Alan Hart: Saudi King Abdullah Should invite Netanyahu to Riyadh? Commented by Uprooted Palestinian

Here Alan Hart, because of the reality of the existence of a nuclear-armed Zionist entity, after storming his brain, is calling the Saudi King to follow the advise of Thomas L. Friedman: “King Abdullah should invite Mr. Netanyahu to Riyadh and present it to him personally.”

My first response was to say to Alan, being the the first western correspondent to interview King Faisal, and having been a good friend of Mother Israel, most likely,  you have access to both Netanyaho and King Abdullah. Maybe they need a LINKMAN 

In case you got the JOB, I should remind you that King Abdulla’s initiative was approved by, an Arab League summit in Beirut only after adding the key words you mentioned. (THANKS MAINLY TO THE RESISTING LEBANESE PRESIDENT LAHOUD)

“… the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.”

In response that Peace Initiative Sharon, the MAN OF PEACE, invaded razed Jenin

A naive would expect King Abdullal would go that far, especially after the failure of the Zionist New Middle East.

A naive would expect Netanyaho, who refused to freeze settlements, to go back to 1967 borders.

Frightened with nuclear-armed Netanyaho, with the threat of Mother Israel to take the world down with Israel if it goes down, you are simply, calling for Palestinian’s, Arab’s, and Muslim’s complete surrender, a dream that shall never come true. Netanyaho may dare to nuke London, and that your problem, but he will never dare to nuke niether Gaza, nor, West Bak, nor South Lebanon.

So Alan, we are not afraid of Samson option

At the bottom of your post, I read: If you like it then….

I don’t like it Alan,

Neither Abbass, nor King Abdulla has the authority to neither to sell my right of Return to my birth place nor to sell Jerusalem,

Palestine shall never die and the it file shall be closed only if Netanyaho follow the advise of BRAVE Helen Thomas Resolution, and it happenned that though she has Photto’s will all USA presidents, she don’t have Alan’s the magic card, his photto with Mother Israel

Should Saudi King Abdullah invite Netanyahu to Riyadh?

By Alan hart

The suggestion that he should was made by Thomas L. Friedman in his column for the New York Times on 7 September.

My first response was to say to myself, “That proves Friedman doesn’t understand the complexities of the conflict and is at least a little bit bonkers.” But the more I thought about it, the more it seemed to me that King Abdullah should do what Friedman suggested.

In a moment I’ll get to what I think the Arabs and the Palestinians especially would have to gain without losing anything, but first here’s the essence what Friedman wrote.
He noted that eight years have passed since the Arab peace initiative pushed by Abdullah when he was Crown Prince was presented to, and approved by, an Arab League summit in Beirut.

(It offered a full and final peace, including the normalizing of relations between the entire Arab region and Israel, in exchange for a complete Israeli withdrawal from all territories occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem, and a “just solution” to the Palestinian refugee problem).

Friedman then commented that the plan has been “floating out there in the ether of diplomatic possibilities” ever since its approval in 2002. “It is time to bring it out of the air. King Abdullah should invite Mr. Netanyahu to Riyadh and present it to him personally.”

Friedman went on:

“Abdullah need not go to Jerusalem, as Anwar Sadat did, or recognize Israel. He can, though, still have a huge impact on the process by simply handing his plan to the leader for whose country it was intended. I can’t think of anything that would get these peace talks off to a better start. It feels to me as though Netanyahu is taking this moment seriously, but he is still very wary. By handing him the Abdullah plan, the Saudi monarch would unleash a huge peace debate in Israel. It would make it more difficult for Netanyahu to continue settlement building – and spur an Israeli public that is also still wary to urge Netanyahu to take risks for peace and support him for doing so. Netanyahu is the only Israeli leader today who can deliver a deal.

“The Saudis can’t just keep faxing their peace initiative to Israelis. That has no emotional punch. It actually says to Israelis: if the Saudis are afraid to hand us their plan, why should we believe they’ll have the courage to implement it if we do everything they suggest? Israelis are isolated. Seeing their prime minister received by the most important Muslim leader in the world in Riyadh would have a real impact.

“Both Israelis and Palestinians are going to have to do something really hard to produce a two-state solution. Saudi officials have developed a reputation in Washington for being experts at advising everyone else about the hard things they must do, while being reluctant to step out themselves. This is their moment – to do something hard and to do something important.”

Netanyahu has apparently said that he will go anywhere for peace, so let’s suppose for the sake of discussion that King Abdullah does invite him to Riyadh and he goes.

Either at his meeting with Abdullah to take personal delivery of the Arab peace plan or afterwards, Netanyahu would say there was one element of it that was completely unacceptable to all Israelis – the proposal that a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem should be on the basis of UN Resolution 194 of 11 December 1948. Its key words are the following:

“… the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.”

Down the years (and consistent with its Nakba denial), Israel has put two fingers up to Resolution 194 and denied the Palestinians a right of return, on the grounds that conceding the right would be an act of national suicide. As it was put, for example, by Likud spokesman Zalman Shoval in March 2007, “If 300,000-400,000, or maybe a million, Palestinians would invade the country, that would be the end of the state of Israel as a Jewish state.”

A truth, which all of Israel’s leaders have known for many years, is that the Palestinian right of return does not have to be an obstacle to peace unless they want it to be. Under the pragmatic Arafat’s leadership, the decision was taken to accept that in the event of a genuine and viable two-state solution, the right of return would have to be limited to the territory of the Palestinian state. Though they could not say so in public, Arafat and his leadership colleagues were completely aware this would mean that probably not more than 100,000 refugees would be able to return and that the rest would have to settle for compensation.

Another truth is that Jerusalem does not have to be an obstacle to peace unless Israel’s leaders want it to be. If they don’t want Jerusalem to be divided again, the Arabs will say, “Okay. Let it be an open, undivided city and the capital of two states.”

My point so far is that if Netanyahu did go to Riyadh, he would discover that the Arab peace plan of 2002, subject only to clarifications of the flexibility of the Arab position on the right of return and Jerusalem, actually offers what a rational Israeli government and people would accept with relief.

What would the Arabs and the Palestinians especially have to gain if King Abdullah did invite Netanyahu to Riyadh and he went?

In one scenario, and assuming that most Israelis are not beyond reason (an assumption I do not make), it might unleash what Friedman described as a “huge peace debate in Israel.” And that just might open the door to peace on terms virtually all Palestinians and most other Arabs and Muslims everywhere could just about accept.

In another scenario – continued Israeli rejection of the Arab peace plan of 2002 – it would enable King Abdullah and all of his Arab brothers at leadership level to say to the world, and America especially, something like: “Now you cannot be in any doubt about what the obstacle to peace is – Zionism. If you really want peace, you must now play your part and use the leverage you have to call and hold Zionism to account for its crimes.”

If that didn’t mobilize support in the Western world for an acceptable measure of justice for the Palestinians and peace for all, nothing ever will.

Footnote:

Some readers will say that a genuine and viable two-state solution, even if it was possible, is unacceptable because it would not provide the Palestinians with enough justice. My response is quite simple. One state for all is by far the best solution for all; but because of the reality of the existence of a nuclear-armed Zionist entity, the two-state solution is the best deal the Palestinians are ever likely to get.

If you liked this post, then…
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Do most Israelis and many other Jews NEED to feel persecuted? Commented by Uprooted Palestinian

 COMMENT:

Here Mr. Hart, is telling us why most Israelis and many other Jews NEED to feel persecuted?

• Most of the jews “do not want to know the truth of history as it relates to the making and sustaining of the conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel.” The truth that “Israel was created, mainly, by Zionist terrorism and ethnic cleansing”
• Mr. M, his Jewish accountant. and “best friend in the world, for more than 40 years”, who met Mother Israel refused to believe him saying that the war in 1967 was a war of Israeli aggression, because if he do “everything crumbles”
• The Jews “sense of victimhood” is “the product of persecution and pogroms on and off down the centuries and which climaxed with the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust” and according to Monty Renot  pushed Jews ” into a mass state of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) from which they’ve never emerged or recovered – like a nightmare trance in which they are stuck”.

Mr Hard concluded: “Yes, Jews (most of them) do need to feel persecuted.”

Therefore “as long as this pathology dominates Israeli political life, it’s hard to see what Barack Obama or anyone else can do to move the Israelis toward a just peace, one that would be acceptable to the vast majority of Palestinians.

As Lord Balfour, and His Promise failed to cure the dominating Jewish pathology,
As Oslo of of Father Palestine, failed to do that
As the USA and the other  Zionized western countries failed to cure the Jewish sick minds
As Mr. Hart failed to cure a single Jew, Mr. M his best friend,

Most likely It is hard for Obama or anyone to do that.

Mr. Linkman stormed his brain to find if “if anything can be done, and by whom, to cure the sickness of traumatized Israeli and other Jewish minds?.”  and he found it. He found two possible ingredients for curing the Jewish agony otherwise “everything crumbles”

• “One would be a New Covenant, not between the Jews and their God but between the Jews and the Gentiles. For their part of the deal the Gentiles would commit to slaying the monster of anti-Semitism. An undertaking to let the monster die in its sleep would not be good enough. There would have to be evidence that the stake was being driven into its heart. For their part the Jews of the world would commit to making common cause with rational Israelis for the purpose of making a real and lasting peace on the basis of an acceptable amount of justice for the Palestinians and security for all (Arabs and Jews).”
• “The other would be an explicit declaration by all Palestinian institutions, organizations and groups, endorsed by all Arab and other Muslim governments, to the effect that whether it be in a genuine and viable two-state or a one-state solution, the security and political and human rights of all Jews (in the one or two states) will be absolutely guaranteed.”

Beyond that Mr. hart have “no answers to the question of what can be done and by whom to cure the sickness of traumatized and brainwashed Israeli and other Jewish minds”.

The more I read Alan, the more feel that his concern is the not Palestinians, the real vitim, nor their agony, his concern are his best friends curing their sick minds. Palestinian should wait until Gentiles (All non Jews) should commit to slaying the so-called “monster of anti-Semitism”, not until slaying the Zionist monster threatning the word’s peace. Once the Monsret of Anti-Semitism is slayed, ofter one million year, “the Jews of the world would commit to making common cause with rational Israelis for the purpose of making a real and lasting peace on the basis of an acceptable amount of justice for the Palestinians and security for all (Arabs and Jews).”

As Palestinians can’t wait one million year, they, the real victims, all Palestinian institutions, organizations and groups, should explicitly declare “to the effect that whether it be in a genuine and viable two-state or a one-state solution, the security and political and human rights of all Jews (in the one or two states) will be absolutely guaranteed.” such deceration should be endorsed “by all Arab and other Muslim governments”

Finally Mr. Hart asks: “Do others have answers?”

Mr. Linkman,

Helen Thomas have the Answer

“When asked by a Rabbi holding a camera: “where should Israelis go”, she said Jews should “get the hell out of Palestine”. When the Rabbi challenged her, she made it plainly clear: “they should go home to Poland, Germany, America and elsewhere”

I would add your ingredients “a New Covenant, not between the Jews and their God but between the Jews and the Gentiles”of Poland, Germany, America and elsewhere “Gentiles would commit to slaying the monster of anti-Semitism. An undertaking to let the monster die in its sleep would not be good enough. There would have to be evidence that the stake was being driven into its heart.”

Mr. Linkman,

look at the picitures added by dear Debbie. I hope its not for decorating your article, but to draw your attention that the real victims are the Palestinians

 Finaly, I have a question for you: Are Jews Really Persecuted??
 Why?

Via May Catbird Seat
– 26. Aug, 2010
By Alan Hart (My Catbird Seat)

Nakba, Sabra – Shatilla, Qana, Jenin, Gaza ?

I have written and often say that very many if not most Jews do not want to know the truth of history as it relates to the making and sustaining of the conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel. (An essential element of the truth being that Israel was created, mainly, by Zionist terrorism and ethnic cleansing).

Because I am a goy, a non-Jew, (actually a blonde, blue-eyed Englishman of advancing years), that may strike some readers as a very presumptuous statement for me to make. How can I possibly know for sure that at least some if not many Jews don’t want to know truth of history? It’s a fair question and my answer to it, quoted below, is in the now published Volume 3 of the American edition of my book, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews (www.claritypress.com and www.zionismbook.net).

After my dear wife, my best friend in the world, for more than 40 years, is my Jewish accountant. I’ll call him M. He is very orthodox in the practise of his religion and strictly kosher, but not a zealot. He lives in London and over the years he has travelled with me on a number of foreign assignments. Shortly before Golda Meir died, and as a way of saying thanks to M for his friendship, I invited him to travel with me and sit in on my last conversation with her. I imagined she would not object and she didn’t. Our conversation lasted nearly five hours. When it ended, I asked Mother Israel if I could take a photograph of her and M. In the tiny back garden of her small home in Tel Aviv, M put his arm around her shoulder (she didn’t object to that either) and I took several pictures. It was, as I knew it would be, one of the proudest moments in M’s life. One of the pictures was given pride of place in M’s home, and he subsequently told me that younger visitors would look at the photograph, point at the old lady, and ask, “Who’s that, your grandmother?”

Over time and privately M came to loathe what Israel has become but he won’t read my book. He doesn’t want to know the truth of history. Shortly before the publication of the original UK Volume One, I said to him the following. “Like most Jews everywhere, you believe that Israel went to war in 1967 either because the Arabs attacked first or were about to attack. What if I can prove to you, using only Israeli sources, that what you believe is Zionist propaganda nonsense and that it was a war of Israeli aggression?” After a long pause, M replied, “If what I believe about that war is not true, everything crumbles.”

I chose not to add to my friend’s agony by asking him what “everything crumbles” really meant or at least symbolizes; but over the several years since that conversation took place, and quietly in my own mind, I’ve been trying to work it out for myself.

What, actually, would “crumble” in those Jews, sadly most Jews, who don’t want to know the truth of history but by some miracle were confronted with it?

The short answer is their sense of victimhood, (link added) the impulse to see enemies everywhere who are committed to exterminating Jews.

Though constantly reinforced by Zionist propaganda since the creation of Israel, and currently by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, this impulse is, of course, the product of persecution and pogroms on and off down the centuries and which climaxed with the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust.

On 14 November 2009, in a comment on a Truthout post by Ira Cherna headlined “Israel’s Pathology”, Monty Renot wrote:

“I have thought, for a while now, that in the aftermath of the Nazi extermination during World War II, many Jews (and I speak as a Jew) entered into a mass state of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) from which they’ve never emerged or recovered – like a nightmare trance in which they are stuck. The symptoms are, and have been, so unmistakably evident, especially in right-wing religious groups such as Meir Kahana’s Kach, whose slogan was ‘Never Again’ and whose vow was to ‘hit ‘em back 10 times as hard as they hit us.’’

Pre-emptive battle ?

What Renot called this “hypervigilant state, so typical of PTSD,” reveals that those who are still stuck in the nightmare trance believe that the threat to them (annihilation) is ever present and always will be; and any sign or omen that the worst was about to occur again “is magnified by the residual paranoia into ‘Uh-oh, here we go again!’, accompanied by a tightening of the emotional armoring and a heightened readiness to go into pre-emptive battle in order to forestall the worst from happening.”

In his analysis, Cherna asked how it can be that pathological feelings of fear, weakness and victimization “are comforting” to very many Israelis (and, I add, very many other Jews)

Gaza massacre

He answers: “For starters, they automatically put Jews on the side of innocence. Who can blame the weak victim for the violence? All the trouble, it seems, is started by the other side… And if all the trouble is started by the other side, then all the fault must lie with the other side. Weakness and victimization seem to prove that ‘We’re moral.’ Obviously, it’s our enemies who are immoral and thus to blame for all our problems. So Israelis have no reason even to consider changing any of their policies or behaviors.”

Cherna believes, as I do, that as long as this pathology dominates Israeli political life, it’s hard to see what Barack Obama or anyone else can do to move the Israelis toward a just peace, one that would be acceptable to the vast majority of Palestinians (“who need no special mental condition to feel victimized; all they have to do is look out the window at the Israeli military patrols passing by.”)

The answer to my headline question seems to be, “Yes, Jews (most of them) do need to feel persecuted. The question arising is what if anything can be done, and by whom, to cure the sickness of traumatized Israeli and other Jewish minds?In theory
I can think of two possible ingredients for a cure.

One would be a New Covenant, not between the Jews and their God but between the Jews and the Gentiles. For their part of the deal the Gentiles would commit to slaying the monster of anti-Semitism. An undertaking to let the monster die in its sleep would not be good enough. There would have to be evidence that the stake was being driven into its heart. For their part the Jews of the world would commit to making common cause with rational Israelis for the purpose of making a real and lasting peace on the basis of an acceptable amount of justice for the Palestinians and security for all (Arabs and Jews).

The other would be an explicit declaration by all Palestinian institutions, organizations and groups, endorsed by all Arab and other Muslim governments, to the effect that whether it be in a genuine and viable two-state or a one-state solution, the security and political and human rights of all Jews (in the one or two states) will be absolutely guaranteed.

Beyond that I have no answers to the question of what can be done and by whom to cure the sickness of traumatized and brainwashed Israeli and other Jewish minds. Do others have answers?

Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East.

His Latest book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, is a three-volume epic in its American edition. 

He blogs on www.alanhart.net and tweets on www.twitter.com/alanauthor.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Alan Hart the Linkman of Peres with "FATHER PALESTINE": Time to close the Palestinian file

Frightened with Zionist Samson option blackmail

Alan believes the Palestinian leadership (Hamas and Fateh) “should now say, in the most explicit terms, that most Palestinians are still prepared to live in permanent peace with an Israel inside its pre-1967 borders.”

NO MR. LINKMAN

Most of Palestinians are either exiled or refugee in their own land (In Gaza,WB, and the so-called Israel), they are not prepared to sell their right of return

“when it was made, it was immediately endorsed by supportive declarations from Hizbollah and Iran to the effect that they will accept whatever the Palestinians accept. (Despite Zionism’s wild assertions to the contrary, that is actually the position of both Hizbollah and Iran)”

KEEP DREAMING DREAMING MR. LINKMAN, and conspiring for impossible “peace” with Zionism.

Here this call should be connected with other DOTS, Mainly, the moving sancions on Iran, and STL plot on Hezbullah

Time for the Palestinians to call Israel’s bluff?

• July 27, 2010

Defenders of Israel right or wrong continue to assert that the absence of peace is all the fault of the Palestinians.

In one sense they are right. When the Palestine file was closed by Israel’s victory (ethnic cleansing and all) on the battlefield in 1948, the Palestinians were supposed to accept their lot as the sacrificial lamb on the altar of political expediency.

That was according to the script written by Zionism and effectively endorsed by all the major powers and, behind closed doors, the regimes of a divided and impotent Arab order.

Nobody in power anywhere wanted the Palestine file to be re-opened because, if it was, a confrontation with Zionism in all of its awesome manifestations would one day be inevitable. So it could be said if the Palestinians had been prepared to be the sacrificial lamb, the first Arab-Israeli war would also have been the last.

[Mr. Linkman:

Could you please explaine why 1948 war was followed by 1956 war two year before the formation of your friend’s Fateh?
Is it because Palestinian refused to be the sacrificial lamb?
Is it because the emerging Arab nationalist Movement wanted the Palestine file to be re-opened??

In a previous article your claimed that the Palestinian file was closed in 1948, and that it is your friend “Father Palestine” who “re-opened” the file.. When he did that, Mr. Linkman??

He formed Fateh in 1958, two years after the second war and the peak of Arab Nationalists Movement, so its not him who re-opned the file. His real mission and yours as his linkman was  performing”, using your own words, the“miracle of leadership by preparing the ground on his side for unthinkable compromise and peace”
They killed him because he failed to close the Palestinians file]

By such cruel and mad logic the Palestinians are to blame for the sustaining and escalation of the conflict.

But let’s now leave fantasy land and acknowledge that the hallmark of Zionism in action is saying one thing to the world and doing the opposite.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert warned that Israel has no future unless there’s a two-state solution, but the colonization of the occupied West Bank went on. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu let the word’s “two states” pass through his lips and, under pressure from President Obama, he even declared a moratorium on settlement building for 10 months, but the colonization went on. (And will no doubt be speeded up when the phoney moratorium ends in September).

So a question. Is there now case for saying that the time has come for the Palestinians to call Israel’s bluff?

They could do so with a joint Fatah-Hamas statement to something like this effect:

“We cannot and will not recognise Israel’s “right” to exist because it has no such right, but we are a pragmatic people and we hereby declare that we are prepared to recognise and live in permanent peace with the reality of an Israel inside its borders as they were on the eve of the 1967 war, with Jerusalem an open, undivided city and the capital of two states…

We further declare that our pragmatism extends to accepting that the right of the dispossessed Palestinians to return must and will be confined to the Palestinian state, which means that many of those who wish to return will have to settle for compensation for the loss of their homes and their land.”

In theory, such a statement would have its best chance of making a positive impact in Israel if, when it was made, it was immediately endorsed by supportive declarations from Hizbollah and Iran to the effect that they will accept whatever the Palestinians accept. (Despite Zionism’s wild assertions to the contrary, that is actually the position of both Hizbollah and Iran).

Polls consistently show that about 70% of Israelis favour a two-state solution. If they really do, declarations as indicted above could have the effect of opening a door to new politics in Israel; new politics that would see a majority of Israelis giving real substance to their democracy by demanding that their leaders be serious about peace on terms almost all Palestinians and most other Arabs and Muslims everywhere could accept.

If a most explicit joint declaration by Fatah and Hamas failed to trigger new politics in Israel, it would prove what Larry Derfner said in an article for the Jerusalem Post on 23 July: “Politically, Israelis now operate strictly on fear and aggression; look at them cross-eyed and they think Hitler’s back and they’re ready to drop the big one. Politically they’re nuts. A danger to others and themselves.”
My way of putting it would be to say that what had been proved is that most Israelis have been brainwashed to the point where they are beyond reason and prefer to live with the fear of annihilation (fear planted and nourished in them by Zionist propaganda) rather than the comfort of peace and security. (In a future article I’m going to address this question – Do Israelis, most of them, need to feel threatened?)

[They do Mr. Linkman, and You know that. They killed Rabin]

What would the Palestinians have to gain from calling Israel’s bluff if doing so did not trigger new and sane politics in Israel? There are two possible answers.

[The answer we heard: Report: Mitchell Tells Abbas Bibi Here to Stay ]

One is nothing if the major powers, America especially, continue to be terrified of offending Zionism too much and remain constant in their refusal to use the leverage they have to cause or try to cause enough Israelis to be serious about peace.

The other is that exposing Israel like never before as the real obstacle to peace could be a game-changer. Even some Americans are now debating whether Israel is more of a liability than an asset. (See, for example, Chas Freeman’s remarks at a Nixon Center debate on 20 July, www.nixoncenter.org/index.cfm?action=showpage&page=Freeman-Israel-Asset-or-Liability).
Could it be that a most explicit Palestinian calling of Israel’s bluff would create the understanding needed in America to free up President Obama (after the mid-term elections in November, of course) to take on and defeat the Zionist lobby, for the sake of peace in the Middle East and best protecting America’s own real interests in the region and the wider Muslim world?

Caveat

I am fully aware that a two-state solution which restricted the right of return to a Palestinian mini state on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip would not come close to providing justice for the dispossessed Palestinians. Nothing but the de-Zionization of Palestine and the creation of One State for all could do that. The point of the article above is only that I believe the Palestinian leadership should now say, in the most explicit terms, that most Palestinians are still prepared to live in permanent peace with an Israel inside its pre-1967 borders.

Palestinians versus the Samson option blackmail

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Palestinians versus the Samson option blackmail

By Nahida the exiled Palestinian

Pictures added by UP

In his article Alan Hart concludes that after the inevitable failure of the two-state solution there is “only two possible end-game scenarios”

• Zionist-awakening scenario: “In one Israeli Jews come to their senses and accept that their best and actually only hope for a future with security and peace is the One State solution – a single, democratic state in which all of its citizens, Jews and Arabs, would have equal civil and political rights.”

• Armageddon scenario: “In the other foreseeable end-game scenario….. The anti-Israel outrage of citizens of all faiths and none around the world would be such that the governments of the major powers, including the one in Washington D.C., would be obliged to punish the Zionist state with boycott, sanctions and divestment” In which case the zionists threaten the world to take it down with them if they go down.

In other words Mr. Hart is telling us that the Palestinians and the world have no option but to gently and tactfully deal with zionists, otherwise any pressure on “israel” even through boycott and sanctions will cause the world demise. Therefore, in his opinion, all what the Palestinians and the world can do is to “un-brainwash” the zionists, to keep trying to “educate” them and work at healing their psychologically messed-up minds, their collective “insanity” or else… it’s Armageddon!!

This is clear cut blackmail to the world.

Alan Hart conveniently omits the third scenario; namely, the Palestinian scenario

The Palestinians who have miraculously survived and endured a century of oppression and ethnic-cleansing without losing their hope or their humanity

The Palestinians who have perplexed the world with their courage, steadfastness and sacrifices

The Palestinians who love their trees as much as they love their own sons and daughters

The Palestinians who love their land more than they love their own selves

The Palestinians whose determination and bravery against all odds have inspired the world

The Palestinians with David’s stones who confronted ruthless Goliath and conquered his delusions of hegemony, expansion and conquest

The Palestinians whose legendary heroism has astounded humanity; from the buzzing streets of Texas to the remote quiet villages in Japan

The Palestinian scenario is the option that refuses neither to bow down to oppression nor to surrender to blackmail

The Palestinian option is the Hizbullah and Salaheddin option

A few thousands dedicated resistance fighters of Hizbullah managed to defeat and kick out from Lebanon the fourth most powerful army in the world after 22 years of occupation

Salaheddin, the Muslim Kurd, with his dedicated and courageous army have liberated al-Quds (Jerusalem) after 200 years of Crusaders’ occupation and colonization and kicked the gory invaders out.

Already, by electing Hamas, Palestinians have made their choice, their scenario of the “end-game” is neither Armageddon nor the waiting game of appeasement, conciliation and un-brainwashing of their tormentors

The Palestinians have chosen the Hizbullah and Salaheddin scenario; RESISTANCE until EVERY inch of Palestine is liberated and EVERY refugee is back home

Palestinians, after a century of intimate knowledge of their oppressors, have reached their threshold of patience. They are not prepared to wait any longer for the illusionary awakening of the “humanity” of their oppressors, nor are they prepared to accept thieves and murderers as guests in their homeland

They understand more than anyone else that the magical awakening of a dead-conscience is not possible, nor is it rational to keep waiting for thieves to give up their illegitimate privileges and give back the stolen lands and property to its rightful owners, the Palestinians.

The menace of Samson’s scenario blackmail does not intimidate Palestinians nor does it suppress their aspiration of the full liberation of their homeland for which they have sacrificed the dearest, the most loved and the most precious.

Zionists are not, as claimed by Alan Hart, some innocent, intelligent, humane people who have been simply brainwashed to be where they are and to do what they are doing!

They, by the sheer fact of taking part in colonizing a STOLEN land are partners in crime

Whether religious or secular, zionists have proven to themselves and to the world that they are a bunch of greedy, arrogant, unethical, robbers and murderers:

• Religious zionists believe that Palestine belongs to them because God gave them the land!
• Hard core secular zionists believe that they have captured this land, created facts on the grounds, and whatever they have acquired by conquest becomes an inalienable right!
• So-called “moderate” secular zionists are satisfied with the achievement of zionism’s goal of creating a homeland for the Jews in Palestine. Thus they ready themselves to simply abandon and discard the word “zionism”, and claiming that all they want now is peace, so they claim. The opportunistic discarding of the word “zionism” is nothing else than meaningless empty rhetoric, since it does not imply in any way or manner the restoration of Palestinians’ inalienable rights, the restitution of their land and property, and the compensation for their losses. Hence the claims of seeking “peace” by self professed “moderates” anti-zionists, ex-zionists, crypto-zionists, or moderate secular zionists, are vacuous and have zero value.

What matters to us is the fact that they have created facts on the ground, engaging with them in “dialogues”, “confidence building”, “peace processes” or asking politely with a million please on top will not liberate the land they occupy nor will it restore justice according to elementary standards of international law.

History has taught us that the criminal privileged never give up their privileges willingly, ever.

Secular or religious zionists will never give up willingly any of their privileges acquired by ongoing terrorism and genocide.

The zionists have wasted a century of opportunities in Palestine, provoked catastrophic wars in the Middle East, and caused economic havoc on the planet.

Alas, the time of reckoning is rapidly approaching.

The faint and anxious voices here and there, who have realized that the zionist colonial project is doomed, try desperately to save what they can of it by spreading the SOS calls, trying frantically to make the zionists see sense. These attempts are as vain and as doomed as is the zionist colonial project.

Six million copies of Alan Hart’s books will not add an ounce of humanity to those who lost it by wickedness, nor can it unbend the crooked mentality that became twisted by decades of evil doing; bulldozing millennial olive grooves, demolishing world heritage, assassinating mothers, babies, and elderly, attempting to annihilate the protectors of the Holy land and descendants of the Prophets, namely the Palestinians.

The balance of power is shifting, the Muslim world will not stay asleep for much longer, the world only just began to wake up to the truth.

People of the world are opening their eyes to the alarming level of zionist infiltration in their own affairs; governments manipulations, media control, financial corruption, and it’s not going to be an pleasant discovery.

The decades of deception are over and the karma of retribution has begun.

The blowback is going to take them by surprise.

Chances of repentance are over and time is out.

The world will soon have to decide; either to succumb to unrelenting zionists blackmail of mass genocide and world annihilation OR stand up like the brave Palestinians and STOP this madness once and for all.
Indubitably, the world will regurgitate those who drive for its annihilation, Samson-ists and Armageddon-ists.

Israeli nuclear plant at Dimona, left. Two Mordechai Vanunu photos at right.

The world will unite and rid itself of this Frankenstein.

In the end, zionists and their associates will not find many to shed tears for them, nor will they find many open doors to welcome them.

The only open doors will be the EXIT doors of expulsion.

Time, perhaps another couple of thousand years, might help them to learn the lesson, to be brought to their senses, back to humanity.

Then and only then, only when animated by peaceful intentions, can they try to knock at Palestine’s doors again.

Not now, and not for a long time.

I am a Jerusalem-born Palestinian refugee living in exile for over 42 years. I was forced to leave my homeland, Palestine at the age of seven during the six-day war. I am a mathematician by profession but art is one of my favourite pastimes, I love hand-made things, so I make dolls, cards, and most of my own clothes. I also write poetry, and participate in dialogues with known and unknown friends as I believe that communication is the first step of understanding, I believe in building bridges not walls. My shy and extra sensitive nature hinders me from public speaking, so I try to compensate for my shortcomings by writing! I started writing about three years ago when my friends insisted I should write about my memories, experiences, and my feelings as a Palestinian. I did… but it all came out -for some strange reason- sounding -as I was told- like poetry! So I self published two books (I Believe in Miracles, and Palestine, The True Story)

Cedar Revolution fella’: "Abdallah wanted his nephew to replace dead Hariri…"

Via Friday-lunch-Club

The guy is basically saying that a branch of the al Saud might have and/or benefited from whacking Rafic Hariri … Nissi’s friend Geagea’ might grind his teeth a bit… In here

“… Nissi, who is in the States and recently met with high level officials at the Pentagon, is angry with those there who maintain that Lebanon has a democratically elected government and that, therefore, the Lebanese army is the legitimate recipient of arms from the U.S. “They simply don’t understand that Hezbollah is controlling the Lebanese army,” Nissi charged.

To Nissi, the 2005 “March 14 Alliance,” which sought freedom from Syrian occupation and democracy, is now a fiction. Everything revolved around the Saudis whose money controls Lebanon. The rivalry between the late King Fahd and the Crown Prince and now King Abdullah colored Lebanese affairs as much as Syria did. Rafik Hariri was Fahd’s man in Lebanon while Prince Waleed bin Talal, (whose mother, Princess Muna al-Sulh, was the daughter of independent Lebanon ’s first prime minister, Riyadh al-Sulh), was Abdullah’s choice. As Prime Minister, the Sunni-Muslim Hariri followed Syrian orders. In September 2004 however, when the U.N. passed Resolution 1559, Syria was compelled to withdraw its troops from Lebanon . Hariri and the Saudis supported it…. Abdullah, according to Nissi, preferred to see his nephew Waleed bin Talal serve in Lebanon, rendering Hariri expendable…..

(UPDATE:) … his aims are, to rehabilitate the identity of the Aramaic speaking Christians. Nissi claims that the Arab-Muslims are deliberately destroying the Aramaic identity. Nissi has created two Aramaic culture and language NGO’S.

On a political level Nissi seeks to bring the Christian community’s 15 organizations in Lebanon under the National Council of the Cedar Revolution (NCCR) umbrella.

On a church level Nissi hopes to reverse the phenomenon of Muslims – including Saudis – buying up Christian owned land. His Christian religious umbrella would purchase land and reserve it for Christians……

Nissi concluded the conversation by saying, “I am working to create an independent, democratic, secular (hahahaha), and pluralistic Lebanon at peace with Israel and a close friend of the USA.”

Posted by G, Z, or B at 10:21 AM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Senior BBC Mideast Correspondent: “Here’s what may have REALLY happened on 9/11″!

My Catbird Seat

Breaking his self-imposed rule against talking about 9/11, former Senior BBC Mideast Correspondent and author Alan Hart described what he thinks may have really happened on that fateful day on yesterday’s Kevin Barrett show.

Hart, who got to know Yasser Arafat and Golda Meir while serving as a Security Council-briefed Mideast peace negotiator, said that he has been assured by a top-level demolitions/engineering expert who wishes to remain anonymous that the three World Trade Center skyscrapers were destroyed by controlled demolitions, not plane crashes and fires. (For the names of more than 1000 experts willing to go on the record with the same opinion, see http://www.ae911truth.org).

During the hour-long interview, Hart discussed Israel’s record of engaging in outrageous attacks on friend and foe alike, and spreading even more outrageous lies to cover them up. (Around the midpoint of the show he explained the real reason Israel attacked the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967.)

Regarding 9/11, Hart suggested that while there may have been some original terrorist plot conceived by fellow-travelers of Osama Bin Laden, the Israeli Mossad, with its near-total penetration of Middle Eastern governments and terrorist groups alike, would have quickly detected and hijacked the operation to its own ends, orchestrating a spectacularly successful attack on America designed to be blamed on its Arab and Muslim enemies. Hart added that the Mossad operation that became 9/11 would have been aided and abetted by certain corrupt American leaders.

Sounding a chilling note, Hart added that the U.S. is in grave danger of an Israeli-instigated false-flag nuclear attack, perhaps using an American nuclear weapon stolen from Minot Air Force Base during the “loose nukes” rogue operation of August, 2007. The motive would be to trigger a U.S. war with Iran, and perhaps to finish the ethnic cleansing of Palestine under cover of war–which Hart is convinced the Zionists are planning to do as soon as the opportunity presents itself.

When a warning this serious is delivered by a messenger with the stature of Alan Hart, the American people had better find a way around the news blackout imposed by the Zionist-dominated corporate and pseudo-alternative media. The only thing standing in the way of an Israeli false-flag nuclear attack on America, a disastrous US war on Iran, and a horrendous acceleration of the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, is the awareness of the American people. Please copy, post, and mass-email this story.

Kevin Barrett
http://www.truthjihad.com
Author, Questioning the War on Terror: A Primer for Obama Voters: http://www.questioningthewaronterror.com




Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East.

His Latest book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, is a three-volume epic in its American edition.  He blogs on http://www.alanhart.net and tweets on www.twitter.com/alanauthor.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Annual Nakba Commemoration Dinner Speech

I am adding here the 4 parts of the speech (videos) posted at My Catbird Seat

Very informative, a must watch/read, I added the pictures, my  comments are in green within the article. At the bottom  I added an update for an old comment.

Your feedback is appreciated.

May 22, 2010

The following is the text of my address to the Annual Nakba Commemoration Dinner, Dearborn, on 15 May 2010. (Video will be posted as soon as possible.)

I’m delighted to be with you on this most significant anniversary, and I want to begin with a very simple statement: In my view Nakba Denial – the denial by all supporters of Israel right or wrong of Zionist ethnic cleansing – is as obscene and as evil, repeat EVIL, as denial of the Nazi holocaust.

But today is not just about remembering what started to happen in Palestine that became Israel 63 years ago. It’s also about saluting the incredible, almost superhuman steadfastness of the occupied and oppressed Palestinians. The Victory sign is only a gesture but I ask you to join me in making it and say after me, “Palestinians of the occupied West Bank and blockaded Gaza Strip, we are with you!”

If one reversed the “V” sign as Winston Churchill sometimes did, one could say it was an appropriate gesture to Prime Minister Netanyahu. He would not have cause for complaint because it’s a gesture he frequently makes to President Obama.

I also want you to know why the occupied and oppressed Palestinians have a special place in my heart as well as my mind. It’s not just that they are the party with right on their side in arguably the most epic might v right struggle in all of history…. If there is one people on earth that ought to have been de-humanized by what has been done to them, it’s the occupied and oppressed Palestinians. They have NOT been de-humanized, but their Zionist oppressors have been, de-humanized by their racist thinking, their insufferable self-righteousness, their contempt for Judaism’s moral values and ethical principles as well as international law, and their criminal actions. Today I go as far as describing Israel’s extreme right wingers as Nazi-like.

Mother Israel – “Father” Palestine with Alan “his Linkman” with Shimon Peres

For some light relief, and also some rare insight, I’ll now tell you my own favourite stories about the two greatest opposites in all of history – Yasser Arafat, Father Palestine, (*FATHER  OSLO) and Golda Meir, Mother Israel. I think I am probably the only person on Planet Earth who enjoyed intimate access to, and on the human level friendship with, both of them.

One of my most treasured souvenirs from my television reporting days is a signed picture of Golda when she was prime minister. The inscription in her own hand is – “To a good friend, Alan Hart.” Because I am a goy, that meant a lot to me. The picture is on my web site and it’s the first one in my latest book. I have also used it as a protective shield. In the late 1980’s when I lectured and debated coast-to-coast across America and Canada, I had the picture with me. When I was accused of anti-Semitism, I would hold up the picture, read out Golda’s inscription, and say to my accuser – “Do you think that old lady was so stupid that she couldn’t have seen through me if I was anti-Jew!” That always won me the applause of the audience and its contempt for my accuser.

When Golda died I went to Israel as a private citizen to say my last goodbye to her. After the burial ceremony on Mount Herzl, I was watching Prime Minster Begin and his ministers leaving. There was a tap on my shoulder. It was Lou Kadar, a very bright and witty lady of French origin who was Golda’s lifelong best friend and confidant. Lou said: “Alan, please come back to my apartment for a drink. There’s something I MUST tell you.” Over a glass of chilled white wine, Lou asked me a question: “Do you remember that BBC Panorama interview you did with Golda in which said the Palestinians did not exist?” I said to Lou: “Not only do I remember, the whole world remembers because it was Golda speaking on film.” (The full quote was: “There is no such thing as a Palestinian. It’s not as though we came and took their land from them. They didn’t exist.”) Lou then said:

“Golda made me promise to tell you, but not until she was dead, that as soon as those words left her lips, she knew they were ‘the silliest damn thing she had ever said!‘”

When I started to write Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, I thought that the significance of Golda’s message to me from the grave was almost impossible to exaggerate. On a personal level I took it to mean that Golda wanted me to know that she was not actually as deluded as I might have imagined her to be on account of her denial, while she lived, of the existence of the Palestinians as a people with rights and an irrefutable claim for justice.

Put another way, she was acknowledging the difference between, on the one hand, Israel’s propaganda – the myth Zionism created to fool the world and comfort itself and, on the other hand, what she knew to be true. In effect and posthumously Mother Israel was admitting that the creation of the Zionist state had required the doing of an injustice to the Palestinians, and that Israel was living a lie.

The problem for Golda’s generation with the truth – the actual existence of the Palestinians – was that it raised fundamental questions about the legality and morality of the Zionist enterprise (her life’s work) and the legitimacy of Israel’s existence. On reflection, and because of her last message to me, I am inclined to the view that Mother Israel went to her grave troubled by the injustice done to the Palestinians in the name of Zionism. She would not have been able to escape the logic of reality and the question it begged. If the Palestinians did not exist – no problem. But if really they did exist – “What have we done?”

The Golda Meir I knew would have asked herself that question when it was obvious – as it was before her death – that the regeneration of Palestinian nationalism was as much a fait accompli as the existence of her state.

As it happened the truth was too uncomfortable for Mother Israel to confront while she lived. That was to be a task for her children. One possible implication of her last message to me was that she wanted them to confront it, by asking themselves what they must do to right the wrong done in Zionism’s name to the Palestinians. Some of my anti-Zionist Jewish friends have said that I have been much too kind to Golda. She was, they insisted, “an unchangeable, Zionist zealot.” They could be right and I could be wrong; but I think I knew Golda better than they did, and I’ll stick with my own interpretation.

Now to my own favourite Arafat story. It’s a good story in its own right but it has a point which I want to develop this evening.

In 1984, shortly after the publication of the first edition of my book Arafat, Terrorist or Peacemaker? I had a call from Tunis.

For those not aware of that book, it was the first ever to tell the true story of the Palestinian struggle from the leadership’s perspective. In addition to Arafat himself, my prime sources were Abu and Um Jihad, Abu Iyad and the Hassan brothers, Khalad and Hani. I spent more than a year virtually living with them and others in the leadership to talk the story out of them.

In that book I came to two main conclusions. The first was that by the end of 1979 – Before 1982 war- (more than three decades ago), Arafat had performed a miracle of leadership by preparing the ground on his side for unthinkable compromise and peace, peace on terms which any rational government and people in Israel would have accepted with relief. The second was that what Arafat needed to emerge as the peacemaker he so much wanted to be was a good faith Israeli negotiating partner.

Back to the call from Tunis. It was from Khalad Hassan. He was Fatah’s intellectual giant on the right. When he thought it necessary, he was fiercely critical of Arafat to his face in private, but nobody did more than Khalad to assist the Chairman to sell the idea of unthinkable compromise with Israel to the PNC.

Khalad said: “Habibi, the Chairman is very, very angry with you.”

I asked why. Khalad replied: “You must come here and find out for yourself.”

So I went to Tunis. I was very aware that Arafat had a terrible tempter and I wasn’t looking forward to be on the receiving end of it. I wondered if our friendship was about to end.

For further background you should know that up to this moment I had enjoyed a very special relationship with the “Old Man”.

It started early in 1980 when I became the linkman in a secret, exploratory dialogue between him and Shimon Peres, who was then the leader of Israel’s main opposition Labour Party.

The hope everywhere at the time, especially in Jimmy Carter’s White House, was that Peres would win Israel’s next election and deny Menachem Begin, the world’s most successful terrorist leader, a second term as prime minister. President Carter was in despair because he had been prevented by Begin and the Zionist Lobby from bringing Arafat and the PLO into the peace process.

Working to a Security Council background briefing, my mission was to try to build a bridge of understanding between Arafat and Peres so that in the event of Peres winning the election and becoming prime minister, he could get into public dialogue with Arafat. When Arafat agreed to participate in what I called a conspiracy for peace, he said this to me: “You must understand that I am putting my life into your hands. If word of this leaks before I have something concrete to show for it, I will be assassinated.”

Some years later I discovered who the assassin would have been. Over lunch in his home, I told Abu Iyad the story of my secret shuttle diplomacy between Arafat and Peres, and I ended by quoting what Arafat had said to me at the start of it – that he would be assassinated if word that he was engaged in dialogue with Peres through me leaked.

Abu Iyad said: “He was telling you the truth. I would not have ordered anybody else to shoot him, I would have done it myself, with my own gun.”

Who killed Abu Iyad and Abu Jihad “FATHER INTIFADA”?

The following day I told Arafat what Abu Iyad had said. He gave me a long, hard look. Then, in a very matter of fact voice, he said: “I knew that. Abu Iyad would have been the one to do it.” (For those in this audience who may not be familiar with Fatah and PLO politics in 1980 when I started my secret, shuttle diplomacy, Abu Iyad was then the one in Fatah’s top leadership who believed that Arafat’s decision to continue the struggle by politics and diplomacy alone was wrong).

The full, inside story of my shuttle diplomacy is in the forthcoming Volume 3 of the American edition of Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews. To wet your appetite for it, and before I get to the climax of my favourite Arafat story, I’ll tell you another because it illustrates how pragmatic, how flexible and how serious Arafat was in his effort to do business with Israel, in order to get an acceptable minimum of justice for his people.

( I would say in order to do his Task -selling Palestine )

At a point in my to’ing and fro-ing between Arafat in Beirut and Peres in Tel Aviv, I decided that we had made enough progress to suggest that they should have a secret, face-to-face meeting. I suggested it first to Arafat. (For background I should tell you that he was not consulting any of his leadership colleagues). When I put the idea to him, Arafat had only one question – What, really, were the prospects of Peres winning the next election and becoming prime minister? I said the expectation in Israel was that he would win. The polls were actually giving his Labour Party a more than 20% lead over Begin’s Likud. Arafat then said, “Yes, I’ll meet with him.” He had only one condition. The meeting could not take place “anywhere on Arab soil”. I said that was no problem. I lived in a rural even remote part of southern England and the meeting could take place in my home. Arafat said, “You have tell me only where and when and I’ll be there“.

I returned to Tel Aviv via Cyprus as usual. At the time, and still today, I was convinced that Peres wanted to meet secretly with Arafat, but it was a risk too far for him.

Months previously when Peres had agreed to talk to Arafat through me, he had said that if word of what we were doing leaked, he would be destroyed and his party would be annihilated at the next election. But Peres wanted there to be a secret, face-to-face meeting with Arafat. He said he would nominate somebody to represent him. I asked who. Peres thought for a minute or so and then said “Aaron Yariv.”

When Golda Meir was prime minister, General Yariv was Israel’s Director of Military Intelligence. I said to Peres: “I’m sure that Arafat knows as well as you do that a number of attempts to kill him were authorized by Yariv when he was DMI. Do you really expect Arafat to meet with him?” Peres replied: “It will be a good test of Arafat’s sincerity. If he agrees to meet with Yariv, I’ll know he is serious.”

(I don’t buy the story of assasination attempts – Arafat was an Israeli Asset)

Peres then commanded me to meet with Yariv and put the proposition to him. If he gave me a “Yes” in principle, Peres would talk with him and, subject to Arafat’s agreement, the secret meeting would be arranged. Yariv gave me a “Yes” in principle.

Back in Beirut, and somewhat to my astonishment, Arafat didn’t need even a few seconds to consider whether he should or should not meet secretly with the former Israeli DMI who had authorized a number of attempts to kill him. “I have only one condition,” Arafat said to me. “I must be assured that Yariv will be speaking FOR Peres“. What Arafat meant and went on to say was that if he made a deal with Yariv, it could only be on the basis of knowing that Peres would honour it. I said I understood that would be the case.

On my journey back to Tel Aviv I allowed myself to flirt for a few seconds with a fantasy. Was it possible, I wondered, that we were on our way to a Nobel Peace Prize?

As soon as I had checked into my room in the Dan Hotel on Tel Aviv’s beach front, I telephoned retired General Chaim Herzog. He was one of two men advising Peres. At the time Herzog was the Labour Party’s secretary general and running his own import/export business. As the founding father of Israel’s Directorate of Military Intelligence, Herzog was already an Israeli legend. He went on to become Israel’s ambassador to the UN and eventually the Zionist state’s president. We were good friends and the reason why I was well informed about what was happening in Israel in my television reporting days is that Herzog was my journalistic deep-throat. On the ‘phone I said to him: “My Arab friend WILL meet with Yariv.” Herzog was obviously excited. He said: “We’re cooking on gas. Go tell Yariv. I’ll brief Shimon.”
Yariv listened to my report of my last meeting with Arafat in complete silence. When I stopped talking, he said: “I’m sorry. I can’t meet with Arafat.” He was obviously very embarrassed.

At this point ladies and gentlemen, and because I want to tell you exactly what happened next, I must ask you, please, to forgive my language. I did an Arafat (and a Begin). I lost my temper. I shouted at Yariv: “We’re not playing fucking games! What the hell is going on?” And I demanded an explanation. His answer was pathetic to say the least. “I didn’t think you’d persuade Arafat to meet with me,” he said. What he meant but didn’t say is that while I was in Beirut getting Arafat’s “Yes”, he, Yariv, had changed his mind and was hoping that Arafat would say “No” so that I could blame Arafat and not him.

I asked Herzog to investigate why, really, Yariv had changed his mind. When he reported back to me, Herzog said I should have a little sympathy for Yariv. While I was away in Beirut, he had done some re-thinking and came to the conclusion that if he met with Arafat, and if word of the meeting leaked, Prime Minister Begin would make an example of him and, as Yariv had put it to Herzog, “He might even have me hanged as a traitor.”

That was not the end of the matter, but to find out how it ended you’ll have to read my book.
Back now to my favourite Arafat story.

When I arrived in Tunis to find out why he was “very, very angry” with me, he was having a meeting with his headquarters staff. When they left his office, a bodyguard who knew me well gestured for me to enter and closed the door behind me. As usual it was just the two of us. Arafat was sitting at his desk, head down, rapidly reading and signing papers. For five very long minutes he didn’t look up or in any way acknowledge my presence. He was ignoring me completely. That was most unusual because Arafat by nature was a most courteous man. (If you were his guest for a meal, he would insist that you sat next to him and would personally serve you from the dishes on the table).

I refused to be intimidated and sat myself down in a chair opposite him. I noticed that my book was open on his desk.

Eventually, Arafat looked up and jabbed an accusing finger at me. With real anger in his voice and flashing in his eyes, he said: “You have made very big troubles for me!” I asked him how. He picked up my open book and read aloud a sentence of what I had quoted him as saying to me: The sentence was:

“Being the Chairman of the PLO is like being the only male customer in a brothel of 22 whores“.

Arafat pronounced the word “hoarez”, but whichever way you pronounced it, there was no getting away from the implication. When he first spoke those words, Arafat was telling me that he and his people were being screwed by each and all of the leaders and governments of the 22 states of the Arab League.

I said: “But Abu Amar, you DID say that to me and it IS true!” If he was going to deny saying it, I was going to remind him of where and when he said it. Something, perhaps it was my response, caused his anger to vanish. He relaxed and then said: “Yes, yes, yes, I DID say it. And yes, yes, yes, it IS true.” Pause. “But you shouldn’t have quoted me. You should have said it was your understanding of my thinking. Then I could have denied it. Now I can’t.”

And that was that. We were still friends.

Still today I think there is no better way of pointing to a truth of history than with the words I quoted Arafat as saying and which he did not deny. That truth can be summarised as follows.

More by default than design, the divided and impotent regimes of a mainly corrupt and oppressive Arab Order betrayed the Palestinians. After the first Zionist fait accompli in 1948, the Arab regimes secretly shared the same hope as all the major powers and Zionism. It was that the Palestine file would remain closed forever. (It had been closed not only by Israel’s victory on the battlefield, but also Jordan’s annexation of the West Bank including East Jerusalem to prevent Zionism grabbing it, and Eygpt’s taking of the Gaza Strip).
There was not supposed to be a re-generation of Palestinian nationalism.

(its more precise to say there was not supposed to be regeneration of Arab nationalism, infact nakba bosted the Arab Nationalism – Arab Nationalists Movement lead by Habash and July Revolution in Egypt)

In the script written by Zionism, and endorsed by all the major powers and the Arab regimes, the Palestinians were supposed to accept their lot as the sacrificial lamb on the altar of political expediency.

In that context it can be said that Arafat’s real crime in the eyes of all who demonized him was causing the Palestine file to be re-opened.

(In that context I would say the Palestinian file was never closed, it was the core of the Arab Nationalists Movement, and Arafat ‘s real mission, after closing the Arab nationalisn file between 1961-1967, was closing the Palestinian file for ever)

After that it was what I have already described as the incredible, almost superhuman steadfastness of the occupied and oppressed Palestinians that guaranteed it could never be closed again – unless Zionism’s in-Israel leaders resort to a final round of ethnic cleansing and are allowed to get away with it.

By now even those of you who are not familiar with my books and other writings will be aware that I am a fierce critic of Zionism, the governments of all the major powers and the regimes of an impotent Arab Order. But that is not a complete list of my crimes. I am also a critic of diaspora Palestinian and almost all other Arab (and non-Arab) activist groups everywhere. At the risk of offending some and perhaps many in this audience, and even further afield, I’m going to tell you why.

As I see it, almost all activist groups are doing their own little things in splendid isolation, and in doing them they demonstrate to me that they have little or no understanding of the strategic essence of what must be done if Zionism is to be successfully confronted and defeated. (If you asked what I would regard as defeat for Zionism, my answer would be the de-Zionisation of Palestine).

My main point is this. While it is true that the incredible, almost superhuman steadfastness of the occupied and oppressed Palestinians is the rock on which all of us who campaign for justice stand, the struggle is not going to be won or lost IN Palestine that became Israel. It’s going to be won or lost HERE IN AMERICA.

In my analysis (and leaving aside the impotence of the regimes of the existing Arab Order) there are three political realities to be faced.

The first is that is that Zionism’s in-Israel leaders are not interested in peace on terms virtually all Palestinians and most other Arabs and Muslims everywhere could accept.

The second is that only an American President has the leverage required to cause – or try to cause – enough Israelis to be serious about peace on the basis of an acceptable amount of justice for the Palestinians. (The leaders and governments of other major powers also have leverage, but they won’t think of using it unless America takes the lead).

The third is that no American President is going to use the leverage he has unless and until he is PUSHED to do so by informed public opinion, by expressions of real democracy in action. In other words, for peace to have a real and I believe last chance, a constituency of understanding has got to be created here in America to enable the President to break the Zionist lobby’s stranglehold on Congress. (As I put it in the Epilogue to the forthcoming Volume 3 of the American edition of this book, in order to use the leverage he has to require Israel to be serious about peace, the President needs enough members of Congress to be more frightened of offending their voters than they are of offending the Zionist lobby in all of its manifestations).

As I dared to suggest in my Dear America Introduction to Volume One of this book, the problem in America is that most Americans are too uninformed and mis-informed TO DO THE PUSHING and make their democracy work. Simply stated, most Americans, like most Westerners, have been conditioned to accept a version of history, Zionism’s version, which is not true. It is, quite simply, a pack of propaganda lies.

The biggest of all the lies is the assertion that poor little Israel has lived in constant danger of annihilation – the “driving into the sea” of its Jews. As I document in detail through the three volumes of this book, Israel’s existence has never, ever, been in danger from any combination of Arab force. Not in 1948. Not in 1967. And not even in 1973. Despite some stupid rhetoric that suggested otherwise and assisted Zionism to get away with the Mother and Father of its propaganda lies, the Arab regimes never, ever, had any intention of fighting Israel to liberate Palestine. Zionism’s assertion to the contrary was the cover that allowed Israel to get away where it mattered most – in America and Western Europe – with presenting its aggression as self-defense and itself as the victim when actually it was and is the oppressor.

I bring the Prologue to Volume 1 of the American edition of this book to a conclusion by quoting an Israeli I admire – Major General Shlomo Gazit. He was the best and the brightest of Israel’s Directors of Military Intelligence. He was also one of the two who were advising Peres when I was shuttling between him and Arafat. Over coffee one morning I said to Shlomo: “I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s all a myth. Israel’s existence has never, ever, been in danger.” Through a sad smile, he replied: “The trouble with us Israelis is that we’ve become the victims of our own propaganda.”

The biggest of the supporting Zionist propaganda lies was the assertion that Israel had no Arab partners for peace. As I’ve already said, and you know, Arafat had prepared the ground on his side for peace with Israel by the end of 1979. But there were a number of Arab overtures for peace long before that. I’ll mention just one. From almost the moment he came to power in Eygpt in 1951, Nasser wanted an accommodation with Israel. So much so that he had secret exchanges with Israel’s then foreign minister, Moshe Sharret. In my view Sharret was the only completely sane Israeli leader of his time. It was because he wanted to be serious about advancing a peace process with Nasser that he was destroyed by Ben-Gurion… The documented record is quite clear. It was Israel’s leaders NOT the Arabs who spurned opportunity after opportunity for peace.

Now to what I believe is the real significance of the truth of history as it relates to the making and sustaining of the conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel. It is THE KEY to creating the constituency of understanding needed here in America to create the space to enable a president to break the Zionist lobby’s stranglehold on Congress.. Put another way, it is only when enough Americans are informed about the truth of history that there will be – perhaps I should say could be – sufficient pressure on Congress for an end to US support for Israel right or wrong.

Question: Why is it that still today most Americans are ignorant of the truth of history?

A large part of the answer is that the mainstream media still prefers to peddle Zionist propaganda. But in my view the ignorance is also evidence of the FAILURE TO DATE OF ACTIVIST GROUPS OF ALL FAITHS AND NONE. Yes, it’s important to draw attention to what’s happening in Israel/Palestine today and to protest against Israel’s violations of human rights and international law. Yes, it’s important to assist the occupied and oppressed Palestinians to remain steadfast and go on surviving. And yes, it’s important to campaign for boycott, divestment and sanctions. But none of this campaigning is going to result in a fundamental change of U.S. policy so long as most Americans remain ignorant of the truth of history and how much they have been conned by Zionist propaganda.

The conclusion invited, or so I believe, is that IT’S TIME FOR ACTIVIST GROUPS TO GIVE PRIORITY TO DEVISING AND IMPLEMENTING A STRATEGY FOR INFORMING AND EDUCATING AMERICANS ABOUT THE TRUTH OF HISTORY, and therefore who must do what and why if this conflict is not to end in catastrophe for all; and by all I don’t just mean the Arabs and Jews of the region, I mean all of us everywhere. The essence of the campaign message would be something like – “Fellow Americans, almost everything you’ve been conditioned to believe about the making and sustaining of this conflict is not true.”

I devoted more than five years of my life to researching and writing the original version of this epic book. My purpose was to provide a powerful weapon to make winning the war for truth possible. The book is about much more than is suggested by its title, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews. (A longer version of the title could be – It isn’t the Arabs who are the real enemy of the Jews, it’s Zionism’s brutal and increasingly Nazi-like colonial enterprise).

Updated to President Obama’s surrender to the Zionist lobby, it’s the first ever book tell the complete story of the making and sustaining of the conflict replacing Zionist mythology with the documented facts and truth of history. And the story as I tell it is not confined to events in the region. I’ve given those events global context, meaning that I take my readers behind closed doors in London, Paris, Washington and Moscow. With this book you can start out knowing nothing worth knowing about the conflict, which sadly is the position of most Americans, and end up seeing how all the pieces of the most complicated jig-saw puzzle fit together. Simply stated, this book enables all readers – almost all of them for the first time ever – to make sense of what is happening and why.

If I had written a pro-Zionist book, I would have had wealthy Jews throwing money at me for promotion of all kinds. My experience to date is that wealthy Arabs, including wealthy Palestinians, are frightened of offending Zionism to assist my efforts to make informed and honest debate possible.

I also think that like most activist groups they have no understanding of how you change lobby-driven government policies in the so-called democratic nations. There is only one way to do it – by informing and educating the citizens, the voters, empowering them to make democracy work and call and hold their leaders to account. When enough citizens want something done, governments have to do it.

So I’m asking you tonight to make good use of my book and become actively engaged in the process of educating your fellow Americans to make democracy work. I am, of course, aware that there is a reason why some and perhaps many Arab and other Muslim Americans think that’s too dangerous and that they should keep their heads down and their mouths shut, in order, as they see it, to protect themselves, their families, their careers and their businesses. The reason is that the monster of Islamophobia is on the prowl in America (as it is in Europe) and licking its lips.

But backing away from this monster is not the way for American and other Western Arabs and other Muslims to protect their own best interests. The best way, I say, is for them to play their ACE card.

What is that? I call it the Patriot Card. Regardless of ethnicity, the one thing above all others that Americans are required to demonstrate in order to be regarded by their fellow citizens as safe and sound is patriotism. Hold on to that thought while I make this short statement.

The best recruiting sergeant for violent Islamic fundamentalism in all of its manifestations everywhere is the double-standard of American-led, Western foreign policy, particularly as it relates to the conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel. General Petraeus, and apparently President Obama, now accept that support for the Zionist state of Israel right or wrong, is NOT in America’s best interests and is damaging them.

By helping your fellow Americans to understand this, you would not only be presenting yourselves as real patriots and therefore best protecting your own interests, you would be helping to expose supporters of Israel right or wrong for what they are – brainwashed, deluded and plain wrong at best, and a threat to real national interests at worst. Some would even call them “traitors”.

I’ll close by reading the first sentence of Volume 1 of the American edition of my book and adding a comment.

“Dear Americans, If all of our children, wherever they live, are to have even the prospect of a future worth having, the world needs America’s best, not what it had under the neo-conned regime of President George “Dubya” Bush – its worst.”

My appeal to you this evening is this. If you really care about stopping the final ethnic cleansing of Palestine, keeping hope for justice and peace alive, and best protecting America’s own real interests, become engaged in the war for truth and justice and play your necessary part in helping to bring out the best of America.
Thank you.


Comment


*Who would believe that ARAFAT, ABU AMMAR, “THE FATHER  PALESTINE” who said “Shaheedan, Shaheedan” was a Jew?

Don’t be surprised. I shall explain how Arafat managed to turn the Palestinian people into a nation of buggers, and many, many into traitors, informers and collaborators working for and on behalf of the enemy.

I would thank Mr. HART for confirming what I was saying over many many years:

Mr. Hart admitted that:

• Early in 1980 he became the linkman in a secret, exploratory dialogue between Arafat  and Shimon Peres, and was part of what he called “Peace conspiracy”. 
• Arafat told Mr. Hart that If word leaks before he have something concrete to show for it, he would be assassinated. by Abu Iyad.
• Mr. Hart failed to get the “Peace Partners” together, because the Israeli party was fearing treason accusation and Arfat was fearing assasination by Abu Iyad.

Therfore , I may conclude that 1982 War was needed by both Parties, Arafat used it to justify selling Palestine under the Slogan “‘Ya Wahdana” – (we are alone). Moreover, I would ask who and why both Abu Iyad and Abu Jihad were assasinated later in Tunis??

Mr. Hart also confirmed two more confirmed two things:

• Arfat was pragmatic, flexible and serious Arafat in his effort to do business with Israel.
• By 1979 two years before 1982 war. “‘Arafat had performed a miracle of leadership by preparing the ground on his side for unthinkable compromise and peace”

Yes, I fully agree with Mr. Hart Arfat  was serious in doing business with Israel, I would add in forming Fateh in 1958 he was doing business for Israel and he did it well over the period (1958-1979), and continued to do it until his zionist master decided that a  Dead “Father Palestine” is better than a living EXPIRED EXPOSED SPY. 

Now, here is my old “Conspiracy” theory

In a famous lecture (after oslo) in London, Hani al-Hassan (an old Fateh Guard, the poltical adviser of Arafat and one of the Mr.Hart’s Prime Sources, tried to Justify going to Oslo.

He claimed (Hanging Fateh treason on Nasir’s hook) that after 1967 war Nasir told Arafat and Fateh leaders close to Arafat: its over, you has no choice other than reaching a peace deal with Israel.

Consequently, according to Al Hassan, after 1967, Fateh decided its time for preparing the Palestinians to accept a peace deal with Isreal.

Based on Al-Hassan’s statement, I am one of Palestinians who claimd that, the Massacres of Palestinians, in Black September, in Jordan, in Lebanese civil war, the performance of Fateh during the 1982 war on Lebanon, its alignment with Saddam that lead to the Nakba of half million Palestinian living in Kuwait, starving Palestinians, especially those on the PLO payroll, for several months before Oslo, were steps in the process of preparing the Palestinians for “peace” that paved the way Oslo, and the selling Oslo to Palestinians, and finally the return of “Victorous” Afrafat to Ramallah to achieve what Israeal failed to achive put an end to the Great First Intifadah.

I am, here, saying Fateh was created to do what it did since its creation

In adopting armed struggle, Fateh put itself to the Left of Nasir and Arab nationalist movement.

Fateh was not the only player, the Syrian Seperation coup funded by Saudia undermined the Liberation Nationalists option, and bosted Fatah and its Palestinian Option.

Both Fateh, based in Syria and, and Pre-assad Syrian regime, pushed, jointly Nasir to 1967 trap (read Fateh litereture during the period (1958-1967) and read Assad Abu Khalil latest Artcle in Al-akhbar) , that paved the way in 1969 for:

• Fateh, taking over PLO in Feb, 1969
• Creating the Organization of Islamic Conference in September 25, 1969 to replace Baghdad Pact and undertake the old task of containing the USSR, and the new task of defeating USSR in Afghanistan.

Here, let us remember that Nasir’s rejected Baghdad Pact , known as Dwight Eisenhower‘s Project, to contain the Soviet Union by having a line of strong states along the USSR’s southwestern frontiercontain.

Nasser felt that the pro-western Baghdad Pact posed a threat to Arab Nationalism. As a response, Egypt and Syria united into the United Arab Republic. At that time, 1958 Syria was as described by Patrick Seal, a feather in wind storm. It is Nasir who protected Syria from the wind storm blowing from Iraq, Turkey, and Lebanon.

The United Arab Republic boasted 1958 revolution in Iraq.

“On July 14, 1958, the Iraqi monarchy was overthrown in a military coup. The new government was led by General Abdul Karim Qasim who withdrew from the Baghdad Pact, opened diplomatic relations with Soviet Union and adopted a non-aligned stance; Iraq quit the organization shortly thereafter. The organization dropped the Baghdad Pact moniker in favor of CENTO at that time.”

“The toppling of a pro-Western government in the Iraq 14 July Revolution, along with the internal instability, caused President Chamoun to call for U.S. assistance.”

The United Arab Republic boasted also in the same year, 1958, the setting up of the first cells of the Fateh movement in Kuwait

The formation of Fatah was the first nail driven in the coffen of Arab nationalist movement at its 1958 peak, and 1967 defeat and the death (poisoning) of Nasir were the last nails.

I remember, and understand how and why, after the the success of Algerians revolution and the 1961 Syrian seperation coup, tens of Palestinian faction have grown like mashrom within Palestinians in Daispora, mainly in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Gaza, but I failed till this very moment to find a reason for creation of Fatah in 1958 (the peak of Arab nationalism).

All events, many meetings, discussions, I held since early sixties confirmed my old theory.

• I met Mahmoud Abbas, accidently, in 1976 in Lybia, without knowing that he is Fatah member, after presenting my theory in his presence, he said nothing other than cursing Palestinian leaders, mainly Habash.
• I met many Fateh Ambasadors, who just commented: Conspiracy theory.
• Few weeks after Camp david 2, one retired Fatah old Guard, who Joined Arafat in Kuwait, told me many, many stories confirming my theory. He told me about an internal secret Document issued before 1967, about the two state solution. He said, a copy of the document is available with ….. another Ex-Fatah, living in….This document, lead to a coup within Fateh in Kuwait. The Coup was ended by Fateh fighters brought from Syria on a Kuwaiti Airlines. And he told me about may of the so-called assasination attempts against Afafat, where Arafat would leave a place, after a phone call, few minutes before bombing the place.
• There was always, a big question mark about Arafat, his family, real family name origin. In early 1990’s I directly heard, while under arrest from my interrogator, a non-confirmed story, claiming that Arafat (THE FATHER PALESTINE) is the son of a Jewish family, from Moroco, His grand father, came to Jerusalem in 1928, coverted to Islam, married the daughter of Abu-Assoud (Jerusalem Mofti) in order to stay in Jerusalem). Arafat’s Father business was selling Jewish Head cover, his shop was burned, and he left to Gaza, then to Egypt. His son Yesir was born in a Jewish neighbourhood (Hay Issakakini) in Cairo.
• Few years ago, I accidently met Arafat’s Egyption half brother without knowing him in a gathering. One syrian claimed, that Syrian PM Al-Kassim was removed because they fount the Al-Kassim family are Ex-Jews. I commented: Good for them, they knew and took action. We know and don’t dare to speakout. I was sitting between Arafat’s Half brother and a friend. My friend hit my leg to stop me, but I told my story. After about half an hour, we moved to the dining table and the half brother standing on the other side facing me, without telling me his identity, he commented as follows: Anwar Al-Sadat, after hearing the same story, he asked for Arafat’s family tree. He found that the  Head of Arafat’s family was our Prophet Mohamad. I am not making it. I have many witnesses. In short the stupid comment of Arafat’s half brother confirmed the un-confirmed story.
• Unlike Cohen (Amin Thabit), the famous spy planted in Syria, Arafat is real and have a real family.

I always argued, how Israel succeeded in assasinating almost all Fatah founders, such as Kamal Edwan, Kamal Nasir, Abu Jehad, Abu Iyad, Abu Alhall, etc.. and fail to get Arafat. His life was saved many, many times, after Balck September in Jordan, The western fleet arrived twice to Labanon to save his ass, Americans rescued him when his plane crushed in Lybian desert. I know many stories about Israel bombing places, building, in both Syria and Lebabon, few minures after Arafat leaving it.

Some would say, how would Israel kill such asset??

My answer is:

After his great sevices to zionist project, in putting Palestinians on the “Peace track” that lead to Oslo and his “Victorous” return to end the first Intifada, Arafat became a liabilty more than an asset.

In Camp David two, he reached and agreement with Barak, but he needed time sell it to Palestinians, Arabs and Muslems, but he failed to deliver. Barak left the office to Sharon, to complete the “Independance” And Arafat lost controll on the Palestinian street with the second Intifidah.

The asset became a Liability. Zionist Elders decided to keep the profile of Arafat as the “Historic God father of Palestinian Armed Resistance” rather than exposing him and paving the way for a New Fatah leader like Barghouti. Especially with the Bahae Mahmoud Abbas Merza, ready to complete the mission.


A Dead “Palestinian HERO” is better than a living EXPIRED EXPOSED SPY.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Is An Israeli – Palestinian Peace Possible?

Contributed By Debbie Menon (Thanks)
Salem-News.com

One of the world’s most esteemed reporters will discuss issues necessary for real understanding of who must do what and why for justice and peace in the Middle East and best protecting America’s own real interests.

Alan Hart brings 40 years of experience to the road.

(LOS ANGELES) – Alan Hart, today an author, is a former foreign correspondent for Independent Television News and Panorama, BBC TV’s flagship current affairs program, who covered wars and conflicts wherever they were happening in the world.

At 68 (a young 68) Alan has been engaged with the conflict in the Middle East for 40 years. He was the first Western correspondent to reach the banks of the Suez Canal with the Israeli army in 1967.

This is a rare opportunity to hear from one of the few people in the world (possibly the only person in the world) who enjoyed intimate access to, and on the human level friendship with, two of the greatest opposites in history – Golda Meir, Mother Israel and Yasser Arafat, Father Palestine.

On the Arab side, in addition to PLO chairman Arafat, he enjoyed special relations and private conversations with Saudi Arabia’s King Faisal (Alan was the first Western correspondent to interview him on camera), Jordan’s King Hussein and Egyptian Presidents Nasser and Sadat.

In pre-revolutionary Iran he was also a confidant of Empress Farah, when she was trying to warn her husband the Shah that things were going badly in his country and that a sycophantic bureaucracy was keeping the truth from him.

His private one-on-one conversations over the years with leaders on both sides of the Arab-Israeli conflict gave Alan a rare insight into the truth of what they really believed and feared as opposed to what they said in public for propaganda and myth-sustaining purposes.

In 1980 Alan, on his own initiative, was the linkman in an unofficial, secret exploratory dialogue between Arafat and Shimon Peres. At the time Peres was the leader of Israel’s main opposition Labour Party and, many believed (wrongly as it turned out), the man who would defeat Menachem Begin and become prime minister after the 1981 election.

A fascinating career. At age 7 Alan knew he wanted to be a reporter. By age 18 he was reporting from Central Africa for not only for The Nyasaland Times but, as a stringer, for all but one of Britain’s national newspapers and the three main international news agencies – Reuters, Associated Press and UPI.
It was in Vietnam, observing America spending six million dollars a minute destroying two countries in a war he thought could not be won and should not be fought, that he started to ask himself questions about why things are as they are in the world.

Today as a private citizen, without constraints, Alan can address the issues necessary for real understanding of who must do what and why for justice and peace in the Middle East and best protecting America’s own real interests.

Following the presentation there will be time for questions and debate with Alan.
Tim – Alan will be speaking in the US and Canada from Mid May to Mid June. He is starting off in Michigan arriving 13 May.
======================================================
Alan’s arrival in America in mid May for a month will be on the heels of the publication of Volume 3 of the American edition of his epic book, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews. The sub-title of this volume is Conflict Without End?

It takes the story from the 1967 war and the creation of Greater Israel to the present and the question: Is Peace Possible?
Will President Obama be allowed to deliver an acceptable amount of justice for the Palestinians in order to achieve peace for all and, if not, what’s the most likely future for the region and the world?

Reviews:
“… immensely readable and a magnificent piece of work …”
— Clare Short, MP and Int’l Development Sec’t in Blair Govt
“… elucidates the dangers involved in the unconditional Western support for Zionism and its oppressive policies against the Palestinians.”
— Ilan Pappe, Leading Israeli revisionist Historian
“… principled, … historical, … excellent, even heroic, in effort and scope.”
— Mark Bruzonsky, founder, MiddleEast.org; World Jewish Congress, first Washington Representative

Over more than four decades Alan Hart enjoyed intimate access to, and on the human level friendship with, leaders of both sides including Golda Meir, Mother Israel, and Yasser Arafat,Father Palestine. (Others included Moshe Dayan, Shimon Peres, Nasser, Sadat, King Faisal, King Hussein—the list is long). He also participated at a leadership level in the secret politics of the search for peace in the Middle East (as an intermediary between Arafat and Peres when it was presumed that Peres was headed for leadership). ZIONISM, THE REAL ENEMY OF THE JEWS is Alan Hart’s epic three-volume journey through the propaganda lies and the documented truth of history as it relates to the making and sustaining of what has come to be called the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

Alan Hart’s Interview With Ray Hanania

– 07. May, 2010 in News/Politics –

– Debbie Menon
They are both correct in much, or most, of what they say and there is no denying that Hart knows what he is talking about when he talks about the Middle East and its Byzantine political web; and Hanania’s comments on “educating Americans.”  Hart will be addressing the Annual Nakba Commemoration Dinner, this […]

Continue Reading and Click on play to listen to the interview

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Minister Bassil Says FPM Has Lost Trust in Hariri’s Cabinet

12/04/2010 Lebanon’s Energy and Water Minister Gebran Bassil said the Free Patriotic Movement has lost trust in Prime Minister Saad Hariri’s cabinet over municipal elections, accusing the government of setting up Lebanese people.

“Holding municipal elections without reforms has led to losing confidence in the government,” Bassil told Lebanese daily An-Nahar. “It will also lead to lack of confidence among the various political parties,” Bassil warned.

He believed failure to hold elections after amendments “constitutes a sever blow to the commitment made by the government to approve the municipal electoral law during a year and al half.”

“To us, what has happened had broken the bridges of trust (with the government) and torpedoed the political agreement inside and outside Cabinet,” Bassil said.

He accused the government of “setting up” The Lebanese people and “cheating” them. “And it (government) continues to manipulate them.”

River to Sea
 Uprooted Palestinian

Iran, Israel and an Obama miscalculation in the works?

President Obama’s apparent desire to move forcefully against Iran with new sanctions within weeks, not months, makes me wonder if he is calculating that he will be in a better position to put some real pressure on Israel, and possibly bring about regime change there, if he can successfully bully Iran into playing the game his way. If that is what Obama is thinking, he could be setting himself up (or is being set up?) for another humiliation.

On one level of argument there is a case for saying that if he could persuade Tehran to meet his requirements on the development of its nuclear program, he could then say to Israel something very like, “I’ve neutralized the Iranian threat, now you must give an absolute priority to making peace with the Palestinians.”

Leaving aside for the moment the matter of Iran’s response to more aggressive bullying, the problem with that way of thinking is what it ignores. Israel’s leaders and AIPAC are playing up the Iranian threat not because they truly believe that a nuclear armed Iran would pose a threat to the Zionist state’s existence, but because it, the asserted threat, is an effective way of limiting the White House’s freedom to pressure Israel. The point?

Even if Obama did succeed in getting what he wants from Iran, that would not improve his chances of bringing Israel to heel, with or without regime change. So from that perspective, Obama would end up being humiliated again. But there is a much worse, even catastrophic scenario.

What if moving quickly and forcefully with new sanctions on Iran did not bring about a policy change in Tehran?

Obama would then have painted himself into a corner where his options would be either to say, in effect, “We’ve got to live with the fact that Iran might possess nuclear weapons,” or to give Israel the green light to attack Iran and risk the U.S. being drawn into a war which might not end until the whole Middle East was in flames and the global economy had been completely wrecked.
That would be quite some miscalculation.

If you liked this post, then…

• Follow me on Twitter (@alanauthor).

River to Sea
 Uprooted Palestinian