THANKS TO BARBARIC SHARIA MAN CRUCIFIED IN 2012

Crucifixion.jpg

This man was murdered in accord with the Qur’an’s directive to crucify those who “wage war against Allah and his messenger.” “Man Crucified By Al-Qaeda-Affiliated Ansar Al-Shari’a For Allegedly Directing U.S. Drones In Yemen – Video Posted On YouTube – Warning: Graphic Images,” from MEMRI, August 29 (thanks to all who sent this in):

I read this on:

www.jihadwatch.org and on http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/6632.htm

…On August 27, 2012, a member of the leading jihadi forum Shumoukh Al-Islam posted a YouTube link to a video showing a man accused of spying for the U.S. by placing chips to direct drones targeting terrorists being crucified on an electric pylon in Abyan province in south of Yemen. A sign placed above the man’s head shows the group’s flag and verse 5:33 of the Koran, which reads: “The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.”…Despite being uploaded on February 22, 2012, it appears that the video has been made available recently as suggested by the low number of views and the recently made comments. Based on the date of the video, it is safe to say that the crucified man is Saleh Ahmed Saleh Al-Jamely who was executed on February 12, 2012 after being convicted by a court managed by Al-Qaeda-affiliated Ansar Al-Shari’a.

Al-Jamely was accused of spying and placing two chips in two cars that were later targeted by U.S. drones. According to a statement issued by the Islamic court of Waqqar Emirate in Abyan Governorate, dated February 10, 2012, in that attack, ten members of Ansar Al-Shari’a were killed. The other two men, Hassan Naji Hassan Al-Naqeeb – accused of recruiting, delivering chips, and paying spies; and Ramzi Muhammad Qaid Al-Ariqi – accused of spying for the Saudi intelligence by taking photographs of several buildings, were executed in public, but not crucified….

LEADERSHIP, THE THREAT OF FASCISM AND THE DANGER TO JEWS ONCE AGAIN

 

These are some of the issues and principles on which the Trotskyist leadership must be built upon:

 

  • The Crisis in capitalism on a world basis
  • The emergence of Fascism in the form of the Muslim Brotherhood.
  • The close alliance which barack Obama and the whole of the Democratic Party organised with the Muslim Jihad.
  • The severe threat to Israel from the Islamic Jihad in the form of the Iranian Bomb and the growing threat of Nuclear Proliferation from all Islamist countries surrounding Israel.
  • The need for a new leadership to lead against these threats.

 

 

Let us take these one by one

 

 

 

 

  • The Crisis in capitalism on a world basis

 

 

Capitalism is a system which is based on the drive for profit and for nothing else. If it does not make a profit it has to be scrapped.

 

Of course this brute reality of capitalism is often hidden by sweet words but strip capitalism to its basics…the only interest is profit.

 

Science can go some of the way in this system but it is very limited.

 

In fact, under capitalism science can have a very negative effect. For example a recent BBC Report has pointed out that the growth of technology in many industries, for example the car industry in Detroit, has meant the working man is now more and more redundant. What this modern industry needs is highly qualified people who look after the computers, and the robot machines do the work. The cars are produced very effectively but more and more without workers. That should be a boon, reducing fatigue and boredom in humans, but it is only suffering for people and their families.

 

And this does matter! The American Election, all agree, is going to be decided by the economy.

 

 

  • The emergence of Fascism in the form of the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

There is a great piece by Leon Trotsky in which he imagines the capitalist system as an electrical circuit say in a house. There are junction boxes in the circuit. These are the countries in the capitalist system world wide. As pressure builds up (the capitalist crisis) the junction boxes blow a fuse. And the blowing of a fuse is the same as a transition to Fascism where the old “democratic” forms of government are no longer “strong” enough. That is beginning to happen and will intesnify. This actually leads on to the next point which has mystified most people, why capitalist governments, like that of Obama in the past 4 years, have united with Islam.

 

 

 

  • The close alliance which Barack Obama and the whole of the Democratic Party organised with the Muslim Jihad.

 

 

 

There are deep problems within the world capitalist system. The overthrow of Stalinist Soviet regimes, long the wish of capitalists everywhere, has only intensified national inter-intercompetition, tend to lead to war.

 

The last 4 years of the Obama government have been momentous and alarming.

 

It was the June 2009 speech of Obama to the Conference in Cairo which did most damage. In the speech Obama was addressing the Islamic World. Even though they were illegal in the country Obama was visiting as a guest Obama invited the Muslim Brotherhood to his speech.

 

This was the thumbs down for mubarak the ruler for 30 years, and the thumbs up for the Islamic Jihad.

 

It was Fascism on TWO levels. Firstly Obama intervened like a Fascist on the International Scene. He truly was rminiscent of Hitler or Mussolini. Secondly the Muslim brotherhood founned by Banna and added to by Qutb was Islamic Fascist.

 

Was Obama really thinking that he was helping “democracy” by helping the Muslim Brotherhood on that fateful day? That is very unlikely. More likely is that America, with its huge knowledge gathering ssources, knew very well the force (Fascism) it was unleashing

 

  • The severe threat to Israel from the Islamic Jihad in the form of the Iranian Bomb and the growing threat of Nuclear Proliferation from all Islamist countries surrounding Israel.

 

For the past 10 years Israel has been threatened with destruction almost every week from official sources in the Iranian Government, with its henchmen in Hamas and Hisbullah also making such threats.

 

I believe that Holocaust Denial is the main form of Antisemitism in the “democratic” capitalist west, especially in Europe.

 

If a European can by termed not Antisemitic then he has to reason something like this: “This people the Jews were nearly liquidated in the Nazi Holocaust. Fifty years later the same language is coming from Iran, along with Holocaust denial. Surely then these threats have to be taken very seriously.”

 

Are they taken seriously? Obviously no! Or Iran would have been stopped by Europe. Also you somethies hear “Oh but Israel has the Bomb so Iran has the same right”. That is Antisemitism right there!

 

The reason Israel got the Nuclear bomb was rooted in the Holocaust and who could begrudge them. The reason Iran wants the Nuclear Bomb is to make effective its threats.

 

 

 

  • The need for a new leadership to lead against these threats.

 

 

These are not small threats. This political situation is not common or usual. This is an extraordinary situation. This requires extraordinary attention to the major “detail” of leadership. That is all we are saying.

 

 

DEATH OF JEW HATER RACHEL CORRIE WAS AN ACCIDENT SAYS JUDGE

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/08/blood-libel-exposed-court-vindicates-israel-in-rachel-corrie-case.html

An Israeli judge rules that the 2003 death of  Jew hater Rachel Corrie, who confronted an Israeli bulldozer in Gaza, was an “unfortunate accident” and not the fault of the IDF. Another Jewish blood libel exposed.

Corrie-windowToday’s court ruling in Haifa finally lays to rest the Rachel Corrie blood libel. The court  found that an Israeli soldier driving a tractor did not see Rachel Corrie become fall into a pile of dirt.

Rachel Corrie’s death was deemed an accident caused the International Solidairty Movement and  by her own Jew hating self.

“The secular beatification of Rachel Corrie sums up everything that is wrong with modern solidarity with ‘Palestine'” The Telegraph

Of course, the unholy evil alliance will be all up in arms about the ruling.

Jerusalem Diaries: Back in March 2003 when Rachel Corrie was killed while trying to prevent Israel from clearing ground to expose terrorist hiding places, I interviewed several International Solidarity Movement (ISM) people who were present in Rafiah that day.

Having lived for many years in Washington State where Corrie attended Evergreen College, I had an inherent interest in trying to bring to light the motivations and actions of the ISMers. I wrote several pieces about the case and was sued for libel (later thrown out of court) by an ISMer who didn’t like hearing the truth.

Today, after years of testimony and months of deliberation, an Israeli judge handed down a decision that verified what many of us familiar with the facts of the case already knew: he rejected the lawsuit brought by the Corrie family whose only purpose was to vilify Israel, not to get to the bottom of the facts of the case; and he ruled the death an accident that resulted due to the stupid actions of Corrie and her fellow travelers in purposefully entering a war zone and ignoring repeated warnings to get out of the way.

For those interested in the facts, not the Corrie family hype, here’s the translation of today’s decision:

Summary of the Verdict (T.A. 371/05) Estate of the Late Rachel Corrie, etc.
v. The State of Israel – Ministry of Defense
1.     The decedent, Rachel Corrie, was born on April 10, 1979.  She was an American citizen, residing in Olympia, Washington.  On March 16, 2003, the decedent was killed during an incident which is the focus of this lawsuit.  She was 24 years old.

The decedent was an activist in the International Solidarity Movement (hereafter: “the Organization” or “the ISM”).

2.     In this lawsuit (T.A. 371/05) the plaintiffs, the estate of the late Rachel Corrie (hereafter: “the decedent”), the decedent’s parents, brother and sister, are petitioning to direct the defendant, the State of Israel, to pay them compensation for special damages and general damages inflicted on them, they claim, as a result of the death of the decedent during the incident that is the focus of this trial.  In addition to the aforementioned, the plaintiffs have petitioned to direct the defendant to pay “punitive damages”.

3.     The plaintiffs claimed in their lawsuit that on March 16, 2003, the decedent, together with other activists in the ISM, arrived at the “Philadelphi Corridor” in the Rafiah area of the Gaza Strip where two bulldozers and an IDF tank were observed conducting operational activities in the area.  The plaintiffs claimed that the bulldozers were about to demolish a house in the area and that the decedent and her fellow members of the ISM stood in the path of the bulldozers in order to prevent them from implementing their plan.

In Article 8.5 of the Statement of Claim, the plaintiffs claimed as follows:

            “At 17:00 or thereabouts, the decedent stood near the house of Dr. Samir Nasrallah, which was designated for demolition, and one of the bulldozers was 10 to 15 meters from her.  The bulldozers approached the decedent and pulled dirt from under her feet.  The decedent fell and the blade of the bulldozer ran over her leg and later the bulldozer ran over her body.  When the bulldozer backed up the decedent was gravely injured and was bleeding extensively, although she was still breathing.

The decedent was evacuated to the Al-Najer Hospital in Rafiah, where her death was declared after 20 minutes”.

4.     The plaintiffs claimed that the bulldozer intentionally caused the death of the decedent.  The plaintiffs based their claim on the following three grounds: assault, negligence and legal grounds.

5.     After hearing many witnesses from both sides, including expert witnesses, and studying the extensive summations from representatives of both sides, I hereby determine as follows:

a.    During the relevant period of time, the “Philadelphi Corridor” was the site of daily warfare, i.e. daily gunfire by snipers, missile fire and IED explosions directed at the IDF forces.  During this period, unceasing efforts were made to kidnap IDF soldiers.  Only soldiers who were in combat units fought in the region.

According to the notes made in the IDF records, from September 2000 to the date of the incident that is the focus of this lawsuit (March 16, 2003), nearly 6,000 grenades had been thrown at IDF forces in the Corridor; there had been approximately 1,400 incidents of gunfire; and there were more than 40 occurrences of mortar fire.  These aforementioned events led to the injury and death of many Israelis.
The United States government issued a travel warning on March 16, 2003 to warn American citizens against visiting the Gaza Strip area or the West Bank.
b.    During the period pertinent to this case, there was a military directive in force declaring the “Philadelphi Corridor” a “closed military area” and forbidding the entry of civilians.

c.    The ISM assigned itself the task of working alongside the Palestinians against the “Israeli occupation” by using what it called “non-violent protest activities”.  However, the evidence presented to me shows a significant gap between the Organization’s statements and the true character of its activities and actions.  The actions taken by the members of the organization, in practice, do not match its statements.  In fact, the Organization exploits the dialogue regarding human rights and morality to blur the severity of its actions, which are, in fact, expressed through violence.

Inter alia, ISM activities included “defending” Palestinian families, even ones that were engaged in terror activities.  The Organization’s activists “specialized” in sabotaging the IDF’s operational actions.  ISM activities included, inter alia: stationing activists to serve as “human shields” for terrorists wanted by Israeli security forces; financial, logistical and moral assistance to Palestinians, including terrorists and their families; interrupting demolition activities or the sealing off of houses belonging to terrorists who conducted suicide attacks with multiple casualties.
d.    The mission of the IDF force on the day of the incident was solely to clear the ground.  This clearing and leveling included leveling the ground and clearing it of brush in order to expose hiding places used by terrorists, who would sneak out from these areas and place explosive devices with the intent of harming IDF soldiers.  There was an urgency to carrying out this mission so that IDF look-outs could observe the area and locate terrorists thereby preventing explosive devices from being buried.  The mission did not include, in any way, the demolition of homes.  The action conducted by the IDF forces was done at real risk to the lives of the soldiers.  Less than one hour before the incident that is the focus of this lawsuit, a live hand-grenade was thrown at the IDF forces.
e.    I hereby determine that, on the day of the incident, the two bulldozers and the armored personnel carrier were occupied with the clear military operational task of clearing the land in a dangerous area which posed a significant risk.  The force’s action was designed to prevent acts of terror and hostility, i.e. to eliminate the danger of terrorists hiding between the creases of land and in the brush, and to expose explosive devices hidden therein, both of which were intended to kill IDF soldiers.  During each act of exposure, the lives of the IDF fighters were at risk from Palestinians terrorists.  As aforementioned, less than an hour before the incident that is the focus of this lawsuit, a live hand-grenade was thrown at the IDF force. For this reason, I hereby determine that the act of clearing the land with which the IDF force was occupied during the event was “a war-related action” as defined in The Civil Wrongs Ordinance.

f.     On March 16, 2003, the decedent and her fellow ISM activists arrived at the location where the IDF force was working to clear the land.   They did so, they claim, in order to prevent the IDF force from demolishing Palestinian houses.  They did so illegally and in contradiction of the military directive declaring the area a “closed military area”.  They held signs, stood in front of the bulldozers and did not allow them to carry out their mission.  The IDF soldiers informed the activists that they had to distance themselves from the area, threw stun grenades towards them, fired warning shots towards them and used methods to disperse demonstrations.  All without avail.

The IDF force was very careful not to harm the Organization’s activists.  Because of the activists’ interference, the force repeatedly relocated to continue carrying out their mission.

g.    Based on the evidence presented to me, including the testimony of the expert for the prosecution, Mr. Osben, I hereby determine that at approximately 17:00, the decedent stood roughly 15 to 20 meters from the relevant bulldozer and knelt down.  The bulldozer to which I refer was a large, clumsy and shielded vehicle of the DR9 model.  The field of view the bulldozer’s operator had inside the bulldozer was limited.  At a certain point, the bulldozer turned and moved toward the decedent.  The bulldozer pushed a tall pile of dirt.  With regard to the field of view that the bulldozer’s operator had, the decedent was in the “blind spot”.  The decedent was behind the bulldozer’s blade and behind a pile of dirt and therefore the bulldozer’s operator could not  have seen her.

The bulldozer moved very slowly, at a speed of one kilometer per hour.

When the decedent saw the pile of dirt moving towards her, she did not move, as any reasonable person would have.  She began to climb the pile of dirt.  Therefore, both because the pile of dirt continued to move as a result of the pushing of the bulldozer, and because the dirt was loose, the decedent was trapped in the pile of dirt and fell.

At this stage, the decedent’s legs were buried in the pile of dirt, and when her colleagues saw from where they stood that the decedent was trapped in the pile of dirt, they ran towards the bulldozer and gestured towards its operator and yelled at him to stop.  By the time the bulldozer’s operator and his commander noticed the decedent’s colleagues and stopped the bulldozer, a significant portion of the decedent’s body was already covered in dirt.

The decedent’s entire body was not covered in dirt.  In fact, when the bulldozer backed up, the decedent’s body was seen to free itself from the pile of dirt and the decedent was still alive.

The decedent was evacuated to the hospital and after 20 minutes, her death was declared.

I hereby determine unequivocally that there is no foundation to the plaintiffs’ claim that the bulldozer struck the decedent intentionally.  This was a very unfortunate accident and was not intentional.  No one wished to harm the decedent.  I was convinced that the bulldozer’s operator would not have continued to work if he had seen the decedent standing in front of the bulldozer, as he and his colleagues acted in similar circumstances earlier that day, when they moved from location to location because of the disturbances caused by the members of the Organization.

h.    Because I find, as aforementioned, that the decedent was accidentally killed in the framework of a “war-related activity” as defined in The Civil Wrongs Ordinance, and in light of the instructions laid out in Article 5 of the aforementioned ordinance, the State bears no responsibility for the damages inflicted on the plaintiffs resulting from a war-related action.

This makes superfluous the need to discuss the cause of action made by the plaintiffs because legally their demand should be rejected.

Nevertheless, above and beyond what is necessary, I have also decided to discuss the cause of action filed by the plaintiffs as well as their other claims.

i.      The plaintiffs claimed that evidentiary damage was done in two areas: first, they claim that the Criminal Investigations Division (CID) investigation carried out after the event was sloppy and unprofessional and led to evidentiary damage for the plaintiffs; the second area, which refers to the responsibility of the Institute for Forensic Medicine for evidentiary damage caused to the plaintiffs as a result of the violation of the judicial order and the destruction of the recording documenting the decedent’s autopsy.

It could be expected that, in light of the claim made above, the plaintiffs’ representative would submit to the court the file of the investigation conducted by the CID so that I could form my own opinion regarding the investigatory actions carried out and the manner in which the investigation was carried out, and to learn if the actions taken by the CID were sufficient or not.  However, it was the plaintiffs that objected to submitting the full file of the investigation as evidence, even though the defendant agreed to do so.  Thus did the plaintiffs, by their own actions, introduce circumstances in which an extremely important tool to examine their claims was denied to the court.

After examining the evidentiary material and studying the claims made by representatives of both sides, I reached the conclusion that the CID investigation was conducted appropriately and without fault.

j.      With regard to the claims made regarding evidentiary damages relating to the Institute of Forensic Medicine:

Investigators from the CID concluded that in order to advance the investigation, an autopsy would have to be performed on the decedent.  As a result, they approached the District Court in Rishon LeZion and asked for a court order that would allow for such an autopsy.  The court order “…that the body be autopsied at the Abu Kabir Institute for Forensic Medicine by a doctor who is not in the military and in the presence of a representative of the American State Department” (Exhibit 6/T).

Professor Hiss testified that since the American Consulate saw no need to send a representative to be present at the autopsy, the autopsy was conducted, with the family’s agreement, without a consular representative.  He also testified that the Consulate sent a fax confirming that the autopsy could be conducted without a representative from the family (Exhibit 11/T).

After examining the evidentiary material and studying the claims made by representatives of both sides, I reached the conclusion that the plaintiffs’ claim of evidentiary damage by the Institute for Forensic Medicine seems strange.  This is because the decedent’s father himself testified that, from the outset, the family had no intention of conducting an autopsy and that their intention was to pursue the matter diplomatically in order to clarify what happened to the decedent.  Moreover: it appears that the decedent’s family had no interest regarding the identity of the Consular representative that was to be present during the autopsy, nor in the type of professional training they had had.  The family wanted a Consular representative to be present even if a secretary or typist had been sent!

Professor Hiss explained in his testimony that the aforementioned fax was sent to him after he telephoned the United States Embassy and asked that they send an American doctor to be present at the autopsy.  He claims that the embassy did not find a need to do so.  Professor Hiss asked to receive approval from the decedent’s family and he then received the fax 11/T in which it is specifically stated that the decedent’s family agreed to the autopsy and that no other faxes would be sent.

I believe that under these circumstances, Professor Hiss was well within his rights to conclude that, ultimately, the decedent’s family conceded its demand for a representative to be present during the autopsy.  The family’s desire was to receive the decedent’s body as soon as possible.  Indeed, the family did not conduct any additional examinations after receiving the decedent’s body and it was cremated: see Mr. Craig Corrie’s testimony.

I am aware of the fact that, according to the language of the District Court’s decision regarding the autopsy of the decedent’s body, there should have been a representative of the US Embassy present during the autopsy.  However, under the circumstances, when it was explained that the embassy saw no reason to send a representative, as Professor Hiss testified, and because the fax sent to Professor Hiss (11/T) stated that the family agreed to the autopsy, we can understand why Professor Hiss believed that there was nothing preventing him from conducting the autopsy without an embassy representative being present.  There is no doubt that the proper course of action would have been to return to the District Court so that, in light of the change in circumstances, the court could amend its decision and remove the condition regarding the presence of an embassy representative.  However, given the circumstances and in light of the aforementioned, it is not clear what evidentiary damage was made to the plaintiffs’ case because of the conduct of the Institute of Forensic Medicine.

With regard to the plaintiffs’ claim regarding the recording documenting the autopsy, I found no grounds to accept it.  It is an audio recording (as opposed to a video recording) which served as a draft for Professor Hiss when preparing his report.  Recordings like this are made because, during an autopsy, the doctor’s hands are holding scalpels and covered in blood, and therefore notes cannot be taken.  Apparently, the aforementioned audio recording simply does not exist anymore because, due to budgetary problems, the Institute of Forensic Medicine recycles tapes (see the testimony given by Professor Hiss).  Under these circumstances, it is not clear what evidentiary damage was caused to the plaintiffs as a result of the aforementioned draft having been erased due to recycling.

In summation, with regard to evidentiary damages, I hereby determine that the two cumulative conditions necessary as laid out in the precedent determined by the Supreme Court were not upheld.  They did not prove that evidentiary damage was caused which harmed their ability to prove their claims, nor did they prove that the defendant, through negligence, caused the claimed evidentiary damage.

k.    With regard to grounds for assault I hereby determine that there is no foundation for such claims because there is no component of “malice”.  As I have determined that the decedent was killed accidentally and not intentionally, legally the claim regarding grounds for assault must be rejected.
l.      With regard to grounds for negligence:  I am convinced that, given the circumstances created at the location of the incident, the actions taken by the force were without fault.  Indeed, the field of vision of the bulldozer’s operator was limited.  However, the decedent’s field of vision while she stood in front of the bulldozer and knelt down was open and without any limitation.  The decedent could have distanced herself from any danger without any difficulty.  However, she chose to take the risk described above, and that eventually led to her death.

Given these circumstances, I have reached the conclusion that it was not negligence on the part of the defendant or any of its representatives that caused the decedent’s death.  Therefore it can be understood that I reject the claim that there is any foundation for the grounds of negligence in this case.

m.   The defendant claims a “willing endangerment” defense, in accordance with Article 5(A) of the Civil Wrongs ordinance.  I reached the conclusion that the foundation for this defense, as determined by the Supreme Court, has not been proven in this case, and therefore I hereby determine that the aforementioned defense does not exist with regard to this lawsuit.

However, even though I have determined that it was not negligence on the part of the defendant or its representatives that led to the death of the decedent, and although the aforementioned defense does not exist with regard to this lawsuit, it is not enough to change the result of rejecting this claim.

n.    With regard to legal grounds:  It is true that the decedent was killed during the incident that is the focus of this lawsuit.  However, in this case the defendant did not violate the decedent’s right to life.  The decedent put herself in a dangerous situation.  She stood in front of a large bulldozer in a location where the bulldozer’s operator could not see her.  Even when she saw the pile of dirt moving towards her and endangering her, she did not remove herself from the situation, as any reasonable person would have.  The decedent began to climb the pile of dirt, got tangled up in it, fell and eventually died.

The decedent’s death was the result of an accident that the decedent caused.  This occurred despite the efforts of the IDF force to distance her and her colleagues from the area.

I believe that, under these circumstances, there is no justification to obligate the State to pay compensation for damages that the decedent could have prevented, but preferred not to, thereby choosing to risk her life as she did.

Therefore, I reject the request to obligate the State to pay compensation on legal grounds.

6.     Because of this and in light of the aforementioned, I reject the lawsuit.

Because of the circumstance surrounding the decedent’s death, I will not make the plaintiffs’ pay the legal expenses and each side will bear its own costs.

Corrie Street in Ramallah. Photo: ISM Palestine@Flickr

 

NGO Monitor: International Solidarity Movement Culpable in the Death of Rachel Corrie

JERUSALEM – In anticipation of the expected verdict on Tuesday, August 28 in the civil court case brought by the parents of Rachel Corrie, Jerusalem based NGO Monitor released the following statement:

 

“Rachel Corrie’s death was a tragedy, but it could have been prevented. Leaders of the ISM movement have repeatedly made statements in support of violence,” said Prof. Gerald Steinberg, president of NGO Monitor.

 

The International Solidarity Movement describes itself as “a Palestinian-led movement committed to resisting the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land using nonviolent, direct-action methods and principles.” The ISM has a long record of encouraging activists to take “direct action”, even if that means putting them in harm’s way, often in direct confrontations with the Israel Defense Forces. Rachel Corrie’s actions as an ISM activist were very much part of this strategy of dangerous confrontation.

 

In 2002 ISM co-founders Adam Shapiro and Huwaida Arraf stated, “The Palestinian resistance must take on a variety of characteristics, both non-violent and violent…Yes, people will get killed and injured,” but these deaths are “no less noble than carrying out a suicide operation. And we are certain that if these men were killed during such an action, they would be considered shaheed Allah.”

 

According to Steinberg, “ISM’s cynical and immoral strategy endangers the lives of its members. ISM co-founder Thomas Saffold showed an utter lack of regret over Corrie’s death, boasting afterwards that ‘we’re like a peace army. Generals send young men and women off to operations, and some die.’ Her bereaved parents should address the ISM for causing her wrongful death, and not target the IDF that is charged with protecting Israeli civilians against terrorism.”

 

The ISM has made no effort to hide its affiliation with organizations that seek the destruction of the State of Israel. In 2002 activists with the ISM attempted to act as human shields for terrorists occupying Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity. In 2003, ISM activist Susan Barclay acknowledged that she worked with representatives of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. More recently the ISM has been involved with the “Free Gaza Flotilla” and violent protests again the security barrier in Ni’lin, where an ISM activist was injured. Despite the number of casualties ISM continues to encourage activists’ entry into conflict zones, further endangering them. Rachel Corrie’s parents are compounding the tragedy by lending their names to the immoral campaigns to demonize Israel.

 

 

For more details on ISM, go to this page on the NGO Monitor website.

UPDATE: Put International Solidarity Movement on Trial for Rachel Corrie’s Death, CiF Watch

 
 

AN IMPORTANT SECTION OF THE IRISH LEFT BEGINS TO FIGHT AGAINST THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD OVER LIBYA AND SYRIA

 

 

An important section of the left in Ireland is fighting against the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria, and some sections of the left have also opposed the war on Muammar Gadhafi and on the Mubarak Government by the same Muslim Brotherhood.

 

The picture above is of demonstrators of this section of the left (last Friday in Dublin) against Amnesty International.

 

This is actually a most important and a very big development.

 

4international believes that capitalist governments, led by the US Government(s) have created an Alliance with Islam, and the Muslim Brotherhood in particular.

 

Thus principled fighters on the left in Ireland took sharp exception to the recruitment by the CIA of Muslim Brotherhood operatives (in Ireland itself) who were later transported to Libya, there to take part in the murders, of Muammar Gadhafi and also of thousands of black ordinary workers who had gone to Libya, and who found sanctuary and work in Gadhafi’s Libya.

 

And they are carrying on this struggle in defending Assad against the same Muslim Brotherhood, backed by the US and Britain. Hence the protest featured above against the CIA controlled Amnesty International.

 

This takes its form in Ireland also where a prominent journalist on The Irish Times has been writing very partisan articles in support of Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

But these fighters for the truth in Ireland must also take on board that Hamas is the Palestine section of the Muslim Brotherhood and they will certainly take over the whole of the Palestine Arab movement against Israel.

 

This in turn must lead to a re-examination by these principled people of the Left in Ireland of just what is Zionism?

 

4international has long maintained that Zionism is nothing more or less than a national movement, just as that led by Collins and DeValera, James Connolly also.

 

If you live in Ireland and would like to help 4international with meetings on these issues get in touch.

 

(written by Felix Quigley)

STOP IRAN

 

4international publishes this remarkable essay which centres on Iran’s drive to the Nuclear Bomb and the way that this is being helped along by all the nations on earth with the exception of Israel. The analysis here by the essayist Joseph Zaalishvili is unanswerable. Facts layered upon facts.

He goes very deep. In the early paragraphs he says he does not understand the phenomenon, and then he writes like a Marxist economist when he suggests it may be the economic crisis in the capitalist system. He does not use the words “capitalist system” but what else can it be?

This is must reading for everybody. You must keep in mind and perhaps make some allowance for the fact that he does not understand anything about the history of the Russian Revolution.

Yet this gap in his knowledge on another level is unforgivable. In 1917 the Czarist state had collapsed, then the capitalist state under kerensky ran smack bang up against the interests of hundreds of millions when Kerensky refused to withdraw from the war (The First World War) and take other measures to alleviate the suffering of the millions of ordinary people.

In fact in one sense the Bolsheviks were URGED ON to take the power by the millions of workers, because they knew very well that a bloody counter revolution led by Kerensky was underway.

Another point hardly ever addressed is that the Russian Revolution saved the great swath of Jewry in Russia from Holocaust. Kerensky was joining forces with those old forces who were imbued with Antisemitism. It is not known either or is hidden that the White Russians were to go on to form the German Nazis and create the Nazi Holocaust. The Bolsheviks have never been given the credit. In fact that has been deliberately hidden because I have written about this on Israpundit and certain Jewish writers have deliberately ignored this information.

It is clear then that Joseph Zaalishvili has not studied any of this, or else he has studied it, knows very well and thus is ideologically driven against the truth. For example and proof of this many of his references are to Stalinism (he talks about the cruelty of Stalin but totally omits or obscures that the greatest enemy who Stalin had was Trotsky and that Stalin almost certainly poisoned linen) which as we all know is the actual “Gravedigger” of the Revolution.

 

{IMPORTANT ESSAY ON IRAN BEGINS HERE}

“There is a saying: time is money… But this expression has changed. Its meaning has changed. In the 21st century, the more accurate expression is that time is security.

I do not know why this is so. Maybe the global financial crisis that has destroyed the economies of many countries is to blame.

With each passing day Iran and the Islamic world come closer to developing nuclear weapons.

Is this so hard to see? Is it not clear that Iran’s nuclear program was not created for peaceful purposes?

Haven’t all the latest speeches by the President, religious leaders, the President of parliament and other leaders of the Islamic Republic confirmed this fact?

The fact that the Saudi king put Ahmadinejad in the place of honor when they met, and that Iranian officials have recently visited Russia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Turkey, Lebanon, and Syria — doesn’t all this matter more than what they say to President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton?

The Iranian Minister of Industries and Business, Mehdi Ghazanfari, during a meeting with the Iraqi Minister of Industry, Ahmed Nassir Dalli Al Karboli, stressed the importance of close ties between Iran and Baghdad in the field of economics and industry, and said that it was important to improve bilateral relations through joint investment.

Mehdi Ghazanfari announced Iran’s readiness to invest and implement infrastructure projects in Iraq, provide for the needs of that country, and supply the Iraqi market a variety of industrial and agricultural products.

Ahmed Nassir Dalli Al Karboli, in turn, said that Iran is a developed industrialized power, and called for greater cooperation in the field of mining.

He said that Iraq needs Iran’s experience in manufacturing and mining, and stressed the need to expand bilateral cooperation in the automotive industry and the creation of joint businesses.

The Iraqi minister pointed out that in Iraq the door for Iranian investors is always open.

Can anyone believe that the oil embargo and economic sanctions alone can stop Islamic supremacism? Unfortunately, I am not one of them.

How can we trust only sanctions, when the current U.S. administration cannot even convince its partners and allies to boycott the Islamic Republic of Iran?

Isn’t that reason enough? Is Iran a democratic state? Does it not infringe upon the rights of citizens? Is it threatened by anyone? Does it not pose a danger? And for whom? Does it not pose a threat to the world both militarily, politically and economically?

Again I remember the time when the world was suspicious of the Soviet Union. What distinguishes Iran from that country? Just the fact that in the Soviet Union there lived people of different faiths.

In the USSR, there was the KGB. In Iran there are the “Revolutionary Guards.”

In the Soviet Union one could get killed for dissent; in Iran, too.

The Soviet Union ruled by an aggressive anti-human ideology; Iran does, too. It is Islam.

In the USSR, people were forced to learn Lenin’s books; in Iran, the book of Muhammad.

The General Secretary of the Communist Party, Khrushchev, gave the world the Cuban Missile Crisis on October 14, 1962, and nearly caused a nuclear war. The Soviet Union supported the Arabs living in Palestine. Iran, too.

So where’s the difference?

Iran does the same things, but this time it’s much more serious. There are new technologies and more hate. The hatred that comes from the ideology of Islam. And America is not the same, either. Unfortunately.

Well, at that time, during the days of the Soviet Union, the Obama administration did not rule America. If it had, I would not be alive to write to you now. Yes, and many other millions would never have seen the sunlight.

A delegation led by Deputy Prime Minister of Iraq Rowsch Nuri Shaways arrived August 14 on an official visit to Tehran.

The Deputy Prime Minister was accompanied by the Ministers of Industry, Trade, Energy and Finance, as well as by the heads of the central bank and customs administration of Iraq.

In a three-day visit, they discussed issues of economic relations between Iraq and Iran and opened a branch of the Iraqi bank in Iran.

Iran will aid the Iraqi reconstruction grid and establish the export electricity to Syria, ISNA reported on Thursday, with reference to the Iranian Minister of Energy, Majid Namdz.

Namdz made this statement during a meeting with Energy Minister Karim Aftanom of Iraq.

According to Namdz, Iraq does not have sufficient electrical capacity to transfer the necessary amount of energy to the country. Since Iraq is now experiencing some technical problems with electrical power, Iran will provide help. At the end of September Iran plans to provide the necessary equipment.

Iraq imports from Iran 1200 MW of electricity per day. In July, Iraq’s debt to Iran for electricity amounted to 500 million dollars.

In addition, through Iraq, Iran sells electricity to Syria and Lebanon.

“We will establish the supply of electricity from Iran to the Iraqi city of Basra,” said Namdz, adding that the first contract was just about to be signed.

In July, Iran and Syria signed two memoranda of understanding on expansion of bilateral cooperation in the field of electricity and water.

In one of the memos, Iran will initially export 50 MW of electricity to Syria through Iraq. In the next phase, electricity exports will increase to 200 MW.

As a result of an economic development plan, in 2015, Iran will increase power generation by 25 GW, and bring it up to 73 GW of energy, the minister said.

Iran currently exchanges electricity with Turkey, Armenia, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Hmm…

The 16th NAM Summit, to be held from 26 to 31 August in Tehran, is a historic opportunity for Iran, in the mind of the Islamic leadership.

The Vice President of the Islamic Republic of Iran for parliamentary affairs, Lutfullah Furuzanda, said that Iran participates in the dialogue about justice and Islamic awakening, and the convening of the 16th NAM Summit in Tehran is a historic opportunity to further this dialogue.

Furuzanda added that the member countries of NAM demonstrate the essence of the Islamic Revolution, the trust and participation of the people, and the progress and achievements of Iranian experts in the nuclear arena, as well as the nature of the sanctions against Iran.

Furuzanda also stressed the need to expose the true face of the imperialists and Zionists, and said that if the member countries of NAM do not come together and start a common dialogue, world imperialism will continue its expansionist policies until it is destroyed as a movement.

And it all happens in the 21st century. Does this meeting and all other such meetings not represent a danger to global security? Who, where, when, why — all go to Tehran.

Is such a meeting not the best way to share or sell information, as well as scientific achievements and technology?

Can we assume that the countdown has already begun?

Ten, nine, eight … three, two…

Posted by Joseph Zaalishvili on August 23, 2012
 

THE WAR ON ISRAEL BY PALESTINIAN JIHADISTS IS A WAR ON INNOCENT CIVILIANS

City of San Francisco to place sharia-compliant disclaimers next to every AFDI pro-Israel bus ad

Pro-freedom bus ad
PAMELA GELLER WRITES ON ATLAS SHRUGS

“Scott Goldstein, President of Titan Transit advertising, just called me. Titan handles the outdoor ads for San Francisco MUNI and BART.

In an unprecedented move, the city of San Francisco is placing ads right next to every one of our pro-Israel ads on San Francisco Muni buses, saying (according to CBS San Francisco) “Muni doesn’t support this message.”

 

 

This is unprecedented in the history of outdoor advertising. This is the manifestation of Sharia in Western society. Any war on innocent civilians is savage. They are reading the idea that “all Muslims” or “all Arabs” want to destroy Israel into my ad. That is nowhere in my message. They are the Islamophobes and racists.

The rush to assure the world that the “Palestinian” jihadists that they are not savages amazes me. The war on Israel is a war on innocent civilians. The targeting of civilians is savage. The relentless 60-year campaign of terror against the Jewish people is savage. The torture of hostage Gilad Shalit was savage. The bloody hacking to death of the Fogel family was savage. The Munich Olympic massacre was savage. The unspeakable torture of Ehud Goldwasser was savage. The tens of thousands of rockets fired from Gaza into southern Israel (into schools, homes, etc.) are savage. The vicious Jew-hatred behind this genocide is savage. The endless demonization of the Jewish people in the Palestinian and Arab media is savage. The refusal to recognize the state of Israel as a Jewish state is savage. The list is endless.

 

But what galls me are the scores of anti-Israel ads that ran without a disclaimer. Why didn’t they have a problem with the anti-Jewish ads? San Francisco has run a number of anti-israel ad campaigns. Why did they not run this disclaimer next to those ads? That silence is sanction and tacit approval. Institutionalized anti-semitism. Who cares if Muni approves the message or not? It is not their job to agree or disagree.

 

And for the Jews who are silent in the face of Islamic Jew-hatred to issue a kneejerk denunciation of me, you have six million (and counting) voiceless to whom you will have to answer.

 

I want to extend this ad’s run in San Francisco. Please help me do this. Contribute here.

Posted by on Friday, August 17, 2012 Iranian President: “Tumor” of Israel Will Soon Be Destroyed

 

 

WWW.4INTERNATIONAL.ME IS SUPPORTING THIS AD CAMPAIGN BY PAMELA GELLER 100 PER CENT

 

AND WE ARE DEFENDING GELLER AND SPENCER OF JIHADWATCH AGAINST DHIMMI JEWS WHO DO NOT WANT TO FIGHT AGAINST THE PALESTINIAN JIHADIST WAR ON ISRAEL AND JEWS. SUCH AS THE ADL!

 

WHY ATTACK GELLER AND SPENCER, 4INTERNATIONAL ASKS?

DID GELLER AND SPENCER SEND SUICIDE BOMBERS IN TO KILL ANY PEOPLE OF ANY DESCRIPTION?

THEY STAND FOR ALL THAT IS DECENT IN LIFE

SO WHAT LIES BEHIND THESE DHIMMI JEW TRAITOR ATTACKS ON THESE TWO AND OTHER FREEDOM FIGHTERS?

 

 

FURTHERMORE IRAN HAS LAST FRIDAY TOLD THE WORLD THAT ISRAEL IS A CANCER THAT WILL BE CUT OUT…IT IS A TUMOUR ETC.

THAT IS THE LANGUAGE OF NAZIS. THAT CAN ONLY END IN THE MURDER OF JEWS AND IF THESE GENOCIDISTS ARE ALLOWED A GREAT KILLING OF JEWS.

 

 

SO PLEASE, WHO ARE THE SAVAGES IN THIS?

 

GELLER IS CORRECT! MORE POWER TO HER CAMPAIGN IN AMERICA. WE NEED IT IN DUBLIN!

 

 

 

Media silence on this relentless genocidal rhetoric against Israel. But my ads are “offensive” and “racist.” If this isn’t savagery, what is?

Ahmadinejad: “Tumor” of Israel Will Soon Be Destroyed
Israel is a “cancerous tumor” that will soon be finished off, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Friday told demonstrators holding an annual protest against the existence of the Jewish state. “The Zionist regime and the Zionists are a cancerous tumor. Even if one cell of them is left in one inch of (Palestinian) land, in the future this story (of Israel’s existence) will repeat,” he said. “The nations of the region will soon finish off the usurper Zionists in the Palestinian land….A new Middle East will definitely be formed.”  (AFP)
    See also Iran’s Supreme Leader: Liberation of Palestine Responsibility of All Muslims
Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei underlined the importance of this year’s International Quds [Jerusalem] Day rallies, and reiterated that liberating Palestine from the grip of Israel and its allies is a religious duty for all Muslims across the world. The Leader described the occupation of the Palestinian territories and the formation of the Israeli regime as the root of evil in the Middle East. International Quds Day was started by the late Founder of the Islamic Republic, Imam Khomeini. (Fars-Iran)

WE TROTSKYISTS ON 4INTERNATIONAL BACK ASSANGE UNCONDITIONALLY

www.4international.me calls for the UNCONDITIONAL defence of Julian Assange

 

We are proud Trotskyists and we have no interest whatsoever in the goings on in a bourgeois court in Sweden which wants Assange charged so that then he can be cleared and snuck across to the US where the Imperialist section of America will certainly execute him, or imprison him for 40 years (Jonathan Pollard is now in his 28th year and all Pollard did was stick up for Israel and the Jews AGAINST IRAN AND ANTISEMITISM.)

 

REASON THAT WE SUPPORT ASSANGE SO STRONGLY

 

We support Assange so strongly because he gave an enormous amount of information to the world, and we cannot survive in our battle against this horrific system of capitalism if we do not have ALL of the information that it is possible to have.

 

This is an issue for the working class in every country, and especially for the British workers, and above all the British trade Unions.

 

The British workers need to know every single detail of every intrigue that their rulers are entering into on the world scene.

 

This is the most reactionary, now decrepid, bloodthirsty ruling elite in the world. Their history in Ireland down the centuries…what can we say! But it is in the support for the Nazi Muslim Brotherhood in the “Arab Nightmare” and especially the murder of Muammar Gadhafi in Libya where they were at their worst.

 

We need to know every detail of this. By studying what Assange released we can learn their methods. The workers of the world can learn the lessons too!

 

When Lenin and Trotsky led the Russian Revolution they stated that there would be no secrets and that they would expose the Imperialists. The diplomatic bags were opened and the contents spilled to the workers of the world.

 

Assange is not a Marxist, Trotskyist and/or revolutionary.

 

No matter, his actions have been most progressive. We back him UNCONDITIONALLY

 

FOLLOWING IS PART OF THE REACTIONARY TELEGRAPH REPORT ON THE AFFAIR

 

{note here the use of the term “so-called”}

The threat to appeal to the so-called “World Court” followed William Hague’s promise to arrest Mr Assange if he tries to leave the Ecuadorean Embassy in London.

Mr Assange has taken refuge in the Knightsbridge embassy near Harrods department store for the last two months to avoid being extradited to Sweden, where he faces allegations of sexual assault.

Britain had threatened it would use a rarely cited law to revoke the embassy’s diplomatic protection, and would barge into the embassy if Ecuador did not hand over Mr Assange.

Ecuador condemned the threat as a “complete intimidation”.

 

 

Sir Tony Brenton, who served as the United Kingdom’s ambassador to Russia between 2004 and 2008, said “arbitrarily” overturning the status of the building where Mr Assange has taken shelter to avoid extradition, would make life “impossible” for British diplomats overseas.

But embassies are not fully exempt from the jurisdiction of the countries they’re in and are not sovereign territory of the represented state.

The FCO wrote to the embassy saying “You need to be aware that there is a legal base in the UK, the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987, that would allow us to take actions in order to arrest Mr Assange in the current premises of the Embassy.

“We sincerely hope that we do not reach that point, but if you are not capable of resolving this matter of Mr Assange’s presence in your premises, this is an open option for us.”

Baltasar Garzon, Mr Assange’s lawyer who came to international attention in 1998 when he indicted Chilean ex-dictator Augusto Pinochet, said Britain was acting far beyond its authority because Mr Assange was a political refugee accepted for asylum by a sovereign nation and Britain was obligated to honour that.

“They have to comply with diplomatic and legal obligations under the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, and respect the sovereignty of a country that has granted asylum,” he told the Spanish newspaper El Pais.

The refugee convention defines who is a refugee, and sets out the rights of individuals granted asylum and the responsibilities of nations that grant asylum.

It provides for special travel arrangements for refugees granted asylum under the convention.

He said: “If Britain doesn’t comply with its obligations, we will go before International Court of Justice to demand that Britain complies with its obligations because there is a person who runs the risk of being persecuted politically.”

Mr Assange has argued, and Ecuador agreed the evidence was strong, that the extradition to Sweden was a pretext for him to be sent to the US, where authorities were incensed by WikiLeaks’ 2010 release of 391,832 secret US documents on the Iraqi war and 77,000 classified Pentagon documents on the Afghan conflict.

The whistle-blowing web site also made available about 250,000 confidential diplomatic cables between the U.S. State Department and more than 270 U.S. diplomatic outposts around the world.

Unconfirmed reports cited by The New York Times indicate a secret grand jury hearing in Alexandria, Va., was considering a U.S. Justice Department bid to charge Assange with espionage.

Leaked emails from Strategic Forecasting Inc., a global intelligence company, suggest a sealed indictment is ready to be made public when US officials determine the legal proceedings against Mr Assange in Britain and Sweden have come to a close.

Mr Assange claims Washington may want to execute him for “political crimes” associated with exposing government secrets.

He denies 2010 allegations of sexual molestation, coercion and rape made by two women in Stockholm, where he was promoting his website.

He is wanted for questioning on one count of unlawful coercion, two of sexual molestation and one of rape.

Swedish prosecutors say they have solid case against Assange, but have not charged him with a crime.

WikiLeaks said Mr Assange, 41, would give a “live” media statement “in front of” the Ecuadorean Embassy Sunday, when he will have been at the facility for two months.

He could be seized if Britain deems he has stepped outside the building’s normally diplomatically protected zone.

British authorities intensified a police presence around the embassy.

About three dozen elite and other police units surrounded the embassy early Friday.

The Union of South American Nations, modelled on the European Union, said it would convene an “extraordinary meeting” in Ecuador Sunday to discuss the embassy crisis.

“We will not allow Mr Assange safe passage out of the United Kingdom, nor is there any legal basis for us to do so,” British Foreign Secretary William Hague said Thursday.