German Chancellor Merkel’s Party Labels BDS Anti-Semitic

December 10, 2016 ZionistReport 0Comment

A sick agenda this woman is allowing to play out in Germany and Europe: She condones massive open door migration to Europe, lies to her electorate about curtailing the veil in order to get re-elected, clamps down of free speech, and now labels BDS anti-Semitic.

Any thinking person can see through her Cultural Marxist agenda — and it won’t be stopping anytime soon as more than 50% Germany seems to support her.

Merkel Jew
We know where Merkel’s loyalty lies

“German Chancellor Merkel’s Party Labels BDS Anti-Semitic,” Source:

Germany’s Christian Democratic Union party on Wednesday passed a resolution opposing the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement because the anti-Israel action is antisemitic.

“Who today under the flag of the BDS movement calls to boycott Israeli goods and services speaks the same language in which people were called to not buy from Jews. That is nothing other than coarse antisemitism,” the CDU said.

The CDU likened BDS to the National Socialists who boycotted Jews in the 1930s. BDS dresses up antisemitism in the “new clothes of the 21st century” as anti-Zionism, the party said.

“The German CDU declares with this motion its disapproval and rejection of every form of BDS activity and condemns these activities as antisemitic. The CDU will decisively oppose every hostile action that Israel faces. The CDU professes its deep friendship toward Israel and continues to work toward a peaceful solution to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians,” the resolution read.

Uwe Becker, the chairman of the CDU branch in Frankfurt, which formulated the resolution and submitted it at the CDU conference, said he was pleased with the result.

Chancellor Angela Merkel was nominated at the convention to run as the party’s candidate in next year’s federal election. The CDU’s resolution appears to be the first German party motion to reject BDS and classify the anti-Israel movement as antisemitic.

Last week, Israel’s ambassador to Germany criticized BDS activities in the state of Lower Saxony.

Writing in the Hannoversche Allgemeine Zeitung daily, Yakov Hadas-Handelsman said: “In Oldenburg a teacher agitates against Israel in an official way; in a magazine of the GEW labor union [the Education and Science Workers Union]. This teacher publicly spreads the proposal to relocate Israel to Baden-Württemberg” in southeastern Germany, wrote Hadas-Handelsman.

The ambassador cited additional outbreaks of contemporary antisemitism in Lower Saxony and asked: “What is wrong in Lower Saxony?”

The administration of the Social Democratic Gov. Stephan Weil in Lower Saxony has been embroiled in state-wide antisemitism scandals since July. Critics say Weil and his government fail to understand new forms of Jew-hatred.

Weil refused to meet with the Berlin office of the American Jewish Committee to find ways to blunt the activities of modern antisemitism in his state.

European Jewish leaders honour German Chancellor Angela Merkel with Jakobits Prize

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has been given the Lord Jakobits Prize for European Jewry, and during an acceptance speech she said her government was a strong supporter of Israel and a two-state solution to the Mideast peace process.

Germany: Anti-Defamation League awards Merkel human rights prize

German Chancellor Angela Merkel was awarded the 2014 Joseph Prize for Human Rights by the US-based anti-semitic NGO, Anti-Defamation League (ADL), in Berlin on Wednesday. Recipients of the Joseph Prize include former US President George Bush, former South African President F.W. de Klerk and former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir.

ADL National Director Abraham Foxman stated that the prize honours Merkel’s “commitment” to human rights, signified, he said, by her public criticism of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Merkel agreed that “the mission to assert human rights does not end at our countries’ borders.”

Among the ADL delegation, were also Israeli Ambassador to Germany, Yakov Hadas-Handelsman, and Head of the Jewish Association of Berlin, Dr. Gideon Joffe. The prize-giving ceremony took place at the Federal Chancellery.

Do Jewish Republicans regret calling Obama a ‘Jew-hater’ yet?


They’re feeling the full force of anti-Semitic hatred from the Trump camp now. But Jewish Republicans abused and devalued the anti-Semitism charge in their constant attacks against the Obama White House.

ed note–As we have said here often, don’t fall into the trap of using superficial and circumstantial evidence such as Trump’s having spoken at AIPAC and a few other noises he’s made as ‘proof’ that he is owned by the Jews. Obviously, as they make clear on a daily basis in various OpEds including this one, there is very deep division/mistrust within Mundus Judaicus as to just what Trump will do vis a vis the entire Jewish state program.

Benjy Cannon, Haaretz

How are American Jews responding to Donald Trump’s campaign dog-whistling to his nakedly racist and anti-Semitic supporters? Largely Democrats, most embrace progressive values and have already rejected him out of hand. But the interesting reactions aren’t coming out of the Jewish left, they’re coming out of the Jewish right. And their divided response to Trump offers an important lesson to Jews in America about fighting anti-Semitism.

As with the rest of the GOP, Republican Jews are not united against Trump. Much of the Republican Jewish “intelligentsia” — Bill Kristol, Bret Stephens and Yuval Levin, for example — adamantly oppose Trump.

But more hardline Jewish Republicans, like Pam Geller, David Horowitz, and most prominently, Sheldon Adelson (who has reportedly pledged upwards of $100 million to support Trump) have lined up behind him. The Republican Jewish Coalition (which is primarily backed by Adelson) issued a fairly evasive statement congratulating Trump on becoming the Republican nominee.

These differing opinions were guaranteed to lead to infighting, and sure enough, writing in Breitbart, David Horowitz sent a shot across the bows. It did not disappoint. In a piece titled “Bill Kristol: Republican Spoiler, Renegade Jew,” Horowitz accused Kristol — who is leading the campaign to push a third-party conservative candidate to challenge Trump — of betraying Jewish values. His argument boiled down this: Only the Republican party is good for the Jews, and a third party candidate will make a Republican candidate less likely, so opposing Trump is the same as betraying American Jewry.

Horowitz’s piece was roundly condemned by the many of the same Republican Jews who oppose Trump. The most instructive and troubling of these responses came from another far-right pundit: Ben Shapiro, the former Editor-at-large at Breitbart.

Shapiro had been something of a protégé of Horowitz. For a while, he ran the right-wing site TruthRevolt, which is a project of the David Horowitz Freedom Center. Shapiro, a self-identified Orthodox Jew, has never been a Trump fan, and in his takedown of Horowitz’s piece he called it “garbage.” He argues that Horowitz — as a secular Jew — has abandoned Jewish teachings and so is not “in a position of strength” to call anyone a “renegade Jew.” Shapiro didn’t think Horowitz was being anti-Semitic. Rather, he argued that Horowitz’s Jewish practice precluded him from accurately speaking in terms of “Jewish interests.”

Since then, Shapiro has come under vicious attack from the pro-Trump right, and has himself been the target of virulent and disgusting anti-Semitism. It has been so bad that Shapiro wrote another piece grappling with the anti-Semitism emanating from the right — his political home. Shapiro previously believed anti-Semitism in the U.S. was “almost entirely a product of the political left”, but since the pro-Trump attacks on him including greeting “the birth of my second child by calling for me, my wife, and two children to be thrown into a gas chamber” he recognizes that, “There is a significant core of Trump support that not only traffics in anti-Semitism but celebrates it — and god-worships Trump as the leader of an anti-Jewish movement.”

So how is it that the leading lights of the Jewish right are actually having a fierce debate over whether it is in the interests of American Jews to support a campaign that peddles in anti-Semitism? Shapiro himself might actually have the answer.

There is a trend on the Jewish right, especially the far-right, to cast ideological opponents as “Jew-haters” or “anti-Semites.” Softer critics merely charge them with being “anti-Israel.” Ben Shapiro has repeatedly referred to the “Jew-hating Obama Administration” in his articles about U.S. foreign policy. He starred in a video about “why Jews vote leftist,” in which he argued that American Jews who “back leftism are betraying Torah Judaism.” In many ways, these arguments are similar to Horowitz’s — Judaism means x, and you’re doing y, so if you don’t do x you are betraying Judaism.

The problem is that, Shapiro, and much of the Jewish far-right, habitually conflate criticism of Israel, abandonment of “traditional values” and diplomacy-driven foreign policy (not least on Iran) with “Jew-hatred.” In this worldview, where people stand on a host of issues (Israel in particular), is largely a function of the degree of their anti-Semitism.

It’s clear how these habits of thinking lead to wrong-headed assessments of shared interests. The habit of some on the right to make constant, unfounded allusions to “Jew-hatred” has produced a group of people who think criticizing settlements is anti-Semitic but who ignore their candidate’s indifference to white nationalists. These pro-Trump Republican Jews who equate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism have now found themselves in bed with real anti-Semites. And as the Trump fiasco demonstrates, that makes presenting a unified front against anti-Semitism — and the broader racism in the Trump campaign — far harder.

To be clear, these writers and activists are outside of the mainstream of even politically conservative Jewry. But they have enormous reach. Breitbart is the highest ranked “mainstream” right-wing publication on Alexa. In 2012, Adelson was the single largest political donor. And while the more centrist Republican #NeverTrumpers might not call Obama a “Jew-hater,” they are no strangers to loose accusations of anti-Semitism. Moreover, if they have an issue with how Adelson and Horowitz operate, I haven’t seen any pushback.

The current spat over Trump — with some Republican Jews recognizing his anti-Semitism, and others supporting his campaign in the name of Judaism, is a predictable consequence of constantly charging your enemies with anti-Semitism. This group of people have so denigrated the political discourse in their circles that they’ve been left floundering in the face of a genuinely anti-Semitic movement in the United States.

That scares me.

The vocal Jewish left and center will oppose Trump for all kinds of reasons. But the Jewish right is far more divided. After years of equating ideological disagreement with animus towards Israel and the Jews that is almost inevitable. Constant charges of anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism have so cheapened the terms that Jewish pro-Trumpers cannot see it staring them in the face.

I hope there’s no “next time” American Jews have to wrestle with this quandary. But if there is — and for the rest of this election cycle — we should stop throwing around charges of anti-Semitism and anti-Israelism so blithely. Doing so has left the Jewish right divided to the forces driving Trump’s campaign. With all that’s at stake this November, that’s not something we can afford.

Jewish Illusions of Kosher Nationalism

Renegade Editor’s Note: this article originally appeared as a comment by Whenever The Whether on “Lobbying and the Arms Trade“. It has been edited for readability.

2 Jewish illusions that I’d like to address

The fake kosher nationalists (TRS/DailyStormer and all the associated once jew-wise outlets online) have all decided to play along with ZOG’s fake news deception, reacting to every Mossad false flag or jewish MSM narrative, playing along with the neo-con agenda.

Apparently fighting the wrong war, against the enemies of jewry rather than the jews themselves, is a step in the right direction. Presumably the idea is once the European people have finished fighting an unwinnable ‘war against islam’ the even further depleted numbers of whites can turn then their attentions to opposing ZOG. This is a rather odd development in the awakening-to-jewish-tyranny movement.

The false claim #1 – Trump has banned muslims

This is a step in the (((right))) direction they claim.

Trump has done no such thing; he has merely extended a pre-existing bill that Obama first initiated in 2015 under zionist command. The nations mentioned in the bill are all actively fighting against the ZOG construct ISIS. They are all the ME nations resisting jewish tyranny, so they are technically on our side. The ‘islamic’ nations not included in the ban are all the countries known to be assisting the isreali Mossad mercenary proxy jewhadists (ISIS/Al Qaeda/DAESH etc).

The left call Trump Hitler. The alt-right kosher clowns pretending to be goys go along with this, so the followers in the infiltrated movements actually believe Trump is Hitler too.

There is no muslim ban, but even so, a war against isreal’s enemies isn’t a step in the right direction. It’s a continuation of zionist control of the Western mind, body and soul, leading to our extinction.

The false claim #2 – Trump has banned foreign lobbyists

This one is simple to explain.

How does banning foreign lobbyists square up with the fact Trump has installed the following into his personal team? David Friedman, Jared Kushner, Jason Greenblatt, Steven Mnuchin, Stephen Miller, Carl Icahn, Gary Cohn, Boris Epshteyn, David Shulkin, Reed Cordish, Avrahm Berkowitz, Kissenger. etc. The list goes on far further than the few I mention here.

Lobbyists aren’t needed if your entire personnel is comprised of dual nationality jewish isreali citizens, who are all geared for misdirecting America’s international and domestic policies to serve isreali interests. Then of course there are the big pharma and Military Industrial Complex demons Trump has employed.

So in the brainwashed mind of the self-proclaimed red-pilled new-wave generation of ‘resistance’ to international jewry the alt-right has aligned with every one of isreal’s interests. This means they think trying to kick off WWIII in the jewish instigated clash of civilisations is a step in their direction, however this is diametrically opposed to national socialist/mankind’s interests.

I’m starting to wonder whether we have already reached our peak of who can be woken up back in 2012, after 9/11 and the internet allowed the awakening to kick off, with earnest investigation into the litany of jewish crimes. Since 2012 the movement hasn’t just gone backwards, but been derailed completely into serving ZOG’s primary key interests.

If you call yourself red-pilled and claim allying with neo-cons is a step in the right direction, you are my enemy. I see you the same as Kissinger, Netanyahu and Soros.




Organized Jewry is frothing at the mouth at Donald Trump’s faux pas on “Holocaust memorial day.”

The political “misstep”? Equating the suffering of all innocent people in World War II with the sufferink of Jews, which we all are supposed to know is different because Jews are a superior race.

This is the first time in history the President of the United States has made no mention of Jews, anti-Semitism, or the science fiction Zionist folklore about ovens and gas chambers so prominent in (((Hollywood))) narratives.

The Six Million meme Jews require their agents to constantly repeat through amplifiers in order to make the lie stick was also avoided. Without constant repetition, the myth and meme begins to decompose.

USA Today:

In a departure from predecessors on both sides of the political aisle, President Trump’s statement Friday marking International Holocaust Remembrance Day did not mention the deaths of six million Jews — a lapse the head of the Anti-Defamation League called “puzzling and troubling.”

In the three-paragraph statement Friday, Trump said: “It is with a heavy heart and somber mind that we remember and honor the victims, survivors, heroes of the Holocaust. It is impossible to fully fathom the depravity and horror inflicted on innocent people by Nazi terror.”

“Yet, we know that in the darkest hours of humanity, light shines the brightest.‎ As we remember those who died, we are deeply grateful to those who risked their lives to save the innocent,” he continued, again referring only to “the innocent.”

“In the name of the perished, I pledge to do everything in my power throughout my Presidency, and my life, to ensure that the forces of evil never again defeat the powers of good,” he concluded. “Together, we will make love and tolerance prevalent throughout the world.”

Greenblatt noted that both Republican and Democratic presidents — including all of Obama’s statements on the occasion — always clearly highlighted the centrality of the genocide of the Jewish people on International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

International Holocaust Remembrance Day was established by the United Nations in 2005 to commemorate the deaths of the six million Jews as well as an estimated two million Roma and thousands of disabled and gay people at the hands of the Nazis.

A separate Holocaust Remembrance Day was established by Israel in the 1950s to mark the Jewish losses in particular, which are also traditionally marked by a presidential proclamation.

Trump’s statement is obviously not pro-Nazi, but he is still exceeding expectations in pushing back against Jewish supremacy. The vast majority of people in America, who are generally ignorant regarding the truth of World War II, will see nothing wrong with Trump’s statement, but the kneejerk Jewish reaction exposes them once again.

Mr Greenblatt, unlike his more Machiavellian and clever predecessor Abe Foxman, is not long for his chairmanship at the ADL if he continues to make drastic high-profile strategic errors and bringing attention to transparent Jewish moral corruption.

The pin holes Trump is piercing in the Jewish helium balloon is causing them to behave recklessly, with Trump setting off all their extraordinarily neurotic triggers. Brace for the ride, because there’s probably a lot more to come.

Read it and weep, Tay-Sachoberg.





President Donald Trump has called out the cucked losers John McCain and Lindsey Graham for always looking at ways to start World War III. This after they released a retarded statement criticizing his immigration bans.

He’s 100 percent correct to call them out for this. Russia is a natural ally to help clean up the Middle East yet they continue to act like Vladimir Putin is the most evil man alive. There’s absolutely no reason for the United States to be meddling in Eastern Europe. Especially in countries that used to be part of the Soviet bloc. Our country has enough problems as is.

It is also ridiculous for them to say that we shouldn’t secure our borders and limit immigration. If McCain and Graham were really serious about national security this is the first place they’d focus in on. Preventing bad people from entering the country at the border should be the primary focus of any national security strategy. What is happening on the other side of the world is secondary.


The joint statement of former presidential candidates John McCain & Lindsey Graham is wrong – they are sadly weak on immigration. The two…

…Senators should focus their energies on ISIS, illegal immigration and border security instead of always looking to start World War III.




It was thought that after having been called a racist for his plan to ban Moslems from entering the United States, Donald Trump would have apologized, visited the Holocaust Museum and then resigned from the Presidency.

However, he didn’t do that.

Instead on Twitter this morning, he doubled down.

Our country needs strong borders and extreme vetting, NOW. Look what is happening all over Europe and, indeed, the world – a horrible mess!

Also – and perhaps even more importantly – on Twitter this morning, he called the New York Times “fake news.”

Somebody with aptitude and conviction should buy the FAKE NEWS and failing @nytimes and either run it correctly or let it fold with dignity!

One would think he would also need to resign for that tweet, as it is both an attack on freedoms and pure anti-Semitism.

By the way, if you were wondering what’s going on with the @POTUS Twitter account – not too much. It’s just official statements and retweets from Trump’s personal account.

But that doesn’t really matter, because @POTUS only has 14.5 million followers, while @realDonaldTrump has 22.7 million followers.

Still though.

It wasn’t until I saw him on the @POTUS twitter account that it sunk in that he is actually President of the United States of America.





Jews who were born in one of seven countries now blacklisted by Trump could face problems if trying to travel to U.S., says New York immigration lawyer Michael Wildes, who is advising some of his clients to stay put.

ed note–in other words, Jews posing as Arabs and working for Mossad in orchestrating false flag terrorism against the US would be banned?

Is some of this beginning to make more sense now?




Donald Trump was the first presidential candidate I ever supported who actually won, and his election was the happiest day of my professional life. He warned us that we will have to get used to winning, and now…


Ambassador Victoria Nuland assumed her position as Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs on September 18, 2013. As Assistant Secretary she is …

Did you click on the link above? It says:


That is the happiest I have ever been to see a broken link. She has been fired by Donald Trump. Listeners to the David Duke show know that for more than three years I never missed an opportunity to point out that Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland was the driving force in the Obama Administration for an aggressive policy towards Russia that aimed at regime change in Moscow and was more than willing to risk World War III to do so. In furtherance of that aim, she engineered the coup d’etat in Ukraine that replaced the constitutionally elected President with what amounts to a Jewish junta.

(Click here for a list of articles we posted about her)

And now she’s gone. While she ought to be in prison for all the lives she snuffed out in the civil war in Ukraine that she provoked, she will no doubt land a very prestigious job in a Jewish-run think or even at a university, despite her lack of academic credentials. The tribe still calls the shots at the universities. She will be a mainstay on network television as a foreign policy expert critiquing President Trump’s follies. But at least she won’t be secretary of state, which was likely what she would have been if Hillary had won the election.

Nuland was kicked out along with the rest of the State Department leadership. I cannot verify the accuracy of this chart, but it has been circulating on the internet.

This looks like “draining the swamp.” Still, I suppose I shouldn’t get too used to winning. The bulk of the replacements are bound to come from the same swamp of the foreign policy establishment, namely think tanks, universities, and the bureaucracy itself. This is all Zionist occupied territory. If we lived in a self-governing country, someone like myself with credentials and experience and a track record of being right and supporting the new president and his policy priorities would stand a good chance of being brought into the administration. However, anyone who has pointed out the massive damage caused to our society by Jewish power is persona non grata in polite company.



Sagging Liar Theresa May Says British Dual Nationals will Not be Affected by Moslem Ban

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
January 31, 2017

The White House and DHS have made it explicitly clear that anyone holding an Islamic passport from one of the 7 first-round banned countries is being totally cockblocked.

It doesn’t matter if they have a Cuck Island passport or not. If they can be identified as being nationals of one of the 7 banned countries, they are out.

Stop lying Theresa, you sagging old childless slut.


Theresa May’s government issued a statement on Monday afternoon insisting British citizens with dual nationality will not be affected by Donald Trump’s US travel ban.

According to the Guardian, the PM’s deputy spokeswoman said the government was confident in the clarification secured by Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson on Sunday.

This is a despite a statement issued on Monday by the US embassy in London claiming the opposite.

In an ‘urgent notice’ published on the embassy’s website on Monday morning, the US government said no visas would be issued to any dual nationals of countries listed under the so-called ‘Muslim ban.’

The Foreign Office had issued a statement late on Sunday night in which it claimed UK nationals traveling from the UK would not be affected by the “extreme vetting” security checks in place, even if they were born in one of the seven barred nations or hold dual nationality.

The statement followed talks between Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, Home Secretary Amber Rudd and US officials.

On Monday morning, the US embassy warned persons with dual nationality of the barred nations and any other nation not to apply for visas.

“Per US Presidential Executive Order signed on January 27, 2017, visa issuance to aliens from the countries of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen has been suspended effective immediately until further notification.

“If you are a national, or dual national, of one of these countries, please do not schedule a visa appointment or pay any visa fees at this time.

“If you already have an appointment scheduled, please DO NOT ATTEND your appointment as we will not be able to proceed with your visa interview. Please note that certain travel for official governmental purposes, related to official business at or on behalf of designated international organizations, on behalf of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or by certain officials is not subject to this suspension.”

The British government is under pressure to condemn Trump’s 90-day travel ban, which prevents people from the Muslim-majority nations of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen from entering the US.

A petition on the UK Parliament’s website calling for Trump to be banned from the UK ahead a planned state visit in the spring has reached over one million signatures.

The Foreign Office issued a statement late Sunday night which sought to clarify how the new travel regulations would affect UK citizens. It followed talks between Johnson, Home Secretary Amber Rudd, and US officials.

According to the statement, UK nationals traveling from the UK will not be affected by the “extreme vetting” security checks in place, even if they were born in one of the seven barred nations or hold dual nationality.

Johnson, who condemned Trump’s travel ban on Twitter on Sunday, will now face questions from MPs in the House of Commons.

“Whatever happens, we will be demanding to know why the Canadian government was able to provide assurance to its nationals on Saturday evening that they would be unaffected by the ban, at the same time that No 10 was only just getting round to looking into [its] implications,” a Labour Party source told the Guardian.

If you faggots hate our country so much, how about this – you keep the hell out of it.

Moslems would only come to America for two reasons:

Terrorism, and the much more popular economic exploitation.

There is no other reason.

They don’t belong here and we don’t want them here and they have to go back.

Boris Johnson should keep his fat mouth shut.

Theresa should resign immediately and turn over control of Britain to Nigel Farage.

George Galloway on Why He Still Backs Brexit

Opinion > Interviews

By: Joe Emersberger

  • George Galloway is a British politician and activist who has long campaigned against British and western imperialism. | Photo: Reuters

Published 27 January 2017

Rejecting the EU is the “spirit of our” age, says the British politician and decades-long activist.

Last June, voters in the United Kingdom were asked, in a referendum, if they wanted to remain part of the European Union or leave the bloc, now commonly referred to as “Brexit.”

What 5 Leading Leftists Think About the UK Leaving the EU

The Brexit side prevailed by a small margin and the U.K. parliament is expected to soon vote to formally start the process of negotiating Brexit with the EU. George Galloway, a former Labour party MP and long-time progressive activist, answered some questions of mine about Brexit.

Joe Emersberger: UK progressives were generally horrified by the win for the Brexit side because there were certainly racist and xenophobic forces emboldened by it. You, however, made a left-wing case for Brexit.  Could you outline what that was?

George Galloway: I reject your premise. Britain’s communists, Trotskyists and left-wing trades unionists campaigned for a Leave vote as did the left’s only daily newspaper the Morning Star.

I think you mean liberal rather than progressive.

It is true that some who might have preferred to do otherwise were by circumstances obliged to argue for a Remain vote. People like Jeremy Corbyn with whom I opposed the EU in the British parliament for nearly 30 years, and some of the major union leaders.

Most importantly the British working class voted leave. The vast majority of constituencies with Labour MPs voted Leave. The majority of the low paid voted leave.

There is nothing progressive about the EU as we said in 1975 in our “No” vote campaign under the leadership of Tony Benn, the greatest progressive leader we’ve ever had in Britain.

The EU has nothing to do with internationalism nor with anti-racism as those suffering the lash of racism and islamophobia in mainland Europe know. And those sinking in the Mediterranean trying and failing to enter Fortress Europe know.

It is nothing to do with peace either, as the people of Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Iraq, Libya Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Mali and others know. The EU is the political wing of NATO.

It has nothing to do with workers’ rights and economic justice, either, as the people of Greece, Spain, Portugal, and Ireland know. The EU is an anti-democratic bankers ramp whose neo-liberal austerity agenda has beggared Europe whilst imposing as economic orthodoxy the “principles” of globalization and the strangling of the idea of democratic control by people and peoples of their own lives.

It is being rejected everywhere in Europe and will soon be gone. People will not accept being ruled by those they did not elect and cannot remove. This is the spirit of our age.

Emersberger: Wasn’t racism partly what drove a backlash against “freedom of movement” for workers with the EU?

Galloway: Racism existed before the EU and within and without it. It must be fought by all right thinking people whatever their views on the EU.

The first and greatest victims of the so-called “freedom of movement” EU rules were Britain’s Black and Asian workers, who have been disproportionately represented in the ranks of the poorly paid, poorly housed, unemployed and under-employed.

The increase in the labour supply by employers bringing in very low paid workers from east and Central Europe, mainly white by the way, put them out of work or depressed their wages and conditions first of all.

The pressure on pitifully poor public services and on rents in the private sector after decades of under-investment by successive British governments was all too obviously increased by so called freedom of movement. At least to the poor and other working class British people.

Emersberger: Will leaving the EU, by itself, solve those problems?

Galloway: EU rules and indeed constitutions make impossible, even illegal, the kind of changes Britain needs. Public ownership of vital services and industries, state intervention in the economy, protection of strategic activity like steel production, are all forbidden by the neo-liberal articles of the EU.

As a socialist, I believe in a planned economy, not the laissez-faire of capitalism.

Trump and May Support for Brexit, NATO

It was, therefore, an article of faith for me to oppose the EU.

The leaving of the EU is a necessary but not sufficient condition for advance for Britain and it’s working class. In other words, leaving does not guarantee that advance. Staying precluded that advance.

If the EU was a progressive cause then it would not have been supported by Big Capital in the City of London, by almost all of British capitalism, by the BBC and Whitehall, by Britain’s mainstream political class, by most of the media. Or by Tony Blair.

I am European and I believe in Europe and its peoples. But I oppose the EU for the reasons above.

For the avoidance of doubt; I am a child of Irish immigrants, I am the father of two Arab and two Indonesian children, my wife is Dutch-Indonesian. I have represented more Black and minority ethnic people, more immigrants in parliament than any other MP in the history of Britain, having been for nearly 30 years the MP for Glasgow, London’s East End and the huge immigrant population of Bradford. Nobody could be more internationalist, less nationalist, more anti-racist than me.


Europe United Kingdom Politics United States Refugee & immigrant rights

‘Britain to blame for Israeli-Palestinian conflict’ – George Galloway

Pro-Palestinian activists held banners and denounced Israeli aggression, following violent clashes and attacks by Israel Defense Forces on Palestinian civilians. According to former MP and current Respect Party leader George Galloway, “Britain is the cause of all this disaste

Tulsi Gabbard e00b4

According to the source, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard who had last week said that she met with Syrian President Bashar Assad during a recent trip to the war-torn country, stressed during the meeting that “affairs are going on in a way that an unprecedented opening is seen in the relations between the two sides in different fields”.

Referring to three existing scenarios on Syria, she said that the first option is continued war which doesn’t benefit any sides and the US administration will likely oppose it; the second option is the victory of dissidents which is opposed by Trump and he even dismisses interactions with them; the third option is Assad’s continued ruling over Syria as the best person to manage the country provided that certain considerations will receive attention in the formation of the government, the Syrian source said.

According to the source, Gabbard has indirectly spoken about a US plan to pave the ground for Trump’s showoff by annihilation of the ISIS in Raqqa like what was done by former US President Barack Obama.

“Raqqa city is a political card important for the world since it is considered as the ISIS’s first base; meantime, ending the war is Raqqa militarily is easy since there are no tunnels and tall buildings in there which facilitates any military measure to annihilate terrorism,” the Syrian diplomatic source said.

Backing from a weeklong trip to Syria defended her meeting with the war-torn country’s president, saying there’s no possibility of a viable peace agreement unless Bashar Assad is part of the conversation.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii said she originally had no intention of sitting down with Assad, according to a statement issued by her office detailing her travels. But she changed her mind when the opportunity arose.

“I think we should be ready to meet with anyone if there’s a chance it can help bring about an end to this war, which is causing the Syrian people so much suffering,” Gabbard said.

Gabbard said that the U.S. has “waged wars of regime change” in Iraq, Libya and Syria. Yet each has resulted “in unimaginable suffering, devastating loss of life, and the strengthening of groups like al-Qaeda” and the Islamic State group, she said.

“My visit to Syria has made it abundantly clear,” Gabbard said. “Our counterproductive regime change war does not serve America’s interest, and it certainly isn’t in the interest of the Syrian people.”

*(Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard visiting a school in Jibreen, Syria. Image Courtesy of Facebook).

Ecuador’s Correa Calls for Latin American Unity Against Trump

  • Rafael Correa speaks to Spanish radio station Cadena Ser in Madrid, Spain, Jan. 30, 2017.

    Rafael Correa speaks to Spanish radio station Cadena Ser in Madrid, Spain, Jan. 30, 2017. | Photo: Presidencia Ecuador

Published 30 January 2017
President Rafael Correa said the region needs to stand together to fight discrimination and human rights violations.

Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa said Monday that Latin America needs to respond with a strong front and united speech against the anti-immigration measures of U.S. President Donald Trump.

Ecuador Creates Plan to Protect Its Migrants Living in US

Correa said there needs to be “a regional stand to defend the main type of mobility, which is human mobility, the defense of human rights, reminding the United States that they have been a country of migrants,” said Correa in an interview with Spain’s Cadena Ser.

The president said that the region is “still missing a consolidated and head-on speech to respond to policies” created by Trump.

Correa is in the midst of his last international tour before ending his presidential term in May. Ecuadoreans will choose a new president on Feb. 19, as well as members of the National Assembly.

Correa’s former vice president, Lenin Moreno, is leading the presidential race with more than 40 percent of the votes, according to recent polls.

Ecuador Household Workers Fight for Rights, Against Tax Havens

“It is impressive what is happening, there will be hard times ahead,” said Correa, referring to Trump’s policies since his arrival in the White House, including the ban on travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries and the construction of a border wall with Mexico.

Correa said that “there are also opportunities” in the recent protests against Trump’s decrees in the U.S. that “haven’t been seen since the Vietnam War or the civil rights struggle.”

Correa signed Saturday a Human Mobility Law that guarantees the rights of migrants and ensures that nobody will be dubbed or treated as “illegal” based solely on their immigration status.

According to the government, there are currently about 200,000 Ecuadoreans who are in an irregular situation in the United States.


Hundreds of Refugees Enter US Despite Trump’s ‘Muslim Ban’

  • Dozens of pro-immigration demonstrators cheer and hold signs as international passengers arrive at Dulles International Airport.

    Dozens of pro-immigration demonstrators cheer and hold signs as international passengers arrive at Dulles International Airport. | Photo: Reuters

Published 31 January 2017 (4 hours 44 minutes ago)
Though Trump and team have been blasted in the media for the apparently arbitrary list, the banned nations had been on the radar of the Obama administration.

Amid massive protests denouncing U.S. President Donald Trump’s executive order banning all refugees and people hailing from seven Muslim-majority countries, the government has granted waivers to 872 refugees that it will let into the U.S.

The passengers are considered “in transit,” a source from the Department of Homeland Security speaking under the condition of anonymity told Reuters, meaning they had already been cleared for resettlement before Trump’s Jan. 27 executive order went into effect.

Lawyers Across the US Volunteer to Fight Trump’s ‘Muslim Ban’

The document did not specify what countries the refugees came from.

Nevertheless, since Trump’s decision, hundreds of non-refugee visitors from the banned countries – which include Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen – have either been detained, deported or, in some cases, blocked from boarding flights entering the U.S.

This included 394 legal permanent U.S. residents who, despite having valid green cards, were pulled aside for extra questioning when entering the country.

This, the DHS said on Sunday, was part of the additional scrutiny that even green card holders traveling would be subjected to under the Trump administration. People from the banned nations would also be allowed into the country based on a case-by-case basis, the DHS official told Reuters.

The 872 refugees to be admitted, however, would be screened using former President Barack Obama’s procedures, which was usually a two-year process including several interviews and background checks.

It is not yet clear whether the DHS will grant more waivers, according to the official speaking to Reuters.

5 Things You Need to Know About Trump’s Travel Ban

Trump’s so-called “Muslim ban” suspended the admission of all refugees into the U.S. for 120 days and barred travelers from the seven aforementioned majority Muslim countries, while allowing Christian refugees applying from the same countries to enter unquestioned.

Though Trump and team have been blasted in the media for supposedly coming up with this arbitrary list, the listed countries had been on the radar of the Obama administration.

The ban does not apply to the nationalities of those who carried out the 9/11 attacks, such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt.


Russian FM says Donald Trump’s ‘safe zones’ in Syria are possible

So long as done in compliance with international law, setting up so-called ‘safe zones’ for the internally displaced in Syria is not an issue.

The idea of setting up special areas, effective ‘quarantine zones’ for the displaced, needn’t imply a no-fly zone nor the bifurcation of Syrian territory. If it did – the proposals would not only be an impossibility, but would be very dangerous if someone tried to implement them. But as it were, Trump seems not to be clutching at those dangerous straws.

Today, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that such zones could be set up in Syria so long as done with the permission of the Syrian government and so long as they can be adequately monitored and policed by the UN. In other words, they would need to conform to the requirements of international law and that includes respecting Syrian sovereignty.

Lavrov seems to understand what many in America and Russia do not. For Trump, the Syria crisis is all about how to limit the outflow of individuals from Syria into other countries whether it be Turkey, European states or the US. Russia has set up many areas in Syria to provide temporary shelter, food and medical care to internally displaced Syrians. Trump’s proposals ought to be understood as an extension of this concept.

Lavrov went on to say:

If this is about the people who were forced to leave their homes by the conflict…getting their basic needs covered…then I think that the idea to create areas within Syria for those internally displaced could be discussed with the UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees and other organisations.”

When understood in this context, it would mean the US would simply be doing what Russia has done almost since the inception of Russian assistance in the conflict. Lavrov was, however, careful to warn that such zones must be purely humanitarian zones rather than places used to set up an ‘alternative’/illegal Syrian government. Addressing this matter, he said:

“There have been ideas of creating some areas where an alternative Syrian government could sit, and use those areas for regime change”.

Lavrov, who has always expressed a healthy skepticism about the rapidity with which the US might begin cooperating with Russia over Syria, has struck an optimistic tone after the lengthy phone call between Presidents Putin and Trump. It is still very early to say that anything concrete has been achieved by the phone call, but in the sense that things have not got worse, it is fair to say the possibility for things to get better remains open.


Netanyahu defends ‘wall’s a great idea’ tweet amid diplomatic row with Mexico

Netanyahu defends ‘wall’s a great idea’ tweet amid diplomatic row with Mexico
Benjamin Netanyahu has defended his ‘wall’ remarks, accusing the media of spinning it as support for Donald Trump’s plan to build a wall along the Mexican border. Unimpressed, Mexico’s FM called it an act of “aggression,” and has demanded an apology.

Benjamin Netanyahu inadvertently initiated a diplomatic row on Saturday after he tweeted what Mexico interpreted as open support of the US president’s plans to erect a wall to separate the two neighboring North American countries.

The story began unfolding during Donald Trump’s interview with Fox News on Thursday, when the new American leader hailed the Israeli wall with Egypt as an example of an effective security measure.

“The wall is necessary,” Trump said. “That’s not just politics, and yet it is good for the heart of the nation in a certain way, because people want protection and a wall protects. All you’ve got to do is ask Israel. They were having a total disaster coming across and they had a wall. It’s 99.9 percent stoppage.”

In reaction to Trump’s praise, Netanyahu tweeted on Saturday: “President Trump is right. I built a wall along Israel’s southern border. It stopped all illegal immigration. Great success. Great idea.”

President Trump is right. I built a wall along Israel’s southern border. It stopped all illegal immigration. Great success. Great idea 🇮🇱🇺🇸

Following the PM’s tweet, the Israeli Foreign Ministry immediately took to social media to ‘clarify’ that Netanyahu was simply referring to the 150-mile (240-kilometer) barrier along its border with Egypt which Israel say has been effective at stopping illegal migrants and traffickers crossing into the Jewish state.

“We do not express a position on US-Mexico relations,” Emmanuel Nahshon tweeted Saturday.

.@IsraeliPM referred to our specific security experience which we are willing to share.We do not express a position on US- Mexico relations

That explanation, however, did not stop the Mexican Foreign Minister from demanding an explanation and apology from Tel Aviv.

“The Foreign Ministry expressed to the government of Israel, via its ambassador in Mexico, its profound astonishment, rejection, and disappointment over Prime Minister Netanyahu’s message on Twitter about the construction of a border wall,” Mexico’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement following the tweet. “Mexico is a friend of Israel and should be treated as such by its Prime Minister.”

On Monday, Netanyahu clarified that his tweet was written in response to Trump’s praise of Israel’s border with Egypt, blaming the media for reporting “fake news” and unleashing a “Bolshevik hunt” against him at a time when Israeli prosecutors are conducting two criminal probes into his possible abuse of office.

“President Trump praised the fence built according to my guidance along the border with Egypt. He said it almost completely halted illegal infiltration to Israel, and I said he was right. As a result, he retweeted what I wrote. And from this molehill the commentators have made a mountain in the press,” the PM told the Likud faction meeting on Monday, Ynet news quoted.

“Who even mentioned Mexico?” Netanyahu asked. “The left-wing media has been on a Bolshevik hunting spree, a brainwashing campaign … They create a barrage of false reporting on us, what’s been referred to as ‘fake news’. They put endless pressure on the attorney general and law enforcement officials to issue an indictment against me by any means necessary.”

READ MORE: Netanyahu accused of illegally using public bonus miles for private travel

It appears that Mexico is not buying into the clarification so easily, with the Mexican Foreign Minister Luis Videgaray calling on the Israeli government to clarify and “correct” its position.

“I would ask prime minister Netanyahu how many walls has President Trump said he wants to build? It’s obvious he was referring to the relationship with Mexico, and we should be serious and assume responsibility for what we say,” Videgaray said Monday, Reuters reported.

“I think an apology … would be appropriate in this case,” the minister added. “It’s absolutely incomprehensible that its prime minister should express himself in this way, which frankly we consider an aggression.”

Meanwhile Israel’s ambassador to Mexico, Jonathan Peled, met with deputy foreign minister Carlos de Icaza on Monday.

“In the conversation, it was agreed to continue being in contact in order to settle the disputes and continue the good relations between the states,” the Israeli foreign ministry said in a statement.

While the diplomatic spat rumbles on, the Israeli President Reuven Rivlin is scheduled to speak with his Mexican counterpart, Enrique Pena Nieto, on Tuesday.

Share on FacebookShare on Twitter


US embassy relocation to Jerusalem ‘a war crime’

If Trump approves the move, it would overturn decades of international consensus on Jerusalem.

Will Trump take a different tack, or will he too relent on his embassy pledge now he is in office? [EPA]


Jerusalem – From the windows of the grey, cube-shaped building that houses the US embassy in Tel Aviv, staff enjoy an undisturbed view out over the Mediterranean and a beach adorned in the summer with sunbeds and parasols.

Most days the only evidence of activity is outside on the pavement:  A queue of Israelis snake out of a side door, clutching their documents and watched over by Israeli soldiers as they wait expectantly for a US travel visa.

The drab exterior offers no clues of the incendiary battle raging behind the scenes over whether the embassy’s days are numbered. Israel, and its allies in Donald Trump’s new administration, want to relocate the embassy to Jerusalem, 70km away.

The distance may be short but the move risks a political and diplomatic earthquake, according to most analysts.

READ MORE: Trump’s embassy move to Jerusalem ‘self-destructive’

If the Trump’s White House approves the relocation, it would overturn decades of international consensus on Jerusalem.

The message to the Palestinians and Arab world would be clear and provocative, said Nabil Shaath, a senior Palestinian official and former Palestinian foreign minister.

“Moving the embassy is the same as recognising Jerusalem as Israel’s united capital. It’s a war crime,” he told Al Jazeera.

“There’s no way we or the Arab world could accept it. It would mean the end of the US as the broker of the peace process. We would fight back and mobilise the rest of the world against the move.”

The Israeli army has been advising the government of Benjamin Netanyahu on the possible fallout too, according to a report last week in the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth. A change of address would be seen as a US green light for Israel to extend its sovereignty over the city and its holy places, including the al-Aqsa mosque, in the view of Israeli military intelligence.

Reactions could include mass protests from the Islamic movements inside Israel; riots in the occupied Palestinian territories and neighbouring states such as Jordan, which is the official guardian of al-Aqsa; and the collapse of Mahmoud Abbas’ Palestinian Authority.

The Israeli army believes the move also risks inflaming the wider Muslim world and increasing the threat of terror attacks against Israeli and Jewish sites around the world.

Moving the embassy is the same as recognising Jerusalem as Israel’s united capital. It’s a war crime.

Nabil Shaath, a senior Palestinian official and former Palestinian foreign minister

Tensions over Jerusalem have been high since the United Nations announced a partition plan in late 1947. It treated the city as an internationally protected zone, separate from the Jewish and Arab states it proposed in the rest of historic Palestine.

But months later, in a war that created Israel on the Palestinian homeland, Jerusalem was divided in two, under separate Israeli and Jordanian control.

In that period, Israel worked strenuously to pressure countries to set up embassies in West Jerusalem over stiff opposition from the US, said Nimrod Goren, the author of a book in Hebrew on the battles over the US embassy’s location.

“Initially, Washington stuck by the international consensus so strictly that its diplomats refused even to travel to Jerusalem for political meetings and ceremonies,” Goren, who heads Mitvim, a think-tank on Israeli foreign policy, told Al Jazeera.

But US resolve weakened through the 1950s as Israel’s main institutions, from the parliament to the president’s office, relocated to West Jerusalem.


A further turning point came in the early 1960s. “The US started to cultivate much closer ties with Israel, especially in defence matters,” he said. Washington turned a blind eye as Israel offered aid to poor, newly independent states in Africa and others in Latin America in return for establishing their embassies in Jerusalem.

By the time Israel invaded and occupied East Jerusalem in 1967, Goren observed, more than a third of the 54 diplomatic missions in Israel were located in the city.

When Israel formally annexed East Jerusalem in 1980, in violation of international law, declaring the entire city its “eternal, united capital”, the US again pressured states to move out of West Jerusalem. Only El Salvador and Costa Rica remained, until they too pulled out in 2006.

Another significant shift in Washington’s attitude followed the signing of the Oslo accords in 1994. Israel’s lobbyists worked hard to erode the significance of the accords, which, it was widely assumed, would entail the creation of a Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem.

In 1995, the US Congress passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act, which recognised Jerusalem as the “capital” of Israel and required a change in the embassy’s location by May 1999 at the latest.

Like Trump, Bill Clinton and George W Bush promised during their presidential campaigns to implement the Jerusalem Embassy Act. Yet, once in office, they baulked at the daunting ramifications.

The US president, as the chief broker in the Oslo process, could not afford to be seen pre-judging the outcome of negotiations on Jerusalem, the most contentious of the final-status issues.

The continuing sensitivity was evident during Barack Obama’s presidency.

He turned to the US Supreme Court in 2015 to strike down another Congressional measure designed to confer implicit US recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. The legislation would have entitled American parents of children born in Jerusalem to list “Israel” as the birthplace on their passports.

Last October, the White House also made a point of publicly correcting the dateline on a press release concerning an eulogy delivered by Obama at Shimon Peres’ funeral in Jerusalem. The press release was re-issued with the word “Israel” struck through.

Hamas: Palestinians ‘will not abandon Jerusalem’ – UpFront

Will Trump take a different tack, or will he too relent on his embassy pledge now he is in office?

In an interview late on Thursday, Trump indicated that he was not in a hurry to approve the move. “I don’t want to talk about it yet. It’s too early,” he told Fox News.

The confusing signals from his officials since his inauguration more than a week ago have hinted at a clash behind the scenes, said Nathan Thrall, a Jerusalem-based analyst with the International Crisis Group, a conflict resolution think-tank.

“The truth is no one really knows what Trump will do, even veteran US diplomats,” he told Al Jazeera.

On the one hand, Trump and his closest advisers on the Middle East have gone out of their way to raise expectations. Trump has invested more political capital on the move taking place than his predecessors.

The difference in approach was underscored by his choice of ambassador to Israel. David Friedman, a former bankruptcy lawyer, is more an ideological partisan –  an ally of the settlers – than a diplomat, noted Yossi Alpher, who served as an adviser to former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak.

At the same time, however, Trump is certain to face strong institutional resistance from the US state department, said Thrall. Its officials have long opposed moving the embassy, fearing the consequences for US relations with the Arab world.

INTERACTIVE: 2016 – A record year of home demolitions in occupied East Jerusalem

Last month, citing national security considerations, Obama signed a presidential waiver included in the Jerusalem Embassy Act to postpone for another six months the law’s implementation – as has happened without fail since it passed 22 years ago.

Trump could use Obama’s waiver to save face by delaying a decision until at least June, observed Goren.

It is possible too that, despite Israeli celebrations over Trump’s promise on the embassy, Netanyahu may prefer in the end to let the matter lie for a while.

“There seems to be an ambivalence among Netanyahu’s circle,” said Thrall. “On the one hand, he has a lot of problems on his plate at the moment [with a series of corruption investigations] and doesn’t need the possibility of triggering a conflagration in the region. And on the other, there’s no great gain for him. If the US moves the embassy, European states will not follow.”

That is how Palestinian officials and diplomats in Jerusalem appear to be reading recent comments from the adminstration. Shaath said: “We have signs that the administration has retreated a little. But it may simply be a delay. We can’t be sure.”

A European diplomat based in Israel, speaking to Al Jazeera on condition of anonymity, said: “It looks like Trump’s bark may have been worse than his bite. But there’s still a danger that [US ambassador] Friedman and Netanyahu will find a work-around.”

Morton Klein, the head of the Zionist Organisation of American, one of Israel’s key Israel lobby groups in Washington, told the Haaretz daily last week that Friedman had told him he would work out of US offices in Jerusalem.

Alpher suggested a possible scenario might be for Friedman to take over a section of the US consulate in Jerusalem, which serves the occupied territories. The US embassy could then function separately in Tel Aviv.

“If American Jewish leaders are insistent that the embassy moves, I could see the [Trump] administration choosing that as a compromise,” he said.

Shaath said such a manoeuvre should fool no one. “We would not accept any sort of so-called compromise along those lines. If the ambassador is working from Jerusalem, then the embassy has moved – and we will fight it.”

Source: Al Jazeera

Blood-chilling VIDEO: IDF soldier seen shooting injured ‘Palestinian attacker’

Blood-chilling VIDEO: IDF soldier seen shooting injured 'Palestinian attacker'
Shocking footage has emerged online apparently showing an Israeli soldier executing a wounded Palestinian lying on the ground. The victim had reportedly been injured in retaliation for a stabbing attack before being cold-bloodedly shot in the head.

While the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldier is given medical treatment and proper care, and seems to be conscious, the Palestinian is lying on the ground immobilized. Both the Israeli servicemen and the medical staff can be seen ignoring the man until the ambulance leaves.

Seconds later, an IDF soldier reloads his weapon, approaches the Palestinian and fires a headshot at his victim. No one tries to prevent the soldier from killing the man, and the shot causes no reaction from bystanders. Armed Israelis are seen walking around as if nothing has happened.

The Palestinian could be seen moving his head at the beginning of the video, clearly indicating he was still alive before he was shot.

Share on FacebookShare on Twitter