HOLOCAUST DENIAL LIES AT THE CENTRE OF MUCH REACTION TODAY…ESPECIALLY ON THE “LEFT”

by Felix Quigley

April 23, 2009

Joshua Rosenburg has drawn attention to a recent article by Carl Savich which deals with the antics of a very notorious character (His name is Marko Attila Hoare) and associate of Oliver Kamm of the Times of London, also a close associate of the equally notorious Harry´s Place website. We deal once again with this man going under the very peculiar name, let me repeat it for effect, in case our readers are unfamiliar…Marko Attila Hoare !

This study is all the more important because it deals with aspects of Holocaust Denial.

[Begin study of Marko Attila Hoare here]

British Marxist, anti-Serbian nutjob & former Hague ICTY/NATO employee, Marko Attila Hoare and the Monty Python “Heinrich Himmler” sketch faux pas.

Hoare  is again proven an egregious liar about Alija Izetbegovic’s resurrected Bosnian Muslim Nazi “Handschar” [aka “Handzar”] division in this great article by Serbian-American historian, Carl Savich.

“Fact versus Delusional Fantasy: The Bosnian Muslim Government Reformed the Nazi SS Division Handzar”
http://serbianna.com/blogs/savich/?p=518
April 19, 2009 – 12:58 pm
Marko Attila Hoare rejects and suppresses this factual image of Bosnian history in favor of a fantasy or delusional image from a television comedy. The real Heinrich Himmler (Heimlich Bimmler) reviewing the real or “historical” Bosnian Muslim Nazi SS Division Handzar, 1943.

Did the Bosnian Muslim Army and Government reform or recreate the infamous Nazi SS Division Handzar or not? Based on Martko Attila Hoare’s response to my article, Hoare now concedes that, indeed, there was a formation in the Bosnian Muslim Army termed the “Handzar Division”.

Let me reiterate that. Hoare admitted that the Bosnian Muslim Government did indeed reform the Handzar Nazi SS Division of World War II. When you cut through and deconstruct all the indeologically-driven claptrap, innuendo, ad hominen, personal attacks, this is the conclusion that he reaches.

Hoare is so caught up in his own arrogance and conceit that he does not even notice that he admitted this fact.

The issue or question is and always was: Did the Bosnian Muslim Government have a unit in its ranks known as the Handzar Division? Hoare’s reply is: Yes.

 

Marko Attila Hoare used this fantasy image to illustrate his article on the reformed Bosnian Muslim Handzar Nazi SS Division. Michael Palin is shown as Heimlich Bimmler (Heinrich Himmler), John Cleese as Mr. Hilter (Adolf Hitler), and Graham Chapman as Ron Vibbentrop (Joachim von Ribbentrop), from a 1970 episode of Monty Python’s Flying Circus. Reality is rejected over delusional fantasy constructs.

Hoare, nevertheless, convinces himself that he was “vindicated” in denying the existence of the reformed Handzar Division. How does he do this? His rebuttal consists of challenging the strength of the reformed Handzar Division. Now that he admits that it existed, he now challenges the size of the formation. His argument is:  The reformed Handzar Division did exist, as you claimed, but it was very small. It was a little bitty Nazi SS Division, not a big bad full-sized Nazi SS Division!

monty_python_hitler_in_england

The Holocaust as joke? Michael Palin as Heimlich Bimmler (Heinrich Himmler) in a 1970 comedy sketch. Isn’t Hoare a Holocaust denier? Fact: Bosnian Muslims, Albanian Muslims, and Croats played a role in the real Holocaust.

But is this a valid argument? Is someone pregnant or not? Can you be pregnant by degree? Is someone dead or not? Can you be only dead to a small degree? Did the Bosnian Muslim Army recreate the Handzar Division or not? This requires a simple yes or no answer. What Hoare initially challenged and questioned was the existence of the division. To be sure, he hedged his bets and cheated by conceding that the division might exist “conceivably” but that its number was small in size.

Hoare hedged his bets this way: “[I]t is conceivable that there really was a handful of Muslim zealots who, during the recent war, fought on the Bosnian side and grandiloquently named themselves the ‘Handžar Division’ after this historic unit.”

Hoare, in essence, denied that the division existed at all. This was the gist of his article. Now he admits and concedes that it, in fact, existed. Now he argues that the unit or formation was a small one. It is hard to pinpoint exactly what he claimed because he constantly changes his arguments and contentions.

Fact versus delusional fantasy? This is a factual image of the real Henrich Himmler (Heimlich Bimmler) with the real Bosnian Muslim Nazi SS Division Hnadzar which Hoare has suppressed and repressed. Delusional fantasy is more reassuring than factual reality.

A fair characterization of his initial argument was that there was no evidence for the reformation of the Handzar Division. The eyewitness account of military analyst and journalist Robert Fox was deemed not credible. Hoare disingenuously hedged his argument by claiming that “conceivably” it could have existed. The way to translate this argument is:  No, the Handzar Division was not reformed. But, nevertheless, it is possible it may have been reformed. Of course, this is nonsensical and absurd.
 
Hoare then concluded: “Monty Python is a much better source for accurate historical information than Neil Clark and his comrades.”

So was the Handzar Division reformed or not? In his rebuttal to my article, Hoare now admits that the Handzar Division was reformed. He again hedges his bets by claiming this time that it was a small unit formed by “zealots”. But, again, the size of the unit or formation was never the question or issue. If there was a small unit or formation in the U.S. Army or British Army termed the “Adolf Hitler Regiment” or “Das Reich Division”, would it be relevant or material that the unit in question was only made up of “a handful” of “zealots”? Now that the existence of the unit is accepted and acknowledged, the issue shifts to the size of the unit, which is unknown.

Hoare concluded:  “It would seem that the ‘Handžar Division’,  confidently described as numbering ‘about 6,000 troops’ by our friend, does indeed turn out to be a bit smaller when the available evidence is examined closely.”

Hoare here mischaracterized Fox’s original statement by quoting my  estimate of the strength of the unit. Fox stated that UN peacekeeping “officers” had told him that the reformed “Handzar Division” was “up to 6,000-strong.” Fox emphazied that the strength of the unit was an approximation or estimate made by UN observers. Fox refers to the formation as a “unit” and as an element of the Bosnian army. Hoare ignores this explicit language and now argues that Fox claimed that the reformed unit consisted of “about 6,000 troops”.  But nowhere does Fox state that the unit was made up of 6,000 troops. The phrase “up to 6,000-strong” could encompass any number from one member to 6,000 members. Moreover, Hoare ignored that fact that Fox referred to the formation as a “unit” in his report leaving the actual size open to debate. Fox referred to the members of the unit as “Handzars” and as “[h]ardline elements of the Bosnian army, like Handzar.” Fox wrote that the formation was a “unit” of the Bosnian army similar to other units: “The Handzars are working closely with other units around Fojnica. ” But even at 6,000 men, it would only have ranked as a regiment or brigade, which usually consist of up to 5,000 men, not a division, which is generally accepted as a formation of 10,000 men or more.  In short, the focus or emphasis of the Fox report was the existence of the unit, not the size, on which issue Fox only proffered a potential maximum figure that was based on a UN estimate.

Finally, Hoare rejected Fox’s 1993 news report from the London Daily Telegraph out of hand, but this was not done by the Republican Policy Committee of the United States Senate, which cited Fox’s report as credible and accurate. In a January 16, 1997 report, the Committee, chaired at the time by U.S. Senator Larry E. Craig, Republican from Idaho, noted that  “there exists another group known as the Handzar (’dagger’ or ’scimitar’) Division” and quoted from Fox’s report. Thus, members of the U.S. Senate, tasked with safeguarding the lives of U.S. troops, found Fox’s report to be factual, credible, and accurate. Only Marko Attila Hoare questioned the veracity and accuracy of the Fox report. Absurdly, the Bosnian Muslim Government or Army never denied the existence of the reformed “Handzar Division”. Only Hoare has done this. At the war crimes trials of Bosnian Muslim military commanders at the ICTY, the existence of the “Handzar Division” as part of the Bosnian Muslim Army is openly acknowledged and detailed.

The translation is: The Bosnian Muslim Government of Alija Izetbegovic reformed the Nazi SS Division Handzar during the 1992-1995 civil war. This is the only logical conclusion when one cuts through all of Hoare’s labels and propagandistic nomenclature.

Hoare uses a bevy of labels to do the thinking for him: “Serb-nationalists” (yes, with a hyphen!), “Milosevic supporters” (at least Hoare gets the correct pronunciation of his name with the correct Serbo-Croat form of his name), “Islamofascist” (no hyphen, a neologism popular after 9-11), “members of a US-based circle of Milosevic supporters and Srebrenica deniers” (an analogy with Holocaust deniers), “Great Serbia” (a propaganda term coined by Austria-Hungary before World War I), “ex-Maoist” (is that a good or a bad thing?), “Milosevic-supporting, Srebrenica-denying website” (hyphenated now, denoting an activity), “all good Chomskyites” (are there such people as “Chomskyites” out there?), “Serb nationalists and their supporters” (no hyphen;  do “Serb nationalists” have supporters?), “Serb nationalists and their fellow travellers”  (didn’t this term go out with the Joseph McCarthy Communist Witch Hunts during the 1950s Red Scare?), and “the Great Serbia supporters”.

How can one explain this plethora of labels? Why does Hoare use such preposterous and risible labels? We use labels to preclude thought or thinking. Labels are a shortcut to thinking and intellectual debate or discusiion. In fact, labels are meant to preclude or prevent any thought at all. This is why Hoare uses labels. They are mindless and senseless. Why use them then? In essence, Hoare does not want to debate or discuss these issues rationally or logically. He thus engages in the use of labels, what is termed “name calling” in propaganda analysis.  In propaganda, we use “pulpit words” or “glittering words” to describe ourselves and our own actions and the opposite words to describe our opponents. In short, Hoare wants to preclude any thought or debate. This is why he resorts to such propagandistic words. There is no thought or thinking going on, no discussion or debate or dialectic. There is only a stream of pre-selected labels or prejudiced or loaded words. It is like when Polonius asked Hamlet what he was reading:  “Polonius: What do you read, my lord? Hamlet: Words, words, words.”

The case is closed. As Detective Steve McGarrett would say to Detective Danny Williams, “Book ‘em, Danno!”

[end study of Marko Attila Hoare here]

The great strength of this study is that it shows that Marko Attila Hoare is responsible for a great revision of history, which is essentially what he does when he makes a joke about an aspect of the Holocaust in the Balkans.

Let us be very clear here. The Handzar division was a Nazi SS Division, and was created out of the forces of Islam in the Balkans.

To deny that is bad, but to deny as Hoare does that that was recreated by Izetbegovic is the most dangerous of all.

Because if you do that then you are saying that the study by Christopher Simpson in “Blowback” and in all the studies of the actions and words of Ahmadinejad in the present are of no relevance.

That another Holocaust is not possible!

That is the great fact that all on this British Imperialist Labourist wing surrounding Kamm, Harry´s Place, the British Media in total except for one noted journalist Eve Ann Prentice, worked might and main to keep hidden during the 90s and indeed since to this very day!

And that is where the Savich claim about Marko Attila Hoare Holocaust Denial is located. They are all guilty of this.

We on 4international have also met Jewish people who did not want to know about this aspect of history, or like Bill Narvey of Israpundit claimed that it had no relevance to today.

We also think that at the centre of all of the Fascist Leftist posturing of today on Israel lies a deep form of Holocaust Denial.

Behind the antics of people like Sinead Cusack now canvassing for her Israel hating son today in Ireland and wider is another form of truth denial, because what is denied is the situation of the Shoah which made it imperative to found Israel.

In fact all attacks that I see being made on Israel today, whether it is in Fatah and Abbas, in Hamas, in Hizbullah, or Iran…all are forms of Holocaust Denial.

There is another distortion which I would like our readers to understand acutely.

It was Leon Trotsky who emerged in the 1930s as the greatest advocate for Jewish nationalism, which he promoted because he had made a deep study of Fascism, and saw the great danger to the Jews from the Nazis.

For some reason the Lefts and “Trotskyists” have also hidden this aspect of history.

And in a strange way these things have come back together again in the grave danger to the Jews of Israel and all the Jews in the Diaspora from a combination of Fascist Islam and Fascist US Foreign policy (of Bush and Obama)

While we on 4international alone continue to fight to defend the Jews of Israel and insist that Israel has no choice but to wage war on the Iranian Nuclear agenda.

We do not wish this. But like Trotsky in the 1930s we are realistic and we try to emulate the realism of Trotsky re 1930s Fascism in the situation of today.

The essence of Hoare, and essentially also of Harry´s Place, Nick Cohen, Maggie O´Kane et al, in the following

The reformed Handzar Division did exist, as you claimed, but it was very small. It was a little bitty Nazi SS Division, not a big bad full-sized Nazi SS Division!

In their analysis of Marko Attila Hoare, in their insisting on his attempts of making a joke out of the Holocaust in the Balkans showing him as a real danger to Jewish people, Joshua and Carl have brought us a great deal further forward.

ISRAEL WILL ATTACK IRAN AND MUST BE SUPPORTED BY SOCIALISTS

by Felix Quigley

April 21, 2009

 

The clock is now ticking down to war between Israel and Iran, with the US Government lining up with Iran, that is with the Iranian Fascist regime, and everything about the US Fascists, Nazis and Jew Haters, and their alliance with their pet babies the Iranian Fascists right out in the open.

This is now totally unavoidable, as surely as night follows day.

This is what we on 4international have said consistently for at least 2 years. We base our analysis on a number of things.

1. That the Jews are indeed a real nation

2. That Islam is antisemitic to the core. The real essence of the Arab rulers in the Arab League and all those Islamist countries in the UN is to prevent Infidels having a base in THEIR lands.

3. The Mullahs of Iran are motivated by Jew Hatred just as much as were the German Nazis

4. In fact during the Holocaust there was at every level close relations between Islam and the German Nazis. That is fact, hidden but easily proven.

The key to the whole situation is the US Government and how the US elite and to some extent the EU elite is lining up with Islam.

The reason for this is extremely simple and if you are a Trotskyist just a little obvious. They both seek a union together against the threatened socialist revolution.

The following report from DEBKAfile will have to be digested with some urgency:

[Begin DEBKAfile report here]

dated April 21, 2009

DEBKAfile‘s military sources cite some Western intelligence and nuclear weapons experts as predicting that Iran could turn out nuclear weapons some time in the next 12 months.

This estimate is based on Tehran’s announcement that 7,000 centrifuges are in operation to enrich uranium. If all those machines were to work at top speed day and night, seven days a week, they could produce enough weapons-grade uranium to build a bomb in 60 days, say some intelligence sources. According to American experts, given the current rate of the program’s development, Iran will be in a position to manufacture as many as 60 nuclear bombs and warheads in 12 to 18 months.

This judgment was confirmed by Israel’s military intelligence (AMAN) chief, Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin in his latest briefing to the cabinet Monday, April 20. He reported that Iran is going all-out for enriched uranium from overseas to shorten the process.

Japanese sources recently reported that a North Korean boat shipped a large quantity to Iran earlier this year. According to the big-circulation The Nikkei, the North Korean vessel’s hold carried a secret cargo of uranium highly-enriched to 50-60 percent. The ship set out for Iran in December, moving moved at a leisurely pace so as not to call attention from Western spy satellites, surveillance vessels and warships. Earlier this year, the illegal consignment was dropped at an Iranian port for transport to a facility near Tehran, according to the Japanese paper.

Yadlin noted that extreme economic crisis has not delayed Tehran’s headlong nuclear progress or curtailed its designs on other Middle East countries – Hizballah’s subversive activities in Egypt are not a lone instance. Inflation is officially put at 30 percent but is probably closer to 50 percent, while unemployment is deepening, yet Tehran upped the 2009 appropriation for its nuclear program by 15 percent.

Rather than translating the crisis into leverage for persuading Iran to abandon its nuclear objectives, the Israeli intelligence chief noted that the Obama administration has opened the door to dialogue with all the extremists of the Middle East, including Iran, albeit “with open eyes.”

Iran, for its part, is accelerating its nuclear program, taking full advantage of the undercover communications with Washington which are aimed at gaining Tehran’s cooperation for the US war effort in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

from

 

(Iran could produce first nuke

 in 60 days with 7,000

centrifuges  working 24/7

DEBKAfile Special Report

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=6035

 

If as we on 4international believe that the Jews are a nation, and have been for thousands of years, then a number of things follow

1. There is no alternative. Israel must make war on the Mullahs, and specifically the Nuclear Bomb making of the Mullahs

2. The Mullahs are not an ordinary opponent, they are an opponent which denies the Holocaust. Logically that means that they have a new Holocaust of the Jews in mind

3. Israel will attack. That is the historical role of Netanyahu and his colleague Lieberman

4. Because without that attack the Jewish nation is as good as dead.

And that is what is spelled out in the Debka report above and is the esence of the position of 4international. Israel must act! Israel must be supported by all socialists and progressive peoples. That support given the power of antisemitism has to be fought for.

UNION OF JEWISH STUDENTS STRIKE BLOW AGAINST IRANIAN MULLAHS AND AHMADINEJAD

by Felix Quigley

April 20, 2009]

The United Nations is now running an antisemitic conference in Geneva and a group of  courageous Jewish students has protested from within the conference itself. The following is the Guardian report which deals with some of the issues involved in this courageous and unprecedented protest which has taken the whole UN Establishment by total surprize.

[Begin Guardian report here]

from http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/20/un-conference-boycott-ahmadinejad

Dozens of diplomats, including Britain’s UN ambassador in Geneva, walked out of a speech by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad this afternoon when the Iranian president accused Israel of being “a totally racist” regime.

The address at a UN conference on racism in Geneva was disrupted by protesters who heckled Ahmadinejad after he branded Israel a “cruel and oppressive racist regime”. He said the state of Israel was created “on the pretext of Jewish suffering” from the second world war.

Peter Gooderham, the UK ambassador to the UN in Geneva, walked out along with representatives from France, Spain and several other European countries. One shook his fist at the Iranian president as he left. The delegates said they planned to return to the session as soon as Ahmadinejad had finished speaking.

(Let there be no confusion here. Brown and the British Labourists are in favour of this antisemitic UN Conference, it is just that they want to save some face by walking out on Obama. This is typical British Labourist antisemitism. The correct thing to do was to stay totally clear of this conference. Ahmadinejad is not the only antisemite here. What happens when groups such as Human Rights Watch begin to speak and to operate their brand of antisemitism)

European countries had been split over whether to attend amid fears Ahmadinejad and other delegates could ignite a new row over the Holocaust or Israel’s right to exist.

Germany, Poland and the Netherlands were joining a boycott led by the US and Israel. France and Britain attended but promised to walk out of the conference if offensive language was used at the podium.

The protesters leapt to their feet and shouted “racist” in French at Ahmadinejad when he made his remarks about the state of Israel.

Some wore clown wigs and one, who was positioned among the delegates, managed to run to within 10 yards of the Iranian president before throwing a soft red object, hitting the podium and interrupting his speech. The protester was ushered out by security.

The protesters said they represented the Union of Jewish Students in France. “We did it because it’s all a farce,” Joelle Jakubowicz said. “You can’t fight racism if you are racist yourself.”

France’s foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, speaking before Ahmadinejad’s speech, said “we will not tolerate any blunder or provocation” from Ahmadinejad, who has referred to the Holocaust as a myth and called for Israel to be “wiped off the pages of history”.

If Ahmadinejad “proffers any racist or antisemitic accusations we will leave the hall immediately”, Kouchner said.

(The position of Kouchner is to be welcomed but of course if he really was in support of Jews against antisemitism he would not be present in the conference at all)

The Iranian president, the only head of state at the conference, is due to give a press conference today, which coincides with the start of Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Day.

The Foreign Office said in a statement, also released before the speech: “The United Kingdom has argued strongly for the concluding document to contain adequate language on Holocaust remembrance and combating antisemitism. We will find unacceptable any attempt to use the Durban process to trivialise or deny the Holocaust, or to renegotiate agreements on the fight against antisemitism.”

(This is rank hypocricy from the British antisemites. They should not be present at all)

A flurry of late-night telephone calls between European foreign ministries failed to salvage what British officials hoped would be a common European position, amid growing unease about what Ahmadinejad would say and fears that a draft text from the UN anti-racism conference would single out Israel and call for bans on the freedom to express criticism of religion.

(It is obvious what has happened. The British want the antisemitism to go ahead but somehow they want to sanatize Ahmadinejad. Wrong option! Cannot be done! The whole UN conference is a stinking cesspit of antisemitism)

Israel today announced it was recalling its ambassador to Switzerland for consultations. Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, said that while Israel would be commemorating 6 million Jews killed by the Nazis, “in Switzerland the guest of honour is a racist and a Holocaust denier who doesn’t conceal his intention to wipe Israel off the face of this Earth”.

The US said on Saturday that it would not be attending today’s UN conference because of what Washington said was “objectionable” language in a draft statement. The Geneva meeting is known as the Durban Review Conference because it is intended to follow up a world conference against racism held in the South African city eight years ago, when the US and Israel walked out in anger at attempts to equate Zionism with racism.

(The position of Obama is the most interesting. Obama is an enemy of Israel and is an antisemite without any shadow of a douubt. The whole orientation of the US Government and ruling elite is to join forces with Islam against the demands of workers who do not wish to be driven into barbaric poverty by the crisis in capitalism. Antisemitism is the tool of the US elite in this period. What applies to Britain applies even more to these US bigots. Obama fears the American people will see that he is pro Islam and pro Muslim, may even be a Muslim himself, and above all hates Israel. That is the only reason the US is not at the conference since they have been there from the beginning of the preparations for the conference)

One person not boycotting the conference was the film star Jon Voight, a staunch supporter of Israel who said he had come to confront Ahmadinejad’s position on the Holocaust. Voight told the Guardian: “The fox is in charge of the hen house here. This is supposed to be about human rights, but hidden under that banner is antisemitism. Someone has to respond to it.”

(Voight is a stupid idiot. Pay no attention to what this stupido says or thinks. He is an insult to the courageous Jewish students seen here. Voight you are a complete fool!)

The draft statement for this week’s conference does not single out Israel but formally upholds the 2001 declaration, which does. The UN high commissioner for human rights, Navi Pillay, said she was “shocked and deeply disappointed” by the US boycott. On the Guardian’s Comment is Free website today, Pillay concedes that the 2001 meeting has been “tainted by the antisemitic behaviour of some NGOs on the sidelines”, but she argues that the best way to tackle such issues is to participate in this week’s meeting.

(Wrong Pillay. And you will be forever marked as an enemy of Israel for organizing this conference and giving the likes of Ahmadinejad a platform to spew out his racist Nazi filth)

That position was echoed today by Human Rights Watch. Juliette de Rivero, the group’s Geneva advocacy director, said: “The sad truth is that countries professing to want to avoid a reprise of the contentious 2001 racism conference are now the ones triggering the collapse of a global consensus on the fight against racism.”

(Human Rights Watch, aka the US nazi CIA front organization, must be thoroughly exposed)

British officials say the current draft text is acceptable if “adequate language” is included on the Holocaust and antisemitism, but they are also anxious to retain European solidarity.

(British officials are antisemites)

Ahmadinejad’s speech and press conference will be carefully scrutinised for his tone towards the US after Barack Obama’s recent overtures to Tehran.

(This and the following paragraph is total bullshit. The fact is that the US Government is the friend of the Iranian Fascist Mullahs. They certainly were close friends int he war to destroy Yugoslavia. The US and the British are stirring up antisemitism in the world in order to hold on to the reins of power)

The Iranian president has ruled out compromise on Iran’s nuclear programme, but has occasionally raised hopes of a thaw in US-Iranian relations, as he did yesterday when he insisted that an Iranian-American journalist, sentenced by an Iranian court to eight years in prison on espionage charges, should be guaranteed the full right to defend herself in her appeal. The Iranian government today urged Obama not to comment on the case.

(This is interesting. I think the Iranian Fascists are in crisis because they now are beginning to realize that Israel has the power, expertise and under Netanyahu the discipline and determination to pulverize their evil Nuclear programme. If you doubt it is evil then listen to Ahmadinejad. The man is obsessed with Jews and with Israel, which he calls usually Zionists, same thing actually. So he is beginning like the cowardly rat he is to snuggle up OPENLY to the US Imperialists, to Obama in particular. The great fear now of Ahmadinejad is that he is beginning to sense that this time Israel will break from the US Nazis of Obama and Bush and will fight alone to defend themselves)

 

So to conclude. What these Jewish students have done is just wonderful, better than a million words.

The US and British political elite who have worked together leading and preparing this conference are exposed as the friends of Ahmadinejad.

There is now not only a growing antisemitic movement but also a growing struggle against antisemitism.

Things are only beginning to move. What lies behind much of this is the total bankruptcy of the capitalist economic system and the needs of US and British Imperialism to move to new forms of rule where they will work alongside the Nazi Islamist Fascists to create dictatorships. Somewhere in there, in their scheme of things, rests their promotion of antisemitism.

 

(If you wish to comment on these things write below but if you wish your comment to be private mark it “private” and we will not publish)

BUILDING THE FIGHT AGAINST OBAMA IN SUPPORT OF ISRAEL

by Felix Quigley

April 16, 2009

The time is racing ahead to the point where the proud Jewish people of Israel make a decisive break with the scourge of US Imperialist Government, that imperialist excrescence that has lain on the back of Israel since it was founded in 1948..

And this must be the point where the people of Israel under a new leadership will create a close unity, not with the Jew hating rulers of the US, but with the Jew loving ordinary people of America, the people who remain true tot he great traditions of struggle against the British which created the Republic int the first place.

Racing ahead…with every move now being made by the Obama team who are carrying on in the same way that Bush and Rice did.

After all it was Bush who appointed Robert Gates was it not! So what is the big difference to Obama!

As we pointed out time and again to Ted Belman and his friends on Israpundit and other Jewish sites, the key thing to understand is that these various elites represent the interests of US Big Business and US Power Politics in the world in general.

In the election this was the clear advice given to Belman by Professor Francisco Gil White but Belman did not listen.

The following is the latest statement by this fiend Gates

[Begin quote from DEBKAfile here]

The US defense secretary Robert Gates again voiced extreme objections to an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear sites. Addressing US marines, Wednesday, April 16, he said Iran’s nuclearization can only be stopped by an Iranian decision. “A strike probably would delay Tehran’s nuclear program one to three years, it would unify Iranians, cement their determination to have a nuclear program and also build into the whole country an undying hatred of whoever hits them.”

DEBKAfile‘s military sources take issue with Gates’ assessment. They note that he avoided spelling out the words “nuclear weapon” – as though to blur the fact that this is Iran’s goal. As for his use of “undying hatred,” in the future tense, he may not have noticed that the radical Islamic regime bombards its people night and day with their undying hatred for Israel and calls to “wipe the Jewish state off map.”

The US defense secretary knows very well that if Israel lets Tehran acquire a nuclear bomb capability, it will be Iran’s first target, whether directly or as a shield for its terrorist proxies. Furthermore, no Israeli government can afford to forego three years – and probably more – relieved of the threat of annihilation by a power dedicated to its destruction. Even Gates cannot prophesy the exact consequences of an Israeli strike on Iran, say those sources. The Middle East would certainly be a different place for all its denizens.

from

Gates totally opposes Israeli

strike on Iran

DEBKAfile Special Report

April 16, 2009, 9:30 AM

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=6026

 

We are totally in agreement with DEBKAfile. Note how sensitive Debkafile  is to the issue of language. This is vital.

Gates talks of  “nuclearization”

Debka points out that the word is “nuclear bomb”.

Debka is so correct. If you are a 17 year old boy or girl at the beginning of your life living in Tel Aviv the word is Nuclear Bomb because it is that which the Iranian Fascists are keen to make ready. But make ready for a very specific purpose.

As we say often on this site. Israel does not wish to make war in any shape or form. But mankind has not yet developed a method of defence against enemies who aim to destroy YOU other than war.

The last sentence above by Debka is particularly prescient.

The Israeli state and its people has no alternative. It is not that they wish to strike Iran, it is that if Jews want to continue living then they must.

And Debka is correct. The world of politics will be changed and nobody can predict what that change will mean.

The Islamist Fascists are hated by the ordinary people of Iran, especially by the youth.

Israel will certainly make sure that the people of Iran will know that their beef is not with them, but with their hated rulers.

An Israeli strike against the Mullahs will have the very opposite effect to what Gates says and warns about.

In fact we now know for sure following the support given to Izetbegovic in Bosnia that the US Governments and Iran are on the same side. That is the side of reaction and on the side of Fascism.

Now the clock ticks. The Israeli Government of Netanyahu must be given the support that it needs.

Mass rallies in America and Europe must be organized.

The very beginnings of this process is underway. Read Israpundit and you will find that Ted Belman travelled for 2 hours from Toronto up to the city of London, Ontario, where there was a huge meeting of people who are very supportive of Israel.

What about ther Israel haters of the ISM and Indymedia etc? Can they pack a hall 600 strong? No they certainly can not!

The same response can happen all over America. There will be huge hatred for the Obama team building up in the period ahead as people realize what they are up to. Use the time well. Every day should be made to count.

WAR WITH IRAN IS A TERRIBLE THOUGHT BUT THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE

by Felix Quigley

April 15, 2009

Any person who is sane finds war of any kind abhorrent. Yet the world has NOT created any alternative to war.

When all is said and done if Iran does have a Nuclear Bomb and since it is a Government made up of Holocaust Deniers and of Jew Haters, and since it has threatened to destroy Israel, than that leaves Israel with no choice BUT TO GO TO WAR WITH IRAN

It is not our task to be engaging our readers in fanciful notions.

These are some questions:

Is Iran preparing the Nuclear Bomb?

Would Iran use the Nucelar Bomb against Israel?

What would smaller Nuclear type devices int he hands of groups like Fatah Al Aqsa, Hamas and Hizbullah do to the life and people of Israel.

The normal person in the streets of the cities of the world do not much bother with that question.

But a 17 year old in Tel Aviv, beginning his or her life, may indeed be vitally interested in the answer to that question. Or can they live to see 21 may be another way to ask the question.

So mankind to our great dismay and disappointment has not devised any other method but war.

We may not like it, wish there was another way, that this reality was not so. But it would be foolish not to face reality.

And we wish there was another message to tell the wonderful Jewish people who such a short historical time ago emigrated to Israel to seek solace.

This is a totally existentialist issue for Israelis. This is seen even in the position of Peres. If ever there was a peace dove it was Peres. Yet even Peres does not want to die or for his country to be incinerated.

In the face of this issue all others fade by comparision. If there is no Israel and if 6 millions of Jews along with many Arabs perish in the region what then!

The horror of this makes the normal person say “Oh that is not possible, is it”

And they dismiss it out of their minds. Get on witht he struggles and personal routines of life. But the same thing held “normal” people from understanding what was happening in the lead up to the Holocaust.

Indeed the Holocaust is not a historical event alone. The Holocaust is a reality in today’s politics because antisemitism did not end.

There is NO question that the US and to some extent the EU is in league with Islam. The US to a full and committed extent, first with Bush, now witht he Obama team.

To those who were not so biased this could be seen clearly in the alliances which the US Clinton team was making in the destruction of Yugoslavia, with Tudjman, with Izetbegovic and with Thaci

But people are biased in their thinking and many could not grasp this.

There is no doubt that the historical role which Netanyahu must carry out is the destruction of the Iranian nuclear powers of Jewish destruction.

1. We are now down to the detailed planning of this

2. This is going to transform totally politics in the world.

It is my opinion that the US Government is with the Iranian Islamist Fascists in this and against Israel.

I do not think that the Netanyahu leadership will pull off no matter what pressure is placed on it by the US Pro Iranian Nazis led and promoted by Obama

This is going to transform the world.

The following report from DEBKAfile tends to follow this type of prognosis rather precisely:

[Begin report from DEBKAfile here]

The detailed report compiled by the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) in Washington last month, complete with graphs and diagrams, has been reprinted in thousands of copies in Tehran. It is compulsory reading for its intelligence and Revolutionary Guards personnel because the Study on a Possible Israeli Strike on Iran’s Nuclear Development Facilities concludes that the Jewish state has all the resources necessary for a successful strike.

When asked recently, Adm. Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint US Chiefs of Staff, agreed with this estimate. This week, president Shimon Peres and prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu both said that if diplomacy failed to halt Iran’s nuclear activities, Israel would be left with no option other than the military one. And Tuesday, April 14, the New York Times quoted an Israeli official as saying that Jerusalem would give the Obama administration until late 2009 to stop Iran’s uranium enrichment projects; after that, Israel will be forced to act.

Tehran responded with a complaint to the UN Security Council demanding that Israel be condemned for “its threats against a sovereign state.”

For the past three years, US military and intelligence sources have used attributed and leaked assessments to the American media to emphasize that such an operation is beyond Israel’s capabilities because of the nuclear facilities’ wide distribution across Iran. At best, they maintained, the Israeli Air Force might knock out a few Iranian nuclear installations, but only enough to put Iran’s nuclear drive temporarily on hold.

The CSIS paper refutes this assessment and maintains there is no need to destroy dozens or hundreds of sites; the destruction of seven to nine targets would be enough to cripple the Iranian program, and lists them as follows:

1. Lashkar A’bad, site of secret uranium enrichment plants in the north near the Turkish border.

2. Tehranb, for the central laboratory for developing atomic armaments as well as more uranium enrichment facilities.

3. Arak, in central Iran, where a heavy water plant is under construction to manufacture plutonium for weapons.

4. Isfahan, in central Iran, near which a small research reactor and a cluster of laboratories for uranium enrichment, centrifuges and weapons development, are situated.

5. Natanz, the main center for uranium enrichment.

6. Ardekan, at the southern tip of Iran, where more uranium enrichment facilities are located.

7. Saghand, Iran’s main uranium mining region.

8. Bushehr, on the Persian Gulf shore, Iran’s biggest nuclear reactor built by Russia.

9. Gachin, near the Strait of Hormuz, the site of more uranium mines and enrichment facilities.

Complicated tables set forth an array of technical details showing how many PG bombs Israeli Air Force F16I or F15F bomber-fighter planes can carry, how much fuel is needed to reach their Iranian targets, and at what stage of their return journey they would need to refuel.

This think tank finds Israel has enough aircraft as well as the necessary intelligence and electronic resources for the task – contrary to previous estimates.

The authors propose three attack routes for a potential Israeli operation against Iran: an eastern route over Saudi Arabia; a central route over Iraq, and a northern route over Turkey, Syria and northern Iraqi Kurdistan. They point to the third as Israel’s best option in view of the superiority of its electronic warfare (EW) capabilities.

This is the first time a detailed and accurate description of these capabilities, and a description of how they were put to use in the Israeli raid on the North Korean-built plutonium reactor in Dar az-Zawr, Syria, on September, 2007, has ever been published.

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1386

If you wish to comment do so below. If you wish your comment to be private mark PRIVATE at the top and it will not be published. But do act!

THE NEW YORK TIMES DOES SPEAK FOR THE US GOVERNMENT AND RULERS

by Felix Quigley

April 15, 2009

This is an article published by The New York Times.

I feel this is an important article for many reasons. Firstly that it is the “New York Times”, that is an organization very much at the heart of the aims and practices of US Imperialism.

So for example in the destruction of Yugoslavia it was the “New York Times” which printed all of those lies against the Serbs.

I will not say very much about the article. Our readers are now well versed in the methodology of lies, that is statements made not backed up by evidence, or as is most often the case backed up by assertions of biased and partisan people.

It is all on view in the following:

[Begin extract from New York Times here]

Israel on trial
George Bisharat, The New York Times, Apr 4, 2009

This article was originally published by The New York Times and is republished with the author’s permission.

A Palestinian child cries outside of a destroyed building following an Israeli air strike in Gaza. (Maan Images)

Chilling testimony by Israeli soldiers substantiates charges that Israel’s Gaza Strip assault entailed grave violations of international law.

The emergence of a predominantly right-wing, nationalist government in Israel suggests that there may be more violations to come. Hamas’s indiscriminate rocket attacks on Israeli civilians also constituted war crimes, but do not excuse Israel’s transgressions.

(I cannot do it here but obviously we would like to investigate “Maan Images” a little more.)

(The following sentence is interesting. It is not that Israel disputes some of this, it is that Israel disputes all of it)

While Israel disputes some of the soldiers’ accounts, the evidence suggests that Israel committed the following six offenses:

• Violating its duty to protect the civilian population of the Gaza Strip. Despite Israel’s 2005 “disengagement” from Gaza, the territory remains occupied. Israel unleashed military firepower against a people it is legally bound to protect.
  
• Imposing collective punishment in the form of a blockade, in violation of Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. In June 2007, after Hamas took power in the Gaza Strip, Israel imposed suffocating restrictions on trade and movement. The blockade – an act of war in customary international law – has helped plunge families into poverty, children into malnutrition, and patients denied access to medical treatment into their graves. People in Gaza thus faced Israel’s winter onslaught in particularly weakened conditions.
  
• Deliberately attacking civilian targets. The laws of war permit attacking a civilian object only when it is making an effective contribution to military action and a definite military advantage is gained by its destruction. Yet an Israeli general, Dan Harel, said, “We are hitting not only terrorists and launchers, but also the whole Hamas government and all its wings.” An Israeli military spokeswoman, Maj. Avital Leibovich, avowed that “anything affiliated with Hamas is a legitimate target.”
  

  	Related Stories
  	Netanyahu takes over The crimes we witnessed in Gaza Talking one way, walking the other Written proof Palestinian views on Netanyahu and peace A hypocritical ‘fear’ of Gaza

  Israeli fire destroyed or damaged mosques, hospitals, factories, schools, a key sewage plant, institutions like the parliament, the main ministries, the central prison and police stations, and thousands of houses.

• Willfully killing civilians without military justification. When civilian institutions are struck, civilians – persons who are not members of the armed forces of a warring party, and are not taking direct part in hostilities – are killed.

  International law authorizes killings of civilians if the objective of the attack is military, and the means are proportional to the advantage gained. Yet proportionality is irrelevant if the targets of attack were not military to begin with. Gaza government employees – traffic policemen, court clerks, secretaries and others – are not combatants merely because Israel considers Hamas, the governing party, a terrorist organization. Many countries do not regard violence against foreign military occupation as terrorism.

  Of 1,434 Palestinians killed in the Gaza invasion, 960 were civilians, including 121 women and 288 children, according to a United Nations special rapporteur, Richard Falk. Israeli military lawyers instructed army commanders that Palestinians who remained in a targeted building after having been warned to leave were “voluntary human shields,” and thus combatants. Israeli gunners “knocked on roofs” – that is, fired first at corners of buildings, before hitting more vulnerable points – to “warn” Palestinian residents to flee.

  With nearly all exits from the densely populated Gaza Strip blocked by Israel, and chaos reigning within it, this was a particularly cruel flaunting of international law. Willful killings of civilians that are not required by military necessity are grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, and are considered war crimes under the Nuremberg principles.
  

• Deliberately employing disproportionate force. Last year, Gen. Gadi Eisenkot, head of Israel’s northern command, speaking on possible future conflicts with neighbors, stated, “We will wield disproportionate power against every village from which shots are fired on Israel, and cause immense damage and destruction.” Such a frank admission of illegal intent can constitute evidence in a criminal prosecution.
• Illegal use of weapons, including white phosphorus. Israel was finally forced to admit, after initial denials, that it employed white phosphorous in the Gaza Strip, though Israel defended its use as legal. White phosphorous may be legally used as an obscurant, not as a weapon, as it burns deeply and is extremely difficult to extinguish.

Israeli political and military personnel who planned, ordered or executed these possible offenses should face criminal prosecution. The appointment of Richard Goldstone, the former war crimes prosecutor from South Africa, to head a fact-finding team into possible war crimes by both parties to the Gaza conflict is an important step in the right direction. The stature of international law is diminished when a nation violates it with impunity.

George Bisharat is a professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law.
The above extract is taken from a website called “Institute for Middle East Understanding”

http://imeu.net/news/article0016142.shtml

Understanding my foot!

 

I think the reader can see the kinds of forces that range themselves against Serbs, Jews and ordinary people in general.

Without answering the above I think it is important to consider how this kind of material can be contested.

Please, if you wish to comment do so below and if you wish to simply write in a private manner place private above your writing and it will be private and not published. But do act!

IRAN MAKES THE NUCLEAR BOMB AND THE US IS ASSISTING

By Felix Quigley

April 15, 2009

I place a query in Google to try to find out what is the meaning of uranium enrichment. I take it as a fact that that is what Iran is doing, its clerical fascist leaders are even shown showing off their machines called centrifuges. I am no expert at all in science of these matters, but I accept that centrifuges in Iran are a fact.

My google query:

What does uranium enrichment mean?

I come therefore across a blog by a man who lives in Norway, who seems to be an Iranian Exile. His profile is astounding and you can look it up yourself. He is more than intelligent, he is amazing.

[Begin quote here]

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Why does Iran need a uranium enrichment facility?

There are only two realistic uses for enriched uranium – to produce low enriched uranium fuel for nuclear reactors and, secondly, to produce the highly enriched uranium for the fissile heart of a nuclear weapon.

Posted by Joseph Salomonsen

http://pasargadae-institute.blogspot.com/2006/04/why-does-iran-need-uranium-enrichment.html

So Salomonsen seems to have hit upon this central truth or reality that I have never seen alluded to

1. Highly enriched fuel means nuclear weapons

2. The present generator created by Russia is supplied by Russia with the low level fuel which is needed to run it

3. If Iran is creating low level fuel then for what. Iran does not have any nuclear industry to use the stuff.

Yet there it is, Iran blazing away with these centrifuges

It must be for high level enrichment. That means for Nuclear Bombs.

These are the most basic and simple facts of reality:

1. Iran is creating nuclear bombs

2. Iran is as much motivated by antisemitism as was the Hiter Nazis

3. In that regard Iran is very similar to Nazi Germany. It is true it hardly has the economic power that Germany had. Yet it does have some power, which is located in the Islamist alliance

So we turn the spotlight once again on the greatest power. That is America and to a secondary extent the EU.

Following the same google search I now reproduce the following which shows the general orientation of Iran towards the creation of “The Bomb” and the orientation of America over many years to this very reality.

[Begin quote here]

President Bush’s decision to replace Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld with Robert M. Gates signals to experienced Iran observers that the Bush White House is about to shift direction once again in Iranian foreign policy, moving back to the type of “constructive engagement” strategy that typified the failed Clinton administration policy toward Iran as originated by Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52871

So it seems to me from the initial comments about enrichment and from the above excellent review of the Bush regime by Corsi that the Iranian Nuclear issue is really the US Imperialist issue.

It is pretty obvious that if the giant US and the giant EU wanted to do something about Iran it could pulverise that country in a matter of a few weeks.

Iran has plenty of cash but it is a backward country. The example of oil purification for use as petrol etc is often used. Iran does not produce the petrol on which its own transport uses and could be brought to a halt within hours.

This reminds me (this is tangential but relevant) of when the US and Britain were given all the information about the death camps. They could easily have bombed the camps and indeed the railway lines. Essentially they were not interested and did not “bother”.

Yet the US and Britain, along with the Vatican did rescue the Death Camp Nazis post 1945. Why was that?

(See Blowback by Christopher Simpson)

So essentially the Iranian Nuclear issue is really a US “Imperialist” issue.

And the above reports kind of make that rather plain, don’t you not think!

Please do not hesitate to contact us through comment facility below and if you want to remain private just mark private at top.

The nomination also suggests stronger Council on Foreign Relations influence on White House thinking than previously recognized.

What is the evidence for these conclusions? In 2004, Gates co-chaired, along with Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Council on Foreign Relations task force report entitled, “Iran: Time for a New Approach.” Brzezinski was best known for his role as national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981. The main point of the Gates- Brzezinski task force was to advocate a policy of “limited or selective engagement with the current Iranian government.”

(Column continues below)

The language of the Gates- Brzezinski task force could easily have been drawn directly from the foreign policy of Carter as advised by Brzezinski, Clinton under Madame Albright’s tutelage, or even Richard Nixon as counseled by Henry Kissinger. Consider the following:

A political dialogue with Iran should not be deferred until such a time as the deep differences over Iranian nuclear ambitions and its invidious involvement with regional conflicts have been resolved. Rather, the process of selective political engagement itself represents a potentially effective path for addressing those differences. Just as the United States maintains a constructive relationship with China (and earlier did so with the Soviet Union) while strongly opposing certain aspects of its internal and international policies, Washington should approach Iran with a readiness to explore areas of common interests, while continuing to contest objectionable policies.

The expected result of the constructive engagement would be to bring Iran into a constructive international dialogue designed to resolve differences. Again, here is the language from the task force report:

Ultimately, any real rapprochement with Tehran can only occur in the context of meaningful progress on the most urgent U.S. concerns surrounding nuclear weapons, terrorism and regional stability.

Instead of arriving at the type of “grand bargain” with Iran that John Kerry pressed during his failed 2004 presidential campaign, the Gates-Brzezinski CFR task force called for “selectively engaging Iran on issues where U.S. and Iranian interests converge.”

The growing CFR influence on the Bush foreign policy is consistent with the growing influence of Kissinger on the Bush White House. Kissinger is a CFR luminary who the administration now acknowledges has been a recent frequent guest at the White House for private talks with the president. Another CFR notable, James Baker III, is now heading Bush’s Iraq Study Team.

With the appointment of Condoleezza Rice, a James Baker prot?g?, to be secretary of state at the start of Bush’s second term, the administration changed policy to support negotiations with Iran to be led by the EU-3 of France, Germany and the UK, together with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Two years later, those negotiations have predictably stalled in the U.N. Security Council where permanent members Russia and China, both allies of Iran, have blocked any meaningful sanctions.

That Iran under President Ahmadinejad has resumed uranium enrichment in open defiance of the EU-3, the IAEA and the U.N. Security Council should be abundant evidence that negotiations with Tehran will not succeed, unless the negotiations are premised on accepting Iran’s asserted right “to pursue the full fuel cycle,” which translates to accepting continued uranium enrichment by Iran on Iranian soil.

Despite the failure of these negotiations, the Bush administration appears to be preparing for direct talks with Iran, designed to implement the strategy of constructive engagement.

Notable on the Gates-Brzezinski CFR task force was Frank Carlucci, the former secretary of defense in the Reagan administration who went on to be a founding principal of the Carlyle Group. Financial ties between the Carlyle Group and both George H. W. Bush and Kissinger Associates serve as further backdrop for the interlacing relationships about to play out in the anticipated foreign policy shift the Bush administration is contemplating with regards to Iran.

The appointment of Gates signals an end to any possibility of utilizing a strategy of engineering regime change within Iran, following the path President Reagan utilized to bring down the Soviet Union.

Despite President Bush signing the Iran Freedom Support Act in September 2006, the State Department still has refused to make regime change the official U.S. policy toward Iran.

The State Department also continues to sit upon the millions of dollars Sens. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., and Sam Brownback, R-Kan., have inserted into legislation for the State Department to disburse to non-governmental organizations dedicated to supporting democracy movements within Iran.

Today, the White House disclosed that consideration of the Gates nomination was seriously considered last weekend, giving context to reports coming out of Iran that talks with the U.S. would be considered.

Responding to reports that U.S. and Iraqi officials have suggested U.S.-Iranian talks might take place on regional developments, Iran’s foreign minister spokesman, Mohammad-Ali Hosseini, told reporters Monday that “if we receive any formal offer in this regard, we will consider it.”

Experienced Iran observers such as Amir Taheri have long counseled that negotiating with the Ahmadinejad regime is unlikely to produce anticipated favorable results. Rejecting a central tenet of the Gates-Brzezinski CFR task force report, Taheri argues that Ahmadinejad’s presidency reflects a second phase of the Iranian revolution in which the Shiite regime anticipates regional dominance.

Taheri notes that Iran under Ahmadinejad has continued to finance and re-arm both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza. Writing in the November 2006 issue of Commentary, Taheri makes a strong argument that internal divisions in Iran could even today be exploited by the type of regime change efforts the Reagan administration applied to topple the Soviet Union.

While the Bush administration is likely to resist the conclusion, a shift of policy to engage in direct talks with Iran probably signals a Bush administration acceptance of Iran’s continued progress toward nuclear weapons. Iran is unlikely to accept talks with the United States on any other basis than a “no conditions” acceptance of Tehran’s current uranium enrichment program at Natanz.

Jerome Corsi

 

Title of above

Does Gates Pick mean accepting a Nuclear Iran

Posted: November 09, 2006
1:00 am Eastern

 

By Jerome R. Corsi

The Russian-supplied nuclear reactors presently under construction at the southern port of Bushehr are supplied complete with Russian-made fuel, so there is no demand for enriched uranium for these reactors.

Tehran says it is pursuing a nuclear programme for energy production only.

But Iran does not have a significant and established nuclear reactor programme, and in economic and practical terms establishing an enrichment facility cannot be justified. Another factor is that Iran is rich in natural gas, and oil reserves for energy consumptions

I simplify here but, that means the enrichment facility is almost certainly for a nuclear weapons programme.

INFORMATIONAL NOTE TO OUR READERS

by Felix Quigley

 

April 14, 2009

 

This is not really a post, just a note to inform. I have had some interesting replies which are written in a private capacity. Please feel free to write just mark the comment  “Private” or something to that effect and it will not be published. It is a way of communicating. The crisis in capitalism is beginning to bite in Europe, especially to my personal knowledge in Britain, Spain and in Ireland. For example the Labourist reformist Zapatero has totally rejigged his cabinet and Brown is in deep trouble over New Labour sleaze tactics. Ireland is a total mess!

 

The Jews do remain in great danger and the question is the alliance between US and Islam, is this comparable between alliance between the Nazi leaders like Hitler and Himmler with Islam.

 

We will try to reflect some of these issues in the next articles.

 

 

Felix

MURDER OF A YOUTH

By Felix Quigley

April 3, 2009

 

Terror alert in Jerusalem, West Bank

after axe-wielding Palestinian

murders Israeli boy

Shlomo Nativ, 13, died of the wounds inflicted by one or more Palestinian terrorists on an axe-wielding rampage in Bat Ayin, a community in the West Bank Gush Etzion Bloc. A second boy, aged 7, was seriously injured in the attack. Residents opened fire on the terrorists who managed to get away. Heavy security reinforcements were rushed to the area. They set up roadblocks and surrounded neighboring Arab villages to search for the killer or killers. All the communities in the area were put on terror alert. The attack occurred on the second day of school holiday for the Passover festival.

http://www.debka.com/index1.php

We urge you to turn to the url below to view pictures of the funeral of this boy

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/130745

 

THE PALESTINE ARABS DO NOT WANT A STATE BUT DO WANT TO OBLITERATE ISRAEL!

by Felix Quigley

April 3, 2009

 

Independent Norwegian poll:

Palestinian majority opposes

two states

DEBKAfile Special Report

April 3, 2009, 10:42 AM (GMT+02:00)

 

The Norwegian Fafo institute which sponsored the 1993 Oslo Framework accords decided to find out how the Palestinians felt about this solution. Its main discovery was that a majority, 53 percent, of Palestinians (like Israelis), is against two states.

[The Fafo Institute is basically an Israel hating body. The OSLO Accords and Norwegian Diplomacy was designed to destroy Israel]

33 PER CENT WANT ISRAEL DESTROYED !

This figure breaks down into 33 percent, who opt for the annihilation of the state of Israel, whether by political means or force of arms – to be replaced by a single Islamic republic on all parts of the country;

AND A FURTHER 20 PER CENT ALSO WANT ISRAEL DESTROYED

and 20 percent, which favors a united Israeli-Palestinian state, to be eventually engulfed by the latter population.

When Hamas members are polled separately, support for two states drops to 21 percent.

FAFO HAS GIVEN UP ON OSLO BUT WHAT IS ITS GAME NOW?

Publication of these findings by the Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies, which is supported by Norwegian foreign ministry and respected by European Middle East policy-makers, indicates that its researchers have given up on the Oslo Accords and the two-state goal pursued by Washington.

BUT US GOVERNMENT ALLIES ITSELF WITH ISLAM

However, DEBKAfile‘s Washington sources expect extreme reluctance on the part of the Obama administration to abandon this goal because it is the only policy objective it has developed and is being used, furthermore, as a key to open the administration’s diplomatic door to the Muslim world, especially in the Afghanistan-Pakistan arena (now lumped together as the “Afpak” front).

OBAMA WANTS TO FORCE ISRAEL INTO 2 STATE HELL

The US president’s advisers are urging him to speed up Israel-Palestinian peacemaking for these ends – even if it means foisting the two-state objective on the Israelis. Proof that the Palestinians too will have to be whipped into line brings the venture close to a mission impossible.

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=6003

WHAT WE SAY!

The position of Obama and the US Government is this

1. They want Israel to live in their small state while Iranian Fascist Mullahs have the possession of the Nuclear Bomb.

These have already said that the Israeli state needs to be destroyed, and Zionism eradicated. Zionism is nothing more than the wish and right of Jews to have a sovereign country

2. This was also the case when the Norwegian state diplomats tried to make Israel accept a Palestine state next to them and on historical Israeli land

3. In other words Norway and Norwegian elitist diplomacy is basically antisemitic.

Now this notorious Fafo Institute is spelling out that Arabs will not accept living side by side with Jews in the area of the Middle East.

What to make of this? Why would they conduct such a search in order to reach such a finding?

So if not a 2 state solution, then the Fafo Institute may be preparing the ground for the Islamist conquest of Israel, which is basically what the Obama Government sets out to do also.

WHAT IS THE ANSWER?

Well the first step is really unavoidable. Israel has no choice hard though it may be.

Israel must strike against Iran to either destroy totally or cripple the Iranian Nuclear Bomb which is aimed against Israel.

Given that the US Government is on the side of Iran then the only solution for Israel is a big movement inside the ordinary people of America, which opposes the Obama Government and which is in alliance and solidarity with Israel.

Write to us below. If you wish your comment private write “Private”  first word and we will keep it so

 

 

GAZA WAR AND SUPPORT FOR HAMAS SHOWED ANTISEMITISM IN ACTION

by Felix Quigley

April 4, 2009

 

This is an article by a person called Dave Rich. It contains some very useful information about antisemitism, Jew hatred and Israel hatred.

The Gaza War was a real lesson in antisemitism in action.

Here was an organization made up of Palestinian Arabs. Their record was for 8 years to fire rockets into Israel.

Every time that Israel tried to do something about this then Israel it was which was condemned.

This in itself was antisemitism in action. No other country on earth would allow terrorists to attack it for 8 long years.

During this time not only were Jews murdered by these rockets, but since it was going on for 8 years many Jewish children never knew what it was like to sleep in safety.

The children and Jews of places like Sderot were never able to sleep as ordinary people do. This 60 years after the end of the Holocaust. What a scandal and what a black mark against humanity.

Understanding all of this is very important for the following reason.

We on 4international are certain that Netanyahu and his Government will strike against the Fascist Nazi Iranian Nuclear bomb and will do so soon.

It will also do it alone because the US Government of Obama is really in alliance with Islam.

And this courageous strike by tiny Israel will literally transform the world.

It is vital that our friends build a big movement in America that will reach out to the ordinary people in America and will mobilise them in defence of solitary Israel. Same in Europe.

It is in that light that I think this article by Dave Rich (who I do not know much about) is useful and important

[Begin article by Dave Rich here]

Holocaust Abuse, by Dave Rich

Wednesday, March 4th, 2009

The following is a guest blog that originally appeared in Harry’s Place. For full coverage of the feedback and debate that ensued, click here.

Opposition in Britain to Israel’s recent assault on Hamas in Gaza saw the allegation that Israel is in some way analogous to Nazi Germany become a central plank of anti-Zionist propaganda. Yet there is no serious similarity, in scale, intentions or outcome, between the Nazi destruction of European Jewry and Israeli policy in Gaza; which begs the question why it has become such a popular idea, when it causes deep offence to so many Jews.

The Nazi comparison wasn’t just something that appeared on the fringes of anti-Israel activity during this period. George Galloway MP, addressing the crowd at one anti-Israel demonstration in London, had this to say:

“In April and May of 1943, the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto were surrounded by barbed wire fences, by the occupiers of Poland, and they faced a choice, in the words of the song of the partisans: ‘They could die on their knees or they could live forever’. And they chose to rise up against their occupier, to use their bodies as weapons, to dig tunnels, to fight, not to die in ones and twos of hunger and typhus, but to die as free men and women. Today, the Palestinian people in Gaza are the new Warsaw Ghetto, and those who are murdering them are the equivalent of those who murdered the Jews in Warsaw in 1943.”

The British Muslim Initiative, one of the organisers of the demonstrations, put it on their placards; and lots of marchers even made their own versions at home.

Plenty of others have weighed in: Gerald Kaufman MP, Ken Livingstone, even a senior figure at the Vatican. There are many more examples. A charge that had previously sat on the fringes of anti-Israel campaigning has taken centre stage, superseding the Apartheid analogy that had previously driven much anti-Zionist discourse.

This is partly because analogies with the Holocaust fit what David Hirsh called “ready-made ways of thinking about Jews”. It’s easy, and it’s lazy, to reach for the Holocaust as the first source for a historical parallel to events involving Israel or antisemitism. But equating Israel to Nazi Germany also serves a political purpose.

(It is a little more and different to “easy” and “lazy” as Hirsh says…FQ)

Richard Falk, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, invoked the Israel/Nazism comparison because “you have to shout to be heard”: accusing the Jewish state of behaving like Nazis gets attention, even if “The references to the Holocaust and to the Nazi policies were not meant to be literal comparisons”.

Martin Shaw, Research Professor of International Relations and Politics at the University of Sussex, concedes that it is an “extreme comparison” with several factual flaws, but argues that it is not “objectionable in principle” because “the use of an exaggerated comparison [is] a common ploy in political campaigning”.

John Wight of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign, argued that it was appropriate to describe Gaza as a “new holocaust” because “The irony of perpetrators of crimes against humanity claiming to represent victims of one of the greatest ever crimes against humanity is what gives the word ‘holocaust’ in relation to Gaza particular resonance – again, at least for those committed to ensuring that the horrors of the Holocaust are never repeated.”

So Wight, who has previously identified an actor called “international Jewry” that is part of the “hydra-headed monster” known as Israel, thinks that the Holocaust analogy should be used specifically because of the connection between Israel, Jews and the Holocaust. Falk and Shaw acknowledge that Israel is not the same as Nazi Germany, but think it is OK to use the comparison because it provokes a response. No surprise there: comparing Israel to Nazi Germany provokes a response precisely because the Holocaust has a “particular resonance” for Jews.

You might think that an anti-racist would see this as a reason not to make the analogy. But let’s leave such sensitivities to one side for now. More interesting is the idea that, even if the facts don’t fit, the comparison is valid because it has political utility. As Wight explains, Israel “is a state which claims to represent the victims of the Holocaust, which largely derives its moral legitimacy from that monstrous crime, and which has been able to violate and flout international law with impunity in its treatment of the Palestinians as a direct consequence of the international guilt which pervades the ruling classes in Europe and the US over the Holocaust.” Take away the moral weight of the Holocaust, so the argument goes, and Israel loses its right to exist, or least to act as it wishes.

We’ve seen this line of thinking before.

In 1980, Canadian Holocaust Denier Ernst Zundel wrote an open letter to the Muslim world:

The Islamic world has the financial means to publish, broadcast or otherwise disseminate the historical, factual data leading to the truth…. There are at this moment already in existence organizations which, if properly funded, could become the nucleus of an independent, worldwide information network capable of countering the now virtually unopposed Zionist disinformation and hate propaganda networks. One such example is the Zundelsite, a United States based website that has exposed the so-called “Holocaust” as an extortion tool…that yields Israel the money, power and excuse to occupy the Palestinians and to intimidate its neighbours such as Syria, Lebanon, Iran and other Arab nations…. Take the Holocaust away, and you will have severed the financial water well that feeds an evil oligarchy and repressive system!

Or as Scottish Islamist writer Yacub Zaki put it, rather more succinctly:

“David Irving has the right idea, destroy the Holocaust myth and you have destroyed Israel.”

Now, it should be stressed that Wight, Shaw, Falk and the rest are not Holocaust Deniers. On the contrary, they think it is the worst crime ever perpetrated. But what they share with Zundel and Zaki is the idea that any political campaign that aims to significantly change the way Israel is viewed in the West must cut the link between the Holocaust, Israel and the Jews. Instead of denying that the Holocaust took place, it is instead appropriated for anti-Zionist purposes. In this way of thinking, Europe’s outstanding moral debt from the Holocaust is to the Palestinians, not to the Jews, who, having abandoned the universalism that so failed to protect Europe’s Jews from the Nazis, should not expect any special protection from Europe as a consequence of Hitler’s genocide.

So much for the theory. What impact does all this have?

Despite the fantasies of British anti-Zionists that they are contributing to the Palestinian struggle, anti-Israel activity has a much greater impact in Britain than it ever will in the Middle East. The unprecedented number of antisemitic incidents in Britain during the Gaza conflict has been widely reported. Less tangible, but in some ways more worrying, is the growing sense of vulnerability felt by many British Jews. There are lots of people in Britain who express their hatred for Israel by attacking Jews. And before anyone suggests that Jews should therefore, as a defensive measure, distance themselves from Israel: the attackers don’t stop first to ask their victim what they think of Gaza, or Olmert, or the occupation. The answer to antisemitism is not to tell Jews to change their behaviour.

The greater the hatred for Israel, the greater the hatred for Jews; and nobody is more deserving of hatred than Nazis. In our post-Holocaust, human rights world, it is generally considered a good thing to hate Nazis, who, by their morals and values, stand outside and in opposition to mainstream society. Efforts are made to deny them platforms, disrupt their activities and even attack them physically. If Israel is a Nazi state, then anybody who does not oppose Israel is morally no better than a Nazi. There is only one place this train of thought can end: with the demonisation and social isolation of the vast majority of ordinary British Jews.

It means that when mainstream Jewish community leadership bodies organise a rally with the slogan, “Stop Hamas Terror: Peace for the people of Israel and Gaza”, and launch a Jewish community fundraising campaign for hospitals in both Gaza and Israel during the fighting, Richard Seymour accuses them of “cheerleading the massacre” and concludes that anybody who goes on the rally “ought to be shunned, and treated as the moral and political degenerates that they are.” It means that a research paper published by the School of Oriental and African Studies to investigate “legal aspects of economic and trade issues arising from Israel’s occupation of the OPTs” lists the names, addresses and contact details of kosher food shops in London and Manchester.

Once the central argument of anti-Israel campaigning in this country is that Israel is Nazi Germany, then this is no longer an anti-Zionist movement: it is an antisemitic one, with an antisemitic politics as its driving force.

THE IRANIAN FASCISTS AND THE BOMB…WHEN THE CIA STEPPED IN TO ENABLE THE FASCISTS

by Felix Quigley

April 4, 2009

Despite the huge amount of verbiage being uttered by sites such as Israpundit we on 4international believe that the key issue for Israel, for Jews, and for us on the Left who support Israel unconditionally is the issue of the Mullahs’ nukes.

We wish it were otherwise but…Israel simply does not have any alternative. If Israel allows the Iranian Nazis to gain the Nuclear bomb then it will certainly be used against the Jews of Israel.

Those who try to gloss over this issue are simply antisemites. Iran has stated clearly that it sees the Zionist state as being something to them evil.

Ahmadinejad talked about either wiping Israel off the map or about the end of the Zionist presence in the Middle East.

And certainly Ahmadinejad is a backer of Hamas and Hizbullah both of which are sworn to destroy Israel.

If all that was not enough Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs are at the centre of Holocaust Denial, in fact actually organizing a major Holocaust Denial conference in Teheran in which all the antisemites of the world who deny the Holocaust were present. Antisemitism, denial of the Holocaust, are signs that lead on to a new Holocaust.

This article on 4international seeks to make known the role of the US CIA organization and its role specifically on this issue.

Remember that Christopher Simpson in his famous book “Blowback” provided the clear evidence that the CIA was made up of tens of thousands of Nazis who were recruited by the US Government out of those Nazis who had led in carrying out the Holocaust.

This therefore throws a major light on the following, when this CIA agency and its organizations came out and claimed (National Intelligence Estimate November 2007) that Iran had given up its pursuit of the Nuclear Bomb. (Specifically had halted in 2003 for a number of years)

But if one bothers to read their report that was their conclusion, and that was the Headline, but in the content of their report they admitted that Iran was continuing to enrich uranium and that a nuclear bomb was possible in 2009.

You can find this on

Click to access 20071203_release.pdf

If you can surmount the usual guff and scan down to the section called “Key Judgments” and look at “C”, then they state that the Mullahs are accelerating the process of enriching uranium in their centrifuges in Natanz, and that it is possible for them to have enough material for a nuclear bomb by 2009.

So what was all the fuss about. How come Hadley the US Government spokesman tried to tell the world there was no problem?

Well for one thing all the antisemitic journalists that I know of in the world who hate Israel honed in on the Headline and obviously did not read the report itself. If they had read the report they would have found that the US was saying 2 contradictory things.

This is the murky world of the US Governmental Imperialism, which is throwing Israel into such deep crisis.

The whole thing is amazing. You have these leftist type journalists (the BBC is full of them) full of Israel hatred and they are so against the Iraq war which overthrew an absolute fiend in Saddam. Yet here they provide an apology for the Iranian Mullahs aim to wipe out the Jews. If that is not antisemitism by these journalists I do not know what is.

It is clear that Obama is in bed with the Islamist Fascists and that Israel is very vulnerable.

This is why the one historical role of the Netanyahu Government is to strike, and either destroy totally or significantly delay the Iranian Nuclear Bomb making.

This in itself will change the political landscape of the world.

Expect NO thanks from those Arab regimes who also fear the Iranian Bomb. They will use the Israeli strike to stir up antisemitism. That is what they do.

As to those in the west who oppose Israel on this we on 4international say…”Quite simply you are antisemites”.

To expect that Israel can be (it is somehow normal to be) threatened by the Nazis Mullahs and their hideous bomb, along with their Holocaust Denial etc, is to be a dyed in the wool antisemite.

It is vital that a big organization is built in the US which will drive out into the ordinary people and garner the necessary suport for Israel in these vital months ahead in the aftermath of the Israeli strike against the Nazi Mullahs.

This will be against Obama, against the Nazi linked Bush family, against Bill Clinton who lined up with Islamist Nazi Izetbegovic in Bosnia, against McCain and (Joseph) Lieberman with their pro Kosovo past.

All those Serbs and Russians who fought the Nazis of the US and their allies in the Balkans (like Izetbegovic) must urgently get off the fence. Decisive moments lie ahead.

Either make a comment below, or if you wish privacy mark it private and we will not publish. But DO ACT!

We give the url for the report itself below.  http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf

It is an easier way into this notorious report by looking at newspapaer reports. We chose here that of the Washington Post

[Begin report from Washington Post here]

WASHINGTON, Dec. 3 — A new assessment by American intelligence agencies concludes that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that the program remains frozen, contradicting judgment two years ago that Tehran was working relentlessly toward building a nuclear bomb.

The conclusions of the new assessment are likely to reshape the final year of the Bush administration, which has made halting Iran’s nuclear program a cornerstone of its foreign policy.

The assessment, a National Intelligence Estimate that represents the consensus view of all 16 American spy agencies, states that Tehran is likely keeping its options open with respect to building a weapon, but that intelligence agencies “do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.”

Iran is continuing to produce enriched uranium, a program that the Tehran government has said is designed for civilian purposes. The new estimate says that enrichment program could still provide Iran with enough raw material to produce a nuclear weapon sometime by the middle of next decade, a timetable essentially unchanged from previous estimates.

(The above was precisely what the antisemites who quote from this report leave out, and since they are indeed antisemites they do this quite deliberately!)

But the new estimate declares with “high confidence” that a military-run Iranian program intended to transform that raw material into a nuclear weapon has been shut down since 2003, and also says with high confidence that the halt “was directed primarily in response to increasing international scrutiny and pressure.”

The “high confidence” is bullshit as the following observation from Washington Post makes clear. They do not say how they have this “high confidence”. The whole thing was a fraud being played out against Israel and in the service of Jew Haters everywhere.

The estimate does not say when American intelligence agencies learned that the weapons program had been halted, but a statement issued by Donald Kerr, the principal director of national intelligence, said the document was being made public “since our understanding of Iran’s capabilities has changed.”

Rather than painting Iran as a rogue, irrational nation determined to join the club of nations with the bomb, the estimate states Iran’s “decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic and military costs.” The administration called new attention to the threat posed by Iran earlier this year when President Bush had suggested in October that a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to “World War III” and Vice President Dick Cheney promised “serious consequences” if the government in Tehran did not abandon its nuclear program.

Yet at the same time officials were airing these dire warnings about the Iranian threat, analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency were secretly concluding that Iran’s nuclear weapons work halted years ago and that international pressure on the Islamic regime in Tehran was working.

Senator Harry Reid, the majority leader, portrayed the assessment as “directly challenging some of this administration’s alarming rhetoric about the threat posed by Iran.” He said he hoped the administration “appropriately adjusts its rhetoric and policy,” and called for a “a diplomatic surge necessary to effectively address the challenges posed by Iran.”

But the national security adviser, Stephen J. Hadley, quickly issued a statement describing the N.I.E. as containing positive news rather than reflecting intelligence mistakes.

“It confirms that we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons,” Mr. Hadley said. “It tells us that we have made progress in trying to ensure that this does not happen. But the intelligence also tells us that the risk of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon remains a very serious problem.”

“The estimate offers grounds for hope that the problem can be solved diplomatically — without the use of force — as the administration has been trying to do,” Mr. Hadley said.

The new report comes out just over five years after a deeply flawed N.I.E. concluded that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons programs and was determined to restart its nuclear program — an estimate that led to congressional authorization for a military invasion of Iraq, although most of the report’s conclusions turned out to be wrong.

Intelligence officials said that the specter of the botched 2002 N.I.E. hung over their deliberations over the Iran assessment, leading them to treat the document with particular caution.

“We felt that we needed to scrub all the assessments and sources to make sure we weren’t misleading ourselves,” said one senior intelligence official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/03/world/middleeast/03cnd-iran.html