Vol 14, No.09 September 2014 Turn to next page ARTICLES STATEMENTS THE ATLANTIC A LLIANCE ’ S “HOLY WAR” AGAINST THE I SLAMIC S TATE (ISIS): NATO’ S ROLE IN THE RECRUITMENT OF I SLAMIC TERRORISTS By Michel Chossudovsky . MH-17 ‘INVESTIGATION’:SECRET AUGUST 8TH AGREEMENT SEEPS OUT BY ERIC ZUESSE...................................................P 4 .THE TRUTH ABOUT IS BY CHANDRA MUZAFFAR......................P3 . JEWISH SURVIVORS OF NAZI GENOCIDE CONDEMN THE MASSACRE OF PALESTINIANS I N GAZA BY COUNTERCURRENTS...................................P 10 .WHAT’S NEXT FOR ISRAEL, HAMAS AND GAZA BY NOAM CHOMSKY............................................P 15 . FERGUSON: NO JUSTICE I N THE AMERICAN POLICE STATE BY PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS...................................P 19 .AMERICA STARTED THIS UKRAINE CRISIS BY WILLIAM PFAFF................................................P8 While NATO leaders in Newport Wales debate the Atlantic Alliance’s role “in containing a mounting militant threat in the Middle East”, it is worth recalling that in 2011 at the outset of the war in Syria, NATO became actively involved in the recruitment of Islamic fighters. Reminiscent of the enlistment of the Mujahideen to wage the CIA’s jihad (holy war) in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war, NATO headquarters in Brussels in liaison with the Turkish High command, according to Israeli intelligence sources, was involved in the enlisting of thousands of terrorists: “Also discussed in Brussels and Ankara, our sources report, is a campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian rebels. The Turkish army would house these volunteers, train them and secure their passage into Syria. (Debkafile, August 31, 2011 emphasis added). Confirmed by Israeli intelligence News, NATO played a key role in the delivery of weapons to Al Qaeda affiliated rebels in the Aleppo region bordering onto Turkey: NATO and a number of European governments, most significantly the UK, have started airlifting heavy weapons to the Syrian rebels poised in Aleppo to fend off a major Syrian army offensive, according to debkafile’s exclusive military sources. They disclose that the first shipments were landed Monday night, June 17 [2013], and early Tuesday in Turkey and Jordan. They contained anti-air and tank missiles as well as recoilless 120 mm cannons mounted on jeeps. From there, they were transferred to rebel forces in southern Syria andAleppo in the northwest. (Debkafile, June 18, 2013) “Terrorists R Us” Ironically, President Barack Obama and Prime Minister David Cameron (who is hosting the NATO Summit in Wales), have asserted that they “will not be cowed by barbaric killers”: “We will not waver in our determination to confront the Islamic State … If terrorists think we will weaken in the face of their threats they could not be more wrong.” (Barack Obama and David Cameron, Strengthening the NATO alliance, op ed published in the London Times, September 4, 2014, emphasis added) But these “Barbaric Killers” were created .SIX MONTHS AFTER MH370, BOEING & INMARSAT NEED TO EXPLAIN THEMSELVES BY NILE BOWIE.........................................................P 6 .EUROPE AWAKE BY FRED DALLMYER............................................P10
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Vol 14, No.09 September 2014
Turn to next page
ARTICLES
STATEMENTS
THE ATLANTIC ALLIANCE’S “HOLY WAR” AGAINST THE ISLAMIC
STATE (ISIS): NATO’S ROLE IN THE RECRUITMENT OF ISLAMIC
TERRORISTS
By Michel Chossudovsky
. MH-17 ‘INVESTIGATION’:SECRET AUGUST 8TH
AGREEMENT SEEPS OUT
BY ERIC ZUESSE...................................................P 4
.THE TRUTH ABOUT IS BY CHANDRA MUZAFFAR......................P3
. JEWISH SURVIVORS OF NAZI GENOCIDE CONDEMN
THE MASSACRE OF PALESTINIANS IN GAZA
BY COUNTERCURRENTS...................................P 10
.WHAT’S NEXT FOR ISRAEL, HAMAS AND GAZA
BY NOAM CHOMSKY............................................P 15
. FERGUSON: NO JUSTICE IN THE AMERICAN POLICE
STATE
BY PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS...................................P 19
.AMERICA STARTED THIS UKRAINE CRISIS
BY WILLIAM PFAFF................................................P8
While NATO leaders in Newport Wales
debate the Atlantic Alliance’s role “in
containing a mounting militant threat in the
Middle East”, it is worth recalling that in
2011 at the outset of the war in Syria, NATO
became actively involved in the recruitment
of Islamic fighters.
Reminiscent of the enlistment of the
Mujahideen to wage the CIA’s jihad (holy
war) in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan
war, NATO headquarters in Brussels in
liaison with the Turkish High command,
according to Israeli intelligence sources, was
involved in the enlisting of thousands of
terrorists:
“Also discussed in Brussels and Ankara, our
sources report, is a campaign to enlist
thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle
East countries and the Muslim world to fight
alongside the Syrian rebels. The Turkish
army would house these volunteers, train
them and secure their passage into Syria.
(Debkafile, August 31, 2011 emphasis
added).
Confirmed by Israeli intelligence News,
NATO played a key role in the delivery of
weapons to Al Qaeda affiliated rebels in the
Aleppo region bordering onto Turkey:
NATO and a number of European
governments, most significantly the UK,
have started airlifting heavy weapons to the
Syrian rebels poised in Aleppo to fend off a
major Syrian army offensive, according to
debkafile’s exclusive military sources. They
disclose that the first shipments were landed
Monday night, June 17 [2013], and early
Tuesday in Turkey and Jordan. They
contained anti-air and tank missiles as well
as recoilless 120 mm cannons mounted on
jeeps. From there, they were transferred
to rebel forces in southern Syria and Aleppo
in the northwest. (Debkafile, June 18, 2013)
“Terrorists R Us”
Ironically, President Barack Obama and
Prime Minister David Cameron (who is
hosting the NATO Summit in Wales), have
asserted that they “will not be cowed by
barbaric killers”:
“We will not waver in our determination to
confront the Islamic State … If terrorists
think we will weaken in the face of their
threats they could not be more wrong.”
(Barack Obama and David Cameron,
Strengthening the NATO alliance, op ed
published in the London Times, September
4, 2014, emphasis added)
But these “Barbaric Killers” were created
.SIX MONTHS AFTER MH370, BOEING & INMARSAT
NEED TO EXPLAIN THEMSELVES
BY NILE BOWIE.........................................................P 6
.EUROPE AWAKE
BY FRED DALLMYER............................................P10
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D
2
continued from page 1
L E A D A R T I C L E
continued next page
by the Western military alliance. They are
serving the strategic interests of the U.S.,
Britain, not to mention Israel.
“They are Our Terrorists“. Without the
terrorists, the “Global War on Terrorism”
would fall flat.
The Obama-Cameron narrative borders on
ridicule. It is not only absurd, it is criminal.
What they are proposing is an all
encompassing NATO mandate to “Go after
Terrorist Entities” which they themselves
created as part of an insidious intelligence
operation to destabilize and destroy both
Syria and Iraq.
British and French Special Forces have been
actively training Syria opposition rebels from
a base in Turkey.
Israel has provided a safe haven to Al Qaeda
affiliated rebels including ISIS and Al
Nusrah rebels in the occupied Golan Heights.
Netanyahu has met up with jihadist leaders
in the Golan Heights. The IDF top brass
acknowledges that there are “global jihad
elements inside Syria” supported by Israel.
Lest we forget, Al Qaeda was at the outset
a creation of the CIA. Who is behind the
ISIS terrorists? The mainstream media is
mum on the subject, despite mountains of
evidence that they are creations of the
Western military alliance.
NATO’s Criminal Agenda
What we are dealing with is a criminal
agenda under NATO auspices. The
evidence amply confirms that the US and
Britain in liaison with the Atlantic Alliance
have relentlessly supported both the
creation as well as development of an
Islamic Terror Network which now
extends from the Middle East and North
Africa into sub-Saharan Africa, South and
Southeast Asia.
And now Obama and Cameron, whose
governments are the architects of the
Islamic State, are calling upon the Atlantic
Alliance as well all on the governments of
the 28 NATO member states to endorse
the bombing campaign on Iraq and Syria
as part of a“counter-terrorism” operation.
The ISIS brigades are “intelligence assets”
supported by US-NATO-Israel. They will
not be the object of the bombings. Quite
the opposite.
Image: Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu
Shakes Hand with a wounded Al Qaeda
Terrorist in occupied Golan.
What is envisaged as part of the propaganda
campaign is to use the “threat of the Islamic
State” as a pretext and justification to
intervene militarily under a “humanitarian”
“Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) mandate.
The civilian population will not be protected.
Under this diabolical military-intelligence
operation, The Islamic State (ISIS) brigades
with Western Special Forces within their
ranks are slated to be “protected”.
The War on Syria
From the outset of the war on Syria in
March 2011, member states of the Atlantic
Alliance as well as Israel, Saudi Arabia and
Qatar have (covertly) supported the
terrorists –including al Nusrah and the ISIS–
with a view to destabilizing Syria as a nation
state. These actions were implemented in
liaison with NATO headquarters in Brussels.
The process of recruitment and training of
mercenaries had been sub-contracted to
private security companies operating out
of the Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States.
Reports point to the creation of training
camps in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates
(UAE).
In Zayed Military City (UAE), “a secret
army is in the making” was operated by Xe
Services, formerly Blackwater. The UAE
deal to establish a military camp for the
training of mercenaries was signed in July
2010, nine months before the onslaught of
the wars in Libya and Syria. (See Manlio
Dinucci, A Secret Army of Mercenaries for
the Middle East and North Africa, Il
Manifesto. 18 May 2011)
Moreover, confirmed by CNN, security
companies on contract to NATO member
states were involved in training Syrian
“opposition” death squads in the use of
chemical weapons:
“The United States and some European allies
are using defense contractors to train Syrian
rebels on how to secure chemical weapons
stockpiles in Syria, a senior U.S. official
and several senior diplomats told CNN
Sunday. ( CNN Report, December 9, 2012)
NATO Supported the Terrorists in Libya
From the outset of NATO’s 2011
“humanitarian war” on Libya, the Atlantic
Alliance was working in close liaison with
the “pro-Al Qaeda brigades” led by “former”
Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) leader
Abdul Hakim Belhhadj (Debka, Pro-Al
Qaeda brigades control Qaddafi Tripoli
strongholds seized by rebels, August 28,
2011 )
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D
3
S T A T E M E N T
continued next page
continued from page 2
STATEMENTS
Abdul Hakim Belhhadj received his military
training in a CIA sponsored guerrilla camp
in Afghanistan. He constitutes a CIA
“intelligence asset” operating in the Libyan
war theater. A 2011 report suggested that
he had some 1,000 men under his
command. (Libyan rebels at pains to distance
themselves from extremists – The Globe
and Mail, March 12, 2011)
THE TRUTH ABOUT IS
The US-NATO coalition is arming the
Jihadists. Weapons are being channeled to
the LIFG from Saudi Arabia, which
historically, since the outset of the Soviet-
Afghan war, has covertly supported Al
Qaeda. The Saudis are now providing the
rebels, in liaison with Washington and
Brussels, with anti-tank rockets and
ground-to-air missiles. (See Michel
Chossudovsky “Our Man in Tripoli”: US-
NATO Sponsored Islamic Terrorists
Integrate Libya’s Pro-Democracy
Opposition, Global Research, 3 April 2011)
5 September 2014
Michel Chossudovsky is an award-
winning author, Professor of Economics
(emeritus) at the University of Ottawa,
Founder and Director of the Centre for
Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal
and Editor of the globalresearch.ca website.
Source: www.globalresearch.ca/
By Chandra Muzaffar
The Islamic State (IS) has been roundly
condemned by everyone. It deserves to be.
It deserves to be condemned because of its
barbaric brutality and its harsh cruelty. It
deserves to be condemned because of its
collective massacres and its individual
murders. It deserves to be condemned
because of its oppression of Shias, of
Christians, of Yazidis. It deserves to be
condemned because of its degradation of
women. It deserves to be condemned
because of its distortion and perversion of
Islamic law.
Nonetheless, many of those who have
condemned IS do not want to know how
this terrorist outfit came into being in the
first instance. It is a direct consequence of
the Anglo-American invasion and occupation
of Iraq in 2003. In order to anchor itself in
Iraqi society, the occupier zealously sought
to eliminate the power base of deposed
President Saddam Hussein by dismantling
his security forces and emasculating related
Baathist structures. At the same time, the
Shias, the majority population, were
strengthened in politics and the public
services. This heightened resentment among
the Sunnis and led to the formation of militias
among them.
When democratic elections were held in
2005, Shia parties expectedly swept into
power. Shia leaders reinforced their cordial
ties with the Iranian Shia elite —— some
of whom had been their mentors long
before the 2003 invasion. Seeing the
increasingly close bond between the Shias
of Iraq and Iran, the US began to feel that
its invasion of Iraq had enhanced Iranian
influence in that country. Ironically, the US
had strengthened the geopolitical hand of
its adversary! More than the US, Israel
which had also encouraged the invasion of
Iraq in order to get rid of a staunch Israeli
opponent in Baghdad was appalled that Iran,
its other mortal foe, had now expanded its
reach in the region. The Saudi elite and
elites in a number of other Gulf monarchies
and certain other Arab governments also
viewed Iraq –Iran ties with much
apprehension. To add to their apprehension,
the Shia based Hezbollah in Lebanon was
also emerging as a major actor in Lebanon
following its steadfast defence of the nation
against Israeli aggression in 2006. This is
why a Sunni Arab leader warned his fellow
Sunnis of the rise of a Shia arc in West
Asia, centred in Tehran.
These Sunni fears, paralleling US- Israeli
concerns about their dominance over West
Asia, prompted these parties to try to stem
what they perceived as Shia influence in
Iraq by supporting Sunni militias with arms,
intelligence and money. Sunni insurgencies
like Al-Qaeda became stronger and created
a lot of havoc in Iraq, directed mainly at the
Shias. A more radical breakaway group
from Al-Qaeda calling itself the Islamic State
of Iraq and Shams (Syria) (ISIS)
established itself as a tough fighting force
and moved into Syria with the same aim of
ousting a Shia government, namely the
government of Bashar Al-Assad.
In Syria, ISIS has outdone other armed
rebel groups in its insatiable appetite for
violence. ISIS fighters have massacred
Christian communities and beheaded scores
of Shias. With ruthless efficiency they have
captured strategic routes and oil fields. It is
alleged that apart from the spoils of war,
this terrorist outfit is also financed and armed
by some of the same groups that helped
the Sunni insurgents in Iraq between 2003
and 2008. It has even been suggested that
ISIS has deep links with Mossad. After all,
Israel which has conducted at least six
military strikes against the Syrian armed
forces in the current conflict is determined
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D
4
S T A T E M E N T
continued from page 3
to oust Assad since he continues to oppose
Israeli control over much of the strategic
Golan Heights in Syria and insists on
protecting his special relationship with
Hezbollah and Iran as part of the resistance
against US-Israeli hegemony over West
Asia.
It is significant that ISIS brutalities in Syria
— like those of the other armed groups —
have only elicited whimpers from the US
and the West. The reason is obvious. They
support the larger aim of these groups which
is the overthrow of Assad. The US and the
West are (or were) on the side of ISIS in
Syria. And yet in Iraq they are against ISIS
which has now renamed itself as IS. What
explains this seemingly glaring contradiction?
If the US has decided to fight IS in Iraq, it
is because it threatens US and other Western
oil companies in the Kurdistan region in the
north. All the big Western oil players —
Mobil, Chevron, Exxon and Total — are in
the region. Kurdistan, according to Robert
Fisk, “accounts for 43.7 billion barrels of
Iraq’s 143 billion barrels of reserves, as well
as 25.5 billion barrels of unproven reserves
and three to six trillion cubic metres of gas.”
Preserving the West’s oil interests in
Kurdistan is intimately connected to yet
another factor. The US and Israel have
always regarded Iraqi Kurdistan as a special
ally. For decades its leadership has helped
to further their agenda in West Asia. In the
2003 invasion of Iraq for instance the Kurds
rendered much assistance to the US and
Britain.
One should not be surprised therefore that
the US has chosen to defend the Kurds
against the IS menace. It is simply a matter
of protecting its geo-economic and
geopolitical interests. Similarly, if in Syria
the US is against Assad, it is because of the
pursuit of its hegemonic design over West
Asia. Since the US will not be able to
eliminate the IS threat to Kurdistan in Iraq
without taking military action against the
IS in Syria, it is now considering launching
military strikes against the IS in certain parts
of that country.
US military action against the IS in Syria
should signal the beginning of the end of all
direct and indirect assistance to the various
armed groups in Syria, all of which have
committed acts of terror at some point or
other. The US’s European and West Asian
allies should also desist from providing any
form of military support to these groups.
Without such external support it is very
likely that the violence and bloodshed in Syria
will come to a halt. Syrians would then be
in a better position to bring about whatever
change they feel is necessary through
peaceful means.
What is more important, the end of crass
political violence in Syria will undoubtedly
help to reduce IS generated terror in Iraq.
Terrorism in West Asia as a whole may
witness a decline. If one is principled and
not opportunistic or hypocritical in the fight
against terrorism, it is not just IS in one corner
of Iraq that will be one’s target. Terrorism,
whether it is perpetrated by friend or foe,
will be confronted and defeated with
courage and integrity.
9 August 2014.
Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is President of the
International Movement for a Just World
(JUST).
ARTICLES
MH-17 ‘INVESTIGATION’: SECRET AUGUST 8TH AGREEMENT SEEPS
OUT- PERPETRATOR OF THE DOWNING IN UKRAINE, OF THE
MALAYSIAN AIRLINER, WILL STAY HIDDEN
By Eric Zuesse
Regarding what caused the downing
of the Malaysian airliner MH-17 in
Ukraine on July 17th, the Ukrainian
news agency UNIAN, reported in a
brief Russian-language news story on
August 12th , that four days earlier
(August 8th) a representative of that
nation’s Prosecutor General office,
Yuri Boychenko, had said that (as auto-
translated by google), “the results [of
the investigation] will be announced
upon completion of the investigation
and with the consent of all the parties
who signed the corresponding
agreement.” This UNIAN report said
that, “As part of the four-party
agreement signed on August 8 between
Ukraine, the Netherlands, Belgium and
Australia [all of which nations are allies
of the United States and are cooperating
with its new Cold War against Russiacontinued next page
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D
5
S T A T E M E N T
continued next page
], information on the investigation into
the disaster Malaysian ‘Boeing-777’
will not be disclosed.” In other words:
the official ‘investigation’ is being
carried out by four nations that, as
U.S. allies, are hostile toward Russia.
One of those four nations, Ukraine, is
not only a prime suspect in possibly
having shot this airliner down , but is
currently waging a hot war to
ethnically-cleanse the pro-Russian
population out of southeastern Ukraine
; and the initial ‘news’ reports in
Western ‘news’ media regarding the
downing of MH-17 had
stenographically repeated the Ukrainian
Government’s line that said that this
airliner was probably downed by the
local rebels there, who were trying to
shoot down the Ukrainian
Government’s bombers that are
constantly bombing them . Some
Western ‘news’ reports even
speculated that perhaps Russia itself
had shot this airliner down. If the
UNIAN news-report is correct, then
there is no way that the ‘investigation’
will be able to be released to the public
if it indicates that the Ukrainian
Government (which, according to that
news-report has veto power over
the making-public of the study’s
findings) is blamed for having shot the
airliner down.
On August 12th, another pro-
Ukrainian-Government ‘news’ site,
gordonua.com , headlined, as auto-
translated by google, “GPU: The
results of the investigation [into the]
crash [of] the Boeing 777 will be
released with the consent of the
parties,” and said, “Information about
the accident MH17 in the Donetsk
region will be published in obtaining
the consent of all the parties that are
involved in the investigation.” UNIAN
was cited there as gordonua’s sole
source. ‘News’ media didn’t probe the
matter further.
continued from page 4
Until 23 August 2014, that seems to
have been the last of the matter, as far
as news reports were concerned, and
both of those two news reports were
just tiny squibs in the Russian language,
published only in Ukraine, by
supporters of the Obama-installed
Ukrainian Government. The news was
ignored both inside and outside
Ukraine.
Then, on 23 August 2014, Global
Research News published the first
English-language news-report on this
matter; it was based on the second
Russian-language news-report, the one
that had appeared at gordonua.com on
August 12th. Global Research
concluded from it that, “The Causes
of the MH17 Crash are ‘Classified’.”
Of course, this way of phrasing the
matter is a slight oversimplification,
because, actually, the findings will
remain ‘classified’ only if, and to the
extent that, the Ukrainian Government
is found to have caused the airliner’s
downing. In other words: this
‘investigation’ will not be published
unless the Ukrainian Government and
the other three nations that are
performing it agree unanimously to
publish it.
So: imagine a murder-case in which
298 innocents are slaughtered, and in
which there are only three suspects
(here: Ukraine, the pro-Russian rebels,
and Russia itself), and one of those
three suspects has veto-power on the
making-public of the ‘investigation’
into that crime. Well: this is that
murder-case, and the veto-holding
‘investigator’ and suspect is Ukraine.
Neither of the other two suspects holds
any such veto-power over this
‘investigation.’
In a sense, whether the official
investigation into the downing will ever
be made public is insignificant, just as
would be any ‘investigation’ that is
carried out by, or with veto-power
from, one of the prime suspects in the
crime that is being investigated.
The international public would
obviously need to be fools in order for
them to trust such an ‘investigation’ as
that. Case closed?
President Obama got the economic-
sanctions-increase against Russia, that
he had wanted out of this shoot-down.
Who needs any ‘investigation’ to
determine this mass-killing’s actual
perpetrator? Certainly not Obama.
Ultimately, it is he who caused it,
because he was the person behind this
ethnic-cleansing campaign, without
which ethnic-cleansing campaign the
airliner itself wouldn’t have been
downed.
The downing of this airliner goes
straight back to the U.S. White House
, which has already won what it wanted
from it.
Those 298 corpses are just casualties
of this U.S.-caused war, like the
Ukrainians are casualties of it who live
in the portions of Ukraine that had
overwhelmingly elected in 2010 the
Ukrainian President whom Obama
ousted from office in 2014. Obama
doesn’t want a President like that
elected ever again in Ukraine; so, those
voters are being gotten rid of, and
ethnic cleansing is how it’s being done.
And the residents there are likewise
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D
6
continued next page
A R T I C L E S
continued from page 5
not being heard from in Western ‘news’
media, and nobody in the West is
asking these victims what they think
of the Ukrainian Government that
Obama installed . Perhaps that’s
because they are increasingly
becoming a guerilla army to defeat the
regime that Obama installed.
As to the specific operation that
downed the plane, there is already a
lot more information about that than
the official ‘investigation,’ if that’s ever
published, is likely to reveal, and it
points clearly to the Ukrainian military
as the perpetrator, in yet another of
their ‘false flag’ operations. And unlike
the Ukrainian Government’s charges
that rebels shot it down by mistake,
Ukraine shot it down with deadly
purpose and knowing full well what
they were doing.
SIX MONTHS AFTER MH370, BOEING AND INMARSAT NEED TO
EXPLAIN THEMSELVES
By Nile Bowie
Six months have passed since the
disappearance of Malaysia Airlines
flight MH370 in March, which took off
from Kuala Lumpur carrying 239
people en route to Beijing. The aircraft
veered wildly off course while flying
over the South China Sea before turning
back over the Malaysian peninsula
toward the Indian Ocean, where it is
presumed to have crashed.
Despite the largest multinational search
and rescue effort ever conducted, not
a trace of debris from the aircraft has
been found, nor has the cause of the
aircraft’s erratic change of trajectory
and disappearance been established.
The case of MH370 has proven to be
the most baffling incident in
commercial aviation history and one of
the world’s greatest aviation mysteries.
Malaysia Airlines has suffered the two
worst disasters in modern aviation less
than five months apart, following the
tragic demise of flight MH17 in July,
forcing the company to slash its staff
numbers by a third as part of a major
restructuring effort. The state has
announced plans to take full ownership
of the national carrier following the
collapse of its share price and its
subsequent removal from the stock
market.
After a fruitless search in the southern
Indian Ocean where the plane is
believed to have terminated,
investigators established a new search
area that has been mapped by Chinese
and Australian ships since June. The
next stage of the investigation has been
given a provisional 12-month duration,
and a Dutch contractor, Fugro Survey,
will conduct an underwater search
beginning this month.
It is hoped that once the wreckage is
discovered, the aircraft’s black boxes,
cockpit voice recordings and flight data
will help investigators explain the
incident, as well as giving closure to
the families of the victims. There is still
little consensus among investigators
and experts as to what actually
happened onboard the doomed flight.
MH370’s transponders were shut off
without a mayday call between
Malaysian and Vietnamese airspace,
followed by significant changes in
altitude after ground control lost
contact with the cockpit less than an
hour into the flight. The aircraft flew
erratically before fixing onto a
consistent flight path, presumably on
autopilot, prior to terminating once the
plane ran out of fuel.
The Malaysian government, as well as
aviation experts, claim that the
aircraft’s movements were consistent
with deliberate action by someone on
the plane. The Australian-led search
team believes that depressurisation and
hypoxia rendered the crew
unconscious because of the orderly
path the aircraft took prior to ending
its flight.
Investigators have cleared all
passengers of any suspicious motives,
while the flight’s pilot, Captain Zaharie
Ahmad Shah, a qualified pilot with over
30 years experience with Malaysia
Airlines, has been the main suspect of
the investigation by Malaysian
authorities. Media reports speculated
that Shah was undergoing difficult
domestic circumstances, but his family
members deny that he exhibited
strange behavior.
Malaysia’s chief of police, Khalid Abu
Bakar, said he believed that hijackers,
saboteurs or someone with a personal
vendetta or psychological problem had
succeeded in diverting the plane. In the
26 August, 2014
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is
the author, most recently, of They’re
Not Even Close: The Democratic vs.
Republican Economic Records, 1910-
2010 , and of CHRIST’S
VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that
Created Christianity .
Source: Countercurrents.org
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D A R T I C L E S
7
continued from page 6
continued next page
face of this exceedingly bizarre and
unexplained incident, the aircraft’s
manufacturer, the Boeing Company,
has exhibited deafening silence.
What has been established thus far
indicates that human intervention
contributed to aircraft’s radical change
in trajectory. If MH370’s pilots were
ultimately not responsible for this, then
other possible scenarios need to be
explored in explaining the flight’s
demise.
Boeing, the world’s largest
manufacturer of commercial jetliners
and military aircraft, was awarded a
patent in 2006 for an ‘uninterruptible
autopilot control system’ that could
enable aircrafts to be remotely piloted
from the ground using radio waves and
global satellite positioning systems to
counter hijacking attempts. The
technology, developed following the 9/
11 attacks, removes all control from
pilots and redirects the airliner to a
predetermined landing location.
“After it has been activated, the aircraft
will be capable of remote digital control
from the ground, enabling operators to
fly it like a sophisticated model plane,
manoeuvring it vertically and laterally…
Once triggered, no one on board will
be able to deactivate the system,”
claims a report from 2007 published
in the London Evening Standard.
The automatic control system
technology, filed under patent number
US7142971B2, is independently
powered by an alternative power
source that is inaccessible to anyone
on board the aircraft. Boeing officials
quoted in the report give the clear
impression that this system was
developed for the purpose of being
installed on Boeing airliners, stating that
the uninterruptible autopilot system
could be fitted into its planes by 2009.
Honeywell, one of Boeing’s avionics
suppliers, filed patent number
US7475851B2 in 2003 for a similar
uninterrupted autopilot control device.
Boeing and Honeywell have both
developed technology for use in
unmanned aerial vehicles, or drones,
with civilian and military applications
for decades.
In 2012, Boeing declared its intention
to install new security mechanisms
aboard several of its 777 series aircraft,
including the models used by Malaysia
Airlines, over concerns the aircrafts’
inflight entertainment system, which
includes USB connections, could allow
hackers to access a plane’s computer.
A report issued by the US Federal
Register in 2013 raised concerns that
Model 777-200, among others, was
exposed to security vulnerabilities.
“This potential exploitation of security
vulnerabilities may result in intentional
or unintentional destruction, disruption,
degradation, or exploitation of data and
systems critical to the safety and
maintenance of the airplane,” the
document stated.
Though the Federal Register’s
statement explicitly mentions Model
777-200, it is also valid for Model 777-
200ER – the aircraft used for MH370
– because the US Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) places both
models 777-200 and 777-200ER in the
same category and does not make a
distinction between the two variants.
This information confirms the
existence of technology that would
allow for an aircraft like MH370 to be
externally controlled, and that Boeing
and the FAA were aware of a potential
vulnerability loophole that could have
conceivably been exploited. Boeing
declined to comment on this incident
and has made no attempt to explain this
technology, even after former
Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir
Mohamad publically raised concerns
over the possibility of such a scenario.
Inmarsat, the British satellite
telecommunications company
responsible for analyzing satellite data
showing that MH370 flew south
toward the Indian Ocean from its last
known position, has also come under
scrutiny from independent satellite
experts and engineers that found
glaring inconsistencies in their analysis.
The Atlantic magazine published a
report in May based on the analysis of
Michael Exner, founder of the
American Mobile Satellite Corporation,
Duncan Steel, a physicist and visiting
scientist at NASA’s Ames Research
Center, and satellite technology
consultant Tim Farrar.
The team of analysts used flight and
navigation software to deconstruct
Inmarsat’s analysis, and determined
that other known evidence contradicted
their mathematical conclusions, such
as in the instance where the graph data
provided by the British company
actually shows the plane and satellite
moving away from each other at 50
miles per hour while the plane was
stationary and had not even taxied to
take off.
The analysts concluded the Inmarsat’s
data contained irregular frequency
shifts, and even when the values were
corrected, Inmarsat’s example flight
paths failed to match and proved to be
erroneous. In another instance, the
graph data marking the position of the
satellite receiving the signal is shown
to be traveling faster in northbound
direction when the satellite itself was
moving south. Inmarsat’s graph shows
the satellite moving at 33 miles per hour
when its overall speed was just 0.07
A R T I C L E SI N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D
8
continued from page 7
continued next page
AMERICA STARTED THIS UKARAINE CRISIS
By William Pfaff
miles per hour at that time.
The authors of the report have
attempted to reach Inmarsat and other
relevant bodies, but they claim that the
company did not reply to requests for
comments on basic technical questions
about their analysis, leading them to
determine that “Inmarsat officials and
search authorities seem to want it both
ways: They release charts, graphics,
and statements that give the appearance
of being backed by math and science,
while refusing to fully explain their
methodologies.”
The investigation into the disappearance
of MH370 has not yet produced any
physical evidence of the wreckage. It
needs to be determined if this can be
attributed to a false mathematical
analysis by Inmarsat. Boeing must also
address concerns over the
uninterruptible autopilot system and
produce the relevant technical
specifics needed to determine the
extent of flight MH370’s vulnerability
to being externally overridden and
controlled.
9 September 2014
Nile Bowie is a columnist with Russia
Today, and a Research Associate with
the International Movement for a Just
World (JUST).
I find it very disquieting that so few
among the West European and
American commentators on the Ukraine
crisis, private or public, seem
concerned that the United States has
started this affair, and that it is not
inconceivable that it may end in a war.
Worse yet, Washington’s demonization
of Vladimir Putin has been so
successful in the American press and
public, and its secrecy about the
American role in Kiev, has left the public
in the United States and in NATO
Europe convinced that this has all been
the result of a Russian strategy of
aggressive expansion into Ukraine, and
not a bungled and essentially American
attempt to annex Ukraine to NATO and
the European Union, and to undermine
the domestic political position of
President Putin — which all has gone
badly and dangerously wrong.
The Ukrainian coup d’état in February
was prepared by Washington. Why else
were the State Department official in
charge of Europe and Eurasian Affairs,
Victoria Nuland, together with officials
of the European Union and a number
of intelligence people present, in
company with the “moderate”
Ukrainians programmed to take over
the government after the planned
overthrow of the corrupt (but elected)
President Viktor Yanukovych? Even
President Obama, in Mexico for a
“summit”, was waiting to supply a video
feed speeding the overthrown Mr.
Yanukovych on his way, and
congratulating the “democratic” victors.
But then, as the night wore on, things
got out of hand. The riot police and the
opposition forces went out of control.
In a video made at the time, the
American candidate for prime minister,
Arseniy Yatsenyuk, said desperately,
“Ukraine is in a big mess.”
Even though the immediate mess was
eventually sorted out, and Mr.
Yatsenyuk (“Yats” to Secretary Nuland)
was soon (briefly) the prime minister
— and immediately was welcomed to
Washington to dine at the White House
with the American president — one
must ask what was accomplished by
all this that did not discredit the United
States and the EU, and draw towards
Ukraine and the American troops
today deployed in Poland and the
Baltics, and towards NATO itself, the
storm-clouds of a useless war?
It is the latest (and probably last) step
in a foolish American and European
betrayal of the promise given to
Mikhail Gorbachev by President
George H.W. Bush, at the time of the
unification of Germany, that if the
Soviet Union agreed to a newly united
Germany’s assuming the Federal
Republic’s existing place as a member
of NATO, no NATO troops would be
stationed in what formerly had been
the Communist German Democratic
Republic.
The deal was done, and at the time
was a cause for congratulations on
all sides, since it removed the principal
obstacle to Germany reunion,
considered desirable (and inevitable)
by the western countries, and as
inevitable, given Germany’s history,
by Moscow as well.
This agreement was undermined
during the Clinton presidency by
measures that first gave the former
Warsaw Pact countries of Eastern
Europe what might be described as
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D
9
continued from page 8
continued next page
A R T I C L E S
cadet NATO membership (the
“Partnership for Peace”).
Agreement to actual NATO admission
came as part of the European Union
Maastricht treaty in 1991, and in 1999
Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia
(soon to become two states) became
NATO members, and in 2004 the Baltic
States, Romania and Bulgaria.
Washington and the EU then turned
their attention to the Caucasus and
Ukraine. As early as 1987, the EU’s
“Europe 2000” plan for expansion
named Ukraine, Moldavia, and Belarus
as eventual candidates for EU
membership.
Georgia was the first to be invited to
prepare for NATO membership, and
took this as a sign that NATO and the
U.S. would underwrite its military
recovery of its “lost lands,” and
launched an attack on South Ossetia.
Russia’s patience was exhausted. The
Russian army promptly defeated the
Georgians and took over the Ossetian
statelet, and nearby Abkhazia as well.
Washington and the NATO allies voiced
loud outrage. But it was Georgia that
had started this little war of national
revenge.
NATO was, and remains, an alliance
effectively under complete American
control. Its arrival on the frontier of
the former Soviet Union was viewed
by the new Russia of Vladimir Putin
with disquiet. This was not supposed
to have happened.
It would take a closer knowledge than
I possess of the workings of American
government to explain why it decided
to take control of post-1990 Central
and Eastern Europe, following
Communism’s collapse. For Poland,
the former Czechoslovakia, the Baltic
states, Hungary and Romania, who
suffered badly under the Communists,
NATO membership obviously offered
reassurance.
But for Georgia and other states in the
Caucasus, and for Ukraine, NATO
membership amounted to an
annexation by NATO of nations
formerly among the historical territories
of Soviet or Czarist Russia. Why
should the United States and the
original states of the European Union
— western, Roman Catholic or
Protestant Christian, Atlantic-oriented
states — decide to dismantle historical
Russia by taking over nations once part
of Russia itself (and in the Ukranian
case had been the instrument of
Russia’s conversion to Christianity), or
had been colonies, some of them
Muslim, of the Czars.
That, in any case, is where we are now,
and Russia’s reaction is not simply that
of an aggressive and authoritarian
President Putin — as the West likes to
make out — but the hostility of a
significant part of the Russian
population, which only now has
recovered its national self-confidence
and ambition.
What was the intent of all this? To
create an east-west civil war in
Ukraine? Why is that in the American
interest? Russia’s intervention in such
a futile war handed it back Crimea, but
also apparent responsibility for some
fool’s shooting down a passenger
airliner.
Dmitri Trenin, Director of the Carnegie
Center in Moscow, recently offered the
following observations: Vladimir
Putin’s essential requirements are:
NATO excluded from Ukraine.
No U.S. troops on Russia’s borders.
Protection and preservation of the
Russian cultural identity of the south
and east of Ukraine.
Keeping Crimea Russian.
Putin won’t yield. Any serious
concession to the U.S. would cause
him to fall from power, and produce
disorder in Russia.
For the future, he considers the U.S.
in decline. He does not look to alliance
with a rising China but to Germany,
which he sees as the coming leader of
a powerful Europe.
What is Barack Obama’s interest in all
this? What about the Washington
hawks responsible for what is
happening? Why have they done this
without an explanation to the American
people?
There is only one possible solution
now: negotiated truce on the Ukraine
frontier, followed by Russo-American
and EU agreement on the permanent
existence of an independent and
autonomous Ukraine. The alternative
could be major war.
7 August 2014
William Pfaff is the author of The
Irony of Manifest Destiny, published
in June 2010 by Walker and Company
(New York)
Source:www.williampfaff.com
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D
10
A R T I C L E S
EUROPE AWAKE!
By Fred Dallmayr, Co- Chairman, World Public Forum “Dialogue Of Civilizations”
continued next page
In this year, 2014, we commemorate the
100th anniversary of the beginning of
World War I, that ferocious war in which
“Old Europe” – the Europe of the “Belle
Epoque”, the Europe of traditional
monarchies and dynasties – was
destroyed. For the peoples of Europe it
was an immense bloodletting, epitomized
by trench warfare and the battle of
Verdun. The war also laid the foundation
for subsequent catastrophes. While
dubbed “the war to end all wars”, the
concluding treaties of Versailles and
Trianon ushered in a “peace to end all
peace.” The conditions imposed on the
vanquished in these treaties were so harsh
and ill-conceived that resentment was
bound to flare up and, after barely two
decades, erupted in an unprecedented
paroxysm of mayhem and destruction
on a global scale.
The commemoration of the great
European war should not be the occasion
for finger-pointing and posthumous
recriminations – an exercise which,
although dear to some historians, can only
stir up nationalistic resentments. The
much more fruitful and beneficial
outcome of the commemoration is (or
should be) the determination to keep
Europe in the future free from warfare
on its soil. This is the basic purpose of
the European Union and the Council of
Europe and of the whole process of
European integration during the past half
century. This means that Europe should
be a zone of peace.
Unfortunately, there are developments
which threaten to undermine the role of
Europe as a peace zone. The greatest danger
is that Europe might become the victim of
“great power” rivalry. There are ominous
danger signals in the present crisis in the
Ukraine. Although the solution of the crisis
is patently simple and obvious – the
“federalization” of the country (which has
repeatedly been proposed) – there are forces
at work seemingly opposed to a peaceful
solution and bent on pushing the country
into civil war, and even into an all-out war
between West and East. Given the latter
horizon, the crisis takes on the character of
another “proxy war” between big powers
– similar to the proxy war which has raged
in Syria, but now much closer to the
European heartland. In some political
circles, one already talks about a possible
war between America and Russia, even
though this may result in nuclear war (a
possibility that is now openly accepted in
the same quarters).
In this situation, one has to ask: who is
going to be the most likely and most
immediate victim? Given its location
between America and Russia, Europe is
bound to be the site of the most direct and
immediate nuclear devastation. This means:
it is time for Europe to wake up from its
slumber and from its pliant submission to
great power politics. As Juergen Habermas
rightly pleaded some time ago: Europe has
to develop its own foreign policy. The first
step should be to bring pressure to bear on
all sides to stop the proxy war in Ukraine.
Europe should do everything possible to
induce contestants in the Ukraine to
assemble around a table and to negotiate
fair terms of peace. This would be the
proper European way to commemorate
1914.
Endorsed by:
Chandra Muzaffar, President,
International Movement for a Just World
(JUST), Malaysia
Vladimir Kulikov, Executive Director,
World Public Forum “Dialogue of
Civilizations”
Hans Kochler, President, International
Progress Organisation (IPO)
JEWISH SURVIVORS OF NAZI GENOCIDE CONDEMN THE MASSACRE OF
PALESTINIANS IN GAZA
By Countercurrents
As Jewish survivors and descendants of
survivors of the Nazi genocide we
unequivocally condemn the massacre of
Palestinians in Gaza and the ongoing
occupation and colonization of historic
Palestine. We further condemn the United
States for providing Israel with the
funding to carry out the attack, and
Western states more generally for using
their diplomatic muscle to protect Israel
from condemnation. Genocide begins
with the silence of the world.
We are alarmed by the extreme, racist
dehumanization of Palestinians in Israeli
society, which has reached a fever-pitch.
In Israel, politicians and pundits in The
Times of Israel and The Jerusalem Post
have called openly for genocide of
Palestinians and right-wing Israelis are
adopting Neo-Nazi insignia.
Furthermore, we are disgusted and
outraged by Elie Wiesel’s abuse of our
history in these [NY Times] pages to
promote blatant falsehoods used to
justify the unjustifiable: Israel’s wholesale
effort to destroy Gaza and the murder
of nearly 2,000 Palestinians, including
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D A R T I C L E S
11
continued next page
continued from page 10
many hundreds of children. Nothing can
justify bombing UN shelters, homes,
hospitals and universities. Nothing can
justify depriving people of electricity and
water.
We must raise our collective voices and
use our collective power to bring about
an end to all forms of racism, including
the ongoing genocide of Palestinian
people. We call for an immediate end to
the siege against and blockade of Gaza.
We call for the full economic, cultural
and academic boycott of Israel. “Never
again” must mean NEVER AGAIN FOR
ANYONE!
Signed, Survivors
* Hajo Meyer, survivor of Auschwitz,
The Netherlands. ( has passed away since
the signing of this document)
* Henri Wajnblum, survivor and son of a
victim of Auschwitz from Lodz, Poland.
Lives in Belgium.
* Renate Bridenthal, child refugee from
Hitler, granddaughter of Auschwitz
victim, United States.
* Marianka Ehrlich Ross, survivor of Nazi
ethnic cleansing in Vienna, Austria. Now
lives in United States.
* Irena Klepfisz, child survivor from the
Warsaw Ghetto, Poland. Now lives in
United States.
* Karen Pomer, granddaughter of
member of Dutch resistance and survivor
of Bergen Belsen. Now lives in the United
States.
* Hedy Epstein, her parents & other
family members were deported to Camp
de Gurs & subsequently all perished in
Auschwitz. Now lives in United States.
* Lillian Rosengarten, survivor of the
Nazi Holocaust, United States.
* Suzanne Weiss, survived in hiding in
France, and daughter of a mother who
was murdered in Auschwitz. Now lives
in Canada.
* H. Richard Leuchtag, survivor, United
States.
* Ervin Somogyi, survivor and son of
survivors, United States.
* Ilse Hadda, survivor on Kindertransport
to England. Now lives in United States.
* Jacques Glaser, survivor, France.
* Norbert Hirschhorn, refugee of Nazi
genocide and grandson of three
grandparents who died in the Shoah,
London.
* Eva Naylor, surivor, New Zealand.
* Suzanne Ross, child refugee from Nazi
occupation in Belgium, two thirds of
family perished in the Lodz Ghetto, in
Auschwitz, and other Camps, United
States.
* Bernard Swierszcz, Polish survivor,
lost relatives in Majdanek concentration
camp. Now lives in the United States.
* Joseph Klinkov, hidden child in Poland,
still lives in Poland.
* Nicole Milner, survivor from Belgium.
Now lives in United States.
* Hedi Saraf, child survivor and daughter
of survivor of Dachau, United States.
* Michael Rice, child survivor and son
and grandson of survivor, aunt died in
Auschwitz and cousin in concentration
camp, ALL 14 remaining Jewish children
in my Dutch boarding school were
murdered in concentration camps, United
States.
* Barbara Roose, survivor from
Germany, half-sister killed in Auschwitz,
United States.
* Sonia Herzbrun, survivor of Nazi
genocide, France.
* Ivan Huber, survivor with my parents,
but 3 of 4 grandparents murdered, United
States.
* Altman Janina, survivor of Janowski
concentration camp, Lvov. Lives in
Israel.
* Leibu Strul Zalman, survivor from
Vaslui Romania. Lives in Jerusalem,
Palestine.
* Miriam Almeleh, survivor, United
States.
* George Bartenieff, child survivor from
Germany and son of survivors, United
States.
* Margarete Liebstaedter, survivor,
hidden by Christian people in Holland.
Lives in Belgium.
* Edith Bell, survivor of Westerbork,
Theresienstadt, Auschwitz and
Kurzbach. Lives in United States.
* Janine Euvrard, survivor, France.
* Harry Halbreich, survivor, German.
* Ruth Kupferschmidt, survivor, spent
five years hiding, The Netherlands.
Children of survivors
* Liliana Kaczerginski, daughter of Vilna
ghetto resistance fighter and
granddaughter of murdered in Ponary
woods, Lithuania. Now lives in France.
* Jean-Claude Meyer, son of Marcel, shot
as a hostage by the Nazis, whose sister
and parents died in Auschwitz. Now lives
in France.
* Chava Finkler, daughter of survivor of
Starachovice labour camp, Poland. Now
lives in Canada.
* Micah Bazant, child of a survivor of
the Nazi genocide, United States.
* Sylvia Schwarz, daughter and
granddaughter of survivors and
granddaughter of victims of the Nazi
genocide, United States.
* Margot Goldstein, daughter and
granddaughter of survivors of the Nazi
genocide, United States.
* Ellen Schwarz Wasfi, daughter of
survivors from Vienna, Austria. Now
lives in United States.
* Lisa Kosowski, daughter of survivor
and granddaughter of Auschwitz victims,
United States.
* Daniel Strum, son of a refugee from
Vienna, who, with his parents were
forced to flee in 1939, his maternal
grand-parents were lost, United States.
* Bruce Ballin, son of survivors, some
relatives of parents died in camps, one
relative beheaded for being in the Baum
Resistance Group, United States.
* Rachel Duell, daughter of survivors
from Germany and Poland, United
States.
* Tom Mayer, son of survivor and
grandson of victims, United States.
* Alex Nissen, daughter of survivors who
escaped but lost family in the Holocaust,
United States.
* Mark Aleshnick, son of survivor who
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L DA R T I C L E S
12
continued from page 11
continued next page
lost most of her family in Nazi genocide,
United States.
* Prof. Haim Bresheeth, son of two
survivors of Auschwitz and Bergen
Belsen, London.
* Todd Michael Edelman, son and
grandson of survivors and great-
grandson of victims of the Nazi genocide
in Hungary, Romania and Slovakia, United
States.
* Tim Naylor, son of survivor, New
Zealand.
* Victor Nepomnyashchy, son and
grandson of survivors and grandson and
relative of many victims, United States.
* Tanya Ury, daughter of parents who
fled Nazi Germany, granddaughter, great
granddaugher and niece of survivors and
those who died in concentration camps,
Germany.
* Rachel Giora, daughter of Polish Jews
who fled Poland, Israel.
* Jane Hirschmann, daughter of
survivors, United States.
* Jenny Heinz, daughter of survivor,
United States.
* Jaap Hamburger, son of survivors and
grandchild of 4 grandparents murdered
in Auschwitz, The Netherlands.
* Elsa Auerbach, daughter of Jewish
refugees from Nazi Germany, United
States.
* Julian Clegg, son and grandson of
Austrian refugees, relative of Austrian and
Hungarian concentration camp victims,
Taiwan.
* David Mizner, son of a survivor,
relative of people who died in the
Holocaust, United States.
* Jeffrey J. Westcott, son and grandson
of Holocaust survivors from Germany,
United States.
* Susan K. Jacoby, daughter of parents
who were refugees from Nazi Germany,
granddaughter of survivor of
Buchenwald, United States.
* Audrey Bomse, daughter of a survivor
of Nazi ethnic cleansing in Vienna, lives
in United States.
* Daniel Gottschalk, son and grandson
of refugees from the Holocaust, relative
to various family members who died in
the Holocaust, United States.
* Barbara Grossman, daughter of
survivors, granddaughter of Holocaust
victims, United States.
* Abraham Weizfeld PhD, son of
survivorswho escaped Warsaw (Jewish
Bundist) and Lublin ghettos, Canada.
* David Rohrlich, son of refugees from
Vienna, grandson of victim, United
States.
* Walter Ballin, son of holocaust
survivors, United States.
* Fritzi Ross, daughter of survivor,
granddaughter of Dachau survivor Hugo
Rosenbaum, great-granddaughter and
great-niece of victims, United States.
* Reuben Roth, son of survivors who
fled from Poland in 1939, Canada.
* Tony Iltis, father fled from
Czechoslovakia and grandmother
murdered in Auschwitz, Australia.
* Anne Hudes, daughter and
granddaughter of survivors from Vienna,
Austria, great-granddaughter of victims
who perished in Auschwitz, United
States.
* Mateo Nube, son of survivor from
Berlin, Germany. Lives in United States.
* John Mifsud, son of survivors from
Malta, United States.
* Mike Okrent, son of two holocaust /
concentration camp survivors, United
States.
* Susan Bailey, daughter of survivor and
niece of victims, UK.
* Brenda Lewis, child of Kindertransport
survivor, parent’s family died in
Auschwitz and Terezin. Lives in Canada.
* Patricia Rincon-Mautner, daughter of
survivor and granddaughter of survivor,
Colombia.
* Barak Michèle, daughter and grand-
daughter of a survivor, many members
of family were killed in Auschwitz or
Bessarabia. Lives in Germany.
* Jessica Blatt, daughter of child refugee
survivor, both grandparents’ entire
families killed in Poland. Lives in United
States
* Maia Ettinger, daughter &
granddaughter of survivors, United
States.
* Ammiel Alcalay, child of survivors from
then Yugoslavia. Lives in United States.
* Julie Deborah Kosowski, daughter of
hidden child survivor, grandparents did
not return from Auschwitz, United States.
* Julia Shpirt, daughter of survivor,
United States.
* Ruben Rosenberg Colorni, grandson
and son of survivors, The Netherlands.
* Victor Ginsburgh, son of survivors,
Belgium.
* Arianne Sved, daughter of a survivor
and granddaughter of victim, Spain.
* Rolf Verleger, son of survivors, father
survived Auschwitz, mother survived
deportation from Berlin to Estonia, other
family did not survive. Lives in Germany.
* Euvrard Janine, daughter of survivors,
France.
* H. Fleishon, daughter of survivors,
United States.
* Barbara Meyer, daughter of survivor
in Polish concentration camps. Lives in
Italy.
* Susan Heuman, child of survivors and
granddaughter of two grandparents
murdered in a forest in Minsk. Lives in
United States.
* Rami Heled, son of survivors, all
grandparents and family killed by the
Germans in Treblinka, Oswiecim and
Russia. Lives in Israel.
* Eitan Altman, son of survivor, France.
* Jorge Sved, son of survivor and
grandson of victim, United Kingdom
* Maria Kruczkowska, daughter of Lea
Horowicz who survived the holocaust
in Poland. Lives in Poland.
* Sarah Lanzman, daughter of survivor
of Auschwitz, United States.
* Cheryl W, daughter, granddaughter and
nieces of survivors, grandfather was a
member of the Dutch Underground
(Eindhoven). Lives in Australia.
* Chris Holmquist, son of survivor, UK.
* Beverly Stuart, daughter and
granddaughter of survivors from
Romania and Poland. Lives in United
States.
* Peter Truskier, son and grandson of
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D A R T I C L E S
13
continued next page
continued from page 12survivors, United States.
* Karen Bermann, daughter of a child
refugee from Vienna. Lives in United
States.
* Rebecca Weston, daughter and
granddaughter of survivor, Spain.
* Prof. Yosefa Loshitzky, daughter of
Holocaust survivors, London, UK.
* Marion Geller, daughter and
granddaughter of those who escaped,
great-granddaughter and relative of many
who died in the camps, UK.
* Susan Slyomovics, daughter and
granddaughter of survivors of
Auschwitz, Plaszow, Markleeberg and
Ghetto Mateszalka, United States.
* Helga Fischer Mankovitz, daughter,
niece and cousin of refugees who fled
from Austria, niece of victim who
perished, Canada.
* Steinberg, daughter of survivors and
grand daughter of victim killed in
Auschwitz as well as all his family of
Poland, France.
* Michael Wischnia, son of survivors and
relative of many who perished, United
States.
* Arthur Graaff, son of decorated Dutch
resistance member and nazi victim, The
Netherlands.
* Johanna Haan, daughter and
granddaughter of victims in the
Netherlands. Lives in the Netherlands.
* Aron Ben Miriam, son of and nephew
of survivors from Auschwitz, Bergen-
Belsen, Salzwedel, Lodz ghetto. Lives in
United States.
Grandchildren of survivors
* Raphael Cohen, grandson of Jewish
survivors of the Nazi genocide, United
States.
* Emma Rubin, granddaughter of a
survivor of the Nazi genocide, United
States.
* Alex Safron, grandson of a survivor of
the Nazi genocide, United States.
* Danielle Feris, grandchild of a Polish
grandmother whose whole family died
in the Nazi Holocaust, United States.
* Jesse Strauss, grandson of Polish
survivors of the Nazi genocide, United
States.
* Anna Baltzer, granddaughter of
survivors whose family members
perished in Auschwitz (others were
members of the Belgian Resistance),
United States.
* Abigail Harms, granddaughter of
Holocaust survivor from Austria, Now
lives in United States.
* Tessa Strauss, granddaughter of Polish
Jewish survivors of the Nazi genocide,
United States.
* Caroline Picker, granddaughter of
survivors of the Nazi genocide, United
States.
* Amalle Dublon, grandchild and great-
grandchild of survivors of the Nazi
holocaust, United States.
* Antonie Kaufmann Churg, 3rd cousin
of Ann Frank and grand-daughter of
NON-survivors, United States.
* Aliza Shvarts, granddaughter of
survivors, United States.
* Linda Mamoun, granddaughter of
survivors, United States.
* Abby Okrent, granddaughter of
survivors of the Auschwitz, Dachau,
Stuttgart, and the Lodz Ghetto, United
States.
* Ted Auerbach, grandson of survivor
whose whole family died in the
Holocaust, United States.
* Beth Bruch, grandchild of German
Jews who fled to US and great-grandchild
of Nazi holocaust survivor, United
States.
* Bob Wilson, grandson of a survivor,
United States.
* Katharine Wallerstein, granddaughter
of survivors and relative of many who
perished, United States.
* Sylvia Finzi, granddaughter and niece
of Holocaust victims murdered in
Auschwitz, London and Berlin. Now lives
in London.
* Esteban Schmelz, grandson of KZ-
Theresienstadt victim, Mexico City.
* Françoise Basch, grand daughter of
Victor and Ilona Basch murdered by the
Gestapo and the French Milice, France.
* Gabriel Alkon, grandson of Holocaust
survivors, Untied States.
* Nirit Ben-Ari, grandchild of Polish
grandparents from both sides whose
entire family was killed in the Nazi
Holocaust, United States.
* Heike Schotten, granddaughter of
refugees from Nazi Germany who
escaped the genocide, United States.
* Ike af Carlstèn, grandson of survivor,
Norway.
* Elias Lazarus, grandson of Holocaust
refugees from Dresden, United States and
Australia.
* Laura Mandelberg, granddaughter of
Holocaust survivors, United States.
* Josh Ruebner, grandson of Nazi
Holocaust survivors, United States.
* Shirley Feldman, granddaughter of
survivors, United States.
* Nuno Cesar Ferreira, grandson of
survivor, Brazil.
* Andrea Land, granddaugher of
survivors who fled programs in Poland,
all European relatives died in German and
Polish concentration camps, United
States.
* Sarah Goldman, granddaughter of
survivors of the Nazi genocide, United
States.
* Baruch Wolski, grandson of survivors,
Austria.
* Frank Amahran, grandson of survivor,
United States.
* Eve Spangler, granddaughter of
Holocaust NON-survivor, United States.
* Gil Medovoy, grandchild of Fela
Hornstein who lost her enitre family in
Poland during the Nazi genocide, United
States.
* Michael Hoffman, grandson of
survivors, rest of family killed in Poland
during Holocaust, live in El Salvador.
* Sarah Hogarth, granddaughter of a
survivor whose entire family was killed
at Auschwitz, United States.
* Tibby Brooks, granddaughter, niece,
and cousin of victims of Nazis in Ukraine.
Lives in United States.
* Dan Berger, grandson of survivor,
United States.
* Dani Baurer, granddaughter of Baruch
Pollack, survivor of Auschwitz. Lives in
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L DA R T I C L E S
14
continued from page 13
continued next page
United States.
* Talia Baurer, granddaughter of a
survivor, United States.
* Evan Cofsky, grandson of survivor,
UK.
* Annie Sicherman, granddaughter of
survivors, United States.
* Anna Heyman, granddaughter of
survivors, UK.
* Maya Ober, granddaughter of survivor
and relative of deceased in Teresienstadt
and Auschwitz, Tel Aviv.
* Anne Haan, granddaughter of Joseph
Slagter, survivor of Auschwitz. Lives in
The Netherlands.
* Oliver Ginsberg, grandson of victim,
Germany.
* Alexia Zdral, granddaughter of Polish
survivors, United States.
* Mitchel Bollag, grandson of Stanislaus
Eisner, who was living in Czechoslovakia
before being sent to a concentration
camp. United States.
* Vivienne Porzsolt, granddaughter of
victims of Nazi genocide, Australia.
* Lisa Nessan, granddaughter of
survivors, United States.
* Kally Alexandrou, granddaughter of
survivors, Australia.
* Laura Ostrow, granddaughter of
survivors, United States
* Anette Jacobson, granddaughter of
relatives killed, town of Kamen Kashirsk,
Poland. Lives in United States.
* Tamar Yaron (Teresa Werner),
granddaughter and niece of victims of
the Nazi genocide in Poland, Israel.
* Antonio Roman-Alcalá, grandson of
survivor, United States.
* Jeremy Luban, grandson of survivor,
United States.
* Heather West, granddaughter of
survivors and relative of other victims,
United States.
* Jeff Ethan Au Green, grandson of
survivor who escaped from a Nazi work
camp and hid in the Polish-Ukranian
forest, United States.
* Noa Shaindlinger, granddaughter of
four holocaust survivors, Canada.
* Merilyn Moos, granddaughter, cousin
and niece murdered victims, UK.
* Ruth Tenne, granddaughter and relative
of those who perished in Warsaw Ghetto,
London.
* Craig Berman, grandson of Holocaust
survivors, UK.
* Nell Hirschmann-Levy, granddaughter
of survivors from Germany. Lives in
United States.
* Osha Neumann, grandson of Gertrud
Neumann who died in Theresienstadt.
Lives in United States.
* Georg Frankl, Grandson of survivor
Ernst-Immo Frankl who survived
German work camp. Lives in Germany.
* Julian Drix, grandson of two survivors
from Poland, including survivor and
escapee from liquidated Janowska
concentration camp in Lwow, Poland.
Lives in United States.
* Katrina Mayer, grandson and relative
of victims, UK.
* Avigail Abarbanel, granddaughter of
survivors, Scotland.
* Denni Turp, granddaughter of Michael
Prooth, survivor, UK.
* Fenya Fischler, granddaughter of
survivors, UK.
* Yakira Teitel, granddaughter of German
Jewish refugees, great-granddaughter of
survivor, United States.
* Sarah, granddaughter of survivor, the
Netherlands.
* Susan Koppelman, granddaughter of
survivor, United States
* Hana Umeda, granddaughter of
survivor, Warsaw.
* Jordan Silverstein, grandson of two
survivors, Canada.
* Daniela Petuchowski, granddaughter of
survivors, United States.
* Aaron Lerner, grandson of survivors,
United States.
* Judith Bernstein, granddaughter of
Holocaust victims in Auschwitz,
Germany.
* Samantha Wischnia, granddaughter and
great niece of survivors from Poland,
United States.
* Elizabeth Wischnia, granddaughter and
grand niece of three holocaust survivors,
great aunt worked for Schindler, United
States.
* Daniel Waterman, grandson of
survivor, The Netherlands.
* Elana Baurer, granddaughter of
survivor, United States.
* Pablo Roman-Alcala, grandson of
participant in the kindertransport and
survivor, Germany.
Great grandchildren of survivors
* Natalie Rothman, great granddaughter
of Holocaust victims in Warsaw. Now
lives in Canada.
* Yotam Amit, great-grandson of Polish
Jew who fled Poland, United States.
* Daniel Boyarin, great grandson of
victims of the Nazi genocide, United
States.
* Maria Luban, great-granddaughter of
survivors of the Holocaust, United
States.
* Mimi Erlich, great-granddaughter of
Holocaust victim, United States.
* Olivia Kraus, great-grandaughter of
victims, granddaughter and daughter of
family that fled Austria and
Czechoslovakia. Lives in United States.
* Emily (Chisefsky) Alma, great
granddaughter and great grandniece of
victims in Bialystok, Poland, United
States.
* Inbal Amin, great-granddaughter of a
mother and son that escaped and related
to plenty that didn’t, United States.
* Matteo Luban, great-granddaughter of
survivors, United States.
* Saira Weiner, greatgranddaughter and
niece of those murdered in the Holocaust,
granddaughter of survivors, UK.
* Andrea Isaak, great-granddaughter of
survivor, Canada.
Other relatives of survivors
* Terri Ginsberg, niece of a survivor of
the Nazi genocide, United States.
* Nathan Pollack, relative of Holocaust
survivors and victims, United States.
* Marcy Winograd, relative of victims,
United States.
* Rabbi Borukh Goldberg, relative of
many victims, United States.
* Martin Davidson, great-nephew of
victims who lived in the Netherlands,
continued from page 14
continued next page
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L DA R T I C L E S
15
Spain.
* Miriam Pickens, relative of survivors,
United States.
* Dorothy Werner, spouse of survivor,
United States.
* Hyman and Hazel Rochman, relatives of
Holocaust victims, United States.
* Rich Siegel, cousin of victims who were
rounded up and shot in town square of
Czestochowa, Poland. Lives in United
States.
* Ignacio Israel Cruz-Lara, relative of
survivor, Mexico.
* Debra Stuckgold, relative of survivors,
United States.
* Joel Kovel, relatives killed at Babi Yar, United
States.
* Carol Krauthamer Smith, niece of
survivors of the Nazi genocide, United
States.
* Chandra Ahuva Hauptman, relatives from
grandfather’s family died in Lodz ghetto,
one survivor cousin and many deceased
from Auschwitz, United States.
* Shelly Weiss, relative of Holocaust
victims, United States.
* Carol Sanders, niece and cousin of victims
of Holocaust in Poland, United States.
* Sandra Rosen, great-niece and cousin of
survivors, United States.
* Raquel Hiller, relative of victims in Poland.
Now lives in Mexico.
* Alex Kantrowitz, most of father’s family
murdered Nesvizh, Belarus 1941. Lives in
United States.
* Michael Steven Smith, many relatives were
killed in Hungary. Lives in United States.
* Linda Moore, relative of survivors and
victims, United States.
* Juliet VanEenwyk, niece and cousin of
Hungarian survivors, United States.
* Anya Achtenberg, grand niece, niece,
cousin of victims tortured and murdered in
Ukraine. Lives in United States.
* Betsy Wolf-Graves, great niece of uncle
who shot himself as he was about to be
arrested by Nazis, United States.
* Abecassis Pierre, grand-uncle died in
concentration camp, France.
* Robert Rosenthal, great-nephew and
cousin of survivors from Poland. Lives in
United States.
* Régine Bohar, relative of victims sent to
Auschwitz, Canada.
* Denise Rickles, relative of survivors
and victims in Poland. Lives in United
States.
* Louis Hirsch, relative of victims, United
States.
* Concepción Marcos, relative of victim,
Spain.
* George Sved, relative of victim, Spain.
* Judith Berlowitz, relative of victims and
survivors, United States.
* Rebecca Sturgeon, descendant of
Holocaust survivor from Amsterdam.
Lives in UK.
* Justin Levy, relative of victims and
survivors, Ireland.
* Sam Semoff, relative of survivors and
victims, UK.
* Leah Brown Klein, daughter-in-law of
survivors Miki and Etu Fixler Klein,
United States
* Karen Malpede, spouse of hidden child
who then fled Germany. Lives in United
States
* Michel Euvrard, husband of survivor,
France.
* Walter Ebmeyer, grandnephew of three
Auschwitz victims and one survivor now
living in Jerusalem, United States.
* Garrett Wright, relative of victims and
survivors, United States.
26 August, 2014
WHAT’S NEXT FOR ISRAEL, HAMAS AND GAZA?By Noam Chomsky
On August 26th, Israel and the Palestinian
Authority (PA) both accepted a ceasefire
agreement after a 50-day Israeli assault on
Gaza that left 2,100 Palestinians dead and
vast landscapes of destruction behind. The
agreement calls for an end to military action
by both Israel and Hamas, as well as an
easing of the Israeli siege that has strangled
Gaza for many years.
This is, however, just the most recent of a
series of ceasefire agreements reached after
each of Israel’s periodic escalations of its
unremitting assault on Gaza. Throughout
this period, the terms of these agreements
remain essentially the same. The regular
pattern is for Israel, then, to disregard
whatever agreement is in place, while Hamas
observes it — as Israel has officially
recognized — until a sharp increase in Israeli
violence elicits a Hamas response, followed
by even fiercer brutality. These escalations,
which amount to shooting fish in a pond,
are called “mowing the lawn” in Israeli
parlance. The most recent was more
accurately described as “removing the
topsoil” by a senior U.S. military officer,
appalled by the practices of the self-
described “most moral army in the world.”
The first of this series was the Agreement
on Movement and Access Between Israel
and the Palestinian Authority in November
2005. It called for “a crossing between Gaza
and Egypt at Rafah for the export of goods
and the transit of people, continuous
operation of crossings between Israel and
Gaza for the import/export of goods, and
the transit of people, reduction of obstacles
to movement within the West Bank, bus
and truck convoys between the West Bank
and Gaza, the building of a seaport in Gaza,
[and the] re-opening of the airport in Gaza”
that Israeli bombing had demolished.
That agreement was reached shortly after
Israel withdrew its settlers and military
forces from Gaza. The motive for the
disengagement was explained by Dov
Weissglass, a confidant of then-Prime
continued next page
continued from page 15
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L DA R T I C L E S
16
Minister Ariel Sharon, who was in charge
of negotiating and implementing it. “The
significance of the disengagement plan is
the freezing of the peace process,”
Weissglass informed the Israeli press. “And
when you freeze that process, you prevent
the establishment of a Palestinian state, and
you prevent a discussion on the refugees,
the borders, and Jerusalem. Effectively, this
whole package called the Palestinian state,
with all that it entails, has been removed
indefinitely from our agenda. And all this
with authority and permission. All with a
[U.S.] presidential blessing and the
ratification of both houses of Congress.”
True enough.
“The disengagement is actually
formaldehyde,” Weissglass added. “It
supplies the amount of formaldehyde that
is necessary so there will not be a political
process with the Palestinians.” Israeli
hawks also recognized that instead of
investing substantial resources in
maintaining a few thousand settlers in illegal
communities in devastated Gaza, it made
more sense to transfer them to illegal
subsidized communities in areas of the West
Bank that Israel intended to keep.
The disengagement was depicted as a noble
effort to pursue peace, but the reality was
quite different. Israel never relinquished
control of Gaza and is, accordingly,
recognized as the occupying power by the
United Nations, the U.S., and other states
(Israel apart, of course). In their
comprehensive history of Israeli settlement
in the occupied territories, Israeli scholars
Idith Zertal and Akiva Eldar describe what
actually happened when that country
disengaged: the ruined territory was not
released “for even a single day from Israel’s
military grip or from the price of the
occupation that the inhabitants pay every
day.” After the disengagement, “Israel left
behind scorched earth, devastated services,
and people with neither a present nor a
future. The settlements were destroyed in
an ungenerous move by an unenlightened
occupier, which in fact continues to control
the territory and kill and harass its inhabitants
by means of its formidable military might.”
Operations Cast Lead and Pillar of Defense
Israel soon had a pretext for violating the
November Agreement more severely. In
January 2006, the Palestinians committed
a serious crime. They voted “the wrong
way” in carefully monitored free elections,
placing the parliament in the hands of
Hamas. Israel and the United States
immediately imposed harsh sanctions, telling
the world very clearly what they mean by
“democracy promotion.” Europe, to its
shame, went along as well.
The U.S. and Israel soon began planning a
military coup to overthrow the unacceptable
elected government, a familiar procedure.
When Hamas pre-empted the coup in 2007,
the siege of Gaza became far more severe,
along with regular Israeli military attacks.
Voting the wrong way in a free election was
bad enough, but preempting a U.S.-planned
military coup proved to be an unpardonable
offense.
A new ceasefire agreement was reached in
June 2008. It again called for opening the
border crossings to “allow the transfer of
all goods that were banned and restricted
to go into Gaza.” Israel formally agreed to
this, but immediately announced that it
would not abide by the agreement and open
the borders until Hamas released Gilad Shalit,
an Israeli soldier held by Hamas.
Israel itself has a long history of kidnapping
civilians in Lebanon and on the high seas
and holding them for lengthy periods without
credible charge, sometimes as hostages. Of
course, imprisoning civilians on dubious
charges, or none, is a regular practice in
the territories Israel controls. But the
standard western distinction between people
and “unpeople” (in Orwell’s useful phrase)
renders all this insignificant.
Israel not only maintained the siege in
violation of the June 2008 ceasefire
agreement but did so with extreme rigor,
even preventing the United Nations Relief
and Works Agency, which cares for the
huge number of official refugees in Gaza,
from replenishing its stocks.
On November 4th, while the media were
focused on the U.S. presidential election,
Israeli troops entered Gaza and killed half a
dozen Hamas militants. That elicited a
Hamas missile response and an exchange
of fire. (All the deaths were Palestinian.) In
late December, Hamas offered to renew the
ceasefire. Israel considered the offer, but
rejected it, preferring instead to launch
Operation Cast Lead, a three-week incursion
of the full power of the Israeli military into
the Gaza strip, resulting in shocking atrocities
well documented by international and Israeli
human rights organizations.
On January 8, 2009, while Cast Lead was
in full fury, the U.N. Security Council
passed a unanimous resolution (with the
U.S. abstaining) calling for “an immediate
ceasefire leading to a full Israeli withdrawal,
unimpeded provision through Gaza of food,
fuel, and medical treatment, and intensified
international arrangements to prevent arms
and ammunition smuggling.”
A new ceasefire agreement was indeed
reached, but the terms, similar to the
previous ones, were again never observed
and broke down completely with the next
major mowing-the-lawn episode in
November 2012, Operation Pillar of
Defense. What happened in the interim can
be illustrated by the casualty figures from
continued from page 16
continued next page
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L DA R T I C L E S
17
January 2012 to the launching of that
operation: one Israeli was killed by fire from
Gaza while 78 Palestinians were killed by
Israeli fire.
The first act of Operation Pillar of Defense
was the murder of Ahmed Jabari, a high
official of the military wing of Hamas. Aluf
Benn, editor-in-chief of Israel’s leading
newspaper Haaretz, described Jabari as
Israel’s “subcontractor” in Gaza, who
enforced relative quiet there for more than
five years. As always, there was a pretext
for the assassination, but the likely reason
was provided by Israeli peace activist
Gershon Baskin. He had been involved in
direct negotiations with Jabari for years and
reported that, hours before he was
assassinated, Jabari “received the draft of a
permanent truce agreement with Israel,
which included mechanisms for maintaining
the ceasefire in the case of a flare-up between
Israel and the factions in the Gaza Strip.”
There is a long record of Israeli actions
designed to deter the threat of a diplomatic
settlement. After this exercise of mowing
the lawn, a ceasefire agreement was reached
yet again. Repeating the now-standard
terms, it called for a cessation of military
action by both sides and the effective ending
of the siege of Gaza with Israel “opening
the crossings and facilitating the movements
of people and transfer of goods, and
refraining from restricting residents’ free
movements and targeting residents in border
areas.”
What happened next was reviewed by
Nathan Thrall, senior Middle East analyst
of the International Crisis Group. Israeli
intelligence recognized that Hamas was
observing the terms of the ceasefire.
“Israel,” Thrall wrote, “therefore saw little
incentive in upholding its end of the deal. In
the three months following the ceasefire,
its forces made regular incursions into Gaza,
strafed Palestinian farmers and those
collecting scrap and rubble across the
border, and fired at boats, preventing
fishermen from accessing the majority of
Gaza’s waters.” In other words, the siege
never ended. “Crossings were repeatedly
shut. So-called buffer zones inside Gaza
[from which Palestinians are barred, and
which include a third or more of the strip’s
limited arable land] were reinstated. Imports
declined, exports were blocked, and fewer
Gazans were given exit permits to Israel
and the West Bank.”
Operation Protective Edge
So matters continued until April 2014, when
an important event took place. The two
major Palestinian groupings, Gaza-based
Hamas and the Fatah-dominated Palestinian
Authority in the West Bank signed a unity
agreement. Hamas made major
concessions. The unity government
contained none of its members or allies. In
substantial measure, as Nathan Thrall
observes, Hamas turned over governance
of Gaza to the PA. Several thousand PA
security forces were sent there and the PA
placed its guards at borders and crossings,
with no reciprocal positions for Hamas in
the West Bank security apparatus. Finally,
the unity government accepted the three
conditions that Washington and the
European Union had long demanded: non-
violence, adherence to past agreements, and
the recognition of Israel.
Israel was infuriated. Its government
declared at once that it would refuse to deal
with the unity government and cancelled
negotiations. Its fury mounted when the
U.S., along with most of the world, signaled
support for the unity government.
There are good reasons why Israel opposes
the unification of Palestinians. One is that
the Hamas-Fatah conflict has provided a
useful pretext for refusing to engage in
serious negotiations. How can one negotiate
with a divided entity? More significantly,
for more than 20 years, Israel has been
committed to separating Gaza from the West
Bank in violation of the Oslo Accords it
signed in 1993, which declare Gaza and
the West Bank to be an inseparable territorial
unity.
A look at a map explains the rationale.
Separated from Gaza, any West Bank
enclaves left to Palestinians have no access
to the outside world. They are contained
by two hostile powers, Israel and Jordan,
both close U.S. allies — and contrary to
illusions, the U.S. is very far from a neutral
“honest broker.”
Furthermore, Israel has been systematically
taking over the Jordan Valley, driving out
Palestinians, establishing settlements, sinking
wells, and otherwise ensuring that the region
— about one-third of the West Bank, with
much of its arable land — will ultimately be
integrated into Israel along with the other
regions that country is taking over. Hence
remaining Palestinian cantons will be
completely imprisoned. Unification with
Gaza would interfere with these plans,
which trace back to the early days of the
occupation and have had steady support
from the major political blocs, including
figures usually portrayed as doves like
former president Shimon Peres, who was
one of the architects of settlement deep in
the West Bank.
As usual, a pretext was needed to move on
to the next escalation. Such an occasion
arose when three Israeli boys from the settler
community in the West Bank were brutally
murdered. The Israeli government evidently
quickly realized that they were dead, but
pretended otherwise, which provided the
opportunity to launch a “rescue operation”
— actually a rampage primarily targeting
continued from page17
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L DA R T I C L E S
18
Hamas. The Netanyahu government has
claimed from the start that it knew Hamas
was responsible, but has made no effort to
present evidence.
One of Israel’s leading authorities on Hamas,
Shlomi Eldar, reported almost at once that
the killers very likely came from a dissident
clan in Hebron that has long been a thorn in
the side of the Hamas leadership. He added,
“I’m sure they didn’t get any green light
from the leadership of Hamas, they just
thought it was the right time to act.”
The Israeli police have since been searching
for and arresting members of the clan, still
claiming, without evidence, that they are
“Hamas terrorists.” On September 2nd,
Haaretz reported that, after very intensive
interrogations, the Israeli security services
concluded the abduction of the teenagers
“was carried out by an independent cell”
with no known direct links to Hamas.
The 18-day rampage by the Israeli Defense
Forces succeeded in undermining the feared
unity government. According to Israeli
military sources, its soldiers arrested 419
Palestinians, including 335 affiliated with
Hamas, and killed six, while searching
thousands of locations and confiscating
$350,000. Israel also conducted dozens of
attacks in Gaza, killing five Hamas members
on July 7th.
Hamas finally reacted with its first rockets
in 18 months, Israeli officials reported,
providing Israel with the pretext to launch
Operation Protective Edge on July 8th. The
50-day assault proved the most extreme
exercise in mowing the lawn — so far.
Operation [Still to Be Named]
Israel is in a fine position today to reverse
its decades-old policy of separating Gaza
from the West Bank in violation of its solemn
agreements and to observe a major ceasefire
agreement for the first time. At least
temporarily, the threat of democracy in
neighboring Egypt has been diminished, and
the brutal Egyptian military dictatorship of
General Abdul Fattah al-Sisi is a welcome
ally for Israel in maintaining control over
Gaza.
The Palestinian unity government, as noted
earlier, is placing the U.S.-trained forces of
the Palestinian Authority in control of Gaza’s
borders, and governance may be shifting
into the hands of the PA, which depends
on Israel for its survival, as well as for its
finances. Israel might feel that its takeover
of Palestinian territory in the West Bank has
proceeded so far that there is little to fear
from some limited form of autonomy for
the enclaves that remain to Palestinians.
There is also some truth to Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu’s observation: “Many
elements in the region understand today that,
in the struggle in which they are threatened,
Israel is not an enemy but a partner.” Akiva
Eldar, Israel’s leading diplomatic
correspondent, adds, however, that “all
those ‘many elements in the region’ also
understand that there is no brave and
comprehensive diplomatic move on the
horizon without an agreement on the
establishment of a Palestinian state based
on the 1967 borders and a just, agreed-upon
solution to the refugee problem.” That is
not on Israel’s agenda, he points out, and is
in fact in direct conflict with the 1999
electoral program of the governing Likud
coalition, never rescinded, which “flatly
rejects the establishment of a Palestinian
Arab state west of the Jordan river.”
Some knowledgeable Israeli commentators,
notably columnist Danny Rubinstein, believe
that Israel is poised to reverse course and
relax its stranglehold on Gaza.
We’ll see.
The record of these past years suggests
otherwise and the first signs are not
auspicious. As Operation Protective Edge
ended, Israel announced its largest
appropriation of West Bank land in 30 years,
almost 1,000 acres. Israel Radio reported
that the takeover was in response to the
killing of the three Jewish teenagers by
“Hamas militants.” A Palestinian boy was
burned to death in retaliation for the murder,
but no Israeli land was handed to
Palestinians, nor was there any reaction
when an Israeli soldier murdered 10-year-
old Khalil Anati on a quiet street in a refugee
camp near Hebron on August 10th, while
the most moral army in the world was
smashing Gaza to bits, and then drove away
in his jeep as the child bled to death.
Anati was one the 23 Palestinians (including
three children) killed by Israeli occupation
forces in the West Bank during the Gaza
onslaught, according to U.N. statistics, along
with more than 2,000 wounded, 38% by
live fire. “None of those killed were
endangering soldiers’ lives,” Israeli journalist
Gideon Levy reported. To none of this is
there any reaction, just as there was no
reaction while Israel killed, on average, more
than two Palestinian children a week for
the past 14 years. Unpeople, after all.
It is commonly claimed on all sides that, if
the two-state settlement is dead as a result
of Israel’s takeover of Palestinian lands, then
the outcome will be one state West of the
Jordan. Some Palestinians welcome this
outcome, anticipating that they can then
conduct a civil rights struggle for equal
rights on the model of South Africa under
apartheid. Many Israeli commentators warn
that the resulting “demographic problem”
of more Arab than Jewish births and
diminishing Jewish immigration will
undermine their hope for a “democratic
Jewish state.”continued next page
But these widespread beliefs are dubious.
The realistic alternative to a two-state
settlement is that Israel will continue to carry
forward the plans it has been implementing
for years, taking over whatever is of value
to it in the West Bank, while avoiding
Palestinian population concentrations and
removing Palestinians from the areas it is
integrating into Israel. That should avoid the
dreaded “demographic problem.”
The areas being integrated into Israel include
a vastly expanded Greater Jerusalem, the
area within the illegal “Separation Wall,”
corridors cutting through the regions to the
East, and will probably also encompass the
Jordan Valley. Gaza will likely remain under
its usual harsh siege, separated from the
West Bank. And the Syrian Golan Heights
— like Jerusalem, annexed in violation of
Security Council orders — will quietly
become part of Greater Israel. In the
meantime, West Bank Palestinians will be
contained in unviable cantons, with special
accommodation for elites in standard
neocolonial style.
These basic policies have been underway
since the 1967 conquest, following a
principle enunciated by then-Defense
Minister Moshe Dayan, one of the Israeli
leaders most sympathetic to the
Palestinians. He informed his cabinet
colleagues that they should tell Palestinian
refugees in the West Bank, “We have no
solution, you shall continue to live like dogs,
and whoever wishes may leave, and we
will see where this process leads.”
The suggestion was natural within the
overriding conception articulated in 1972
by future president Haim Herzog: “I do not
deny the Palestinians a place or stand or
opinion on every matter... But certainly I
am not prepared to consider them as
partners in any respect in a land that has
been consecrated in the hands of our nation
for thousands of years. For the Jews of
this land there cannot be any partner.”
Dayan also called for Israel’s “permanent
rule” (“memshelet keva”) over the occupied
territories. When Netanyahu expresses the
same stand today, he is not breaking new
ground.
Like other states, Israel pleads “security”
as justification for its aggressive and violent
actions. But knowledgeable Israelis know
better. Their recognition of reality was
continued from page18 articulated clearly in 1972 by Air Force
Commander (and later president) Ezer
Weizmann. He explained that there would
be no security problem if Israel were to
accept the international call to withdraw
from the territories it conquered in 1967,
but the country would not then be able to
“exist according to the scale, spirit, and
quality she now embodies.”
For a century, the Zionist colonization of
Palestine has proceeded primarily on the
pragmatic principle of the quiet
establishment of facts on the ground, which
the world was to ultimately come to accept.
It has been a highly successful policy. There
is every reason to expect it to persist as
long as the United States provides the
necessary military, economic, diplomatic,
and ideological support. For those concerned
with the rights of the brutalized Palestinians,
there can be no higher priority than working
to change U.S. policies, not an idle dream
by any means.
09 September, 2014
Noam Chomsky is Institute Professor
emeritus in the Department of Linguistics
and Philosophy at Massachusetts Institute
of Technology.
Source: TomDispatch.com
FERGUSON: NO JUSTICE IN THE AMERICAN POLICE STATE
By Paul Craig Roberts
There are reports that American
police kill 500 or more Americans
every year. Few of these murdered
Americans posed a threat to police.
ht tps: / /www.dojmedia.com/u-s-
po l i ce -have-k i l l ed -over -5000-
civilians-since-911/ Police murder
Americans for totally implausible
reasons. For example, a few days
before Michael Brown was gunned
down in Ferguson, John Crawford
picked up a toy gun from a WalMart
shelf in the toy department and was
shot and killed on the spot by police
goons. http://www.msnbc.com/
msnbc/family-man-kil led-cops-
walmart-demands-surveillance-video
Less than four miles from Ferguson,
goon thugs murdered another black
man on August 19. The police claims
of “threat” are disproved by the video
of the murder released by the police.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
2 0 1 4 / 0 8 / 2 0 / k a j i e m e - p o w e l l -
shooting_n_5696546.html
Five hundred is more than one killing
by police per day. Yet the reports of
the shootings seldom get beyond the
local news. Why then has the
Ferguson, Missouri, police killing of
Michael Brown gone international?
Probably the answer is the large
multi-day protests of the black
community in Ferguson that led to
the state police being sent to
continued next page
19
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D A R T I C L E S
Ferguson and now the National
Guard. Also, domestic police in full
military combat gear with armored
personnel carriers and tanks pointing
numerous rifles in the faces of
unarmed civilians and arresting and
threatening journalists make good
video copy. The “land of the free”
looks like a Gestapo Nazi state. To
much of the world, which has grown
to hate American bullying, the
bullying of Americans by their own
police is poetic justice.
For those who have long protested
racial profiling and police brutality
toward racial minorities, the police
murder of Michael Brown in
Ferguson is just another in a history
of racists murders. http://
www.counterpunch.org/2014/08/20/
racial-repression-and-the-murder-of-
mike-brown/print Rob Urie is correct
that blacks receive disproportionate
punishment from the white criminal
justice (sic) system. See, for
example: http://
www.lewrockwell.com/2014/08/
william-norman-grigg/mother-faces-
11-years-in-prison/
Myself, former US Representative
Dennis Kucinich, and others see
Michael Brown’s murder as
reflective of the militarization of the
police and police training that creates
a hostile police attitude toward the
public. The police are taught to view
the public as threats against whom
the use of violence is the safest
course for the police officers.
This doesn’t mean that racism is not
also involved. Polls show that a
majority of white Americans are
content with the police justification
for the killing. Police apologists are
flooding the Internet with arguments
against those of the opposite
persuasion. Only
those who regard the police excuse
as unconvincing are accused of
jumping to conclusions before the
jury’s verdict is in. Those who jump
to conclusions favorable to the police
are regarded as proper Americans.
What I address in this article is non-
evidential considerations that
determine a jury’s verdict and the
incompetence of Ferguson’s
government that caused the riots and
looting.
Unless the US Department of Justice
makes Michael Brown’s killing a
federal case, the black community in
Ferguson is powerless to prevent a
cover-up.
What usually happens in these cases
is that the police concoct a story
protective of the police officer(s) and
the prosecutor does not bring an
indictment. As Obama and his
Attorney General, Eric Holder, are
partially black (in skin color alone),
the black majority community in
Ferguson, Missouri, might have
hopes from Holder’s visit. However,
nothing could be more clear than the
fact that Obama and Holder, along
with the rest of “black leadership,”
have been co-opted by the white
power structure. How else would
Obama and Holder be in office? Do
you think that the white power
structure puts in office people who
want justice for minorities or for
anyone other than the mega-rich?
The 1960s were a time of black
leadership, but that leadership was
assassinated (Martin Luther King) or
co-opted. Black leaders sold out for
prestige appointments and corporate
board memberships. Today black
leadership is marginalized and exists
only at local levels if at all.
If the cop who killed Brown is
indicted and he is tried in Ferguson,
the jury will contain whites who live
in Ferguson. Unless there is a huge
change in white sentiment about the
killing, no white juror can vote to
convict the white cop and continue
to live in Ferguson. The hostility of
the white community toward white
jurors who took the side of a “black
hoodlum who stole cigars” against
the white police officer would make
life for the jurors impossible in
Ferguson.
The trouble with purely racial
explanations of police using
excessive force is that cops don’t
limit their excesses to racial
minorities. White people suffer them
also. Remember the recent case of
Cecily McMillan, an Occupy
protester who was brutalized by a
white good thug with a record of
using excessive force. McMillan is a
young white woman. Her breasts
were seized from behind, and when
she swung around her elbow
reflexively and instinctively came up
and hit the goon thug. She was
arrested for assaulting a police officer
and sentenced by a jury to a term in
jail. The prosecutor and judge made
certain that no evidence could be
presented in her defense. Medical
evidence of the bruises on her breast
and the police officer’s record of
police brutality were not allowed as
evidence in her show trial , the
purpose of which was to intimidate
Occupy protesters.
In America white jurors are usually
continued from page19
continued next page
20
I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D A R T I C L E S
sheep who do whatever the
prosecutor wants. As Cecily
McMillan, a white woman, could not
get justice, it is even less likely that
the black family of Michael Brown
will. Those who are awaiting a jury’s
verdict to decide Michael Brown’s
case are awaiting a cover-up and the
complicity of the US criminal justice
(sic) system in murder.
If there is a federal indictment of the
police officer, and the trial is held in
a distant jurisdiction, there is a better
chance that a jury would consider the
facts. But even these precautions
would not eliminate the racist element
in white jurors’ decisions.
The situation in Ferguson was so
badly handled it almost seems like the
police state, in responding to the
shooting, intended to provoke
violence so that the American public
could become accustomed to military
force being applied to unarmed
civilian protests.
Ferguson brings to mind the Boston
Marathon Bombing. Two brothers of
foreign extraction allegedly set off a
“pressure cooker bomb” left in a
backback that killed and injured race
participants or observers. The two
brothers were deemed, without any
evidence, to be so dangerous that the
entirety of Boston and its suburbs
were “locked down” while 10,000
heavily armed police and military
patrolled the streets in military
vehicles conducting door-to-door
searches forcing residents from their
homes at gun point, while the police
ransacked homes where it was totally
obvious the brothers were not hiding.
Not a single family evicted from their
residences at gunpoint said: “Thank
God you are here. The bombers are
hiding in our home.”
The excessive display of force and
warrantless police home intrusions is
the reason that aware and thoughtful
Americans do not believe one word
of the official account of the Boston
Marathon Bombing. Thoughtful
people wonder why every American
does not see the bombing as an
orchestrated state act of terror in
order to accustom Americans to the
lock-down of a city and police
intrusion into their homes.
Logistically, it is impossible to
assemble 10,000 armed troops so
quickly. The obvious indication is that
the readiness of the troops indicates
pre-planning.
In Ferguson all that was needed to
prevent mass protests and looting
was for the police chief, mayor or
governor to immediately announce
that there would be a full investigation
by a civic committee independent of
the police and that the black
community should select the
members it wished to serve on the
investigative committee.
Instead, the name of the cop who
killed Michael Brown was withheld
for days, a video allegedly of Michael
Brown taking cigars from a store
was released as a justification for his
murder by police. These responses
and a variety of other stupid police
and government responses convinced
the black community, which already
knew in its bones, that there would
be a coverup.
It is entirely possible that the police
chief, mayor, and governor lacked the
intelligence and judgment to deal with
the occasion. In other words,
perhaps they are too stupid to be in
public office. The incapacity of the
American public to elect qualified
representatives is world-renown. But
it is also possible that Michael
Brown’s killing provided another
opportunity to accustom Americans
to the need for military violence to
be deployed against the civilian
population in order to protect us from
threats.
Occupy Wall Street was white, and
these whites were overwhelmed by
police violence.
This is why I conclude that more is
involved in Ferguson than white racist
attitudes toward blacks.
The founding fathers warned against
allowing US military forces to be
deployed against the American
people, and the Posse Comitatus Act
prevents the use of military forces
against civilians. These restrictions
designed to protect liberty have been
subverted by the George W. Bush and
Obama regimes.
Today Americans have no more
protection against state violence than
Germans had under National
Socialism.
Far from being a “light unto the
world,” America is descending into
cold hard tyranny.
Who will liberate us?
21 August, 2014
Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury
for Economic Policy and associate
editor of the Wall Street Journal.
Source: Countercurrents.org
continued from page 20
21I N T E R N A T I O N A L M O V E M E N T F O R A J U S T W O R L D A R T I C L E S
INTERNATIONAL MOVEMENTFOR A JUST WORLD (JUST)P.O BOX 288Jalan Sultan46730 Petaling JayaSelangor Darul EhsanMALAYSIAwww.just-international.org
Bayaran Pos JelasPostage Paid
Pejabat Pos BesarKuala Lumpur
MalaysiaNo. WP 1385
Please donate to JUST by Postal Order or Cheque
addressed to:
International Movement for a Just World
P.O. Box 288, Jalan Sultan, 46730, Petaling Jaya,
Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
or direct to our bank account:Malayan Banking Berhad, Petaling Jaya Main
Branch, 50 Jalan Sultan, 46200, Petaling Jaya,
Selangor Darul Ehsan,MALAYSIA
Account No. 5141 6917 0716
Donations from outside Malaysia should be made
by Telegraphic Transfer or Bank Draft in USD$
The International Movement for a Just World isa nonprofit international citizens’ organisationwhich seeks to create public awareness aboutinjustices within the existing global system.It a lso attempts to develop a deeperunderstanding of the struggle for social justiceand human dignity at the global level, guided byuniversal spiritual and moral values.
In furtherance of these objectives, JUST hasundertaken a number of activities includingconducting research, publishing books andmonographs, organising conferences andseminars, networking with groups and individuals and participating in public campaigns.
JUST has friends and supporters in more than130 countries and cooperates actively withother organisations which are committed to
similar objectives in different parts of the world.
About the International Movement for aJust World (JUST)