred to them a few months ago at the PSC AGM.
“Seemingly, it is the personification of WW2 and the Holocaust that blinded Greenstein & Co from internalising the real meaning of the conditions and the events that led towards their growing unpopularity.”
Would mark Elf understand the meaning of the Holocaust he would stop himself from calling an innocent Indy media moderator he doesn’t agree with a “Wanker” and a “Fuckwit”. Sorry for mentioning it, I just can’t get over it. The meaning of the Holocaust is preventing the Holocaust in Palestine and Iraq. The Meaning of the Holocaust is preventing the already planned Holocaust in Iran. Yet the AJC (American Jewish Committee) and the Israeli Lobby are promoting a war against Iran and it is the Greensteins of this world who try to prevent us from dealing with the issue. This says it all. Some racially orientated Jews who for some reason call themselves ‘progressive’ indeed learned nothing.
It is never too late
Inshallah they get it right soon.
All the best
Gilad Atzmon
INDYMEDIA ARCHIVES
MARY RIZZO'S POST TO INDYMEDIA (AS YET NOT ONLINE)
Tony Greenstein says: "And just one final point. I’m not going to reply to the ramblings of Mary Rizzo, though I would certainly stand by my opposition to suicide bombings in Israel, even if that means criticising Hamas."
I say. Of course he isn't going to respond, because he'd have to come out being the most inconsistent being on the planet and it's pretty difficult for him to defend what he said and come out looking respectable. The fact that Tony has written that he does not respect, nor should he, the Palestinians, that he gives a toss about their vote, that Fatah "at least" was secular, (therefore, they would have been better, a choice that -ahem- only the electorate is able to determine), that the victory of Hamas should be equated with the victory of Hitler in Germany.... it's pretty amazing, and I would love to see him say this on a board or site run by Palestinians. Secular or not, they would run him out of the room. This is why he confines his activities to the Jewish or UK cyber spheres. Not only is it outrageous and completely insulting to a people that is FAR more politicised than Tony himself will ever be, and would know better than he would what suits them, it is a-historical and wrong.
That he was endorsing violating a cultural boycott he was even promoting, that he most certainly knows what is good for Palestinians, and what is good, obviously, is what will be accepted by a faction he identifies himself with in Israel. As if the Palestinians are puppets who must earn respect, respect which has a set of conditions around it. That he does not campaign for the Right of Return (I can't remember him ever calling for it) makes one wonder if he understands the Palestinians' situation and aspirations at all. All of this alone should be reason enough that those of us actively involved in Pro-Palestinian actions and campaigns have to keep him well beyond arms' length. He is precisely the WORST sort of person to be dictating what should be happening in "the world of solidarity". Most activists have gotten wise to him, and this is a relief, but his litany, repeated ad nauseam just like the Queen of Hearts "Off with their heads!!" makes him a character that is almost as laughable as he is disgusting. Both sensations compete for predominance. When one is, like I have been for ages, subject to his abuse, one simply gets used to it, but has to remind oneself that not everyone else is prepared for the disgusting rain of verbal abuse and plain uppityness that he unleashes. Other people have to be warned about what he is.
Again, referring to this single phrase of Tony, no one is promoting terrorism or suicide bombings, and Tony instrumentally links Hamas with suicide bombings. If he knew any STATISTICS, he'd see that they are not directly implicated in them! That they have also distanced themselves from them, and that it was indeed the Hamas that had held the truce longer than any other political party, including the Israelis. His disinformation is straight out of the annals of the neocons, if not straight into the laps of the theories of the Islamophobes. What's Tony's Agenda? To isolate the Gazans and Palestinians even more from a resolution to their problem? Is this the way he's going to spread socialism to the Arabs who he doesn't respect for their political illiteracy, when they are not outright religiously oriented.
They should have caved in long ago, according to Tony, and voted for a party that has NO consensus and no nationalist vision, because the value of their socialism was intrinsic and "of course" the Westerners in the far left parties of Europe would have defended them. What a load of steaming crap.
If all of his intolerance of Palestinians and lack of respect for them weren't enough, he denies there is a lobby, he attempts to shut up anyone who dare mention this FACT, he smears and distorts in order to push his own very grey agenda of some kind of socialism that is not relevant to Palestinians. Why doesn't he spend his time better, trying to improve the Israeli society? That would be at least a target he could reach. I'd let him go any way he wanted with his harebrained schemes if that was his campaign. Our paths would never cross either. I don't bother with Israeli progressives. The best ones are those like Dorothy Naor who when I asked about the boycott said, "boycott me, please". They aren't looking for internal consensus among the "progressive Israelis". They have realised that the victims are our priority and the victims are the Palestinians. Whatever it takes to support them, that is what we have to stand for.
Indymedia moderators caving in to someone like that would be quite a pity, because it would have resonance in internet, where the Palestinians are at some level respected and supported with passion and dedication. It would put Indymedia on "the other side" of the Palestinians. And, obviously, he wonders why his letters aren't given major space. It is so self-evident, that it's not even worth questioning why. Why is Tony never published anywhere? Because his stuff is unreadable, contradictory and venomous. It is only print-worthy in minor jewish leftist things like Socialist Unity, or CIF, where the Zionists seem to dictate what goes up. I think Tony is the only one that is oblivious to this.
mary
That he was endorsing violating a cultural boycott he was even promoting, that he most certainly knows what is good for Palestinians, and what is good, obviously, is what will be accepted by a faction he identifies himself with in Israel. As if the Palestinians are puppets who must earn respect, respect which has a set of conditions around it. That he does not campaign for the Right of Return (I can't remember him ever calling for it) makes one wonder if he understands the Palestinians' situation and aspirations at all. All of this alone should be reason enough that those of us actively involved in Pro-Palestinian actions and campaigns have to keep him well beyond arms' length. He is precisely the WORST sort of person to be dictating what should be happening in "the world of solidarity". Most activists have gotten wise to him, and this is a relief, but his litany, repeated ad nauseam just like the Queen of Hearts "Off with their heads!!" makes him a character that is almost as laughable as he is disgusting. Both sensations compete for predominance. When one is, like I have been for ages, subject to his abuse, one simply gets used to it, but has to remind oneself that not everyone else is prepared for the disgusting rain of verbal abuse and plain uppityness that he unleashes. Other people have to be warned about what he is.
Again, referring to this single phrase of Tony, no one is promoting terrorism or suicide bombings, and Tony instrumentally links Hamas with suicide bombings. If he knew any STATISTICS, he'd see that they are not directly implicated in them! That they have also distanced themselves from them, and that it was indeed the Hamas that had held the truce longer than any other political party, including the Israelis. His disinformation is straight out of the annals of the neocons, if not straight into the laps of the theories of the Islamophobes. What's Tony's Agenda? To isolate the Gazans and Palestinians even more from a resolution to their problem? Is this the way he's going to spread socialism to the Arabs who he doesn't respect for their political illiteracy, when they are not outright religiously oriented.
They should have caved in long ago, according to Tony, and voted for a party that has NO consensus and no nationalist vision, because the value of their socialism was intrinsic and "of course" the Westerners in the far left parties of Europe would have defended them. What a load of steaming crap.
If all of his intolerance of Palestinians and lack of respect for them weren't enough, he denies there is a lobby, he attempts to shut up anyone who dare mention this FACT, he smears and distorts in order to push his own very grey agenda of some kind of socialism that is not relevant to Palestinians. Why doesn't he spend his time better, trying to improve the Israeli society? That would be at least a target he could reach. I'd let him go any way he wanted with his harebrained schemes if that was his campaign. Our paths would never cross either. I don't bother with Israeli progressives. The best ones are those like Dorothy Naor who when I asked about the boycott said, "boycott me, please". They aren't looking for internal consensus among the "progressive Israelis". They have realised that the victims are our priority and the victims are the Palestinians. Whatever it takes to support them, that is what we have to stand for.
Indymedia moderators caving in to someone like that would be quite a pity, because it would have resonance in internet, where the Palestinians are at some level respected and supported with passion and dedication. It would put Indymedia on "the other side" of the Palestinians. And, obviously, he wonders why his letters aren't given major space. It is so self-evident, that it's not even worth questioning why. Why is Tony never published anywhere? Because his stuff is unreadable, contradictory and venomous. It is only print-worthy in minor jewish leftist things like Socialist Unity, or CIF, where the Zionists seem to dictate what goes up. I think Tony is the only one that is oblivious to this.
mary
Labels: activism, Atzmon, gatekeeping, journalism, lobbying, Palestine
