Enough Is Enough

The UK Jewish Chronicle is apparently stupid enough to unveil the ferocity of Zionist lobbying within the British Government and its corridors of power. The Jewish weekly is happy to outline the relentless measures that are being taken by Jewish lobbyists in order to Zionise the British legal system and its value system.

As one may assume the supporters of Israel in Britain are far from happy about Britain’s magistrates being able to implement ‘universal jurisdiction’ laws, laws that allow local magistrates to issue arrest warrants for high profile foreign visitors accused of war crimes. The rabid Zionist Jewish Chronicle is obviously outraged because universal jurisdiction puts most of the Israeli political and military echelon at a severe risk. Last month ex Israeli Foreign minister Mrs. Tzipi Livini cancelled her visit to Britain over fears that arrest warrants would be issued in connection with accusations of war crimes under laws of universal jurisdiction.

Surely universal jurisdiction is not a bad thing. It is actually an ethically orientated idea that is there to prevent world leaders from abusing their powers and committing crimes against humanity. It is also there to chase war criminals and to stop them from celebrating their freedom. Yet, it is not very surprising that the only political lobby in Britain that acts against such a set of universal laws is the Zionist lobby.

While in the past Zionist activists tried to hide their conspiratorial actions, JC political editor Martin Bright and Chief editor Stephen Pollard are providing us with a glimpse into the Jewish relentless political activity here. “Will the government ever act?” they ask in their latest editorial as if the British government has to act in order to satisfy the Zionist will.

Interestingly enough, the JC editors do not offer a single ideological, ethical or legal argument suggesting what is wrong with laws of universal jurisdiction except suggesting that it is not good for the Jews or Israel.

The JC is rather outraged with Justice Secretary Jack Straw who apparently fails to bow to Israeli pressure. Considering Jack Straw is of Jewish descent, the JC must believe that it is entitled to use some measures to put him in the line of fire. In spite of the fact that Straw is known in Britain for his notorious call for Muslim women to remove their veils and also as a backer of the illegal invasionof Iraq. The JC blames Straw for being too friendly with Muslims. “Mr Straw is known to be highly sensitive to the views of his Muslim constituents in Blackburn and is close to the Muslim Council of Britain, which opposes a change to the law.”

The JC should have also accepted the fact that, bearing in mind Straw’s Jewish origin, it is just natural for him to be reluctant to put a change into British law that is there to solely to serve Israeli interests and stands in total opposition to every universal and ethical value.

According to the JC, the Jews of Britain should not be too worried. The Shadow Middle East minister David Lidington is already in their pockets. “This has to be sorted and quickly,” says the shadow man. “It is very clear to me that this issue is doing serious damage to relations with Israel.”

The JC also assures its Zionist readers that they have a man within the government who is working hard serving their interests willingly and even enthusiastically. David Miliband, the British foreign minister who is also listed as an “Israeli Propaganda (Hasbara) author” on an Israeli official Hasbara site already announced his intention to change the law late last year. According to the JC he is “pushing hard within Whitehall for a solution.” Earlier this month, says the JC “the Foreign Office briefed that an announcement of the law change was imminent.” I wouldn’t except less from a listed “Hasbara author.”

But the JC is taking it even further. In its JC Opinion editorial it says it is “Crystal clear who is to blame” referring to Justice Secretary Straw and PM Brown

“The time for excuses is over,” says the paper. “For weeks the government has been giving every possible off-the-record promise that it would change the law on universal jurisdiction. No longer would unsuitable magistrates be able to issue warrants for the arrest of some of our closest allies.” One may wonder why exactly “on the record” genocidal murderers such as Livni, Barak or Olmert should be considered as “Britain closest allies.” In fact these people are primary enemies of humanity and as such they are also the enemy of Britain and any other nation.

Seemingly, the JC, doesn’t just talk on behalf of its editors. For some reason it prefers to talk in the name of the “Jewish community.” “Mr Straw must take the Jewish community for mugs if he thinks his behaviour is not transparent.” The only possible interpretation of this statement is that British Jewry wants Britain to give up on universal Jurisdiction just to appease its Zionists.

In case PM Brown is slightly confused and doesn’t know how to react, the JC is there to tell him how he should run Britain just to keep the Jewish community happy. “As for the Prime Minister: all he has ever needed to do is make clear that he backs Mr Miliband, and the issue would have been over.” Considering Miliband is listed as an “Israeli Propaganda author,” the message here is clear. Britain better start to work for Israel and even change its laws accordingly so it can easily comply with Israeli unethical conduct.

Britain is heading towards election, and the JC is advising PM Brown that he is about to pay the ultimate political price for his unwillingness to succumb to the Zionist will. “That he (PM Brown) has done precisely nothing since promising action speaks volumes about his own bona fides. If — and now it looks like when — the deadline for action passes and nothing is done, it will be crystal clear who is to blame.”

In plain language the JC is suggesting that PM Brown as far as the Jews are concerned, is basically finished. I wonder how long it will take for British people to wake up and say enough is enough. How long will it take before they say NO to Israeli and Zionist infiltration into their politics, laws and value system.

Gilad Atzmon, now living in London, was born in Israel and served in the Israeli military. He is the author of The Wandering Who and Being in Time and is one of the most accomplished jazz saxophonists in Europe. He can be reached via his website. Read other articles by Gilad, or visit Gilad's website.

12 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. kalidas said on January 31st, 2010 at 8:56am #


    “No child. You mustn’t say that. You must say that Israelis did it. Jews may be offended.”

    Hey folks, it’s not the UK Zionist Chronicle.
    It’s the UK Jewish Chronicle.

    How long before the vast majority of people in every nation see the truth through the eyes of these kids?

    Zionists, yeah, sure, right, that’s the ticket.
    The Zionists did it..

  2. MichaelKenny said on January 31st, 2010 at 9:25am #

    Universal jurisdiction is a very bad thing, Mr Atzmon, essentially because it violates one of the fundamental principles of law, justice and human rights, namely, the territoriality of laws. That has nothing whatsoever to do the Jewish Chronicle, Israel, Zionists or the Jews. The principle is that everyone in a territory is subject to the law of that territory and must be tried there for breaches of that law, by the courts of that territory and in accordance with the law of that territory. In other words, to be tried in an English court, you must have committed an offence in England. It’s hard to see how Israeli ministers could be brought before the English courts, since during any visit they might have made there, they would be covered by diplomatic immunity (Vienna Convention!) and, thus, even if they had committed an offence, they could not be prosecuted for it.
    A prefect example of the evils of universal jurisdiction is Guantanamo, where persons alleged to have committed offences in, for example, Afghanistan, are being held prisoner by the US in Cuban territory and, if put on trial anywhere, it will be in the US, in whose territory nobody claims they ever committed any offence.

  3. Rehmat said on January 31st, 2010 at 10:41am #

    David Brooks in his January 12 Op-Ed column ”The Tel Aviv Cluster’ in the New York Times boasted many Jewish achievements considering they make-up only 0.2% of world’s population. He claimed that 54% of world chess champions, 27% of the Nobel physics laureates and 31% of the medicine laureates are Jewish. David Brooks also adds that though Jews make only 2% of United States population – 21% of Ivy League student bodies, 26% of the Kennedy Center honorees, 37% of Academy Award winning directors, 38% of those on a recent Business Week list of leading philanthropists and 51% of Pulitzer Prize winners for non-fiction are Jewish. I, too, find them very laudable. But then David Brooks come out of his Hasbara (propaganda) liter-box by equating these Jewish achiement with Israeli achievements – as if the great majority of 12.7 million world Jewish population lives inside Jewish occupied Palestine. In fact there are more Jews in the US than in Israel and its extended Jewish settlements on the remaining 22% Palestinian land. Some of the unique achievements the American Jews made included the only couple which was executed on electric chairs on June 19, 1953 for spying for a enemy country (Russia) – were Jewish Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. Furthermore, the traitor who is currently serving life sentence for stealing close to one million US secret documents for a foreign country (Israel) – Jonathan Pollard, is also Jewish. I suppose it’s too late now to agree with Philip Zelikow that the pro-Israel moles in the US government were responsible for the invasion of Iraq to protect Zionist entity. Now the same traitors are pushing Washington to invade Islamic Iran on similar flimsy execuses. Another recent great achiever is Bernard Madoff, who single-handed robbed the Americans of US$50 billion!!

    Jewish or Israeli Achievements

  4. kalidas said on January 31st, 2010 at 11:34am #

    “as if the great majority of 12.7 million world Jewish population lives inside Jewish occupied Palestine.”

    Obviously not, Rehmat, but I’ll bet Jewish occupied Palestine lives inside the great majority of them.

    Just ask them.
    (and duck)

  5. dan e said on January 31st, 2010 at 12:13pm #

    Michael Kenny’s is amazing. It’s interesting that he occasionally posts something fairly intelligent, which serves to provide cover for his basically reactionary outlook.
    This time he poses as a defender of “…fundamental principles of law, justice and human rights…” by calling for the elimination of Universal Jurisdiction, one of the few tools available to call government officials to account for Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes committed under cover of legal systems in their home country, systems which make “legal” acts which violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other recognized international standards of legality.
    He tries to justify his pro-Israeli, pro-Pinochet stance by claiming US criminal policies of kidnapping persons in US-invaded territory and their arbitrary imprisonment with out charge are dependent on international recognition of Universal Jurisdiction. What nonsense.
    Wake up and come into the real world, Mr Kenny — Neither the current US Supine Court, nor those who run the US government, from Obama on down, nor those who run the US Ideological State Apparatus care a fig for international law, or even for US law. They do what they want, and let hirelings justify it later.

  6. bozh said on January 31st, 2010 at 12:17pm #

    There is no proof that mother nature [or god, if u will] had endowned ‘jews’ with special brain functions or diff’nt brains-blood-digestion-bodycells.

    My guess is that most of them shun work and with help of other ‘jews’ obtain good positions and money for education.
    US system of rule now favoring [or seens so] ‘jews’ more than any other ethnos, may be another factor in ‘jewish’ over-representation in politics, banking, journalism, etc. tnx

  7. observing said on January 31st, 2010 at 12:24pm #

    As with most things, Universal Jurisdiction is most “bad” when selectively applied. If it’s OK for the US with its extraordinary renditions etc., then it’s OK for national and International Courts.

    Perhaps Universal Jurisdiction cases should be tried under International Law only. Not necessarily only in the International Courts, as national court lawyers can and do operate under different sets of laws. That way, differences and inconsistencies in national laws do not come into play.

    Time for the US, Britain and Israel, (as well as all other nations) to stop playing both ends against the middle. Diplomatic immunity is an outdated artifact of monarchist/imperialist rule.

  8. dan e said on January 31st, 2010 at 12:43pm #

    The Real World, cont:
    http://antifascist-calling.blogspot.com/ EXCERPT:
    [the paras most relevant to this thread are at the end of this excerpt; more details at the URL -de]
    Sunday, January 31, 2010
    Court Tosses NSA Spy Suits, Sides with White House Over Illegal Surveillance
    In late January, the Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General released a report that provided startling new details on illegal operations by the FBI’s Communications Analysis Unit (CAU) and America’s grifting telecoms.

    For years, AT&T, Verizon, MCI and others fed the Bureau phone records of journalists and citizens under the guise of America’s endless, and highly profitable, “War on Terror.”

    Between 2002 and 2007, the FBI illegally collected more than 4,000 U.S. telephone records, citing bogus terrorism threats or simply by persuading telephone companies to hand over the records. Why? Because the FBI could and the telecoms were more than willing to help out a “friend”–and reap profits accrued by shredding the Constitution in the process.

    So egregious had these practices become that “based on nothing more than e-mail messages or scribbled requests on Post-it notes, the phone employees turned over customer calling records” to the FBI, The New York Times reported.

    And when questions about these dodgy practices were raised internally, top FBI managers “up to the assistant director level” approved CAU’s blatantly illegal methodology and responded by “crafting a ‘blanket’ national security letter to authorize all past searches that had not been covered by open cases,” The Washington Post disclosed.

    “On some occasions” according to the Times, “the phone employees allowed the F.B.I. to upload call records to government databases. On others, they allowed agents to view records on their computer screens, a practice that became known as ‘sneak peeks’.”

    “But in a surprise buried at the end of the 289-page report” Wired disclosed, “the inspector general also reveals that the Obama administration issued a secret rule almost two weeks ago saying it was legal for the FBI to have skirted federal privacy protections.”…

    According to Klein, these programs are not “targeted” against suspected terrorists but rather “show an untargeted, massive vacuum cleaner sweeping up millions of peoples’ communications every second automatically.”

    Yet despite overwhelming evidence of lawbreaking by the secret state and their corporate partners, on January 21 U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker tossed out the EFF’s lawsuit, Jewell v. NSA, filed on behalf of AT&T customers fighting the National Security Agency’s illegal operations that target millions of citizens’ phone calls, emails and web searches.

    In a cowardly ruling that skirts the issue of Americans’ privacy rights, Walker reaffirmed the unlimited power of the so-called “Unitary Executive,” Bushist double-speak for a presidential dictatorship; a position embraced by current Oval Office resident, the discredited “change” President, Barack Obama.

    In a further sign that the Executive Branch and secret state agencies are above the law, Walker ruled that harm done to U.S. citizens and legal residents under the PSP, was not a “particularized injury” but instead was a “generalized grievance” because almost everyone in the United States has a phone and Internet service.

    Chillingly, Walker asserted that “a citizen may not gain standing by claiming a right to have the government follow the law.” This pitiful summary judgement merely affirms the obvious: America is a lawless state where neither citizens nor “co-equal” branches of government, Congress and the Courts, can challenge the quintessentially political decisions made in secret by the Executive Branch.

  9. Rehmat said on January 31st, 2010 at 2:06pm #

    Well kalidas – many Jews are learning that they were tricked by the Zionist by selling their colonial agenda as a ‘save haven for the Jews’ in Palestine – which to great surprise many moral Jews has become ‘save heaven for the criminal Jews’. No one ever expected that a Zionist Jewish judge (Golstone) would critize Israel or the son of one of the two ‘founders’ of Zionist Israel, Gilad Atzmon, would become one of the critic of state of Israel and work for the dismantling of the state itself or Yoav Shamir producing the movie “Defamation”, making fun of the ‘anti-Semitism’ myth or the movie “Lebanon” showing Israeli humiliation in Lebanon in 2006?

    Zionist establishment is becoming very paranoid of the young Jewish generations in the US and Canada, who have started raising their voices against Israel’s Nazi tactics against Gaza and Lebanon. We saw their red faces during the screening of Israeli movie Tel Aviv in Toronto.


    TIFF ‘protest’ irks Israel Lobby

    Movie “Lebanon” – Israel’s Vietnam

  10. kalidas said on January 31st, 2010 at 4:57pm #

    Yeah, well good luck with that, Rehmat.
    A few kids in a movie theater in Toronto do not a majority make. Not even ‘many.’ I don’t believe there is nor will there ever be that ‘many.’
    When it comes down to the rubber hitting the road, their daddies and Rabbis have the last say on who and what they are. Not Gilad, Goldman some film maker or even their so-called home nation(s), whereever it may be. Do you really think that’s going to change any time soon? Ever?
    Neither do I believe they really feel an honest sorrow and compassion for the Palestinians, or anyone else for that matter. Only to the extent that events hurt their positions and elevated status. To the degree it effects THEM.

    I’m well aware of the rarities, the anomalies, but that’s just what they are. And they aren’t many.

    When hard times come, or even uncomfortable times, they’ll circle their wagons faster than you can say compound interest.
    Come to think of it, I’m probably wrong.
    First they’d have to un-circle their wagons.
    That ain’t ever gonna happen.

  11. Charlie said on January 31st, 2010 at 6:07pm #

    I believe you are mistaken, Mr. Kenny. Territoriality is common to many legal systems but it is not “one of the fundamental principles of law, justice and human rights,” as you so cavalierly and assert. The global common good, negotiated through treaties and agreements, or sometimes arrived at unilaterally, requires that all nations have some measure of Universal Jurisdiction.

    For instance, Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution grants Congress the power “To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations.” The high seas are not the territory of any nation and, therefore, demand an international law. The US, legally through its Constitution, can bring charges against pirates and adjudicate their cases in the US even if an American vessel was not involved. Similarly, “offences against the Law of Nations” is not as limited by claims of territory as you think.

    So when you and the US Founding Fathers disagree on a legal point, I’ll put my money on the latter.

  12. kynaston said on February 1st, 2010 at 8:31am #

    It is essential that racist criminals should be caught and brought to book, and they obviously won’t be in the areas they dominate, so extraterritoriality is vital if we are to recreate a human world. Brown himself is a zionist – it was – just- still part of the ‘left’ package when he and Bliar decided to sell out, so he keeps it on as part of the camouflage hiding his toryism, not noticing the world has changed and his big fat arse is sticking out, dripping children’s blood like the rest of him. British politics are in a terminal mess. In my own view the only answer is to break up this unnatural State.