Al Nakba and Canada

By: Mazin Al Nahawi.

It is a shame that John Baird and his boss Stephen Harper haven’t learned yet from Canada’s colonial past.

For over a century, the Palestine question has been described as the most complex political issue of our modern time. A very “complicated” equation that after a half of a century of Zionist colonization to set up and establish a colonial “Jewish state” in Palestine, a mathematician, none other than Einstein himself, had something to say about the crimes committed in his name as a Jew, and in the name of Judaism.

In a letter by Einstein to the Zionist, Shepard Rifkin, executive director for “American Friends of the Fighters for the Freedom of Israel”, dated April 10, 1948 (the date is very important, it’s only a month before the illegal creation of the Zionist state in Palestine.)

Mr. Shepard Rifkin
Dear Sir:
When a real and final catastrophe should befall us in Palestine the first responsible for it would be the British and the second responsible for it the Terrorist organizations build up from our own ranks.
I am not willing to see anybody associated with those misled and criminal people.
Sincerely yours,
(Signed, ‘A. Einstein’)

It didn’t require more than three lines to solve this “complex” matter, and it seems that Einstein was very confident in naming the culprits for the “catastrophe in Palestine”, as he precisely described it.

One month after that letter, the Palestinian Arabs began to call the day of the creation of the Israeli occupation state, which consisted of the robbery of their homeland and existence as AL NAKBA (Cataclysm or Catastrophe). That was 65 years ago. Continue reading

Advertisements

Zionism and the United States Congress. By William James Martin

Art by Naji al-Ali

Via: CounterPunch.

The Locus of the Conflict in Palestine is in Washington DC

The ideology, or political project, of Zionism which underlies the creation of the State of Israel had, in fact, a Christian origin rather than a Jewish one, as writings can be found dating from the 1500’s, written by Christian clergymen in England advocating the migration of Jews to the Holy Land.

The migration of Jews to Palestine was also advocated by Napoleon Bonaparte.

The first Jewish presentations of Zionism were written by Moses Hess in 1862 and 20 years later by Leo Pinsker, both of the Russian Pale, with each writer advocated a separate state for Jews.

Twentieth century Zionism was initiated by Theodore Herzl who, likewise, advocated a separate state for Jews in his book in his book, Der Judenstaat, written in 1896. One year later he formed the World Zionist Congress which held its first meeting in Basel Switzerland in that same year.

What to do with the Arabs present in the prospective Jewish state dominated the thoughts of the founders of Israel from Herzl up until the actual expulsion of the Palestinians in 1948.
Thus Herzl stated:

“[We shall] spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.”

Thus the concept of the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians was introduced.

It is not rocket science, if you want to create a state exclusively of Jews, mostly European, in the heart of the Middle East, then you must first get rid of the Arabs. Continue reading

The Zionist Story. (Full Documentary)

The Zionist Story, an independent film by Ronen Berelovich, is the story of ethnic cleansing, colonialism and apartheid to produce a demographically Jewish State.

Ronen successfully combines archival footage with commentary from himself and others such as Ilan Pappe, Terry Boullata, Alan Hart and Jeff Halper.

“I have recently finished an independent documentary, The Zionist Story, in which I aim to present not just the history of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, but also the core reason for it: the Zionist ideology, its goals (past and present) and its firm grip not only on Israeli society, but also, increasingly, on the perception of Middle East issues in Western democracies. Continue reading

Stephen Harper’s Sermon on the Hill. By Terry Greenberg

Via: PULSE.

Editor’s Note: This essay was written in response to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s speech at the Ottawa Conference on Combating Antisemitism on November 8th.

by Terry Greenberg

Blessed art the war mongers
For they are hastening the Second Coming;
Blessed art the ethnic-cleansers
For they are fulfilling the prophecy;
Blessed art the soldiers of Zion
For they are doing God’s Work;
Blessed art the enemies of free speech
For they are silencing the Devil.

On Parliament Hill in Ottawa on November 8, 2010 the Prime Minister of Canada delivered a sermon on good and evil to an international gathering of supporters of Israel in which he clearly articulated his view that all support for Israel is “good” and all animosity toward Israel is “evil”. In true Bible-thumper style he offered no middle ground, denouncing this as “moral ambivalence”. It was clear in his preaching that he believed Israel was God’s Plan, and any opposition to Israel was the Devil’s work.

It should be terrifying to Canadians that their Prime Minister would have such a fundamentalist and extremist world view. If we want to understand our current government’s foreign policy and the danger it poses to Canada’s welfare, it would be worthwhile to examine our Prime Minister’s “Sermon on the Hill”. All Canadians should read it for themselves and shudder.

Harper’s speech was remarkable in a number of ways which are outlined below:

1) Biblical eschatological thinking. This is the foundation to Harper’s speech and is partly evidenced in his repetitious use of evangelical code words; particularly “evil” (eight times) and “hope” (three times). “Evil” for evangelicals is anything that opposes God’s plan, and “hope” refers to the desire for an early arrival of the End Times. When both of these words are used in conjunction with Israel the coded implications are clear.

2) Harper out-Zionists the Zionists. He appropriates many of the most extremely absurdist claims of mainstream Zionist propaganda as his own, including the following:

a) That criticism of Israel’s policies is a new, more sophisticated form of anti-Semitism;

b) The Jewish people are faced with another imminent Holocaust;

c) That most criticism of Israel, including that made by Israel’s direct victims, the Palestinians, is motivated by anti-Semitism rather than legitimate grievances;

d) That people in the fields of human rights and international law are only interested in criticizing Israel because they are anti-Semitic. Continue reading

Sarah Palin and the missing “F” word. By Alan Hart

Via: Alan Hart.

Sarah Palin (or her publisher) chose a title for her latest book with three “F” words –America by Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith and the Flag. But surely there’s something missing. Another “F” word. One with four letters. What could it be? (My answer in a moment).

As she embarks on a 16-state tour to promote her new book, Republican leaders are said to be in a state of panic and asking themselves what the hell they can do to stop her emerging as the party’s frontrunner for the race to the White House in 2012. They fear that if she did secure the nomination, it would almost certainly guarantee a second term for Obama if he seeks it or a first term for Hillary Clinton if he doesn’t. (My own guess is that while Republican leaders are agonizing about how to stop Palin, Democratic party leaders are considering whether or not they should seek to prevail upon Obama to stand down in favour of Hillary).

I think it’s not unreasonable to speculate that more than a few of Israel’s deluded leaders would welcome a Palin presidency if that was the alternative to a second-term Obama. They must have been delighted with the answer she gave a year ago when Barbara Walters asked her what she thought about the (illegal) West Bank settlements. Palin said:

“I disagree with the Obama administration on that. I believe that the Jewish settlements should be allowed to be expanded upon, because that population of Israel is, is going to grow. More and more Jewish people will be flocking to Israel in the days and weeks and months ahead. And I don’t think that the Obama administration has any right to tell Israel that the Jewish settlements cannot expand.”

Sarah Palin and international law are clearly complete strangers. Continue reading

Al-Qaeda’s Christian Massacre — Aiding and Abetting the Occupation of Palestine. By Maidhc Ó Cathail

Via: Media Monitors Network.

If we are to believe the voice on those Osama bin Laden tapes, the elusive al-Qaeda leader cares deeply about Palestine. Yet the actions of the terrorist network he supposedly still directs all too often belie its statements of concern for their “brothers” under Israeli occupation.

The massacre of Iraqi Christians at Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad also makes one wonder about claims that the group has “a great sense of timing.” The slaughter of Catholic Mass-goers occurred just one week after church leaders from across the Middle East had forcefully condemned Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories.

More than 200 members of 14 different churches had gathered in Rome for a papal synod to address concerns about Christian emigration from the region. However, as one commentator observed, “Time and again, they turned the discussions … towards the Palestinian question.”

In their final communiqué, the bishops urged the international community to apply UN Security Council resolutions and take “the necessary legal steps to put an end to the occupation of the different Arab territories.” Significantly, they charged the Israeli occupation with causing tensions that have led to the exodus of Christians from the Middle East.

In a follow-up news conference, the archbishop in charge of the committee that drafted the communiqué, Cyrille Salim Bustros, rejected any biblical justification for the Zionist project. “The concept of the promised land cannot be used as a base for the justification of the return of Jews to Israel and the displacement of Palestinians,” he said. “Sacred scripture should not be used to justify the occupation by Israel of Palestine.”

Not surprisingly, Tel Aviv was none too pleased with this serious challenge to the legitimacy of the self-described Jewish state. The following day, Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon issued a statement condemning the bishops. The synod, he said, had been “hijacked by an anti-Israel majority,” turning it into “a forum for political attacks on Israel in the best history of Arab propaganda.” In particular, his government was “appalled” by Archbishop Bustros’ “outrageous comments,” describing them as “a libel against the Jewish people and the State of Israel.” Continue reading