Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 623 (since 2010-04-23 03:59:57)

Just doing the internet ;-)


Showing comments 623 - 601

  • When a U.S. president demanded inspections of a nuclear facility in the Middle East (and failed)
    • Turn on your sarcasm detector, Kris.

      Thanks, RoHa.

      What we have in the case of the Zionist movement and Israel is a pattern of a serial perpetrator of murder, mass murder and terror. This is a well established fact. That pattern started well before the creation of Israel, see eg the murder of Jacob Israël de Haan on 30/6/1924 or the King David Hotel bombing on 22/7/1946. That murderous pattern continued after the creation of Israel, see for the early days for example the murder of Folke Bernadotte on 17/9/1948 and then read "Israel's sacred terrorism" based on Moshe Sharett's Personal Diary:

      link to

      Since the early days of Zionism there are so many proven Zionist and Israeli state sponsored murders that it is hard to keep tracking them all. The murderous pattern of Israeli behaviour continues to the very recent time, think for example of the attampted assassination of Khaled Mashal on 25/9/1997, the car bomb killing Imad Mughniyah on 12/2/2008, the murder of Brig Gen Mohammed Suleiman on 1/8/2008 (which was just recently proven by US documents to be an Israeli job), the assassination of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh on 19/1/2010 or the recent serial murder of Iranian scientists.

      The murder of Jacob Israël de Haan proves that the Zionist movement targeted also jews. It was not a single case. Naeim Giladi wrote in detail about his role as a Zionist in attacking Iraqi jews on behalf of Israel in his book: Ben-Gurion's Scandals: How the Haganah and the Mossad Eliminated Jews. We also know from things like Operation Susannah and the attempt to sink the USS Liberty that Israel also has already attacked US targets in the past.

      Generally I'ld say Israeli murders and terrors fit in two motive categories: either Israel committed state sponsored murders to get rid of anactual or perceived enemy like Khaled Mashal or Imad Mughniyah or someone deemed otherwise harmful to Israeli interests like Folke Bernadotte, or Israel committed acts of terror and murder with the intention of blaming the crime on someone else, ie perpetraiting "false flag operations", like it was the case with attacking Iraqi jews or Operation Susannah. One regular motivation for Israeli false flag ops was to enlist the US in fighting Israel's real or perceived enemies, ie starting US-led wars of aggression in the service of Israel. AIPAC/WINEP operatives publicly talk about using such "options" in the service of starting wars Israel wanted to get started:

      link to

      A typical Israeli method to ensure false blame was faking signal intelligence. Victor Ostrovsky wrote about how the Mossad did falsely blame Libya of terror in his time with radio signal boxes placed by the Mossad in Libya for that purpose. In the case of the Ghouta chemical false flag terror attack, Israel simply provided the US with faked signal intelligence, essentially saying to Obama: now you must go to war, because we proved hereby that Syria crossed your chemical red lines.

      So, now comes the funny thing. Despite this whole record of serial Israeli murder, terror and false flag terror targeting likewise enemies and friends, terrorists and innocents, Arabs and Westerners, Muslims, Christians and Jews, Syrians and Americans, and clear motives for Israel to perpetrate the crimes, there still exists a big taboo of talking about and investigating a possible Israeli sponsorship of the JFK murder and 9/11. It's even deemed anti-semitic to speak about this.

    • Who benefits from a big crime like the Kennedy murders or 9/11 is purely accidential and shall in no way be included in a final judgement on who did it. Who says anything else can only be an anti-semite. Just look at Operation Susannah or the USS Liberty to see how these anti-semitic conspiracy terrorists work to delegitimize the single and only jewish state on earth.

      That is, while the true role of the sole Jewish State is totally different. Israel doesn't do such things like terror, but provides valuable intelligence on significant acts of terror like the valuable intelligence provided by Israeli intelligence proving that the Syrian government perpetrated the Ghouta chemical attack, to which POTUS almost responded by bombing Syria:

      link to

      But than POTUS decided otherwise and made the Chemical deal with the Syrian government and the Iran deal instead, thereby displeasing Israel. So he thanked Israel for what she does.

  • Iran deal is overwhelmingly supported by American voters -- 54 to 38 percent
    • Here is another interesting US poll:

      Poll: Overwhelming US Majority Says Israel Should Receive No Aid Boost due to US / Iran “Deal”

      link to

    • David

      Yes, I think that is the real story:

      Democrats split 75 to 17 (pro Iran deal)

      To me it looks like Bibi and AIPAC are heading for a major trainwreck likely to result in serious permament damage to the power of the Israeli lobby.

      When Bibi, Israel and AIPAC now go against the deal as they do, they will very likely transform US support for Israel into a partisan political football. That will almost inevitably bring big discussions on long tabooed subjects regarding Israel to public attention in the US like the colonial-style law making it a duty for a US president to guarantee Israels QME. And finally Israel and AIPAC will lose big, because when the Democrats will single out Republicans on following a foreign leader and put up slogan like "When Americans made huge sacrifices fore a revolution against being a British colony, they did it not done to be subjugated by another country some time later - even if it's a good friend like Israel. Vote American, Vote Democrat" the Republicans will have a hard time to maintain their pattern of following Bibi on whatever he does.

      I can already see the lobby crashing before my eye.

    • Feedback from German polls regarding the Iran deal

      YouGov 18/7/2015: Majority of 63% of Germans welcomes Iran deal, while 18% oppose it

      link to

      Forsa 24/7/2015: Majority of 85% of Germans welcomes improved relations with Iran, 70% want more engagement from German business in Iran

      link to

  • 'If we don't take out Iran,' it will reenact the Holocaust in US and Israel -- Steven Emerson to Times Square rally
  • The global arms race between the US and China is devastating Africa and the Middle East
    • Keith

      The empire is on a rampage, destroying any country not sufficiently subservient to the imperial agenda.

      Yes, that's the core of the problem. And, of course, any ruler doing major business with a competitor of the empire, like China, Russia or Iran, is not considered "sufficiently subservient to the imperial agenda" and their country a candidate for destruction by plots of the empire.

      So, whenever a ruler does major business projects with China, or Russia or Iran, the rulers next logical question for his Chinese business partners is: You made the best commercial offer for our business project, but I know, if I give the project to you, I will be subject of imperial regime change plans and my country will be a candidate for destruction by the empire, so can you sell me some effective weapons to help defend myself and my country against attacks from Washington and it's lackeys?

      That China, in cooperation with Russian partners, has now good answers to this question, is indeed partly a sign of an arms race popping up as a side effect of growing Chinese industrial competitiveness. One may see it the problem as a side effect of a historic competitive power transition from the US to China, usually called the "Asian century." But, at least so far, there is no moral equivalence, but a huge difference between US and Chinese arms exports, the difference between aggressor and defender, because the basic global problem currently is - like you correctly said - that the "empire is on a rampage, destroying any country not sufficiently subservient to the imperial agenda."

    • Donald
      I don't have starry-eyed vision of China’s role. I know the Chinese way of doing business is about making money and often causes a lot of problems for many people.

      However, I nevertheless see a huge difference between Chinese and US business customs, especially in regard to arms sales and involvement in armed conflicts, and that difference isn't reflected in this article here.

      China is doing business with governments, be them good or bad, from building stuff and infrastructure to arms, and often gets natural resources in return. In this way China is quite similar to the classic colonial and imperial powers, from US over France to the Britain. The main difference is not that the US, Britain and France do these things, too. The main difference is that the US and their imperial comrades are also in the business of murdering foreign heads of states, armed separatism and regime changes, often ostensibly for lofty goals like promoting democracy, human rights and good governance, but in reality to overthrow whatever government they dislike, and that US-led behaviour is exactly what destroys countries and what's most devastating for much of Africa, Western Asia and many other countries of the third world. See eg Somalia, Ruanda, Sudan, Yugoslavia, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine and Yemen for the effects of the US behaviour of trying to do regime changes whereever it pleases the US rulers and their buddies.

      China is not engaged in such armed regime change business, but helps legitimate governments, however odious they may be, to keep their power, and that's a big difference, whatever odious behaviour the Chinese employ otherwise.

    • I think the article is grossly misleading because it suggests a moral equivalence between the crimes of the predatory US empire and it's allies and lackeys in crime, like Britain, France, Israel and the wahhabi regime of the Sauds, and the PR China selling legitimate governments weapons to protect themselves and their people against the wars of aggression and other regime change attempts of the lackeys and vassals of the US empire.

      See Sudan: for more than five decades the US destabilized Sudan to split up the country for getting the oil there. And Israel and it's lobby was first buddy of the US empire there with bloody false propaganda campaigns like "Save Darfur." So, after about half a century that the US sowed terror in Sudan it had success: the country split up. But, when that moment - for which the US and Israel have worked so long - finally came the whole country was not a nice price, but a wreck - both, the rest of old Sudan and the new South Sudan. So the US wasn't interested in owning that burden anymore and Sudan and South Sudan turned to China for help. China did help, both of the Sudanese governments: with investments, with credit and with arms to be able to claim authority over the land the governments are responsible for.Of course, without the authority of government the country would sink even lower, regardless whether the government - which was installed by decades of US terror support in the case of South Sudan- is considered to be a better or a worse one. And now comes Loewenstein and says China supports a bad government. It looks like a joke.

      And elsewhere in Africa it's similar: China built houses in Libya and invested in oil. The US and it's lackeys destroyed the country with war and terror. And Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, one country after another destroyed by the US and it's allies from Israel, NATO and GCC. A similar thing happened in Nigeria, even as Israels lackey Jonathan Goodluck ruled there: thanks to the western and Wahhabi terror support, Biafra - an early version of the completely lying western Save Darfur campaign - is everywhere in Nigeria while China builds a railway for Nigeria. And don't forget Somlia. The US and it's western friends were successful there in disempowering "communist dicator" Siad Barre and the result is: it looks like everywhere where the US had it's fingers in. Elsewhere it's like in Ruanda, where a US proxy war against French proxies killed hundred thousands. And Angola, Zimbabwe, Nicaragua, El Salvador and so on and so on. But, of course, Antony, you blame China, as if there was a moral equivalence between doing business with foreign governments like China does and destroying countries like the US does it. You must be kidding.

  • Democrats are 'uncomfortable' with Iran deal because Netanyahu is so 'influential in our country' -- Rep. Ellison
    • In Vienna today the Israel lobby (Stop the Bomb) organized a protest against a conference for business opportunities in Iran. The protest against the Iran business conference was announced days before in all national media, TV and so on. And then, today, only 6 (in words Six!) protesters have shown up to protest against dealing with Iran in Vienna.

      Here is a pic of the protest from the organizer:

      link to

      A major Austrian newspapers makes fun of the no show of the mighty Israel lobby, putting the number of 6 anti-Iran-protesters in the headline of their report from the conference:

      link to

      The Israel lobby seems to have huge problems mobilizing significant numbers of protesters.

    • Israel's prestige is likely based on her ability to organize huge rallies in New York.

      The Guardian reports:

      Iran nuclear deal with US sees thousands protest in Times Square

      An estimated 10,000 people, consisting mainly of pro-Israel supporters, chant ‘kill the deal’ and demand Congress vote down proposed nuclear agreement


      link to

      The only thing a bit irritating with that huge 10,000 strong rally on Times Square is the picture of that rally attached to the Guardian report:

      link to

      To me the pitucure looks more like about 70 anti-deal-protesters, if at all. A video of that protest doesn't show many more anti-deal-protesters neither:

      link to

      But anyway, the Guardian reporter and other zionist mass media reporting on this huge event seems to have found about 9930 more of AIPAC's anti-Iran-protestors than I did. Even when factoring in the pro-Iran-deal protesters then the numbers of people showing up for AIPAC seem not have to been close to what was reported. See Pro-deal-protesters, same time, same place:

      link to

      To me the pics of that anti-Iran-protest on Times Square look like AIPAC & Israel ran out of money so they couldn't even pay enough people to show up on Times Sqare to make a nice pic, but the Zionist media tries to portray the protest a success for Israel.

    • Taking on the open battle against he deal the lobby did a huge mistake.

      “A lobby is like a night flower: it thrives in the dark and dies in the sun.”

      (Steven Rosen, who was then the director of foreign-policy issues at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.)

      I'm convinced that now that the lobby is open in the sun and everyone can see it, it's going to die.

  • Nine reasons Obama is going to win on Iran. The first: Netanyahu
    • Has anyone read Slate recently? I usually avoid zionist hasbara outfits where I can, but this article in Slate caught my attention. Quote:

      Why Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Neocons Hate the Iran Deal

      Hint: It has nothing to do with the deal.
      By Fred Kaplan

      ... What Netanyahu and King Salman want Obama to do is to wage war against Iran—or, more to the point, to fight their wars against Iran for them. That is why they so virulently oppose U.S. diplomacy with Iran—because the more we talk with Iran’s leaders, the less likely we are to go to war with them. Their view is the opposite of Winston Churchill’s: They believe to war-war is better than to jaw-jaw. ... Netanyahu is sure to lobby against this deal on Capitol Hill in the coming weeks, just as he lobbied against the negotiations in his dreadful but politically potent speech before Congress in March. Republicans—keen to cheer the Israeli prime minister and to pummel their own president—probably won’t realize that they’re being played as pawns in someone else’s game. ...

      I bet the US public is not keen to be used as proxy for other nations fighting their stupid and selfish wars, even if they are allies and best friends. I think if that will become a main discussion narrative in the US during the next months AIPAC and their pawns may be finished soon.

  • Kristol frets that he walked into Obama's 'trap,' and Rubio says he'll demand Iran recognize 'Israel's right to exist'
    • What I find interesting is that it so long for Netanyahu's guys to figure out that the Iran bill in Congress meant a defeat for them in the agreed form.

      I have said that four days ago, very explitcitely here in a comment on Mondo Weiss, directly after news of the deal on the bill was going around:

      I think it’s a pretty good victory for Obama. Here’s why.

      Obama and the P5+1 can now go on and terminating the deal. I expect the deal have the following parameters: Iran is committing to some overviews and limitations of it’s nuclear programm, while P5+1 commits to drop all UNSC and unilateral sanctions regarding Iran’s nuclear programme. In the negotiated contract there will be something like a clause, like when US Congress blocks lifting of US sanctions, other P5+1 will go ahead anyway and regard US secondary sanctions as sanctions against them and fight back, while Iran has fewer nuclear commitments to fulfill, if congress blocks US sanction relief. ...

      link to

      Why did the Israel lobby and the neocons needed so much time to fgure this out? It sounds to me that they had to wait for an order what to do, but Netanyahu was somewhere partying and generating more empty bottles that his wife can return to receive some money from that, and as long as Bibi was partying, the neocons were on hold.

  • Obama got Senate to reject 'two of Netanyahu's demands' on Iran (but the 'NYT' won't touch that angle)
    • I think it's a pretty good victory for Obama. Here's why.

      Obama and the P5+1 can now go on and terminating the deal. I expect the deal have the following parameters: Iran is committing to some overviews and limitations of it's nuclear programm, while P5+1 commits to drop all UNSC and unilateral sanctions regarding Iran's nuclear programme. In the negotiated contract there will be something like a clause, like when US Congress blocks lifting of US sanctions, other P5+1 will go ahead anyway and regard US secondary sanctions as sanctions against them and fight back, while Iran has fewer nuclear commitments to fulfill, if congress blocks US sanction relief.

      For Iran, US sanctions don't matter much, if UNSC sanctions are lifted and EU & China won't accept US secondary sanctions on Iran anymore. For ordinary Iranians it means they need to fly Airbus only instead of being able to choose between Airbus and Boeing, and similar, they go drive French & German cars, and no GM & Ford. For Iran's oil & gas business it means, EU, Russia & China will help develop it without US. So what?

      So, when the deal is concluded, US congress will be in a weak position: not lifting US sanctions would simply mean the US economy can't get market shares in Iran, while Iran has fewer nuclear commitments to fulfill, and is not hurt much at all by US unilateral sanctions. EU, China & Russia will be happy to provide everything what the US economy would have hoped to sell to Iran. And, of course, Iran would have to sell it's oil for Euros instead of Dollars, so sorry.

      That may well be the situation when the US congress gets the deal to review US sanctions relief regarding Iran.

  • Gunter Grass became 'persona non grata' for 2012 poem exposing Israeli nuclear hypocrisy
    • Philip

      The main achievement of Günter Grass with his poem was not exposing the Israeli nuclear hypocrisy, but exposing the German guilt mechanism.

      That's what the lobby and Netanyahu made so angry. The Nuclear hypocrisy was axpoed by Mordachai Vanunu before. But what Grass did, was that he exposed that it is immoral for Germans, though rightly blamed for crimes against jews, to support Israeli crimes against world peace.

    • RIP

      It's likely that there is this one one poem, what's outstanstanding, what is the one real historic achievement of Günter Grass. As a baby boomer blessed with the gift of late birth I could never stand anything Günter Grass wrote, Nobel Prize here, or there.

      But I remember quite well that early in 2012 I had someone questioning me on Israel and Germany on my blog. He was especially interested in topics of guilt and the Israel lobby, and very afraid of bad information that could get him into bad waters.

      I have no idea who that was, but I told it him all. From BDS for apartheid, over Stephen Walt's book on the Israel lobby up to the German guilt komplex as I knew it from Jews from Neturei Karta, who where in Germany for Quds day, I told the commenting guy all I knew as best as I could. And a couple of months later: Boom! The poem Grass has published met all the most important topics I had in that discussion with that anonymous comment writer.

      I have still no idea whether my dialogue partner was Grass or not, but it struck me.

      However, whatever the truth is. That one poem was the one masterpiece of work what makes you a real hero and a historical significant person in the global struggle for justice. Thank You.

      Rest in Peace, Günter Grass.

  • Does Schumer have any idea how angry his constituents will be if he torpedoes his president on Iran?
    • Meanwhile in Israel:

      Netanyahu told cabinet: Our biggest fear is that Iran will honor nuclear deal

      Netanyahu expressed concern that Iranian compliance with the agreement will lull the world into complacency over the bomb threat, according to officials.

      Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at a recent meeting of the inner cabinet that if a comprehensive nuclear agreement between Iran and the six world powers is indeed signed by the June 30 deadline, the greatest concern is that Tehran will fully implement it without violations, two senior Israeli officials said.

      link to

  • Yarmouk-based NGO chronicles week of ISIS attacks on the Palestinian refugee camp in Syria
    • Oh, what tragic and sad bloody irony.

      From Al Akhbar, January 13, 2014: Yarmouk – A Palestinian Responsibility

      The camp’s most prominent group is Aknaf Bayt al-Maqdis Brigades (Brigades in the Environs of Jerusalem), formed by members of Hamas, including a bodyguard of Hamas political bureau chief Khaled Meshaal. Hamas claims the group leaders are no longer within its organizational structure, but still refuses to condemn their actions. Some of these militants provided assistance to armed groups outside the camp and even outside Damascus countryside.

      So, Aknaf Bayt al-Maqdis Brigades is essentially Hamas, which teamed up with Israel & Al Qaeda and betrayed the Syrian government after the Zionist-sponsored war on Syria started in 2011. And now this:

      It was then realized that Nusra had allowed ISIS into the camp, giving them access via streets they had been controlling previously. The two have now joined forces against Aknaf Beit Al Maqdis and other volunteer Palestinian fighters.

      Al Qaeda betrayed Hamas. How could they? And then this:

      Aknaf Beit Al Maqdis, along with those who had volunteered that day (in total about 500 fighters), waited for reinforcements to arrive from other armed opposition groups. These fighters came from Babilla and Beit Sahem.

      So, the brutal "siege" of the Syrian army on Yarmouk camp claimed by Hamas & Co seems not to be the truth. Even hundreds of fighters can access the Yarmouk camp from other terrorist infested areas near Damascus.

      Meanwhile the Syrian government does it's best to help the civilians leave the terrorist infested Yarmouk camp. SANA reports (SANA, 05/04/2015: Thousands of residents flee terrorism-torn Yarmouk Camp):

      Up to 2000 people have fled in the past two days, who were moved to government-run makeshift centers in the al-Tadamun and al-Zahira neighborhoods.

      Time for Hamas to stop their sectarian-driven struggle against Syria.

  • Now Obama needs to 'compensate' Netanyahu -- NYT pipes Israeli propaganda (Update)
    • Annie
      Thanks a lot for your reference to Taxis great blog article. Yes, it looks like big "change" is underway, and this time the cards are not stacked in Israels favour anymore.

      As I'm pessimistic that the Saud's are able to deliver the policy changes demanded from them to get that whole chaos stopped, I expect the House of Saud to be removed from power, and, possibly, "their" country, Saudi Arabia, being split up, perhaps not formally, but de facto, into two or three.

    • Annie

      There's nothing sweet in this red carpet treatment for the Saudi king.

      Obama will likely ask the Saudi king in Camp David to swallow some bitter political pills or see his kingdom vanish. What Obama likely will demand there from King Salman is:

      1) Saudi Arabia must align with Obama in his fight against Netanyahu and not the other way round, and also influence it's allies to do this, especially GCC, Jordan, Egypt, Morocco and Pakistan
      2) Saudi Arabia must end hostility with Iran and the resistance and cooperate with Iran on regional issues, including Palestine. Iran has already said it's willing to cooperate with the Saudis.
      3) Stop Saudi's stupid war on Yemen, and go out of this with a defeat coated in face-saving sugar

      If King Salman refuses to do this, Obama will promise King Salman to stop politically supporting Saudi's war on Yemen, open UNSC doors to sanctions and ICC prosecution against Saudia, and Obama will not come to the Saudis rescue, when the Houthis march through Saudia to conquer Riyadh.

      Al Manar today announced that following the call for general mobilization, which the Houthis announced after the beginning of the Saudi bombing campaign, so far 642.000 Yemini people signed up with the Houthis to voluntarily fight against the Saudis:

      link to

      Netanyahu can do nothing to save the Saudi king from the consequences of his own stupid decision to wage war against Yemen, but Obama and Iran can.

    • "After"

      One more detail. Obama called Netanyahu directly "after" he spoke about the deal with some important people in the region. Quote JPost:

      Obama already called Saudi Arabia's King Salman bin Abdulaziz al-Saud to discuss the deal. He invited Salman and the Gulf Cooperation Council to Camp David for a summit to continue conversations on Iran.

      link to

      So we see how "the American" rushed to speak with Big Bibi after the deal to listen to his "lectures."

  • How Obama won on Iran
    • just
      The whole resistance is up to that. Didn't you see how Hassan Nasrallah smiled in his speech on Yemen? As sad as this bloody crime is, the stupid Saudi aggression on Yemen is very likely the one crime too much committed by the axis of arrogance and ignorance. The resistance now got the Sauds by their balls. The likely outcome is a policy change in Saudi Arabia to team up with the axis of resistance, be it by an unlikely sudden enlightening of the Saudi regime or a regime change in Riyadh. The stakes are high as never. Just imagine for a second, how Bibi's world looks like if Riyadh, and all their client regime, from Islamabad over Kuwait and Aman up to Cairo, suddenly team up with Iran and the resistance. But also are the chances for a crucial victory of the resistance. As chaos is the best result the Sauds can theoretically achieve in Yemen, but chaos in Yemen would mean the destabilization of Saudi Arabia, too, there is virtually no path to victory for the Saudi zio-wahhabi coalition in Yemen. And Ansarullah made it very clear, that, if the Saudi aggression on Yemen continues their war goal will be regime change in Riyadh. Is there anyone who thinks it's a good idea and would do a lot to help them? I certainly would. Let's wait and see, who else will.

      Have a look at some videos from Yemen:

      link to

      link to

      These brave guys are not only marching to liberate Yemen, but they also march to liberate Riyadh and al Quds. They are mostly very poor, and often poorly educated, too, but one thing they mastered very well: fighting.

    • Page: 6
    • Harry

      Yemen is a brutal and bloody war launched by the zionist wahhabi axis to undo the results of this deal. However, it is bound to fail. The result can very well be the unmaking of the kingdom of Netanyahu's staunchest ally, the Sauds.

      link to

      The Sauds may rescue themselves from the consequences of their crimes in Yemen if they align their kingdom with the axis of resistance, though. Anyway, the Saudi war on Yemen may well prove to be a crucial event in the long struggle to successfully liberate Palestine.

      Did anyone remark that King Salman endorsed the Iran deal - thereby backstabbing his best buddy Bibi?

      link to

      Oh, what was such a statement painful for King Salman! But he needs Obama very much now for the mess he created in Yemen, and, due to Yemen, he will need Obama in the future, also, and Iran, too. So expect more good news to come from that corner.

  • Netanyahu says US is part of new 'axis'!
    • I wonder when the great leader of the free, Benyamin Netanyahu, will give his IDF forces the order to bomb Switzerland.

      Because obviously, in an axis "Iran-Lausanne-Yemen" Switzerland is the central part.

      Or maybe Netanyahu doesn't mean Switzerland, but he meant an axis "Iran-US-Britain-France-China-Russia-Germany-Yemen" is standing up against the dictates of a Western Asian apartheid regime calling itself Israel, being always at the heart of the international community? But an axis "Iran-Switzerland-Yemen" seems to be more easily dismissed by the sole superpower in the world as an axis "Iran-US-Britain-France-China-Russia-Germany-Yemen," doesn't it?

      Btw: In German we easily speak of a European axis Paris-Berlin-Moscow - we did so a lot when the US invaded Iraq - but noone thinks of it as having anything to do with Nazis.

  • White House will go after AIPAC next -- Newsweek
    • On a sidenote, there is one more problem brewing for the Israel lobby.

      Netanyahus best arab allies, the Saudis, are totally dependent on Obama to give them cover for their war in Yemen in the UN security council.

      As Britain and France stay at the fence, and Russia and China are opposed, the Saudis have in their Yemen war absolutely no cover from the security council except Obama. Netanyahu wants it as much as the Sauds that Iran's friends are crushed in Yemen, but both, the Sauds and Netanyahu are dependent on Obama to make that operation of a proxy war against Irans interests continue.

  • Apartheid is no longer verboten word for Israel in 'NYT' and 'CNN'
    • Well, 9 years after a former US president called Israel an apartheid state a major liberal propaganda sheet in the US doesn't exclude this anymore from the debate.

      So I'm very hopeful that the same major liberal propaganda sheet in the US will only need 9 more years to let the debate go, whether Israel is a terrorist state supporting Al Qaeda terrorists like those belonging to Nusra Front. I'm so happy.

      And, what does make me even more happy is, that after 9 more years, ie 18 years from now, the major liberal propaganda sheet in the US, NYT, may perhaps even permit discussions on more controversial topics like why Israel tried to sink the USS liberty. I'm so happy.

      And, after 9 more years, ie 27 years from now, the major liberal propaganda sheet in the US, NYT, may perhaps even permit discussions on even more controversial topics like how fine it as for Israel that JFK was killed since it meant there was no obstacle in the way anymore for the Israeli bomb. I'm so happy.

      And, after 9 more years, ie 36 years from now, the major liberal propaganda sheet in the US, NYT, may perhaps even permit discussions on even more controversial topics like what did Benjamin Netanyahu had in mind, when he said, that Israel profited from one thing, and that was the 9/11 attacks. I'm so happy.

      I can't await the year 2051 when we all - may be - can freely discuss possible Israeli hands in major terror attacks in major liberal propaganda sheets in the US. However, I'm not optimistic and I fear the Israel lobby will find ways to silence us all before this date comes.

  • 'Do US Jews need a Jewish state for our safety?' debate begins in wake of Netanyahu victory
    • Sorry for dropping a comment and then not coming back for a long time to reply.

      Of course, I'm real. And let me say I'm neither in love with a jewish Zionist state nor with a German Aryan state, and not with any other racial, ethnical or religiously exclusive artificially built states. If Christian, Islamic or Jewish is a desciption of a state, I'm fine with that, but if has something like a cleaning or converting agenda to achieve it, I'm totally opposed.

      Here in Berlin with my friends I recently had a very similar discussion. The argument is, that after all the crimes that Germans did to jews, isn't it understandable if jews say they get psychologically ill if they have to sit with the racist and murderous gentiles in the same state always fearing the next racist gentile massacres will get them soon and to protect against that jews need their own state - just like women beaten by their men shall be offered shelter in women houses? If so, isn't it morally the right thing to do to support the one and only "jewish state" - the Zionist state of Israel?

      Well, and that's it. I think, regarding the first question: yes, it's understandable and because of the German crimes it would be morally right to support that desire. But the answer to the second question is "no" - it was wrong and it is still wrong to support building a Zionist state in Palestine because Germans did the most ugly crimes to jews - because it completely violates and denies the rights of Palestinians, who did not such crimes against jews as the Germans did. So, if the establishment of a Jewish state was morally the right thing to do because of German crimes where should it be built? The answer is clear: on German territory. And the Germans accepted huge losses of territory after WWII, because the Germans understand what crimes they did so they had to give that. And the Germans also accepted that they had to leave ethnically most mixed areas in eastern Europe, because their neighbors didn't want to live together with the German monsters anymore. So why didn't jews get a chunk of Germany after WWII, just like the four allied powers all got a chunk of Berlin? It's not because the Germans wouldn't have given that but because the Zionists were not interested in a chunk of Germany, they wanted Palestine. And that's still the situation, even when one considers that cleaning a chunk of Germany today would be much more difficult than after WWII.

      Just imagine some very rich countries like Germany were fed up with the Palestine conflict and willing to build a brand new Israel on newly to be created territory won by making land from the open sea so that Israel would no more built on robbed Palestinian land and the conflict in Palestine thereby baseless. Would the Zionists take it? They wouldn't, even if the newly built land would be much nicer, because they want Jerusalem. I think beside Zionist rightwing chauvinism it's mainly jewish mythology what drives that conflict in Palestine - and that what makes that conflict so difficult. It's hard to find a rational solution for a myth.

    • Phil,

      though I'm not jewish I do strongly believe that you mix two important questions into one. You ask "Do US Jews need a Jewish state for our safety?" However you don't ask "Is the zionist state in Palestine a 'Jewish state' which (US) Jews need for their safety?" I think the difference between these two questions is enormous - it can make the difference in the answer. I personally would like to offer my hometown Berlin and the surroundings up to the Baltic sea as part of a just compensation for what jews suffered by the hands of Germans, and I think Germans would understand what crimes Germans have done to jews so they are obliged to give that, however, I nevertheless believe Palestinians didn't do these crimes and therefore the Zionists built their state in the wrong place.

      PS: This your statement I find just ugly:

      “I have stated for a long time that I don’t feel that need: that actually, American Jews need to extend the elements of our own lived American experience to others. The great principles of protecting minority rights and the separation of church and state are at the core of our incredible experience in the U.S., so let us pay that good fortune forward by promoting those ideas wherever we have influence.”

      My comment on this: there is nothing to be proud of for immigrants into America in almost exterminating the indigenous people of America. The people adherent to the European misculture have a penchant for exterminating people they define as others far away or close by. Europeans did such genocidal crimes in Africa, Asia and America, and later in Europe, too, but that should be a source of shame, nothing to be proud of, and at the very least the ideological foundations should be nothing to be exported into the world.

      And as everyone who checks the twitter hashtags #blacklivesmatter or #Gitmo can see, rights of powerless minorities are not well protected in the US. Looking back at histoy the US state is based on European massacres and genocide against indigenous people. I sincerely hope that the US comes to peace with the popultion it has now, but I also sincerely hope, the US stops promoting it's flawed ideas wherever it has influence. I don't like to see such mass murderous efforts to promote ideas of the US anywhere anymore. I have seen enough of the results of these efforts in Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Somalia, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine and other places to be deeply fed up with any and all US promotion of any ideas in foreign countries.

  • Netanyahu's victory marks the end of the two-state solution
    • echinococcus

      "... If and when Zionists can be pressured enough ..."

      The essence of my argument is not what to do when pressure is up, but how the pressure on the zionist regime, which is needed for whatever solution, can be built. Building pressure on the zionist regime is a pretty tough task, because the zionist regime controls powerful puppet forces in the western world. Currently pressing on with the demand for a two state solution seems to be more promosing for a builtup of pressure than abandoning the demand of a two state solution.

      I myself think a two state solution is neither possible nor desirable. It's not desirable because it doesn't solve the problem - which is the suppression of, institutionalized Zionist land robbery from and colonial racism against (a part of) the native population of Palestine.

      But abandoning the demand of a two state solution would let the zionist regime off the hook. If we'ld only demand a one state solution the zionist regime could find thousands of excuses for complaining why Israel would be pressured and others not so much, eg Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, Myanmar, Hamas, Sudan, Belarus, whatever. Israel would surely claim singling out Israel for unequal and undemocratic treatment of citizens is anti-semitic leading to decades of fruitless discussions. However, with regard to Israels duty of agreeing to a two state solution the Zionist regime is in a corner now. We shall use Israel being cornered for piling up pressure, sanctions, UN resolutions, BDS, whatever, on israel, instead of letting the Zionist regime walk out of the corner without giving anything substantional.

      An offer for one state with equal rights for all can be made anytime later anyway, and I'ld argue it would be a sensible offer, but when the current pressure for a two state solution is taken away now, there is no serious pressure at all to get anything. Similar is Jeff's idea of dissolving the PA: it would just give Zionists (minus Netanyahu) a good argument, that Israel has no partner for a two state solution, so the Palstenians are to be blamed that there is no solution to the conflict. Israel would benefit from the chaos. Much better would be limited resistance tactics like PA police/security forces going on strike/staying home for three days each time Israel announces new settlement units or does something else hampering peace efforts. Crucial is here that there is serious backing for Palestianians from western countries, too. When the security temporarily, but seriously detoriates after Israel announces new settlement units EU countries would be likely quick to blame Israel for it, even if a PA strike in response to settlement construction was the reason for the break down.

    • Kay24

      Just in: Obama Congratulates Netanyahu on Election in Phone Call

      link to

    • Well, while I agree that a two state solution is virtually impossible, I think one doesn't have to abandon the concept as a means of bringing pressure on the Zionist regime.

      I find it a totally legitimate strategy to pile up sanctions and UN resolutions on Israel for not fulfilling the two state solution promise, and when the sanctions finally bite and push comes to shove to offer the Zionist regime the alternative: one state with equal rights for all in all spheres, from voting to immigration and the "right of return." Unable to go back to a two state solution, the zionist regime may have to agree to the latter than, effectively ending the zionist project "Israel."

  • Who can save Israel now?
    • Regarding the title: Who can save Israel now?

      Why would anybody want to save Israel now?

      Netanyahu and his voters have proven Nasrallah and Khamenei to be right: the only viable solution to the I/P problem is ending the zionist project to create one state in Palestine with equal rights for all people there and the only way to get there is resistance.

  • Why I hope Netanyahu will be crushed tonight
    • Walid

      Maybe you didn't understand my argument: in my anti-thesis I credit Netanyahu and his neocon buddies for breaking the US empire and weakening the US, thereby helping to decolonize the world.

      I credit them for unintendedly midwifing the growth of China to a superpower, the BRICS and their cooperation in SCO, making Iran a regional superpower co-operating in the framework of SCO, the liberation of Latin America and so on. These welcome developments are last not least all unintended consequences of horrible US wars of aggression in the arab world and ideologically driven economic policies pushed forward by Bibi and his neocon friends.

      With Bibi gone, I worry that the US will become stronger and launch more successful imperialial wars to safeguard the interests of the empire in staying the sole global superpower. Having freed up it's military from being stuck in arab quicksands and waging stupid and unsuccessful wars for Israel, I especially worry that the US will use it's new strength to wage a clever and successful war on China - because China is the engine of global liberation and the only serious competitor to the US empire.

    • I agree that it would be a good thing if Bibi was gone. However, I disagree with the presentation of the antithesis.

      They say that things must get worse before they get better, or that no one has done more to delegitimize the state of Israel in the eyes of the world than crude Benjamin Netanyahu the king of the Jews.

      Let me formulate an opposing opinion lauding Bibi's accomplishments I'd deem more realistic:

      Bibi and his neocon comrades are on the way to destroying the US empire, and possibly the US itself. That could be seen as a good thing, and as a prerequisite to liberate Palestine.

      The US is a settler state populated with rabidly violent people driven by messianic exceptionalist ideology hell-bent on subduing other people with destruction and aggressive wars, which were economically empowered by the geographic luck of having occupied a huge terrirtory protected by two oceans as borders.

      After the US won the cold war Bibi has accomplished to permanently make the US military get bogged down in the qucksands of wars in the arab world, so that the US penchant for waging aggressive wars was bound in a very limited geographic area of the world, and other regions of the world, notably China and the SCO, but BRICS and Latin America, too, could develop without being destrcuted by US aggressive wars before they took over the position of the most powerful state and global alliance from the US. That is while Bibi's neocon surrogates in the US managed to weaken and almost destroy the US economy with their ideologically driven neocon economic policies, thereby further weakening the US and it's wicked messianic empire of chaos and destruction.

      Having Bibi and his neocon buddies to continue ruling the US empire would further contribute to the US military being bogged down in the arab world. And with their self-destructive hyper-capitalist neocon predator economic policies Bibi's neocon buddies would further the laudable agenda of destroying the US economy which is the power base of that aggressive empire.

      Breaking the rule of the US empire over the world is the only viable way to liberate Palestine, as the messianic settler state Israel is an integral part of the empire of the US messianic settler state and the US empire will always back the Zionist apartheid regime as long as it is strong enough to do so. Herzog will be no improvement at all for Palestinians. they will get more "Cast Lead" instead of "Protective Edge" from Herzog. Herzog will strengthen the US empire because he is able to better hide his messianism than Netanyahu, thereby make the US empire seem less lunatic, and that will make the task of liberating Palestine harder. And that's why many Mossad figures support Herzog.

      So, as I said in the beginning, I'm happy if Bibi has to go today, because I think it will further splits in the US empire and thereby weakening it, but I'm deeply worried that it may all go the other way round.

  • We may not have Netanyahu to kick around anymore
    • Phil

      "I’m a liberal so I pull for a De Klerk"

      I can't see it happening yet in Israel because I don't think Herzog has a base mandating him treating Palestians as equals. If Herzog is indeed elected I suspect he will be elected to get back protection of US/EU for the zionist cause and thereby preserve the institutionalized Israeli racism.

      So that might become more like a change from GWB to Obama. What was the change there? GWB was hated in the world because he openly committed devastating imperial wars of aggression against Afghanistan and Iraq. Obama was loved in the world because he talked peace and respect for different cultures, but he continued GWBs policy with devastating imperial wars of aggression against Libya and Syria and sparking war in Ukraine while sugarcoating these wars as revolutions so that they didn't coast the US so many international hatred as the Bush wars. That was pretty much why Obama got backing from much of big money: he promised to continue the war policies of GWB but conduct the wars of aggression in a more clever way, cheaper and with less international blowback. And Obama delivered on this promise.

      So what would that analogy with Obama mean in the context of Herzog/Livni? Expect less Operation Protective Edge and more Operation Cast Lead - and expect Israel to sugarcoat the wars of aggression and institutionalized Zionist racism more clever than Netanyahu did it.

      However, there is a silver lining in that gloomy picture. Obama behaved in his 2nd term notable different than in his first term, now opposing more wars of aggression and confronting the Israeli lobby in a meaningful way. So, to project the analogy on Israel, let's hope that Herzog will behave better in several years after he consolidated his political power.

      And so long, let's judge actions instead of words or intentions and let's work hard to keep up the pressure on zionist racism and aggressions though Herzog will be a much more difficult target than Netanyahu.

  • By busting up peace efforts, AIPAC may have burst its own bubble
    • Gallup just put some figures as a measure of that change haüüening right now online:

      After Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's much-publicized and controversial address to Congress, Americans' opinions of him have worsened. His favorable rating is down seven percentage points, to 38%, while his unfavorable rating has increased five points, to 29%. These changes are largely confined to Democrats; Republicans' views are essentially stable. ...


      link to

  • Factchecking Netanyahu: An annotated guide to the Israeli P.M.'s speech to Congress
  • Pelosi blasts Netanyahu speech as 'insult to intelligence of U.S.', Amanpour calls it 'dark, Strangelovian'
    • hophmi

      Are we mentioning Amanpour’s ethnicity and possible bias, or is that only important if the journalists are Jews?

      So, why not. Christiane Amanpour is a member of the family of the US-Israeli backed dictator Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, which was installed by a US-led coup and thrwon out of power by the Islamic revolution in Iran when the US decided that it was a good idea to support violent islamic movements in the region for their opposition to the secular Soviet Union.

      After the revolution she exiled herself because the Iranian people don't like her US-backed dictator family and recently she married former Clinton U.S. state dept spokesman James Rubin, a staunch Zionist and supporter of Israel's apartheid regime.

      And, so what?

  • It's not about nukes, it's about the US shifting the power balance -- Parsi
    • piotr

      If you really think that the law only requires to report on Israel's QME you are wrong. the law stipulates an obligation to maintain Israel's QME and the reporting is to verify that the US president is fulfilling this obligation. It's not a joke, and it's not only about reporting, sorry.

      Just have a look yourself:

      link to

      link to

    • Mooser, pabelmont

      “…it it will reduce the United States’ commitment to the security of Israel,”

      ... if it were up to me I’d formally end the USA’s promises of security help (much less guarantees) to Israel.

      It can't happen. Since the US is a colony of Israel disregarding Israel's security against the law in the US - even for the president. The US president is bound by law to regularly report "the extent to which Israel possesses a qualitative military edge over military threats to Israel" to Israel's stooges. The "Naval Vessel Transfer Act of 2008" states about the US president's obligation regarding Israel's qualitative military edge (QME):

      ... The President shall carry out an empirical and qualitative assessment on an ongoing basis of the extent to which Israel possesses a qualitative military edge over military threats to Israel. The assessment required under this subsection shall be sufficiently robust so as to facilitate comparability of data over concurrent years. ... In this subsection, the term `qualitative military edge' means the ability to counter and defeat any credible conventional military threat from any individual state or possible coalition of states or from non-state actors, while sustaining minimal damages and casualties, through the use of superior military means, possessed in sufficient quantity, including weapons, command, control, communication, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities that in their technical characteristics are superior in capability to those of such other individual or possible coalition of states or non-state actors.'. ...

      Source: link to

      The law was updated since then a bit, but only to place even more burdens on the US president regarding reporting on Israel's QME to Israel's stooges. And, since the US Congress is Israeli occupied territory and only Israel's selected stooges can get seats there, the law cannot change - so the US is legally bound to make Israel win any war of aggression Israel wants to wage while sustaining minimal damages and casualties.

      Of course, the best way to comply with that law is to use cheap US soldiers to wage wars of aggression desired by Israel to fulfill the Zionists' racist dream of Eretz Israel. And so is it done.

  • Thanks to Netanyahu, Israel support turns into a political football
    • Btw, have you noticed? Bibi is going to repeat his exercise of bypassing the WH to get what he wants from the US:

      Israel asks US for additional $300mn for missile defense – report

      Published time: March 01, 2015 04:32

      Israel reportedly bypassed the White House and asked the US Congress for an extra $317 million to be added to President Barack Obama's budget for the next fiscal year in order to fund Israeli missile defense programs, Bloomberg reported. ...

      Source: link to

      Seems like Netanyahu wants to establish it as a norm that the US President is not being asked nothing when Israel deals with the US. It will be interesting to see how Obama will react to this latest provocation of Netanyahu.

  • What we talk about when we talk about ISIS
    • Mayhem

      The problem is that the Saudis don't grow a nice lawn where there is sometimes a bit ugly weed, but they grew the whole lawn of weed only.

      The ISIS terrorist ideology of Wahhabism was not only born in Saudi Arabia, but it is still the proud official ideology of the Saudi state. And that is why the Saudi state behaviour looks so similar to IS "state" behaviour. The top Saudi cleric two years ago demanded in a fatwa to destroy all churches (and other non-wahhabi religious sites) in the Arab world and ISIS does it. Of course, there are today no churches anymore destroyed in Saudi Arabia, because the Wahhabis did already destroy them all a century ago. Saudi state clerics day, women are inferiour properties to men and must be veiled, and IS does it as well. The Saudi regime loves whipping people for their unpleasant opinion about the ruler and beheading people for crimes like "sorcery" and IS does it as well. And so on, and so on. Read the references in the article I linked above. For example:

      Karen Armstrong: Wahhabism to ISIS: how Saudi Arabia exported the main source of global terrorism

      That the Saudis grow their weedy takfiri Wahhabi terrorist ideology for have it dominate Saudi Arabia, wouldn't have to disturb the world much except for humanitarian reasons, but the problem is that the Saudi pay a lot of money to export the weed and poison other countries with this. See what Reza Aslan says, also linked in the article above:

      “And as we all know, Saudi Arabia has spent over $100 billion in the past 20 or 30 years spreading this ideology throughout the world.”

      And, yes, the Saudis also nurtured and financed ISIS, though they today maybe see it as a mistake. See The Atlantic: 'Thank God for the Saudis': ISIS, Iraq, and the Lessons of Blowback.

      Of course, after the declaration of the caliphate by IS the Saudis were shocked, because the declaration of the caliphate means that Caliph Ibrahim is legitimate and the Saudi king is illegitimate in the view of IS. There can only be one ruler in the Wahhabi doctrine. But the Saudis and IS don't have many ideological differences, they just differ about the question who should rule.

      Also from that article above you can see that the principal backer of the Saudi support for the terrorists is the top JINSA-crowned US Israel lobbyist John McCain. And Israeli officials are on the record saying Israel's policy is to prefer takfiri terrorists ruling Syria instead of an Iranian-backed government. It's not hard to do the math, that the Saudis and Israel work together supporting ISIS and other Al Qaeda terrorists to weaken Iran.

    • What a great nonsense.

      Wood carefully misses the main point about ISIS, and this article based on super extremist Zionist Michael Weiss does miss the main point about ISIS, too.

      ISIS ideology is takfiri Wahhabism just as it is preached in about every Saudi school and mosque. How did the takfiri Wahhabism did manage to takeover the Arabic peninsula? The British Empire supported the ideology and it's proponents in a guerilla war to destroy the Ottomans a hundred years ago. Since then the Americans took over the job of protecting the dominance of takfiri Wahhabism in the arab peninsula. And more recently, the Zionists and Neocons took over the job of protection the dominance of takfiri perversion of Islam in the arab peninsula, because the ruling Saudi takfiri extremists are the best buddies of Israel.

      Ever since the takeover of the Arab peninsula by takfiri wahhabi proxy forces of the western empires, the takfiri wahhabi perversion of Islam has spread throughout the world and wreaked havoc whereever it put it's feet in. How did the takfiri wahhabi perversion spread throughout the world while it's Saudi center is protected by the US empire? With billions over billions of petrodollars. Who nurtured and financed the "takfiri Wahhabi movement" in Iraq after the US troops left, that eventually put up a flag of ISIS about it's long-held strongholds like Mosul? The Saudis did it, with tacit support of Israel, with the intention of harming Iran.

      It's simple as that. However, don't expect Wood or Weiss to say this.

      If you want this opinion in a bit more nuanced and with more details, I recommend this article:

      What the mass media hide about the Charlie Hebdo terror attack: Wahhabism, Takfirism, and Saudi Arabia

  • Israel's new Asian allies
    • W.Jones

      China had something like a strong "jewish lobby" in the past but the very most people in China have no fond memories for this time and want it never again:

      link to

    • Israeli cooperation with Japan, India and China is several decades old. China is happy to have Israel export the arms technology to China, which sale to China is banned by the US and the EU. With India the driver is not banned technology, but competion with the EU. But neither the political system of China nor India is open to Israeli manipulation or domination, like the those of US and EU are - or were.

      While Japan is a US client state, China and India are in the process of forming a close global BRICS and regional SCO alliance with Russia and Iran. Netanyahu is very mistaken if he thinks, China and India will ever protect an Israeli apartheid regime with their growing diplomatic and economic clout. But there is also good news in this: If Bibi really has illusions about this, he's likely to overplay his hand very seriously in the face of the US and the EU and the unmaking of Israel is coming.

  • Congress flooded with letters urging members to #SkipTheSpeech of Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu
    • Sorry for being off-topic here, but I think this story important and would make a pretty topic for a full Mondo Weiss article:

      BBC Won't Punish Reporter Accused of Anti-Semitism

      BBC says Tim Wilcox didn't 'breach editorial standards' by telling Jewish woman that 'Palestinians suffer at Jewish hands.'



      link to

      It looks to me pretty much like a strong indicator of a sea change in Britain.

  • In Their Own Words: Four residents of Yarmouk speak
    • W.Jones
      Regarding the Wikipedia article "Syrian Opposition" you mentioned I think it's nonsense. Many groups of two persons or so financed by the MEPI US state department programme or similar programmes in other countries for regime change in Syria give them a fancy name and call them a "major opposition group." When these "major opposition groups" than convened together in Turkey, they regarded themselves as "the representatives of the Syrian people." Independent polls however suggest that the popularity of all these "major opposition groups" together in their stronghold Aleppo were about 2 to 3% - together. And western governments and media supported this nonsense anyway.

      A second thing is that the "secular moderate opposition" regularly proved on the ground so bad and outright criminal, that most people of liberated areas where quite happy when extremists from Al Qaeda pushed these criminal "secular moderate opposition" gangs out of their areas. Remember, ho it was in 2012/2013 in Aleppo, even western media reported about "moderate opposition" leaders on the ground like "Abu Ali" or "Khaled Hayyani":

      link to

      link to

      Nobody wanted to be "governed" by "moderate opposition" leaders like "Abu Ali" or "Khaled Hayyani." The actual "moderate opposition forces on the ground" proved to be so selfish, corrupt and murderously criminal, that many people even prefered to be "governed" by Al Qaeda or ISIS instead. These were no exceptions, it was the norm. "Moderate opposition leader" Maarouf of Idlib (after participating in the beheading of a few dozen soldiers in June 2011 he moderated himself and prefered to kill people opposing him by shooting and blaming his murderous acts with false flag propaganda on government forces before dumping the bodies of his victims in the wells outside his residence), the Attasis in Homs (terrorising people and selling out Syria to zionism) or FSA (turned Islam army) Damascus commander Alloush (his stated goal is the extinction of Alawite and Shia in Syria, preferable by torturing them to death as cruel as possible) are even worse than there Aleppo pendants.

      What is quite useful in the Wikipedia article "Syrian opposition" is the map. It shows that "other rebels" - anybody who is not Government/Nusra/ISIS/YPG, including the western-backed collection of ugly warlords from whom I named above some leaders like Marouf and Alloush - control almost nothing in Syria except strips of small villages with direct ammo connections to borders.

      link to

      Alloush has still some parts of Ghouta east of Damascus, Khaled Hayani some parts of northern Aleppo countryside, the "friends of Maarouf" hold some parts of Idlib mountains and south Aleppo desert. The only things real still going on is some heavily armed border incursions from Turkey (called the northern front) and from Jordan/Israel (called the southern front).

    • W.Jones
      Re Gilbert Achcar I didn't know him well, but I would surely not see him as a "leading Marxist intellectual" - though he seems to have been involved in the French Revolutionary Communist League.

      Gilbert Achcar consequently advocates the US-led bombing of countries aligned with the global opposition to US hegemony in the name of bringing them democracy, whereever there is an option for regime change.

      He did that in regard to Libya,

      link to

      And he did it to Syria, decrying US meddling and lack of US support for the regime change in Syria at the same time. I don't know whether he's just totally dellusional or whether he's corrupt, but I'ld say he's a classic liberal imperialist (interventionalist) and in no way an anti-imperialist marxist or leninist though he coats his imperialism in the language of a marxist.

      Regarding Syria's future: The undisputed leader of the only (besides the regionally/ethnically limited YPG) sizeable moderate and democratic forces in Syria is Bashar Al Assad. But of course the war will seriuosly hamper any drive to more openness and more liberalism in Syria. In the best case a seriously authoritarian government will manage to enforce the stop of the bloodshed, get a national deal will all major tribes, keep the country in the axis of resistance and put in place some basic democratic principles for a decade or two, until the security situation stabilizes, and than, perhaps a new drive for more openness and more liberalism in Syria may develop.

    • W.Jones
      So many questions in such a short comment. Let me try to answer them very short so it fits into one comment. If you want more answers please ask more distinct questions about my opinion in a seperate comment and I'll do my best to answer them as honest as I can, one by one.

      1st: Marxism. I'm no Marxist so I can't speak for Marxists - though my website maybe considered as one of the most important news hubs of the marxist German DKP party. I see Marxism as an evil Monarchist ploy to counter a bourgoise German revolution back then. But today I like the independent Marxist history writing, Leninist rejection of imperialism and the sound economic model of Deng Xiaoping. Anyway, today Marx is dead for more than 130 years, and different people exploit his ideas and appeal for very different political aims, last not least Israel. So I suggest to let Marx rest in England.

      2nd: I think Max Blumenthal is no Marxist, but a liberal democrat. I don't think he believes in the marxist "dictatorship of the proletariat." And I suspect he has a selective view of Syria, partly by his selection of sources, eg in Jordan refugee camps, where he got only opposition, because most of those war refugees who are with the Syrian government fled to Damascus. But I'm not Max Blumenthal, so I can't speak for him.

      3rd: Why did or do so many of the radical left support "fighting Assad"? Again, I'm not part of them and I can speak for them. However my opinion: In Germany large parts of the "radical" left - represented today by the almost mainstream Left Party - were coopted and corrupted by Israel - usually in the name of a fight against anti-semitism. Most of those parts rejected the aggressive war against Iraq anyway. However, since the war against Syria is done in a hybrid (4th generation) war tecnic and was marketed as revolution, many of the far left (and also supporters of Palestine) didn't understand the nature of the war and they supported on the wrong side, against their own otherwise held ideals. Since the picture of the zionist nature of the cruel war against Syria got clearer each month, more and more left wing activists and politicians come back in the pro-Syrian camp. That I see especially the case after a (former) communist candidate was defeated by Assad in the 2014 presidential election by a wide margin and the advances made by the Syrian army in the same time frame.

      4th: The FSA. Since I do not speak for Marxists, Max Blumenthal or "radical leftists" opposed to the Syrian government, I can only offer my own opinion about the FSA. My oppinion about the FSA is that it was a total fraud. The FSA was neither "Free" nor "Syrian," and especially it was not an "Army" and today an FSA doesn't exist anymore. As long as an FSA existed it was a collection of Zionist-MB-Wahhabi puppet militias - a collection of the ugliest and most corrupt liars, criminals and extremists of te whole Muslim world. The US-Israeli FSA propaganda, fooled many inside and outside of Syria but when the Syrian people saw what the FSA they ran away. Some ran to the Syrian army, others ran to ISIS, Jabhat Al Nusra^ or similar militant shops.

      5th: Are there at least 1000 FSA (moderate opposition fighters) worth to support? My opinion: there may be 1000 moderate opposition fighters or more in Syria though I won't call them FSA. Most moderate fighters long ago came back to the side of the Syrian government or the YPG - who have a somewhat tensioned working relationship with the government forces and the YPG there doesn't exist any sizeable moderate force in Syria. There may be a 1000 moderate opposition fighters a didn't hear off and who didn't get the message so far, but I doubt it. But even if they existed - where shall they be - the Syrian war is fought by Hundred Thousends against Hundred Thousends, so a presense of 1000 moderate opposition fighters wouldn't make any difference.

    • Walid

      When I first in 2011 tried to build attention here and at other places that the regime changes in Tunisia and Egypt where accomplishments with heavy lifting done by the US military (many people even didn't want to notice the US aircraft carrier off Egypt's coast that was crucial in the regime change there) and that the whole Arab Spring was a set of regime changes concocted by Israel via the US State Department's (which Chuck Hagel once said is Israeli occupied territory) MEPI programme I got a lot of hostility and disbelief in response.

      Now the picture became much clearer, which is a huge accomplishment of the resistance, and today many people understand hybrid warfare, color revolutions,Israeli-(Saudi-AlQaeda/Qatari-MB) collaboration and so on at least to a certain degree. And yes, I remember well all the gleeful articles and comments here, when Libya was destroyed by NATO, and how I was desparately trying to say a very ugly crime and a very bad thing was happening there.

      The question whether the Israel lobby in the US rules Israel or Israel rules the Israel lobby in the US I would deem mostly philosophical. US billionaire Sheldon Adelson installed Netanyahu (among others by using his billions to buy him a newspaper in Israel), but now Netanyahu commands the Israel lobby. Hard to see who rules whom. It's much like the philosophical question whether the hen or the egg was first. I'ld see the Israel lobby and Israel mostly as a unit.

      However, not all of the US is under the control of the Israel lobby. Especially when it comes to Iran, and Syria is more or less a sub-chapter of that chapter in US foreign policy, there exists quite big differences between Obama and his backers one one side and the Israel lobby and their allies on the other side, especially in recent times, which also seems to be a result of the failed hybrid/terror war against Syria.

    • Donald

      I closely follow the Syrian news agency SANA for quite a long time now. I found out that what they report is usually quite reliable, however you're right that they ommit things what puts the Syrian government in a bad light.

      And the author of this article here at Mondo Weiss, is not impartial neither. Almost all of what is known from Talal Alyan is a relentless stream of propaganda in the service of the Israeli-led regime change in and the Israeli-led terror war on Syria. And than look what how Talal Alyan blatantly distorts the truth. See for example this quote from the article of himself Talal Alyan linked here in this article:

      ... Water has been cut off entirely for over a month in a regime-produced drought. ...


      link to

      In that sentence Talal Alyan used a link to UNRWA to prove his charge that the Syrian government cut off water to the Yarmouk camp. But, surprise, surprise, when one opens that UNRWA statement, one reads something very different:

      ... Since the first week of September, the mains water supply has been disrupted, apparently as a result of damage to pipes in a contested area inside Yarmouk. ...

      link to

      This way of handling truth by Talal Alyan proves that he distorts the truth with aim of blaming the Syrian government and generate support for his cause of regime change in Syria, which he shares with the Israeli regime. Now, when Talal Alyan distorts even such simple statements of UNRWA, imagine what can be proven of what he says in this article. Names of the interviewees have been invented, as the author admits, and in the introduction Talal Alyan makes clear he shares the same view as his first interviewee (whose name happens to be the same as the photographer in the article he linked to) regarding PLFP-GC and the Syrian government. Who are the other three interviewees nobody knows. Has Talal Alyan invented these 3 (or all 4) to affirm his statements? Nobody knows, but we know for sure from the example above that Talal Alyan has not only highly partisan views on Syria similar to those of the Israeli government, but he also uses the propaganda technic of distorting facts to that end.

      So, in result, I think it's important to listen to the other side, too. In this case as representative of the other side SANA is quite fine.

    • W.Jones
      The story of the Yarmouk camp is not too complicated. When the terrorists (and the backers) decided to make the final push to conquer Damascus in 2012, Yarmouk became a front line in the war as it functions like the southern entrance to Damacus city. So the Yarmouk camp became a hot warzone and that's what is is stilltoday.

      Regarding the population of Yarmouk, it was like in many other parts of Syria, that some parts of the population fell for the propaganda of Zionists, MB and Wahhabis, that a "revolution" in Syria happens, or a pan-arabic fight of Sunnis against oppression by Shia and so on. The Yarmouk camp, though PFLP-GC and it's allies tried it's best to provide security there, was hit especially hard by this propaganda last not least due to the shameful and very unhelpful role of Hamas there.

      And that's waht it's still now. Highly sectarian militant forces are entranched in the Yarmouk camp desiring to cleanse "Sham" from "Nusayris" and "Shia", wreak havoc there and block aid to use aid as a political bargaining tool to open the southern gateway to Damascus city for terrorists with the political help of the international community and the Palestinian solidarity movement.

      And, by the way, as we speak here, SANA also has got some news from the Yarmouk camp:

      Terrorists stymie new aid distribution operation in Yarmouk camp

      Armed terrorist organizations in Yarmouk refugee Camp blocked the delivery of aid that was bound for besieged locals in the neighborhood, located south of Damascus city.

      The new act of hindrance follows a dismal pattern that terrorists have pursued for the 11th consecutive week, further multiplying the agony of aid-strapped locals.

      Director of the General Authority for Palestine Arab Refugees (GAPAR) Ali Mustafa clarified in a statement on Sunday that terrorists opened fire at the aid distribution site to disperse the residents who assembled to receive aid. ...


      link to

      A usual thing there. Terrorists block aid delivery in Yarmouk, so as to lay a basis for more international pressure on Damascus. It's quite similar to what FSA turned into Islam Army terrorist leader Alloush does in Douma. For the well-being of civilian residents these terrorists don't care at all, they just use them to make propaganda, any propaganda, to give the mass media controlled by the Israel lobby new stuff to use to bash the Syrian government.

    • Walid

      Israel is not calling the shots on that one eventhough it’s the prime beneficiary of ISIS’ evil.

      You are very wrong on this. It is mainly Israel calling the shots behind the scenes in this terror war on Syria. And listen to Wesley Clark more carefully. He doesn't say "the West" got ISIS going, he said "Friends and allies" of the US did create ISIS to fight Hezbollah.

      So, who's the primary "ally" of the US? Israel.
      And, who's the primary "enemy" of the Hezbollah? Israel.

      Of course, Israel doesn't support ISIS and Al Qaeda all the way that openly as Israel does now support Al Qaeda on the southern front with artillery and jet fighter support - ISIS and Al Qaeda are recognized terrorist organisations, so it's usually done a bit more covert.

      So they way Israel made ISIS and Al Qaeda follows a bit more indirect scheme. Israel instructed the worldwide Israel lobby and especially that in the US to support all and any terrorist group wreaking havoc in Syria. The first public "FSA" war plan to support terrorists taking over Damascus was written by Michael Weiss, who was at that time with the Henry Jackson Society, which is one of the most radical outfits of the Israel lobby. And, always supporting Michael Weiss in his war designs against Syria were the guys from WINEP/AIPAC with whom he has close connections.

      But, of course, making war plans alone didn't give the terrorists the weapons they have to fight the Syrian army. The godfather of the weapon deliveries seems to have be a US politician named John McCain. John McCain is a recipient of the "Henry M. "Scoop" Jackson Distinguished Service Award" given to him 2006 by the Israel lobby's organisation JINSA. Though John McCain and his friends didn't deliver the weapons to terrorists in Syria himself, they blessed others doing this, mainly the GCC countries, especially Qatar, who is behind the Al Qaeda organisation Jabhat Al Nusra, and Saudi Arabia, whose then intel chief Bandar Bin Bush made ISIS strong. You can read about this here in detail at the Atlantic:

      'Thank God for the Saudis': ISIS, Iraq, and the Lessons of Blowback

      U.S lawmakers encouraged officials in Riyadh to arm Syrian rebels. Now that strategy may have created a monster in the Middle East.

      Without the encouragement of Israel, the Israel lobby and it's stooges in the US Congress, Saudi Arabia could never have followed it's policy to support terrorism in Syria and to buy and ship many tons of heavy weapons from distant places like Croatia to terrorists in Syria. Saudi Arabia doesn't have the policial cloud in the US and the West to shield itself from charges of supporting terrorism. But Israel has that cloud, and it used it. And Israeli officials even repeatedly said on the record, Israel prefers Al Qaeda ruling over Syria against Bashar Assad ruling over Syria, because Al Qaeda in Syria is dependent on support from Israel's Saudi friends.

      Thus, Netanyahu is the godfather of the international terror war against Syria, no one else.

    • This whole report is nonsense.

      These 4 guys support Israel in it's desire for doing a regime change in Syria to serve Israeli interests.

      I'ld suggest to these 4 anonymous guys to appeal to Netanyahu to further their interests as they are the5th column of Israel. Israeli orgs already blame the plight of Palestinians on arab coutries not willing to take them - so please, go and match.

      Of course, these 4 guys don't speak of Al Qaeda's Nusra Front in Yarmouk, and neither of Aknaf Bait al Makdes, which is similar extremist and terrorist. Israel publicly declared it loves Al Qaeda more than Syria and Hisbollah, and these 4 guys follow the line.

      Sorry, I can't put my disgust for these 4 guys in words. They align with Netanyahu and Al Qaeda and ask for solidarity? Phuuu!

      I suggest them to apply at Netanyahu for cleaning his toilet.

  • AIPAC behind new US/EU trade legislation designed to thwart BDS
    • Hello everybody,

      is there any way we can support the Israel Lobby with that legislation here from Berlin?

      I'm pretty sure that would kill TTIP altogether.

      Here in Germany, at least I think so, most activists see TTIP as an attempt of the Israel lobby to sabotage the good German relations with China. And good German relations with China we see - last not least - as a strategic option to get rid of the pressure of the Israel Lobby in Germany.

      To make it short: I think the Israel Lobby is playing a bluff here - and it will backfire harshly on the lobby when cards are called to see. I'ld double down on this.

  • End the silence -- Support Palestinian refugees in Yarmouk
    • I can't hold back to write another comment here.

      This article here presenting false allegations against the Syrian people I find so outragous, because it serves the hatred fueling the caused the slaughter of tens of thousands of people in Syria. I see it as the moral equivalent of German government papers in the 30s pushng propaganda lies like "how Polish jews raped and killed German girls" in Poland. Back then lot's of innocent jewish and Polish people were killed in Germany and Poland due to the hatred stirred up by such propaganda lies, and so it is today in Syria.

      What's especially damaging here is that unlike propaganda rackets well-known to serve the interests of the Zionist war lobby like AI and HuffPo Mondo Weiss really has otherwise some credibility among people opposed to the Zionist war lobby.

      When Mariam Barghouti writes that "there is a sentiment of lamenting what is happening to Palestinian refugees in Syria" it's absolutely not true. Many Palestinian refugees fight side by side with the Syrian army in Brigades known as Quds-Briagdes or PFLP-GC to liberate their refugee homes in Syria from the scourge of Israeli-backed terrorism, and it's well-known. Israel, however, fights with her airforce on the other side, that side, what Mariam Barghouti supports with her lies, namely Al Qaeda and other head-chopping wahhabi terrorists trying to conquer Damascus, bombing Syrian soldiers and their Palestinian comrades fighting against the Israeli-sponsored terrorism alike.

      When Mariam Barghouti writes that "our shortcomings are coated under the emblem of complexity and controversy" it's not true neither. Her comrade in activism, the neocon Michael Weiss, formerly known to do war planning against Syria in the service of the Henry Jackson Society, and now known for working for the Russian Zionist oligarch Khodorkovsky for example, published already in 2013 a similar propaganda piece titled: Assad’s terror-famine. Shortly after that Brooklyn Middleton from Israel published a similar story in the Saudi wahhabi propaganda racket Al Arabiya titled "Assad’s latest war crime hits Yarmouk refugee camp." And Eric Reidy from New York also published a similar piece in the Qatari-wahhabi propaganda racket "Al Jazeera" titled "Starving to death in Syria's Yarmouk camp." And so on and so forth. The murderous zionist-wahhabi propaganda lies of Syria starving Palestinian refugees in Yarmouk were published over all Zionist and Wahhabi major mass media. Just WINEP/AIPACs Aaron Y. Zelin seems to have missed the zionist propaganda memo when he tweeted: Yarmouk update: Nusra's (the wahhabi head-choppers also called Al Qaeda) apparent return complicates UNRWA's hopes for food program ‏.

      Ooops. So Al Qaeda complicates UNRWA's delivery of food in the Yarmouk camp? Mariam Barghouti didn't say a word of Al Qaeda being in the Yarmouk camp. But if Mariam Barghouti would have been out to inform people in a balanced way, how could she have missed this? What Mariam Barghouti doesn't look like an attempt to inform people in a balanced way, it looks like a hacthet job designed to fuel hatred to make Palestinians kill their Syrian hosts and neighbors, thereby ultimately serving noone except Israel. And at the same time Israel is working hard to use it's airforce to kill the very same Syrians and true friends of Syria, like Hezbollah, IRGC, or PFLP-GC.

      It's a shame.

    • I feel deeply sorrow for Palestianians who are victims of the Zionist psychological warfare divisions and promote Israeli hasbara lies aimed to destroy their most steadfast supporter for more than half a century.

      In lieu of my own respinse, which I have given here to a similar hatchet job composed of zionist sponsored rumors against the resistance people of the Syrian state, Hezbollah, Iran, Russia and Iraqi militia defending a secular Syria with their blood against Israel and Israeli stooges - may they know or not know what job there are eally rdoing - some days ago, now I want just to post a link from Susan Dirgham here:

      Response to American activist Mariam Barghouti’s “End the silence – Support Palestinian refugees in Yarmouk”

      Mariam Barghouti posted a long text here, and almost in every sentence there are crucial hasbara lies to switch victims and perpetratots included, so it would take me hours to just refute all the hasbara here one by one. And if I did so, my comment would likely be filtered out by the spam filter, because it would be too long and have too many links. So, just one example:

      Yarmouk refugee camp in Damascus has been under siege for nearly 550 days and counting.

      Click on ethe link, and you see that there is nothing behind it that says the Yarmouk refugee camp is under siege for nearly 550 days and counting, and more so not to assign blame who is responsible for that, because that would mean taking sides in conflict. However, the Syrian media say wahhabi terrorists reign in Yarmouk, terrorize remaining civilians, prevent the distribution of aid and videos not distributed by Israel, terrorists or their common friends seem to prove that.

      And a second example:

      It is vital to not only expose the siege, but the culprits responsible for the ongoing monstrosities. The Palestinian Front for The Liberation of Palestine- General Command and others have assisted the Assad regime-the primary perpetuator- in besieging the camp.

      In reality, besides the PFLP-GC, among others, the PFLP, the PLO, Hamas (though sectarian reasons made it take Hamas long to come to this), support the Syrian government with public statements in how they are dealing with the terrorist problem in Yarmouk camp. Those, who support the terrorists with false statements and other propaganda lies are Israel, Al Qaeda, and all their stooges in the West and the GCC.

      Sorry for being this blunt, but as I said, I feel deeply sorrow for Palestianians who are victims of the Zionist psychological warfare divisions and promote Israeli hasbara lies aimed to destroy their most steadfast supporter for more than half a century.

  • In Iraq and Syria the US sanctions its allies while its friends back its enemies (got that?)
    • lproyect
      What you write is a part of misleading statements, and a part simple lies.

      First of all, of course, what you miss to mention, is that there was absolutely no justification for the US to start waging a war of aggression of the fourth generation type (a proxy war) against Syria at all, except serving Israel's agenda of getting the Golan and harming Iranian infuence. You wrote:

      it depends on what you mean by “on our side”. There is zero evidence that the USA ever gave the FSA the kind of support that Russia gave the Baathists.

      And then, the so-called moderate terrorists of the FSA have preferred to be an ally of Al Qaeda instead of being an ally of the United States. See here for example, Telegraph, 10 Dec 2012:

      Syrian rebels defy US and pledge allegiance to jihadi group
      Rebel groups across Syria are defying the United States by pledging their allegiance to a group that Washington will designate today a terrorist organization for its alleged links to al-Qaeda.


      link to

      So as these so called moderate terrorist groups like the FSA which were backed by the US, declared allegiance to Al Qaeda, it would have been a crime under US law for any US government people to give these terrorists any arms. You may remember, that the US is at war with Al Qaeda since September 2001.

      You wrote:

      The support was a combination of words and “support” that made hardly any difference such as MRE rations, walkie-talkies, small arms, etc.

      What you spread here are plain lies, Despite Obama and the CIA knowing that the US partners in crime in Syria were Al Qaeda aligned terrorists they anyway faciliated massive weapons transfers to these FSA terrorists aligned with Al Qaeda, which you described as allies of the US, riding on the fact, that the thousands of tons of heavy weapons the US organized to deliver to these terrorists did not originate in the US. Instead of supplying the weapons themselves the US orginized it that Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey provide lot's of weapons from Libya and Croatia to these terrorists.

      The New York Times reported on March 24, 2013:

      Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A.

      With help from the C.I.A., Arab governments and Turkey have sharply increased their military aid to Syria’s opposition fighters in recent months, expanding a secret airlift of arms and equipment for the uprising against President Bashar al-Assad ... The airlift, which began on a small scale in early 2012 and continued intermittently through last fall, expanded into a steady and much heavier flow late last year ... “A conservative estimate of the payload of these flights would be 3,500 tons of military equipment,” said Hugh Griffiths, of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, who monitors illicit arms transfers.


      link to

      Despite getting these thousands of tons of weapons organized by the CIA, the leading FSA figures still aligned themselves with the Al Qaeda and ISIS terrorist groups. They even recorded their laudations for Al Qaida and ISIS on video like top US-backed FSA Aleppo commander Okaidi did in 2013:

      link to

      You wrote:

      In fact, when the FSA was trying to get MANPAD’s, the one thing that could have made a difference, the CIA worked with Turkey and Jordan to prevent them from being shipped into Syria.

      It's another lie. MANPAD’s don't make a huge difference. The US-backed terrorists have MANPAD’s since a long time, at least all through 2014 they had plenty of them. However, since the US-backed terrorists have few support among the Syrian people they still lose the war. Just look how much the US-backed terrorists lost in Aleppo province in 2014 though they had plenty of Manpads. And in Idlib, the US-backed FSA terrorists donated all their US-provided Manpads and other weapons to Al Qaeda at the end of last year, after the people there together with Al Qaeda kicked the US-backed warlord and mass murderer Jamal Marouf out iof the area.

      So, the FSA is just one more of those supposed allies of the US, which is aligned with the enemies of the US, especially Al Qaeda.

    • oldgeezer

      Not madness. A crime. A crime against humanity on a very large scale.

      That, what I described politically as sheer madness, is more serious than a "crime against humanity" on a very large scale.

      Following the Nuremberg principles, these are serial crimes against peace. The crime against peace, namely planning and waging aggressive war, was the most serious charge of the Nuremberg trials.

      On the issue of aggressive war, the Nuremberg Tribunal declared:

      “The charges in the indictment that the defendants planned and waged aggressive war are charges of the utmost gravity. War is essentially an evil thing. Its consequences are not confined to the belligerent states alone, but affect the whole world. To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”

      And the tribunal had good reason for this, just as good as the reasons that the US, the Israel lobby and their allies had for successfully lobbying for the exclusion of the supreme international crime of waging a war of aggression from being prosecutable under ICC regulations. They know they serially commit this supreme crime which "contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

    • Kathleen

      Well first let me thank Mondo Weiss to bring up the crucial topic of the desastrous foreign policy driven by assumed Israeli interests here.

      Now, to your comment:

      Israel surely does not want to give back the Golan Heights the land that belongs to Syria.

      Thanks for bringing that topic into the discussion. I think that's the main reason for Israel and the global Israel lobby are persuing the regime change policy in Syria: installing a pliant US puppet regime (like this SNC or so) in Syria is the only way for Israel to get from it's occupation of the Golan new territory. There is hardly any more striking motive for the US to persue that desastrous regime change policy in Syria - but it's reported nowhere in the Western mainstream media.

      ”Securing the Realm”

      Everyone who wants to understand why the US spends trillions of Dollars on regime changes in Western Asia shall read it to understand the geopolitical plan behind the terror and the wars. And one shall also read "The Afghan Vortex" which advocated an US-led war on Afghanistan in 2000, and was written by the same institution IASPS as ”Securing the Realm”. Yes, the Israeli lobby formulated the political plan for the US war on Afghanistan already a year before 9/11.

      And then one may see why Robert Kagan's wife Nuland instructed the US ambassador in Ukraine to "F*ck the EU" and persue regime change there, even if the EU doesn't want it: destroy the west's partnership with Russia, because Russia opposed the Israeli-Saudi-policy of supporting Al Qaeda in Syria to get a regime change there.

      In April last year, Rober Parry over there at Consorium News wrote an outstanding article of the desastrous foreign policy of the Israel lobby reminding him of the “little-old-lady-who-swallowed-the-fly”:

      link to

      Each time one of the US-led wars for Israel fails, they just push for a bigger US-led war for Israel to compensate for te failure. Thereby the Israel lobby caused the death of hundred thousands, perhaps even millions of people, and currently the Israel lobby is trying hard to bring the US to a war against Russia, which, as every military officer knows, would likely be fought out with nuclear weapons. the warmongering of Israel and the Israel lobby in the assumed interests of Israel is sheer madness.

  • 'No to martyrdom by hunger in Yarmouk camp': Palestinian refugees protest Assad’s siege
    • Walid
      I know the Harari murder case quite well. A friend of mine wrote a book about it:

      link to

      It's very obvious that Israel did commit that murder to blame it on Syria, kickstart the color revolution in Lebanon and thereby kick the Syrian troops out of Lebanon. After that succeeded but Hezbollah nevertheless was able to take over the role of Syria in Lebanon, Israel launched the 2006 war on Hezbollah.

      To blame the Hariri murder on Syria the international investigators and prosecutors (some notorious Germans were also involved) bought even false witnesses. When these false witnesses were uncovered as liars, the investigation suddenly said not Syria, but Hezbollah had done it. Since it's creation the fraudulent STL is following US-Israeli orders and not allowed to go after Israel as the obvious prime suspect for the Hariri murder.

    • Walid

      I know that there is no such thing as a clean war.

      Regarding "Rami Abdul Rahman" (I forgot his real name) running the "SOHR", there were Western media reports that he admitted to be funded by the British government and the EU. How he and the western and GCC mass media incited the war in Syria with spreading deliberatley faked news, was once described by Ali Abunimah:

      link to

      And while the uprising in Syria has of course real internal causes, too, the whole Syrian uprising is in general built on fake news and was, like the whole "arab spring", planned by the US in the MEPI programme. Obama gave order to start the "arab spring" wars in his "Presidential Study Directive 11" in August 2010:

      link to

      And when one further knows that MEPI was created under George W. Bush by Ultra-Zionist Jeffrey Feltman in State dept, one can easily understand whom the whole "Arab Spring" wars were designed to serve: Israel, Israel, and Israel.

    • audiatur et altera pars

      SANA, 18.01.2015:

      Terrorists continue attacks on aid distribution site in besieged Yarmouk Camp

      Terrorist organizations continue to block the besieged residents of Yarmouk Camp neighborhood in Damascus from gaining access to humanitarian aid by targeting the convoys sometimes and attacking the residents at other times.

      The terrorists’ attacks, which have included gun, sniper and mortar fire, often occur upon the arrival of representatives from the General Authority for Palestine Arab Refugees (GAPAR) and the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) at the site where the relief supplies are being distributed. ...

      link to

      Sharmine Narwani, 10.11.2014

      Stealing Palestine: Who dragged Palestinians into Syria’s conflict?

      link to

  • To counter radical Islam, we must confront our own hypocrisy
    • Well, not to commit crimes against Muslims is certainly a good recipe to contribute to not enraging Muslims. So it's certainly a good idea to stop the racist colonialisation of Palestine, to stop waging war of agressions against Muslim countries, to stop torturing Muslims in places like Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, to stop murdering participants of Muslim wedding parties with drones, to stop applying double standards against Muslims etc.

      However, I think that's necessary, but likely not sufficient to bring down the global jihadi terror. Another important point is to not support those who spread and finance the spread of the extremist ideology with billions of Dollars which is feeding the global jihadi terror, but instead to counter the spread of the extremist ideology. As it happens to be, the main ideology underlying almost all the global jihadi terror is what is known as Wahhabism (also incorrectly called salafism, or better called takfirism) and the main source of the spreading of the extremist ideology is Saudi Arabia, the West's and Israel's best friend in the Arab world. No deradicalization programme for jihadis will ever be effective, when they go afterwards in widely accepted mosques financed by the Saudis (or other Wahhabi types who are soaked in that Saudi state ideology) and get their heads stuffed again with the Wahhabi propaganda there.

      So, what I think, what, besides committing crimes against Muslims, is urgently needed is to confront Saudi Arabia on Wahhabism. As the oil-controlling Saudis are a main column of Western power and good friends of Israel, almost nobody dares to confront them. But some people think that's very important. And it's especially important for Muslims because most victims of the global jihadi terror are Muslims in Muslim countries. Here are some links on this topic, which I find helpful:

      link to

      link to

      link to

      I think there shouldn't be silence on the desastrous results of the spread of Wahhabism anymore, and I think, action is needed, and it would also help to bring the case of Palestine forward, because the Wahhabi Saudis are the main Israeli partners in the region.

  • French terror attacks contribute to Israeli's isolation
    • Walid

      I know about the pipelines. However that falls far short of an explanation. Energy policies are formulated in the service of Israel, not the other way round. It's clear that Nabucco project was started when the US decided to attck Iraq, so that Nabucco could have been feeded via Iraq (where the installation of a US puppet government was planned) with the Qatari North Dome gas. But, the gas pipeline was not the reason for the attack on Iraq. It was a commercial byproduct.

      Gas diversification for the EU is not the main issue: if the EU really wanted gas for Nabucco, Iran could easily supply that from the very same Iranian/Qatari South Pars/North Dome gas field. But it's not done because Israel and it’s lobby do not want that, because Iran, Syria and Hezbollah reject zionist colonialization of Palestine. Instead the Israel lobby and it's US/EU puppet governments support regime change in Syria. The gas feed from Qatar to Nabucco would be a nice commercial byproduct, but gas diversification for the EU is not the main reason. If the EU wanted gas diversification, Iran would be happy to deliver it to Nabucco, but it's not done because Israel and it’s lobby do not want that.

      And even now, when everybody understands, that there will no gas South-North-gas-pipeline across Syria, because insecurity will last for long in Syria and Al Qaeda may even take over in the case of regime change, the US/EU-policy is still regime change in Syria, because Israel and the lobby want that. I hope that clarifies my point why I think that US/EU energy policy is formulated in a way that it suits the wishes of Israel and the lobby and not the other way round.

      Regarding the 1949 CIA coup in Syria, I know it. The CIA's habbit to see democracy as a form of government easy to manipulate, to hijack and to overthrow is, I think, one of the main reasons why it's hard for countries opposed to Israel/US/NATO like Syria to develop and maintain a stable democracy. Autocracy is less easy to manipulate, to hijack and to overthrow from the outside. As soon as democracy develops, the US will try to use that opening to install a puppet government.

    • ivri

      "in the same boat"?

      Why the EU and the US tried to oust Assad? Because Israel and it's lobby want that, because Iran, Syria and Hezbollah reject zionist colonialization of Palestine.

      Whom does Israel think to ally with for that purpose? Al Qaeda.

      “The initial message about the Syrian issue was that we always wanted [President] Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren’t backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran,” he said.

      This was the case, he (outgoing ambassador to the US Michael Oren) said, even if the other “bad guys” were affiliated to al-Qaida.

      link to

      So, that's declared Israeli policy: better have Al Qaeda ruling Syria than Assad. What does Israel do?

      Syrian opposition activists in southern Syria say Israel has played a vital role in Jabhat al-Nusra’s (Al Qaeda's Syrian wing) recent gains in Quneitra and Daraa.

      link to

      So now that Al Qaeda has risen thanks to the policies wanted by Israel to oust Assad, Al Qaeda struck in Paris and Netanyahu sheds crocodile tears over the murderous terrorism and anti-semitism of Al Qaeda.

      And after he went to Paris Netanyahu commited an act of murderous state terrorism in Syria to prevent Hezbollah and the Syrian army to fight Al Qaeda terrorists, who have save havens in Israeli controlled territory and come from there to Syria to commit acts of terror:

      Minister of Information Omran al-Zoubi said that the Israeli aggression in Quneitra was not a single act, but a continuation of the Israeli support to armed terrorist groups that are listed internationally as terrorist organizations.

      link to

      Believe me, ivri, more and more Europeans are as fed-up with Al Qaeda as they are fed up with fighting wars for Israel, with Israeli support for Al Qaeda, with Israeli aggressiveness, with the bullying of Israel lobby and with Israeli disregard for justice,peace and human rights.

  • #JeSuisUnJuifBritannique
    • Hello Rodney

      thanks for your reply. I'm just looking from far on Britain.

      Let's hope this years election in UK will continue the trend for the better after the earthquakes of the Galloway election and the defeat of the Zionist war lobby when the parliament voted down bombing Syria 2013. I'm surely hopeful that the election in May might become another big defeat for the zionist war lobby in Britain.

    • @Rodneywatts
      Do you really think that Netanyahu's political gestures "genuinely riled" David Ward?

      To me it looks more like Bradford-East MP David Ward just suddenly developed a critical stance on Israel and sympathy for Palestinians after the shock of seeing George Gallaway while campaigning for Palestine win the by-elections 2012 in Bradford-West by a huge margin.

      Bradford-West seems to be a bit more Muslim than Bradford-East, but in the tendencies the constituencies seem to be quite similar.

      2001 Census Demographics for Bradford West: ... Muslim: 38% ...

      link to

      Respect George Gallaway won the 2012 by-election in Bradford West with 55.9%, against 25% for Labour, 8.4% for Conservatives, and 4.6% for the LibDem candidate.

      2001 Census Demographics for Bradford East: ... Muslim: 24.3% ...

      link to

      LibDem David Ward won the 2010 election with 33.7%, against 32.8% for Labour and 26.8% for the Conservatives candidate.

      While I cannot say anything about what David Ward genuinely thinks, to me it looks like David Ward is just very afraid that Respect will win Bradford East in 2015 with a campaign for Palestine, too.

    • Mooser

      Yes, of course. In no way I wanted to say that black people are more stupid, and jewish people are more intelligent or having any other group attribute by birth that makes blacks or jews generally them different.

      I even tried to edit my comment in that direction after I had posted it, but when I submitted the edit, time was already over.

      Wherever black people are given the same legal rights (and not subjected to overwhelming social prejudice) and those rights are not abrogated they do just fine.

      There is much more to that than just having the same legal rights. I think reasons have also a lot to do with having the same social chances, the financial status of parents, education chances, the existence or absence of effective group specific career networks and so on. In short: when one is born into a group that is down, it's hard to get up. And other way round it seems also to be true: when one when one is born into a group that is doing well, chances are good that one will do well, too. However, that was not my main point.

      My main point was that there is a huge difference between holding prejudices against a powerless minority (whatever the reasons) and having a grudge against the abuse of power by some powerful people (whoever they are and whatever the reasons for their power), and such difference is deliberately eliminated from such polls on anti-semitism as discussed here.

    • JeffB
      Of course it does matter why and on what reasons people hold negative opinions or prejudices. And of course it does matter if people differentiate between an identity of others and actions of others, but a poll does not.

      While I agree with you that people who don’t like ethnic minorities have in their own head good reasons for that dislike let me bring a different comparison to make the point more clear. Instead of comparing jews with blacks let's compare jews with the British or Saudi royals.

      There are some people who dislike royals and have prejudices against royals just because they are royals though nobody has any guilt of being born a royal. These people are for the abolishment of the monarchy. Let's call these people anti-royal. Other people may generally be fine with the system of a monarchy, but they dislike the abuse of power, warmongering and the amassing of wealth by some powerful royals and the support of these powerful royals by other royals. It's an important difference, but then a poll goes and asks: do you dislike the (media) power of the royals? And when people then answer "yes, partly" the pollsters make the headline: Shocking! xx percent of the population are anti-royal, hold prejudices against royals.

      Of course the comparison of jews with royals doesn't fit well, because jews have not the legal status of royals, but the comparison of jews with blacks doesn't fit well, too, because jews are a very successful and powerful minority well magnitudes above their share of the general population, while balcks are a very unsuccessful and powerless minority magnitudes under their share of the general population. That jews were so successful and powerful was different some decades and centuries ago, but it obviously changed today.

      Regarding media (and other tools of power) for example I think it's obvious that some powerful jews (most, if not of them staunch Zionists), wield much larger media power (and other power) than a jewish population share of between 0.3% in Britain and 3% in the USA would suggest.

      Don't you see a difference between holding prejudices against a powerless minority and having a grudge against the abuse of power of some powerful people? In the polls that isn't reflected at all.

    • It's possible, of course.

      However I think the more powerful way to get desired results is to pose the questions accordigly. Just look at this question for example:

      "Jews have too much power in the media."

      So, how would one respond who thinks that most mass media have a Zionist pro-Israel and anti-Palestinian bias, and that that is no good thing?

      If someone answers then "Partly agree" with the statement above, because he believes many Zionists who are influential in the media are jews, but he thinks the wording of the statement is wrong conflating jews with zionists, then that's taken as proof for anti-semitism. Though, when asked, whether he/she would object if a relative married a jew, than he answers he have no objection because he understands that judaism and Zionism are two different things.

      Another thing is that causes for anti-semitism are not questioned thoroughly. For example, one may believe that lot's of Muslim anti-semitism may have a root in the Saudi/Qatari doctrines of Wahhabism. One may further believe that ruling British elites, including Zionists, powerful jews and the government of Israel, are partly responsible for the spread of Islamic anti-semitism, because they are in cahoots with Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and let their Saudi/Qatari allies spread their Wahhabi version of intolerant Islam in Britain (and France, and other western countries) virtually unchecked, or they even encourage Saudi/Qatari donations for Islamic teaching in Britain (and France, etc.)

      And what about people who dislike most jews because they think most jews are adherents of a racist ideology called Zionism? Or what about those who think that "Israel" is "the state of the jewish people" and therefore jews worldwide agree with what the government of Israel does? Of course, such polls don't reflect such opinions, and those who pay for the polls don't want the poll to reflect such opinions, because they would lead to undesired political conclusions.

      So, I believe, such superficial polls on anti-semitism poorly reflect real opinions. They are more like a PR tool to influence policy in a direction those who pay for them favor.

  • Media obsesses over 'free speech' in Charlie Hebdo case while ignoring Israeli targeting of journalists
    • Walid

      Pehaps not polite to recall that there are 4 Jewish mnisters in Hollande’s cabinet including Fabius, and these have definite leanings towards Israel.

      There is more to that. It's not an issue of "4 Jewish mnisters in Hollande’s cabinet." It's an issue of the presidency. First, of course, Fabius couldn't have blocked the P5+1 without Hollande's backing. And, what's more, Fabius isn't the commander of the French armed forces. That's the French president. And ever since Chirac - who opposed the US war for Israel on Iraq - was replaced with Sarkozy, the French presidency puts the French military in the service of Israel.

      When Sarkozy was president France was the first to bomb Libya in 2011. Before, leading advocates of Israel like John McCain and Bernard-Henri Levy advocated bombing Libya. Israel has hidden it's stance well, but the Israel lobby was undoubtedly a main driving force behind the war on Libya.

      When Hollande was president France was (and is) a leading sponsor of the regime change in Syria. Fabius even criticized Obama in 2012 for outlawing Syria's Al Qaeda branch Nusra Front as terrorist arguing Al Qaeda "did a good job on the ground" in Syria - his words, a direct quote. See here, footnote 5:

      link to

      But French policy on Syria is finally decided by Hollande, not by Fabius. And Hollande had French fighter jets already on the tarnac in September 2013 to be the first to bomb Syria's government - a move very much desired by Israel and Saudi Arabia. That Hollande didn't bomb Syria was only a consequence of Obama's last-minute surprise decision to seek congress support for bombing Syria, and Hollande knew without the U.S. French military is too weak to be decisive against Syria's army.

      The Saudis provide financial support for France (investment, weapon procurements, etc) in return for French staunch support for the Israeli-Saudi axis against Iran and Iranian influence in the middle east.

    • @JeffB

      "What are the main international partners of Saudi Arabia? France and Israel.

      Don’t be silly. The main partners of Saudi Arabia are the United States and Britain. Until recently the Saudis hated Israel and worked against them."

      That Saudi Arabia and Israel form a political axis is not new while at the same time the Sauds publicly tried to display distance from Israel. That alliance is quite old, take Bandar Bin Sultan as an example who was always on very good terms with the Israel and the Israeli lobby in Washington. Together the US, Britain, the Sauds, Israel and the Israeli lobby in Washington coordinated well for example in regard to Lebanon, as well as in regard to Iran, Nicaragua and so on.

      The component relatively new to this axis is France, where the Israel lobby took power in 2007 when Sarkozy became president. In the course of the Syrian war Israel, the Sauds and the lobby became quite unhappy with the US not willing to bomb Syria and with Britain being blocked by the vote on bombing Syria lost by Cameron in parliament in 2013. What is left now is an axis of Israel, Saudis and France - with backing of the Israel lobby and it's agents in the US like John McCain and most of Congress.

      Israel has media & lobby power in Western countries, the Sauds have oil and money they don't need to account for and France has weapons and a blocking vote in UNSC and EU. In the course of the Syrian war that alliance trying to outmanover the US president, Qatar and Turkey became very clear. And even more so it became clear when Hollande blocked the P5+1 deal with Iran on behalf of Israel and the Sauds. I put 2 references to this in my comment, see them here again, this time as links:

      link to

      link to

      Their are many more sources which tell about the de facto axis Saudi-Israel-France. A strange alliance, of course, but very real. the weakest component in it seems to be France which is more or less in it because France lacks money and the Sauds have it. Israel and the Sauds on the other hand work hand in glove together driven by their shared aversion against Iran and Iranian influence in the region.

    • There are much more things regarding Al Qaeda and terror to stiffle free speech what is ignored by the mass media. Who is behind all this wahhabi takfiri terror around the world? Of course, Sadui Arabia is the main power driving the spread of the wahhabi takfiri ideology around the world.

      Jonathan Manthorpe on May 28, 2013 in the Vancouver Sun: Saudi Arabia funding fuels jihadist terror

      And besides Saudi Arabia Qatar funds Al Qaeda, too.

      Steve Clemons on Jun 23 2014 in The Atlantic: 'Thank God for the Saudis': ISIS, Iraq, and the Lessons of Blowback

      What are the main international partners of Saudi Arabia? France and Israel. Together with France and Israel the Saudis even try to derail US policy to get more peace in the middle east.

      Consortium News on November 24, 2013: A Saudi-Israeli Defeat on Iran Deal
      Al Monitor on October 4, 2013: The Israeli-Sunni Coalition Against Iran

      Who else supports Al Qaeda? French foreign minister Laurent Fabius, a good friend of Israel, publicly came to the defense of Al Qaeda, saying "Al Qaeda does a good job on the ground."

      Voltairenet on 13 décembre 2012: Laurent Fabius prend la défense d’Al-Qaida

      And the UN recently found links between Israel and Al Qaeda:

      GlobalResearch/SANA on 14 September 2014: United Nations Reveals Close Links Between Israel and Al Qaeda Affiliated Terrorist Organizations in Syria

      Activist Post on January 7, 2015: New UN Report Highlights Israeli Connection To Syrian Death Squads

      So, what is Israel's position regarding Al Qaeda?

      Algemeiner on June 4, 2013: Israeli Officials: We’d Prefer Al-Qaeda-Run Syria to an Assad Victory

      Add to this the support of the US government to this French-Israeli-Saudi takfiri terror network.

      NYTimes on March 24, 2013: Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A.

      The covert relationship of the US with takfiri terrorism is decades old. The US even printed and funded with taxpayer money textbooks with Takfiri ideology from Saudi Arabia for schoolchildren to incite children to kill "infidels"

      Washington Post on 22 March 2002: From U.S., the ABC's of Jihad

      So, the background of the spread of takfiri terror ideology and the Charlie Hebdo attack is all out in the open, but the MSM try to bury the truth deeply.

  • The Israel lobby rallies inside the Republican Party
    • Citizen

      I do think Rand Paul just calculated that - if he wants to be president - he must move in the direction of the middle, ie he must water down the positions many others find outlandish, even if his fans don't like that. You see that with every radical lefty or liberal - as soon as they try to climb the political ladder they water down their positions regarding unions, banking and so on. In case of Rand Paul it means watering down the assumed anti-Israel stance. If he is working - like I think he is - on becoming POTUS, he will currently do anything what improves his chances to win the Republican primaries - and since the Republicans are very much pro-Israel he's now working to present himself as being pro-Israel, too. I think he has a fair chance to become president, probably the Republican primaries being a bigger hurdle as the final battle against Hillary.

      The huge problem, for the voters, but even more for AIPAC, is, that nobody knows what positions he will take once he became president - if he manges that. AIPAC wants presidential elections where both candidates are reliable and trusted friends - or better say: stooges - of Israel. Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush all fulfill this criterium, Rand Paul doesn't. And that's why AIPAC and Bibi's buddies in the US are currently working hard to stop Rand Paul - they hate uncertainty.

    • Yes, I did.

      That's why I wrote: "That he now supports pro-Israeli positions doesn’t make him more trustworthy in the eyes of the lobby, but more dangerous – because it’s harder to build pro-Israeli opposition to him this way. the problem for the lobby is that nobody knows whether he would – once elected president – keep his newly found pro-Israel positions or return to his fathers positions."

    • I disagree with the interpretations of this article.

      To me interpretation of all this is quite different: it's all about the Israel lobby to stop Rand Paul from becoming president 2016. It's true that the voter base in democrats is less pro-Israel and more so. But for 2016 the Israel lobby has pocketed in Hillary already. She will do whatever Israel wants her to do. The Israel lobby knows this because Hillary always was like this. The only chance that anyone else than Hillary will get the Democratic ticket for 2016 is that the Israel lobby wants it. There is no serious contender other than Hillary - and no non-zionist at all.

      In the Republican party the situation is completely the opposite. The base is hawkish, very much pro-Israel and all things the Israel Lobby likes, but there is a huge danger for the lobby in the person of Rand Paul. He may turn everything upside down. That he now supports pro-Israeli positions doesn't make him more trustworthy in the eyes of the lobby, but more dangerous - because it's harder to build pro-Israeli opposition to him this way. the problem for the lobby is that nobody knows whether he would - once elected president - keep his newly found pro-Israel positions or return to his fathers positions. All bets are on.

      For the Israel lobby that uncertainty is true horror and that is why it concentrates most of it's resources to fight Rand Paul.

      So, that's my interpretation of these events, hope it's unterstandable.

  • Couldn't there be just one 'NYT' columnist who was critical of Israel? (No)
    • Quit referring to the NYT as anything but a blatant tool of corporate and Zionist propaganda.

      I usually refer to the NYTimes as a zionist propaganda rag well-known for routinosly spreading blatant lies like the Judy Miller fairytales to start illegal wars in the assumed service of Israeli interests.

      As blatant zionist propaganda lies in the NYT can be identified as such in almost every major foreign policy issue it covers, from Palestine over Iraq, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Libya and so forth up to glorifying Ukraine's Nazi-putsch regime, I think such terminology like propaganda is quite approproiate. What's inappropriate is to refer to the stuff peddled in the NYT as journalism, or worse and more misleading, as journalism with good reputation.

  • Palestinian minister dies after Israeli army assault during olive tree planting ceremony in West Bank village
    • Mooser

      Aren’t a couple of Israel people who died from heart attacks connected with the fright generated about Palestinian rockets counted as casualties?

      Yes, Zionists usually and routinely count Zionist people who died from heart attacks while running to shelter as casualties of hostilities or terror. I have always rejected this assuption of moral equivalence when Zionists argued so, and so I do here.

      However, you raise an important point, again. Zionists apply double standards. Whenever a Zionist dies due to a heart attack due to action nearby, the Zionist regime call him/her a victim murdered by the resistance. But when a Pakestian dies due to a heart attack due to action nearby, the Zionist regime calls it an accident. Such double standards are, of course, unacceptable.

    • Mooser

      Don't get me wrong. I'm not off the opinion that Israeli occupation forces have any legitimacy, whether it is on 48 occupied Palestinian or land they grabed later. So, of course, I see the Zionist regime responsible for whatever happens due the actions of their occupation forces.

      However, even as I see it that way that Zionist occupation forces mustn't have been there, I also allow me to distinguish between what I see as regularly committing the crime of murder by zionist forces, and this one, what looks to me more like a death from anger. Of course I see the Zionist forces responsible for the anger, but that's a difference from just killing people directly like the Zionist forces often do it.

      Let me say it with a rough example: there is a difference between a criminal act where a burglar goes into a house of a stranger, pushs the owner around and the owner dies from anger, and where a burglar goes into a house of a stranger and he kills the owner by splitting his head. Usually the zionist forces behave like the latter, but in this case it seems to me they behaved like the former.

    • Call me a mooser,

      those who know me for longer commenting here know that I've have no pro-Israel bias whatsoever.

      But I watched many videos of that incident and I sincerely believe that Ziad Abu Ain died as a result of a heart attack which was hardly forseeable as a result of how the occupation forces behaved this time. It looks to me like Ziad Abu Ain died as a result of his anger about the Israeli injustice, once again proven in that situation, but much less as a result of direct Israeli violence in that situation.

      I support Palestine, because Palestine stands for justice and truth, and so I feel I have to say this, here. Shall truth be what truth is, whereever it falls.

      However, I can't supress my feelings that I find it deeply ironic that in this incident Israel may feel what it is to get hammered by false accusations, as spreading false accusations is usually one of Israels preferred tactic to annihilate their opponents.

  • A point by point response to Alan Dershowitz’s 'Ten Reasons Why The BDS Movement Is Immoral'
    • The issue that terrorism is not clearly defined because Israel and the US would come out as top terrorists using any common definition of terrorism shall not deflect from the pure and unmitigated evil terrorism regurlarly applied by Israel and it's worldwide fifth column. Let me just to name three examples in the not so distant past to make the point of terrorism by & it's global fifth column clear.

      1. The British zionist paper "Times" - which is usually peddling stories planted by the Israeli government - wrote back in 2007:

      Revealed: Israel plans nuclear strike on Iran
      By Uzi Mahnaimi, New York and Sarah Baxter, Washington
      ISRAEL has drawn up secret plans to destroy Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities with tactical nuclear weapons.


      link to,,2089-2535310,00.html

      2. Patrick Clawson, a leading figure in Israel's US-based fifth column complex AIPAC/WINEP, advocated in an official WINEP policy presentation in September 2012 that Israel or "somebody" shall commit acts of false flag terrorism against Iran to start a war between the US and Iran to please Israel:

      "I frankly think that crisis initiation is really tough. And it's very hard for me to see how the United States … uh … [the] president can get us to war with Iran." He then went on to recount a series of incidents in American history—like the Gulf of Tonkin incident and the attack on Pearl Harbor—that gave U.S. presidents the justification needed to go to war. He ended by saying, with a note of sarcasm in his voice, "So, if in fact the Iranians aren't going to compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war."

      Source & Video proof: link to

      3. Sheldon Adelson, a billionaire, leading figure in Israel's US-based fifth column complex and one of the main enablers of Bibi, the current chief of the Israeli regime, publicly advocated to terrorize Iran by firing an ‘atomic weapon’ at Iran. The audience of supporters of Israel was supportive of the idea of terrorizing Iran with a nuclear first strike to install so much fear in Iranians that Iran would submit to Israeli demonds whatever they are.


      link to

      There is nothing secret there. Whatever definition applied Israel and it's global fifth column are the ultimate terrorists, terrorist enablers and advocates of terrorism, from terrorism involving nuclear attacks to false flag terrorism to spark senseless bloody wars between christians and muslims or between muslims themselves with te aim to make millions of other people kill each other.

    • There is so much more relating to international terrorism what Israel has done that any list seems to be very incomplete.

      Just in very recent years Israel did - besides brutalizing Palestinians in the lands between the river and the sea among other things:
      - wage war on Lebanon using disproportionate force against civilians
      - commit aerial attacks on Syria, Lebanon and Sudan
      - send death squads committing acts of murder and/or terror bombings to Iran, UAE, Lebanon, Syria
      - commit murderous piracy against a Turkish ship stuffed with unarmed civilians
      - support internationally banned terrorist groups active in Iran and neighboring countries while posing as US government agents
      - use deception and agents of influence to orchestrate international wars and other bloody attempts for regime change in Iraq, Lebanon, Iran, Libya & Syria

      A bit longer ago Israel also did:
      - bomb jewish people in Iraq to blame it on arabs and make jewish Iraqis emigrate to Israel
      - bomb US institutions in Egypt to blame it on arabs to make the US hate arabs
      - bomb a US warship in the medeteranian sea killing lot's of US soldiers witht he intent on blaming it on arabs
      - commit an act of kidnapping against a secular Moroccan politician in Switzerland leading to his murder
      - murder an innocent waiter in Norway
      - commit an act of kidnapping against a nuclear scientist who fled Israel in Italy
      - proliferating nuclear weapons technology, know how and raq materials to the apartheid state of South Africa
      - support death squads committing mass acts of murder, terror, drug dealings and serial other crimes in Nicaragua
      - attempt to murder a Palestinian politician in Jordan

      And there is much more. Some of the Israeli acts of terror and other heinous crimes across the globe are well-known, while many other international Israeli crimes are still not known to the general public.

    • 6. The BDS movement is immoral because it would encourage Iran—the world’s leading facilitator of international terrorism...

      That's a false claim. Israel is the world’s leading facilitator of international terrorism.

      The UN just reported that Israel supports terrorists of Al Qaeda and other groups in cross-border attacks against Syria.

      link to

      To support Al Qaeda and other terrorists Israel itself regularly commits her military - and the military of her proxy forces like the US in the case of Iraq - to attack other countries and launch wars of aggression.

      Today Israel launched airstrikes - unprovoked acts of a war of aggression - against Syria to support the Al Qaeda terrorist forces whose terror Israel backs in Syria. Syria demands sanctions against Israel - just like against any other country that supports international terrorism.

      link to

  • Why I confronted Gregor Gysi
    • Btw: In the Left party - the party who invited Max & David - their was a campaign organized to demand "consequences" (excluding from the party or the left parlament faction) against those Left party parlamentarians who invited Max & David, and against two more Left parlamentarians who were also present at the meeting with Max & David and spoke there. The petition is initially signed by the manager of the Left party in Germany, about a dozen members of federal parliment of the Left party and several dozens more Left parlamentarians from reginal parlaments and so on. Gysi is not among the undersigned. It is these guys who I cited in a comment above as being called the "Mossad faction" in the left party.

      However, the regional party leaders from Bundesland Nordrhein-Westfalen, where those who invited May & David are members, seem to back those who invited Max & David, so a formal motion against them is likely defeated.

      link to

    • Walid

      I still wonder how much of this is due to the leftists being sincerely pro-Palestinian and how much is due simply to weaken their opponents.

      I can assure you that the parlementarians who invited Max & David did that simply because they are pro human rights and they think Israel is very much anti human rights. Some of them are timid, but all of them would have a lot easier life if they would adhere to the demands of the Israel lobby, but their conscience puts them to confront Israel. They are a very tiny faction in German politics. Most others go for money and fame, instead of justice.

      Disclosure: I had some conversations with one of those politicians who invited Max & David a while ago. Had I known they invited Max & David I think maybe I could have helped them to avoid this displeasure. Those who invited Max & David are very much on the same page as Max & David, but sadly the event to promote their common views didn't run well. It weakened those who invited Max & David. I'm sure it wasn't the intention of Max & David, and neither the intention of those who invited them, so I think better communication would have been essential to get a better result.

    • Felicia Langer, who was awarded a "Federal Cross of Merit" by Germany in 2009, pinned an article in strong solidarity with Max & David, calling out the shame of Gregor Gysi & Petra Pau:

      ’’Blessed are the Peacemakers“

      link to

      (As far as I know, it's in German language only, so far, but might well worth a translation into English)

    • Walid

      Bandolero, if you are saying that Max and Sheen were “used” or were recruited by the anti-imperialists to get back at Gysi, it may explain the absurd washroom episode.

      In my opinion, that they "used" Max & David "to get back at Gysi" is a wrong characterization.

      It's more like that they wanted Max & David in Berlin to make a better point for their pro-palestinian positions, to get them influence the Left Party members and the German public that the strong pro-Israeli positions held by the German government and the realist/Mossad wing of the Left party are wrong, because the pro-Israeli positions contradict the German/Left commitment to human rights and justice.

      In my point of view, Gysi himself is likely trying to boil down tensions between "the Mossad faction" and "the anti-imperialist faction" in the left party, because he knows that these clashes have the potential to split and destroy the party. Gysi likely knows well how contradictionary the commitment for pro-Israel-stances is for an otherwise lefty anti-Nato-party. That's likely why he feared this confrontation: he knows the pro-Israeli stance of his party is totally contradictionary to the rest of the party's policies, but he fears that a clash between "the Mossad faction" and "the anti-imperialist faction" would destroy the party. Neither faction is strong enough without the other to make it over the 5%-threshold to get elected into the Bundestag. Of course, Gysi knows that the MSM in Germany likes nothing more than clashes inside the left party, because the German elite hates the left party for their anti-capitalist and anti-NATO-stances, and the MSM and the elites will do anything to widen any rift in the Left party. And Israel and the elite's MSM are very strong in Germany. So Gysi tried to avoid the serious contradiction in his party regarding Zionism being exposed by not showing up and running away. Afterwards Gysi tried to play down the incident, so as not to widen the rift further.

      What went wrong seems to me that this background of German politics and Left politics in Germany was likely not explained, or not explained well enough, to Max and David when they were invited to come to Berlin by the anti-imperialist faction of the Left party.

    • In reply to: ziusudra - November 15, 2014, 2:32 am

      If anything, Me Gysi is feared by the Zio lobbies here in Germany.

      That is completely false and wrong.

      Let me explain. Mr Gysi was a prominent jewish figure in the GDR and it's ruling party (SED), and, of course, as we know the GDR and it's ruling party was anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, anti-fascist, anti-Nazi and anti-zionist.

      When the GDR was swallowed by the FRG in 1990, the future existence of the SED was in doubt, and Gregr Gysi became the leader of the party. With the breakdown of the GDR anti-capitalist positions were discredited and the SED had no powerful friends. In that situation Mr Gysi and Ms Pau formed an alliance between the SED and the world Zionist lobby against anti-semitism, fascism and Nazism. Shimon Samuels from the Simon Wiesenthal Center in France wrote 2010 about that:

      Samuels reminded Pau that "when we last met in Jerusalem, you called for a campaign against antisemitism", likewise recalling to Gysi that "we first spoke in the heady days of January 1990, when the wall had fallen and you fought to prevent the passage of neo-Nazis from West to East Berlin" continuing, "both of you have publicly denounced Dierkes, but your declared cause to contain antisemitism and neo-Nazism cannot be served by allowing such discourse to remain in your Party."

      Source: Simon Wiesenthal Center, Paris, 15 March 2010, Wiesenthal Center to German 'Left Party' Leaders:- "Expel Holocaust Slanderer from your Party in order to keep it in Camp of Post-War and Post-Wall Democracy"

      Last not least due to the alliance with powerful right-wing Zionists like the Wiesenthal Center the SED party survived, is today called "The left" and stands for values like pacifism, anti-capitalism & anti-fascism. However, the alliance with right-wing Zionism is a serious contradiction in that general lefty national & global position, and Zionism is challenged from within parts of the Left party time and again as being racist, imperialist & war-mongering.

      Currently there are two major factions in the Left party: one called "reformer" and one called "anti-imperialists." Gysi is head of the reformer wing in the party, and inside the reformer faction there are serious right-wing zionist neocon forces at work, sometimes refered by people who don't like them as "the Mossad faction." That's while the anti-imperialist faction of the very same party tends to be somehow more pro-Palestinian. In German language, read the article in "Hintergrund" 17/3/2010: "Die LINKE – Von innen umzingelt" to understand who's who regarding Zionism in the German Left party.

      You can imagine the high tensions between "The Mossad faction" and the the "anti-imperialists" in the left party. The stand-off between Gysi and Sheen/Blumenthal - who were invited by members of the "anti-imperialists" - is just one more episode to this.

  • 'NYT' can't keep its story straight on anti-Semitism in Germany
    • As someone who lives in Berlin, I just want to say what's going on here:

      There is a fairly small community of people going out to Anti-Israeli/Anti-Zionist demonstrations like the "Quds day." I happened to participate in that demonstration this year. There were about 2000 people there on that "major event" - coming this year at a time of the Israeli massacre in Gaza. Besides the demonstration all way right and left there were pro-Israeli counter-demonstrators led by the Israeli ambassador and some German politicians trying to provoke the participants of the demonstrators to say or shout anything anti-semitic, lot's of pro-Israeli journalists looking for any chance to find proof of anti-semitsm in the anti-Israeli demonstration and large police forces instructed by Israel-friendly politicians to go in consequently against anything anti-semitic and directly arrest people. But, in Berlin Quds day they didn't manage to find anything. The people demonstrating were very aware of the Zionist intention to conflate criticism of Israel with anti-semitism. Besides Shia and German lefties there were many jews critical of Israel participating in the anti-Israeli demonstration. After the demonstration I read in the media that there had been one occurence were one participant was reported to have shouted something anti-semitic. I haven't heard anything and police said in a statement they didn't hear such a thing neither. If their really was one person on the demonstration, a youth or agent provocateur or whatever, shouting one time an anti-semitic slogan, of course, I don't know because I wasn't always everywhere. And, thouigh the mood on the demonstration was clearly not anti-semitic, of course, it's hard to prevent one guy coming to a demonstration, taking a place in front of hungrily waiting cameras and shouting something contrary to the intentions of the rest of the demonstration. I'm told the situation with other anti-Israeli demonstration in Germany is quite the same. The one on which the NYT reported anti-semitism, was, if I remember it correctly, organized by the left party, where absolutely no anti-semitism is found. But, of course, it's hard to prevent that one guy, or a small group of saboteurs and agents provocateuers, comes to your demo and shouts something to the contrary in front of cameras. The local pro-israeli community has a lot of experierence in staging such intrusion events and other provocations, and the NYT and other zionist media willfully collaborate with such behaviour. That's the background of the NYT story. It's obviously a propaganda job to tar anti-Israeli protests as anti-semitic.

      Regarding the existence of anti-semitism in Germany, it's true that there exists anti-semitism, albeit much fewer as prejedices against muslims, Turks and arabs. My impression is that anti-semitism is mostly found in the higher echolons of better society in Germany, it is usually only whispered, and comes from anti-semites who usually brand themselves as good friends of Israel. Typical anti-semitism in Germany is whisper like one has to be nice to Israel, because, you know, after Germany and Hitler lost it, jews rule the world, and so, if you want to have a career, you must show your support for the jews and Israel, whether you like them or not. Other forms of anti-semitism are sometimes anonymous graffitis like "Against the Judenrepublik" (jewish republic) which are quickly overpainted. Violent anti-semitism is almost completely absent. Jewish poeple immigrating to Germany have in the daily life absolutely no problem with antisemitism here in Berlin. It's quite the opposite, like a preferrential status: if one is jewish it can open some doors. Berlin is in reality very multi cultural and quite tolerant in all directions.

      I hope this comment helps to get a clue which piece of the NYT is propaganda lies and which is not. James and Phil got it essentially right.

  • Where is the antiwar movement?
    • "They had no clue."

      With that I completely agree. When the US finally found out what it did in Iraq, they where neither on the battlefield nor in elections able to turn the tables against the resistance anymore. And now the US is up for more of that in Syria and Iraq.

    • Alex
      There are many reasons why the anti-war movement is not strongly speaking up against the current US-led bombings of targets which are said to be ISIS. The main reason, I think, is, that many people think, ISIS acted in a way that it deserves to be bombed. Have a look how many Kurdish people protest today around the world demanding more bombs on ISIS targets. I don't disagree with that ISIS should be defeated, but I think, the US bombing ISIS will make ISIS only stronger, because it lends ISIS legitimacy and credibility to recruit more fighters for their cause. I think ISIS does think that, too, and that's why ISIS didn't do anything to avoid clashing with the US. But I easily understand that many people around the world still think, US bombs can solve terrorist problems, so the anti-war movement against bombing ISIS is weak. Btw, as the US was bombing lefty leader Gaddafi and his followers 2011 to support a bunch of brutal racists grabbing power in Libya, it was even weaker. As most people in te west are uneducated, I understand this.

      But what I totally fail to understand is, why there is no anti-war movement protesting against the war waged by Israel against secular Syria using Al Qaeda as it's proxy force:

      link to

      Is it because people in the west still haven't learned yet that Al Qaeda is a bunch of mass murderous extremists doing completely outrageous stuff? Or is supporting Al Qaeda to wage war against neighboring countries OK for western folks when Israel does it? I'm clueless.

    • "The machine doesn’t trust the Shia"

      The machine assumes the Shia will lean towards Iran, the major Shia power. But that isn't about religion, it's about Israel. As Iran is taking on Israel, the machine wants distrusts Shia, that's all the reason behind. As long as Israel's buddy, the Shah, was in Iran, the Shia were fine for the empire. Came Khomeini and Khamenei, and the catastrophic defeat of the empire in Iraq due to Shia power, and now the sytem distrusts the Shia. But when Sunni leaders are suspected of really opposing Israel and the empire in a meaningful way, then the empire takes them out anyway. That's why the empire killed Saddam and Gaddafi - they opposed Israel and the empire in meaningful ways. Where as the grotesque and brutal clownerie of arabic kings and emirs is spared from being targeted by the empire - they support Israel and the empire as willing stooges.

    • "... blind support for the Shia majority who sidelined the Sunni minority ..."

      In my opinion, this is pure nonsense. The US has in post 2003 Iraq supported the Kurds and the Sunnis. It was the resistance against the US occupation - led by Iran and Iraqi Shia clerics like Sistani and Sadr - that forced the US to accept an Iran-friendly Shia government in Iraq as the outcome of the US war against Saddam. It was a strategic defeat for the US. And to reverse this strategic defeat in Iraq is exactly why the US and it's partners in crime (Sauds, Turkey, Qatar, Israel, Barzani-Kurds) incited and supported a Sunni insurgency in Syria and Iraq in 2011/2012 - which now inadvertently morphed into ISIS.

  • Netanyahu's 'poison' -- latest settlement will distance Israel's closest allies, State Dep't warns
  • Netanyahu at the United Nations: Hamas, Iran, ISIS and 100 cheering Israelis
  • Jodi Rudoren effectively annexes Golan Heights to Israel
    • Even more important than the failure to report on the fact that the "Israeli Golan" is territory illegaly occupied by Israel I find the failure to report that Israel with that strike and other military actions directly supports the Al Qaeda group Nusra Front, which is deemed as a terrorist organisation by the UN, and while the US together with some partners of the US are fighting a difficult war against ISIS and Nusra Front. Israel's army is directly aiding the Al Qaeda enemy.

      link to

  • ISIS, 9/11, and the terrorism time loop
    • elephantine

      Yes, I know, there are lot's of tricks to maek any text readable. Ctrl-+ to make it larger, disabling styles in the browser to get rid of a hard to read font - or, copy paste text into an editor to read it with a nice font.

      When I first so the new MW layout, I thought I'll get used to the new layout, but now, after some time, I remarked, that I didn't get used to it, and I unconsciously react to the new layout by visiting the MW site a lot fewer times than before the new layout.

      Since I can imagine that I'm not the only one experienceing such an effect, and I find the MW site and it's content very important, I wanted the editors here to know that.

      But maybe I'm just still mourning: the old MW layout was so nice to read ...

    • Seems my comment mmetiately got published, so I repudiate: that part is working again.

    • MW

      I still wonder when there is the bugfixing since the "New Layout."

      When I said I was optimistic about the "New Layout" I didn't know that it would last that long.

      Sorry that I couldn't read this article: my eyes are not that good and I didn't make the effort to paste the text into a text editor to be able to read it.

      I also noticed that a feature of the new layout is to have me in a waiting queue, I don't know whether that's intentional, however I want you to know it's discouragang.

      So it goes. (Sorry for my blunt criticism, I would much more like to be more positive, but I really can't read articles here now anymore - my eyes are not good enough for that)

  • Our new look
    • Peter

      Is it possible to get a chronological list of all articles? - See more at: link to

      I had the same problem. I just did my quick daily visit to MW to check for new articles - ugh.

      As a workaround I use the feed for a "recent article" list:

      For a list of recent comments I use the comment feed

      For a chronilogial list of comments to a specific article it also works

      What is likely a minor css bug quickly fixed is that there is no text highlighting for copy/paste. As a workaround I found out that switching off the style in Firefox makes highlighting work again - that the way I just quoted you here. I guess quoting will become a bit more work in future to put away the javascript auto attachment " - See more at: URL" - but OK, I understand it's for promotion, and when I switch off Javascript in my Browser it's gone, too.

      But all in all, though I found the previous design more comfortable from design to font, more news-like and making it easier to find things with a better overwiew over recent articles and comments, I think I'll get used to this new design.

      So let me try to be constructive with my criticism. What I find a bit odd is the category "Middle East" filled with quite old stuff. Maybe it would be an idea to broaden it to something like "International" or "Worldwide" news.

      Then it could also feature news like this one of Hugo Gutierrez filing charges against Netanyahu in Chile for crimes against humanity:

      On Friday, Chilean congressman Hugo Gutierrez (Communist Party) filed a lawsuit against the Israeli Prime Minister for “crimes against humanity”. He was accompanied by the Palestinian Federation of Chile.

      link to

  • Hillary Clinton just lost the White House in Gaza -- same way she lost it in Iraq the last time
    • Sean

      Thanks for that information. It sounds strange to me. From what I see most Americans are quite dissatisfied with the current Democrat government. The economy seems not to get back on track, health care far less popular than envisioned and other great domestic advancements not in sight. So my understanding is that in the 2016 elections U.S. people will likely vote for change, voting the Democrats out and Republicans in. Yet, as you point out, Hillary seems to be seen as a bright light in all the mess. I wonder why. She was part of that Democratic government.

      Foreign policy I generally expect to be no decisive factor in the elections. The only thing where it may count is for Hillary personally, as her record as successful or unsuccessful foreign policy manager may be seen as a hint on how well or bad she will manage domestic issues.

      When Hillary's foreign policy is scrutinized I expect Libya to become a major topic. The war on Libya was her baby and she was very happy with the success of having managed to get Gaddafi killed in a most cruel way. But the resulting situation in Libya and Northern Africa is a mess which I hardly expect to get cleaned up before 2016. And I guess this mess will stick to Hillary.

      From a campaign point, I'm looking forward to see the video being embedded in a campaign video of Hillary's opponents:

      link to

      Presented in the right way, I cannot imagine that many people will vote for Hillary after watching this. She sounds just bloodthirsty and mad - and given the mess she caused in Libya, she looks also stupid.

    • I don't think that the support for Israel's massacre in Gaza costs Hillary the White House.

      As things develop in the U.S. - at least from what I see from here - I suspect the next U.S. president will likely by a Republican.

  • Amid fierce debate, members of German think tank take a stand on Gaza
    • LeaNder
      The underlying reason why the Rosalux Stiftung disinvited Finkelstein is that the left party and the Rosalux Stiftung are dominated by ardent Zionists (Antideutsche ...) like the left party in general is dominated by ardent Zionists in top positions (Gysi, Pau, Ramelow, Liebich...) supporting ultra-rightwing zionist basis groups (BAK Shalom etc), too. And these rightwing zionist supporters just hate Finkelstein, that's the reason. The campaign run by zionist MSM against Finkelstein was just a pretext.

      The anti-imperialist left in the left party is clearly a minority in the Left party, the zionists in the left party (Mossad faction once they were called) are the majority even in the left, but the left party can't get rid of the anti-imperialist minority cause they might fail on the 5% threshold due to that in next elections.

    • Here is a more powerful open letter from 90 German I/P experts, some of them from Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung and the same as in the letter above, but also many others, professors from universities, to the German government demanding:
      - stopp of weapons exports to Israel
      - liftung the blockade of Gaza
      - reimburse Israel for the damage done to infrastructure in Gaza paid for with German tax money
      - and more ...

      link to

      Spiegel Online, the most popular "serious" German magazine reports on it's website about that open letter (Huh, I never thought Spiegel Online would report on it and not spinning it all too negative):

      link to

      (Sorry, all in German)

  • Israel correctly fears its 'delegitimizers,' says leftwing member of Irish parliament
    • Among the factors: “The existence of an ‘insoluble problem’… The growth of private violence… Multi-racial or multi-tribal conflicts…” Israel meets several of those tests.

      Israel, it's lobby and lackeys have one more feature which in my view is even much more horrible and should not be forgotten. Besides that Israel commits serious serial crimes against Palestinians, Israel, it's lobby and lackeys are constantly trying to push others into wars and bloody conflicts.

      Most prominent:
      - Israel lobbying for war against Iraq
      - AIPACs lobbying for bomb Syria
      - constant lobbying for bombing Iran

      And many of the usual prominent guys of Israel firsters were also on the forefront in lobbying for:
      - Tough action against Russia over conflict in Ukraine
      - Bombing Libya
      - Georgian attack on South Ossetia and Russian peacekeeper troops stationed there
      - ENcouraging Kurds to fight secession wars in Iraq, Turkey, Syria and Iran
      - Encouraging Azerbaijan warmondering against Armenia
      - Bombing Belgrad
      - Pressure Sudan to heat up conflict there with campaigns like Save Darfur
      - Supporting contras in Nicaragua
      - Supporting apartheid South Africa
      - and so on and on and on

      Besides that Israeli forces massacred many people in Lebanon, bombed Syria and Sudan, and it's intelligence service murdered people in, among others, Norway, Syria, Dubai and Iran

      I think this record of permanent pushing for wars, conflict and suppression of people's rights everywhere is - combined with the power of it's global lobby - what distinguishes Israel from so many more other rogue states.

      And, adding to this, Israel coordinates it's vicious policies closely with Saudi Arabia, a similar rogue state that is constantly poisening muslim people in the whole world by propagating a medieval interpretation of Islam and encouraging racist violence mocking any idea of universal human rights around the world.

  • Liberal Zionism has lost its refuge-- a plausible two-state solution
    • I think the economic collapase - or, what I find more likely what will happen, the relative economic decline - of the U.S. will have a huge effect on liberating Palestine.

      Even if the Israel lobby manages to stay in charge of the U.S. - what I wouldn't take as a given - the power of the U.S. to coerce independent nations like BRICS to accept Israeli behaviour and abondon Palestine will decline.

      Today, the Israel lobby in the US manages to push global sanctions against anyone who supports Palestinian resistance and resists worldwide wars for Israel projects. In a couple of years that trend may resverse. Countries like BRICS may pile up sanctions on the U.S. and EU then for their support of a brutal Israeli apartheid regime.

      Add that to other factors, like the public discovery that disastrous US-led wars of aggression worldwide were fought for narrow interests of Zionist settlers, and the costs may easily become so huge for the U.S. elite in a couple of years, that they abandon the zionist apartheid state. In the end, most of the rich men in the U.S. love their money even more than they love Israel.

  • Hope in the one state solution 
    • JeffB
      When Israel becomes Palestine again I do expect many jews to stay there.

      I think that even many of the die-hard racists of which the Israeli society mainly consists today, will prefer to live in a equal Palestine than going somewhere else. Some of the racists may want to try to start something like a civil war, however, when a unified Palestine will become reality, they won't get the international support they'ld need to win, so that option will be limited,too. The typical zionist method of false-flag-terror won't work neither, because by then the zionist false-flag-terror will have been long exposed.

      What I think will be the only thing what likely will remain of Israel for a long time in the hearts of many then-former zionists will be a deep feeling of shame.

  • Tunnels-to-kindergartens propaganda Netanyahu peddled to NYT and CNN is exploded by Israeli news site
    • The final line I read in this hasbara piece is:

      Clarification: An earlier version said a building in Gaza that was booby-trapped, killing three Israeli soldiers, was designated as a United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees. This was based on information provided by the Israel Defence Forces, which has since confirmed the building has not been used as a UNRWA facility for many years. The IDF said it regrets the error.

      One more hasbara propaganda lie blown away.

  • Hamas equals ISIS in 'grisly creeds and grisly deeds,' Netanyahu tells a nodding Cuomo
    • Walid

      Die Zeit is a major German newspaper but it's totally pro-Israel, one of the most biased for Israel I would say. I remember, that in 2002 it acted like a mouthpiece of AIPAC. One of the big wigs at Die Zeit, Josef Joffe, is on especially good terms with the Washington NeoCon-Israel-Lobby cabal. I suspect most of what it prints is spoonfed Israeli propaganda. The quote from BBC above reads to me like this: the hasbara tries to paint an image as if the Israeli spies and agents in the US were trying to warn the US of 9/11 while in reality some of them were doing false propaganda dancing to 9/11 and trying to create the impression Arabs danced to 9/11 in the US.

      By the way: to me it seems to be quite clear that 9/11 was a Saudi-Israeli co-production. "I know what America is. America is a thing you can move very easily, move it in the right direction. They won't get in their way," Bibi said some months before it to a settler fearing peace, and then Bibi's buddy Larry Silverstein bought the asbestos-contaminated WTC towers for a lot of money and insured them remarkbly well against terrorism.

    • Interesting what Israeli agents did and Netanyahu said about Israel and 9/11. I thought most of the world knows today that five Israeli agents were arrested in the U.S., playing Arabs dancing for 9/11.

      link to

      And guess who said these words:

      "We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon..."

      Netanyahu himself, of course.

      link to

      And now Netanyahu says:

      Remember that Hamas celebrated 9/11. They celebrated the murder of thousands of innocent people, including thousands of New Yorkers… They were standing on the roof and cheering while all of the people of Israel grieved… with the United States…

      Netanyahu is really stunning.

  • US branch of the Jewish 'family' owes the homeland 'unconditional love' -- Rosner
  • Daily News publisher, Gov. Cuomo, Yankees president, and NE Patriots' owner are latest to rush to Israel's side
  • Goldstone sequel to be co-authored by Amal Alamuddin, Clooney's fiancee
    • Kay24

      I can't see that James Zogby claims that the Goldstone report played a part in Israel getting away with slaughtering civilians. I understand the article as describung the propaganda efforts made by Israel, and supported by NYT and WaPo, to neutralize the Goldstine report, and further lining out that, when this failed, Israel "resorted to intimidation to silence critics — even pummeling the venerable Justice Goldstone into submission."

  • Propaganda on Palestine: All-Knowing White Man & Angry Black Woman conjure good Jews and evil Arabs
    • Regarding Chloe Valdary, two things:

      Richard Silverstein, 28/2/2014:

      Chloe Valdary’s Suspect Pro-Israel Marketing

      Chloe Valdary is an African-American, Christian Zionist, and University of New Orleans undergraduate who’s been embraced by the Israel Lobby. It has showered her with Israel junkets (Aipac, CAMERA and ZOA have each sent her), funding ($6,000 per year from CAMERA), and lots of promotion (her video was produced by a group founded by the David Project‘s Charles Jacobs). She blogs at the Seth Klarman-funded Times of Israel and the settler media portal, Arutz Sheva. ...

      link to

      And JTA 05/08/2014:

      Ebbing support for Israel among key groups stirring alarm

      ... AIPAC would not comment for this article but is aware of the vulnerability of the pro-Israel outlook among Democratic constituencies. Earlier this year, the organization hired from within its ranks Marilyn Rosenthal, a former deputy political director for the lobby, as its national director for progressive engagement.

      AIPAC’s pitch to students is more apt to include pro-Israel students from traditionally black colleges, Obama voters and feminists, said a former senior Senate aide who is familiar with the lobby’s strategies.

      “They know they have a problem; they’re working on it,” the former staffer said. “Go to their events for students and you’re likelier to see a female rabbi who identifies as progressive. You’ll see black pastors.” ...

      link to

      PS: To the editors of MW: Some text in this MW article seems to appear two times in my browser. I suspect there went something wrong in MW while inserting the article text into the CMS.

  • 'One nation, one state, one leader' -- frightening slogan at Tel Aviv protest
    • At the time when Zionism was created at the end of the 19th century racism was not a discredited idea. Quite the opposite, it was flourishing and modern science. Of course, there was some opposition to racism, like Marxists and some other Europeans like many jews and some christians, but in general the existence of human races was a widely accepted fact of modern science.

      In the 20th century racism was largely discarded as a science and as a good idea, largely due to the abhorrent crimes and the following defeat of racist Germany in 1945, but in took still decades to push back the idea of racism. In the US, a big pushback against the idea of racism came, I think, with Montgomery Bus Boycott 1955, and for South Africa it took several decades longer.

      The problem with the born-out-of-racism ideology of Zionism as I see it, is how it adapted to the continuning defeat of the racist worldview. From what I see Zionism adpated to this largely by exchanging the word "race" for "ethnicity" and "people" but leaving the rest of the underlying racist ideology largely like it was. This bluff was called in the 70s when the UN parliament sigled out zionism as a racist ideology. When Israel's best ally, the US, won the cold war, the UN parliament retracted that criticism of zionism as racism due to US pressure, but the underlying problem that zionism in it's core is indeed a racist ideology largely unchanged from colonial Europe in the 19th century persisted and so the problem persists up to this very day.

    • yonah
      Of course two different groups of people are never the same, so what ever Israel does, it will never be the same as what the Nazis did and the equation Israel = Nazi is wrong.

      So, I find it wrong to use it. I agree that the equation prevents a sensible discourse on a sensitive topic: why do the ideologies of Nazism and Zionism are so similar in many regards?

      I think the answer is that both, Nazism and Zionism, are ideological sister products of the wave of racism sweeping over colonial Europe at the end of the 19th century. Both these ideologies are born out of affirmation of the racist ideas of Europeans and European colonialists at that time. It was the time when in European towns black people in cages were publicly exhibited so that exited white parents could show their children what real negroes look like.

    • Citizen

      Regarding the link you provided: the server checks the referer. To see the poster, one has to go to this site:

      link to

      then down to 63. and click on the image.

Showing comments 623 - 601