Search This Blog

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

deLiberation - the future of journalism

DateSunday, January 29, 2012 at 1:17PM AuthorGilad Atzmon
Greetings citizens of the World,
This is message regarding our online news website deLiberation, only a 3 weeks old but growing fast.
deLiberation are thinkers, writers, artists and activists, each committed to freedom of thought and to telling the stories that the mainstream media is there to conceal.
At deLiberation we hope for a better future – a Western ‘spring’. Unlike other journals committed to power, hegemony and mammon, deLIBERATION is committed to
  1. Truth,
  2. Justice &
  3. Peace.
Come visit us at deLiberation. If you would like to help us, you can by putting in a link from your website/facebook/blog to deLiberation, help us spread the word, :)) ... of TJP, Truth - Justice - Peace.
Higlights this week on deLiberation

Glad not to be ….. in the PSC

Glad not to be ….. in the PSC
Dr. Elias Akleh is a Palestinian. In 1948 and again in 1967 his family were displaced, and like millions of other Palestinians, he now finds himself living outside of his homeland. It is perhaps fortunate that he did not move to the UK and join the…

How to watch Press TV in the UK

Press TV, the Iranian state broadcaster’s English-language outlet, has been forced off the air in the UK after Ofcom revoked its licence for ‘breaching the Communications Act.’ Though the British Government sends young soldiers to kill in the name of freedom, in the United Kingdom....

Stop Britain’s pro-Israel lobby

The Queen needs a new royal yacht. But the British government says it can’t afford to buy her one. The GBP 80 million for the project must come from private sources. “Leading British companies will … be asked to donate funds in exchange for naming rights to…

PSC, Racism and ‘The Two-State Solution’.

PSC, Racism and ‘The Two-State Solution’.
Things can only get worse for the PSC. So far, the PSC leadership has faced just the thin end of a derailment campaign which is sure to intensify now they have shown such willingness to bow to Jewish power tactics. Now that PSC has started to censor…

If a country wants.......

made in Syria !!
( even under the " dictatorship " )
If a country has already an atom bomb ,
it should not complain about Iran´s .

If a country has not even a parliament
nor any elected-leaders (or head of state)
it should not complain about Syria´s elected-parliament.

If a country has introduced and practised terrorism into Palestine
it should not complain that (some) Palestinians also use it now,
as self-defence.

If a country wants to "save the Jews"
(from any probable anything )
it must take them back to where they came from
or take them into its own .

If any country wants any Peace,
it must start by recalling all its soldiers
back to within its own borders.
If any country wants to put me in a prison
,for what I write or what I say,
it must have its prisons
with ,
Chinese cooks and Swiss-hygiene
Syrian sweet + pastry shop

Raja Chemayel

Arab participation at Israeli security summit enrages BDS activists

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad speaks during the annual international conference on security and policy in Herzliya, north of Tel Aviv, on 2 February 2010. (Photo: AFP - Jack Guez)
Published Monday, January 30, 2012
The participation of Arab officials and institutions at a major Israeli security conference has drawn staunch criticism from Palestinian and human rights activists.
The annual Herzliya conference, which includes high-profile guest speakers focusing on Israel's major security challenges, invited a number of key Arab speakers, including Jordan's Prince el Hassan bin Talal and senior Palestinian official Saeb Erekat.

Omar Barghouti of the Palestinian chapter of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel slammed Arab involvement at the conference as "an act of complicity in the promotion of Israeli occupation and apartheid."

The conference, which is being held for the 12th year, aims at enhancing Israel's national security through developing the country's military and intelligence fields.

“The participation of any Arab speaker...[is] a move that undermines our struggle for freedom and our right to return and self-determinism,” Barghouti said.

The conference is being held under the name of “In the Eye of the Storm: Israel and the Middle East” and will be attended by Israeli and international speakers as well as several Arab political, business and academic figures.
Riad al-Khouri
Salman Shaikh
Some of the most prominent participants also include Salman Shaikh, Director of the Brookings Doha Center, and Riad al-Khouri, a member of the International Council of Quest-scope in Amman as well as others.

“The Palestinian civil society calls on all Arab participants to immediately withdraw from the Herzliya conference and respect the demands of the majority of the Palestinians who fully support the BDS campaign,” Barghouti added.

Herzliya's website listed Saeb Erekat, the Palestine Liberation Organization's (PLO) chief negotiator, as a speaker at the conference, but an official source told al-Akhbar that he was never invited to the conference and therefore will not be attending it.

The official, who wished to remain anonymous, said Yasser Abed Rabbo, a senior Palestinian official was the only member of the PLO to be invited to the Israeli conference, but declined the invitation.
A spokesperson for the Palestinian Embassy in Lebanon – who also wished to remain anonymous – declined to confirm who of the PLO was invited and would attend.

However, sources in Ramallah told Barghouti that Erekat had been invited to the conference, but withdrew following pressure from the Palestinian civil society.

“If true, this would crucially deny other Arab participants their Palestinian excuse,” Barghouti said.
“We hope that all Arab – and international – participants will withdraw from this shameful conference. Raising awareness about this form of Arab complicity is a key goal of our campaign.”

BDS campaigners aim to increase Israel's international isolation and raise awareness of the plight of Palestinians suffering under Israeli military occupation.

“Our campaign for a boycott of the Herzliya conference is based on this meeting’s singular importance in building Israel’s strategy, especially in the security and military fields, to enhance its oppressive system of settler-colonialism, occupation and apartheid,” he explained.

Barghouti said Israel is “keen to display” the Arab officials and figures at the conference since it “boosts its propaganda efforts and cover up its increasingly isolated regime.”

The BDS activist also condemned the participation of the Brookings Doha Center, whose director is participating in the event despite the institution working to cement itself in the Arab world.
An “academic endeavor should never justify complicity in covering up grave violations of human rights and international law,” Barghouti said.

“At a time when BDS is achieving spectacular successes and turning Israel into a world pariah, these Arab participants are knowingly colluding in Israeli propaganda efforts, siding with the wrong side of history."

Salman Shaikh of the Brookings Doha Center failed to respond to an interview request before this story went to publish.

Hezbollah Denounces Arab Participation in Herzilya Conference

Fire Burn and Cauldron Bubble: Eye of Newt and the ‘Invented’ Palestinians

“Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn, and cauldron bubble”

“Perhaps unsurprisingly, the former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives seems to have a history of deserting the women in his life precisely at moments they find themselves battling debilitating illnesses. Gingrich divorced his first wife, Jackie, as she was being treated for cancer, and then said adios to his second wife, Marianne, after she had been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. The 68-year-old is now on his third marriage…”

Normally I don’t write a whole lot on presidential politics for the simple reason that it’s such a Zionist-controlled cesspool it often seems hardly worth commenting on. Moreover, it has always struck me as intellectually dishonest to single out this or that Republican—as a lot of leftwing bloggers do—for criticism, when the Democrats, including the one presently in the White House, are just as bad if not worse. Even so, here are a few items I couldn’t let pass, the first having to do with Newt Gingrich’s comment about the Palestinians being an “invented” people.
Gingrich seems like a reasonably intelligent fellow, and I’m guessing he knows enough about American history to know that white Europeans were not the original Americans. Here are what the original Americans looked like:

Here is what Gingrich looks like:

Gingrich is a white European. For white Europeans to come to America and kill off and displace the original Americans, turn around and claim to be the rightful owners of the land, all the while designating themselves as “Americans” while consigning the original Americans to squalid reservations in the process—very much required a considerable amount of “inventing.” So where does Gingrich get off accusing another people of being “invented”?
Here is what those whom Gingrich dismisses as “invented” look like. These are the original, native, indigenous Palestinians. Notice the brown skin—very similar in shade to the original Americans…

…however, these are Semites. Semites are the people indigenous to the Middle East—just like Native Americans are the people indigenous to America. In other words, the Middle East is the part of the planet Earth in which these people originated. Am I going too fast for you, Newt? Slow me down if I am.
Now as it so happens, there is one other group of people I would like to mention—Ashkenazi Jews. Here is what an Ashkenazi Jew looks like (who happens to be named Benjamin Netanyahu.):
Ashkenazi Jews are not Semites. They are white Europeans. Compare the two photos. Notice a certain familial resemblance:
Let me repeat: Ashkenazi Jews are not Semites, they are white Europeans. For white European/Ashkenazis to come to Palestine and kill off and displace the original Semites, turn around and claim to be the rightful owners of the land, all the while designating themselves as “Semites” while consigning the original Semites to squalid reservations in the process—very much required a certain amount of “inventing.”
(Yes, I know—the terrain is starting to get repetitious, but given the subject matter, it’s inevitable.)

U.S. map showing Native American reservations

Occupied Palestine map showing ethnic cleansing of Palestinians

Are “Ashkenazi Jews” an invented people? Gingrich should avail himself of a book written by a man named Shlomo Sand. And before he makes any more references to the Palestinians as “invented” he should actually, well, open the book and read it. Of course, we don’t know if he’ll bother to do that. Gingrich’s comment about the Palestinians is the bombast of an ignoramus, but rather than suffer public rebuke over his utterance, Gingrich, who in 1999 resigned from Congress after being found guilty of ethics violations, was rewarded with a $5 million check from Zionist Sheldon Adelson—with an additional $5 million donation recently being announced by Adelson’s wife.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives seems to have a history of deserting the women in his life precisely at moments they find themselves battling debilitating illnesses. Gingrich divorced his first wife, Jackie, as she was being treated for cancer, and then said adios to his second wife, Marianne, after she had been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. The 68-year-old is now on his third marriage. It was the second wife, Marianne, who recently offered some telling revelations about her former husband in an interview with ABC News, disclosing, among other things, that Gingrich wanted to have an “open marriage” in which he would be free to see other women while still remaining married to her—a request Marianne rejected. Moreover, it seems there was one woman in particular Newt was desirous of spending time with—the blonde congressional aide who went on to become his present wife, Callista.
Gingrich and wife Callista in November of 2000--3 months after their wedding

Marianne today

Marianne told ABC her husband had been advised by the doctor treating her for MS that stress should be avoided, but that this evidently did not stop him from moving for a divorce just months after she had been diagnosed.

In her most provocative comments, the ex-Mrs. Gingrich said Newt sought an “open marriage” arrangement so he could have a mistress and a wife.

She said when Gingrich admitted to a six-year affair with a Congressional aide, he asked her if she would share him with the other woman, Callista, who is now married to Gingrich.

“And I just stared at him and he said, 'Callista doesn't care what I do,'" Marianne Gingrich told ABC News. "He wanted an open marriage and I refused.”

Marianne described her “shock” at Gingrich’s behavior, including how she says she learned he conducted his affair with Callista “in my bedroom in our apartment in Washington.”

He always called me at night,” she recalled, “and always ended with ‘I love you.’ Well, she was listening.”

Perhaps even more eye-brow-raising is that, according to ABC, all this was going on at the same time Gingrich was publicly denouncing Bill Clinton over his affair with Monica Lewinsky. If you go to the ABC link and watch the video, you’ll see film footage taken from that era showing Gingrich declaring in a speech he delivered, “There’s no administration in American history with less moral authority than the Clinton-Gore administration.”

One would be hard-pressed to point to a more glaring example of hypocrisy. What are we to make of the fact that such an unscrupulous hypocrite has been embraced by a prominent and wealthy Zionist contributor? Does this not tell us something about, a) presidential politics in America, and, b) the state of Israel itself?

Adelson’s support is widely acknowledged as having been a key factor in Gingrich’s victory in the South Carolina primary. According to Wikipedia, the casino magnate, with a net worth of $21.5 billion, is the 8th wealthiest American and 16th wealthiest person in the world. Speaking of Gingrich, Adelson has said , “There is not a better advocate for Israel”—and now thanks to this spigot of wealth, the Georgia Republican has notched up his first presidential primary win. Could there possibly be a plainer, more illustrative example of how Zionism, and Zionist money, have corrupted American politics?

And here’s another rhetorical question: Why does Israel seem to draw so much of its support from some of the most corrupt people on the planet? What is it about the Zionist state that they find so likeable and praiseworthy? I’m not simply talking about the 535 members of the U.S. Congress. No. From France to Germany, from Britain to America, from Belgium to the Netherlands to Denmark, from Spain to Italy to Greece, and from the IMF to the World Bank to the UN Security Council—virtually throughout the entire Western world—the most seriously corrupt, repressive, and dishonest specimens of humanity walking upright on the earth all seem to share one thing in common: they all love Israel.

Imagine that.

All of which brings me to a second point—one which I very much wanted to make about the American political system (although it probably applies to the political systems in all the other countries mentioned as well): namely that it’s a rigged game. It is rigged to ensure that one outcome and one outcome only will occur. Moreover it’s an outcome that will occur repetitively, over and over, time and time again, regardless of the changing faces, the evolving issues, or the advancing body of human thought and knowledge. What I’m speaking of is this: that the system is geared to ensure that the only candidates who stand more than a snowball’s chance in hell of getting elected are the absolute dregs of American society. The most unprincipled. The most corrupt. The most deceitful, profligate, hypocritical, and immoral. The absolute dregs. This is the way the process has been engineered.

In her interview with ABC, Marianne expressed the opinion that Gingrich “lacks the moral character to be president,” but with all due respect to this good lady who endured 18 years of marriage to a hypocrite, she seems a bit confused as to what exactly the job qualifications are for serving as chief executive in this country. Certainly—as we all know—there are bright and talented Americans, Americans who, if given the chance, could, and definitely would, bring the country out of the morass in which it presently finds itself, people of courage, honor, and rectitude, people who remain true to their principles, who would react with indignation were someone to offer them money to invade another country and kill millions of its people, and who would probably even have the person offering such a bribe arrested. Yes. There are lots of Americans like that. They are all over the place. Quite literally. But the thing to keep in mind is that these are the very last people the top 1 percent would ever, ever want to see running the country. Far preferable to them are the moral degenerates. Moral degenerates and miscreants are invariably the ones who get the most money and most media attention, and don’t for a moment believe that’s by accident. As I say the system is rigged. There is no longer anything even resembling a democracy.

Another presidential issue I wanted to comment on, and which kind of ties in with everything I said about Gingrich, is Mitt Romney’s recent impromptu encounter with an Occupy Wall Street protester. Here it is. Check it out.

Now let me see if I understand him correctly. Romney is saying that the rich should continue getting richer and the poor poorer (the trend of the last 30 years or so), and anyone who objects to this state of affairs is being—“divisive”? It isn’t merely that his logic fails the infallibility test. The twin arguments he’s advancing—that wealth should be concentrated and that America should remain united—are diametrically, contradictorily opposed to one another. Wealth disparity, by definition, is a divide. It is a divide between rich and poor. America is very much a divided nation at this moment. It is a country in which CEOs make 325 times the average worker’s pay (up from 263 times as recently as 2009). By trying to reduce economic inequality, the OWS movement is essentially trying to restore unity to the country. If Romney really wanted a united America—rather than an America with a vast gulf between rich and poor—he would actually champion the OWS protesters rather than attack them, but we won’t hear anything like that from Romney because the richest 1 percent are funding his campaign.

Romney, who by the way also insists that corporations are people , vows that if elected president, his first foreign policy trip will be to Israel. No surprise there. But perhaps we could expect him to make a stop at the Cayman Islands on his way home. According to his tax returns, Romney holds a stake in an enterprise called BCIP Trust Associates III, but regulatory filings show that the partnership, valued at $5 million to $25 million, is registered in the Cayman Islands. This presumably would render it sheltered from U.S. taxation. However, with the predictability of a military press office flack denying civilian casualties in the latest drone attack, Romney’s campaign spokesperson, Andrea Saul, has insisted everything is strictly legal and on the up and up.

“The Romney’s investments in funds established in the Cayman Islands are taxed in the very same way they would be if those funds were established in the United States. These are not tax havens and it is false to say so.”

Romney and his wife Ann made $27 million in 2010, and up until that same year held millions in a Swiss bank account. Despite this, their 2010 federal tax rate worked out to 13.9 percent, “a rate typical of households earning about $80,000 a year,” reported the New York Times.

As I said, it’s a bit intellectually dishonest to criticize Republicans while omitting the sins of the Democrats, so let’s talk for a moment about Obama. In his state of the union address last week (full text here ), the chief executive spouted a lot of faux populism, painting himself as a man of action who intends to impose new regulations on Wall Street and close loopholes favoring the rich (apparently hoping people will forget that Wall Street bankers have consistently been among his biggest backers), while championing average Americans. In fact this seems to be his strategy for defeating the Republicans this year: let them flap their jaws about the wonders of the “free market” system while in turn casting himself as a populist—when in fact he is every bit as pro-rich as the Republicans are. In this respect, Obama is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. And of course, significantly missing from his speech was any mention of his recent signing of the National Defense Authorization Act, giving the military the authority to arrest U.S. citizens and hold them indefinitely without trial, essentially shredding the last remnants of our constitutional safeguards. It is an ominous, ill-boding development (one of many these days, it seems) that places all of us in jeopardy.

But bad as the NDAA is—and it is indeed bad—that is not the only issue pertaining to the current president that merits attention. A recent campaign video has been the focus of considerable discussion of late, a video so bad, so exaggerated in terms of its worshipful tones, its deference to the Israeli lobby, that it seems to have left some people almost literally cringing. We see images of Obama wearing a yarmulke, visiting the Western Wall, etc.—as well as footage from various speeches in which he extols the virtues of the Zionist state, not his own country mind you, but Israel. Take a look:

The tone is quite reverential, would you not agree? Particularly striking I think is this image:

Obama is in essence worshipping at the altar of the Holocaust religion. Ali Abunimah, at the Electronic Intifada, says the video “takes Israel pandering to dangerous levels,” but actually even more than that is going on. The video is in essence presenting the Zionist state as an object of religious adoration. This is the kind of thing you’d expect to see at a Christians United for Israel conference—not from the Obama campaign. “When I touched my hand against the Western Wall and placed my prayer between its ancient stones, I thought of all the centuries in which the children of Israel had longed to return to their ancient homeland.” What we have here basically is adulation to a deity. Israel is being deified. And of course interjected through it all are Israeli officials bestowing their kosher seal of approval upon the U.S. head of state.

A question has arisen as to whether this is actually an “official” Obama campaign video—or possibly something put together simply to make the commander-in-chief of the United States look like a beggarly, brownnosing fawner. In point of fact, though, if you examine closely you will see that it appears to have been uploaded to YouTube by BarackObamadotcom. So yes, it does look as if it’s a genuine campaign video. But of course, what would you expect? Populist rhetoric is all well and good—it plays well to the masses—but it takes fawning to get Zionist money, and it takes Zionist money to get elected.

And so it goes in the rigged system of U.S. politics. And of course if all else fails, our 1 percent may always fall back upon the electronic voting machines to ensure this year’s election results are the ones they desire…
“For a charm of power trouble,
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble…”

The Smirk

Thought I would throw this into the mix (or the cauldron, if you prefer) as well. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a human being smirk quite this often in a 23-minute time segment as does one of the guests on this program. Are facial expressions an indicator of what resides in the heart? Speaking purely subjectively here—and based upon my own limited contact with habitual smirkers—the thing we see forming and dissipating…forming and dissipating…at periodic intervals throughout much of the show, seems to suggest something abnormal, an almost psychopathological disgust for any and all things decent.

One statement made on the show is in fact correct, however. The American people are not sheep. They are in fact much worse off than sheep. Sheep follow a herd instinct, a trait that is in their DNA. The herd instinct is a product of nature, one that functions to help ensure the survival of the entire herd, not simply single individuals, and it is a behavior observable in many species of animals. What the American people have succumbed to is not an innate, naturally-occurring herd instinct, but something far more sinister.

Jews in Iran

DateMonday, January 30, 2012 at 3:38AM AuthorGilad Atzmon

12th Herzliya Conference Addresses Challenge of Iran, Syria, Resistance “Arabs” Participate

By Abdul Nasser Fakih
"The Herzliya Conference", hosted by "the Interdisciplinary Center" at Herzliya in occupied Palestine; also one of the "Israeli" strategic security conferences and one aiming at assisting the enemy's entity to determine the present security risks and the means to face them, is being held on the 30th of January through the 2nd of February in occupied Palestine, where a big number of economic, military, and political Zionist leaders are participating, as well as international, influential figures including European presidents and prime ministers and senior officers of international institutions and organizations. Yet, it is significant that some Arabs from Qatar, Jordan, and the Palestinian Authority (PA) are taking part in "the Herzliya Conference" and in normalization, therefore. This complies with a previous declaration by "the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)" concerning "an Iranian threat", which has matched with Zionist calls for the alliance of Arabs and "Israel" in confrontation with "an Iranian threat for both".

"Tahsine al-Halabi", a Palestinian political writer and "Israeli"-affairs researcher residing in Damascus, has spoken to "al-Intiqad" Website, confirming that "the major concern of "the Herzliya Conference" is confronting the axis of the resistance, whose power and withstanding are increasing upon its steadfastness." As well, al-Halabi points out, "The kind of Arab participation in the Conference is significant as it reveals the appearance of a new axis in alliance with "Israel" involving Doha, Oman, and Ramallah." The Palestinian writer also sees that "among the central topics of the Conference are: first, the effect of the economic financial crisis on "Israel"; second, "Israel's" current strategic asset with respect to the United States and the question on the continuity of the Zionist entity's protection for the US interests in the Middle East; third, Tel Aviv's and Washington DC's security, military, and political conflict with Tehran; fourth, the influence of the current evolutions, evoked by the so-called "Arab Spring" ("the Arab Awakening"), on the resistance movements (Hizbullah and Hamas)."

Al-Halabi considers that "the most significant urgency the Conference deals with this year is the means to handle the Arab evolution and the prospect on the Iranian matter." Then he talks about "an "Israeli"-US-European agenda, with which some Arab regimes familiarize in confrontation with Tehran." Al-Halabi warns that "the Conference aims at preparing the Arab wisdom to accept this familiarization." Besides, al-Halabi clarifies that "the participants' proposals and debates in the Conference are to recommend working for the promotion of a media plan executed by numerous Arab-speaking media." Al-Halabi points out that "this plan aims at addressing the public consciousness to view Iran as "the major enemy" and to promote a sectarian incitement; these are excellently two "Israeli" requests."

Now al-Halabi explains, "The Conference is handling the ways "Israel" can benefit from the Arab evolutions and diminish the consequent harms these evolutions inflect on the Zionist entity." Though al-Halabi says, "The Arab participants' role serves to promote the principle of "non-opposition" of the so-called "Arab Spring" and "peace" with the Zionist-Occupation entity," he notices "the apparent weakness in representing the countries of the uprisings, except Egypt, from which a participant is presented as an international character; that is, none of the Arab-uprisings countries dares normalize with the "Israeli" enemy in such circumstances." Al-Halabi denounces "the representation for Qatar by one of the figures when no direct normalization agreement with the Occupation entity exists; this actually signifies the presence of secret "Israeli"-(Arab) Gulf affairs."

In comparison, al-Halabi sees that Turkey "has taken no part in the Conference so as to guard its prestige and evade the accusation of participation in plotting against Syria." Al-Halabi considers that the participation of Jordan and the Palestinian Authority "is no more than a mere ornament for the Conference, and this makes "Israel" seem as it were adherent to "peace" and as if it were sustaining the negotiations with Palestine."
Now the Palestinian writer talks about the European participation in "the Herzliya Conference", revealing that "the purpose beyond this participation is the "Israeli" cooperation with the European governments to counter the activity of some non-governmental organizations in "the old continent", which are working for depriving the "legal and ethical legitimacy" of the Zionist entity." He adds, "The means to develop the European-"Israeli" relations are being debated in consequence with the recent political conflict between Europe and "Israel"."

Thereon, al-Halabi reveals that "the Turkish State has displayed a documentary film on the so-called "Jewish Holocaust" in parallel with the commemoration of "the International Remembrance Holocaust Day", which the United Nations held in the UN Headquarters in New York last Friday, the 27th of January." The Palestinian writer refers this act to "Ankara's will to lessen the pressure on it, which the Zionist Lobby has been creating through Paris consequently after the French Congress ratified a law that incriminated the denial of the occurrence of "the Armenian Genocide" ("the Armenian Holocaust") in time of the Ottoman Reign", pointing out that "this has been the first time for an Islamic state to display such film, and this hasn't evoked public agitation in Turkey since the public realizes that its government is suffering European pressure concerning the issue of "the Armenian Genocide"." Al-Halabi concludes that this pressure is one of the outcomes of the "Israeli"-European cooperation, for which preparations have been made in common conferences held earlier, including "the Herzliya Conference"."

Here are epitomes of the Arabs declared as participants in "the Herzliya Conference":
1. Prince al-Hassan Bin Talal: the Regent of Jordan since 1965 until his discharge on the 25th of January, 1999, and the youngest son of King Talal and Queen Zein ash-Sharaf. Western institutes describe him as "an outstanding Arab economist and intellect" as he is actively involved in international forums and conferences for economy and intellect, which twin with the Western ideology. He is making a direct speech via video-link in the opening of "the Herzliya Conference".
2. Dr. Saeb Erekat: Chief Palestinian Negotiator for "the Process of Settlement" with the Zionist entity since 1996 and senior member of the Palestinian-"Israeli" negotiations, which accomplished "the Oslo Accords" in 1993. On the 12th of February, 2011, he made his resignation to the President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas after "the Process of Settlement" had reached a dead end. Seldom has Erekat missed membership in the negotiations of Palestinian delegations with the representatives of the "Israeli" Occupation. In the Conference he is addressing the recent developments of the Palestinian-"Israeli" relations entitled:

3. Riad el-Khouri: Jordanian economist "specialized" in Middle East and Africa affairs; previously participated in "the Herzliya Conference"; a former member of "the Carnegie Middle East Center"; a professor at the American University of Beirut (AUB) and the Lebanese-American University (LAU); consultant for the European Commission, the World Bank, the Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), and the US Aid Program (USAID); member of the International Council of "Questscope" in Amman, Jordan, a British organization involved in "changing and merging" communities. El-Khouri is lecturing on these topics:

4. Salman Sheikh: a Qatari researcher; Director of "the Brookings Doha Center" and Fellow at the corresponding "Saban Center for Middle East Policy". Sheikh's researches involve "settlement" issues and "solutions" for the Middle East struggle. Among his researches is "A Chance for Hamas to Seek Friends outside Damascus". He has held several earlier positions, including: the Personal Representative of the Secretary General for Lebanon; the UN the Special Advisor to the UN Secretary General on the Middle East; the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East "Peace Process"; and "the Director for Policy and Research at the office of Sheikha Mozah Bint Nasser el-Missned". Currently he is the Special Representative to the European "Muslim West Facts Project"; he is also "the Counselor of Oxford Research Group for Middle East Affairs". Sheikh is lecturing on:

5. Tony Badran: Lebanese-American Research Fellow at "the Foundation for Defense of Democracies" (FDD) in Washington DC, which is sponsored by the "Israeli" Lobby and the Neo-Conservatives of the US; whereby he is specialized in the Lebanese and Syrian political affairs. He is known for his extremism and discrimination against Arabs; yet, he is in contact with the Lebanese "Future Party" (of "the March 14 Alliance") and has been considered to be "the foreign secretary of the Future Party" for many US lobbies. Previously he joined "the Lebanese Forces", and he has actually acknowledged this when interviewed by several US media, including "Fox News"; whereby he bragged about taking part in the perpetration of "the Sabra and Shatila Massacre" against the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon (in 1982). Actually, even some "Israeli" associations refrain from inviting him to their conferences as he has called for killing Muslims - even American Muslims. Badran is lecturing on:
6. Sherif el-Diwany: an Egyptian economist and Director of "al-Marsad Incorporation". He has held the position of the Director of "the Middle East and North Africa for the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos", the policies of which are quite known. Though el-Diwany has no publicity or post in Egypt, he's going to lecture on:


7. Advocate Basha'er Fahoum Jayoussi: a Palestinian of the lands occupied in 1948, one of the founders and the Chairwoman of "the Jewish-Arab Center" at the University of Haifa, which concentrates on "merging Arabs with the "Israeli" community" and establishing "common actualities" between Jewish and Arab students; whereby the Center offers awards and scholarships to students doing researches on the issue of "common Arab-Jewish livelihood", as well as to students reinforcing this "common livelihood" in appreciation for their "social activity". Most of Jayoussi's activities focus on the normalization between Palestine and "Israel". She is lecturing on:
8. Nahed Khazem: Mayor of the Shafa Amr (Shfaram) Municipality in the Western al-Jalil (Galilee) in the north of occupied Palestine; is well known for his cooperation and good terms with the Zionist-government ministers, particularly with the Culture Minister Gideon Saer. Khazem also participates in merging Arabs with "the "Israeli" community" in the Galilee Region. He is lecturing on:


Here are epitomes of the prominent Arab attendees of "the Herzliya Conference":

1. Muhammad Darawshe: a Palestinian of the lands occupied in 1948; Fellow Member at "the Abraham Fund", an "Israeli" foundation; has held the position of the Foreign Affairs Director of "the Abraham Fund Initiatives" since 1996, of which he and Amnon Be'eri-Sulitzeanu have been the Co-Executive Directors since 2004. The foundation actually aims at eliminating the Arab presence in occupied Palestine; claiming the conduct of a "Merging and Equality Policy" targeting the Jews and Arabs in occupied Palestine. For more than twenty years, Darawshe has been significantly involved in the field of "Jewish-Arab co-existence".
2. Masad Barhoum: a Palestinian of the lands occupied in 1948; the M.D. Director General of "the Nahariya Governmental Hospital" in Western al-Jalil (Galilee). Barhoum is known for his activity and cooperation with the "Histadrut" ("the "Israeli" General Federation of Laborers"), as well as his outstanding relations with the consecutive governments of the Zionist entity, particularly with the Zionist health ministers.

3. Ayman Seif: the Director of "the Center for the Development of the Arab Minority" at the office of the Zionist Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In 1996 through 2008, he was in charge of "the "Israeli" Financial Committee" of the Prime Ministry, an economist at the Economy and Planning Ministry, and a member of "the Governmental Committee" in charge of securing the backgrounds of Arabs, claiming "Convenient Representation of Arab Scholars at Governmental Centers" as a policy; also a member of "the Special Committee for Promoting Work Opportunities and Initiatives in the Arab Mainstream".
4. Dr. Khaled Abu Asbah: a Palestinian of the lands occupied in 1948; the Director of "the Massar Institute for Research, Planning, and Educational Counseling"; a Sociology-Department Lecturer at the Zionist "Beit Berl Academic College" in "the Third Sector" in occupied Palestine. He received his Sociology and Anthropology PhD from "the Bar Ilan University" in occupied Palestine. His dissertation addressed "Family and School Perceptions: Indicators for Arab-"Israeli" Students' Involvement in Violence". Abu Asbah is a pioneer as to merging Palestinians with the Zionist entity; whereby he is in charge of "the Strategy for the Advancement of Arab-"Israeli" Citizens in "Israel"", a project regarding which he has made studies at "the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute".
Source: Al Intiqad Online Newspaper, Translated and Edited by
  • Hizbullah Slams Arab Participation in Herzliya: Reflection of Normalization, Commitment to “Israel’s” Security

Is Israel on the road to self-destruction?

Again and again Mr. Alan Hart is repeating the song (Blackmail): His friend "Mother Israel" told him: "In a doomsday situation," she said, "Israel would be prepared to take the region down with it.”

Is Israel on the road to self-destruction? Alan asked, though he knows the answer.

Israel is in a doomsday situastion, and Alan's "nightmare" may come true.

To prevent Israel from destroying itself and taking the world with it, he involved him self in the what he called "Peace conspiracy" and served as a linkman between Arafat "Father Palestine" and Perez. Oslo is the bastard child of his peace conspiracy. After two decades Alan is still woried

On september, 2010, Mr. hart called the Saudi King to follow the advise of Thomas L. Friedman: "King Abdullah should invite Mr. Netanyahu to Riyadh and present it to him personally.”

He called Fatah-Hamas to declare in the most explicit terms, "we are a pragmatic people and we hereby declare that we are prepared to recognise and live in permanent peace with the reality of an Israel inside its borders as they were on the eve of the 1967 war, with Jerusalem an open, undivided city and the capital of two states… We further declare that our pragmatism extends to accepting that the right of the dispossessed Palestinians to return must and will be confined to the Palestinian state, which means that many of those who wish to return will have to settle for compensation for the loss of their homes and their land.”

"Is there any power on Planet Earth that could assist Israeli Jews to save themselves from themselves – perhaps I should say save themselves from their deluded leaders?" He asked..
The more He think about this question, the more he is convinced that "there is only one power that could do it – the Jews of the world."


Who is trying to bluff the Palestinians?

by Alan Hart

One very well informed and courageous Israeli who thinks the answer is ‘Yes’ is Merav Michaeli, a radio and television presenter who also writes for Ha’aretz. She is completely without fear when it comes to telling it like it is. On 2 January this year, for example, she wrote:
The Israeli government doesn’t want peace. There’s nothing new in that. It has been the proven way since the establishment of the state.”
The headline over her latest article is Israel’s never-ending Holocaust. One of her main points is that Israel has never confronted the trauma of the Nazi holocaust and has
turned it into a placard in the service of the national trauma, to reinforce the constant existential fear and the aggressiveness that comes with it.”
Because what she wrote is so important, and in my view ought to be read by all peoples of all faiths everywhere who want to understand why the Zionist state is what it is, I am going to quote her at some length.

She wrote:

The Holocaust is the primary way Israel defines itself. And that definition is narrow and ailing in the extreme, because the Holocaust is remembered only in a very specific way, as are its lessons. It has long been used to justify the existence and the necessity of the state, and has been mentioned in the same breath as proof that the state is under a never-ending existential threat.
The Holocaust is the sole prism through which our leadership, followed by society at large, examines every situation. This prism distorts reality and leads inexorably to a forgone conclusion… that all our lives are simply one long Shoah (experience of persecution and extermination – my amplification not Merav’s).
The ‘Hitlers’ are always there: Just a week ago, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said for the nth time that there is no shortage of those who want to exterminate us completely. In other words, there is no lack of reasons to continue to reinforce the fear of the Holocaust – which, according to his father, historian Benzion Netanyahu, has never ended.
So it is that we don’t have any rivals, adversaries or even enemies. Only Hitlers. This is how the Holocaust is taught in school, this how it is that Israeli students are taken to visit death camps – and how it came to be that, as Ha’aretz reported on Friday, just 2 percent of Israeli youth feel committed to democratic principles after studying the Holocaust… That’s the way it is with traumas. Because of our human limitations, a trauma that is not dealt with makes us constantly see yet another trauma approaching – even when whatever is coming has no connection to the previous trauma and may even be a good thing. Trauma leads to belligerence and a strong tendency to wreak havoc on one’s surroundings, but first and foremost on oneself.
What we consider rational is actually a frightened, defensive, aggressive pattern. Our current leaders have made Israeli Judaism just a post-traumatic syndrome, while they lead us to self-destruction.

I imagine that most if not all Arabs and other Muslims everywhere would welcome the prospect of Israel self-destructing, but in my Gentile view it is not actually a prospect to be welcomed. Why not?
If there comes a time when it seemed to them that the Zionist state’s self-destruction was imminent, Israel’s leaders would respond in the same way as they would if their state was in danger of being defeated on the battlefield. As readers of my book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews know, that response was put into words by Golda Meir in the course of one of my BBC Panorama interviews with her when she was prime minister. In a doomsday situation, she said, Israel
would be prepared to take the region down with it.”
The question arising is something like this. Is there any power on Planet Earth that could assist Israeli Jews to save themselves from themselves – perhaps I should say save themselves from their deluded leaders?

The more I think about this question, the more I am convinced that there is only one power that could do it – the Jews of the world. But that must be the subject of another post and I will welcome thoughts from others before I write it.

The Bible Unearthed (The Documentary)

Two days ago I got the following article from Dr. Ashraf Ezzat,

The Bible Unearthed (The Documentary)

Dr. Ashraf looks so excited with  Prof. Israel Finkelstein & Neil Silberman, asserting that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob never existed,
"Dozens of digs in Egypt, Israel, Jordan and Lebanon have changed experts’ understanding of ancient Israel and its neighbours- as well as their vision of the Bible’s greatest tales" In other words instead of digging somewhere else, the A masterful archaeological and biblical investigation, lead atheist the digs as a real evidence that "Abraham, Isaac and Jacob never existed, that David and Solomon were not great kings but obscure chieftains and that the Exodus never happened" wrote Heather Campbell
"I think the genius and power lie with the scientists and scholars who have painstakingly put together what really happened, based on real evidence, even though it goes against what they have been told is holy and authoritative. This book is a testament to what the human mind can discover when it does not delude itself."
In his article, "Deconstructing the walls of Jericho" published by Ha' Friday, October 29, 1999, Ze'ev Herzog asserted that:

"The Bible Came From Arabia"
As a born-Muslim, who embraced Islam in his late fourties after extensive reading, and realized the very thin line seperating Islam (Quran) and the relative human understaing and the history of Islam (muslims), I accept archaeological facts, but at the same time I reject using it as an ideoligical tool to "Assert":
  • That "Abraham, Isaac and Jacob never existed", Kaaba, in Mecca is the evidence that Irahim and Ismael existed.
  • that "David and Solomon were not great kings but obscure chieftains". This conclusion is political designed to justfy, the Israeli failure to find a single archaeological evidence to support Jewish claims in Palestine, So David and Solomon were not great kings, they were Tribe cheifs living in TENT, and therefore, the conquest of Palestine is judstified.  
  • That the men wrote the Bible, (Consequently Quran was written by Mohamad PUH).
We Muslims believe that the Bible is the world of God, Quran tells us that it was rewitten by men.
"2.79 . Therefore woe be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands anthem say , "This is from Allah , " that they may purchase a small gain therewith . Woe unto them for that their hands have written , and woe unto them for that they earn thereby ."
فويل للذين يكتبون الكتاب بأيديهم ثم يقولون هذا من عند الله ليشتروا به ثمناً قليلاً فويل لهم مما كتبت أيديهم وويل لهم مما يكسبون “79″)

One year ago, I commented on Juan Cole's article titled: Ten Reasons East Jerusalem does not belong to Jewish-Israelis, adding that Palestine from River to see does not belong to Jewish Israelis.

Moreover, the prominent Israeli archeologist Israel Finkelstein and the American historian Neil Asher Silberman, should have heard about the Lebanon's historian Kamal Salibi and his book "The Bible Came From Arabia"
In his book Kamal Salibi solved the problem of the "Two of archaeology’s leading scholars Prof. Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman," and the conflict within the the Bible as a religious and historical work. Salibi claimed that Asir near Yemen was the original Israel and the original Judah. And the Jordan was not a river, but the escarpment between the highlands of Asir and the coastal plain below.
Research and analysis of the Old Testament place names, corroborated by contemporary Pharaonic and Mesopotamian sources, Kamal Salibi locates the ancient land of Israel, not in Palestine, but in the Najran province of what is now Saudi Arabia. According to Salibi, The Promised Land was Asir
More here and here

So, the wo of archaeology’s leading scholars were looking on the wrong place, and their conclusions are nothing but political assumptions.
Israel Finkelstein
The Bible Unearthed (The Documentary)

January 28, 2012

“Prof. Israel Finkelstein & Neil Silberman, Two of archaeology’s leading scholars shed new light on how the Bible came into existence. They assert, for example, that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob never existed, that David and Solomon were not great kings but obscure chieftains and that the Exodus never happened.”

For the first time, the true history of ancient Israel as revealed through recent archaeological discoveries-and a controversial new take on when, why and how the Bible was written. In the past three decades, archaeologists have made great strides in recovering the lost world of the Old Testament. Dozens of digs in Egypt, Israel, Jordan and Lebanon have changed experts’ understanding of ancient Israel and its neighbours- as well as their vision of the Bible’s greatest tales.
Yet until now, the public has remained almost entirely unaware of these discoveries which help separate legend from historical truth. Here, at last, two of archaeology’s leading scholars shed new light on how the Bible came into existence. They assert, for example, that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob never existed, that David and Solomon were not great kings but obscure chieftains and that the Exodus never happened.
They offer instead a new historical truth: the Bible was created by the people of the small, southern nation of Judah in a heroic last-ditch attempt to keep their faith alive after the demise of the larger, wealthier nation of Israel to the north. It is in this truth, not in the myths of the past, that the real value of the Bible is evident.

The Bible is both a religious and historical work, but how much is myth and how much is history? When and why was the Old Testament written, and by whom? What do contemporary archaeologists know about the Patriarchs? The Exodus? The Conquest of Canaan? Kings David and Solomon? Where do the people of Israel originally come from? Why were the historical accounts of the Bible written down?
A masterful archaeological and biblical investigation, The Bible Unearthed visits digs in Egypt, Jordan and Israel – including Megiddo, the cradle of biblical archeology, where 7,000 years of history have been excavated.
This far-ranging exploration of biblical history also makes use of archival footage of previous archaeological excavations, maps, biblical illustrations and computer animation, revealing ancient architecture, cuneiform tablets and other rare artifacts.
Based on the best-selling book (The Bible Unearthed) by prominent Israeli archeologist Israel Finkelstein & coauthored by American historian Neil Asher Silberman, this enthralling documentary features interviews with archaeological specialists and biblical scholars from all over the world, including experts from the Louvre, the Museum of Cairo, the Museum of Jerusalem, and the British Museum.
The Bible Unearthed does something which has never been done before: it reveals a still-unraveling revolution of what we know of the society, the history, and the men who wrote the Bible.

"Following 70 years of intensive excavations in the Land of Israel, archaeologists have found out: The patriarchs' acts are legendary, the Israelites did not sojourn in Egypt or make an exodus, they did not conquer the land. Neither is there any mention of the empire of David and Solomon, nor of the source of belief in the God of Israel. These facts have been known for years, but Israel is a stubborn people and nobody wants to hear about it."