Friday, Sep 3rd, 2010

Shimon Peres is a war criminal and his potential knighthood is a travesty

Shimon Peres is being touted for a knighthood by the Queen of England, but his record is a blood-soaked and criminal one, a career that has seen a dedicated attachment to the dismemberment of historical and post-1967 Palestine.

By Akram Awad on Monday, November 17th, 2008 - 904 words.

Share

It seems that the Zionist pro-Israeli blackmailing tactics against the Royals have done the trick – again. Latest news reports from Israel are confirming that the Israeli embassy’s desperate begging for a knighthood title to be given by Queen Elizabeth to the Israeli President Shimon Peres during his visit to the UK this week has finally been answered. Another report published in the Daily Express earlier this month leaked information about the Queen’s rejection of the Israeli bidding for the honorary title. The report quoted a British Official stating, “It’s not going to happen. There is no knighthood.” It is, therefore, still too early to confirm the reliability of the Israeli reports, as they may simply be part of the campaign itself.

It’s no exaggeration to say Mr. Peres’ contributions to the Zionist project in Palestine and the sufferings of the Palestinians and Arabs have not stopped once since the Nakba, the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians in 1947-1949. His record includes his role in searching for talented officers to join the Haganah terrorist militias — Ben Gurion’s military gang and the predecessor of the Israeli army — which has led to acts of terrorism, killing and forced expulsion against the Palestinians since 1947. Peres became a member of the Haganah’s high command in May 1947 where he was responsible for manpower and arms purchases and production. So to call Peres “Israel’s Dove of Peace” is the reverse of reality.

The most distinguished war crime of the 1994 Noble Peace Prize laureate was his direct responsibility as a Prime Minister for the shelling of the UN forces headquarters in the village of Qana in southern Lebanon in 1996. More than 800 Lebanese civilians sought refuge in the building to escape Israeli fire, yet the UN flag was not enough to stop the Israeli thirst for blood. 106 people were killed in the massacre and at least 110 were seriously injured. Despite the UN investigation conclusions that the attack could never be referred to a technical or procedural error, the International Community failed so far to prosecute Peres and bring him to trial as a war criminal. Instead, The UN General Assembly debated whether Israel should be charged for the repair of the attacked compound — and the vote almost failed!

The Israeli President is one of the strongest advocates for bringing the Iranian nuclear program to a halt at any cost even if military intervention is required. Since the first time I wrote about this issue two years ago many things have changed but one has remained the same: The Israeli military nuclear program remains intact, and the man who prides himself for making that program possible is still allowed to blatantly criticize Iran’s nuclear program and threaten to destroy it. “The president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map,” Peres once stated. If it hadn’t been for Shimon Peres convincing the French in 1957 to help build the Israeli secret nuclear reactor, Dimona, the Israeli nuclear program could have never seen the light of day. Apart from a few slips of the tongue, the Israelis still insist upon denying the existence of their nuclear program and their possession of hundreds of nuclear warheads. The world’s silence on Israel’s nuclear arsenal led the latter to safely conclude the following moral of the story: “We should be allowed to do whatever we want as long as we lie about it.”

I’ll go back to the word “exaggeration”. Questioning the dedication of Peres to the Zionist project in Palestine — all Palestine — does not stand as an option when we listen to the man’s statements echoing the racist evil nature of Zionism. Peres strongly criticized the International Court of Justice after its ruling that the construction of the Israeli apartheid wall/barrier in the West Bank was illegal. Nor was he ashamed of expressing his racist concerns about the “demographical danger” threatening Israel due to the fast growth of the Arab population compared to the Jewish population. “If a division of territory is not effected within a decade, the Arab minority will have become an Arab majority. Israel will no longer be a Jewish state – or (it will) stop being a democratic state,” Peres once said, arguing basically for the need of a Palestinian state to complete the unfinished job of cleansing the rest of the Palestinians from their land in 1948′s occupied Palestine. While the illegal settlements in the West Bank have been a major obstacle toward any peace agreement in Palestine, Peres was the first to fight for the implantation of the first Jewish settlement, Kedumim, in 1970s in the heart of the 1967 occupied West Bank as well as the set up of the security zone which makes up more than 45 percent of the West Bank.

If the Israelis’ knighthood news reports prove themselves right this week, Buckingham Palace will score a point for trying to resist the blackmail early on, but its reputation will also suffer for eventually succumbing.

Disagree with this articleAgree with this article (+1 rating, 5 votes)
Loading ... Loading ...

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

6 Comments

  1. Matt Kennard says:

    I agree with this article wholeheartedly. One of the biggest lies of Israeli politics is the “moderates” or “doves”; under Ehud Barak settlements in the West Bank shot up, and no side shows a willingness to actually take on the underlying assumption that they own the place…

    Would disagree a bit about your comments on the Royal Family, I don't think they have much respect to lose around the world. People who support them are either little old ladies in Hastings, or people who have a yearning for a return to empire and Victorian values.

    I actually think the knighthood is quite an apposite award for Peres, because remember it will make an Order of the British Empire, and sits he is a colonizer extraordinaire it seems very fitting.

  2. Zachary Goelman says:

    I thought knighthoods were traditionally given to those brave enough to brutally suppress and exploit foreign peoples and territories for the good of England.

  3. Matt Kennard says:

    You're right Zach, they were, lots of people actually turn them down (Harold Pinter, bunch of others)

  4. Akram Awad says:

    Matt, with regard to whether the Royal family has any respect or not, I prefer not to generalise so as not to lose credibility. Prince Charles, for instance, has tried to understand the real situation. If last November's reports about his rejection to visit Israel so that his visit isn't used to improve Israel's image – if those reports are true then for me as a Palestinian I cannot but respect the man.

  5. Matt Kennard says:

    I see no evidence that Prince Charles understands the situation, or has even tried. He didn't go for whatever reason. To hold out for the Royal Family of all things to say something meaningful about the Israel-Palestine conflict is a waste of time in my opinion. The British Empire is responsible for most of the territorial disputes in the Middle East — along with France — so this award is perfect for Peres, like it is any other sadistic colonizer. Perfect.

  6. Tom Fry says:

    I should think he has at least tried. If old Chazzy has one redeeming feature it is his suprisingly refreshing and insightful views towrds Islam, which often borders on gushy affection. If you look back at some of things he has written and the speeches he's made you'll find he is unbelievably tolerant towards Islam, and has (in stark comparison to most Brits) an extensive knowledge of the religion, and has obviously read a lot. He often praises aspects of Islamic morality and philosophy, quotes from the Qu'aran fairly regularly, and seems genuinely and deeply concerned by the growing rift between Western secular materialism and the Islamic East. Read up on it, you'll be suprised. In light of this I would not be suprised if what Akram says about his visit to Palestine is true. In fact I find it very interesting that we hear and see little of this side of the Prince in mainstream media in the UK.

Leave a Reply

Akram Awad





Articles by this author
Search the site