Lieberman urges US to pressure for expelling Hamas leaders from Beirut
Palestine Information Center – June 9, 2017
OCCUPIED JERUSALEM – The Israeli war minister, Avigdor Lieberman, on Friday urged the visiting American UN ambassador Nikki Haley to pressure Beirut to expel Hamas anti-occupation leaders.
According to the Hebrew-language Walla news site, Lieberman launched calls to expel prominent Hamas leaders from Lebanon following a meeting with the American UN ambassador Nikki Haley.
“Hamas leaders in Lebanon should be banished because they are working against Israel,” claimed Lieberman.
Over recent weeks, an ad hominem campaign has been waged against Palestinian anti-occupation leaders affiliated with Hamas resistance movement in an attempt to deport them from their countries of residency.
Report: Rise in number of Russian Jews leaving Israel
MEMO | June 9, 2017
A new report revealed an increase in the number of Russian Jews who migrate from Israel to other countries or to their original home in Russia and the former Soviet Union.
The report, released by the Knesset Committee for Immigration, Absorption and Diaspora Affairs, revealed that 38 per cent of the total 290,300 immigrants who left Israel without return within the past 14 years are Russian immigrants.
According to the report, the main reasons for their reverse migration include the “glass barrier” which prevents their progress in the occupational ladder, lack of separation between religion and state especially in the matters of marriage, burial rituals, in addition to the stereotyping of Russians and discrimination on the public and official levels.
The committee held on Wednesday an emergency session following the release of the report published in early May which pointed out that one in six Russian immigrants leave Israel and that the percentage could rise if the relevant authorities do not provide appropriate solutions.
According to official data, nearly 650,000 people from the former Soviet Union immigrated to Israel – including 185,000 people under the age of 20 – between 1990 and 1996.
Israeli Deputy FM calls on UN to stop using the term ‘occupation’
MEMO | June 9, 2017
Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, Tzipi Hotovely, has called on the United Nations to stop using the term “occupation” in reference to Israel’s control over Palestinian lands.
The senior official claimed that the international organisation has been lured to repeating the “Palestinian propaganda vocabulary” and claimed that Israel does not occupy the land of anyone.
“As a proof, this year marks the 50th anniversary of Israel’s liberation of Jerusalem and the West Bank,” she claimed.
Hotovely’s remarks came in response to UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, who accused the Israeli occupation of putting more burdens on the Palestinians and preventing them from developing.
The Israeli politician has called on the UN chief to reform what she called the distortion in the United Nations terms and to retract his statements.
“These are facts on the ground,” she said, adding that the term occupation was invented by the Palestinian propaganda machine, and it is very regrettable that the United Nations is being drawn to echo and use it in its speech and literature.
When the international organisation stops using distorted and false terms such as “occupation”, confidence will be restored in it as an institution established for justice and truth.
US Congress and Knesset celebrate ‘reunification’ of Jerusalem in joint event
Joint US Congress-Knesset event celebrating “reunification” of Jerusalem (Credit: Knesset)
Ma’an – June 8, 2017
BETHLEHEM – In the latest event celebrating the “reunification” of Jerusalem in Israel, the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, and the US Congress held a joint live broadcast event marking the occasion on Wednesday, in which leaders from both countries celebrated their shared colonial histories and applauded Israel’s control over occupied East Jerusalem.
During each year that Israelis celebrate the “reunification” of Jerusalem to mark the Israeli military takeover of the territory decades ago, Palestinians, in contrast, have commemorated the Naksa, meaning “setback,” marking the Israeli invasion and occupation of the West Bank — including East Jerusalem — Gaza, Sinai, and the Golan Heights that began on June 5, 1967 during the Six-Day War, displacing some 300,000 Palestinians, as well as thousands of Syrians, from their homes.
Since 1967, Israel has stood accused of committing major violations of human rights and humanitarian law in the occupied Palestinian territory, including excessive and deadly use of violence; forced displacement; the blockade of the Gaza Strip; unjustified restrictions on movement; and the expansion of illegal settlements.
“For the sake of Jerusalem, let us not remain silent. Let us promise that support for unified Jerusalem remains high on both sides of the aisle, across the political spectrum, and throughout the United States,” Speaker of the Knesset Yuli-Yoel Edelstein said during the event.
“Looking around the world, and especially at this region, one thing becomes crystal clear: Only Israeli sovereignty will ensure that the city’s holy sites remain open, free, and safe for members of every religion,” he added.
However, while Israelis are permitted freedom of movement in Jerusalem and even in the majority of the occupied West Bank, most Palestinians are not permitted to enter Jerusalem without Israeli-issued permits, which means that the city is a rare sight and far from being “open and free.”
Edelstein also applauded the US’ own colonial history, saying that “your country was settled by pilgrims building a city upon the hill,” and developed a “just society based on the values that the Hebrew Prophets preached right here thousands of years ago,” without mentioning the mass killings and displacement of the indigenous peoples of that land; some academics have noted that some 20 million indigenous peoples died as a result of the European invasion and subsequent colonization of the Americas.
US Speaker of the House Paul Ryan also reiterated a similar point of equal rights at the holy sites, before saying that ”without Jerusalem, the Israel we know today would simply not exist” and called members of the Popular Front of the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) “terrorists” for taking Israeli hostages in exchange for the release of Palestinians imprisoned by Israel in 1976.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu greeted the leaders by once again stating that Jerusalem is “the eternal, undivided capital of the Jewish state,” in contravention of international law, which, according to the Fourth Geneva Convention, prohibits Israel from transferring any of its population to occupied East Jerusalem.
Meanwhile, while Israel officially annexed East Jerusalem in 1980, in a move never recognized by the international community, according to Palestinians and the international community the city has remained an intricate part of the occupied Palestinian territory and would be considered the capital of any future Palestinian state.
Netanyahu also said that Israel had “made sure that the holy sites for Judaism, Christianity and Islam were available to all,” again failing to mention the millions of Palestinians who do not have free access to these sights in Jerusalem.
“In this great convulsion that is taking place around us, there is one free city, where Christians, Jews and Muslims are free to worship undisturbed, and that’s in the free, united city of Jerusalem, and that’s how it will stay,” Netanyahu added.
In response to the event, Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Executive Committee Member Hanan Ashrawi said in a statement last week that the move was “unprecedented” and “provocative” and that the US Congress was “singularly contravening longstanding American policy and becoming party to Israel’s egregious violation of international law and international humanitarian law.”
“If the US wants to play a constructive role as a peacemaker rather than as a supporter of an illegal occupation, it must demonstrate respect for the law and recognition of equal rights for all peoples, foremost the Palestinian right to self-determination and freedom,” Ashrawi concluded.
Meanwhile, the US Senate passed a resolution on Monday declaring Jerusalem the “undivided” capital of Israel.
The Senate reportedly passed the nonbinding resolution in order to express its support for the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, which would move the US embassy to Jerusalem. US President Donald Trump signed a presidential waiver to prevent the act’s implementation last week, following on the footsteps of every US president since the act’s introduction.
However, on the issue of Palestine, Trump has remained largely elusive, saying in February that when it came to a solution for the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict he could “live with either” a one- or two-state solution, in a significant departure from the US’ publicly held position in favor of a two-state solution to the conflict.
Nevertheless, his elusiveness has not belied the fact that Trump and his administration have maintained their pro-Israel stance, despite stated efforts to renew the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, which he said in the past was “not as difficult as people have thought over the years.”
An Intolerable Europeanization of ‘Antisemitism’ Blackmail
Union Juive Française Pour La Paix* | June 7, 2017
On 1 June, the European Parliament voted, by a very large majority, for a new resolution on antisemitism. It goes without saying that we deplore, yet again, the singling out of antisemitism from other manifestations of racism. Not a word on the others, whereas, for example, Islamophobia is rampant and Romophobia is deadly. But it’s more serious. At closer inspection, it’s not so much a matter of reining in antisemitism as of restricting free speech and of criminalizing any criticism of Israel.
The resolution, by means of paragraph 2, embodies the criteria proposed by the ultra-Zionist International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) to define antisemitism. If this recognizes as antisemitism the hate of Jews qua Jews, the definition does not stop there. Thus “Denying the Jewish people (sic) their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor” also falls within the definition. Ditto “Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic (sic) nation”. Antisemitism? *
The UK and Austria have recently adopted this definition, and the disastrous effects have not taken long to make themselves felt. It is in this environment that the Palestine Expo 2017 in London was almost cancelled under pressure, planned for early July.
In France as well, the refrain which insidiously combines the least criticism of Israel and/or of Zionism to that of antisemitism plays non-stop. No need for the IHRA definition in France!
However, if the vote of this resolution in the European Parliament is not legally binding, it contributes to reinforcing the rancid climate where criticism and Israel in the same sentence is silenced and criminalized. The vote constitutes a devious attack against free speech through the medium of the only democratic institution in the European Union.
With the notable exception of the European United Left / Nordic Green Left and some Greens, all the Parliamentary groupings have listened more or less religiously to the whingeing of the hyperactive pro-Israeli lobbies – in the first rank of which is the IHRA and the European Jewish Congress – which have ultimately won out after a long and costly campaign.
But we’re not deceived. This resolution has not been gained only under pressure. It’s a vote of conviction. It has been approved by a large majority comprising an alliance not as diverse as appears at first sight: from the right wing of the social democrats to the nationalist and anti-Semite extreme right – all, with rare exceptions, have voted for the resolution.
Without a tacit ideological bond founded on an Islamophobia essentially taken for granted and the unfailing strategic support of the Neoconservatives for Israel, such a coalition would have been inconceivable. It suffices to scratch below the surface of the ‘good intentions’ of this resolution to readily discern its raison d’être, which besides has little to do with the situation of Europe Jewry. It’s necessary to highlight that there is no officially condoned antisemitism in Europe, and that this vote is clearly intended to prevent not genuine antisemitism but the legitimate political criticism of a state, of its policies and of its character.
The vote on this resolution brings home to us that, here in Europe, the right to criticize Israel is based on the general freedom of political expression – an asset so precious and fragile that it is necessary to defend it at all costs.
The Union Juive Française pour la Paix was established in 1994, and was a foundation member of the Fédération des Juifs européens pour une Paix juste in 2002. The UJFP has as its masthead: The conflict between Israelis and Palestinians can only be resolved by the cessation of the dominance of one people by another, by the implementation of the right to self-determination for the Palestinian people and of the right to create its own independent state. No just and durable solution is possible without a total withdrawal of Israel from all territories that it has occupied since 1967, without the right of return for Palestinian refugees and without an end to internal Israeli apartheid which constrains its Palestinian population to second-class status.
This article appeared on the UJFP website on 3 June, and was reproduced on Comité Valmy.
* Translated by Evan Jones.
Translator’s Note:
The May 2016 IHRA declaration includes in its list of ‘contemporary examples of antisemitism’ the item ‘Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel’. Given that the central thrust of the IHRA definition of antisemitism fuses the state of Israel indissolubly with Jewry in toto, this item is a glaring anomaly. More, are there ‘actions of the state of Israel’ that Jews might find distasteful? It suggests that the authors are either thick as two bricks or they have a brutal sense of humour.
Hamas: Israel will exploit Arab rift to kill our people
MEMO | June 7, 2017
Hamas today criticised statements made by Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir that Qatar should stop backing the Palestinian resistance movement as a condition to ending the rift with its neighbours.
In a statement the movement said: “Hamas is a legitimate resistance movement against the Zionist occupation, which represents the central enemy of the Arab and Islamic nations, especially Hamas.”
Yesterday evening, Al-Jubeir told journalists on a visit to France that Qatar was undermining the Palestinian Authority and Egypt in its support of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. “We don’t think this is good. Qatar has to stop these policies so that it can contribute to stability in the Middle East.”
In response, Hamas said: “It is no secret to anyone how the Zionist enemy exploits such statements to commit more violations and crimes against our people and our land and our sanctities and the right of Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque.”
The movement stressed that Al-Jubeir’s statements violate international laws and Arab and Islamic positions which emphasise the right of the Palestinian people to resist and struggle to liberate their land and holy sites. Hamas called on the brothers in Saudi Arabia to stop these statements that harm the kingdom and its positions on the issue of the Palestinian people and their legitimate rights.
Someone has just declared war on Iran
By Adam Garrie | The Duran | June 7, 2017
Terrorist acts of brutality and terrorist attacks in the service of traditional war are two different things.
Differences between an act of terrorism and a terrorist act which serves as a declaration of war carry an important distinction.
Attacks throughout the west from 9/11 to the recent Salafist/ISIS attack on London are dictionary definitions of terrorism (false flag or otherwise). This means that they are acts of bestial savagery designed to kill as many as possible, sow fear into a civilian population and force governments into a state of either infighting or panic. The terrorists behind every major attack on the US or Europe over the last decades did not intend to overthrow any one let alone several regimes. They simply wanted to cause as much chaos and carnage as possible given the weapons at their disposal.
In this sense, the terrorists won and no amount of virtue signalling hashtags can refute this. They wanted to kill, sow terror and discord, and they manifestly succeeded.
The wars in Syria and Libya by contrast, are wars spearheaded by terrorist groups who technically do not represent a state but are funded by and serve the foreign policy objectives of states ranging from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Israel the United States, Britain, France and Turkey. The assaults on Syria and Libya saw terrorists who perhaps are better described as NGO’s with heavy weapons, working with major regional and world powers with the clear objective of conquest and regime change.
In Libya, the result was mission accomplished. In Syria, the move has largely failed as the Syrian government remains in power and its allies Russia, Iran and other non-state groups have helped Syria in this respect.
In Iran, while things are not yet entirely clear, it would appear that today’s attack was an opening salvo in a wider war to destroy the very government and society of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Although a few terrorists with guns and bombs cannot overthrow any nation, the objectives of regional players ranging from Saudi Arabia to Israel are well known. It is difficult to believe that this attack was not orchestrated at some level by at least one state actor which openly seeks illegal regime change in Iran.
Iran is a vast state with incredibly powerful and well equipped armed forces, so much so that it would still seem unlikely that any state, including the US would actually attempt to wage open war on Iran.
That being said, today’s terrorist atrocity, aimed at two important centres in Tehran has a clear message.
Those who seek war on Iran will not resist stooping to terrorist means in order to attempt to accomplish their goal.
Iran will almost certainly not end up like Syria or Libya, but the attack on Iran, at least at an ideological level, seeks that which was done in Libya and what many are still attempting to do in Syria.
This was not the act of lone loonies and of course unlike the west which funds Salafism, this was not blow-back. It was the opposite. Iran fights Salafism and Iran opposes Saudi Arabia and Israel. This was a terroristic declaration of war, one that Iran may not have necessarily expected but one which it is entirely prepared for.
Qatar is about to fall in one way or another. If others seek to change the government in Iran… get ready for regime change blow-back.
If this piece isn’t automatically censored in Riyadh, it ought to be read with seriousness.
Saudi tells Israel: No place for Hamas in Middle East
MEMO | June 6, 2017
A Saudi expert has for the first time been interviewed on Israeli television. Abdel Hamid Hakim, who heads the Jeddah-based Institute for Middle East Studies, told Israel’s Channel 2 via Skype that the decision by three Gulf countries to sever relations to Qatar “comes in the framework of a new policy in which there is no room for terrorism.”
Asked what the aim of the Saudi, Egyptian, Bahraini, Emirati step regarding Qatar was, Hakim replied:
“There is a political stance which Saudi, Egypt and the Emirates agreed to, especially after the Riyadh Summit which was the first visit by the new American administration to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, that there is no place in the political arena of these countries for terrorism or for groups who use religion for political gains like Hamas and [Islamic] Jihad.”
“I believe these countries took a decision in a step towards peace, and achieving piece in the Middle East.”
He added:
“The first for this is to weed out terrorism. There is no place for any religious group, be it the [Muslim] Brotherhood or any other, which uses religion for political gain or commits terrorism in the name of religion, in the name of resistance or in the name of jihad.”





