IDF

Israel To Outlaw Filming Of Anti-Palestinian Atrocities

These ill criminals don’t want their atrocities to be on film. If they do this to Palestinians, imagine what they have in store for you Goy! Oh! But isn’t Israel the only democracy in the Middle East? Aren’t the Jews the first to express their ‘hatred’ against racism? How long until JUSTICE IS DONE?! Are there any REAL human beings left in this world?! Or is it that what we see walking on this earth are just BRAINLESS ZOMBIES! 

IDF

“Israel to outlaw filming of anti-Palestinian atrocities,” Source: presstv.com
Israel’s cabinet ministers have authorized a bill that would criminalize filming of the Israeli soldiers’ atrocities against the Palestinians while on duty.
A ministerial committee which oversees legislation voted in favor of the controversial bill on Sunday.
The bill, sponsored by the Yisrael Beitenu party in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s governing coalition, would subject anyone caught filming or publishing footage “with intent to harm the morale of Israel’s soldiers or its inhabitants” to up to five years in prison.

It would give 10 years in jail to those intending to damage Israel’s “national security.”

The parliament will probably vote the bill this week. If passed, it will be scrutinized and amended before three more parliamentary votes needed for it to pass into law.

In recent months, Israeli troops have on numerous occasions been caught on camera brutally killing Palestinians, with the videos going viral online and sparking condemnations of the regime’s military.

A video circulated online in April showed the moment an Israeli sniper shoots an unarmed Palestinian protester near the border fence in the besieged enclave. The sniper and the other soldiers are heard rejoicing following the “successful” shooting.

An Israeli human rights organization also in August 2017 captured a video showing Israeli settlers verbally abusing Palestinians and swearing at the holy religion of Islam as well as Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in the presence of regime forces.

The B’Tselem video shows the Israelis from the settlement of Kiryat Arba using obscene language through a loudspeaker against a Palestinian woman, who is a local volunteer for the group and is filming the incident from her window.

In March 2016, Israeli Sergeant Elor Azaria shot dead a Palestinian who was lying immobile on the ground, following an alleged stabbing attack in the West Bank city of al-Khalil (Hebron).

Azaria was found guilty of manslaughter and given 18 months in prison. However, he was released earlier this month after serving only two-thirds of his sentence.

Yisrael Beitenu leader and Minister of Military Affairs, Avigdor Lieberman, said: “Israeli soldiers are under constant attack by Israel haters and supporters of terrorism who look constantly to degrade and sully them. We will put an end to this.”

However, Deputy Palestinian Information Minister Fayez Abu Aitta condemned the move and told Reuters, “This decision aims to cover up crimes committed by Israeli soldiers against our people, and to free their hands to commit more crimes.”

The phrasing of the bill stops short of a blanket ban, aiming instead at “anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian organizations” which spend “entire days near Israeli soldiers waiting breathlessly for actions that can be documented in a slanted and one-sided way so that soldiers can be smeared.”

The bill claims that B’Tselem and several other rights groups are supported by organizations and governments with “a clear anti-Israel agenda” and that the videos aim to damage Israel and its national security.

The ban would cover social networks as well as traditional media.

B’Tselem spokesman Amit Gilutz shrugged off the bill and said, “If the occupation embarrasses the government, then the government should take action to end it.”

“Documenting the reality of the occupation will continue regardless of such ridiculous legislation efforts,” he pointed out.

Palestinian journalists in May condemned the draft law, entitled “Prohibition against photographing and documenting IDF soldiers.”

The Palestinian Journalist Syndicate (PCJ) said in a statement that the “racist” bill “severely attacks the profession of the press and legitimizes the criminal practices committed by the Israeli occupation army against the Palestinian people.”

VIDEO: “Within 1 or 2 Years Iran Will Be Destroyed”

Kenneth Abramowitz, a full-fledged Zionist and dual US/Israeli national, is dreaming of war and total destruction of Iran. Indeed you can be assured he has Kushner’s and Trump’s ear — after all, he donated to the POTUS.

https://www.ngncapital.com/kenneth-abramowitz-full-bio/

https://youtu.be/gtlO1x96cBQ

Patrick Little

BOMBSHELL: A Little Investigation

You might be wondering why we posted a video of Patrick Little today praising him, and now we post this. Why the sudden change of opinion? Sadly, the devil is way more powerful than us humans and has a way of playing with our minds so they work against us. The reason why we posted that video is because we got excited! We felt Patrick was a breath of fresh air! Finally, someone who speaks out! ‘Little’ did we know about him. But, something he said about Assad on a different video, made us wonder. Why would he be ‘protecting’ Assad like that? When we all know by now, that Assad is part of the game? So, we decided to do some research and we found that someone had already done it, and a GREAT JOB by the way, so we congratulate him and decided to post his findings. Stay alert and remember, they want you on their side, and they will do whatever it takes because it is our ignorance that gives them ALL THEIR POWER! 

Patrick Little

“A Little Investigation,” Source: realmoarpheus.wordpress.com


little 000

Patrick Little came out of nowhere and information on him seems scarce, even coming from investigative reporters. Every voter deserves to know who their candidates are and hopefully, this post will shed a little light. This investigation is by no means complete. I encourage the People to form their own opinions based on the evidence available…and there’s plenty more to be found.
Don’t be sheep.

+———————————————–+
Part One: His cover examined
+———————————————–+

According to an interview on the Brexit Party podcast, after serving as a network admin in the U.S. Marine Corps, Little read Culture of Critique by Kevin MacDonald and became redpilled on the Jewish Question (http://archive.is/UL0Yq). Little then left a $100k/year IT job to combat Jews and save the white race. Let’s examine this claim.patrick resumeAccording to his online resume, he was an IT guy in the U.S. Marines.  But there’s another employer listed: Vets 4 Trump.

little-vets-4-trumphttp://archive.is/Vjg7bhttps://angel.co/vets4trump (they scrubbed Patrick once I started poking around)

Vets4Trump website seems abandoned. Odd.

little vets for trump 6

And the Facebook fanpage seems dead too.

little vets for trump 9

Vets4Trump seems like a front. They even tried raising $10 million on Fundly.

little vets for trump scam.JPG

Shane Burns, eh? Who is that?

little vets for trump 10

http://archive.is/fvBzl

little vets for trump 12

Shane’s LinkedIn has lots of leads. Ultimately it shows he’s the founder of REC Protocol

little vets for trump 11

https://www.linkedin.com/company/rec-protocol

Keep “renewable energy” in mind as we go forward.

While involved with Vets4Trump Patrick also worked with Nicole Garay.

little-vets-for-trump-6She’s the Vice Chair of the Sans Francisco Republican Party, and a Zionist Jew.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/ngaray

Her Twitter was also scrubbed recently and replaced.

little-vets-for-trump-5https://web.archive.org/web/20180522005757/https:/twitter.com/madamvicechair/status/996820721018929152

Who are these Zionists connected to the banking elite and Trump’s campaign? Why is everything backtraced to a small clique of Jewish persons operating within business and politics? And why are they scrubbing their tracks? Very strange.

What about Patrick’s claim of leaving a high paying IT job to save the white race? According to a business proposal sent by Little to (((John Moren))), Little is/was self-employed.

LITTLE-BUSINESS-6http://archive.is/1XgmR | https://file.io/HNjN8E | https://file.io/D4iW7E | https://file.io/ZgDBTzlittle morenhttps://web.archive.org/web/20180525195454/https://blog.sfgate.com/cityinsider/2011/09/19/citys-new-harbor-master-dives-right-in

The current facts lead me to believe Patrick merely put his own business on hold while LARPing as George Lincoln Rockwell. This, in my opinion, is not the act of a martyr but a conman. I’m certain Little can reclaim his career at any time or maybe anon’s prophesy is correct?

little prediction

To re-cap: Patrick Little left a $100k/year IT job, read Culture of Critique, and became a redpilled anti-Semite.

little coverstory 3

That cover sounds familiar…

little coverstory 2http://archive.is/Xg2dA

I wonder what else is the same? Wasn’t Mike Enoch a Libertarian before going “full 1488?”

little enoch libertarian

>muh libertarianism!

little libertarian

Oh, look. Patrick Little was also a Libertarian before taking the anti-Semitic redpill. https://voterrecords.com/voter/10970191/patrick-little

libertarianism

is Unit 8200 getting lazy? Little’s and Enoch’s cover-story are virtually identical.

So what about Kevin MacDonald? Besides claiming Jews are more successful than everyone else because they’re smarter (their control certainly has nothing to do with nepotism and criminality), Kevin defends Mike Enoch and TRS. Listen to MacDonald’s interview on (((Torah Talk))): https://youtu.be/6K6gT-yNw-4?t=1h4m40s Anyone refusing to expose Zionist nepotism while supporting likely MOSSAD operatives like Mike Enoch (will talk about him more later), all while promoting “based Nationalist Israel” is not redpilled and are incapable of redpilling others. MacDonald and Libertarianism both seem like stepping stones to anti-Semitism which produces Zionism. Clever, but not clever enough.

israel macdonald

Pat’s entire cover-story is suspicious. He’s worked with a lot of powerful Zionist Jews, has employment connections to the U.S. Government beyond just the Marines, and he came outta nowhere. I wonder if he’s also Jewish?

+————————————————–+
Part Two: Is Patrick Little Jewish?
+————————————————–+

This section is clearly for fun. Without both a DNA test and his family tree there’s no way of knowing his lineage, but we can discover enough information to form an educated opinion.

Patrick Ryan Little, 33 years old, is known to have lived in Florida….where he studied Hebrew. O_O

little coverstory 1

https://web.archive.org/web/20180525231511/https://www.jweekly.com/2018/05/10/senate-candidate-patrick-little-hates-jews-heres-matters

Interesting note: Little also studied Yiddish while attending high school in Germany. Check out the above article.

Alright, let’s examine Patrick’s connections to Florida.

little jewish 0

A couple relatives are listed, possibly his mother and father or aunt/uncle. Let’s examine Kathleen. https://nuwber.com/person/563a2dc4e0cd4806cb7f3a67

little mom 0

little mom 001https://www.beenverified.com/people/kathleen-m-little-191530416

Ah, so her middle initial “M” is for McDonough, likely her maiden name.

little mom 12https://www.whitepages.com/name/Kathleen-Mcdonough-Little/Jacksonville-FL/r3eqda7

In the Family & Relatives section, we find Patrick. This is definitely her. We also find a few family members: William, Lauren, /ourguy/ Patrick, Michael, and David Little. Let’s look into William Hunter Little.

little dad

He’s a real estate agent in Florida.

little dad 2.JPG

And employed at Watson Commercial. I wonder if they have an employee page?

little dad brother

Success! And not only is William listed but so is David Little.

little dad 4little dad 3

Let’s look at David.

little brother 3little brother 2Looks Jewish to me. What do you think?

William and David share the same eyes. They’re prbly father and son. Does Patrick Little have the same eyes?

little-jewish-9.png

https://web.archive.org/web/20180522021422/https://www.jta.org/2018/05/11/news-opinion/anti-semite-running-senate-california-opens-jewish-newspaper

Surrounding yourself with Jews. Working with Jews.  Learning Hebrew and Yiddish. The family seems to be Jewish. Highly suspicious. Are Jewish, Pat?

+——————————–+
Part Two: Mike Enoch
+——————————–+

Enoch and TRS have disavowed Patrick Little, which seems questionable considering Little reflects TRS style anti-Semitism.  In my opinion, the conflict is manufactured to confuse anons. /pol/ destroyed Mike Enoch and TRS so thoroughly that any person they promote is automatically viewed as a subversive plant. It seems natural Enoch would distance himself from prospects he and other TRS agents spam.

little TRS 1Full size: https://imgur.com/a/3epbnxO 

little enoch

If Enoch and Little have disavowed one another why do they look so /comfy/?

And why are shills promoting TRS in Patrick Little threads?

Moreover, the little support Patrick receives on /pol/ is looking like a PSYOP.

cry more kike ?

organic-1lolwut?! Maybe Portugalbro is just really excited about Patrick Little…

?

organic-2Jesus Christ…

/ourguy/

organic-3

psst…hey faggot, want to elect /ourguy/?

organic-4

Go ahead and try to convince me Patrick Little isn’t secretly being helped by TRS. I wonder if in a few days Enoch, Anglin, and others will openly embrace Little seeing as that’s the only move they can make now…or let Little fade into obscurity. Pick your poison, Mikey.

+—————————————+
Part Three: Road to Power
+—————————————+

road to power 2

The Road to Power paid for the Patrick Little robocall in an attempt to spread Little’s brand.

road to power 7

A recent article by Chad Sokol has exposed The Road to Power as run by Scott D. Rhodes, 49. He was busted leaving flyers promoting the DailyStormer at high schools and parking lots.

ROAD TO POWER 11

In the same article, we discover Rhodes’ real surname is Platek.

little rhodes 4

> inb4 Platek is (((Platek)))

little rhodes 1

A Polish Jew!

road to power 14

What’s most interesting to me is that Mr. (((Platek))) seems involved with Andrew Anglin, Weev, and the DailyStormer — even spreading their flyers. In my opinion, it’s evidence they’re helping Little along with TRS.

Hey kid… want a redpill?

little-Rhodes-maymay

To me, what really makes Patek glow is his American Discovery Publishing, LCC description. “Our team of research specialists, consumer advocates, editors, marketing specialists, programmers and designers…” This wouldn’t stand-out were it not for the fact Patek is involved in propaganda and information warfare. His “team” sounds like an Intelligence cell.

little rhodes 2What is Unit 8200?

This guy promotes Patrick Little and Andrew Anglin. Who is paying him? Is he involved with Mike Enoch too? And why does his flyer tell Jews to go back to Israel — is he a Zionist?

+—————————————+
Part Four: EuroFolk Radio
+—————————————+

Beside TRS and Patek, Little is being launched into eceleb status by various small-time nobodies on YouTube. Let’s look at one now EuroFolk Radio.

eurofolkradio 0http://archive.is/29fDZ

eurofolkradio 2hmmm…not much in the Whois. Let’s check the IP.

eurofolkradio 1Ah ha! So they also run openfreepress.com.

eurofolkradio 3http://archive.is/nKdmj

They didn’t hide their contact info ? Who is Paul Hesling? Check out his email addy: paul@voxinet.com

eurofolkradio 8

We’ve found an old LTD! I wonder what Paul is up to these days?..

eurofolkradio9https://suite.endole.co.uk/insight/company/09575356-energy7-ltd?page=overview

It seems he’s running an alternative energy LTD, called Energy7, along with a few other gentlemen.

eurofolkradio 10 https://archive.li/ZsCzR

Why are they operating in Africa?

eurofolkradio 11

Maybe if we look into the other directors of Energy7 it’ll make some sense.

eurofolkradio 12

First, Felix Riedl.

eurofolkradio 6He’s done lots of work with children in Africa.

http://archive.is/x3LAR | http://archive.is/csBqE | http://archive.li/trUF6

And Norbert Ruther seems to be a corrupt German politician.

eurofolkradio 4eurofolkradio 5He’s also a Cultural Marxist. I wonder what they’re up to in Africa, and why they’re involved in White Nationalist podcasts. This one little podcast is connected to some very powerful players. Makes me wonder who TRS is connected to.

+——————————————+
Part Five: WTF is Going On?
+——————————————+

In my opinion, there are a few possible reasons for this level of Deep State fuckery:

  1. To give Feinstein or another Democrat the vote
  2. To give another Republican the vote
  3. To promote a culture of anti-Semitism which results in Zionism

Let’s briefly look at why one or all of these are correct.

  1. To give Feinstein or another Democrat the vote

This scenario should be obvious to everyone. Patrick Little is highly unlikely to win California with his juvenile antics and the polls prove it. Patrick is doing a great job scaring the liberals into never voting Red.

little poll

2. To give another Republican the vote

This may be less obvious but consider who else is running as Republican. Most of the below candidates lack any social media presence and several of them even lack proper websites.

INVESTIGATE

There is only one candidate with a legitimate shot at winning the Trump crowd. Everyone else are total nobodies. And it just so happens she’s a Zionist Jew.

LITTLE CRUZerin cruz 3erin cruz 1

Compared to Patrick “Literally Hitler” Little, Erin Cruz is looking good to the Trumpfags. In the end, it may very well be Feinstein VS. Cruz. Either way, only Israel wins.

3. To promote a culture of anti-Semitism which results in Zionism

It feels counter-intuitive to rally against anti-Semitism given the crimes of the Tribe, but anons are realizing anti-Semitism and Zionism are two sides of the same shekel. Patrick Little, TRS, the Road to Power, Anglin and the DailyStormer… they all promote two things: Anti-Semitism and Zionism. By exposing the problems Jews cause it’s easy generating widespread anti-Semitism, which makes spreading Zionism natural because let’s just deport the Jews to Israel, right? This is Zionism, anons, even if reluctant… and it didn’t work so well for Hitler. Zionists create the problems, Zionists offer their solution. In a future post, we’ll explore both anti-Semitism and Zionism. Until then, stop falling for their tricks. Zionism is not the answer to the JQ and anti-Semitism belongs on /pol/.

little zionist 2TRS Jewish Nationalism

Antisemitism-Redpill.png

The last unspoken option four: all of the above

What if they are manipulating both sides to create confusion? At the height of said confusion, they can offer a seemingly reasonable solution and you are likely to accept it. Regardless of what their goal is, I could never believe Patrick Little is an organic candidate without a hidden agenda, but that’s my opinion.

This concludes Part One of our Little Investigation. Part Two later.

little maltegoBonus: I’ve uploaded a Maltego barebones file here.

UPDATE

Is 4chan compromised by Zionist Jews who now protect the Patrick Little spammers? Let’s find out…

little bannedBanned for posting an image exposing Jewish subversion of /pol/

little 4chan 2Jewish subversives not banned for actual spam

4chan redpillO hai, Jay!

little-how-do-you-do.jpgDisclaimer: The information contained in this post is the product of OSINT; all information is publicly available. If I’ve made any mistakes please contact me with the correction along with proofs. The purpose of this post is to spread what I sincerely believe is the truth based on research. Don’t do anything illegal as a result of what I write. See the original Spencergate disclaimer for more information: https://spencergate.wordpress.com/legal

“A Little Investigation – Part 2,” Source: realmoarpheus.wordpress.com 

little whoisThe whois registry for Patrick’s website returns a Florida phone number. Let’s check it out…

little phone 3According to Nuwber, the phone belongs to Wesley D. Parker. Who is that?

little wesley 1

He’s a Real Estate Appraiser in Florida.  You can read more about him here.

little wesley 2

According to PeopleSmart Wesley D. Parker is related to Wesley Ryan Parker.

little wesley 3

Wesley Ryan Parker was arrested for running weed. There should be a mugshot somewhere…

little wesley 4

WEW LAD!  That’s one kosher looking criminal. If Wesley Ryan Parker is Jewish and related to Wesley D. Parker that means Wesley D. Parker is likely also Jewish. Why is Little’s website coming back to Jews in Florida? This rabbit-hole can be explored further but let’s redirect our attention back to Patrick.

little-trs-reddit

In part one of this investigation ,I showed that the DailyStormer and TRS are likely aiding Patrick Little, and the admin of his Reddit page has basically admitted as much.

little enoch 2

And since exposing Enoch’s support for Little in my first post, Enoch was forced to publicly endorse Little. This is all looking like another (((TRS))) PSYOP.

TRS-=-JIDF.jpgWhy are MOSSADfags so incompetent?

Anyway. Patrick’s social media confirms that controlled opposition is controlled. He only follows 80+/- people on Gab  and it’s a literal who’s who of TRS and the DailyStormer.

patrick little following 13

His Twitter is even worse.

Patrick follows a lot of Nazbol cancer, like Alexander Dugin, whom I’ve touched upon before. Let’s take a look at some of the shills who protect him on social media to confirm.

little nazbol 2

little threat 3

little nazbol 3little nazbol complete

little threat 4

(((Nazbol))) kids are pulling e-muscle for Patrick Little. Why would commies protect an ebil Natzee?

little threat 3a

Is Patrick Little a crypto-Communist Jew working to infiltrate American politics? It’s looking that way to me. Maybe that’s why he refuses to address his Zionist shilling?

little coward 1little coward 2little coward 5

Nazbols think anons are too stupid to even care they’re being manipulated. Is that true, /pol/?

WAKE UP    WAKE UP    WAKE UP    WAKE UP    WAKE UP

PROTIP: How to Recognize an Israeli plant

  1. They’re “/ourguy/” or “/ourgirl/”
  2. They accuse you of Jewry
  3. They promote the agent like no other. All day, every day. Nothing organic to it.
  4. They say, “At least agent is doing something — what are you doing?!”
  5. They accuse you of being scared or a shill
  6. They defend the agent within seconds on many IPs to control public perception
  7. “Reported”
  8. Everyone who rejects the agent is automatically the same person
  9. Mis-use of the term “redpill” when everyone knows the first redpill is out of the Matrix controlled by Jews
  10. Agent somehow goes “full 1488” while rejecting all forms of National Socialism
  11. Agent promotes Zionism as the solution to the Jewish Problem

Stop Falling for Jewish Tricks!!!!!!

blacked

Disclaimer: The information contained in this post is the product of OSINT; all information is publicly available. If I’ve made any mistakes please contact me with the correction along with proofs. The purpose of this post is to spread what I sincerely believe is the truth based on research. Don’t do anything illegal as a result of what I write. See the original Spencergate disclaimer for more information: https://spencergate.wordpress.com/legal

VIDEO: There Is NO Free Speech

This video, produced by Johnny Gat, masterfully describes the current state of affairs regarding the ZOG (Zionist Occupied Government) & free speech.

Please lend your support, and subscribe to his YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1ynbS-PMSMJIniFVHIWm8g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_S9j9Ohcvk&t=

 

Palestine

COMMENTARY: U.S. Media Whitewashes Gaza Massacre

Everyone should know by now that world media is 100% controlled by Jewish interests, and no matter which side they take on a story, they always carefully follow an agenda. Zionists want people to kill each other and create as much chaos and confusion as possible. The end of this evil is near, but things will get worse before they get better. 

Palestine
“U.S. Media Whitewashes Gaza Massacre,” Source: consortiumnews.com 

 

As Israel killed more than 50 Palestinians in cold blood protesting the American embassy move on Monday, U.S. corporate media failed to accurately report what happened in Gaza, once again meekly protecting the government line, argues Joe Lauria.

Typical of the mindset of corporate media reporting on what happened in Gaza on Monday as Israeli soldiers killed more than 50 protesting Palestinians, is this tweet from CNN. It says: “Death toll rises to at least 52 people during clashes along the border fence between Israel and Gaza, Palestinian officials say. More than 2,400 people have been injured.” CNN’s new slogan is “#FactsFirst.”

Adam Johnson, who writes for the media watchdog Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, responded to CNN with a tweet of his own:

“This one’s got it all:

  • ‘death toll rises’ — no one was killed and no one specific party did the killing, the death toll just mysteriously ‘rises’
  • ‘clashes’ — launders all power asymmetry
  • ‘2,400 people have been injured’ — all 2,400 are Palestinian but lets go with ‘people’.”

Craig Murray, a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, said on his blog that he did a Google News search for the word “massacre” and found not one reference to Gaza.

New York Times headline on Monday said: “Dozens of Palestinians have died in protests as the U.S. prepares to open its Jerusalem Embassy.” Journalist Glenn Greenwald responded: “Most western media outlets have become quite skilled – through years of practice – at writing headlines and describing Israeli massacres using the passive tense so as to hide the culprit. But the all-time champion has long been, and remains, the New York Times.#HaveDied.”

[Perhaps because of pressure from Greenwald and others, the Times on Monday night changed its headline to “Israel Kills Dozens at Gaza Border as U.S. Embassy Opens in Jerusalem.”]

Yet another CNN headline simply read: “Dozens die in Gaza.” Journalist Max Blumenthal responded: “Maybe they were old. Perhaps they were very sick. They just up and died! Who will solve the mystery behind these deaths?”

Blumenthal later offered a possible solution to the mystery: “According to the White House, Khhamas launched 41 protesters into unsuspecting Israeli bullets.”

Projecting

Deflecting blame from Israel is one thing. But projecting it onto the victim is quite another. Israel’s UN Ambassador Danny Danon on Monday called for the U.N. Security Council to, “Condemn Hamas for their war crimes,” because “every casualty on the border is a direct victim of Hamas.” 

He said in a statement released by Israel’s U.N. mission:

“Condemn Hamas for the war crimes they commit. Not only does Hamas incite tens of thousands of Palestinians to breach the border and hurt Israeli civilians, but Hamas also deliberately endangers Palestinian civilians. The murder of Israeli civilians or deaths of the people of Gaza – each one of them is a desirable outcome for Hamas. Every casualty on the border is a victim of Hamas’ war crimes, every death is a result of Hamas’ terror activity, and these casualties are solely Hamas’ responsibility.”

That’s one way to wash the Israeli government’s (blood-soaked) hands of the matter. Especially if you fear Israel will be accused of war crimes itself for its actions on Monday. Danon mentioned, “breaching the border.” But it is virtually impossible to get in or out of Gaza without Israeli permission. Burning kites lofted over the barrier that pens in nearly two million Gazans subject to an internationally unrecognized economic blockade, supposedly constitutes “breaching,” in Danon’s mind.

He would do well to consider the words of Moshe Dayan, one of the Israel’s Founding Fathers, who said in 1956:

“What cause have we to complain about their fierce hatred to us? For eight years now, they sit in their refugee camps in Gaza, and before their eyes we turn into our homestead the land and villages in which they and their forefathers have lived.” He went on: “We are a generation of settlers, and without the steel helmet and gun barrel, we shall not be able to plant a tree or build a house. . . . Let us not be afraid to see the hatred that accompanies and consumes the lives of hundreds of thousands of Arabs who sit all around us and wait for the moment when their hands will be able to reach our blood.”

So on the day, 61 years later, when the United States declared Jerusalem/Al Quds as the capital of Israel by moving its embassy there, rather than leaving its status to negotiation, people still trapped in Gaza protested at the gate fencing them in while Israeli military snipers picked off more than 50 of them and wounded thousands more for protesting their entrapment.

U.S. Parrots Israel, Media Parrots U.S.

Danon’s position was callously promoted by the White House on Monday. Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah was asked several times to condemn Israel’s military response. “We believe Hamas is responsible for these tragic deaths,” he said. “Their rather cynical exploitation of the situation is what’s leading to these deaths and we want it stopped.” He later blamed Hamas for a “gruesome and unfortunate propaganda attempt.”

Unsurprisingly, Congress also lined up behind the Jewish State, mostly ignoring what went on in Gaza.

At the ceremony opening the embassy, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, called Monday “a monumental day in United States-Israel relations.” Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, who was among four senators and 10 members of the House of Representatives present, incredulously said moving the embassy “furthers the chances of peace in the Middle East by demonstrating that America’s support for Israel is unconditional and will not be bullied by global media opinion.”

Back in Washington, Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, proclaimed: “Every nation should have the right to choose its capital. I sponsored legislation to do this two decades ago, and I applaud President Trump for doing it.”

Ajamu Baraka, the Green Party vice presidential candidate in 2016, tweeted: Where are the democrats condemning the slaughter in Gaza? If this was Assad they would be joining the republicans calling for military action pretending like they cared for Arab life.”

Handful of Democrats Speak Out

Bernie Sanders of Vermont mildly criticized Israel’s murderous response. “Hamas violence does not justify Israel firing on unarmed protesters,” he said. “The United States must play an aggressive role in bringing Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Egypt and the international community together to address Gaza’s humanitarian crisis and stop this escalating violence.”

Senator Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat from California, was more critical: “It’s just heartbreaking. The humanitarian situation in Gaza is desperate. Instead of cutting aid, the Trump administration must restore our leadership role and do what it can to alleviate the Palestinians’ suffering. The location of the embassy is a final-status issue that should have been resolved as part of peace negotiations where both sides benefit, not just one side. Israel will only know true security when it is at peace with its neighbors.”

Representative Betty McCollum, a Democrat from Minnesota, tweeted: “Today’s @USEmbassyIsrael opening in Jerusalem & killing of dozens of Gaza protesters advances @netanyahu agenda of occupation & oppression of Palestinians. @realDonaldTrump policies are fueling conflict, abandoning diplomatic efforts to achieve peace.”

Pressure to support Israel on The Hill is infamously intense. But what is the media’s excuse for being afraid to simply report facts, such as that Israeli soldiers “killed” Palestinians on Monday? They didn’t just simply die.

Just because U.S. government figures are apologists for Israel, does not mean the media must be too. But that would require the U.S. having an independent mainstream media.

When control of powerful mainstream communications breeds self-aggrandizement and adherence to a line pushed for so long because it got you where you are in the pecking order of media culture, it seems virtually impossible to shift gears and take another look at what you are reporting.

COMMENTARY: Trump And Netanyahu Bringing Us Closer To The End Times

We can clearly say that Cultural Marxism has won the battle. Our society lives by the phrase ‘don’t make your problem my problem’. People go about their lives ignoring the suffering of those who are in dire need of help. This is a society of zombies, who think their little world is all there is. How long do these idiots think they have until justice is done? Do they really think that nothing will ever happen to them?  One of these days God will finally say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. The good news is that we are one day closer to that day. 

In the meantime, Communism continues to make progress. On the one hand, we see blood sacrifices continuing to take place in the Middle East and all around the world. Jews are one step closer to owning the world oil reserves, not that they don’t already, but they have to ‘justify their evil actions’ to the ignorant Goyim. Iran who is also in the game is being used to help boycott the US Dollar. Gas prices will continue to go up, so the Goyim will need more money to survive. They have to keep us busy, so we don’t have time to think about anything else but how to survive in the jungle.

On the other hand, Putin is in power for another …. who knows how long, so is Netanyahu and, Trump continues to follow orders from the Kremlin. The One Belt One Road is progressing fast with the help of our Chinese friends and pretty soon, we will not need to buy clothes, because we will get to wear uniforms provided by our One World Government Comrades. Oh! And let’s not forget Pope Francis! He is doing an amazing job of brainwashing the faithful, leading them to believe that there is no difference amongst religions, after all, they all take you to God. It doesn’t matter what Jesus said, we have to obey Comrade Francis. 

And finally, here is an article from State-owned Russian Television directed by Comrade Putin and his puppet collaborators. Rt.com is dedicated to brainwashing the Goyim on a daily basis, blaming their comrade the Jewnited States of the crimes that are committing. Remember, they can’t leave any trace of democracy, they must finish with it. 

George Galloway George Galloway was a member of the British Parliament for nearly 30 years. He presents TV and radio shows (including on RT). He is a film-maker, writer and a renowned orator.

“Trump & Netanyahu bringing us closer to end of times,” Source: rt.com

 The biblical town of Armageddon is but a few miles as the bullets fly from the site of the latest Gaza massacre which has taken us further down the road to the end of times.

Its proximate cause was the latest Man-Child effort of Donald J Trump, this time to relocate the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv, with all the other embassies, to Jerusalem, half of which though annexed by Israel still constitutes Occupied Territory under international law.

It is a criminal offense to “make permanent changes” on “territory acquired by force” – which this territory was in 1967 when Israel seized it by force of arms.

Israel has made many such changes to Occupied Territories. For example, the Golan Heights still belongs to Syria despite the many illegal settlements built there, however, much-stolen oil is extracted there, or however many field hospitals for Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) and Al-Qaeda fighters Israel erects there. That like Jerusalem, the Golan has been illegally annexed makes no difference at all in law nor to every other government in the world. Except Trump’s government.

In fact, every US president in the last 50 years has promised to move the US embassy to Jerusalem, at least whilst running for election. But campaigning is done in poetry, governing is done in prose and no president has followed through on this pledge. Except Donald Trump.

That his decision would entirely predictably lead to a bloodbath may not have occurred to Trump, but it certainly did to the professionals around him, from those aghast at the State Department to those salivating for the provocation, dripping from the mustache of the likes of John Bolton.

There have been many bloodbaths, of course, but there is reason to believe that this one may be of more lasting significance. It surely hastens the political passing of the Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas for whom time and circumstance have run their course. It makes it more likely that the Palestinian Mandela, the prisoner Marwan Barghouti, will enter the race –  from behind bars – to be his successor and make more likely his success.

It may – temporarily at least – complicate the all-but-consummated courtship between the Saudi Crown Prince MbS (Mohammad bin Salman) and Prime Minister Netanyahu, enjoined by their mutual antipathy towards Iran but now, inevitably, tempered by the Gaza massacre. The religious establishment in Saudi Arabia and the conservative forces are waiting for their excuse to strike back at the man who allegedly hung his relatives upside down in the Ritz-Carlton until their money fell out of their trouser pockets, and the massacre gives them a perfectly Kosher opportunity to do so.

It makes more difficult any complicity by any Arab ruler with any Israeli provocation against Iran. Many Arabs may be hostile to Iran but, after this week, many have rediscovered their antipathy towards Netanyahu.

The already-vaulting opposition to Israeli crimes against the Palestinians in Western countries –  which has led to spectacular successes in the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement across several continents – will likely intensify too.

When I joined the movement in solidarity with the Palestinians back in 1975 you could have fitted the supporters of the PLO in Britain into a medium-sized hall. Now you couldn’t fit them into Hyde Park or indeed all of Central London. Back then there was genuine affection for the State of Israel in all Western countries. Now nobody moves for Israel out of love, only out of interest. And interest too is waning.

The US is now defunct as a broker in the Middle East, that mantle surely passed smoothly to Russia this week.

For Trump and Netanyahu – on whom both their respective police forces may be closing fast –  there is no way back. That they are steeped in blood so far that none could tell whether it is bloodier to go on or to go o’er is self-evident. Trump tweeted on the morning of the massacre that “This is a big day for Israel, a big day.” For once he was quite accurate. Just not in the way he could possibly have imagined.

 

 

 

Netanyahu

PM Authorized To Declare War In ‘Extreme’ Situations Without Consulting Cabinet

Interesting to see how Netanyahu and Putin ‘leaders of the Satanic NWO’, continue in power ruling over their ‘respective democracies’. Now Bibi is authorized to declare war only during an ‘extreme’ situation. The only extreme situation is the dangerous POWER and CONTROL they already have over the world and their mindset on killing the Goyim.

Netanyahu

“PM authorized to declare war in ‘extreme’ situations without consulting cabinet,” Source: timesofisrael.com

In a surprise and potentially far-reaching victory for Benjamin Netanyahu, the Knesset on Monday evening gave the prime minister the authority to declare war or order a major military operation by consulting only the defense minister, and not via a full cabinet vote as the law had previously required.
Sixty-two Knesset members voted the dramatic proposal into law, beating out the 41 opposition MKs who opposed it claiming that the language of the law effectively gives free reign to the prime minister by removing all oversight. According to the new law, in “extreme circumstances,” military operations can be authorized by the prime minister and defense minister alone and will not need a vote by cabinet ministers. The law does not specify exactly what those circumstances may be, or who will determine them, saying only that the case will apply, “if the issue is necessary due to urgency.”

IDF soldiers in Hebron on June 17, 2014. (AFP Photo/Hazem Bader)

The proposal — advanced by Netanyahu since last year — had been rejected earlier in the day by members of two key Knesset committees: Law and Justice, and Foreign Affairs and Defense. It was resubmitted, however, by Likud member and Foreign Affairs and Defense committee chairman Avi Dichter during the second and third readings of a broader amendment and was voted into law as part of that wider legislation.

That wider amendment allows the government to delegate the authority for going to war under normal circumstances, or mobilizing for a major military operation, to a forum made up of “at least half” of all cabinet ministers.

Chairman of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, Avi Dichter, leads a committee meeting at the Knesset, on April 30, 2018. (Miriam Alster/Flash90)

Some eight years ago, Netanyahu and then-defense minister Ehud Barak instructed the chief of staff and head of the Mossad intelligence service to put the army into a state of readiness, only to be told by the latter two that the relevant activity was illegal because it had not been properly approved and could lead to war.

There have, however, been numerous occasions where decisions of a similar nature have been taken by just the Security Cabinet, a smaller forum of ministers tasked with forming policy regarding war and peace, or other smaller forums of ministers.

National Security Adviser Ya'akov Amidror (right) seen here talking with IDF Chief of General Staff Benny Gantz (photo credit: Miriam Alster/Flash90)

Yaakov Amidror (right) seen here talking with IDF Chief of General Staff Benny Gantz (photo credit: Miriam Alster/Flash90)

A committee set up in 2016 under a former National Security Adviser, Major General (res.) Yaakov Amidror, to examine the functioning of the security cabinet and the way it informs and updates ministers, recommended bringing the law into line with what he said had become the “normal practice.” In June last year, the cabinet voted in favor of amending the law.

Two opposition lawmakers — Zionist Union’s Omer Bar Lev, an IDF reserve officer with the rank of colonel and a former commander of the elite unit Sayeret Matkal, and Yesh Atid’s Ofer Shelah, a company commander in the reserve Paratroopers Brigade who lost an eye during the 1982 Lebanon War — warned the committees that the wording of the new legislation could enable the prime minister to exclude lawmakers who opposed a military operation and to bring such an operation to a vote in their absence.

Yesh Atid MK Ofer Shelah speaks during a press conference regarding the so-called “Recruitment Law” in Tel Aviv on September 12, 2017. (Miriam Alster/Flash90)

They also said that allowing the prime minister and defense minister to decide when a situation is considered “extreme circumstances” would give them full power to go to war without any oversight.

Shelah later charged that coalition members voted “against their own opinions, in the matter of life and death” because of pressure from Netanyahu

“Netanyahu’s contempt for everyone around him and for everything we’ve learned from our many wars has overtaken the judgment of many good and experienced Knesset members,” he said.

The Israel Democracy Institute submitted a series of reservations to the committees about the bill, including requiring the approval of the prime minister, deputy prime minister and ministers of several key departments and suggesting defining which military activities needed cabinet approval and which did not. None of the institute’s recommendations was accepted.

Despite unsuccessfully opposing the bill in the Knesset, opposition parties told The Times of Israel Monday night that there were no current plans to petition against it in the High Court.

Ben Gurion

COMMENTARY: ‘We Look At Them Like Donkeys’ – What Israel’s First Ruling Party Thought About Palestinian Citizens

There is an ‘apparent’ clear divide among Jews today, but one finds it hard to believe that there are Jews who do not think or feel different than non-Jews, especially when they have been raised believing that they are the ‘chosen people of God’. The truth of the matter is, that Jews have ALWAYS been a problem, because they DO NOT INTEGRATE, but rather INFILTRATE and CORRODE society. 

So what is this ‘divide’ all about then? Could it be that there is a plan to destroy those who are not ‘that Jewish’?

Ben Gurion‘We look at them like donkeys’: What Israel’s first ruling party thought about Palestinian citizens,” Source: haaretz.com

“The Arab question in Israel” was the term used in the top ranks of Mapai, the ruling party in the young State of Israel – and forerunner of Labor – to encapsulate the complex issue that arose after the War of Independence of 1948-49. In the wake of the fighting, and the armistice agreements that concluded the war, about 156,000 Arabs remained within Israel (out of an estimated 700,000 before the war), accounting for 14 percent of the nascent state’s population. So it was with some justification that Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett stated in a meeting of Mapai Knesset members and the party’s senior leadership, on June 18, 1950, that “this is one of the fundamental questions of our policy and of the future of our country.” He added that the issue was one “that will determine the direction of the country’s morality,” for “our entire moral stature depends on this test – on whether we pass it or not.”

Almost 70 years later, the “Arab question in Israel” continues to pose a conundrum for politicians when they address the issue of the status of Palestinian citizens of Israel (or, as they are often imprecisely called, “Israeli Arabs”).

The minutes of the meetings held by Mapai, which are stored in the Labor Party Archive in Beit Berl, outside Kfar Sava, attest to the deep dispute in the party over two conflicting approaches concerning the Arabs in Israel. Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion and his associates – Moshe Dayan (Israel Defense Forces chief of staff 1953-1958) and Shimon Peres, at the time a senior official in the Defense Ministry – urged a policy of segregation and a hard hand against what he argued was a communal threat to national security; while Sharett and other Mapai leaders – Pinhas Lavon, Zalman Aran, David Hacohen and others – promoted a policy of integration.

The disagreement between Ben-Gurion and Sharett mirrored the respective approaches held by the two regarding the Arab world in general. Sharett was critical of Ben-Gurion’s policy, which he said, held that “the only language the Arabs understand is force,” and called for an approach that preferred the “matter of peace.” Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, then a Knesset member, and later Israel’s second president (1952-1963), summed up succinctly the alternatives in a meeting of the Mapai MKs several weeks later, on July 9, 1950: “The question is the attitude the state takes toward the minorities. Do we want them to remain in the country, to be integrated in the country, or to get out of the country We declared civic equality irrespective of race difference. Does this refer to a time when there will be no Arabs in the country? If so, it’s fraud.”

‘Transfer’ option

The discussions within the party were quite freewheeling, even if speakers frequently expressed concern of leaks to the press, which could have lead to international pressure on Israel to improve the treatment of its Arab citizens. Indeed, the future of the relations between the peoples who inhabited the country demanded weighty political decisions. Among the issues in question: the right to vote, the Absentees’ Property Law, the status of the Arab education system, membership of Arab workers in the Mapai-affiliated Histadrut federation of labor, and more.

One proposition that arose frequently in the discussions was that of a transfer – the expulsion of the Arabs who continued to reside in Israel – a term that some found grating already then. In the June 1950 meeting, Sharett took issue with the allegation, voiced by Ben-Gurion and his supporters, that the Arabs in Israel were a “fifth column.” That was a simplistic assumption, Sharett said, “which needs to be examined.” As he saw it, the fate of the relations between the two peoples depended overwhelmingly on the Jews. “Will we continue to fan the flames?” Sharett asked, or try to douse them? Even though a high-school education was not yet mandatory under law (and the state was not obligated to offer one), a large number of the Jewish youth in the country attended high school, and Sharett thought that the state should establish high schools for the Arabs as well. Israel needs “to guarantee them their cultural minimum,” he added.

For political reasons, the segregationists tended to ignore the difference between the Arabs living in Israel and those who were left on the other side of the border following the war, many of whom made attempts to “infiltrate” and return to their homes. Sharett took the opposite view: “A distinction must be made between vigorous action against Arab infiltration” and “discrimination against Arabs within the country.”

Ben Gurion David Ben-Gurion. Fritz Cohen / GPO

Ranking figures such as Sharett and Lavon, who was defense minister in 1954-55, viewed positively a further exodus of Arabs from the country, but only “by peaceful means.” Sharett vehemently objected to the position taken by Dayan, who not only wanted to bring about a situation in which there would be fewer Arabs in Israel, but sought to achieve this through active expulsion. In Sharett’s view, “We must not strive to do this by a wholesale policy of persecution and discrimination.” Sharett spoke of “distinctly unnecessary forms of cruelty, which are tantamount to an indescribable desecration of God’s name.”

Dayan, notwithstanding the fact that he was serving in the army at the time – as head of Southern Command – participated in Mapai’s political meetings and helped set public policy. He was one of the leaders of the aggressive stance against the country’s Arabs and was against a proposal that they should serve in the army (an idea that came up but was shelved). He opposed granting the Arabs “permanent-citizenship certificates,” opposed compensating those who had been dispossessed of their land, and in fact opposed every constructive action that could contribute to bridge-building between the peoples. “Let’s say that we help them live in the situation they are in today” and no more, he proposed.

Dayan’s approach remained consistent over the years, and conflicted with the view taken by Sharett and the stream in Mapai that he represented. Speaking in the same June 1950 meeting, Dayan asserted, “I want to say that in my opinion, the policy of this party should be geared to see this public, of 170,000 Arabs, as though their fate has not yet been sealed. I hope that in the years to come there will perhaps be another possibility to implement a transfer of these Arabs from the Land of Israel, and as long as a possibility of this sort is feasible, we should not do anything that conflicts with this.”

Dayan also objected to Sharett’s proposals to improve the level of education among the country’s Arabs. “It is not in our interest to do that,” he said. “This is not the only question on which the time for a final solution has not yet arrived.”

Zalman Aran, a future education minister, objected to the military government that had been imposed on Israel’s Arabs at the time of statehood and remained in effect until 1966. Under its terms, Arabs had to be equipped with permits both to work and to travel outside their hometowns, which were also under curfew at night. “As long as we keep them in ghettos,” Aran said, no constructive activity will help. Lavon, too, urged the dismantlement of the military government. In 1955, a few months after resigning as defense minister, he savaged the concept at a meeting in Beit Berl. “The State of Israel cannot solve the question of the Arabs who are in the country by Nazi means,” he stated, adding, “Nazism is Nazism, even if carried out by Jews.”

Even earlier, Lavon was a sharp critic of the line taken by Dayan and other advocates of transfer. At a meeting of another Mapai leadership forum, on May 21, 1949, he said acidly, “It’s well known that we socialists are the best in the world even when we rob Arabs.” A few months later, on January 1, 1950, in another meeting, he warned, “It is impossible to take action among the Arabs when the policy is one of transfer. It is impossible to work among them if the policy is to oppress Arabs – that prevents concrete action. What is being carried out is a dramatic and brutal suppression of the Arabs in Israel… Transfer is not on the cards. If there is not a war, they will not go. Two-hundred thousand Arabs will be citizens in terms of voting… As the state party, we must set for ourselves a constructive policy in the Arab realm.”

Back in December 1948, during the discussions on granting the right to vote for the Constituent Assembly – Israel’s first parliamentary institution, which was elected in January 1949, and a month later became the “Israel Knesset” – Ben-Gurion agreed to grant the right to vote to the Arabs who had been in the country when a census was taken, a month earlier. About 37,000 Arabs were registered in the census. The decision to enfranchise them apparently stemmed from party-political considerations. The thinking was that most of them would vote for Mapai.

This assessment was voiced in the discussions on the Citizenship Law in early 1951, when Ben-Gurion expressed the most assertive opinion. He refused to grant the right to vote to the Arabs who were living in the country lawfully (as Sharett demanded) but who had been elsewhere during the census (because they had fled or had been expelled in the wake of the war); or to those Arabs who resided in the “Triangle” (an area of Arab towns and villages on the Sharon plain), which was annexed to Israel only in April 1949, under the armistice agreement with Jordan. “Is there no country in the world that has two types of citizens in elections [meaning voting and non-voting],” Ben-Gurion asked rhetorically in a meeting of Mapai MKs on February 20, 1951.

Moshe Dayan. Fritz Cohen / GPO

In the view of Sharett, who submitted a conflicting draft resolution, it would not be possible to defend “this situation in regard to ourselves and in regard to these Arabs, and in regard to the Arabs in Israel as a whole and in terms of world public opinion. Accordingly, I suggest granting them the right to vote… Discriminate only against the Arabs who entered Israel without permission.”

Sharett maintained that Ben-Gurion had not given consideration to the root of the problem. “Terrible things” were being done against Arabs in the country, he warned. “Until a Jew is hanged for murdering an Arab for no reason, in cold blood, the Jews will not understand that Arabs are not dogs but human beings.” Sharett’s view carried the day in the vote, and the Arabs in the Triangle voted in the elections.

In the July 9, 1950, meeting, MK David Hacohen disputed the argument that discrimination against the Arabs and the institution of the military government were essential for the country’s security. Assailing the Absentees’ Property Law – a series of measures that allowed the state to expropriate land and homes abandoned by Palestinians who were displaced during the war, even if they subsequently returned to the country – he said, “I don’t know whether it was clear to us all, when we voted, how grave it is.” He noted that, “According to the law, when an Arab dies, his property does not go to his wife but to the Custodian of Absentees’ Property It is inconceivable for us to declare equality of all citizens and at the same time have a law like this on the books.”

Apparently, no one took issue with the next comparison Hacohen drew: “These laws that we are coming up with in regard to Israel’s Arab residents cannot even be likened to the laws that were promulgated against the Jews in the Middle Ages, when they were deprived of all rights. After all, this is a total contrast between our declarations and our deeds.”

A similar approach was voiced during the same meeting by Zalman Aran, who viewed Mapai’s handling of the Arabs as a “process of despair” that must be rejected instead of finding excuses for it.

“Morally, if we are a movement that does not lie, and we do not want to lie, we are here living a total lie,” he said. “All the books and articles that have been written, and the speeches made internally and for external consumption, are groundless when it comes to implementation. I am not talking about the attitude of individuals in the country toward the Arabs. I am talking about a [policy] line. I reject this line, which has emerged within society and has a thousand-and-one manifestations. I do not accept all the excuses that have been put forward.”

Taking issue with Dayan’s approach, Aran compared the situation of the Arabs in Israel with the situation of Jews in other countries. “On the basis of what we are doing here to the Arabs, there is no justification for demanding a different attitude toward Jewish minorities in other countries I would be contemptuous of Arabs who would want to form ties with us on the basis of this policy. We would be lying in the [Socialist] Internationale, we are lying to ourselves and we are lying to the nations of the world.”

Dayan – still an officer in uniform, it must be remembered – objected to the opinions voiced by Hacohen and Aran, and saw no reason to draw a distinction between the Arab public in Israel and Arabs in enemy countries. “I am far more pessimistic about the prospect of viewing these Arabs as loyal,” he countered.

Moshe Sharett. Frank Scherschel

Flawed democracy

During the same period of a decade-plus when Ben-Gurion was premier, a political battle raged in Mapai over the continued existence of the military government. Ben-Gurion persistently defended the military government, which he saw as a “deterrent force” against the Arabs in Israel. In a meeting of the Mapai Secretariat on January 1, 1962, he railed against the “dominant naivete” of those, such as Sharett and Aran, who do not understand the Arabs, and warned of the possible consequences: “There are people living under the illusion that we are like all the nations, that the Arabs are loyal to Israel and that what happened in Algeria cannot happen here.”

He added, “We view them like donkeys. They don’t care. They accept it with love…” To loosen the reins on the Arabs would be a great danger, he added: “You and your ilk” – those who support the abolition of the military government or making it less stringent – “will be responsible for the perdition of Israel.” A decade earlier, on January 15, 1951, Shmuel Dayan, Moshe Dayan’s father, a Mapai leader and longtime Knesset member, had voiced similar sentiments in a meeting of Mapai MKs. The Arabs, he said, “could be good citizens, but it’s clear that at the moment they become an obstacle, they will constitute a terrible danger.”

A decade later, Aran offered an opposite assessment of the situation. Speaking at a meeting of the Mapai Secretariat in January 1962, he maintained that it was the military government that “is exacerbating the situation.” He also rejected the Algeria analogy. On the contrary, he thought, the existence of the military government would not delay an Arab uprising but would only spur it. He reiterated his critique of the early 1950s a decade later. He was against a situation in which the Arabs are “second-class” citizens who lack rights like the Jews, and he was critical of both himself and his colleagues: “We accepted this thing, we became accustomed to it… We took it in stride… It’s hard to swallow… No Arab in the State of Israel is able, needs to, is capable of – whatever you give him economically, educationally – accepting that he is a second-class citizen in this country. I think that the world does not know the true situation. If it did, it would not let us keep going on this way.”

Already then, Finance Minister Levi Eshkol, under whose term as prime minister the military government would be abolished, foresaw the dire consequences: “It would not surprise me if something new suddenly emerges, that people will not want to rent a stable – or a room – to an Arab in some locale, which is the [logical] continuation of this situation. Will we be able to bear that?”

One person who was not impressed by such arguments was the deputy defense minister, Shimon Peres. In a Mapai Secretariat meeting on January 5, 1962, he maintained that in practice, the military government “is not a strain on the Arabs.” The military government, he added, was [effectively] created by the Arabs, “who endanger Israel and as long as that danger exists, we must meet it with understanding.” In contrast, Isser Harel, head of the Shin Bet security service (1948-1952) and the Mossad (1952-1963), stated in 1966, days after resigning as Eshkol’s adviser for intelligence and security, that “the military government is not a security necessity, and therefore there is no need for its existence. The army should not be dealing with the Arab citizens. That is a flaw in terms of our democracy” (quoted in the daily Maariv, July 10, 1966). That had been the view of the security hawks, including Yigal Allon, since the early 1950s.

Over the years, it was claimed that the military government had served as a tool in Mapai’s hands for reinforcing its rule, both by giving out jobs and by distributing benefits, and also by intervening in election campaigns through the creation of Arab factions within existing parties that were convenient for the ruling party (and suppressing opponents on the other side). This is not the venue to discuss that allegation – for which evidence exists – but it’s worth noting one of the motifs of the hard-hand policy, which preserved the segregation between Arabs and Jews, as expressed candidly by Ben-Gurion in the meeting of the Mapai Secretariat on January 5, 1962: “The moment that the difference between Jews and Arabs is eliminated, and they are at the same level If on that day there does not exist a regime in a world where there are no more wars, I do not have the shadow of a doubt that Israel will be eradicated and no trace will remain of the Jewish people.”

DEBATE: Is A Two-State Solution Still Even Possible?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRf-4NtCw7c

Israeli MPs pass a new law making it harder for any future government to cede Jerusalem.

In the words of one Israeli opposition member of parliament: “When Jerusalem burns, everything burns”.

Nahman Shai fears a newly passed law in the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, could lead to more unrest in the Middle East. The Israeli law makes it harder to divide the contested capital of Jerusalem in any future deal with the Palestinians. Israel says the city is its capital. Palestinian leaders say East Jerusalem has always been their capital.

It all could have a dramatic impact on any peace deal between Israel and Palestine – with some saying its yet another fatal blow to a possible two-state solution.