By Stuart Littlewood | September 15, 2009
“The
Israel Project”, a US media advocacy group, has produced a revised
training manual to help the worldwide Zionist movement win the
propaganda war, keep their ill-gotten territorial gains and persuade
international audiences to accept that their crimes are necessary and
conform to “shared values” between Israel and the civilized West.
It’s a clever document.
The
manual teaches how to justify the slaughter, the ethnic cleansing, the
land-grabbing, the cruelty and the blatant disregard for international
law and UN resolutions, and make it all smell sweeter with a liberal
squirt of the aerosol of persuasive language. It is designed to hoodwink
us ignorant and gullible Americans and Europeans into believing that we
actually share values with the racist regime in Israel and that its
abominable behaviour is therefore deserving of our support.
Israel
is hoping for a public relations massacre. The other side – the
Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization – don’t
take communications seriously and have neglected to correct Israeli
distortion. They are happy, it seems, for Israel’s one-sided definitions
to prevail, which of course makes the task for Israel so much easier.
This latest propaganda offensive is potentially the “coup de grace” to
finish off the tormented Palestinians. See it
here.
And
the manual will no doubt serve as a communications primer for the army
of cyber-scribblers that Israel’s Ministry of Dirty Tricks is recruiting
to spread Zionism’s poison across the internet.
This quote at the beginning sets the tone: “Remember, it’s not what you say that counts. It’s what people hear.”
Top priority: demonize Hamas
The
manual’s numerous messages are aimed at the mass of “persuadables”,
primarily in America but also in the UK. The strategy from the start is
to isolate the democratically-elected Hamas and to rob the resistance
movement and the Palestinian population of their human rights.
- “Clearly
differentiate between the Palestinian people and Hamas. There is an
immediate and clear distinction between the empathy Americans feel for
the Palestinians and the scorn they direct at Palestinian leadership.
Hamas is a terrorist organization – Americans get that already. But if
it sounds like you are attacking the Palestinian people (even though
they elected Hamas) rather than their leadership, you will lose public
support. Right now, many Americans sympathize with the plight of the
Palestinians, and that sympathy will increase if you fail to
differentiate the people from their leaders.”
The plight of the Palestinians under Israel’s heel was an international concern long before Hamas appeared on the scene.
But
this is familiar ground. We scorned George Bush and Tony Blair and had
to differentiate between them and their respective peoples. We now have
to do the same with Barack Obama and Gordon Brown. We are tired of
having to make that same differentiation between the Israeli people and
the dreadful leaders they produce.
- “ISRAEL’S
RIGHT TO DEFENSIBLE BORDERS: With more than three years of violent
history since Israel’s agreement to withdraw from Gaza and portions of
the West Bank [sic], Americans have had time to take stock of the
situation and form opinions. The big picture: they believe that Hamas’s
leadership of Gaza has made Israel and the region less safe, while some
are more receptive to what they perceive as a moderate approach in the
West Bank by Mahmoud Abbas. Based on these experiences, they are willing
to grant Israel more leeway in resisting calls to give more land for
more peace.”
Here
we clearly see the motive for demonizing Hamas – Israel wants more
leeway to continue its land-grabs and other criminal activities.
- “If…
If… If… Then”: Put the burden on Hamas to make the first move for peace
by using If’s (and don’t forget to finish with a hard then to show
Israel is a willing peace partner). “If Hamas reforms… If Hamas
recognize our right to exist… If Hamas renounces terrorism… If Hamas
supports international peace agreements… then we are willing to make
peace today.”
How one-sided and daft can you get? Substitute Israel for Hamas.
Words that work
The manual sets out numerous examples of “words that work” – supposedly.
- “We
know that the Palestinians deserve leaders who will care about the well
being of their people, and who do not simply take hundreds of millions
of dollars in assistance from America and Europe, put them in Swiss bank
accounts, and use them to support terror instead of peace.”
No
mention here of the billions of tax dollars Israel takes from the US
and spends on munitions to obliterate and vaporize its neighbours.
- “Peace
can only be made with adversaries who want to make peace with you.
Terrorist organizations like Iran-backed Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic
Jihad are, by definition, opposed to peaceful co-existence, and
determined to prevent reconciliation. I ask you, how do you negotiate
with those who want you dead?”
Hamas
and Hezbollah are only regarded as terrorists by the White House and
Tel Aviv and by US-Israeli stooges and flag-wavers in Westminster and
elsewhere.
In
Executive Order 13224 – “BLOCKING PROPERTY AND PROHIBITING TRANSACTIONS
WITH PERSONS WHO COMMIT, THREATEN TO COMMIT, OR SUPPORT TERRORISM” –
Bush used this definition: “The term “terrorism” means an activity that –
(i) involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, property, or infrastructure; and
(ii) appears to be intended —
(A) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(B) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(C) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, kidnapping, or hostage-taking.”
It describes the antics of the US and Israel perfectly.
- “There is NEVER, EVER, any justification for the deliberate slaughter of innocent
women and children. NEVER… there is one fundamental principle that all
peoples from all parts of the globe will agree on: civilized people do
not target innocent women and children for death.”
Quite
so. Where does that leave Israel, which recently killed 320 children in
Gaza and 773 civilians, including 109 women? From 2000 (the start of
the second
Intifada – the Palestinian urising against the
Israeli occupation) up to the end of last year Israel had slaughtered
4,936 Palestinians in their homeland, including 952 children, according
to the Israeli human rights organization
B’Tselem.
In the same period Palestinians killed 490 Israelis in Israel including
only 84 children. So, Israel’s kill-rate is at least 10 to 1, and
rising since the
blitzkrieg on Gaza.
Iran-backed or US-backed – take your pick
- “Use
humility. ‘I know that in trying to defend its children and citizens
from terrorists that Israel has accidentally hurt innocent people. I
know it, and I’m sorry for it. But what can Israel do to defend itself?
If America had given up land for peace – and that land had been used for
launching rockets at America, what would America do? Israel was
attacked with thousands of rockets from Iran-backed Palestinian
terrorists in Gaza. What should Israel have done to protect her
children?’”
Palestinians
too have a right to defend themselves. Hamas was the popular choice of
Palestinians at the last election and is entitled under international
law to take up arms against an illegal occupier and invader. If it is
supported by Iran, so what? Israel is extravagantly funded and supplied
by the US. Here’s part of their begging-bowl “Military Aid Speech”:
- “Israel
makes the request for military assistance out of self-defense. As a
democracy, they have the right and the responsibility to protect our
borders. As a democracy, they have the right and the responsibility to
protect their citizens.
- “Israel
does not ask for US troops to protect itself. It does not ask for a
single American soldier to protect its borders. It only asks for the
funds for them to protect themselves. They need the equipment so that
their own troops can ensure the safety of their civilian population
through this gathering conflict with the enemies of democracy.
- “They
didn’t ask to have our nation built in range of Iranian missiles. They
didn’t ask that their nation be a focal point for religious extremists
who have declared war on the West and on democracy.
- “But they are, and they need your help.”
And here’s the rationale behind it:
- “Americans
fundamentally believe that a democracy has a right to protect its
people and its borders. And while Americans don’t want to increase
foreign aid in a time of significant budgetary deficits and painful
spending cuts, there is one and only one argument that will work for
Israel (in four easy steps):
(1) As a democracy, Israel has the right and the responsibility to defend its borders and protect its people.
(2)
Terrorist groups, including Iran-backed Hezbollah and Hamas, continue
to pose a direct threat to Israeli security and have repeatedly taken
innocent Israeli lives.
(3)
Israel is America’s one and only true ally in the region. In these
particularly unstable and dangerous times, Israel should not be forced
to go it alone.
(4) With
America’s financial assistance, Israel can defend its borders, protect
its people, and provide invaluable assistance to the American effort
against the war against terrorism.”
It’s evident that Americans don’t believe in democracy enough to allow Palestinian democracy to flourish.
- “When
the terror ends, Israel will no longer need to have challenging
checkpoints to inspect goods and people. When the terror ends we will no
longer need a security fence.”
There
are no rockets coming out of the West Bank, so why is the security
fence still there – and still being built? Why are the occupation troops
still there? Why are hundreds of checkpoints still there? Why is Israel
still stealing land, demolishing Palestinian homes and building
settlements there?
- “Remind people – again and again – that Israel wants peace.
Reason
One: If Americans see no hope for peace – if they only see a
continuation of a 2,000-year-long episode of “Family Feud” – Americans
will not want their government to spend tax dollars or their president’s
clout on helping Israel.
Reason
Two: The speaker that is perceived as being most for PEACE will win the
debate. Every time someone makes the plea for peace, the reaction is
positive. If you want to regain the public relations advantage, peace
should be at the core of whatever message you wish to convey.”
Israel
has never met its peace agreement obligations. It doesn’t want peace –
every action is directed at keeping the conflict going until the
Israelis have stolen enough land and established enough ‘facts on the
ground’ – Jews-only settlements, highways, disconnected Palestinian
bantustans – to enable them to redraw the map to suit their expansionist
agenda and make the occupation PERMANENT.
Gaza in a vice
- “Israel
made painful sacrifices and took a risk to give peace a chance. They
voluntarily removed over 9,000 settlers from Gaza and parts of the West
Bank, abandoning homes, schools, businesses and places of worship in the
hopes of renewing the peace process. Despite making an overture for
peace by withdrawing from Gaza, Israel continues to face terrorist
attacks, including rocket attacks and drive-by shootings of innocent
Israelis. Israel knows that for a lasting peace, they must be free from
terrorism and live with defensible borders.”
Israel
never left. It still occupies Gazan airspace, coastal waters and
airwaves, and controls all borders except Rafah where it nevertheless
exerts a veto. Israel has Gaza in a vice, which is crushing the tiny
enclave’s economy, starving its 1.5 million citizens and creating a huge
humanitarian crisis in an attempt to bring the elected government to
its knees.
- “Draw
direct parallels between Israel and America – including the need to
defend against terrorism… The more you focus on the similarities between
Israel and America, the more likely you are to win the support of those
who are neutral. Indeed, Israel is an important American ally in the
war against terrorism, and faces many of the same challenges as America
in protecting their citizens.”
Note
how Israel’s strategy is almost totally dependent on the false idea
that they are victims of terror and Western nations need to huddle
together with Israel for mutual protection. Fortunately, level-headed
people are beginning to realize who the terrorists really are.
It
must be blindingly obvious by now that allowing parallels to be drawn
between Israel and America only serves to increase the world’s hatred of
America. US citizens need to wake up to this, and British citizens
should avoid falling into the same trap.
Inject with “core values” and repeat over and over again…
- “The
language of Israel is the language of America: ‘democracy’, ‘freedom’,
‘security’, and ‘peace’. These four words are at the core of the
American political, economic, social and cultural systems, and they
should be repeated as often as possible because they resonate with
virtually every American.”
If
so fluent in this language, why doesn’t Israel acknowledge its
neighbours’ rights to democracy, freedom, security and peace and end
their military oppression?
- “A
simple rule of thumb is that once you get to the point of repeating the
same message over and over again so many times that you think you might
get sick – that is just about the time the public will wake up and say
‘Hey – this person just might be saying something interesting to me!’
But don’t confuse messages with facts…”
Never let facts get in the way of a good message!
- “How
can the current Palestinian leadership honestly say it will pursue
peace when previous leaders rejected an offer to create a Palestinian
state just a few short years ago and now refuse to live up to their
responsibilities as outlined in the Road Map?”
This
must be a reference to Ehud Barak’s so-called “generous offer”, another
of the myths Israelis love to peddle. The West Bank and the Gaza Strip,
seized by Israel in 1967 and occupied ever since, comprise just 22 per
cent of pre-partition Palestine. When the Palestinians signed the Oslo
Agreement in 1993 they agreed to accept the 22 per cent and to recognize
Israel within “Green Line” borders (i.e. the 1949 armistice line
established after the Arab-Israeli war). Conceding 78 per cent of the
land that was originally theirs was an astonishing compromise on the
part of the Palestinians.
But
it wasn’t enough for greedy Barak. His “generous offer” required the
inclusion of 69 Israeli settlements within the 22 per cent remnant. It
was plain to see on the map that these settlement blocs created
impossible borders and already severely disrupted Palestinian life in
the West Bank. Barak also demanded the Palestinian territories be placed
under “temporary Israeli control”, meaning Israeli military and
administrative control indefinitely. The “generous offer” also gave
Israel control over all the border crossings of the new Palestinian
state. What nation in the world would accept that? The unacceptable
reality of Barak’s offer, contained in the map, was hidden by propaganda
spin.
Later,
at Taba, Barak produced a revised map but withdrew it after his
election defeat. Don’t take my word for it – the facts are well
documented and explained by organizations such as Israel’s Gush Shalom.
- “Why is the world so silent about the written, vocal, stated aims of Hamas?”
And
why is the world so silent about the written, stated aims of the racist
regime and its political parties? Read their manifestos.
- “Successful
communications is not about being able to recite every fact from the
long history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is about pointing out a
few core principles of shared values – such as democracy and freedom –
and repeating them over and over again… You need to start with empathy
for both sides, remind your audience that Israel wants peace and then
repeat the messages of democracy, freedom, and peace over and over
again… we need to repeat the message, on average, 10 times to be
effective.”
Is
democracy a shared value? Israel is an ethnocracy not a democracy. Is
freedom a shared value? The world is still waiting for Israel to allow
the Palestinians their freedom.
- “The
situation in the Middle East may be complicated, but all parties should
adopt a simple approach: peace first, political boundaries second.”
Renounce
resistance while still under Israel’s jackboot? The correct approach is
for the international community to insist first that Israel complies
with international law and the many UN resolutions it has contemptuously
ignored. The boundaries are already defined. Whatever issues remain to
be decided, Palestinians should not have to negotiate under occupation
or duress.
Rockets, bombs and atrocities: the language of peace
- “Bottom
line: What will happen if we fail to get the world to care about the
fact that Israeli parents in southern Israel need to literally dodge
rockets when they drive their children to kindergarten in the morning?
What will happen if the world allows Iran, the world’s largest state
sponsor of terrorism, to get nuclear weapons? What will Israel do if bad
press causes American citizens to ask [their] government to turn its
back on Israel? Why do I care so much about the success of your
communications efforts? I care because I never want our children to live
through what my family and yours lived through in the Holocaust.”
Only
one in 500 makeshift Qassam rockets causes a fatality, small beer
compared to the devastation and carnage resulting from Israel’s
state-of-the-art rocketry targeted on Gaza. How does it look when
Palestinians are forced to pay the price for the Holocaust? And how much
does Israel care about the Palestinian holocaust it has caused?
The manual then gives a long glossary of terms. Here’s a sample:
- “Deliberately firing rockets into civilian communities”:
Combine terrorist motive with civilian visuals and you have the perfect
illustration of what Israel faced in Gaza and Lebanon. Especially with
regard to rocket attacks but useful for any kind of terrorist attack,
deliberate is the right word to use to call out the intent behind the
attacks. This is far more powerful than describing the attacks as
“random”.
Israelis
know all about bombarding civilian targets. And they are careful not to
mention that Sderot, until recently the only Israeli township within
range of Gazan rockets, is built on the ruins of an ethnically cleansed
Palestinian village whose inhabitants were forced from their homes by
Jewish terrorists.
- “Economic Diplomacy”:
This is a much more embracing and popular term than the current lexicon
of “sanctions”. It has appeal across the political spectrum: the tough
economic approach appeals to Republicans, and the diplomacy component
satisfies Democrats.
We can all play this game. Israel is now beginning to suffer “economic diplomacy” in the form of worldwide boycotts.
- “Economic Prosperity”:
Whenever Israel talks about the “economic prosperity” of the
Palestinians, it puts Israel in the most positive light possible. After
all, who can disagree?
What
sort of prosperity is it when nothing can be imported or exported
without Israel’s approval and fisherman can’t even put to sea in their
own waters without having their boats shot up by the Israeli navy?
- “Human to Human”:
“We know that the average Palestinian and the average Israeli want to
come together and make peace. They want to live in peace. Israeli
leaders have come together with Arab leaders to make peace in the past.
But how do you make peace with Hamas and Hezbollah?”
Simple.
You get off their land and stay off. There can be no peace under
occupation. You have to be very stupid not to understand that.
- “Humanize Rockets”:
Paint a vivid picture of what life is like in Israeli communities that
are vulnerable to attack. Yes, cite the number of rocket attacks that
have occurred. But immediately follow that up with what it is like to
make the nightly trek to the bomb shelter.
Would
Israel care to tell the world how many bombs, rockets and shells
(including the illegal and prohibited variety) its US-supplied F-16s,
tanks, armed drones and navy gunboats have poured into the
densely-packed humanity that is Gaza?
Still more advice…
- “Living
together, side by side”. This is the best way to describe the ultimate
vision of a two-state solution without using the phrase.
Sounds
cute but is worn out. Who would want to live alongside bigots and
extremists who have made your life a misery for 61 years?
- “When
talking about a Palestinian partner, it is essential to distinguish
between Hamas and everyone else. Only the most anti-Israel,
pro-Palestinian American expects Israel to negotiate with Hamas, so you
have to be clear that you are seeking a ‘moderate Palestinian partner’.”
Where are the moderate Israeli partners?
- “The
fight is over IDEOLOGY – not land; terror, not territory. Thus, you
must avoid using Israel’s religious claims to land as a reason why
Israel should not give up land. Such claims only make Israel look
extremist to people who are not religious Christians or Jews.”
If the fight isn’t about land, why did Israel steal it at gunpoint? And why won’t they give it back when told to by the UN?
- “Think
PRO-PALESTINIAN. While I have spoken about Israeli casualties, I want
to recognize those Palestinians that have been killed or wounded,
because they are suffering as well. I particularly want to reach out to
Palestinian mothers who have lost their children. No parent should have
to bury their child.”
Israel won’t even allow cement into Gaza to build the graves.
- “And
so I say to my Palestinian colleagues … you can stop the bloodshed. You
can stop the suicide bombings and rocket attacks. If you really want
to, you can put an end to this cycle of violence. If you won’t do it for
our children, do it for your children.”
Effective Israeli sound bite. Speechless.
- “I
want to see a future where the Palestinians govern themselves. Israel
does not want to govern a single Palestinian. Not one. We want them to
govern themselves. We want them to have complete self-determination.”
Is
that why Israel tried to snuff out Palestine’s democracy – and the
people’s right to self-determination – immediately after the 2006
elections?
- “The big picture approach is this: You must isolate Hamas as:
– A critical cause of the delay in achieving a two-state solution
– The biggest source of harm to the Palestinian people, and
– The reason why Israel must defend its people from living in terror.
Read
from the Hamas Charter. Now, here’s how to attack Hamas: indict them
with their own indoctrination materials. Yes, people know Hamas is a
terrorist organization – but they don’t know just how terrifying Hamas
can be. The absolute best way to heighten their awareness is to read
from the Hamas Charter itself. Don’t just “quote” from it. Read it. Out
loud. Again and again. Hand it out to everyone.”
At
last Israel makes a good point. After three years of “government” Hamas
must be mad to persist with its ill-advised charter. They have been
severely tested. They have matured. They have earned credibility in many
eyes. Israel’s behaviour makes Hamas look good. But all that will count
for nothing if they don’t rewrite their charter as a matter of urgency.
Regev’s pearls of wisdom. But how safe is the region under the threat of Israel’s nukes?
- “It’s
not just Israel who refuses to speak to Hamas. It’s the whole
international community… Most of the democratic world refuses to have a
relationship with Hamas because Hamas has refused to meet the most
minimal benchmarks of international behaviour.” – Mark Regev
Isn’t that a little cheeky, Mr Regev, coming from a regime widely condemned for war crimes, piracy and mega-lawlessness?
- “It
was the former UN secretary-general, Kofi Anan, that put four
benchmarks on the table. And he said, speaking for the international
community…
That if Hamas reforms itself …
If Hamas recognizes my country’s right to live in freedom…
If Hamas renounces terrorism against innocent civilians…
If
Hamas supports international agreements that are being signed and
agreed to concerning the peace process… then the door is open. But
unfortunately – tragically – Hamas has failed to meet even one of those
four benchmarks. And that’s why today Hamas is isolated internationally.
Even the United Nations refuses to speak to Hamas. – Mark Regev
Which of those benchmarks has Israel met, Mr Regev?
- “Israel
is very concerned about the Iranian nuclear programme. And for good
reason. Iran’s president openly talks about wiping Israel off the map.
We see them racing ahead on nuclear enrichment so they can have enough
fissile material to build a bomb. We see them working on their ballistic
missiles. We only saw, last week, shooting a rocket to launch a
so-called satellite into outer space and so forth. The Iranian nuclear
programme is a threat, not just to my country, but to the entire region.
And it’s incumbent upon us all to do what needs to be done to keep from
proliferating.” – Mark Regev
Why
is Israel the only state in the region not to have signed the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty, Mr Regev? Are we all supposed to believe that
Israel’s 200 (or is it 400?) nuclear warheads pose no threat? Would you
also like to comment on why Israel hasn’t signed the Biological and
Toxin Weapons Convention, and why it has signed but not ratified the
Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty, similarly the Chemical Weapons
Convention? What proof do you have of Iran’s nuclear weapons plans?
And why do you persist in misquoting Mr Ahmadinejad?
The Holy City is not up for grabs
- “The
toughest issue to communicate will be the final resolution of
Jerusalem. Americans overwhelmingly want Israel to be in charge of the
religious holy sites and are frankly afraid of the consequences should
Israel turn over control to the Palestinians. Consider:
– 71 per cent of Americans trust Israel most to protect the holy sites
in Jerusalem, compared to 6.1 per cent who trust the Palestinian
authority most. 8.5 per cent per cent trust neither.
– 54 per cent of Americans believe that ‘Jerusalem must remain united
under Israeli sovereignty’ while just 23.9 per cent believe that
‘Jerusalem should be divided into Israeli controlled and Palestinian
controlled areas’.
Given the choice between the two, Americans of all political and
demographic stripes trust Israel to protect and have sovereignty over
Jerusalem.”
Israel
is in control right now and prevents Muslims and Christians from
outside the city visiting the holy places. No way can Israel be trusted.
The UN’s partition plan decreed that Jerusalem should become a ”corpus separatum”
under international management. It is unlikely that the UN would wish
to see its resolutions torn up or international law rewritten for
Israel’s sole benefit, regardless of America’s misinformed opinion.
Get the name-calling right
I’ll close with the following extract:
- “Many on the left see an ‘Israel vs. Palestinian’ crisis where Israel is Goliath and the Palestinians are David.
It is critical that they understand that this is an Arab-Israeli crisis
and that the force undermining peace is Iran and their proxies
Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. You must not call Hamas just Hamas.
Call them what they are: Iran-backed Hamas. Indeed, when they know that
Iran is behind Hamas and Hezbollah, they are much more supportive of
Israel.”
By the same token we must call the racist regime what it is – US-backed Israel.
Iran’s
support for Hamas is difficult to quantify and probably less than we
think. More funding has probably come from Sunni Arab countries such as
Saudi Arabia and Qatar. In any case, it is peanuts compared to America’s
support for Israel.
Hamas is an offshoot of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and was founded in 1987 during the first Intifada.
Hezbollah came into being in 1982 in response to US-backed Israel’s
invasion of Lebanon. So, the territorial ambitions of US-backed Israel
provoked the rise of both. Israel’s problem is entirely self-inflicted
and shouldn’t concern the rest of us.
Hamas’s
election manifesto in 2006 called for maintaining the armed struggle
against US-backed Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories,
which seems a perfectly valid aim.
Our obligation to respect and promote human rights
The
Israel Project’s training manual is an unpleasant piece of work. It
runs to 116 pages and I have only scratched the surface. It recycles
many of the discredited techniques used by the advertising industry
before standards of honesty, decency and truthfulness were brought in to
protect the public.
And
it serves to undermine with clever words the inalienable rights pledged
by the UN and the world’s civilized nations to all peoples, including
the Palestinians.
When you have to stoop this low you simply don’t have a case.
The
Palestinian side urgently needs to strip away the deception and
re-frame the Holy Land situation in truthful language. And it needs to
debunk this Zionist handbook. If the PA and the PLO won’t do it, who
will?
Everyone should bear in mind the following, written nearly 61 years ago:
“Now,
Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF
HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all
nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society,
keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching
and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by
progressive measures, national and international, to secure their
universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the
peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories
under their jurisdiction.”
It
would seem that Israel has not read or understood the principles
enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which all
nations signed up to. Attempts to wipe out the rights of people who
happen to be in the way of the Zionist vision of a “Greater Israel”
deserve no support whatever.
sells for $39.9 million. There are some experts who now believe this to be a fake.
