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: and on

…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….



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.




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 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)



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.



“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.


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


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

Pro-freedom bus ad

“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























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 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.)




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




{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.






“Egyptian Cleric Hashem Islam Issues Fatwa Permitting the Killing of Anti-Morsi Demonstrators,” from MEMRI, n.d.:


Following are excerpts from a TV show, posted on the Internet on August 14, 2012, in which Egyptian cleric Hashem Islam, a member of the Al-Azhar Fatwa Committee, issues a fatwa against potential demonstrators on August 24, and from a later TV show, which aired on Dream 1 TV on August 15.

The Internet, August 14, 2012:

Hashem Islam: The revolution planned for August 24 is a par excellence revolution of kharijite apostasy against democracy and freedom. I am currently working on a relevant fatwa.


The legitimate president is Dr. Mohamed Morsi, and anyone who goes out [to protest] on August 24 will be revolution against the January 25 Revolution, and will be committing the crimes of hiraba and high treason against the country, against Allah, against his messenger, and against the believers.

Therefore, I convey the following fatwa to the Egyptian people: Confront these people, and if they fight you, fight them. Oh people of Egypt, confront these people, and if they fight you, fight them. If some of you are killed by them, you will go to Paradise, and if you kill them, no “blood money” will be warranted, because their killing is permissible. Allah’s mercy and blessings upon you….




Egypt’s Jihad Organizations Call for Christian Genocide

{FROM JIHADWATCH}According to today’s issue of El Fegr, “Elements of terrorist, jihadi organizations distributed leaflets today inciting for the killing of Copts in Suez, Ismailia, and Upper Egypt, promising them [Copts] a tragic end if they do not return to the truth.”

An image of a copy of the letter appears on El Fegr’s website. Titled “An Urgent and Important Notice,” it begins by calling on “all brothers and sisters” to “kill or physically attack the enemies of the religion of Allah—the Christians in all of Egypt’s provinces, the slaves of the Cross, Allah’s curse upon them…”

It proceeds to promise a monetary reward for whoever helps “achieve Allah’s rights against his enemies.”


As a testimony to how safe the jihadi organizations of today’s Egypt feel under the new president, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muhammad Morsi, the usual cryptic language is dropped, as the letter names contact points and even a mosque, Sheikh Ahmed Mosque in Kasfrit, where those interested should rally “after Friday prayers where new members to the organization will be welcomed.”

This genocide has been called until Egypt’s Christians “return to the truth,” a reference apparently meaning that Egypt’s Christians must either embrace “the truth”—that is, Islam, which they must convert to—or else return to the truths of the religion, which holds that Christians must embrace their subhuman dhimmi status (Koran 9:29).

Both forced conversions and dhimmi status for Christians are a regular feature of Egypt’s landscape, past and present.
Subsequent news reports cite the growing fear and terror among Egypt’s Christian population.

Posted by Raymond on August 14, 2012




{FROM JIHADWATCH} “Morsi ‘to Make Changes in Camp David Accords,'” by Gil Ronen for Arutz Sheva, August 14 (thanks to Voice of the Copts):

Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi will discuss, in coming days, making changes in the Camp David Accord signed with Israel. The changes will allow Egypt “to implement its full sovereignty over the Sinai Peninsula.”


The Camp David Accord was in essence about making peace with the Jews, and also partly being bribed by the US, and also through this the US building up a large army in Egypt to use against Israel. It was peace of a kind, and a cold peace at that. But Morsi is 180 degrees different.



The Muslim Brotherhood is 100 degrees immersed in Antisemitism



It cannot be otherwise because the origin of Islam was based on the massacre of Jews. And the Muslim Brotherhood is (Antisemi






“This is Obama’s legacy, the malignancy of his anti-freedom, pro-jihad foreign policy. American history is forever stained with our tacit sanction of the persecution, slaughter, and oppression of non-Muslim minorities in countries we helped enslave. We will live with this for generations, and our children will pay an unimaginable price.

This is our nightmare, and he is the nightmare of freedom-loving peoples across the world”.

“U.S. ignores abuse of Christian women in Egypt” Washington Times, August 14, 2012 (thanks to David)

[….] Coptic Christian women are routinely victimized and forcibly converted by Muslims in Egypt, Miss Ghaly says.

In its annual Religious Freedom Report, released July 30, the U.S. State Department acknowledged the problem, but at the same time appeared to downplay it. The report described forcible conversions as “disputed,” asserting that while there were “occasional claims” of Muslim men forcing Coptic women (and sometimes girls younger than legal age) to convert to Islam, these accounts “often included inflammatory allegations and categorical denials of kidnapping and rape.”

Miss Ghaly has no faith in the current U.S. administration. “I feel that politically the United States will look after its own interests,” Miss Ghaly said. “I feel that they favor the Muslim Brotherhood and [Egyptian President Mohammed] Morsi more than the human rights of the Copts.”

Miss Ghaly has devoted the past 15 years to researching the problem of forced conversion in Egypt. In 2004, she teamed up with John Eibner, president of Christian Solidarity International, a human rights organization that has focused on the maltreatment of Christians and other religious minorities in the Middle East.

Mr. Eibner introduced Miss Ghaly to anti-trafficking activist Michelle Clark. Ms. Clark, an adjunct professor with the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University, is former head of the Anti-Trafficking Assistance Unit at the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

The women wrote two reports for Christian Solidarity International on the forced conversion issue, the latest released last month. The State Department report mentioned their July study, but said “local human rights groups were unable to verify such cases.”

The report’s co-authors took issue with this. “They do not believe reports and findings such as this one, but they believe Muslims who say that these stories are full of lies,” Miss Ghaly said.

“We stand by the report,” Ms. Clark said. “We did this work through good and professional methodology. We know who we talked to.”

Their research reveals a climate where women and their families are often afraid to talk for fear of Muslim retribution. “We met in hushed rooms and church courtyards because people feel safe there,” Ms. Clark said. “The Coptic community is afraid of any reprisal, afraid of what might happen.”

Egypt’s Copts are no strangers to discrimination and violence. Church burnings were common during the regime of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. A car bomb last Christmas Eve killed 21 Christians. Since Mr. Mubarak was overthrown, U.S. immigration courts have seen an escalation in Coptic requests for asylum, specifically from Christian women who either escape abduction or fear abduction by Muslim men.

This is happening although the country’s new president, a former member of the Muslim Brotherhood, has pledged to be a “president for all Egyptians,” including Christians. “We will face together the strife and conspiracies that target our national unity,” he said.

Miss Ghaly does not believe President Morsi. Indeed, she believes he will “make things worse for the Copts.” When she visited Egypt recently, she said she saw heightened religious discrimination. She was spat on, insulted and humiliated for wearing a cross, she says.











According to today’s issue of El Fegr, “Elements of terrorist, jihadi organizations distributed leaflets today inciting for the killing of Copts in Suez, Ismailia, and Upper Egypt, promising them [Copts] a tragic end if they do not return to the truth.”

An image of a copy of the letter appears on El Fegr’s website. Titled “An Urgent and Important Notice,” it begins by calling on “all brothers and sisters” to “kill or physically attack the enemies of the religion of Allah—the Christians in all of Egypt’s provinces, the slaves of the Cross, Allah’s curse upon them…” It proceeds to promise a monetary reward for whoever helps “achieve Allah’s rights against his enemies.”

As a testimony to how safe the jihadi organizations of today’s Egypt feel under the new president, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muhammad Morsi, the usual cryptic language is dropped, as the letter names contact points and even a mosque, Sheikh Ahmed Mosque in Kasfrit, where those interested should rally “after Friday prayers where new members to the organization will be welcomed.”

This genocide has been called until Egypt’s Christians “return to the truth,” a reference apparently meaning that Egypt’s Christians must either embrace “the truth”—that is, Islam, which they must convert to—or else return to the truths of the religion, which holds that Christians must embrace their subhuman dhimmi status (Koran 9:29).

Both forced conversions and dhimmi status for Christians are a regular feature of Egypt’s landscape, past and present.

Subsequent news reports cite the growing fear and terror among Egypt’s Christian population.



Felix Quigley

US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said Tuesday night that he doesn’t believe Israel has made a decision to attack Iran’s nuclear program. “As a sovereign country, they will ultimately make decisions based on what they think is in their national security interest,” he said, but he believed there was “still room to continue to negotiate” and “additional sanctions were beginning to have an additional impact.”  The Secretary added that the Israeli prime minister agrees that military action should be the last resort.
At their joint press briefing in Washington, Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said: “I am not privy to [Israel’s] planning. So what I’m telling you is based on what I know of their capabilities. And I may not know about all of their capabilities. But I think it’s fair… to say they could delay but not destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities.”


debkafile’s military and intelligence sources say that neither official said anything new.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak have reiterated firmly that the government had not reached a decision on whether to attack Iran. They have fully agreed it must be the last, not the first, option.
The fly in the ointment of US-Israeli interchanges on the subject is to be found in Gen. Dempsey’s rather than Panetta’s phrasing. For instance:
1. Dempsey: “I may not know all of their [Israel’s] capabilities.”



{Here is an important point made by debka. As we on say continually after the Nazi Holocaust only the Jews must be responsible for the security of the Jews.

This is what stuck in the craw of the left pro Islam Fascists who run the Indymedia Ireland site. We proved on that site that the essence of this Fascism in Ireland is Holocaust denial, the very worst form of Antisemitism.

Debka here points out that the US is not privy to the Jews and Iran. the Jews of Israel rightly keep this to themselves. read this carefully since it is most important.}



debkafile: The US army chief may know all there is to know about those capabilities but may not be fully apprised of how they are to be used, or when. That doesn’t mean he has no notion of Israel’s plans of operations, but the tight compartmentalization of top-level and IDF operational decision-making on the Iranian topic necessarily results in him not being privy, as he said himself, to every last detail of Israeli planning for action against a nuclear Iran.


This does not rule out Israel, at the critical moment, forewarning Panetta and Dempsey – and through them President Barack Obama – about the event to come.
2. Dempsey:   “But I think it’s fair… to say they [Israel] could delay but not destroy Iran’s nuclear capabilities.”
debkafile:  This premise is accurate: Neither Netanyahu and Barak or the IDF generals and security chiefs, past and present, who urge Israel to strike Iran’s nuclear capabilities (They are numerous although antagonists are featured on front pages.) presume that Iran’s nuclear program can be leveled to the ground at one stroke. Israel hopes to hold it up for a couple of years.


But this raises another question: Isn’t it too late for even the United States with its superior capabilities to aspire to total Iran’s nuclear capabilities?  
Neither Panetta nor Dempsey discussed this US capacity but, according to our sources, while the Americans can certainly achieve more and longer-lasting destruction than Israel, they too can no longer destroy the program in its entirety. But they could delay it for four to five years, double the grace period Israel could achieve.
It must be stressed that the longer the world waits for diplomacy or sanctions to take effect and holds back from direction action, the faster the options for even slowing down Iran’s nuclearization shrink – not just for Israel but for the United States too.


The last moment for the United States and Israel, separately or together, to have destroyed Iran’s program went by without action four years ago in 2007. Today, the best they can achieve is to temporarily hold Iran back from building a bomb.


{Finally I consider this is amost important analysis by debka. It says what we on 4international say, the Jews are responsible for the Jews. Strike iran Now! Delay them from getting the Nuclear Bomb. We do not yet know what that time will bring but it is fatal to hesitate. Also expect NOTHING but opposition from Obama and Romney.}

THE PRO-ISLAM “LEFT” FASCISTS ON INDYMEDIA IRELAND NEED TO WASH THEIR MOUTHS OUT is the only organization on the real left which stands in unconditional support and defence of the Jews and Israel.


It is therefore not a surprise that the Fascist Left, which is certainly a pro Islam left, and is also in varying degrees a Holocaust denying left, would reserve greatest hatred for ourselves.


This is from Indymedia. The name used to attack us is “Fuck Israel”. (We would advise the commenters on Indymedia Ireland to wash their mouths out) Anyway this character mouths at me:


“Fuck off with your war-mongering and blood-lust Felix, you NAZI scum”


There is much more of the same, but do we need to read it, on


Essentially the issue is over iran and the Bomb. I say that Israel is going to strike against the Iranian bomb alone because it cannot place its security in the hands of America, of either Obama or Romney.


I argue furthermore that another name for Israel could be “never Again” in the sense that following the Nazi Holocaust the security of the Jews must always be in the hands of the Jews.


Thus on this pro Islam left there is a large amount of Holocaust Denial.


If they really took the Holocaust of the Jews seriously then they would empathise with the Jews over Iran, because goodness knows, Iran has made enough threats against Israel, usually calling it a cancer, or such like.


A new Trotskyist leadership must be built in the Left. The future does belong to socialism because capitalism is in steep decline and both the Republican and Democrats (latter under Carter/Bill Clinton/Obama) are working with Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood,  and thus we need a new left to follow in the footsteps of the Great Russian Workers Revolution led by Lenin and Trotsky.
















Debka begins by looking at what the Iranian Fascists are doing in the plutonium Enrichment field:

At its present rate of enrichment, Iran will have 250 kilograms of 20-percent grade uranium, exactly enough to build its first nuclear bomb, in roughly six weeks, and two-to- four bombs by early 2013, debkafile’s military and intelligence sources report. Hence the leak by an unnamed Israeli security source Sunday, Aug. 12, disclosing Iran’s progress in developing the detonator and fuses for a nuclear warhead which can be fitted onto Shehab-3 ballistic missiles capable of reaching Israel.
Since 20 percent refined uranium is a short jump to weapons grade fuel, Iran will have the capability and materials for building an operational nuclear bomb by approximately October 1.
This knowledge is not news to US President Barack Obama, Saudi King Abdullah, Syrian ruler Bashar Assad, or Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu – and certainly not to Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.  Netanyahu’s comment at the opening of the weekly cabinet meeting Sunday: “All threats against the home front are dwarfed by one – Iran must not be allowed to have nuclear arms!” – was prompted by that deadline.
Ex-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert did not have that information when he “assured” Tel Aviv students Sunday, “Iran’s nuclear program has not reached the threshold necessitating Israeli action now or in the near future.” He further claimed that Israel’s “defense leaders” don’t subscribe to the view that “action now is unavoidable.” Olmert, who stepped down under a cloud of suspected corruption in 2009, has not since then had access to regular intelligence briefings on Iran. So either he spoke out of ignorance or willfully joined an opposition chorus of voices speaking out against Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak.

The fact is that when Olmert approved the Israeli strike for destroying a nuclear reactor under construction by Iran and North Korea in northern Syria in September 2007,  Iran was years away from accumulating enough enriched uranium and the capability to build nuclear warheads.
Both are now within Tehran’s grasp in weeks.


Leading an opposition campaign to bring down the incumbent government is legitimate. Discrediting belated Israeli action to pre-empt a nuclear Iran as fodder for that campaign is not.  If what Olmert and Barack (the same defense minister as today) did in 2007 was necessary then, action now for delaying Iran’s imminent “breakout” to a bomb is many times more necessary and far more urgent.
However Netanyahu and Barak have put themselves in a straitjacket by two lapses:

1.  By foot-dragging on their decision for two years, they have led their opponents at home and in Washington – and Khamenei’s office too – to believe that, by turning on the heat, they can hold Israel back from military action against Iran’s nuclear program until it is too late. The time has been used not just for Iranian nuclear progress, but to enlist ex-politicians and retired generals at home and add them to the voices, especially in the White House, which believe Israel can learn to live with a nuclear-armed Iran.
2.  Netanyahu and Barak have behaved as though a decision on Iran is in their exclusive province, insulated from the turmoil and change swirling through Israel’s Arab neighbors in the past two years.
But the Middle East has a way of catching up with and rushing past slow-moving politicians: 
Sunday, at 10:00 a.m. Netanyahu warned his ministers that no threat was worse than a nuclear Iran. At 17:55 p.m., Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Morsi dropped a bombshell in Cairo. In one fell swoop, he smashed the Egyptian military clique ruling the country for decades, sacked the Supreme Military Council running Egypt since March 2011 and cut the generals off from their business empire by appropriating the defense ministry and military industry.
That fateful eight hours-less-five-minutes have forced Israel’s leaders to take a second look at their plans for Iran.
Morsi’s lightning decisions were the finishing touches that proved the Islamist Bedouin terror attacks in Sinai of Aug. 5 fitted neatly into a secret master plan hatched by Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood to seize full control of rule in Cairo – a plan debkafile first revealed exclusively last Friday, Aug. 10.

Netanyahu now faces one of the hardest dilemmas of his political career – whether to go forward with the Iran operation, which calls for mustering all Israel’s military and defense capabilities – especially for the repercussions, after being suddenly confronted with unforeseen security challenges on its southwestern border, for thirty years a frontier of peace.

The exceptional talents of Netanyahu and Barak to put off strategic decisions until they are overtaken by events has landed Israel in an especially perilous plight, surrounded now by a soon-to-be nuclear-armed Iran from the east;  threatened Syrian chemical warfare from the north and the Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt to its south.


Acording to Debka Morsi has been moving over the past week in order to have the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt take control of the Army. The position of dual power in Egypt was not sustainable.

The question is why within one week Morsi has moved to get rid of Tantawi.
This is a major question that needs to be answered by every class conscious worker, in Ireland and everywhere.

You have now got Fascism in power in many countries, from Tunisia, Libya, Ivory Coast, Sudan, Gaza, and now Egypt.

Al of this in the space of a year. But it is the speed with which the Muslim Brotherhood moved against Tantawi, to take total power, power in this case of the very powerful army, that is so astounding.
This is the pay off from Morsi for the huge betrayals of the Jews by Netanyahu who agreed to coperate with Morsi in Sinai. So now Israeli leaders wil see AMERICAN, made and donated, Egyptian Army tanks on the other side of the wire staring at them from Sinai.



According to the latest Ma’ariv poll (major Israeli daily)


41 per cent of the Israeli public believe that only a military strike can stop Iran going Nuclear.


35 per cent prefer an American strike rather than Israel going it alone


A great number of Israelis think that Iran with the bomb equals the Second Holocaust believe that Israel has no choice. It must make war on the Mullah Nazis before it is too late.


More Jewish lives will be lost because Israel leaders waited too long, and because there is a traitorous class inside Israel which is sometimes called the Left.



The task in any war is to win it decisively and with as few Jewish lives lost as possible.


In this regard the threat is a nuclear attack on Jews. Jews shouild and must deliver a nuclear attack on their enemies.


Syria is involved. (see latest news on debka…


Israel must defend Assad for this reason. The US and EU Capitalism is trying to reorder the world in alliance with the enemies of the Jews, the Jihadists of Islam. So the US is supplying Stingers to Assad’s enemies.


But why? Why is Assad such an enemy? What is the grand strategy of the Imperialists, that is of US, EU, UN and NATO?


It is inconceivable that the US does not have a strategy. Never in its history of hundreds of years did the US not have a strategy.


This is what I believe: The big battle is still in the eyes of the US against Communism, against socialism, and Marx was right the working class (he used the French word “proletariat) is still its nemesis.


In preparation for big battles against the masses the elite much smaller in number is preparing Alliances and one of these Alliances is with Islam, usually in the shape of the Muslim Brotherhood.


Only that way of thinking, and it is a state of mind, can explain the Alliance with Izetbegovic in Bosnia against Serb Christianity, with the Nazi group around Tudjman in Croatia, with the major Alliance with German Nazis following the War as explained in the book “Blowback” by Christopher Simpson.


To the US and EU elites the Jews are expendable. They were in 1933 to 1945 so how could the fundamentals have changed.


And once again the future of the Jews is tied in with the future of the masses of working class people and billions world wide.


Antisemitism is rife but Antisemitism always has had and has today a large component of ignorance.


I meet many intelligent people who are devoid of historical understanding, and thus cannot understand the meaning of Israel.


Israel can be written also by these words “Never Again” but it is amazing how few people actually understand this.


It is on one sense an empathy void.


So the point is was it real? Was the decision to set up Israel as “never Again” real? That is the test that is now in front of Jewish Israeli leaders.


The US has given Stingers to the Savages against the Secularist and relatively speaking cultured Assad.


But the US in 2009 did not lift a finger to help the Iranian youth who were being butchered by the extreme Islamists (not secularists) in the great 2009 Iranian revolt, which was a real revolution. Obama helped the Fascist Mullahs against the Iranians.


So do you think now that Obama cares a hoot about Israel?


Some experts are saying that it is too late for Israel to stop the bomb. But whatever about that Israel has got to remain true to the reason for its founding “never Again”.


Obama and his US, the UN, NATO, the EU all think that Israel is essentially weak in the face of Iran and that it must make compromises. But learning from 1939 to 1945 a compromise is death and betrayal of existence.


Look at how those Clerical fascists have taunted the Jews, for years now.


But because the world runs on oil, and chaotic and anarchic, unplanned, capitalism could not provide a substitute, then Iranian and Saudi oil is very vulnerable.


We do not know if Israel can stop the Iranian Clerical Fascists having their bomb, but we on 4international do know that Israel can paralyse world capitalism and can bring billions of human beings to a standstill.


So Israel HAS all the cards and I say it must be prepared to use them.


And the workers have got to realise that they too will have to take action and to end capitalism, which caused all of these problems.


When Netanyahu visited Washington in 2010 he was totally insulted on many occasions by Obama. Well we will see how in the end that turns out.


These issues are of vital importance for the international workers movement. This time the workers must defend the Jews, simple as that.


We are Trotskyists on 4international and we are never pacifists, and the great thing about Lenin and Trotsky is that they were at all times realists. There is a time to attack and a time to withdraw. But when you attack you have to do so to win. That means that Israel has got to be prepared to use its nuclear weapons if Jewish life is threatened. It is that philosophy that is important…not the exact tactics of battle.


We advise the Jews of Israel. Please do not lose a single Jewish life against such scum. Use your Nuclear rockets because you have them for that very purpose, to save Jewish life. Jews have suffered enough.





How Serbia Could Emerge as a Bridge

By MICHAEL FREUND, Special to the NY Sun

Imagine a country with a long and proud history that is regularly vilified by the international press. It faces mounting pressure to concede its ancient heartland and turn its back on a central part of its cultural and spiritual heritage.

Surrounded by numerous foes, in a region where ancient hatreds run deep, this diminutive but intrepid people perseveres, standing firm on principle rather than selling out its age-old patrimony.

As familiar as this reality may sound to our Israeli ears, there is a country in the heart of Europe which would find it no less resonant: Serbia.

And given the close ties that existed between Serbs and Jews throughout much of the past thousand years, it behooves Israel and world Jewry to forge closer bonds with Belgrade.

Michael Freund…it appears from reading this that Freund represents the Israeli Jewish bourgeois and pro-imperialist line.

Thus his perspective on the situation in former Yugoslavia needs to be questioned.

And in the above Freund is calling for a bourgeois relationship, a bourgeois relationship inside the confines of Imperialist directives, specifically directives from the US and EU. The working class of Yugoslavia, the working class of Israel and specifically the Jews as a nation will suffer from such perspectives.

Of course, for much of the past two decades, Serbia was viewed by many Jews as a pariah because of the Balkan wars that followed the break-up of Yugoslavia.

Allegations of war crimes committed in Bosnia stirred up public opinion in America and the West, tarnishing the image of the Serbs and setting the stage for the subsequent confrontation over the status of Kosovo.

As a result, the age-old Serbian-Jewish relationship was nearly torn asunder, as many American-Jewish organizations and spokesmen chose to side with the Bosnians and the Kosovars in their struggle against the Serbs.

But the Serbia of 2012 is not the same as the Serbia of two decades ago. The country has changed course, leaving behind the authoritarianism of its past and fully embracing democratic values and norms. It has taken great strides to mend relations with its neighbors and extradited war crimes suspects to the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

As a result, the European Union recently agreed to grant Serbia’s request to be an official candidate for membership, bringing it one step closer to full integration with the rest of Europe.

To be sure, Serbia continues to reject the idea of independence for Kosovo. But who can blame them? After all, history is clearly on their side.

It is clear from these paragraphs that Freund is acting as spokesman for the Israeli status quo, and is mouthing the aims also of the Serbian capitulationist present rulers. And there is a linkage to the Stalinists in Russia.

By the end of the 12th century, Kosovo was serving as the administrative and spiritual center of Serbia. It remained so for two centuries until the Battle of Kosovo Polje in 1389, when Ottoman Turkish invaders defeated the Serbs and their allies. Over time, Kosovo’s Serbs were largely displaced by Albanians, who now make up the majority of the province’s population.

But numerous medieval Serbian churches and monasteries that dot Kosovo’s landscape stand as tangible proof of the area’s historical identity.

So it is no wonder that successive Serbian governments have refused to countenance the idea of capitulating on the territory’s status.

However the Kosovo issue eventually plays out, Israel and world Jewry should seize the opportunity now to rekindle a stronger relationship with Belgrade.

The “displacement” by the Albanians that Freund refers to was really the bloody Islamist Jihad in action, and even bourgeois commentators and historians like Spencer and Bostom now understand it very well as such. Thus this word used by Freund is absurdly weak.

{This section of history from Freund is good but he later spoils it}…From the start, the relationship between Serbs and Jews was shaped by a sense of humanity. In the 14th century, Jews fleeing persecution in Hungary found refuge in the Serbian kingdom.

And even after Serbia was defeated by the Ottoman Turks in 1389 and subsequently subjugated, the Serbs nonetheless welcomed Spanish and Portuguese Jews who were exiled from Iberia a century later.

The Serbian town of Zemun, on the outskirts of Belgrade, played an important role in the Zionist movement.

Rabbi Shlomo Alkalai, an early religious-Zionist visionary, preached there in the 19th century, and a Jewish couple grew up there whose grandson, Theodor Herzl, would later alter the course of Jewish history.

More recently, during the Holocaust, Jews and Serbs found themselves the targets of their Croatian fascist neighbors, the Ustashe, who were allied with Hitler and proved to be energetic executioners. The Ustashe slaughtered tens of thousands of Jews and more than half a million Serbs in an orgy of violence and terror that left deep scars throughout the region. That sense of shared suffering is one that Serbs continue to feel towards Jews, and it underlines their strong sense of solidarity with Israel and the challenges that it faces.

{That was put rather better in a comment below this article “

Yes, the Serbs did lead the resistance to the Nazis in Yugoslavia in WW2, and the Croats (because of Jasenovac and the Ustashe) and the Bosnian Muslims (due to the Hanshar SS Division) had worse records when it came to Jews, and the Croats, upon independence in the 1990s, elected the neo-fascist Franjo Tudjman to power”.



The nature of this alliance between the Serbian bourgeois rulers who have replaced Milosevic and the present Israeli leaders becomes clear in the following:

Indeed, in a August 3 interview I conducted with Serbian Ambassador to Israel Zoran Basaraba, which appeared in The Jerusalem Post , he highlighted what he described as “a natural affinity” between Serbs and Jews. This affinity, he believes, can serve as the basis for further enhancing ties between the two peoples.

But in order for this to happen, I believe that Israel and world Jewry must move now to embrace Serbia and to stop viewing the country solely through the lens of the Bosnian war and the Kosovo conflict.

The fact is that Serbia is uniquely positioned to serve as an important bridge between East and West. It has longstanding historical and ethnic ties to Russia, and it is poised to join the EU in the near future.

In the coming years, once its economy stabilizes and emerges from the doldrums, Serbia’s strategic and diplomatic importance will only continue to grow. And with militant Islam actively seeking a foothold in Europe – particularly in places such as Bosnia and Albania – Serbia will undoubtedly play an increasingly significant role on the front-lines of the war on terror.

During the 1990s, many American Jews rallied behind Bosnia and Kosovo, in effect viewing Serbia as a lost cause.

But in light of everything that has happened in the interim, it is time that we “find” Serbia again – both for their sake and our own

Everything in the above is false, including the commas!

It is contained in the preposterous statement by Freund after his admitted talking to the present traitors in Belgrade “to stop viewing the country solely through the lens of the Bosnian war and the Kosovo conflict”

It is precisely the opposite to what Freund proposes that is actually needed. It is only through seeing the intervention of the US and EU, with NATO and the UN, in Yugoslavia, to destroy that sovereign country, that one can really understand how these same agencies intervened in the “Arab Spring”, really the Jihad/Imperialist war on basic rights in action

Rather than cast it aside it has to be made centre-stage, so that the working class internationally, and all Jews and Serbs, can understand that capitalism in terminal decline makes national sovereignty an impossibility.

It is therefore necessary to destroy capitalism and replace it by the socialist commonwealth of nations.

That is the only hope for Serbs and for the Jews and Israel and it will be done only in total conflict with concealers like Freund.










(We wrote over a year ago)

The natural allies of the Jews ARE the Serbs because the Serbs and the Jews suffered together in the Nazi Holocaust, and both Serbs and Jews are linked together in recognition of the previous and precedent setting Armenian Massacre by the Turkish government on defenceless Christians. But Jews, especially American Jews, have got to learn the main lesson which is that the power of American Imperialist ideology is great, and that American Jews and their organizations were largely taken in by the ruder Finn propaganda, and this problem is carried into the present, especially over the destruction of Mubarak and Gadhafi, again being replaced by the equivalent of Izetbegovic, The Muslim Brotherhood. It is also to recognize this strategic alliance between capitalist imperialist power and the forces of Islam, essentially the present day Jihad, which we call the Empire Sharia Alliance. It is real.



I am a really big fan of Gates of Vienna, both the Baron and Dymphna, and the latter reports are always brilliant. like this one. All Marxists should read this. It explains in an indirect way why the Islamist Fascists just like the Hitlerite Fascists can make hay in this climate.




Dymphna here is referring to the need for a “truth Doctor” and it looks as if she has found one. Is this paragraph not thought provoking about the depravity of capitalism in terminal decline and the kinds of pressure it places on people:


Thus we come to a Truth doctor, one who has no qualms about bringing these reports to life:

Among many other things the MSM doesn’t touch, Debbie Schlussel has been reporting on the waaay strange and quite bent appointments emanating from the Obama administration since at least 2010 — her information probably goes back further, but that’s as good a place as any to begin before moving on to her current series of stories on our Department of Homeland Security. Her work will not make you feel more secure.

I learned two new things on that post. The first is the word “tranny” for transgendered persons. Ms. Schlussel is not sparing in her details of their surgery. Thus, the second thing I learned was that in order for Mitch to become a more credible “Amanda” he had to have his forehead ground down and his Adam’s apple removed. Shudder. No wonder Islam thinks we can be rolled without a problem. I don’t know the critical point for a culture which promotes such decisions as a good, but sometimes it seems our little barrel is tumbling way too fast toward the Falls.



Syrian child hanged by those trying to oust Assad. This is the future also for the Syrian Christians if Assad falls.

The key issue in our times is the defence of dictatorial type (BUT RELATIVELY SECULAR) leaders in the Arab world, such as Gaghbo, Ben Ali, Mubarak, Gadhafi and now Assad.


There is a vast change taking place in the world as capitalism is moving rapidly towards dictatorship. (The recent Olympics in London is all about this. The glorification of elitist athletes, now totally professional. The jingoism of the Brits sickening and threatening. The Islamisation!)


This move to dictatorship in the world did not begin with Obama and his close alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood prefigured and announced to the world in 2009, his first main meeting on the international stage after being elected was in Cairo where he insisted that the BANNED and ILLEGAL Muslim Brotherhood be present. This was a declaration of war on behalf of Fascism against Mubarak.


No remember how Bush and Blair went to war on Saddam, who despite all was a SECULAR leader in Iraq. Under Saddam the Christians were quite safe.


Now the issue is Syria and Assad. We have defended all of these leaders we mentioned above on but now the situation centres on Assad.


Let us say this. Our movement is Zionist in the sense that we believe that the Jews have suffered too much Antisemitism and a future Workers Commonwealth must set aside their Palestine (it is theirs) for the Jews to be able to live alone and unmolested by ANY kind of Antisemitism.


But not ONE Zionist leader has defended in any way any ONE of these leaders I mentioned above.


In the choice between Imperialism with Fascism on the one hand, and these Arab in comparision gentle and freedom loving leaders, the Zionist leaders could not, would not, did not make a choice.


We will speak endlessly on this as we go forward.


What this says to us on is that these present Jewish leaders, all of them, without exception, will betray the Jews to Fascism


We repeat…betray the Jews. That is what present Jewish leaders are all about.


Wait and see…will these Jewish leaders have the gumption to obliterate the Ahmadinejad Plutonium Enrichment (death to all Jews) programme?


I believe that when I see it.



The devout Muslim group Boko Haram (translation “books bad” or “Western education is sinful”) mercilessly slaughter Christians, terrorize with impunity and bomb the country in the cause of Islam.

Boko Haram was responsible for at least 450 killings in Nigeria. It was also reported that they had been responsible for over 620 deaths over the first 6 months of 2012. In the first few years of operations, 10,000 people are reported to have died (source).

Despite this, Obama continues his pro-sharia, pro-jihad, anti-freedom foreign policy agenda, and refuses to name Boko Haram a terrorist organization. If not them, who?

“Suspected Boko Haram Gunmen Kill Evangelist In Maiduguri,Nigeria,” from Waoh Naija!, August 8 (thanks to The Religion of Peace via Jihadwatch)

Gunmen suspected to be members of the Boko Haram sect on Monday evening killed an evangelist with a Pentecostal church in Maiduguri, Ali Samari.

Evangelist Samari, 57, was with the Good News Church (GNC) Maiduguri and was reportedly killed at his Mafoni residence at exactly 6.30pm.

An eyewitness said the evangelist, who equally repairs wrist watches at the Post Office Area of the town was trailed to his house by two gunmen, after closing from work.

The witness also said the evangelist had sometimes this year received a stern warning from men suspected to be members of the Boko Haram sect, asking him to vacate his residence…. (FROM ATLAS SHRUGS)









The election of a Sudanese warlord accused of genocide to the United Nations Human Rights Council is now virtually guaranteed, since he has the full backing of the world body’s African delegation. (FOX news)

Millions dead in jihadi wars in Darfur and southern Sudan, and this is the UN’s pick for a seat on the “Human Rights” council, which includes Muslim slave-state Mauritania. The candidacies of Venezuela and Pakistan are also being protested by UN Watch and other human rights groups. 

One of Barack Hussein’s first acts as President was to reverse President Bush’s policy and seek a seat on the UN Human Rights council back in March of 2009. The Bush administration rightly shunned the United Nations’ human rights body to protest the influence of repressive states. Obama’s reversal is part of his  perverse and depraved transformation of American foreign policy. Once a force for good and freedom, we have become the very thing our nation once held in the utmost contempt.

“Outrage: Sudan’s Al-Bashir, Indicted for Genocide, is Nominated for Seat on U.N. Human Rights Council” UN Watch, August 9, 2012

Rights group UN Watch urges Ban Ki-moon, rights chief Navi Pillay to speak out
GENEVA, July 12 – Geneva-based human rights group UN Watch urged United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay to urgently speak out against the African-backed bid by Sudanese president Omar Al-Bashir, indicted for genocide by the International Criminal Court, for a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council.

 Last week, the U.S. failed to get the council to pass a condemnation of what it said was a Syrian candidacy for 2014.

The NGO UN Watch also called on US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the EU’s Catherine Ashton to denounce and fight against Sudan’s candidacy.

“Electing Sudan to the U.N. body mandated to promote and protect human rights worldwide is like putting Jack the Ripper in charge of a women’s shelter,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch.

UN Watch already heads an international campaign of MPs and human rights groups opposing the candidacies of Venezuela and Pakistan.

The U.N.’s African group of states agreed behind closed doors to endorse the candidacies of Ethiopia, Gabon, Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone and Sudan. Because Africa has arranged for five countries to run for the same amount of allotted seats, Sudan’s election is virtually assured.

“Technically,” said Neuer, “Sudan must still receive an absolute majority of 97 affirmative country votes in the U.N. General Assembly’s November election for new human rights council members. However, in the history of these ballots, names presented on a closed slate have never been rejected. It’s just the way U.N. ambassadors work. And the fact is that Sudan has been chosen to head various U.N. groupings, so its election to the UNHRC, however outrageous, is a real possibility.”

Neuer said that UN rights chief Navi Pillay, who hails from South Africa, could make a big difference by speaking out. “We need her to be the moral voice here, to urge other African countries to put their names forward, and to call for unequivocal opposition to Sudan’s scandalous bid. Her role is crucial.”

“Just a year after the human rights council sought to exorcise the ghosts of its past by suspending Col. Muammar Qaddafi’s Libya — which infamously chaired the body in 2003, and was reelected a member in 2010 — it is now set to replace him with a tyrant wanted for genocide by the International Criminal Court. For how long must we have the inmates running the asylum?”

Neuer said that Sudan clearly failed to meet the criteria of UNGA Resolution 60/251, which established the UN Human Rights Council in 2006. General Assembly members are obliged to elect states to the Council by “tak[ing] into account the candidates’ contribution to the promotion and protection of human rights and their voluntary pledges and commitments made thereto.” The resolution also provides that consideration ought to be given to whether the candidate can meet the obligations of Council membership, which include (a) to “uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights” and (b) to “fully cooperate with the Council.”

“The U.N. and the cause of human rights will be severely damaged if Al-Bashir’s Sudanese regime wins a seat,” said Neuer. 

UN Watch also called on the U.S. and the EU to lead a vigorous campaign to defeat Sudan’s candidacy, and to ensure there will be competition on the African slate of candidates.

“Last year, the democracies fought a successful campaign to defeat Syria, by persuading other countries to compete. Yet they said and did absolutely nothing in 2010 on Libya — perhaps due to lucrative oil and business deals — and Qaddafi won by a landslide. It’s vital this year that the US and the EU announce early that they are opposed to having the oppressive Sudanese regime of Al-Bashir Assad judging the world on human rights,” said Neuer.


Child syria

Terrorists in Syria Hang Shiite Child after Killing Family Members ABNA, Ausgust 7, 2012



Serb murdered by Jihadists backed by US and EU


The picture on top is of a child murdered by Jihadists, called continually “rebels” by the BBC, supported by the BBC and by the whole of the Media. Picture is published by the freedom fighter Pamela Geller on Atlas Shrugs


The picture below is the butchered head of a Serb also murdered by Jihadists in Yugoslavia. This and others are widely available ont he web. they are true.


In both of these the Jihadists were supported and encouraged by the US Governments. Then Clinton and Bush. Now Obama.


And this is the reality. This is the period we are in.


We are moving rapidly from a period of the boom, to the period of growing dictatorship and total barbarism. Only the socialist revolution over capitalism can put an end to these barbarities.






So much subterfuge. So many false leads sown by the Fascist Left on sites such as Indymedia Ireland. is quite unique in the world in that


1. we are socialist to the core

2. we believe capitalism is a mortal danger to man and to all life on the planet (we do not use these words lightly)

3. we defended Assad and Syria against the war which is led by the US, aided by the EU, aiming tol create another Muslim Dominated land

4. we immediately defended Mubarak and Gadhafi and did so unconditionally against the same forces of Muslim Brotherhood, US Government



During all this time the Fascist Left have tried to say you have to defend Syria to defend Iran. This was trying to say that the US was intent on making war with Iran.


But why? Where is the logic? We know that the US has been doing everything in all of these countries to put the MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD into power.


So why would the US want the Iranian Clerical Fascists OUT OF POWER.


That in no way makes any sense. There is something out of kilter in that thought.


I CAN personally see the US attacking the Iranian plutonium enrichment. There ARE issues at stake there. But NOT to put the Ayotollahs out of power.


Obama hates Israel. I mean he really does hate Israel with the type of hatred we see from the Fascist Left on Indymedia. THAT is the difference between Obama and Romney.


American Christian people support Israel first and foremost, most of all, above everything else, not because they are Christian, but because they are American patriots who have got great respect for the traditions of America.


This is a very valuable, to be treasured, patriotism… it is essentially a quiet patriotism and is opposed to Jingoism.


Obama is first and foremost an antisemite. He is an antisemite in this way…he wants the Jewish people to be subdued and to live under the heel of the Arabs.


By a great fluke of history Obama is joined in this by the big majority of American Jews. They also want an Israel, as does AIPAC, but an Israel that is under the heel of Arab Imperialism (Sharia Jihad)


The only friends of Israel in this situation are not Christians in general, but politicised Christians, such as especially Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller.


In other words the political struggle has taken precedence. Not Christianity at all, but political consciousness, political awakening. THAT is what Pamela Geller represents and this is proved in that she has only taken up blogging relatively recently. Not CUFI at all but there will be many more Gellers, for example Breitbart before his untimely death.


And the political thinkers are taking huge leaps. Just this past week the noted blogger Richard Landes has taken a huge leap in his activism by stating boldly that the Left/Right terminology is totally false, and argues this in the most brilliant way.


Landes is not the same as CUFI. Number One Landes is politically active and Number 2 as the crisis is driving everybody forward Landes is thinking deeply and is courageous enough to take up definite positions.


Now war is inevitable and soon.


Debkafile who is never wrong on these issues gives us the proof:’s-Top-Leaders-WAR-IN-WEEKS


Just as 4international defended Syria against the US and against the Muslim Brotherhood, now we will turn to defending Israel unconditionally.


We on 4international very simply equate the Iranian regime with Hitler. There you have the same Antisemitism.


Leon Trotsky in 1933 would have moved the Red Army against Hitler to finish off the Nazis. Think of what that would have meant to history.


Now Israel must strike and stop these Fascists in Iran. There is NO measure to stop these Fascists that we on 4international will not support.


In the world of socialism today we on are unique.