‘Strings attached’ very gentle way of putting it
The Guardian reported today that two years ago a controversial study by American academics Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer explored the influence of the Israel lobby over US foreign policy “but Britain's pro-Israel organisations have been subjected to far to less scrutiny.”
This is indeed the case, and as Oborne disclosed, both British politicians and Zionist pressure groups enjoy it to the max.
In the film Sir Richard Dalton, a former ambassador to Libya and Iran, said: "I don't believe, and I don't think anybody else believes these contributions come with no strings attached."
I would suggest that ‘strings attached’ is a very gentle way of putting it.
‘Chained to submission’ would be far closer to the truth.
Seemingly a British, consensus case against Zionism and Zionist infiltration is piling up.
Controlling BBC
The Jewish lobby is not happy at all.
After so many years of setting the tone, bribing UK politicians and controlling the BBC they are used to being untouchable.
Labor MP Denis MacShane, who operates as the House of Common’s UK equivalent of the ‘anti defamation league’ told the Jerusalem Post:
"If there is a Jewish /Israel lobby here, it is not very effective, as Israel is almost treated as a pariah state in the media and has few friends in politics."
MacShane may be right; one cannot buy friendship with money.
But according to Monday’s broadcast one can certainly buy British politician’s subservience for just a few shekels.
Half of Tories ‘friends of Israel’
According to the Guardian 50% of the Shadow Cabinet are now ‘friends of Israel’.
In that context one common saying comes to mind.
“Tell me who your friends are and I will tell you who you are”.
I would assume that if there was any public respect left for the British Parliament, British political parties and the BBC, it should be gone by now.
Just a few months ago Brits were devastated to find out about their MPs' personal expenses bills.
|
‘Strings attached’ very gentle way of putting it
Yesterday they learned about their leading politician’s affiliation with the darkest possible regime and ideology around.
They also learned that their national broadcast corporation is influenced by Zionists pressure groups run from Jerusalem.
Investigating criminal gang?
Murderous state with devastating record of crimes
Mark Gardner from the Zionist ‘Community Security Trust’ is not happy either.
He complained that Dispatches producers behaved as if they were investigating a “criminal gang rather than various Jewish community-linked organizations,”
Gardner is also correct.
It is indeed tragic to admit that the Jewish lobby is far more worrying than a criminal gang.
It is there to serve a murderous state with a devastating record of crimes against humanity.
Thanks to the Jewish lobby, we are all complicit in the Zionist crime.
Contaminates every politician
Not only are those lobbyists heavily corrupted and removed from any ethical value system, they also corrupt everything they touch.
They obviously contaminate every politician who is happy to take their shekels.
Consequently they incriminate us all as a society.
Watching Cannel 4’s Dispatches yesterday I wondered to myself whether this is the ‘democracy’ some British politicians, such as David Miliband insist on spreading around.
I also wonder whether this is the governing model that Jewish Chronicle writer Nick Cohen and the Israeli Hasbara committee author David Aaronovitch were trying to promote when they were supporting the invasion of back Iraq in 2003.
Political commentator Peter Oborne indeed fulfilled his promise.
He told us almost everything we want to know about the lobby:
“Who they are, how they are funded, how they work and what influence they have, from the key groups to the wealthy individuals who help bankroll the lobbying.”
|
|
Britain taken into Iraq war — Lord Levy Number 1 Labour fund-raiser.
However, there is a single observation that must be added.
People out there must never forget that Britain was taken into a war that cost more than a million Iraqi lives and at the time Lord Levy was the Number 1 Labour fund-raiser.
Putting the two together: an illegal war that only serves Israeli interests and Sir Richard Dalton’s observation that Zionist ‘contribution’ comes with ‘strings attached’, leaves a very bitter taste.
Due to its heavily corrupted politicians, Britain is now willingly serving the darkest possible racist national ideology and supporting a criminal terrorist state.
British politicians and media are caught in bed with too many Zionist wolfs.
In order to reclaim sovereignty and dignity, Britain must de-Zionise itself immediately.
The TV program can be seen here:
http://channel4.com/
programmes/dispatches/
4od#3010424 |
|
The second Balfour Declaration
By Danny Rubinstein
President Bush's letter recognizing that Israel will not withdraw to the 1967 Green Line, and rejecting the Palestinian right of return, has helped bring about a rapprochement between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
|
|
The Balfour Declaration was mentioned by almost every Palestinian spokesman who commented at week's end on last Wednesday's press conference held by U.S. President George Bush and Prime Minister Ariel Sharon at the White House, in which Bush declared that America does not recognize the refugees' right of return and does not think it is realistic to expect Israel to return to the Green Line.
In Palestinian national history, the Balfour Declaration, issued on November 2, 1917, by the British foreign secretary, Lord Balfour, marks the advent of Zionism.
(The key phrase of the declaration asserted: "His Majesty's Government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people.")
The original text of the Palestinian National Covenant (the founding charter of the Palestine Liberation Organization) states that the only Jews who will be allowed to remain in Palestine after its liberation will be those who arrived in the country before the Balfour Declaration.
The typical Palestinian statement concerning the injustice of the Balfour Declaration is: "Those to whom the country doesn't belong [Balfour and the British government] promised it to those to have no right to it [the Jewish people]."
There is hardly any Palestinian who has not heard about or read the Balfour Declaration, and it would be no great exaggeration to say that its content is better known to the Palestinian public than to the Israeli public.
Against this background, for example, the headline in the Palestinian newspaper Al-Ayyam last Thursday stated: "Second Balfour Declaration exempts Israel from full withdrawal from the occupied territories."
Bassem Abu Samiya, from the Palestinian Information Ministry and a columnist for another paper, Al-Hayat al-Jadida, suggested calling President Bush's statement the "Bushfour Declaration."
Statements issued by the Palestinian Authority and remarks by Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia (Abu Ala), cabinet ministers and members of the Palestinian Legislative Council [the parliament] in the past few days have invoked every possible dramatic metaphor: 'Dangerous turning point,' 'historic precedent,' 'regression of decades,' 'deterioration that will lead to terrible bloodshed,' 'erasure of the whole political process since the Madrid conference and the Oslo Accord,' and 'liquidation of the road map and its replacement with the Sharon plan.'
What do the Palestinians find so frustrating and frightening in the Bush statement?
There are four issues at stake:
|
1. The fact that the negotiations on the fate of the Palestinians are being conducted without them and without taking their position into account.
Some of the Palestinian spokesmen said that the Israeli government could have received a substantial part of Bush's promises in negotiations and an agreement with the Palestinians. However, the Sharon government preferred to humiliate and ignore them.
At the failed Camp David summit of July 2000, and in the formula that was afterward put forward in the Taba talks, the Palestinian representatives agreed to the presence of several settlement blocs; and both the Geneva Initiative of Yossi Beilin and Yasser Abed Rabbo and the accord of Ami Ayalon and Sari Nusseibeh contain understandings relating to the right of return.
However, Sharon was having none of that, because he never saw the Palestinians as partners, only - always - as enemies.
2. The Palestinians are furious, of course, at the historic precedent of American recognition of the settlement blocs in the West Bank, American support for Israel's not having to return to the Green Line and American rejection of the right of return. These are cardinal subjects that will have to be addressed in the final status agreement, and as such have to be discussed by the parties involved, but suddenly agreement has been reached on them in an American-Israeli understanding.
3. The Palestinians describe the Israeli political success as especially impressive because Ariel Sharon, in their perception, won American support without giving anything in return. "Who knows if and when there will be an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza?" said a teacher from Ramallah in a street interview to an Arab television network.
4. The Palestinians were grieved to hear Bush's announcement against the background of an earlier meeting with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. The U.S. administration ostensibly needs Arab assistance in the Iraq crisis - but in the end it turned out that it doesn't regard such assistance as important. In other words, the Arab world is so weak and pitiful that it is unable to stop the sharp pro-Israeli turn in Washington's policy.
What, then, can we expect now?
The talk in Ramallah over the weekend was that the major blow was suffered by the official Palestinian Authority - namely Yasser Arafat and his colleagues.
They were the ones who were surprised and hurt, not the circles that constitute the Palestinian opposition. Hamas spokesmen, for example, were almost exultant at Bush's remarks. Khaled Meshal, the head of Hamas's politburo, said, "At long last comes the Bush statement and puts an end to the illusion about a possible political agreement, under American auspices, between the Jewish state and the Palestinians."
A spokesman for Islamic Jihad added, "We always told you [referring to Arafat and the senior level of the Palestinian Authority] that armed struggle is the only way."
One result of the shift in American policy seems to be that the Palestinian public is pushing for the emergence of a united national leadership as quickly as possible.
At week's end circles in the West Bank and Gaza also marked the second anniversary of the arrest by Israel of Fatah-Tanzim leader Marwan Barghouti (Palestinian reports spoke of Barghouti's "abduction").
He was described as "the engineer of the intifada and the symbol of the struggle."
This was also the anniversary of the death of Khalil al-Wazir (Abu Jihad), who was considered the No. 2 figure in the PLO; he was killed by Israeli commandos in his home in Tunis in 1988.
|
Assemblies and meetings in honor of Barghouti and in memory of the "prince of the shaheeds," Abu Jihad, were held in the territories, and all of them emphasized the need for national unity.
The unity slogan currently in use by Hamas is "partnership in blood and partnership in decision-making."
That is, given the end of the Oslo process and the return to the violent struggle, they are ready to join the new leadership that will replace the existing institutions.
The official announcements emanating recently from Arafat's office also report meetings of "the PLO executive and representatives of the different factions" - meaning that Arafat is already implementing moves toward unity.
"It was only because of security problems that Hamas and Islamic Jihad did not attend the meetings," one communique stated, seeking to underscore the fact that the Islamic zealots, too, have stopped boycotting the Palestinian national institutions.
Arafat, in a public speech devoted to Abu Jihad that was broadcast by Palestinian television on Thursday, emphasized the theme of national unity along with declarations that the Palestinians have no intention of forgoing their rights, including the right of return.
The entire Palestinian public is thus united in its rejection of the Israeli-American understandings.
The situation was concisely summed up in a cartoon in Al-Ayyam showing a Palestinian family in which the father is reading the "Bush declaration" and asserts: "It will never happen."
|
|
Letter from President Bush to Prime Minister Sharon
April 14, 2004
His Excellency
Ariel Sharon Prime Minister of Israel Dear Mr. Prime Minister: Thank you for your letter setting out your disengagement plan. The United States remains hopeful and determined to find a way forward toward a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. I remain committed to my June 24, 2002 vision of two states living side by side in peace and security as the key to peace, and to the roadmap as the route to get there. |
We welcome the disengagement plan you have prepared, under which Israel would withdraw certain military installations and all settlements from Gaza, and withdraw certain military installations and settlements in the West Bank.
These steps described in the plan will mark real progress toward realizing my June 24, 2002 vision, and make a real contribution towards peace.
We also understand that, in this context, Israel believes it is important to bring new opportunities to the Negev and the Galilee.
We are hopeful that steps pursuant to this plan, consistent with my vision, will remind all states and parties of their own obligations under the roadmap.
The United States appreciates the risks such an undertaking represents. I therefore want to reassure you on several points.
First, the United States remains committed to my vision and to its implementation as described in the roadmap.
The United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan. Under the roadmap, Palestinians must undertake an immediate cessation of armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere, and all official Palestinian institutions must end incitement against Israel.
The Palestinian leadership must act decisively against terror, including sustained, targeted, and effective operations to stop terrorism and dismantle terrorist capabilities and infrastructure.
Palestinians must undertake a comprehensive and fundamental political reform that includes a strong parliamentary democracy and an empowered prime minister.
Second, there will be no security for Israelis or Palestinians until they and all states, in the region and beyond, join together to fight terrorism and dismantle terrorist organizations.
The United States reiterates its steadfast commitment to Israel's security, including secure, defensible borders, and to preserve and strengthen Israel's capability to deter and defend itself, by itself, against any threat or possible combination of threats.
Third, Israel will retain its right to defend itself against terrorism, including to take actions against terrorist organizations.
The United States will lead efforts, working together with Jordan, Egypt, and others in the international community, to build the capacity and will of Palestinian institutions to fight terrorism, dismantle terrorist organizations, and prevent the areas from which Israel has withdrawn from posing a threat that would have to be addressed by any other means.
|
The United States understands that after Israel withdraws from Gaza and/or parts of the West Bank, and pending agreements on other arrangements, existing arrangements regarding control of airspace, territorial waters, and land passages of the West Bank and Gaza will continue.
The United States is strongly committed to Israel's security and well-being as a Jewish state. It seems clear that an agreed, just, fair, and realistic framework for a solution to the Palestinian refugee issue as part of any final status agreement will need to be found through the establishment of a Palestinian state, and the settling of Palestinian refugees there, rather than in Israel.
As part of a final peace settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338.
In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion.
It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities.
I know that, as you state in your letter, you are aware that certain responsibilities face the State of Israel.
Among these, your government has stated that the barrier being erected by Israel should be a security rather than political barrier, should be temporary rather than permanent, and therefore not prejudice any final status issues including final borders, and its route should take into account, consistent with security needs, its impact on Palestinians not engaged in terrorist activities.
As you know, the United States supports the establishment of a Palestinian state that is viable, contiguous, sovereign, and independent, so that the Palestinian people can build their own future in accordance with my vision set forth in June 2002 and with the path set forth in the roadmap.
The United States will join with others in the international community to foster the development of democratic political institutions and new leadership committed to those institutions, the reconstruction of civic institutions, the growth of a free and prosperous economy, and the building of capable security institutions dedicated to maintaining law and order and dismantling terrorist organizations.
A peace settlement negotiated between Israelis and Palestinians would be a great boon not only to those peoples but to the peoples of the entire region.
Accordingly, the United States believes that all states in the region have special responsibilities: to support the building of the institutions of a Palestinian state; to fight terrorism, and cut off all forms of assistance to individuals and groups engaged in terrorism; and to begin now to move toward more normal relations with the State of Israel. These actions would be true contributions to building peace in the region.
Mr. Prime Minister, you have described a bold and historic initiative that can make an important contribution to peace.
I commend your efforts and your courageous decision which I support.
As a close friend and ally, the United States intends to work closely with you to help make it a success.
Sincerely,
George W. Bush © 2003 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. An AOL Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved. |
|
|
| US Veto 17 for Israel | September 13, 1985 — US vetoes UN denouncing Israel violation of human rights in the occupied territories; vote: 10 to 1, with 4 abstentions, Britain, France, Australia, Denmark |
|
| US Veto 18 for Israel | January 17, 1986 — US vetoes UN deploring Israel violence in Southern Lebanon; vote: 11 to 1, with 3 abstentions, Britain, Australia, Denmark |
|
| US Veto 19 for Israel | January 30, 1986 — US vetoes UN deploring Israel activities in occupied Arab East Jerusalem which threaten the sanctity of Muslim holy sites; vote: 13 to 1, with 1 abstention, Thailand |
|
|
|
|
| US Veto 20 for Israel | February 6, 1986 — US vetoes UN condemning Israel hijacking of a Libyan passenger airplane on Feb. 4; vote: 10 to 1, with 4 abstentions, Britain, Australia, Denmark, France |
|
| US Veto 21 for Israel | January 18, 1988 — US vetoes UN deploring Israel attacks against Lebanon and its measures and practices against the civilian population of Lebanon; vote: 13 to 1, with Britain abstaining |
|
| US Veto 22 for Israel | February 1, 1988 — US vetoes UN calling on Israel to abandon its policies against the Palestinian uprising that violate the rights of occupied Palestinians, abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention and formalize a leading role for the United Nations in future peace negotiations; vote: 14 to 1 |
|
| US Veto 23 for Israel | April 15, 1988 — US vetoes UN urging Israel to accept back deported Palestinians, condemned Israel’s shooting of civilians, called on Israel to uphold the Fourth Geneva Convention and called for a peace settlement under U.N. auspices; vote: 14 to 1 |
UN President calls for sanctions against Israel
by Saed Bannoura — IMEMC News Thursday November 27, 2008
Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann said that the international community should engage in a 'boycott, divestment and sanctions' campaign against Israel, similar to those enacted against South Africa two decades ago."
Israel has engaged in a military occupation of the Palestinian territories since 1967, with an increase in military presence since the year 2000.
The people of Palestine continue to live under martial law, with no control of their land, sea or water.
In his remarks, d'Escoto said that Israeli policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territories appear similar to the apartheid of an earlier era, a continent away.
He said that the United Nations should not be afraid to use the term apartheid to describe what is happening in occupied Palestine.
Former US President Jimmy Carter came under fire for using the term 'apartheid' in reference to the Israel-Palestine conflict.
He was even prevented from speaking at the Democratic National Convention this year because of his position on the issue.
Inserted by TheWE.biz
More than Fifteen million US dollars is given by US taxpayers each day for the use of Israel, which presently involves the imprisonment of the remaining segregated ' Bantustan — Apartheid ' parcels of land occupied by millions of Palestinian.
Palestinians were forced from their homes 60 years ago from what is now called Israel into refugee camps in Gaza and the West Bank, Jordan and Lebanon.
While attempts have been made by the Palestinians to create a better life for themselves, these refugee camps have been forced upon them to this day by American Taxpayer funding, and Anglo American, Europe backing and banking for Israel that has propped up the forced 'state' of Israel for more than fifty years.
Illuminati, New World Order elite have been at the forefront in protecting European and American settler people who stole the land and continue to steal the remaining few segments of land from the Palestinians, in essence taking away from the Palestinians piece by piece this land over these many years.
Funding by the US Taxpayer for the enslavement of the Palestinian people continues to increase, estimated now considerably more than the previous 4 billion US dollars per year.
© 2001-2008 IMEMC NEWS.
Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse reprint, and rebroadcast on the net and elsewhere. |
| US Veto 24 for Israel | May 10, 1988 — US vetoes UN condemning Israel May 2 incursion into Lebanon; vote: 14 to 1 |
|
| US Veto 25 for Israel | December 14, 1988 — US vetoes UN deploring Israel December 9 commando raids on Lebanon; vote: 14 to 1 |
|
| Please take these images you see Please place them on your website Future generations need to know the monsters presently running our planet! |
| US Veto 26 for Israel | Feb. 17, 1989 — US vetoes UN deploring Israel repression of the Palestinian uprising and calling on Israel to respect the human rights of the Palestinians; vote: 14 to 1 |
|
| US Veto 27 for Israel | June 9, 1989 — US vetoes UN deploring Israel violation of the human rights of the Palestinians; vote: 14 to 1 |
|
| US Veto 28 for Israel | November 7, 1989 — US vetoes UN demanding Israel return property confiscated from Palestinians during a tax protest and allow a fact-finding mission to observe Israel crackdown on the Palestinian uprising; vote: 14 to 1 |
|
| US Veto 29 for Israel | May 31, 1990 — US vetoes UN calling for a fact-finding mission on abuses against Palestinians in Israeli-occupied lands; vote: 14 to 1 |
|
| US Veto 42 for Israel | January 3, 2009 — US vetoes approval of a U.N. Security Council statement calling for an immediate cease-fire in the Gaza Strip and southern Israel and expressing concern at the escalation of violence |
About the Nakba
IMEU
"We thought it would be a matter of weeks, only until the fighting died down. Of course, we were never allowed to go home." Nina Saah, Washington, DC "My family's farm of oranges, grapefruits and lemons, centuries old, was gone." Darwish Addassi, Walnut Creek, California "Those of us who left unwillingly in 1948 are plagued with painful nostalgia. My house in West Jerusalem is an Israeli nursery school now." Inea Bushnaq, New York "The people of New Orleans woke up one morning to complete devastation and had to flee. The Nakba was our Hurricane Katrina." Abe Fawal, Birmingham, Alabama
Sixty years ago, more than 700,000 Palestinians lost their homes and belongings, their farms and businesses, their towns and cities.
Jewish militias seeking to create a state with a Jewish majority in Palestine, and later, the Israeli army, drove them out.
Israel rapidly moved Jews into the newly-emptied Palestinian homes.
Nakba means Catastrophe in Arabic, and Palestinians refer to the destruction of their society and the takeover of their homeland as an-Nakba: The Catastrophe. |
|
|
Atrocities committed by Israel — graphic pictures What CNN nor the BBC ever shows you |
| ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES The horror of January 2009 Israel massacres — children bullets to the head I watched an Israeli soldier shoot dead my two little girls |
| ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES January 19 - 21 Israel massacres — children bullets to the head I watched an Israeli soldier shoot dead my two little girls |
| ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES January 14 - 18 2009 Israel massacres — desire to kill one and half million people They came up again with the Hamas-was-in-the-UN-school lie |
| US ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES February March 2008 US Israel massacres — desire to kill one and half million people The Story of Palestinians Childhoods |
| ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES CONTINUE January 2nd week 2009 99% of US House joins 100% of US Senate in Supporting Israel with HRes34 The 42 vetoes of the US for Israel |
US Israel attack on Gaza City The Politics of Anti-Semitism 99 US Senators, 350 US House members attend AIPAC meeting |
|
ISRAEL MASS WAR CRIMES CONTINUE January 2009 — Click here Israel killing — US paid army fires towards populations to cause death and injury The 42 vetoes of the US for Israel |
Lest we forget — Ahmed and Asma, story of two children dying |
The Dark Side Initiates — Click here Dark path initiates depend on the denial The five-percent manipulator class is composed of those on the dark path |
Twenty Questions Radio/TV interviewers avoid asking about Israel Which parts of the Declaration of Human Rights and Geneva Conventions don't Israelis understand? Why is Israel still stealing Palestinian land for more illegal construction? |
Fake News on Palestine — Israel As Jews we march with the Palestinians and raise their flag! |
|
For archives, these articles are being stored on TheWE.biz website.The purpose is to advance understandings of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. |