I expect you need to be on Facebook to go to this link:
http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Gaza-Youth-Breaks-Out-GYBO/118914244840679
The Guardian published their manifesto yesterday. It may be superfluous but I nonetheless think it should be repeated as widely as possible:
GAZA YOUTH’S MANIFESTO FOR CHANGE: “We, the youth in Gaza, are so fed up with Israel, Hamas, the occupation, the violations of human rights and the indifference of the international community! We want to scream…” – read more below!
Contact us: [email protected]
Pls consider supporting us by taking one or more of the following actions:
1) Promoting our manifesto by sharing it on your profile on Facebook
2) Sending an email to your friends asking them to like our page FB
3) Translating the manifesto to your language and sending it to us (we have it in Arabic, Hebrew, French, Portuguese, German, Spanish, Italian, Dutch, Danish, Greek, Chinese, Russian, Icelandic, Norwegian, Finnish, Swedish)
4) Sending the manifesto to journalists in your country
5) Making organizations in your countries that are concerned with the Palestinian issue and/or youth rights know about our existence
6) Posting links about violation of youth’s rights in Gaza on our wall
7) Suggesting us ideas for reaching out to a greater number of people
???|__
ok, much appreciated anno – but I’ll defer replying until tomorrow, lest it get lost in this latest deluge of opmoc BS. “anonymous” would have been very fair in telling opmoc to just F.O., for the record.
It just wouldn’t stop raining and my tears would not stop falling
I knew that Craig Murray was not lying
You Do Not Potentially Lose Your Entire Life By Lying
You Stand Up amd Say NO Regardless Of The Consequences
Being TORTURED and Boiled Alive To Death Is NOT ACCEPTABLE
And Craig Murray – The UK Ambassador
Said
I am Not FUCKING HAVING IT
And Ever since I read it…and all The Detail
Where I Live People are Quite Countryfied Raw Sort of People…
And We Have Our Pagan Festivals and When The Time is Right We Celebrate The End of Summer By Burning The STRAW JACK
I have being trying to warn Tony Blair about what might happen when the English Country Folk Get a Bit Primative…
American Country People Understand This Completely
Its all about doing a Spring Clean
Tony
“I have being trying to warn Tony Blair about what might happen when the English Country Folk Get a Bit Primative…”
This is like a cliche of a rambling old senile person. Not knowing who the current prime minister is and thinking someone from years ago is still in power.
Both Thatcher and Blair are still very much in power, in my opinion. It appears that our governments would do almost anything rather than reject the proven stupidities of their predecessors. My first move, if I was in power, would be to nationalise the banks, and my second move would be to imprison and strip the personal assets of the bankers and multi-millionaires. It would be illegal to charge interest even for a postage stamp.
Then I would declare unilateral withdrawal from all illegal operations under international law, and hostility to any other nation participating in them. I would imprison the Royal family in their private residences for promoting and condoning Blair’s illegal invasions, and make it illegal to belong to political association that supported Israel until the present condition of apartheid there had ceased.
Then I would tackle Gordon Brown’s Keynsian disaster of job creation by the state.
I would abolish income tax below average income salaries and abolish benefits for other than the sick, mentally ill, elderly or unemployed. I would make the care of children the responsibility of fathers, so that they can decide who should look after their children, whom they would then have to support. After I had got the UK looking something like the 1950s, I would make my own radical agenda for establishing the legality of shariah and a strictly voluntary Islamic state.
Time, I think, to permenantly ban tony-opomoc from this blog. Even I can’t stand it anymore.
Quite agree, Frazer. Mind you, it’s been attempted before:
“Tony Opmoc –
deleted your last few and the complaints about them. If you want to post completely irrelevant details of your own life, please get your own blog. I really have had enough of it.
Posted by: Craig at May 22, 2010 1:31 AM”
Anno If you heard the Radio 4 Today propaganda this morning (including Wyre Davies ramping up the likelihood of another war in the ME – Israel’s security is threatened!! – and then the demonization of an UK citizen with an Iranian name who is the wholesaler supplying drugs to American states for executions) you would have heard these statistics –
The average pay rise for private sector employees last year was 2.2%.
For those in the public sector the average was under 2%.
Directors of UK companies received average increases over 55%.
Inflation CPI 3.7% RPI over 4%.
Plus
Sadly, I agree with Frazer, Tony should get a timed ban and reminder that his nightly fuelled expresssions here are destructive to say the least, boringly predictable is another one.
Thanks somebody, I was still half asleep, but these figures woke me up, John Humphreys is becoming more odious by the day and the war talk is now a daily occurence.
The psychological way of preparing us for the death of diplomacy and the rise of the Leviathan in the ME.
I concure with Frazer. Tony seemingly needs a timed ban to recollect his rambling thoughts and fuelled expressions here, he must understand that it is disruptive.
Thanks somebody, the figures you quote and the war talk woke me up this morning.
John Humphrey is beginning to sound like a tromphe del mort.
I only see one Tony_opmoc post; have several yards been removed?
Concerning GM, I hope this won’t sound too parochial, but I suspect that the pressure of the GM lobby has already been felt up here in Scotland. The SNP has always (to some extent) opposed GM. Just before the last Holyrood elections a group of scientists sent an open letter to the press, as follows:
~~
“The Union benefits Scottish science
As senior members of the Scottish science community, we are very concerned to note that in the current debates about possible separation of Scotland from the Union no consideration appears to have been given to the effect on Scottish science.
Currently, we punch well above our weight in terms of funding from UK sources (such as the research councils) and in our role within the UK science infrastructure. Separation would inevitably lead to disruption of these ties with detrimental consequences for the health of the Scottish science base and for the long-term viability of the Scottish economy and society. Therefore, we wish to endorse the Union.”
~~
This was signed by 62 scientists, 48 of whom are in the biosciences, several with a notorious track record of advocacy of GM.
Perhaps the best known incident in the GM argument of recent times was the row that followed publication by The Lancet of results of experiments by Arpad Pustzai, showing harmful effects to rats from eating GM potatoes. Peter Lachmann of the Royal Society called the editor of The Lancet and allegedly threatened his job if the results were published. It has been alleged that the Royal Society has a ‘rebuttal team’ to counter news unfavourable to GM.
The chair of the Royal Society group that set the remit for the peer review of Dr Arpad Pusztai’s work was Noreen Murray, also a signatory to the scientists’ letter. Murray’s group returned a critical report even though they did not have Pusztai’s full data but only a report meant for internal use among Pusztai’s colleagues. With her husband, Professor Sir Kenneth Murray and Professor Jean Beggs (also both signatories to the scientists’ letter), Professor Murray are founders of the Darwin Trust in Edinburgh, which conducts biotech research, with financial support from the pharmaceutical industry-funded Wellcome Trust. A good short summary of the case is at Spectrezine in the form of a book review (which book, incidentally, is well worth reading).
http://www.spectrezine.org/reviews/rowell.htm
With elections to Holyrood taking place again this year, I wonder if the ‘scientists’ will make another appearance?
The so-called “irony” of the persecuted people who set up their own ethnosupremacist state relies on our swallowing Frankfurt School/Zionist propaganda wholesale.
The true history of relations between the “persecuted ones” in the Diaspora is NOT the narrative peddled by Zionists with which the vast majority of assimilated Jewry up to WW2 also had fundamental disagreements.
Before WW2 Zionism had the problem of convincing enough Jews that assimilation was no longer possible and that migration to Palestine was the only option. Before WW2 the Zionists were a long way from winning the argument.
With entrenched power bases in London and NY the Zionists were in a position much as they had been during WW1 to influence and even control key players in banking, politics, media, intelligence, war supplies and Refugee management (WRB;UNRRA).
Many of these Zionists particularly in NY were Soviet communist agents who were in a position to exercise a determining influence over the military course of the war and its aftermath. It wasn’t by accident that the Soviets came to dominate Eastern Europe.
Who was in a position to shape post-war world opinion on who was responsible for the crimes that took place during WW2? Again it was Zionists who played a key role in setting up the mandate of the court at Nuremberg.
Zionists were also active in the post-war DP camps which became military training camps for the post-war invasion of Palestine. Jews were convinced by Zionist propaganda that anti-semitic pogroms were again breaking out in Poland and elsewhere and that staying in Eastern Europe was not an option.
After the war the Soviets willingly absorbed and resettled millions of Jews post-war. The Zionists also had the problem that many Jews wanted to migrate not to Palestine but to the US. A mass movement of Jewish refugees west into the US zone prompted fears that up to 3m were on the move from what became the Soviet bloc.
There was clearly some doubt as to the real post-war demographics across post-war Europe but the Zionists were not about to tell anyone about that! Nor were they about to tell anyone re-their real role in collaborating with the Nazis and their Transfer policies as later documented by Jewish historian Edwin Black.
In fact leading players like Patton and Forrestal who stood athwart post-war Zionist propaganda were simply eliminated.
With ZOG still entrenched across the West until the advent of the internet and revisionist accounts that challenge official history the Zionists probably thought their WW2 propaganda victory had been complete.
Let’s see if it’s been complete here shall we?
Yep, removed a few of Tony’s colourful posts. Tone, ol’ chap, could you give your poor keyboard a rest for a bit?
Sadly bans are difficult to set up, unless one insists all commentators have accounts. This can be a barrier to occasional or new contributors, so is probably not recommended.
Brian Barder’s blog just needs an e-mail address the first time you post; looks like a good compromise:
http://www.barder.com/ephems
Hi,
Have you got any information regarding the use of remote, non-passive, non-invasive inner ear cochlea sound transmission via either the ultrasonic hearing effect (or hypersonic effect), or the microwave auditory effect (or microwave hearing effect or Frey effect), incorporating hybrid carrier wave sound (or overlay sound) propagation using ambient and subliminal sound techniques? Possible uses could be non-lethal weaponry, psychological warfare or private message transmission.
Query is regarding the increased use of remote, non-invasive, non-passive, non-lethal military weapons, being used by security agencies, as well as in the UK, in the ‘surveillance war against terror’, against political dissidence, political activism and public demonstrations! They are being used along side more traditional remote, passive, covert full intrusive surveillance methods, and other abuses of RIPA.
These include the use of ‘under the radar’ remote non-invasive, non-passive weaponised instruments that shoot intense radiations and emissions (ionizing or non-ionizing), to target individuals from nearby properties and vehicles, to cause a detrimental effect to their neurological and physiological well-being; surveillance war in an urban environment.
There are serious human-rights & civil-liberties issues at stake with this kind of growing urban warfare, being rolled out in the UK since at least 2007. The legal issues regarding the use of suspect radioactive isotopes outside controlled laboratory environments, and the violation of ‘The Radioactive Substances Act 1993 – Prohibition of use of radioactive material without registration’ now known as ‘The Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010’ are a blatant disregard and abuse to our freedoms and liberties.
There maybe growing evidence that the security services have diversified their tactics, and are using ‘local instruments of government’ (particularly the ‘NHS’ – Over 2,000 organisations in England and Wales, including hospitals, research organisations, radiographers and process industries, use radioactive materials!) as a front and illegal loop-hole to allow them to orchestrate acts equatable to torture and interrogation within the UK.
To isolate and identify the exact legal & technical definitions of these illegal, unlicensed, non-passive, non-lethal military weapons being used within the UK is nearly impossible, so that the correct ‘Freedom of information Requests’ can be made to the relevant non-/governmental institutions!
Regards
Mr Humanus Wright
Re: registration. New commenters probably assume you have to enter a valid email address here anyway. I don’t think a username/password combo would make much difference to the perception of accessibility.
nextus @ 2.28 – as you say. To require registration does raise the bar, very slightly – it would add 1 extra page and a couple of extra mouseclicks the first time, to set up, but after that it would hardly look any different from the way it is now (it took me a bit of time before I realised the email wasn’t obligatory, as it stands – why /is/ it asked for, currently ?). Given the number of other sites that ask for it, I’m not sure many people would see that as offputting – apart from the parasites, of course, who probably would object, just as they’re sniping at the idea of moderation now.
Because, it would have advantages. The people who have been “banned” could actually be banned, for example. It would prevent impersonations, which we’ve seen to be very destabilising, and strongly encourage the use of a single name so people could know who they’re dealing with. It seems to me that expecting people to take responsibility for what they say has a good chance of improving the conversation considerably.
Are there counter-arguments ? I’ve found it amusing to be “uggh boots”, “de Quincy’s ghost”, etc etc, but it’s hardly important – my world wouldn’t collapse if I was prevented.
But I don’t know what goes on behind the scenes, it may not be easy, or perhaps even possible, to set up ?
Oh, okay, a counterargument – Jon’s moderation is new. Give it a chance and see what difference it makes, before making more changes 🙂
Once one is familiar with the real history of how persecution has not been all one way a whole new set of questions about how the world looks now becomes possible.
Once cognitive dissonance abates and some real interpretive effort is brought to bear on the evidence real understanding replaces the cynicism and helplessness people have been programmed to think is natural.
This short piece has put many potential researchers on the right path:
http://harbingersjournal.blogspot.com/2010/11/why-are-jews-persecuted.html
There have been a couple of occasions when I’ve commented on a current affairs site – especially one opposed to my perspective – where I’ve felt uncomfortable giving an email address. So my point is more to do with data misuse than convenience.
That said, not a bad idea. But, not my call – Craig would have to decide to go down that route.
The real movers and shakers behind Zionism were the Frankist/Sabbatean apostates with power-bases in London and NY. With players like Stephen Wise in NY and Weizmann in London they managed to co-opt Reform and conservative Judaism into colluding with their agenda.
Their atheistic movement masqueraded as the fulfilment of religious prophecy. Their intention was to subvert and replace Torah-based Judaism with a Talmudic-based Jewish ethnosupremacism. Whereas the Torah taught acceptance of exile until God saw fit to return them to the promised land Talmudic teachings lent themselves to militant Zionism.
The Zionists continued implementation of their long-term hegemonic game-plan beyond the establishment of Israel in 1948. The next target that had already been prepared was the US.
The next phase was to use mass manipulation techniques pioneered at Foundations like Tavistock and Rand to brain-wash the US public into accepting
the need to confront Islam and fight wars which actually benefited Israel more than they do the US.
The whole sordid and ultimately horrific story is told here:
http://www.rense.com/general78/antisem.htm
IT’S OFFICIAL P.C. IS NO JOKE
Lucid discussion re-how Frankfurt School Cultural Marxism morphed into Political Correctness:
http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/
“I’ve felt uncomfortable giving an email address.”
It only takes a few moments to create a valid email address on yahoo, hotmail or the like. Free POP3 sites (gmail, gawab) are also available (letting you use your preferred mail client). I give a valid email address when signing in here, but it’s one I seldom look at. The idea as used on other sites is that if a post is rejected the moderator can email the poster and explain his reasons. It would also be useful to see a placeholder inserted where a post has been deleted, other than in the case of simple spam cleaning. This gives some indication of the level of moderation being applied (or the level of attack being encountered).
On topic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vnpcEFQoREfeature=player_embedded
please insert & after RE
Please give me the RFD-PC chip before allowing me to visit this comment board!
More on how Frankfurt Critical Theory begat PC:
http://jeremysarber.com/2010/09/07/the-history-of-political-correctness/
Jen Marlowe: One Family in Gaza (video)
Friday, January 7, 2011
Just months after the Israeli assault that killed 1,390 Palestinians, I visited Gaza. Among dozens of painful stories I heard, one family stood out. I spent several days with Kamal and Wafaa Awajah, playing with their children, sleeping in the tent they were living in, and filming their story.
Wafaa described the execution of their son, Ibrahim. As she spoke, her children played on the rubble of their destroyed home. Kamal talked about struggling to help his kids heal from trauma.
What compelled me to tell the Awajah family’s story? I was moved not only by their tragedy but by the love for their children in Wafaa and Kamal’s every word.
Palestinians in Gaza are depicted either as violent terrorists or as helpless victims. The Awajah family challenges both portrayals. Through one family’s story, the larger tragedy of Gaza is exposed, and the courage and resilience of its people shines through.
For more information or to purchase a DVD or organize a screening, please contact [email protected]?
To watch the video:
http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/jen-marlowe-one-family-in-gaza-video.html
Glenn
Sorry I didn’t know you wanted a reply to 12:55 AM
What you wrote was a good comment, the reason why I didn’t reply is the same reason why I don’t post much any more. I don’t have as much time as I used to.
To 12:55 AM
First of all no law including Shariyah law assumes everybody wants to live according to it.
If everyone agrees to a code of life, and abides to it diligently. Laws wont be needed, because people will voluntarily abide by it.
The reason why crimes are punished is you will always get people unwilling to live by moral codes, so punishment is used as a deterrent.
Secondly Shariya law doesn’t require the implementers of the law to be just and moral. Quite the opposite.
Shariyah means limits. Shriyah is the limits placed by God on what the legislators are allowed to legislate.
It is limits on the powers of the rulers, not a blank check.
So the opposite applies: Humans whether in a democracy or dictatorship, having the right to make or remove any law they see fit without limits implies they are all good and just. Which will never be the case.
Shariya law isn’t about second guessing God’s intent, it is about implementing what we have been told to implement within our holy book, as opposed to ignoring it.
Would I agree to seculer laws being on to Of Shariya?
Are you talking about for the Khilafah?
If so It wont be the Khilafah, it wont be an Islamic state then.
It would be basically be what we have in every Muslim country right now, where the kings and dictators have absolute power because there is no Shariya(limits) to there power. The and only they decide on which aspects of God’s law to implement, and which to ignore.
Your last point is actually what Shariya law has been in practice. The Khilafah has always been a very federal state. With different religions and regions being granted a lot of autonomy.
People of other religions have always had their own courts to settle their own disputes. This has always been the case, and this will always be the case.
The idea that Muslims implement their laws on others is just an excuse to stop us implementing our own laws on ourselves.
@Vronsky – not a bad idea, on marking items as moderated. Will do.
arsalan: Thank you for the reply, and for enlightening me. And, I know you haven’t got much time for posting these days because of difficulties… may I extend my best wishes towards your loved ones.
It sounds as if you are saying Shariya law is – like the US Constitution – a bill of negative rights. (Obama got a lot of stick for saying just that from the teabaggers, because they thought he was dissing the Constitution. But he was actually saying the big C limited the power of government to control people.) In that case, Shariya law is widely misunderstood, and poorly explained. The hardline Islamic leaders always appeared to be saying, “Shariya law demands” this or that , whereas actually it could have called for no such thing.
What actually bothers me about Islamic states, or Christian, Judaic or Mormon states for that matter, is the assumption that everyone in it holds the same faith, and has to abide by rather arbitrary rules which often have little moral meaning outside that faith. Obviously, murder, kidnap and theft is wrong, a religious framework is not required to point out such things. Where a clear moral case cannot be argued, I have a great deal of difficulty accepting that a religious decree needs to be followed by everyone. Nobody should be required to worship to any extent in a free society, and freedom means a lot more to me than religious observance.