Spain, Israel and the Jews

Manuel Tapial and terrorism (III).

2012-01-21T18:54:00.002+01:00

Manuel Tapial is a Spanish pro-Palestinian activist who was on board the Mavi Marmara when this ship was assaulted by Israel's Tzahal in 2010. Though he declares himself a pacifist, he has a long history of support for terrorism (read here and here), which constitutes a criminal offense according to the Spanish Penal Code.

Now let's read how his self-procclaimed pacifism is contradicted by what he wrote (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

1.- On Thursday, January 12th, 2012, Manuel Tapial wrote the following:

"The tremendous shamelessness of the European political class before the occupation of Palestine, could, in the medium term, reverse the increasing feeling of struggling lawfully and in a pacific way which characterizes the Palestinians when achieving their legitimate rights..."

Manuel Tapial seems not to pay too much attention to what has been going on in the Middle East for the last years. The truth is that the way the Palestinians are struggling have been consisting mainly of this.

2.- Manuel Tapial himself suggests to harass Israeli citizens worlwide just because of their nationality (which is also punishable under Spanish laws), as he wrote lately from Nicaragua:

"The same [wall] Israel will use to isolate the Palestinians is the one the world's civil society should build to isolate Israel and its practices in order to make them realize their criminal attitude is not tolerable! I'm happy to be in Nicaragua and to see that Israeli citizens here are asked and questioned constantly about what they do to the Palestinians, don't let this people even a single minute of rest!"

3.- On Monday, December 26th, 2011, Manuel Tapial published an article in his own blog. He later linked to his article via Facebook, as shown in the screen capture. What he wrote in his blog includes the following:

"Under the present scene, all indicates we are called to write the History of our epoch. New persons will have to make them known publicly this year around the new struggles which appear before us (..) emulating Rosa Parks, Angela Davis, Ulrike Meinhof, Leila Khaled, Steve Bico, Fonseca, Salvador Puig Antic[h] and many others,..."

Of those individuals mentioned, at least two, Ulrike Meinhof and Leila Khaled, are well known terrorists. Ulrike Meinhof was part of the R.A.F. (Rote Armee Fraktion or Red Army Fraction), a West German extreme-left terrorist organization, while Leila Khaled was the first known woman who hijacked a civil passenger aircraft, in this case on behalf of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

Indeed, daring to compare those two terrorists with Rosa Parks, who is a symbol against racism, is insulting.

Manuel Tapial's link in Facebook was answered by one of his contacts in the social network: Sarai Costas Silva. She commented the following:

"Ulrike Meinhof, extrajudicially executed by the 'Federal Republic of Germany' (the specific executor organism is still to be determined; maybe their intelligence service?) at the Stammheim prison in 1977."

And under this comment, Sarai Costas Silva wrote another one:

"Also executed by the Federal Germany's security apparatus were, in Stammheim, Andreas Baader, his girlfriend Gudrun Ensslin, and Jan Carl-Raspe. The same night during which these three executions were carried out, they tried to do the same to Irmgard Möller, but they failed.

All of these were the leaders of the first generation of the Red Army Fraction. Earlier, another of its member, Holger Meins, had been executed in prison, leaving him dying from starvation (he had begun a hunger strike)."

4.- As we can see in the screen capture bellow, Manuel Tapial liked Sarai Costas Silva's first comment. Does it mean he really believes in such an absurd conspiracy theory about West German extrajudicial executions of prison inmates?

5.- Finally, we can see here how Manuel Tapial supports another well known terrorist: Venezuelan-born Ilich Ramírez Sánchez, also know as Carlos the Jackal, who is currently serving life imprisonment sentence for the murders of two French security officials and a Lebanese contact, among other crimes. The multiple crime happened in Paris in June 27th, 1975. He was apprehended in Sudan in 1994.

Article on anti-Semitism in Spain.

2011-12-03T00:42:00.007+01:00

An article on anti-Semitism in Spain was published by El País on Friday, December 2, 2011, under the title España encabeza las encuestas de antijudaísmo (Spain leads the polls on anti-Jewishness). It was written by Juan G. Bedoya and reads as follows (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"'We are often asked why the Jews have been being hated so much and for so long. The question has to be made to those who hate us, not to those who are hated.' This thought by Isaac Querub Caro, president of the Federación de Comunidades Judías de España (F.C.J.E. [in English, Federation of Jewish Communities of Spain]), summarized the IV International Seminar on Anti-Semitism. It was closed the last night at the Fundación Caja Navarra [Caja Navarra Foundation]. Several graffiti in the street insulted those present with phrases such as 'Zionism is terrorism' and red crossing-outs on the Star of David.

'The insults, the graffiti, and the slogans against the Jews are considered something normal, when the truth is that they reflect an underlying anti-Semitism. They're a symptom of a social pathology', Alejandro Baer, professor of Sociology at the University of Munich, had denounced previously.

Jurist Jorge Trías Sagnier, who participated in the debate Penal struggle against anti-Semitism and hate offenses, expressed his repugnance regarding last April [Spanish] Supreme Court sentence which revoked the conviction against four nazis when considering that phrases such as: 'The Jews are destroyers and promote the wars'; 'The Germans were wrong for not having burnt all of them'; or that 'They're a pestilent race', don't pose a danger and don't deserve a penal reproach.

Trías Sagnier described that sentence as 'barbaric'. 'Some of the magistrates who passed it are the same who are chasing Baltasar Garzón [a Spanish magistrate currently under a judicial investigation for his alleged missconduct during his own judicial investigation on the crimes committed by former Spanish dictator Francisco Franco], but there was a particular vote, full of dignity, by magistrate Martínez Arrieta', he added.

Jews are just a o.1% of Spain's population, but the anti-Semitism levels are among the highest ones in Europe, Querub denounced. The final manifesto of the seminar concluded that 'the denial of the existence of this anti-Semitism aggravates the problem and stops its prevention'."

Yo dona on Natalie Portman's comments about John Galliano.

2011-08-27T16:00:00.004+02:00

After British designer John Galliano's unfortunate anti-Semitic remarks, Israeli-born American actress Natalie Portman showed her annoyance about such comments in this way:

"I am deeply shocked and disgusted by the video of John Galliano's comments that surfaced today. In light of this video, and as an individual who is proud to be Jewish, I will not be associated with Mr. Galliano in any way."

Nobody could say this is not a normal reaction. It's logical for a Jew to be disgusted by someone's negative comments about Jews (among others) such as "I love Hitler". But María Vela Zanetti seems to have another point of view, at least in light of an article written by her and published recently by Yo dona, a magazine distributed with the Spanish daily El Mundo. The article was written under the title Natalie Portman: un dechado de virtudes (Natalie Portman: a model of virtues). Excerpts from the article below (translated as accurate and possible, between quotation marks):

"So disgusted was the good Jew that she hurried to reject both of the models [made] by the Gibraltarian elected for the Oscars ceremony."

"Poor mechanical doll! She's a conceited chubby person, thanks to the toxic banality of her profession and to the moral perfection of her people, now a cruel stalker of another one, and persecuted and exterminated before."

"There is a popular saying about female Jews which tells: Soft in shirt and crazy at mass, that is, cold and fanatical."

"What could have happened to her (...) the Synagogue? Maybe; I think, as my admired comedian Bill Maher, that religions destroy peoples' lives." [Jewish religion is included in this assertion].

"(...) so, if it can be affirmed that within a human group of 10 intelligent people, nine are Jews, she's not a part of the equation."

This shows how anti-Semitic topics are freely spread by the Spanish media.

Rebelión on the July 22 attacks against Norway (III).

2011-08-07T22:29:00.004+02:00

We saw before how Spanish far-left website Rebelión published two articles claiming or implying the Mossad (Israel's intelligence service for operations abroad) was behind the July 22 attacks against Norway (read here and here). At least two more articles have appeared at Rebelión focusing on the same conspiracy theory.

On Sunday, July 24, 2011, The Intel Hub published an article by Saman Mohammadi (a university student in Toronto) under the title Mossad, CIA and NATO Attack Democracy in Oslo, Norway. Mohammadi's article was translated by Ricardo García Pérez and published by Rebelión on Tuesday, July 26, 2011, under the title El Mosad, la CIA y la OTAN atacan a la democracia en Oslo, Noruega. Mohammadi's article reads as follows:

"As usual, new evidence and new information is emerging about the terror attacks in Oslo, Norway on Friday, July 22, that raises suspicions that the event was orchestrated by secret Mossad, CIA and NATO forces.

I call them the coalition of the killing.

Investigative journalist Wayne Madsen reported on Sunday, July 24, that Anders Behring Breivik, the so called lone gunman behind the attacks, has ties with freemasonry and espouses the Zionist agenda. Madsen writes:

'Anders Behring Breivik is suspect in massacre of over 80 at Labour Party Youth camp on Norwegian island and downtown Oslo bombing. Breivik is being called a Christian fundamentalist even though he was a Freemason and supporter of such vile Zionist Islamophobes as Pam Geller and Richard Pipes.'

This fact by itself doesn't mean we should lay the blame squarely at Mossad's doorstep. But it is a piece of a puzzle that we are constructing in the dark, and it will take time before all the pieces are put together.

The other day I was wrong to say only Mossad was behind the attacks in Oslo. I forgot to mention the rogue CIA and NATO as being suspects in the murders.

This is not purely a Zionist crime. This is a crime by the entire axis of evil that has captured Western democracies: the rogue CIA, the criminal Mossad, and the illegal NATO. All their interests were being challenged by the democratic government of Norway.

Investigative journalist Webster G. Tarpley reports in his article Norway Terror Attacks a False Flag, that Norway was getting ready to call off its bombing missions in Libya and stop its involvement in that ongoing war crime in August.

Tarpley also mentions the fact that witnesses reported two shooters at the scene of the crime, casting doubt that this is another 'lone-assassin' terror strike. Tarpley says:

'The presence of a second shooter is of course most inconvenient for the lone assassin theory, since it represents incontrovertible evidence of a criminal conspiracy, the very thing which the media coverage is usually anxious to avoid. In the Norwegian case, the reports of a second shooter seemed to be persistent enough 36 hours after the main event so as to hold out some hope that the entire official version can be brought down on this particular.'

So, Norway made itself a democratic enemy of Israel by supporting the Palestinian effort for statehood in the United Nations in September, and a democratic enemy of the CIA and NATO because it no longer wanted any part in the takeover of Libya's oil fields.

Read this June 10 article, Norway to quit Libya operation by August, for more information on Norway's decision to quit the Libya war.

Norway was attacked by the corrupt and secret forces behind the CIA, NATO and Mossad for refusing to go along with their overall agenda. They figured they could kill two birds with one stone by bringing Norway back into line on the issue of Israel-Palestine and Libya. What we are witnessing is the strategy of tension playing out in Norway.

II. The Return of The Gladio Villains.

During the Cold War, secret NATO 'Gladio' networks carried out false flags attacks in European cities that were falsely blamed on leftist groups and which were intended to create an atmosphere of fear.

The chief beneficiaries of the terror attacks were government security forces, intelligence agencies, and ruling political coalitions.

But state violence and state terror will not bring down the voice of the people of Norway and its democratic government. After the attacks, Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg said:

'No one will bomb us to silence. No one wil shoot us to silence. No one will ever scare us away from being Norway. You will not destroy us. You will not destroy our democracy or our ideals for a better world.' – (At a press conference in Oslo. Quote from BBC's report As it happened: Norway attacks).

God bless Norway and god bless freedom. The criminals in the CIA, Mossad and NATO have to pay for this crime against innocent human beings and the voice of the people.

And there is a way out of this dark age of state terror. We have to dig for the truth and then tell it, write it, scream it. We are not destined to be hostages of state terrorists.

We cannot give into artificially stimulated fear, into ignorant peer pressure, and into the blind herd mind that says 'it's a conspiracy theory, you have no evidence, you have no proof that Mossad and CIA are ran by criminals'. Bullshit.

We have all the proof in the world that the biggest terrorists on this planet are in the Mossad, CIA, MI6, and other Western intelligence agencies. They are destroying self-government, freedom of speech, and our basic humanity.

Madsen writes:

'With ample evidence of Mossad involvement in Oslo, it is up to every one of us to report to the Nth degree any suspicious contacts with Israelis or Israeli sympathizers.'

Truth-telling is a task that we must all embrace. We have to bury the nonsensical theory of the 'crazed lone gunman' to explain politically motivated assassinations and terror attacks because it is simply not true. State political conspirators are responsible for the attacks in Oslo and other terrorist attacks in America and the Western world.

We cannot let the rascals and demons in the Mossad and the CIA get away with the murder of innocent people. For justice to be done, the truth must be spoken about State staged terror attacks, and as early as possible, as loud as possible, and as much as possible."

On Monday, August 1, 2011, The Palestine Chronicle published an article by James Petras under the title The Norwegian Massacre, the State, the Media and Israel, which was translated by Silvia Arana in order to be published by Rebelión. This happened on Wednesday, August 3, 2011. The Spanish title of Petras' article is La masacre noruega, el estado, los medios e Israel. Excerpt from Petras' article below:

"The Lone Assassin: A Fascist Superman Travels Faster than a Speeding Bullet Versus the Police Moving Slower than an Arthritic Turtle:

The case for the 'lone wolf terrorist' defies credence. It is a tissue of lies used to cover up state complicity, intelligence malfeasance, and the sharp right-turn in the domestic and foreign policies of NATO countries.

There is no basis to accept Breivik's initial claim that he acted alone for several outstanding reasons: First, the car bomb, which devastated downtown Oslo, was a highly complex weapon requiring expertise and coordination – the kind available to state or intelligence services, like the Mossad, which specialize in devastating car bombs. Amateurs, like Breivik, with no training in explosives, usually blow themselves up or lack the skill required to connect the electronic timing devices or remote detonators (like the unsuccessful 'shoe', 'underpants' and 'Times Square' bombers have proved). Secondly, the details of (a) moving the bomb, (b) obtaining (stealing) a vehicle, (c) placing the device at the strategic site, (d) successfully detonating it and (e) then gowning up in an elaborate special police uniform with an arsenal of hundreds of rounds of ammunition and driving off in another vehicle to Utoeya Island, (f) waiting patiently while armed to the teeth for a ferry boat, g) crossing with other passengers in his police uniform, (h) rounding up the Labor youth activists and commencing the massacre of scores of unarmed youth and finally (i) finishing off the wounded and hunting for those trying to hide or swim away - is not the activity of a lone zealot. Even the combination of Superman, Einstein and a world class marksman could not perform those tasks.

The media and NATO leaders must view the public as passive morons to expect them to believe that Anders Behring Breivik 'acted alone'. He is willing to take a 20 year prison sentence if it means, as he maintains, that their collective action is the spark that ignites his comrades and advances the agenda of the violent and legal far-right wing parties. Facing a Norwegian judge on July 25 [2012], he publically declared the existence of 'two more cells in my organization'. According to witness testimony on Utoeya Island shots from two distinct weapons were heard from different directions during the massacre. The police say they are… 'investigating'. Needless to say the police have found nothing; instead they put on a 'show' to cover their inaction by raiding two houses far from the massacre and quickly released the suspects.

The most serious political implication of the terrorist action, however, is the conspicuous complicity of top police officials. The police took 90 minutes to arrive at Utoeya Island, located less than 20 kilometers from Oslo, 12 minutes by helicopter and 25 to 30 minutes by car and boat. The delay allowed the right wing assassins to use up the ammunition, maximizing the death toll of young, anti-fascist activists and devastating the Labor youth movement. The police chief, Sveinung Sponheim, made the feeblest excuse and cover-up, claiming 'problems with transport'. Sponheim argued that a helicopter 'wasn't on standby' and they 'could not find a boat' (Associated Press, July 24, 2011). Yet a helicopter was available; it managed to fly to Utoeya and film the ongoing slaughter, and over half of Norwegians, a seafaring people for millennia, own or have access to a boat. A police force, faced with what the Prime Minister calls the 'worst atrocity since the Nazi occupation', moving at the pace of an arthritic turtle to rescue youth activists, raises the suspicion of some level of complicity. The obvious question arises as to the degree to which the ideology of right wing extremism – neo-fascism – has penetrated the police and security forces, especially the upper echelons? This level of 'inactivity' raises more questions than it answers. What it suggests is that the Social Democrats only control part of the Government – the legislative, while the neo-fascists influence the state apparatus.

The plain fact is that the police did not save a single life. When they finally arrived, Anders Behring Breivik had run out of ammunition and surrendered turning himself over to the police. The police literally did not fire a single shot; they did not even have to hunt or capture the assassin. An almost choreographed scenario: Hundreds wounded, 68 unarmed, peaceful activists killed and the Labor youth movement decimated.

The police can claim 'crime solved' while the mass media prattles about a 'lone assassin'. The far right has a 'martyr' to mask a further advance in their anti-Muslim, pro Israel crusade. (It is reminiscent of the celebrated Israeli-American fascist mass murderer, Dr. Baruch Goldstein, who slaughtered dozens of unarmed Palestinian men and boys at prayer in 1994).

Only two days before the political murders, the head of the Labor Party Youth Movement, Eskil Pedersen, gave an interview to the Dagbladet, Norway's second largest tabloid, in which he announced a 'unilateral economic embargo of Israel from the Norwegian side' (Gilad Atzmon, July 24, 2011). The fact of the matter is that the Norwegian military has no problem promptly dispatching 500 troops to Afghanistan, half way around the world and providing six Norwegian Air Force jets and pilots to bomb and terrorize Libya. And yet they can't find a helicopter or a row boat to transport their police a couple hundred yards to stop a domestic right wing terrorist – whose murderous rampage was being described second by second by the terrorized young victims on their cell phones to their frantic parents?"

Through publishing these two articles, Rebelión tries to imply that not only the Mossad, but also the Norwegian police, the N.A.T.O. and the C.I.A. were behind the July 22 attacks against Norway, thus treacherously using a tragedy which took the lives of 77 innocent people just to spread more hatred.

Rebelión on the July 22 attacks against Norway (II).

2011-07-25T19:06:00.006+02:00

And it has happened again.

Gilad Atzmon, an Israeli-born British musician, novelist, political activist and writer, well known for his anti-Israeli ideas, has written an article on the July 22 attacks against Norway, which was published today by Rebelión under the title ¿Fue la masacre noruega una reacción al BDS? (titled in English as Was Norway Massacre a reaction to BDS Israeli Boycott?). This is Atzmon's position on the issue:

"I learned last night from an Israeli online journal, that two days before the Utoya Island massacre, AUF's (Labour Party’s youth movement) leader Eskil Pedersen gave an interview to the Dagbladet, Norway’s second largest tabloid newspaper, in which he unveiled what he thinks of Israel.

In the course of the interview, Pedersen stated that he 'believes the time has come for more drastic measures against Israel, and (that he) wants the Foreign Minister to impose an economic boycott against the country.'

Pedersen went on to say, 'The peace process goes nowhere, and though the whole world expect Israel to comply, they do not. We in Labour Youth will have a unilateral economic embargo of Israel from the Norwegian side.'

The AUF Labour Party Youth Movement have been devoted promoters of the Israel Boycott campaign, the Dagbladet newspaper reporting that 'The AUF has long been a supporter of an international boycott of Israel, but the decision at the last congress, demands that Norway imposes a unilateral economic embargo on the country and it must be stricter than before.'

'I acknowledge that this is a drastic measure', stated Pedersen, 'but I think it gives a clear indication that we are tired of Israel's behaviour, quite simply.'

Yesterday we also learned that mass-murderer Anders Behring Breivik was openly enthusiastic about Israel. According to a variety of internet outlets, Behring Breivik was a regular poster on several Norwegian internet sites, notably the blog document.no, which is run by Hans Rustad, a former left-wing journalist.

Hans Rustad is Jewish, extremely pro-Zionist, and warns against 'Islam-isation', violence, and other social problems he assumes to be connected with Muslim immigration.

Alongside the UK's infamously Islamophobic Harry's Place and other Jewish pro-war Zionist blogs, the observant amongst us are becoming more and more aware of an increasingly pervasive trend of Jerusalemite internet journals that — ostensibly – like to give the impression of 'rallying for the preservation of Western culture', and of 'standing up for democratic values'.

For the most obvious of reasons, these blog pages are almost exclusively focused on 'the problem of Islam', and on Muslim migrants' 'troubled and reactionary' communities and politics, whilst all the while, simultaneously, relentlessly and forcefully propounding a propagandistic Zionist agenda.

Interestingly enough, other immigrants are routinely depicted on these blog pages as being 'harmless', or as 'positive contributors to society' – you won't find Hans Rustad or Harry Place criticising the Jewish Lobbies, the Lord Levy's or the Russian Oligarchs' disastrous impact on 'Western culture' or on 'democratic values' any time soon.

Gordon Duff wrote yesterday in Veterans Today that the 'car bombing carries the signature of an intelligence agency. Nobody else bothers with such things.'

And indeed it is after all, pretty clear that a car bomb of such magnitude, and an operation of such sophistication is not exactly something a layman can put together with such apparent ease: it would surely take some specialist knowledge, and the question here is, who could provide such knowledge, and such a vast amount of lethal explosives?

I am not in a position at present to firmly point a finger at Israel, its agents, or its sayanim — but assembling the information together, and considering all possibilities may suggest that Anders Behring Breivik might indeed, have been a Sabbath Goy.

Within its Judaic mundane-societal context, the Sabbath Goy is simply there to accomplish some minor tasks the Jews cannot undertake during the Sabbath. But within the Zion-ised reality we tragically enough live in, the Sabbath Goy kills for the Jewish state. He may even do it voluntarily.

Being an admirer of Israel, Behring Breivik does appear to have treated his fellow countrymen in the same way that the IDF treats Palestinians. Devastatingly enough, in Israel, Behring Breivik found a few enthusiastic followers who praised his action against the Norwegian youth. In the Hebrew article that reported about the AUF camp being pro Palestinian and supportive of the Israel Boycott Campaign, I found the following comments amongst other supports for the massacre:

24. 'Oslo criminals paid'.

26. 'It's stupidity and evil not to desire death for those who call to boycott Israel.'

41. 'Hitler Youth members killed in the bombing of Germany were also innocent. Let us all cry about the terrible evil bombardment carried out by the Allied…We have a bunch of haters of Israel meeting in a country that hates Israel in a conference that endorses the boycott.. So it's not okay, not nice, really a tragedy for families, and we condemn the act itself, but to cry about it? Come on. We Jews are not Christians. In the Jewish religion there is no obligation to love or mourn for the enemy.'

The full facts of the Norwegian tragedy are, as yet, unknown, but the message should by now be transparently and urgently clear to all of us:

Western intelligence agencies must immediately crackdown on Israeli and Zionist operators in our midst, and regarding the terrible events of the weekend.

It must be made absolutely clear who it was that spread such hate and promoted such terror, and for what exact reasons."

A photograph showing Anders Behring Breivik with a rifle is shown in Atzmon's article, and under it, we can read:

"Who-What Really Made Him Pull the Trigger So Many Times".

So, Gilad Atzmon seems to see Israel's hand behind the July 22 attacks in Norway. This also seems to be Rebelión's position since this Spanish far-left website published another article by María José Lera (professor of psychology at the University of Seville) and Ricardo García Pérez (a translator) which supports such a conspiracy theory. And now they use Atzmon's article at Veterans Today, translating it into Spanish, in order to imply again that Israel played a role in the tragic events happened in the Scandinavian country three days ago.

It's very hypocritical taking into account Rebelión's support for Hezbollah, a Lebanese terrorist organization involved in a bomb attack against the A.M.I.A. (Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina or Argentine Israelite Mutual Association), which killed 85 people in 1994.

I'd also demand Gilad Atzmon to translate the other comments he didn't translate. 3 comments out of at least 41 don't demonstrate that Israelis really think Norwegians deserve what they suffered recently.

Rebelión on the July 22 attacks against Norway (I).

2011-07-25T03:47:00.012+02:00

Rebelión (which means Rebellion) is a Spanish website which focuses on political, economic and social issues such as the Arab-Israeli conflict, E.T.A., the Catholic Church, the mainstream media, the Iraq War, fascism and many others, always from a far-left viewpoint.

On Sunday, July 24, 2011, this website published an article by María José Lera (professor of psychology at the University of Seville) and Ricardo García Pérez (a translator) under the title Noruega e Israel (Norway and Israel). It is claimed in this article that the July 22 attacks against Norway happened in a context which should attract our attention, since the AUF (Arbeidernes Ungdomsfylking or Workers' Youth League, the Norwegian Labour Party's youth organization), whose members were holding a meeting at the Utøya island when they were intentionally attacked by Anders Behring Breivik, are among the most prominent proponents of boycotting Israel.

Norwegian initiatives against Israel are then cited by the authors of the article, such as (sources available within the article itself):

1.- An academic boycott proposed from within the University of Bergen and the NTNU (Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet or Norwegian University of Science and Technology).

2.- Statements made by Jonas Gahr Støre (Norway's Minister of Foreign Affairs), at the Utøya island itself the day before the attacks, against the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories and the Israeli security fence in the West Bank. Støre is a member of the Arbeiderpartiet or Labour Party.

3.- Statements made by Eskil Pedersen (AUF leader) demanding a boycott against Israel and the recognition of a Palestinian State.

4.- Statements made by Kristin Halvorsen in 2006 (when she was Norway's Minister of Finance) demanding a boycott against Israel, as well as subsequent divestment measures by Norway against Israel. Halvorsen is a member of the Sosialistisk Venstreparti or Socialist Left Party.

5.- The fact that during 2010, 4 out of 10 Norwegians refused to buy Israeli products.

6.- Statements made by Jonas Gahr Støre supporting the Norwegian recognition of a Palestinian State, during a visit of the Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas.

7.- The Palestinian passport which former Norwegian Prime Minister Kåre Willoch gave Mahmoud Abbas, as well as Willoch's statements supporting the Palestinians. Willoch is a member of the Høyre or Right, known internationally as the Norwegian Conservative Party.

8.- Reactions to the Norwegian support for the Palestinians by the Israeli media and pro-Israeli advocates such as American lawyer, jurist and political commentator Alan Dershowitz, who was rejected by three Norwegian universities when he demanded to be granted the right to speak about Israel.

For more information about Norwegian attitudes towards Israel and the Jewish people, please read Norway, Israel and the jews.

The article by María José Lera and Ricardo García Pérez ends as follows (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"It could ultimately be that the State of Israel's tentacles are not so far away from this slaughter; after all it would have not been the first one they commit, nor unfortunately will be the last one. In the end, the Norwegian Workers' Youth League (AUF), the Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs and his whole government have received a tremendous hit.

Those who have positioned themselves the most against Israel's genocidal policies towards the Palestinian people are precisely the ones who suffer the most, previously warned by Israel about their «tremendous boldness»… something which according to the Israeli language means that the price has to be paid."

This is outrageous. While Norway is experiencing its worst crisis since the German occupation of the country during the Second World War, María José Lera, Ricardo García Pérez and Rebelión dare to use this tragedy in order to discredit Israel through implying the Jewish State could have been involved in the attacks against Norwegian innocent citizens.

This kind of perfidy demonstrates how far anti-Israel advocates can go here in Spain.

An analysis of the vocabulary and the images used by the Spanish media regarding Israel (II).

2011-07-01T19:38:00.007+02:00

On Monday, June 27, 2011, Público published an article under the title Cinco años (Five years) by Eugenio García Gascón, regarding Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier who was kidnapped by Hamas in 2006, and negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians regarding exchanges of prisoners. The third paragraph of Gascón's article reads as follows (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"Prime minister Netanyahu, like his predecessor Olmert, hasn't shown a great interest in the liberation of the soldier. Hamas demands the liberation of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in exchange, some of them being militiamen responsible for deadly attacks and strikes, and Netanyahu seems not to be in favour of such exchange."

Now please notice what Gascón wrote in the fourth paragraph of his article:

"Some Israelis remember that during his first mandate, between 1996 and 1999, Netanyahu freed Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, founder and spiritual leader of Hamas in exchange of three Mossad agents arrested in Amman when they wanted to murder Khaled Meshaal, the leader of Hamas in the exile. Meshaal currently lives in Damascus and Sheikh Yassin was murdered in Gaza by the Israeli aviation during the second intifada."

So, according to Público and its journalist Eugenio García Gascón, Palestinian terrorists who killed innocent Israelis and are currently under Israel's custody are "militiamen responsible for deadly attacks and strikes" instead of "criminals responsible for terrorist attacks", while the Mossad wanted to "murder" Khaled Meshaal and the Israeli Air Force "murdered" Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, in spite of the fact that they were enemies of Israel (as well as criminals) during wartime.

This exemplifies again how the Spanish mainstream media distorts reality when it comes to Israel and the Palestinians.

On the Six-Day War, the Naksa Day and the Resolution 242.

2011-06-05T18:24:00.002+02:00

Today, Sunday, June 5, 2011, Palestine and its supporters commemorate the so-called Naksa Day. Naksa means Setback in Arabic, and the Naksa Day refers to the beginning of the Six-Day War on Monday, June 5, 1967, which led to the occupation of the Syrian Golan Heights, the Egyptian Sinai, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem by Israel.

The Naksa Day should not be confused with the Nakba Day (Nakba means Catastrophe in Arabic), which commemorates the 1947 to 1948 Palestinian exodus from what today is the Jewish State, even though both of the days have one thing to do with each other: all the useful idiots who try to cross Israel's borders unlawfully in order to cause confrontations, intended these ones to delegitimize the Jewish State in the eyes of the public opinion.

The Six-Day War prompted the United Nations Security Council to pass the Resolution 242 on November 22, 1967. This Resolution is usually portrayed as intended to make Israel to withdraw from all the territories occupied in the Six-Day War to the so-called 1967 borders, leaving the Palestinians with the opportunity of creating a State of their own in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip with its capital in East Jerusalem.

Well, the truth is that such claims regarding the U.N.S.C.'s Resolution 242 are false, according to its drafters themselves. Will the Spanish maintream media report clearly about this issue?

Manuel Tapial and terrorism (II).

2011-05-26T12:37:00.005+02:00

On Sunday, August 15, 2010, I wrote an article under the title Manuel Tapial and terrorism. Among other things I denounced Manuel Tapial's support for terrorist organizations such as Hamas, which he compared with the armed resistance against fascist Francisco Franco and that against the nazis. I also explained how his language was comparable to that of E.T.A., the well known Basque terrorist organization.

Manuel Tapial was on board the Gaza flotilla when it was stopped by the Tzahal almost one year ago. The organization behind it was the I.H.H., a self-proclaimed Turkish N.G.O., which is also supported by Manuel Tapial. And recently, we could see the Spanish activist meeting Hussein Orush, one of I.H.H.'s representatives, as shown in the image below, uploaded from a Manuel Tapial's Facebook contact (Manuel Tapial is at the left, Hussein Orush is the second from the right).

The text under the photo reads as follows (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"Here we are with Hussein Orush, representative of the Turkish I.H.H., a model organization because of his fight for the defense of the Palestinian People."

Can the I.H.H. be considered a model organization? No. It's in fact an organization linked with terrorist activities, according to the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center as well as the Danish Institute for International Studies. Please read their linked reports and you will be able to understand what can be actually seen in the upper photograph: Manuel Tapial meeting a representative of a criminal organization.

Israel never made concessions, according to Eugenio García Gascón.

2011-05-21T00:12:00.002+02:00

This time his assertions have been shocking and even insulting. In an article published on Friday, May 20, 2011, under the title Concesiones (Concessions), Público's journalist Eugenio García Gascón wrote about Ehud Barak's statements declaring that Israel is strong enough to make concessions.

According to Eugenio García Gascón, Ehud Barak's intransigence derived on the Second Intifada in 2000, when the truth is that precisely in 2000, the aforementioned Israeli politician, then the Prime Minister of his country, proposed a peace plan consisting of the creation of a Palestinian State with sovereignty over many sectors of East Jerusalem as its capital. The Palestinian response consisted of starting the Second Intifada. Is Ehud Barak responsible for the Palestinian failure to continue the negotiations instead of murdering Israeli civilians as the Palestinians actually did?

The journalist describes how Israel has never made concessions by arguing that Israel's withdrawals from Lebanon in 2000 and the Gaza Strip in 2005 were made in order to avoid casualties to happen within those territories, but he fails to explain why Israel didn't withdrew also from the West Bank (where soldiers and settlers were also killed; just remember the so-called Ramallah lynching or the more recent Itamar killings) or why Israel sent its soldiers to Lebanon in 2006 and the Gaza Strip during the operation Cast Lead at all.

The truth is that Israeli withdrawals from Lebanon in 2000 and the Gaza Strip in 2005 were in fact concessions. The aforementioned peace plan as proposed by Ehud Barak was intended as a concession, as well as Israel's withdrawal from the Sinai in 1957 and in 1982 again were also concessions. And what about Jewish acceptance of the United Nations-proposed Partition Plan of November 29, 1947, intended to create two States for two peoples and to bring Jerusalem's inhabitants the opportunity to decide by themselves what of those States did they want to belong to through a referendum? Was not that a concession, Eugenio?

Manuel Tapial's activities on Facebook (IV).

2011-05-14T18:52:00.016+02:00

As explained many times before, Manuel Tapial was one of the three Spanish activists who were on board the Mavi Marmara when the vessel was assaulted by the Tzahal. I spent some time trying to explain how this activist thinks regarding Israel and the Jews to the point that he declared once that my coverage of his political activities on Facebook would be treated as a punishable offense in the form of threats. But since he should be worrier than me regarding the law, I'll continue to summarize his ideas. Translations are made as accurate as possible, between quotation marks.

1.- Manuel Tapial works for a platform called Rumbo a Gaza or, as it is known in English, Ship to Gaza. Apparently, some members of the organization and their vehicles were checked by the Civil Guard (a Spanish national law enforcement agency which is part of the military). Please notice that such a measure is in fact one of the Civil Guard's role, but let's see how Manuel Tapial overreacted (#1):

"What has happened to our fellow activists has no precedents. A legal campaign in which the volunteers are harassed by the Civil Guard, their belongings are 'photographed' and 'manipulated' far off their presence and everything indicates the harassment has just begun!! I call the media to ask the Government why is this harassment happening!!!"

2.- Answering one of his contacts on Facebook, Manuel Tapial wrote (#2):

"Ackbar, the situation HAS BEEN ILLEGAL as they have confirmed to me. All of this is in the lawyers' hands and this week there will be fresh news. We'll report soon. I reiterate that WE ARE LAW-ABIDING!!!!"

Again, Manuel Tapial has failed regarding the law, since it is not illegal for the Civil Guard to check vehicles. In fact, there has been no such "fresh news" regarding lawsuits against the Civil Guard for now. And now please notice what a Manuel Tapial's contact wrote (#3):

"Spain's main interest is not a humanitarian campaign but the weapons, 9 dead people on board the Mavi Marmara were nothing for them, did in fact the media report about it? Absolutely not! It's not interesting the harassment the members of the new freedom flotilla are experiencing as well... but for that we have to fight. PALESTINE!!!"

I don't know where this individual was between May and June, 2010, but yes, the media reported about the Mavi Marmara massively... and from an intentional anti-Israeli perspective.

3.- As Manuel Tapial warned (#4):

"The next week there will be a response due to the situation they have created, we have ceased to recognize the Spanish government as an interlocutor for being actively favourable towards the state of Israel."

As commented before, there was no response, while we still see how the activist tried to promote some sort of conspiracy theory which was answered by two of his contacts as follows (#5 and #6, respectively):

"[This was] the response by the fascist apparatus which rules the Spanish State".

"What has happened to you is nothing new in kaosenlared [an extreme left webpage] the threats, the criminalization and detentions of some of some collaborators happen constantly..."

4.- But such a theory didn't end there. Manuel Tapial even suggested that the Spanish Government shoud be tried for treason and conspiracy in favour of a foreign State, taking into account what the Civil Guard supposedly did (#7). Cristina Soler Crespo and Manuel Tapial wrote about the issue as follows (#8):

"Your lawyer should verify whether there is some way to denounce that offense, before an International Court or the National Court or something..."

Manuel Tapial's answer was:

"We will do so, Cristina, we will do so... ;)"

5.- Manuel Lozano added the following:

"Since there are Mossad agents at the Spanish airports registering Spanish citizens IN SPANISH SOIL before embarking to go to Israel, I already believe everything."

This is clearly indicative of how pro-Palestinians in Spain are vulnerable to anti-Israeli conspiracy theories.

6.- Manuel Tapial finally created a Facebook event in favour of Palestine and against the Civil Guard. At the end of his explanatory text (#10) he commented:

"Let's avoid other GAL!!!"

This is a clear and very offesive reference about the G.A.L. (Grupos Antiterroristas de Liberación or Antiterrorist Liberation Groups), which were formed and maintained by the Spanish governmental authorities between 1983 and 1987. More information about them here.

Maybe another overreaction after being notified by his lawyer he wouldn't be able to denounce the Civil Guard?

Eugenio García Gascón uses Yom HaShoah to criticize Israel.

2011-05-06T19:53:00.005+02:00

On Sunday, May 1, 2011, Israel commemorated the 6,000,000 Jewish victims of the Holocaust through the Yom HaShoah, i.e., the Holocaust Day. The next day, Público published an article by Eugenio García Gascón titled Antisemitismo (Anti-Semitism). This journalist's double standard and lack of historical accuracy is more than evident in this article. Please pay attention to the first paragraph (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"Yesterday night, during a ceremony held at the Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Museum in Jerusalem, prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu told that the world hasn't learnt the lesson derived from the Holocaust, and compared the Holocaust, that is the Second World War nazi actions against Europe's Jews with the current Iranian threat. It's something which seems to be disproportionate and out of place but all Israeli leaders talk endlessly about Iran, once they see a microphone within their reach, and Netanyahu is not an exception, although Iran is a country which never has attacked anybody, unlike Israel, and in exchange it had to endure aggressions."

So Eugenio García Gascón pretends to make his readers to believe that Iran never attacked anybody while Israel did, and that Iran suffered attacks. The truth is that Iran attacked others in the past and is currently doing so. Its victims include Iranians (real or alleged political dissidents, homosexuals, adulterous and raped women, and so on), Israelis (who suffer attacks by terrorists organizations supplied with weapons by Iran), Palestinians (who suffer repression by the aforementioned organizations) and the Red Crescent (whose ambulances were used by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to smuggle weapons into Lebanon).

Meanwhile, aggressions against Israel are not mentioned by Eugenio García Gascón as the main cause of Israel's defense policies. It's not also told by the Spanish journalist how, while Iran was being attacked by Saddam Hussein-led Iraq between 1980 and 1988, the Persian State received Israel's help; in spite of this, Iran refused to re-establish ties with Israel.

The journalist ends his article by suggesting that complete Israel's withdrawal from the Palestinian territories would stop anti-Semitism worldwide, taking into account statistical data which shows that anti-Semitic acts dropped in 2010, a year after the operation Cast Lead ended. The truth is that Israel withdrew once from the Gaza Strip and such a concession only led to an increase on terrorist attacks by Hamas (an anti-Semitic organization), while reading journalists such as Público's Eugenio García Gascón should be enough to understand that media bias against Israel seems to be one of the actual and main reasons behind anti-Semitism.

Spanish Goverment's and media's double standard.

2011-04-16T01:20:00.008+02:00

One of the most acclaimed TV programs in Spain is Tengo una pregunta para usted (I have a question for you), broadcasted by TVE's (Televisión Española, Spain's public TV) channel La 1. It gives citizens an opportunity to ask politicians about those issues they consider important or of a special interest. And on January 26, 2009, Spain's President of the Government and secretary general of the P.S.O.E. (Partido Socialista Obrero Español or Spanish Socialist Workers' Party), José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, was the politician invited to be questioned by ordinary citizens.

Rafael Lafuente Blanco, 29 years old, from the city of Granada, was one of those ordinary citizens. He chose to ask Zapatero about the Spanish arms trade, which makes Spain one of the main exporters of weapons globally, as well as about the hypocrisy behind Zapatero's cabinet, publicly committed to peace while veiledly committed to supply Israel and Colombia with weapons (please notice that, according to Lafuente, Israel and Colombia are countries which usually violate human rights).

Spanish President of the Government answered by explaining that the total amount of weapons sold to Israel by Spain equals just about 1,000,000 €, and that such a quantity means that Spain is not one of Israel's main suppliers of weapons. Then, Lafuente interrupts Zapatero's answer by asking: "Do you have any idea about how many Palestinian civilians have been killed by our weapons?" Zapatero answers by telling that Spanish war material sold to Israel was not used by the Jewish State to kill Palestinian civilians.

Another argument provided by the Spanish socialist leader is the fact that Spain is a pioneer country on the erradication of cluster bombs.

Well, on Friday, April 15, 2011, Público published an article, based on another one published by Europa Press (a Spanish news agency), regarding Libya. Both of the articles reveale that Muammar al-Gaddafi's forces used cluster projectiles against Libyan rebels in Misrata. Those cluster projectiles were made in Spain in 2007 (a year before Spain signed an international agreement which banned this kind of weapons), and later provided to Libya. This issue was also covered by The New York Times, and can also be read in El País, in English.

Público's and Europa Press' articles also deal with the fact that al-Gaddafi's forces used Grad rockets during their operations. The two articles provide explanations about these type of rockets regarding their use by al-Gaddafi's forces, including civilians killed and locations attacked by them, as well as their design and technical data.

Now please notice that:

i) The P.S.O.E. has been very critical towards Israel, especially during the 2006 Lebanon War and the 2008-2009 operation Cast Lead. Spain's socialist leader, who is the President of the Goverment since 2004, admitted to have provided Israel with weapons, and justified it by explaining that those weapons were not used to kill innocent civilians. But at the same time, the socialists, while governing the country, sold nothing less than cluster ammunitions to the Libyan regime.

ii) Público and Europa Press explained in detail how the Grad rockets have been used by al-Gaddafi's forces, how these rockets affected civilians and infrastructures in Misrata and how these rockets were designed. But at the same time, neither Público nor Europa Press depicted in such detail how Israel has been being attacked with al-Qassam and Grad rockets, as well as mortars, during the last months.

Eugenio García Gascón on the religion in Israel (I).

2011-04-10T17:08:00.009+02:00

Yoram Cohen was appointed new Shabak director. The Shabak (an acronym for Sherut haBitahon haKlali or General Security Service), formerly known as the Shin Bet, is Israel's security service for operations inside the State of Israel itself and the Palestinian territories.

Público's Eugenio García Gascón wrote an article about the issue, published on Wednesday, March 30, 2011, under the title Kipot y uniformes (Kipot and uniforms). The journalist describes how religious Jews are taking the control over the State of Israel, putting Yoram Cohen as an example. On what grounds did Eugenio García Gascón base his theory? Yoram Cohen usually wears a kippah (whose plural form is kippot). This means Yoram Cohen is a religious Jew, and for Eugenio García Gascón this is enough to think that "a doubt concerning his professional behaviour will always exist."

He also wrote that many appointments recently made in Israel fell on religious Jews, as well as there are many religious military high commanders. On these grounds he argues that Israel is becoming a more nationalistic and religious country.

Well, he seems to forget that, in spite of the presence of religious Jews in Israel, Israel's Supreme Court sentenced against imposed gender segregation in mehadrin buses, used precisely by religious Jews; that Israeli homosexual couples are granted the right to adopt children and take paternity or maternity leaves, being the homosexuality a sin according precisely to the Jewish religious law or halakha; that religious Jews can be arrested for having committed hate crimes based precisely on religious laws; and that in Israel there is a free press legally able to criticize precisely religious Jews.

Please notice that the aforementioned facts happened during the last years, being Israel under Netanyahu-led coalition Government, usually portrayed as too much nationalistic, too much religious and of a right-wing extremist nature by the Spanish media. So, is there a regression in Israel, as Eugenio García Gascón literally wrote? Should we be alert, as he recommends us?

Should somebody tell Público's journalist that protraying Yoram Cohen as he did just because the new Shabak chief usually wears a kippah is an anti-Semitic argument in nature?

An analysis of the vocabulary and the images used by the Spanish media regarding Israel.

2011-03-23T03:32:00.004+01:00

On Tuesday, March 22, 2011, an article by Ana Carbajosa was published by Spanish daily El País. Ana Carbajosa is El País' correspondent in Jerusalem, which is Israel's capital, though the newspaper she works for still denies this fact by intentionally indicating that Israel's capital city is Tel Aviv.

But now it's time to focus on the vocabulary and the images used by the Spanish anti-Israeli media, and the aforementioned article will be used here as a good example of media bias against the Jewish State.

Firstly, the article is titled as follows: El ejército israelí mata a ocho palestinos, dos de ellos menores, en Gaza, i.e., Israeli army kills eight Palestinians, two of them being minors, in Gaza. And secondly, it's subtitled as follows: "Más de una veintena de palestinos, varios de ellos jóvenes, han resultado heridos durante el ataque a consecuencia de una serie de ataques perpetrados por el ejército", i.e., "More than twenty Palestinians, several of them being youths, have been injured during the attack as a consequence of a series of attacks perpetrated by the army".

Both the title and the subtitle deliberately omit Israel's main reason to attack: Palestinian attacks intentionally directed against Israeli civilians by launching rockets from the Gaza Strip. It's also deliberately omitted that among those killed there were three Palestinian terrorists who were firing from densely populated areas, a fact which could confirm Israel's claim of being attacked by them and the use of local non-combatants as human shields and civilian infrastructures as bases for their operations.

The Palestinian attacks against Israel, the dead terrorists and their tactics are mentioned within the main body of the article, but taking into account that the title is written in bold and in bigger letters and the subtitle is just under it, as well as they're the first part to be read, they claim the attention of the reader firstly and thus condition his or her perception of what has happened: a supposed Israeli attack against Palestinian civilians or at least without consideration for them.

Furthermore, the terms "terrorist", "terrorists" or "terrorism" are not used regarding the members of Palestinian terrorist groups or the groups themselves. The two Palestinian terrorist groups mentioned in this case are Islamic Jihad and Hamas, which are referred to by their names or as "Palestinian armed groups" or simply "armed groups". Hamas is also referred to as an "Islamist movement".

The terrorists are referred to as "militiamen".

In order to avoid doubts about Israel's veiledly alleged vileness among the readers and to erase those facts which could be used to defend Israel's claims from their minds, it's told precisely in the last paragraph that Israel's invasion of the Gaza Strip, early in 2009, left 1,400 Palestinians dead.

Facts which could be used to defend Israel's claims regarding what really happened during the 2008-2009 Gaza War, such as statements by a spokesperson of Hamas admitting the use of human shields as well as confirming Israel's death toll of Palestinian terrorists killed (about 700, an estimation initially denied by Hamas), as well as the increasing of Palestinian rocket and mortar attacks against Israel in spite of the 2005 Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, are not mentioned.

Finally, the picture shown next to the article shows a dead Palestinian child's body, which is claimed to have been "murdered" by an Israeli tank. Please notice that the verb "murder" is used referring to an intentional, premeditated and illegal killing, and in this case there is no evidence enough supporting such a claim; it seems to have happened rather the opposite, i.e., an unintentional, unpremeditated killing, whose legal consequences should affect the terrorists who fired from a densely populated area.

Meanwhile, not a single picture showing the intentionally sought adverse effects of the Palestinian rocket attacks against Israeli civilians is shown to El País' readers.

Is Antonio Gala an anti-Semite?

2011-03-17T04:35:00.006+01:00

Antonio Gala is surely one of the most renowned Spanish writers, with works such as Petra regalada, Samarkanda or La pasión turca, among many others.

But he doesn't only write novels, poems or scripts, but also opinion articles to be published by Spanish daily El Mundo. And, as Libertad Digital reported on Wednesday, March 16, 2011, one of his last ideas consisted of using the human and national tragedy Japan is currently living to target Israel.

Gala explained in his article about what he calls the "human fleas" that "lessons such as the earthquake and the tsunami in Japan should teach them other kinds of behaviour: unity in the face of helplessness, generosity, (...). But they don't learn." And then he writes about Israel in this manner: "So we see Israel there, the most racist country, going back to Gaza after the fright."

This is not the first time he targets Israel or even the Jews. In an article published on February 5, 2009 by El Mundo, he explained that "the Jewish people will succumb again. Like it happened many times: pogroms, voluntary or unvoluntary ghettos, extermination, persecutions, expulsions,... From Egypt to Sepharad, from Canaan to Zion: all of them promised lands. Shouldn't they ask themselves why does always happen the same to them? Or is the rest of the world wrong?"

Spanish journalist David Gistau answered Gala through an article published on February 8, 2009 by El Mundo. He wrote that Gala's "reasoning makes Hitler an executor arm of a hate morally justified by a majority", as well as "we should ask Gala whether he would apply the same logic to (...) understand other persecutions (...). For example, those which were suffered by homosexuals."

Did Gala react to Gistau's argument by apologizing to the Jews? No, he didn't. On March 5, 2009, another article written by Gala was published by El Mundo. The Spanish writer explained about the Jews that: "Always the same: or persecuted or persecutors. Or both things at the same time."

I'll not insult anybody's intelligence by explicitly answering the question which serves as the title of this article since I think you can do it by yourselves easily.

Spanish society surveyed about international issues.

2011-02-26T00:53:00.006+01:00

The Real Instituto Elcano surveyed 1,200 people in Spain between October 28 and November 10, 2010, regarding international issues. When it comes to rate different countries in a 0 to 10 scale, the results are the following:

1.- Brazil: 6.

2.- Germany: 5.9.

3.- France: 5.8.

4.- United States: 5.7.

5.- Argentina: 5.6.

6.- Chile: 5.3.

6.- Venezuela: 5.3.

8.- Russia: 4.7.

9.- Cuba: 4.6.

10.- China: 4.5.

11.- Turkey: 4.4.

12.- Israel: 4.1.

13.- Morocco: 3.9.

14.- Iran: 3.

Russia, Cuba and China are considered Not Free by Freedom House's Freedom of the World report of 2010, while Venezuela and Turkey are considered Partly Free and Israel is considered Free by the same report. But in spite of these facts, Israel is rated worse than Venezuela, Russia, Cuba, China and Turkey by the Spanish society.

Does a Spanish intelligentsiya exist, properly speaking?

2011-02-09T05:15:00.012+01:00

Through an article by Lucía Villa published on Público's official website on Monday, February 7, 2011, a video has been presented in support of a campaign for a new Gaza flotilla, called Ship to Gaza (translated into Spanish, Rumbo a Gaza). The video shows Spanish celebrities such as Alberto San Juan, Guillermo Toledo, Wyoming, Juan Diego Boto and Melanie Olivares, among others. They mainly come from the so-called mundo de la cultura (literally, culture world), which encompasses personalities from sectors like the TV, the cinema or the literature.

In other words: celebrities. Celebrities who serve as useful idiots (as Bernard-Henri Lévy portrayed those who joined the last Gaza flotilla on behalf of the I.H.H. through an article I'll translate soon) for a cause related to the Arab-Israeli conflict, whose history and characteristics they surely don't even know (as they demonstrate by their own words, repeating myths proven historically wrong on this blog), but who don't hesitate to present themselves as a moral authority on humanitarian issues (and they're often accepted as such by the public opinion and the mainstream media).

Well, or that's what they pretend to be. Because we've been presented individuals in that video such as Spanish actor Willy Toledo, who justifies the Cuban dictatorship and portrayes a non-violent anti-Castro activist as a common criminal.

Because those who appear in that video tell absolutely nothing about the despotic regime Hamas established in the Gaza Strip and the rocket and mortar attacks that terrorist organization committed against the Jewish State, in spite of the 2005 Israeli withdrawal from the aforementioned Palestinian territory (which these celebrities also omit), a withdrawal which Hamas tried to avoid and managed to delay.

Independent documentary filmmaker Maital Guttman managed to explain all of this and more here. Why don't we the Spaniards have such an example of real (and, by the way, beautiful) intelligentsiya?

Indoctrination in schools.

2011-01-22T17:06:00.003+01:00

Two Galician associations known as Cosal and Buserana will adhere to the Rumbo a Gaza (Ship to Gaza) campaign, officially intended to send another flotilla to the Gaza Strip. They'll also try to gain public support through "informative" activities in schools. Chicha Martínez, member of both of the associations, explained in Cee's municipal plenary room that an agreement was reached in order to perform their activities in schools of Corcubión, Cee and Muxía municipalities, and that the number of schools to visit will grow during the next days.

Martínez's conference in Cee's municipal plenary room was completed with a documentary about the Gaza flotilla stopped by the Tzahal the night between Sunday, May 30, and Monday, May 31, 2010.

First of all, sending another flotilla to the Gaza Strip would be opposed to U.N.R.W.A.'s official policy. Martin Nesirsky, a U.N. spokesperson, explained last July that even the U.N.R.W.A. considers that routes for supplies to enter by land through Israel's border are well established, and that those routes are the way to send the humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip.

Secondly, it should be noted that the last Gaza flotilla seemed to be an act of provocation rather than a humanitarian campaign, if we attend to the proofs that demostrate the pre-planned violence by the activists and I.H.H.'s ties with international terrorism.

Finally, we must ask ourselves about the supposed democratic and legal legitimacy of the arrangement between the aforementioned Galician associations and Corcubión's, Cee's and Muxía's municipal authorities. This is not about teaching schoolchildren lessons on universal human values, democracy or ethics. What Cosal and Buserana associations are trying to do is to gain support by indoctrinating kids into an specific political ideology.

It would be like entering those schools and preach ideological principles of a political party. And it wouldn't be the first time this happens regarding Israel and the Palestinians. In 2010, the Israeli Embassy in Madrid received anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic postcards sent by six to nine-year-old Spanish schoolchildren. The school in which those kids were studying belongs to Amnesty International's school network.

The Jerusalem Post on WikiLeaks revelations regarding Spain.

2011-01-04T00:51:00.002+01:00

The Jerusalem Post published two articles on WikiLeaks revelations regarding Spain. Both of the now available cables corroborate two main challenges Spanish authorities must meet:

a) A severe problem of anti-Semitism does exist in Spain.

b) Catalonia, in northeastern Spain, is a major Mediterranean center for Islamic terrorism while the whole country is a past and present target for al-Qaeda.

Bernard-Henri Lévy and Susan Abulhawa.

2010-12-28T00:45:00.012+01:00

On Sunday, December 5, 2010, El País published an opinion article by French intellectual Bernard-Henri Lévy under the title ¿Vuelve el antisemitismo? This is in fact a translation into Spanish from his article, published by The Huffington Post under the title The Antisemitism to Come two days before.

Lévy denounces French initiatives to boycott Israel, Susan Abulhawa's novel Mornings in Jenin and Vibeke Løkkeberg's film Tears of Gaza as signs of a resurgent anti-Semitism which seems to affect the world and especially Scandinavia.

On Tuesday, December 21, 2010, El País published an opinion article by Palestinian American author Susan Abulhawa under the title Respuesta a Bernard-Henri Lévy. This is in fact a translation into Spanish from her article, published by The Huffington Post under the title The Antisemitism to Come? Hardly one day before, as a response to Bernard-Henri Lévy's aforementioned article.

Abulhawa's answer seems to consist mainly of denying Lévy's statements without having read the reliable data he provides in order to denounce the aforementioned events. This reliable data provided by the French philosopher consists of:

a) French individuals and organizations want Israel to be boycotted, in spite of the fact that the Jewish State is the only democracy in the Middle East, whose population mainly accepts a two-State solution.

b) Israel's neighbours are not democracies and many of them still reject a two-State solution, but they're not subjected to boycott proposals.

c) Fathi Hamad, a senior Hamas official, stated recently that about 700 members of Hamas and other Palestinian armed factions died during the Operation Cast Lead, which almost match the number of Palestinian combatants provided by Israel (709).

d) Tears of Gaza, whose production team didn't actually go to the Gaza Strip in order to collect evidence, omitted that Hamas is directly responsible for the war itself, committed war crimes during the clash and rules the Gaza Strip in a despotic manner; all of this makes the film to be propagandistic in nature.

e) Mornings in Jenin is a compendium of anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic topics.

f) Israel's Embassy in Oslo had to be protected by installing a security fence.

g) A Swedish fascist party known as Sverigedemokraterna (i.e., Sweden Democrats) has gained access to the Riksdag (i.e., the Parliament) in the past elections.

h) Malmö, which is Sweden's third largest city and suffers from inter-ethnic violence, is ruled by a mayor who equates anti-Semitism and Zionism.

Abulhawa's answer mainly consists of:

a) She ignores the aforementioned eight points.

b) She supports the boycott campaign against Israel, in spite of the fact that the European Court of Human Rights of the Council of Europe sentenced against such a measure as a discriminatory action, and thus, a punishable offense.

c) She states the Palestinians are the only ones who can be considered the native population not only of Palestine, but also of Israel, thus implicitly denying Israel's right to exist as a Jewish State, when the Jews historically are a native population of Israel and Palestine.

d) She states that Lévy considers every single sort of criticism against Israel an act of anti-Semitism, something which is not true. Lévy only states that anti-Semitism is resurging in Europe.

e) Abulhawa accuses Israel of wiping Palestine of the map, expelling people from their homes, stealing their possessions and so on, while she ignores 1.5 million non-Jews living in Israel while enjoying democracy; that the Jewish State is not entirely and exclusively accountable for the Palestinian exodus, being the Arab countries also responsible for it, as well as for the living conditions of the Palestinian refugees living in their territories and the absence of a Palestinian State which they refused to build while occupying the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip; that the Palestinian Arabs themselves started the conflict and rejected a State of their own with the war when they were offered one; that Mahmoud Abbas waited almost until the end of Israel's moratorium on settlement building to resume negotiations, so when the moratorium came to an end almost inmediately, he had the excuse to stop negotiating again; as well as many other historical facts.

f) She accuses Israel of applying apartheid-style policies in spite of the fact that Israel grants equality for its population by law, regardless of ethnicity, religion and race, while the South African laws during apartheid granted the opposite.

g) She accuses Israel of deliberately targeting Palestinian schools, in spite of the fact that Hamas and other armed factions deliberately used schools with military purposes.

h) She accuses Israel of having expelled Palestinian Christians from Bethlehem, when the truth is that those Christians are subjected to threats and violence by Muslims.

i) She states about Lévy as somebody who thinks that he has more rights to the land of her grandparents than herself just because he is a Jew. This comes to be a false allegation after reading Lévy's arguments and demonstrates Abulhawa's predisposition to disqualify Jews, thus demonstrating Lévy's main argument: there is a clear resurgence of anti-Semitic attitudes.

Manuel Tapial suggests to denounce me for threats.

2010-12-15T03:24:00.005+01:00

Please watch the image below. Marked as #1 we can read a comment with a link to an article of my own. Manuel Tapial's answer (marked as #2) consisted of suggesting to denounce me because I threatened him due to my coverage of some of his activities.

The truth is that I never threatened the Spanish activist to commit a punishable offense against him or to hurt him in any way. I just monitored part of his publicly proclaimed activism (particularly on Facebook), just as he can do the same to me. But, could he have committed a punishable offense? Oh, yes, he could.

Article 510.1 of the Spanish Penal Code bans incitement to discrimination, hate or violence against groups or associations on the grounds of, among others, the national origins of those groups and associations. Such an action can consist of boycotting goods just because those who provide them are Israeli citizens, according to a sentence by the European Court of Human Rights of the Council of Europe. And such boycotts are constantly being proposed by Manuel Tapial.

Manuel Tapial could also have committed those actions considered as punishable offenses by articles 510.2 and 578 of the Spanish Penal Code: disseminating slanderous information on the aforementioned groups or associations (in this case, Israelis and Jews) and praising or justifying terrorist organizations (in this case, Hamas), respectively.

So, Manuel Tapial would be more afraid of the Spanish Penal Code than I am.

Manuel Tapial has come back to Facebook.

2010-12-08T01:01:00.005+01:00

Manuel Tapial's Facebook account has been reopened, and the Spanish activist is still campaigning against the Jewish State. This time he protested against Españoles en el mundo, a TV programme broadcasted by La 1 (the first national public TV channel). This programme deals with Spaniards leaving abroad, and on Tuesday, December 7, 2010, Jerusalem (i.e., Israel's capital) was the chosen place (among those interviewed, Sal Emergui). Manuel Tapial protested against the public TV channel as follows (text marked as #1, translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"ashamed of TVE [Televisión Española, the national public television], the public one, because of the programme Españoles en el Mundo... the vision on Jerusalem gave by them is unacceptable. The conclusion of the programme is that everybody can go to Israel except its historical inhabitants, the Palestinians!"

Maybe Manuel Tapial should have been learnt History in order to know that the Jews have been living in the place today known as the State of Israel since several thousands of years, when the Palestinian Arabs weren't already existing. This is also applicable to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, but let the activist sleep tonight; after all, he seems to need it if we take into account what he wrote just eleven minutes before the upper image was captured ("physically disconnected").

By the way, I watched the programme, and it wasn't politically biased neither against Israel nor against the Palestinians, just because it wasn't politically biased.

WikiLeaks and Israel.

2010-12-06T01:38:00.003+01:00

It has been surprising how the 250,000 revealed documents of the United States Department of State have enhanced Israel's official positions; what hasn't been so surprising is the fact that the Spanish mainstream media has severely demoted WikiLeaks revelations benefitting Israel. These ones are at least three:

a) Qatari ruler Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani defends Israel's credibility and demotes its rivals'.

b) Several Arab countries, including ones which don't recognize Israel's inherent right to exist, coincide with Israel regarding the Iranian nuclear threat and even tried to make the United States to bomb Iran's nuclear installations.

c) An Iranian source affiliated with the Red Crescent revealed that its ambulances were used by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard with the help of its crews to smuggle weapons into Lebanon on behalf of Hezbollah during the Second Lebanon War, in the summer of 2006.

Manuel Tapial's Facebook account has been disabled.

2010-11-27T02:18:00.005+01:00

1 & 2.- Facebook has decided to close Manuel Tapial's account. Marked as #1 we can read the address of his account, while marked as #2 we can read as follows:

"The requested page couldn't be found."

3, 4, 5 & 6.- An event has been created in Facebook in order to support Manuel Tapial. Its title and one of the explanatory texts (marked as #3 and #4) read as follows:

"In favor of the reactivation of Manuel Tapial's Facebook account."

There are two other texts, marked as #5 and #6, which respectively read as follows:

"It has been 35 years since fascism died along side with Franco or this is what we think. We have overcome repression and censorship. We demand Facebook to adhere to democracy and to reactivate Manuel Tapial’s account."

"This is a virtual event. When you confirm your attendance you are declaring yourself in favor of freedom of ideas and the ability to show solidarity with those who do not have a voice, in this case, Manuel Tapial, activist and defender of Human Rights."

These texts are also available in Spanish and Arabic.

7 & 8.- A Facebook page has been created in order to support the activist, under the title Against censorship of Human Rights. Manuel Tapial Come Back. The text marked as #7 reads as follows:

"Those who pretend to shut up the voices of the defenders of the Palestinian People will must use other methods but they won't succeed because We Are Decided to denounce DAY AFTER DAY the serious violations of Human Rights and International law committed by the Terrorist State of Israel."

The photo marked as #8 shows Spanish activists Manuel Tapial (left) and Laura Arau (right) during a demonstration (presumably against Israel).

Now I'll ask those who are reading this article just a simple question. Could be the decision by Facebook to disable Manuel Tapial's account considered unjust or illegal when the activist has sistematically shown attitudes such as those collected here, here and here? Please notice that these attitudes are forbidden by Facebook.

Manuel Tapial's activities on Facebook (III).

2010-11-15T03:15:00.013+01:00

Manuel Tapial, one of the three Spanish activists who were on board the Mavi Marmara, runs his own Facebook account. Surprisingly, he was confronted by one of his friends, Julio Belmonte García (a Honduran citizen), on his Wall. Now I'll provide a first excerpt from the debate between Tapial and Belmonte. Some comments were monitored a few minutes after having been posted. Translations are available, made as accurate as possible and between quotation marks.

1 & 2.- Manuel Tapial suggests in a veiled way to disrupt relations with Israel. Julio Belmonte García answers the activist as follows (text marked as #1):

"I consider it sincerely difficult.

I mean, if we had to cut relations with a country when it had committed violations of human rights, we'd have to turn everything upside down. We could establish relations neither with Israel nor with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Morroco, the United States, China, Cuba, Iran, Russia, Colombia, Malaysia, Indonesia and many others."

This is Manuel Tapial's answer to Belmonte (marked as #2):

"Julio, there are countries which not only commit human rights violations but also promote values which have nothing to do with us. There are also countries whose societies are subjected to inclusion and whose dissidents are contacted by us, and we can enhance our relations with them. And which is completely inadmissible, Julio, is Iran and Cuba being considered demons and also isolated and punished by the E.U. while Israel, Morroco, and Colombia are considered 'our friends' letting them to do what they want with their dissidents with any consequence.

Furthermore, the favoritism which these countries enjoy from our governments when they attack our nationals make these governments to appear as puppets in the hands of their owner."

3, 4 & 5.- Julio Belmonte answers Manuel Tapial as follows (marked as #3):

"And wouldn't be more logical not to isolate Israel, Cuba and Morroco, but to keep them with us, as well as to enhance our relations with Cuba and Iran? That's my point."

Manuel Tapial's answer to Belmonte reads as follows (marked as #4):

"Julio, in my point of view, a dialogue is useful to someone who pretends to be integrated or to try to gain access to what he has not access to... Regarding those cases you bring up now, they gained too much access. Why would they change their policies at this moment if they weren't to see their current privileges revoked? .... It's just my opinion... and as said by Eradna [Delastro Sol, a Manuel Tapial's friend], I think our government is on the devil's side.

Julio Belmonte answers Manuel Tapial as follows (marked as #5):

"However, isolating despotic regimes is equally useless. For example, Cuba and Saddam Hussein's Iraq didn't change their repressive policies in spite of the American blockade and the U.N. sanctions, respectively. Moreover, the subsequent economic weakening suffered by these countries were useful to both dictators in order to implement their policies. I'll explain myself.

When a country is subjected to isolation and it affects the economy, the degree of development and the quality of life, its population tends to divide itself into two opposing groups: the adepts to the system and its opposers. Both conflicting groups have been existing since before, and the new situation distances them much more.

The adepts to the system let themselves to be deceived by it and feel themselves attacked by the foreign entities which proceed to isolate their country. At the same time, the isolation suffered by the country makes difficult the entry of foreigners (N.G.O.'s, diplomatic representatives, journalists, etc.), the exit of nationals and the entry and exit of information, which derives on more repression because it can be performed more inadvertently.

All of this has a consequence: the regime which we pretend to destroy through the isolation of the country becomes stronger.

I'll add that if such an isolation drives to the political instability of the affected country, this one will act more aggressively. Could really be considered that forcing Israel to act more aggressively is the best solution? Due to all of this I propose to try to change a country (e.g., Israel or Morroco) from a friendly perspective."

6 & 7.- This is an excerpt from Manuel Tapial's answer (marked as #6) to Julio Belmonte:

"The isolation of these countries is possible and necessary. There are cases like South Africa, in which Boycott, Sanctions and De-investments made the Apartheid to fall, and it's true that there was much repression, but the outcome was positive for the natives. Sadly there are no leaders able to communicate and to take brave decisions in view of the so hostile contexts in which we evolve, we have representatives of the system and not politicians guided by noble ideals, and that put all of us in danger."

Julio Belmonte answers Manuel Tapial as follows (marked as #7):

"I personally dissent from some of your observations. Saddam Hussein's Iraq wasn't the most advanced country in terms of freedom in the Middle East; this one was Israel (something which doesn't legitimate abusing [the Palestinians], of course). According to all the indicators of freedom it's above all the countries of the zone. Lebanon and Jordan also were above Saddam Hussein's Iraq in terms of freedom. Hussein is usually compared with Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao and Stalin, among others, and that's suggestive of something.

Regarding the end of the apartheid in South Africa, it's difficult to believe seriously that the embargo was what ended it. Firstly, sanctions against South Africa weren't respected; for example, France sold Mirage III and Mirage F1 fighter aircraft [to South Africa] during the 60s, the 70s and the 80s. I think that was the internal opposition what favoured the end of the regime, while the international condemnation and the sanctions were accessory to the success achieved in 1993 [please note that the South African apartheid actually ended in 1994].

Furthermore, regarding a boycott against a country, it's doubtfully legal. The European Court of Human Rights of the Council of Europe sentenced that boycotting a country is an illegal form of discrimination. I'll bring you the sentence:

http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view.asp?action=html&documentId=852555&portal=hbkm&source=externalbydocnumber&table=F69A27FD8FB86142BF01C1166DEA398649

As a democratic person, I obey the law and the jurisprudence."

Former Spanish President of the Government on the policy of targeted killings.

2010-11-11T02:12:00.016+01:00

Felipe González Márquez was Spain's President of the Government between 1982 and 1996 with the P.S.O.E. (Partido Socialista Obrero Español or Spanish Socialist Workers' Party). His mandate thus coincided with one of the most turbulent periods of E.T.A.'s terrorism. And also during his mandate, a counter-terrorism group appeared and began to act: the G.A.L. (Grupos Antiterroristas de Liberación or Antiterrorist Liberation Groups).

This squad was created by officials of the Spanish Government and among its members there were Spanish police officers and foreign mercenaries. The G.A.L. worked between 1983 and 1987, kidnapping and killing several dozens of individuals, many of them unconnected with E.T.A. G.A.L.'s existence and actions were discovered by the Spanish press and several police officers and Government officials were arrested and imprisoned due to their role in the so-called guerra sucia (dirty war) against the Basque terrorist group.

This guerra sucia was one of the major scandals of the P.S.O.E.-led Spanish Government along with many others, including that of the embezzlement of public funds by individuals related to the G.A.L.

It has been always reported about a mysterious Sr. X (Mr. X), who would be the main figure behind G.A.L.'s network; and it has been always suspected that Sr. X was González himself, although nothing was proved against him.

On Sunday, November 7, 2010, an interview with Felipe González by Juan José Millás was published in El País. Among González's statements, we can find this excerpt from an answer to the question "And what about the embezzlement of public funds?" (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"The other discussion, an absurd one which drives oneself to the melancholy, is how the reserved funds are handled, those which I was responsible for, which by definition are reserved and which started a ridiculous debate because it was said that they had to have receipts of those provided funds. That is, the informers or the infiltrators who were working for the police after having been paid for their fight against terrorism had to sign the receipts of the money they were being given. We got to this ridiculous [point] in our country! By definition they can't do it, and by definition it's impossible to know whether the guy who has to provide those funds to the informer to give the information to you, or to bring you a [terrorist] commando, is actually providing those funds. Or [whether] he is providing a half while he is taking the other [half]. Here and everywhere. Those are the State's guts. It's been a long time since I'm not in the Government but I'll tell you something that maybe will surprise you.

Even now I still don't know if I did right or wrong, I'm not bringing a moral problem up to you, because I'm still not sure. In my life I had just an opportunity to give an order to liquidate the whole E.T.A.'s leadership. Before [Philippe] Bidart's [leader and founder of Iparretarrak, a Basque nationalist terrorist organization operating in the French Basque Country] fall, in 1992, they wanted to spoil the Olympic Games, to have a universal influence... I don't know how much time before, maybe in 1990 or 1989, some information was given to me, it had to be given to me due to its importance. It wasn't about ordinary operations regarding the fight against terrorism: our people had detected -I don't tell who [were those people]- the place and the day of a meeting of E.T.A.'s leadership in southern France. The whole leadership. An operation which they had been waiting for much time. We had the place and the day, but our chance to arrest them was inexistent, they weren't in our territory. And the possibility that the operation was to be done by France was very low. Now it would have been easier. Although if it had been detected by our services, if the whole E.T.A.'s leadership had met in a French location, France['s authorities] would have fallen on them. [But] not at that moment. At that moment we only had the possibility to blow them up altogether in the house they were to meet. I will not even explain you the consequences of acting in French territory, I'll not explain you the whole issue, but the fact was: a possibility to blow them up and to leave E.T.A. without its leaders did exist. The decision was between 'Yes' and 'No'. I'll simplify it, I said: 'No'. And I'll add this: I don't already know if I did right. I'm not telling you that I'd never do it for moral reasons. No, it's not true. One of the things that tortured me during the following 24 hours was how many murders of innocent people could I have avoided within the following four or five years. That's the matter. But I said 'No'."

This is the way in which former Spain's President of the Government Felipe González justified the policy of targeted killings. Please notice that he had to decide whether to blow E.T.A.'s leadership up, due to the fact that at that time Spanish authorities were unable to apprehend the terrorists, who were hiding in the territory of a country which was doing absolutely nothing to arrest them; please notice also that González decided not to do it for diplomatic reasons, not for moral ones.

The case is that former Spain's President of the Government Felipe González at least considered whether to commit a targeted killing in order to fight a terrorist organization. Some people have argued that these statements prove that González really was Sr. X, the main figure behind the G.A.L.'s network.

Were G.A.L.'s activities illegal? Yes, they were. Although Spain had to deal with a terrorist organization at the time, this problem didn't happen in the context of a war, so in that case the policy of targeted killings and kidnappings was illegal. And even if this was not the case in strict legal terms (many would justify such a policy in this case arguing that France neither was fighting against E.T.A. in its own soil nor allowed Spain to apprehend the terrorists in French territory), the fact is that in practice, G.A.L.'s activities were performed foolishly and took many innocent lives.

But what about a sovereign State which suffers terrorism in the context of a war? Does constitute a punishable offense to kill your enemies when you're at war with them? No, it doesn't, especially if the members of those terrorist organizations hide and operate in the territory of a country which neither apprehends them nor allows the affected sovereign State to act appropriately. And is not the policy of targeted killings even more justifiable when in the context of a war the country where the terrorists hide and operate actively support them? In such a case, is not actually the country which supports the terrorists participating in the hostilities against the affected sovereign State? And is not the affected sovereign State entitled to defend itself through a policy of targeted killings if necessary?

Yes, it is. And this is Israel's case.

What about Malmö's Jews?

2010-11-08T20:04:00.005+01:00

Malmö is Sweden's third largest city, and it has been suffering a continuous increasing of hate crimes for the last years. These hate crimes have been suffered both by Jews and inmigrants from African and Asian countries.

Jew-hatred in Malmö increased to the extent that approximately a half of the city's Jewish population decided to leave their place of origin, having emigrated to other Swedish locations or to the State of Israel. As reported early this year, they're less than 700, and for the last years they suffered not only vandalism, harassment and threats, but also at least two bomb attacks: one at a burial site and other at the city's only synagogue.

These attacks are being committed mostly by extremist muslims and radical left-wingers, and to a lesser extent, by radical right-wingers. And Malmö's mayor Ilmar Reepalu's response to this problem was inappropriate and shameful.

At the same time, a series of shootings against people with dark skin and non-Swedish appearance have been happening in Malmö at least since 2009, but the authorities consider now that the case could date back as far as 2003. The multiple shootings have resulted in at least one person killed and many more people injured. A man has been arrested recently but the case is still far from being solved and closed. This case coincides with the Sverigedemokraterna's (Sweden Democrats) entry into the Riksdag (Sweden's legislature).

This political party proposes strict regulations concerning inmigration, especially from muslim countries. It is supported especially in southern Sweden, where Malmö is located. This city comprises a large inmigrant population frequently associated not only with the aforementioned Jew-hatred, but also with violence in general, especially in the district of Rosengård, so the Sweden Democrats' political rise is considered to be partly responsible for the shootings.

Once a man has been arrested in connection with the racist shootings in Malmö, laSexta Noticias has broadcasted a report on them on Sunday, November 7, 2010. The report can be watched here, from the minute 19:39 to the minute 20:08. Meanwhile, the Jew-hatred which affects Sweden's third largest city is still ignored by laSexta Noticias.

Ironically, the aforementioned report is followed by another about racism, while for laSexta Noticias, Malmö's Jews are not important enough to be mentioned.

Manuel Tapial's activities on Facebook (II).

2010-11-05T02:03:00.013+01:00

As explained before, Manuel Tapial was one of the three Spanish activists who were on board the Mavi Marmara, and he runs his own Facebook account. There we can find multiple examples of his political ideology, and now I'll provide eight of them. Click on the images below to watch them in high resolution. Translations are available, made as accurate as possible and between quotation marks.

1.- Manuel Tapial writes about an Israeli politician, Avi Dichter, who refused to travel to Spain due to his concerns about the possibility of being arrested or interrogated. Manuel Tapial's friend Pedro Luis Ruiz Sanchez comments below, among other things (comment marked as #1):

"... if he is guilty of serious crimes he should be hanged as Sad[d]am [Hussein] before and his vice-president Tarek Aziz now were, or can't the Jews be hanged? because if they kill and they're not tried it's normal that terrorism does exist in that occupied zone, and well, it was told in the past and it still prevails, even God doesn't want the Jews."

This anti-Semitic remarks, liked by Manuel Tapial's friend Farid Hach, haven't been erased by the activist.

2 & 3.- Manuel Tapial links from the wall of his own Facebook account to a Facebook page titled Demand Egypt let the Road to Hope convoy through (the link is marked as #2). If we follow the link and read the information of this Facebook page we will be able to read (the text is marked as #3):

"The Road to Hope convoy has been sitting on the Libyan/Egyptian border for over one week now.

We demand the inmediate and safe passage so the Road to Hope convoy can deliver humanitarian cargo to the people of Gaza."

This demand seems to be supported by Manuel Tapial since he has joined this Facebook page. I'd like to ask him why would be right to send humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip by land through Egypt, while sending humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip by land through Israel is not. After all, when the Gaza flotilla was en route to the Gaza Strip, Israeli authorities gave the activists a chance to do it, which was rejected by them.

4 & 5.- The map marked as #4 was found by the Tzahal during the Operation Cast Lead. It was made by Hamas and shows Hamas' tactics during the aforementioned clash, which included the use of civilian population and infrastructures as shields. Much more complete and detailed information on Hamas' tactics during the Operation Cast Lead is available here.

Regarding to the map, it was uploaded by Jorge Casas Bermúdez (not a Manuel Tapial's friend) to a Facebook page titled Rumbo a Gaza (On the road to Gaza), the name given to an initiative which pretends to send another flotilla to the Gaza Strip. This Facebook page was created by Manuel Tapial.

Jorge Casas Bermúdez claims to have received the map through an anonymous e-mail by which he was also told that it's important to the aforementioned initiative, so the map, which is in Arabic, should be translated (presumably into Spanish or English). Manuel Tapial, unable to translate the map, asks Jorge Casas Bermúdez who has been received the map from. Amar Hachemi (not a Manuel Tapial's friend) writes in Arabic, but later makes the translation into Spanish (marked as #5) as follows:

"it's palastine's flag and the girl [who made it also] made a drawing begging peace and love".

Well, the truth is that, as explained before, it's a map (not a Palestinian flag with a drawing) made by Hamas (not by a girl) which shows its criminal tactics, so this evidence against Hamas and in favour of Israel is available on the wall of this pro-Palestinian Facebook page.

It's curious, isn't it? Let's see how much time will the map still be available there without them having realized it!

6.- As reported before as a rare example of an unbiased report on Israel, an Israeli rabbi has allowed female Mossad agents to engage in sexual intercourse when necessary to achieve a mission. According to this ruling, such activity wouldn't constitute a sin according to the Jewish religious laws.

On the wall of his own Facebook account, Manuel Tapial warns (statement marked as #6) his friends against being lured by female Mossad agents. This warning is followed by some blue jokes and a comment by Manuel Tapial himself (not shown here but still available there) defending Mordechai Vanunu, who was lured by a female Mossad agent, apprehended and smuggled into Israel. Vanunu revealed nuclear secrets to the British press.

Does Manuel Tapial really think he is important enough to attract Mossad's attention upon him? Well, he probably does think so. After all, he claimed his last cell phone was probably hacked by Israel, warning his friends to erase his cell phone number from their datebooks (read here, at point #1).

7.- Pilar Rahola, a Spanish journalist and former politician from Catalonia, was awarded the Daniel Pearl Award for her defense of Israel. Here, Manuel Tapial writes his disagreement with the Award being given to Pilar Rahola. Manuel Tapial's friends Amparo Amparito and Wadi Nasrallah-Daghestani also disagree (marked as #7). The first one demands Pilar Rahola to be censored while the second one describes the Catalonian journalist as human scum.

Other comment (not captured here but still available there) by Pedro Luis Ruiz Sanchez (already mentioned in this same article at point #1) calls her to search for psychological and psychiatric treatment and to hit the Western Wall with her head in order to hurt herself.

Other insults against Rahola are still available on his wall and haven't been erased by Manuel Tapial.

8.- Manuel Tapial claims here (marked as #8) that the police took a Palestinian acquaintance of his own during two hours in the city of Almería. He also claims that this Palestinian individual was interrogated about the reasons of his trip to the city and whether he had the intention to attend a conference by Manuel Tapial there.

Manuel Tapial is thus accusing the Spanish authorities of intimidating those related to his cause.

The Jerusalem Post on Casa Sefarad-Israel's study about anti-Semitism in Spain.

2010-11-02T21:26:00.003+01:00

The Pew Research Center published a report about anti-Semitism and Islamophobia in Spain, Poland, Russia, Germany, France, Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States. The report dates from 2008 and showed that 46% of the Spaniards had unfavourable views towards the Jews; concerned about this fact, the Spanish Government made Casa Sefarad-Israel to study the problem, releasing the data contained here.

The Jerusalem Post's response to the report can be read here (in English).

Público on others' double standard, but not on its own double standard.

2010-10-28T02:32:00.008+02:00

Público has published an article by Daniel Basteiro, correspondent in Brussels, on Wednesday, October 27, 2010, under the title El doble rasero de Bruselas (Brussels' double standard). The article deals with what Público perceives as a double standard by the European Union regarding its human rights policies, which are not as harsh with China, Myanmar, Honduras, Morroco, the United States, Russia and Mexico as with Cuba. The article relies on statements made by left-wing Members of the European Parliament and an Amnesty International official, who attribute E.U.'s attitudes to the economic ties with countries like Morroco and China and the fact that the right-wing parties hold a majority in the European Parliament.

Maybe this Público's denounce is correct, but the reality is that it fails to denounce its own double standard when it comes to one country: the State of Israel. Just read here, here, here, here and here to understand what I'm referring to.

Eugenio García Gascón on Israel's nuclear capabilities.

2010-10-16T21:02:00.005+02:00

Público has published an article by Eugenio García Gascón on Friday, October 15, 2010, under the title Israel y la bomba (Israel and the bomb). Excerpt from the article below (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"Of course, to allow Iran to build the bomb must be avoided (although to obtain nuclear energy for commercial purposes should be allowed). And the same should be told about Israel. There are trigger-happy politicians in the Israeli cabinet, like the Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman. Lieberman has expressed himself recently in an aggresive and bellicose manner, even regarding those Arab countries which signed peace with Israel. It would be right to take the bomb away from him and the West shoud be working to achieve it."

What I think is that there are trigger-happy Arabs and muslims who prompted Israel to arm itself. Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has stated publicly that Israel must be destroyed, and Arab countries attacked Israel in the past with the purpose of achieving such a mission. Iran and Syria also supply Hezbollah and Hamas with rockets. Egypt tried to achieve nuclear capabilities during Nasser's regime, employing nuclear scientists who had worked for the nazi regime before.

The question here is: would Israel have armed itself with nuclear weapons if its enemies hadn't attacked and threatened Israel before?

An example of an unbiased report on Israel.

2010-10-10T23:28:00.005+02:00

Incredibly, it has happened. It's the first time since weeks or even months that I have watched a Spanish TV report on Israel which can't be considered biased. And the most extraordinary fact is that the report was broadcasted by laSexta Noticias and that it was made by Sal Emergui. In spite of this fact, Israel is neither criticized nor denounced in the report.

The report focuses on a rabbinical ruling regarding female Mossad agents engaging in sexual intercourse when necessary to achieve a mission. According to the ruling, such activity doesn't constitute a sin according to the Jewish religious laws.

More information in English about the issue, here.

Was Spanish activist Manuel Tapial shot?

2010-10-02T18:09:00.002+02:00

According to an article published in ideal.es: El cooperante tiroteado Manuel Tapia[l] presentará la película 'Vals con Bashir' (The shot activist Manuel Tapia[l] will present the film 'Waltz with Bashir'). The truth is that Manuel Tapial was not shot when the Mavi Marmara was raided by the Tzahal.

Again, the Gaza flotilla has been defined as a "humanitarian aid flotilla for the Palestinians", in spite of the proofs against the activists and the lack of evidence against the Israeli soldiers who assaulted the vessels.

Casa Sefarad-Israel on anti-Semitism in Spain.

2010-09-18T03:09:00.004+02:00

Worried about the results of the report, the Spanish Government made the Casa Sefarad-Israel (an institution centred on the study of Jews and dedicated to foment Spanish-Israeli relations) to take on the issue. Finally, a new report was published, which found the following results:

1.- 58.4% of the Spaniards think that the "Jews have much power because they control the economy and the media". Among university students this attitude encompasses the 62.2%, and among people "interested in politics" this attitude encompasses the 70.5%. All of this means that anti-Semitism in Spain is highly worrying and intolerable, due to its level and to the fact that it's higher among educated and informed people.

2.- 34.6% of the Spaniards have unfavourable or totally unfavourable opinions about the Jews. This attitude encompasses 34% of the far-rightists (who rate the Jews with 4.9 points in a scale from 1 to 10) and 37.7% of centre-left-wingers (who rate the Jews with 4.6 points in a scale from 1 to 10). This case is unique in Europe because far-rightists show less unpleasantness towards the Jews than centre-left-wingers.

3.- Among those who admit to be "unpleasant towards the Jews", 17% of them attribute this attitude to the "Middle East conflict"; 29.6% of them attribute this attitude to "their religion", "their customs", "the way they are", etc.; others among them attribute this attitude to "general unpleasantness", "the power" and "the money"; 17% of them attribute this attitude to reasons they don't know. This means that only a small percentage of the Spaniards show unpleasantness towards the Jews due to "the State of Israel and its policies".

Jewish religious traditions and history left out by laSexta Noticias.

2010-09-10T04:37:00.004+02:00

On Thursday, September 9, 2010, laSexta Noticias broadcasted twice a news report on one of the most important Jerusalem's Holy Places: the one known as Har haBayit or Temple Mount by the Jews, and as al-Haram ash-Sharif or Noble Sanctuary by the muslims.

The report was first broadcasted at lunchtime. Helena Resano, the anchorwoman, made an explanatory introduction before the actual report by Sal Emergui was broadcasted. During the introduction, Helena Resano commented on the fact that this Holy Place is the Noble Sanctuary, sacred to muslims, but ommitted the fact that it also is the Temple Mount, sacred to Jews. She also reported on Ariel Sharon's visit to the site on September 28, 2000, as the main cause of the Second Intifada.

The actual report by Sal Emergui was then broadcasted. Only at the end was mentioned the fact that the site is also a Jewish Holy Place. But once this was explained, an interview with Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, current Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, was shown, in which he clearly denied the Jewish historical and religious ties with the site. Any single spokesperson of the rabbinical authorities has been interviewed by Sal Emergui.

The report was broadcasted again at dinnertime. Again, an explanatory introduction was made, in this case by Mamen Mendizábal, the anchorwoman. Again it was told that the site is the Noble Sanctuary, excluding the fact that it also is the Temple Mount.

Then was broadcasted the actual report by Sal Emergui. This time other words were used and the Jewish historical and religious ties with the site were excluded, while the aforementioned interview with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was shown again. And again, any single spokesperson of the rabbinical authorities was interviewed.

This is the way laSexta Noticias has left Jewish religious traditions and history out.

Manuel Tapial's activities on Facebook (I).

2010-08-24T23:05:00.019+02:00

Manuel Tapial, one of the three Spanish activists who were on board the Mavi Marmara, runs his own Facebook account. There we can find multiple examples about his political ideology. Now I'll provide nine of those examples through images collected during the past days. Click on the images below to watch them in high resolution. Translations are available, made as accurate as possible and between quotation marks.

1.- Manuel Tapial suspects his cell phone has been hacked by Israel, which he calls "Israhell". The text marked as #1 reads as follows:

"Erase my cell phone number from your datebooks, they've hacked it (Israhell?), and it doesn't work. I ask myself whether Movistar [a Spanish mobile phone operator] hasn't passed my [personal] data unlawfully."

Comments concerning such a suspicion support Manuel Tapial's hypothesis.

2.- Manuel Tapial's friend Ali Ebubekir Tockan tagged Manuel Tapial in a photo uploaded to Tapial's account. The photo consists of a meal. The text in English marked as #2 reads:

"As of February 2010 became the world's population 6.805.000.000. But, only 560 people made the journey aboard the Mavi marmara and able to eat at Gaza Cafe's famous meatball :)".

This is curious, isn't it? I mean, the so-called Gaza flotilla was officially intended to provide Gazans with food (among other help), but were in fact the activists providing themselves with tasty banquets instead of keeping as much food as possible in order to deliver it throughout the Gaza Strip?

3.- Manuel Tapial has been showing concern publicly regarding the humanitaran situation in the Gaza Strip, but a friend of his own who signs as Fdlp Palestina (a clear reference to the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine) uploaded a photo which shows Cuban dictator Fidel Castro meeting D.F.L.P.'s founder and leader Nayef Hawatmeh. Manuel Tapial himself was tagged in the photo, and his name (marked as #3) appears when you put the cursor above the photo. What about Tapial's concerns regarding the Cuban people, which is ruled by Fidel Castro? What about Tapial's concerns regarding the 22 Israeli high school students murdered by the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine during the 1974 Ma'alot massacre? Oh, wait a minute; Manuel Tapial supports Palestinian terrorism against innocent Israelis, as he himself declared once.

4.- Manuel Tapial relies on Gara's official website to spread his political ideology (the link is marked as #4). Please note that Gara is a Basque newspaper which has been showing support for the terrorist organization E.T.A. since it was first published in 1999 succeeding Egin, another Basque newspaper supportive to E.T.A. which was banned in 1998.

5.- In a photomontage marked as #5 and uploaded to Manuel Tapial's account by Osama Qashoo, one of Tapial's friends, Paul the Octopus can be seen predicting Hezbollah's victory over Israel. It's a clear message of support towards Hezbollah. What about Tapial's concerns regarding the suffering the Lebanese people had to endure during the 2006 Lebanon War, which was unnecesarily prompted by Hezbollah through the Zar'it-Shtula incident?

6.- A Manuel Tapial's friend who signs as Palestina Libre (which means Free Palestine) uploaded an image (marked as #6) to Tapial's account which explicitly minimizes the adverse effects derived from the rocket attacks on Israel by Hamas and other terrorist organizations. What about Tapial's humanitarian concerns about Sderot's 45% of children under the age of six, 41% of mothers and 33% of fathers who were diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder? Does Manuel Tapial remember the drawings by African children about war? Please notice, Manuel, that according to a 2007 account by a seven-year old girl from Sderot, Someone has been wounded.

7.- A boycott against Israeli products is demanded by showing this image (marked as #7), in which a bar code corresponding to an Israeli product (denoted by indicating the number 729) is combined with a revolver. It's of course a manner of associating every single Israeli product to the alleged Israeli oppression of the Palestinians.

Now let's see: Manuel Tapial was recently worried about his cell phone, as indicated before. Well, Manuel Tapial's cell phone, like every single cell phone on Earth, has been built using many materials, including one known as coltan. Maybe Manuel Tapial should read a report which shows that there is much more blood on his cell phone than on any Israeli product.

8.- Manuel Tapial's friend John Erik Hanson uploaded this drawing (marked as #8) to Tapial's account. It shows the way in which happened the boarding of the Mavi Marmara by the Tzahal from the activists' perspective, in spite of the proofs against the activists and the lack of evidence against Israeli soldiers.

9.- Manuel Tapial linked a videoconference by David Duke. Duke's videoconference is intended to criticize Israel, Zionism and the Jews as a whole heavily. Please note that David Duke, an American citizen, is a white supremacist, a fomer Ku Klux Klan's member and an anti-Semite. And to have linked the video can't be considered the result of Tapial's ignorance, because he himself indicates this fact. The first comment under the link, written by Tapial, reads as follows:

"Be careful because this guy is a nazi, although what he says makes sense, it's necessary to know who he is."

Here is Amin Shiranai's answer to Manuel Tapial, being Amin one of Tapial's friend (it's the second comment under the link):

"I don't care about him being a nazi, this guy tells the truth, the fucking truth, the Zionists have trippled nazis' crimes, so I really don't care about what he thinks.."

Please notice Aupa Towanda's and Mukkader Bauer's answers to Tapial and Shiranai, rejecting David Duke in Spanish and English, respectively (third and fifth comments under the link, respectively). Both Aupa and Mukkader are Tapial's friends.

Tapial's explanation of the linked videoconference, which is marked as #9, reads as follows:

"Recommendable the visualization and spreading of this video ..."

Manuel Tapial and terrorism (I).

2010-08-15T18:50:00.017+02:00

Manuel Tapial is one of the three Spanish activists who were on board the Mavi Marmara. On Monday, July 5, 2010, Spanish daily AHORA Leganés published an interview with him about the P.P.'s (People's Party, a right-wing, conservative party) branch for the municipality of Leganés (a city near Madrid, Spain's capital), which refused to condemn the raid conducted by the Tzahal against the so-called Gaza flotilla. During the voting process, Leganés' councillor Dolores Montoro (a member of the People's Party) wore two Stars of David. This is the interview (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"Q. Leganés' P.P. has refused to condemn the Israeli assault on the Flotilla during the Voting Process.

A. I think that to affirm we attacked the Israelis comes from a supine ignorance. These statements discredit the P.P. by themselves. P.P.'s spokesman puts himself out of the Law through his words. It sounds like if defense of State terrorism had been made, defending a State which has committed a violation of the Human Rights and which has committed murders.

Q. What do you think about the P.P.'s councillor wearing two Stars of David during this Voting Process?

A. Leganés' citizens must know these facts. We could compare it with a member of E.T.A. showing the photographs of those killed by him during a Voting Process. That's the same indignation our families have been able to feel while seeing it. It's outrageous that somebody can defend a State which has committed a terrorist act, which has put our lives in danger and which has provoked nine deaths. It's outrageous.

Q. What would you tell this councillor?

A. [I'd tell her] to go to live in Israel."

E.T.A. (Euskadi Ta Askatasuna, which in Basque means Basque Homeland and Freedom) is a far-left, armed organization which aims to achieve the independence for Euskadi or Basque Country (which would include two Spanish Autonomous Communities, Euskadi or Basque Country and Navarre, as well as the western part of the French department of Pyrénées-Atlantiques) through the use of force and intimidation; id est, it's a terrorist organization, delegitimized by most of the Basques, which has demonstrated many times it's able to kill, harm and kidnap members of the security forces, politicians, businesspeople, journalists and innocent civilians as a whole, through both selective and indiscriminate actions committed by the use of firearms and explosives.

Since E.T.A. was founded in 1959, it killed more than 800 people.

Before being expelled from the Basque Parliament and municipal councils by law, the members of those political parties supporting E.T.A. were able to defend the organization inside those institutions, showing photographs of E.T.A.'s members, refusing to condemn E.T.A.'s criminal activities and so on.

And for Manuel Tapial, refusing to condemn the Israeli raid on the Gaza flotilla is comparable to show support for terrorism, in spite of all the proofs against many of the activists who were on board the Mavi Marmara and the lack of evidence against Israeli soldiers.

But what really shocks me is that, in his point of view, a Spanish politician wearing a Magen David during a council meeting is comparable to a member of E.T.A. supporting E.T.A.'s terrorism during a council meeting. And he made this statement in a country which has been suffering E.T.A.'s terrorism for decades, as well as anti-Semitism for centuries.

Well, maybe Manuel Tapial should be informed that his own ideas are much more comparable with E.T.A.'s than a person wearing a Star of David, not only because the organization behind the Gaza flotilla, the I.H.H., has been linked with terrorist organizations by the Danish Institute for International Studies and the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, but also because E.T.A. and Manuel Tapial share a common ideology regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Manuel Tapial is a member of the Comité de Solidaridad con la Causa Árabe (Solidarity with the Arab Cause Committee). In its website we can find this article, written by Manuel Tapial himself. He states the following (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"As an activist, I refuse to assume the official positions and to justify the massacre of civilians, and I refuse to condemn the legitimate resistance of a people under so brutal attacks. The tools of every people are those which are considered the most useful to defend themselves, and in this case I recognize Hamas' moral authority to defend the Gaza Strip, a zone where through free elections most of the people chose it to represent them in the Palestinian parliament. Poor Palestinians who chose the erroneous option. Don't we the Western countries agree on that kind of electoral system of one person, one vote?"

In the next paragraph he proposes to recognize the legitimacy of the armed operations carried out in Lebanon and Palestine, which he dares to compare with the armed resistance against Francisco Franco during the 1936 to 1939 Spanish Civil War and that against the nazis during the Second World War, and ends suggesting the disruption of Spanish-Israeli relations.

He ends his article with the following words: "Viva the Resistance, Viva the struggle of the Palestinian people!"

This comes from a pro-E.T.A. website. It's an article under the title País Vasco, una cultura de resistencia (Basque Country, a culture of resistance) which uses a language similar to Manuel Tapial's:

"E.T.A. continued with its activities after Franco's death.

During these days E.T.A. has attracted the attention of the media due to its car bombs and its actions against the Spanish government, which continuously derive on the escalation of the repression against the Basques, against revolutionary groups of resistance and even anarchists.

In spite of the fact that nationalism is usually implemented by the State to maintain its people in a situation of ignorance, the Basque nation, like others, is still absorbed by the powers of the capitalist western world (Spain and France).

The struggle for the freedom of the Basque people is important, being one of many battles against the fascist opression."

While Manuel Tapial recognized Hamas as a legitimate organization entitled to represent the Palestinians, sympathizers of E.T.A. (and E.T.A. itself) have been denouncing the banning of political parties (such as Batasuna) which support E.T.A. and try to appear before the public opinion as the legitimate representatives of the Basque people. One example is Segi, a pro-E.T.A. youth organization which protested against the aforementioned banning, as can be read in the same pro-E.T.A. website, in an article under the title Segi denuncia la ilegalización de Batasuna y la estrategia aniquiladora contra Euskal Herria (Segi denounces the banning of Batasuna and the destructive strategy against Euskal Herria, being Euskal Herria the country of the euskera, or Basque language).

Furthermore, E.T.A. and its sympathizers, and Manuel Tapial himself, support Hamas in a similar manner. The same pro-E.T.A. website published an article under this title: Solidaridad con la resistencia del pueblo palestino frente a las atrocidades del ejército israelí (Solidarity with the resistance of the Palestinian people against the atrocities of the Israeli army).

So, who are acting like supporters of terrorism, those who refuse to condemn the Israeli raid on the Gaza flotilla due to the proofs against many of the activists who were on board the Mavi Marmara and the lack of evidence against any single Israeli, or those who ally themselves with organizations linked to terrorist groups, while supporting terrorist activities and criticizing a State like members and supporters of E.T.A. usually do?

To portray the Magen David as a terrorist symbol... And then he pretends not to appear as an anti-Semite before the public opinion.

Do Público's journalists know how the world where they live is?

2010-07-31T18:18:00.006+02:00

I mean, Público published an article by Eugenio García Gacón on Friday, July 2, 2010, which offered the following information (excerpt from the article below, translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"Israel rejects outright Turkey's demands. In the first hand, Gaza's blockade which theoretically was lifted last week, according to the Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu actually is going on almost at the same level than prior to the announcement. The Israelis justify their attitude saying that they're avoiding the smuggling of weapons and dual-use materials, though actually they're avoiding the entrance of food, medicines, gas for private use and civil construction materials."

Well, the truth is that food, medicines, gas, civil construction materials and many more items are actually being sent to the Gaza Strip, as shown here, here and here.

A lawsuit is brought against eight Israelis in Spain.

2010-07-27T17:46:00.005+02:00

A Spanish N.G.O., known as Comité de Solidaridad con la Causa Árabe (Solidarity with the Arab Cause Committe) has brought a lawsuit against eight Israelis due to the boarding of the so-called Gaza flotilla, under the auspices of Laura Aral, Manuel Espinar Tapial and David Segarra, the three Spaniards who were on board the Mavi Marmara during the Israeli assault. The lawsuit consists of accusing those eight Israelis of having committed crimes of less humanity and crimes against people and goods protected in the case of armed conflict, it was sent to the National Court (which is in charge of alleged crimes against humanity, among others) on Friday, July 23, 2010, and it can be read here (in Spanish).

The eight Israeli citizens accused by the Committe are: Binyamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister; Ehud Barak, Minister of Defense; Avigdor Lieberman, Minister of Foreign Affairs; Dan Meridor, Minister of Intelligence and Atomic Energy; Moshe Ya'alon, Minister of Strategic Affairs; Eli Yishai, Minister of Internal Affairs; Ze'ev Binyamin Begin, Minister without portfolio; and Eliezer Marom, commander of the Tzahal's naval branch.

This is the second time a lawsuit accusing Israel of having committed crimes against humanity is brought against the Jewish State before the Spanish National Court, being the first one about the Tzahal operation which killed Palestinian terrorist leader Salah Shehadeh (at the time member of the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades) and fourteen civilians in 2002. This lawsuit is also available here (in Spanish), and it was unsuccessful.

During this summer I was and I'll be busy, but sooner or later I'll write about this new lawsuit against Israel. I already made a response to the lawsuit on the attack against Shehadeh, which is available here (in Spanish), and which I'll translate into English in this blog.

Once finished the current summer, I'll recover my usual rythm here.

Gaza flotilla still defined as Freedom Flotilla by Público.

2010-07-20T17:26:00.004+02:00

On Sunday, July 18, 2010, Público published an article written by Eugenio García Gascón under the title La UE insta a Israel a abrir las fronteras de Gaza (EU urges Israel to open Gaza's borders). Excerpt from the article below:

"Israel announced the change of its policy towards Gaza due to the Freedom Flotilla incident, which was boarded by the Israeli Navy on May 31 in front of Gaza's coast. Israeli soldiers caused the death to nine Turkish activists and later announced the partial opening of the borders mainly for food."

Taking into account the evidencies showing the pre-planned violence exercised by the activists, including this video, to write that the Gaza flotilla was a Freedom Flotilla seems to be inaccurate.

Historical inaccuracies by El País.

2010-07-15T00:36:00.009+02:00

On Monday, July 11, 2010, an article written by Ana Carbajosa, correspondent for El País in Tel Aviv-Yafo, was published under the title El hilo del que pende Ariel Sharon (The thread Ariel Sharon hangs by). The article deals with Ariel Sharon, former Israeli Prime Minister, who is in a coma since January 2006. Facts about him as a political leader are summarized in the article, and some historical inaccuracies are present. Excerpts from the article below (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"[Former Sharon's advisor Raanan] Gissin maintains that, as a friend, he doesn't desire Sharon's death. Involved in his role as an advisor, this fervent admirer of the man who led Israel to the war with Lebanon and in which the Sabra and Shatila massacres were produced thinks that Sharon's political legacy would have enjoyed a major recognition if he had died the day he suffered the cerebral haemorrhage.

In Israel, beyond the aggresiveness deployed by the former prime minister in the battlefield, his role as the one who triggered the second Intifada or the brutality of the Operation Defensive Shield that he ordered, he will be remembered as the father of the colonialist movement, who just before going into a coma surprised [everybody] by ordering the evacuation of Gaza's settlements in 2005."

In her article, Ana Carbajosa makes Sharon the one responsible for the 1982 Lebanon War, when it would be more accurate to explain that the Jewish State went to war there as a response to terrorist actions committed by the P.L.O., consisting of rocket attacks on northern Israel from Lebanon.

Carbajosa also blames Sharon for the al-Aqsa Intifada, a usual accusation which consists of stating that Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount, a Holy Place to muslims as well as Jews, offended the Palestinians to the point that the aforementioned uprising erupted. It's true that Sharon visited the Temple Mount on Thursday, September 28, 2000, but other facts which led to the al-Aqsa Intifada or that extended it should also be mentioned, such as David Biri's death on the same day after being attacked the day before, the shock among Israelis due to the Ramallah lynching in October 2000, Arafat's refusal to a peace plan proposed by Ehud Barak early that same year (which would include some East Jerusalem's areas for a future Palestinian State), or the Palestinian suicide bombings, which began during the 90s; moreover, to begin an uprising just because a Jew has visited a Holy Place to him is not understandable, after all.

Operation Defensive Shield happened in 2002 due to the Palestinian terrorist attacks against Israel during the al-Aqsa Intifada. The aforementioned "brutality" during the Operation consisted of a supposed massacre of Palestinian civilians occurred during the Battle of Jenin. It was initially reported that hundreds of civilians (and even 1,500 ones) had been killed. The truth behind this story is that there were isolated cases of human rights abuses, but any massacre had happened.

Lorenzo Cremonesi, correspondent for Il Corriere della Sera in Jerusalem, while denouncing Israel's military censorship in combat zones, affirmed that he was able to enter Jenin and that any massacre had occurred. Here are his own words:

"The first took place in the Jenin refugee camp in April 2002. Do you remember? The camp was surrounded, and the media was not allowed in. From a distance, one could see pillars of smoke and hear occasional shooting. The Palestinians spoke about 1,500 dead - a toll that later dropped to 500. There were rumors of mass graves, of entire families that had been shot in the streets by Zionist soldiers.

On April 13, I succeeded in crossing through the army barricades on foot and reached the hospital bordering on the refugee camp. I was prepared to see scenes of a bloodbath. Anyone who follows what takes place in the arena of war knows that generally speaking, the ratio of dead to wounded is one to three. That is to say, if there are 500 dead, there will be at least 1,500 wounded. What did I find? Absolutely nothing. The hospital was almost deserted, doctors were playing cards in the emergency room, there were two women in labor and one old man who had had an appendectomy.

In one of the wards I finally saw wounded - 25 people who had been lightly wounded. And the stories they told were indeed heart-rending. 'I saw a woman and three children who were shot close by here', one of them told me. Nonetheless, when they were asked for the names of the dead and to show where the bodies were, the responses became evasive. In short, it was all talk and nothing could be verified, nothing was concrete. At the end of that day, I wrote that the death toll was not more than 50 and that most of them were combatants. And indeed, a few weeks later, following a UN investigation, it was reported that there had been 53 dead."

Time reported the following:

"A Time investigation concludes that there was no wanton massacre in Jenin, no deliberate slaughter of Palestinians by Israeli soldiers. But the 12 days of fighting took a severe toll on the camp. According to the U.N., 54 Palestinians are confirmed dead. An additional 49 are missing; it is unclear how many of them perished in the fighting and how many either fled or were captured by Israeli troops. In the final count, there may well be fewer dead in Jenin than the 78 killed in Nablus Casbah in a battle that took place at the same time. But it is Jenin that has attracted worldwide attention because of the widespread destruction of property and because some of those who died during the fighting were mere spectators.

Human Rights Watch, which in a published report last week also concluded that no massacre took place, nonetheless documented 22 civilian deaths and said the Israelis used excessive and indiscriminate force during the operation. Time found that as Israeli soldiers moved from house to house, they sometimes compelled Palestinian civilians to take the dangerous job of leading the approach to the buildings. On the other hand, a senior Palestinian military officer has admitted to Time that some of those who died were killed by rubble from the exploding booby traps with which Palestinian fighters had honeycombed the camp."

Please compare these death tolls with those attributed to the alleged massacre. Moreover, please watch this video in order to understand how the Palestinians act when they want to blame Israel, or read again about the Palestinian booby traps which killed Palestinian civilians.

Why not all of this is remembered by Carbajosa in her article when writing about the 1982 Lebanon War, the al-Aqsa Intifada and the 2002 Battle of Jenin?

Israeli soldiers are guilty of... dancing?

2010-07-08T17:40:00.003+02:00

Israeli soldiers have videotaped themselves dancing Kesha's song TiK ToK in Hebron, and have uploaded the video to YouTube. This story has been covered by La Voz de Galicia, Televisión de Galicia, La Vanguardia, El País, elplural.com and ABC, among others.

It's interesting to see how a video showing how Israeli soldiers are just dancing (without harming any single civilian) attracts much more attention than videos showing, for example, how Palestinian children are indoctrinated in order to make them to become terrorists and how they are used as human shields.

Quiz.

2010-06-11T04:10:00.004+02:00

Maybe you came here from Norway, Israel and the jews in order to know what is shown in this picture, but it's not so easy; you'll have to try to find an answer by yourselves. What does this photo suggest you? Please answer in the commentary section.

Double standard.

2010-06-10T20:17:00.007+02:00

Now it's time to focus on laSexta Noticias again.

On Friday, June 4, 2010, at the night edition, they reported about the three Spanish activists who were on board the Mavi Marmara, so their witness accounts could be heard again. This was the fourth report by laSexta Noticias that night, preceded by another one about... a simulated boarding performed by the G.A.R. (Grupo de Acción Rápida or Rapid Action Group), an elite unit inside the Civil Guard, a Spanish military corps with police functions (thus comparable with the French National Gendarmerie).

During the report, all kind of dificulties which can be encountered by a civil or military unit during a boarding were cited, such as: the helicopter pilot has to maintain it above the ship in order to make sure that those who are performing the boarding abseil onto the deck of the ship itself and not onto the water; maybe the boarding happens at night, when the visibility is severely reduced; or that the possibility of encountering violent opposition does exist, and in such a case, the officers who are boarding the ship could respond through using their firearms.

So, for laSexta Noticias, a boarding performed by armed officers and the use of their firearms when necessary are licit actions when fighting against E.T.A., a terrorist organization; but when it's about the Tzahal boarding the Mavi Marmara in order to enforce a blockade which is justified due to the military necessities of a country literally at war, the boarding is a wrongful act, as the use of firearms itself, in spite of the fact that the Israeli soldiers encountered a violent opposition during night time by members of the I.H.H., a Turkish organization linked to terrorist activities, according to the Danish Institute for International Studies and the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center.

One more time has been demonstrated that, for laSexta Noticias, Israel hasn't enjoy presumption of innocence, while it seems they think that the fight against anti-Israeli terrorism is not as legitimate as the fight against E.T.A. (which is, by the way, a pro-Palestinian organization).

Anti-Semitic McCarthyism in Spain.

2010-06-08T20:04:00.009+02:00

The Spanish F.E.L.G.T.B. (Federación Estatal de Lesbianas, Gays, Transexuales y Bisexuales or State Federation of Lesbians, Gays, Transsexuals and Bisexuals) has decided to veto the participation of Israeli homosexuals from Tel Aviv-Yafo in the gay pride parade, which will be held on Saturday, July 3, 2010, in Madrid, Spain's capital. The Israeli homosexuals who want to participate were notified that their presence was suspended due to security concerns, but the reason given here in Spain by the Federation was that Tel Aviv-Yafo's municipal authorities didn't condemn the operation carried out by the Tzahal against the so-called Gaza flotilla last week.

Antonio Póveda, president of the Federation, has stated (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks): "We can't allow that in a demonstration held in the defense of human rights, also in the defense of the murdered activists' rights, an institution which doesn't condemn those facts can participate." Póveda has also declared that Israeli associations of homosexuals are allowed to participate in the parade only if they condemn the aforementioned military operation.

A gay pride parade is supposed to defend lesbians', gays', transsexuals' and bisexuals' rights, regardless of other issues such as the Arab-Israeli conflict. And the F.E.L.G.T.B. has decided to veto Israeli homosexuals just because they're citizens of the Jewish State, which precisely is in many aspects one of the most tolerant countries on Earth towards homosexuals, and even the most one in the Middle East; but Póveda hasn't told anything about those homosexuals from Arab and muslim countries who are being subjected to persecution and repression, including death penalty.

This case reminds me Norwegian homosexual parlamentarian Anette Trettebergstuen, whose case is available in Norway, Israel and the jews (read here), a Norwegian blog which has also covered the case of the F.E.L.G.T.B.

F.E.L.G.T.B.'s attitudes towards Israeli homosexuals, forcing them to officially accept a determined ideal if they want to exercise their right to held a demonstration in the defense of their rights, also remind me Republican Senator from Wisconsin Joseph Raymond McCarthy, who was in charge of a witch-hunt against suspected communists during the 1940s and 1950s. This witch-hunt included unconstitutional measures such as making the suspects to confess their ideology, to reject communism and to swear they weren't communists, thus forcing them to accept an undesired cause in order to exercise other rights such as being free (to refuse to accept the aforementioned... "proposals" and many others used to be severely punished with imprisonment).

And as done by McCarthy himself in the past, the F.E.L.G.T.B. seems to be exclusively centred on Jews.

David Segarra interacts with El Mundo's readers.

2010-06-07T17:47:00.009+02:00

David Segarra is a Spanish journalist who was one of the three Spaniards on board the Mavi Marmara, the ship which was boarded by the Tzahal last week. While writing this, he's interacting with El Mundo's readers through its Internet website. Of course, his intervention consists of accusing Israel and exonerating the activists; he has been answering questions for the last hour (at the moment I'm writing this).

The hypocrisy he's showing is evident. For example, in the question #21, a reader asks him about the violence in Congo, where more than 5,000,000 people have been killed in the last years. The reader writes that activists usually denounce the violence suffered by the Palestinians while ignoring millions of people being slaughtered in other parts of the world. Segarra's answer? All the human beings are equal and they deserve the same attention; but neither Segarra himself nor the activists are leading a humanitarian campaign in favour of the Congolese people.

Segarra's eyewitness account was confronted with this question (#6, translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"Hello, David. You affirm that the Israelis began to shoot before the boarding and that they killed at least two people from the helicopters. However, autopsies say that all of the deads were killed by 9mm pistol shots at point-blank range. Doesn't this contradict your testimony? Do you have visual proofs which support your version?"

Segarra's answer began with this statements:

"Those who have visual evidencies are they. The facts: 10 deads, 40 wounded, they were journalists and voluntary workers. On the Israeli side, four wounded, none of them being in danger."

Segarra continues his answer through talking about his personal experience, telling, for example, that he and some other individuals were involved in a shooting aimed at them.

The issue here is that the available images show: activists singing anti-Semitic songs; an activist telling how he tried to become a martyr twice and that he is trying it for the third time; Israeli military authorities trying to prevent a violent outcome, being they answered with statements such as "Shut up, go back to Auschwitz"; activists preparing themselves to exercise violence before Israeli soldiers boarded the ship; Israeli soldiers being attacked before they began to shoot; and injured Israeli soldiers.

Of course, all of this, along with Israeli soldiers' accounts, leave every single observer with a reasonable doubt about Israeli soldiers' actions, while demonstrating the violence exercised by the activists.

Regarding the idea of the blockade and the boarding themselves, Segarra sustains they were illegal according to internaional law. Maybe the time has come to clarify that, according to the article 67 of the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea:

"Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:

(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;".

Segarra denied that Israel allows humanitarian aid to be sent to the Gaza Strip through its border, despite all the visual evidencies showing humanitarian aid being delivered and Gaza Strip's stores and markets plenty of food and clothes.

Segarra also fails to specify the connection between the organization behind the flotilla (I.H.H.) and terrorist organizations (see here, from page 10).

Now the interview is closed. I tried to participate through asking Segarra about the violence which erupted aboard the Mavi Marmara, but I wasn't answered.

Israel's Ambassador to Spain, Raphael Schutz, speaks Spanish better than laSexta's journalists.

2010-06-04T23:20:00.005+02:00

During the night between Sunday, May 30, and Monday, May 31, 2010, the so-called Gaza flotilla was raided by Israeli military personnel. Proximately I'll write about the issue here, but now I'll exemplify how Spanish press is capable of distorting reality.

Israel's Ambassador to Spain, Raphael Schutz, was interviewed by El Periódico de Catalunya's journalist Pilar Santos regarding the aforementioned Israeli raid. During the interview, the journalist said: "There have been nine deads." This was Schutz's answer:

"Yes, nine people have died in that act. But 155 died in a terrorist attack in India last week. Who does care? Have you heard something about it? Twenty-three Spaniards have died in the roads last weekend."

Of course, laSexta Noticias' reaction was an article in its official website under this title: "Sí, nueve personas han muerto. ¿A quién le importa?" ("Yes, nine people have died. Who does care?").

Well, it seems that laSexta Noticias' journalists have more problems trying to understand Spanish than an foreign Ambassador, in this case from Israel. Because it's evident that what Schutz tried to make clear is the hypocrisy shown by those who have been supporting Gaza flotilla's cause for the last days, including laSexta Noticias itself; because, as Schutz stated, the nine people killed aboard Mavi Marmara, almost for sure after having tried to harm Israeli soldiers' lives, are more important for those supporters than the 155 innocent people murdered in a terrorist attack in India.

And by the way, Schutz has apologized for his statements; but laSexta Noticias hasn't published anything about it yet.

Spanish media ignores Mahmoud Abbas blaming the Palestinian people for the Second Intifada and exonerating Yasser Arafat.

2010-05-30T20:13:00.009+02:00

It's frequent for Spanish media to cite both Israeli and non-Israeli Jews criticizing Israeli attitudes, and even to interview them in order to know what they want to say. What is not so frequent is to cite and to interview those Arabs or muslims (both Palestinians and non-Palestinians) who criticize the other party (although some exceptions are made, such as Mosab Hassan Yousef, though he attracted little attention here in Spain).

One of the last examples of a Palestinian criticizing Palestinian attitudes was Mahmoud Abbas, who recently claimed that the Palestinian Second Intifada was a mistake. Apart from the fact that he blames (again) Netanyahu-led Israeli Government for the freezing of the peace process (in spite of Netanyahu's statements regarding his desire to talk face to face to Abbas, being the Palestinian leader the one who rejected this proposal), what is more surprising to me is the fact that he blames the Palestinian people for the uprising, exonerating Yasser Arafat.

But to find out about Mahmoud Abbas' statements, I had to rely on AURORA DIGITAL, an Israeli news website. Then I checked Spanish dailies El País, El Mundo, Público, ABC, La Voz de Galicia and La Vanguardia, and I couldn't find the same information.

Mahmoud Abbas' statements were made during an interview for the Egyptian television, as explained in AURORA DIGITAL's article, published on Wednesday, May 26, 2010, under the title Abás: la segunda intifada fue nuestro peor error (Abbas: the second intifada was our worst mistake). Excerpts from the article below (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, admitted that the second intifada was a great mistake by the Palestinian people.

Army's radio quoted Abbas saying in an interview for the Egyptian television channel 'Nile TV', that 'this was one of the worst mistakes of our lives. (Former Palestinian leader Yasser) Arafat didn't want the second intifida to break out, but he was unable to control it.'

'My slogan, since the second intifada broke out, was that it had to be stopped, because violence destroyes us, and in fact it did it', he said, adding that 'Arafat was pragmatic instead of an extremist'."

The article follows with accusations against Israel, statements regarding Arabs' desire for peace and accusations against Iran for distancing Hamas from al-Fatah.

Apart from the fact that Yasser Arafat was actually an extremist responsible for terrorist attacks against innocent Israelis; apart from the fact that he sought genocide against them; apart from the fact that the network of armed organizations he was leading was active in terrorist activities against innocent Israelis during the al-Aqsa Intifada; appart from the fact that during the al-Aqsa Intifida he gave speeches and made statements inciting to violence against innocent Israelis; appart from all of that and many other issues, what is surprising to me is that Abbas blames the people he is currently representing and leading, his own people, for the uprising which led to the deaths of innocent Israelis and Palestinians, freezing peace negotiations.

He said this in a public interview for the Egyptian television. And Spanish mainstream media just shut up, but those Israeli and non-Israeli Jews who criticize Israeli attitudes (govermental, military or public ones) are subjected to a more strict coverage. And do they actually pretend to be neutral when reporting about Israel? I don't think so...

Ilan Pappé joins Nabil Shaath.

2010-05-27T23:19:00.008+02:00

Recently I criticized Nabil Shaath's statements in El País. In the same diary, Israeli historian Ilan Pappé joined Shaath in the process of Israel's demonization, writing about the 1948 Palestinian exodus, too. And his criticism is harsher than Shaath's.

Firstly, he writes that the Palestinian Nakba is still happening. In fact, his article is titled 'Nakbah' 2010, while the subtitle is: "The despossession of the Palestinian people initiated with the 1948 killings and expulsions continues today with the siege of Gaza and the 'judaization' of Jerusalem and the West Bank. All is due to a plan of 'ethnic cleansing'".

One of the paragraphs is translated as follows (as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"It has to be recognized that our task [to relate the 1948 Palestinian exodus and to try to end the oppression of the Palestinians] is not easy, mainly because of the extraordinary success obtained during that days (1948) through the manoeuvres of despossession carried out by the State of Israel when occupying the 80% of the Palestinian land, achieving the expulsion, in this way, of more than a half of the native population. Due to the magnitude of these drastic operations, those responsible can now allow themselves -and implement- all kind of genocidal policies with the ethnic cleansing as the main objective, substituting in that way the Palestinian population eliminated during the days of the Nakbah."

The article also relates acts of violence and threats against the Palestinians during that days, as well as the threats faced today by the Israeli and the Palestinian Arabs.

One of the most shocking statements is this one: "..., without forgetting as well the Palestinians in the refugee camps in Lebanon and Syria: none of them is safe from the last Zionist push to a project initiated in 1882 and which pretends to subjugate, also through the use of force, the neighboring Arab countries."

Finally, Pappé demands the end of the Nakba and the right of return of every single Palestinian refugee, as a previous step to a just peace accord.

In order to answer Ilan Pappé's statements about the 1948 Palestinian exodus, it would be enough to read again my response to Nabil Shaath (please follow the first link provided in this article).

About Israel's administration of East Jerusalem and the siege of the Gaza Strip, please read here (at point #4) and here, respectively.

Pappé uses the word "genocide". A genocide consists of wiping off the map a racial, national, ethnic or religious group, that is, it consists of exterminating it. Claiming that the Palestinians are being exterminated by Israel doesn't make sense, taking into account that in strict demographic terms, the Palestinian and Israeli Arab populations have been clearly increasing for the last 62 years. For example, there were about 700,000 Palestinian refugees in 1948, but currently there are about 4,700,000 Palestinian refugees. If Israel actually had been committing genocide for the last 62 years, Palestinian and Israeli Arab populations would be decreasing. This was what happened with the Jews in Europe, the Armenians in the Caucasus, the tutsis in Rwanda and the indigenous peoples of North America.

It's also interesting the Pappé-alleged Israeli intention of subjugating its neighboring Arab States. If this is true, why did Israel sign peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan?

Nabil Shaath writes about the Nakba.

2010-05-16T16:53:00.022+02:00

Nabil Shaath is a Palestinian politician. He wrote an article for Spanish daily El País under the title La 'Nakba' palestina (The Palestinian 'Nakba'), about the 1948 Palestinian exodus from those places which currently are part of Israel. The article was published on Saturday, May 15, 2010. Content of the article below (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"Today Israel celebrates 62 years since its creation, on May 15, 1948. For the Palestinians, the 62 years of the Nakba -our national and personal catastrophe, the lose of our ancestral fatherland and the dispersion in the exile of the three fourths of our people- are commemorated today. The Palestinian people still waits for Israel's recognition of its responsibility in that catastrophe and an accord to solve the conflict which is based on the International Law, including U.N.'s resolutions.

I experienced the exile in first person. On May 13, 1948, the day before the declaration of the State of Israel, my own city, Jaffa, was captured by Zionist forces. Seventy thousand christian and muslim Palestinians were forced to leave the city, the majority of them by sea, towards Gaza, Egypt and Lebanon. The majority of Jaffa's population was literally thrown into the sea and never was allowed to return. I was 10 years old.

This same reality was lived by more than 726,000 christian and muslim Palestinians who in 1948 abandoned their homes terrorized, or were expelled by force, in what was a part of the then British Mandate of Palestine, while hundreds of their compatriots were being murdered.

This pain was experienced by me, as well as I heard many other stories about pain and fight while I was growing up. During that time, and many more years, it was intended to deny our history. But today nobody can do it. Even Israeli historians like Benny Morris and Ilan Pappé have confirmed what we knew since so much time ago.

Along with the expulsion of people, 418 Palestinian villages were destroyed. Almost all of the Palestinians' properties, including those which pertained to Palestinians who managed to stay in areas which remained under exclusive Israeli control, were confiscated by the nascent State of Israel, on exclusive behalf of the Jews.

In 1952, when the Israeli Parliament passed his nationality law, Palestinian refugees were denied the option to become citizens of the new State. And aditional measures were taken to prohibit the return to our country and to our homes.

Both the expulsion of the Palestinians in 1948 and the following measures intended to make the displacement permament were taken contravening international law.

This situation has worsened due to the Israeli military occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in 1967. Again, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians had to leave their homes, and Israel expanded its control to the remaining 22% of our historical fatherland.

Today, the complete besiege of the Gaza Strip, the continuation of the settlements and the presence of the wall in the West Bank, East Jerusalem's isolation from its historical environment, are provoking a major Palestinian fragmentation and despossession. Clearly, the Nakba continues.

Currently there are more than seven million Palestinian refugees. They constitute the largest population of refugees in the world and the most prolonged in the time. Palestinian refugees' vulnerability, as a result of their long exile and the lack of a State, contributed to the instability in the Near East and to its insecurity, from Iraq to Lebanon and the Gaza Strip.

As a Palestinian, I can't forget my nation's uprooting, which has made up my history and which has supposed a hard reality for my people. At the same time, we the Palestinians have expressed our desire to achieve a conciliation and to advance on the base of a new accord in order to recognize and to implement our rights in a just form.

In the course of the 62 years of the Palestinian Nakba, Israel's responsibility for the Palestinian people's forced displacement and despossession has been clearly recognized by many historians and International Law academicians. Palestinians' individual right to return to their homes and to decide their own destiny is proclaimed by the international community through the United Nations General Assembly's Resolution 194. But in practice the Palestinians are denied the most elemental human rights.

I deeply regret that Israel continues to ignore the Arab Peace Initiative (API) adopted by the Arab League in Beirut in March 2002. The API asks for an independent Palestinian State in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, with the pre-1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, and a just solution to the question of the Palestinian refugees accorded between the two parties, based on the U.N.'s Resolution 194, in exchange of the normalization of the relations with Israel and a lasting peace.

The Arab Peace Initiative has been repeatedly supported by the Arab countries. And aditionally, the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which represents 57 muslim countries, has added itself to it in order to end the Arab/Palestinian-Israeli conflict. This means, in practice, achieving peace between Israel and more than 1,200 million Arabs and muslims worldwide.

Peace is achieved between equals, respecting each side of the other's history and identity, as well as understanding the other's discourse. As history demonstrates, the States commit errors, yes, but they strengthen themselves when they recognize them and they apologize. The first thing is achieving the accord proposed by the Arab Peace Initiative. In the same way, it's necessary for the Palestinians to be recognized as human beings who receive the same treatment and the application of the same laws as other refugees and victims of conflicts, including their right of return and to have the freedom of choosing their future.

To achieve a lasting peace it's necessary for Israel to recognize its responsibility in the creation and prolongation of the Palestinian refugees' tragedy. This recognition is not a threat against its existence. To the contrary, when doing it, Israel, unavoidably, would prepare our respective leaders and citizens to establish peace through a political accord. In the 62nd commemoration of the Palestinian Nakba, I invite Israel to assume its responsibilities, to recognize our sufferings and our rights and to work with us in the search for peace, for the historical reconciliation and for the end of the conflict."

Firstly, Israel's creation occured on Friday, May 14, 1948 (according to the Gregorian calendar) or Iyar 5, 5708 (according to the Hebrew calendar).

Secondly, could the Nakba be interpreted as a "national" catastrophe? Until Israel's War of Independence was ended in 1949, the Palestinian Arabs didn't even consider themselves a nation. Arab Palestinian nationalism is just the result of Israel's implementation and nothing else. This has been fully demonstrated by the Palestinian Arabs themselves, who carried out the 1947 to 1948 Palestinian Civil War against the Jews as Arabs, not as Palestinians. In fact, the term "Palestinian" was used referring to the Jews and by the Jews to refer to themselves, as explained by journalist Martin Sieff in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Middle East; furthermore, Shaath fails to specify that their "ancestral fatherland", according to Sieff's book, was part of the Ottoman Empire during centuries, and that during this period there wasn't a widespread sense of Arab Palestinian nationhood.

Martin Sieff is editor-in-chief of United Press International's international section. He covered the Middle East during four decades, and he worked for The Washington Times, National Review, The Belfast Telegraph and The Times. He was nominated three times for the Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting.

Thirdly, the 1948 Palestinian exodus was not only the result of Israel's policies. In this U.N.'s report, reasons for the Palestinian exodus are summarized as follows: "The exodus of Palestinian Arabs resulted from panic created by fighting in their communities, by rumours concerning real or alleged acts of terrorism, or expulsion."

Furthermore, not only Israel's, but also Arabs' responsibility for the Nakba must be taken into account. Time reported on Monday, May 3, 1948, about Haifa's Arabs:

"Of the 60,000 Arabs who lived there, many had fled to safety even before the attack started. As the panicky evacuation began during the Jewish assault, the remaining thousands gathered what few belongings they could carry. Lashed on by the mortar barrage, more than a thousand men, women & children hammered at the No. 3 gate of the British-controlled port area to seek safety. Royal Marine guards finally let them on to the docks."

Also, in the same article by Time:

"The mass evacuation, prompted partly by fear, partly by orders of Arab leaders, left the Arab quarter of Haifa a ghost city. More than pride and defiance was behind . the Arab orders. By withdrawing Arab workers, their leaders hoped to paralyze Haifa. Jewish leaders said wishfully: 'They'll be back in a few days. Already some are returning.'"

Benny Morris is the most prominent figure in the study of the Palestinian exodus. He distinguished four main waves of Palestinian Arab refugees during the 1947 to 1948 Palestinian Civil War and 1948 to 1949 Israel's War of Independence: December, 1947 to March, 1948; April to June, 1948; July to October, 1948; and October to November, 1948. He argues that the Palestinian exodus derived from expulsion orders, military attacks and intimidation by Jewish as well as Arab troops, and from Arab fear of being victims of massacres committed by radical Jews (such as the Deir Yassin one) and dying during the clashes.

Arabs' partial responsibility for the Palestinian exodus was confirmed even by Arab sources. Khalid al-Azm, former Syrian Prime Minister, wrote in his memoirs: "We brought disaster upon one million Arab refugees, by inviting them and bringing pressure to bear upon them to leave their land, their homes, their work and their industry." This position was also shared by Salah Mesbah Khalaf, also known as Abu Iyad, former member of Arafat-led al-Fatah. Former Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Pasha al-Said declared: "We will smash the country with our guns and obliterate every place the Jews shelter in. The Arabs should conduct their wives and children to safe areas until the fighting has died down."

Current Arab leaders also expressed this position. In Mahmoud Abbas' words: "The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live."

All of this demonstrates that not only Jewish and Arab expulsion orders were the main factor of the Palestinian exodus, but also the fear of the refugees, and that the resposibility for the exodus itself must be shared by both of the parties in conflict; but Shaath puts all the responsibility on Israel solely. Does it make sense when reading his own words about reconciliation through recognition of historical errors? Why doesn't he demand the respective Arabs' recognition for their involvement in the Palestinian Nakba? Furthermore, he fails to remember the treatment which Arab countries gave to the Palestinians, regarding to their national aspirations and the status of most of them as refugees, as explained here (at point #7).

Shaath writes about the Arab Peace Initiative and how Israel has ignored it. But he doesn't cite one fact: during the vote of the A.P.I., then Palestinian Prime Minister (and terrorist leader) Ismail Haniyeh didn't vote in favour of it, choosing to abstain.

Shaath also wrote about the Palestinian refugees' right of return, ignoring those Jews who were expelled or fled from their homes in the West Bank and East Jerusalem prior to and during Israel's War of Independence. According to his own point of view, shouldn't be those Jews and their descendants allowed to relocate in the West Bank and East Jerusalem? He also failed to specify that after Israel's independence about 800,000 Jews were expelled or fled from their homes in Arab and muslim countries and had to seek refuge in the Jewish State.

In 1967, as he wrote, Israel fought the Six-Day War and a new wave of Palestinian refugees emerged. What he contradicts is the main cause of this wave of refugees, who fled voluntarily, as Michael B. Oren told in his book Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East.

The most prominent proof against the theory of Israeli intention to expel all the Arabs in 1948 and 1967 is the fact that there are Arabs both in Israel and the Palestinian territories.

About Israeli administration of East Jerusalem, read here (at point #4).

Israel has also allowed humanitarian aid to be sent into the Gaza Strip through its border.

Shaath counts more than 7,000,000 Palestinian refugees, adding that they're the largest population of refugees. Firstly, the U.N.R.W.A. counts 4,700,000 refugees, and not more than 7,000,000. And secondly, they're not the largest population of refugees worldwide. The partition of India in 1947 provoked the displacement of about 15,000,000 people, while more than 10,000,000 people were subjected to displacement due to the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. The number of Palestinian refugees since 1947 has been equaled by the number of Iraqi refugees since 2003 only.

It's interesting to see that only the Palestinian refugees have an agency of their own inside the United Nations...

Netanyahu is blamed for... his desire to talk face to face to Abbas.

2010-05-09T18:29:00.002+02:00

This time the article has been published by Público, under the title Las negociaciones indirectas de paz en Palestina chocan con Netanyahu (Indirect peace negotiations in Palestine are at odds with Netanyahu) and the subtitle "Israeli Prime Minister criticizes the process started this Sunday, which counts on American mediation". Content of the article below (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"Attempts for achieving peace between Israel and Palestine through the indirect conversations initiated this Sunday are at odds with Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's words, who has maintained that it's not possible to achieve an accord 'from a distance'.

Precisely on the same day on which Palestinian chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat, announced in Ramallah the beginning of the indirect negotiations with Israel under American mediation, Netanyahu has shown himself critical with the process to demand the establishment of 'direct' negotiations 'as soon as possible' and not through 'remote control'. 'We'll not achieve accords or take decisions about critical issues if we don't sit down together in the same room', Netanyahu has declared.

This is not the first stone which Israeli Prime Minister puts on the way of these new negotiations, the first ones after 18 months, having declared on other occasion that the conversations should be initiated 'without previous conditions', referring to the Palestinian condition of stopping East Jerusalem's Jewish settlements.

White House's envoy to the Middle East, George Mitchell, is participating in the indirect conversations, and he has maintained a meeting last Sunday with the President of the Palestinian National Authority (P.N.A.), Mahmoud Abbas, who leads the Palestinian negotiating team. The objective of these meetings is to deal with all the issues related to the definitive peace statute."

So, according to Público, Netanyahu should be blamed for a new hindrance in the recently re-started peace process, just because he wants to talk face to face with Mahmoud Abbas. Shouldn't Abbas himself be blamed for trying to avoid direct peace conversations with Netanyahu? Who is more likely to want peace, someone who wants to talk directly about a peace accord or someone who doesn't want to do so?

Another anti-Semitic joke by Dani Mateo.

2010-05-03T03:07:00.002+02:00

New Dani Mateo's anti-Semitic joke was made a few days ago in the same space of the same TV programme of the same TV channel. This time it happened in the following way.

The presenter talked about an Israeli journalist who, according to Mateo, made a joke about topics related to Spaniards, Irish and Greeks. This explanation was followed by fabricated attempts to talk with a Spaniard, an Irishman and a Greek (in fact, members of the TV show) who were not able to talk with the presenter. Then Mateo said that they also failed to talk with the Israeli journalist, because the programme refused to pay him for the interview.

Maybe that Israeli journalist, if he really exists and made that joke, should have been more cautious when speaking about Spaniards taking siestas or drunk Irish, but offending the Jewish people due to the actions of just one of them is not the adequate response.

To be a Zionist invalidates your opinion about the use of the hiyab, according to María Antonia Iglesias.

2010-04-30T16:45:00.009+02:00

One of the most prolific journalists, opinion makers, polemicists and left-wingers in Spain is María Antonia Iglesias, who often appears in television debates. On Saturday, April 24, 2010, she appeared in La Noria, a TV programme broadcasted by Spanish channel Telecinco. The programme usually focuses on matters pertaining to the private and public lives of famous people, but it also has a space for political debates.

Recently, Najwa Malha, a muslim girl living in Spain, was banned from attending high school wearing a hiyab. Her case, along with French and Belgian propositions to ban the burka, has resurrected the debate on the Islamic veil in Spain, which has been responded by La Noria with its own debate on the matter.

Among the debaters were two well know left-wingers: Pilar Rahola and María Antonia Iglesias (the aforementioned one). Both of them showed two different views: Pilar Rahola criticized the use of the Islamic veil and María Antonia Iglesias defended it. During the debate, Iglesias said about Rahola's position on the matter (translation between quotation marks, as accurate as possible):

"It would be very believable (and excuse this personal allusion, but the public has to know certain things) if you were not a convinced Zionist, a pro-Jewish militant."

Rahola's reaction (which didn't consist on denying her stance as a Zionist, which is well known) encountered this response by Iglesias, which was repeated four times: "What do you mean, you're not?" Then, Iglesias stated: "Of course the worst, those who practice military terrorism against the Palestinian people."

Seconds later, and trying to interrupt Rahola's statements: "You defend Israel's positions, they're military terrorists." Later, about Rahola's stance as a pro-Israeli activist: "... a purely ideological interpretation..., which I respect, but the people must know what to take into account, and why are you defending that position."

This was part of Rahola's response: "You have no fucking idea, María Antonia, no fucking idea!" Surprisingly for me, Rahola's statement encountered an effusive response by the public, which was followed by Iglesias' questions regarding Rahola's position about Israel and the Middle East. Rahola's answer was: "I'm in favour of peace... but today is not the debate [about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict]".

Then, she was replied by Iglesias with this statement (please pay attention): "Yes, of course, Jews' peace."

Should the debate on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict be confused with that about the use of the Islamic veil? Why is not a Zionist perfectly able to judge about the Islamic veil? If Rahola had declared that a defender of the Palestinian cause is not able to debate about the issue, what would be Iglesias' response?

You can watch the video here (in Spanish).

Is al-Fatah actually a moderate faction?

2010-04-22T16:05:00.006+02:00

Not only what the mainstream media shows about Israel and its conflicts is important; we must also take into account those facts which are not told by Spanish newspapers. And Israeli daily AURORA DIGITAL, which is written in Spanish on the Internet, has published two articles whose content rarely appears in El País or Público.

One of the articles is entitled Analysis: who are the moderate Palestinians? Almost the entire article below (as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"Al-Fatah, the main component of the Palestinian Authority, is in some kind of stew. It would like to launch a third intifada (an armed uprising against Israel) but it thinks it has not the power at this moment.

The source of this is none other than Nabil Shaath, an al-Fatah's veteran civil servant. He would like to see the 'popular resistance' against the West Bank security fence (which prevents suicide attacks and has brought some peace not only for Israel but for the Palestinians, and which has allowed the Palestinian economy to strengthen itself); against the construction in the east of Jerusalem by Israel (although he is not opposed to the Palestinian construction in the east of Jerusalem, which in some way is never reported), and against the Israeli settlements in the West Bank (which occupy approximately the 9% of the West Bank, almost insignificant for the dreams of the Palestinian society).

He also sees as a justification for an armed struggle against Israel, the 'siege' of Gaza. Gaza, dou you remember? The area from which Israel entirely withdrew in 2005? Gaza, the zone from which Hamas fires rockets against Israeli cities, like Sderot? Gaza, where all the gun-running passes through the Sinai peninsula to fire much more powerful attacks against Israel?

'We are not talking about here whether we have the right to do it or not [to initiate another intifada]', said Shaath to the Jerusalem Post, 'we are talking about whether it would be effective and whether we have the capacities and the desire'.

Take into account that an 'armed uprising' or 'intifada' is not but other word for a terrorist attack: bombings against cafés, pizzerias, discotheques, buses and other public places. This is what Nabil Shaath, a high-profile Fatah's civil servant, considers undoubtedly to have the 'right' to do.

Is that moderate? If it is so, with the moderates as potential associates of peace, who does need 'extremist' enemies? Which is actually the difference between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas?

Within this hate and this thirst for violence, there is an opportunity for peace. The reason for which Shaath doubts whether Fatah has the 'capacity' or not at this moment are the big losses which the Palestinians suffered during the last intifada. Israel's high fire power, specially demonstrated during its counteroffensive after the 2002 Pesach massacre in Netanya, restored Israel's deterrence, at least regarding the West Bank. (It took many more years of Hamas' provocations until Israel restored its power of deterrence over Hamas in December 2008 and January 2009).

Those are the good news. The bad news are that both the 'moderate' Fatah and the 'extremist' Hamas are now preparing themselves to the next clash ('popular resistance'), trying to acquire much more powerful rockets, launchers and weapons.

Are these Palestinian leaders like that kind of people who want to live in peace with Israel, inside the borders of their own State? Palestinian State. Two-State solution.

Will be this one a solution? Not if the leaders of the 'moderate' Palestinian Authority are in charge."

More lies about Israel are told.

2010-04-12T16:02:00.011+02:00

Spanish daily Público has published an article by Eugenio García Gascón about the hunger strike of Palestinian prisoners under Israeli custody, and also about a new Israeli law. Excerpts from the article below (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks):

"Israeli penitentiary authorities have sanctioned tens of Palestinian prisoners, which are considered responsible for the three-day hunger strike the inmates have called for. The first day of this protest has taken place on April 7, and the two remaining days will be 17 and 27 of this month. The measures of punishment affect inmates of several centres, including 36 prisoners from Damun, a prison located near Haifa.

The suspected leaders of the strike, in which more than 7,000 prisoners has taken part, have been punished with measures such as being not allowed to go to the playground during just one hour on a day and the prohibition of buying in the prison store, as well as of corresponding their families. The inmates have responded through threatening to increase the protests, which they're carrying out to improve their quality of life.

The Palestinian inmates demand a package of measures such as unrestricted visits (also for the prisoners natives to the Gaza Strip), the inmates being allowed to take graduation exams, and putting an end to the isolation of prisoners as a punishment, a widely used measure. They also ask for unrestricted access to medical attention, and putting an end to collective punishments against all of the prison population."

I'm not an expert on penitentiary discipline, but as far as I'm concerned, in all countries around the world punishments like isolation are applied to prisoners who take part in acts of disobedience. Maybe some of the measures applied by Israel are wrongful ones, but many others are perfectly justified.

Indeed, we must take into account that Israel is at war. The measures applied by a country against its enemies during wartime are not those which are applied during peacetime. In the Israeli case, those prisoners responsible for terrorist activities are not only criminals, but enemies of the State during wartime, too. And during wartime, enemies of the State (even those who are not considered criminal offenders) are subjected to a more strict incarceration regime.

Exempli gratia, Luftwaffe pilots shot down over the United Kingdom during the Battle of Britain (thus enemies of the State during wartime) were imprisoned during years before being released, without being allowed to meet their relatives.

Público's article also deals with a new law which allows the Israeli authorities to expel from the West Bank those who have not a permit to be there issued by those authorities. The information regarding this issue is summarized inside the article as follows: "The order turn many Palestinians into infractors of the law", thus trying to tell its readers that the new law is primarily intended to expel Palestinians from their land.

What is not told is that this law has been passed in order to act against non-Palestinians. As written yesterday by Spanish journalist and blogger Jorge Marirrodriga:

"Israel has passed new legislation which, apparently, will take effect tomorrow, Tuesday, and which will allow to deport those who are in the West Bank illegaly. The N.G.O.'s which work there have made a fuss through accusing Israel of taking an unprecedented apartheid measure because such a measure theoretically could be applied to the Palestinians. Theoretically and could be.

Don't let them deceive us. That measure will actually be applied to the legion of ngoers that live at the expense of the other people's money in the name of the Palestinian cause, and that instead of dedicating themselves to help their fellow men and women they dedicate themselves to politically attack Israel. These ones are those who will be kicked out with the new legislation."

Marirrodriga ends his article talking about the collusion of those ngoers and the media to politically attack Israel, exploiting the fact that Israel has passed a new law: "The perfect alibi."

Anti-Semitic joke on TV.

2010-04-09T17:19:00.007+02:00

It has occured just a few minutes ago; in fact, I was using the laptop when it happened and I've come here as fast as I could (after having overcome the shock). Let's see what has happened.

There is a Spanish TV channel called laSexta. Among its programmes, one of the most popular ones is SÉ LO QUE HICISTEIS, which is broadcasted between 15:25 and 17:30. One of its presenters is Dani Mateo, who runs a parody of a TV news bulletin inside this programme, based on actual events.

One of this events was the selling of the famous list made by Oskar Schindler in order to save more than 1,100 Jews from the nazis. Schindler's story was dramatized in Steven Spielberg's Schindler's List.

I can't remember now the exact words employed by Mateo, but it was something like this:

"Taking into account that the owner of the list is probably a Jew and that it's possible that one of his relatives is on the list, now it can be said that, for a million euros, a Jew is capable of selling his own mother."

I don't know whether Dani Mateo, or the person who is the real author of the joke, is actually an anti-Semite. What I know is that making that kind of jokes makes him like he is an anti-Semite.

If I find the video, I'll link it here.

Bastenier's double standard against Israel.

2010-04-03T16:17:00.013+02:00

Miguel Ángel Bastenier wrote an article for Spanish daily El País, which was published on Wednesday, March 31, 2010. In the article, Bastenier claims that 21 United Nations' Resolutions call Israel to stop the so-called "judaization" of East Jerusalem and to withdraw from those territories conquered by the Jewish State in 1967. Under this premise is Bastenier advocating for a severe punishment against Israel by the United States. His article begins with this question: "What's necessary for President Barack Obama to be really annoyed with Israel instead of just saying that he is annoyed?"

Of course, Bastenier forgets those United Nations' Resolutions which were violated by the Arabs. For example, he cites the Security Council's Resolution 242, which he only applies to Israel, like most of those who criticize the Jewish State; it's of course another way to single Israel out for criticism. Let's see what the U.N.S.C.'s Resolution 242 really says in its articles 1 and 2:

"1. Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which would include the application of both of the following principles:

(i) Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

(ii) Termination of all claims or state of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;"

2. Affirms further the necessity

(a) For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;

(b) For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;

(c) For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area, through measures including the establishment of demilitarized zones;"

Bastenier doesn't mention that:

1.- The U.N.S.C.'s Resolution 242, article 1, principle (i), calls Israel to withdraw from "territories occupied in the recent conflict", instead of "the territories occupied in the recent conflict"; that is, it fails to specify what of those territories are subjected to the withdrawal. So, could be said that East Jerusalem's annexation by Israel and its inherent power to construct Jewish homes there actually constitutes a violation of the Resolution?

2.- Non-recognition, threats and attacks carried out by the Arabs against Israel were (and still are) clear violations of the U.N.S.C.'s Resolution 242, article 1, principle (ii) and article 2, necessities (a) and (c).

3.- The U.N.S.C.'s Resolution 242, article 1, principle (ii) and article 2, necessity (c) have been approved on the basis that only mutual recognition and repect between those parties involved in the conflict could lead to peace. Those who prompted the conflict through non-recognition, threats and aggressions were the Arabs.

4.- The U.N.S.C.'s Resolution 242, article 2, necessity (a) has been approved in order to avoid the blockade of Eilat's port in Israel through the closing of the Straits of Tiran, an action performed by Egypt in May 1967. This action prompted Israel to strike in self defense, thus starting the Six-Day War, which led to the occupation.

5.- About the U.N.S.C.'s Resolution 242, article 2, necessity (b), please read here (at point #7).

So, taking into account the five aforementioned points, we come to these two conclusions: the Arabs are those who prompted the war which led to the U.N.S.C.'s Resolution 242, and the Arabs always were (and still are) violating it. Could Israel be exhorted to comply with this Resolution, in the absence of an Arab proper response to it?

Another interesting question is the lack of historical accuracy by Bastenier, who is a historian. He writes that Eisenhower forced Israel to withdraw from the Sinai in March 1957, a few months after the 1956 Suez Crisis. This clash began after Egypt blockaded Eilat's port (in the aforementioned way) and nationalized the Suez Canal. The United Kingdom, France and Israel agreed to attack Egypt as a response.

The international community, led by both the Soviet Union and Eisenhower himself, prompted British and French withdrawals, but Israel was not forced to withdraw from the Sinai in the way described by Bastenier. Israel only accepted to withdraw once an accord was reached in order to implement the U.N.E.F. as a guarantee for the achievement of peace. Then, in March 1957 (once Israel's demands based on security grounds were satisfied) the last Israeli soldier returned to the Jewish State.

Please notice that U.N.E.F.'s personnel was expelled by Egypt in May 1967, prior to the re-militarization of the Sinai and the Gaza Strip and the blockade of Eilat's port, prompting Israel to go to war.

But Bastenier claims that Eisenhower forced Israel to withdraw, and then he writes that the United States never performed a similar, serious pressure against the Jewish State. What about Lyndon Baines Johnson, who succeeded John Fitzgerald Kennedy in 1963? When Israel tried to obtain the green light by Washington to attack the Arabs in self defense during the 1967 Middle East crisis (Foreign Minister Abba Eban was sent to the White House by Prime Minister Levi Eshkol), Johnson refused to give the Israelis any support in a moment of a major existential threat against an isolated State of Israel (prior to his visit to Washington, Abba Eban travelled to Paris and London with the same mission; Charles de Gaulle refused to give Israel any support, while Joseph Harold Wilson gave Abba Eban the green light).

The 1967 Six-Day War is masterly treated in Michael B. Oren's Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East, while he summarizes the previous and the following periods of belligerency (that is, causes and consequences of the war).

Bastenier also claims in his article that the Palestinian National Authority is favourable to the implementation of U.N.'s Resolutions, something which is false. General Assembly's Resolution 181 was adopted in order not only to create two States for two peoples, but to put the cities of Jerusalem and Bethlehem under international administration. The P.N.A. wants East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian State, and of course it will not renounce to Bethlehem. Furthermore, al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, which constantly threat and attack Israel (thus violating U.N.S.C.'s Resolution 242), belong to Fatah, the so-called moderate Palestinian faction which rules the P.N.A.

Another Bastenier's statement, a shocking one, is that Hamas "has put an end to the terrorist war" against the Jewish State, when the truth is that this is a moment of armed clashes between Hamas and Israel, due to terrorist attacks from the Gaza Strip, which affected Israelis and non-Israelis.

Spanish media demonizes Israel again.

2010-03-30T02:15:00.005+02:00

On Friday, March 26, 2010, El País published an article by Jesús Ruiz Mantilla on Daniel Barenboim's intention to play music in the Gaza Strip. In the article, the Jewish State was demonized again, this time through the distortion of the Israeli public opinion towards the peace process. Excerpt from the article below (translation between quotation marks, as accurate as possible):

"Relationship between Barenboim and his fellow Israelis have always been strained. The Argentine-born musician also has Israeli and Spanish nationalities and has a passport from the Palestine Authority, which named him honorary citizen in 2008. He has always publicly defended the creation of a Palestinian State, a position which has not been entirely understood in Israel. There, many consider the orchestra conductor a traitor, who indeed sometimes makes them listen another of their demons: Richard Wagner."

I don't know whether Wagner was actually an anti-Semite. What I know is this: Jesús Ruiz Mantilla, the author of the article, is distorting the reality. He is actually trying to make the Israelis like they don't want a Palestinian State, and due to this attitude they treat Barenboim (who wants a Palestinian State) as a traitor.

Well, maybe that kind of Israelis do exist. But the vast majority of the Israelis want peace through a two-State solution, and this is not something new, as we can see here, here, here, here, here and here.

Does somebody need more proofs?

Anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic attitudes in Galicia.

2010-03-25T23:47:00.007+01:00

Spain is divided into seventeen Autonomous Communities, two Autonomous Cities and the so-called places of sovereignty. One of those Autonomous Communities is Galicia, my home, in northwestern Spain. It has its own language, Galician, which is co-official along with Spanish, the language of the Kingdom of Spain. Galicia is divided into 4 provinces: Pontevedra, A Coruña, Ourense and Lugo. Each province's capital has the same name as the province itself. Galicia's capital is Santiago de Compostela, in the province of A Coruña.

Ignacio Ramonet, a writer and journalist, was born in Redondela, a municipality in the province of Pontevedra, on May 5, 1943. He was the editor in chief of Le Monde diplomatique from 1991 until March 2008. Already in 2007, he warned El País' readers about anti-Semitism in Galicia (translation between quotation marks, as accurate as possible):

"I was with Ramón Chao in Redondela, my home, a few days ago, invited by the International Press Club, which is being efficiently directed by Carmen Carballo. At the A Xunqueira Multipurpose Auditorium, provided by mayor Xaime Rei, we gave a speech about War and peace today; geopolitics of contemporary conflicts, which was intended to close the series about The beats of the world. We were far from imagining that, in that context, we were about to be witnesses of hateful anti-Semitic manifestations in today's Galicia.

Our purpose was to propose answers to some of the following questions: how to understand contemporary world? ¿What are the main clashes (military, political, economic and ecological ones) of today's world? Is in any case the so-called 'war against international terrorism' the adequate response to the great contemporary disturbances?"

So, that was the purpose of the conference. After that, as Ramonet writes, a discussion about the issue began, with the audience's involvement. Please pay attention to Ramonet's explanations about what was heard there:

"The first person who talked, very excited, began to curse against a sort of 'plot of the Jews' which, according to this person, consists of, 'through their economic and mediatic power', 'permanently blackmailing the international public opinion by constantly evoking the genocide and victimizing themselves'. This, according to that speecher, 'allows them to commit a genocide against the Palestinians'.

After that stream of anti-Semitic topics, expressed by crying them out, what was more surprising to us was that part of the audience applauded as if they were approving such a lamentable speech. I declared that I condemn in the most explicit way such words and that I find unusual that at this stage somebody can yield, under the pretext of the defense of the Palestinian cause, to the crassest anti-Semitism. If it's obvious that some actions by the Israeli army must be criticized (as the Palestinian attacks against Israeli innocent civilians), that mustn't in any case make us take part in the dreadful pseudo-arguments of the oldest and most criminal anti-Semitism. The majority of those in the audience approved this position through applauses.

But, cleverly distributed all over the room, something which demostrates that the group was up to no good, the friends of the speecher replied calling me 'traitor' and 'ignorant', arguing that 'anti-Semitism doesn't exist because the Arabs are Semites, too'. It was like if a lexical criticism could deny the reality of the tragic and old anti-Judaism all over Europe, including Galicia."

And this happens in Galicia, my home. As explained by Ramonet:

"This incident not only tarnished my joy when giving a conference in my home, Redondela, for the first time, but, above all, it also shows worrying, deep-rooted and sickening anti-Semitic theses within a Galician extreme left which went astray. Which dishonours our land. The sleep of reason generates monsters. And the lack of some people's ability to think has led them to the worst of the monstrosities. It is time to rectify."

Israel is singled out for criticism and its right to exist is put into question.

2010-03-20T16:34:00.043+01:00

On Friday, March 19, 2010, an opinion article by Jerónimo Páez, a lawyer, was published by Spanish daily El País. In this article Israel is singled out for the freezing of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, and its right to exist is put into question. Excerpts of the article below (translation between quotation marks, as accurate as posible):

1.- "One of the best books published in Spain about the Palestinian conflict is entitled Without mercy, without hope: Palestinians and Israelis, the tragedy which doesn't cease. Its author, David Solar, announced, already in 2002, the current spring of the Israeli hawk and the checkmate to the Palestinian people. The time, unfortunately, has come to agree that he's right."

In this first paragraph, the author doesn't hesitate to simplify the conflict almost by reducing it to an agression by a completely guilty execution-style murderer against a completely innocent defenseless victim, regardless of the fact that all parties involved are able to use violence against each other. Would Sderot's inhabitants agree with Jerónimo Páez's vision of the conflict? Would the victims of the 1929 Hebron massacre do so? Páez should notice that the pain which Palestinian violence has provoked does exist, too, and it plays a major role in the conflict. Could Páez say that the Palestinians are completely innocent defenseless victims? Or are they part of the problem, too?

2.- "Being the Israelis relentless in the defense of their interests, being obsessed with extending the territories where they settled during the first half of the past century with the United Kingdom's support, they've forgotten the traditions of tolerance and grandness of spirit which made the Jews an admired and admirable people during centuries. It could be that no other has fought more to survive and to win through the adversities and persecutions, but the initial, noble purpose to create in the Near East 'a home' for its people has turned it into a militaristic and aggressor State, which doesn't hesitate to use any method to finish with its enemies, real or hypothetical ones."

If the Israelis are so obsessed with extending their territories, why haven't they annexed the Palestinian territories, while expelling almost all of its inhabitants? Why did they evacuate the Gaza Strip and some areas of the West Bank, soldiers and settlers included? It should be mentioned, too, that Hamas (which continued launching rockets and mortar shells regardless of the Israeli territorial disengagement) has stated that their goal is not the achievement of a solution of two States for two peoples, living in peace, side by side, but the building of a single State after the destruction of Israel. Páez failed to specify whether such an attitude isn't also an obsession, in fact much more dangerous than that of the Israelis.

3.- "With the excuse of its security, Israel always demands the support for all of its actions from the Western powers, which rarely reject it. Huge is its mediatic power, powerful are its lobbies and numerous are the West's negative perceptions about the muslim world, which Zionism was able to manipulate to the point that many hold the oppressed responsible for the tragedy and not the opressors. The statements recently brought by Shimon Peres are part of this campaign, when he affirms, without blushing, that 'Gaza is an Iranian organism' after having destroyed it and attacked its population with white phosphorus bombs."

Mediatic power, powerful lobbies and Zionist manipulation. Are this expressions a mention of the myth of the Jewish power? How could be said that the Zionists rule the media when Páez himself is perfectly able to write against Israel? In fact, it would be enough to read on a regular basis the international and opinion sections of European newspapers such as Spanish El País, Norwegian Aftenposten or Swedish Aftonbladet to understand that pro-Israeli lobbies have failed to achieve a positive image of Israel in the mainstream media and, subsequently, in the public opinion.

It is also hard to understand Páez's position about the Western attitudes towards Israel (which in his opinion primarily consists of a strong support for the Jewish State), especially considering that the Quartet on the Middle East (which is composed by the United Nations, the European Union, the United States and the Russian Federation) has recently called Israel for the freezing of the settlements, as El País itself has published.

Páez should also notice that Iranian support for Hamas (as specified by Shimon Peres) is a fact, not just a theory.

4.- "Israel knows that with difficulty any international institution will dare to call it for making the necessary steps towards peace. It hasn't frozen the settlements of the occupied West Bank, it agreed on increase them in East Jerusalem, it rejects the bi-national status of this city and it hinders in practice, as long as it can, the birth of the Palestinian State."

The alleged collusion of the foreign powers with Israel is mentioned again, while Páez fails to mention the Israeli moratorium on the construction of new settlements, the dismantling of those settlements considered illegal even by Israel and the fact that East Jerusalem is part of Jerusalem, a city inside Israel and the capital of the Jewish State. It is illegal for a country to decide whether to build or not to build inside its territory?

Furthermore, Israel has recognized East Jerusalem's Arabs' rights (including citizenship) and has built homes for them, as published by AURORA DIGITAL, an Israeli Internet daily written in Spanish. It also should be mentioned that the Beit Yehonatan building (home to eight Jewish families) of East Jerusalem was reported by The Jerusalem Post to be sealed and demolished in the near future, while El País was falsely denouncing the rejection of that plan two days after The Jerusalem Post's aforementioned article was published.

What is Páez trying to tell us when he writes about the bi-national status of East Jerusalem? There are many Germans living in the Balearic Islands. Should be consider that this Spanish archipelago has a bi-national (both Spanish and German) status?

5.- "A far right coalition has been politically consolidated in Israel, the fanatical colonists and the radical rabbis, who support Binyamin Netanyahu, hawk among hawks, whose main obsession, as Avi Shlaim says in The Iron Wall, is no other than dynamite the peace process. The Israeli Prime Minister hasn't made any concession to the peace process and he is about frustrating the hope placed in Obama, who he doesn't doubt to dare, like has happened during the recent visit of the Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden. Difficult is the situation for Obama, unless he dares to freeze the American help for Israel, which according to a Congressional Research Service's report has supposed the unbelievebable sum of $28,900 billion, used by the receiver to reinforce much more its military power."

So, Páez considers American economic aid to Israel a problem, because it strengthens its military power. Would Israel need any military power if the Arab and muslim world had recognized Israel's right to exist? Is not also a problem the Iranian aid to Hamas and Hezbollah, which forces Israel to arm itself? What about the Soviet aid to the Arab countries since Israel's creation? Was not that the primary factor which made the Jewish State to strengthen its military capacities? "We'd like to live like Europe or Costa Rica", declared once Israeli Ambassador to Spain, Raphael Schutz, mentioning the fact that the armed forces of the European countries are generally small, while some of them (like Iceland) and Costa Rica in Latin America have not armed forces. Why? Because they don't need a strong military, while Israel does.

Hamas' suicide, rocket and mortar attacks since the 2005 territorial disengagement plan, were not also primarily intended to dynamite the peace process? Or it is that the Palestinians are not playing any role in the conflict?

6.- "The representatives of the Israeli State usually accuse of anti-Semitism those who dare to criticize them and defend the thesis which proclaims the Palestinians are those who reject to negotiate for peace. This was affirmed by Raphael Schutz, Israeli Ambassador to Spain, in a recent article, in which he also adverts them that 'if they want to achieve peace, they'll have to rennounce to part of their dreams'. The Ambassador doesn't specify whether they can afford just one and he also fails to remember that when the Balfour Declaration was issued in 1917, which was intended to establish a 'fatherland for the Jewish people', were in the zone less than 50,000 Jews and more than 600,000 Arabs."

If anti-Semitism doesn't play any role in anti-Israeli attitudes, how could Páez explain what we see here or here? Are the terrorist attacks by Hamas an act of negotiation towards peace? When Páez cites the demographic figures about the Jewish and Arab populations of Palestine, he is clearly putting into question Israel's right to exist. Is that peaceful?

7.- "When they're asked about the peace process, the Palestinians answer: 'Netanyahu is not taking a first step in order to begin negotiations'. Today, any accord would scarcely grant the Palestinians space enough to live with dignity."

What about the Palestinians? Are they contributing to the peace process? For example, the Jewish Agency accepted the Partition Plan, being this one rejected by the Arabs.

After the Israeli War of Independence (1948-1949), the West Bank and East Jerusalem were occupied and annexed by Amman's authorities, while the Gaza Strip was occupied by Cairo's regime. Each of the armistice agreements signed by Israel with those regimes supposed the Jewish approval of that fact; we're talking about Israel's rejection of those territories which are being claimed now by the Palestinian National Authority in order to build its own State. Egypt kept the Gaza Strip until 1956 (re-ocuppying it in 1967 for a short term), while Jordan did the same with the West Bank and East Jerusalem until 1967. ¿Why did the Egyptians, the Jordanians and the Palestinians avoid the building and subsequent consolidation of a Palestinian State in those territories? The main cause couldn't be the lack of time, after all. So, maybe the actual cause was that was much more interesting for the Arabs condemning the Palestinians to remain as a Stateless people in order to use such a human drama against the interests of the State of Israel, wasn't it?

During the year 2000, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak proposed a Palestinian State which would include some East Jerusalem's areas. What was the Palestinian response? The Second Intifada, also known as the al-Aqsa Intifada.

8.- "The worst thing is that there's no any reason for hope. Dan Ephron, Newsweek's correspondent in the zone, recently wrote: 'Israel has abandoned the path to peace and is benefiting itself from the dividends of peace without any accord'. He added: 'The barrier is working', that is, 'repression has worked'. Because of the fact that the Israeli economy is growing due to its spectacular technological development, caused in part by its military technology, many in that country are those who think that why to embark on a difficult peace process that maybe will generate more problems than advantages, or, as some of them say, 'that may rock the boat again'.

Maybe we should cite again the 2005 territorial disengagement plan performed by Israeli authorities, and the Palestinian response in the form of terrorist attacks. Who were working for peace in that occasion, the Israelis or the Palestinians?

But what actually upsets me in this eighth paragraph is the idea given by Páez: many people in Israel doesn't want peace, something which is completely false. The majority of the Israelis want peace through a two-State solution, and also many Palestinians, according to a poll conducted in 2009.

Couldn't be also said that there are Palestinians who see peace unfavourable to their interests, such as Hamas' leaders?

9.- "It's not distant from reality this Ephron's analysis, given the fact that all of the Israeli pro-peace parties suffered their biggest electoral defeat in their history last year. But it's more surprising the short-term thinking of that growing majority of the Israeli population. At least their rulers should realize that the situation can blow up later or sooner and that with their aggressions they contribute to consolidate Hamas' power and that of some of their more inflamed enemies."

Páez's theory of a vast majority of Israelis accomodating themselves in an atmosphere of war without having realized its inherent dangers is transmitted to El País' readers again, regardless of the polls which show us another reality: that majority wants peace. This should be separated from Israeli public opinion being favourable to military operations primarily intended to foil terrorist attacks. Will Páez be able to assimilate the difference in the future?

By the other hand, are Israeli military operations strengthening Hamas and other Israel's enemies? For example, Operation Cast Lead was carried out between the end of 2008 and the first weeks of 2009. Just compare the number of terror attacks per year in the period between 2005 and 2008 (before the Operation Cast Lead) with that of the year 2009 (after the Operation Cast Lead). It is clearly shown that in 2009 Israel was less vulnerable to terrorist attacks by Hamas and other terrorist groups than during previous years.

Exempli gratia, as published by AURORA DIGITAL, 15 Israelis were killed in terrorist attacks during 2009, compared with the 38 killed in 2008. According to data gathered by the Shabak (more commonly known as the Shin Bet, which is in charge of those intelligence operations carried out within the State of Israel and the occupied territories), a total of 566 rockets were launched to Israel in 2009, compared to the 2,048 rockets launched in 2008. There was no a single suicide bombing during 2009. The number of injured people was also lower in 2009 than in 2008.

All of this made 2009 the safest year of the decade for the Jewish State, something which derives from the Israeli security measures (id est, checkpoints, security barriers, military operations, and so on).

10.- "The powerful American pro-Israeli lobby (A.I.P.A.C.) has just warned Obama that he is putting pressure 'excesively and unilaterally' on the Jewish State. And this one justifies all of the and each of its actions saying that the only threat against the peace in the region is Iran. But would be advisable that the Western powers shouldn't forget that in order to achieve peace it could be that is necessary to neutralize the Iranian hawks... and also the Israeli hawks."

Again, nothing is written by Páez about the necessity of taking measures primarily intended to foil Palestinian ideological violence; because it would also be advisable to remember that in order to achieve peace it's necessary for the Palestinians to avoid Israeli reactions (legitimate or not) to their attacks, which are proven effective, as shown before.

So, maybe Spanish lawyer Jerónimo Páez is the one who should be blushing for his article, instead of Shimon Peres for its statements regarding Iranian support for Hamas' and Hezbollah's criminal activities.

Russell Tribunal on Palestine, held in Barcelona.

2010-03-17T22:24:00.017+01:00

The Russell Tribunal was created in order to judge American (among others) involvement and attitudes in Vietnam. It also judged some Latin American dictatorships, the Irak War and, more recently, alleged Israeli violations of human rights and European Union's complicity with Israel. Those responsible for the Tribunal's activities always claimed that it was based on international law.
The Tribunal finally found Israel guilty of apartheid and war crimes against Palestinians during military operations and while occupying the Palestinian territories, and European Union was found guilty of complicity, because it sold weapons to Israel, while legitimizing the occupation of the Palestinian territories and assisting Israel in it.
Was this Tribunal actually able to judge somebody or something? No. Why? The primary reason for it is that this Tribunal is not a real one. It has no authority to judge neither anybody nor anything. It's a symbolic Tribunal, not a real one appointed by a governmental department in order to judge and punish according to laws.
But more interesting is the nature of the Tribunal itself. This is just a part of the response (translated as accurate as possible, between quotation marks) of the Israeli Embassy in Spain:

"Without credibility nor moral weight. The self-denominated tribunal is exclusively constituted by people with a long anti-Israeli trajectory, like the payroll of people and institutions that support it. There's no a single independent voice, it's simply a lynching tribune which will stage the reading of a condemnatory sentence against Israel, whose script was decided since the same moment of its announcement. A condemnatory sentence as predictable as that which would be passed by a jury exclusively composed by Ku Klux Klan's members in a process against a coloured man."

Following this and other statements by the Israeli Embassy in Spain, we can find a link to the same statement with an interesting cartoon. Pay attention to it, please.
Also interesting are those statements made by Pilar Rahola and Jorge Marirrodriga. Pilar Rahola is a Spanish journalist from Catalonia, and a former leftist and nationalist politician, who considers herself pro-Israeli. She has her own website. We can find her statements about the Tribunal here.
She argues that it uses Bertrand Russell's name in vane, simplifies the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by reducing it to a dispute of good Palestinians and bad Israelis and is constituted by people with a long history of anti-Israeli attitudes, finally explaining that the Tribunal was financed by the Catalonian autonomous government and Barcelona's municipal council: "I claim for the returning of the money which, in my name, they've used to criminalize Israel."
Jorge Marirrodriga is also a Spanish journalist. He has a blog of his own entitled Sobre Israel Opinamos Todos (which could be translated as About Israel All of Us Think or About Israel All of Us Give an Opinion), where he criticizes anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic attitudes. The article in which he criticized the Tribunal can be found here.
He denounces the lack of morality of the Tribunal, claiming that it's an act of manipulation of the public opinion within the process of demonization of Israel. He also claims that the Russell Tribunal was used to revive the spirit of the movement against the United States' involvement in Vietnam, and that its members are delegitimizing Israel's right to exist while having failed to dennounce what is happening with enslaved societies. He finally exhorts the members of the Tribunal to ask Mosab Hassan Yousef "who is responsible for war crimes, what is Hamas and why it's worth to save lives even by facing his own father."

But this is not the first time this Tribunal is criticized due to its perceived political bias. Staughton Lynd, a self-declared social democrat pacifist, claimed in his book The War Crimes Tribunal: A Dissent (1967), that he was requested by Bertrand Russell to participate in the Tribunal, and that he rejected the invitation arguing that the Tribunal was biased against just one party involved in the Vietnam conflict.

Lynd wrote that "in conversation to the emissary who proffered the invitation, I argued that the alleged war crimes of any party to the conflict should come before the Tribunal. After all, I argued, a 'crime' is an action that is wrong no matter who does it. Pressing my case, I asked, 'What if it were shown that the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam tortures unarmed prisoners?' The answer, as I understood it, was, 'Anything is justified that drives the imperialist aggressor into the sea.' I declined the invitation to be a member of the Tribunal."

Please notice that driving the "aggressor" into the sea is what the Arabs and muslims want to do with the Israeli Jews.

Anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic expressions on the Internet.

2010-03-17T00:13:00.007+01:00

Norway, Israel and the jews commented once on a debate forum in Spanish supplied by Yahoo. This forum deals with the Arab-Israeli conflict (there are other forums relating to many other issues, such as the ruling of Venezuela by Hugo Chávez, the Cuban dictatorship, religion, crime in Spain, and so on, supplied by Yahoo, too). Currently the forum has just a few members debating about the Arab-Israeli conflict, mostly against Israel. Well, regardless of the number of members, most of them always were against Israel.
These are just a few examples of what was written there (translations are provided between quotation marks, as accurate as posible, including spelling mistakes):
1.- "i think israel is a monster being feed by its god the united states and its crimes are backed by the yankee empire of the multinationals which support israel's genocides and while there are thousands of people with no food the sons of bitches waste money in weapons and contracts with those who commit genocide (this for the united states) barack obama gives millions of dollars to that damned country to kill children and women in gaza and the west bank.Strength from el salvador to HAMAS everybody against jewish fascism and its yankee father!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
2.- "Rafaeli demonstrates the taliban-israeli persecution against anyone who doesn't adjust to its mesianic militaristic vision of the reality of that nation. As the talibans destroying Buda statues they're chasing pacifists and those who profess other religions and believes. zionist neo-nazism is even repudiated by so many jews of the USA. In Israel they have to run away from the fanatism and the reprisals."
3.- "hello everybody. it's easy to listen the voices of a state who considers itself democratic, which declares itself the only democracy in an arab vacuum. this is another of the great zionist lies. israel is not a democracy, it's a theocracy.
the religious ones don't allow the creation of a constitution, because israel's laws can't be written by men, only by god.
gentlemen, switch off and let's go."

Spanish anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic attitudes are mentioned by an Israeli newspaper.

2010-03-16T23:09:00.012+01:00

Criticism came from The Jerusalem Post, under the title "The Spanish disease". These are just a few examples of anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic incidents in Spain:
1.- The so-called Russell Tribunal on Palestine, which held its sessions in Barcelona. The Israeli Embassy in Spain has compared it with a Ku Klux Klan tribunal against a black person.
2.- Those postcards which were sent by Spanish schoolchildren to the Israeli Embassy in Spain with messages such as "Jews kill for money", "Leave the country to the Palestinians" and "Go somewhere they will accept you".
3.- Israeli Ambassador to Spain, Raphael Schutz, was verbally assaulted when returning from a soccer match with his wife. They had to listen things like "Dirty Jew" and "Jew bastard". Fortunately, they were being escorted by police officers.
4.- The 1492 Spanish Jews' expulsion by the Catholic Monarchs, Queen Isabella I of Castilla and King Ferdinand II of Aragón.
5.- During Francisco Franco's fascist dictatorship, the Jews were subjected to the communist and Judeo-Masonic conspiracy theories.

How to deal with this atmosphere of both anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic attitudes in Spain? According to The Jerusalem Post, it's clear that Israeli Ambassador to Spain, Raphael Schutz, will not be able to "brave it alone." But even the best public diplomacy "will not eradicate ingrained Spanish anti-Semitism. That's a challenge for Spain to meet."

Example of a Spanish anti-Israeli rally.

2010-03-14T15:41:00.019+01:00

As said by the Anti-Defamation League's report about the increase of anti-Semitism in Spain, support for Palestinian terrorism and anti-Semitic attitudes are frequent during anti-Israeli rallies. This is an example of what we can see during these kind of events here in Spain.

During the summer of 2006, Israel engaged in a war against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, due to an armed raid through the Israeli-Lebanese border by the Shi'ite terrorist organization, which resulted in the deaths of several Israeli soldiers and the kidnapping of two others. During the raid and the subsequent war, Katyusha rockets were intentionally fired by Hezbollah to civilian areas in northern Israel.

During the war, many demonstrations were held worldwide. One of them took place in Spain on Thursday, July 20. This is what many of the demostrators expressed (translations between quotation marks):

1.- "Anne Frank is Palestinian".

2.- "NO MORE HOLOCAUSTS". - The Star of David is equated with the nazi swastika.

3.- "¿WOULD THE PRO-PEOPLE IN POWER CONDEMN THE 'ERRONEOUS' SLAUGHTER OF ISRAELI CHILDREN?" - The slogan "NO TO THE WAR" is also shown. This slogan has been widely used in Spain against the Irak War, which the right-wing P.P. (Partido Popular or People's Party) supported while governing the country, both politically and militarily (notice that both of the P's of "PRO-PEOPLE IN POWER" are a reference to the conservative People's Party). This means that the Irak War was compared with the Israeli military actions during the Second Lebanon War, regardless of the Hezbollah's raid which provoked the Israeli operations in that occasion and the subsequent armed operations against Israel during the clash. It also can be read "The Banks Always Win", which easily could be a reference to the myth of the Jewish economic and financial power.

4.- "STOP the new nazis". - The famous picture of a Palestinian boy throwing a stone to an Israeli Merkava tank is shown. It can also be read "Oleiros with Palestine", being Oleiros a municipality of the province of A Coruña, in Galicia, Spain. The Oleiros' official logo can also be seen under the Palestinian flag. The texts are in this case in Galician, a language mainly spoken in Galicia.

5.- "DOWN THE WALL" and "VIVA THE INTIFADA!"

6.- "Nazis, yankees and Jews, ¡no more chosen peoples!"

7.- "ISRAEL GENOCIDAL. It learnt from nazis."

8.- "Don't let them deceive you! Who votes Hezbollah and Hamas Doesn't want PEACE." - The guy who showed this message against Hamas and Hezbollah terrorist groups encountered this response. He was intimidated and taken into police custody. Among what demostrators shouted to him, we can hear "Who is paying you for coming here to rouse?!", "Nazi!", "Go out!", "Assassin!", "Rouser!", and so on.

Does anti-Semitism exist in Spain?

2010-03-12T17:35:00.014+01:00

In October, 2009, the President of the Government of Spain, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, was visiting the State of Israel and the Palestinian territories. Asked by Maariv (an Israeli newspaper) about an Anti-Defamation League's report on the increase of anti-Semitic attitudes in Spain, the P.S.O.E.'s (Partido Socialista Obrero Español, Spanish Socialist Workers' Party) leader declared, as explained by Spanish newspaper El Mundo:

"I must declare in a clear way, there is no anti-Semitism in Spain in any of its expressions. Not all comment, publication or photography must be considered anti-Semitic. The best proof is that today there are no anti-Semitic acts in Spain. Anti-Semitism was Franco's dictatorship".

But the report issued by the Anti-Defamation League tells us another story, according to the same article by El Mundo:

"Creators of opinion in Spain are crossing the line which separates legitimate criticism of Israeli actions from anti-Semitism. (...) In our 2009 survey, three fourth parts of the Spaniards believe that the Jews have 'too much power' in the international financial markets; almost two thirds believe that Jews 'are not loyal towards Spain'".

The report can be found here, it's divided into several parts (Introduction, Anti-Semitism in The Media, Anti-Semitism in Anti-Israel Rallies, Anti-Semitic Incidents in 2009, Anti-Semitic Attitudes, Government Response and Recommendations), and it has been posted on Monday, September 21, 2009, under the title "Polluting the Public Square: Anti-Semitic Discourse In Spain".