Thursday, March 12, 2009

Vladimir Jabotinsky

In 1923 Vladimir Jabotinsky, leading intellectual of the Zionist movement and father of the right wing of that movement,... wrote: "Zionist colonization must either stop, or else proceed regardless of the native population. Which means that it can proceed and develop only under the protection of a power that is independent of the native population - behind an The Iron Wall , which the native population cannot breach."
First published in Russian under the title O Zheleznoi Stene in Rassvyet, 4 November 1923.

Theodor Hartzl

When Theodore Hertzl, the ideological founder of the Zionist movements in the 1890s, was asked what he proposed to do with the indigenous Palestinian population when his "state of the Jews" become a reality, he replied, "We will quietly spirit them across the boarder".

Friday, February 27, 2009

REFUTING BRETBOUDI THE SPAMMER

REFUTING BRETBOUDI THE SPAMMER

Bretboudi is not a spammer. We know spammers! They appear as friends and then try to hurt us from inside! These are well-known style and technique of Zio-Nazis!!






--- In freeamericanow@yahoogroups.com, John Robinson wrote:

Re: [freeamericanow] Re: REFUTING BRETBOUDI THE SPAMMER


..before the bombardment of european zionists..

You hit the nail on the HEAD with this statement...!








--- In freeamericanow@yahoogroups.com, "bretboudi" wrote:

Re: REFUTING BRETBOUDI THE SPAMMER


--- In freeamericanow@yahoogroups.com, "kreplach_oy"
wrote:
>

as we can see these bogus justifications! 1920? well arabs have always been a vast majority for a 1000 yrs until the european jews started immigrating in the late 1800's... prior to that it was never eastern european dominated... never... 6% of arab jews lived in palestine in peace.....before the bombardment of European zionists..with the intention to kill and expell arabs to create a state for themselves and to maintain the majority with jews from other nations... these are the facts world wide...

even the racist minister from moldova is not even a native born israeli and has more rights then palestinians expelled from what we call israel today.. and he wants to expell native israeli arabs as needed if they are not loyal! try that in the states!... a moldovian? go figure!... again israel is a pure racist state period.....








--- In freeamericanow@yahoogroups.com, "bretboudi" wrote:

Re: REFUTING BRETBOUDI THE SPAMMER


hi jodie! nice to hear from you! again this guy pops up all over lol! and accuses people to be "jew haters" who are not alined with his views about the zionist racist state of israel...plus he has his own groups that he censors like communism and hardly no members due to the fact he will boot or pre monitor people to join... i sence he is from the oulawed kahane group that even israel banned!..

hang in their my dear :) your group is great!

regards!

Bret






--- In freeamericanow@yahoogroups.com, "Jodie" wrote:

Re: REFUTING BRETBOUDI THE SPAMMER



Hi Bret,

Nice to hear from you again., and thanks for the information. I understand now. I hope you are doing well. I'm "hangin in."

Jodie






--- In freeamericanow@yahoogroups.com, "bretboudi" wrote:

Re: REFUTING BRETBOUDI THE SPAMMER


>Hi Jodie! dont worry about the guy! he is a neo nazi zionist that spews hatred and atempts to cover up the truth about Palestine, he will never offer proof or any rebutts in to the conflict! his only lousy weapon is accusing people of anti semetism and spamming ,as u see he cant rebutt the truth and the support of 191 nations for a free palestine..... but just accuse! it might be wise to block and boot him like he does on his groups when anyone says a bad word about israel and its brutal and racial occupation of non jews....again a
non voice for 2 yrs and now he is spamming with the same old song..

best regards jodie!






--- In freeamericanow@yahoogroups.com, "Jodie" wrote:

Re: REFUTING BRETBOUDI THE SPAMMER



What do you mean by "the others" ?? No, I certainly do not see Bret as a spammer.

(Taxi) Faruque is the owner of FAN, and I am moderator.

FAN is a group of members with diverse opinions and backgrounds. I choose to think of us as moderates... Surely there is a place for all of us on this earth .

Jodie



--- In freeamericanow@yahoogroups.com, "kreplach_oy" wrote:

Re: REFUTING BRETBOUDI THE SPAMMER


I'm sorry you dont recognize Bretboudi as a spammer. Then What about
the others?






--- In freeamericanow@yahoogroups.com, "Jodie" wrote:

Re: REFUTING BRETBOUDI THE SPAMMER



I beg your pardon.... Bret Boudi is not a spammer. He has been a member of this group for several years. In the past he was welcomed as a friendly and active member.

I noticed that you have been a member for almost 2 years, but have not participated in group discussions. Why now ???

Jodie, moderator












--- In freeamericanow@yahoogroups.com, "bretboudi" wrote:
No peace for Israel"




Whenever Israel has an election, pundits begin the usual refrain that hopes for peace depend on the "peace camp" – formerly represented by the Labour party, but now by Tzipi Livni's Kadima – prevailing over the anti-peace right, led by the Likud.

This has never been true, and makes even less sense as Israeli parties begin coalition talks after Tuesday's election. Yes, the "peace camp" helped launch the "peace process", but it did much more to undermine the chances for a just settlement.

In 1993, Labour prime minister Yitzhak Rabin signed the Oslo accords. Ambiguities in the agreement – which included no mention of "self-determination" or "independence" for Palestinians, or even "occupation" – made it easier to clinch a short-term deal. But
confrontation over irreconcilable expectations was inevitable. While Palestinians hoped the Palestinian Authority, created by the accord, would be the nucleus of an independent state, Israel viewed it as little more than a native police force to suppress resistance to
continued occupation and colonial settlement in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Collaboration with Israel has always been the measure by which any Palestinian leader is judged to be a "peace partner". Rabin, according to Shlomo Ben-Ami, a former Israeli foreign minister, "never thought this [Oslo] will end in a full-fledged Palestinian state". He was right.

Throughout the "peace process", Israeli governments, regardless of who led them, expanded Jewish-only settlements in the heart of the West Bank, the territory supposed to form the bulk of the Palestinian state. In the 1990s, Ehud Barak's Labour-led government actually approved more settlement expansion than the Likud-led government that preceded it headed by Binyamin Netanyahu.

Barak, once considered "dovish", promoted a bloodthirsty image in the campaign, bolstered by the massacres of Gaza civilians he directed as defence minister. "Who has he ever shot?" Barak quipped derisively about Avigdor Lieberman, the leader of the proto-fascist Yisrael Beitenu party, in an attempt to paint the latter as a lightweight.

Today, Lieberman's party, which beat Labour into third place, will play a decisive role in a government. An immigrant who came to Israel from the former Soviet republic of Moldova, Lieberman was once a member of the outlawed racist party Kach that calls for expelling all Palestinians.

Yisrael Beitenu's manifesto was that 1.5 million Arab Palestinian citizens of Israel (indigenous survivors or descendants of the Palestinian majority ethnically cleansed in 1948) be subjected to a loyalty oath. If they don't swear allegiance to the "Jewish state"
they would lose their citizenship and be forced from the land of their birth, joining millions of already stateless Palestinians in exile or in Israeli-controlled ghettos. In a move instigated by Lieberman but supported by Livni's allegedly "centrist" Kadima, the
Knesset recently voted to ban Arab parties from participating in elections. Although the high court overturned it in time for the vote, it is an ominous sign of what may follow.

Lieberman, who previously served as deputy prime minister, has a long history of racist and violent incitement. Prior to Israel's recent attack, for example, he demanded Israel subject Palestinians to the brutal and indiscriminate violence Russia used in Chechyna. He also called for Arab Knesset members who met with officials from Hamas to be executed.

But it's too easy to make him the bogeyman. Israel's narrow political spectrum now consists at one end of the former "peace camp" that never halted the violent expropriation of Palestinian land for Jewish settlements and boasts with pride of the war crimes in Gaza, and at the other, a surging far-right whose "solutions" vary from apartheid
to outright ethnic cleansing.

What does not help is brazen western hypocrisy. Already the US state department spokesman affirmed that the Obama administration would work with whatever coalition emerged from Israel's "thriving democracy" and promised that the US would not interfere in Israel's "internal politics". Despite Barack Obama's sweet talk about a new relationship with the Arab world, few will fail to notice the brazen double standard. In 2006, Hamas won a democratic election in the occupied territories, observed numerous unilateral or agreed truces that were violated by Israel, offered Israel a generation-long truce to set the stage for peace, and yet it is still boycotted by the US and European Union.

Worse, the US sponsored a failed coup against Hamas and continues to arm and train the anti-Hamas militias of Mahmoud Abbas, whose term as Palestinian Authority president expired on 9 January. As soon as he took office, Obama reaffirmed this boycott of Palestinian democracy.

The clearest message from Israel's election is that no Zionist party can solve Israel's basic conundrum and no negotiations will lead to a two-state solution. Israel could only be created as a "Jewish state" by the forced removal of the non-Jewish majority Palestinian
population. As Palestinians once again become the majority in a country that has defied all attempts at partition, the only way to maintain Jewish control is through ever more brazen violence and repression of resistance (see Gaza). Whatever government emerges is certain to preside over more settlement-building, racial discrimination and escalating violence.

There are alternatives that have helped end what once seemed like equally intractable and bloody conflicts: a South African-style one-person one-vote democracy, or Northern Ireland-style power-sharing. Only under a democratic system according rights to all the people of the country will elections have the power to transform people's futures.

But Israel today is lurching into open fascism. It is utterly disingenuous to continue to pretend – as so many do – that its failed leaders hold the key to getting out of the morass. Instead of waiting for them to form a coalition, we must escalate the international civil society campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions to force Israelis to choose a saner path.

Source:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/freeamericanow/message/53074

Sunday, October 26, 2008

Debate and Discussion

Debate and Discussion



Debate/discussion is for enlightenment and stimulation, advancing an idea and friendship, means of conflict resolution and bringing peace. Intelligence and integrity are desired elements in a discussion or debate; articulation or a good sense of humor simply ads the flavor.



Branding or tagging opponents, shouting someone down, hollow threats of unspecified action … defeats the intent and purpose of debate. Historically and logically the wicked party avoids debate and brings in the dirty tricks.

Victory to FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Victory to debate and discussion.

Abridged from: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/freeamericanow/message/603

Monday, September 8, 2008

Jihad to Bolidan


Jihad, crusade, and bolidan carry same weight, meaning and intention in Islam, Christianity and Hindu religions respectively. The application or misuse of jihad, crusade, and bolidan can be traced thorough out history. However jihad is the most feared word in our century! Do we know why?
To protect one’s family and country one can fight and die honorably according to the principle and procedure of jihad, crusade, and bolidan. However no one is allowed to use jihad, crusade, and bolidan to rob or rape anyone and invade/pillage other people's countries. For example, the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq is not a crusade. Similarly, invasion of Afghanistan based on the corporate American pipeline dream is not a crusade too.

Friday, July 4, 2008

Gutless Americans and Kisan of Mukto Mona

Gutless Americans and Kisan of Mukto Mona



The gutless “kisan” of so called “Mukto-Mona” is not only an alleged child molester! This person is also a Zionised hypocrite and deliberately polluting our group for a long time with blatant and false anti-Muslim and anti-Arab filths. This shameless creepy crawly should be volunteering to the nearest gas chamber as it is long overdue.

Gutless kisan is silent about
How the hell the American Terrorists gained the right to terrorise Iran or anyone for that matter? or Israeli slaves Nuclear Terrorism!

The Enemy of Mankind is Israel, Why do we have to suffer for Zionist Israel?, Why the hell we are tolerating this terrorist state? and We Got the Right to Punish Israel; the article below supports the fact that the whole world earned the right to eliminate this terrorist state called Israel. They are a threat to world peace and enemy of mankind.
6:10pm on ABC Local Radio.
Source:
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2291334.htm

Amazing: PATRICIA MCNERNEY: You know, I think in terms of the Israel question we certainly have not seen any indication that Israel is ready to introduce nuclear weapons as a weapon into the region.

This is a transcript from PM. The program is broadcast around Australia at 5:10p
Source:
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2291334.htm

US State Department representative speaks on nuclear weapons
PM - Tuesday, 1 July , 2008 18:24:00
Reporter: Mark Colvin
MARK COLVIN: The thaw in North Korea's relations with the rest of the world had its most visible expression a few days ago, with TV pictures of the cooling tower at the Yongbyon nuclear power plant being blown up.

But that was just another stage in a process that began towards the end of last year, in which the six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons program achieved a breakthrough.

The North Koreans agreed then to allow a six person US team to go in and observe the shutdown of the plant. In return, North Korea gets 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil.

The US is denying flatly that the arrival of a big consignment of emergency food in North Korea on Sunday is part of the same trade-off.

Patricia McNerney is Acting Assistant Secretary for International Security and Non-Proliferation with the US State Department.

She told me today the US team was still at Yongbyon, and the shutdown was being verified.

PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Yeah, the team has been there basically overseeing and in some ways directing the disablement actions.

All the work is being done by North Koreans on the ground that are actually carrying out the disablement actions, but we've got some experts from our Department of Energy as well as our State Department giving guidance, giving ideas, basically making sure it's done according to the agreed implementation plan to do these disablement actions.

MARK COLVIN: So how sure are you then that it's all being done? I mean has it been completely transparent?

PATRICIA MCNERNEY: It has been completely transparent, and in fact our experts are there watching the whole program.

And my bureau basically has the source of the funding for all of this activity. And we have a manager who's also in Pyongyang who is also coordinating with the North Korean authorities and making sure that we're doing it all as we agreed and as we've laid out.

MARK COLVIN: But John Bolton who used to be the top East Asia diplomat for the US and who is now sniping from the sidelines says that you've had the wool pulled over your eyes, and that the North Koreans, for instance, the cooling … they could do it without a cooling tower if they're prepared to pollute the environment enough.

PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Yeah, John Bolton who used to be the Under Secretary of State actually and a former boss of mine has been critical of this agreement.

He, I think he's rightly, is sceptical of North Korean intentions, but in fact our own Secretary last week in her speech in Washington, as well as our President said, "Look, this is all about verifying. We're not going to just take the word of the North Koreans."

We've got agreements, we're implementing them. The next step is to put in place a serious verification regime, and that verification regime is our ability to make sure that what they say and what they promise are in fact what is carried out.

MARK COLVIN: The other really big non-proliferation hot spot of course is the Middle East. Seymour Hersh, the investigative journalist has a piece in the latest New Yorker, which suggests that the Bush administration has just diverted quite a large sum of money to intelligence on Iran's nuclear program and to operations inside Iran.

Do you have any comment on that?

PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Yeah, you know, I've never seen a writer get it wrong so many times and still get credence every time he writes something. Our ambassador in Iraq was very clear in his statements and he called them completely incorrect and not accurate. So let our ambassador speak for the United States on that.

MARK COLVIN: So what is the United States' position at the moment on Iran's nuclear program?

PATRICIA MCNERNEY: The United States' is working through the so-called P5+1 process, working together to push the Iranians to reassess their decision to pursue a nuclear program through the UN Security Council. We have outlined a number of sanctions, measures, that are binding in all states.

And we've also said that we're going to stop those sanctions if Iran ceases its enrichment reprocessing activities. And additionally we've created a package of incentives that were Iran to cease its enrichment and reprocessing activities, we are prepared to negotiate a number of benefits that flow from that package, including even development of civil and nuclear energy cooperation in a way that obviously is not proliferation sensitive.

MARK COLVIN: Meantime, though, there's a constant drumbeat particularly from Israel saying you've got very little time to do anything about this and that Iran may be a year, two years, three years away from a nuclear weapon and that the suggestion is that the Israelis may do something about it.

PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Obviously, Israel sees Iran as the existential threat, will obviously look at its own strategic interest. Our national intelligence estimate says the worst case scenario is 2009, but more likely the development of the fissile material needed for a nuclear weapon would occur into the next decade.

So there is some time to make diplomacy work, not a lot of time, and we are committed to work through the diplomatic path. A mix of sanctions, of pressure, a collaboration with our partners.

Not only in the P5+1, but also in the Gulf region as well as working closely here in Asia. Many of the supplies and the (inaudible) items that are getting to Iran for these programs have a source here.

MARK COLVIN: Whenever we look at this subject on this program, I get emails and letters from people saying, "Well, Israel's got the nuclear bomb. Why is there not similar outrage about that? Because they're outside the non-proliferation treaty too."

PATRICIA MCNERNEY: Well Iran is a member of the non-proliferation treaty. They ratified it, they committed to implement it, and we believe they are acting in contravention to that binding legal commitment that they took. And so, this process…

MARK COLVIN: That really doesn't answer the question about Israel though, does it?

PATRICIA MCNERNEY: You know, I think in terms of the Israel question we certainly have not seen any indication that Israel is ready to introduce nuclear weapons as a weapon into the region.

MARK COLVIN: What do you mean?

PATRICIA MCNERNEY: And they have always indicated as a better policy that is not … that they will not be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons into the region.

MARK COLVIN: You mean no first strike? I mean that doesn't say they haven't got them?

PATRICIA MCNERNEY: You know I sort of don't want to articulate their policy, that's something that they've done.

MARK COLVIN: So the US doesn't believe Israel has a nuclear weapon?

PATRICIA MCNERNEY: I really wouldn't want to characterise what the US calculations, our assessments are on that point.

My major point would be that Iran is pursuing its nuclear weapons in contravention to its legal commitments. Iran is also a deep, stabilised force in the region.

MARK COLVIN: What I'm asking you, that the people write in and they say, "Why get so worried about Iran's nuclear weapons, when everybody knows that Israel has the nuclear weapon?"

PATRICIA MCNERNEY: I think we all need to be worried about Iran. It's a destabilising influence in the region. It's supplying arms, not only to Iraqi insurgents, but even to its sworn enemy, the Taliban. It is supplying support to Hezbollah, it is supporting actions on the part of Syria.

So it is having a larger destabilising influence in the region. It is also has the potential for the nuclear cascade. If you look at countries in the Gulf states, they look to Iran and were Iran to acquire the nuclear weapons capability, the potential for further acquisition of nuclear weapons capabilities in that region would certainly augment in the view of many who have assessed that region.

MARK COLVIN: Patricia McNerney, Acting Assistant Secretary for International Security and Non-Proliferation with the US State Department.

Tuesday, July 1, 2008

The Enemy of Mankind is Israel

The Enemy of Mankind is Israel


Further to Why do we have to suffer for Zionist Israel?, Why the hell we are tolerating this terrorist state? and We Got the Right to Punish Israel; the article below supports the fact that the whole world earned the right to eliminate this terrorist state called Israel. They are a threat to world peace and enemy of mankind.

AP
Tuesday July 1, 11:46 am ET By Adam Schreck, AP Business Writer


Oil climbs above $142 a barrel on concerns about tight global supplies, Mideast conflict



NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil prices pushed back above $142 a barrel Tuesday on worries about tight supply and possible armed conflict between Iran and Israel. In the U.S., gasoline edged to a new record high.

Prices resumed their advance as the International Energy Agency issued a report cautioning that worldwide crude supplies are unlikely to ease despite record prices and falling demand in industrialized countries. The world is experiencing "the third oil price shock," the head of the Paris-based body said, comparing the effects of today's pricey petroleum to times of soaring prices in the 1970s and 1980s.

OPEC production is at record highs and non-OPEC producers are working at full throttle, but stocks show no unusual build," IEA chief Nobuo Tanaka said at the report's presentation in Madrid. "These factors demonstrate that it is mainly fundamentals pushing up the price."

U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson echoed those concerns in Berlin, saying that there were no "obvious short-term solutions" to soaring oil prices.

Light, sweet crude for August delivery rose $2.02 to trade at $142.02 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

On Monday, the contract soared to a record $143.67 a barrel. It later fell back to close at $140 as traders took profits and settled their positions at the end of the quarter.

In the U.S., gas station operators nudged the record for a gallon of regular a tenth of a penny higher, to an average of $4.087 a gallon nationwide, according to AAA, the Oil Price Information Service and Wright Express.

Concerns about ongoing tension in the Middle East -- a factor that has helped fuel oil's recent rise -- continued to weigh on traders' minds Tuesday.

ABC News quoted an unnamed senior Pentagon official as saying there is an "increasing likelihood" that Israel will strike Iran's nuclear facilities before the end of the year. Such an attack could prompt Iran to retaliate, potentially disrupting oil supplies in the strategically vital Persian Gulf.

Jim Ritterbusch, president of energy consultancy Ritterbusch and Associates in Galena, Ill., called the report "more of the same" but acknowledged it was having an effect on energy market psychology.

"The market's forced to insert some type of risk premium on geopolitical developments," he said.

Iran is the world's fourth-largest oil exporter and OPEC's second-largest exporter. About 40 percent of world oil exports pass through the Gulf.

In its Medium-Term Oil Market Report on Tuesday, the Paris-based IEA said demand would rise most in developing countries, with Asia, the Middle East and Latin America accounting for nearly 90 percent of demand growth over the next five years.

Victor Shum, an analyst with Purvin & Gertz in Singapore, predicted concerns about supply, including worries about conflict with Iran, will likely keep prices high.

"I don't see much resistance to $150 (a barrel), which could happen in the coming weeks."

In other Nymex trading, heating oil futures were up about 6 cents to $3.9705 a gallon, while gasoline futures rose 3.84 cents to $3.5375 a gallon. Natural gas futures jumped 18.8 cents to $13.541 per 1,000 cubic feet.

In London, Brent crude futures rose $2.27 to $142.10 on the ICE Futures exchange.

Associated Press writers Alex Kennedy in Bangkok, Thailand, George Jahn in Madrid, Spain, and Pablo Gorondi in Budapest, Hungary contributed to this report.