More on "Apartheid" in Judea-Samaria -- Rami Levy Plots against the Arab Consumer with Low Prices

An official of the "palestinian authority" accuses officials of the Authority of shopping in the Rami Levy supermarkets in defiance of the boycott of those stores declared by the "Authority." Levy is plotting against the "palestinian" consumer with his low prices [Kalkalist 9-19-2010; here]. See below the original Hebrew article and my translation. We have dealt before with the boycott declared by the Palestinian Authority against the Rami Levy supermarkets as an implicit rejection of the "apartheid" charge made against Israel by Jimmy Carter and other professional slanderers of Israel.

The Palestinian Authority against The Rami Levy Chain

The head of the Consumer Society in the Hebron District claims that officials of the Authority are making purchases in the Rami Levy branch in Gush Etsiyon. Thereby they violate the law [of the PA] that forbids purchasing goods in the settlements. If the phenomenon does not stop, he will publish the names of the senior officials [who do that]

Doron Paskin 9-19-2010

The Palestinian Authority has put Rami Levy in its gunsight. `Azmi Shayukhi, head of the Consumer Society in the Hebron District, claims that officials of the Authority violate the law [of the PA] that forbids purchasing goods in the settlements, when they come to the Israeli chain to make purchases. Shayukhi called on the authorities to stop those people and stressed that it was very shameful that they arrive in Palestinian Authority vehicles with red license plates [denoting official vehicles] in order to make purchases at Rami Levy. He promised that if the phenomenon did not stop, he would publish the names of the senior officials who make purchases in the Israeli chain.

Shayukhi claims that the Rami Levy chain operates several branches on the West Bank, and that the branch preferred by Palestinians is in Gush `Etsiyon. According to him, the chain offers especially cheap prices in its branches on the West Bank in order to attract Palestinian customers. Shayukhi claims that a large part of these products are produced in the settlements and therefore purchasing them is forbidden in the context of the boycott on settlement products which the Palestinian Authority promulgated. Moreover, according to the same spokesman, a considerable part of the employees in the Rami Levy stores are Palestinians who "have lost their national conscience," as he defined it. He attacked them with harsh words like "agents of the settlement" and "traitors."
The author is director of the research department of the Info Prod Research Co. (Middle East). www.infoprod.co.il [Kalkalist is a business section published by Yedi`ot Ahronot]

הרשות הפלסטינית נגד רשת רמי לוי
דורון פסקין 9-19-2010 כלכליסט

ראש אגודת הצרכן במחוז חברון טוען כי פקידים ברשות עושים קניות בסניף של רמי לוי בגוש עציון ובכך מפירים את החוק האוסר לרכוש מוצרים בהתנחלויות. אם התופעה לא תיפסק הוא יפרסם את שמות הבכירים
דורון פסקין
14 תגובות

ברשות הפלסטינית שמו את רמי לוי על הכוונת. עזמי שיוחי, ראש אגודת הצרכן במחוז חברון טוען כי פקידים ברשות מפירים את החוק האוסר רכישת מוצרים בהתנחלויות כשהם מגיעים לעשות קניות ברשת הישראלית. שיוחי קרא לרשויות לעצור את אותם אנשים והדגיש כי למרבה הבושה הם מגיעים ברכבי הרשות הפלסטינית עם לוחיות זיהוי אדומות כדי לעשות קניות אצל רמי לוי. הוא הבטיח כי אם התופעה לא תיפסק הוא יפרסם את שמות הבכירים העושים קניות ברשת הישראלית.

שיוחי טוען כי רשת רמי לוי מפעילה מספר סניפים בגדה המערבית כשהסניף המועדף על ידי הפלסטינים נמצא בגוש עציון. לדבריו, הרשת מציעה בסניפים בגדה המערבית מחירים זולים במיוחד כדי למשוך את הלקוחות הפלסטינים. שיוחיי טוען כי חלק גדול ממוצרים אלה מיוצרים בהתנחלויות ולכן רכישתם אסורה במסגרת החרם על מוצרי ההתנחלויות שהכריזה הרשות הפלסטינית. יתרה מזאת, לפי אותו דובר, חלק ניכר מהמועסקים בחנויות רמי לוי הם פלסטינים ש"איבדו את המצפון הלאומי שלהם" כהגדרתו. הוא תקף אותם במילים קשות כמו "סוכני ההתנחלות" ו"בוגדים".
הכותב הוא מנהל אגף המחקר בחברת אינפו פרוד מחקרים (המזה"ת

- - - - - - - - - -
More on the Rami Levy supermarket in Gush Etsiyon [here]

Anti-Jewish Racism & Apartheid in the name of "Peace" -- Obama & Clinton back to FDR's Bad Old Days of Fostering the Holocaust

UPDATING 9-17-2010 see at bottom

When fascism comes to America, it will
be called anti-fascism.
[attributed to Huey Long]

Official Washington is in a tizzy. Jews who are simply not pliable enough actually believe that they have a right to live and build new homes in what the international community designated as the Jewish National Home [San Remo 1920; League of Nations 1922, etc].

The Administration of Palestine. . . shall facilitate Jewish immigration . . . and shall encourage . . . close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands. . .
[League of Nations mandate, Article 6; 1922]

Needless to say, Britain reneged on its duties as Administrator of the Jewish National Home fairly quickly, making if difficult for Jews to immigrate into the country and to settle the land. This obstruction of Jewish exercise of Jewish rights culminated on the eve of the Holocaust with an official British statement, the 1939 "White Paper on Palestine," which severely limited Jewish immigration into the country, the internationally designated Jewish National Home, when Jews most urgently needed a home, a refuge. Further, Jews were forbidden by the British White Paper policy to buy real estate in most of the country. Thereby, Britain, the UK, was imposing an anti-Jewish apartheid policy on the country through Land Purchase Regulations promulgated in 1940, a year after the White Paper but in line with it. Britain was a silent partner in the Holocaust and the Foreign Office's hostile policy towards Israel since then should be seen in that light. Incidentally, the Permanent Mandates Commission of the League of Nations ruled that the 1939 White Paper policy was a violation of the mandate. That didn't stop the British from applying the restrictions on Jewish rights embodied in the White Paper. So much for British respect for international law.

Now, Washington follows the old UK policy. It's bad enough that Washington wants Israel to share its scarce territory with a state [Palestinian Authority] that even now, in its embryonic stages incites murderous hatred of Jews, but Washington, particularly Hilary Clinton's State Department, is pressuring Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu not to allow Jews to resume building homes in Judea-Samaria even after the unjust 10-month moratorium expires shortly. In Sharm ash-Shaykh, Clinton and veteran facilitator of Arab terrorism, George Mitchell, pressed Israel to give in once again on this important issue of human rights. But Clinton, Mitchell and Obama don't give a damn about the human rights of Jews, just as an earlier American Liberal, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, avoided trying to save Jews' lives during the Holocaust, thereby giving auxiliary support to British policy towards the Holocaust.

Now that the conference between Netanyahu, Mahmoud Abbas, Mubarak, King Abdullah [Plucky Little King #2] and Clinton has ended --supposedly to resume-- Hilary Clinton, US Secretary of State, has come to Jerusalem to nag and pressure our leaders more in order to persuade them to divest Jews of human rights. In fact these are also national rights made into international law by the League of Nations mandate for a Jewish National Home [1922], in Article 6. So the United States under its present leadership works against the international law which recognized Jewish rights. Bear in mind that the Israeli people have suffered greatly from "peace processes" and "peace efforts" and "peace accords." Need we mention Oslo? Thousands of Israelis have been murdered and wounded since Oslo was signed on the White House lawn on 13 September 1993, seventeen years ago. The rate of deaths from Arab terrorism rose astronomically after Oslo, although lying shills for mass murder like the Norwegian Terje Larsen pretended that Oslo had benefited the Israeli people, falsely claiming that fewer Israelis had died from terrorism since Oslo.

As to Liberal American presidents, we don't really know what "liberal" means. Franklin Roosevelt was considered a Liberal. As said above, he did not try to save Jews from the Holocaust. Although American and British bomber aircraft reached the Auschwitz area in Poland to strike at military targets, they never tried to bomb the death camps in that region, to bomb the gas chambers or the crematoria -- or even the railroad tracks that led to the camps. The concern of those governments for the Holocaust and its victims is a pretense at best. In that period, Britain violated its international commitment to the Jews, to the Jewish National Home, by preventing Jewish refugees from finding refuge there. Britain went so far as to pressure governments in southern Europe to prevent Jewish refugees from embarking from their ports. This is not a matter of conjecture or interpretation. It is fact but not what is usually taught in schools and universities. Instead we hear the big lie, also propounded by the so-called "Left", that Britain favored the Jews and helped create the State of Israel. Shameless big lies coming forth from the mouths of academics, politicians, diplomats, and officials of so-called [misnamed] "non-governmental organizations." [see Notes below]

There is another case that shows how official Washington discriminates against Jews and Israel, doing so with the collaboration of fake "human rights" and "civil rights" groups. Jonathan Pollard has been in jail since 1985, for 25 years. Yes, he was a spy. Yet, his sentence is virtually a life sentence. He has never been given pardon or clemency. His sentence violates the Eighth Amendment to the United States constitution. This amendment is part of the Bill of Rights and states:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Yet other spies were sentenced around the same time as Pollard, the Walker family, Christopher Boyce, Andrew Daulton Lee, an Egyptian spying for his country, and others. Their sentences were nearly all lighter than Pollard's, although Pollard had spied for a friendly country, not an enemy like the Soviet Union which Boyce, Lee and the Walkers had done. The Egyptian was sentenced to several years. Boyce and Lee are already out of jail. Pollard's sentence is a virtual lifetime sentence. The US Justice Department even broke --even violated-- a plea bargain agreement with Pollard, after he had confessed to spying as his part of the accord. The secretary of defense even intervened in the case, sending the judge a special letter that has never been disclosed to the public. Nevertheless, despite the unfair sentence and the unfair procedure, no self-designated "civil rights" group or "human rights" group has ever taken up the defense of Pollard's civil and human rights. Neither the American Civil Liberties Union, led by former US attorney general, Ramsey Clark [a sympathizer of Khomeini & Saddam Hussein -- yes, look it up], nor "Human Rights Watch" nor Amnesty International has ever made a public statement in favor of Pollard or complained of his mistreatment. Professor Eugene Narrett once inquired of Amnesty if they had taken a position on Pollard's case. They answered him that they had not since they felt it was not of interest --or some similar excuse to avoid defending Pollard's rights.

Of course, official Washington can get very humanitarian and very human rights conscious when it involves someone working for Washington. Consider the case of a Chinese-American sentenced to only eight years by China for spying on China's oil industry. This spy's name is Xue Feng.

US consular officials have visited Mr Xue nearly 30 times during his detention, and President Barack Obama raised the case with President Hu Jintao during a state visit to Beijing last November. The US ambassador to China, Jim M Huntsman Jr, was in the Beijing courtroom when the sentence was handed down Monday.
"Now that the Chinese legal system has ruled, I believe the time has come for Dr Xue, who has already been detained for two and a half years, to be released," Mr Huntsman said in a statement. I urge the Chinese authorities to take into account the long ordeal he has suffered and in the spirit of justice allow him to return home and be reunited with his family."
The statement said the US government was dismayed by the verdict and was concerned about both his right to due process under Chinese law and his well-being while in prison.
[International Herald-Tribune, 6 July 2010].

So US diplomats know how to talk the civil rights talk [as in the reference to "due process"] and play on the heartstrings with the hope that he can go back to his family. And Obama whom some regard as a Great Emancipator, intervened on Xue's behalf when in China on other business. But at eight years, even if added to the 2 1/2 years awaiting trial, Xue's sentence is nothing compared to Pollard's. But it seems that few in the United States care about Pollard. Those groups that one might naturally assume should be concerned for the unconstitutionality and cruelty and abuse of power in the Pollard case, have been silent. As said, not a peep from the ACLU or HRW or Amnesty.

So the Jews --both in Israel and the United States-- are much in the position of the Black slave Dred Scott. The US Supreme Court ruled in his case that:
"The negro . . . had no rights which the white man was bound to respect"
[Dred Scott v. Sandford, US Supreme Court decision, 1857]

- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Notes:
On the British diplomats trying to prevent Jewish refugees from escaping Europe, see:
William Perl, The Four Front War (New York: Crown 1979).
On US policy to do nothing to stop the Holocaust, see:
Arthur Morse, While Six Million Died (New York 1968).
David Wyman, The Abandonment of the Jews (New York: Pantheon 1984)

Also the website of the David Wyman Institute:
http://www.wymaninstitute.org/
Also authors such as Laurel Leff, Rafael Medoff, Monty Penkower, Ben Hecht, even "Leftist" journalists like Lawrence Lipton, Sidney Zion, Sol Stern and others.

On British pro-Holocaust policy, see books by Walter Z Laqueur, Martin Gilbert,William Perl, Bernard Wasserstein, William Ziff, and others plus previous posts here at Emet m'Tsiyon [& here].
UPDATE
Obama statement in favor of continued anti-Jewish apartheid policy in Judea-Samaria [here] & [here]
Also note that George Mitchell stressed the US government's desire to see the "settlement freeze" continue in his press conference after yesterday's conference at Sharm ash-Shaykh.
Hilary butts in with her obnoxious two cents in favor of denying Jewish rights: "Clinton told reporters that the U.S. wants the construction halt extended." [Bloomberg report here]
Khaled Abu Toameh's view of Abbas' policy on settlements [here & here].
Jewish efforts to pressure Obama against his pro-apartheid position [here]

UPDATING 9-17-2010 Obaminable gang supports apartheid against Israel at the UN [here]
10-5-2010 Caroline Glick asks whether Jews have civil rights [here]. I have written that Jews today, particularly Israelis, are in the position of Dred Scott, the Black American slave in whose case the US Supreme Court wrote: ". . . the negro had no rights which the white man was bound to respect" [see above]

Obama's Nuclear Permissiveness with Iran Will Lead to a Mid East Nuclear Arms Race -- Where Is the CND When We Need Them? - Carla Bruni's Honor? Nyet

UPDATING 9-5&7&17-2010 below

Time to get back to the Iran Bomb issue while the ayatollahs' regime is racing towards developing their bomb. The respected Italian paper, Il Foglio warns that economic sanctions against Iran are a rather hollow weapon, a weak reed to rely on when trying to stop the ayatollahs from getting The Bomb. We explain why below.

Lee Smith has an important article on how Obama's indulgent policy toward the Iranian bomb will produce a nuclear arms race in the Mid East, since the Arabs are more afraid of Iran using the bomb or threatening with the bomb than they are of Israel. Likewise, Arab states fear each other. As one state --for instance, Saudi Arabia-- gets the Bomb, other Arab states will want to catch up, both out of fear of Iran and of each other. What happened to the old Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament [CND]? [see a second Il Foglio piece on matters related to the Iranian Bomb here]

So the major Western powers led by the United States of Obama are indulging the ayatollahs, allowing them to obtain the Bomb, although pretending otherwise. The US and UK speak of international law while allowing the ayatollahs to violate the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which Iran signed.

In the latest opportunity to stand up to the awful ayatollahs, the US and the rest of the West have failed in a humiliating and cynical way, humiliating for Western women, cynical and dangerous as their Iran policy usually is. Several Iranian official and semi-official outlets, have smeared French First Lady, Carla Bruni, as a whore. As Fiamma Nirenstein points out, at one time insults like that to the wife of a head of state would have been seen as a declaration of war. Iran's mouthpieces claimed that because Bruni was a whore, it was only natural for her and for French actress Isabelle Adjani --also called a whore-- to sign a petition asking Iran not to execute by stoning a woman called Sakineh. She was first accused of adultery, then, after much international criticism [including from Iran's would be ally, Brazil], another charge was added, that of collaborating in her husband's murder. Against Carla Bruni, the Iranians also falsely charged that she had broken up Sarkozy's previous marriage. Thereby, they imply that Bruni too is an adulterer. Therefore, she too deserves stoning. Fiamma Nirenstein calls this "a sexual fatwa." Bruni too deserves stoning which means a death sentence. Yet the Western reaction to this verbal attack has been very quiet. Bear in mind that Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa on the life of Salman Rushdie. Rushdie is still alive but lives under constant guard. However, several translators of his book, The Satanic Verses, into several languages have in fact been murdered. Such as the translator into Japanese, Hitoshi Igarashi, although we would ordinarily think of Japan as being far away from Middle Eastern and European fanatics. And Western press commentators do not comment on the implications of smearing Carla Bruni. The US chief delegate to the UN, Susan Rice, did not try to stop Iran from being elected to the UN Commission on the Status of Women. She's protected. Unlike Sakineh.

Of course, the Iranian Bomb program is more dangerous, while the Iran-Bruni-Sakineh affair is insidious. The Il Foglio article points out the fallacy of thinking that the sanctions regime will force Iran to halt its nuclear program. I am not going to translate all of it but it has a lot of detail and might be worthwhile to do so for someone, maybe on google. China, India, Turkey and even South Korea are already trying to make up for Iran the goods that it can't get from Euro states. Turkey is already on board with its neo-Ottoman policy in which turning toward Muslim militancy is a central part. Turkey is offering its ports of Mersin and Trabzon [once Trebizond] as hubs for Iranian trade. Turkey has also voted with Iran at the UN security council and appointed a supporter of Iran against Israel as head of its secret services.

Obviously, some Euro or Western products may be unavailable elsewhere. But much of Iran's imports from Western powers, not all of them enthusiastic about the sanctions anyhow, can be made up by other suppliers. Hence, without universal application, the sanctions are a weak tool. American efforts at persuasion are apparently not being taken too seriously. Other means than sanctions have to be taken to stop the Iranian bomb project. While the Western govts, led by the USA and UK, take a soft stance on the Iranian Bomb, the Western "Left", whatever that means anymore, often takes the stance that Iran deserves the Bomb or that it doesn't matter or that it is paranoid to warn of the Iranian Bomb program. Fifty years ago however, the "Left" worldwide was much exercised by the threat of nuclear bombs. This was especially so in Japan, victim of the actual use of the Bomb, and Britain where the CND, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, was riding high. Yet, giving another proof that the "Left" is not a body with consistent principles, it no longer worries about the Bomb. Such worries, as said above, are now considered paranoid or "racist" against Islam by the "Left."

Bear in mind that Iran represents a threat not only to Israel but to other Middle Eastern states and to Europe. Even if the Bomb is not used, the threat will be everpresent. Meanwhile, the insidious danger to freedom in the West and elsewhere goes on and will be facilitated by Iran's possession of The Bomb. Rushdie was only the first victim of the attack on freedom outside Iran in supposedly free Europe. But not the last. And the soft policy toward the Iranian Bomb is frightening Arab states into going for their own bombs. Zbig and jimmy carter created a worldwide threat when they helped Khomeini take over Iran in early 1979.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -
UPDATING 9-5-2010 The Saudi paper al-Madina writes [15 August 2010] that "the military option" might be "the best solution" for the Iranian nuclear bomb crisis. The Saudi paper points out:

"What is of concern is [the fact] that the Bushehr reactor is closer to several Gulf capitals than to the Iranian capital itself, as well as the fact that it is very near the crucial oil routes which pass through the Arabian Gulf – placing the neighboring countries in great danger, both in the event of an attack and in the event of radioactive leakage. Moreover, [the Bushehr reactor] may become the site where Tehran will develop its nuclear weapons, which it may use to impose demands or exert pressure on the region. This is a suspicion that Iran has not managed to refute to date." . . . . . .

"In taking this action, Tehran is ignoring all the advice, warnings, and requests to halt its nuclear program, or at the very least to try to continue it under clear and open international inspection that would guarantee that it does not have a military facet. If [Tehran] insists upon going ahead [with the program] without the agreement of the international community, it will bring embarrassment and suspicion upon every [country] that supported [Iran's] right to peaceful nuclear energy.so

"More importantly, by means of this action, Tehran is moving its conflict with the international community into high gear, and [in this case] some may consider the military option to be the best solution. [Delaying recourse to this option] may lead to a point where it is impossible to implement it – if Tehran manages to produce a nuclear bomb of its own." [see here]

Those who believe that the Iranian Bomb is only an Israeli concern ought to take note. This article in this Saudi newspaper supports part of what Lee Smith says. See above.

- - - - - - - - - -

UPDATING 9-7-2010 South Korea is said to be about to impose some sanctions on Iran. This is an encouraging sign, since we noted above --according to Il Foglio-- that South Korea was among the emerging industrial powers that were trying to make up for Iran the supplies in goods that it would no longer get from Western powers if the sanctions regime were properly applied by the Western states. The brief report below is from Guysen News of 9-7-2010. Unfortunately the report does not detail which sanctions are to be imposed, but for the suspension of commercial activity by an Iranian bank operating in South Korea's capital, Seoul. Without details, we can't know how meaningful the Korean sanctions will be.

La Corée du Sud compte annoncer dès mercredi ses sanctions contre l'Iran à cause de son projet nucléaire, ont rapporté mardi les médias locaux. Ces sanctions comprendront probablement la suspension commerciale pour deux mois de l'agence d'une banque iranienne à Séoul. [Guysen 9-7-2010]

Jonathan Tobin is skeptical about the efficacity of the sanctions as well as about the international commitment to stop the Iranian Bomb project [here] UPDATING 9-17-2010 Jonathan Tobin strikes again at Obama's fatuity. What will Obambi do now that Turkey has openly declared its intention to "triple" trade with Iran in the next five years? What about Erdogan's acceptance of $25 million from Iran for his own Islamist party, the AKP? [here]