Have you heard the bragging by the U.S. mass media that Israel is the only “democracy” in the Middle East?
That is actually an understatement. Israel is unique in the world as a "democracy". It is the only "democracy" in the world
Wants to pick and choose who leads the Palestinians, being unhappy with its current leadership
Murdered the United Nation's Peace Mediator, Count Bernadott,
when it didn't agree with his diplomatic efforts, never bringing the assassins to justice
(even though Ben Gurion, the first Prime Minister of Israel knew that the Stern Gang (an Al Qaeda-like Jewish organization was responsible). The mission to assasinate Bernadotte was organized by Yitzhak Shamir, who later became Prime Minister of Israel
Had a Prime Minister (Menachim Begin) wanted for terrorism (by the British Government). Begin's Irgun
was another Al-Qaeda-like Jewish terrorist group.
"The Israeli security
forces who carry out the extrajudicial executions offer no proof of guilt, no right of defence," said Amnesty International. "The Israeli authorities are showing an utter disregard of the right to life."
United Nation's Resolution
1998/32 (at the 45th plenary meeting, 29 July 1998) - Economic and social repercussions of the Israeli occupation on the living conditions of the Palestinian
people in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem, and the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan - states categorically under point 5 (see link to 1998/32 above for complete text):
"5. (The UN) Also reaffirms that Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory,
including Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan, are illegal and an obstacle to economic and social development."
Gathers sympathy for itself via the holocaust "industry" (even after reparations have been paid) but practices genocide and apartheid on the Palestinians in a manner similar to South Africa and genocide like the Nazis (REUTERS report by Jeffery Heller 03/13/2002 & The Post, Dublin, Ireland,14 April, 2002).
Actively creates "facts on the ground" causing derailment of any hope for peace and immense human suffering. All this to fulfill Zionist aspirations of annexing
the entire West Bank as Yertz Yisrael
(the Land of
which I later learned encompasses not just the city of Jerusalem, but 40 percent of the West Bank, including large Palestinian
towns and villages—Ramalla, El Bireh, Beit Sahour, Bethlehem and Beit Jalla, to name a few.
What one has to understand about Jerusalem is that it is being transformed
from a city into a larger region by the Israeli government. This has three effects: It divides the northern part of the West Bank from the southern part; isolates Jerusalem's Palestinian population from
fellow Palestinians and; creates a corridor from Tel Aviv to Amman, Jordan. All of this ensures Israeli control over any Palestinian state that might emerge from the "peace process."
Has disregarded for over five decades, United Nation's Resolutions, including the Resolutions that condemned it for "breaking" the Resolutions (# 517 and # 673), yet no "regime change" demands have been brought against it.(See, MEDIA MONITOR )
Cries loud and clear about individual cases of “suicide bombings” (caused by
conditions of hopelessness and anomie that it has directly caused in the camps) yet has killed, on average, 12 Palestinians
for every Israeli that is killed (before the current uprising, now the ratio is narrower). (New
York Times, 3/12/2002, Front Page Story).
Since 1973, Israel has cost the United States about $1.6 trillion.
If divided by today's population, that is more than $5,700 per person. This is an estimate by Thomas Stauffer, a consulting
economist in Washington. For decades, his analyses of the Middle East scene have made him a frequent thorn in the side of the Israel lobby. For the first time
in many years, Mr. Stauffer has tallied the total cost to the US of its backing of Israel in its drawn-out, violent
dispute with the Palestinians. So far, he figures, the bill adds up to more than twice the cost of the Vietnam War. And now
Israel wants more...( Christian Science Monitor, December 9, 2002 )
Attacked and almost sank a US Navy ship, the USS Liberty , killing 34 US Sailors, and wounding 171.
"Bamford writes that while
the Israelis were attacking the Liberty, an American spy plane overhead, a Navy EC-121, overheard and recorded Israeli conversations.
The results are devastating. The Israelis were unaware that anyone was listening, and their pilots talked openly about seeing
an American flag on the ship they were attacking."
After the Egyptian Revolution of 1954 when U.S. and Egyptian relations were improving, Israel started a "terror campaign" aginst U.S. government officials and businesses in Egypt. The campaign was eventually broken and led to the resignation of the Ben-Gurion government in 1961.
This Israeli "terror campaign" against the U.S. is rememberd as the Lavon Affair.
Was caught spying on the US, remember Jonathan Pollard?
"One document Pollard is believed
to have slipped to the Israelis --thought to have landed in Soviet hands, albeit unintentionally-- was a huge compendium of
frequencies used by foreign military and intelligence services [which] cost the U.S. billions of dollars but Pollard rendered
. . . useless [and, by compromising it] may have cost informants their lives." (Time magazine,
Dec. 13, 1993)
Labels anyone speaking out against its inhumane policies an Anti-Semite while actively pressuring our U.S media and capitalizing on the anti-Islam sentiment generated after 9-11.
GET THE FACTS FROM SOURCE DOCUMENTS
The problems between Arabs and Jews in
the Middle East is not a 2000 year
old problem. It is not a religious problem. The golden years of Jewery were in 12th century Andalusia under Muslim rule, at a time when Christians were persecuting
them as "Christ killers". Anti-Semitism was a European-Christian phenomena not related to Arabs and Muslims.
between Arabs and Jews started when the Jewish minority in historic Palestine wanted to bring in immigrants from all over the world to change the demography of the region (1917)
and to displace the indigeneous Arab residents.
1. CONFLICT NOT 2000 YEARS OLD 2.
CONFLICT NOT BASED ON RELIGION 3. CONFLICT NOT INITIATED BY THE ARABS 4. CONFLICT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING
TO DO WITH ANTI-SEMITISM.
The charge of anti-semitism applied to the conflict
is historically, geographically, religiously and ethnically misplaced.
Compiled by two scholars with impeccable
credentials -- Michael Hoffman, a former reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated Press, and Moshe Lieberman, a
former Hebrew University researcher -- the authors combine their sleuthing skills and erudition to bring the reader an irrefutable
dossier of Israeli war crimes in Palestine, profusely illustrated with harrowing photos of the death and destruction which
the Zionist war machine has administered as collective punishment upon the entire Palestinian nation.
Conservative Jews and Evangelical Christians
use "God" and his "promise" to justify the dispossession of the Arabs from Palestine. The famous promise that they talk about is found
in Genesis 17:8 of the Holy Bible.
And I will give to you (Abraham)
and to your seed after you, the land wherein you are a stranger, all the land of Canaan (Palestine) for an everlasting possession and I will be their God (Genesis 17:8-The Holy
Note that the promise is made to Abraham
who was NOT a Jew. The words Jew, Judaism, and Israelpostdate
Abraham. Also, the Arabs are the "seed" of Abraham through Ishmael, so the "promise"
covers them as well, and not only the children of Isaac (the Jews). Thirdly, the statement in the Bible promised Abraham ("YOU and your seed") the land, however when he died he did not possess
any part of it (Acts 7:3-5- The Bible). It did not fall
into Jewish hands until Joshua. As such this promise cannot be from God, according to the Torah’s own standards (of
distinguishing truth from falsehood):
When a prophet speaks in the name of
the Lord, if the thing FOLLOW NOT, NOR COME TO PASS, that is the thing the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken
it presumptuously (Deuteronomy 18:21-22- The Bible)
Supposedly, according to the Bible, the
Jews invaded Palestine under Joshua three thousand years ago (Joshua 12:24) conquering each little divided village by force of arms, killing old men, women, children and animals-
it was not given to them, it was forcibly taken by them through conquest, using the same tactics that the modern Israeli state uses in terrorizing and displacing outgunned Palestinians.
to the Talmud, Judaism's holiest book, considered even holier than the Old Testament by its own admission (Erubin 21b, Soncino edition), non-Jews are like dogs and pigs. Jews can rob, steal and kill non-Jews without being brought to justice. Inspired by such indoctrination, Baruch Goldstein, an orthodox Jew from Brooklyn
massacared 29 Palestinians as they knelt in prayer at a mosque. Goldstein was a disciple of the Rabbi Kahane, who stated that
his view of Arabs as "dogs" was "from the Talmud" (CBS 60 minutes)
And they utterly destroyed all that was in
the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox and sheep, and ass,
with the edge of the sword (Joshua -
PLEASE CONTRIBUTE TO HELP THE ABOVE ORGANIZATIONS DO HUMAN RIGHTS WORK
Rodinson, a Jew, writes in his book, Israel
and the Arabs:
But for one thing, they (the Israelis)
cannot be said to have a historic right to a piece of territory because some of their ancestors supposedly inhabited
it two thousand years ago…The Arabs of Palestine have the same rights over Palestine territory as the French exercise
in France, and the English in England. These rights have been violated without any provocation on their part.
Robert Malley, the US National Security
Council’s Middle East expert under Clinton and a member of the American team at Camp David, wrote an article for the
July 8, 2001 edition of the New York Times, in which he says:
“The Palestinians were arguing
for the creation of a Palestinian state based on the June 4, 1967, borders, living alongside Israel. They accepted the notion
of Israeli annexation of West Bank territory to accommodate settlement blocs. They accepted the principle of Israeli sovereignty over the Jewish neighborhoods
of East Jerusalem—neighborhoods
that were not part of Israel before the Six Day War in 1967. And, while they insisted on recognition of the refugees’ right
of return, they agreed that it should be implemented in a manner that protected Israel’s demographic and security interests
by limiting the number of returnees. No other Arab party that has negotiated with Israel—not Anwar el-Sadat’s
Egypt, not King Hussein’s Jordan, let alone Hafez al-Assad’s Syria—ever came close to even considering such
It is a FACT that the Palestinian Authority has accepted the existence of Israel, on over 78% of historic Palestine as reflected in the Oslo Accords of
1993 and their own official charter. The UN partition plan of 1947 gave Israel 55% of the land at a time when Jewish population
in historic Palestine was 30% of the whole, and Jews owned 7% of the land, with most being recent immigrants from other countries.
Now they have over 78% and are occupying the rest and building Jewish settlements on it.
Israel wants even more land by continued
settlement building and talk about Judea and Samaria as Yertz Israel (the Land of Israel).
In the Camp David Accords, by denying complete soverignity to the Palestinians, Barak rejected in principle the United Nations
Resolutions 242 and 338, which had been accepted as the basis for the Oslo Accords.
The blame does not lie with the
Palestinians for the breakdown of the Camp David meeting.
Avi Shlaim, Oxford Historian and author of The Iron Wall: Israel
& the Arab World (1999), says in an interview
The Israelis would never concede to the
Palestinians the status of victims, this they insist on keeping for themselves. One example of this is the case of the 1948
refugees, which Benny Morris demonstrated was the result of Israeli pressure and outright expulsions. And yet no Israeli leader
would ever accept the moral responsibility, let alone the political responsibility, for creating the refugee problem. They
wouldn't even accept a share of the moral responsibility for this problem. Ehud Barak at Camp David wasn't asked to accept the right of return for refugees.
He was asked to accept that Israel bear merely a part of the moral responsibility for this problem, which would then be tackled by the international
community. And he refused."
CHEMICAL WEAPONS AGAINST THEIR OWN
In a few years if regime change in Russia "fits in" with the agenda of
the corporate elite, maybe the argument that "they used chemical weapons against their own people"- can be resurrected.
that outrage is lacking in the media's propaganda priorities at the time that it has taken place. The propaganda about Iraq's
use of chemical weapons, "against its own people", makes clear that the media propaganda model operates without any temporal
logic-events are resurrected a decade after they happen when need be and ignored as unimportant at the time they occur.
the millions that have died of cancer caused by nuclear testing and radioactive/chemical dumping- according to many government
and private studies- , even after the studies made the effects of them clear, amounts to our US "regime(s)" using chemical
and nuclear weapons against its own people, in a permeditated fashion. Why don't we hear about that on the mass media?
Let's get things in perspective. First,
Iraq's military strength is about a third of what it was in 1990, the US military capabilities are 10 times stronger than
they were back then. How can Iraq be a greater threat now? Second, Iraq flouted UN resolutions, not for over a decade, as the president said, but only when it saw no end in
sight for the economic sanctions and their removal. On the other hand, Israel has been flouting UN resolutions for the
past five decades including Resolution 673 that deplored Israel for not cooperating with it, and Resolution 517 that "censures" Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions.
It's a joke that Israel not only flouted the UN resolutions for over five decades but also those that asked it not to flout
the resolutions. What does our president think about that?
In the face of these clear facts, the whole speech of the
president to the UN becomes quite meaningless -- a joke -- and appears to the ordinary person like myself who uses his common
sense, that an ulterior motive is behind putting the lives of ordinary people, both American and Iraqis, at risk for the sake
of power and materialism.
NONE of the experts
in the media panels of the United States seem to realise that when suicide becomes a part of the daily life of a community, it is an abnormality
that must have a social context and cause. This 'opposition culture' can only be neutralised if what nourishes it is eradicated.
Israel's oppression and humiliation of the Palestinian people is legitimate reason for the would-be suicide bombers, in their
mind, to indulge in what they do - this is how an 'opposition culture' operates. No one has to inform these people, who are
willing to give up their lives, about what is going on. They see it all around them on the streets of the occupied territories
everyday. Tanks rolling into civilian cities and firing at will is not a 'normal' situation to live in. This is the anatomy
of the problem, yet we choose to ignore it. - M. Asadi.
Korea fears an Iraq-type threat from the US and so it is being provoked, by the current administration's rhetoric, to use
Nuclear deterrence- all this after the "Axis of Evil" speech. This makes us wonder if the current U.S. regime is actually making the
world a "safer" place or holding humanity hostage under the shadow of "nuclear death" by provoking other nations to take steps
in desperation. The Lockheed Martins of our world wouldn't prosper if the world was a safer place. We can all be certain that
illusions of the "lack of security" is their number one marketing concern, while provoking situations abroad, ensures their
survival and profitability. To the arms peddlers of this world, we are all expendable- sooner or later - M. Asadi.
The Morality of Prejudice (April 18, 2004)
I was very
disappointed to note regarding Elie Wiesel (who is presented by your program as a "towering moral figure", winner of the Nobel
Prize and the Congressional Medal of Honor) that people like him who have suffered so much themselves become, in the drift
of time, blind to the suffereing of others. I refer to his letter which was read on air in your program, in which he mentions
the mutual suffering of the Jews during the Holocaust and the Palestinians at the current time.
What was conveniently
forgotten by him in that letter from the 1970s was that the suffering of the Jews during the Holocaust was not caused by Palestinians
or "fanatics" whereas the suffering of the Palestinians and their dispossession (see the work of Benny Morris, Israeli historian)
from their ancestral land was directly caused by Israel and the Jewish elite. His letter while a beautiful string of words is factually quite meaningless. While
condemning the terrorism of the suicide bombers, he similarly forgets that such reactions do not occur in a social vacuum.
They occur within a social structure of hopelessness and extreme oppression that Israel has constructed and maintains.
Similarly, his idea about martyrdom morality in Judaism and Christianity compared to what those he calls "fanatics" (his term
for Muslims) is completley detached from the view presented in the Old Testament. The morality of Moses during conflict (see
Numbers 31:17-19) "in the name of the Lord", makes the suicide bombers look like Sunday school kids. Wiesel further mentions
that no government would deal with "terrorists," conveniently forgetting that terrorism was used by the "founding fathers"
of Israel to get their "homeland"(the blowing up of the KingDavidHotel, the
Semirimis Hotel, murdering the UN envoy, Count Bernadott, etc).
Before Mr. Wiesel makes moral proclamations to humanity,
may I suggest he try to break free of the immoral prejudice of always seeing the Palestinians as the criminal culprits and
Israel as the righteous victim.
M. Asadi Published at SOF site at: http://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/reflection/2004/0415_wiesel_1.shtml
On Bill Maher's Picture-Book,
"When You Ride Alone, You Ride with Bin-Laden"
on Islam being forced on the people, as your quote on page 130 in large type-font (for the sake of sensationalism) is historically
misguided. Historians have, across the board, termed this "sword" claim as a "debunked hypothesis" (See Philip K. Hitti's,
A Short History of the Arabs 1973:59). An analysis of the adoption of Islamic names reveals that over a century and a half
after the "conquests", less than 10% of the population of those areas was Muslim. This suggests that the masses accepted Islam
much later and not as a result of the conquest (see Albert Hourani's, A History of the Arab Peoples (1991), page 46-47). Prominent
Western historians (like Edward Gibbon) have called this "sword" propaganda a myth. Why are you perpetuating a myth that has been debunked by experts who scientifically
analyze the evidence?
Your silence about "Holy Violence" in the Torah, and the explicit racism of the Old Testament that has been translated into the present day apartheid regime
of modern Israel, shows dishonesty and insincerity. Your claim that U.S Foreign Policy cannot be criticized by today's
Muslims because Muslims who lived 1400 years back allegedly had a "conquering to convert" foreign policy is not only absurd,
it reeks of the Israeli claim that since their ancestors allegedly inhabited Palestine 2000 years back, they are justified
today in stealing the entire area from its indigenous Arab population. Don't resurrect the past to fulfill your present-day