Petitions UK Government and Parliament: Arrest Benjamin Netanyahu

Petitions UK Government and Parliament – Benjamin Netanyahu to be arrested for war crimes

Benjamin Netanyahu to be arrested for war crimes when he arrives in London.

Benjamin Netanyahu is to hold talks in London this September. Under international law he should be arrested for war crimes upon arrival in the U.K. for the massacre of over 2000 civilians in 2014 [during Gaza War]

Sign this petition …
60,772 signatures

++++++++++++++++++++

Government will respond
Government responds to all petitions that get more than 10,000 signatures
Waiting for 7 days for a government response

At 100,000 signatures…
At 100,000 signatures, this petition will be considered for debate in Parliament

++++++++++++++++++++

Petition Calling For the Netanyahu’s Arrest Goes Viral | IMEMC |

A British petition demanding the arrest of the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, upon his arrival in the UK next month, went viral in just a few days.

« click for more info Bibi's Blues: Arrest Netanyahu Petition Goes Viral In The UK (MintPress)

Israeli newspaper Haaretz said that over 30,000 people signed the petition, and the numbers are dramatically rising.

The British government is expected to respond to the demand as all petitions that get more than 100,000 signatures should be seen into, according to law. Rules governing the petition site also stipulate that any petition that receives in excess of 100,000 signatures must be considered by the UK parliament for debate.

Israel launched a deadly offensive on Gaza last year starting July, which killed over 2,000 civilians, and 73 soldiers on the Israeli side. The offensive ended in late August 2014, with a truce that took effect after indirect negotiations between Hamas and Israeli officials in the Egyptian capital city of Cairo.

Gaza War, Day 24: 61 IDF Soldiers Killed, 1,458 Palestinians Killed, 9,000 Homes Destroyed, Bibi Lied About West Bank Kidnapping | Tikun Olam |

From his book in 1986 – “Terrorism: How the West Can Win” – it was already clear how repugnant a politician Bibi Netanyahu would be. Radicalized by the death of his hero brother Yonathan in the Israeli Entebbe raid and indoctrinated by his Zionist scholar father.

More below the fold …

On the edge of the abyss | Ynet News – Opinion | by Nahum Barnea

Analysis: Israel is willing to do anything to thwart the nuclear deal with Iran, including publicly threatening Iranian scientists, interfering with the internal affairs of the US, and dividing US Jews; meanwhile, Netanyahu’s mistaken 2002 assessment of Iraq is coming back to haunt him in his battle against Tehran.

A concerned citizen

In September of 2002, former prime minister, the concerned citizen Benjamin Netanyahu, decided to save the world from an enemy like no other. He chose an appropriate stage: The US Congress. His testimony, made to a House of Representatives sub-committee, was filmed and is available online in its full version (43 minutes), an abridged version (five minutes), and an even more abridged version (four minutes). If you’re really interested, I recommend finding the video on Google under “Netanyahu expert testimony on Iraq in 2002 – C-SPAN.” It is worth the effort.

The members of Congress were debating at the time whether to support an American invasion of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, or oppose it. At the heart of the debate was the question of whether Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction. Netanyahu sought to add his powerful influence, as well as that of his country, to the Republican campaign in favor of the invasion.

Here is a selection of quotes.

“There is no question whatsoever that Saddam is seeking and is working and is advancing towards the development of nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu determined. “A nuclear-armed Saddam will place the security of our entire world at risk. Make no mistake about it — if and once Saddam has nuclear weapons, the terror networks will have nuclear weapons.”

The chairman, Congressman John Tierney, asked Netanyahu if Iraq played a part in the September 11 attacks. “It’s not whether Iraq was connected to September 11, but how do you prevent the next September 11,” Netanyahu responded.

An invasion of Iraq, Netanyahu explained, would save the world not just from Iraq, but from Iran as well. “The question now is a practical question,” he said.

“What is the best place to proceed. It’s not a question of whether Iraq’s regime should be taken out, but when should it be taken out. It’s not a question of whether you’d like to see a regime change in Iran but how to achieve it,” he continued. “Iran has something that Iraq doesn’t have… (there are) internal forces of dissension that are available in Iran, which is paradoxically probably the most open society in that part of the world. It is a lot more open than Iraq which is probably the most closed society.

“If you take out Saddam, Saddam’s regime, I guarantee you that it will have enormous positive reverberations on the region. And I think that people sitting right next door in Iran, young people, and many others, will say the time of such regimes, of such despots, is gone.

“In 1986 I wrote a book in which I had said that the way to deal with terror was to deal with the terrorist regimes. And the way to deal with the terrorist regimes among other things was to apply military force against them… as quickly as possible.”

Repugnant Review | LA Times – Aug. 10, 1986 |

Sen. Dennis DeConcini’s review of “Terrorism: How the West Can Win” (The Book Review, July 20), was as chilling and repugnant as Netanyahu’s book itself. After quoting the author’s definition of terrorism as “murder, maiming, and menacing the innocent for political reasons,” he goes on to advocate exactly those tactics for retaliating.

He applauds the wholly unconstitutional strategy of “preemptive strikes” regardless of “risk of civilian casualties,” and says that we “need not confine our military response to the terrorists themselves.” So if terrorists kill half a dozen, we are justified in killing a hundred, not terrorists, but innocent families (as we did in Libya, one day after our deputy secretary of state went on national television to assure the world we would not attack, even knowing the attack had already been ordered four days earlier!).

Such treacherous advocacy is unworthy of any American, much less a senator, and will lead to further retaliation and counter-retaliation, until somebody decides to use atomic bombs and we’re all obliterated. Meanwhile, neither DeConcini nor Netanyahu has addressed the question of why we have those terrorists to contend with in the first place. If, as suggested, they have their roots in totalitarianism, why does America so often support right-wing dictatorships, in some cases even after they’ve been deposed? And to assert they have their roots in Islam is an insult to Muslims everywhere.

From the text spoken by Rep. Dennis Kucinich in 2002 committe hearing:
Sept. 20, 2001 Netanyahu before US Congress House Government Reform Committee “Policy Towards Iraq.”

Statement by Former PM Benjamin Netanyahu at the Hearing of the US House Government Reform Committee- Preparing for the war on terrorism-20-Sep-2001 [Source website Israel’s MFA]

Chairman Burton, distinguished representatives, I want to thank you for inviting me to appear here today. I feel a profound responsibility addressing you in this hour of peril in the capital of liberty. What is at stake today is nothing less than the survival of our civilization. Now there might have been some who would have thought a week ago that to talk in these Apocalyptic terms about the battle against international terrorism, was to engage in reckless exaggeration or wild hyperbole.

That is no longer the case. I think each one of us today understands that we are all targets, that our cities are vulnerable and that our values are hated with an unmatched fanaticism that seeks to destroy our societies and our way of life.

I’m certain that I speak today on behalf of my entire nation when I say today we are all Americans in grief and in defiance. In grief because my people have faced the agonizing horrors of terror for many decades and we feel an instant kinship, an instant sympathy with both the victims of this tragedy and the great nation that mourns its fallen brothers and sisters. In defiance because, just as my country continues to fight terrorism in our battle for survival, I know that America will not cower before this challenge. I have absolute confidence that if we, the citizens of the free world led by President Bush, marshal the enormous reserves of power at our disposal, if we harness the steely resolve of free people, and if we mobilize our collective will, we’ll succeed in eradicating this evil from the face of the earth.

…
The first and most crucial thing to understand is this: there is no international terrorism without the support of sovereign states. International terrorism simply cannot be sustained for any length of time without the regimes that aid and abet it, because, as you well know, terrorists are not suspended in mid-air. They train, arm and indoctrinate their killer from within safe havens in the territories provided by terrorist states. Often these regimes provide the territory with money, with operational assistance, with intelligence, dispatching them to serve as deadly proxies to wager hidden war against more powerful enemies which are very often, by the way, democracies. These regimes mount a world wide propaganda campaign to legitimize terror, besmirching its victims, exculpating its practitioners, as we witnessed in this farcical spectacle in Durban the other week. I think, that to see Iran, Libya and Syria call the U.S. and Israel racist countries that abuse human rights, I think even Orwell could not have imagined such a grotesque cynicism.

Take away all the state support and the entire scaffolding of international terrorism will collapse into the dust. The international terrorist network is thus based on regimes: on Iraq, on Iran, on Syria, on Taliban Afghanistan, Yasser Arafat’s Palestinian authority, and several other Arab regimes such as the Sudan. These regimes are the ones that harbor the terrorist groups. Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, Hizbullah and others in Syrian controlled Lebanon, Hamas Islamic Jihad, and the recently mobilized Fatah and Tanzim factions in the Palestinian territories, and sundry other terror organizations based in such capitals as Damascus, Baghdad, and Khartoum.

These terrorist states and terror organizations together constitute a terror network whose constituent parts support each other operationally as well as politically. For example, the Palestinian groups cooperate closely with Hizbullah which, in turn, links them to Iran and Syria and to bin Laden. These offshoots of terror also have affiliates in other states that have not yet uprooted their presence, such as Egypt, Yemen, Saudi Arabia. Now the question is: how did this come about, how did this terror network come into being?

The growth of this terror network is the result of several crucial developments in the last two decades. The chief among them is the Khomeini revolution which established a clerical Islamic state in Iran. This created a sovereign spiritual base for formatting a strident Islamic militancy, a militancy that was often back by terror. Equally important was the victory in the Afghan war, of the international Mujaheddin brotherhood. I suppose that the only way I can compare it is to say that the international Mujaheddin is to Islam what the international brigade was for international communism in the Spanish civil war.

It created an international band of zealots. In this case their ranks include Osama bin Laden who saw their victory over the Soviet Union as providential proof of the innate superiority of faithful Muslims over the weak infidel powers. They believe that even the superior weapons of a superpower could not withstand their superior will. To this should be added Saddam Hussein’s escape from destruction at the end of the Gulf war. His dismissal of U.N. monitors and his growing confidence that he can soon develop unconventional weapons to match those of the west.

Finally, the creation of Yasser Arafat’s terror enclave centered in Gaza gave a safe haven to militant Islamic terrorist groups such as Islamic Jihad and Hamas. Like their Mujaheddin cousins, they and their Fatah colleagues, drew inspiration from Israel’s hasty withdrawal from Lebanon, glorified as a great Muslim victory by the Syrian backed Hizbullah.

[Read on …]

From another source:

Ehud Barak and Richard Perle appeared on a BBC program where they outlined what amounted to a neocon war plan of quick, successive offensives against all of Israel’s enemies. Barak pointed fingers at Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad as “rogue actors” that need to be dealt with. Richard Perle emphasized the need to deal with the “states that sponsor terrorism,” and not just disparate groups of armed rebels who reside in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan. The following day Benjamin Netanyahu added the Palestinian Authority to the list of enemies.

Nine days after the attacks Netanyahu expanded his list of foes that would be prime targets in the Zionist-devised “war on terror.” At a speech before the US House of Representatives’ Government Reform Committee on September 20, Netanyahu suggested that US vengeance in the face of 9/11 terrorism should be visited upon “Iran, Iraq, Syria, Taliban Afghanistan, Yasser Arafat’s Palestinian Authority, and several other Arab regimes, such as the Sudan.” Netanyahu also named “Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, Hizbullah and others in Syrian-controlled Lebanon, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the recently mobilized Fatah and Tanzim factions in the Palestinian territories, and sundry other terror organizations based in such capitals as Damascus, Baghdad, and Khartoum” as legitimate targets. Netanyahu’s diatribe was no less than a declaration of war against the entire Arab/Muslim world with few exceptions.

So the United States have been led hand-in-hand by Israel and the neocon fifth colonne into an eternal war on terror … from 9/11 into Afghanistan, Northern Pakistan, Balochistan and Iraq. The Obama administration added Libya and Syria for good measure. Saudi Arabia just recently focused on bombing raids on Yemen which has no means to defend itself. The role played by Erdogan in Turkey to support foreign fighters in Northern Syria with arms, logistics and intelligence support completes the enormous quagmire of the Middle East region.

On which nation does the United States and Israel put the blame until the very present day: IRAN. Great job done by Israel’s lobby groups and fortune on Capitol Hill in Washington DC … the perpetual revolving door of U.S. representatives, capitalism, corporations and self-interest of a few political figures in leadership position.

Comment: Israel’s American nightmare An Obama Successor As President | Jerusalem Post |

If the American left remains ascendant, then Israel will have to prepare itself for changes no less portentous than an Iranian bomb.

For my generation, a possible estrangement between Israel and the Democrats is an emotional issue. The Democratic Party was what French Socialists called the “vieux maison,” the old home. I still remember our inconsolable classroom after the 1968 elections and the sympathetic instructor explaining that Republican Richard Nixon’s defeat of Hubert Humphrey the Democrat was not the end of the world.

In 1972, I voted for Nixon because his Democratic opponent George McGovern’s convention cry of “come home America” signaled at least a temporary retreat from involvement in world affairs with obvious implications for Israel. I still do not regret that choice, and I dread thinking what could have happened if George McGovern – a far more decent person than Nixon – had been in the White House during the 1973 Yom Kippur War and whether the vital American aid Nixon authorized for Israel would have been forthcoming.

…
Across the pond, Hillary Rodham Clinton is tacking increasingly left to avoid being embarrassed by liberal Senator Bernie Sanders on what once seemed to be a sure road to a Democratic coronation. With the Iran agreement we appear to have reached another McGovern moment.

Moreover, if the American left regards political power as an entitlement, it will keep asking us for additional signs of contrition. Beinart himself recently provided an example when he chastised Clinton for not displaying sufficient empathy with Palestinian grievances and tying her support of the two-state solution purely to the need to assure a Jewish majority.

Bottom line: If the prediction of permanent ascendancy of the American left is accurate, then Israel will have to prepare itself for changes no less portentous than an Iranian bomb.

Dennis Ross Moves to NSC ¶ A Hawk Within? – July 2009