First, find out what isn't true…

June 19, 2012

The Hasbara = Israeli propaganda. What gives Israel the right to have more defensible borders than its neighbours?


Did you know Israel has never been invaded by any state or non state entity and that no one has ever taken any Israeli territory?
That Israel has illegally acquired by war over 50% of the territory slated for the Arab state, non of which has ever been legally annexed?

Yet how many times have you read Israel’s demand for “defensible borders”?

Question: What gives Israel the right to have more defensible borders than its neighbours?

Israel is a UN Member State.

UN Charter Article 2

The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.

1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.

It’s really quite simple… Israel has no more right to defensible borders than its neighbours. The phrase does not appear in any International Law, the UN Charter or any convention. It’s Hasbara. Twaddle.

Like the Israeli demand for Palestinian recognition of the Jewish State, Israel’s demand for more secure borders has absolutely no basis in law.

Thx Mike @ occupy911truth


June 16, 2012

What is meant by “the Land of Israel” today? The Hasbara, stupid propaganda for people who don’t check


How many times have you heard the expression “the Land of Israel” referring to Israel today?

They’re weasel words, without any meaning in the eyes of the Laws and UN Charter Israel obliged itself to uphold.

Israel was “… proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947″ … to … ” become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time” It was recognized as such by the USA within minutes.

Put quite simply, the “Land of Israel” is territory sovereign to the State of Israel. The acquisition of territory by war is illegal and; as Israel has never legally annexed any territory, the “Land of Israel” is the same as it was when Israel was recognized as the Jewish people’s homeland state in 1948. I.e., before being admitted to the UN and before Israel officially claimed on the 31st Aug 1949, territory it had previously stated was “outside the State of Israel”. A claim that was rebuffed.

June 10, 2012

The Hasbara – Israeli Propaganda – Distortion 101 or how Hasbara bullsh*te is made


How many times have you read accusations like “Under Jordan’s illegal occupation Jews were prevented access to holy places for 19 years”

Let’s first dispense with the silly “Jordan’s illegal occupation” theory. Under the Israel Jordan Armistice Agreement of 1949, Israel AGREED to Jordan being the Occupying Power over the territories subsequently renamed the West Bank. Jordan agreed to Israel being the Occupying Power over territories under Israeli military control.

Israel Jordan Armistice Agreement of 1949 Article VI

1. It is agreed that the forces of the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom shall replace the forces of Iraq in the sector now held by the latter forces, the intention of the Government of Iraq in this regard having been communicated to the Acting Mediator in the message of 20 March from the Foreign Minister of Iraq authorizing the delegation of the Hashemite Jordan Kingdom to negotiate for the Iraqi forces and stating that those forces would be withdrawn.


Article II
2. It is also recognized that no provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party hereto in the ultimate peaceful settlement of the Palestine question, the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations.

Exactly how was it illegal?

The claim it was Jordan prevented Jews access to holy places for 19 years is also a fallacy. They prevented Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs! In fact, under the Armistice Agreement it was prohibited for citizens of either opposing state to cross the Armistice Demarcation lines.

Article IV

3. Rules and regulations of the armed forces of the Parties, which prohibit civilians from crossing the fighting lines or entering the area between the lines, shall remain in effect after the signing of this Agreement with application to the Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI.

It is NORMAL for states to restrict the movements of citizens of respective hostile countries and even their own citizens originally from hostile states, curtailing and/or prohibiting their ability to conduct business, buy land etc. Japanese, Germans, Italians, were interned and/or deported by the UK, USA, Australia, during WWII and their assets were frozen. Unless they have opted to take up citizenship in a country other than that of return, thereby losing their refugee status, it is also normal to release and/or allow their return and to unfreeze their assets .

The Israel’s 1948 Emergency Regulations (Foreign Travel) Ordinance still current, prevents Israeli citizens or residents from entering the territory of any entity deemed to be hostile under Israeli law. The Jordanian controlled West Bank was such a hostile entity from 1948 til 1967. So too was Gaza, under Egyptian control.

From 1948 til 1967, Israeli Emergency Regulations prevented citizens and residents, Jews, Christians and Muslims, from worshiping in territories under the military control of Jordan. Naturally Jordan and Egypt did likewise. It is normal behaviour for hostile states.

So what is the point of this Hasbara morsel? How exactly does it effect the legal status of Israel’s Sovereign extent on which UNSC resolutions are based?

Fact is, it doesn’t. It’s just propaganda. Like the claims made about Mark Twain, it is of perhaps historical interest. It has no legal bearing what so ever.

June 4, 2012

Land for Peace Israeli propaganda – The fallacy of Israel’s Land for Peace rhetoric – Read the Israel / Egypt Peace Agreement


How many times have you heard the phrase “Land For Peace”?
Or perhaps “UNSC Resolution 242 said borders must be negotiated”?

The Israel / Egypt Peace Treaty tells us three major points that contradict Israel’s stupid propaganda.

A) The purpose of UNSC Res 242 was to end hostilities between already existing UN Member states, resulting in peace agreements between those states.

B) Withdrawal by Israel from Egyptian territories was to begin BEFORE peaceful relations were assumed

C) No borders were negotiated. Egypt’s borders were set when it became an independent state, BEFORE Israel was declared.

From the Peace Treaty:

Article II Determination of Final Lines and Zones

1. In order to provide maximum security for both Parties after the final withdrawal, the lines and the Zones delineated on Map 1 are to be established and organized as follows:

until Israeli armed forces complete withdrawal from the current J and M Lines established by the Egyptian-Israeli Agreement of September 1975, hereinafter referred to as the 1975 Agreement, up to the interim withdrawal line, all military arrangements existing under that Agreement will remain in effect, except those military arrangements otherwise provided for in this Appendix.

Within a period of seven days after Israeli armed forces have evacuated any area located in Zone A…..

Within a period of seven days after Israeli armed forces have evacuated any area located in Zones A or B…

The Parties agree to remove all discriminatory barriers to normal economic relations and to terminate economic boycotts of each other upon completion of the interim withdrawal.

As soon as possible, and not later than six months after the completion of the interim withdrawal, the Parties will enter negotiations with a view to concluding an agreement on trade and commerce for the purpose of promoting beneficial economic relations.

1. The Parties agree to establish normal cultural relations following completion of the interim withdrawal.

2. They agree on the desirability of cultural exchanges in all fields, and shall, as soon as possible and not later than six months after completion of the interim withdrawal, enter into negotiations with a view to concluding a cultural agreement for this purpose.

Upon completion of the interim withdrawal, each Party will permit the free movement of the nationals and vehicles of the other into and within its territory ….etc etc

Again, from the Israeli Government:

March 26, 1979
The President,
The White House

Dear Mr. President,

I am pleased to be able to confirm that the Government of Israel is agreeable to the procedure set out in your letter of March 26, 1979, in which you state:

“I have received a letter from President Sadat that, within one month after Israel completes its withdrawal to the interim line in Sinai, as provided for in the Treaty of peace between Egypt and Israel, Egypt will send a resident ambassador to Israel and will receive in Egypt a resident Israeli ambassador.”


Menachem Begin

From the Peace Treaty:

Convinced of the urgent necessity of the establishment of a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East in accordance with Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338;

Israel was left as the Occupying Power over Palestinian territories captured during the ‘recent conflict’ (1967) and; territories occupied by Israel in 1948/49, not recognized as Israeli by any country and never legally annexed to Israel.

May 30, 2012

Hasbara. The world’s worst propaganda. Jewish settlers and the JNF purchased “territory” in Palestine


How many times have you heard “Jewish settlers and the JNF purchased “territory” in Palestine “

In the spring of 1903 JNF-KKL purchased its first parcel of land: 50 acres in Hadera with funds given as a gift by the well-known philanthropist Isaac (Yitzhak Leib) Goldberg”

“By 1905, JNF-KKL’s land holdings had expanded to include land near the Sea of Galilee, and at Ben Shemen in the center of the country”

By 1921, JNF-KKL purchases of land had quadrupled its land holdings, bringing them up to 25,000 acres”

Again, from the Israeli Land Fund:

The State of Israel today was built on land which was legally purchased by Jewish organizations such as the Jewish National Fund (JNF) and other private individuals.”

As always, the Hasbara has a gaping big hole. The Jewish National Fund trips up on its own lies. The JNF also says:

“These are not State lands

ShortLink to here

The 7% of ‘real estate/land/property’ purchased by Jewish institutions, Jewish individuals was minuscule compared to the whole amount of ‘territory’ allotted by UNGA res 181 and accepted as binding by the Jewish Agency for the Jewish State. Some 56% of Palestine in 1947/48.
‘land’ is ‘real estate’ or ‘property’ owned by civilians, companies, trusts, corporations, banks, even Government Departments & institutions. In some countries, foreign companies and Government institutions can own ‘real estate’. It is their ‘property’, however it does not give them any sovereignty over the ‘real estate / land / property’, nor does it give them any ‘territorial’ rights. (Note how the UN does not say ‘land’)

‘territory’ belongs to the legitimate citizens of the ‘territory’, whether they own ‘real estate/property’, lease or rent ‘real estate/property’ or are propertyless, homelss bums living under a bridge. It is their right to determine which state their ‘territory’ will belong. The Jewish National Fund was not a citizen of Palestine, nor did it represent legitimate citizens of Palestine 1947/48.

Israel paid NOTHING for its ‘territory’. Not one shekel, nada. Israel now sells land to Jews who are allegedly ‘returning’.

Before the US conducted a referendum amongst US representatives to annex Texas, a referendum was held amongst the legitimate citizens of Texas, whether they owned real estate, rented or leased real estate. Texas was annexed to the US on behalf of the legitimate citizens of Texas. The US annexation of Texas, Hawaii and Alaska by the legal custom of having an agreement, was eventually instrumental in that legal custom eventually passing into Customary International Law and furthermore forming some of the basis of the notion of self determination.

No such referendum has been ever been conducted on behalf of the people whose ‘territory’ was assigned to the Jewish state and the ‘territories’ Israel has occupied for 67 years. Israel has never legally annexed any territory.

Territory may be ‘restored’ to a sovereign, however it is inadmissible to ‘acquire’ territory by war. Any war!

All Members shall refrain; in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

One of the ‘Purposes of the United Nations’ is contained in the UN Charter

CHAPTER XI: DECLARATION REGARDING NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES – Article 73 Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end:.. etc etc

By occupying Palestinian territory “outside the State of Israel”, Israel has assumed responsibility for its administration.

May 28, 2012

The Hasbara. World’s worst propaganda – United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 was not binding and is irrelevant because the Arabs rejected it


How many times have you heard “the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 was not binding and is irrelevant because the Arabs rejected it”

Friday, 5 March 1948 Rabbi Silver stated to the UNSC

“Nevertheless, reluctantly but loyally, we accepted the decision which appeared fair and reasonable to the United Nations”

“We feel under the obligation to make our position unmistakably clear. As far as the Jewish people are concerned, they have accepted the decision of the United Nations. We regard it as binding, and we are resolved to move forward in the spirit of that decision. “

Friday, 19 March 1948 Rabbi Silver replacing Mr. Shertok at the Council table as representative of the Jewish Agency for Palestine stated

“We are under the obligation at this time to repeat what we stated at a [262nd meeting] meeting of the Security Council last week: The decision of the General Assembly remains valid for the Jewish people. We have accepted it and we are prepared to abide by it. If the United Nations Palestine Commission is unable to carry out the mandates which were assigned to it by the General Assembly, the Jewish people of Palestine will move forward in the spirit of that resolution and will do everything which is dictated by considerations of national survival and by considerations of justice and historic rights.”

“The setting up of one State was not made conditional upon the setting up of the other State.”

And again:
Security Council S/PV.271 19 March 1948 The representative of the Jewish Agency, Rabbi Silver:

The statement that the plan proposed by the General Assembly is an integral plan which cannot succeed unless each of its parts can be carried out, is incorrect. This conception was never part of the plan. Indeed, it is contrary to the statement made by the representative of the United States during the second session of the General Assembly. The setting up of one State was not made conditional upon the setting up of the other State. Mr. Herschel Johnson, representing the United States delegation, speaking in a sub-committee of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question on 28 October 1947, stated, in discussing this very matter in connexion with economic union: “The element of mutuality would not necessarily be a factor, as the document might be signed by one party only.”

UNGA res 181 is enshrined in the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel

Someone is lying … You decide

August 30, 2011

Google Earth Overlay Israel Palestine, Google Earth Overlay of Israeli borders, Israel borders overlay for Google Earth, Map of Israel Google Earth


It’s simple. Territory confirmed by the Government of Israel on the 22nd May 1948 as “outside of the state of Israel”, is not Israeli

BIG detailed Google Earth Overlay
of Israel’s borders and;
by default, what is not Israeli.
Google Earth Overlay Israel Palestine, Google Earth Overlay of Israeli borders, Israel borders overlay for Google Earth
Includes the UNGA text.
Load the kmz file into Google Earth
then use the properties in the left hand column
to vary the transparency
Israel did not define its borders in 1948 = a ghastly LIE!

Israeli Government statement made on the 22nd May 1948 to the UNSC AFTER declaring, AFTER being recognized :

"the above areas, outside the territory of the State of Israel, are under the control of the military authorities of the State of Israel, who are strictly adhering to international regulations in this regard"

"the Government of the State of Israel operates in parts of Palestine outside the territory of the State of Israel"

"sallies beyond the frontiers of the State"

"the above operations in areas outside the State of Israel"

"No area outside of Palestine is under Jewish occupation but sallies beyond the frontiers of the State of Israel have occasionally been carried out by Jewish forces for imperative military reasons, and as a part of an essentially defensive plan"

The document shows us that:
A) Israel did have borders, acknowledged by the Israeli Government in 1948
B) It acknowledges two separate entities. The State of Israel and Palestine (outside the territories of the State of Israel)
C) It acknowledges that Israeli forces were operating in Palestinian territory, i.e., what remained of Palestine outside of Israel
D) It acknowledges territories under Israeli military control. Which meant they were occupied according to the “international regulations” at the time, the Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV); October 18, 1907 Art. 42 SECTION III

Large copy of the map used in Google Earth

Other Maps relating to the Israeli Palestine conflict. Areas never legally annexed by Israel.

Palestine pre – 1900
Maps from the Jewish National and University Library

Map of Mark Twain’s journey Through predominantly arid regions, in the middle of summer. Includes quotations from Twain’s ‘Innocents Abroad’ and other authors pre-dating Twain

December 18, 2010

WikiLeaks. An uninformed democracy can only vote in ignorance

Filed under: It's Our World Too! — Tags: , , , , , , , — talknic @ 4:34 pm

The Internal Organizational Structure of Wikileaks: Record of Wikileaks Email Exchanges

Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2006 20:42:37 +1100
This is a restricted internal development mailinglist for w-i-k-i-l-e-a-k-s-.-o-r-g. Please do not mention that word directly in these discussions; refer instead to ‘WL’. This list is housed at, an activist collective in Seattle with an established lawyer and plenty of backbone.
Dear Mr. Ellsberg.
We have followed with interest and delight your recent statements on
document leaking.
We have come to the conclusion that fomenting a world wide movement of
mass leaking is the most cost effective political intervention
available to us* We believe that injustice is answered by good
governance and for there to be good governance there must be open
governance. Governance by stealth is governance by conspiracy and
fear. Fear, because without it, secrecy does not last for long.
Retired generals and diplomats are vociferous, but those in active
service hold their tune.
Lord Action said, “Everything secret degenerates, even the
administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it
can bear discussion and publicity”.
This degeneration comes about because when injustice is concealed,
including plans for future injustice, it cannot be addressed. When
governance is closed, man’s eyes become cataracts. When governance is
open, man can see and so act to move the world towards a more just

Need one say more?

December 16, 2010

Israel has no fixed borders? On May 22 1948 Israel confirmed it’s borders in a letter to the UNSC. The Hasbara does not explain, it justifies the usurping of the Palestinians

…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the actual Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel, then by default it is the territory of what remained of Palestine on May 15th 1948. Non-self Governing Territories fall under the protection of the UN Charter Chapt XI…


How many times have you heard the notion that Israel has no borders with Palestine? According to the Provisional Israeli Government’s May 15th 1948 plea for recognition, the State of Israel was declared

“within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947,”

Israel was immediately recognized as such by the US followed by Russia and; recognized as such by the majority of the International Community of Nations before being accepted into the UN and; the extent of Israel’s sovereignty was confirmed by the Israeli Government in a statement to the UNSC on 22nd May 1948, before Israel was accepted into the UN as declared and recognized, before the Armistice Agreements and; before Israel made the first claims to territories the Israeli Government stated (n 22nd May ’48) were “outside the territory of the State of Israel”.

On May 15th 1948 the extent of Israel’s Sovereign territories were clearly defined in the Israeli Government’s official plea for recognition to the President of the USA.

May 15, 1948 Letter From the Agent of the Provisional Government of Israel to the President of the United States, “MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have the honor to notify you that the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time.”

The US immediately recognized Israel as such. No more, no less. The British also recognized Israel as such and considered non-declared territories under Israel’s control by the time of British recognition, as occupied.

On May 22nd 1948 the extent of Israel’s Sovereign territories were clearly stated again in the Israeli Government’s Reply to the UNSC.

May 22, 1948 The reply of the Provisional Government of Israel UNSC S/766 to the questions addressed to the “Jewish authorities in Palestine” was transmitted by the acting representative of Israel at the United Nations on May 22.

“at present over the entire area of the Jewish State as defined in the Resolution of the General Assembly of the 29th November, 1947. In addition, the Provisional Government exercises control over the city of Jaffa; Northwestern Galilee, including Acre, Zib, Base, and the Jewish settlements up to the Lebanese frontier; a strip of territory alongside the road from Hilda to Jerusalem; almost all of new Jerusalem; and of the Jewish quarter within the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem. The above areas, outside the territory of the State of Israel, are under the control of the military authorities of the State of Israel, who are strictly adhering to international regulations in this regard [1]. The Southern Negev is uninhabited desert over which no effective authority has ever existed.”

The Israeli Govt goes on to use these phrases in the document:

“the Government of the State of Israel operates in parts of Palestine outside the territory of the State of Israel” — “outside the area of the State” — “beyond the frontiers of the State of Israel”

Four instances where the Israeli Government, after having declared and been recognized, acknowledged limits to it’s territory. aka Borders, delineating the state of Israel from Palestine!

On 12 Aug 1948 an Israeli Government Proclamation says Jerusalem was “occupied”.

Jerusalem Declared Israel-Occupied City- by Israeli Government Proclamation 12 Aug 1948.


[1] “international regulations” at the time say;

Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV); October 18, 1907 Art. 42 SECTION III
“Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised. “

On June 15, 1949, Israel’s position on its frontiers, statement to the Knesset by Foreign Minister Sharett.

June 15, 1949 Israel-s position on its frontiers VOLUMES 1-2: 1947-1974
“As for the frontier between the State of Israel and the area west of the Jordan which is not included in Israel…”

ShortLink to this section
On the 31st Aug 1949 Israel made it’s first official claim to territories beyond the extent of its sovereign frontiers. After accepting UNGA resolution without registering any reservations. After declaring Israel Independent of any other entity including Palestine, per the borders of UNGA Res 181 and; enshrining UNGA Resolution in the Declaration. After being recognized as asked & declared. After confirming what was “outside the territory of the State of Israel” to the UNSC and by proclamation declaring Jerusalem “Israeli-Occupied”. After being accepted into the UN, as recognized and based on the Israeli Government statements to the UNSC prior to the UNSC recommendation. Israel’s claim was rebuffed, citing the Armistice Agreements, specifically the Armistice Demarcation Line is not to “be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary”.

UN Charter

Chapt XI DECLARATION REGARDING NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES . Israeli Declaration “Israel…will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations May 14th 1948.

Under the UN charter, the acquisition of territory by war is inadmissible. The only manner in which territory can be acquired is by legal annexation. Israel has never legally annexed any territory

Consecutive Israeli Governments have been LYING to it’s own citizens and the world for 62 years.

Contrary to the opinions on why the British took so long to recognize Israel, the British waited until an Israeli Government was elected and waited until Israel was accepted into the UN as Declared and as recognized by the majority of Nations. The British also took into consideration the statements by the Israeli Government, granting de jure recognition of State and elected Government, with conditions.

ISRAEL (GOVERNMENT DECISION) HC Deb 27 April 1950 vol 474 cc1137-41 “His Majesty’s Government have also decided to accord de jure recognition to the State of Israel, subject to explanations on two points corresponding to those described above in regard to the case of Jordan. These points are as follows. First, that His Majesty’s Government are unable to recognise the sovereignty of Israel over that part of Jerusalem which she occupies, though, pending a final determination of the status of the area, they recognise that Israel exercises de facto authority in it. Secondly, that His Majesty’s Government cannot regard the present boundaries between Israel, and Egypt, Jordan, Syria and the Lebanon as constituting the definitive frontiers of Israel, as these boundaries were laid 1139 down in the Armistice Agreements concluded severally between Israel and each of these States, and are subject to any modifications which may be agreed upon under the terms of those Agreements, or of any final settlements which may replace them.”

Nothing has yet replaced them. Israel has never legally annexed any territory to the “frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947”. It’s two attempts at annexation were condemned by UNSC Res 252 (+ 5 reminders) and UNSC Res 497, the Golan.


These territories, “outside the territory of the State of Israel”, acquired by war, confirmed by the Israeli Government as occupied and never legally annexed to Israel, are quite simply not sovereign to Israel. As Professor Stephen M. Schwebel, after leaving office as a Judge of International Court of Justice, explains (citing Elihu Lauterpacht), a sovereign can ‘restore’ it’s own sovereign territory by war. It cannot ‘acquire’ territory by war.

Israel has never had to ‘restore’ any sovereign territory, it has never had any sovereign Israeli territory taken from it. In fact, failing to reach a peaceful settlement under Chapt VI of the UN Charter, Syria has a right to ‘restore’ the Golan by war. Likewise Egypt had the same right over the Sinai.

Detailed Partition Map.
Overlay for Google Earth with borders marked according to text of UNGA Res 181 (included)
1947 Partition Google Earth Overlay

September 18, 2010

If Israel legally annexes territories after this round of negotiations, it will tell us two major realities.

…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel,
then it’s a territory of Palestine…


Perhaps the most ironic outcome would be were Israel to legally annex ANY territories in a negotiated outcome.

It would

A) Quite clearly show that all along those territories were NEVER actually sovereign to Israel, thereby dispelling the twaddle peddled by those who say it is already Israeli territory.

B) Quite clearly show the generosity of the Palestinian people by forgoing the right to all their territory in order to have peace and perhaps, if they wish, declare a state or independent sovereignty.

Meanwhile., no one can force a people to accept a deal that is less than their rights. Nor can they be forced to declare statehood with anything less that their rightful territories. It’s up to the OCCUPYING Power, as a TRUSTee, to recognize those rights.

In the end the only way the Palestinians can have a state, is when occupation ends.

The declaration of the State of Israel ONLY came into effect AFTER the British Mandate (occupation as a TRUSTee) ENDED . INDEPENDENCE. Look it up. …

September 7, 2010

Is one half of Israel only worth $50 billion?

…It’s actually quite simple. If it hasn’t been legally annexed to, or isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel,
then it’s a territory of what is left of Palestine after the existing states have defined their boundaries in order to be recognized as independent of Palestine….

Shortlink –

Haaretz – Tue, September 07, 2010 Egypt FM: Palestinians could get $50 billion in compensation under peace deal

Within the comments we can read comparisons to the Arab states expelling Jewish folk post 1948 or Germany’s Holocaust reparations and the illegal acquisition of territories of Palestine by Israel. They reflect the complete mis-understanding of the two situations. I do not agree with ANY of the parties actions BTW.

‘real estate’ and ‘territories’ are two quite different things. ‘real estate’ is bought and sold to and by private individuals, corporations, institutions (even state institutions), this does not make it the ‘territory’ of the buyer. ‘territory’ is the stuff of states and/or entities.

Germany and the Arab States confiscated ‘real estate’ belonging to Jewish folk living in their respective state ‘territories’. Israel on the other hand, has illegally acquired some 50% of the ‘territory’ of Palestine. This is roughly equivalent to 50% of the actual Sovereign Territories of Israel itself. Would you value 50% of Israel at only $50 billion?

I doubt anyone in their right mind would. Yet for some folk, it’s an amount too much for the ‘p’alestinians for the equivalent territory. Amazing!

January 29, 2010

A comparison of UN speeches Netinyahu / Ahmadjinedad. Lies and Fear vs Common Sense!

…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel,
then it’s a territory of Palestine…

There are 36 lies in Netinyahu's speech. Numerous straw man arguments. It ignores International Law. In it's entirety it is a virtual repeat of the last 62 years of Zionist fallacies and fear mongering, indoctrinated, propaganda.

ShortLink (including full commentary)
Netanyahu's speech at the UN General Assembly 24th September 2009 - full text

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland. I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people. The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events. Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth. 1

Yesterday the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie. 2

Last month, I went to a villa in a suburb of Berlin called Wannsee. There, on January 20, 1942, after a hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided how to exterminate the Jewish people. The detailed minutes of that meeting have been preserved by successive German governments. Here is a copy of those minutes, in which the Nazis issued precise instructions on how to carry out the extermination of the Jews. Is this a lie? A day before I was in Wannsee, I was given in Berlin the original construction plans for the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. Those plans are signed by Hitler?s deputy, Heinrich Himmler himself. Here is a copy of the plans for Auschwitz-Birkenau, where one million Jews were murdered. Is this too a lie? This June, President Obama visited the Buchenwald concentration camp. Did President Obama pay tribute to a lie? And what of the Auschwitz survivors whose arms still bear the tattooed numbers branded on them by the Nazis? Are those tattoos a lie? One-third of all Jews perished in the conflagration. Nearly every Jewish family was affected, including my own. My wife's grandparents, her father?s two sisters and three brothers, and all the aunts, uncles and cousins were all murdered by the Nazis. Is that also a lie?

( The above straw man argument is based on the belief that Ahmadjinidad denied the Holocaust. He actually asked why, if the Holocaust took place in Europe, are the Palestinians were paying for it. That is indeed a myth of the Holocaust. Having laid a bed of straw, Netinyahu goes on... )

Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium. To those who refused to come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you brought honor to your countries. But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame? Have you no decency?

A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state. ( Predicted the Zionist regime in Jerusalem would end ) 3

What a disgrace! What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations. 4

Perhaps some of you think that this man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews. You're wrong. History has shown us time and again that what starts with attacks on the Jews eventually ends up engulfing many others. 5 / 6

This Iranian regime is fueled by an extreme fundamentalism that burst onto the world scene three decades ago after lying dormant for centuries. In the past thirty years, this fanaticism has swept the globe with a murderous violence and cold-blooded impartiality in its choice of victims. It has callously slaughtered Moslems and Christians, Jews and Hindus, and many others. Though it is comprised of different offshoots, the adherents of this unforgiving creed seek to return humanity to medieval times. 7 Wherever they can, they impose a backward regimented society where women, minorities, gays or anyone not deemed to be a true believer is brutally subjugated. 8

The struggle against this fanaticism does not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization. It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death. 9

The primitivism of the 9th century ought to be no match for the progress of the 21st century. The allure of freedom, the power of technology, the reach of communications should surely win the day. Ultimately, the past cannot triumph over the future. And the future offers all nations magnificent bounties of hope. The pace of progress is growing exponentially. It took us centuries to get from the printing press to the telephone, decades to get from the telephone to the personal computer, and only a few years to get from the personal computer to the internet. What seemed impossible a few years ago is already outdated, and we can scarcely fathom the changes that are yet to come. We will crack the genetic code. We will cure the incurable. We will lengthen our lives. We will find a cheap alternative to fossil fuels and clean up the planet. I am proud that my country Israel is at the forefront of these advances, by leading innovations in science and technology, medicine and biology, agriculture and water, energy and the environment. These innovations the world over offer humanity a sunlit future of unimagined promise 10

But if the most primitive fanaticism can acquire the most deadly weapons, the march of history could be reversed for a time. And like the belated victory over the Nazis, the forces of progress and freedom will prevail only after an horrific toll of blood and fortune has been exacted from mankind. That is why the greatest threat facing the world today is the marriage between religious fanaticism and the weapons of mass destruction. 11

The most urgent challenge facing this body is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Are the member states of the United Nations up to that challenge? Will the international community confront a despotism that terrorizes its own people as they bravely stand up for freedom? Will it take action against the dictators who stole an election in broad daylight and gunned down Iranian protesters who died in the streets choking in their own blood? 12

Will the international community thwart the world's most pernicious sponsors and practitioners of terrorism? 13

Above all, will the international community stop the terrorist regime of Iran from developing atomic weapons, thereby endangering the peace of the entire world? 14

The people of Iran are courageously standing up to this regime. People of goodwill around the world stand with them, as do the thousands who have been protesting outside this hall. Will the United Nations stand by their side?

Ladies and Gentlemen, the jury is still out on the United Nations, and recent signs are not encouraging. Rather than condemning the terrorists and their Iranian patrons, some here have condemned their victims. That is exactly what a recent UN report on Gaza did, falsely equating the terrorists with those they targeted. 15

For eight long years, Hamas fired from Gaza thousands of missiles, mortars and rockets on nearby Israeli cities. 16

Year after year, as these missiles were deliberately hurled at our civilians, not a single UN resolution was passed condemning those criminal attacks. 17 We heard nothing, absolutely nothing, from the UN Human Rights Council, a misnamed institution if there ever was one. 18

In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza. 19 It dismantled 21 settlements 20 and uprooted over 8,000 Israelis. We didn't get peace. Instead we got an Iranian backed terror base fifty miles from Tel Aviv. Life in Israeli towns and cities next to Gaza became a nightmare. 21

You see, the Hamas rocket attacks not only continued, they increased tenfold. Again, the UN was silent 22

Finally, after eight years of this unremitting assault, Israel was finally forced to respond. 23 Israel chose to respond differently. Faced with an enemy committing a double war crime of firing on civilians while hiding behind civilians, Israel sought to conduct surgical strikes against the rocket launchers. That was no easy task because the terrorists were firing missiles from homes and schools, using mosques as weapons depots and ferreting explosives in ambulances. Israel, by contrast, tried to minimize casualties by urging Palestinian civilians to vacate the targeted areas. We dropped countless flyers over their homes, sent thousands of text messages and called thousands of cell phones asking people to leave. Never has a country gone to such extraordinary lengths to remove the enemy's civilian population from harm's way. 24

Yet faced with such a clear case of aggressor and victim, who did the UN Human Rights Council decide to condemn? Israel. A democracy legitimately defending itself against terror is morally hanged, drawn and quartered, and given an unfair trial to boot. By these twisted standards, the UN Human Rights Council would have dragged Roosevelt and Churchill to the dock as war criminals. What a perversion of truth. What a perversion of justice. 25

Delegates of the United Nations, Will you accept this farce? Because if you do, the United Nations would revert to its darkest days, when the worst violators of human rights sat in judgment against the law-abiding democracies.... 26 ....when Zionism was equated with racism and when an automatic majority could declare that the earth is flat. 27t If this body does not reject this report, it would send a message to terrorists everywhere: Terror pays; if you launch your attacks from densely populated areas, you will win immunity. And in condemning Israel, this body would also deal a mortal blow to peace. 28 Here's why. When Israel left Gaza, many hoped that the missile attacks would stop. Others believed that at the very least, Israel would have international legitimacy to exercise its right of self-defense. What legitimacy? What self-defense? 29

The same UN that cheered Israel as it left Gaza and promised to back our right of self-defense now accuses us, my people, my country of war crimes? And for what? For acting responsibly in self-defense. What a travesty! 30 Israel justly defended itself against terror. This biased and unjust report is a clear-cut test for all governments. Will you stand with Israel or will you stand with the terrorists? We must know the answer to that question now. Now and not later. Because if Israel is again asked to take more risks for peace, we must know today that you will stand with us tomorrow. Only if we have the confidence that we can defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace. 31 Ladies and Gentlemen, All of Israel wants peace. Any time an Arab leader genuinely wanted peace with us, we made peace. We made peace with Egypt led by Anwar Sadat. 32 We made peace with Jordan led by King Hussein. 33 And if the Palestinians truly want peace, I and my government, and the people of Israel, will make peace. But we want a genuine peace, a defensible peace, a permanent peace. In 1947, this body voted to establish two states for two peoples, a Jewish state and an Arab state. 34

The Jews accepted that resolution. ( and the borders it recommended ) The Arabs rejected it. We ask the Palestinians to finally do what they have refused to do for 62 years. Say yes to a Jewish state. Just as we are asked to recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, the Palestinians must be asked to recognize the nation state of the Jewish people. ( There is no legal requirement ) The Jewish people are not foreign conquerors in the Land of Israel. 35 This is the land of our forefathers. ( It is also the land of other peoples' forefathers ) Inscribed on the walls outside this building is the great Biblical vision of peace: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation. They shall learn war no more." These words were spoken by the Jewish prophet Isaiah 2,800 years ago as he walked in my country, in my city, in the hills of Judea and in the streets of Jerusalem.

We are not strangers to this land. It is our homeland. As deeply connected as we are to this land, we recognize that the Palestinians also live there and want a home of their own. We want to live side by side with them, two free peoples living in peace, prosperity and dignity. 36 But we must have security. The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves except those handful of powers that could endanger Israel. ( They'd be nothing more than a protectorate ) That is why a Palestinian state must be effectively demilitarized. We don't want another Gaza, another Iranian backed terror base abutting Jerusalem and perched on the hills a few kilometers from Tel Aviv. ( Why are Hamas using home made Qassams, antiquated small arms and simple mortars and the occasional RUSSIAN made Grad? ) We want peace. I believe such a peace can be achieved. But only if we roll back the forces of terror, led by Iran, that seek to destroy peace, eliminate Israel and overthrow the world order. The question facing the international community is whether it is prepared to confront those forces or accommodate them. Over seventy years ago, Winston Churchill lamented what he called the "confirmed unteachability of mankind," the unfortunate habit of civilized societies to sleep until danger nearly overtakes them. Churchill bemoaned what he called the "want of foresight, the unwillingness to act when action will be simple and effective, the lack of clear thinking, the confusion of counsel until emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong." I speak here today in the hope that Churchill's assessment of the "unteachibility of mankind" is for once proven wrong. I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history -- that we can prevent danger in time.

In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good courage. Let us confront this peril, secure our future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for generations to come.

Commentary : Israel
When a country believes it's own propaganda, it's in deep shite! 'Rockets target Israeli cities in Southern Israel' blare the headlines. Yet Israel has never annexed ANY of the territories it illegally acquired by war by 1949, North or South. Netinyahu must surely know which territories the state of Israel has annexed!

So what exactly is he talking about? What Israel has illegally taken. That which is not it's own!

Illegally acquired territory in the north, never legally annexed
illegally acquired territory in the north, never annexed
Illegally acquired territory in the south, never annexed
illegally acquired territory in the south, never annexed

And of course East Jerusalem, NOT legally annexed.

Commentary : Iran
I cannot put up a map for all the territory Iran has taken in the last 62 years and although Iran no doubt supports it's Muslim brothers in their struggles and although it was a bit long winded and had religious over tones, Ahmadjinedad's speech contains no spite, hatred or more importantly, fearmongering!

Apart from the religious aspects and a little exaggeration on Iran's behalf, I can find nothing dis-agreeable, threatening or Antisemitic and unlike Netinyahu's speech, there are no lies. The West HAS interfered in the M East for over a century, the US for at least 50 years. We were taught (in Australia) to be proud of the British efforts in the M East in school. It was all good for the British Commonwealth.

ShortLink (including full commentary)

Ahmadinejad's Speech at the UN General Assembly 23rd September 2009 - full text

In the name of God the Compassionate, the Merciful All praise Be to Allah, the Lord of the Universe and peace and blessing be upon our Master and prophet Mohammad and his pure household and his noble Companions. Oh, god, hasten the arrival of Imam Al- Mahdi and grant him good health and victory and make us his followers and those who attest to his rightfulness. (see below for his expansion of what is meant by 'the arrival of Imam Al- Mahdi'

President, dear Colleagues, Ladies and gentlemen, I thank the Almighty God for granting me once again, the opportunity to address this important International forum. I wish at the outset, to begin by congratulating you for having assumed the presidency of the 64th Session of the UN General Assembly and wish every the success for your efforts. I also extend my thanks to His Excellency Mr. Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, President of the 63rd Session of the General Assembly, for his excellent stewardship of the work of the General Assembly during his term.

Dear Colleagues, over the past four years I have spoken about the main challenges facing our world. I have discussed the roots and underlying causes of these challenges and the need for world powers to review their outlook and workout new mechanisms to address the pressing International problems before us. I have talked about the two conflicting outlooks prevailing in our world, one that is based on the predominance of its materialistic interests, through spreading inequality and oppression, poverty and deprivation, aggression, occupation and deception and tends to bring the entire world under its control and impose its will on other nations. This outlook has produced nothing but frustration, disappointment and a dark future for the entire humanity.

The other outlook is the one that spouses with the belief in the oneness of the Almighty God, follows the teaching of His messengers, respects human dignity and seeks to build a secure world for all members of the human community, in which everybody can equally enjoy the blessings of sustainable peace and spirituality. This latter is an outlook that respects all human beings, nations, and valuable cultures in defiance of all types of discrimination in the world and commits itself into a constant fight to promote equality for all before the law on the basis of justice and fraternity, laying a solid foundation to guarantee equal access for all human beings in their quest to excel in knowledge and in science. I have laid emphasis time and again on the need to make fundamental changes in the current outlook towards the world and the human being in order to be able to create a brighter tomorrow.

Friends and Colleagues. Today, I wish to share with you a few points about the changes that should take place.

First. Clearly, the continuation of the current circumstances in the world is impossible. The current inequitable and unfavorable conditions run counter to the very nature of human kind and move in a direction which contravenes the truth and the goal behind the creation of the world. It is no longer possible to inject thousands of billions of dollars of unreal wealth to the world economy, simply by printing worthless paper assets, or transferring inflation as well as social and economic problems to others through creating severe budget deficits. The engine of unbridled capitalism with its unfair system of thought has reached the end of road and is unable to move. The era of capitalist thinking and the imposition of one's thoughts on the international community, intended to predominate the world in the name of globalization and the age of setting up empires is over. It is no longer possible to humiliate nations and impose double standard policies on the world community.

It is necessary to de-legitimize and reject any approach which give the realization of the interests of certain powers as the only measurement of democracy and uses despicable forces of intimidation and deceit under the mantle of freedom or democratic practice and approaches that allow dictators to be portrayed as democrats lack legitimacy and should be rejected. The time has come to an end for those who define democracy and freedom and set standards while they themselves are the first who violate its fundamental principles. They can no longer be both in fact the judge and the executor and (they?) challenge the real democratically established governments. So I would like to say again, the time has come for a group of people who believe that they alone can define concepts such as democracy and freedom and hold up the criteria for these definitions while simultaneously violating the very principles to which they aspire. Governments can continue which are based on the rule of people.

The awakening of nations and the expansion of freedom worldwide will no longer allow others to continue their hypocrisy and vicious attitudes. Because of these reasons, most nations including the people of the Untied States, are waiting for real and profound changes. They have welcomed and will continue to welcome changes.

How can one imagine that the inhuman policies in Palestine may continue to force the entire population of a country out of their homeland for more than 60 years by resorting to force and coercion. To attack them with all types of arms and at times even prohibited weapons. To deny them of their legitimate right of self-defense, while much to the surprise of the international community calling the occupiers peace lovers and portraying the victims as terrorists. How can the crimes of the occupiers against defenseless women and children and destruction of their homes, farms, hospitals and schools be supported unconditionally by certain governments and at the same time, the oppressed men and women be subject to the heaviest economic blockade which denies their basic needs, food, water and medicine and leads to genocide. They are not allowed to rebuild their homes even which were destroyed during the 22-day barbaric attacks by the Zionist regime, as winter was approaching. Whereas the aggressors and their supporters deceitfully continue their rhetoric in defense of human rights, in order to put others under pressure.

It is un-acceptable that a small minority should dominate the politics, economy and culture of vast parts of the world a complicated complicated network and establish a new form of slavery and harm the reputation of other nations, even European nations and the United States to attain its racist ambitions. It is not acceptable that some who are several thousands of kilometers away from the Middle East would send their troops for military intervention and for spreading war, bloodshed, aggression, terror and intimidation in the Middle East, in our region, while blaming the protests of nations in the region, that are concerned about their fate and their national security, as a move against peace and as interference in others' affairs.

Such perspectives are baffling, look at the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is no longer possible to bring a country under military occupation in the name of fight against terrorism or drug trafficking while the production of illicit drugs has multiplied, terrorism has widened its dimensions and has tightened its grips. Thousands of innocent people have been killed, injured or displaced, infrastructures have been destroyed and regional security has been seriously jeopardized and those who have created the current disastrous situation continue to blame others. How you can speak of friendship and solidarity with other nations while you expand your military bases in different parts of the world including in Latin America. This situation cannot continue. It is all the more impossible to advance expansionist and inhuman policies on the basis of a militaristic logic. The logic of coercion and intimidation will produce dire consequences, exacerbating the present global problems.

It is not acceptable that the military budget of some governments exceeds far larger (than) those of the entire countries of the world. There are those who export billions of dollars of arms annually, stockpile chemical and biological weapons, as well as nuclear Weapons. Establish military bases or have military presence in other countries while accusing others of militarism and mobilize all their resources in the world to impede the scientific and technological progress of other nations under the pretext of countering arms proliferation. It is not acceptable that the United Nations and the Security Council, whose decisions should represent all nations and governments through applying democratic measures of decision making, popular methods of decision making, be dominated by a few governments who seek to serve their own interests. Principally in a world where cultures, thoughts and public opinion should be the determining factors. The continuation of the present situation is impossible, and fundamental changes seem to be unavoidable. We seek to establish a new system. A new world system.

Second. Any change must be structural, theoretical and practical, involving all domains of life. Outdated mechanisms which themselves were instrumental in and the root cause for present problems in human societies, can never be used to bring change and create our desired world. Liberalism and capitalism, especially of the nature that seeks to dominate the world and alienates human beings from heavenly and moral values will never bring happiness for humanity, because they are the main source of all misfortune, wars, poverty and deprivation.

We have all seen that the inequitable economic structures controlled by certain political interest groups were used to plunder national wealth of countries simply for the benefit of a group of corrupt businesses. Present structures therefore are incapable of reforming the challenges before us. The political and economic structures created after World War II that were based on intentions to dominate the world, in brief, failed to promote justice and lasting security. Rulers whose hearts do not beat for the love of humankind and who sacrificed the spirit of justice in their minds never can offer the promise of peace and friendship to humanity. By the grace of God, Marxism is gone. It is now history and the unhindered expansion Capitalism too will certainly have the same fate. Because based on the divine traditions referred to as a principle in the Holy Quran, the wrong like the bubbles on the surface of water and will disappear. There remains only what that can be used forever towards the interest of human societies. We must therefore all remain vigilant to prevent the pursuit of colonialism, discriminatory and inhuman goals under the pretext of the slogans for change or and in new formats. The world needs to undergo fundamental changes and all must engage collectively to make them happen in the right way and through such efforts no one and no government would consider itself an exception to change or superior to others and try to impose its will on others by proclaiming world leadership.

Third. All problems that exist in our world today emanate from the fact that rulers have distanced themselves from human values, morality and the teachings of divine messengers. Regrettably, in the current state of international relations, selfishness and insatiable greed have taken the place of such humanitarian concepts as love, sacrifice, dignity and justice. The belief in the One God has been replaced with self belief. Some have taken the place of God and insist to impose their values and wishes on others. Lies have taken the place of honesty, hypocrisy has replaced integrity and selfishness has taken the place of sacrifice. Deception in interactions is called foresight these days and statesmanship. Looting the wealth of other nations is called development efforts, occupation is introduced as a gift towards promotion of freedom and democracy, and defenseless nations are subjected to repression in the name of defending human rights.

Friends and Colleagues. The resolution of global problems and administration of justice and maintenance of peace will only be materialized with collective determination and cooperation of all nations and states. The time to polarizing the world on the premises of the hegemony or domination of a few governments is over. Today we must rise together in a collective commitment against the present challenges, we must take change seriously and help others through collective work to return to basic moral and human values.

Messengers were sent by God to show the light of the truth to mankind, they came to make people aware of their individual and social obligations. Piety, having faith in Allah and its judgment of human behavior in the next world, in the belief in the primacy of justice in both lives, seeking one's happiness, well being and security in the happiness, well-being and security of others, respecting human kind, making efforts to expand love and compassion against hostility, were all on top of the teachings offered by the Messengers of God, his divine messengers from Adam to Noah, from Noah to Abraham, Moses, Jesus Christ and the last Prophet Mohammad, may peace be upon all of them. All of them came to eliminate war and ignorance, to eradicate poverty and uproot discrimination in order to spread happiness in the entire world. They are the best gifts that God Almighty has granted to human beings. If the belief in Entezar or, in other words, awaiting patiently for justice to return to earth, will turn into a common goal and we join hands to achieve prosperity for all, then there will be more real and increasing hope for reform.

Fourth. In my opinion, we have several important agendas in front of us. The Secretary-General and the UN General Assembly can take the lead by undertaking necessary measures for the fulfillment of our shared goals on the basis of the following:
1 - Restructuring the United Nations in order to transform this world body to an efficient and fully democratic organization, capable of playing an impartial, equitable, and effective role in international relations, reforming the structure of the Security Council, specially by abolishing the discriminatory privilege of veto right, restoration of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people by organizing a referendum and free elections in Palestine in order to prepare a conducive environment for all Palestinian populations, including Muslims, Christians and Jews to live together in peace and harmony, putting an end to all types of interferences in the affairs of Iraq, Afghanistan, Middle East, and in all countries in Africa, Latin America, Asia and Europe.

My friends, as our great Prophet said, a government may survive with blasphemy, but never with oppression. Oppression against Palestinians and the violation of their rights still continue. A new group of Palestinians who lived in al-Qod al-Sharif were again forced out of their homes as the destruction of their residential homes continues by the occupiers and usurpers. Bombings in Afghanistan and Pakistan have not yet stopped and the Guantanamo Prison has not yet been shut down and, there are still secret prisons in Europe.

Continuation of the present situation adds to hostilities and violence. Oppression and military aggression must be stopped. Regrettably, official reports concerning the brutalities of the Zionist regime in Gaza have not all been completely published. The Secretary-General and the United Nations have crucial responsibilities in this respect and the international community is impatiently waiting for the punishment of the aggressors and the murderers of the defenseless people of Gaza.

2- Reforming the current economic structures and setting up a new international economic order based on human and moral values and obligations. A new course is needed in fact that would help promote justice and progress worldwide, by flourishing the potentials and talents of all nations, thus bringing well-being for all and for future generations.
3- Reforming the international political relations based on the promotion of lasting peace and friendship, eradication of arms race and elimination of all nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. To pave the way for all nations to have access to advanced and peaceful technologies for the advancement of human beings.
4- Reforming cultural structures, respect for diverse customs and traditions of all nations, fostering moral values and spirituality aimed at strengthening the institution of a warm family which is the backbone of all human societies.
5- Worldwide efforts to protect the environment and full observance of the international agreements and arrangements to prevent the annihilation of nature's non-renewable resources.

Fifth. Our nation has successfully gone through a glorious and fully democratic election, opening a new chapter for our country in the march towards national progress and enhanced international interactions. They entrusted me once more with a large majority, with this heavy responsibility. And now, I want to declare that our great nation that has made great contribution to the world civilization, and the Islamic Republic of Iran, as one of the most democratic and progressive governments in the world, is ready to mobilize all its cultural, political and economic capabilities to engage in a constructive process aimed at addressing the international concerns and challenges, and confronting the challenges that face human society.

Our country that builds cultures has been a main victim of terrorism itself, blind form terrorism and the target of an all-out military aggression during the first decade of it's revolution. All through the past thirty years we have been subject to hostile attitudes of those who once supported with all their might Saddam's military aggression and his use of chemical weapons against us and then, decided another day and time, to take military action in Iraq to get of the same man.

Today, our nation seeks to create a world in which justice and compassion prevail. We announce our commitment to participate in the process of building durable peace and security worldwide for all nations, based on based on justice, spirituality and human dignity, while being dedicated to strongly defending our legitimate and legal rights. To materialize these goals, our nation is prepared to warmly shake all those hands which are honestly extended to us. No nation can claim to be free from the need to change and reform in this journey towards perfectness. We welcome real and humane changes and stand ready to actively engage in fundamental global reforms.

Therefore, we emphasize that the only path to remain safe is to return to Monotheism and justice and this is the greatest hope and opportunity in all ages and generations. Without belief in God and commitment to the cause of justice and fight against injustice and discrimination, the world structure will not be corrected. Man is at the center of the universe. The man's unique feature is his humanity. The same feature which seeks justice, piety, love, knowledge, awareness and all other high values. These human values should be supported and each and every fellow human should be given the opportunity to acquire them. Neglecting any of them is tantamount to the omission of a constituting piece of humanity. These are common elements which connect all human communities and constitute the basis of peace, security and friendship.

The divine religions pay attention to all aspects of human life, including obedience to God, morality, justice, fighting oppression, and endeavor to establish just and good governance. The prophet Abraham called for the oneness of God against Nimrod, as Prophet Moses did the same against Pharaohs and Jesus Christ and Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon them all, did against the oppressors of their own time. They were all threatened to death and were forced out of their homelands. Without resistance and objection, the injustices would not be removed from the face of earth.
Link to this section
And the last point that I would like to make. Dear Friends and Colleagues, the world is in a continuous change and evolution. The promised destiny for mankind is the establishment of the humane pure life and this will come when justice is pervasive across the globe and every single human being will enjoy respect and dignity. That will be the time when mankind's path to moral and spiritual perfectness will be opened and his journey to God and the manifestation of God's divine names will come true. Mankind should excel to represent God's "knowledge and wisdom", His "compassion and benevolence", His "justice and fairness", His "power and art" and His "kindness and forgiveness". These will all come true under the rule of the Perfect Man, the last Divine Source on earth Hazrat Mahdi, Peace be upon him, an offspring of the Prophet of Islam, who will re-engage and Jesus Christ, Peace be upon him and other pious men will accompany him in the accomplishment of this grand universal mission. And this is the belief in Entezar, awaiting patiently for the Imam to return, waiting with patience for the rule of goodness and the governance of the best he promises. Which is a universal human notion and which is a source of nations' hope for the betterment of the world. They will come and with the help of righteous people and true believers will materialize the man's long-standing desires for freedom, perfectness, maturity and security and tranquility, peace and beauty. They will come to put an end to war and aggression and present the entire knowledge to the world as well as spirituality and friendship to the whole world. Yes. Indeed, the bright future for the mankind will come.

Friends. Dear Friends, in waiting for that brilliant time to come and in a collective commitment, let's make due contributions in paving the grounds and preparing the conditions for building that bright future. Long live love and spirituality, long live peace and security, long live justice and freedom. I thank you all.

January 28, 2010

Busy at the Fallacy Factory manufacturing lies and false accusations for Israel.

…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel, then it’s a part of the non-state entity of Palestine…


Labouring away at the fallacy factory. Making mud they hope will stick.

What is it that drives people like the despicable TomWonacott to make false accusations?

1st accusation : Classic victimization of the Palestinians justifying murder of Israeli civilians (isn’t the Goldstone report about targeting civilians?) was also a feature of the thread:

His evidence :

talknic19 6 Jan 2010, 2:25PM

( SouthLondon01 6 Jan 2010, 2:06PM “…The Israeli kids were killed on busses, in schools, restaurants and parks, quite deliberately, and absolutely becaue of their race.”)

Dispossession (sometimes twice), illegal acquisition of territory, illegal annexation, illegal settlements, bulldozing homes are a racial trait? Amazing.

2nd accusation : And then there are the supporters of the one-state solution:

His evidence :

talknic19 6 Jan 2010, 2:32PM

(toryzionist “Perhaps if palestinian leaders had genuinely offered to allow Jewish people to remain in 1947 instead of proclaiming how they would push them into the sea ..”)

?? Declaration on the Invasion of Palestine says: “The Governments of the Arab States emphasise, on this occasion, what they have already declared before the London Conference and the United Nations, that the only solution of the Palestine problem is the establishment of a unitary Palestinian State, in accordance with democratic principles, whereby its inhabitants will enjoy complete equality before the law, [and whereby] minorities will be assured of all the guarantees recognised in democratic constitutional countries, and [whereby] the holy places will be preserved and the right of access thereto guaranteed.” Democracy!! Equal rights!! How dare they!

Neither post fits the accusation, nor is there any Antisemitism. The accusations are pathetic attempts to spread false notions.

Another example The Olive Branch
The accusation :

(ItsikDeWembley » Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:40 am “Some one named Talknic was doubting the Ahmedinajad was a foot soldier in the 80’s which performed many acts of war crimes (if you can say a war was hapening…)” )

Evidence? Fortunately the original posts have never been purged even though talknic was banned. I asked for a source.

Not permitted to answer these false accusations on CiF (banned & purged), CiFWatch (not allowed to join) or The Olive Branch (not allowed to join) et al, gives me no recourse but to refute their pathetic attempts here.

Here it is again … Plying it’s trade ..

ItsikDeWembley Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:14 am “Yeterday, reading comments in The Guardian, a regular poster calls himself “Talknic” seems to counter your opinion about the Palestinian aspirations prior to 1967 as a result that no borders were declared between 1949 and 1967.

This, in my opinion, shows his / hers true intentions that either the armestice lines of 1949 should be moved back to the original patition plan (absurd idea) or that Zionism is not a valid movement and Jews do not have the right to self govern and a national movement.

Needless to say that many agree with him in that forum.
The one state solutioners all fit this line of thoughts.

Arrafat’s finest troops.

A complete fabrication. Quite bizarre.

These folk don’t seem to realise that their un-warranted and unsubstantiated character assassination attempts only show us that… they… are… LIARS! More importantly, it poses a few questions, why would anyone purposefully lie? If they lie on InterNet forums and blogs, what’s to stop them from lying elsewhere? Why would anyone believe ANYTHING they say?

December 30, 2009

The War Against Iran. Western ‘intelligence’ sources say Iran, smuggling, purified uranium & reporters who’re stupid? Or are they hoping YOU are?

Filed under: Iran, The lies they willingly tell — Tags: , , , , , , — talknic @ 12:29 am


They’re at it again. Trying to scare you. But who should you be afraid of?

Haaretz 29/12/2009 Report: Iran seeking to smuggle purified uranium

usatoday 2009-12-29 .. intelligence report that says Iran is trying to import 1,350 tons of purified uranium ore from Kazakhstan in violation of U.N. Security Council sanctions

Meanwhile….. MONTHS AGOApril 9 2009 The World Affairs Blog Net //The Iranian and Kazakh presidents met Monday in the Kazakh capital of Astana and signed a series of mutually beneficial deals that will also pay dividends to other countries. President Nazarbayev said he supports Iran’s right to have nuclear energy but believed it should be developed in a transparent way so as to not worry the rest of the world. He pushed for the creation of a nuclear fuel bank from which Iran could procure uranium and have safe nuclear power. President Ahmadinejad defended his country’s right to enrich uranium while praising his counterpart’s plan//

MONTHS AGO Apr 6, 2009 //”If such a nuclear fuel bank were to be created, Kazakhstan would be ready to consider hosting it on its territory as a signatory of the nuclear non-proliferation agreement and as a country that voluntarily renounced nuclear weapons,” he said.

The idea, supported by U.S. President Barack Obama, rests on the creation of a global repository that would allow countries to tap into its reserves to fuel their nuclear plants without having to develop their own nuclear enrichment capability.//

If an olde schmuck like me can find evidence to refute their idiotic claims in less than 5 minutes, how STUPID are these scaremongering propagandists? Are they complete cretins?

Of course the answer is no. They’re propagandists. They don’t care as long as they scare enough people into believing the sh*te they puke out day after day. They don’t care, as long as people who don’t bother to double check, believe them.

They want people to be scared. They want YOU to be scared. Will they retract their idiotic accusations? No. That would defeat their purpose.

What is the reason for their deceptive, fraudulent activity? Why would they be PAID, that’s right folks, reporters are paid, to spout complete bullsh*te in order to scare YOU? Why would they want to scare YOU?

Remember Iraq and the WarMongers who infested the Whitehouse for 8 years? More importantly the fools who believed them!!!

Furthermore how many of the so called ‘news’ sites and blogs will retract this storie? Do they care? Probably not. They’ll just move it off the front page.

As long as the stinking, diseased ridden corpse has been thrown over the wall is left, it will continue to contaminate as many un-suspecting people as possible. It’s fleas jumping from news service to news service, blog to blog, tawk bored to tawk bored.

‘purified’ uranium? It will be as ‘pure’ as Gaza’s water at the moment.

December 2, 2009

The fear of Right of Return to Israeli Sovereign Territory. It’s another Fairy tale from the Fallacy Factory.

…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel,
then it’s a territory of Palestine…

Shortlink to this article –


Report to the Provisional Government by Prime Minister and Minister of Defence – 17 Jun 1948
We cannot allow the Arabs to return to those places that they left.”

“The Arabs attacked us in Jaffa, Haifa, etc.; and
I do not want those who fled to return.

It is every civilian’s right to flee the violence of war. Even Jewish folk. It is also every civilians right to return after the war. Land ownership is not a criteria. Even a landless bum who lived under a bridge has RoR. The only criteria is that the region was their normal place of abode at the time they fled or were dispossessed.

All civilians have a right to flee violence and return, no matter who starts a war or for what reason or who tells them to flee or who wins or loses. Because they are A) Civilians, who… B) …might not have voted for or even have been able to vote for, the regime in power when hostilities began. C) Did the Palestinians vote for the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem? No, they didn’t. He was installed by a Jewish chap, one Herbert Samuel. D) Did they vote for the Governments of the Arab States? No, they didn’t. E) Were they responsible at the time for the Jewish folk who fled the Arab states? No they were not! F) Were the Palestinians of today responsible? No, they were ALL children in 1948.


Let’s look at the Israeli demand of having a peace agreement before any RoR is granted.

A) RoR is an individual right. As such the Palestinian negotiators can only really negotiate to ensure that RoR be observed.

B) Let’s say Palestine signs a peace agreement. OK. Very good. However, the returnees would be ISRAELI citizens, not citizens of Palestine!

It is simply nonsense to demand RoR depend on a peace agreement with an entity who returnees are A) no longer belong to and who B) no longer represents them.

What happens should hostilities break out between Israel and Palestine? Would they suddenly lose their Israeli citizenship?

According to the Jewish Virtual Library – On May 14th 1948 Israel was guaranteed a minority of non-Jewish civilians within it’s Sovereign territory. 538,000 Jews / 397,000 Arabs. Of this minority, only some fled the violence of war. Simple mathematics tells us that even if all of them had fled, had they returned some weeks later, by August 1948, they could not possibly have been a demographic threat. Never the less, in August 1948 Israeli Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett is quoted as saying, “To repatriate those who had fled would be suicidal folly.“

He was quite wrong. RoR has inbuilt safe guards for the country of return. They have the right to refuse RoR to folk who do not satisfy the criteria.

That was 63 years ago. In 2009 the life expectancy of a Palestine refugee is 73yrs. In 1948 it would have been even lower. In 2011, every Palestine refugee still alive, who fled Israel’s Sovereign territory in 1947/48, are at the very minimum, 63 years of age. Past the age of rampant procreation and natural attrition has seen many who are older, pass away.

For the most part, were children at the time of their dispossession. They did not take part in any hostilities, did not vote for the Mufti of Jerusalem, did not vote for the leaders of the Arab States, had nothing to do with the Holocaust, did not kill or dispossess any Jews or Israelis and were not even born as far back as 1920.

Today, there are less ’48 Palestine refugees with a genuine RoR to Israel’s Sovereign territories, than ever before. Naturally their numbers grow ever smaller every day. The Demographic threat to Sovereign Israel, is BULL SHITE! A blatant lie.

There are three main areas to which Palestine refugees have RoR.

1) Those from what is Sovereign Israeli territory as per Israel’s Declaration of a Sovereign State, where there was an absolute maximum of 397,000 Arabs in 1948. Remember Israel has never had any territory legally annexed to it, not all it’s minority non- Jewish population fled the violence and those who did are now beyond the age of procreation.

2) Those who were dispossessed from territories slated for the Arab State, illegally acquired by war under Plan Dalet then Israel between 1948 & 1949, none of it annexed to Israel.

3) Those who were dispossessed in 1967 from ‘territories occupied in the recent conflict’. Some of whom were also dispossessed in ’48-’49. Again, territories never legally annexed to Israel.

Are there 3.5 to 4 million Palestine refugees ready to flood Israel? NO! That too is a fallacy. The Palestinians have only ever claimed RoR as per UN resolutions which are as a matter of course, based on UN Refugee Conventions which do not allow for all lineal descendants.

Under basic RoR, only innocent civilians, who actually lived in a region and who agree to live in peace, have legitimate RoR. It is their right to either return or opt for compensation. Even then the state of return has the right to veto those who do not fit the criterion. Although the state of return is obliged to recognize and grant only basic RoR, they can expand on this basic right through their own legislation and allow, as some countries have, for lineal descendants.

The 3.5 to 4 million figure often cited by the ‘demographic threat’ scare mongers, comes from the UNRWA figures for Palestine refugees. UNRWA was set up because of the unique set of conditions that apply to Palestine refugees
A) The protracted nature of the conflict B) Israel’s illegal refusal to recognize even basic RoR and Israel’s illegal claims to territory OUTSIDE it’s Sovereign borders C) All Palestinians and Palestine refugees are stateless.

However under the UNRWA Mandate the term ‘Palestine’ refugee is a need-based definition the clue is in the name, Relief and Works. The UNRWA definition is not for the purposes of repatriation or compensation as envisaged in UN General Assembly (UNGA) Resolution 194 (III) of December 1948. UNRWA’s working definition, is only for expediency in ascertaining who may qualify for Relief and Works, while they are refugees.

It’s numbers are not those who qualify for RoR to Israel’s actual sovereign territories. UNRWA’s limited mandate

” UNRWA is a humanitarian agency and its mandate defines its role as one of providing services to the refugees.”

Yet Professor Ruth Lapidoth perpetuates the fallacy on the Israeli Government web site. “According to Palestinian sources, there are about 3.5 million Palestinian refugees nowadays registered with UNRWA. If Israel were to allow all of them to return to her territory, this would be an act of suicide on her part, and no state can be expected to destroy itself.”

Is she, a professor, really that ignorant? Of course she isn’t. The ambiguity of her assertion shows she is engaged in typical propaganda modus operandi. Planting the seeds of panic in order that there be no RoR at all. She does not say the Palestinians demand that all lineal descendants have RoR, she only says “there are about 3.5 million Palestinian refugees nowadays registered with UNRWA “….she then slyly adds…. If Israel were to allow all of them to return to her territory…etc”

This is a typical propagandista’s strawman argument, enough to make people think this is the Palestinian demand. It isn’t. The Palestinians have only asked for RoR per the UN Conventions, (res 194) which is as a matter of course, a resolution based on the UNHCR statute. No RoR for lineal descendants, one must have lived in the region. Added to which Israel is NOT REQUIRED to admit all those registered with UNRWA into Sovereign Israeli territory. The UNRWA mandate does not cover RoR or final status negotiations and only those who agree to live in peace need be granted RoR.

The propagandists also treat us to the false notion that, because Palestine refugees are served by UNRWA, they are not covered by the UNHCR. However, although the Palestine refugees are afforded ‘assistance’ whilst they are refugees under UNRWA and because of this they are not afforded ‘assistance’ under the UNHCR, they are never the less, still refugees and as such have RoR.

The Convention relating to the Status of Refugees 1950 states: ” D. This Convention shall not apply to persons who are at present receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance.”

‘Protection’ or ‘assistance’. It does not say they are no longer refugees. It does not say they are not covered by the other aspects of the UNHCR statute. The document goes on to say: “When such protection or assistance has ceased for any reason, without the position of such persons being definitively settled in accordance with the relevant resolutions adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, these persons shall ipso facto be entitled to the benefits of this Convention.”

What has been Israel’s true intentions all these years? Let’s look at the events from the launch of Plan Dalet in the weeks prior to May 14th 1948. We are told it was a defensive strategy. Fair enough. However, if folk have fled, what is the strategy of razing their villages and homes if they were not there? It does not add up.

Link to this section

What was Israeli Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett talking about when he said in August 1948 “To repatriate those who had fled would be suicidal folly.“? If he was talking about those who fled Sovereign Israeli territory being a demographic threat, simple maths tells us it just does not compute. If he was talking about them being a violent threat. Israel was not and is still not required to repatriate folk unless they agree to line in peace. Either he was ill informed, which I doubt, or lying or had crap maths skills or perhaps was creating an insidious propaganda mantra in order to promote fear in the Israeli psyche, thereby preventing any RoR at all. A propaganda mantra that lives on today.

Perhaps Moshe Sharett was talking about those unfortunates who fled from the territories outside of Israel’s Sovereignty? Territories slated for the new Arab State, already cleansed under Plan Dalet before the 14th May 1948 and after, by Israel during the war of Independence? Territories Israel has illegally acquired by war but never annexed? Territories Israel did not Declare Sovereignty over.

If these are the folk Moshe Sharett was talking about, why was he, a few weeks later, in August 1948, saying they’d be a demographic threat were they to return. Before the War of Independence was even over? Was it Israel’s intention in August 1948 to keep these territories? It was by August 1949 according to Israel.

Fact is, all of Israel’s actions have confirmed that intention. Israel HAS kept all the territories it has acquired by war. Yet none of the territories Israel has captured have ever been legally annexed. They are, quite simply, NOT legally Sovereign Israeli territory.

Unilateral annexation is invalid and Armistice lines are only borders where they were borders before the armistice. Only parts of the Green Line were ever actual borders. The majority of the ‘Green Line’ was never a border between Israel and Palestine. Parts of the armistice line were the border between Israel and the Arab States and other parts were a border between Palestine and the Arab States. For the most part, it was only an armistice line.

Is there a demographic threat to the territories Israel has illegally claimed as it’s own for 62 years?

Of course there’s a threat to Israel’s existence in these territories. They’re not Israeli. Legally, it’s up to the Palestinians to pass legislation as to who returns and illegal settlers who might stay.

Israel’s fallacious ‘facts on the ground’. It’s ignoring International Law, UNSC resolutions. Even dissing it’s own voluntarily Declared obligation to adhere to the UN Charter. All ignored. Added to which the USA’s complicity in using it’s power of veto in the UNSC, have caused a hugely complicated and seemingly intractable MESS for Israelis and Palestinians alike.

Further reading:


Convention relating to the Status of Refugees Adopted on 28 July 1951 by the United Nations Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Status of Refugees and Stateless Persons convened under General Assembly resolution 429 (V) of 14 December 1950

October 28, 2009

Fairy tales from the Fallacy Factory. “Hamas do not wear uniforms!” Naive or lying for Israel?

Demonizing one’s enemies is as old as humans have had them. Not only human to human, but to all manner of creatures who might occasion us harm. Sharks for example are not ‘man eaters’. Their main diet isn’t man. Nor is man the diet of lions, tigers or crocodiles et al. It’s just that they’re hungry and we are sometimes, very rarely, a tasty morsel that happens to be in their environment at lunch time.

Why do we call them ‘man eaters’, when we constitute an immeasurably minuscule fraction of their diet? To scare the kids into being careful when they’re in the ‘man eaters’ domain at a guess. It is after all why we tell kids to be careful when they’re in or near traffic. Eventually, we learn. Don’t play in the traffic, don’t swim in the crocodile’s pool. Are people forever children when it comes to ‘man eaters’? Some people remain naive to either the actual diet of these beasties or to the actual proportions of the problem. With a little thought, most people come to the conclusion that it is only the occasional human venturing into the beasties domain who becomes a part of the beasty’s diet. Even children can understand that much. Out of this understanding grows a respect for the animal kingdom. A healthy respect, where we have our place and they theirs respectfully. Very respectfully.

When it comes to humanity though, a very different picture seems to emerge. Our human enemies are demonized when we are in their territory or they’re in ours or when we fear they might be in our territory. Much of it is just propaganda. Propaganda always has a hole in it somewhere. It’s either shown not to be true by prior events, like the trashing of the glasshouses in Gaza, or by contrary statements or some other information coming to light after the event, that shows it to be, well…..just propaganda or outright LIES!

For a starters, let’s look at one of the most commonly held beliefs about Hamas. “Hamas do not wear uniforms!” Is this true or is it a fairy tale from a fallacy factory? It is repeated over and over, as though it is a ‘fact’. So, is it? Seems not. From the mouths of Israel’s leaders, we have contrary evidence. Israeli Knesset :“You can see on television that most of those who died during the attack were wearing Hamas uniforms, either black or other uniforms of Hamas.” Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Tzipi Livni on December 28, 2008 Israeli Knesset.

One would have thought that if Israel’s Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Tzipi Livni, can see these uniforms, the public would too. Does believing propaganda make one blind?

The IDF also tenders contrary evidence. Dec 27: IDF operation against terror infrastructure in the Gaza Strip. “Since this morning, the IDF attacked dozens of targets affiliated with the Hamas terror organization in the Gaza Strip. The targets included command centers, training camps, various Hamas installations, rocket manufacturing facilities and storage warehouses. The vast majority of the casualties are terror operatives, most of whom were wearing uniform and working on behalf of terror organizations.”

One might gather from this information that most do actually wear uniforms. Yet it is repeated over and over ad nauseum, that Hamas do not wear uniforms.

So just where is the legal requirement to wear a uniform stated? It doesn’t appear in any Laws or Conventions! In fact, an emblem is required. Not a uniform. The Laws of War – Article 1: ”To have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance. Common sense tells us why. For example, why are combat fatigues camouflaged? Even in the most law abiding militaries, Combat Fatigues are camouflaged. They’re camouflaged so that the enemy CAN’T see them! Who can see the uniform of a pilot in a fighter plane or combatants in a tank or a ship off of Gaza’s Coast? Added to which, enemy armies might have similar or even identical military fatigues. An army might have many different uniform configurations, depending on the conditions. A legitimate militia (per the Laws of War), may not have the resources to afford a uniform. That’s why there is no legal requirement to wear a uniform, but display a distinctive emblem.

Another requirement, is: “To carry arms openly”. Do any country’s undercover operatives A) wear a uniform OR B) carry their arms openly?

Are we to believe Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Tzipi Livni a liar? Or the IDF liars? A search with google reveals that Hezbollah also wear uniforms. What are we to make of this? If the Hamas mantra is a lie or propaganda, what else is being spouted by either naive folk or propaganda meisters for Israel? Can we believe anything they say?

Not much actually. They’ve had 61 years of practice at the Fallacy Factory. A litany of fallacy litters history of the Israeli Palestinian conflict.

October 24, 2009

Is there a danger of Sacred Fact being drowned out on the Guardian’s Comment is Free – CiF ?

…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel,
then it’s a territory of Palestine…


Why am I writing this? In order to have a balanced discourse on the Israel/Palestinian issue, it is imperative that well sourced and factual counter argument be given the chance to be heard. Apart from the various slings and arrows and opinions of posters and contributors, the casual reader ought be given the chance to see what is actually said in documents, law, UNSC resolutions rather than after they’ve been put through the Ziofier and spammed endlessly.

The machinations of the UN are quite complex and ought be explained in concise and understandable terms, not just presented as an Anti-Israel organization bent on the destruction of Israel. Propaganda ought be shown for what it is. CiF and the Guardian surely owe it to their readers that a moderate voice, with a basic understanding of the Laws, UN Charter et al, be heard.

So, is there danger that CiF will be flooded with propaganda in support of Israel’s expansionist policies and illegal activities? Can moderate voices, factual information and rational counter argument be silenced? I know I am! Regularly.

By their own admissions and actions, the apologists for Israel’s illegal expansionism and illegal activities group together, issue reports on CiF commentaries, conduct mail outs advising people and encouraging them to counter anything which might be construed as Anti-Israel.

How do I know? I subscribe to some under another name in order to find out what they’re up to. Others, like CiFWatch are just too blatant and stupid for their own good, actually undermining their own hard work by the shear idiocy of their accusations and admissions. HERE”S ONE BY A CiF CONTRIBUTOR!!!Admitting to concerted efforts to have folk banned.

Ironically they complain about being banned themselves. To this end, they appear to be willing to stop at nothing. If they blatantly lie in their posts on CiF & CiFWatch, what’s to stop them from lying in their complaints to moderators especially if over worked moderators don’t look closely. Nothing!

Are these people devious? Yes. Most certainly. I’ve only kept one example of the handiwork of an apologist for Israel’s illegal activities at work on TALK International, combined alas, with moderation that begs enhancement. (I do not envy the position BTW). I had been posting as ‘Some1’ and received the following warning …

From: …… [mailto:……]
Sent: Saturday, 5 August 2006 1:26 AM
To: {…….}
Subject: GU Talk Warning (Some1)
This is your first warning. We are issuing 1 warning per user before banning people permanently.
User Help
Guardian Unlimited
119 Farringdon Road
London EC1R 3ER

Some1 – 08:34am Aug 4, 2006 GMT

How do you tell if a Jew is lying – his lips are moving. For some reason, anything that comes from Israel is a LIE. But anything that Hizbullah, Iran, and Hamas say or print is GOSPEL!

I immediately searched for this alleged breach of the guidelines and found the following

Israel/Lebanon Conflict Thread

100reader – 01:53pm Aug 4, 2006 GMT (#408 of 503)

Some1 – 08:34am Aug 4, 2006 GMT

How do you tell if a Jew is lying – his lips are moving. For some reason, anything that comes from Israel is a LIE. But anything that Hizbullah, Iran, and Hamas say or print is GOSPEL!

A) A poster had taken 100reader’s sarcastic, strawman remark, deleted 100reader from it and attributed it to me. Very likely 100reader, judging by a subsequent post advising me I’d need a new user name.
B) It is not in quotes. Not mine. Doesn’t closely resemble anything I’d say.
C) If one reads carefully, it reveals itself by the second two sentences in that single, unquoted, paragraph… “For some reason, anything that comes from Israel is a LIE. But anything that Hizbullah, Iran, and Hamas say or print is GOSPEL!”
1) It shows a sarcastic remark by 100Reader, prefaced with “How do you tell if a Jew is lying – his lips are moving.”
2) I’d never claimed or written anything of the sort. 100reader was of course constructing a strawman.

I attempted to explain this deception to …….@guardian. To no avail. Correspondence went un-answered. I was later banned, very likely on a similar completely false premise.

It was the type of tactic commonly used in posts by the advocates of Israel’s illegal expansionist policies. Cherry picking, replacing words, mis-quoting, false accusations, outright lying and concerted efforts to have posters banned and of course, completely ignoring factual material and posting the same fallacies over and over. Spam. Show them a document proving their fallacy is a blatant lie and they just ignore it and carry on regardless. Hard core denial by a hard core of organized Anti-Cifers

On the other hand there are no organized Pro-CiF groups that I know of. No email lists, no concerted efforts by groups of people trying to get the apologists for Israeli expansionism banned. I have never been invited to join or subscribe to any alternative to the likes of Giyus with about 40,000 users and numerous supporters, CifWatch, the Olivebranch, Harry’s place. There is a very real danger of it becoming a one sided battle.

In any one sided battle, the chances of the more powerful side drowning out the other is always a possibility and of course the desired result. In respect to the Israel/Palestinian issue, Cif could, I dare say is, fast becoming devoid of facts. Like TALK International, a place where silly, repetitious, sniping bun fights are commonplace. Boring to the reader, non-informative and for the most part non-factual, which is of course is also a tactic. If you can’t win the argument, turn the dialogue into a moshpit that no one can be bothered reading.

As talknic there were some 5,300 posts on Cif. None abusive, none contained any hatred, bigotry, Antisemitism. To the best of my knowledge, none contravened the CiF guidelines. If I went off topic it was only in response to where some other poster had, usually with an oft repeated propaganda mantra. Spam.

I’ve never used Islamist sources, hate or Antisemitic sites, only citing, as I have here, mainly irrefutable and reliable Jewish sources such as the Israeli Govt web site, the Jewish virtual library, the UN and university repositories for documents.

With correspondence going un-answered, re-registering and continuing to post is the only form of protest one has and one hopes in the brief time the information remains, someone will learn something other than the endless propaganda. It is of course purged as soon as someone complains. Not that there is ever anything to actually complain against, nor has there ever been. I’m guessing it goes like this. ‘This person is the much banned ‘talknic’, a well known Anti-semite’

However, nothing I’ve ever written on CiF comes even close to Antisemitism, hatred, bigotry or abuse. In 42 years of addressing the I/P issue at public forums, meetings, letters to the editors and now with the advent of the likes of CiF, no-one has ever been able to show anything remotely Antisemitic from what must now be hundreds of thousands of words I’ve written and spoken on the subject. The only complaint my opponents actually have is, they cannot honestly answer the questions I ask. I don’t even make it on CiFWatch’s pathetic Anti-semite list!!!

In real life discussions I’ve been ejected from meetings, threatened, had my walls sprayed with graffiti, refused service, hate mailed (constantly). One hand written letter shoved under my door advised me not to sit near the window. I’ve been covered in the spittle sprayed from bug eyed, red faced denialistas, shaking in rage, screaming their obscenities and predictable list of what they wish I was, but am not. The only way apologists for Israel’s illegal actions can ‘counter’ irrefutable knowledge from verifiable and reliable sources, is to ignore, scream over the top or try to deny access to the discussion by making a false accusations. I dare say the moderators had hundreds of complaints about Talknic, in the hope that one, like the example above, would slip through, resulting in a banning.

Meanwhile all I have ever done is speak in the hope that folk will be educated as to what actually has taken place, what laws actually have been broken and what laws actually do stand, without changing anything. I do this IN SUPPORT of the Sovereign Israel that was created as a homeland/state for all Jewish people. Israel should, like all UN Member states, at the very least be law abiding. That is all I ask.

So how does one address the imbalance of organized groups against CiF, vs no organized group at all for CiF? How does one get re-instated in order that a moderate voice with factual information be heard? Correspond? No point if your correspondence goes in the spam bin. Write about it as I have done here? Of course.

Continue to be a squeaky door where “Facts are…meant to be… Sacred”

Both! Because I can! And will.

October 20, 2009

Lying for Israel. Where ‘Facts are Sacred’, Harold Evans does it in bulk. Fact is purged, again!

…It’s actually quite simple. If it isn’t the “acknowledged” Sovereign Territory of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt or Israel,
then it’s a territory of Palestine…


Almost every statement in Harold Evans’ CiF article is either a lie or an unsubstantiated statement of opinion. How can such blatant lies be allowed space where “Facts are Sacred”? Different points of view, certainly should be allowed. However, absolute bullshite in this article, is quite beyond the pale. Talknic posts pointing to substantiated facts, from verifiable, irrefutable sources have been completely purged (ironically, at the appearance of PetraMB & Sydk)

The headline is enough to tell us that this is going to be a propaganda pack of bullshite straight from the Israeli handbook.

Harold Evans – A moral atrocity – Judge Goldstone has been suckered into letting war criminals use his name to pillory Israel

Who are these war criminals Harold Evans speaks of, he fails to mention any.

“It was to be expected that the usual suspects of the risible UN human rights council would be eager to condemn Israel for war crimes in defending itself against Hamas.”

Defend itself? It’s defending the notion that Israeli citizens can live in non-Sovereign territory. The areas in reach of Hamas’ weapons are not Israeli. They reach only into non-annexed areas, illegally acquired by war. Areas cleansed of many of their rightful inhabitants by war, by 1949.

“If you treat people as the Chinese do the Tibetans or Uighurs (“Off with their heads!”); or as the Russians eliminate Chechen dissidents; or as the Nigerians tolerate extrajudicial killings, the evictions of 800,000, rape and cruel treatment of prisoners; or as the Egyptians get prisoners to talk (torture) and the Saudis suppress half their population … well, go through the practices of all 25 states voting to refer Israel to the security council for the Gaza war, and you have to acknowledge they know a lot about the abuse of humans. Anything to divert attention from their own atrocities.”

I’d’ve thought a journalist would at least familiarize themselves with the mandate under which the UN and it’s instruments are enabled. The UN cannot interfere in internal matters of Sovereign countries. At best all the UN can do through the UNHRC is support the victims. So, as ghastly as they might be, his examples are quite pointless.
“..the Chinese do the Tibetans or Uighurs” – Internal & does China even allow UNHRC in? NO!
“..the Russians eliminate Chechen dissidents” – Internal & does Russia even allow UNHRC in? NO!
“..the Nigerians tolerate extrajudicial killings, the evictions of 800,000, rape and cruel treatment of prisoners”– Internal
“..the Egyptians get prisoners to talk” – Internal
“..the Saudis suppress half their population” – Internal
Have any of the countries railed against prevented ALL the civilians of their neighbour from fleeing a war zone by having ALL means of escape closed, including the closure of border crossings that are NOT it’s own (Gaza / Egypt under the 2005 agreement), including flight into the sea. Then proceeded to attack the territory with some of the world’s most advanced weaponry? Geneva Convention 1V…Section II..Occupied territories…….Art49…The Occupying Power shall not detain protected persons in an area particularly exposed to the dangers of war unless the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.

“Poor Judge Goldstone now regrets how his good name has been used to single out Israel. The Swiss paper Le Temps reports him complaining that “This draft [UN human rights council] resolution saddens me … there is not a single phrase condemning Hamas as we have done in the report. I hope the council can modify the text.” Fat hope.”

Harold Evans’ link leads to Haaretz reporting, Israeli Army radio reporting, Le Temps.

A) Mr Goldstone did NOT say he ” regrets how his good name has been used to single out Israel” It simply does not appear anywhere other than in unsubstantiated accusations. Why does Harold Evans lie?
B) The original Le Temps goes on to say: The judge, however, defends its conclusions: “The Americans talk about errors in our report, but they do not advance a single fact to demonstrate tangible.” Despite the politicization of his report – including Hamas – it can only regret, he remains confident that it will make its way and will support peace in the region. As for the virulence of Israeli attacks, he expected, “but not to such venom. It is a sad experience. “

Meanwhile the UNHRC has altered the text to include Hamas. The report was adopted in Geneva on Friday. The resolution proposed by Palestine on crimes committed by Israel and Hamas in Gaza has been approved by 25 votes to six against and 11 abstentions. Why does Harold Evans lie?

“The truth is he was suckered into lending his good name to a half-baked report – read its 575 pages and see. He said that, as a Jew himself, he was surprised to be invited. He shouldn’t have been, and should never have accepted leadership of a commission whose terms of reference were designed to excuse the aggressor, Hamas, and punish the defender, Israel.”

Why does Harold Evans lie? The truth is, Mr Goldstone demanded that Hamas be included BEFORE he took the position and there are nine pages in the report condemning Hamas.

“The council’s decision was to “dispatch an urgent, independent, international fact-finding mission … to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law by the occupying power, Israel, against the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression, and [it] calls upon Israel not to obstruct the process of investigation and to fully co-operate with the mission”.”

Why does Harold Evans lie? The council’s decision was changed at the demand of Goldstone to include Hamas.

“Israel is not an “occupying power” in Gaza in either fact or international law. Four years ago it voluntarily pulled out all its soldiers and uprooted all its settlers.”

The UNSC tells us that Gaza is a part of the Occupied Territories.

The Security Council“Recalling all of its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003) and 1850 (2008), “Stressing that the Gaza Strip constitutes an integral part of the territory occupied in 1967 and will be a part of the Palestinian state,

“Here was a wonderful chance for Gaza to be the building block of a Palestinian state, and for Hamas to do what the Israelis did – take a piece of land and build a model state. They didn’t. Instead of helping the desperate Palestinians, they conducted a religious war.”

A) A part of a proposed state cannot declare Sovereignty. In order to declare, the entity must have control over ALL it’s territories. Same rules applied to Israel.
B) A religious war? No Mr Evans, it’s a war against a neighbour who has continued to steal Palestinian territory for 61 years.

“The terms of reference he accepted validate the torment of Israeli civilians.”

Why does Harold Evans lie? Goldstone demanded the terms of reference be change BEFORE he accepted the position

“The rockets were war crimes and ought to have been universally condemned as such. While new rockets hit Israel ….”

A) They have been condemned by HRW as War Crimes. They were condemned by the Goldstone report as War Crimes.
B) Israel’s Sovereign territories are those recommended by UNGA resolution 181. Israel has never legally annexed any territory outside of it’s Sovereign territory.

“…over many months there was no rush by the world’s moralisers – including Britain – to censure Hamas”

Miliband criticized Hamas’ rocket attacks on Israel and implicitly urged Syria to exert its influence on the group to stop such attacks.
“I argue that Hamas’ violence hurts Syria, which says it believes in a comprehensive peace,” Miliband said. “The rockets are a threat to the successful process.

“…no urgency as there was in “world opinion” when Israel finally responded. Then Israel was immediately accused of a “disproportionate” response without anyone thinking: “What is a ‘proportionate’ attack against an enemy dedicated to exterminating your people?” A dedication to exterminating all of his?”

Perhaps a better question is, what is the justification for illegally acquiring your enemies territory over 62 years and thus prompting them to want rid of you?

Israel risked its own forces by imposing unprecedented restraint. In testimony volunteered to the human rights council (and ignored), Colonel Richard Kemp, a British commander in Bosnia and Afghanistan, stated: “The Israeli Defence Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.”

By preventing civilians from fleeing a war zone, then attacking the territory with some of the most modern war technology in the world.

“No doubt there were blunders. A defensive war is still a war with all its suffering and destruction. But Hamas compounded its original war crime with another. It held its own people hostage. It used them as human shields.”

Mr Evans’ rhetoric is straight out of the Israel propaganda handbook.

Had Israel allowed civilians from fleeing the war zone, they’d not have been in this alleged predicament. I say alleged, because it is a well known, transparent and age olde propaganda ploy, to demonize one’s enemy. It is a fact however, that Israel prevented them from fleeing the war zone, by having all means of escape closed, even the borders between Gaza and Egypt, under the 2005 agreement. On the other hand, it is only alleged, by Israel, that Hamas held it’s own people hostage. Furthermore, Hamas did not just drop out of the sky they are all volunteers, Palestinians, their own people, fighting for the cause of their own people. They can exist only with the support of their own people. So it does not make one iota of sense to have their own turn against them.

“The Goldstone report won the gold standard of moral equivalence between the killer and the victim. Now Britain wins the silver. Who’s cheering?”

Harold Evan$ perhaps? I can think of no other reason why one would stoop so low. Statistics show us who the killers are, by a ratio of about 100 :1

The “moral atrocity” is the absolute shite dished up by one Harold Evans.

October 19, 2009

Lying for Israel since 1948. The BIGGEST LIE!


UNGA res 181 is irrelevant, Israel’s borders have never been defined

Letter From the Agent of the Provisional Government of Israel to the President of the United States, May 15, 1948
“MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have the honor to notify you that the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time.”

Also bear this in mind. Israel has never legally annexed any territory outside it’s Declared Sovereign borders. Ever!

How many people on the planet believe the fallacy?
Prime Ministers, Senators, Presidents, politicians, civilians
and worst of all ISRAELI CITIZENS!!

Israeli citizens who have been led to believe they are living in Israel.
Israeli citizens in Ashkelon, Beer Sheeba.
Israeli citizens in a big chunk of territory bordering Lebanon.
Israeli citizens whose lives have been sacrificed for the Zionist dream of a Greater Israel.

How much longer can the world allow this fallacy to pollute the issue?
How much longer can the International Community turn a blind eye to this deceit?
How much longer will honest Israeli citizens allow themselves to be used by a corrupt, cabal of people who are willing break the very basic tenets of Judaism?

Enough is enough already!
Jewish folk were given, completely gratis**, a big chunk of land for a Sovereign homeland. Enough territory for every Jewish person on the planet today.
The extent of Israel’s Sovereignty had been declared & confirmed by the Israeli Government with the UNSC on May 22nd 1948 admitting to having territories “outside of Israel” It was further confirmed with the UNSC by the Israeli Government on June the 15th 1949
Instead of being grateful, Israel has taken more and more and more.
Illegally ‘acquired’ by war, illegally acquired through illegal annexation.
Illegally acquired through illegal settlements in “territories occupied” NOT belonging to Israel!
ILLEGALLY sold to those who are either complicit, or ignorant of what has and is still being done in the name of all the world’s Jewish population.

** ‘real estate’ is not territory.
The US paid Mexico for their territories.
How much did Israel pay?

October 16, 2009

Has Professor Geoffrey Alderman no shame? A Professor? Of what? BullShite?

(Post post pre-post postscript) My apologies to Professor Alderman in respect to the struck out part of this post (see replies for the apology)

Where “Facts are Sacred” the Ziofied ‘facts’ remain, polluting the discourse! Factual counter argument, has been purged.

geoffreyalderman 15 Oct 09

stell: There was no such country as “Jordan” – and no such “people” as “Jordanians” – until well after WW1. The land we now call Jordan originally comprised about three-quarters of the total land mass of Mandate Palestine. The British decreed that Mandate Palestine east of the Jordan river should be reserved exclusively for Arabs (including, of course, Palestinian Arabs) and be prohibited to the Jews. This was of course agreed to by the Arabs.

KrustytheClown asks me two questions:
1) Do you believe that the only ‘Palestinian state’ is in Jordan? Answer No.
2) Do you believe that the occupied West Bank belongs only to the Jewish people? Answer No.
Geoffrey Alderman”

geoffreyalderman 12 Oct 09

“…It must be remembered that the Palestinians already have one state of their own – Jordan, the territory of which was part of the original Mandate given to the UK by the League of Nations.”

Have you no shame? Have you no history books? On 25 May 1923 , the Emirate of Transjordan (Arabic: ????? ??? ?????? ?Imarat Sharq al-?Urdun ) was proclaimed an independent state. It’s citizens were known as Jordanian. TransJordan became a sovereign state in 1946. It’s citizens were known as Jordanian. When the name was changed to Jordan , it’s citizens were known as Jordanian

Q: How many Israelis were there before 1948?

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Blog at