Israeli Brig-General likens IOF to worms
Urbicide by worming: the zionist entity’s cutting edge in military strategy.
_______
Israel: Sanctions must target Iran energy sector
Press TV – February 22, 2010
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continues on his campaign for international sanctions to be imposed against Iran’s energy sector.
“We must prohibit Iranian oil exports and imports to Iran of refined oil products. No other sanctions will be effective,” Netanyahu said in Jerusalem (Al-Quds) at a meeting of delegates from the Jewish Agency, an organization that encourages Jewish immigration to Israel.
Netanyahu went so far as to say the UN Security Council should be sidestepped if it cannot agree on the move.
“We have arrived at a point where the international community has to decide if it seriously plans to stop Iran’s nuclear program,” he added.
Netanyahu’s effort to stop Iran’s nuclear program — which Tehran says is peaceful — comes while Israel is reportedly the sole possessor of nuclear arsenals in the Middle East with 200 nuclear warheads.
On a visit to Russia last week, Netanyahu insisted on the need for “biting sanctions that have the power to influence the regime, bitter sanctions that have to hit, in a convincing way, the oil industry, imports, exports and refining.”
Russia’s Foreign Ministry, however, rebuffed the call and announced that Moscow is against imposing sanctions on Iran, noting that Russia has always favored a diplomatic solution with regards to Iran’s nuclear program.
Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Moscow was against imposing “crippling sanctions” on Iran.
The US, Israel and some Western countries accuse Iran of seeking atomic weapons under the guise of its nuclear energy program.
Iran denies that it seeks to build an atomic bomb and says it only wants to enrich uranium for civilian purposes such as generating electricity and producing medical isotopes.
Israeli assassinations: crime against humanity?
By Rachel Rudolph | Palestine Telegraph | February 21, 2010
Dominating the world news, even in the United States, is the Al-Mabhouh assassination. Israel has a long history of engaging in targeted killings and assassinations, so why has this one sparked media frenzy? Many outlets are focusing on the use of fake passports, while others are condemning the lack of action by those governments whose passports were used. Very few are actually focusing on the act of assassination itself and its consequences under international law. While targeted killings of specific individuals with government approval are permissible under international law under certain conditions, assassinations (an attack on an individual who believes there is no need to fear the attacker) are not. Was the murder of Al-Mabhouh an assassination? If so, is this another Israeli crime against humanity?
While I am sure Palestine Telegraph readers are well acquainted with the murder, a little background should be given to help understand the applicability of international law. Born in the Jabalya camp in the northern Gaza Strip on Feb. 14, 1960, Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh was murdered on Jan. 20 at a hotel in Dubai. There was no reason to suspect that this trip would be his last, as Al-Mabhouh had travelled to Dubai in the past and never encountered any problems. However, while he had no problems travelling to Dubai, Israel’s Mossad had attempted to take his life three times in the past: in 1991, 2004 and 2008. The last attempt followed the Israeli assassination of Imad Mughniyeh, a top military leader with the Lebanese Hizbullah organization. (He was blamed for the kidnapping of Western hostages in Beirut – including the Briton Terry Waite – and a 1983 bombing that killed 240 U.S. marines in the Lebanese capital.)
Al-Mabhouh was murdered by a team consisting of 11 agents. The team of agents changed hotels, arrived from different locations and changed their clothes to thwart identification. All of them had Austrian mobile numbers and conducted encrypted calls from Dubai to Austria. None, however, had prior contact with one another, as all communication went through the Austrian office. Austrian authorities said they intended to open an investigation. Dubai also detained two Palestinian Fatah security officials in connection with the murder.
The team of 11 also used fake passports. Mossad has a history of using foreign passports to carry out its activities. In 1987, Margaret Thatcher deported 13 Israeli diplomats after the assassination of a Palestinian cartoonist in London. In 1997, Israeli agents traveling with fake Canadian passports were arrested in Amman after attempting to assassinate Khaled Meshaal, the elected head of the Hamas politburo. In 1998, Labour’s MP Galloway stated that four members of the UN weapons inspection team in Iraq were Mossad agents working under false names and papers.
Israel’s response to Mossad’s involvement in the Al-Mabhouh murder was noncommittal. Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman said there was no evidence of Israeli involvement, but in any case, Israel never responds, never confirms and never denies. This response or lack thereof was to be expected given Israel’s policy on Mossad actions.
Prior to Efraim Havely becoming the ninth director of Mossad, the prime minister’s approval for such operations was needed. Havely disagreed with this policy, arguing that the prime minister needs “deniability” and must be insulated from any failures as well. While the procedure for selecting targets has not been made public, the overall sense of how decisions are made has emerged. According to Steven R. David (2003), Israeli intelligence agencies rely on the testimony of collaborators to identify those who pose a threat to security. A report on the target’s activities is complied and the potential for him or her to engage in future attacks is assessed. A recommendation is then made to target the individual, which is approved or disapproved by the Israeli government. Once approval is given, no further permission is sought for the operation in terms of timing, location, etc.
History of Israeli Assassinations
The history of Israeli assassinations actually predates the declaration of statehood by Israel. Nachman Ben-Yehuda (1997) examines the political assassinations carried out prior to and after the establishment of the State of Israel. According to his findings, up until 1988, 90 percent of the political assassinations occurred between 1939 and 1948 and were conducted by Hagana, Etzel or Lehi. Most of them (73 percent) targeted Jews rather than Brits or Arabs, motivated by revenge or the target’s reputation as “squealers” or “traitors.” The charge of “traitor/squealer” was used 91.2% of the time. Moreover, Ben-Yehuda’s research finds that the assassinations were all deliberate and planned in advance.
The policy of sanctioning targeted murder did not stop with the establishment of the state of Israel. In the 1970s, there was a wave of killings of pro-Palestinian individuals in Paris, Nicosia, Beirut and Athens; and, in 1978, a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine was killed. In 1988, during the first Intifada, the PLO’s Khalil al-Wazir was assassinated.
In the 1990s, there were three major waves of Israeli assassinations. Two of the prominent political targets were Fathi Shikaki and Yahya Ayyash. There was also the attempted assassination of Khaled Meshaal. Another wave began in 2000, following the second Intifada. Some of the high-ranking individuals targeted include Abu Ali Mustafa (PFLP), Raed al-Karmi (Tanzim Movement), Salah Shehada (a commander of the military wing of Hamas), Sheikh Ahmed Yassin (one of the founders of Hamas) and Abdel Aziz Rantisi (the leader of Hamas in Gaza in 2004). Then, in 2008, Mossad assassinated Imad Mughniyeh. There were many other figures targeted, but these were the most high-profile. All, including those not listed, were killed without any trial or due process. It should also be noted that in the past, Israel’s policy of systematically targeting individuals has been condemned by Arab countries, Europe, the United Nations and even the United States (David, 2003). In 2002, the European Union even threatened sanctions.
Following the political murder of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh, however, there have been no calls for an investigation or threats of sanctions by the International community. It was not until it was revealed that foreign passports were used to carry out the attack that foreign governments –namely, the British, French and Irish governments — called on Israel’s ambassadors to explain the situation. The UK and France have also increased pressure on Israel to provide them with information on the assassination. Britain has also launched an investigation due to the violation of its security and affront to its integrity. The investigation is to be led by the Serious Organised Crime Agency, which will work closely with the Emirati authorities. British politicians have also called on Israel to launch an investigation into the matter.
Israeli press commentary suggests that there is no need to be concerned over the “unpleasantness with [the] governments,” since the “State of Israel will emerge from this affair unblemished and the Mossad will continue enjoying a reputation of fearless determination and nearly unstoppable capabilities.” Mossad’s strategy, according to Efraim Havely, is to think outside the box, including penetrating organizations it deems enemies and exploiting the differences between factions, movements and political parties. But is Israel’s systematic practice of political assassinations and willful disregard of the other states’ sovereignty consistent with international law?
Systematic Murder under International law
International law is complex in terms of the protection, rights and treatment of non-state actors, especially when they are the target of state violence. Official state actions are governed by the UN Charter. Article 2 of the charter specifically prohibits the aggressive use of force by states. The only exception to this prohibition is Article 51, which authorizes military action for self-defense. This right, however, can only be invoked when the threat of aggression is imminent and force is necessary as a last resort. If force is used, the state’s response must be proportionate.
It is hard to argue Israel’s applicability of Article 51 in the case of Al-Mabhouh’s murder. First, Israel’s actions were not taken against another state actor. Second, he posed no imminent danger. Al-Mabhouh lived in Syria and was traveling on a diplomatic mission for Hamas. Threat of imminent aggression was not present. Israel, however, argues that it is involved in an ongoing armed conflict with the Palestinians, especially with the political movement Hamas. Therefore, it says, there is a constant, imminent threat of aggression. However, this argument is a stretch for the Al-Mabhouh murder because he was not living inside the Palestinian Territories. This fact in itself reduces the imminent nature of any perceived threat he may have been. Third, Article 51 states that force is to be used only as a means of last resort. The Israeli agents could have subdued and arrested Al-Mabhouh or contacted the Emirati authorities to seek his arrest. The use of force was not proportionate.
In addition, Israel violated Article 2 of the UN Charter. Article 2 requires that states respect the sovereignty of other countries. The use of fake passports of another country and the carrying out of murder on another state’s territory, without its permission, is a clear violation of this article. Israel also violated the sovereignty of Austria, given that its territory was used as the command center for carrying out the attack. There is no plausible argument that Israel can give to justify this violation, particularly since Al-Mabhouh posed no imminent threat.
However, while Article 51 of the UN charter is not plausibly applicable to the Al-Mabhouh murder, the United States has set a precedent in its so-called war on Al-Qaeda. Due to the U.S. targeting of Al-Qaeda, the definition of a non-international conflict has been extended to include one between a state and non-state actor outside the state’s territory. Thus, Article 3 (as well as the Provisions of Additional Protocol II) of the Geneva Conventions are applicable when a state engages in violence against a non-state actor outside of its territory or the territories in which there is ongoing conflict.
Given this U.S. precedent, there are several other criteria that must be met. First, the individuals targeted must be of the armed forces of the non-state actor. And while there is no obligation to attempt to arrest members of the armed forces before they are targeted, combatants can only be killed when they cannot be prevented from perpetrating an attack that endangerw the lives of others. In all other circumstances, combatants should be arrested, prosecuted and punished for their crimes under law. Second, those who play a purely political role for a non-state group cannot be targeted. Third, targeting must meet the requirement of proportionality under customary international law. Fourth, permission must be sought from the government on whose territory an attack is believed to be imminent.
Israel did not seek the permission of the UAE to carry out an attack on its territory and there has been no evidence presented that Al-Mabhouh was planning to perpetrate an attack. Moreover, the Israeli agents were able to locate him at his hotel. Even if Israel attempted to make the weak argument that he was planning to perpetrate an attack, there is no plausible argument that he could not have been prevented from carrying it out. Al-Mabhouh could have been arrested, prosecuted and punished for whatever so-called crimes that Israel claims he violated. Nothing changes the fact that he deserved due process and Israel violated his rights granted under international law. Israel willfully murdered Al-Mabhouh. The question now is whether the murder was in fact an assassination.
Targeted Killing versus Assassination
Targeted killing is the intentional slaying of a specific individual or group of individuals undertaken with explicit government approval. It is permissible to target combatants under international law, especially when a state is in armed conflict. For a targeted killing to be permissible, the targets must be combatants or part of the military chain of command; they must pose an imminent threat to the security of the state; and, the means used must not be “treacherous.” A targeted killing must be an option of last resort and arrest not possible. Finally, when conducted in a foreign territory, permission must be obtained for it to be legal under international law. If it is not, then the act is in violation of Article 2 of the UN Charter. This is even the case when the individual targeted is a non-state actor. Therefore, even if Al-Mabhouh’s murder is considered a targeted killing and not an assassination, Israel violated Article 2 because permission was not granted by the UAE. Given the means used to carry out the murder, it is questionable whether it was in fact a targeted killing.
Assassination is defined as “murder by treacherous means”; therefore, the method used is important for determining the legality of the action. Treachery is an attack on an individual who believes there is no need to fear the attacker, especially in incidents when the attacker pretends to be a non-combatant civilian. There was no reason to believe that Al-Mabhouh feared the attackers, who knocked on his hotel room door. The woman who knocked was dressed as a hotel employee and the other agents were all dressed in civilian clothing. Thus, the means used were treacherous and it was an assassination, not a targeted killing. It is clear from the press photos released that Al-Mabhouh was treated in a cruel, humiliating and inhumane way. Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions prohibits cruel, humiliating and degrading treatment.
A Crime Against Humanity?
A crime against humanity is one that is part of a systematic or widespread pattern of attacks against a civilian population. In addition, if an assassination that targeted a particular person was part of a broader plan to destroy the individual’s entire group, it could be viewed as genocide. As has been demonstrated, there was a systematic use of murder and political assassination carried out before and after the establishment of the state of Israel. Since Israel’s declaration of independence, the Israeli government has engaged in a systematic and widespread pattern of attacks on Palestinian civilians. Moreover, it has engaged in a systematic pattern of assassinations that target particular persons in a group.
Therefore, Israel has engaged in crimes against humanity and genocide. Israel has continuously and systematically violated international law. The British, French, Irish, Austrian and Emirati governments, as well as the international community, have a duty to do more than call for an investigation into Israeli action. Condemnation and sanctions are necessary.
Rachael M. Rudolph, PhD
__________________________
Sources:
Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades-Information Office
BBC News, “Dubai suspects on Interpol list,” 18 February 2010.
BBC News, “UK inquiry into ‘fake ID’ murder, 17 February 2010.
BBC News, “Arab press glee at ‘Mossad exposed,” 18 February 2010.
Havely, E. (2006). Man in the Shadows, St. Martin’s Press.
BBC News, “UK: ‘Undercover Mossad agents in UN team,” 3 November 1998.
David, S (2003). “Israel’s Policy of Targeted Killing,” Ethics and International Affairs.
Ben-Yehuda, N (1997). “Political Assassination Events as a Cross-Cultural Form of Alternative Justice,” International Journal of Comparative Sociology.
BBC News, “Long History of Israel’s covert killing,” 29 January 2010.
BBC World Service, “Dubai Hamas killing: ‘fraudulent’ passports fuel Mossad suspicion,” 17 February 2010.
BBC News, “UK ‘outrage’ at passport killing, 18 February 2010.
BBC News, “Israel press on Hamas killing,” 18 February 2010.
Cullen, P (2008). “The Role of Targeted Killing in the Campaign Against Terror,” JFQ: National Defense University.
Mossad’s Murderous Reach: The Larger Political Issues
By James Petras | 02.21.2010
On January 19 Israel’s international secret police, the Mossad, sent an eighteen member death squad to Dubai using European passports, supposedly ‘stolen’ from Israeli dual citizens and altered with fake photos and signatures, in order to assassinate the Palestinian leader, Mahmoud al Mabhouh.
The evidence is overwhelming: The Dubai police presentation of detailed security videos of the assassins was corroborated by the testimony of Israeli security experts and applauded by Israel’s leading newspapers and columnists. The Mossad openly stated that Mabhouh was a high priority target who had survived three previous assassination attempts. Israel did not even bother to deny the murder. Furthermore, the sophisticated communication system used by the killers, the logistics and planning surrounding their entry and exit from Dubai and the scope and scale of the operation have all the characteristics of a high-level state operation.
Furthermore, only Mossad would have access to the European passports of its dual citizens! Only Mossad would have the capacity, motivation, stated intent and willingness to provoke a diplomatic row with its European allies, knowing full well that Western European governments’ anger would blow over because of their deep links to Israel. After meticulous investigation and the interrogation of 2 captured Palestinian Mossad collaborators, the Dubai police chief has stated he is sure the Mossad was behind the killing.
The Larger Political Issues
Israel’s policy of overseas assassination raises profound issues that threaten the basis of the modern state: sovereignty, rule of law and national and personal security.
Israel has a publicly-stated policy of violating the sovereignty of any and all countries in order to kill or abduct its opponents. In both proclamation and actual practice, Israeli law, decrees and actions abroad supersede the laws and law enforcement agencies of any other nation. If Israel’s policy becomes the common practice world-wide, we would enter a savage Hobbesian jungle in which individuals would be subject to the murderous intent of foreign assassination squads unrestrained by any law or accountable national authority. Each and every state could impose its own laws and cross national borders in order to murder other nation’s citizens or residents with impunity. Israel’s extra-territorial assassinations make a mockery of the very notion of national sovereignty. Extra-territorial secret police elimination of opponents was a common practice of the Nazi Gestapo, Stalin’s GPU and Pinochet’s DINA and has now become the sanctioned practice of the US “Special Forces” and the CIA clandestine division. Such policies are the hallmark of totalitarian, dictatorial and imperialist states, which systematically trample on the sovereign rights of peoples.
Israel’s practice of extra-judicial, extra-territorial assassinations, exemplified by the recent murder of Mahmoud al Mabhouh in a Dubai hotel room, violates all the fundamental precepts of the rule of law. Extra-judicial killings ordered by a state, mean its own secret police are judge, jury, prosecutor and executioner, unrestrained by sovereignty, law and the duty of nations to protect their citizens and visitors. Evidence, legal procedures, defense and cross examinations are obliterated in the process. State-sponsored, extra-judicial murder completely undermines due process. Liquidation of opponents abroad is the logical next step after Israel’s domestic show trials, based on the application of its racial laws and administrative detention decrees, which have dispossessed the Palestinian people and violated international laws.
Mossad death squads operate directly under the Israeli Prime Minister (who personally approved the recent murder).The vast majority of Israelis proudly support these assassinations, especially when the killers escape detection and capture. The unfettered operation of foreign state-sponsored death squads, carrying out extra-judicial assassinations with impunity, is a serious threat to every critic, writer, political leader and civic activist who dares to criticize Israel.
Mossad Murders – Zionist Fire
The precedent of Israel killing its adversaries abroad, establishes the outer boundaries of repression by its overseas supporters in the leading Zionist organizations, most of whom have now and in the past supported Israel’s violation of national sovereignty via extra-judicial killings. If Israel physically eliminates its opponents and critics, the 51 major American Jewish organizations economically repress Israel’s critics in the US. They actively pressure employers, university presidents and public officials to fire employees, academics and professionals who dare to speak or write against Israeli torture, killing and systematic dispossession of Palestinians.
So far, most critical comments, in Israel and elsewhere, of Mossad’s recent murder in Dubai focus on the agents’ “incompetence”, including allowing their faces to be captured on numerous security videos as they clumsily changed their wigs and costumes under the camera gaze . Other critics complain that the bungling Mossad is “tarnishing Israel’s image” as a democratic state and providing ammunition for the anti-Semites. None of these superficial criticisms have been repeated by the US Congress, White House or the Presidents of the Major Jewish American organizations, where the mafia rule of Omerga, or silence, reigns supreme and criminal complicity is the rule
Conclusion
While the critics bemoan the clumsy Mossad job, making it harder for Western powers to provide Israel with diplomatic cover for its operations abroad, the fundamental issue is never addressed: The Mossad’s acquisition and alteration of official British, French, German and Irish passports of dual Israeli citizen’s underscores the cynical and sinister nature of Israel’s exploitation of its dual citizens in the pursuit of its own bloody foreign policy goals. Mossad’s use of genuine passports issued by four sovereign European nations to its citizens in order to murder a Palestinian in a Dubai hotel room raises the question of to whom ‘dual’ Israeli citizens really owe their allegiance and just how far they are willing to go in defending or promoting Israel’s overseas assassinations.
Thanks to Israel’s use of British passports to enter Dubai and murder an adversary, every British businessperson or tourist traveling in the Middle East will be suspected of links to Israeli death squads. With elections this year and the Labor and Conservative parties counting heavily on Zionist millionaires for campaign funding, it remains to be seen whether Prime Minister Gordon Brown will do more than whimper and cringe!
Scattered in death as in life
By Nadia Hijab, The Electronic Intifada, 22 February 2010
 |
| The Mamilla cemetery in Jerusalem, 1854. (Wikipedia) |
I carried a handful of ashes from my father’s cremates into the Occupied Palestinian Territories a few years ago, hoping to take them to his hometown, Nablus. At the border, the only available taxi was driven by an Israeli Moroccan Jew. Delighted I was an Arab, he immediately plunged into conversation and pointed out various landmarks along the way to Jerusalem.
“That road,” he said at one point, “leads to Nablus,” indicating the tarmac cutting through the rocky soil as we drove through a desolate area. I asked him to stop the car. Israel often kept Nablus under curfew for weeks on end and I didn’t know if I’d be able to get there during my short trip. On the road to Nablus, I laid the ashes and paid my respects. Back in the car, the puzzled driver wondered what I had been doing. When I told him he asked hesitantly, “Don’t you have rites like ours, including visiting loved ones’ graves?”
I stared at the back of his neck, as brown as my own, as I sought a response. We do have similar rites. It is rare for a Muslim to seek cremation, as in our father’s case, part of the enforced modernity of exile. In fact, at no time is the loss of Palestine more piercing than at a loved one’s passing, reinforcing the realization that, Muslim or Christian, Palestinians are as scattered across the globe in death as in life. But how could one explain 100 years of history in a cab ride? “Yes, but you’ve made it impossible for us to practice ours.”
So it is with special poignancy that I have followed the latest twist in the battle over Jerusalem’s Mamilla Cemetery, a Muslim cemetery known in Arabic as Maman Allah, where the US-based Simon Wiesenthal Center intends to build a Museum of Tolerance, a project stalled by legal and other protests since it began in 2004.
Mamilla is estimated to be over 800 years old and was in continuous use until 1948 when the Western part of Jerusalem was conquered as Israel was created. In the latest Palestinian challenge, representatives of 60 of the oldest and most prominent Jerusalemite families have petitioned several bodies at the United Nations to uphold the international legal obligation to halt the project.
The battle over Mamilla encapsulates many aspects of Israel’s approach to Palestinian rights since the conflict began, and it is worth considering five here.
First, the use of legal garb to shroud illegal acts. In this case, for example, Israel’s high court ruled in favor of the museum project in 2008. However, it turned out that the Israeli Antiquities Authority had withheld its own Chief Excavator’s conclusion that the site should not be approved for construction. Calling the Authority’s conduct an “archeological crime” the Chief Excavator noted, among other things, at least four unexcavated layers of Muslim graves dating back to the 11th century. However, the court has refused to reopen the case.
Second, the overreach. The move on Mamilla spotlights not just Israel’s occupation of Arab East Jerusalem in 1967, but also its original takeover of West Jerusalem. The international community still does not accept Israeli sovereignty over West Jerusalem because the basis for the establishment of the Israeli state — the 1947 United Nations partition plan — provides for a corpus separatum for Jerusalem, as the European Community reminded Israel in 1999.
Third, the ongoing creation of facts on the ground to erase evidence of the indigenous inhabitants. As former Israeli leader Moshe Dayan told Technion University students back in 1969, “There is not one place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.”
Fourth, the Orwellian use of language to mean the direct opposite of what is intended: for example “tolerance” for “discrimination.” Indeed, the plans for the Museum of Tolerance are replete with irony. At one point, it was suggested that a horizontal barrier be built to separate the museum and the graves to show “respect” — a horizontal separation of the dead comparable to Israel’s vertical separation barriers in the West Bank and Gaza.
Fifth, the delegitimization — not of Israel, which is a secure member state of the UN — but of the Zionist ideology that resulted in Israel’s creation. These actions remind the world that one people was displaced by another. The project architect, the renowned Frank Gehry, has since withdrawn his plans. Further international attention to the Mamilla case can only add to the growing global campaign to boycott Israel until it upholds international law.
Mamilla is not just about family history but also a nation’s history, as Dyala Husseini-Dajani — who comes from one long-established Jerusalem families and married into another — told a journalist while at the cemetery to say a prayer to her forebears. She added, “One day I want to be buried here. And I want my grandchildren to come and say this prayer for me.” As I read those words, I wished the Moroccan Jewish taxi driver would read them too.
Nadia Hijab is an independent analyst and a senior fellow at the Institute for Palestine Studies.
Turkey arrests 40 linked with coup plot
Press TV – February 22, 2010
Turkey has arrested more than 40 people, including high ranking officers, in connection with an alleged military plot against the government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
“This morning our security forces began a detention process,” the prime minister told a news conference during an official visit to Spain. “As of now, more than 40 people have been detained,” he added.
According to Turkish media, former air force chief Ibrahim Firtina, former navy chief Ozden Ornek and other high-ranking officers both retired and on active service in Ankara, Istanbul, the western city of Izmir and the northwestern city of Bursa, were among the detainees. They also included at least five other retired top officials, among them Ergin Saygun, the former First Army commander and retired admirals Ahmet Feyyaz Ogutcu and Lutfi Sancar, the reports said.
Those held were brought to Istanbul for questioning by anti-terror police, AFP reported. The detainees arrested over alleged links to a purported 2003 plot, which was revealed by the liberal Taraf daily in January.
The daily published what it described as a document drafted in April by a navy colonel on blocking efforts by Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development Party from “destroying Turkey’s secular order and replacing it with an Islamist state.”
Turkish military chief, Gen. Ilker Basburg, however, dismissed the allegations saying as far as the military investigators were concerned the document was fake.
Latest collapse in Jerusalem blamed on Israeli excavations
Ma’an – 22/02/2010
Jerusalem – A street collapse near the entrance of the Bab Khan Az-Zeit market in the Old City of Jerusalem occurred on Sunday, as a result of Israeli excavations in the area, witnesses reported.
“A two by one meter deep hole was left following the collapse,” Ma’an’s Jerusalem correspondent said.
The latest collapse is reportedly related to ongoing Israeli archeological digs around the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, which have caused a series of cave-ins around the Old City and in East Jerusalem neighborhoods.
The cave-in follows Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision to include two sites in the occupied Palestinian territories on an Israeli heritage list, The Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron and Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem.
In January, the Al-Aqsa Foundation for Endowment and Heritage reported a street collapse on the main road in the area of Silwan in occupied East Jerusalem, causing a hole in similar dimensions to the most recent cave-in.
According to the foundation, the collapse was related to ongoing excavations by Israeli authorities in the vicinity, apparently on tunnels extending underneath the neighborhood about 700 meters from the mosque compound. Authorities recently removed quantities of dirt and rocks from under Silwan to undisclosed locations, the statement said.
A second collapse was further reported in Silwan in January, by the Wadi Hilwah Information Centre, south of the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound which creating a 12 meter square hole in the middle of Wadi Hilwah street.
Jawad Siam, head of the information centre, said that the latest collapse in Wadi Hilwah took place over a 10 meter deep tunnel and is was few meters from the previous cave-in in January.
A child was injured and a vehicle fell ithrough the site, Siam said, adding that the local Al-Ein mosque, where Israeli excavation has intensified, was flooded as rainwater seeped into the collapsed site.
The Al-Quds Centre for Economic and Social rights said that this incident follows a number of similar collapses in Silwan recently, pointing out that last year, a collapse occurred in a girls’ school, injuring 17 students.
Clinton avoided nuke question – student
AFP | February 22, 2010
A SAUDI student blasted US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for skirting her question on Israel’s nuclear arsenal during a “town hall” meeting at a Jeddah college.
“I did not get a straight answer,” Mariyam Alavi said in a letter published in Arab News on her question to the top US diplomat last Tuesday. “My question was simple and direct enough,” she wrote, but Ms Clinton’s response “was very unsatisfying.”
Alavi, a 12th grader at the International Indian School in Jeddah, attended the meeting at the elite Dar al-Hekma College with six classmates. She had asked Ms Clinton about Washington’s stance on the existence of nuclear weapons in the Middle East.
If the Americans “so vehemently oppose Iran’s nuclear programme,” she had asked, “then why isn’t the US asking Israel to give up their nuclear weapons?”
Ms Clinton gave a lengthy answer detailing the US case against Iran, but did not mention Israel. She did, however, say that “we want not only a world free of nuclear weapons, we want a Middle East free of nuclear weapons, including everyone.”
Alavi’s Arab News letter assailed US “hypocrisy” over the issue, reflecting a widely held sentiment in in the region.
“Clinton said that the United States, under the able leadership of President Barack Obama, was trying to repair and strengthen its ties with the Muslim world.
“It is high time she realised it couldn’t be done without answering the questions uppermost in the minds of the Middle East people.”
Alavi said she had been nervous about asking such a “politically provocative question” but was then encouraged by strong applause from the audience when she addressed Ms Clinton.
Ms Clinton had been on a three-day trip to Qatar and Saudi Arabia to discuss, among other things, how to confront Iran’s alleged programme to develop nuclear weapons.
‘Ecuador being punished for befriending Iran’
Press TV – February 22, 2010
Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa says his country was added to a list of states accused of lagging in the campaign against money laundering to punish it for its ties with Iran.
“This decision has nothing to do with the fight against money laundering, or the fight against the funding of terrorism… It has to do with that we have an embassy in Iran,” Correa said in the highland town of Sangolqui outside Quito on Saturday.
“So because we have misbehaved. They are giving us a smack so we don’t misbehave,” he added, describing the move as a “hypocritical punishment.”
“Instead of revising themselves, they condemn us. There is no money laundering here my friends. There is no terrorism, and no funding of terrorism. Imagine if he had money to fund terrorism, I wish I had money to build all the schools that I want to build,” he said.
The Paris-based Financial Action Task Force, or FATF, named Ecuador and Iran on a list of states that it says are failing to comply with international regulations against money laundering and financing terrorism.
However, Correa said that Ecuador’s two dozen banks had perfectly adequate legislation to protect against laundering and terrorism financing and dismissed the report as “a huge lie.”
Under Correa’s administration, Ecuador has strengthened diplomatic and commercial ties with Iran, which has opened an embassy in Quito.
In recent years, Iran has looked to increase its cooperation with Latin American states such as Ecuador, to the chagrin of Washington.
Citing a 2009 agreement between Ecuador’s Central Bank and some Iranian financial institutions, Ecuador’s private bank association said on Friday that it believed the Iran factor was behind the country’s inclusion on the FATF list.
Hamas to Dubai police: Prove collaborator claim
Ma’an – 22/02/2010
Gaza – Hamas said Monday that Dubai Chief of Police Dahi Khalfan Tamim had yet to provide evidence that a collaborator from within the movement had supplied Mossad with information on Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh, who was killed in his Dubai hotel room in January.
“Who is this person he speaks of, why haven’t they disclosed his name and why wasn’t he arrested like the two other Palestinians?” read a statement from a party official.
UAE media outlets reported that Tamim accused a member of Hamas of providing information to the Israeli intelligence agency on Al-Mabhouh’s movements and locations in Dubai to facilitate the hit.
Sources said that the movement had not been informed of the Dubai police’s investigations into the murder. “It is illogical to see Hamas learn of case through the media,” adding that it was unclear if Tamim’s claims were based on evidence or mere speculation.
Hamas spokesman Salah Al-Bardawil said Saturday that Al-Mabhouh’s pursuers could have learned of his whereabouts from a telephone call he made to his family before leaving for Dubai, informing them of his hotel details and the online booking he made when purchasing airline tickets.
On Sunday, the British weekly The Sunday Times reported that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave the final authorization to carry out the assassination Al-Mabhouh in Dubai, and that he met with members of the 11-person hit squad, traveling on a host of European passports.
Members of the hit squad had visited Dubai on previous occasions to follow up on Al-Mabhouh’s movements and trained in a Tel Aviv hotel to prepare for the hit, the weekly wrote.
Israel’s contemptuous response to Goldstone findings
By Sayed Dhansay, The Electronic Intifada, 22 February 2010
 |
| Israel’s investigation into the war crimes committed during the assault on Gaza, including the killing of 320 children, lacks credibility. (Wissam Nassar/MaanImages) |
After Israel’s devastating attack on Gaza last winter, the UN-commissioned Goldstone fact-finding team and subsequent report accused both Israel and Hamas of committing war crimes and possible crimes against humanity. Released in September 2009, the Goldstone report recommended that both parties conduct impartial, independent investigations into these accusations within six months, failing which, the matter would be referred to the International Criminal Court (ICC).
While both parties to the conflict were cited for possible war crimes, the Goldstone report reserved the majority of its condemnation for Israel because of the vast difference in casualties on the two sides — more than 1,400 Palestinians were killed, and 13 Israelis. Four Israeli civilians were killed by rocket fire from Gaza, while more than 900 unarmed Palestinian civilians, including some 320 children, were massacred in Gaza.
Submitted to the UN on 29 January, the Israeli government’s response falls far short of a credible investigation however, and continues Israel’s long-standing policy of refusal to investigate and convict those responsible for crimes committed during its military campaigns.
A fundamental flaw of this “investigation” is that Israel has a military justice system for its armed forces. As stated in the report, Israel’s Military Advocate General’s Corps is “responsible for enforcing the rule of law throughout the IDF [Israeli military].” The three main organs of Israel’s military justice system are the Military Advocate General’s Corps, the Military Police Criminal Investigation Division (MPCID) and the Military Courts — all branches of the Israeli military.
While the Israeli government’s report goes to great lengths to argue that these bodies are “professionally independent” of the armed forces, the fact remains that they are all part of Israel’s overall military establishment, and therefore share a common interest. Furthermore, the fact that Israel’s military courts are located in military bases raises great doubt over whether the same rules of evidence and due process apply as would in public civilian criminal proceedings. Indeed, many human rights organizations have documented that Israel’s military court system does not come close to respecting international norms of justice.
This situation creates a clear conflict of interest, and practically renders the impartiality of such an investigation impossible — the Israeli military is certainly not going to incriminate and punish itself and its leaders. The final decision to institute criminal investigations regarding all complaints against the army rests with the Military Advocate General (MAG). The indisputable bias created by this self-regulating system is obvious throughout Israel’s report.
For example, the Israeli report claims that seven separate incidents were investigated in which “a large number of civilians not directly participating in hostilities were harmed.” According to the report, in four of these incidents, the MAG “found no grounds to open a criminal inquiry.” Included in these four incidents are the bombing of senior Hamas leader Nizar Rayyan’s home, killing Rayyan and 15 other civilians, and the shelling of the house of Dr. Izzedin Abu al-Aish, which resulted in the deaths of his three daughters and niece. The remaining three incidents are still “undergoing investigation.”
The Israeli government attempts to justify these indiscriminate attacks on civilian targets by claiming that it made thousands of phone calls and dropped leaflets on areas in which the army was operating. The Goldstone report found however that due to the deep shock and widespread damage caused by hundreds of air strikes during the first week of Israel’s campaign, Gaza residents were faced with “the dilemma of not only where to go, but whether it was safe to leave at all.”
The Goldstone report concludes that civilians in Gaza had no objective basis on which to believe that they would be safer elsewhere, because many of the central areas which Israel had instructed civilians to move toward, had suffered “intense aerial bombardment and destruction.”
On 15 January 2009, Gaza City’s al-Quds Hospital was struck by a number of white phosphorous shells. The ensuing fires caused widespread panic and chaos among the sick and wounded, necessitated two evacuations of the hospital under extremely perilous conditions and caused huge financial losses. As a result of the destruction of the hospital’s infrastructure, an eight-year-old girl who had been shot by an Israeli sniper could not receive the requisite care and died. Contrary to claims made by the Israeli government, the Goldstone commission found no evidence that Palestinian resistance fighters used the hospital’s premises to launch attacks against Israeli forces.
The Goldstone report also notes the destruction of three ambulances by Israeli tank fire and heavy damage to a nearby ambulance depot in the same attack. It concludes that by using white phosphorous to directly attack a civilian hospital and ambulances, the Israeli military breached the Fourth Geneva Convention, and violated international law.
The Israeli report devotes just one line to these allegations. While it mentions that there were allegations of ten incidents of its forces opening fire on medical facilities and buildings, it simply concludes that “the MAG found no basis to order criminal investigations of the ten incidents under review.”
Although the Goldstone report notes that white phosphorous is not proscribed under international law for concealing troop movements, the commission labeled Israel’s repeated use of the substance on civilian targets as “reckless.” After noting the horrific injuries and number of deaths caused by its use in Gaza, the commission actually called for serious consideration to be given to banning white phosphorous as an obscurant.
The Israeli government initially repeatedly denied that its armed forces were using white phosphorous. Now, the report says rather casually that “The MAG found no grounds to take disciplinary or other measures for the [Israeli military’s] use of weapons containing phosphorous, which involved no violation of the Law of Armed Conflict.”
One of the main incidents detailed in the Goldstone report regarding indiscriminate attacks by Israeli forces against civilians in Gaza is the shelling of al-Fakhura Street in Jabaliya, where the UN agency for Palestine refugees (UNRWA) had opened a school for fleeing civilians to take refuge. UNRWA confirmed to the Goldstone commission that the Israeli army was “fully aware” that more than 1,300 civilians were taking refuge in the school.
However, on 6 January 2009, four Israeli mortar shells were fired into the street outside the school, killing 35 civilians, including 11 members of the al-Deeb family. Witnesses described scenes of “chaos and carnage” as at least 40 more persons were injured by the blasts, the situation exacerbated by the difficulties in reaching ambulance services at the time. This incident, like several others, is not even mentioned in the Israeli response.
The Goldstone report devotes an entire chapter to Israeli attacks on the foundations of civilian life in Gaza. It finds that Israeli forces were responsible for premeditated and systematic destruction of food production facilities, water and sanitation services and construction industries, thereby violating the civilian population’s fundamental human rights to food security, means of subsistence and adequate housing. The Goldstone report notes that 324 factories were either partially or completely destroyed, resulting in the loss of 40,000 jobs, and notes that none of these attacks were necessary for the achievement of military objectives.
Following a typical pattern, the Israeli response glosses over these accusations with limited detail and factual evidence. It states that of the 34 major incidents discussed in the Goldstone report, only nine are the subject of ongoing criminal investigations by the MPCID, without disclosing which incidents these claims refer to. In its rebuttal of the Goldstone report’s claims that the Israeli army systematically destroyed Gaza’s civilian infrastructure, the report states simply: “Regarding certain incidents … the MAG has reviewed the entire record and concluded that there was no basis for a criminal investigation.”
The report then lists three incidents of damage to civilian infrastructure, which it claims were the subject of investigations. The Namar Wells, which supplied more than 25,000 persons with drinking water, were completely destroyed by several Israeli air strikes. The Goldstone commission reported that no evidence existed to suggest that Hamas used the wells for military purposes. The Israeli report claims it to be a legitimate target because it was a “Hamas military compound” and the incident thus unworthy of a criminal investigation.
Similarly, the Israeli report claims that the area surrounding the al-Bader flour mills, one of Gaza’s few remaining food production facilities, was “hit by several tank shells when responding to Hamas fire in the area.” This was proven untrue, when several news outlets reported that a UN bomb disposal team had in fact found the remnants of an MK-82 bomb used by the Israeli Air Force in the mill. This incident was also deemed unworthy of a criminal investigation by the Israelis.
The Hamas investigation, also effectively an internal probe, faces the same issue of lack of impartiality. It should be noted however, that while Israel has the deaths of more than 900 civilians to answer for, Hamas is responsible for four Israeli civilian casualties. Furthermore, Hamas strictly abided by the Egyptian-brokered ceasefire for four months preceding Israel’s attack, drastically reducing rocket fire into the country’s south. This resumed only when the Israeli army broke the ceasefire and assassinated six Hamas members on 5 November 2009, in an attempt to lure the group back into hostilities, thereby justifying its upcoming offensive.
In its conclusion, the Israeli report claims to have launched investigations into 150 separate incidents, including 36 criminal cases. More than one year after the offensive however, there have been no criminal convictions or legal cases of note. Aside from two soldiers who were “disciplined” for exceeding their authority by authorizing the firing of explosive shells in populated areas, the Israeli report makes no other specific mention of guilty verdicts.
Israel’s feeble response to the Goldstone report continues the country’s long and consistent history of impunity and unaccountability regarding serious allegations of war crimes made against it. In 1983, the Israeli Kahan Commission found Israel “indirectly responsible” for the massacre at the Palestinian Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Beirut the previous year. Ariel Sharon, the architect of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and then defense minister, was found to bear “personal responsibility” for ignoring and not preventing the massacre. Although he reluctantly resigned as defense minister, he remained in Israel’s Cabinet and would return almost two decades later to become the country’s prime minister, never facing any criminal charges.
And after the Israeli army’s invasion and destruction of the Jenin refugee camp in 2002 — which then UN envoy Terje Roed-Larsen described as “horrific beyond belief” — and allegations of war crimes from a number of human rights organizations, the UN Security Council voted unanimously to send a fact-finding mission to the camp. In another callous move to evade international scrutiny, then Israeli prime minister Sharon arrogantly declared that the composition of the UN team was “unacceptable to Israel.” After failing to twist the UN’s arm on the composition of the team and its terms of reference, Israel prevented its entry into the country.
More recently, after the 2006 shelling of Beit Hanoun in Gaza, the UN Human Rights Council established a fact-finding mission led by former South African Archbishop and Nobel Peace laureate Desmond Tutu. The mission was denied access to Gaza by the Israeli government on three separate occasions. When it finally reached Beit Hanoun almost two years later, the mission concluded that the Israeli attack possibly constituted a war crime. Tutu sharply criticized not only the incident, but also Israel’s “lack of an adequate investigation into the killings.”
The Israeli report into its conduct in Gaza last winter appears to be a haphazard excuse of an investigation, using dual tactics of denial and delay, purely to stave off pressure from the international community. Blatant violations of human rights and humanitarian law are shamelessly denied in the report. In other cases, few details are given about the numerous “ongoing investigations.” The high number of incidents that were merely discarded by the MAG indicates that international standards required for a proper investigation into violations of international law have not been met. Lending further doubt to Israel’s process is the fact that several incidents were not criminally investigated, but probed through internal Israeli army operational debriefings.
The Israeli investigation, conducted without public scrutiny, and entirely within the realm of the army’s structures, lacks credibility, consistency and transparency. An army accused of serious violations of law cannot be expected to impartially investigate itself. Throughout its history, Israel has demonstrated time and again its belligerent disregard for Palestinian human rights and contempt of international law. Its outright refusal to cooperate with the Goldstone commission came as no surprise, and continues a consistent pattern of impunity and unaccountability for egregious war crimes. It is imperative that the international community view the Israeli response to the Goldstone report as a blatant attempt to whitewash its crimes in Gaza, and refer the matter to the ICC without further delay. To do otherwise will only continue to encourage Israeli intransigence and its crimes against the Palestinian people.
Sayed Dhansay is a South African human rights activist and independent freelance writer. He volunteered for the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) in the Israeli-occupied West Bank in 2006 and is an organizer of the South African delegation for the Gaza Freedom March. He blogs at http://sayeddhansay.wordpress.com.
Montreal Gaza Photo Exposition to Stay Open
CJPME and Cinema du Parc win battle to host Gaza Exposition
CJPME | February 22nd, 2010
Montreal – It was with great satisfaction and relief that Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) received the news Wednesday that its Photo Exposition Human Drama in Gaza would continue until its scheduled closing on Feb. 28th. Around noon, an email from legal representative Lieba Shell advised the management of Cinema du Parc, the exposition host, that after “reviewing its options,” Management Redbourne retracted its previous position and was no longer seeking to close the photo exposition on Gaza. Given the lack of justification for its demand, Redbourne backed down on its request when hundreds of emails of support from the public were received.
Two days earlier, on Monday, Feb. 15th, the real estate management firm owning the shopping center housing the Cinema du Parc – one of whose shareholders is based in Israel – had indeed ordered Cinema du Parc to dismantle the exposition immediately, failing which it threatened to use legal action. Citing a clause in its lease, Redbourne had argued that the Cinema du Parc had violated the terms of the lease with the Photo Exposition. This claim, however, was contradicted by the preceding clause, which clearly mentions the possibility for Cinema to host all kinds of related activities, such as “presentations, meetings, viewing, or other similar activities.” Cinema du Parc had frequently exercised this right in the past, with the hosting of nearly forty exhibitions of a socially progressive nature, without there ever having been a problem in the past. “People should know what happened,” said Thomas Woodley, the President of CJPME.
“Redbourne sought to intimidate the Cinema du Parc into shutting down the Exposition. This behaviour is unacceptable and had absolutely no legal basis. It was clearly a political manoeuvre intended to block access to information regarding the Israeli assault on Gaza last winter, and during which several violations of human rights have been identified.” CJPME had hoped that the dialog around the Exposition would help Canadians grasp the gravity of crimes committed during the Israeli assault, and would facilitate a free public debate on the incidents. CJPME was naturally alarmed when Redbourne, prompted by pro-Israeli voices, sought to shut down this free exchange. As publicized since its inception, Human Drama in Gaza sought to transcend labels and stereotypes, and wanted to help people understand the human catastrophe unfolding in Gaza. The Exposition aimed to put a human face on the misery of the people of Gaza, and to show the poignant resilience of a people facing severe adversity. The captions accompanying the photos cite statistics and legal analyses of Israel’s 22-day assault on Gaza of last winter.
About CJPME – Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) is a non-profit and secular
organization bringing together men and women of all backgrounds who labour to see justice and peace take root again in the Middle East. Its mission is to empower decision-makers to view all sides with fairness and to promote the equitable and sustainable development of the region.
For more information, please contact Grace Batchoun at 514-745-8491or grace.batchoun@cjpme.org.
Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East
http://www.cjpme.org
Featured Video
Iran’s Mass Protests /Patrick Henningsen & Lt Col Daniel Davis
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Does Kevin Barrett Seek to “Absolve Islam of a Terrible Crime”?
The Kevin Barrett-Chomsky Dispute in Historical Perspective – Last part of the series titled “9/11 and the Zionist Question”
By Prof. Tony Hall | American Herald Tribune | August 28, 2016
Amidst his litany of condemnations, Jonathan Kay reserves some of his most vicious and vitriolic attacks for Kevin Barrett. For instance Kay harshly criticizes Dr. Barrett’s published E-Mail exchange in 2008 with Prof. Chomsky. In that exchange Barrett castigates Chomsky for not going to the roots of the event that “doubled the military budget overnight, stripped Americans of their liberties and destroyed their Constitution.” The original misrepresentations of 9/11, argues Barrett, led to further “false flag attacks to trigger wars, authoritarianism and genocide.”
In Among The Truthers Kay tries to defend Chomsky against Barrett’s alleged “personal obsession” with “vilifying” the MIT academic. Kay objects particularly to Barrett’s “final salvo” in the published exchange where the Wisconsin public intellectual accuses Prof. Chomsky of having “done more to keep the 9/11 blood libel alive, and cause the murder of more than a million Muslims than any other single person.” … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
loongtip on UK believes it can seize any t… loongtip on Pirates of the Caribbean loongtip on Australian festival boycotted… loongtip on Kiev seeks to ban Russian musi… seversonebcfb985d9 on Somaliland and the ‘Grea… John Edward Kendrick on Kidnapped By the Washington… aletho on Somaliland and the ‘Grea… John Edward Kendrick on Somaliland and the ‘Grea… aletho on Donald Trump, and Most America… John Edward Kendrick on Donald Trump, and Most America… aletho on The US Has Invaded Venezuela t… John Edward Kendrick on The US Has Invaded Venezuela t…
Aletho News- US Cargo Planes Have Flooded the Persian Gulf Since the First of December
- Deep-state forces from abroad instigated violence in Nepal – former foreign minister
- Rare Earths—or Arctic Control? Greenland’s Riches May Just Be Excuse
- Kiev awards major mining project to Trump-linked investors
- US makes money from weapons, not from Ukrainian minerals
- Drone hits Kazakh tanker en route to Russian port
- British minister dreams of kidnapping Putin
- Iran’s Mass Protests /Patrick Henningsen & Lt Col Daniel Davis
- EU admits it will have to talk with Putin
- Where Did 0.85 Come From? Aluminum Adjuvants and the Science That Was Never Done
- If Americans Knew
- The New Neoconservatives
- As more Gaza children freeze to death, Trump eyes Gaza as starting point for world domination – Not a ceasefire Day 94
- More death: in Gaza, West Bank, Israeli prison – Not a ceasefire Day 94
- The Israeli Influence Operation Aiming to Install Reza Pahlavi as Shah of Iran
- Avoidable tragedy: another infant dies from cold – Not a ceasefire Day 93
- Israel is quietly erasing Palestinian refugee camps from existence in the West Bank
- The “Zionist tint” to the Maduro abduction, if not operational, then normative
- Press association condemns Israel’s continued ban on media access to Gaza
- Israeli Indifference to Palestinian Suffering Is Fertile Ground for the Growth of Sadism
- Surge in premature births, congenital defects, cancer deaths in Gaza – Not a ceasefire Day 92
- No Tricks Zone
- Denmark Places Climate Protection Above Animal Welfare, Poisoning And Culling Cows
- New Study: Greenland Was 3-7°C Warmer And Far Less Glaciated Than Today 6000-8000 Years Ago
- German Media Report That Current Frigid Weather Can Be Explained By Arctic Warming!
- Berlin Blackout Shows Germany’s $5 Trillion Green Scheme Is “Left-Green Ideological Pipe Dream”
- Modeling Error In Estimating How Clouds Affect Climate Is 8700% Larger Than Alleged CO2 Forcing
- Berlin’s Terror-Blackout Enters 4th Day As Tens Of Thousands Suffer In Cold Without Heat!
- Expect Soon Another PIK Paper Claiming Warming Leads To Cold Snaps Over Europe
- New Study: Human CO2 Emissions Responsible For 1.57% Of Global Temperature Change Since 1750
- Welcome To 2026: Europe Laying Groundwork For Climate Science Censorship!
- New Study Finds A Higher Rate Of Global Warming From 1899-1940 Than From 1983-2024
Aletho News 
