Monday, April 21, 2008

Zionist Terror Gang

Zionist Terror Gang

UK Journalist Vilified For Criticising Israel
London, Dec. 13, IRNA

Veteran Middle East correspondent Robert Fisk has spoken out for the first time about his vilification by Israel and the Zionist lobby fordaring to tell the truth about the Palestinian Uprising. "The degree of abuse and outright threats now being directed at anyone - academic, analyst, reporter - who dare to criticise Israel is fastreaching McCarthyite proportions," he said in an article in theIndependent newspaper on Wednesday.
Fisk broke his silence about thecampaign against him after rumors that the Independent has been underpressure from the Zionist lobby for the past two months not topublish his critical articles during the current massacre of Palestinians. The British journalist also referred to the unprecedented abuse from the Zionist Organisation of America against Professor Edward Said of Columbia University, saying that demands for his dismissal were now on an almost daily basis. US Jewish philosopher Noam Chomsky, who also writes scathing review of Israel's occupation, has also become the target of ever more ruthless abuse, he said. "Ignorance of the Middle East is now so firmly adhered to inthe US that only a few tiny newspapers report anything other than Israel's point of view," the British journalist said. He referred tothe attempt to force the media to obey Israel's rules as now becoming international. "Israeli ambassadors and Israel's lobbyists have neverbeen such frequent visitors to European newspaper offices, to complain," he said. Fisk's own experiences of abuse included the Israel Ambassador to Dublin Mark Sofer launching a diatribe against his reporting, which he said should not be read or believed, in the middle of a totally unrelated prize-giving ceremony for a Belfast journalist.
He said that the abuse continues against the Independent's sister newspapers in other countries that also carry his articles, including a five-page letter from an Australian lobby group that accused him of a "stupor of self-deception." His final question was whether journalist would listen to Arab ambassadors and lobbyists behaving like their Israeli opposite numbers, saying that there was no chance they would run for cover and print only one side of the story.

Free America Now and HC/JH End ::irna 13/12/2000 15:01

Gas Chamber Bound Jews

Gas Chamber Bound Jews

A Strange Kind of Freedom
Wednesday, July 10 2002 @ 05:29 PM GMTBy Robert Fisk

Inside the First Congregational Church of Berkeley, the Californian audience had been struck silent. Dennis Bernstein, the Jewish host of KPFA Radio's Flashpoint current affairs program, was reading some recent e-mails that he had received from Israel's supporters in America. Each one left the people in the church —Muslims, Jews, Christians — in a state of shock.

"You self-hating Jewish piece of shit. Hitler killed the wrong Jews. He should have killed your parents, so a piece of Jewish shit like you would not have been born. God willing, Arab terrorists will cut you to pieces Daniel Pearl-style, AMEN!!!"

Bernstein's sin was to have covered the story of Israel's invasion of Jenin in April and to have interviewed journalists who investigated the killings that took place there — including Phil Reeves and Justin Huggler of The Independent — for his Flashpoint program. Bernstein's grandfather was a revered Orthodox Rabbi of international prominence but neither his family history nor his origins spared him. "Read this and weep, you self-hating Jew boy!!!" another e-mail told Bernstein. "God willing a Palestinian will murder you, rape your wife and slash your kids' throats." Yet another: "I hope that you, Barbara Lubin and all other Jewish Marxist Communist traitors and anti-American cop haters will die a violent and cruel death just like the victims of suicide bombers in Israel." Lubin is also Jewish, the executive director of the Middle East Children's Alliance, a one-time committed Zionist but now one of Israel's fiercest critics. Her e-mails are even worse.

Indeed, you have to come to America to realize just how brave this small but vocal Jewish community is. Bernstein is the first to acknowledge that a combination of Israeli lobbyists and conservative Christian fundamentalists have in effect censored all free discussion of Israel and the Middle East out of the public domain in the US. "Everyone else is terrified," Bernstein says. "The only ones who begin to open their mouths are the Jews in this country. You know, as a kid, I sent money to plant trees in Israel. But now we are horrified by a government representing a country that we grew up loving and cherishing. Israel's defenders have a special vengeance for Jews who don't fall in line behind Sharon's scorched-earth policy because they give the lie to the charge that Israel's critics are simply anti-Semite."

Adam Shapiro is among those who have paid a price for their beliefs. He is a Jew engaged to an American-born Palestinian, a volunteer with the International Solidarity Movement who was trapped in Yasser Arafat's headquarters in the spring while administering medical aid. After telling CNN that the Sharon government was acting like "terrorists" while receiving $3bn a year in US military aid, Shapiro and his family were savaged in the New York Post. The paper slandered Shapiro as the "Jewish Taleban" and demeaned his family as "traitors". Israeli supporters publicized his family's address and his parents were forced to flee their Brooklyn home and seek police protection. Shapiro's father, a New York public high-school teacher and a part-time Yeshiva (Jewish day school) teacher, was fired from his job. His brother receives regular death threats.

Israel's supporters have no qualms about their alliance with the Christian right. Indeed, the fundamentalists can campaign on their own in Israel's favor, as I discovered for myself at Stanford recently when I was about to give a lecture on the media and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, part of a series of talks arranged largely by Jewish Americans. A right-wing Christian "Free Republic" outfit posted my name on its website, and described me as a "PLO butt-kisser" and asked its supporters to "freep" my lecture. A few demonstrators turned up outside the First United Methodist Church in Sacramento where I was to speak, waving American and Israeliflags. "Jew haters!" they screamed at the organizers.

They were also handing out crudely printed flyers. "Nothing to worry about, Bob," one of my Jewish hosts remarked. "They can't even spell your name right." True. But also false. "Stop the Lies!" the leaflet read. "There was no massacre in Jenin. Fiske [sic] is paid big bucks to spin [lie] for the Arabs..." But the real lie was in that last sentence. I never take any payment for lectures — so that no one can ever claim that I'm paid to give the views of others. But the truth didn't matter to these people. Nor did the content of my talk — which began, by chance, with the words "There was no massacre" — in which I described Arafat as a "corrupt, vain little despot" and suicide bombings as "a fearful, evil weapon". None of this was relevant. The aim was to shut me up.

Dennis Bernstein sums it up quite simply: "Any US journalist, columnist, editor, college professor, student-activist, public official or clergy member who dares to speak critically of Israel or accurately report the brutalities of its illegal occupation will be vilified as an anti-Semite." In fact, no sooner had Bernstein made these remarks than pro-Israeli groups initiated an extraordinary campaign against some of the most pro-Israeli newspapers in America, all claiming that The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and the San Francisco Chronicle were biased in their coverage of the Middle-East conflict. Just how The New York Times — which boasts WilliamSafire and Charles Krauthammer, those giants of pro-Israeli bias, among its writers — could be anti-Israeli is difficult to see, although it is just possible that, amid its reports on Israel'sdestruction in the West Bank and Gaza, some mildly critical comments found their way into print. The New York Times, for example, did report that Israeli soldiers used civilians as human shields — though only in the very last paragraph of a dispatch from Jenin.

None the less, the campaign of boycotts and e-mails got under way. More than 1,000 readers suspended their subscriptions to the Los Angeles Times, while a blizzard of e-mails told pro-Israeli readers to cancel their subscription to The New York Times for a day. On the East Coast, at least one local radio station has lost $1m from a Jewish philanthropist while other stations attempting to cover the Middle East with some degree of fairness are said to have lost evenmore. When the San Francisco Chronicle published a four-page guide to the conflict, its editors had to meet a 14-member delegation of local Jewish groups to discuss their grievances.

According to Michael Futterman, who chairs the Middle East strategy committee of 80 Bay Area synagogues, Jewish anger hit "boiling point" when the Chronicle failed to cover a pro-Israeli rally in San Francisco. Needless to say, the Chronicle's "Readers' Representative", Dick Rogers, published a groveling, self-flagellating apology. "The paper didn't have a word on the pro-Israelrally," he wrote. "This wasn't fair and balanced coverage." Another objection came from a Jewish reader who objected to the word "terror" being placed within inverted commas in a Chronicle headline that read "Sharon says `terror' justifies assault". The reader's point? The Chronicle's reporting "harmonizes well with Palestinian propaganda, which tries to divert attention from the terrorist campaign against Israel (which enjoys almost unanimous support among Palestinians, all the way from Yasser Arafat to the 10-year-old who dreams of blowing himself up one day) and instead describes Israel's military moves as groundless, evil bullying tactics."

And so it goes on. On a radio show with me in Berkeley, the Chronicle's foreign editor, Andrew Ross, tried to laugh off the influence of the pro-Israeli lobby — "the famous lobby", he called itwith that deference that is half way between acknowledgement and fear — but the Israeli Consul General Yossi Amrani had no hesitation in campaigning against the Chronicle, describing a paper largely docile in its reporting of the Middle East as "a professionally and politically biased, pro-Palestinian newspaper".

The Chronicle's four-page pull-out on the Middle East was, in fact, a soft sell. Its headline — "The Current Strife Between The Israelis And The Palestinians Is A Battle For Control Of Land" — missed the obvious point: That one of the two groups that were "battling for control of the land" — the Palestinians — had been occupied by Israel for 35 years.

The most astonishing — and least covered — story is in fact the alliance of Israeli lobbyists and Christian Zionist fundamentalists, a coalition that began in 1978 with the publication of a Likud plan to encourage fundamentalist churches to give their support to Israel. By 1980, there was an "International Christian Embassy" in Jerusalem; and in 1985, a Christian Zionist lobby emerged at a "National Prayer Breakfast for Israel" whose principal speaker was Benjamin Netanyahu, who was to become Israeli prime minister. "A sense of history, poetry and morality imbued the Christian Zionists who, more than a century ago, began to write, plan and organize for Israel's restoration," Netanyahu told his audience. The so-called National Unity Coalition for Israel became a lobbying arm of Christian Zionism with contacts in Congress and neo-conservative think-tanks in Washington.

In May this year, the Israeli Embassy in Washington, no less, arranged a prayer breakfast for Christian Zionists. Present were Alonzo Short, a member of the board of "Promise Keepers", and Michael Little who is president of the "Christian Broadcasting Network". Event hosts were listed as including those dour old Christian conservatives Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, who once financed a rogue television station in southern Lebanon which threatened Muslim villagers and broadcast tirades by Major Saad Haddad, Israel's stooge militia leader in Lebanon. In Tennessee, Jewish officials invited hundreds of Christians to join Jewish crowds at a pro-Israel solidarity rally in Memphis.

On the face of it, this coalition seems natural. The Jewish Anti-Defamation League felt able to run an ad that included an article by a former Christian coalition executive director Ralph Reed,headlined "We People of Faith Stand Firmly With Israel". Christians, Reed claimed, supported Israel because of "their humanitarian impulse to help and protect Jews, a shared strategic interest in democracy in the Middle East and a spiritual connection to Israel".

But, of course, a fundamental problem — fundamental in every sense of the word — lies behind this strange partnership. As Uri Avnery, the leader of Gush Shalom, the most courageous Israeli peace group, pointed out in a typically ferocious essay last month, there is a darker side to the alliance.

"According to its [Christian Zionist] theological beliefs, the Jews must congregate in Palestine and establish a Jewish state on all its territory" — an idea that would obviously appeal to Ariel Sharon — "so as to make the Second Coming of Jesus Christ possible." But here comes the bad bit. As Avnery says, "the evangelists don't like to dwell openly on what comes next: Before the coming [of the Messiah], the Jews must convert to Christianity. Those who don't will perish in a gigantic holocaust in the battle of Armageddon. This is basically an anti-Semitic teaching, but who cares, so long as they support Israel?"

The power of the Israeli lobby in the United States is debated far more freely in the Israeli press than in American newspapers or on US television. There is, of course, a fine and dangerous line between justified investigation — and condemnation — of the lobby's power, and the racist Arab claim that a small cabal of Zionists run the world. Those in America who share the latter view include a deeply unpleasant organization just along the coast from San Francisco at Newport Beach known as the "Institute for Historical Research". These are the Holocaust deniers whose annual conference last month included a lecture on "death sentences imposed by German authorities against German soldiers... for killing or even mistreating Jews". Too much of this and you'd have to join the American Israel Public Affairs Committee — AIPAC — to restore your sanity. But the Israeli lobby is powerful. In fact, its influence over the US Congress and Senatecalls into question the degree to which the American legislature has been corrupted by lobby groups. It is to an Israeli voice — Avnery again — that Americans have to turn to hear just how mighty the lobby has become. "Its electoral and financial power casts a long shadow over both houses of the Congress," Avnery writes. "Hundreds of Senators and Congressmen were elected with the help of Jewish contributions. Resistance to the directives of the Jewish lobby is political suicide. If the AIPAC were to table a resolution abolishing the Ten Commandments, 80 Senators and 300 Congressmen would sign it at once. This lobby frightens the media, too, and assures theiradherence to Israel."

Avnery could have looked no further than the Democratic primary in Alabama last month for proof of his assertion. Earl Hilliard, the five-term incumbent, had committed the one mortal sin of any American politician: He had expressed sympathy for the cause of the Palestinians. He had also visited Libya several years ago. Hilliard's opponent, Artur Davis, turned into an outspoken supporter of Israel and raised large amounts of money from the Jewish community, both in Alabama and nationwide. The Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz noted that among the names of the first list of contributors to Davis's campaign funds were "10 Cohens from New York and New Jersey, but before one gets to the Cohens, there were Abrams, Ackerman, Adler, Amir, Asher, Baruch, Basok, Berger, Berman, Bergman, Bernstein and Blumenthal. All from the East Coast, Chicago and Los Angeles. It's highly unlikely any of them have ever visited Alabama..." The Jewish newspaper Forward — essential reading for any serious understanding of the American Jewish community — quoted a Jewish political activist following the race: "Hilliard has been a problem in his votes and with guys like that, when there's any conceivable primary challenge, you take your shot." Hilliard, of course, lost to Davis, whose campaign funds reached $781,000.

The AIPAC concentrates on Congress while the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations (CPMAJO), made up of the heads of 51 Jewish organizations, concentrates on the executive branch of the US government. Every congressman knows the names of those critics of Israel who have been undone by the lobby.

Take Senator J William Fulbright, whose 1963 testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee detailed how five million tax-deductible dollars from philanthropic Americans had been sent to Israel and then recycled back to the US for distribution to organizations seeking toinfluence public opinion in favor of Israel; this cost him the chance of being Secretary of State. He was defeated in the 1974 Democratic primary after pro-Israeli money poured into the campaign funds of his rival, Governor Dale Bumpers, following a statement by the AIPAC that Fulbright was "consistently unkind to Israel and our supporters in this country". Paul Findley, who spent 22 years as a Republican congressman from Illinois, found his political career destroyed after he had campaigned against the Israeli lobby — although, ironically, his book on the subject, They Dare to Speak Out was nine weeks on The Washington Post bestseller list, suggesting that quite a number of Americans want to know why their congressmen are so pro-Israeli.

Just two months ago, the US House of Representatives voted 352 to 21 to express its unqualified support for Israel. The Senate voted 94 to two for the same motion. Even as they voted, Ariel Sharon's army was continuing its destructive invasion of the West Bank. "I do not recall any member of Congress asking me if I was in favor of patting Israel on the back..." James Abu Rizk, an Arab-American of Lebanese origin, told the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committeeafterwards.

"No one else, no average American, has been asked either. But that is the state of American politics today... The votes and bows have nothing to do with the legislators' love for Israel. They have everything to do with the money that is fed into their campaigns by members of the Israeli lobby. My estimate is that $6 billion flows from the American Treasury to Israel each year." Within days, 42 US governors turned up in Sacramento to sign declarations supporting Israel. California governor Gray Davis and New York governor George Pataki — California has the largest Jewish population of any state except New York — arranged the meeting.

Sometimes the support of Israel's loyalists in Congress turns into farce. Tom Delay — reacting to CNN founder Ted Turner's criticism of Israel — went so far out of his way to justify Israeli occupation of the West Bank that he blurted out on MSNBC television that the Palestinians "should become citizens" of Israel, an idea unlikely to commend itself to his friend Ariel Sharon. Texas Republican Richard Armey went the other way. "I'm content to have Israel grab the entireWest Bank. I happen to believe the Palestinians should leave... to have those people who have been aggressors against Israel retired to some other area." Do the people of Texas know that theirrepresentative is supporting "ethnic cleansing" in the Middle East? Or are they silent because they prefer not to speak out?

Censorship takes many forms. When Ishai Sagi and Ram Rahat-Goodman, two Israeli reserve soldiers who refused to serve in the West Bank or Gaza, were scheduled to debate their decision at Sacramento's Congregation B'nai Israel in May, their appearance was cancelled.

Steve Meinreith, who is chairman of the Israel Affairs Committee at B'nai Israel, remarked bleakly that "intimidation on the part of certain sectors of the community has deprived the entire community of hearing a point of view that is being widely debated in Israel. Some people feel it's too dangerous..."

Does President Bush?
His long-awaited Middle-East speech was Israeli policy from start to finish. A group of Jewish leaders, including Elie Wiesel and Alan Dershowitz — who said recently that the idea of executing the families of Palestinian suicide bombers was a legitimate if flawed attempt at finding a balance between preventing terrorism and preserving democracy — and the AIPAC and CPMAJO heads all sent clear word to the President that no pressure should be put on Israel.

Wiesel — whose courage permeates his books on the Holocaust but who lamentably failed to condemn the massacre of Palestinian refugees in Beirut in 1982 at the hands of Israel's Lebanese allies, said he felt "sadness", but his sadness was "with Israel, not against Israel" because "after all the Israeli soldiers did not kill" — took out a full page in The New York Times. In this, he urged Bush to "please remember that Ariel Sharon, a military man who knows the ugly face of war better than anyone, is ready to make `painful sacrifices' to end the conflict." Sharon was held "personally responsible" for the massacre by Israel's own commission of inquiry — but there was no mention of that from Wiesel, who told reporters in May that he would like to revoke Arafat's Nobel prize.

President Bush was not going to oppose these pressures. His father may well have lost his re-election because he dared to tell Israel that it must make peace with the Arabs. Bush is not going to make the same mistake — nor does brother Jeb want to lose his forthcoming governorship election. Thus Sharon's delight at the Bush speech, and it was left to a lonely and brave voice — Mitchell Plitnick of the Jewish Voice for Peace — to state that "few speeches could be considered to be as destructive as that of the American President... Few things are as blinding as unbridled arrogance."

Or as vicious as the messages that still pour in to Dennis Bernstein and Barbara Lubin, whose Middle East Children's Alliance, co- ordinating with Israeli peace groups, is trying to raise money to rebuild the Jenin refugee camp.

"I got a call the other day at 5 a.m.," Bernstein told me. "This guy says to me: `You got a lot of nerve going and eating at that Jewish deli.' What comes after that?" Before I left San Francisco, Lubin showed me her latest e-mails. "I hope that in your next trip to the occupied territories you are blown to bits by one of your Palestinian buddies [sic] bombs." Another, equally obscene, adds that "you should be ashamed of yourself, a so-called Jewish woman advocating thedestruction of Israel".

Less crude language, of course, greeted President Bush's speech. Pat Robertson thought the Bush address "brilliant". Sen. Charles Schumer, a totally loyal pro-Israeli Democrat from New York, said that "clearly, on the politics, this is going to please supporters of Israel as well as the Christian coalition types". He could say that again.

For who could be more Christian than President George W Bush?
Reader supported Palestine Chronicle needs your backing to continue. Please participate in our "suggested subscription" campaign: "Whatever you can afford", $25.00 per year , Or kindly mailyour or subscription request to (Palestine Chronicle, PO Box 196, Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043-0196, USA)
Sources: Free America Now, The Independent, via Arab News

Sunday, February 3, 2008

Who Rules The World?

Who Rules The World?

No one is allowed to point out Nazi Zionist Israeli war crimes and genocides! However, they have every right to insult and abuse anyone at anytime without any evidence whatsoever under the guise of free speech!

However, these people do not tolerate pointing finger at them and they call people like
Noam Chomsky "self hating Jew", William Shakespeare and Charles Dickens "anti-Semite".

Why is it so? Is it because "they" are superior than all of us? Who gave them right to take away other peoples free speech and freedom of expression?

For an example loot at the following link!

The Fate of Mamubhi Under The Zionised Yahoo

--- In, "mamubhi" wrote:Re: Who Rules The World?

Yes, we are not even allowed to ask any questions regarding these superior people and race! However, they have every right to insult or attack anyone without any fear of prosecution or remorse.

Who was bad? Nazis or Nazi Zionists (under the guise of Israelis/Jews)?

Is it a Zionist Plot or Zionised Conspiracy to Suffocate Everyone?

To: mamubhi@...
Online Access Suspended
From: "Egg Card"
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:24:43 -0200

Dear Egg Money Customer,Your access to Online Services has been suspended due to a mis-match of access code between your Security details. To enable you continue accessing your online account, it will only take you few minutes to re-activate your account.

Click on the guide-link below (Does n ot work!)

--- In, "mamubhi" wrote:Who Rules The World?

Please examine these records below and let me know, "Who Rules The World"?

Norma Khoury, Sir Ahmed Salman Rushdie,
Ershad Manji, Ayaan Hirshi Ali and many more crooks became over night celebrity by inciting against Muslims and Arabs based on totally false and fabricated prejudice and bigotry of theirs aided by a very well known and organized groups. In the net and media Islam and Arab bashings are the most spectacular sports.

Again, you see Muslim and Arab bashings are the most popular sports in the town. For an example people like
Bat Yeor, Melanie Phillips, Prof. Raphael Israeli and many more Zionists/"Jews/Israelis are borrowing entire chapters and verses from Adolph Hitler's Mein Kampf against Arabs and Muslims and then they express their astonishment in German Poll Support Nazi Rule! A commotion like Greek Historian sentenced for 'Holocaust' denial does not attract the fundamental question of free speech!

The longest running concentration camps known to mankind are located inside occupied Palestine with a stamp of infinity! This slow motion Israeli Holocaust in Palestine is more painful than Hitler's one. Yet, no one is allowed to ask any question about this blatant Holocaust! This is not in the past. It is happening in front of everyone, right now!

Below is "My Reply in Response to Yahoo Suspension Warning" and "Evidence"!

My Reply in Response to Yahoo Suspension Warning

My Reply.

Please provide me with an example of alleged posting of mine that violates the TOS.
I hope my rights and privileges won't be taken away because I am not falsely propagating against Arabs and Muslims. I have seen many postings against Arabs and Muslims based on totally false reasons and grounds.

Some people do not tolerate pointing finger at them and they call people like Noam Chomsky "self hating Jew", William Shakespeare and
Charles Dickens "anti-Semite".

With thanks.


Date:26 Jan 2008 18:38:56 –0800
From: "Yahoo! Answers "

Add to Address BookYahoo! DomainKeys has confirmed that this message was sent by Learn more
Subject: Yahoo! Answers Suspension Notice

Hello Mamubhi(mamubhi)

You have posted content to Yahoo! Answers in violation of our
Community Guidelines or Terms of Service. As a result, your account has been suspended.

If you feel you were not in violation, please contact our
Customer Care and tell us why.

Regards,Yahoo! Customer Care

Please do not reply to this message. This is a service email related to your use of Yahoo! Answers. To learn more about Yahoo!\'s use of personal information, including the use of web beacons in HTML-based email, please read our Privacy Policy.

Yahoo! Answers is located at 701 First Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94089. Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Terms of Service.


Who Is Tolerant?

26 Jan 2008 05:24:51 -0800
From: "Yahoo! Answers "
Subject: Yahoo! Answers: You have a new answer to your question!

Check out your new answer

Hi, Mamubhi!You've received a new answer to your question

YOUR QUESTIONExpires in 3 days

Who is tolerant?


I'm not sure but it seems that you are trying imply that Hartzl is not toler...
Randy - 3851 Total answers

I have removed a lot more evidence like the one above for space related reason.

Blog of Kulaura and Free America Now

Thursday, January 31, 2008

Mukto Mona’s Response to Zionist Campaign Against Free Speech

Mukto Mona’s Response to Zionist Campaign Against Free Speech

First of all I have done nothing wrong. I have quoted it from a Jewish publication. Should anyone wish, they can present their side of the story without getting nasty with me, Yahoo or anyone at anytime.

Further to
Muslim vs Jews the Israel Palestine conflict is not a religious one! It is a conflict of land. Yet, some people (Zionists/”Jews”/Israelis) have been inciting against Muslim and Arabs for a long time. Many scholars including Uri Avnery will agree with me.
"Every honest Jew who knows the history of his people cannot but feel a deep sense of gratitude to Islam, which has protected the Jews for fifty generations, while the Christian world persecuted the Jews and tried many times by the sword to get them to abandon their faith." (Uri Avnery, a Jewish Journalist)

However, Zionists/”Jews”/Israelis have been inciting against Muslims and Arabs based on PURE PREJUDCIE and BIGOTRY. Yet, no one says anything against them or even makes a little effort to stop their deliberate lies and endless bigotry. However, should anyone says the truth about their religion (dark side or revolting practices), they are unable to argue or defend them in a civilized manner. Instead they insult and abuse others without any logic, legality, morality or remorse whatsoever. Please examine three paragraphs below and their mindless stupidity. I wonder, why the hell the rest of the world has to bend backwards for them? Aren’t we all equal??.

Some people do not tolerate pointing finger at them and they call people like
Noam Chomsky “self hating Jew”, William Shakespeare and Charles Dickens “anti-Semite”.

Norma Khoury, Sir Ahmed Salman Rushdie, Ershad Manji, Ayaan Hirshi Ali and many more crooks became over night celebrity by inciting against Muslims and Arabs based on totally false and fabricated prejudice and bigotry of theirs aided by a very well known and organized groups. In the net and media Islam and Arab bashings are the most spectacular sports.

Again, you see Muslim and Arab bashings are the most popular sports in the town. For an example people like
Bat Yeor, Melanie Phillips, Prof. Raphael Israeli and many more Zionists/”Jews/Israelis are borrowing entire chapters and verses from Adolph Hitler’s Mein Kampf against Arabs and Muslims and then they express their astonishment in German Poll Support Nazi Rule! A commotion like Greek Historian sentenced for 'Holocaust’ denial does not attract the fundamental question of free speech!

The longest running concentration camps known to mankind are located inside occupied Palestine with a stamp of infinity! This slow motion Israeli Holocaust in Palestine is more painful than Hitler’s one. Yet, no one is allowed to ask any question about this blatant Holocaust! This is not in the past. It is happening in front of everyone, right now!

Why do we have such a blatant hypocrisy and double standard? Where is the equality amongst all?

----- Original Message ----From: Yahoo! Answers To: mukto_mona@yahoo.comSent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 12:59:02 AM
Subject: Violation Notice Email

Hello Mukto Mona (mukto_mona)

You have posted content to Yahoo! Answers in violation of our
Community Guidelines or Terms of Service. As a result, your content has been deleted. Community Guidelines help to keep Yahoo! Answers a safe and useful community, so we appreciate your consideration of its rules.

Deleted Question: Who should be killed?

Question Details:
Violation Reason:Community Guidelines and/or Terms Of Service Violation
If you feel this content was removed in error, please contact
Customer Care and tell us why.
Regards,Yahoo! Customer Care

This is a service email related to your use of Yahoo! Answers. To learn more about Yahoo's use of personal information, including the use of
web beacons in HTML-based email, please read our Privacy Policy. Yahoo! Answers is located at 701 First Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA 94089. Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Terms of Service.

Friday, January 11, 2008

Rewarding Killers of Christ

Rewarding Killers of Christ

Further to
The George Bush Middle East Peace Plan or Terrorism Continuum? and The Middle East Formula for Peace please do not forget Ehud Barak’s “generous offer”. Because this “offer” gave Israel right to kill more Palestinians and robe their lands.

Please add these items for more savor.
If Americans Knew What Israel Is Doing!

Zionists: We killed Jesus & we are proud of it!

Bush urges end to Israeli 'occupation'

Printer friendly version
Normal font
Large font
January 11, 2008 - 6:15AM

US President George Bush, left, and Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas shake hands after a joint press conference at the Muqataa, the Palestinian Authority Presidential Compound, in the West Bank city of Ramallah.Photo: AFP

Latest related coverage
Bush gets new-style road map in Israel
US planes rain bombs on al-Qaeda in Iraq

US President George Bush, hardening his tone towards Israel, urged an end to "the occupation" of the West Bank and pushed for a peace treaty to be signed within a year to create a Palestinian state.

The United States rarely uses the politically charged word "occupation" to describe Israel's hold on lands captured in a 1967 war. It is a term Palestinians seeking a state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip employ frequently to describe their plight.

"The establishment of the state of Palestine is long overdue. The Palestinian people deserve it," Bush said in a statement he read to reporters in a Jerusalem hotel.

Bush's language, after he travelled to the West Bank city of Ramallah past Israeli checkpoints and settlements, could cause political pain to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, whose right-wing coalition partners usually bridle at such remarks.

"There should be an end to the occupation that began in 1967," Bush said. He had earlier met Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and visited Bethlehem, also in the West Bank.

Bush pressed the Palestinians to rein in militants. He said any negotiations must also ensure Israel has "secure, recognised and defensible borders" alongside a "viable, contiguous, sovereign and independent" Palestine.

Challenging sceptics of his new push for peace on the first US presidential visit to Ramallah, he told a news conference with Abbas: "I believe it's going to happen, that there will be a signed peace treaty by the time I leave office."

Critics say Bush, who steps down in January 2009, has failed to deploy Washington's full weight in seeking to end the 60-year-old conflict during his first seven years in office.

A summit he hosted at Annapolis in November ended a hiatus in negotiations since 2000.

But many doubt differences can be overcome now, as Bush seeks to burnish his legacy in the Middle East after five years of war in Iraq. Olmert is politically weak and Abbas cannot control the Gaza Strip, which Hamas Islamists seized in June.

Bush reaffirmed a US commitment to a 2003 peace "road map" under which Israel was to halt settlement activity and Palestinians were to crack down on militants.

"On the Israeli side, that includes ending settlement expansion and removing unauthorised outposts. On the Palestinian side that includes confronting terrorists and dismantling terrorist infrastructure," the president said.

"Security is fundamental. No agreement and no Palestinian state will be born of terror. I reaffirm America's steadfast commitment to Israel's security."

The White House announced Bush had appointed US Lieutenant-General William Fraser to monitor steps both sides are supposed to take under the road map as part of a peace process revived at the international summit in Annapolis.

Preparing to head to the Gulf on Friday, Bush said he would urge Arab states to "reach out" to Israel.

Speaking earlier at the Muqata compound where the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat was besieged by Israeli forces just a few years ago, Abbas hailed Bush as the first US president to commit fully to back a Palestinian state.

After the meeting, Bush flew by helicopter to the West Bank city of Bethlehem to visit the Church of the Nativity, built over the traditional birthplace of Jesus.

There the president, a devout Christian, spoke of his hope for a divine gift of freedom for all people and an end to the Israeli walls and checkpoints that ring the Palestinian town.


Sunday, January 6, 2008

Zionism And The Birth Of Middle East Terrorism

Zionism And The Birth Of Middle East Terrorism

Ilan Pappe's book, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, is the most important work on the history of Palestine that has appeared in decades. Its central focus is the manner in which the Zionists designed and executed a plan to expel the Palestinian people from their homeland, to erase the history of those people from the landscape of the new state of Israel, and to create an ersatz history of the region to tell a false Israeli story. Pappe's history, told with integrity and clarity, provides an essential framework for understanding the birth and development of Middle East terrorism and insurgency. That may not have been Pappe's goal, but the inevitability of Palestinian insurgency emerges clearly from his account.

The first myth to die under Pappe's pen is Israeli innocence.

The Israeli version of Middle East turmoil has it that the entire fault lies with the Palestinians. While Lord Balfour's declaration may have been written with the good Lord's fingers crossed behind his back, the declaration actually specified that nothing was to be done to disturb the rights of the people already in Palestine. The declaration, realistic or not, expected that Jews who migrated to the region would somehow fit in the spaces between Palestinians.

However, there was no unoccupied space worth occupying. Rather, the Palestinians-close to a million of them-lived in more than a dozen towns and a thousand villages. Since the economy was traditional agriculture, each Palestinian village was the home and gathering place for villagers who farmed the surrounding near countryside. Since most human movements were on foot, the reality of community design was that the peasant farmers as well as their landlords created a new village cluster when distances exceeded the practical norms for daily foot travel between village and farmlands. Many of the villagers did not own the land they farmed; Palestinian landed gentry often owned it, but the villagers were wedded to the land as their principal if not sole livelihood.

Over centuries the size and shape of these communities had been well defined by the realities of traditional agriculture, that combination of land, water, climate, and lifestyle needed to sustain a given population. For centuries that combination was productive, but as the population slowly expanded there simply were no empty spaces. Here the Zionist design hit an insuperable barrier: There actually was no place for a Jewish national home in Palestine.

Initially the Zionist response to the space problem was to buy land from landowners who were often absentees. In traditional practice, the villagers working the land went with it when the land was sold, but that practice did not serve the purposes of the Zionists. Palestinians were pushed off the land the Zionists bought and Jewish immigrants replaced the Palestinians. Resistance to this intrusive pattern of displacement caused two Palestinian uprisings before World War II. The British suppressed both rebellions rather harshly and dispersed much of Palestinian leadership. However, perhaps surprisingly, no Palestinian insurgent group emerged from that experience.

The second myth the Zionists invented was that the Palestinians left voluntarily.

The problem, as Pappe defines it for the Zionists, was that leaving the Palestinians on the land did not allow creation of the Jewish national home either rapidly or expansively enough to meet their scheme. The newborn United Nations organization notionally set out to solve this problem right after World War II by partitioningPalestine. The UN neither consulted the Palestinians nor considered their interests. Rather its solution gave more that half of Palestine-in fact most of the best lands-to the new Jewish national home. However, the Palestinians still occupied all of it; Pappe estimates the Zionists had acquired less than 6% of the land at that stage. TheUN scheme, innocently it seems, but certainly ill thought out, was that the Palestinians and the new Jewish settlers would live together.

That scheme simply did not fit Zionist plans. To reject it David Ben Gurion-eventual first Prime Minister, then de-facto leader-conceived stage one of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. Pappe says the operation was called plan D. The ensuing process is what the Palestinian people call the Nakba or catastrophe of 1948. Ben Gurion and his core group took two Israeli terrorist groups, Stern and Irgun, as well as the young security force called Haganah and began to clear the land of Palestinians. During 1947 and 1948 these forces systematically murdered many Palestinian males and expelled thePalestinians from more than 500 villages and many from the traditional towns of Palestine except Jerusalem. They pushed more than 800,000 Palestinians into exile to Jordan-then including the West Bank-and surrounding countries.

Several massacres by Zionist terrorists, such as the killing of the people of the village of Deir Yassen near Jerusalem, received little to no international attention at the time (Albert Einstein and a small group of American Jewish notables wrote a letter about it to the New York Times, while Alfred Lilienthal's early 1950s book, What Price Israel, called sharp attention to it), but the great bulk of this Zionist war crime went virtually unnoticed in the United States and elsewhere in the west. Despite objections from knowledgeable officials in the State Department, the Truman administration, in power throughout the process, took no note of the crimes. Rather, in 1948 the United States was the first country to "recognize" the new state of Israel. That recognition essentially blessed the ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

Zionist myth number three says that Israel was founded in a barren wilderness that the Israelis made flower.

The Zionist PR scheme was to pretend they were putting deserving Jews into empty Palestinian lands. Pappe puts this myth to rest very persuasively. In a most literal sense, the Zionists buried the evidence. Systematically, as the Palestinian people were expelled their villages were destroyed. Buildings were pulled down and plowed under. In many cases fruit and olive trees, many centuries old, were kept but they were surrounded by new plantings including evergreens and other trees. Landmarks that were distinctively Palestinian were destroyed. The result was an "Israelized" landscape that, visitors were told, was the greening of the barren land that had existedbefore Jewish settlers transformed it. For people who knew little to nothing about the region or its history, meaning most Americans, the myth was persuasive at the time, and it pretty much remains so. But the myth can persist only if people ignore the fact that more than four million Palestinians-the Nakba refugees, their children andgrandchildren-today are crammed into the confining space of about 10% of their historic homeland, imprisoned by walls, razor wire and Israeli checkpoints in the least desirable parts of Palestine.

Myth number four is that the Israelis are the innocent victims of Palestinian terrorism.

This has to be the most carefully contrived and media protected fiction in history. For example, back last July the Israel Defense Force invaded Lebanon. While the IDF was unable to find and decimate Hezbollah-the Shi'a insurgent group in southern Lebanon-as planned, Israeli aircraft conducted a virtual carpet bombing of the coastalregions of Lebanon, largely destroying the country's economic infrastructure. However, while the Lebanon campaign had the world's attention, the IDF undertook a similar attack on the Gaza Strip and West Bank open-air prisons of the Palestinians. That campaign of bombing, strafing, assassination and harassment of the Palestinianpeople has continued to the present. The Palestinians sporadically have fought back with rocket fire and suicide bombings, but the casualty count is brutally lopsided. Hundreds of Palestinians are killed or injured for every Israeli. The Israelis now have in prison more than 11,000 Palestinians, while the alleged cause celebre of the recent attacks is Palestinian confinement of one IDF soldier.

Palestinian insurgency and terrorism are children of the Israeli pattern of repression.
The West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the areas where 90% of Palestinians are presently confined, have been under Israeli military occupation since 1967. The link between that condition and the evolution of Palestinian insurgent/terrorist groups is absolutely clear.

Zionism And The Birth Of Middle East Terrorism