Nahida Izzat, Exiled Palestinian

To expose the absurd and unrealistic nature of the “one-state with equal rights for Israelis and Palestinians”, and to extract one of the main perils it encapsulates, I would mention here mainly three facts. These facts have the double merit of being crystal clear, and also of being based on fundamental pillars of civilization, i.e. time-tested. I would suggest that they become fundamental guidelines for any further proposition:

Firstly: to allow mass-murderers, land-thieves, ideological supremacists, destroyers of cultural heritage to keep the loot, is ethically unacceptable. Worse still, in our era of post-Nuremberg Principles of International Law, and post-Geneva Conventions, this would represent a perilous turn backwards of the wheel of history, by re-allowing and even justifying land acquisition by means of military conquest and terrorism, down to genocide and democide.

Secondly: to force or coerce victims of slow genocide, -ongoing since seven decades, to live with their rapists and murderers of their children, is ruthless, inhumane, and also an incentive for the perpetrators to perpetuate said crimes, even increase their insane cruelty.

Thirdly: to bring to the fore the notion of “equal rights” when the parties concerned are one of dispossessed victims, and the other one of serial killers and supremacists, it constitutes an oxymoron which itself is nothing else than sabotage of the very foundation of Justice.

To sabotage foundational elements of human cohabitation, is downright perilous for mankind, and yet this is what is promoted by people under the ominously fake pretext of “peace”! A peace that justifies past massacres and promotes future massacres, is not peace. - Enough is enough!

More »

Charles E. Carlson

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse

Where is the hope for world peace now that the season for singing "Peace on earth and mercy mild, Christ and sinners reconciled" and “Joy to the world, the Lord has come," is over?

Political candidates are competing for the votes of so-called "Christian Zionists,” who are, in mass, supporting the Warmakers’ goal of bigger conflicts in Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, and Gaza and any place Muslims live. Note that all of these countries with the exception of Gaza, have small populations and rich natural resources,

The outcry for peace that fueled demonstrations a few years back has sadly faded. It seems the banker-warmakers have stamped out all resistance to their war-based economy. The call for jobs, tax reform, home financing, and even concerns about the shaky states in Europe dominate financial news. Peace has become a non-issue.

President Obama is trying to make it appear that he has fulfilled his 2008 promise by bringing home the occupation force from Iraq. This is a sham, for it appears that 8000 troops are not coming back, but will remain stationed on Kurdish territory near the Iranian border. Worse yet, a huge number of incredibly expensive non-military mercenaries--a private army in every sense--are staying in Iraq. They are no doubt there to control the corrupt government installed by the U.S. The people of Iraq have no peace.

It is likely that President Obama does not himself understand the continued occupation, or who is pumping Iraq’s oil. He, like his opponents, is too caught up with the election to unravel the "facts" he is fed from the Pentagon, and central bankers. In America, war is too important a business to be entrusted to the President.

As for the Republicans, Dr. Paul seems to be the only one who understands the war-based economy and how it is financed through the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FED). The rest of the Republican candidates have accepted the wars as a given. The big media is ignoring the move toward new wars and playing down the old ones.

Failure to link the corruption of the bankers with the serial warmaking has defused the protests against Wall Street, leaving Occupy Wall Street a fractured and confused movement.

More »

Dirk Adriaensens
War Is A Crime.org

Forced disappearances and missing persons: The missing persons of Iraq. -Always someone’s mother or father, always someone’s child.

A forced disappearance (or enforced disappearance) is defined in Article 2 of the Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly On 20 December 2006, as the arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person, which place such a person outside the protection of the law. Often forced disappearance implies murder. The victim in such a case is first abducted, then illegally detained, and often tortured; the victim is then killed, and the body is then hidden. Typically, a murder will be surreptitious, with the corpse disposed of in such a way as to prevent it ever being found, so that the person apparently vanishes. The party committing the murder has deniability, as there is no body to prove that the victim has actually died. [1]

Article 1 of the Convention further states that No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification for enforced disappearance.[2]

Neither Iraq, nor the USA have signed or ratified this convention.[3]

The United States refused to sign, saying that the text "did not meet our expectations", without giving an explanation.[4]

Once again the United States placed itself outside the provisions of International Humanitarian law.

More »

Jonathan Azaziah

A refutation of Shelby Steele’s propaganda piece masquerading as a legitimate editorial.

1. World opinion is to be divided into two categories. The first category is the category of governments, and the second category is the category of citizens. In the framework of the first category, the overwhelming majority of governments have supported the Israeli massacre of the Freedom Flotilla, because the majority of governments are under the influence and/or subversion and/or control of the Zionist lobby. In that same framework, whatever government officials have offered a condemnation of the ‘attack,’ have not specified who exactly they’re condemning, and this, as aforementioned, is the result of the Zionist lobby. Again, in the same framework, the minute amount of government officials that have actually condemned Israel itself, their condemnations ring hollow, for they will not be backed up with action. In the framework of the second category, it is becoming increasingly evident, that populations of the world, Muslim and Jewish, Christian and Hindu, Black and White, Latino and Asian, lower-class and middle class, have lost their patience with the constant tyrannical, genocidal, and quite frankly, insane behavior of the illegal occupational entity known as Israel. The people are tired of forking over their tax dollars to a state that murders, steals, occupies, rapes, tortures, imprisons for no reason, and now, pirates, when their money could go to their failing social and economic crises. The people are tired of another people, just like them, being unjustly treated in a fashion worse than animals, for 62 years. The people are weary of their governments who continue to lend their irrational, unwavering support to this criminal fraud of a nation. The people, finally, seem to understand the severity of the crimes against the Palestinians, and it seems, they finally want an end to it. When world opinion isn’t divided into these two diametrically opposed categories, then that phrase, is simply a generality being used to mislead on behalf of Israel and its cohorts in America and Britain.

More »