Aletho News


Bedouin communities near Qalqiliya isolated by Israel and facing school demolition

International Solidarity Movement | February 22, 2013

Nablus, Occupied Palestine – The small Bedouin communities of ‘Arab Ramadin al-Janubi and ‘Arab Ab Farda lie south of Qalqilya between the apartheid wall and the green line,close to the illegal settlement Alfe Menashe. They are separated from the rest of West Bank from all sides by the Israeli apartheid wall. The communities, founded by people deported from areas in Negev and Netanya during and after the Nakba are today home to around 500 people. They suffer from multiple restrictions imposed by the Israeli authorities,including no permissions for new buildings or expansion of existing buildings, and limits to the amount of food and gas allowed for sale in the communities.


Bedouin girls at school

Access to the communities is limited by Israel with a permission system. The system of access permissions has effectively resulted in the social isolation of the communities, as people from the city of Qalqilya and neighboring villages face difficulties in obtaining permits for visiting the area.

The community of Abu Farda has no access to running water or electricity, and thus water has to be bought in tanks from the village of ‘Azzun. There is a well on the grounds of the village, but the illegal settlement Alfe Menashe has confiscated the well and closed access to it for the inhabitants of Abu Farda. People from the family Fayez living in Abu Farda told us:

“The lack of electricity is a big problem, as we are not able to refrigerate food bought from merchants or the yogurt and milk we produce ourselves for sale, and our children are not able to do their homework after dark due to lack of lighting.”

Furthermore, the Israeli authorities do not allow veterinaries access to the villages, while the village is largely dependent on the raising of livestock.

In October 2012 the community of Ramadin al-Janubi founded a school for 6 to 8 year old children. The new school gives it’s 25 students the opportunity to go to school without having to pass daily through the Israeli checkpoints between the community and a school in the nearby village of Habla. Children older than 8 years still have to go to school outside the community, and in order to reach their schools and go back home they need to cross the Israeli checkpoints twice every single day.

The school in Ramadin, consisting of 4 tents, received a demolition order from the Israeli authorities after two weeks of operation. The faculty of the school live in Qalqilya and have to spend from 30 minutes to over an hour every day passing through the checkpoint and having their papers and belongings examined by the IOF forces at the checkpoint in order to access the school. For now, the village has taken the demolition order to court, and is waiting to for the court hearings to take place.


Bedouin school tents with demolition order

February 22, 2013 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture | , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Bedouin communities near Qalqiliya isolated by Israel and facing school demolition

‘Mali war will cost the French dearly’


February 22, 2013 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Video | , , | Comments Off on ‘Mali war will cost the French dearly’

Foreign companies don’t have to fear nationalization, if they invest, says Morales

MercoPress | February 22nd 2013

President Evo Morales said on Thursday that Repsol and the other multinational companies operating in Bolivia should not fear nationalization since his government only appeals to that extreme when corporations think in ‘looting’ instead of investing.

“With Repsol we have excellent relations” said the Bolivian president, but “we won’t tolerate looting” “With Repsol we have excellent relations” said the Bolivian president, but “we won’t tolerate looting”

“To all those companies that invest in Bolivia, I want to assure them that their investments are guaranteed, that they have the right to recover those investments and to make a profit”, said Morales during a press conference in United Nations where he is participating in a world conference on quinoa.

He added that his administration works jointly with companies that are partners and that invest, and mentioned as an example Spain’s Repsol, with whom “we have excellent relations”.

Morales was referring to the recently nationalized air terminals’ operator, Sabsa, which he seized arguing the Spanish company back in 1997, with an initial investment of 4.000 dollars had taken over control of Bolivia’s three main airports, La Paz, Cochabamba and Santa Cruz, a business with “has assets and a turnover of 430 million dollars”.

He added that from 1997 to 2005, Spanish controlled Sabsa had “no investment plans, it was only looting and looting”, and for the period 2006 to 2025 had promised to invest 26 million dollars and allegedly only 5 million were invested in 2006.

“At first sight there was no changes, nothing new, although the company would insist it had invested in maintenance”, claimed Morales.

“Maybe because of some bad companies, mistaken board members, we are having certain diplomatic differences”, added the first indigenous president of Bolivia.

The Spanish government warned President Morales that it was reviewing relations with Bolivia following the latest nationalization and the European Commission criticized the decision and demanded fair compensation.

“It’s not the government of Spain or the Spanish people to blame, but rather some companies that come with an only interest: looting, robbing and making quick money without thinking about any investments in our airports”.

Morales revealed that three years ago the Spanish Socialist government of President Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero had asked him to delay the measure and talk to the company because they were going to make the needed investments.

“Unfortunately the dialogue with the company Sabsa made us lose three years” and not only that but international organizations of air transport have placed observers in some airports.

“It is evident that the air terminals have resulted too small and now after the nationalization we are determined to make the necessary investments” pledged the Bolivian president.

Finally Morales argued that nationalizing basic sectors of the national economy was an instrument to recover sovereignty and improve the living conditions of his people.

February 22, 2013 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | Comments Off on Foreign companies don’t have to fear nationalization, if they invest, says Morales

Britain’s UKIP – another Zionist lobby tool

Is the UK Independence Party planning to free us from the EU and handcuff us to Israel?

By Stuart Littlewood | Salem-News | February 22, 2013

The main aim of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) is withdrawal from the European Union. A ComRes poll for the Independent on Sunday and the Sunday Mirror puts UKIP in third place on 14 per cent, well ahead of the Liberal Democrats.

A few weeks ago YouGov, with the European Parliament in mind and using two different methods, put support for UKIP at between 17 per cent and 19 per cent. So, the Conservatives are under pressure while the Liberal Democrats (on a measly 8 per cent) are set to lose badly.

Spouting Israeli propaganda

After 20 years and eight leader changes UKIP still has no seat in the British Parliament, but with 12 seats in the European Parliament it is now a force to be reckoned with, and the Zionists in their determination to cover all bases appear to have infiltrated the leadership core. It is no longer the likable anti-European Union protest party it used to be.

In its foreign affairs policy statement “Out of the EU, into the world”, UKIP says it

fully supports the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state… Israel is surrounded by hostile states committed to its destruction. The tiny state has been the frequent victim of rocket attacks and suicide bombings from terrorist groups, almost all deliberately targeting civilians. Israel has every right to respond with proportionate force to these attacks, and a UKIP government would do the same were Britain similarly threatened.

UKIP rejects the notion that Israel should be punished through sanctions or cancellation of trade deals (such as the EU-Israel Association Agreement) for defending itself from attack.

UKIP urges Israel to adopt a lasting solution based on a political dialogue and not just military strength…

UKIP wishes to see a peaceful and mutually amicable settlement reached between Israel and the Palestinians. It is not for us to set the terms for these talks, nor the boundaries for any peace deal. This is an issue the Israelis and Palestinians must work out between themselves…

This stuff reads like it was written in Tel Aviv by the regime’s chief spin-master, Mark Regev himself. There’s no acknowledgement that the Palestinians have suffered illegal occupation, dispossession and ethnic cleansing for the last 65 years and they too are entitled to defend themselves. As for “political dialogue”, what does UKIP think has been going on for decades to no avail? Notice they don’t mention law and justice as the path to a solution, don’t demand due process nor an end to the illegal occupation of the West Bank and the blockade of Gaza, nor require compliance with those countless UN resolutions. They’re just happy for the oppressor and the oppressed to carry on arguing, one with a gun to the other’s head, with no prospect of a just peace.

Are they really too thick to understand there can be no peace under occupation?

The same policy document says UKIP believes a nuclear Iran would be unacceptable, and they’d support efforts to eliminate its nuclear weapons capability “by targeted military means” if necessary. UKIP conveniently ignores the fact that Israel possesses hundreds of nuclear warheads (and the means to deliver them), menaces the whole region and beyond, and defies calls to sign up to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and place all its nuclear facilities under comprehensive International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards.

What part of Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement does UKIP not understand?

Rejecting calls for the suspension of trade deals such as the EU-Israel Association Agreement is further evidence of UKIP’s woeful ignorance. The purpose of the agreement is to promote (1) peace and security, (2) shared prosperity through, for example, the creation of a free trade zone, and (3) cross-cultural rapprochement. It governs not only EU-Israel relations, but Israel’s relations with the EU’s other Mediterranean partners, including the Palestinian National Authority. To enjoy the association’s privileges Israel undertook to show “respect for human rights and democratic principles” as set out as a general condition in Article 2, which says:

Relations between the Parties, as well as all the provisions of the Agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this Agreement.

Note that “respect for human rights and democratic principles” is an essential element – not optional.

The clause allows steps to be taken to enforce the contractual obligations regarding human rights and to dissuade partners from pursuing policies and practices that disrespect those rights. The agreement also requires respect for self-determination of peoples and fundamental freedoms for all.

Honourable politicians would have enforced Article 2, insisted on the observance of all other codes of behaviour and not let matters slide. They would have suspended Israel’s membership until the regime complied 100 per cent. Israel relies heavily on exports to Europe so the EU could, at a stroke, end the brutal occupation, murder and land theft, and resolve the problem in the Holy Land.

Bristling with lies and distortions

UKIP’s leadership has also decided that the party needs a “Friends of Israel” fan club. I include the mission statement in full for its sheer entertainment value to those who know the truth about the situation in the Holy Land:

The State of Israel remains to date the only liberal democracy in the Middle East. It is also the world’s only Jewish state, surrounded and largely unrecognized by 21 Arab nations.

Despite constant assault from within and without, Israel has maintained an impeccable human rights record and remains the only country in the Middle East to extend full civil and political rights to all of its citizens, regardless of race or religion. Yet somehow it is cast as the oppressor, vilified as an “apartheid state” and singled out for disproportionate criticism.

Decades of malicious propaganda campaigns have seen to it that a one-sided historical narrative which portrays the Palestinians as blameless victims now successfully masquerades as reality. Little attention is paid to the fact that an independent Palestinian state has existed under the name of Jordan since 1946, and that the Palestinian leadership has consistently rejected a two-state solution whenever it has been offered, choosing instead to resort to terrorism.

The State of Israel, like all nation-states, has three fundamental rights which must be championed by freedom-loving people the world over: the right to exist, the right to secure borders, and the right to defend itself. In addition, it must also be allowed to preserve its unique Jewish character if it is to remain a safe-haven for Jews in a part of the world where violent anti-Semitism is still rife.

The purpose of Friends of Israel in UKIP is to support Israel’s right to exist as a viable, sovereign homeland for the Jewish people, and to oppose attempts to discredit, dissolve or damage it. FOI in UKIP does not seek to proffer a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, but rather to promote an impartial understanding of the issues by providing a counter-balance to the anti-Zionist rhetoric which currently dominates the debate.

Of course, friendship is more than mere political advocacy. FOI in UKIP will also seek to foster links with the Israeli government and people in order to provide an avenue for the discourse and meeting of minds which cement true friendship.

Doesn’t this just bristle with lies and distortion? UKIP’s leader, Nigel Farage, has been described by the Jewish Chronicle as “a good friend of Israel”. The party’s secretary, Michael Zuckerman, is the one who set up Friends of Israel. “There is tremendous support for Israel within UKIP,” Zuckerman told the Jewish Chronicle. The group has the backing of party leader Farage and others among their MEPs, he said.

The objectives of UKIP’s FoI include organizing delegations to Israel; ensuring that UKIP has “a fully informed” foreign policy (no joking); providing UKIP’s elected representatives with information relevant to Britain and Israel’s mutual security concerns (imagine the Zio-nonsense being circulated); and ensuring Israel gets a fair hearing in all forums in which UKIP is represented. Clearly UKIP, or at least those members who provide “tremendous support” to its Israel admiration society, are expected to act as agents for that foreign power.

As disenchantment with the corrupt, extravagant and unaccountable EU continues to grow, UKIP is the only party with a clear intention to bring us out. With its cluster of MEPs, UKIP is targeting local (county council) elections this year, and hoping to profit in the European parliamentary elections next year and the UK general election in 2015.

Fascists, racists and psychopaths

But UKIP is tainted with the extremism of groups to which it has become affiliated within the European Parliament, such as the odious EFD (Europe of Freedom and Democracy), which Farage co-chairs. Given this gruesome alliance, linking up with the racist psychopaths in Tel Aviv is no doubt seen as a “good fit”. It is obvious when listening to remarks by some of the leading lights of the EDF, for example Bastiaan Belder (Netherlands) who chairs the Delegation for Relations with Israel and sits on the Foreign Affairs Committee, that they have swallowed the Israeli propaganda narrative hook, line and sinker and still think the Palestinians are the terrorists.

I hear that if a UKIP MEP refuses to sit alongside those obnoxious EFD people he/she face disciplinary action.

More than likely, voters who are planning to tick UKIP’s box next time they go into a polling booth – and indeed many of the party’s members and activists – are unaware of this dark and dangerous side to the UK Independence Party. UKIP started life with the right idea but sadly has fallen into the wrong hands, like all the others.
At the time of filing this article I found access to UK FoI’s mission statement blocked. Maybe it’s temporary. Maybe they’re feverishly rewriting it.

February 22, 2013 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , , , | Comments Off on Britain’s UKIP – another Zionist lobby tool

When You’re Cutting Social Security, ‘Wealthy’ Begins at $25K

By Jim Naureckas | FAIR | February 21, 2013

Here’s a proposal for Social Security that was on the New York Times op-ed page yesterday (2/20/13):

The top third of beneficiaries (by lifetime income) [would] receive no annual cost-of-living adjustment in retirement. The middle third would get half of today’s adjustment, and the bottom third would receive the same annual increase they do now. Such a reform…would reduce Social Security spending by more than a tenth over a decade and fix the program’s long-term financing.

This is part of Paul Ryan adviser Yuval Levin‘s attempt to find “common ground” on the entitlement issue: “Both sides should agree at least to spend less money on the wealthy.” So who are these “wealthy” people who would be getting a benefit cut equal to the rate of inflation every year? According to the  SSA, about 34 percent of people over 65 have family incomes of $50,000.

Now, you can argue about what “wealthy” is, but I think you would find pretty widespread agreement on what wealthy isn’t: $50,000 a year. If you sent the New York Times an op-ed outlining your plan to balance the budget by raising taxes on “wealthy” people who make 50k a year or more, it would be put in the same pile that gets the submissions about Elvis’s UFO diet. But when you’re talking about cutting entitlements, if you want to call those people “wealthy,” that’s perfectly reasonable.

But wait! Those aren’t the only people who are getting too much from the government and need to have their benefits cut–the middle third of the elderly are also “wealthy” and need their benefits cut–but by only half the rate of inflation per year. The ones making more than $50,000 must be the super-wealthy, the regular wealthy make…between $25,000 and $50,000, roughly.

For comparison purposes, the poverty line for a family of four is $23,350. Talk about a shrinking middle class!

This idea of “means testing” as a painless way to solve the supposed entitlement crisis is very popular among wealthy pundits. It’s not hard to understand why. One of the principles Levin suggests we should all be able to agree on is “give less to the wealthy rather than take more from them.”

OK, so let’s say you’re wealthy–not Levin’s pretend wealthy, but truly super-rich, in the top 0.01 percent of income.  Average income in this group is about $24 million a year. So you can easily afford to give up their whole Social Security paycheck. If you’ve paid in the maximum possible amount and retire at 66, that’s $2,513 a month–or $30,582 a year. You have sacrificed for your country.

But let’s say that instead of taking away your Social Security check, we tax your income–which comes entirely in the form of investment income, since you’re a wealthy retiree–at the rate for regular income rather than at the special lower fat-cat rate. So instead of paying (very roughly) $4.8 million in federal income tax, you’ll be paying about $9.5 million.

Now, you can surely afford to live on $14.5 million a year rather than $19.2 million–just as you can afford to give up your Social Security check. Somehow, though, making the latter sacrifice is probably going to seem more appealing.

And the thing is, there aren’t that many really wealthy people who won’t miss their Social Security checks–so in order to save any appreciable amount of money, you have to take a substantial chunk away from people who actually aren’t very wealthy at all. That’s a principle we can all agree on. All of us making $24 million a year, anyway.

February 22, 2013 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , , , | Comments Off on When You’re Cutting Social Security, ‘Wealthy’ Begins at $25K

Pakistan condemns deadly bombings in India

Press TV – February 22, 2013

Pakistan has condemned the twin deadly bomb explosions in the Indian city of Hyderabad which left at least 20 people dead.

“Terrorism in all its forms and manifestations constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security,” Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

“Being itself a victim of terrorism, Pakistan fully understands and shares the pain and agony of the people of India. Our prayers and thoughts are with the families of victims of this terrorist attack,” the statement added.

A bomb went off on Thursday evening near a popular cinema called Venkatadri Cinema in the district of Dilsukh Nagar which is one of the largest commercial centers in Hyderabad. Minutes later, a second blast took place next to a nearby bus stop.

Indian police have said that they had been informed of plans for a possible attack in the Hyderabad area last year.

“We interrogated two militants [from the Indian Mujahideen group], who said they had recced (reconnoitered) various spots in Delhi, Mumbai, Hyderabad, Pune for a possible attack. One of the places they mentioned was Dilsukh Nagar, which was hit last night,” said S.N. Shrivastava, a Delhi police commissioner.

According to reports, since 1992, at least nine bomb blasts have rocked Heydarabad including three bomb explosions in 2007 that claimed the lives of at least 51 people.

In 2008, the Indian city of Mumbai came under a bomb attack. India accused the Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) of training, equipping, and financing those responsible for the killings of at least 166 people with support from “elements” in the Pakistani military.

Islamabad admitted that the attacks were partly planned on its soil, but has firmly denied allegations of any official involvement.

February 22, 2013 Posted by | Aletho News | 1 Comment