Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 567 (since 2010-04-23 03:59:57)

Just doing the internet ;-)

Website: http://net-news-global.net/

Showing comments 567 - 501
Page:

  • 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.

      Source:

      link to telegraph.co.uk

      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.

      Source:

      link to nytimes.com

      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 youtu.be

      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 consortiumnews.com

      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 voltairenet.org

      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 electronicintifada.net

      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 realclearpolitics.com

      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 sana.sy

      Sharmine Narwani, 10.11.2014

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

      link to rt.com

  • 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 newstatesman.com

      link to nocheinparteibuch.wordpress.com

      link to chicagotribune.com

      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 jpost.com

      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 al-monitor.com

      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 sana.sy

      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 ukpollingreport.co.uk

      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 ukpollingreport.co.uk

      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 mondialisation.ca

      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 al-monitor.com

      link to consortiumnews.com

      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.

      Source:

      link to web.archive.org,,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 mondoweiss.net

      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.

      Source:

      link to mondoweiss.net

      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 moonofalabama.org

      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 sana.sy

  • 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.

      ihrsprechtnichtfueruns.de

      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 internetz-zeitung.eu

    • 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 palaestina-portal.eu

      (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 moonofalabama.org

      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 moonofalabama.org

  • 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 mondoweiss.net

      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:

      mondoweiss.net/feed

      For a list of recent comments I use the comment feed

      mondoweiss.net/comments/feed

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

      mondoweiss.net/2014/08/our-new-look.html/feed

      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 globalresearch.ca

  • 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 youtu.be

      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 sites.google.com

      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 spiegel.de

      (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 whatreallyhappened.com

      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 blog.foreignpolicy.com

      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 richardsilverstein.com

      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 jta.org

      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 bytwerk.com

      then down to 63. and click on the image.

Showing comments 567 - 501
Page: