Articles

NOVANEWS     Richard Silverstein Remember that old screed attacking Rush Limbaugh: Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell them? ...Read more

NOVANEWS   by Stephen Lendman June 18, 2011 In Washington, hypocrisy and duplicity substitute for resolute action to obey international ...Read more

Two Nazi officers indicted Sunday, for  ordering soldier to hit Palestinian with jeep Nazi major was indicted Sunday on charges ...Read more

NOVANEWS Nazi Gestapo intelligence officers appeared on national television Saturday to talk about assassinating Palestinians in a program broadcast on ...Read more

USA
NOVANEWS jpost.com Ackerman urges Egyptians to finish probe of alleged Mossad agent; dismisses claim that Grapel, who served as his ...Read more

NOVANEWS     Zionist Rabbinical judges rules spirit of secular lawyer who insulted judges 20 years ago transferred into wandering ...Read more

NOVANEWS State TV airs footage purportedly of effect of air raid in Tripoli that official calls “sign of brutality of ...Read more

NOVANEWS Supreme Court ruled long ago that settlements may not be built on confiscated private Palestinian land, but move hinges ...Read more

NOVANEWS Zio-Nazi is warning organisers of another pro-Palestinian flotilla heading for Gaza that violence will be met with violence. A ...Read more

NOVANEWS   Beneath The Spin by Eric L. Wattree I’m about to do something that I generally make it a ...Read more

NOVANEWS Is Adolf Hitler Really the Founding Father of Israel? by Johnny Punish In The Transfer Agreement, Edwin Black’s compelling award-winning story of a ...Read more

NOVANEWS   What would Dr. Martin Luther King say about the plight of the indigenous Palestinian peoples and the political ...Read more

Lying Zio-Nazi Generals: ‘IsraHell Blockade Recognized Under International Law’

NOVANEWS
 

 
Richard Silverstein
Remember that old screed attacking Rush Limbaugh: Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell them? Well, IDF Brig. Gen. Yoav Mordechai seems to have studied the book and learned all its lessons down cold.  He threatened mayhem on the unarmed activists who are about to depart on the Gaza flotilla boats for Occupied Palestine.  But what was most mendacious in his remarks was this:
“There is an unequivocal directive from the government to enforce the naval blockade that is recognized by international law, and we will not allow it to be broken.”
Just who recognizes the legality of Israel’s siege of Gaza’s 1.5 million civilians?  Why, the IDF of course.  But since when is the IDF or any similar Israeli source the sole arbiter of international law?  Are there any other non-hasbarist legal analysts who defend the Israeli siege as legal under international law?  Besides Alan Dershowitz, of course.  I haven’t heard any.
So let’s be very clear: this tin-pot general has just threatened unarmed civilians with the use of any and all means necessary to subdue them.  This is hooliganism and brutishness.  And Israel can surely be proud it has such a general in its midst.  One who isn’t afraid to shoot men and women if necessary to uphold the nation’s honor.
Israel and most military bodies like to give names to their exercises.  I’ve got one for the upcoming flotilla interdiction.  And for this, we’ll have to turn Meir Kahane’s “Never Again” slogan on its head.  My suggestion: “Mavi Marmara–Again.”  Or alternatively, we could use a version of the slogan that Auschwitz survivor Malvina Schwartz saw scrawled on a wall in her Hungarian hometown after she came back from the camps: “This time–we’ll finish the job.”
Ethan Bronner interprets the bellicosity of Brig. Gen. Mordechai this way:
The statements seemed part of a heightened effort to stop another flotilla and to pre-emptively explain Israel’s position if violence ensues.
I’d make one small change in that sentence: “when violence ensues.”  Because the IDF of course controls whether there will be murder and mayhem, just as it did a year ago on the Mavi Marmara, when it slaughtered nine men with ‘kill shots’ at point-blank range.
And hey, we can’t get away with writing about a Bronner piece without noting his bias in favor of Israel:
Israel…said that a year ago the ship was dominated by extremists who created the confrontations that resulted in the deaths.
“Israel said?”  What about what everyone else in the world said, which directly contradicts this?  And what about an acknowledgement that whatever the passengers did, they did not, could not provoke nine murders.  That was solely the doing of the IDF naval commandos.  Not a word on this from Good Soldier Bronner (oh, that’s right, it’s his son who’s in the IDF).
And how about a little more hasbara from the Times IDF (er, Israel) bureau chief:
Israel began a naval blockade two and a half years ago when it invaded Gaza to stop Palestinian militants from firing rockets into Israel.
Say what?  First this is erroneous.  There was a full Israeli blockade of Gaza, including naval, beginning in 2006, not 2009.  Second, the reasons Israel says it’s doing something are often not the real reasons it’s doing it.  In this case, the blockade, if this was the purpose, never stopped a single rocket from being fired.  Rather, Israel wished to punish Gazans for voting for Hamas to be their leader and to punish Hamas for its pre-emptive coup which kicked Fatah out of the enclave in 2006.  That’s the real reason there is an Israeli siege.  One which, contrary to the word of an Israeli hack general, is illegal under international law.
How about this bit of breathless Bronnerism:
Today Gaza has plenty of goods available…
For God’s sake, what does it mean that there are “plenty of goods available” if there are no jobs with which people can earn money to buy them?  This is the heartlessness of Ethan Bronner.  Besides, most of those goods didn’t come to Gaza through Israeli crossings which allow a trickle to flow in.  Rather they’re smuggled in via Egypt.  No thanks to Israel.
Bronner gets yet another point wrong in this passage:
The government says its goal is to prevent Hamas from importing weapons by sea. In March, Israel stopped a vessel packed with weapons that it says were Gaza-bound.
No,  the vessel wasn’t bound for Gaza.  It was actually taken on the high seas on its way to Egypt.  It’s possible the weapons were intended for Gaza, but that ship wasn’t bringing them there.
Bronner continues his whitewash of the Mavi Marmara massacre thus:
This year an Israeli commission concluded that the blockade conformed with international law, as did Israel’s raid on the Mavi Marmara in international waters. The panel included two foreign legal experts who agreed with the conclusions.
First, Bronner neglects to mention the clear bias of the panel, the fact that it was not independent, did not have subpoena power, and had a very limited mandated.  Not to mention that it’s nearly senile 89-year-old chairman died a few weeks into deliberations.  Second, the two foreign “experts” were neither experts nor unbiased.  David Trimble is not an expert on international law, but rather a Northern Ireland pro-Israel politician.  The other expert was a Canadian military judge advocate whose expertise on international law was never promoted by the Israelis.
Enough badgering poor old ‘Eitan’ Bronner.  Let’s go back to the IDF military spokesperson who’s always good for a cynical laugh:
He said that many of those planning to take part in the flotilla were peace activists, but that they were naïve because “extremists will set the tone” if Israeli commandos board the ships.
Yes, indeed.  The tone will be set by extremists like 86 year-old Holocaust survivor Hedy Epstein; or non-violent human rights activist Medea Benjamin; or by Yonatan Shapira, the peace activist who refused to bomb Palestinians in the West Bank with his IDF Black Hawk helicopter.  These are the caliber of man-eating extremists those commandos will be facing.  Scary.  They better take along an extra copy of Gandhi’s biography in order to do battle with them.
To support the sacred work of the Gaza flotilla and tell the IDF you won’t support vigilantism, you may contribute to the Canadian boat, Tahrir, which will include Tikun Olam reader Mary Hughes Thompson among its passengers.  Godspeed, Mary and all the others.  Come back safe.

 

Duplicitous Congressional Posturing on Libya

NOVANEWS
 


by Stephen Lendman
June 18, 2011

In Washington, hypocrisy and duplicity substitute for resolute action to obey international and constitutional law. In fact, they’re mere artifacts long ago discarded to advance America’s imperium.

All Washington’s wars are illegal. International law permits them only in self-defense. Constitutional law only lets Congress, not the president, declare or wage them overtly, covertly or any other way for any reason unless America was attacked.

Moreover, the principle of non-intervention (a cornerstone of international law pertaining to national sovereignty) prohibits meddling in the internal affairs of other countries as stipulated in the UN Charter’s Article 2 (7), stating:

“Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter VII,” pertaining to threats to peace, its breaches, or acts of aggression.

These issues don’t apply to America’s wars against Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Yemen, and numerous proxy ones. Congress can easily stop them with a simple up or down vote to end funding, as well as another with teeth, holding the president accountable unless hostilities are immediately halted.

Moreover, so-called “humanitarian intervention” is modern-day colonialism dressed up in rhetorical mumbo jumbo to justify aggression. As a result, when America intervenes, it’s for policy goals, not human rights, civil liberties, democratic values, or humanitarian priorities, presidents and lawmakers don’t give a damn about and never did, abroad or at home.

Nonetheless, on June 15, Obama claimed legitimacy for America’s war on Libya, telling Congress:

“The President is of the view that the current US military operations in Libya are consistent with the War Powers Resolution and do not under that law require further congressional authorization, because US military operations are distinct from the kind of ‘hostilities’ contemplated by the Resolution’s 60 day termination provision.”

Calling America’s role “constrained,” he added other duplicitously reasons for another illegal war against a nonbelligerent country.

Moreover, claiming War Powers Resolution authority is a red herring. It applies only to legal wars in self-defense as defined under international and constitutional laws. No exceptions apply. Presidents can’t subvert them. Congress can hold them accountable by cutting off funding and impeachment for usurping illegal executive supremacy.

In fact, failure to do so violates the Constitution’s Article VI, Clause 3 Oath of Office provision. The first Congress instituted a binding pledge, stating:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.”

In April 1861, Lincoln expanded it to include all federal civilian employees. In 1884, the modern version was enacted, stating:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

Virtually all congressional members violate constitutional law, governing contrary to this oath, rendering it null and void, thus making them complicit in presidential crimes, their rhetorical posturing notwithstanding.

For example, on June 13, House members, in an amendment to a military appropriations bill, voted to prohibit funding operations for Libya without congressional authorization. It was political posturing as Senate follow-through is unlikely, giving representatives for it a safe vote.

In an earlier June 3 one, House members said Obama “failed to provide Congress with a compelling rationale based upon United States national security interests for current United States military activities regarding Libya.” However, the measure lacked teeth, merely stating that:

“Congress has (but won’t enforce) the constitutional prerogative to withhold funding for any unauthorized use of the United States Armed Forces, including for unauthorized activities regarding Libya.”

Moreover, in a separate vote, members defeated a Homeland Security Appropriations bill amendment to prohibit funding it.

On June 15, 10 congressional members (3 Democrats, 7 Republicans) sued Obama in the US District of Columbia District Court for unilaterally waging war on Libya.

Calling for “Injunctive and Declaratory Relief,” the complaint said in part:

This measure challenges “Defendant Barack Obama, President of the United States, (for) go(ing) to war in Libya and other countries without the declaration of war from Congress required by Article I, Section, 8, Clause 11 of the US Constitution.”

It further challenges his violation of the War Powers Resolution, requiring congressional authorization, as well as “commit(ting) the United States to a war under the authority of (NATO) in violation of the express condition of the North Atlantic Treaty ratified by Congress.”

In fact, rhetorical posturing, toothless congressional measures and ineffective lawsuits aside, most members of Congress support wars by passing defense authorization bills and supplemental appropriations with comfortable margins.

In addition, since WW II, they never challenged presidential war making authority without congressional approval, as well as for failing to follow international and constitutional law. Nor have they demanded domestic accountability for fundamental democratic rights they, in fact, also spurn with impunity.

Instead they support imperial wars and corporate privilege for their own self-interest. As a result, they benefit greatly at the public’s expense, especially during hard times when federal aid more than ever is needed, not austerity cuts leaving millions on their own sink or swim.

A Final Comment

America’s media wholeheartedly support US imperial wars, no matter how lawless, mindless, destructive and counterproductive. In fact, they revel in them, cheerleading daily slaughter, mostly affecting noncombatant men, women and children, defenseless against American-led terror bombing.

In Libya, for example, non-military targets are struck, including ports, schools, hospitals, houses, civilian infrastructure, a university, a Brega peace conference killing 16 imams and wounding dozens, Gaddafi’s personal compound to kill him, instead murdering his son and three grandchildren, as well as daily attacks killing and injuring hundreds of Libyans.

Nonetheless, a June 16 New York Times editorial wants more, headlined “Libya and the War Powers Act,” saying:

“It would be hugely costly – for this country’s credibility, for the future of NATO and for the people of Libya – if Congress were to force (Obama) to abandon military operations over Libya.”

The Pentagon planned, leads, and directs the war for an estimated $1.1 billion through September, yet The Times calls America’s involvement “limited,” adding:

“We support the Libya campaign….(W)e have no doubt that if NATO had not intervened, thousands more Libyan civilians would have been slaughtered.”

In fact, clear evidence shows America and other Western powers recruited, funded, armed, and support Libyan mercenaries to help oust Gaddafi’s regime. Moreover, no humanitarian crisis existed until NATO intervened.

Nonetheless, The Times said, ending America’s involvement would cause NATO’s campaign to “unravel.” As a result, “relations with Europe and the unity of the military alliance (would be enormously harmed), likely felt all the way to Afghanistan,” another illegal war The Times supports, urging Obama to fight on, adding:

“Congress….needs to authorize continued American support for NATO’s air campaign over Libya,” no matter the body count it causes. America’s entire corporate media establishment agrees.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

Zio-Nazi Major ordered Palestinian run over

Two Nazi officers indicted Sunday, for  ordering soldier to hit Palestinian with jeep

Nazi major was indicted Sunday on charges of overstepping authority and putting a life at risk by ordering a soldier to run over a 20-year old Palestinian with an army jeep.

In another case, Nazi lieutenant and infantry commander was indicted on charges of vandalism with malicious intent for torching Palestinian vehicles with his soldiers.

The first case reportedly occurred in 2008 during a chase after Palestinians who had constructed a barrier of stones on a road near Qalqilya.

The military prosecution said the Palestinian suffered injuries to his face and that there had been no call to hit him with a vehicle. The investigation was lengthy, and the prosecution decided only recently to try the senior officer.

The second case was said to occur in 2009, during a military operation in Mount Hebron. The prosecution says it has decided not to try the soldiers allegedly involved, but rather only their Nazi commanding officer.

Zio-Nazi Gestapo boast of killing Palestinians on TV

NOVANEWS




Nazi Gestapo intelligence officers appeared on national television Saturday to talk about assassinating Palestinians in a program broadcast on Zionist Channel 10.
Oren Beaton presented a photo album of Palestinians he killed during his time as a commander of an undercover Nazi unit operating in the northern West Bank city of Nablus.
Beaton explained that he kept photos of his victims.
“This is a photo of a Palestinian young man called Basim Subeih who I killed. This is another young man. I shredded his body, and the photo shows the remnants of his body,” he said.
The TV program also featured an undercover agent referred to as “D”, who openly admitted killing “wanted Palestinians.”
He complained of suffering from post traumatic stress disorder and said that the state had rejected his demands for compensation.
The Channel 10 presenter appealed to the Nazi regime to meet the Gestapo agent’s demands.
“Those are the Shin Bet agents we only hear about and never see, and thanks to them we live safely,” she said.
The report was filmed in the Palestinian territories, and showed agents wandering around the streets of Ar-Ram in occupied East Jerusalem with handguns under their shirts, illustrating that the Nazi agents were still operating in Palestinian cities.
The agents, who speak fluent Arabic, are shown surrounded by masked Palestinian collaborators secretly deployed to the area to protect them.
The program provided previously unconfirmed details about the operational methods of undercover agents.
The report explained that officers conducted surveillance before an assassination, investigating the target’s friends and classmates.
Agents would even ask about the target’s favorite meals and habits at home, the report said.
In this way, agents would put together an image of the target’s behavior and routine.
Agent “D” said officers would then “seize the target and wait until the commander arrives to confirm his identity. Then we shoot him.”
This confirms previous accounts from Palestinians who have said they witnessed the Nazi agents shooting Palestinians at point-blank range.

 

US Rep. Zionist Ackerman insists Grapel is no Zionist spy

NOVANEWS

jpost.com
Ackerman urges Egyptians to finish probe of alleged Mossad agent; dismisses claim that Grapel, who served as his intern in 2002, is a spy.
WASHINGTON – Congressman Gary Ackerman has appealed personally to Egyptian authorities in the case of Ilan Grapel, who once worked as his intern and is now being held for allegedly spying for the Mossad.
“I’m speaking with Egyptian officials on a regular basis,” the New York Democrat told The Jerusalem Post on Friday. “I got assurances from Israel that this kid is not their kid,” i.e. a Mossad agent.
Instead, Ackerman said that Grapel was a full-time law student whose schedule he had verified with the Emory University authorities to prove that he couldn’t have been engaged in espionage for the Mossad.
Ackerman said he has also been in close touch with the US State Department, and that all parties involved were acting professionally and seriously in the case.
Grapel interned for Ackerman, whose office is near his home in Queens, in the summer of 2002.
A dual citizen of America and Israel, he later served in the IDF and was wounded in the second Lebanon War, an incident that was well publicized.
The congressman described his former intern as “very liberal” and someone who “wants to help people in Egypt.” He said he was in the country to help refugees from nearby African countries who had fled to Egypt.
“This is like no good deed goes unpunished,” he said. “He did some things that are frankly foolish… but a spy – give me a break!” Ackerman is urging the Egyptians to finish their investigation and procedures as quickly as possible so the case can be resolved and Grapel doesn’t become a political pawn.
“We’re working very hard. His parents love him very much and are very concerned,” he said.
“They and I want him back in Queens as quickly as possible.”
Despite the current situation, Ackerman said he remains hopeful about Grapel’s fate.
“I have to be optimistic because he’s not a spy. He’s not involved in espionage,” he said.
“He’s the most unlikely spy anybody could ever imagine.”
Efforts to secure the release of Grapel continued over the weekend, with the Egyptian press reporting the Israeli and Egyptian authorities have met to discuss the situation.
According to reports in the Egyptian daily Al-Ahram and in the Hebrew media, Israeli Ambassador Yitzhak Levanon met with the head of the Israeli desk in the Egyptian Foreign Ministry to try to get the young man freed.
Also on Friday, Al-Ahram reported that Grapel, a 27-yearold American-Israel arrested in Cairo on Sunday for allegedly working for the Mossad to penetrate Egyptian political parties and activist groups to gather intelligence and foment sectarian strife, was visited by a US consular official who said he was in “deep trouble.”

 

Dog sentenced to death by stoning by Jewish court

NOVANEWS

 


 

Zionist Rabbinical judges rules spirit of secular lawyer who insulted judges 20 years ago transferred into wandering dog’s body. God help the Palestinian’s.

ynet

A Jerusalem rabbinical court recently sentenced a wandering dog to death by stoning. The cruel sentence stemmed from the suspicion that the hound was the reincarnation of a famous secular lawyer, who insulted the court’s judges 20 years ago.

Several weeks ago, according to the Behadrei Hadarim website, a large dog entered the Monetary Affairs Court near the ultra-Orthodox neighborhood of Mea Shearim. The dog scared the court’s visitors and, to their surprise, refused to leave even after they attempted to drive him away.

One of the judges suddenly recalled that about 20 years ago, a famous secular lawyer who insulted the court was cursed by the panel of judges, who wished that his spirit would move on to the body of a dog (considered an impure animal by Halacha). The lawyer passed away several years ago.

Still offended, one of the judges sentenced the poor animal to death by stoning, recruiting the neighborhood’s children to carry out the order. Luckily, the dog managed to escape.

The head of the court, Rabbi Avraham Dov Levin, denied that the judges had called for the dog’s stoning. But one of the court’s managers confirmed the report to Yedioth Ahronoth.

“It was ordered by the rabbis because of the grief he had caused the court,” he said. “They didn’t issue an official ruling, but ordered the children outside to throw stones at him in order to drive him away. They didn’t think of it as cruelty to animals, but as an appropriate way to ‘get back at’ the spirit which entered the poor dog.”

Jerusalem City Council Member and social activist Rachel Azaria sent an urgent letter to the attorney general, calling on him to “deal with the criminals”. The Let the Animals Live organization filed a complaint with the police against Rabbi Levin.

Civilians killed in NATO raid, Libya says

NOVANEWS

State TV airs footage purportedly of effect of air raid in Tripoli that official calls “sign of brutality of the West”.

Libyan officials say a number of civilians have been killed in a NATO air strike in eastern Tripoli in the early hours of Sunday morning.

Reporters were taken by Libyan government officials to a residential area in the city’s Arada neighbourhood and saw a body pulled out of the rubble of a destroyed building.

“There was intentional and deliberate targeting of the civilian houses,” Khaled Kaim, Libya’s deputy foreign minister, said.

“This is another sign of the brutality of the West.”

There were heaps of rubble and chunks of shattered concrete at the scene, which a large crowd of what appeared to be local residents were helping to clear.

On previous occasions when reporters have been taken to see fresh air raids, the ruins of shattered buildings would typically still be smoking so soon after being hit.

There did not appear to be any smoke at the site that was reported to have been attacked by NATO.

Mike Bracken, a NATO spokesman, denied the Libyan claims. He told Al Jazeera that NATO only targeted a surface-to-air missile site in Tripoli.

Hospital scenes

If confirmed, the incident would be a blow to NATO’s campaign which is aiding rebels fighting the government of Muammar Gaddafi at a time when the Western alliance is debating how to sustain its mission.

At a local hospital, reporters were shown three bodies, including a child, which government officials said were people killed in the air strike.

One of the bodies was covered with debris and dust. Reporters were also shown a wounded child.

“Basically, this is another night of murder, terror and horror in Tripoli caused by NATO,” Moussa Ibrahim, a government spokesman, said at the hospital. Five families were living in the building which was hit, he said.

It could not be immediately verified whether the three bodies had come from the destroyed building.

The most recent figures from Libya’s health ministry show 856 civilians have been killed in NATO air raids since they began in March. The figure could not be independently confirmed.

Previous government-announced tolls from individual attacks have proven to be exaggerated.

NATO, which has a mandate to protect Libyan civilians, has been stepping up the pressure on Muammar Gaddafi as a four-month uprising devolved into a civil war. It rejects allegations it targets civilians.

Mistaken attack

Late on Saturday, NATO announced that it had mistakenly struck a column of Libyan rebel vehicles in an air attack near an eastern oil town two days earlier and expressed regret for any casualties that might have resulted.

“We are conducting operations with utmost care and precision to avoid civilian casualties. Civilian casualties figures mentioned by the Libyan regime are pure propaganda,” Oana Lungescu, a NATO spokeswoman, said.

The alliance has accidentally hit rebel forces before in its air campaign to protect civilians in the civil war between Gaddafi’s military and the fighters trying to end his more than four decades in power.

The rebels have also complained that NATO’s raids have not helped them gain decisive momentum against the Libyan leader’s better trained and equipped military.

The alliance statement gave no figures on casualties from Thursday’s raid, but said it regretted “any possible loss of life or injuries caused by this unfortunate incident”.

NATO said its forces spotted a column of military vehicles near the frequent flashpoint town of Brega where forces loyal to Gaddafi had recently been operating and hit them because they believed they posed a threat to civilians.

International military forces have had some trouble in hitting government troops because of their proximity to civilians. Government troops have also used civilian vehicles, making them difficult to distinguish from rebel forces.

A doctor in the nearby city of Ajdabiya said the bodies of four rebel fighters were brought to his hospital around the time of Thursday’s attack, but it was not possible to confirm whether they were killed in the bombardment.

A rebel military spokesman, Abdel-Rahman Abu-Sin, said on Saturday that they appreciated NATO’s efforts and understood the difficulty in differentiating between the two sides along shifting front lines.

After four months of civil war, rebels control much of the east of Libya, the area around the western port city of Misurata and much of the western mountain region stretching to the border with Tunisia.

Zio-Nazi State moves to expand settlement on Palestinian land confiscated by Jordan

NOVANEWS

Supreme Court ruled long ago that settlements may not be built on confiscated private Palestinian land, but move hinges on fact that it was Jordan, not IsraHell, who confiscated the land.

Haaretz

Israel is pushing ahead with a plan that would legitimize construction on land near the settlement of Ofra in the West Bank.

The Supreme Court ruled as early as 1979 that settlements may not be built on confiscated private Palestinian land. The move’s legal foundation appears to hinge on the fact that it was the Jordanians, not the Israelis, who confiscated the land – before Israel took over the West Bank during the Six-Day War in 1967.

Jordan had confiscated land from the villages of Ein Yabrud and Silwad to build a military camp. When the settlement project began after 1967, the first settlers used the military buildings as sleeping quarters for a camp they established there. By 1975, the camp had become Ofra, the first Jewish settlement in the northern West Bank, now home to more than 700 families.

The land in the current plan contains a cluster of dilapidated buildings. In the past two years, amid a housing shortage, the settlers of Ofra began preparing the land for a new neighborhood. The land now lies within Ofra’s fence; in effect, the plan would expand the settlement.

The move is being advanced without permits, and in the last few months Israel’s Civil Administration in the West Bank has issued demolition orders for structures in the compound. It said the work should stop, but this order was ignored.

According to data from the Civil Administration’s inspection unit, construction has begun on six permanent buildings containing a dozen housing units. The inspection unit says 20 prefab homes have been placed at the site, and the land is being prepared for more construction. Work has also begun on a central public building.

Original owners

Two months ago, the original Palestinian owners petitioned the High Court of Justice to demolish the buildings and give them back the land. Until 1979, construction of settlements on Palestinian land seized for “military needs” was the norm. The Supreme Court ruled this practice illegal in 1979, and the state stopped confiscating private Palestinian land for settlements. But settlements have since been built on private land expropriated before 1979.

Responding to the recent petition, the state said it has no intention to carry out the Civil Administration’s demolition orders, and that it plans to prepare the site for construction.

The affidavit, submitted by an adviser to Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Eitan Broshi, noted that the decision to legalize the construction was made after it was found that the land had been expropriated by the Jordanians.

The move is legally complex: While the land was originally confiscated by the Jordanians, Israel has since reaffirmed the Jordanians’ confiscation order and stated that the land would be used for public needs such as infrastructure. This also contradicts the use intended for the land in the new plan.

Zio-Nazi Gestapo Stark Warning To Gaza Aid Ships

NOVANEWS

Zio-Nazi is warning organisers of another pro-Palestinian flotilla heading for Gaza that violence will be met with violence.

A senior Zio-Nazi military source briefed a select group of news organisations including Sky News to deliver the message as activists in Turkey and Greece prepare to set sail.

He spoke anonymously in keeping with IsraHell military rules on briefing journalists.

“We’ll do anything that we have to to stop these ships breaking a security maritime blockade.”

The uncompromising threat comes despite the risk of a repeat of the military and PR debacle during Israel’s previous operation to prevent the breach of its sea blockade of Gaza.

In May last year, elite Nazi commandos, rappelling from helicopters onto the Mavi Marmara aid vessel. Israel claims they were overwhelmed by activists armed with knives and clubs.

When they lost control they were ordered to open fire and killed nine activists, most – according to Turkish doctors – shot at close quarters, some in the back.

The outrage that followed forced IsraHell to ease its blockade of Gaza.

The Israeli source insisted the military had learned lessons from last year’s botched operation but said there was a limit to which PR considerations could determine Nazi’s ability to safeguard its security.

“If the same violence will be on board, there is a pretty good chance there will be injuries on board.”

Zio-Naziu insists it has a right to enforce a maritime blockade because it is in a state of armed conflict with the rulers of Gaza.

World leaders including David Cameron have urged the organisers of this latest flotilla to cancel their plans. Zio-Nazi’s clam’s of easing the blockade undermines the need to send aid by sea, it is argued.

But its organisers say the flotilla is about more than shipping aid. They also hope to more generally highlight the plight of Gazans. IsraHell has not lifted its draconian ban on exports out of the desperately poor coastal strip, with devastating consequences on its private sector economy.

Critics including Zionist Tony Blair, Quartet Special Envoy, have told Zio-Nazi the export ban weakens civil society and the middle classes in Gaza and strengthens extremists including Hamas. Recent figures suggest unemployment has reached almost 50%, partly because of IsraHell’s export ban.

What’s the Difference Between Zionism and Racism?

NOVANEWS

 

Beneath The Spin

by Eric L. Wattree

I’m about to do something that I generally make it a point to avoid – discuss the collective nature of White folks. The reason I make it a point to avoid this subject is because I don’t want to add to the disinformation disseminated by many Black racists (oh yes, racists come in Black too) that there is something more intrinsically evil in White people than there is in any other racial group.

The fact is, as humans, just as intellect is distributed equally across our species, so is malevolence. We all have a tendency to be self-serving and corrupt given half a chance. The only difference between White people and any other group is that they have the power, thus opportunity, to reflect that side of their nature – and to anyone who wants to challenge my assertion in that regard, I invite you to witness the Black-on-Black mayhem that’s currently taking place on the continent of Africa, or take the police out of the Black communities of America and see the level of enlightenment that prevails – it would be the survival of the fittest within a week.

So it seems that the common trait shared by all those who tend to be inhumane and corrupt is neither race, creed, nor color. What they all have in common is power, opportunity, and greed. And let there be no doubt, that’s the source of all of the turmoil in the Middle-East – the power, opportunity, and greed of Israel and the American military/industrial complex.

But whenever anyone seeks to examine this issue they’re immediately met with hysterical charges of being either unpatriotic, anti-Semitic, or both. So while everyone is aware of the problem, we tend to turn a blind eye to it.

This is an issue that desperately needs to be addressed, because due to our failure to do so, American troops are dying, the United States treasury is being looted, and the entire world is being placed at risk. So enough with all of the name-calling and accusations. Israel’s behavior needs to be scrutinized just like any other country in the world.

Pure, objective, and unadulterated truth is not nearly as complicated or elusive as we try to make it seem in this country. But since truth doesn’t lend itself to being Black, White, Jew, or Gentile, when the truth comes up less than a perfect fit to our carefully constructed comfort zone, we tend to beat, distort, and convolute it into a more comfortable fit. In the process, however, we do ourselves a gross injustice, because no matter how you distort it, truth will always prevail in the end. That is the source of most of our problems in this world. We all seek to distort the truth in a way that is most palatable to our special interest – and this problem is magnified by the fact that our writers, political pundits, and politicians have a natural tendency to seek applause and self-interest over truth. But if we’re indeed dependent on the truth to set us free, let us not doom ourselves to a life of death, carnage, and intellectual bondage by living a lie.

And the truth is, our poor and middle-class young people are being wooed by slick government commercials to become cannon fodder in a war for profit. But young people, take it from an old Marine, it’s all a lie. They’re only showing you the benefits and upside of military life, with standing proud and strong in your spotless uniform at home, with all the girls looking at you with admiring eyes. They’re not showing you the real picture, with you lying in 120 degree heat in agony thousands of miles from home, bleeding to death from the stub that use to be your leg, or looking at your foot in a bloody boot twenty-five yards away from where the rest of you lie dying. They’re being criminally remiss in not showing you that side of military life.

Now, don’t get the impression that I’m a pacifist, or hate the military, however – I’m not. There IS a time when war is justified, but this ain’t it. You know it’s time to go to war when you’re prepared to see your own love ones become it’s first casualty, but it’s abundantly clear that no one in our government has reached that point as yet. If they had, they’d be encouraging their kids to enlist.

Where is Liz Cheney, or the Bush girls? They can drive a truck. But no, not on your life – their idea of patriotism is cheering on the dying “little people” from the lobby of exclusive tennis clubs. So be all that you can be, but don’t be a fool. You won’t be fighting for your country; you’ll be fighting for Exxon and Halliburton’s collusion with Israel to rob the people of the Middle East, and gouge the American taxpayer.

The truth is, the dispute over Israel is nothing less than “The Manifest Destiny” being reenacted. When the Europeans came to America and began to strip the indigenous people of their land, they justified their unholy atrocities by declaring that it was God’s will that they settle and bring his word to this “uncivilized land”– it was their manifest destiny. So in true civilized, Christian fashion, they began to spread the Holy word of God through the hot muzzle of a Gatlin gun. It was a brutally unconscionable and gruesome event, but what could these good Christians do? After all, it was God’s will that they slaughter those “Godless savages.” That is the exact same scenario that is currently taking place in the Middle East today. It began with the “creation” of the state of Israel in 1948, and the campaign continues as I speak – but this time, it’s called Zionism.

In 1882, while Jews were being massacred throughout Russia, Leo Pinsker, the founder of the Zionist movement, published a small booklet entitled “Auto-emancipation”. It pointed out that Jews would never find equality in Russia, so it was necessary for world Jewry to establish their own homeland. At first he didn’t care where it was located – in fact, the area encompassing Zaire, Africa was even considered. But later, Pinsker recognized that in order to get Jews to immigrate in numbers large enough to establish a homeland, he needed a location that would inspired the Jewish soul, and no location in the world would suit that purpose like Palestine, the land of Zion – “the land that God had promised the Jews.” The fact that there were indigenous people already living in Palestine never even crossed his mind.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines Zionism as follows: “Zionism: An organized movement of world Jewry that arose in Europe in the late 19th century with the aim of reconstituting a Jewish state in Palestine. Modern Zionism is concerned with the development and support of the state of Israel.”

Thus, Zionism, by definition and design, is a doctrine dedicated to the taking of Palestine – and on May 14, 1948, European Jews did just that. Between 1944 and 1948, due to their experience with the Nazi’s, Eastern European Jews wanted to get off the European continent by any means necessary, so various Zionist organizations created the Bariha (escape) Organization that helped close to 200,000 Jews to leave Europe and settle in Palestine. Prior to that time, in July of 1922, the League of Nations (the progenitor of the United Nations) gave Great Britain a mandate to protect the people of Palestine, but on November 29, 1947 when the U. N. General Assembly passed a resolution to partition off Palestine between the Arabs and Jews, Great Britain announced that it was terminating its mandate. The end of the British mandate was to go into effect on May 15, 1948, but on May 14, 1948 the Zionists declared the creation of Israel, a Jewish state.

But in order for the new State of Israel to have any legitimacy it had to be recognized by the United States. The U.S. State Department was less than enthusiastic about creating a Jewish state in Palestine, but shortly after President Truman took office, European Zionist, Chaim Weizmann, convinced the president that it was only just that the survivors of the holocaust would be given their own homeland. Truman agreed, and recognized the State of Israel on May 14, 1948, and all hell’s been breaking loose every since.

The Israeli-American alliance was a match made in Hell from the very outset – they didn’t even trust each other. One of the largest units in the CIA is dedicated to the prevention of Israeli spying on the United States, and one of the biggest spy scandals in U.S. history involved an Israeli spy name Jonathan Pollard, an American of Jewish descent, born in Galveston, Texas. But in spite of that, Israel receives more U.S. foreign aid than any other country in the world, and we’ve made them one of the most formidable military forces in the world. The reason for that?–oil.

Israel stands as an extension of the United States in the Middle East, within easy striking distance of Middle Eastern oil fields. So what we have in the Middle East is an unholy quid pro quo -The United States will help the Israelis steal Arab land, and the Israelis will help the United States steal the oil beneath the land.

So the Israeli claim that their slaughter of the Arab people is simply an attempt to defend themselves is nothing but a farce. Granted, when someone invades your home you do have a right to retaliate against them, but Europeans have about as much right to call Israel their home as I’d have of tearing off a part of China simply because I converted to Buddhism.

Far be it from me, however, to say who’s a Jew and who’s not, but I think we can all agree that European Jews are not the same Jews that were spoken of in the Bible. But, of course, you’re not suppose to even whisper such sentiments here in America. To say that European Jews don’t belong in Israel, or to speak out on any atrocity that the State of Israel might commit, is considered anti Semitic in this country. But even that’s a farce. There’s a big difference between being anti Semitic and anti Zionist. To be anti Semitic is to be against a people, while being anti-Zionist is to be against a philosophy. After all, all Jews are not Zionist. But there’s another issue here as well. How can you be anti Semitic towards Europeans? They aren’t even Semites.

The situation above describes exactly why we’re in Iraq and Afghanistan today. Thus, all of the killing in the Middle East is about European hubris, injustice, and greed. The entire justification for Europeans being in the Middle East at all, is based on a lie – and that includes Europeans by way of America.

How can you go into your neighbor’s home and kill his family, then call him the aggressor? And now they’re talking about invading Iran! It’s all about racism and greed. Think about it– as bad as the Germans and Russians treated the Jews over the years, you’d think the Jews would have been given part of one of those countries. If they’d done that, European Jews wouldn’t have even had to leave home. But White folks don’t play that – no matter how much they hate each other.

Religious bigotry: It’s not that I hate everyone who doesn’t look, think, and act like me – it’s just that God does

Truth Telling Transfer Agreement Exposes Hitler as Father of Israel

NOVANEWS

Is Adolf Hitler Really the Founding Father of Israel?

by Johnny Punish

In The Transfer Agreement, Edwin Black’s compelling award-winning story of a negotiated arrangement in 1933 between Zionist organizations and the Nazis to transfer some 50,000 Jews, and $100 million of their assets to Jewish Palestine in exchange for stopping the worldwide Jewish-led boycott threatening to topple the Hitler regime in its first year, exposes historical truth.

This truth threatens to destablize modern Zionism’s stranglehold on the mainstream media propaganda that, in 2011, continues to suffocate U.S. Citizens and the world with “guilt” appeals and billions of US taxpayer “aid” dollars given each year to a state that neither has the best interest of the American people nor the best interests of it’s own indigenous populations that the Zionist so-called democracy claims to represent.

Join with me as we  follow the historical journey of Edwin Black as his travels into the truth that was the movement of German Jews into Palestine and their subsequent conquest of the indigenious Palestinian people.

On August 7, 1933, leaders of the Zionist movement concluded a controversial pact with the Third Reich which, in its various forms, transferred some 60,000 Jews and $100 million– almost $800 million in 1984 dollars– to Jewish Palestine. In return, Zionists would halt the worldwide Jewish-led anti-nazi boycott that threatened to topple the Hitler regime in its first year. Ultimately, the Transfer Agreement saved lives, rescued assets, and seeded the infrastructure of the Jewish State.

Fiery debates instantly ignited throughout the pre-War Jewish world as rumors of the pact leaked out. The acrimony was rekindled in 1984 with the original publication of The Transfer Agreement and has never stopped.

Understanding the painful process and the agonizing decisions taken by Jewish leadership requires a journey. This journey will not be a comfortable one with clear-cut concepts and landmarks. The facts, as they unfold, will challenge your sense of the period, break your heart, and try your ethics… just as it did for those in 1933 who struggled to identify the correct path through a Fascist minefield and away from the conflagration that awaited European Jewry.

To discover The Transfer Agreement, Edwin Black took that journey.


YouTube – Veterans Today –

His journey began in 1978 when a small bank of misfits preaching nazism and waving swastikas decided to march through the predominantly Jewish Chicago suburb of Skokie. Suddenly an unimportant group of bigots provoked an important controversy. The outraged community was determined either to prevent the march or to confront the neo-nazis on the parade route. Many Skokie residents were Holocaust survivors and remembered well that only fifty years before, Hitler’s circle had also started as a small band of social misfits. The Jewish community would not ignore an attempt to reintroduce the nazi concept–no matter how feeble the source.

But establishment Jewish leaders counseled Jews to shutter their windows and pay no attention. And a Jewish attorney from the American Civil Liberties Union rose reluctantly to champion the neo-nazis’ right to freedom of expression–over the survivors’ right to be left alone. In covering the issue as a young journalist and reacting to the crisis as a Jew and the son of Holocaust survivors, he was confused by the response of Jewish leaders.

To prepare for a Chicago Reader interview with the Jewish ACLU attorney representing the neo-nazis, he spoke with Jewish scholar Rabbi Byron Sherwin. He told Edwin Black there were many enigmas about the Jewish response to nazism, one of which was a long-rumored arrangement between the Third Reich and the Zionist Organization involving the transfer of German Jewish assets to Palestine. He added that little was known about the arrangement, if it indeed existed.

Author Edwin Black

Edwin Black couldn’t believe what he had heard. The possibility of a Zionist-nazi arrangement for the sake of Israel was inconceivable for a person of his background.  His mother, as a girl, had been pushed by her mother through the vent of a boxcar on the way to the Treblinka death camp. She was shot by nazi soldiers and buried in a shallow mass grave.  His father had stepped out of line during a long march to a destiny with death. While hiding in the woods, he came upon a leg protruding from the snow. This was his mother.

Together, by night and by courage, these two Polish teenagers survived in the forest for two years. When the war was over, they cautiously emerged from the woods believing that nearly all Jews may have been exterminated–except them. The question for them was whether there was still any use being “Jewish.” And yet–believing themselves to be among the last of their people–they decided to live on, as Jews, and never forget.

Quickly, his parents learned that others had survived, although almost none from their families. They resettled in the United States.

Edwin Black was born in Chicago, raised in Jewish neighborhoods, and his parents tried never to speak of their experience. Like the other children of Holocaust survivors, his life was overshadowed by his family’s tragedy. And, like other Jews, he saw the State of Israel as the salvation and redemption of the remnant of the Jewish people.  He had spent time on a kibbutz and returned to Israel several times after that. For years, he considered emigrating to Israel. The very meaning of Israel was a deep motivation in his life.

Yet there were incongruities he could never understand. Everywhere he looked in Israel, he saw German equipment. The icons of nazi commerce– Mercedes, Grundig, Siemens, Krupp–were thriving in the Jewish State, even as the ban on Wagner’s music was strictly enforced. And so many families were German Jews who had come to Israel during the Hitler era. For a year, he filed Rabbi Sherwin’s rumor in a mental box of imponderables. He had said many times that the most important rule in approaching the Holocaust is that nothing makes sense. And yet  he needed to make sense out of it.  If  he could, then perhaps there was a reason his mother and father had lived, while six million had died.

Working through the staff and resources of Spertus College of Judaica, he was able to obtain some rare Hebrew and German materials that documented in skeletal form that the arrangement indeed existed. After a great deal of personal anguish, he made his decision.

Indigenous Women Suffering From Zionist Bulldozing of Home in Modern Day Palestinian Terror-Tory

When he told his parents, his mother threatened to disown him and my father threatened to personally strangle him if he dared lend any credence to the notion of nazi-Zionist cooperation. This was done against a background of rising anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli attempts to somehow link the nazi regime with Zionists.

When he later showed his parents a hundred-page summary of his proposed book, his mother cried and said, “now I understand what I could never understand. Write the book.”

His father, who fought in the war as a Zionist Betar partisan, also gave him his blessing with the simple words: “Go write the book.”

His agent said he thought there was only one editor with the stamina to take on this book. That man was Edward T. Chase, editor-in-chief of new York Times Books, a man with preeminent credentials in WWII and Holocaust books.

Chase read the proposal and said yes.

He spent the next several years traveling through Germany, Israel, England, and the United States, locating forgotten files in archives, scouring newspapers of the era, interviewing principals, and surveying government papers. Millions of microfilm frames of captured nazi documents had never been analyzed. Boxes of boycott papers had never been organized. Worse, he found that little had been written about Hitler’s first year–1933.

For months, the information confounded Edwin Black;  nothing made sense. There were so many contradictions; nazis promoting Jewish nationalism. American Jewish leaders refusing even to criticize the Third Reich. Principal players who said one thing in public and did the opposite in private. Everything was upside down. And historians of the period told me they were equally confused about what had really occurred.

Finally Edwin Black was able to piece the information together and reconstruct events.

To do so, he had to clear his mind of preconceived notions and stare at the situation through the eyes of those who lived through it. And yet, after all the researching and reading and writing,his intense inner attachment to the Zionist concept and Jewish nationalism and the State of Israel only deepened. That’s because he had finally made sense of it. And anyone who does will understand Zionism for what it is: a national movement, with the rights and wrongs, the ethics and expediencies, found in any other national movement.

The Jews were the first to recognize the Hitler threat and the first to react to that threat.

The fact they were foiled by their own disunity merely puts them in the company of all mankind.

  • Who did not confront the Hitler menace with indecision?

  • Who did not seal pacts of expediency with the Third Reich?

The Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church, and the Supreme Moslem Council all endorsed the Hitler regime. The United States, England, France, Italy, Russia, Argentina, Japan, Ireland, Poland, and dozens of other nations all signed friendship and trade treaties and knowingly contributed to German economic and military recovery. The international banking and commercial community–no less than the Zionists–saw Germany as indispensable to its salvation. The Zionists were indeed in the company of all mankind–with this exception: The Jews were the only ones with a gun to their heads.

Hitler was not unique; he was organized. But among Hitler’s enemies, none were organized–except the Zionists. The world recognized the Hitler threat and hoped it would not arrive. The Zionists recognized the Hitler threat and always expected it. The events of the Hitler era and the Transfer Agreement were ultimately determined by those factors.

Edwin Black ’s belief in the Jewish people, in American Jewish organizations, in Zionism, and in the State of Israel and its founding mothers and fathers was never shaken. Those who sense outrage or anger in his words are hearing but the echo of their agony.

For More Information Visit Official Transfer Agreement Web Site >>>

EXTRA!  EXTRA!  READ ALL ABOUT IT

Holocaust, Hate Speech & Were the Germans so Stupid?


YouTube – Veterans Today –

Suppressing free and open discussion on any subject is as bad as telling lies, and knowingly suppressing the truth is the biggest lie of all, because it is based, not on a mistake or a genuine error, but on a deliberate intention to deceive. Having been tortured, Rudolf Höss, who was the commander of Auschwitz from 1940 to 1943, almost certainly lied to save the lives of his wife and children. Even if torture and duress cannot be proven, the overwhelming reason for recognizing the utter falsity of the Höss confession is that the gassing method he described was not scientifically plausible. Yet Höss’s conviction has stood, by inference, as a testament to the cruelty of Germans in general, since he was tried at Nuremberg, in 1947, and subsequently hanged on April 16th, 1947, in Poland. With great respect for those who have tried—though harassed, punished, fined, imprisoned and otherwise abused—to tell it like it really was: Arthur R. Butz, Robert Faurisson, Paul Grubach, Gerd Honsik, David Irving, Kevin Käther, Nicholas Kollerstrom, Fred Leuchter, Horst Mahler, Ingrid Rimland, Germar Rudolf, Bradley Smith, Sylvia Stolz, Fredrick Töbin, Ernst Zündel and many others.

Jews Zionism and the Stupidity of Bigotry

NOVANEWS
 

What would Dr. Martin Luther King say about the plight of the indigenous Palestinian peoples and the political imperial movement of Zionism?

Beneath the Spin

by Eric L. Wattree

I guess I’m going to have to retrace my steps, yet again.  Last week I reprise an article on Zionism “Maybe I’m Dumb, but Could Somebody Please Tell Me the Difference Between Zionism and Racism?“.

Due to a response to the article by a young Black man the first time it ran, I found it necessary to write a follow-up article the following week. That seems to be necessary once again.

I try to avoid addressing the same issue in consecutive columns – that’s my only defense against my natural tendency to be tedious and predictable. But this past weekend a young man, let’s call him Rob, came up to me and said, “Brother, I got to give you props – you really stuck it to those damn Jews last week.” As soon as the words came out of his mouth I knew I had to clarify my message by revisiting the issue of Zionism.

I didn’t have the time, at that moment, to stand there in front of the store and explain to the young man that my article wasn’t against Jews, but on the other hand, I wanted to make sure that he understood the distinction between hating a philosophy, and hating a people. So I asked the young man to be sure to pickup the following week’s paper because I was going to write an article especially, and specifically, for him. So Rob, as promised, this one’s for you – and I sincerely hope that God gives me the skill to make my point.

Rob, while my last article had to do with a segment of Judaism, it wasn’t intended as a diatribe against Jews. I’m not against Jews, or any other group of people. I’m against various behaviors.

It would be a pity to go through the pain and suffering that Black people have experience in America and not come out the other end with at least some measure of wisdom. One would think that we would have learned through the blood, sweat, and tears that we’ve shed, that trying to paint any group of people with the same broad brush, whether it’s to say that they’re all good, or they’re all bad, is not only the height of stupidity, but is the very mindset that has caused Black people so much misery here in America.

How can I claim to detest racism, only to turn around an embrace that very same ignorant philosophy?

No, I’m not against Jews, I’m against the injustice of Zionism – a philosophy which dictates that one group of people are entitled to the land of another by virtue of their religious beliefs alone. But while I argue passionately that Zionism is a gross and unjust philosophy, I always keep in mind that all Jews are not Zionists. In fact, many Jews are more adamantly opposed to Zionism than non-Jews.

It’s important to recognize that fact, because efficient thought requires that we always recognize subtle distinctions. While knowledge is power, knowledge can only yield its power when combined with the wisdom of truth. Evident of that is the fact that one of the most prolific problems that we have in this vast world filled with knowledge, is our tendency to circumvent that knowledge through thinking with our brain stems.

Instead using our higher cognitive abilities and taking the time to be precise in our thinking, we find it easier to lob preconceived generalizations at every problem – and more often than not, those generalizations cater to the very darkest side of our nature. Look at what we’re doing with our knowledge in the Middle East.

Instead of using that knowledge to enhance the quality of life for all of humanity, we’re using it to spread death and destruction around the entire world.

We’ve got to learn to stop thinking in terms of Black and White, Jew and Gentile, or whether a person is Gay or Straight. As long as we think in those terms and continue to antagonize one another, we sabotage every opportunity to form coalitions to fight for our common good. That’s why people like Bush, Cheney, and much of the GOP crowd thrive in a hostile environment.

They love keeping us ignorant, because ignorance keeps us divided, and that very division allow them to step in and conquer all of our hopes and dreams as a people. It is a must, therefore, that we develop the wisdom to understand that there are only two kinds of people in this world – good people, and bad people.

Now, I’m not suggesting that Black people forget their history and engage in a rousing chorus of Kumbaya, that would be fool hearty. But it behooves Black people to not only understand, but remember, that while malevolent White men did indeed place us in shackles, it was malevolent Black men who made us available to be shackled.

We must also recognize that we commit a gross injustice by forgetting the sacrifice, and the families, of the thousands of White men of good character who gave their lives to unlock those shackles.

So while we witness the horror and atrocities that the state of Israel is committing against the Palestinian people and we lean toward condemning all Jews, we must keep in mind men like Joel Elias Spingarn, also a Jew, and a prominent literary figure of his time.

He not only gave great support to the Harlem Renaissance, but helped W.E.B. DuBois to establish the NAACP as a driving force for change in America. Spingarn also established the Spingarn Medal in 1913 – and to this day it’s awarded annually for Excellence in African American Achievement. So as we’re formulating our opinions about Jews, we should remember this man and many others who made great contributions to the African American people.

Spingarn was Chairman of the Board of the NAACP from 1913 until his death in 1939. We should also keep in mind that during that period the NAACP board was predominantly Jewish – W.E.B. DuBois was the only Black man on the Board of Directors. In fact, the NAACP didn’t elect its first Black president until 1975. Think about that.

But it’s become less than politically correct to bring up issues such as these – probably because many of us are afraid of becoming associated with Black opportunist, turncoats, and White apologists like Clarence Thomas, Alan Keyes, Larry Elder, and the like. But it’s important that we keep these facts in mind and pass them down as part of our history.

Facts such as these represent valuable knowledge to our youth. It’s a source of knowledge to young people that says – as the three misguided Black men mentioned above clearly atest – everybody that looks like you is not your brother, and conversely, everybody that doesn’t look like you is not your enemy.

That’s an invaluable lesson, not only for Black people, but for all of America, because we will never truly overcome until all people of good faith come together as a coalition – and that will never happen until we begin to recognize that true brotherhood is not of the skin, but of the soul.