Δευτέρα, 25 Απριλίου 2011



1 - Transformed by truth : Richard Forer’s journey from AIPAC to compassion
2 - SAMI JADALLAH : Netanyahu, King of the Hill
3 - Doves and hawks - Nahida the exiled Palestinian
4 - Itamar Killers Found ? - Mohammad/KABOBfest + Itamar attack: ‘My son was tortured into confessing’
5 - Three Myths of Israel's Insecurity And Why They Must Be Debunked - Ira Chernus
6 - Libya : 42 years of oppression? +
Libya : African Union mediation hindered by NATO for 18 days +
No Evidence Of Gaddafi Violence, Say Britons
7 - Depleted Uranium : The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War +
'US To Recoup Libya Oil From China', Interview with Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, former assistant secretary of US Treasury
8 - Lobby, lobbification and the lobbified: the corruption of the USA’s elected representatives - Lawrence Davidson
9 - Lebanon – Wiki-Cables Tell of Treason, US Interference - Franklin Lamb
11 - U.S. secretly backed Syrian opposition groups, as cables released by WikiLeaks show - Craig Whitlock +
Secret memos expose link between oil firms and invasion of Iraq - Paul Bignell
12 - Bahrain : Is a U.S. Ally Torturing Its People? - Karen Leigh +
Exposing The Bahraini Regime - TVO +
Bahrain braced for new wave of repression +
Bahraini forces demolish two mosques
13 - Terminally Twisted beyond Recovery or Redemption & OTHER VIDEOS
14 - Throw Out the Money Changers, - Chris Hedges +
ShortGS.com - ShortGoldmanSachs
15 - Iranian general accuses Siemens of helping U.S., Israel build Stuxnet & suggests Iran may file charges in international courts - Gregg
16 - 9/11 AND BUILDING 7, FOREKNOWLEGE AND UNDENIABLE PROOF Foreknowledge of Building 7′s Collapse - Dr. Graeme MacQueen +
Saving the Saudis - Craig Unger
17 - ALLEN L ROLAND : Fukushima / One Of The Greatest Disasters In Modern Times
18 - Award-Winning Palestinian Journalist Tortured By Shin Beth - Khalid Amayreh in the occupied Palestinian Territories
19 - German Jews toppled Westerwelle
20 - Alexander Mashkevich looks to create around-the-clock Zionist news channel
21 - Billionaires Flourish, Inequalities Deepen as Economies “Recover” - James Petras
22 - Obama’s Mother Worked For CIA - Wayne Madsen
23 - Death from the skies : Thousands killed by U.S. unmanned drones & the survivors are driven into the arms of Al Qaeda - David Rose
24 - Is A False Flag Nuke On the Table?, Posted on Pakalert on April 18, 2011 - Zen Gardner
25 - Koroush Ziabari – An analysis
26 - Deconstructing the US Military : America's Global War against Planet Earth - Dana Visalli
27 - EVOLVING STORY: Israeli Ambassador Leaves Cairo Amid Speculations of Opening Egypt’s Border with Gaza Soon - Dr. Ashraf Ezzat
29 - The `First Holocaust' : Origins of the 'Six Million' - Don Heddesheimer
30 - Don Heddesheimer : The First Holocaust, Chapter 5 : Following The Money
31 - One of the World's Oldest Astronomy Sites : Egypt's Nabta Playa +
Scientists Showing Concern Over Solar Storms - Mitch Battros
32 - Mysterious Cosmic Blast Keeps on Going - Ron Cowen
33 - "Is the Trillion-Dollar Worldwide 'Sickness Industry' Robbing You of Vibrant Health?" + LINKS to other health articles

All articles are reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and are for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. The material presented underneath does not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the editor. Then : everybody should do research of his own and check for deception or some 'agenda'. As always it is : 'Caveat Lector'!

Thanks to : Debbie Menon (http://mycatbirdseat.com/,http://www.intifada-palestine.com), Alex James, Vatic Project (http://vaticproject.blogspot.com) , "Information Clearing House'', Antiwar.com , DAILY CENSORED, VETERANS TODAY, REDRESS INFORMATION & ANALYSIS, PAK ALERT PRESS, INTIFADA PALESTINA, The European Union Times, Global Research, Electronic Intifada, Sabbah Report, RADIO ISLAM, ET AL.

Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered Since The U.S. Invaded Iraq

Cost of War in Iraq & Afghanistan Since 2001


1 - Transformed by truth : Richard Forer’s journey from AIPAC to compassion


By Paul J. Balles

19 April 2011

Paul J. Balles charts the journey of Richard Forer, an American Jew brought up on Israeli propaganda, who had his early beliefs challenged by friends and, consequently, embarked on an honest study of the facts of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. As a result, he underwent a monumental transformation.

In many Jewish circles today it has become more important to believe in Israel than to believe in God. (Richard Forer)

Richard Forer joined the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) for the same reason that most Jews joined this Israel lobby. He refers to what he calls “the primal fear of many Jews around the world -- the fear of another holocaust.”

He felt strong support for Israel at the time of Israel’s invasion of Lebanon and the capture of Israeli Gilad Shalit. However, some of his friends disagreed.

Retelling a story of his discussion with a friend, Forer raises every single argument and justification ever offered for the occupation of Palestine.

“If Jews looked at the history and not at the fictions, their fear would crumble... They would realize that the Palestinians were not only human but that the Jews have dehumanized the Palestinians through their indoctrination."

Richard Forer

As a result, Forer decided to study the history, “something I'd never really done. What I found astounded me and blew all of my beliefs apart”.

He found out that everything he, as a Jewish American, had grown up believing was false.

He discovered that the propaganda about Israel wanting peace was not true. What Israel really wanted was more land. "That's always been their primary objective; peace is secondary to that."

He learned that Israel's pre-emptive attacks on Egypt, Syria and Jordan in 1967 were based on a falsehood that they would have attacked Israel.

Forer discovered that stories put out by Bill Clinton and Dennis Ross after the 2000 Camp David summit were also lies about how Yasser Arafat "would not go along with a very fair and generous offer made by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak".

The entire history of Israel and the Palestinians put out by Israel is deceitful, according to Forer.

Growing up, "I identified more as a Jew than as an American… I felt that Israel was the one place where Jews could go if ever they were persecuted again."

In his book, Breakthrough: Transforming Fear into Compassion, Forer tells of how he changed his thinking about Israel as a benign and democratic state to a tribe of people dominated by fear.

“If Jews looked at the history and not at the fictions, their fear would crumble,” says Forer.

"They would realize that the Palestinians were not only human but that the Jews have dehumanized the Palestinians through their indoctrination."

Forer's transformation took place at the time of the second Lebanese war. The typical response to his transformation was to call him a self-hating Jew.

Forer makes the important point, after his visit to the West Bank, that the Palestinians and Arabs are not angry at Jews but at the Zionist ideology and the government of Israel that oppresses them.

"Every single person I met [in the West Bank] said it's not about Jews or Muslims, it's about human beings, it's a human rights issue."

Interestingly, Forer notes that the government of Israel does not represent the Jewish people. "That's just an excuse they make.

Most of the Jewish people in Israel are apathetic. They don't know what's going on.”

They don't even know that the Separation Wall is built mostly in Palestinian territory.

"If the Israelis were honest, they'd say if the Palestinians would just lie down and do what we tell them to do, then we'll have peace and maybe we'll give them 8 to 10 per cent of Palestine."

Richard Forer

"They just live in denial. If the Israelis were honest, they'd say if the Palestinians would just lie down and do what we tell them to do, then we'll have peace and maybe we'll give them 8 to 10 per cent of Palestine."

In his book, Forer debunks all of the arguments that people make to defend Israel against criticism.

He talks about Hebron, the only Palestinian community with a Jewish presence. He writes about the Separation Wall and about settlements and the seizure of land by Israelis.

Virtually any argument that he heard before his transformation Forer goes into and shows what the truth really is.

A Jew, brought up on Israeli propaganda, had his early beliefs challenged by friends. His honest study of the facts resulted in a monumental transformation.

His courageous decision to share that experience led to the publication of his book Breakthrough: Transforming Fear into Compassion.

The blind will continue to label Forer a self-hating Jew. This will come from apathetic Israelis and Zionists who have fed on fear and falsehood.

Those who read his book may discover that integrity is an antidote for fear of the truth.


2 - SAMI JADALLAH : Netanyahu, King of the Hill
April 18, 2011 posted by Sami Jadallah

Of course Netanyahu knows he is the Boss in the American Knesset and he wants Barack Obama to know that very well.
When it comes to the American Knesset, it is Bibi, the Israeli Prime Minister and
not the President of the United States that has a say so.


Note: True we are a Republic with elected president and members of both houses, Senate and House of Representatives ( not House of Lords). However when it comes to the “people’s houses” there is no president, there is only a King, and the King is always the Israeli Prime Minister. Welcome to America’s Knesset. So far Israel costs the US tax payers over $ Trillion ($1,000,000,000,000,) just imagine what this $ Trillion could do for our country, in North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Wisconsin, Wyoming, Montana, Michigan, Vermont and New Hampshire not to mention all other states.

In two separate statements coming out of Tel-Aviv and Tel-Aviv West (Washington-DC) both the Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu and House Speaker John Boehner announced that Bibi Netanyahu is invited to speak before a Joint Session of Congress an honor that is afforded to very few heads of state. For Netanyahu this will not be the first but his second time before a Joint Session, the first was on July 10, 1996. Bibi is the fourth Israeli prime minister invited to speak at the Join Session of the American Knesset.

John Boehner who represents a poor and “working class district” much run down, can only hear the “cash register” as he announced through his spokesman “America and Israel are the closest of friends and allies, and we look forward to hearing the Prime Minister’s views on how we can continue working together for peace, freedom and security”.

Nancy Pelosi also an ardent and loyal Zionists seconded the statement of John Boehner as she “Looks forward to the Prime Minister’s address to the Joint Session during this critical time in history for the Middle East”.

For his part Bibi Netanyahu announced to his Likud members that his speech before the Joint Session of Congress will cover two fundamental issues and priorities for Israel stating “The two most important are, first of all, Palestinians recognition of Israel as the state of the Jewish people and the second principle is real security arrangements on the ground”. Of course Netanyahu said nothing and will say nothing about ending the Jewish Occupation that began in 1967, will say nothing about the eviction and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from East Jerusalem, will say nothing about house eviction and house demolitions to make room for “Jewish Settlers” and will say nothing about the 600 “security checkpoints” with daily humiliations of Palestinians choking their freedom and economy. Only Israel can ask for things (Chosen People) but not the Palestinians, they can only accept what the Jews give them.

Of course Netanyahu knows he is at home in the American Knesset, with political support far more than he has in the Israeli Knesset where he is often hounded by the opposition, as opposed to the American Knesset where members of both houses will wait in line to kiss his ring if not his behind. In the words of Aluf Benn “they love him there or at least scared of the lobby that supports him”. Of course we all know that AIPAC, the American Jewish Party is the majority party in the American Knesset that counts on 90 Senators among its members and counting on some 300 members of the House as members also. The American Jewish Party is the true majority party in the American Congress with no apposition, and if there is an opposition, no one dares to speak up.

Netanyahu’s invitation to the Joint Session is orchestrated to thwart international efforts by the Palestinians to gain official recognition in the UN for a Palestinian State within 67 borders and with East Jerusalem as its capital, an effort that will for sure be apposed by the American Knesset if not by the White House.

To preempt this effort, Netanyahu will most likely announce a limited deployment of the Occupation Army from the West Bank, a deployment similar to the one that took place in Gaza making sure the areas evacuated by the Jewish Army put under siege increasing the number of security checkpoints. Of course there is never any talks of evacuating the settlements (Israel for sure will ask the American Knesset compensation exceeding $2 million dollars for each person evacuated and at least $5 million for each “trailer caravan” evacuated, making sure Israel milk the American tax payers as it expand settlements and as it evacuate “illegal settlements” and with the American Knesset more than happy to foot the bill for and on behalf of poor American tax payers who are held hostage by the American Jewish Party and its members in Congress.

Of course Netanyahu knows he is the Boss in the American Knesset and he wants Barack Obama to know that very well. When it comes to the American Knesset, it is Bibi, the Israeli Prime Minister and not the President of the United States that has a say so.

Obama who is often being accused by Israelis and their partners in the US and among Zionist and Christian Evangelical circles as Anti-Israeli and Anti-Semite and lacking birth credential to become the president of the United State, notwithstanding that his entire Middle East team is made up of Israeli loyalists if not agents. And as president has the most “Zionists” in his cabinet and his inner circles of advisors.

It is this close circle of Zionists that made it impossible for Barack Obama to deliver on his promise in Cairo to bring about peace, and it is this close circle of Israel loyalists that has backtracked on the issue of settlements, offering Israel tens of billions to stop moving few trailer caravans with one F-35 for each Israeli caravan removed from the West Bank.

Don’t worry about Barack Obama, he does not have what it takes to bring about peace in the Middle East based on a two state solution one is Israel and the other is Palestine within 1967 borders and with East Jerusalem as its capital. No one sitting in the White House dares to announce such principle and continues to remain president of the United States for 24 hours, and President Obama knows that too.

That is why the Palestinian leadership must and could not count on the US supporting their demands to the UN General Assembly and for sure the US will not dare even abstain and will for sure “Veto” such a resolution. It vetoed the UN Security Council Resolution calling for an end to the Israeli settlements, and does Ramallah really think that Washington with its American Knesset could support an independent free state in Palestine? We all must remember, the US was never a fair and honest broker, and the US was never fully committed to the Israeli ending its Occupation that began in 1967, and the US not only gives political support to Israel at the UN it also gives it money and weapons to keep its occupation and to use such weapons to kill and murder innocent Palestinians as it did in its War on Gaza and as it continues to use American weapons and planes to bomb Palestinians on a daily basis. As long as there is an American Knesset in Washington forget about the US being a partner in any peace in the Middle East. The US must first be free from Israel before it can bring freedom to the Palestinians.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Sami Jamil Jadallah is born in the Palestinian city of El-Bireh (presently under Israeli Military and Settlers Occupation). Immigrated to the US in 62. After graduating from high school in Gary, Indiana was drafted into the US Army (66-68) received the Leadership Award from the US 6th Army NCO Academy in Ft. Lewis, Washington. Five of us brothers were in US military service about the same time (Nabil-Army), (Lutfi-Marines), (Sam-Army) and (Taiseer-Marines) with two nephews presently with US Army. Graduated from …Read Full Bio


3 - Doves and hawks
It is perplexing to observe the “soft-zionist” or the upholders of “post-zionism”, the “doves” of the “peace camp”, exerting tremendous effort to "teach" Palestinians the ethics of "non-violent resistance":

How to "resist” sadistic soldiers with peaceful smiles
How to silence machineguns with intelligent argument
How to face lethal bullets with colourful banners
How to stop tanks with bare hands
How to fend off F16 with debka dance and folklore songs
How to subdue a nihilist army with hospitality
How to freeze an apache helicopter by “shooting” a movie of its actions
How to receive thieves as lawful owners
How to welcome baby-killers as good friends and righteous neighbours
How to embrace armed invaders with open arms

How to accept and befriend the fanatic supremacists (those who invade fully-armed, fully-trained ready to kill, whether they arrived yesterday, today or even tomorrow) as honourable citizens with equal rights

Instead of wasting their time and energy preaching to the oppressed how to defend themselves "non-violently", the "me-peacers" aught to be teaching their own society how to conduct their daily lives without aggression and non-violence

Instead of condemning the self-defence of armed resistance as "terrorism", they aught to be condemning the very violent creation and existence of their own terrorist state, founded by theft, terrorism, ethnic cleansing and slow genocide

How could anyone with a thread of moral fiber condemn self-defence when one's very life is threatened with extermination?

And one can only wonder what would the reaction of those “peace-campers” be in a hypothetical situation, wherein they and their children are attacked by heavily armed gangsters, would they stand peacefully waving their banners to face the bullets? Would they sit and write a petition against the actions of the attackers then pass it around to be signed? Or would they run to their guns to defend themselves and protect their children?

While the “doves” persist to “educate” Palestinians with all that stuff, their “hawks” brethren continue to advance their military power, refine their plans, intensify their aggression, expand their control, extend their influence, and spread their hasbara.

The hawks continue to teach their future-invader children how to perfect the use of machineguns, how to become good-sharpshooters, how to gun down a mother and baby with one bullet, how to make life even more unbearable for Palestinians that they leave, how to finish off the ethnic-cleansing of Palestine, and how to wrap up their zionist project by forging more documents, stealing more land and creating more irreversible facts on the grounds!

It works mighty well between those two seemingly opposite poles; the harmonious duo complements each other magnificently!!While one team is busy doing the “dirty work”, the other rolls its sleeves to clean up the mess and put the makeup on.

In short, while “soft” zionists are busy “teaching” Palestinians the “art of peace-making”, their brethren are working tirelessly teaching themselves the “art of war”.

And as a Palestinian once said, the hawks want to eat us with bare hands, while the doves want to eat us with knives and forks.

In that context the Zionist Mossad motto “by deception we wage war” fits perfectly with the saying of Sun Tzu “Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting".

Finally, I would draw to the attention of the reader some quotes of Gandhi that many don’t like to mention or even remember these

Gandhi Quotes:

“I WOULD risk violence a thousand times rather than risk the emasculation of a whole race.”

“I have been repeating over and over again that he who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honour by non-violently facing death may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden. He has no business to be the head of a family. He must either hide himself, or must rest content to live for ever in helplessness and be prepared to crawl like a worm at the bidding of a bully”

“Though violence is not lawful, when it is offered in self-defence or for the defence of the defenceless, it is an act of bravery far better than cowardly submission. The latter befits neither man nor woman. Under violence, there are many stages and varieties of bravery. Every man must judge this for himself. No other person can or has the right”

nahida the exiled Palestinian


4 - Itamar Killers Found?

by Mohammad/KABOBfest

The Israeli press is ablaze this morning with the news that the killers of the Fogel family in the illegal colony of Itamar in the occupied West Bank have been found. After several weeks of besieging the village of Awarta, arresting virtually all of its inhabitants, and causing extensive property damage, the Israeli authorities have announced that two teenagers from the village have admitted to carrying out the killings.

This particular case has been quite interesting, because of the fact that all Palestinian factions publicly distanced themselves from it and denied responsibility for carrying it out. Despite the Israeli government immediately blaming it on Palestinian ‘terror’ without any proof and using the death of the Fogels as an excuse to further expand the illegal colonization of the West Bank, a gag order was placed on the investigation as rumors and theories grew about who the actual culprit may have been.

Itamar is a heavily fortified settlement overlooking the surrounding Palestinian villages on whose land it is illegally built. The colony is notoriously well fortified to ensure intruders do not enter; it is completely surrounded by 8 foot high electrified wire fence with 2 feet of razor wire on top, sensors to determine if the fence has been cut, automatic cameras that cover the entire perimeter, 24 hour security guard presence and protection provided by the Israeli military. All of its inhabitants are heavily armed, and like almost all Israeli settlements it is surrounded by hundreds of meters of empty buffer land that Palestinians cannot step foot in.

The fact that Itamar probably has more security than the White House led many to conclude that whoever killed the Fogels could not have simply snuck in and snuck back out again.

But now the Israeli security authorities, that bastion of transparency and human rights, say they’ve extracted confessions from Amjad Awad, 19, and Hakim Awad, 18, both from Awarta. According to Haaretz, the teens decided on a whim to go to Itamar armed with nothing but wire cutters and a prayer. They walked across the buffer zone without being noticed by the cameras, security guards, soldiers or residents of the colony. They reached the electrified fence, where they spent ten minutes cutting the wire. The automatic cameras and sensors seemed, by a stroke of anti-semitic fortune, to be asleep that day.

Once they’d cut the fence, the two teenagers walked into the colony, where again nobody noticed them. They found a house which by sheer luck was 1) unlocked, 2) empty and 3) had an M16 rifle and ammunition lying about. Amjad and Hakim picked up the gun and the bullets, and stepped out of the empty house. There, they moved to the Fogels’ residence. They walked in, and killed four family members-one with the gun, the others with a knife.

Having defied all odds, the teenagers now left the house and went back outside. They still hadn’t been noticed. Neither the gun shot nor the screams had been heard (the security services here explain that the weather wasn’t conducive to carrying sound waves that evening). While realizing they STILL hadn’t been noticed by any of the residents, soldiers, security guards or cameras, Amjad and Hakim spotted the Fogels’ 3 month old baby through the window. So they decided to go back inside and kill the baby.

Insatiable Arab thirst for blood and all that.

Now the teens, armed with a big stolen M16 rifle, ammunition, and a knife simply walked back out of the colony, again unnoticed by the cameras, soldiers, guards, colonists, sensors and maybe even God himself. They walked across the buffer zone, back to their village, and thought they had gotten away with their dastardly crime. Of course, they had forgotten to factor in the tireless efforts of the Israeli army and intelligence apparatus, who laid siege to their village for days, barring the entry of food and medicine, rounding up villagers en masse, savagely beating others and destroying extensive property in Awarta.

The story presented by the Israeli security forces has more holes in it than a hunk of Swiss cheese treated with birdshot. As Ali Abunimah points out, they can’t even get their claim right about whether or not Amjad and Hakim acted alone or on behalf of the PFLP. And Israel’s penchant for using torture and threats to coerce confessions doesn’t really do much for its credibility here. If 6 year old girls are beaten and 60 year old womenare violently detained in Awarta, your brain doesn’t have to go far to guess what the Shin Bet did to extract confessions from the young men.

And before the seething masses of indignant Zionists could finish wringing their hands, out comes the family of Hakim Awad with the inconvenient revelation that their son had recently undergone testicular surgery that made it impossible for him to walk long distances and needing the toilet every hour, and was at home recovering the night the Fogels were killed. Oops.

Zionism really is losing its lustre: They decided to frame a guy who can barely walk for trekking across a buffer zone, through an electrified fence, breaking into two houses, killing an entire family then jogging merrily home.

Itamar attack: ‘My son was tortured into confessing’April 17, 2011 by crescentandcross
Families of two Awarta teens who confessed to murdering Fogel family still maintain their innocence. ‘Israel wants to cover up crimes it committed in our village,’ mother of Hakim Awad says

The families of the two terrorists who confessed to murdering five members of the Fogel family refuse to believe the two committed the massacre. Hakim Awad’s mother, Nawef, claimed that her son was at home the night of the murder and never left the house. “Five months ago Hakim underwent a surgery in his stomach and I’m sure he was tortured and forced into confessing.”

Disbelief in Awarta

Awarta stunned over Itamar attack revelation; ‘They’re just kids’ / Elior Levy

Awarta village neighbors of two suspects in Itamar massacre stunned by their arrest. Village chief says confessions must have been coerced, demands international probe

The mother claimed that Israel was trying to cover up for crimes it committed in Awarta last month and noted that their home in the village was very far from the settlement of Itamar.

Hakim, 18, is not the only member of the family involved in terrorist activity. His father Mazen Awad is active with the Popular Front and had previously served in prison in connection to the murder of his cousin whose body was burned. He has recently been arrested.

Hakim’s uncle, Jibril Awad, was killed in a clash with an IDF force in December 2003 and was involved in a terror attack in Itamar in 2002. The attack left the community’s security officer and four family members dead.

Another member of the family, Salah Awad, agreed to cover for the murder and handed over the weapons to a Popular Front operative in Ramallah. Two other members of the family are suspected in connection to the affair.

The family members of the second suspect, Amjad Awad, also deny any connection to the massacre. They are claiming Amjad was in the village at the time of the murder. “The Israeli narrative is filled with lies and is a distortion of the truth,” one family member claimed. He also asserted that the two suspects are not friends. “One went to university, the other is in high school.”

He claimed that had the two been guilty, Israel would have captured them long ago. “Why weren’t the culprits’ identities revealed in the first days after the murder? The whole world knows about Israel’s advanced investigation abilities and its use of sophisticated means,” he said.

5 - Three Myths of Israel's Insecurity And Why They Must Be Debunked

By Ira Chernus

April 18, 2011 "Tom Dispatch" -- Here are the Three Sacred Commandments for Americans who shape the public conversation on Israel:
1. For politicians, especially at the federal level: As soon as you say the word “Israel,” you must also say the word “security” and promise that the United States will always, always, always be committed to Israel’s security. If you occasionally label an action by the Israeli government “unhelpful,” you must immediately reaffirm the eternal U.S. commitment to Israel’s security.

2. For TV talking heads and op-ed pundits: If you criticize any policies or actions of the Israeli government, you must immediately add that Israel does, of course, have very real and serious security needs that have to be addressed.

3. For journalists covering the Israel-Palestine conflict for major American news outlets: You must live in Jewish Jerusalem or in Tel Aviv and take only occasional day trips into the Occupied Territories. So your reporting must inevitably be slanted toward the perspective of the Jews you live among. And you must indicate in every report that Jewish Israeli life is dominated by anxiety about security.

U.S. opinion-shapers have obeyed the Three Commandments scrupulously for decades. As a result, they’ve created an indelible image of Israel as a deeply insecure nation. That image is a major, if often overlooked, factor that has shaped and continues to shape Washington’s policies in the Middle East and especially the longstanding American tilt toward Israel.

It’s often said that the number one factor in that tilt is the power of the right-wing “pro-Israel” (more accurately, “pro-Israeli-government”) lobby. That lobby certainly is a skillful, well-oiled machine. It uses every trick in the PR book to promote the myth of Israel as a brave little nation constantly forced to fight for its life against enemies all around who are eager to destroy it, a Jewish David withstanding the Arab Goliath. The lobby justifies everything Israel does to the Palestinians -- military occupation, economic strangulation, expanding settlements, confiscating land, demolishing homes, imprisoning children -- as perhaps unfortunate but absolutely necessary for Israel’s self-defense.

No matter how slick any lobby is, however, it can’t succeed without a substantial level of public support. (How powerful would the National Rifle Association be without the millions of Americans who truly love their guns?) Along with its other sources of power and influence, the right-wing Israel lobby needs a large majority of the U.S. public to believe in the myth of Israel’s insecurity as the God’s honest truth.

Ironically, that myth gets plenty of criticism and questioning in the Israeli press from writers like (to cite just some recent examples) Merav Michaeli and Doron Rosenblum in the liberal newspaper Haaretz, and even Alon Ben-Meir in the more conservative Jerusalem Post. In the United States, though, the myth of insecurity is the taken-for-granted lens through which the public views everything about the Israel-Palestine conflict. Like the air we breathe, it’s a view so pervasive that we hardly notice it.

Nor do we notice how reflexively most Americans accept the claim of self-defense as justification for everything Israel does, no matter how outrageous. That reflex goes far to explain why, in the latest Gallup poll matchup (“Do you sympathize more with Israel or the Palestinians?”), Israel won by a nearly 4 to 1 margin. And the pro-Israeli sentiment just keeps growing.

Our politicians, pundits, and correspondents breathe the same air in the same unthinking fashion, and so they hesitate to put much pressure on Israel to change its ways. As it happens, without such pressure, no Israeli government is likely to make the compromises needed for a just and lasting peace in the region. Instead, Israel will keep up its attacks on Gaza. In addition, if the Palestinians declare themselves an independent state come September, as many reports indicate might happen, Israel will feel free to quash that state by any means necessary -- but only if Washington goes on giving it the old wink and nod.

If American attitudes and so policies are ever to change, one necessary (though not in itself sufficient) step is to confront and debunk the myth of Israel’s insecurity.

Three Myths in One

Israel actually promotes three separate myths of insecurity, although its PR machine weaves them into a single tightly knit fabric. To grasp the reality behind it, the three strands have to be teased apart and examined separately.

Myth Number 1: Israel’s existence is threatened by the ever-present possibility of military attack. In fact, there’s no chance that any of Israel’s neighbors will start a war to wipe out Israel. They know their history. Despite its size, ever since its war of independence in 1948, the Israeli military has been a better equipped, better trained, more effective, and in virtually every case a successful fighting force. It clearly remains the strongest military power in the Middle East.

According to the authoritative volume, The Military Balance 2011, Israel still maintains a decisive edge over any of its neighbors. While the Israeli government constantly sounds alarms about imagined Iranian nuclear weapons -- though its intelligence services now suggest Iran won’t have even one before 2015 at the earliest -- Israel remains the region’s only nuclear power for the foreseeable future. It possesses up to 200 nukes, in addition to “a significant number” of precision-guided 1,000 kg conventional bombs.

To deliver its most powerful weapons, Israel can rely on its 100 land-based missile launchers, 200 aircraft armed with cruise missiles, and (according to “repeated press reports”) cruise-missile-armed submarines. The subs are key, of course, since they ensure that no future blow delivered to Israel would ever lack payback.

Israel spends far more on its military than any of the neighbors it claims to fear, largely because it gets more military aid from the U.S. than any other Mideast nation -- $3 billion a year is the official figure, although no one is likely to know the full amount.

The Obama administration has continued a long tradition of guaranteeing Israel’s massive military superiority in the region. Israel will, for example, be the first foreign country to get the U.S.’s most advanced fighter jet, the F-35 joint strike fighter. In fact, Defense Minister Ehud Barak recently complained that 20 of the promised planes aren’t enough, though he admittedthat his country “faces no imminent threat” that would justify upping the numbers. Israel is also beginning to deploy its Iron Dome mobile air-defense system, with the U.S. funding at least half its cost.

In sum, none of the nations that Israel casts as a threat to its very existence can pose an existential military danger. Of course, that doesn’t mean all Jewish Israelis are safe from harm, which brings us to...

Myth Number 2: The personal safety of every Jewish Israeli is threatened daily by the possibility of violent attack. In fact, according to Israeli government statistics, since the beginning of 2009 only one Israeli civilian (and two non-Israelis) have been killed by politically motivated attacks inside the green line (Israel’s pre-1967 border). Israelis who live inside that line go about their daily lives virtually free from such worry.

As a result, the insecurity myth has come to focus on rockets -- the real ones launched from Gaza and the imaginary ones that supposedly could be launched from a future Palestinian state in the West Bank. Purveyors of the insecurity myth, including the American media, portray such rocket attacks as bolts from the blue, with no other motive than an irrational desire to kill and maim innocent Jews. As it happens, most of the rockets from Gaza have been fired in response to Israeli attacks that often broke ceasefires declared by the Palestinians.

Those rockets are part of an ongoing war in which each side uses the best weapons it has. The Palestinians, of course, have access to none of the high-tech Israeli guidance systems. Their weaponry tends to be crude and often homemade. They shoot their rockets, most of them unguided, and let them fall where they may (which means the vast majority harm no one).

Israel’s weapons actually do far more harm. Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli assault on Gaza that began at the end of 2008, killed far more civilians than all the rockets Palestinians have ever launched at Israel. Despite (or perhaps because of) its grievous losses, the Hamas government in Gaza has generally tried to minimize the rocket fire. When Hamas calls for all factions in Gaza to observe a ceasefire, however, the Israelis often ramp up their attacks.

Jewish civilians do run some risk when they live in the West Bank settlements. In the most recent horrific incident, a Jewish family of five was slaughtered at the Itamar settlement. In response, Israeli Vice Premier Moshe Yaalon showed clearly how the deaths of individual settlers are woven into the myth of Israel’s “existential insecurity.” “This murder,” he declared, “reminds everyone that the struggle and conflict is not about Israel’s borders or about independence of a repressed nation but a struggle for our existence.”

The logic of the myth goes back to the premise of the earliest Zionists: All gentiles are implacably and eternally anti-semitic. By this logic, any attack on one Jew, no matter how random, becomes evidence that all Jews are permanently threatened with extinction.

Most Zionists have been unable to see that once they founded a state committed to regional military superiority, they were bound to be on the receiving as well as the giving end of acts of war. It is the absence of peace far more than the presence of anti-semitism that renders Israelis who live near Gaza or in the West Bank insecure.

However, according to the myth, it’s not only physical violence that threatens Israel’s existence. In the last two years, right-wing Israelis and their supporters in the U.S. have learned to lie awake at night worrying about another threat...

Myth Number 3: Israel’s existence is threatened by worldwide efforts to delegitimize the Jewish state. Early in 2010, Military Intelligence Chief Amos Yadlin told the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, that the country was not “suffering from terror or from an immediate military threat” -- only to warn of a new peril: “The Palestinian Authority is encouraging the international arena to challenge Israel’s legitimacy.”

The “delegitimization” alarm was first sounded by an influential Israeli think tank and then spread like wildfire through the nation’s political and media ranks.

There are shreds of truth in it. There have always been people who saw the Jewish state, imposed on indigenous Palestinians, as illegitimate. Until recently, however, Israelis seemed to pay them little heed. Now, they are deemed an “existential threat,” as Yadlin explained, only because the old claims of “existential threat” via violence have grown unbelievable even to the Israeli military (though not to the government’s American supporters).

It’s also true that challenges to Israel’s legitimacy are growing rapidly around the world and that the specter of becoming a “pariah state” does pose a danger. The head of that think tank got it half-right when he warned that Israel’s “survival and prosperity” depend on its relations with the world, “all of which rely on its legitimacy.” Survival? No. After all, being a pariah state doesn’t have to be existence threatening, as North Korea and Burma have proved.

But prosperity? That’s at least possible. When the Israelis complain about “delegitimization,” they focus most on the boycott/divestment/sanctions (BDS) movement, which aims not to eliminate the state of Israel, but to use economic pressure to end Israel’s occupation and economic strangulation of Palestinian lands. (Nor is there any real evidence to back up the chargethat this is some vast conspiracy coordinated by the Palestinian Authority.)

Were Israel to start behaving by accepted international moral norms, the BDS movement would fade from the scene quickly enough, ending the crisis of “delegitimization” -- just as the rockets from Gaza might well cease. But here’s the reality of this moment: The only genuine threat to Israel’s security comes from its own oppressive policies, which are the fuel propelling the BDS movement.

So far, however, “effects on the Israeli economy are marginal,” according to a popular Israeli newspaper. The BDS campaign, it reports, “has been far more damaging when it comes to the negative image that it spreads.” A growing number of foreign governments are criticizing Israel, and some already recognize an actual Palestinian state. In diplomatic terms, Israel’s legitimacy rests on the good will of its sole dependable ally, the United States.

More than any military need, that political need offers the U.S. powerful leverage in moving toward a settlement of the Israeli/Palestinian crisis. The triple-stranded myth of Israel’s insecurity, however, makes the use of such leverage virtually impossible for Washington. Israel’s president put his country’s needs plainly in March 2010: "[Israel] must forge good relations with other countries, primarily the United States, so as to guarantee political support in a time of need.” So far, the U.S. has continued to offer its strong support, even though President Obama knows, as he recently told American Jewish leaders, that “Israel is the stronger party here, militarily, culturally, and politically. And Israel needs to create the context for [peace] to happen.”

But what if the American public knew the facts that Obama acknowledged? What if every solemn reference to Israel’s “security needs” were greeted not with nodding heads, but with the eye-rolling skepticism it deserves? What if Israel’s endless excesses and excuses -- its claims that the occupation of the West Bank and the economic strangulation of Gaza are necessary “for the sake of security” -- were regularly scoffed at by most Americans?

It’s hard to imagine the Obama administration, or any American administration, keeping up a pro-Israel tilt in the face of such public scorn.

To catch Timothy MacBain’s latest TomCast audio interview in which Chernus discusses what to make of American attitudes toward Israel and the Palestinians, click here, or download it to your iPod here.

Ira Chernus is Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Read more of his writing on Israel, Palestine, and American Jews on his blog. Contact him at chernus@colorado.edu

Copyright 2011 Ira Chernus


6 - Libya : 42 years of oppression ?

Posted: 2011/04/20
From: Source

The assault on Libya has nothing to do with 'humanitarianism'.

by Graham Brown / March 31st 2011

Having lived and worked in Libya from 2 weeks after the Revolution (or coup, as opponents call it) of September 1st 1969 for several years up until 1980, I feel I am able to provide some testimony as to the nature and achievements of the new regime that swept away a corrupt monarchy which condemned the majority of Libyans to poverty.

Whatever may be said about Gadaffi, I cannot understand how so many are referring to 42 years of oppression when, as I recall, the new leadership was greeted with something like euphoria in 1969 especially by the young some of whom I was teaching. I clearly remember my classes being cut short by my pupils eagerly streaming out of the classroom to join massive pro-government demonstrations.

The new authority calling itself The Revolutionary Command Council initiated a socialist programme- first nationalising the oil companies, fixing a minimum wage, extending the welfare and health systems and slashing the obscene rents being charged by property owners. A limit was imposed on the rents that landlords could charge, fixing maximum rents at about one third of the pre-revolutionary level. Tripoli untill then had been the most expensive city in the Middle East. Many large properties were taken over and let to the people at low rents. The vast sprawling shanty town just outside Tripoli was torn down and replaced by new workers' housing projects. The Kingdom of Libya became The Libyan Arab Republic and shortly after was re-named The Libyan Arab Socialist Jamahariyah (or State of the Masses).

Later, a law was enacted making it illegal to own more than one house. I can recall an argument in one class with a student who attacked Gadaffi for this, with myself defending the law saying it would solve the housing problem in my country.

With only about 20% literacy in 1969, by 1980 this had increased to over 90%. Education was given priority with a large proportion of the oil wealth being spent on new schools and colleges.

The new government quickly demonstrated its anti-imperialist credentials by kicking the Americans out of the huge Wheelus Air Base for which they never forgave Gadaffi as it was their key base in the Mediterranean. Similarly Britain was expelled from its military base at El Adem, and the days on which these events happened became national holidays. In the first year the large Italian community which owed its origin to the fascist occupation was expelled from the country, and the commercial life of Tripoli which Italians had dominated came under the control of Libyans.

Libya joined the socialist countries in giving support and aid to anti-imperialist movements, especially to the Palestinian cause and the struggle of the ANC against the apartheid regime in South Africa. It should be noted that Colonel Gadaffi was the first national leader whom Nelson Mandela visited after his release. When criticised for doing this, he countered by saying that Libya above all other countries had given the most support to the anti-apartheid movement and he wanted to thank the Libyan leader for this.

Gadaffi outlined his concept of government in 'The Green Book', which essentially was an attempt to establish a form of government not based on representative institutions but on Peoples' Commitees which are supposed to deliver a form of grass roots directly participatory democracy. How effective this has been is difficult to assess, but it appears to have been a genuine attempt to empower ordinary Libyans.

To say, as many in the media and Libyan dissidents are claiming, that Libyans have been enduring 42 years of oppression since 1st September 1969 is not borne out by my own experience of living and working in Libya. During the four years I spent there between 1969 and 1980 at different periods I never sensed any atmosphere of repression. In fact the few Libyans I did encounter who criticised the government did not appear afraid to voice their opinions and among the large number I mixed with, including the many Libyan friends my wife and I had, most expressed their support.

There are claims that the east, particularly Benghazi, has not received equal treatment with the west of Libya and that a feeling of being discriminated against in more recent years has led to the growth of an opposition which saw the events in neighbouring Tunisia and Egypt as an opportunity to rise up against the regime. This may be the case, though it seems likely that Gadaffi still commands widespread support in the rest of Libya, especially Tripoli where the majority of the population live. The army, unlike in Tunisia and Egypt, has stayed largely loyal to the government and continues to fight bravely in spite of the airstrikes by NATO countries.

Some will say that my experience of life in Libya was 31 years ago and that a lot could have changed since then and I have to accept that my knowledge of the history of the new Libya since 1980 is very limited. But I think that we need to be very suspicious of some of the negative propaganda furnished by the Western media.

The conviction of Al Megrahi for the Lockerbie bombing is almost certainly unsafe as it is far more likely to have been the work of Iran and the evidence presented was totally inadequate, which is the view of some of the victims' families. Many of the stories we read about are unsubstantiated, though it does seem that an Islamist insurgency in the 1990's was put down pretty ferociously and that a number of prisoners taken during that conflict were shot during a riot at Abu Salim prison. The figure of 1,000 put out by dissidents is no doubt a huge exaggeration. The riot as far as can be ascertained started after some prison guards were held hostage.

The assault on Libya has nothing to do with 'humanitarianism'. It has gone far beyond Security Council Resolution 1973 in taking sides with the anti-government forces in what is clearly a civil war. Now Cameron and Sarkozy are clamouring to actually arm the rebels, or should we call them insurgents, and US officials have admitted that CIA ground forces have been operating inside Libya for several weeks. This is an imperialist intervention, with the aim of regaining Western control of a Third World country.

Libya : African Union mediation hindered by NATO for 18 days

An African Union delegation finally managed to meet with Colonel Muammar Gaddafi in Tripoli on Sunday, 10 April 2011. At the end of the talks, the head of the delegation, South African President Jacob Zuma, told the press that the "road map" leading out of the crisis had been accepted by the "Brother Leader".

Composed of AU Secretary General Jean Ping and the Presidents of South Africa, Mali (Amadou Toumani Touré), Mauritania (Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz) and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Denis Sassou Nguesso), the delegation headed for Benghazi for talks with the National Transitional Council.

The "road map" was crafted by the AU ad hoc committee on 19 March in Nouakchott, Mauritania, i.e. the same day the allied military operations were launched.
It was adopted on 23 March by the AU Peace and Security Council. Ever since, the AU desperately attempted to reach Tripoli to clinch the deal with Colonel Gaddafi, but the coalition stood in its way. It took some arduous shuttle diplomacy, including a referral for the UN Secretary-General to coordinate with NATO, before an air corridor for the AU delegation was finally opened.

Western leaders have consistently told public opinion that the military operations were backed by the African Union, while in truth the AU has denounced the use of force, boycotted the Paris (19 March) and London (29 March)conferences convened by the coalition, and accused NATO of exceeding the UN mandate.
The coalition de facto obstructed the negotiations andplunged into 18 days of unbridled bombardments against Libya. As could unfortunately be expected, the Libyan rebels’ Western advisers have prodded them to reject the "road map". Consequently, before "any" negotiation, the National Transitional Council has posed a precondition: Colonel Gaddafi’s capitulation.

No Evidence Of Gaddafi Violence, Say Britons
Posted: 2011/04/20
From: Mathaba

The Libyan government has renewed its call for independent fact-finding experts to come to the country to assess allegations of violence against civilians.


Speaking to Sky News, deputy foreign minister Khalid Kaim said: "We are asking for professional fact-finding missions.
"We asked the British government for this in the first week of the conflict but never received a reply. When we have claim and counter-claim, this is unacceptable."

It comes as the United Nations outlines plans for a humanitarian team to be sent to the besieged city of Misratah.

It also follows the surprise finding of a British campaign group who claimed they had seen 'no evidence' that Colonel Gaddafi's forces had attacked, bombed or killed any civilians in western Libya, despite widespread condemnation of the regime from organisations such as the UN, the African Court of Human Rights and the International Criminal Court.

The group spent a week in Tripoli and other towns

The mission, from British Civilians For Peace in Libya, led by Dave Roberts, of the Socialist Labour Party, spent a week touring Tripoli and a number of other towns in the west of Libya.

The 13-person group comprised a number of humanitarian campaigners involved in projects in Ramallah and Gaza, as well as film-makers, bloggers and political activists.

They travelled to Libya last week after forming a few days earlier.

It is unclear who funded their visit.

In their interim findings, the campaign group claimed they had been able to "corroborate civilian casualties and fatalities due to Nato bombing" but "could find no evidence that three areas of Tripoli cited in UN resolution 1973 had been subjected to government forces bombardment".

We are deficient but we’re the only people doing this… there is a need for an independent international fact-finding intervention

Dave Roberts, British Civilians For Peace in Libya
Although Mr Roberts acknowledged the group's visit had been facilitated and overseen by minders from the Libyan Government and a Libyan non-governmental organisation (NGO), he claimed they had been able to speak freely to organisations and individuals in many towns in western Libya, although not those which have seen the most significant fighting in recent weeks, such as Misratah, or Yafran, Zintan and Nalut in the Nafusa mountain range.

Among the towns the campaign group visited were Zawiyah, Bin Walid, Tajoura, Fashloom and Suk Jooma.

The group's interim report also criticised media coverage of events in Libya, saying: "We are concerned that Western media outlets are failing in their duty to report on the conflict truthfully."

Speaking at the news conference in Tripoli, Mr Roberts referred to the restrictions that had been put on journalists, saying "one of the reasons you are being locked up is because your independence is being questioned".

British Civilians For Peace in Libya
David Roberts
Dr Anour Izzadine
Nidaa Sabbagh
Manzur Sadaq
Baboo Zanghar
Ishmahil Blagrove
Majed Sabbagh
Richard Mejeh
Mohamed Elhaddad
Martin Longhurst
Agab Eldoor Khamis
Mohielddin Zakaria
Sukant Chandan

However, when Sky’s chief correspondent Stuart Ramsay put to the delegates that Sky News had recorded footage in Zawiyah which showed civilians and children being severely injured during government bombardment, it was unclear whether the campaigners had seen the report, or factored in reports like it in their conclusions.

Indeed, they admitted that they had not conducted any research into wider media reporting or into video posted online on social media networks by those who claim they witnessed the onslaughts.

Mr Roberts acknowledged that he and his fellow delegates were "not experts", adding: "We are deficient but we're the only people doing this… there is a need for an independent international fact-finding intervention by a professional, credible and acceptable organisation."

When asked by journalists whether they had sought access to detainees in Libyan prisons, Mr Roberts said they had not but would take the suggestion on board.

Sources in Tripoli who oppose the Gaddafi government have told Sky News they believe several thousand people in the city have been arrested and continue to be detained on suspicion of holding anti-regime views.

In New York, a UN spokesman reiterated the importance of allowing humanitarian missions to access the country.

"The Libyan government said that it would ensure unimpeded access through the Tunisian border into Libya up to Tripoli and said it would ensure safe passage for humanitarian workers to enter areas where the government of Libya is in control," he said.



Iraq 1990; Yugoslavia 1999; Afghanistan 2001; Iraq 2003 ... Libya 2011

7 - Depleted Uranium : The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War
by Leuren Moret

By most accounts, the U.S. has embarked on another humanitarian war, and its fifth one, using depleted uranium. In this compelling 2004 study, geoscientist and radiation expert Leuren Moret paints a bold picture of the pervasive and devastating effects of this "silent killer that will not go away". However, beyond its much-touted military advantages, Moret suggests that depleted uranium serves as a deadly instrument for furthering Washington’s unavowed geo-strategic agenda, as in Libya today.


16 APRIL 2011

Berkeley (États-Unis)

Brzezinski’s map of the Eurasian Chessboard South Region: “This huge region, torn by volatile hatreds and surrounded by competing powerful neighbors, is likely to be a major battlefield, both for wars among nation-states and, more likely, for protracted ethnic and religious violence. Whether India acts as a restraint or whether it takes advantage of some opportunity to impose its will on Pakistan will greatly affect the regional scope of the likely conflicts. The internal strains within Turkey and Iran are likely not only to get worse but to greatly reduce the stabilizing role these states are capable of playing within this volcanic region. Such developments will in turn make it more difficult to assimilate the new Central Asian states into the international community, while also adversely affecting the American-dominated security of the Persian Gulf region. In any case, both America and the international community may be faced here with a challenge that will dwarf the recent crisis in the former Yugoslavia.” Zbigniew Brzezinski The use of depleted uranium weaponry by the United States, defying all international treaties, will slowly annihilate all species on earth including the human species, and yet this country continues to do so with full knowledge of its destructive potential.

Since 1991, the United States has staged four wars using depleted uranium weaponry, illegal under all international treaties, conventions and agreements, as well as under the US military law. The continued use of this illegal radioactive weaponry, which has already contaminated vast regions with low level radiation and will contaminate other parts of the world over time, is indeed a world affair and an international issue. The deeper purpose is revealed by comparing regions now contaminated with depleted uranium — from Egypt, the Middle East, Central Asia and the northern half of India — to the US geostrategic imperatives described in Zbigniew Brzezinski’s 1997 book The Grand Chessboard.

The fact is that the United States and its military partners have staged four nuclear wars, "slipping nukes under the wire" by using dirty bombs and dirty weapons in countries the US needs to control. Depleted uranium aerosols will permanently contaminate vast regions and slowly destroy the genetic future of populations living in those regions, where there are resources which the US must control, in order to establish and maintain American primacy.

Described as the Trojan Horse of nuclear war, depleted uranium is the weapon that keeps killing. The half-life of Uranium-238 is 4.5 billion years, the age of the earth. And, as Uranium-238 decays into daughter radioactive products, in four steps before turning into lead, it continues to release more radiation at each step. There is no way to turn it off, and there is no way to clean it up. It meets the US Government’s own definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction.

After forming microscopic and submicroscopic insoluble Uranium oxide particles on the battlefield, they remain suspended in air and travel around the earth as a radioactive component of atmospheric dust, contaminating the environment, indiscriminately killing, maiming and causing disease in all living things where rain, snow and moisture remove it from the atmosphere. Global radioactive contamination from atmospheric testing was the equivalent of 40,000 Hiroshima bombs, and still contaminates the atmosphere and lower orbital space today. The amount of low level radioactive pollution from depleted uranium released since 1991, is many times more (deposited internally in the body), than was released from atmospheric testing fallout.

A 2003 independent report for the European Parliament by the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR), reports that based on Chernobyl studies, low level radiation risk is 100 to 1000 times greater than the International Committee for Radiation Protection models estimate which are based on the flawed Atomic and Hydrogen Bomb Studies conducted by the US Government. Referring to the extreme killing effects of radiation on biological systems, Dr. Rosalie Bertell, one of the 46 international radiation expert authors of the ECRR report, describes it as:

"The concept of species annihilation means a relatively swift, deliberately induced end to history, culture, science, biological reproduction and memory. It is the ultimate human rejection of the gift of life, an act which requires a new word to describe it: omnicide."

1943 Manhattan Project blueprint for Depleted Uranium
In a declassified memo to General Leslie R. Groves, dated October 30, 1943, three of the top physicists in the Manhattan Project, Dr James B Conant, A. H. Compton, and H. C. Urey, made their recommendation, as members of the Subcommittee of the S-1 Executive Committee on the Use of Radioactive Materials:

as a Military Weapon:

"As a gas warfare instrument the material would be ground into particles of microscopic size to form dust and smoke and distributed by a ground-fired projectile, land vehicles, or aerial bombs. In this form it would be inhaled by personnel. The amount necessary to cause death to a person inhaling the material is extremely small … There are no known methods of treatment for such a casualty … it will permeate a standard gas mask filter in quantities large enough to be extremely damaging."

as a Terrain Contaminant:

"To be used in this manner, the radioactive materials would be spread on the ground either from the air or from the ground if in enemy controlled territory. In order to deny terrain to either side except at the expense of exposing personnel to harmful radiations … Areas so contaminated by radioactive material would be dangerous until the slow natural decay of the material took place … for average terrain no decontaminating methods are known. No effective protective clothing for personnel seems possible of development. … Reservoirs or wells would be contaminated or food poisoned with an effect similar to that resulting from inhalation of dust or smoke."

Internal Exposure:

"… Particles smaller than 1µ [micron] are more likely to be deposited in the alveoli where they will either remain indefinitely or be absorbed into the lymphatics or blood. … could get into the gastro-intestinal tract from polluted water, or food, or air. … may be absorbed from the lungs or G-I tract into the blood and so distributed throughout the body."

Both the fission products and depleted uranium waste from the Atomic Bomb Project were to be utilised under this plan. The pyrophoric nature of depleted uranium, which causes it to begin to burn at very low temperatures from friction in the gun barrel, made it an ideal radioactive gas weapon then and now. Also it was more available because the amount of depleted uranium produced was much greater than the amount of fission products produced in 1943.

Britain had thoughts of using poisoned gas on Iraq long before 1991:

"I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilized tribes. The moral effect should be good... and it would spread a lively terror..." (Winston Churchill commenting on the British use of poison gas against the Iraqis after the First World War).

Guided Weapons Systems
Depleted uranium weapons were first given by the US to Israel for use under US supervision in the 1973 Sinai war against the Arabs. Since then the US has tested, manufactured, and sold depleted uranium weapons systems to 29 countries. An international taboo prevented their use until 1991, when the US broke the taboo and used them for the first time, on the battlefields of Iraq and Kuwait.

The US military admitted using depleted uranium projectiles in tanks and planes, but warheads in missiles and bombs are classified or referred to as a ‘dense’ or ‘mystery metal’. Dai Williams, a researcher at the 2003 World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference, reported finding 11 US patents for guided weapons systems with the term ‘depleted uranium’ or ‘dense metal’, which from the density can only be depleted uranium or tungsten, in order to fit the dimensions of the warhead.

Hard target guided weapons in 2002 : smart bombs & cruise missiles with "dense metal" warheads (updated September 2002). Warhead weights include explosives ( 20%) and casing. Dense metal ballast or liners (suspected to be DU) estimated to be 50-75% of warhead weight - necessary to double the density of previous versions. AUP = Advanced penetrators. S/CH = Shaped Charge. BR = BROACH Multiple Warhead System (S/CH+AUP). P = older ’heavy metal’ penetrators. © Dai Williams 2002 source : Depleted Uranium weapons in 2001-2002 : Occupational, public and environmental health issues - Mystery Metal Nightmare in Afghanistan ? Collected studies and public domain sources compiled by Dai Williams, first edition 31 January 2002. Extensive carpet bombing, grid bombing, and the frequent use of missiles and depleted uranium bullets on buildings in densely populated areas has occurred in Iraq, Yugoslavia, and Afghanistan. The discovery that bomb craters in Yugoslavia in 1999 were radioactive, and that an unexploded missile in 1999 contained a depleted uranium warhead, implies that the total amount of depleted uranium used since 1991 has been greatly underestimated. Of even greater concern, is that 100 per cent of the depleted uranium in bombs and missiles is aerosolized upon impact and immediately released into the atmosphere. This amount can be as much as 1.5 tons in the large bombs. In bullets and cannon shells, the amount aerosolized is 40-70 per cent, leaving pieces and unexploded shells in the environment, to provide new sources of radioactive dust and contamination of the groundwater from dissolved depleted uranium metal long after the battles are over, as reported in a 2003 report by the UN Environmental Program on Yugoslavia. Considering that the US has admitted using 34 tons of depleted uranium from bullets and cannon shells in Yugoslavia, and the fact that 35,000 NATO bombing missions occurred there in 1999, potentially the amount of depleted uranium contaminating Yugoslavia and transboundary drift into surrounding countries is staggering.

Because of mysterious illnesses and post-war birth defects reported among Gulf War veterans and civilians in southern Iraq, and radiation related illnesses in UN Peacekeepers serving in Yugoslavia, growing concerns about radiation effects and environmental damage has stirred up international outrage about the use of radioactive weapons by the US after 1991. At the 2003 meeting of parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, discussing the U.S. desire to maintain its nuclear weapons stockpile, the Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi AKIBA stated,

"It is incumbent upon the rest of the world ... to stand up now and tell all of our military leaders that we refuse to be threatened or protected by nuclear weapons. We refuse to live in a world of continually recycled fear and hatred".

Illegal Under International Law
Four reasons why using depleted uranium weapons violates the UN Convention on Human Rights:

Legality test for weapons under International Law

Temporal Test: Weapons must not continue to act after the battle is over.

Environmental Test: Weapons must not be unduly harmful to the environment.

Territorial Test: Weapons must not act off of the battlefield.

Humaneness Test: Weapons must not kill or wound inhumanly.

International Human Rights and humanitarian lawyer, Karen Parker, determined that depleted uranium weaponry fails the four tests for legal weapons under international law, and that it is also illegal under the definition of a ‘poison’ weapon. Through Karen Parker’s continued efforts, a sub-commission of the UN Human Rights Commission determined in 1996 that depleted uranium is a weapon of mass destruction that should not be used:

UN Resolution 1996/16 on Stopping the Use of Depleted Uranium - DU

The military use of DU violates current international humanitarian law, including the principle that there is no unlimited right to choose the means and methods of warfare (Art. 22 Hague Convention VI (HCIV); Art. 35 of the Additional Protocol to the Geneva (GP1); the ban on causing unnecessary suffering and superfluous injury (Art. 23 §le HCIV; Art. 35 §2 GP1), indiscriminate warfare (Art. 51 §4c and 5b GP1) as well as the use of poison or poisoned weapons.

The deployment and use of DU violate the principles of international environmental and human rights protection. They contradict the right to life established by the Resolution 1996/16 of the UN Subcommittee on Human Rights.

Four Nuclear Wars

Henry Kissinger:"Military Men Are Just Dumb, Stupid, Animals To Be Used As Pawns In Foreign Policy"Although restricted to battlefields in Iraq and Kuwait, the 1991 Gulf War was one of the most toxic and environmentally devastating wars in world history. Oil well fires, the bombing of oil tankers and oil wells which released millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Arabia and desert, and the devastation from tanks and heavy equipment destroyed the desert ecosystem. The long term and far reaching effects, and dispersal of at least 340 tons of depleted uranium weapons, had a global environmental effect. Smoke from the oil fires was later found in deposits in South America, the Himalayas and Hawaii. Large annual dust storms originating in North Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia will quickly spread the radioactive contamination around the world, and weathering of old depleted uranium munitions on battlefields and other areas will provide new sources of radioactive contamination in future years. Downwind from the radioactive devastation in Iraq, Israel is also suffering from large increases in breast cancer, leukemia and childhood diabetes.

Radiation respects no borders, no socioeconomic class, and no religion

The expendability of the sanctity of life to achieve US political ends was described by US soldiers on the ground, and from the air, along the Highway of Death in Iraq in 1991:

"Iraqi soldiers [whether they] be young boys or old men. They were a sad sight, with absolutely no fight left in them. Their leaders had cut their Achilles’ tendons so they couldn’t run away and then left them. What weapons they had were in bad repair and little ammunition was on hand. They were hungry, cold, and scared. The hate I had for any Iraqi dissipated. These people had no business being on a battlefield." (Seymour Hersh, "Overwhelming Force", New Yorker, May 22, 2000; full text.)

American pilots bombing and strafing, with depleted uranium weapons, helpless retreating Iraqi soldiers who had already surrendered, exclaimed:

"We toasted him…. we hit the jackpot….a turkey shoot….shooting fish in a barrel….basically just sitting ducks… There’s just nothing like it. It’s the biggest Fourth of July show you’ve ever seen, and to see those tanks just ‘boom’, and more stuff just keeps spewing out of them… they just become white hot. It’s wonderful."
(Los Angeles Times and Washington Post, both February 27, 1991)

Nearly 700,000 American Gulf War Veterans returned to the US from a war that lasted just a few weeks. Today more than 240,000 of those soldiers are on permanent medical disability, and over 11,000 are dead. In a US Government study on post-Gulf War babies born to 251 veterans, 67 per cent of the babies were reported to have serious illnesses or serious birth defects. They were born without eyes, ears, had missing organs, fused fingers, thyroid or other malfunctions. Depleted uranium in the semen of the soldiers internally contaminated their wives. Severe birth defects have been reported in babies born to contaminated civilians in Iraq, Yugoslavia, and Afghanistan and the incidence and severity of defects is increasing over time. Women in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq are afraid now to have babies, and when they do give birth, instead of asking if it is a girl or a boy, they ask ‘is it normal?’.

Known illnesses inflicted by internationalization of Depleted Uranium particles
(See list compiled by Leuren Moret from Interviews with Gulf War Vets and their families)

Soldiers who served in Bradley fighting vehicles, where it was common to sit on ammunition boxes where depleted uranium ammunition was stored, are now reporting that many have rectal cancer.

For the first time, medical doctors in Yugoslavia and Iraq have reported multiple in situ unrelated cancers developing in patients, and even in families who are living in highly contaminated areas. Even stranger, they report that cancer was unknown in previous generations. Very rare and unusual cancers and birth defects have also been reported to be increasing above normal levels prior to 1991, not only in war torn countries, but in neighbouring countries from transboundary contamination.

Dr. Keith Baverstock, a senior radiation advisor who was on the staff of the World Health Organization, co-authored a report in November 2001, warning that the long-term health effects of depleted uranium would endanger Iraq’s civilian population, and that the dry climate would increase exposure from the tiny particles blowing around and be inhaled for years to come. TheWHO refused to give him permission to publish the study, bowing to pressure from the IAEA. Dr. Baverstock released the damning report to the media in February 2004. Pekka Haavisto, Chairman of the UN Environment Program’s Post-Conflict Assessment Unit in Geneva, shares Baverstock’s anxiety about depleted uranium but UNEP experts have not been allowed into Iraq to assess the pollution.

"Depleted Uranium Scare" - Claimed by President George W. Bush on the official White House website:

"During the Gulf War, coalition forces used armor-piercing ammunition made from depleted uranium, which is ideal for the purpose because of its great density. In recent years, the Iraqi regime has made substantial efforts to promote the false claim that the depleted uranium rounds fired by coalition forces have caused cancers and birth defects in Iraq. Iraq has distributed horrifying pictures of children with birth defects and linked them to depleted uranium. The campaign has two major propaganda assets:"

"Uranium is a name that has frightening associations in the mind of the average person, which makes the lie relatively easy to sell; and Iraq could take advantage of an established international network of antinuclear activists who had already launched their own campaign against depleted uranium."

"But scientists working for the World Health Organization, the UN Environmental Programme, and the European Union could find no health effects linked to exposure to depleted uranium."

The US war in Afghanistan made it clear that this was not a war IN the third world, but a war AGAINST the third world. In Afghanistan where 800 to 1000 tons of depleted uranium was estimated to have been used in 2001, even uneducated Afghanis understand the impact these weapons have had on their children and on future generations:

"After the Americans destroyed our village and killed many of us, we also lost our houses and have nothing to eat. However, we would have endured these miseries and even accepted them, if the Americans had not sentenced us all to death. When I saw my deformed grandson, I realized that my hopes of the future have vanished for good, different from the hopelessness of the Russian barbarism, even though at that time I lost my older son Shafiqullah. This time, however, I know we are part of the invisible genocide brought on us by America, a silent death from which I know we will not escape."
Jooma Khan of Laghman province, March 2003)

In 1990, the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) wrote a report warning about the potential health and environmental catastrophe from the use of depleted uranium weapons. The health effects had been known for a long time. The report sent to the UK government warned "in their estimation, if 50 tonnes of residual DU dust remained ‘in the region’ there could be half a million extra cancers by the end of the century [2000]." Estimates of depleted uranium weapons used in 1991, now range from the Pentagon’s admitted 325 tons, to other scientific bodies who put the figure as high as 900 tons. That would make the number of estimated cancers as high as 9,000,000, depending on the amount used in the 1991 Gulf War. In the 2003 Gulf War, estimates of 2200 tons have been given — causing about 22,000,000 new cancer cases. Altogether the total number of cancer patients estimated using the UKAEA data would be 25,250,000. In July of 1998, the CIA estimated the population of Iraq to be approximately 24,683,313.

Ironically, the UN Resolution 661 calling for sanctions against Iraq, was signed on Hiroshima Day, August 6, 1990.

The Parallels
The parallels between Iraq, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan are startlingly similar. The weapons used, the unfair treaties offered by the US, and the bombing and destruction of the environment and entire infrastructure. In every city of Iraq and Yugoslavia, the television and radio stations were bombed.

Educational centres were targeted, and stores where educational materials were sold were destroyed on nearly the same day. Under UN sanctions, Iraq was not even allowed pencils for schoolchildren. Cultural antiquities and historical treasures were targeted and destroyed in all three countries, a kind of cultural and historical cleansing, a collective national psychic trauma.

The permanent radioactive contamination and environmental devastation of all three countries is unprecedented, resulting in huge increases in cancer and birth defects following the attacks. These will increase over time from unknown effects due to chronic exposure, increasing internal levels of radiation from depleted uranium dust, and permanent genetic effects passed on to future generations. Clearly, this has been a genocidal plan from the start.

Map of regions within a 1000 mile radius of Baghdad and Afghanistan which have been contaminated with depleted uranium since 1991. Depleted uranium dust will be repeatedly recycled throughout this dry region, and also carried around the world. More than ten times the amount of radiation, released during atmospheric testing, has been released from depleted uranium weaponry since 1991. In 2002 the US government admitted that every person living in the US between 1957 and 1963 was internally contaminated with radiation. Note that the contaminated region corresponds with the "South" region on the Eurasian chessboard (see above). What has happened to Human Rights, to the Rights of the Child, to civil society, and to common humanity?

It is up to the citizens of the world to stop the depleted uranium wars, and future nuclear wars, causing irreversible devastation. There are just a few generations left before the collapse of our environment, and then it will be too late. We can be no healthier than the health of the environment — we breathe the same air, drink the same water, eat food from the same soil.

"Our collective gene pool of life, evolving for hundreds of millions of years has been seriously damaged in less than the past fifty. The time remaining to reverse this culture of ‘lemming death’ is on the wane. In the future, what will you tell our grandchildren about what you did in the prime of your life to turn around this death process?" (Rosalie Bertell, 1982)

The Deeper Purpose: G*O*D*
[Gold, Oil, and Drugs]
"We must become the owners, or at any rate the controllers at the source, of at least a proportion of the oil which we require." (British Royal Commission, agreeing with Winston Churchill’s policy towards Iraq 1913).

"It is clear our nation is reliant upon big foreign oil. More and more of our imports come from overseas."
(US President George W. Bush, Beaverton, Oregon, Sep. 25, 2000).

"If they turn on the radars we’re going to blow up their goddamn SAMs (surface-to-air missiles). They know we own their country. We own their airspace... We dictate the way they live and talk. And that’s what’s great about America right now. It’s a good thing, especially when there’s a lot of oil out there we need."
(US Brig. General William Looney in 1999, referring to Iraq).

Millions of years ago, before India crashed into the Eurasian continent and uplifted the Himalayas, the ancient shallow Tethys sea stretched from the Atlantic across what is now the Mediterranean, Black, Caspian and Aral seas. Rich oil deposits are now located where ancient life accumulated and ‘cooked’ under just the right conditions to form large oil deposits in the ancient sediments. Long before 1991, Unocal in Afghanistan, Amoco in Yugoslavia, and various oil companies interested in Iraq oil deposits, had conducted extensive exploration and characterisation of oil deposits in the Middle East and Central Asian regions, including the northern half of India.

Britain has maintained an interest in Middle Eastern oil deposits for a century, and has been the staunchest military partner of the US since the first depleted uranium war in 1991 in Iraq. Germany, another military partner in Yugoslavia with forces now in Afghanistan, was one of the major economic beneficiaries of the breakup of Yugoslavia and the colonisation of the Balkans. US interest in Yugoslavia had much to do with building pipelines from Central Asia to the Mediterranean warm water ports in Yugoslavia.

A silent and hidden partnership between the US and Japan provided large amounts of cash from Japan to finance the 1991 Iraq and 1995/1999 Yugoslavian wars, with additional help in Afghanistan by providing not only cash, but fuel for the war, from Aegis warships of the Japanese Self Defense Forces in the Indian Ocean. Nippon Steel, Mitsubishi, and Halliburton are now partners in a Central Asian oil pipeline project.

In 2004, despite much citizen opposition in Japan, the Japanese government sent Self Defense Forces to Iraq for ‘reconstruction’. This action taken by the Japanese government, of placing troops on the ground in a war zone, will lead to rescinding Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, which forever prohibits military aggression by Japan.

The Iron Triangle (all under one roof): Military, Big Business, Politics
The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism — ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt

But what do oil, military partners, depleted uranium wars, and US foreign policy have to do with nuclear weapons? The answer came to me in 1991 when I became a whistleblower at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Laboratory near San Francisco, California. Richard Berta, the Western Regional Inspector for the Department of Energy, told me "The Pentagon exists for the oil companies… and the nuclear weapons labs exist for the Pentagon."

Depleted uranium was used beginning in 1991 for three reasons:

To test the radiobiological effects of 4th generation nuclear weapons, which are still under development.
To blur and break down the distinction between conventional and nuclear weapons.
To make it easier to reintroduce nuclear weapons into the US military arsenal.

Today, the US is number one in 4th generation nuclear weapons research and development, followed by Japan and Germany tied for number two, and Russia and other countries follow.

Depleted uranium and 4th generation nuclear weapons Map by Mika TSUTSUMI 12/12/03The Carlyle Group, a private massive equity firm, the 12th largest defense business with an obscenely high profit margin, is a business "arrangement" between the Bush and Bin Laden families, wealthy Saudis, former British Prime Minister John Major, James Baker III, Afsaneh Masheyekhi, Frank Carlucci, Colin Powell, other former US Government administrators, and Madeleine Albright’s daughter.

The Carlyle Group is the ‘gatekeeper’ to the Saudi investment community. It owns 70 percent of Lockheed Martin Marietta, the largest military contractor in the US, and because Carlyle is privately owned, has no scrutiny or accountability whatsoever. A journalist who calls himself ‘a skunk at the garden party’ described investigating the Carlyle Group, he said ‘it’s like shadow boxing with a ghost’.

The Group hires as lobbyists the best known politicians from around the world, in order to influence the politics of war, and privately profit from their previous public policies. The conflict of interest is obvious: President George W. Bush is creating wars as his father, former President George Bush, is globally peddling weapons and "protection". Lockheed Martin Marietta now owns Sandia Laboratories, a private contractor that makes the trigger for nuclear weapons, with a Sandia laboratory facility across the street from Los Alamos and Livermore National Laboratories, where the nuclear bombs are made.

At the May 2003 University of California Regents meeting which I attended, Admiral Linton Brooks was present and newly in charge of the nuclear weapons programme under the Department of Energy. Admiral Brooks informed California Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante and the UC Regents that the management contract for the nuclear weapons laboratories, held unchallenged by the University of California for over 60 years, will be put up for competitive bid in 2005.

The favoured institution, with a faculty member on the ‘blue ribbon committee’ making the contract award, is the University of Texas. This privatisation and management contract transfer of the US nuclear weapons programme will put control of the US nuclear weapons programme close to the Carlyle Group. The incestuous relationship between the US government, private companies, and the Bush and Bin Laden families in a way answers many of the lingering questions in everyone’s minds about many of the ill fated decisions and policies that have been implemented.


NATO using depleted uranium in Libya

RT interview with Conn Hallinan, a columnist with Foreign Policy in Focus, 13 April 2011


Reference documents:
Known Illnesses Inflicted by Internalization of Depleted Uranium Particles: List
Leuren Moret Speaking on Depleted Uranium: Nuclear Holocaust and The Politics of Radiation, Los Altos, California, 21 April 2003.
International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan written opinion of Judge N. Bhagwat
Question 11: What does the US Government know about depleted uranium (pdf download)
World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference
"A comparison of delayed radiobiological effects of depleted-uranium munitions versus fourth-generation nuclear weapons" by A. Gsponer, J.-P. Hurni, and B. Vitale, 4th International Conference of the Yugoslav Nuclear Society, Belgrade, September 30-October 4, 2002.
"Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons: The Physical Principles Of Thermonuclear Explosives, Inertial Confinement Fusion, And The Quest For Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons" by Andre Gsponer and Jean-Pierre Hurni


An interesting exchange of e-mails between Leuren Moret and a US Army Col Special Ops Green Beret (hidden identity):

From: "Leuren Moret"
To: < [US Army Col Special Ops Green Beret] >
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 00:56 AM
Subject: Re: Treachery And Treason
Hi John - Here is an article coming out in July in World Affairs Journal. Can you please tell me what you think and whose decision it could have been to use DU on the Arab world? It looks to me like it was in the 1970s.

From: < [US Army Col Special Ops Green Beret] >
To: "Leuren Moret"
Subject: Re: Treachery And Treason
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 11:10:01 -0700
Hi Leuren,
Your report is very comprehensive and compelling.
It begs the question WHO and WHY re the responsibility for the decision to create an area of deniability that covers the Arab world.
It seems credible that the decision to isolate the Arab occupied areas of the world was and is intentional for the express purpose of controlling the flow of oil from Russia, through the mid-east countries of Afghanistan and Iraq (with eventual expansion to Syria and Iran and North Africa, and Saudi Arabia) while simultaneously destroying the current population to preclude resistance. Deaths in the contested area as a direct result of DU is, in my opinion, the covert means by which CONTROL over these lands will be accomplished.
Systems must be in development to eventually provide automated CONTROL of the oil production mechanisms with minimum human exposure for maintenance. High altitude observation will CONTROL the threat of sabotage in ways perfected to secure Area 51 in Nevada.
Whose Idea was this scenario? Henry Kissinger’s fingerprints are all over this project. The Carlyle Group is in perfect position to carry out Henry’s design.
Take for example the exposure of Kissinger’s genocidal action by configuring over 3000 secret B-52 strikes (using multiple aircraft) on Cambodia (1969-72) as written in the book "Side Show". B-52’s would take off from Guam with assigned targets in North and South Vietnam only to receive in-flight changes of the coordinates to targets in Cambodia. Only the Command Pilot and the Navigator were aware of the changes, by design, to keep the bombing of Cambodia compartmentalized from other crew members to minimize compromising the illegal acts of war on a neutral country. This dovetails with the covert DU attack on the Arab World. It also provides the reason the US. Air Force ran out of 750 bombs during the Vietnam War. This also provides insight as to the diversion of the war on terrorism which began in Afghanistan only to be shifted, without justification, to Iraq, thereby cutting off the available resources to go after bin Laden and al Qaeda strongholds in Afghanistan. It is now apparent that the United States only wanted the appearance of going after bin Laden since he is an integral part of the Carlyle Group. These are the "sources and methods" which must be kept compartmented from the clueless.
Henry’s other quote re military is; "they are mindless cattle". But, then again, the military leadership excepts it’s existence as "expendable assets".
He would have made a wonderful Nazi. Right up there with Goebbels, Eichmann, Erlichman, Haldeman, und Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz.
We have definitely become the Aggressor Nation. I fear we will pay dearly for the criminal greed of those responsible.
I will wait until your material is published before passing it on to interested parties.
Strangely enough, the Trojan Horse inside a shield was the Green Beret emblem of the 10th Special Forces Group in Germany in the fifties and sixties....that was my first exposure to diabolical thinking and the "sources and methods" of the Agency.

'US To Recoup Libya Oil From China'

Interview with Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, former assistant secretary of US Treasury

Global Research, April 17, 2011
Press TV

Press TV has interviewed Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, former assistant secretary of US Treasury from Panama City, who gives his insight on the revolution in Libya and why US President Barack Obama needs to overthrow Qaddafi when no other US presidents did.

Press TV: Russia has criticized NATO for going far beyond its UN mandate. In other news a joint Op Ed is going to be written by Obama, Cameron and Sarkozy who have said that “leaving Qaddafi in power would be an unconscionable betrayal to the Libyan people”.

We do know that the mandate does not call for regime change; the Obama administration has been saying they are not in there for regime change; but things seem a little different now don't they?

Roberts: Yes they do. First of all, notice that the protests in Libya are different from the ones in Egypt or Yemen or Bahrain or Tunisia and the difference is that this is an armed rebellion.

There are more differences: another is that these protests originated in the eastern part of Libya where the oil is - they did not originate in the capital city. And we have heard from the beginning credible reports that the CIA is involved in the protests, and there have been a large number of press reports that the CIA has sent back to Libya its Libyan asset to head up the Libyan rebellion.

In my opinion, what this is about is to eliminate China from the Mediterranean. China has extensive energy investments and construction investments in Libya. They are looking to Africa as a future energy source.

The US is countering this by organizing the United States African Command (USAC), which Qaddafi refused to join. So that's the second reason for the Americans to want Qaddafi out.

And the third reason is that Libya controls part of the Mediterranean coast and it's not in American hands.

Press TV: Who are the revolutionaries. The US say they don't know who they're dealing with, but considering the CIA is on the ground in contact with revolutionaries - Who are the people under whom Libya will function in any post-Qaddafi era?

Roberts: Whether or not Libya functions under “revolutionaries” depends if the CIA wins - we don't know that yet. As you said earlier, the UN resolution puts constraints on what the European and American forces can achieve in Libya. They can have a no fly zone, but they are not supposed to be in there fighting together with the rebels.

But of course the CIA is. So we do have these violations of the UN resolution. If NATO, which is now the cover for the “world community,” succeeds in overthrowing Qaddafi, the next target will be Syria. Syria has already been demonized.

Why are they targeting Syria? - Because the Russians have a very large naval base in Syria. And it gives the Russian navy a presence in the Mediterranean; the US and NATO do not want that. If there is success in overthrowing Qaddafi, Syria is next.

Already, they are blaming Iran for Syria and Libya. Iran is a major target because it is an independent state that is not a puppet of the Western colonialists.

Press TV: With regards to the expansionist agenda of the West, when the UN mandate on Libya was debated in the UN Security Council, Russia did not veto it. Surely Russia must see this expansionist policy of the US, France and Britain.

Roberts: Yes they must see that; and the same for China. It's a greater threat to China because it has 50 major investment projects in eastern Libya. So the question is why did Russia and China abstain rather than veto and block? We don't know the answer.

Possibly the countries are thinking to let the Americans get further over- extended, or they may not have wanted to confront the US with a military or diplomatic position and have an onslaught of Western propaganda against them. We don't know the reasons, but we know they did abstain because they did not agree with the policy, and they continue to criticize it.

Press TV: A sizeable portion of Qaddafi's assets have been frozen in the US as well as some other countries. We also know that the Libyan revolutionaries have set up a central bank and that they have started limited production of oil and they are dealing with American and other Western firms. It begs the question that we've never seen something like this happen in the middle of a revolution. Don't you find that bizarre?

Roberts: Yes it's very bizarre and very suggestive. It brings back the fact of all the reports that the CIA is the originator of this so-called revolt and protest and is fomenting it and controlling it in a way that excludes China from its own Libyan oil investments.

In my opinion, what is going on is comparable to what the US and Britain did to Japan in the 1930s. When they cut Japan off from oil, from rubber, from minerals; that was the origin of World War II in the pacific. And now the Americans and the British are doing the same thing to China.

The difference is that China has nuclear weapons and it also has a stronger economy than do the Americans. And so the Americans are taking a very high risk not only with themselves, but with the rest of the world. The entire world is now at stake on American over-reach; American hubris - the drive for American hegemony over the world is driving the rest of the world into a World War.

Press TV: In the context of America's expansionist policies, how far do you think the US will stretch beyond the UN mandate? Are we going to see boots on the ground?

Roberts: Most likely - unless they can find some way of defeating Qaddafi without that. Ever since we've had Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and now Obama, what we've learned is law means nothing to the executive branch in the US. They don't obey our own laws; they don't obey international law; they violate all the civil liberties and buried the principal of habeas corpus, no crime without intent, and the ability for a defendant to be legally represented.

They don't pay any attention to law so they're not going to pay any attention to the UN. The UN is an American puppet organization and Washington will use it as a cover. So, yes, if they cannot run Qaddafi out they will put troops on the ground - that's why we have the French and the British involved. We're using the French elsewhere in Africa also; we use the British in Afghanistan - they're puppets.

These countries are not independent. Sarkozy doesn't report to the French people - he reports to Washington. The British PM doesn't report to the English people he reports to Washington. These are puppet rulers of an empire; they have nothing to do with their own people and we put them in office.

Press TV: So these other countries would welcome having NATO troops on the ground?

Roberts: Of course. They are in the CIAs pocket. It's a CIA operation, not a legitimate protest of the Libyan people. It's an armed rebellion that has no support in the capital city. It's taking place in the east where the oil is and is directed at China.

Press TV: Where do you see the situation headed? There seems to be a rift between NATO countries with Britain and France wanting to increase the momentum of these air strikes, but the US saying no, there is no need.

Roberts: The rift is not real. The rift is just part of the cover, just part of the propaganda. Qaddafi has been ruling for 40 years - he goes back to Gamal Abdel Nasser (before Anwar Sadat) who wanted to give independence to Egypt.

He (Qaddafi) was never before called a brutal dictator that has to be removed. No other president has ever said Qaddafi has to go. Not even Ronald Reagan who actually bombed Qaddafi's compound. But all of a sudden he has to go. Why?

Because he's blocking the US African Command, he controls part of the Mediterranean and he has let China in to find its energy needs for the future. Washington is trying to cripple its main rival, China, by denying China energy. That's what this is really about; a reaction by the US to China’s penetration of Africa.

If the US was concerned about humanitarianism, it wouldn't be killing all these people in Afghanistan and Pakistan with their drones and military strikes. Almost always it's civilians that are killed. And the US is reluctant to issue apologies about any of it. They say we thought we were killing Taliban or some other made-up enemy.

Press TV: Who will benefit from all of this other than the US? The other countries that comply with US wishes - What do they stand to gain from this?

Roberts: We are only talking about NATO countries, the American puppet states. Britain, France, Italy, Germany, all belong to the American empire. We've had troops stationed in Germany since 1945. You're talking about 66 years of American occupation of Germany. The Americans have military bases in Italy - how is that an independent country? France was somewhat independent until Washington put Sarkozy in power. So they all do what they're told.

Washington wants to rule Russia, China, Iran, and Africa, all of South America. Washington wants hegemony over the world. That's what the word hegemony means. And Washington will pursue it at all costs.


8 - Lobby, lobbification and the lobbified : the corruption of the USA’s elected representatives

By Lawrence Davidson

18 April 2011

Lawrence Davidson analyses the distorting effect of political lobbies on the USA’s elected representatives and, using the example of the Israel lobby, shows how the lobbied politicians end up representing the lobby and not their constituents or the national interest.

Lobbification is a word I have just coined for the corruptive process that bends politicians to the will of special interests, that is, to the will of lobbies. The result of lobbification can be seen in the stilted and fawning behaviour of the lobbified political brain. Politicians with lobbified brains become the obedient instruments of the lobbies which have captured their political souls. Below are a few examples of the results of lobbification.

An example from the House of Representatives
The majority of the politicians who sit on the US House Foreign Affairs Committee are victims of lobbification. Among the major lobbies that have, over the decades, carried out this corrupting process are the Zionist organizations in their various Jewish and Christian manifestations. In their present state, the lobbified minds of these committee members, so influential in the foreign policy formulation process of our country, are utterly incapable of questioning, much less defying, the hypnotic power of either American Zionists or the Israelis. Here is just one illustration of the resulting mental paralysis.

“...alas, the lobbified brain functions something like Israel’s apartheid wall. Meaningful questions about Israel and doubts about the real consequences of Zionism cannot easily get over or around the nine-metre-high conditioning that is lobbification”

On Tuesday 5 April 2011 three Israelis appeared before the US House Foreign Affairs Committee. Two were retired Israeli armed forces generals and one was Dore Gold, the president of the Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs. Gold is one of those transplanted Americans who have chosen careers as Israeli spokesmen. (As an aside, he is also an Inspector Clouseau look alike.) He served as Israeli ambassador to the United Nations and political advisor to former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Among other dubious accomplishments, it was Gold who convinced the Clinton administration not to press Israel on the issue of the Golan Heights. The Saudi ambassador to the US, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, once described him as "simply hatred’s scribe". Here is some of what Gold and his fellow Israelis told the Foreign Affairs Committee:

1. Israel is confronting a new diplomatic assault that could well strip it of territorial defences in the West Bank that have provided for its security for over 40 years..."

2. "The 1993 Oslo agreements envisioned a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with borders to be decided by the parties themselves and not imposed by international coalitions or by unilateral acts."

3. "Traditional US policy recognized that Israel is not expected to withdrew from all territories it captured in the 1967 Six Day War. This was enshrined in UN Security Council Resolution 242..."

4. "...the entire Middle East is engulfed in flames. Just as Israel faces complete strategic uncertainty ... it is being asked to acquiesce to unprecedented concessions that could put its very future at risk." Therefore, "...to agree to a full withdrawal from the West Bank and to acquiesce to the loss of defensible borders pose an unacceptable risk for the Jewish state."

During this lament our Congressional Representatives sat there, in their collective lobbified frame of mind, and swallowed it all in as if it were gospel. This was completely predictable. The Foreign Affairs Committee is chaired by Florida Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, an ardent anti-Castro Cuban American who has spent her political life doing two things: first, distorting our foreign policy toward Cuba so that no vestige of national interest can be found therein, and second, promoting a tactical alliance between reactionary Cuban American groups and the Zionists. Ros-Lehtinen has recently confirmed her lobbified status by demanding that Congress "make it US policy to demand that the UN General Assembly revoke and repudiate the Goldstone Report". She did this despite the fact that three of the four signatories of the report have avowed its accuracy and continued relevance. The senior Democratic Party member on the committee is Howard Berman who has never been able to figure out who he should represent more diligently, his California district constituents or Israel.

Both these leading committee members clearly suffer from lobbification and most of the other standing members also display this condition to one extent or another. As a result, when it came to the discussion that followed the Israelis’ presentation, all the possible probing questions remained unasked. Here are some of them, figuratively addressed to Ambassador Dore, and others:

1. What do you mean by "diplomatic assault", "imposed by international coalitions", and "unilateral acts"? Do you mean the rather feeble US and European suggestion that your country negotiate in good faith and cease its own series of illegal unilateral acts such as the ethnic cleansing of East Jerusalem?

2. And how is it that you are now telling us that, for the last 40 years, your "territorial defences" have made you secure? For the past 40 years you have been telling us how insecure you are! Are we to understand that your constant claim of insecurity was a gross exaggeration? Perhaps nothing more than an addictive frame of mind? Or has it been just a facade behind which you carry on expansion in violation of international law?

3. Why do you bring up the Oslo accords? For the last few decades you have been telling us that they are dead letters, irrelevant to current circumstances. You seem to trot them out when they serve your purposes and cast them into oblivion when they do not. Also, are you not aware that in the past your country has violated these accords at will?

4. Is Israel’s determined refusal to negotiate rational concessions really a function of the assertion that the "entire Middle East" is allegedly "engulfed in flames"? If we simply go back to a period when there was no "complete strategic uncertainty" we find that Israel’s position on compromise was exactly the same as it is today. So isn’t this new concern really a contrived excuse to justify your country’s refusal to come to just and fair settlement with the Palestinians?

5. Why are you bringing up the possibility of "full withdrawal" from the West Bank as if it was a spectre gazing over your shoulder? When is the last time the US government or the European Union demanded this of you? Is not the present understanding of the final character of borders based upon the 1967 Green Line one that includes mutually agreed upon and equitable land swaps? Is not this the recognized contemporary understanding of UN Resolution 242?

6. And what is this business of "defensible borders"? When was the last time your country’s borders proved indefensible to conventional military attack? Isn’t it true that, even without the West Bank, your borders have never been seriously crossed by such forces? Your vulnerability lies in your inability to counter guerrilla and terrorist attacks, and to prevent missile penetration. Ultimate security against these threats does not rest in a policy of colonial expansion but rather in an equitable peace agreement.

What a memorable and actually useful committee meeting it would have been if these or similar questions had been posed. But alas, the lobbified brain functions something like Israel’s apartheid wall. Meaningful questions about Israel and doubts about the real consequences of Zionism cannot easily get over or around the nine-metre-high conditioning that is lobbification.

An example from the US Senate
“Only the thoroughly lobbified brain can advocate cutting 500 million dollars from federal programmes for health and nutrition for women, infants and children and simultaneously insist on continuing to give Israel 3 billion dollars a year...”

The on-line magazine Politico tells us that "even as they push for huge cuts, 11 freshman GOP [Grand Old Party – the US Republican Party] senators say the US must continue to provide foreign aid to its strongest ally in the Middle East: Israel".

In a letter to Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) the security conscious 11 stated, "as we work to reduce wasteful government spending ... we must continue to prioritize the safety of our nation and the security of our allies, including Israel".

Only the thoroughly lobbified brain can advocate cutting 500 million dollars from federal programmes for health and nutrition for women, infants and children and simultaneously insist on continuing to give Israel 3 billion dollars a year – and, do so in the name of "prioritizing the safety of our nation"!

The senator who organized the letter to McConnell is Marco Rubio of Florida (a male version of Ros-Lehtinen) and he sits on what committee? The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, of course. His lobbified state apparently makes it impossible for him to see the connection between our open-ended support of Israel, Israel’s ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians and our nation’s insecurity. It should come as no surprise that Senator Rubio has said that the US must "stand with Israel without equivocation or hesitation" and cease pressuring Israel over its settlement policies.

As the approximately 206.8 million adult Americans go about their daily lives most probably do not realize that they, or at least the approximately 57 per cent who bother to vote in federal elections, have placed into positions of power individuals who have been corrupted by lobby power. This is due to the fact that most Americans do not understand and/or pay attention to how their own political system works. Few and far between are the school "civics" courses that, in theory, explain its intricacies. And, once the Republicans get done gutting the education budgets, those remaining courses will most likely disappear.

Ignorance is not bliss. It is often the prelude to sudden destruction. It is not bliss to be ignorant of the corruption that is undermining your government . Lobbification is synonymous with just that – a dangerous form of political corruption. Our political system is riddled with it. It has been so for a long time and the situation is not improving.

This condition has recently manifested itself in Wisconsin, Michigan, Maine, Ohio and a host of other states in the form of feverish acts of self-destruction. And, as we have seen, Congress has no immunity. Yet the citizenry goes blissfully about its business.

To quote the immortal Samuel Johnson, "Must helpless man, in ignorance sedate, roll darkling down the torrent of his fate? (Oxford Dictionary of Quotations, 2001, p. 411, No. 19).

Perhaps it is so.


9 - Lebanon – Wiki-Cables Tell of Treason, US Interference, Franklin Lamb
Posted: 10 Apr 2011

Veterans Today

Interview with Franklin Lamb in Beirut on the latest Wilkileaks from US Embassy Beirut and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL)

Franklin Lamb, a former Assistant Counsel of the US House Judiciary Committee at the US Congress and Professor of International Law at Northwestern College of Law in Oregon, earned his Law Degree at Boston University and his LLM, M.Phil, and PhD degrees at the London School of Economics. Following three summers at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Lamb was a visiting fellow at the Harvard Law School’s East Asian Legal Studies Center where he specialized in Chinese Law. He was the first westerner allowed by the government of China to visit the notorious “Ward Street” Prison in Shanghai. Lamb is doing research in Lebanon and works with the Palestine Civil Rights Campaign-Lebanon and the Sabra-Shatila Foundation. His new book, The Case for Palestinian Civil Rights in Lebanon, is due out shortly.

Q: Lebanon, for well-known geostrategic reasons is fixed in the cross-hairs of the conflict of the Middle East. Some analysts believe that there is more foreign intervention in Lebanon than in any Middle East country except Iraq. As tensions rise between Iran and America for influence in Lebanon, the issue of loyalty to Lebanon or Israel has entered the public discourse with new intensity. One issue hotly debated today in Lebanon is whether there were political leaders within the Lebanese government who assisted Israel in its invasion of Lebanon in 2006? Were there?

Franklin Lamb: Yes. Several members of the pro-US-Saudi March 14th “Team” regularly met with US officials during the 33-day conflict including then US Ambassador to Lebanon Jeffrey Feltman and then Undersecretary of State David Welch. Meetings, often secret, were also held after the 33 day conflict. At these meetings some of the Lebanaese officials tried to influence the terms of the cease fire. Some Lebanese officials wanted to delay a ceasefire in the hope that Israel would perform better and destroy Hezbollah, the political adversaries of the March 14 group.

Some Lebanese asked the US Embassy to forward advice to Israel or, in the case of Samir Geagea, asked Jeffrey Feltman to tell Israel not to bomb Christian areas as that would increase Christian support for the Lebanese Resistance but rather to instruct Israel to direct their bombings against Hezbollah areas.

Today the same individuals continue to meet with now US Ambassador Maura Connelly and with now Undersecretary of State Jeffrey Feltman.

Most were asked for their advice and gave it while others wanted the US and/or Israel to take certain actions that would undermine the National Lebanese Resistance lead by Hezbollah while enhancing the political position of the person and his political allies or confession

Q: Who are these people and what would possibly be their motive for this serious accusation?

Among those who have been publicly identified and have admitted the accuracy of Wilkileaks cables and media reports include Lebanese Forces leader, Samir Geagea, former Prime Ministers Fuad Siniora and Saad Hariri, current care taker Labor Minister Boutros Harb, then Minister of Defense Elias Murr, Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt, and half a dozen others.

Their common motive was to see Hezbollah defeated so that their team could continue to govern Lebanon without serious opposition. Some no doubt felt Hezbollah’s defeat would be good for Lebanon and expressed the view that Lebanon would benefit more from US-Saudi affiliation than building relations with Iran.

Q: If these men helped Israel or gave them a “green light” to commence military operations against Lebanon, what are their critics in Lebanon and the Lebanese media saying about their actions?

FL: Critics of the pro-US March 14th team are claiming that those who aided Israel have a direct shared legal responsibility for the deaths of the 1,200 Lebanese civilians who were killed in the invasion.

Q: Walid Jumblatt is head of Lebanon’s Progressive Socialist Party and the most prominent leader of the Druze community. Here’s an excerpt from a Wikileaks cable that suggests that he felt Israel should have continued the war.

Excerpt: “Jumblatt noted the heavy destruction of Lebanese infrastructure but bemoaned the irony that Hezbollah’s military infrastructure had not been seriously touched. Jumblatt explained that although March 14 must call for a cease-fire in public, it is hoping that Israel continues its military operations until it destroys Hezbollah’s military capabilities. “If there is a cease-fire now, Hezbollah wins,” said Jumblatt. “We don’t want it to stop….Responding to Jumblatt’s complaint that Israel is hitting targets that hurt the GOL while leaving Hezbollah strategically strong, the Ambassador asked Jumblatt what Israel should do to cause serious damage to Hezbollah. Jumblatt replied that Israel is still in the mindset of fighting classic battles with Arab armies. “You can’t win this kind of war with zero dead,” he said.

Jumblatt finally said what he meant; Israel will have to invade southern Lebanon. Israel must be careful to avoid massacres, but it should clear Hezbollah out of southern Lebanon. Then the LAF can replace the IDF once a cease-fire is reached.”

Q: I think most Americans would see Jumblatt’s comments as proof of treason—that he actively conspired with a foreign power in a way that assured the violent deaths of his fellow countrymen. Am I getting this wrong?

FL: No you are not, your assessment is exactly correct. Jumblatt has admitted that the leaked US Embassy cables accurately report his words. His explanation is that at that time he was a pillar of the March 14th team and wanted to see Hezbollah out of the South and out of Lebanese politics. “That’s how we play politics in Lebanon” he commented to a visiting American delegation. Today Jumblatt strongly supports Hezbollah and says that Lebanon must return to its Arab identity and commit to helping Palestinians obtain civil rights in Lebanon while declaring that only Israel is the enemy of Lebanon and that Palestine must be liberated. It is not known to what extent Jumblatt will be held accountable for his statements during the July 2006 War.

Q : How has Hezbollah responded to the release of the Wikileaks cables? Is the public more supportive of Hezbollah than before? What does the future hold for the conspirators?

FL: The Resistance expects any conspirators to stand trial and more Embassy cables are expected to provide specific details relating to a number of Lebanese officials.

Evidence continues to be gathered confirming earlier expressed suspicions of Lebanese politicians collaborating with Israel while having knowledge of, but failing to report, Mossad units in Lebanon.

Hezbollah has said that there are more revelations to come and that those who can be proven to have worked for Israel must be tried for treason. The Resistance believes that many Lebanese were killed by Israel during the July War as a direct result of March 14th collaboration with Israel and with the US Embassy which they believe functioned as a branch operations center for Israel.

Many more US Embassy and State Department memos are expected and observers here emphasize that this is why there is currently such an intense contest on the new government’s appointment to fill the Ministry of Interior cabinet position and this has delayed government formation for the past two months. Whoever becomes Interior Minister will have a major influence over who is brought to trial for treason stemming from collaboration with Israel before, during, and following the July 2006 War.

Regarding whether the public is more supportive of Hezbollah than before, I would say the public supports Hezbollah’s domestic legislative program and its resistance to Israeli aggression. Some of Hezbollah’s achievements have been blurred a bit by the US-Israel campaign of defamation and vilification of the Resistance. Nearly daily attacks on the Resistance, its arms, accusations that it was involved in the 2/14/05 assassination of Prime Minister Hariri, US threats against Lebanese banks, cutting off aid to Lebanon etc. have taken at least a modest toll in public confidence.

Among the US Embassy-State Department cables made public this week in Lebanon are the following revelations:

Lebanese Forces head Samir Geagea informed then US Ambassador Sison on May 9, 2008 that” he has 10,000 Fighters ready and willing to fight Hezbollah but that they “may need to be provided with weapons and some more training would be good.” In addition, Geagea stressed to Sisson the need for the U.S. to pressure the Lebanese army to perform its duties because he wasn’t sure that it was capable of doing so, noting that the army failed in protecting Christian areas in Lebanon. He also suggested that Arab peacekeeping forces be deployed in Lebanon, which according to Sison was first proposed by Saudi Arabia.

Some examples of recently leaked US Embassy cables include:
In 2008 an Israeli official requested in that the United States directly support the March 14 camp instead of the Lebanese state out of fears that Hezbollah would soon take over the cabinet. This leaded US Embassy cable came to light on 4/6/11.Nimrod Barkan, then head of Israel’s Foreign Ministry Center for Policy Research, made his statements during a meeting with U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman in Israel. “The March 14 camp is brave, but it has been castrated,” the Israeli official said. Feltman regularly briefs Mossad on developments in Lebanon in the run up to the next Israeli invasion. Feltman emphasized the need to support the Lebanese army against Hezbollah, to which Barkan chastised Feltman that it would be useless “because the LAF would never directly confront Hizbullah and it could eventually fall under its control.” Barkan called for a US-Saudi funded Sunni militia to be organized. Feltman replied that it was an idea worth exploring.
Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat stressed in a number of leaked U.S. Embassy cables from 2006 and 2009 published on 3/6/11, Lebanon’s need for funds after the July 2006 war. A July 11, 2006, cable spoke of meeting between the MP and then U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Jeffery Feltman during which he told him about his July 7 visit to Saudi Arabia which he said was aimed at convincing newly crowned Saudi King Abdullah to finance the March 14 camp.He told the monarch that the funding “was aimed at confronting the Shiite expansion in Lebanon and the region.” “King Abdullah was not receptive to the suggestion … his predecessor was much more generous,” noted Jumblat.
During a later cable, dated August 21, 2006, Jumblatt said that the Lebanese government should “act quickly to defeat Hizbullah’s reconstruction efforts” after the July 2006 war. Jumblat calculated that the some 200 million dollars would be needed to rebuild the 15,000 residential units Israel destroyed during the war, saying: “This is a tiny figured compared to Hariri’s capabilities!” “We currently don’t need democracy, but money,” the MP declared. A May 14, 2009, cable revealed that Jumblat and a number of March 14 officials “finally received Saudi funds.” What happened to these funds remains a mystery.
A leaked U.S. Embassy cable published on 4/8/11 revealed that Defense Minister Elias Murr had initially rejected on 12/16/08 a Russian grant of 77 tanks and 50,000 of their ammunition, saying that the Lebanese had no need for them.
Murr changed his mind and told then U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Michele Sison that he had no choice but to accept the offer because if he rejected it, he would have been labeled as a traitor who is following an American agenda. According to Sison’s cable, Murr added that the Russian equipment could be used against Hezbollah, noting that it could also bolster the March 14 camp’s chances of winning the 2009 parliamentary elections, according to the cable. “The MiG jets are the best way to combat and destroy Hezbollah”, Murr stressed. The 12/18/08 cable revealed that Sison had opposed the MiG deal because they might be used against Israel were Israel to attack Lebanon. Murr later told Sisson Lebanon would not accept the MIGS before 2040. Sison reportedly quipped that Israel might not be around in 2040.
According to a WikiLeaks cable published on 4/8/11 then Prime minister Saad Hariri said during a meeting with U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State David Hale on 12/17/08 that the ownership of MiG jets by the army might complicate Israeli over flights but on the other hand the planes would further “weaken one of Hezbollah’s excuses to hold onto its arms.” Hariri told Hale: “Hezbollah is feeling threatened by the MiG deal and the party’s al-Manar TV station dealt with it (the issue) negatively,” he said, according to the cable. But then U.S. Ambassador Michele Sison contradicted Hariri in the cable that there was no negative reaction from the Shiite group on the MiG deal.” Sison wrote: “A Hezbollah representative has stressed in an official statement his support to arm the Lebanese military to confront Israel.” During his meeting with Hale, Hariri also stressed the importance of delivering MiG fighter jets to Lebanon to “fight terrorism in the Palestinian camps.” Ambassador Sison reportedly found this idea of Hariri’s a little bizarre.
A leaked U.S. Embassy cable published in Lebanon on 3/6/11 revealed that then Prime Minister Fouad Saniora had rejected a transfer of 500 and 300 million dollars to Lebanon aimed at rebuilding the country after the July 2006 war.The WikiLeaks cable spoke of a meeting between Saniora and then U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Jeffrey Feltman on August 18, 2006, during which the former explained that he rejected the aid money from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait “because he didn’t want the money to go to Speaker Nabih Berri’s pocket given that the man is a thief.” Regarding the war, the premier said that the Israeli attacks are only strengthening Hezbollah and not weakening it. Furthermore, he rejected accusations that the Lebanese government was ignoring United Nations Security Council resolution 1701, asking Feltman: “Doesn’t your government understand that the deployment of the Lebanese army in the South is an historic achievement?”
A US Embassy cable published on 3/6/11 asserts than Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblat voiced his concern over reports that the Mustaqbal (March 14th) movement was training 15,000 Sunni militias in Beirut and Tripoli. The MP stated that MP Saad Hariri’s establishment of private security companies in Beirut and Tripoli is a sign that some individuals are providing him with bad advice, especially ISF chief Ashraf Rifi.

Q: Does this derail US-Israeli plans for Lebanon? Will there now be less foreign influence on Lebanese politics?

FL: Maybe slightly in the near term these revelations may curtail US-Israel plans a bit.

But we must remember that the US-Israel axis is committed to the destruction and eradication of the Lebanese Resistance and curtailing Iranian influence in the Levant and while perhaps a dozen of US-Israel projects, including igniting a Sunni-Shia civil war in Lebanon have failed to date, we are actually seeing an intensification of foreign influence in Lebanon. One imagines there are many more pressures beyond the banks, US aid and a possible sanctions regime following any Special Tribunal for Lebanon convictions which we could see in late 2011 or 2012.

Q: What’s next for Lebanon?

FL: That is one tough question and I trust my motorbike mechanic or green grocers analysis more, even though some of we foreigners here are daily asked this question by our Lebanese friends and neighbor as if we know something they don’t.

However my 2 cents worth is that there will not be a civil war here. There will not be an Israeli invasion for at least the next year but more psych warfare in various forms that we have become used to here.

Domestically, I believe that Hezbollah will solidify its power in the new government and will have the opportunity to convince a majority of the Lebanese public that its domestic program can change their lives for the better. Hezbollah has the political power to enact broad domestic reforms that will affect nearly every Lebanese life for the better, regardless of Confession.

Hezbollah will face fierce opposition from some officials, even some allies, who may have been regularly pocketing a sizable chunk of Lebanon’s GDP. Hezbollah has the political power to enact exactly the reforms being demanded around the region in the Arab Awakening we are all experiencing.

What Hezbollah can do is historically breathtaking But do they have the political will to do it? Will they make good on their pledges to grant Palestinian refugees in Lebanon the most elementary civil right to work and to own a home and thus be true to their religion, morality and politics? I think they do but the road will be tough and it will test them. If they succeed, the era of Resistance in the Middle East will have significantly matured.

Q: Before we end, could you answer a couple of questions about the rather confusing status of the so-called Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL)? What is the status of the Rafiq Hariri Assassination case with the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL)?

FL: As you may recall the Prosecutor of the STL, Canadian jurist Daniel Bellemare has handed down a first batch of indictments to trial judge Daniel Fransen. Fransen is now reviewing Bellemare’s indictment. Fransen has to be satisfied that this is a prima facie, meaning that on the face of it there is enough substantial evidence that makes it likely that the Trial Chamber would be satisfied that the burden of proof has been met. The material presented by Prosecutor Bellemare to the pre-trial judge is not the ultimate test. It is only a pre-trial test to see if a trial is possible based on what the Prosecutor has submitted.

Pre-trial Judge Fransen raised certain questions of law with the Appeals Chamber and asked for their legal opinion. Their answers included decisions on the questions of law raised and their work amounted to 153 pages of fairly technical material. Presumably it will take Judge Fransen more time to digest it. There is no way to be sure but I would guess we might expect Fransen’s decision sometime in June.

Q: Can the new government of Lebanon stop the STL from continuing its proceedings? After all that’s why the former government collapsed.

FL: Not in my opinion. The STL was created by the UN Security Council. As the International Court of Justice has decided years ago, UNSC actions are the highest law in the international community and what the UN Security Council decides is binding on all members of the UN and I would argue on every country that is not a UN member state.

That is why jurists by and large are of the view that what the UNSC did with Resolution 1973 regarding the Libyan “no fly zone” is legal. This does not mean it’s necessarily legitimate. But for the international community it is legal because the UNSC decided it.

In addition, Lebanon signed an initial agreement with the United Nations back in 2007 but it failed to complete the process. Nothing happened in Lebanon after it was signed. It was not ratified by the parliament, The UN waited and waited until they decided not to wait any longer. The UNSC declared that it was going to proceed with the establishment of the tribunal based on the signed agreement. I believe the UN Security Council has the legal power to do so.

However, it will give the Office of the Defense an argument to challenge the legitimacy of the STL at trial by arguing that the STL was not established in a legitimate way and that therefore the STL has no jurisdiction to even hear the case. This same argument was made in the first trial of the Yugoslavia Tribunal. Once the names of those indicted are made public look for the Office of Defense to make this same argument in the Hariri assassination case

Q: If trial judge Daniel Fransen confirms Prosecutor Bellemare’s indictment what happens next?

FL: The indictment will be sent to Lebanon and Syria and anywhere else those indicted are thought to be residing. An effort will be made to serve personal copies on all those named in the indictment. If they cannot be located another method such as publication in the media might be used to give those indicted fair notice. If those indicted decide to appear at the Tribunal for trial they can have their own lawyers or use those at the Office of Defense which has great power and equal standing with the Office of the Prosecutor and the Trial Chambers.

If those indicted decide to ignore the proceedings they will be tried in absentia as though they were present and lawyers acting on their behalf from the Office of Defense will defend them.

Q: For the past couple of months we have read in the media that Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare asked the Lebanese authorities for more information. But this was after he handed in his indictment. Why does he want more information if he has completed his indictment which should have included all his evidence to support it?

FL: Actually, Bellemare has every right and arguably a duty to try to gather more evidence while he is awaiting the decision of the pre-trial judge on his submitted indictment. Bellemare is presumably doing everything he can to convince pre-Trial Judge Daniel Fransen to confirm it. He is free to file everything he can to present the strongest case he can muster. Once Bellesmare has submitted all else he has discovered that he thinks is relevant then it is up to the Trial Chamber to accept or reject his case against those he suspects of the Hariri assassination.

Veterans Today / Managing Editor : Thank you Mr. Lamb.



Posted: 10 Apr 2011

Mohamed Khodr

“Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.”

–Martin Luther King, Jr.

“Nothing can stand in the way of the power of millions of voices calling for change.”

–Barack Obama, DNC Speech, August 28, 2008

It is heartbreaking and tragic to watch innocent peaceful protesters, including women and children, throughout the Arab world being slaughtered with American weapons used by American supported and coddled tyrants who only serve the interests of the U.S. and Israel at the expense of the precious blood of their people.

According to a study published in the magazine Foreign Policy on March 31, 2011 titled “Children of the Revolution”, quote:

“Many children have died and countless more have been injured, orphaned, or displaced from their homes over the course of this year’s Arab uprisings. But the Arab Spring’s youngest are not only victims — leading chants in Cairo’s Tahrir Square to joining up with Libya’s rebel fighters to camping out in Pearl Square in Bahrain to being jailed for writing the graffiti that inspired Syria to rise up, the children of the Arab Spring are proving that the future belongs to them.

In Yemen, children have been at the forefront of protests – UNICEF counts at least 19 who have been killed by both snipers and explosions over the course of the protests that have gripped the nation since early February — an estimated 20 percent of the total casualties. Above, a young Yemeni boy wears a headband that says in Arabic “I’m the next martyr” during an anti-government protest in the capital Sanaa on March 27”.

Yemen is the poorest Arab nation and one of the most impoverished in the world with an annual GDP/per capita of $1,300, ranking 142nd in the world, according to the CIA Fact book. It has a population of about 24 million with 43% under the age of 15 according to the United Nations.

Yemen’s tyrant for 33 years, President Al Abdullah Saleh, has ruled Yemen with an iron fist utilizing the country’s wealth to not only enrich himself, family, and cronies but to buy and bribe loyalty of some of Yemen’s powerful tribes, military commanders, security police, intelligence apparatus, and forming his own private Republican Guard commanded by his son.

Under his dictatorship every political, economic educational, health and social development indicator has worsened dramatically.

Millions of Yemenies across the country in at least 16 of the 21 provinces in the country have been protesting for weeks demanding Saleh, his government, and his political party be removed from power. They not only want them removed but they demand that they be prosecuted for decades of oppression, murder, disappearance, imprisonment without trial, torture, massive abuse of human rights, and the embezzlement of billions of dollars, especially from oil revenues that began in 1984 with the discovery of oil by the U.S. Hunt Oil Company.

Like all Arab tyrants Saleh has ruled under the established “Emergency Laws” which give him carte blanche authority to decide the fate and destiny of his people.

During this civil and peaceful uprising demanding his resignation many reports have revealed that Saleh is spending millions of dollars around the country to gather tens of thousands of impoverished citizens to the capital Sana to show their support and loyalty to him and his dictatorial regime.

This murderous tyrant has used military force, security police, and hired thugs to unleash live ammunition, tear gas, sticks, and stones to murder thus far close to 200 civilians, including children, and injure thousands of protesters overwhelming the country’s meager health system already deprived of qualified physicians, nurses, necessary drugs, and surgical equipment. Yemenie physicians report that Saleh’s forces are also using internationally banned nerve gas against civilians who not only exhibit widespread neurological symptoms but often die.

Despite mass defection of prominent military officers, members of his political party, many in the diplomatic corps, even his son-in law, Saleh has refused to resign depending on the support of the United States due to his assistance in fighting Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula that has been accused of attacking U.S. interests including the attempted bombing of a U.S. airliner by the “underwear” bomber. However, many in Yemen believe that such an entity was created by President Saleh himself to garner U.S. financial and military support.

Saleh thus far has refused any mediation or proposal that calls for his resignation. The last mediation attempt was formulated by the Gulf nations, including Saudi Arabia, that asks for his resignation but guarantees the safe exist of him, his family, and cronies. It is unclear if under this proposal he’ll be able to keep his embezzled billions of dollars.

True to his irrational nature Saleh even refused this plan thereby severing his last Arab alliance.

Saleh’s rejection of all mediation attempts seals his only remaining fate: To resign under pressure or force and be arrested and prosecuted for his crimes against humanity.

Since 9/11 dictators have learned that the gateway to America’s political, economic and military blessing is to claim their alliance in its “war on terrorism”. .

Post 9/11 President Bush declared that Muslim extremists hate our freedoms and wish to end western civilization, a most irrational statement but a useful prelude to the illegal invasion of Iraq. Is it logical that a human being born free from a mother’s womb would hate freedom and prefer living under tyranny?

Bush’s statement is contradicted by the Pentagon’s own Defense Science Board that issued a report in September 2004 requested by Secretary Rumsfeld.

The report states:

“Muslims do not hate our freedom, but rather they hate our policies. The overwhelming majority voice their objections to what they see as one-sided support in favor of Israel and against Palestinian rights, and the long-standing, even increasing, support for what Muslims collectively see as tyrannies, most notably Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan and the Gulf states. Thus, when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy
to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy.’

Such honest assessments that challenge Israel’s hold on U.S Foreign policy and America’s blind support of Arab dictators are immediately discarded along with hundreds of similar reports into the dustbin of history never to be resurrected again.

Given the recent uprisings across the Middle East clamoring for freedom it seems to the Arabs that it’s the U.S. that hates their acquisition of freedom and not vice versa as it fears its loss of regional hegemony and the rise of Islamists.

U.S. policy in the Middle East is based on three parameters—Obtaining cheap oil which Saudi Arabia single handedly guarantees—an unquestioning support for Israel which the entire Muslim world opposes—and a blind commitment to the ill-defined “war on terrorism”.

All three parameters ensure Muslim animosity to the U.S. and guarantee recruiting success for Al Qaeda. Sadly the U.S. has deliberately ignored an honest debate and reevaluation of such foreign policy priorities due to domestic political, economic, and military interests. .

The U.S must realize that only a truly free and democratic Arab and Muslim world can defeat terrorism, develop beneficial relationships with the U.S. given their mutual economic interdependence, and provide a peaceful end to the Israeli Palestinian conflict despite Israel’s historical intransigence.

According to the New York Times, April 4, 2011, President Obama is quietly shifting his support for President Saleh to possibly ease his exit. If true, it’s a most welcome decision although America’s modern history has always sided with compliant dictators and never the wishes of their oppressed populations.

Whether in domestic or foreign policy the U.S. Government is held hostage to the special interests and lobbyists who write the regulations, the talking points to support them, plan the public relations campaigns and media blitz, thereby ensuring their power, wealth, and influence on government policies at the expense of the American people.. Who will a President, Senator, or Representative listen to: AIPAC, Exxon Mobil, Goldman Sachs, Media and Telecommunication Companies, or the American public?

A corrupt government can only respond to corrupt interests, not the voting citizens.

If America truly values freedom from tyranny and the establishment of democracy around the world, than the Arab world that has only known colonial then dictatorial oppression and wars for centuries is most deserving.

In the long run the best guarantor and protector of peace in the Middle East and for the U.S. is a peaceful democratic region that in reality holds no animosity to the American people, only to America’s Israeli directed foreign policy. On the contrary the entire Arab and Muslim world, 1.6 Billion people, respect and admire America’s freedoms and democracy, and despite being Muslim nations they have largely adopted America’s cultural trappings

Arab tyrants feign democracy and liberty for their people while in truth they are akin to Robespierre who inflicted a “reign of terror” against his opposition and people during the French Revolution. The crimes of terror and crimes against humanity that these brutal tyrants commit against their own population is far more lethal than any that Al Qaeda has ever committed in all its years of existence.

To their people they are the terrorists, to America they are the Anti-terrorists.

One is reminded of Madame Roland’s statement during the French Revolution prior to her death: “Liberty, Liberty, what crimes are committed in thy name.”

President Obama, the choice of freedom for Yemen and other Arab nations is sacrosanct in our Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and as God’s gift to humanity.

America is much greater than its priority of economic prosperity built on the backs of the oppressed Arab peoples at the hands of its puppet tyrants.

President Obama, Yemen and the Arab world are awaiting the fruits of your Nobel Peace Prize.

Can Yemen and the Arab world depend on “change” from your “Mendacity of Hope” to your winning idealism of “Audacity of Hope” for their freedom from tyranny?



“Children of the Revolution”, March 31, 2011


Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Strategic Communication

September 2004


11 - U.S. secretly backed Syrian opposition groups, as cables released by WikiLeaks show
By Craig Whitlock, Sunday, April 17, 11:01 PM
The State Department has secretly financed Syrian political opposition groups and related projects, including a satellite TV channel that beams anti-government programming into the country, according to previously undisclosed diplomatic cables.

The London-based satellite channel, Barada TV, began broadcasting in April 2009 but has ramped up operations to cover the mass protests in Syria as part of a long-standing campaign to overthrow the country’s autocratic leader, Bashar al-Assad. Human rights groups say scores of people have been killed by Assad’s security forces since thedemonstrations began March 18; Syria has blamed the violence on “armed gangs.”

Barada TV is closely affiliated with the Movement for Justice and Development, a London-based network of Syrian exiles. Classified U.S. diplomatic cables show that the State Department has funneled as much as $6 million to the group since 2006 to operate the satellite channel and finance other activities inside Syria. The channel is named after the Barada River, which courses through the heart of Damascus, the Syrian capital.

The U.S. money for Syrian opposition figures began flowing under President George W. Bush after he effectively froze political ties with Damascus in 2005. The financial backing has continued under President Obama, even as his administration sought to rebuild relations with Assad. In January, the White House posted an ambassador to Damascus for the first time in six years.

The cables, provided by the anti-secrecy Web site WikiLeaks, show that U.S. Embassy officials in Damascus became worried in 2009 when they learned that Syrian intelligence agents were raising questions about U.S. programs. Some embassy officials suggested that the State Department reconsider its involvement, arguing that it could put the Obama administration’s rapprochement with Damascus at risk.

Syrian authorities “would undoubtedly view any U.S. funds going to illegal political groups as tantamount to supporting regime change,” read an April 2009 cable signed by the top-ranking U.S. diplomat in Damascus at the time. “A reassessment of current U.S.-sponsored programming that supports anti-[government] factions, both inside and outside Syria, may prove productive,” the cable said.

It is unclear whether the State Department is still funding Syrian opposition groups, but the cables indicate money was set aside at least through September 2010. While some of that money has also supported programs and dissidents inside Syria, The Washington Post is withholding certain names and program details at the request of the State Department, which said disclosure could endanger the recipients’ personal safety.

Syria, a police state, has been ruled by Assad since 2000, when he took power after his father’s death. Although the White House has condemned the killing of protesters in Syria, it has not explicitly called for his ouster.

The State Department declined to comment on the authenticity of the cables or answer questions about its funding of Barada TV.

Tamara Wittes, a deputy assistant secretary of state who oversees the democracy and human rights portfolio in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, said the State Department does not endorse political parties or movements.

“We back a set of principles,” she said. “There are a lot of organizations in Syria and other countries that are seeking changes from their government. That’s an agenda that we believe in and we’re going to support.”

The State Department often funds programs around the world that promote democratic ideals and human rights, but it usually draws the line at giving money to political opposition groups.

In February 2006, when relations with Damascus were at a nadir, the Bush administration announced that it would award $5 million in grants to “accelerate the work of reformers in Syria.”

But no dissidents inside Syria were willing to take the money, for fear it would lead to their arrest or execution for treason, according to a 2006 cable from the U.S. Embassy, which reported that “no bona fide opposition member will be courageous enough to accept funding.”

Around the same time, Syrian exiles in Europe founded the Movement for Justice and Development. The group, which is banned in Syria, openly advocates for Assad’s removal. U.S. cables describe its leaders as “liberal, moderate Islamists” who are former members of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Barada TV

It is unclear when the group began to receive U.S. funds, but cables show U.S. officials in 2007 raised the idea of helping to start an anti-Assad satellite channel.

People involved with the group and with Barada TV, however, would not acknowledge taking money from the U.S. government.

“I’m not aware of anything like that,” Malik al-Abdeh, Barada TV’s news director, said in a brief telephone interview from London.

Abdeh said the channel receives money from “independent Syrian businessmen” whom he declined to name. He also said there was no connection between Barada TV and the Movement for Justice and Development, although he confirmed that he serves on the political group’s board. The board is chaired by his brother, Anas.

“If your purpose is to smear Barada TV, I don’t want to continue this conversation,” Malik al-Abdeh said. “That’s all I’m going to give you.”

Other dissidents said that Barada TV has a growing audience in Syria but that its viewer share is tiny compared with other independent satellite news channels such as al-Jazeera and BBC Arabic. Although Barada TV broadcasts 24 hours a day, many of its programs are reruns. Some of the mainstay shows are “Towards Change,” a panel discussion about current events, and “First Step,” a program produced by a Syrian dissident group based in the United States.

Ausama Monajed, another Syrian exile in London, said he used to work as a producer for Barada TV and as media relations director for the Movement for Justice and Development but has not been “active” in either job for about a year. He said he now devotes all his energy to the Syrian revolutionary movement, distributing videos and protest updates to journalists.

He said he “could not confirm” any U.S. government support for the satellite channel, because he was not involved with its finances. “I didn’t receive a penny myself,” he said.

Several U.S. diplomatic cables from the embassy in Damascus reveal that the Syrian exiles received money from a State Department program called the Middle East Partnership Initiative. According to the cables, the State Department funneled money to the exile group via the Democracy Council, a Los Angeles-based nonprofit. According to its Web site, the council sponsors projects in the Middle East, Asia and Latin America to promote the “fundamental elements of stable societies.”

The council’s founder and president, James Prince, is a former congressional staff member and investment adviser for PricewaterhouseCoopers. Reached by telephone, Prince acknowledged that the council administers a grant from the Middle East Partnership Initiative but said that it was not “Syria-specific.”

Prince said he was “familiar with” Barada TV and the Syrian exile group in London, but he declined to comment further, saying he did not have approval from his board of directors. “We don’t really talk about anything like that,” he said.

The April 2009 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Damascus states that the Democracy Council received $6.3 million from the State Department to run a Syria-related program called the “Civil Society Strengthening Initiative.” That program is described as “a discrete collaborative effort between the Democracy Council and local partners” to produce, among other things, “various broadcast concepts.” Other cables make clear that one of those concepts was Barada TV.

U.S. allocations

Edgar Vasquez, a State Department spokesman, said the Middle East Partnership Initiative has allocated $7.5 million for Syrian programs since 2005. A cable from the embassy in Damascus, however, pegged a much higher total — about $12 million — between 2005 and 2010.

The cables report persistent fears among U.S. diplomats that Syrian state security agents had uncovered the money trail from Washington.

A September 2009 cable reported that Syrian agents had interrogated a number of people about “MEPI operations in particular,” a reference to the Middle East Partnership Initiative.

“It is unclear to what extent [Syrian] intelligence services understand how USG money enters Syria and through which proxy organizations,” the cable stated, referring to funding from the U.S. government. “What is clear, however, is that security agents are increasingly focused on this issue.”

U.S. diplomats also warned that Syrian agents may have “penetrated” the Movement for Justice and Development by intercepting its communications.

A June 2009 cable listed the concerns under the heading “MJD: A Leaky Boat?” It reported that the group was “seeking to expand its base in Syria” but had been “initially lax in its security, often speaking about highly sensitive material on open lines.”

The cable cited evidence that the Syrian intelligence service was aware of the connection between the London exile group and the Democracy Council in Los Angeles. As a result, embassy officials fretted that the entire Syria assistance program had been compromised.

“Reporting in other channels suggest the Syrian [Mukhabarat] may already have penetrated the MJD and is using the MJD contacts to track U.S. democracy programming,” the cable stated. “If the [Syrian government] does know, but has chosen not to intervene openly, it raises the possibility that the [government] may be mounting a campaign to entrap democracy activists.”


Secret memos expose link between oil firms and invasion of Iraq

By Paul Bignell

Global Research, April 19, 2011
The Independent

Plans to exploit Iraq's oil reserves were discussed by government ministers and the world's largest oil companies the year before Britain took a leading role in invading Iraq, government documents show.

The papers, revealed here for the first time, raise new questions over Britain's involvement in the war, which had divided Tony Blair's cabinet and was voted through only after his claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

They denied it was about Iraq's resources. But it never rang true.

The minutes of a series of meetings between ministers and senior oil executives are at odds with the public denials of self-interest from oil companies and Western governments at the time.

The documents were not offered as evidence in the ongoing Chilcot Inquiry into the UK's involvement in the Iraq war. In March 2003, just before Britain went to war, Shell denounced reports that it had held talks with Downing Street about Iraqi oil as "highly inaccurate". BP denied that it had any "strategic interest" in Iraq, while Tony Blair described "the oil conspiracy theory" as "the most absurd".

But documents from October and November the previous year paint a very different picture.

Five months before the March 2003 invasion, Baroness Symons, then the Trade Minister, told BP that the Government believed British energy firms should be given a share of Iraq's enormous oil and gas reserves as a reward for Tony Blair's military commitment to US plans for regime change.

The papers show that Lady Symons agreed to lobby the Bush administration on BP's behalf because the oil giant feared it was being "locked out" of deals that Washington was quietly striking with US, French and Russian governments and their energy firms.

Minutes of a meeting with BP, Shell and BG (formerly British Gas) on 31 October 2002 read: "Baroness Symons agreed that it would be difficult to justify British companies losing out in Iraq in that way if the UK had itself been a conspicuous supporter of the US government throughout the crisis."

The minister then promised to "report back to the companies before Christmas" on her lobbying efforts.

The Foreign Office invited BP in on 6 November 2002 to talk about opportunities in Iraq "post regime change". Its minutes state: "Iraq is the big oil prospect. BP is desperate to get in there and anxious that political deals should not deny them the opportunity."

After another meeting, this one in October 2002, the Foreign Office's Middle East director at the time, Edward Chaplin, noted: "Shell and BP could not afford not to have a stake in [Iraq] for the sake of their long-term future... We were determined to get a fair slice of the action for UK companies in a post-Saddam Iraq."

Whereas BP was insisting in public that it had "no strategic interest" in Iraq, in private it told the Foreign Office that Iraq was "more important than anything we've seen for a long time".

BP was concerned that if Washington allowed TotalFinaElf's existing contact with Saddam Hussein to stand after the invasion it would make the French conglomerate the world's leading oil company. BP told the Government it was willing to take "big risks" to get a share of the Iraqi reserves, the second largest in the world.

Over 1,000 documents were obtained under Freedom of Information over five years by the oil campaigner Greg Muttitt. They reveal that at least five meetings were held between civil servants, ministers and BP and Shell in late 2002.

The 20-year contracts signed in the wake of the invasion were the largest in the history of the oil industry. They covered half of Iraq's reserves – 60 billion barrels of oil, bought up by companies such as BP and CNPC (China National Petroleum Company), whose joint consortium alone stands to make £403m ($658m) profit per year from the Rumaila field in southern Iraq.

Last week, Iraq raised its oil output to the highest level for almost decade, 2.7 million barrels a day – seen as especially important at the moment given the regional volatility and loss of Libyan output. Many opponents of the war suspected that one of Washington's main ambitions in invading Iraq was to secure a cheap and plentiful source of oil.

Mr Muttitt, whose book Fuel on Fire is published next week, said: "Before the war, the Government went to great lengths to insist it had no interest in Iraq's oil. These documents provide the evidence that give the lie to those claims.

"We see that oil was in fact one of the Government's most important strategic considerations, and it secretly colluded with oil companies to give them access to that huge prize."

Lady Symons, 59, later took up an advisory post with a UK merchant bank that cashed in on post-war Iraq reconstruction contracts. Last month she severed links as an unpaid adviser to Libya's National Economic Development Board after Colonel Gaddafi started firing on protesters. Last night, BP and Shell declined to comment.

Not about oil? what they said before the invasion

* Foreign Office memorandum, 13 November 2002, following meeting with BP: "Iraq is the big oil prospect. BP are desperate to get in there and anxious that political deals should not deny them the opportunity to compete. The long-term potential is enormous..."

* Tony Blair, 6 February 2003: "Let me just deal with the oil thing because... the oil conspiracy theory is honestly one of the most absurd when you analyse it. The fact is that, if the oil that Iraq has were our concern, I mean we could probably cut a deal with Saddam tomorrow in relation to the oil. It's not the oil that is the issue, it is the weapons..."

* BP, 12 March 2003: "We have no strategic interest in Iraq. If whoever comes to power wants Western involvement post the war, if there is a war, all we have ever said is that it should be on a level playing field. We are certainly not pushing for involvement."

* Lord Browne, the then-BP chief executive, 12 March 2003: "It is not in my or BP's opinion, a war about oil. Iraq is an important producer, but it must decide what to do with its patrimony and oil."

* Shell, 12 March 2003, said reports that it had discussed oil opportunities with Downing Street were 'highly inaccurate', adding: "We have neither sought nor attended meetings with officials in the UK Government on the subject of Iraq. The subject has only come up during conversations during normal meetings we attend from time to time with officials... We have never asked for 'contracts'."


12 - Bahrain : Is a U.S. Ally Torturing Its People?

By Karen Leigh
April 18, 2011 "Time" - -April 14, 2011 --- On March 17, Ibrahim Shareef, the head of the anti-government activist movement Waad, was snatched from his home at gunpoint by what his family describes as Bahraini security forces. Thrown into a waiting sport utility vehicle, he was driven off into the night. Today he's still missing, whereabouts unknown.

As the island kingdom's Sunni regime continues to crack down on anti-government activists and prominent Shi'ites, Shareef and more than 460 others are believed to be in government custody. New arrests happen daily in the country, which is home base of the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet. Bahrain was designated an official Non-NATO ally in October 2001, after the 9/11 attacks on America. (See TIME's exclusive photos of the crackdown in Bahrain.)

While there have been wild rumors of the whereabouts of the arrested dissidents, the likely truth is dire enough. Nearly all may be held in prisons around Bahrain, with an unknown number undergoing questioning and torture. On Wednesday, opposition party al-Wefaq claimed that at least four detainees had been killed since April 2, from injuries sustained from police-inflicted torture. Human Rights Watch says another three died in March, including one man who arrived in custody with knees blown out by ammunition fired at close range.

Meanwhile, press scrutiny of the regime of King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa has been severely hampered. Foreign media are largely shut out of the country; and Mansur al-Jamri, the editor of Wefaq's newspaper al Wasat, sits in custody alongside other journalists and bloggers. "There are concerns that heightened restrictions on international press and the levels of intimidation among much of the Shi'a community will prevent important information from getting out," says Jane Kinninmont, senior research fellow for the Middle East and North Africa at Chatham House. "Many people are scared that talking to the international media or human rights groups will endanger them or their families."

The result has been catastrophic for the opposition. Based on accounts from Bahrainis who were taken into custody in the revolution's earlier days, the treatment of prisoners can be brutal. The corpses of recent alleged victims may be evidence of torture as well. According to Human Rights Watch, the body of a 31-year-old Shi'ite activist named Ali Issa Saqer bore "signs of horrific abuse." The organization says the other bodies displayed signs that they too had met a "violent end." (See pictures of government troops routing protesters from Pearl Square.)

Bahrain's Interior Ministry says that Saqer died in a jailhouse rumble that got out of hand; it claims two others died while in custody from complications from sickle-cell anemia. But while the disease is common in Bahrain, neither victim had shown symptoms of carrying it pre-arrest. "I very much fear there will be more death because there is no transparency in all this," says Joe Stork, deputy director for the Middle East and North Africa at Human Rights Watch. "We're not seeing where they're being held, or their names, and it's these kinds of conditions that make for torture and brutality and death."

It doesn't take much to get arrested in Bahrain these days, as the country operates under a reign of terror. People can be taken into custody for any number of reasons: speaking out against the King or vague association with activist groups (offenses can include carrying a Bahraini flag, deemed a symbol of the anti-government movement). They are routinely hauled out of their cars at police checkpoints after being identified as Shi'a. Once jailed, they reportedly face interrogators bent on getting them to incriminate themselves, even for nonviolent political association. The regime is taking extreme measures to extinguish any flicker of rebellion. "The hard line faction of the ruling family is [eliminating] any and all forms of political dissent," says Stork. "There are still raids into villages every night. It's punishment, creating a state of fear, so that no one will stick out their head and raise their voice." (See "Has Bahrain's Opposition Thrown In the Towel?")

In Manama, those who have been arrested at gunpoint and let go tell of being bound by their hands and feet with cables tied so tight blood circulation is cut off; they described being gagged and blindfolded for days. According to HRW, the regime has, in the past, used electro-shock devices. These include cattle prods and stun guns, which immobilize victims' bodies and leave visible marks.

Once the torture ends, jailhouse conditions are still brutal. One leading activist spent six months in prison, in a cell he described as being "not much wider" than a bath towel. He was allowed so little contact with the outside world that towards the end of his imprisonment, the family was unsure if he was still alive. Briefly released, he was re-arrested last month, now one of the 460 missing.

Exposing The Bahraini Regime


Saudi Arabia has sent forces to Bahrain, escalating tensions between the country's predominantly Shia pro-democracy protesters and its Sunni rulers. What does the intervention of Gulf forces mean to the region? Will it provoke Iran? And could Bahrain be the next state to fall?

Bahrain braced for new wave of repressionArrests and troop movements signal another government crackdown on protests in the tiny Gulf state
Foreign staff
guardian.co.uk, Saturday 16 April 2011
Bahrain is braced for a fresh bout of violent repression as new arrests and the alleged death of a female student fuel sectarian tensions in the tiny Gulf state.

Armoured vehicles and security forces were reported to be gathering in the streets of the capital, Manama, and in surrounding suburbs and villages.

Meanwhile, evidence has emerged that Saudi forces have been involved in violence against the opposition in the mainly Shia villages and suburbs around Manama. In a graphic eyewitness account of the repression given to the Observer, a Bahraini who has been caught up in the violence claimed that officers with Saudi accents, in plainclothes but armed with automatic weapons, had led attacks on members of the Shia opposition on several occasions over the past month.

When Saudi and UAE troops from the Gulf Peninsula Shield force entered the kingdom at the request of the government last month, it was said that they were there to guard strategic buildings and infrastructure.

Reports from the city said that a young woman – beaten up last month by government supporters at Bahrain University – had died. A family member confirmed her death but the circumstances remained unclear. Arrests of lawyers and doctors working for the opposition continued.

Protesters, who were brutally removed from their peaceful anti-government site at Manama's Pearl roundabout last month, claim that there has since been a systematic campaign of repression by Sunni Bahraini security forces, backed by forces from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Human Rights Watch says that four people have died in custody over the past month, out of 430 who were arrested. Opposition sources say that the true figure is 720 arrested with 210 missing.

Tensions were high after another day of mourning, for Karim Fakhrawi, a Shia businessman who died in police detention, allegedly after being tortured. The mourning also coincided with an important Shia festival, the commemoration of the death of Fatima al-Zahra, the daughter of the Prophet Muhammad. This is traditionally marked by three days of religious observance, including marches, which are now banned under Bahrain's month-old state of emergency.

Meanwhile, Mohammed al-Tajer, a lawyer who represented detainees held during the protests, was reportedly arrested along with a doctor accused of treating injured demonstrators. Doctors and medical facilities have been singled out in the repression, with the main hospital in Manama, Salimanya, under military occupation for the past month.

The government says that it is acting to maintain security after what it describes as an "attempted revolution" by mainly Shia protesters last month. It says hospitals were being used as organisation centres for the protests.

The government appears to be backing down from a plan to outlaw the leading opposition parties, Al Wefaq and Islamic Action, after protests from America and Britain. But a suppression of media reporting continues. Last week a correspondent from theFinancial Times was denied entry at the airport. No reason was given.

Frank Gardner, the BBC's security correspondent, was detained at the airport for three hours before being allowed into the country. Other journalists reported increasing difficulties in obtaining visas.

Bell Pottinger, a British public relations company that advised the Bahraini crown prince, Salman bin Hamad al-Khalifa, and which was assisting with media visas, has had its government contracts suspended during the period of martial law.

Prince Salman is regarded as a moderate, but the failure of his offers of "dialogue" with the protesters has handed power to Sunni hardliners, led by the prime minister, Prince Khalifa, who has been in office since 1971.

The protests are seen as a threat to security across the whole Gulf region. There have been further protests in Iran in support of the mainly Shia Bahraini opposition, and Tehran recently warned Pakistan against sending any more "mercenaries" to join the crackdown.

Many Bahrain police officers are hired in Sunni countries such as Pakistan and Jordan.

• This article was amended on 18 April 2011. The original referred to Fatima al-Zahra as the wife of the Prophet Muhammad. This has been corrected.

Bahraini forces demolish two mosques
Mon Apr 18, 2011
Saudi-backed Bahraini forces have reportedly destroyed two more mosques in line with the country's policy of demolishing Muslim religious sites.
One of the mosques was demolished in Karzakan and the other one in Salmabad on Monday, a Press TV correspondent reported.

Several mosques have been destroyed so far as part of the Saudi-backed crackdown against peaceful protesters.

On Sunday, security forces fired tear gas into several religious sites across the country and two mosques were demolished -- one in Karzakan and another in A'ali.

Earlier this month, a video footage showed a mosque in the northern town of Kawarah destroyed in attacks by Saudi forces.

Earlier on Monday, Bahraini forces reportedly detained eight teachers and 25 pupils from a girl's secondary school in the town of Hamad.

So far, hundreds of civil servants from the Education Ministry have been detained and prosecuted for taking part in the anti-regime protests.

The security forces also fired tear gas at the house of Nabeel Rajab who heads the Bahrain Center for Human Rights.

The new arrests came as Bahraini anti-government protesters are preparing to start the world's largest joint hunger strike to show their anger at the regime's crackdown.

The organizers have called on all Bahrainis around the world to begin a hunger strike from Monday in protest at the Saudi-backed regime's brutalities against the opposition.

In March, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait deployed their troops in Bahrain to reinforce the brutal armed clampdown against mass protests.

Scores of protesters have been killed and many others gone missing during the harsh crackdown.


13 - Terminally Twisted beyond Recovery or Redemption
Here’s what you should say, loud and clear, the next time a TSA agent wants to grope your child at an airport check in line; “See darling, this is the bad stranger we were telling you about. If any grownup tries to touch you like this person is doing, you will know that they are perverted. We can’t do anything because they have guns but you should look at this person and remember what a child molester looks like. This is why we do not want you to talk to strangers or get into a car with someone you don’t know. Remember this person’s face and all the faces of the rest of these people in uniforms here. They are child molesters.”

Lecture by Leuren Moret, nuclear scientist, on the Fukushima disaster.
Regardless of how you feel about nuclear power this lecture is worth listening to.
Leuren Moret on Fukushima implications, Long but absolutely worth knowing :

VIDEO: Libya Campaign : The Longer the Fighting, the Better?
New interview now on GRTV- by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

VIDEO: American Authorities Accused of Torturing Wikileaks Informant
Watch the report on GRTV

JapanAlert : Fukushima "Road Map" in Danger --iRobot Packbots Find High Levels of Radiation Two remote-controlled robots from iRobot found high radiation levels in reactor buildings 1 and 3 yesterday, throwing doubt on ability to control Fukushima crisis. The finding could make it impossible for workers to enter the Fukushima plant to carry out...

Why was Glenn Beck canned?
A six min. clip that you might find informative.

Nashid Speaks !

Eddie Izzard -- Cake or Death ?


14 - Throw Out the Money Changers

By Chris Hedges

These are remarks Chris Hedges made in Union Square in New York City last Friday during a protest outside a branch office of the Bank of America.

Posted April 18, 2011

April 18, 2011 "Truthdig" --- We stand today before the gates of one of our temples of finance. It is a temple where greed and profit are the highest good, where self-worth is determined by the ability to amass wealth and power at the expense of others, where laws are manipulated, rewritten and broken, where the endless treadmill of consumption defines human progress, where fraud and crimes are the tools of business.

The two most destructive forces of human nature—greed and envy—drive the financiers, the bankers, the corporate mandarins and the leaders of our two major political parties, all of whom profit from this system. They place themselves at the center of creation. They disdain or ignore the cries of those below them. They take from us our rights, our dignity and thwart our capacity for resistance. They seek to make us prisoners in our own land. They view human beings and the natural world as mere commodities to exploit until exhaustion or collapse. Human suffering, wars, climate change, poverty, it is all the price of business. Nothing is sacred. The Lord of Profit is the Lord of Death.

The pharisees of high finance who can see us this morning from their cubicles and corner officers mock virtue. Life for them is solely about self-gain. The suffering of the poor is not their concern. The 6 million families thrown out of their homes are not their concern. The tens of millions of pensioners whose retirement savings were wiped out because of the fraud and dishonesty of Wall Street are not their concern. The failure to halt carbon emissions is not their concern. Justice is not their concern. Truth is not their concern. A hungry child is not their concern.

Fyodor Dostoyevsky in “Crime and Punishment” understood the radical evil behind the human yearning not to be ordinary but to be extraordinary, the desire that allows men and women to serve systems of self-glorification and naked greed. Raskolnikov in the novel believes—like those in this temple—that humankind can be divided into two groups. The first is composed of ordinary people. These ordinary people are meek and submissive. They do little more than reproduce other human beings in their own likeness, grow old and die. And Raskolnikov is dismissive of these lesser forms of human life.

The second group, he believes, is extraordinary. These are, according to Raskolnikov, the Napoleons of the world, those who flout law and custom, those who shred conventions and traditions to create a finer, more glorious future. Raskolnikov argues that, although we live in the world, we can free ourselves from the consequences of living with others, consequences that will not always be in our favor. The Raskolnikovs of the world place unbridled and total faith in the human intellect. They disdain the attributes of compassion, empathy, beauty, justice and truth. And this demented vision of human existence leads Raskolnikov to murder a pawnbroker and steal her money.

The priests in these corporate temples, in the name of profit, kill with even more ruthlessness, finesse and cunning than Raskolnikov. Corporations let 50,000 people die last year because they could not pay them for proper medical care. They have killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghanis, Palestinians and Pakistanis, and gleefully watched as the stock price of weapons contractors quadrupled. They have turned cancer into an epidemic in the coal fields of West Virginia where families breathe polluted air, drink poisoned water and watch the Appalachian Mountains blasted into a desolate wasteland while coal companies can make billions. And after looting the U.S. treasury these corporations demand, in the name of austerity, that we abolish food programs for children, heating assistance and medical care for our elderly, and good public education. They demand that we tolerate a permanent underclass that will leave one in six workers without jobs, that condemns tens of millions of Americans to poverty and tosses our mentally ill onto heating grates. Those without power, those whom these corporations deem to be ordinary, are cast aside like human refuse. It is what the god of the market demands.

When Dante enters the “city of woes” in the Inferno he hears the cries of “those whose lives earned neither honor nor bad fame,” those rejected by Heaven and Hell, those who dedicated their lives solely to the pursuit of happiness. These are all the “good” people, the ones who never made a fuss, who filled their lives with vain and empty pursuits, harmless perhaps, to amuse themselves, who never took a stand for anything, never risked anything, who went along. They never looked hard at their lives, never felt the need, never wanted to look.

Those who chase the glittering rainbows of the consumer society, who buy into the perverted ideology of consumer culture, become, as Dante knew, moral cowards. They are indoctrinated by our corporate systems of information and remain passive as our legislative, executive and judicial branches of government—tools of the corporate state—strip us of the capacity to resist. Democrat or Republican. Liberal or conservative. It makes no difference. Barack Obama serves corporate interests as assiduously as did George W. Bush. And to place our faith in any party or established institution as a mechanism for reform is to be entranced by the celluloid shadows on the wall of Plato’s cave.

We must defy the cant of consumer culture and recover the primacy in our lives of mercy and justice. And this requires courage, not just physical courage but the harder moral courage of listening to our conscience. If we are to save our country, and our planet, we must turn from exalting the self, to subsuming of the self for our neighbor. Self-sacrifice defies the sickness of corporate ideology. Self-sacrifice mocks opportunities for advancement, money and power. Self-sacrifice smashes the idols of greed and envy. Self-sacrifice demands that we rise up against the abuse, injury and injustice forced upon us by the mandarins of corporate power. There is a profound truth in the biblical admonition “He who loves his life will lose it.”

Life is not only about us. We can never have justice until our neighbor has justice. And we can never recover our freedom until we are willing to sacrifice our comfort for open rebellion. The president has failed us. The Congress has failed us. The courts have failed us. The press has failed us. The universities have failed us. Our process of electoral democracy has failed us. There are no structures or institutions left that have not been contaminated or destroyed by corporations. And this means it is up to us. Civil disobedience, which will entail hardship and suffering, which will be long and difficult, which at its core means self-sacrifice, is the only mechanism left.

The bankers and hedge fund managers, the corporate and governmental elites, are the modern version of the misguided Israelites who prostrated themselves before the golden calf. The sparkle of wealth glitters before them, spurring them faster and faster on the treadmill towards destruction. And they seek to make us worship at their altar. As long as greed inspires us, greed keeps us complicit and silent. But once we defy the religion of unfettered capitalism, once we demand that a society serve the needs of citizens and the ecosystem that sustains life, rather than the needs of the marketplace, once we learn to speak with a new humility and live with a new simplicity, once we love our neighbor as ourself, we break our chains and make hope visible.

Chris Hedges, whose column is published Mondays on www.truthdig.com , spent nearly two decades as a foreign correspondent in Central America, the Middle East, Africa and the Balkans. He has reported from more than 50 countries and has worked for The Christian Science Monitor, National Public Radio, The Dallas Morning News and The New York Times, for which he was a foreign correspondent for 15 years.

Copyright © 2011 Truthdig, L.L.C.


Are you sick and tired of the parasitical thieves at Goldman Sachs (GS)?

Are willing to do something that will finally stop their avaricious greed?

If so:

Together we can take down Goldman Sachs using their own game.


It's simple, just Short GS (Goldman Sachs).

Short Selling: What Is Short Selling?
by Brigitte Yuille

Goldman Sucks

The Great American Bubble Machine
>From Tech Stocks To High Gas Prices, Goldman Sachs Has Engineered
Every Major Market Manipulation Since The Great Depression --
And They're About To Do It Again
by Matt Taibbi

Wall Street's Bailout Hustle
Goldman Sachs And Other Big Banks Aren't Just Pocketing
The Trillions We Gave Them To Rescue The Economy -
They're Re-Creating The Conditions For Another Crash
by Matt Taibbi

Goldman Sachs 666

Max Keiser Takes Offense To Goldman Sachs (Part 1 of 2)

Max Keiser Takes Offense To Goldman Sachs (Part 2 of 2)

Flash Trading: Goldman Sachs Front Running Everyone Else
by Tyler Durden

Goldman Sachs "License To Steal" Granted By The Federal Reserve
Bob Chapman Of The International Forecaster Explains How Goldman Sachs
Uses A Technique Called "Front Running" To Rig The Market In Their Favor

On the Edge with Max Keiser
The Criminal Goldman Sachs

Federal Reserve
Is Neither Federal Nor A Reserve, It Stole Our Currency In 1913


15 - Iranian general accuses Siemens of helping U.S., Israel build Stuxnet
Suggests Iran may file charges in international courts
By Gregg Keizer
April 18, 2011
Computerworld - An Iranian military commander Saturday accused the German electronics giant Siemens with helping U.S. and Israeli teams craft the Stuxnet worm that attacked his country's nuclear facilities.

According to the Islamic Republic News Service (IRNA), Iran's state news agency, Brigadier General Gholam Reza Jalali laid some of the blame for Stuxnet on Siemens.

"Siemens should explain why and how it provided the enemies with the information about the codes of the SCADA software and prepared the ground for a cyber attack against us," Jalali told IRNA.

Siemens did not reply to a request for comment on Jalali's accusations.

Jalali heads Iran's Passive Defense Organization, a military unit responsible for constructing and defending the country's nuclear enrichment facilities. He is a former commander in Iran's Revolutionary Guard.

Stuxnet, which first came to light in June 2010 but hit Iranian targets in several waves starting the year before, has been extensively analyzed by security researchers, most notably a three-man team at Symantec, and by Ralph Langner of the German firm Langner Communications GmbH.

According to both Symantec and Langner, Stuxnet was designed to infiltrate Iran's nuclear enrichment program, hide in the Iranian SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) control systems that operate its plants, then force gas centrifuge motors to spin at unsafe speeds. Gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium, can fly apart if spun too fast.

Jalali suggested that Iranian officials would pursue Siemens in the courts.

"The Foreign Ministry and other relevant political and judicial organizations should lodge complaints at international courts," said Jalali. "The attacking countries should be held legally responsible for the cyberattack."

He also claimed that Iranian researchers had traced the attack to Israel and the U.S. "The investigations and research showed that the Stuxnet worm had been disseminated from sources in the U.S. and Israel," said Jalali, who added that the worm sent reports of infected systems to computers in Texas.

Jalali's allegations of U.S. and Israeli involvement were the first from an Iranian official, although President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly blamed the two countries for trying to destabilize his government.

In January, the New York Times, citing confidential sources, said that Stuxnet was jointly created by the U.S. and Israel, with the latter using its covert nuclear facility at Dimona to test the worm's effectiveness on centrifuges like the ones Iran employs.

According to the Times, Siemens cooperated in 2008 with the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) to help experts there identify vulnerabilities in the SCADA hardware and software sold by the German firm. The lab -- located about 30 miles east of Idaho Falls, Idaho -- is the U.S. Department of Energy's lead nuclear research facility.

Jalali repeated earlier claims by others in Iran, including Ahmadinejad, that Stuxnet did not cause major damage or disrupt its nuclear enrichment program because researchers discovered the worm and instituted defenses.

"If we were not ready to tackle the crisis and their attack was successful, the attack could have created tragic incidents at the country's industrial sites and refineries," said Jalali.

He suggested that massive casualties could have resulted, and suggested that they might have been on the scale of the Bhopal, India disaster, where in 1984 a Union Carbide pesticide plant released chemicals that killed between 4,000 and 8,000 people.

Symantec, however, has said that Stuxnet was very successful. In a February update to its research on the worm, Symantec said the first attacks in June 2009 infected Iranian computers just 12 hours after the worm was compiled. The average time between compilation and infection was 19 days for the 10 successful attacks Symantec monitored over an 11-month span.

Gregg Keizer covers Microsoft, security issues, Apple, Web browsers and general technology breaking news for Computerworld. Follow Gregg on Twitter at @gkeizer or subscribe to Gregg's RSS feed . His e-mail address isgkeizer@computerworld.com.

Read more about Security in Computerworld's Security Topic Center.


April 13, 2011 posted by Gordon Duff

The Case for a New Building 7 Investigation
First of a a Three-part Presentation Introduced by Dr. William Pepper, International Human Rights Attorney
Foreknowledge of Building 7′s Collapse
Dr. Graeme MacQueen

Editor’s note: That people of the caliber of Dr. MacQueen still have the patience and perseverance to continue their important work for justice for the American people is laudable. Veterans Today gives its thanks to all those who honestly seek a solution to 9/11. It is likely that 9/11 will kill more Americans today, first responders, hundreds who have died mysteriously of unexplained illnesses and those fighting in Afghanistan. The video is over an hour.

Even though World Trade Center Building 7 is said to have been the first steel-framed building in history to undergo total collapse due to fire, there were many people who knew the building was going to collapse long before it did. In this presentation, the evidence for this peculiar foreknowledge will be summarized and its significance discussed. The argument will be made that it is impossible to explain this foreknowledge on the basis of the collapse hypothesis offered by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The only hypothesis that explains this foreknowledge is the controlled demolition hypothesis.

YouTube - Veterans Today -

Saving the Saudis*

Craig Unger**

Just days after 9/11, wealthy Saudi Arabians, including members of the bin Laden family, were whisked out of the U.S. on private jets. No one will admit to clearing the flights, and the passengers weren't questioned. Did the Bush family's long relationship with the Saudis make it happen?

On the morning of September 13, 2001, a 49-year-old private eye named Dan Grossi got an unexpected call from the Tampa Police Department. Grossi had worked with the Tampa force for 20 years before retiring, and it was not particularly unusual for the police to recommend former officers for special security jobs. But Grossi's new assignment was very much out of the ordinary.

Two days earlier, terrorists had hijacked four airliners and carried out the worst atrocity in American history. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers had been from Saudi Arabia. "The police had been giving Saudi students protection since September 11." Grossi recalls. "They asked if I was interested in escorting these students from Tampa to Lexington, Kentucky."

Grossi was told to go to the airport, where a small charter jet would be available to take him and the Saudis on their flight. He was dubious about the prospects of accomplishing his task. "Quite frankly, I knew that everything was grounded," he says. "I never thought this was going to happen." Even so, Grossi, who'd been asked to bring a colleague, phoned Manuel Perez, a former F.B.I. agent, to put him on alert. Perez was equally unconvinced. "I said, 'Forget about it,"' Perez recalls. "'Nobody is flying today."'

The two men had good reason to be skeptical. Within minutes of the attacks on 9/ 11, the Federal Aviation Administration had sent out a special notification called a NOTAM - a notice to airmen - ordering every airborne plane in the United States to land at the nearest airport as soon as possible, and prohibiting planes on the ground from taking off. For the next two days, commercial and private aviation throughout the entire United States ceased. Former vice president Al Gore was stranded in Austria when his flight to the U.S. was canceled. Bill Clinton postponed travel as well. Major-league baseball games were called off. For the first time in a century, American skies were nearly as empty as they had been when the Wright brothers first flew at Kitty Hawk.

Nevertheless, at 1:30 or 2 P.M. on the 13th, Dan Grossi received his phone call. He was told the Saudis would be delivered to Raytheon Airport Services, a private hangar at Tampa International Airport.

When he and Perez met at the terminal, a woman laughed at Grossi for even thinking he would be flying that day. Commercial flights had slowly begun to resume, but at 10:57 A.M. the F.A.A. had issued another notice to airmen, a reminder that private aviation was still prohibited. Three private planes violated the ban that day, and in each case a pair of jet fighters quickly forced the aircraft down. As far as private planes were concerned, America was still grounded. "I was told it would take White House approval," says Grossi.

Then one of the pilots arrived. "Here's your plane," he told Grossi. "Whenever you're ready to go."

Unbeknownst to Dan Grossi, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the 52-year-old Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States, had been in Washington orchestrating the exodus of about 140 Saudis scattered throughout the country who were members of, or close to, two enormous families. One was the House of Saud, the family that rules the Royal Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and that, owing to its vast oil reserves, is the richest family in the world. The other was the ruling family's friends and allies the bin Ladens, who, in addition to owning a multi-billion-dollar construction conglomerate, had spawned the notorious terrorist Osama bin Laden. Thanks to the bin Ladens' extremely close relationship with the House of Saud, the family's huge construction company, the Saudi Binladin Group, had won contracts to restore the holy mosques in Mecca and Medina, two of the greatest icons in all of Islam.

The repatriation of the Saudis is far more than just a case of wealthy Arabs being granted special status by the White House under extraordinary conditions. For one thing, in the two years since September 11, a number of highly placed Saudis, including both bin Ladens and members of the royal family, have come under fire for their alleged roles in financing terrorism. Four thousand relatives of the victims of 9/11 have filed a $1 trillion civil suit in Washington, D.C., charging the House of Saud, the bin Ladens, and hundreds of others with wrongful death, conspiracy, and racketeering for having contributed tens of millions of dollars to charities that were al-Qaeda fronts. Newsweek has reported that Prince Bandar's wife, perhaps unwittingly, sent thousands of dollars to charities that ended up funding the hijackers. In addition, F.B.I. documents marked "Secret" indicate that two members of the bin Laden family, which has repeatedly distanced itself from Osama bin Laden, were under investigation by the bureau for suspected associations with an Islamic charity designated as a terrorist support group.

Most recently, in July, the administration asked Congress to withhold 28 pages of its official report on 9/11. According to news reports, the classified section charges that there were ties between the hijackers and two Saudis, Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Brassnan, who had financial relationships with members of the Saudi government. Saudi officials deny that their government was in any way linked to the attacks. The Saudis have asked that the pages be declassified so they can refute them, but President Bush has refused.

Terrorism experts say that the Saudis who were in the U.S. immediately after the attacks might have been able to shed light on the structure of al-Qaeda and to provide valuable leads for investigating 9/ 11. And yet, according to sources who participated in the repatriation, they left the US. without even being interviewed by the F.B.I.

Officially, the White House declined to comment, and a source inside asserted that the flights never took place. However, former high-level Bush-administration officials have told Vanity Fair otherwise.

How was it possible that, just as President Bush declared a no-holds-barred global war on terror that would send hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops to Afghanistan and Iraq, and just as Osama bin Laden became Public Enemy No. 1 and the target of a worldwide manhunt, the White House would expedite the departure of so many potential witnesses, including two dozen relatives of the man behind the attack itself?

The incident is particularly important in light of the special relationship the Saudis have long had with the United States - and the Bush family in particular. For decades, Saudi Arabia has been one of America's two most powerful allies in the Middle East, not to mention an enormous source of oil. The Bush family and the House of Saud, the two most powerful dynasties in the world, have had close personal, business, and political ties for more than 20 years. In the 80s, when the elder Bush was vice president, he and Prince Bandar became personal friends. Together, they lobbied through massive U.S. arms sales to the Saudis and participated in critical foreign-policy ventures. In the 1991 Gulf War, the Saudis and the elder Bush were allies.

In the private sector, the Saudis supported Harken Energy, a struggling oil company in which George W. Bush was an investor. Most recently, former president George H. W. Bush and former secretary of state James A. Baker III, his longtime ally, have appeared before Saudis at fund-raisers for the Carlyle Group, arguably the biggest private equity firm in the world. Today, former president Bush continues to serve as a senior adviser to the firm, whose investors allegedly include a Saudi accused of ties to terrorist support groups.

"It's always been very clear that there are deep ties between the Bush family and the Saudis," says Charles Lewis, head of the Center for Public Integrity, a Washington, D.C., foundation that examines issues of ethics in government. "It creates a credibility problem. When it comes to the war on terror, a lot of people have to be wondering why we are concerned about some countries and not others. Why does Saudi Arabia get a pass?"

On a humid July day, Nail al-Jubeir, director of information for Saudi Arabia, sits in his office in the Saudi Embassy in Washington and recalls the morning of September 11, 2001. Like many people, al-Jubeir was on his way to work that morning, and as soon as he heard that a second plane had crashed into the south tower of the World Trade Center, he realized that terrorists had attacked.

Over the next few days, the Saudi Embassy was in turmoil. Innocent Saudi citizens in the United States were arrested. "That created an issue," al-Jubeir says. "How do we protect the Saudis who are being rounded up? Our concern was the safety of Saudis here in the United States."

Initially, Prince Bandar had hoped that early reports of the Saudi role in the attacks had been exaggerated - after all, al-Qaeda terrorist operatives were known to use false passports. But at 10 P.M. on the evening of September 12, about 36 hours after the attacks, a high-ranking C.I.A. official - according to Newsweek, it was probably C.I.A. director George Tenet - phoned Bandar and gave him the bad news: 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis.

After two decades as ambassador, Bandar had long been the most recognizable figure from his country in America. Widely known as "the Arab Gatsby," with his trimmed goatee and tailored double-breasted suits, Bandar embodied the contradictions of the modern, jet-setting, Western-leaning member of the royal House of Saud. He knew that public relations had never been more crucial for the Saudis.

With the help of P.R. giant Burson-Marsteller, Bandar launched an international media blitz. He placed ads in newspapers across the country condemning the attacks and disassociating Saudi Arabia from them. On TV, he hammered home the same points: Saudi Arabia would support America in its fight against terrorism. The hijackers could not even be considered real Saudis, he asserted, because "we in the kingdom, the government and the people of Saudi Arabia, refuse to have any person affiliated with terrorism to be connected to our country." That included Osama bin Laden, Bandar said, since the government had taken away his passport in response to his terrorist activities.

Osama bin Laden, however, was a Saudi, and not just any Saudi. Bandar knew the members of his prominent family well. "They're really lovely human beings," he told CNN. "[Osama] is the only one. I met him only once. The rest of them are well-educated, successful businessmen, involved in a lot of charities. It is - it is tragic ... He's caused them a lot of pain."

The bin Laden family neatly exemplifies the dilemma the United States faces in its relations with Saudi Arabia. On the one hand, the bin Ladens are products of Wahhabi fundamentalism, a puritanical Islamic sect that has helped make Saudi Arabia a fertile breeding ground for terrorists. Contrary to popular belief, Osama was not the only member of the immense bin Laden family - there are more than 50 siblings - with ties to militant Islamic fundamentalists. As early as 1979, Mahrous bin Laden, an older half-brother of Osama's, had befriended members of the militant Muslim Brotherhood and had played, perhaps unwittingly, a key role in the Mecca Affair, a violent uprising against the House of Saud in 1979 which resulted in more than 100 deaths.

Later, the Saudi Binladin Group became part of what was known as "the Golden Chain," a list of wealthy Saudis who nurtured al-Qaeda at its inception in the late 80s, some time before it was perceived as an international threat.

On the other hand, the bin Ladens years ago had disassociated themselves from Osama and his horrific terrorist acts. These were the Saudi billionaires who banked with Citigroup, invested with Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch, and did business with such icons of Western culture as Disney, Snapple, and Porsche.

The young bin Ladens and members of the House of Saud who were living in the United States in September 2001 were mostly students attending high school or college and young professionals. Several bin Ladens had attended Tufts University, near Boston. Sana bin Laden had graduated from Wheelock College, in Boston. Abdullah bin Laden, a younger brother of Osama's, was a 1994 graduate of Harvard Law School and had offices in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Two bin Ladens - Mohammed and Nawaf - owned units in the Flagship Wharf condominium complex on Boston Harbor.

Wafah (sometimes spelled Waffa) Bin-ladin, a 26-year-old graduate of Columbia Law School, lived in a $6,000-a-month loft in New York's SoHo and was considering pursuing a singing career. Partial to hip Manhattan nightspots and restaurants such as Lotus, the Mercer Kitchen, and Pravda, she happened to be in London on September 11 and did not return to the United States. Kameron bin Laden, in his 30s and a cousin of Osama's, also frequented Manhattan nightclubs and, less than two months after 9/11, reportedly spent nearly $30,000 in a single day at Prada's Fifth Avenue boutique. He elected to stay in the United States. But half-brother Khalil Binladin decided to go back to Jidda. Khalil, who has a Brazilian wife, had been appointed Brazil's honorary consul in Jidda, though he also owns a sprawling 20-acre estate in Winter Garden, Florida, near Orlando.

As for the Saudi royal family, its members were scattered across the United States. Some had gone to Lexington, Kentucky, for the September horse auctions, which were suspended on September 11 but resumed the next day. Saudi prince Ahmed Salman, a regular in Lexington, stayed and bought two horses for $1.2 million on September 12. "I am a businessman," Salman said. "I have nothing to do with the other stuff. I feel as badly as any American." Others felt more personally threatened. Shortly after the attacks, one of Osama bin Laden's brothers frantically called the Saudi Embassy in Washington seeking protection. He was given a room at the Watergate Hotel and told not to open the door. King Fahd, the aging and infirm Saudi monarch, sent a message to his emissaries in Washington: "Take measures to protect the innocent."

If any foreign diplomat had the clout to pull strings at the White House in the midst of a grave national-security crisis, it was Prince Bandar. The Saudis were famously adept at currying favor with U.S. administrations - they have contributed to every presidential library built in the past 30 years - but no one did it better than Bandar. He had played racquetball with Colin Powell years earlier. He had run covert operations for the late C.I.A. director Bill Casey that were kept secret even from President Ronald Reagan, He was the man who had stashed away dozens of locked attach� cases that held some of the deepest secrets in the intelligence world.

But it was his intimate friendship with the Bushes that truly set him apart. When George H. W. Bush became vice president in 1981, Bandar saw him for what he was - a Texas oilman who had enormous respect for the Saudis' vast oil reserves and was not a knee-jerk defender of Israel. The two began to have lunch regularly, and in the mid-80s at a time when the press was assailing Bush as a "wimp," Bandar staged an extravagant soiree in his honor.

After Bush became president in 1989, Bandar acted as an envoy between him and Saddam Hussein, assuring Bush that the U.S. could count on Saddam to provide a bulwark against extremist Islamic fundamentalism. In August 1990, after Iraq invaded Kuwait, Bandar joined Bush at the president's family retreat in Kennebunkport, Maine, where the two men discussed going to war together against Saddam. A few months later, at Bush's urging, Bandar persuaded King Fahd of Saudi Arabia to join Bush as an ally in the Gulf War. In 1992, Bandar took Bush's defeat by Bill Clinton as a personal loss. And after the 2000 election, Bandar flew off on his Airbus jet to go hunting in Spain with former president Bush, General Norman Schwarzkopf, and former national-security adviser Brent Scowcroft.

Now, in the wake of 9/11, the Saudi-U.S. relationship was being tested, and Bandar went into overdrive. For the 48 hours after the attacks, he stayed in constant contact with Secretary of State Colin Powell and National-Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.

Before 9/ 11, coincidentally, President Bush had invited Bandar to come to the White House on September 13, 2001, to discuss the Middle East peace process. The meeting went ahead as scheduled, but in the wake of the terrorist attacks the political landscape had changed dramatically. According to The New Yorker, Bush had told Bandar at the meeting that the U.S. would hand over to the Saudis any captured al-Qaeda operative who could not be made to cooperate, implying that the Saudis could use any means necessary to get suspects to talk. Nail al-Jubeir says he does not know if Prince Bandar and the president discussed getting the bin Ladens and other Saudis back to Saudi Arabia.

But the job began to get done all the same. In Tampa, on the same day that Bandar and Bush were meeting in the White House, private investigator Dan Grossi says, he and Manuel Perez waited until three Saudi men, all apparently in their early 20s, arrived. Then the pilot took Grossi, Perez, and the Saudis to a well-appointed eight-passenger Learjet. They departed for Lexington, Kentucky, at about 4:30 P.M.

Grossi did not get the names of the students he was escorting. "It happened so fast," he says. "I just knew they were Saudis. They were well connected. One of them told me his father or his uncle was good friends with George Bush Sr."

Both the Tampa Tribune and sources familiar with the flight say that one of the young men was either the son or nephew of Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz, the Saudi minister of defense and Prince Bandar's father. Another passenger was said to have been the son of a Saudi army commander. But the Saudi Embassy declined to confirm their identities. The Tribune reported that the request to repatriate the Saudis had been made by a different Saudi royal, Prince Sultan bin Fahad.

According to Grossi, about an hour and 45 minutes after takeoff they landed at Blue Grass Airport in Lexington. There the Saudis were greeted by an American who took custody of them and helped them with their baggage. On the tarmac was a Boeing 747 with Arabic writing on it, apparently waiting to take them back to Saudi Arabia. "My understanding is that there were other Saudis in Kentucky buying racehorses at that time, and they were going to fly back together," Grossi says.

The Tampa-to-Lexington flight, which was reported in the Tampa Tribune in October 2001, is the only documented incident in which Saudis had been granted access to American airspace when U.S. citizens were still restricted from flying privately - access that required special government approval.

How did the phantom flight from Tampa get permission to take off? At the time, the F.A.A. denied the flight had taken place at all. "It's not in our logs," Chris White, a spokesman for the F.A.A., told the Tampa Tribune. "It didn't occur." On the record, the White House declined to comment, but privately a source there said the administration was confident that no secret flights took place and that there was no evidence to suggest that the White House had authorized such flights. According to Nail al-Jubeir, however, the repatriation had been approved "at the highest level of the U.S. government."

The process began in the bowels of the White House. At the time, the Bush administration was holed up in the Situation Room, a small underground suite with a plush, 18-by-18-foot conference room in the West Wing. Live links connected the room's occupants to the F.B.I., the State Department, and other relevant agencies. Vice President Dick Cheney, National-Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and other officials hunkered down and devoured intelligence, hoping to ascertain if other terrorist attacks had been planned. The most powerful officials in the administration came and went, among them Colin Powell, C.I.A. director George Tenet, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Within the cramped confines of that room, the White House terrorism czar, Richard Clarke, the head of the Counterterrorism Security Group of the National Security Council, chaired an ongoing crisis group making hundreds of decisions related to the attacks. A true Washington rarity, Clarke was a civil servant who had ascended to the highest levels of policymaking. As characterized in The Age of Sacred Terror, by Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon, Clarke was a man who broke all the rules. Beholden to neither Republicans nor Democrats, he refused to attend regular National Security Council staff meetings, sent insulting e-mails to his colleagues, and regularly worked outside normal bureaucratic channels. One of only two senior directors from the administration of the elder George Bush who were kept by Bill Clinton, Clarke, abrasive as he was, had continued to rise because of his genius for knowing when and how to push the levers of power.

In the days immediately after 9/ 11 - he doesn't remember exactly when - Clarke was approached in the Situation Room about quickly repatriating the Saudis.

"Somebody brought to us for approval the decision to let an airplane filled with Saudis, including members of the bin Laden family leave the country," Clarke says. "My role was to say that it can't happen until the F.B.I. approves it. And so the F.B.I. was asked - we had a live connection to the F.B.I. - and we asked the F.B.I. to make sure that they were satisfied that everybody getting on that plane was someone that it was O.K. to leave. And they came back and said yes, it was fine with them. So we said, 'Fine, let it happen."' Clarke, who has since left the government and now runs a consulting firm in Virginia, adds that he does not recall who initiated the request, but that it was probably either the F.B.I. or the State Department. Both agencies deny playing any role whatsoever in the episode. "It did not come out of this place," says one source at the State Department. "The likes of Prince Bandar does not need the State Department to get this done."

"I can say unequivocally that the F.B.I. had no role in facilitating these flights one way or another," says Special Agent John Iannarelli, the F.B.I.'s spokesman on counterterrorism activities.

With just three Saudis on it, the Tampa flight was hardly the only mysterious trip under way. All over the country, members of the extended bin Laden family, the House of Saud, and their associates were assembling in various locations.

According to The New York Times, bin Laden family members were driven or flown under F.B.I. supervision first to a secret assembly point in Texas and later to Washington. From there, the Times reported, they left the country when airports reopened on September 14. The F.B.I. has said the Timesreport is "erroneous."

Meanwhile, the Saudis had at least two other planes on call. Starting in Los Angeles on an undetermined date, one of them flew first to Orlando, Florida, where Khalil bin Laden boarded. From Orlando, the plane continued to Dulles International Airport, outside Washington, D.C., before going on to Boston's Logan International Airport on September 19, picking up members of the bin Laden family along the way. Other stops for the Saudis are said to have included Houston, Cleveland, and Newark. Altogether, about 140 Saudis were on the flights, according to an F.B.I. source.

By this time, the lockdown on air travel had begun to lift. The F.A.A. was allowing airlines to operate as long as they followed certain security rules. Private aviation was subject to more constraints, but even there the F.A.A. had begun to allow flights by charter-service planes when the pilots filed flight plans. The F.A.A. has given all its records of air travel during the period in question to the Department of Homeland Security. A Freedom of Information Act request has been filed, but the documents have not yet been released.

Richard Clarke's approval for repatriating the Saudis had been conditional upon the F.B.I.'s vetting them. "I asked [the F.B.I.] to make sure that no one inappropriate was leaving," he says. "I asked them if they had any objection to the entire event - to Saudis leaving the country at a time when aircraft were banned from flying." Clarke adds that he assumed the F.B.I. had vetted the bin Ladens prior to September 11. "I have no idea if they did a good job," he says. "I'm not in any position to second-guess the F.B.I."

In fact, the F.B.I. had been keeping an eye on some of the bin Ladens. A classified F.B.I. file examined by Vanity Fair and marked "Secret" shows that as early as 1996 the bureau had spent nearly nine months investigating Abdullah and Omar bin Laden, who were involved with the American branch of the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), a charity that has published writings by Islamic scholar Sayyid Qutb, one of Osama bin Laden's intellectual influences. But, according to Dale Watson, the F.B.I.'s former head of counterterrorism, such investigations into Saudis in the United States were the exception. "If allegations came up, they were looked into," he says. "But a blanket investigation into Saudis here did not take place."

At times, the Saudis who had assembled for departure tried to get the planes to leave before the F.B.I. had even identified who was on them. "I recall getting into a big flap with Bandar's office about whether they would leave without us knowing who was on the plane," says one F.B.I. agent. "Bandar wanted the plane to take off, and we were stressing that that plane was not leaving until we knew exactly who was on it."

In the end, the F.B.I. decided it was simply not practical to conduct full-blown investigations. "They were identified says Dale Watson, "but they were not subject to serious interviews or interrogations." The bureau has declined to release their identities.

Some participants in the repatriation insist that the failure to interview the Saudis was insignificant, and, indeed, a persuasive case can be made that neither the bin Ladens nor the Saudi royals would have knowingly aided terrorists. "For groups like al-Qaeda, their objective is to overthrow the Saudi government," says Nail al-Jubeir, the Saudi Embassy spokesperson. "People say we pay [al-Qaeda] off. but that's simply not the case. Why would we support people who want to overthrow our own government?"

Most of those who were leaving were either students or young businessmen. The bin Ladens, moreover, had forcefully broken with Osama by issuing a statement expressing "condemnation of this sad event, which resulted in the loss of many innocent men, women, and children, and which contradicts our Islamic faith." An F.B.I. agent says that they had a right to leave and that being related to Osama did not constitute grounds for investigation.

But 9/11 was arguably the biggest crime in American history. Nearly 3,000 people had been killed. A global manhunt of unprecedented proportions was under way. Attorney General John Ashcroft had asserted that the government had "a responsibility to use every legal means at our disposal to prevent further terrorist activity by taking people into custody who have violated the law and who may pose a threat to America." All over the country Arabs were being rounded up and interrogated. By the weekend after the attacks, Ashcroft had already proposed broadening the F.B.I.'s power to arrest foreigners, wiretap them, and trace money-laundering to terrorists. Hundreds of people were detained by the government while U.S. agents performed extensive background checks. Some were held for as long as 10 months at the American naval base in Guantanamo, Cuba.

"It's a natural part of any investigation to seek out people who know the alleged suspect in the murder," says John L. Martin. who, as chief of internal security in the Criminal Division of the Justice Department. supervised the investigation and prosecution of national-security offenses for 18 years. "In the case of the Kennedy assassination. Lee Harvey Oswald's family, including his wife and mother, while not culpable, were looked upon for information about his background. In the case of Timothy McVeigh, McVeigh's family became a center of attention."

How could officials bypass such an elemental and routine part of an investigation during an unprecedented national-security catastrophe? At the very least, wouldn't relatives have been able to provide some information about Osama's finances, associates, or supporters?

A number of experienced investigators expressed surprise that the Saudis had not been interviewed. "Certainly it would be my expectation that they would do that," says Oliver "Buck" Revell, former associate deputy director of the F.B.I.

"Here you have an attack with substantial links to Saudi Arabia," John Martin says. "You would want to talk to people in the Saudi royal family and the Saudi government, particularly since they have pledged cooperation."

Did a simple disclaimer from the bin Laden family mean that no one in the entire family had any contacts or useful information whatsoever? Not long after 9/11 Carmen bin Laden, an estranged sister-in-law of Osama's, told ABC News that she thought members of the family might have given money to Osama. Osama's brother-in-law Mohammed Jamal Khalifa was widely reported to be an important figure in al-Quaeda and was accused of having ties to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, to the October 2000 bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, and to the funding of a Philippine terrorist group. (Khalifa was rumored to be in the Philippines in September 2001.) Khalil bin Laden, who boarded a plane in Orlando that eventually took him back to Saudi Arabia, won the attention of Brazilian investigators for possible terrorist connections. According to a Brazilian paper, he had business connections in the Brazilian province of Minas Gerais, not far from the tri-border region, an alleged center for training terrorists.

Then there were the secret F.B.I. documents detailing Abdullah and Omar bin Laden's involvement with the World Assembly of Muslim Youth. Indian officials and the Philippine military have both cited WAMY for funding terrorism in Kashmir and the Philip pines. WAMY was involved in terrorist-support activity," says a security official who served under George W. Bush. "There's no doubt about it."

F.B.I. officials declined to comment on the investigation, which was reported in Britain's The Guardian but the documents show that the file on Abdullah and Omar was reopened on September 19, 2001, while the Saudi repatriation was still under way. "These documents show there was an open F.B.I. investigation into these guys at the time of their departure," says David Armstrong, an investigator for the Public Education Center, the Washington, D.C., foundation that obtained the documents.

In the 1980s, with the support of the American government, the House of Saud and prominent Saudi businessmen had eagerly contributed to the fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan by sending money and weapons to Islamic-fundamentalist rebels who were battling alongside local mujahideen forces. Both the Saudis and the Americans supported these militants. But after helping to expel the Soviets from Afghanistan, these guerrillas, led by Osama bin Laden, morphed into the terrorist network known as al-Qaeda. Vexing questions remain about the extent to which the Saudis continued to support militant Islamic fundamentalism after bin Laden and al-Qaeda began attacking U.S. targets in the 1990s.

During the Clinton administration, the Saudis repeatedly resisted attempts by the United States to track the funding of terrorism within the kingdom. According to Richard Clarke, who led that initiative, there were several reasons for resistance from the Saudis. "Some of them were clearly sympathetic to al-Qaeda," he says. "Some of them thought that if they allowed a certain degree of cooperation with al-Qaeda, al-Qaeda would leave them alone. And some of them were merely reacting in a knee-jerk, instinctive way to what they believed was interference in their internal affairs."

Again and again, the U.S. Treasury Department has gone after the directors of various Islamic charities for providing support to terrorists. In October 2002 the Council on Foreign Relations asserted that, more than a year after 9/11, al-Qaeda continued to raise funds from wealthy Saudi supporters.

Last November, Newsweek reported that thousands of dollars in charitable gifts from Princess Haifa, the wife of Prince Bandar, had indirectly ended up in the hands of two of the September 11 hijackers. And many members of the royal family, along with several members of the bin Laden family, are now defendants in the $1 trillion class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of 4,000 relatives of 9/11 victims.

Documents filed in the suit allege that Prince Bandar's father, Defense Minister Prince Sultan, has contributed at least $6 million since 1994 to four charities that finance Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Sultan's own attorneys acknowledge that for 16 consecutive years he approved annual payments of about $266,000 to the International Islamic Relief Organization - a Saudi charity whose U.S. offices were raided by federal agents. Casey Cooper, an attorney for Prince Sultan, says, "The allegations have no merit." He adds that Prince Sultan authorized the grants as part of his official governmental duties and did not knowingly fund terrorism.

The allegation against Prince Sultan is just one of hundreds included in the lawsuit. In addition to Osama bin Laden, the family company, the Saudi Binladin Group, has been named as a defendant in the suit. At the heart of the allegations is the charge that the defendants knew some of their money was going to al-Qaeda and therefore had some responsibility for the September 11 attacks.

Many of the Saudis acknowledge that they contributed to the charities in question but say they had no knowledge that the money would end up in the hands of al-Qaeda. "The biggest problem we have with Saudi charities is poor and sloppy management," says Nail al-Jubeir.

The plaintiffs' attorneys do not consider that a satisfactory answer. In addition, they believe that, by interviewing t Ladens and members of the royal family before they left the country, the government could have answered some key questions. "They should have been asked whether they had contacts or knew of any other Saudi contacts with Osama bin Laden," says Allan Gerson, co-lead counsel for the plaintiffs in the case. "What did they know about the financing of al-Qaeda? What did they know about the use of charitable institutions in the U.S. and elsewhere as conduits for terrorism financing? Why was the Saudi government not responsive to U.S. pleas in 1999 and 2000 that they stop turning a blind eye to terrorist financing through Saudi banks and charities?"

All of which leads to the question of who made the decision to let the Saudis go. And why? Could the longstanding relationship between the Saudis and the Bush family have influenced the administration?

National-security experts such as Richard Clarke find that suggestion dubious. "Prince Bandar played a very key role during the first Gulf War," Clarke says. "He was very close to the Bush family. But I don't think it's accurate to say that he plays that role now. There's a realization that we have to work with the government we've got in Saudi Arabia. The alternatives could be far worse. The most likely replacement to the House of Saud is likely to be more hostile - in fact, extremely hostile - to the U.S. That's probably the reason the administration treats it the way it does - not any personal relationship." With the war on terror getting under way, the U.S. wanted Saudi cooperation, and repatriation was clearly a high priority at the highest levels of the kingdom.

Still, the Bush-Saudi relationship raises serious questions, if only because it is so extraordinary for two presidents to share such a long and rich personal history with any foreign power, much less one that is both as vital to U.S. economic interests and as troublesome as Saudi Arabia.

It began in the mid-70s when two young Saudi billionaires - Salem bin Laden, Osama's older brother and the head of the Saudi Binladin Group, and Khalid bin Mahfouz, a billionaire Saudi banker - first came to Texas hoping to forge political relationships. To represent their American interests, they chose a Houston businessman named James R. Bath, who knew George W. Bush from the Texas Air National Guard. Bath invested $50,000 in Bush's new oil company, Arbusto. He denies, however, that his investment represented the Saudis' interests.

In 1986, George W. Bush sold the latest incarnation of his failing oil company to Harken Energy, an independent Texas oil company that was struggling itself, and took a seat on its board of directors. By then, Khalid bin Mahfouz had become the largest stockholder in the Bank of Commerce & Credit International, or B.C.C.I., an international bank which financed drug dealers, terrorists, and covert operations and which became known as the most corrupt financial institution in history.

Once Bush was with Harken, a phantom courtship by Khalid bin Mahfouz and B.C.C.I. began. Neither George W. Bush nor Harken ever had any direct contact with bin Mahfouz or B.C.C.I. Yet once Bush took his seat on the board, wonderful things started to happen to Harken - new investments, unexpected sources of financing, serendipitous drilling rights. Among those with links to B.C.C.I. who came to Harken's aid were the Arkansas investment bank Stephens Inc., Saudi investor Sheik Abdullah Bakhsh, and the Emir of Bahrain, who unexpectedly awarded Harken exclusive offshore drilling rights. In 1991, aWall Street Journal investigation into Harken's B.C.C.I. ties concluded, "The number of B.C.C.I.-connected people who had dealings with Harken all since George W. Bush came on board - likewise raises the question of whether they mask an effort to cozy up to a presidential son."

After George H. W. Bush and James Baker returned to the private sector in 1993, they finally began to reap the benefits of their friendship with the Saudis. That year, Baker took a position as senior counselor with the Carlyle Group, the $16 billion private-equity firm. Two years later, Bush signed on as senior adviser. In 1998, former British prime minister John Major joined the firm as well.

On several occasions, Bush, Baker, and Major flew to Saudi Arabia with Carlyle executives to meet with and speak before members of the royal family and wealthy businessmen such as the bin Ladens and the bin Mahfouzes, Saudi Arabia's richest banking family.

As world leaders who had defended the Saudis during the Gulf War, Bush, Baker, and Major had the potential to be star rainmakers for Carlyle, and the firm's practices allowed them to do so without sullying their hands by asking for money directly. "Bush's speeches are about what it's like to be a former president, and what it's like to be the father of a president," says Carlyle C.E.O. David Rubenstein. "He doesn't talk about Carlyle or solicit investors." After Bush's speeches, Rubenstein and his fund-raising team would come in for the money. "Carlyle wanted to open up doors," one observer told The Independent, "and they bring in Bush and Major, who saved the Saudis' ass in the Gulf War. If you got these guys coming in ... those companies are going to have it pretty good." Rubenstein says Bush and Baker were not given special treatment in Saudi Arabia. "They were well received there, as they are throughout the world."

A source close to the Saudi government says that the royal family viewed investing in the Carlyle Group as a way to show gratitude to President Bush for defending the Saudis in the Gulf War. "George Bush or James Baker would meet with all the big guys in the royal family," the source says. "Indirectly, the message was 'I'd appreciate it if you put some money in the Carlyle Group."'

According to The Washington Post, Prince Bandar was among those who invested. In 1995 the bin Ladens joined in. Khalid bin Mahfouz's sons Abdulrahman and Sultan became investors as well, according to family attorney Cherif Sedky. Abdulrahman bin Mahfouz was a director of the Muwafaq Foundation, which has been designated by the US. Treasury Department as "an al-Qaeda front." "Abdulrahman and Sultan made an investment in one of the Carlyle funds in 1995 which is in the neighborhood of $30 million." Sedky wrote in an e-mail. "The investment is held for their benefit by Sami Ba'arma," an investment manager who has often worked with the bin Mahfouz family. Sedky added that the bin Mahfouz family condemns terrorism and denies that funds it has given to charities have been used to finance terror. Carlyle categorically denies that the bin Mahfouzes are now or have ever been investors. Reached on vacation in Michigan, Cherif Sedky stood by his original statement. "I assume that Carlyle has records of investments from somebody on the bin Mahfouz side, whether it is with Sami Ba'arma as a nominee or someone else," he said. He added that Ba'arma was a first cousin of the bin Mahfouz brothers.

In all, Carlyle officials say that the Saudis have invested $80 million in the firm. It is unclear how much of that was raised following meetings attended by former president George Bush or James Baker. The bin Ladens put $2 million in the Carlyle Partners II Fund, a relatively small sum that was said to be part of a larger package. One family member, Shafig bin Laden, was attending an investor conference held by the Carlyle Group in Washington on September 11, 2001. But after the attacks of that day, Carlyle bought out the bin Ladens' interest. "At first I felt it was unfair to blame the other 53 half-siblings because of this guy they haven't seen in 10 years," Rubenstein says. "But then I realized, life isn't fair at times".

There is no evidence to suggest that Carlyle played any role in the repatriation of the Saudis, but public advocates argue that the Bush-Saudi ties create at least the appearance of a conflict of interest. "You would be less inclined to do anything forceful or dynamic if you are tied in with them financially," says the Center for Public Integrity's Charles Lewis. "That's common sense."

On September 18, 2001, a specially configured Boeing 727 flew at least five members of the bin Laden family back to Saudi Arabia from Logan airport.

On September 19, President Bush's speechwriting team was working on a stirring address to be delivered the next day, officially declaring a global war on terror. "Our war on terror ... will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated," he would vow. At the Pentagon, planning was already under way to take this new war on terror all the way to Iraq.

That same day, the plane that had originated in Los Angeles and made stops at Orlando and Dulles airports arrived at Logan. It is unclear how many members of the bin Laden family or other Saudis had boarded prior to its arrival in Boston, but once it landed, at least 11 additional bin Laden relatives boarded the aircraft.

At the time, Logan was in chaos. The airport was reeling from criticism that its security failures had allowed the hijackings to take place. After all, the two hijacked planes that had crashed into the World Trade Center had departed from Logan. As a result, exceptional measures were now being taken. Several thousand cars were towed from the airport's parking garages. "We didn't know if they were booby-trapped or what," says Tom Kinton, director of aviation at Logan.

The F.A.A. had allowed commercial flights to resume on September 13, as long as they complied with new security measures. Logan, however, because of various security issues, did not reopen until September 15, two days later. Even then, air traffic resumed slowly. So when a call came into Logan's Emergency Operations Center in the early afternoon of September 19 saying that the charter aircraft was going to pick up members of the bin Laden family, Kinton was incredulous. "We were in the midst of the worst terrorist act in history," he says, "and here we were seeing an evacuation of the bin Ladens!"

Like Kinton, Virginia Buckingham, then the head of the Massachusetts Port Authority, which oversees Logan, was stunned. "My staff was told that a private jet was arriving at Logan from Saudi Arabia to pick up 14 members of Osama bin Laden's family living in the Boston area," she later wrote in The Boston Globe. "'Does the F.B.I. know?' staffers wondered. 'Does the State Department know? Why are they letting these people go? Have they questioned them?' This was ridiculous."

Only a few days earlier, some planes, such as the one carrying a heart to be transplanted to a deathly ill cardiac patient in Olympia, Washington, had been forced down in midflight. According to F.B.I. spokesman John Iannarelli, F.B.I. counterterrorism agents pursuing the investigation were stranded all over the country, unable to fly for several days. Yet now the same counterterrorism unit was effectively acting as a chaperone for the Saudis. Astonishingly, the repatriation was routed through Logan and Newark, two of the airports where, just a few days earlier, the hijackings had originated.

As the bin Ladens began to approach Boston, the top brass at Logan airport were agog at what was taking place. But federal law did not allow them much leeway to restrict individual flights. "I wanted to go to the highest authorities in Washington," says Tom Kinton. "This was a call for them. But this was not just some mystery flight dropping into Logan. It had been to three major airports already, and we were the last stop. It was known. The federal authorities knew what it was doing. And we were told to let it come."

Kinton and his co-workers were also told to let the other bin Ladens board and to allow the plane to leave and return to Saudi Arabia. As Virginia Buckingham put it, "Under the cover of darkness, they did."

It was an inauspicious start to the just-declared war on terror. "What happened on September 11 was a horrific crime," says John Martin, the former Justice Department official. "It was an act of war. And the answer is no, this is not any way to go about investigating it."

**In 1992, Craig Unger investigated George H. W. Bush's roles in the Iran-contra scandal and "Iraqgate" for The New Yorker. "In both of those cases I was struck by the remarkably close relationship between Bush and the Saudis," says Unger, who was the editor of Boston Magazine from 1995 to 2000. So when the September 11 attacks took place, Unger saw a pattern. This article on the post-9/11 repatriation of Saudis is adapted from his upcoming book, The Bush-Saudi Connection: The Secret Relationship Between the Most Powerful Dynasties in the World (Scribner).


17 - ALLEN L ROLAND : Fukushima / One Of The Greatest Disasters In Modern Times
April 18, 2011 posted by Allen L Roland

The silent monstrous killer of deadly radiation has been released at Fukushima and despite the denial of the Japanese government ~ its repercussions will be rapidly rising death rates. The lessons of Chernobyl 25 years ago offers Japan a deadly hint of what’s to come for clearly we are witnessing one of the greatest disasters in modern times: Allen L Roland

The mainstream media has all but buried the BP Deepwater Horizon drilling rig disaster off the coast of Louisiana on April 20, 2010 and the subsequent 210 million gallon oil gusher while Gulf coast residents continue to say “The oil is not gone. Dead wildlife are washing up on our shores by the hundreds, Entire livelihoods are in peril” in one of the world’s greatest ecological disasters.

Now the mainstream media is attempting to bury one of the greatest disasters in modern time in Fukushima where residents will soon be crying out that ” the radiation is not gone, people are dying and our livelihoods are in peril ” but this time other voices are being heard.

One of the most reliable voices speaking out on the Fukushima nuclear disaster is Arnie Gundersen who was an engineer and senior vice president with Danbury, Connecticut-based Nuclear Energy Services. He was as insider in commercial nuclear power generation, and understands reactor operation as well as any in his field.

Last week, when the Japanese government finally announced that the disaster rating at Fukushima went from 5 to 7 ~ the worst possible nuclear accident was finally acknowledged publicly. What went unacknowledged, according to Gundersen, was that in an instant the catastrophe became 100 times worse than had been previously reported. Each increase in numeric value officially acknowledges a ten-fold increase in level of nuclear disaster. In other words, from 5 to 7 was 10 x 10: or 100 times greater.

Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now!, interviewed Michio Kaku on her show last week and asked him the very same question about the raising of the category 5 to a 7 in par with Chernobyl. Dr. Michio Kaku ,professor of theoretical physics at the City University of New York and the City College of New York, confirmed that Tokyo Electric has been in denial trying to downplay the full impact of this nuclear accident ~ “However, there’s a mathematical formula by which you can determine what level this accident is. This accident has already released something in the order of 50,000 trillion becquerels of radiation. You do the math. That puts it right in the middle of a level 7 nuclear accident. Still less than Chernobyl; however, radiation is continuing to leak out of the reactors. The situation is not stable at all … So, you’re looking at a ticking time bomb. It appears stable but the slightest disturbance from a secondary earthquake, a pipe break, an evacuation of the crew at Fukushima can set off a full scale nuclear meltdown at three nuclear power plants far beyond what we saw at Chernobyl.”

Kaku is not a guy to be sneezed at. He’s a Japanese American physicist, a best-selling author, a professor of theoretical physics at the University of New York, and the author of A Physics of the Future. This is a well-known expert in this field. He’s telling the truth, and the truth is this: the Japanese government is in denial and Fukushima is a ticking time bomb.

What remains unacknowledged is that Fukushima is continuing to release terabecquerels of radioactive poison and will continue to do so for months, if not years but the public is not fully getting this message.

Gunderson’s video presentation is an absolute must-watch. In the 7 and 3/4 minute video here, he exposes a great deal, including previously confidential NRC and nuclear industry inside information. It’s clear, according to Gundersen, that March 21st, ten days after the earthquake and tsunami, the Fukushima disaster was already rated a 7 and that the NRC, the Nuclear Industry, and TEPCO were already limiting the flow of Information and still are for that matter.

Today, we have reported evidence that the level of radioactivity in the seawater dramatically rose again. Iodine-131 spiked to 6,500 times the legal limit and levels of cesium-134 and cesium-137 rose nearly four fold.

It is here that we should address the lessons of Chernobyl ~ after 25 years, some of Chernobyl’s radioactivesubstances have either decayed or migrated deeper into the ground. Although levels of cesium-137 are slowly falling, concentrations of this damaging bioactive element remain high in many areas. Half of the cesium-137 deposited in 1986 will have decayed into relatively stable barium-137 by 2016 but a quarter of it will still remain in 2046 (60 years after the Chernobyl disaster)

Plants and animals continue to recycle cesium-137 through their tissue and consequently suffer from chronic radiation syndrome, increased mortality, reproductive losses and genetic defects.

The legacy of iodine-131 is although it decays relatively soon after the accident ~ enough of it inhaled or consumed in milk will cause a significant increase in thyroid cancer. A recent U.N. Report, drawing on studies by Western researchers, said 6,000 cases of thyroid cancer could be linked to Chernobyl but evidence regarding other diseases is inconclusive. Russian, Ukrainian and Belarusan researchers, however, say their studies show increased incidence of high blood pressure, stroke, vascular disease and non-malignant thyroid diseases among the after effects of Chernobyl.

I agree with Jim Kirwin who writes ~ “ Much has been made, by comparisons to Chernobyl; but that event involved just one reactor and the dimensions of its meltdown were only delayed one day before the Russian government ordered evacuations just 24 hours after the world heard about it. Japan chose the opposite course and has still not owned up to just how deadly the meltdown of their six reactors really is. The amount of radiation being released is staggering; but the massive attempt by business, by governments and by the entire nuclear industry to cover-this-up is a crime against humanity! The tonnage of the fuel rods that have melted and burned, so far, makes Chernobyl look like backyard fireworks, compared to what has already been released into the global environment which is already enough to kill the planet many times over. This is the unimaginable disaster that makes contrived-fiction look like children’s fairy-tales; because the lives of all of us depend directly on what the world does now to end this continuing nightmare.”

“Fish in nearby waters are now being measured at 4,000% above the Codex Alimentation limits for Iodine-131 and 447% of Cesium-137. Radioactive cesium has a half-life of 30 years. Radiation levels for the isotope are not considered “safe” for 10 to 20 times longer. The cesium released today will remain dangerous six centuries from now…. “Fukushima has become the dirty bomb of the Pacific“….(“Radiation Spreads Worldwide”, Freedom Against Censorship Thailand, Global Research, April 14, 2011)

Will Englund, Washington Post, offers on the LESSONS OF CHERNOBYL a hint of the fate that may well face Japan ~ “Near Pripyat, the abandoned and now overgrown dormitory city for Chernobyl, where moss grows on the central square and the wind thrums through the rusting Ferris wheel ~ lies a more haunting place. It was once the village of Kopachi, which happens to mean “Gravedigger” in Ukrainian. Every house there was buried in 1991 because of contamination. When Gravedigger was interred, only a nursery school was left standing, with a memorial to the Soviet soldiers and the fierce battles they fought here in World War II. “No one forgets. Nothing is forgotten,” reads the plaque on the memorial. But because of Chernobyl there is now no one here to remember.” Story here ~

Let us hope that the same fate will not befall Fukashima, Japan ~ which is already deserted and decaying.

Allen L Roland

About the author: Freelance Alternative Press Online columnist and psychotherapist Allen L Roland is available for comments, interviews, speaking engagements and private consultations ( allen@allenroland.com )

Allen L Roland is a practicing psychotherapist, author and lecturer who also shares a daily political and social commentary on his web log and website allenroland.com He also guest hosts a monthly national radio show TRUTHTALK on www.conscioustalk.net


18 - Award-Winning Palestinian
Journalist Tortured By Shin Beth

Khalid Amayreh in the occupied Palestinian Territories

From his hospital bed at the European Hospital in Gaza and with barely audible voice, award-winning Palestinian journalist Muhammed Omer has given a full account of the hair-raising encounter he had last week with Shin Beth agents at the Allenby Bridge border-crossing between Jordan and the West Bank.

Omer, a co-winner of the 2008 Martha Gelhorn Prize for Journalistic Excellence, said he was abused, assaulted , humiliated, ridiculed, kicked, and strip-searched at gunpoint by undisciplined Shin Beth officers until he had a nervous breakdown in which case he lost consciousness for at least 90 minutes.

A resident of Rafah at the southern edge of the Gaza Strip, Omer said he didn't know for sure why the Shin Beth people treated him in such a barbaric matter apart from the characteristic sadism and savagery routinely meted out to Palestinians.

"They behaved with unimaginable hatefulness and vindictiveness. They couldn't accept the very idea of a Palestinian journalist winning a renowned journalism prize. They wanted to punish me for being a successful journalist and especially for exposing Israeli barbarianism to the people of Europe."

The following is Muhammed Omer's story as intimated by him to this writer:

"On Thursday, 26 June, the Israeli authorities finally allowed me to return to Gaza after several days of waiting and uncertainty in Jordan. When I arrived at the Allenby Bridge Border Crossing, I was dragged away rather unceremoniously to a special room where I was made to wait for more than 90 minutes. This happened as Dutch diplomats who were accompanying me were waiting outside.

"When I arrived on the Israeli side of the Allenby Bridge, I encountered an Israeli female officer who started mocking me in a brazenly insulting manner.

"She asked me repeatedly where Gaza was. She then said I had no permit to return to Gaza via Israel.

"Then a Shin Beth officer who introduced himself as "Avi" showed up and took me to an isolated room where I was kept stranded for an hour and a half.

"He asked me "Oh, You are Muhammed Omer.

"Yes, I said.

"You know you are a fool," said Avi, adding "how could you leave Europe and return to Gaza where there is no water, no electricity, nothing.

"I told him Gaza was my country, and I was a journalist and wanted to be a voice for the voiceless.

"A voice for the voiceless," Avi spoke sarcastically.

"He then asked me if I was carrying any contrabands or guns or knives.

"I said no, I had none.

"Then he asked me to produce the money of the prize I won. I told him that the money would be transferred later to my bank account."

"Then one Shin Beth agent demanded in a stern tone that I hand all the money I was carrying with me over to them. They didn't believe I didn't have the prize money with me.

"Disappointed, Avi, who was carrying a pistol in his hand, ordered me to take off all my clothes, which I did, leaving my underwear. At the same time, another officer was pointing an M-16 rifle in my face.

"Take the underwear as well," he said. "I told him I wouldn't. What do you want from me," I protested in a suffocated voice.

"Then he ganged up on me and forcibly removed my underwear piece, leaving me completely naked."

"Avi, training the pistol at me, told me to turn right and turn left, before telling me to get dressed again.

"At that point, I was nearly totally broken emotionally. I felt I was being raped. I cried and pleaded to them to leave me alone, but to no avail"

"Telling me I haven't seen anything yet, they dragged me to another room where they interrogated me on my speaking tour in Britain, Sweden and Greece.

"Oh, you have not left a place in Europe without speaking atYou know these Europeans, they hate Israel.

"Then another Shin Bet officer began kicking me and pushing me. This lasted for more than ten minutes after which I fainted and lost consciousness. Eventually they began dragging me along the floor by my feet with my head banging on the floor.

"I don't remember much of what happened to me during this period, but remember a Shin Beth officer piercing his finger right below my eyes and at the lower end of ears. Also, another Shin Beth officer was pressing his large boots against my neck as I was lying unconscious on the ground.

"I thought I was dying. I remained in a state of unconsciousness for up to 90 minutes until a medical doctor, who was carrying an M-16, performed an (electro-cardiogram) or ECG on me.

"Then I heard someone saying the word 'ambulance.'

"However, before a Palestinian ambulance from Jericho arrived, a Shin Beth officer came to me and asked me to sign a form that I was not being maltreated by the Shin Beth.

"I was too distraught, too confused and too unconscious to say anything.

"Eventually, I was taken to the Jericho hospital where I was assured by doctors that I was fine."

Muhammed Omer said the Israeli Shin Beth inserted a special electronic device into his mobile phone which would enable them to know his whereabouts.

He also called upon his colleagues around the world to condemn in the strongest words the "criminal and disgraceful Israeli behavior" which he said "only befits criminals and thugs, not states, let a lone states that claim to be civilized, western and democratic."

The Dutch Foreign Ministry has protested the traumatic treatment meted out to Muhammed Omer and demanded and explanation.

Similarly, the Dutch Embassy in Israel reportedly has raised the issue with the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

The Shin Beth, Israel's chief domestic security agency, controls all aspects of Palestinian lives and is widely believed to systematically and grossly violate the basic human rights of Palestinians.


Juden stürzten Westerwelle
19 - German Jews toppled Westerwelle
Seine Parteifreunde benutzen sogar den Begriff "räudiger Hund."
Even His Party Friends Used the Expression “Mangy Dog.”

By the Authors of the National Journal
Translated by J M Damon
The original is posted at http://www.globalfire.tv/nj/11de/politik/westerwelles_sturz.htm

Never before in the history of the so-called Federal Republic of Germany has the head of a political party been so abruptly and disgracefully driven from office as Guido Westerwelle. Even the expression “mangy dog” has been used in conjunction with his forced resignation as party head.

In the view of the Zionist Lobby, Westerwelle’s hesitation to participate in the war against Libya (engineered by Jewish do-gooders Nicolas Sarkozy and Henri Lévy) caused the cup of “Anti-Semitism” to overflow. Westerwelle committed too great an indiscretion for the Jewish power centers. Henri Lévy pronounced the political death sentence on Westerwelle when he decreed in the 28 March issue of DIE WELT: “Gaddafi has got to go, and so does Westerwelle.”

On 18 February 2011, Westerwelle played a decisive role in Germany’s vote against Israel in the United Nation’s condemnation of that country’s policy of building settlements on Palestinian lands.
To this day, the Lobby-controlled media has effectively hushed up that vote against Israel, presumably because Westerwelle might well have received broad public approval.

It is significant that just a few days after Westerwelle’s fall, Israeli Prime Minister Netanjahu called on Chancellor Merkel in Berlin.
On that same day, 7 April 2011, Merkel announced that Germany would station soldiers in Libya.
Needless to say, this was touted as a “humanitarian mission” (like Germany’s war in Afghanistan.)

It was a kind of declaration of war against the Jewish Lobby early last year when Westerwelle called for the removal of Jewish-American nuclear weapons from German soil.
According to SPIEGEL magazine on 13 April 2010: “The American ex-Nato Secretary General George Robertson strongly attacked Foreign Minister Westerwelle, saying his demand was irresponsible.”(SPIEGEL.DE, 13.04.2010)
It goes without saying that the German occupation government did not support Westerwelle’s demand for the removal of nuclear weapons from German soil.

It is significant also that immediately following the victories of CDU/CSU and FDP in the elections of 2009, the Lobby media began warning of the danger of a new “Teutonic identity” in Germany.
“Following the national election, the eyes of the world are on Germany.
The judgment and expectation of the international press have a certain implication or implied judgment.
They say that a new “Teutonic consciousness” is evolving.
(wap.n24, 28 September 2009)

The list of Westerwelle’s transgressions against the Jewish power centers is long, going back to the days of Jürgen Möllemann.
{Möllemann died in a highly suspicious “accident” in 2003: see WWW.ERICHUFSCHMID.NET/TFC/BOLLYN_MOELLEMANN-MURDER.HTM}
That is why the campaign against Westerwelle was launched in the Lobby media soon after the election of 2009.
At that time Westerwelle was “advised” to let the office of foreign minister go by and accept instead a ministerial position that would not entail contact with foreign governments.
An opinion survey made right after the election was supposed to persuade Westerwelle to decline the office of Foreign Minister: “According to the opinion of the voters, Westerwelle should not take accept the foreign office.” (WELT.DE, 7 October 2009)

At that time SPIEGEL, the voice of the Lobby, referred to Westerwelle as “The Incompetent.” (SPIEGEL, 41/2009, page 42)
And Israel made it unmistakably clear to Chancellor Merkel that it greatly esteemed her dedication and loyalty to its interest but would be displeased to see Westerwelle named as foreign minister:
“The possible designation of the head of the Free Democratic Party, Guido Westerwelle, to be the new German Foreign Minister is meeting with reservation in Israel.
The Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem would not comment on questions regarding its misgivings.
Previously the daily newspaper Jerusalem Post had reported that the prospect of Westerwelle’s naming as Germany’s foreign minister was causing ‘wrinkled brows’ in Jerusalem.
As a representative of the new Generation of Germans born after Holocaust, ‘...he does not have the same reflexive sympathy for Israel that characterizes German politicians throughout the political spectrum.’”
(NN-ONLINE.DE, 29 September 2009)

Why this sudden dislike of Westerwelle so soon after the federal elections of 2009?
After all, he is homosexual, which is a prerequisite for high government office within the international “Lobby Democracies.”
In contrast to his former party colleague Jürgen Möllemann, he did not expect opposition from the Central Jewish Committee.

In reality, the Jewish power structure tends to block politicians from influential positions when those politicians have intimate knowledge about them.
This is especially true if they suspect that the politicians harbor a secret disinclination against international Jewry, even though they keep their mouths shut.
The Jewish power brokers never forgave Westerwelle for not distancing himself from Möllemann until the latter received the final blow:
“Westerwelle did not immediately distance himself from Möllemann, but rather waited for public pressure to build...”
(NN-ONLINE.DE, 29 Sep 2009)

The Central Jewish Committee and Israel are correct in this respect.
During his visit to Israel in 2002 Westerwelle dropped a rhetorical bomb, after the customary kowtowing and guilt ritual:
“...Referring to Friedman, Westerwele denied that the former had a ‘higher moral position’ in the debate.
Responding to the question of his relationship to Germany’s National Socialist past, his response was: ‘We all need to ask different questions and come up with different answers’.
He declined to explain what he meant by that.”
(SPIEGEL, 41/2009, page 42)
For Israel and international Jewry, such a remark, even if denied and relativized a thousand times, has the same effect as if the true “Holocaust” Story should be exposed as a lie in YAD VASCHEM (the Israeli “Holocaust” Museum).

Another thing for which international Jewry can never forgive Westerwelle is “Campaign 18” that he and Möllemann launched years ago.
It is known in the worldwide resistance movement that “18” signifies “A.H.”
It is obvious to everyone that Westerwelle and Möllemann did not really believe they would win 18 percent of the vote!
“18” was a cabalistic jab at the Power Jews, who reacted abruptly.
Acting on instructions of the Jewish Central Committee, the head of the FDP in Berlin Dahlem, Susanne Thaler, accused Möllemann of Nazism and Racism:
“Playing with fire like as Möllemann is doing is ‘repulsive and dangerous’ said Thaler, accusing her party colleague of harboring ‘internalized Nazi racism...’
She had doubts as to whether the goal of ‘18 percent’ had not been chosen with more profound significance.
Among Neo-Nazi, the number 18, in numerization of the alphabet, stands for the abbreviation AH, or Adolf Hitler.”
(SPIEGEL online, 6 June 2002)

The number 18, being 3x6, also represents the diabolical number in the Kabala and in Revelations.
Möllemann was sending a signal: “You have been recognized: we know who you are.”
Obviously, Westerwelle was collaborating in this.
The object in those days was to hinder Möllemann from becoming Foreign Minister...
Westerwell was following in his footprints, as has become clear.

In our article following the Federal elections, we at the National Journal foresaw Westerwelle’s fall.
We wrote the following commentary, which can be read on our 2009 web page:
“Guido will be carved into mincemeat by Merkel the Lobby Moll, with the intention of bursting the coalition bubble.
This is because the queer QUIETSCHFROSCH (stuffed frog, a child’s plaything) will now be required to throw all his campaign promises overboard.
We have not forgotten how he flatly promised that he would not sign any coalition agreements unless they contained his promised tax reductions and simplifications:
‘The Chancellor knows that I will sign a coalition agreement only if it contains a system of taxation that is lower, simpler and more fair." (Westerwelle on his website.)
Probably the Mossad will not have to bump him off as it disposed of Möllemann.
Westerwelle has squashed himself, since his promises of tax reductions will still be empty promises at the time of the next elections.”

During the 2011 local elections, the campaign to dump Westerwelle was carried out under the slogan that under his leadership, the FDP became the party of broken promises.
Again and again his simplistic promises to lower taxes have been emphasized and pilloried.
The turning point in atomic energy policy, following the constant stream of horrific reports from Japan, finally brought the campaign to a successful conclusion.
In a way, this was understandable.
How can a mentally stable person initially swear on the Bible assuring the public that atomic power is absolutely safe, and then admit that it is not safe?
Nobody can appear less credible than such a person.
On top of this, his party colleague Rainer Brüderle declared before the nuclear potentates that talk about abandoning nuclear power should not be taken seriously.

Now the Zionist Lobby has driven the brainwashed masses into the life-threatening arc of the Greens.
The Greens whine about nuclear power plants, but they have nothing against American warplanes armed with concrete-penetrating munitions conducting war games above these installations, as MONITOR reported on 7 April 2011.
In addition, the Greens want to continue stuffing the international cartel of finance criminals with guarantees of more German billions.

And of course the Greens are maneuvering to assure that in a few more years Germany will surpass the number of100 million foreigners.
This hate-filled conglomeration has marshalled its forces to totally wipe out the Germans.
Greens such as Volker Beck, leader of the Green faction in the Federal Parliament, consider it their duty to pass legislation establishing child abuse as a human right for pedophiles.
In his book DER PÄDOSEXUELLE KOMPLEX Beck writes that the struggle for human rights should include the decriminalization of pedophilia, and this demand is supported by broad sectors of the Green Party.

In the case of Guido Westerwelle we can see that homosexuality, the predicate of “Democracy,” means nothing once the Jewish power structure recognizes a critic lurking behind that “preference.”
Acting on orders of the Zionist Lobby, the wretched FDP knifed its chairperson in a manner normally used against Neo-Nazi.
Westerwelle was abroad when his party colleagues, led by Kubicki (who in turn was egged on by Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger) used the expression “mangy dog” on N-TV, in conjunction with Westerwelle.
Kubicki’s literal remark was: “We have to allow Westerwelle the possibility of returning to leadership of the party... we should not drive him away like a mangy dog.”

Now the Free Democrats are seeking salvation through the nomination of Vietnamese-born Philipp Rösler to head the party and fill the office of vice chancellor.
This “beacon of hope” with his Asian accent makes a good impression on German do-gooders, and the FDP hopes to win back the favor of the Lobby with the nomination of a Multiculti figure.

Besides, Rösler has already made a name for himself with health insurance “reforms” that so restrict the delivery of health care that many Germans no longer expect effective assistance.
Furthermore he did this while simultaneous raising co-payments!
Such a brilliant politician!

At the same time he was able to make Germans pay for medical treatment for millions of foreigners in their native land:
“German health insurance companies must now pay for family members of foreign employees...
They pay the costs of treatment even of family members who do not live in Germany, but rather their native country.
This applies to countless parents of foreigners who have health insurance in Germany, including foreigners in Turkey and countries that were formerly part of Yugoslavia.”
(WAMS, 13 April 2003)

What a superb vice-chancellor for Germany!


20 - Alexander Mashkevich looks to create around-the-clock Zionist news channel

Alexander Mashkevich, an Israeli tycoon from Central Asia, announced his intention to launch by 2012 an around-the-clock world satellite news channel offering a Zionist take on current events. He plans to submit his project to President Shimon Peres in the near future.

One would be tempted to remark that there is already an oversupply of such channels, but Mr. Mashkevich is especially keen on conveying the official Israeli point of view.

Alexander Mashkevich, together with pals Patokh Chodiev and Alijan Ibragimov, made a fortune with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Known as the "Kazach trio", they exploited Kazahkstan’s key mineral resources through the London-based Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation (ENRC). They gradually extended their empire to Zambia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Indonesia, Russia and Kosovo.

Mr. Mashkevich currently serves as President of the Euro-Asian Jewish Congress (EAJC), one of the five regional branches of World Jewish Congress. He is campaigning for the creation of a parliament for the world’s Jewish diaspora. An orthodox Jew, he funded the construction of several synagogues in many parts of the world.

He hit the headlines in September 2010 when he was arrested along with other personalities while partying on the Savarona, the yacht that formerly belonged to Kemal Atatürk. Alexander Mashkevich is suspected by the Turkish police of being part of an international women trafficking ring, headed by Taufik "David" Arif. He is believed to have hosted and ensconced in his hotels young Russian and Ukrainian girls who were bought and imported by Arif.
Mr. Mashkevich paid 300 000 dollars to rent the yacht for 9 days for the fun and games of his customers. During the raid, the girls that were freed by the police were between 13 and 14 years of age.


21 - Billionaires Flourish, Inequalities Deepen as Economies “Recover”

by James Petras

In this profile of global wealth accumulation, James Petras illustrates the direct link between the exponential increase of the U.S. super rich in recent years and the tanking real economy. Unsurprisingly, the prize for the fastest and most dramatic growth of new billionaires goes to the BRIC block countries - recently joined by South Africa - albeit to the great detriment of their working classes and environment.


19 APRIL 2011

The bailouts of banks, speculators and manufacturers served their real purposes: the multi-millionaires became billionaires and the latter became multi-billionaires.


According to the annual report of the business magazineForbes there are 1,210 individuals – and in many cases family clans – with a net value of $1 billion dollars (or more). There total net worth is $4 trillion, 500 billion dollars, greater than the combined worth of 4 billion people in the world. The current concentration of wealth exceeds any previous period in history; from King Midas, the Maharajahs, and the Robber Barons to the recent Silicon Valley – Wall Street moguls of the present decade.

An analysis of the source of wealth of the super-rich, the distribution in the world economy and the methods of accumulation highlights several important differences with major political consequences. We will proceed to identify these specific features of the super-rich, starting with the United States and follow with an analysis of the rest of the world.

The Super-Rich in the US: Greatest Living Parasites

The US has the most billionaires in the world (413), better than one third of the total, the greatest proportion among the “big countries" in the world. A closer look also reveals that among the top 200 billionaires (those with $5.2 billion and more) there are 57 from the US (29%). Over one third made their fortune through speculative activity, predators on the productive economy and exploiters of the property and stock market. This is the highest percentage of any major country in Europe or Asia (with the exception of England). The enormous concentration of wealth in the hands of this tiny parasitical ruling class is one reason why the US has the worst inequalities of any advanced economy and among the worst in the entire world.

Speculators do not employ workers, they secure tax loopholes and bailouts and then press for cuts in the social budget, since they do not require a healthy, educated workforce (except for a tiny elite). In 1976 the top 1% held 20% of the wealth; in 2007 they commanded 35% of total wealth. Eighty percent of Americans own only 15% of the wealth. The recent economic crises, which initially reduced the total wealth of the country, did so in an uneven fashion – hitting the majority of workers and employees worse.

The Bush-Obama bailout led to the economic recovery, not of the “economy in general”, but was confined to further enhancing the wealth of the billionaires – which explains why the unemployment/under employment rate has hardly moved, why the fiscal debt and trade deficit grows and the state lowers corporate taxes and slashes federal, state and municipal budgets.

The “dynamic” sector composed of parasitical capitalists employs few workers, exports no products, pays lower taxes and imposes greater cuts in social spending for productive workers. In the case of the US billionaires, their wealth is largely accrued via the pillage of the state treasury and productive economy and via speculation in the information technology sector which houses one-fifth of the top billionaires.

BRIC’s: The New billionaires: Exploiting Labor of Nature

The leading emerging capitalist countries, Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) hailed by the mass media for their rapid growth over the past decade are producing billionaires at a faster rate than any bloc of countries in the world. According to the latest data in Forbes (March 2011), the number of billionaires in the BRICs increased over 56% from 193 in 2010 to 301 in 2011, exceeding that of Europe.

The high growth of the BRICs - has led to the concentration and centralization of capital, in every case promoted by state policies which provides low interest loans, subsidies, tax incentives, unrestricted exploitation of natural resources and labor, the dispossession of small property owners and the give-away of publically owned enterprises.

The dynamic growth of billionaires in the BRICs has led to the most egregious inequalities in the world. Among the BRICs, China leads the way with the greatest number of billionaires (115) and the worst inequalities in all of Asia, in sharp contrast to its Communist past when it was the most egalitarian country in the world. An examination of the source of wealth of China’s super rich reveals that it has resulted from the exploitation of labor in the manufacturing sector, speculation in real-estate and construction and trade. China has surpassed the US as the world’s biggest manufacturer in 2011, as a result of the super-exploitation of labor in China and the growth of parasitical financial capital in the US.

In contrast to the US, China’s working class is making significant inroads into the profiteering of its manufacturing and real estate elite. As a result of working class struggle, wages have been growing between 10% and 20% over the past 5 years; protests by farmers and urban households against state sanctioned evictions by real estate speculators have exceeded 100,000 per year.

The wealth of Russian billionaires on the other hand resulted from the violent theft of public resources (oil, gas, aluminum, iron, steel, etc.), developed by the previous Communist regime. The great majority of Russian billionaires depend on the export of commodities, pillaging and devastating the natural environment under a corrupt and deregulated regime. The contrast in living and working conditions between the western oriented billionaires and the Russian working class is largely the result of the siphoning off of wealth to overseas accounts, offshore investments and extraordinary personal luxuries including multi-million dollar real estate. In contrast to China’s industrial elite, Russia’s billionaires resemble the parasitical ‘rentiers’ found among Wall Street speculators and Persian Gulf sheiks.

India’s billionaires are a combination of old and new rich drawing their wealth by exploiting low wage industrial workers, dispossessing slum and tribal peoples, as well as from diversified holdings in real estate, IT and software. India’s billionaires accumulated their wealth through their class-kin linkages to the very corrupt higher echelons of the political class, securing monopolies via state contracts. India’s high growth over the past decade (averaging 7%) and the upsurge in billionaires upward to 55 by 2011, are both linked the neo-liberal policies of deregulation, privatization and globalization, which have concentrated wealth at the top, undermined small scale producers and dispossessed tens of millions.

Brazil’s billionaire class has expanded rapidly, especially under the leadership of the Workers Party, to 29, up from single digits a decade earlier. Today over two-thirds of Latin America’s billionaires are Brazilians. The centerpiece of Brazil’s super rich wealth is the financial-banking sector which has benefited enormously from the monetary, fiscal and neo-liberal policies of the Lula Da Silva regime. Billionaire bankers have been the principle beneficiaries of the agro-mineral export economy which has flourished over the past decade, at the expense of the manufacturing sector. Despite claims by Workers Party leaders, the class inequalities between the mass of minimum wage workers ($380 per month as of March 2011) and the super-rich continues to be worst in Latin America. An analysis of the source of wealth among Brazilian billionaires reveals that 60% accrued their wealth in the finance, real estate and insurance (FIRE) sector and only one (3%) in the capital or intermediary maufacturing sector.

Brazil’s boom in economic growth and billionaires fits the profile of a ‘colonial economy’: heavy in conspicuous consumption, commodity exports and presided over by a dominant financial sector which promotes neo-liberal policies. Over the course of the past decade despite the populist political theatrics and paternalistic poverty-programs sponsored by the “center-left” Workers Party, the major socio-economic outcome has been the growth of a class of “super-rich” billionaires concentrated in banking with powerful links to the agro-mineral sectors. The free-market high growth financial-agro-mineral class has degraded the manufacturing sector, especially textiles and shoes, as well as capital and intermediary goods producers.

The BRICs are producing more, and growing faster than the established imperial powers in Europe and the US but they are also producing monstrous inequalities and concentrations of wealth. The socio-economic consequences have already manifested themselves in increasing class conflict especially in China and India, as intensive exploitation and dispossession have provoked mass action.

The Chinese political elite seems to be the most conscious of the political threat posed by the growing concentration of wealth and is in the midst of promoting substantial wage increases and greater local consumption which seems to be lowering profit margins among some sectors of the manufacturing elite. Perhaps the ‘historical memory’ of the “cultural revolution’ and the Maoist legacy plays a role in alerting the political elite to the political dangers resulting from “capitalist excesses” associated with the high levels of exploitation and the rapid growth of a class of politically connected kinship based billionaires.

Middle East

Over the past decade the most dynamic country in the Middle East has been Turkey. Led by a liberal democratic regime of Islamic inspiration, Turkey has led the region in GDP growth and in the production of billionaires. The Turkish economic performance has been presented by the World Bank and the IMF as a model for the post dictatorial regimes in the Arab world – ‘high growth’, a diversified economy based on the growing concentration of wealth. Turkey has 35% more billionaires (37) than the Gulf and North African states combined (24).

The ‘secret’ of Turkish growth is the high rates of investments in diverse industries and the intensive exploitation of labor. Many Turkish billionaires (14) derive their wealth via ‘conglomerates’, investments in diverse manufacturing, finance and construction sectors . Apart from the ‘conglomerate’ billionaires, there are ‘specialist billionaires’ who have accumulated wealth from banking, construction and food manufacturing. One of the reasons Turkey has rebuked and challenged Israeli power in the Middle East is because its capitalists are eager to project investments and penetrate markets in the Arab world. Apart from the highly Zionized US political system, the ruling elites and publics in Europe and Asia have looked favorably on Turkey’s opposition to Israel’s massacres in Gaza and violation of international law on the high seas.

If a modern liberal Islamic regime can grow rapidly through the rapid expansion of a diversified class of the super-rich, so does Israel, a modern neo-liberal-Judaic state based on the rapid growth of a highly diverse class of billionaires. Israel with 16 billionaires is a country with the fastest growing class inequalities in the region-with the highest per-capita billionaires in the world… Israel’s “growth sectors”, software, military industries, finance, insurance and diamonds and overseas investments in metals and mining are led by billionaires and multi-millionaires who have benefited from Zionist induced financial handouts from the US pillage of resources from the ex-USSR and transfer of funds by Russian-Israeli oligarchs and though joint ventures with Jewish-American billionaires in software corporations, especially in the “security” sector.

Israel’s high percentage of billionaires at a time of sharp cuts in social spending puts the lie to its claim to be a ‘social democracy’ in the midst of Arab ‘sheiksdoms.’ As a matter of record, Israel has twice as many billionaires (16) as Saudi Arabia (8) and more super-rich than the entire Gulf countries (13). The fact that Israel has more billionaires per capita than any other country has not prevented its Zionist supporters in the US from pressing for additional 20 billions in aid over the next decade.

Unlike the past, today Israel’s wealth concentration has less to do with its being the biggest recipient of foreign aid ... Israel’s handouts is a political issue: Zionist power over the Congressional purse. Given the total wealth of Israel’s billionaires a five percent tax would more than compensate for any cut off of US foreign aid. But that is not about to happen simply because Zionist power in America dictates that the US taxpayers subsidize Israel’s plutocrats by paying for their offensive weaponry.


The “economic crises” of 2008-2009 inflicted only temporary losses to some (US-EU) billionaires and not others (Asian). Thanks to trillion dollar/Euro/yen bailouts, the billionaires class has recovered and expanded, even as wages in the US and Europe stagnate and ‘living standards’ are slashed by massive cutbacks in health, education, employment and public services.

What is striking about the recovery, growth, and expansion of the world’s billionaires is how dependent their accumulation of wealth is based on pillage of state resources; how much of their fortunes were based on neo-liberal policies which led to the takeover at bargain prices of privatized public enterprises; how state de-regulation allows for plunder of the environment to extract resources at the highest rate of return; how the state promoted the expansion of speculative activity in real estate, finance and hedge funds, while encouraging the growth of monopolies, oligopolies and conglomerates which captured “super profits” – rates above the ‘historical level’. Billionaires in the BRICs and in the older imperial centers (Europe, US and Japan) have been the primary tax beneficiaries of reductions and elimination of social programs and labor rights.

What is absolutely clear is that the state not the market plays a essential role in facilitating the greatest concentration and centralization of wealth in world history, whether in facilitating the plundering of the treasury and the environment or in heightening the direct and indirect exploitation of labor.

The variations in the paths to ‘billionaire’ status are striking: in the US and UK, the parasitical – speculative sector predominates over the productive; among the BRICs – with the exception of Russia diverse sectors incorporating manufacturers, software, finance and agro-mineral billionaires predominate. In China the abysmal economic gap between the billionaires and the working class, between real estate speculators and dispossessed household is lead to increasing class conflict and challenges, forcing significant increases in wages (over 20% the past 3 years) and demands for increased public spending on education, health and housing. Nothing comparable is occurring in the US, EU or in the other BRICs.

The sources of billionaire wealth are, at best, only partially due to ‘entrepreneurial innovations’. Their wealth may have begun, at an earlier phase, from producing useful goods and services; but as the capitalist economies ‘mature’ and shift toward finance, overseas markets and the search for higher profits by imposing neo-liberal policies, the economic profile of the billionaire class shifts toward the parasitical model of the established imperial centers.

The billionaires in the BRICs, Turkey and Israel contrast sharply from the Middle East oil billionaires who are ‘rentiers’ living off ‘rents’ from exploiting oil and gas and overseas investments especially in the FIRE sector. Among the BRICs only the Russian billionaire oligarchs resemble the rentiers of the Gulf. The rest, especially Chinese, Indian, Brazilian and Turkish billionaires have taken advantage of state promoted industrial policies to concentrate wealth under the rhetoric of ‘national champions’, promoting their own ‘interests’ in the name of a “successful emerging economy”.

But the basic class questions remains: “growth for whom and who benefits?”. So far the historical record shows that growth of billionaires has been based on a highly polarized economy in which the state serves the new class of billionaires, whether parasitical speculators as in the US, rentier pillagers of the state and environment such as Russia and the Gulf states or exploiters of labor such as in the BRICs.

Post Script

The Arab revolt can be seen in part as an effort to overthrow ‘rentier capitalist clans’. Western intervention in the revolts and support of the “opposition” military and political elites is an effort to substitute a ‘neo-liberal’ capitalist ruling class. This “new class” would be based on the exploitation of labor and dispossession of current crony-clan-kin owners of resources Major enterprises would be transferred to multi-nationals and local capitalists.

Much more promising are the internal working struggles in China and to lesser degree in Brazil and the rural based Maoist peasant and tribal movements in India which oppose rentier and capitalist exploitation and dispossession.


22 - Obama’s Mother Worked For CIA
Posted on Pakalert on April 18, 2011

by Wayne Madsen

A female “Indiana Jones” who “human terrained” Communists in Indonesia for the CIA.

A third world leader who had challenged the hegemony of the United States was accused of trying to obtain an atomic bomb and helping to create an “axis” of America’s enemy. We are not referring to either Saddam Hussein or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad but to President Sukarno of Indonesia.

U.S. support for the Indonesian coup and Project CAMELOT

President Obama’s step-father, Lolo Soetoro, a reserve Indonesian army officer called back into service in the army in 1965 from his CIA-supplied scholarship at the East-West Center at the University of Hawaii, was a foot soldier in the putschist cabal of General Suharto, the man who the CIA designated as the leader of the 1965 coup that deposed Sukarno and targeted between 500,000 and 1 million members of the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI) for elimination. Lolo Soetoro was one of some 4000 Indonesian army officers who were trained in the United States between 1958 and 1965 and the CIA and Pentagon ensured that these officers would be available for the long-planned overthrow of Sukarno. In fact, an overwhelming majority of Indonesian army officers who were trained abroad received their training in the United States, not in the Soviet Union or China. The air force, on the other hand, was seen as pro-PKI and PKI influence extended into the junior officer ranks of the Indonesian navy, particularly in Surabaya, eastern Java.

The Indonesian army also included some PKI sympathizers, especially in units in central and eastern Java, which were also areas of interest to Ann Soetoro in her “anthropological field work” for the U.S. government. In addition, the police force in central and eastern Java was also sympathetic to the PKI.

Obama’s mother, Ann Soetoro, was dispatched from Hawaii to Indonesia in 1967, along with seven year-old Barack Obama, to infiltrate villages in Java to carry out a CIA survey of political leanings among the Javanese population. Those unfortunate enough to be tagged as Communists or Sukarno supporters were then targeted for elimination by the CIA, which turned the target lists over to Suharto’s army officers, including Lolo Soetoro. During the Cold War, the use of anthropologists by the CIA and Defense Department in the collection of ethnographic and cultural intelligence was commonplace, with modern roots in a classified U.S. intelligence program created in 1964, three years before Dunham Soetoro arrived in Indonesia, called Project CAMELOT. The first testing ground for CAMELOT was Chile and the target was that nation’s indigenous population, including the Mapuche Indians.

The use of anthropologists like Dunham Soetoro was supported through grants laundered by the Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie Foundations. Many of Dunham Soetoro’s activities in Java were funded by the Ford Foundation.

CAMELOT was officially described as follows by the U.S. Army: “Success in such tasks as equipping and training indigenous forces for an internal security mission, civic action, psychological warfare, or othercounterinsurgency action depends on a thorough understanding of the indigenous social structure, upon the accuracy with which changes within the indigenous culture, particularly violent changes, are anticipated, and the effects of various courses of action available to the military and other agencies of government upon the indigenous process of change.”

CAMELOT’s work was conducted at American University in Washington, DC by the Pentagon’s Special Operations Research Office (SORO). SORO ran the Army’s psychological warfare operations. In addition to CAMELOT “research” in Chile, SORO anthropological research also targeted the indigenous peoples of Colombia and Peru.

CAMELOT still exists under a new name and Obama supports it

Today, a number of elements in CAMELOT are integral to the much-discredited “Human Terrain System” (HTS) operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. As with CAMELOT and other covert operations involving anthropologists, HTS has been charged with exacerbating tensions between various indigenous groups and tribes to create intelligence opportunities for the U.S. military. The targeting of village leaders, a replay, of the CIA’s PHOENIX assassination program in South Vietnam, part of CIA Southeast Asia regional chief William Colby’s Civil Operations and Revolutionary Development Support (CORDS) program, has also been a charge leveled against those involved with HTS. President Obama has done nothing to curtail HTS funding, although there have been some moves by some in Congress to do so.

Obama continues to fund the follow-on to CAMELOT, PHOENIX, CORDS, and MODJOKUTO, all CIA/Pentagon operations familiar to his mother and her colleagues, the Human Terrain System, which has been responsible for massacres of civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen and Pakistan.

Members of the American Anthropological Association (AAA) have, like they did with CAMELOT and PHOENIX, have condemned HTS for its reliance on what the AAA has described as “mercenary anthropology.” A survey of literature during the late 1960s and 70s indicate that Dunham Soetoro and many of her colleagues engaged in U.S. government- and Ford Foundation-financed anthropological field work in Indonesia met the definition of “mercenary anthropologists.” Central and eastern Java were known as hotbeds of what was termed “rural radicalism,” and, thus, were of extreme interest to CAMELOT and the CIA behavioral science and ethnographic elements. Other CIA-funded anthropologists fanned out after the 1965 coup to other areas of Indonesia known to be areas of strong PKI support, including Aceh in northwestern Sumatra and Bali. The massacres of actual and suspected PKI members were so great that sanitation in Java, Bali, and Aceh became an issue as a result from the rotting of human corpses. It was into this environment that Ann Soetoro brought seven year-old Barack Obama in 1967, yet Obama barely mentions these “years of living dangerously” in his autobiographical sketches about his mother’s and step father’s activities in Indonesia. There is only a brief mention of Lolo Soetoro’s counter-insurgency operations in Indonesian occupied West Papua, which, like East Timor and Aceh, would attract the interests of a fair number of CIA-funded anthropologists in counter-insurgency — and even genocidal campaigns in the case of East Timor — into the 1970s, 80s, 90s, and to the present day.

At its height, the PKI was estimated to have some 20 million members, with its main areas of support in central and eastern Java, particular areas of focus after the Suharto coup for Ann Soetoro and her US Agency for International Development (USAID) and CIA official and non-official cover embassy and consulate colleagues in Jakarta and Surabaya. One of Dunham Soetoro’s colleagues in Indonesia was Ford Foundation consultant Clifford Geertz who became known later as an eminent scholar on cultural anthropology in Indonesia and Morocco.

In a poem written by intelligence expert Professor Peter Dale Scott about the Indonesian massacre Geertz is mentioned in a cryptic passage:

Clifford Geertz having just

reread your Notes

on the Balinese cockfight

how you were first accepted

by cautious villagers

after you all fled

from the Javanese constabulary

and how slaughter

in the cock ring itself

after red pepper

is stuffed down their beaks

and up their anuses

joins pride to selfhood

selfhood to cocks

and cocks to destruction

a blood sacrifice

offered to the demons

to pacify their cannibal hunger

Geertz, who was heavily funded by the Ford Foundation, happened to have arrived in Indonesia the day before the coup against Sukarno. Geertz immediately went to Yogyakarta, the PKI hot-bed that would later also see Dunham Soetoro conducting “field research.”

The use of cultural anthropologists for CIA work created a furor in the 1960s, especially with their use in South Vietnam and Thailand in support of the war effort. However, one of the most noted anthropologists in the world at the time, Margaret Mead, renowned for her seminal work in 1928, “Coming of Age in Samoa,” and her controversial views on the sexual morés of the 1960s, defended the CIA’s use of anthropologists in field work. In a 1971 report, called the Mead Report, Mead rebutted the Beals Report and stated that the use of anthropologists in counter-insurgency “research” met the “traditional canons of acceptable behavior” for anthropologists.

Mead found herself in opposition to senior anthropologists of the AAA who were opposed to the CIA’s use of anthropologists in covert operations and counter-insurgency programs. In 1966, Professor Ralph Beals of UCLA presented a report commissioned by the AAA on the subject of CIA co-option of anthropologists. The Beals Report stated: “several anthropologists, especially younger ones who had difficulty in securing research funds, were approached by ‘obscure’ foundations or were offered support from such organizations only to discover later that they were expected to provide intelligence information to the CIA.” The report added, “agents of the CIA have posed as anthropologists, much to the detriment of the anthropological research programs.”

Note: WMR is attempting to obtain a copy of the full Beals Report, which was officially adopted by the AAA’s Council of Fellows in 1967, the year Dunham Soetoro arrived in Indonesia. Professor Beals died in 1985.

Geertz worked with the Center for International Studies (CENIS) at MIT on projects funded by the CIA and Ford Foundation. One was Project MODJOKUTO in Indonesia. In fact, in his book, “The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama,” David Remnick cites Geertz as one of Dunham Soetoro’s Indonesian colleagues. Geertz, a specialist in the post-war Javanese economy, believed in modernization of tribal and rural societies and was not sold on Dunham Soetoro’s quaint ideas of promoting the interests and development of Indonesian village craftsmen and weavers.

CENIS’s anthropological work on behalf of the CIA was the brainchild of Max Millikan, CENIS’s first director, and Walt W. Rostow who, in 1954, convinced CIA director Allen Dulles of the need for CIA involvement in development projects abroad. Rostow later became deputy national security adviser in the Lyndon Johnson White House. Rostow worked for McGeorge Bundy, who, after leaving the White House in 1966, became President of the Ford Foundation, the main source of the laundered CIA funding for Geertz’s and Dunham Soetoro’s field work in Indonesia.

Many of the pre-1977 CIA files on its interactions with the American Anthropological Association have either been heavily redacted or destroyed. Many of the MK-ULTRA documents on CIA behavioral science work in theUnited States and abroad were ordered destroyed in 1973 by CIA director Colby, shortly after he took over at Langley. Some of the CIA’s anthropological studies were directed domestically a the Black Panther Party, which also gained the attention of Barack Obama, Jr. in the mid-1980s, while he was allegedly involved in “community organizing” in south Chicago, a Black Panther base of operations, after leaving a high-paying job as a “journalist” for CIA front Business International Corporation in Manhattan.

Three anthropologists serving with Human Terrain Teams in Afghanistan have been killed since the inception of the program or what could be termed the resurrection of CAMELOT and PHOENIX. Dunham Soetoro and her colleagues were much luckier in Java and on other Indonesian islands following the 1965 military coup. For one thing, the CIA had already infiltrated and sponsored a number of Indonesian groups prior to the coup against Sukarno, providing a ready-made network of informants for Ann Soetoro and her anthropology colleagues. Groups sponsored by the CIA included the Central Organization of Indonesian Socialist Employees (SOKSI), student organizations, and others.

Ann Dunham Soetoro: A female “Indiana Jones” surveying villagers to root out Communists for the CIA. She was not the only anthropologist involved in such activities.

As with the reasons why the United States went to war in Afghanistan and Iraq, which were based on false premises, the covert U.S. incursion into Indonesia in 1965 was also based on fraudulent “new stories” and outright lies crafted by the CIA and Pentagon.

The CIA propaganda war against Sukarno

In September 1964, Sukarno accused leaders of the Murba Party, a “nationalist” Communist Party with ties to Moscow, as opposed to the pro-Chinese PKI, of attempting to launch a palace coup backed by the CIA. The Murba Party masked its true intentions by launching a new group, the “Body to Promote Sukarnoism” (BPS), however Sukarno saw it as a ruse to further the ambitions of Washington and Moscow and he banned the BPS. Ann Soetoro’s knowledge of Russian, which she took, along with Barack Obama, Sr., at the University of Hawaii in 1960, would come in handy in her contacts with Murba officials, including Murba secretary general Adam Malik, who had been Indonesia’s ambassador in Moscow in 1959. In January 1965, Sukarno banned Murba, which, after the coup later that year, became legal again under Suharto. Malik, who may have also acted as an agent of the CIA while in Moscow and as Indonesian Trade Minister in 1963, became Indonesian foreign minister and deputy prime minister under Suharto in 1966.

The western media began a full propaganda effort against Sukarno in late 1964. On October 16, China tested its first atomic bomb. In November, Chinese Foreign Minister Chen Yi visited Jakarta and almost immediately, there were bogus reports put out by the CIA in the Asian and western press that China was prepared to givenuclear weapons technology to Indonesia. There were also Western media reports that Sukarno was planning to set up an anti-western “axis” of Indonesia, Cambodia, North Korea, North Vietnam, and mainland China. Only Cambodia was a member of the United Nations. The similarities between this so-called “axis” and the “axis of evil” of Iraq, Iran, and North Korea promoted by the neo-conservatives before the U.S. invasion of Iraq are stark.

The CIA’s propaganda efforts even extended to Indonesian seers and mystics, who began to predict Sukarno’s imminent downfall or death.

The stage was being set for a coup against Sukarno. In January 1965, Indonesia withdrew from the United Nations because its arch-enemy, Malaysia, was given a seat on the UN Security Council. There were also reports that Chinese Prime Minister Chou En-lai had promised to provide weapons to PKI cadres to provide Sukarno with his own armed militia against the suspect Indonesian army. The bogus story about the secret supply of Chinese weapons to the PKI for a communist revolt first appeared in a Malaysian newspaper, citing unnamed sources in Bangkok, who heard the story from Hong Kong sources who picked up the information from contacts in mainland China. Even by today’s shoddy journalism standards of Fox News and CNN, the story lacked any credulity.

A mysterious letter surfaced in Indonesia in July 1965, purportedly written by British ambassador in Jakarta Andrew Gilchrist to the British Foreign Office in London that referred to “our local army friends.” Gilchrist was a British intelligence agent in India and Thailand during World War II. Gilchrist, in the months leading up to the coup, told London that regime change in Jakarta would entail “more than a little shooting.” Before being posted to Jakarta, Gilchrist was British Consul General in Chicago. The University of Chicago’s “New Nations Project, a suspected CIA-linked research project that examined nationalist movements around the world during the 1960s, involved none other than Dunham Soetoro’s colleague in Indonesia, Clifford Geertz.

In March 1965, Sukarno infuriated the West by taking over the operations of western oil companies, including Shell, Caltex, and Stanvac, which was owned by Mobil. In 1970, after leaving the army, Lolo Soetoro went to work for Mobil, which was assured of no interference from the pro-U.S. Suharto government.

In April 1965, Sukarno expelled the Peace Corps from Indonesia as he grew more and more suspicious of American covert activities in his country. The next month, Sukarno accused the United States and Britain of planning a coup against him with the aid of the Indonesian army. Army forces began to call back Indonesian army reserve officers who were studying abroad in order to supplement their ranks for the planned coup against Sukarno. On July 20, 1965, Lolo Soetoro, who had been in the United States receiving CIA- and Pentagon-funded training since September 18, 1962, left Hawaii for Indonesia. He had married Ann Dunham on March 15, 1965. Ann Soetoro received her U.S. passport on July 19, 1965, the day before Lolo Soetoro left for Indonesia and just as events were heating up in Indonesia.

Suspiciously, Lolo Soetoro’s Wikipedia entry has been altered to reflect his departure from Hawaii to Indonesia in 1966, the year following the coup. It appears that certain interests want to cover up Lolo Soetoro’s involvement in the 1965 CIA coup.

In August, Sukarno committed the arch sin as viewed by the West and quasi-CIA support organizations like the Ford Foundation. Sukarno withdrew Indonesia from the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and INTERPOL. In August, while receiving a foreign delegation, Sukarno began to vomit uncontrollably and he collapsed. This was during the height of the CIA’s assassination program led by the “Black Sorcerer,” Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, the head of MK-ULTRA, who had previously attempted the poisonings of Fidel Castro, Iraqi leader Abdul Karim Qassem, and Congo’s Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba.

False flag assassinations blamed on the Communists

On September 30, 1965, what unfolded in Indonesia may have been a classic CIA disinformation and “false flag” operation. Low-ranking army officers, said to be part of an attempted PKI takeover and calling themselves the “30 September Movement,” attempted to kidnap seven anti-PKI army generals, however, oddly, General Suharto, the CIA’s point man for the coup, was not among the kidnapping targets. Generals Yani, Haryono, and Panjaitan were killed at their homes “while resisting arrest,” while Generals Soeprapto, Parman, and Sutoyo were taken alive and shot later by the coup plotters. The bodies of all seven generals were dumped into a well.

The Minister of Defense and Security, General Nasution, managed to escape alive from his home and received asylum at the Iraqi embassy, although his five year-old daughter was killed in the attack. The coup was launched from the Halim airbase outside Jakarta. However, for a coup attempt blamed on the PKI, which was used to launch a bloody massacre of PKI members and their sympathizers and force Sukarno from power, it was amazing that most of the PKI leadership were not in Jakarta and were not in contact with the low-ranking coup leaders. Aidit, one of the PKI Politburo members, was present at the Halim base but Politburo members Njoto, Lukman, Subandrio, Chaerul Saleh and Sastroamidjojo were not in Jakarta. There is no conclusive evidence that the PKI staged the murders of the seven generals but there is ample evidence that given the CIA’s and MI-6′s pre-coup operations, that it was they and Suharto that staged the massacre to provide a reason to oust Sukarno and begin the systematic massacres of PKI members.

It was also odd that given General Yani’s soft approach to the PKI, that he was marked for assassination by alleged PKI cadres. However, General Nasution, who was known to be extremely anti-Communist and who was counted in the pro-U.S. camp, was able to escape assassination and hide out in the Iraqi embassy. Although Nasution swore Suharto in as the new president after the formal ousting of Sukarno, Nasution later broke with Suharto.

Why Indonesia 1965 matters for America 2011

Obama’s advent to the White House was hailed as a first for the United States, someone had been elected as the “leader of the Free World” who had a multi-cultural background and a unique international understanding, as opposed to the pedestrian nature of George W. Bush. As Obama’s policies have become more clear, it is now a distinct possibility that Obama’s “international understanding” has been influenced not so much by America’s founders’ principles but by the “strong man” characteristics of Asian personages such as Suharto, Adam Malik, and Obama’s step-father Lolo Soetoro. And for that, all Americans should be fearful.


23 - How CIA spies deal death from the skies :
Thousands killed by U.S. unmanned drones
(as the survivors are driven in to the arms of Al Qaeda)
Posted on Pakalert on April 18, 2011

By David Rose

The assembly, a traditional Pathan jirga (tribal council), was being held in the open, on flat ground close to the Tochi river, on the Pakistani side of the Afghan border in tribal North Waziristan. There were more than 150 present, gathered to resolve a dispute over how much revenue each of several neighbouring clans was due from a chromite mine on the slopes of a nearby mountain.

Sharbat Khan, the contractor who had leased the mining rights, had just begun to speak when four or five Predators - American pilotless ‘drone’ aircraft - flew over the line of brown, craggy hills at the valley’s rim and seemingly filled the sky.

Their first target was a car which was heading away from the Afghan border, being driven along the rough mountain road at high speed in an effort to outrun the drones and their deadly payload. According to witnesses, the aircraft fired four missiles at the car, but it was going so fast that they missed. Then, as the vehicle passed the village of Datta Khel, where the jirga had assembled, the drones fired two more missiles. This time, the car turned into a fireball, and all five men inside were killed.

Strike force: Predators that are remote-controlled from America have devastated Pakistan’s tribal border region

Smoke rises during a U.S. air strike on Taliban positions in Kunduz province, Afghanistan in 2001

It may well be that whoever was piloting the drones thousands of miles away, sitting at a computer screen somewhere in America, did have reliable intelligence that the men in the car were terrorists. It is probable, say Pakistani security sources, that a GPS chip had been secreted inside the vehicle by an agent working for the Americans in order to track it more accurately.

But after the car’s destruction, and before the tribesmen could take cover, the drones came back and started firing indiscriminately at them. ‘Four missiles were fired on the jirga members, who included people from all ages,’ a tribesman, Samiullah Khan, told a local Pathan journalist. ‘The next moment there was nothing except the bodies of the slain and injured all around.’ According to Samiullah Khan, the victims’ families had to be satisfied with burying disconnected ‘pieces of flesh’. In all, 41 died immediately, and a further seven over the following week.

On March 16, the day before the attack, Raymond A. Davis, an American CIA operative who shot two men dead in the city of Lahore in January, had walked free from prison. His arrest, and the tense diplomatic manoeuvring which followed it, saw a temporary pause in the drone strikes.

Pakistani sources say tension was running so high over his case that the guards in his jail were prevented from carrying their usual weapons, lest one of them take the opportunity to murder him.

But now, after America had secured Davis’s release by paying £1.5m in ‘blood money’ to the families of the men he shot and arranging visas for them to settle abroad, the strikes were back with a vengeance.

Last week in Islamabad, Pakistani ministers and senior officials told me the cumulative effect has been to plunge US-Pakistan relations into profound crisis, so placing the coalition’s war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in both Pakistan and Afghanistan in jeopardy.

It was also evident that the issue is about to trigger an international human rights furore, with lawyers and campaigners claiming many of the victims of earlier attacks were also innocent of any connection with the Taliban. They believe that while some were ‘collateral damage’ in strikes in which genuine terrorists died, others were only targeted because a top-secret private intelligence network which America has established inside Pakistan is deeply unreliable.

1st Lt. Erik Evans controls an MQ-1B Predator for takeoff for a mission – unmanned drones controlled in the U.S. have dealt huge damage on Pakistan’s borders

Foreign secretary Salman Bashir, interior minister Rehman Malik, army spokesman General Athar Abbas and a senior officer from Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) all said much the same thing: that while the drones have killed some important terrorists, they are now helping to rally more recruits to the extremists’ cause, and at the same time undermining Pakistani sovereignty.

‘Not only are drone strikes counter-productive, they are affecting the entire relationship with the US,’ said Bashir, who is to visit Washington later this month. ‘If we and America are partners, sharing the same goals, then it has to be recognised that Pakistan has a right to homeland security too.’

The ISI man added: ‘These attacks are unilateral actions being run by the CIA. We have no say in whom they target, where they target, and when they target, even though we are using our own army and air force in the same region.

‘Irrespective of the short-term tactical gains, there is a huge strategic loss. The killing of the maliks [tribal elders] at the Datta Khel jirga has had a catastrophic effect on public opinion. Our interests are being ignored.’

Maliks were the government’s critical allies against the Taliban, he said.

The CIA began to go it alone. It was also expanding the scale of its operations inside Pakistan and increasing the number of its personnel, many of them nominally private ‘contractors’ rather than permanent CIA staff.
More attacks such as this would drive them into the extremists’ arms and render the entire frontier region ungovernable.

Attacks by drones were not at first controversial. In the beginning, according to a regularly updated survey by the Democratinclined New America Foundation, they were also relatively rare: a total of just nine strikes over the period 2004-2007, with estimates as to the number killed ranging between 89 and 112. In 2008, however, their frequency increased dramatically: there were 34 attacks that year, which left between 273 and 313 dead.

Meanwhile, the ISI official said, the intelligence methods being used to select targets changed. Until then, America had selected them in close cooperation with the Pakistanis. Now, the CIA began to go it alone. It was also expanding the scale of its operations inside Pakistan and increasing the number of its personnel, many of them, like Raymond Davis, nominally private ‘contractors’ rather than permanent CIA staff.

It was, say Pakistani officials, effectively running its own, parallel intelligence network inside the territory of a supposed ally, recruiting and paying agents in the tribal areas on the Afghan border both to help it choose targets and to plant the GPS chips that guide the drones. At first, the strikes still commanded Pakistani support. As the casualties mounted, that support began to ebb.

Increased attacks: There was a rise in the number of drone strikes – and resultant deaths – after President Barack Obama took office in January 2009

When the Obama administration took office in January 2009, drone strikes increased again, with the total number of deaths reported as between 368 and 724. In 2010, this almost doubled again, with the estimated total rising to between 607 and 993.

How many of them were really terrorists? The New America Foundation, basing its conclusions on contemporary media reports, suggests the total killed since 2004 is between 1,435 and 2,283. Around two-thirds were Taliban or Al Qaeda, it says, with a ‘true civilian fatality rate’ of 32 per cent. That is worrying enough: those figures imply that up to 730 innocents have been killed. However, most of those media reports derived their information from claims made by US spokesmen at the time. Some Pakistanis believe the real total of dead non-combatants may be significantly higher.

‘The CIA has set up its own networks,’ said Shahzad Akbar, a leading Pakistani lawyer who is preparing a class-action law suit by drone victims’ families against US defence secretary Robert Gates, former CIA Islamabad chief Jonathan Banks and CIA director Leon Panetta. ‘But how reliable are they? They are paying individuals who now have an incentive to say, so-and-so Khan is a very bad man. But how do they really know he is?’

‘I don’t want to cast aspersions on US intelligence, but if they consult us, they will do much better,’ said Malik, Pakistan’s interior minister. ‘We are in touch with the sons of the soil, who really know when and where to strike. On their side, things are just not like that.’
Akbar compared the situation to the months after 9/11, when hundreds of prisoners who were later released without charge were consigned to Guantanamo Bay for years on the basis of denunciations by people who were able to claim a $5,000 bounty by accusing them, and were often merely settling scores: the Pathan regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan, he recalled, are rife with tribal vendettas.

Akbar also cited several cases where ‘high-value targets’ were said by US spokesmen to have been killed by drones, only later to show themselves very much alive - including Hakimullah Mehsud, the ruthless leader of the Pakistani Taliban responsible for thousands of deaths caused by suicide bombings in Pakistani cities since 2007.

Akbar is now being supported by lawyers from the British human rights group Reprieve and the US Center for Constitutional Rights, both of which led high-profile legal campaigns against Guantanamo and the CIA’s ‘extraordinary renditions’.

He has already filed court papers on behalf of three people killed in a Waziristan village called Machi Khel in December 2009. They state that a drone hit the village hujra, its social centre, killing an 18-year-old school teaching assistant, a secondary school teacher, and a construction worker who was helping to rebuild the local mosque.

Akbar said his investigators were now gathering many more such examples in the tribal border areas. If he wins the case in Pakistan, he said he would then file suit in America to enforce the payment of damages. There is every sign that the Pakistani government welcomes Akbar’s actions.

‘I don’t want to cast aspersions on US intelligence, but if they consult us, they will do much better,’ said Malik, Pakistan’s interior minister. ‘We are in touch with the sons of the soil, who really know when and where to strike. On their side, things are just not like that.’

There was a temporary pause in drone strikes after the March arrest of CIA operative Raymond A Davis, who shot two men dead in Lahore

Drone strikes and Raymond Davis are not the only reasons for the chilly state of US-Pakistan relations. Ten days ago, a White House report to the US Congress was heavily critical of Pakistan’s performance as an ally, the latest in a long line of such documents which have left Pakistanis dismayed and exasperated.

For example, the report suggests that in mounting counter-insurgency operations against the Taliban, Pakistan often merely ‘mows the grass’ and then lets it grow back - clearing out terrorists from border areas on a temporary basis without taking steps to hold hard-won territory, or to build resilient structures which would prevent the terrorists from coming back.

It singles out the Mohmand region north of Peshawar, where the Pakistan army is now engaged on its third operation since 2005. This claim reduces Pakistani officials to a state of palpable fury. Mohmand,

they point out, adjoins the Korengal and Pech valleys in Afghanistan from which America recently withdrew, after years of bitter fighting.

Last week, Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters were filmed happily ensconced in what had been a US militaryoutpost in the Pech.

‘There is no military solution,’ said foreign secretary Bashir. ‘The American commander General Petraeus says he has halted the Taliban momentum. ‘Quite honestly, our assessment does not match that. We think things have got worse.’
‘For years we’ve been lectured by the Americans about how we have allowed the Afghan Taliban havens on our side of the border,’ one general said.

‘Now we’re having to mount a new operation in Mohmand because America’s withdrawal has created a safe haven in Afghanistan.’

Looming over all this is a much bigger issue: that while Britain and America are now publicly committed to withdrawal from Afghanistan, with the first troop reductions set for this summer, neither they nor the Afghan government have even started on the road to a political settlement. Without one, the prospect for Pakistan is to have on its border a failed state dominated by warlords, drug barons and extremists - a permanent source of crime and terrorism.

All the officials I spoke to said the time had come for a complete rethink of Western strategy, suggesting that the Afghan ‘surge’ which was supposed to make the Taliban keener on reconciliation had simply failed. ‘The idea that this was ever going to force them to come to the table was always flawed,’ the general said.

‘It’s against the whole nature of Afghanistan and its history.’

‘There is no military solution,’ said foreign secretary Bashir. ‘The American commander General Petraeus says he has halted the Taliban momentum. ‘Quite honestly, our assessment does not match that. We think things have got worse.’

Drone strikes have worsened diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Pakistan

The political process must be led by the Afghan government, added Bashir. But it had to start now: ‘We have not set these deadlines for withdrawal and troop drawdowns. But they impel a sense of urgency.’

If Afghanistan, and perhaps eventually nuclear-armed Pakistan in its turn, are not to become failed states, the breakdown in the US-Pakistan relationship matters. It could make it impossible to supply Nato troops by causing their vital supply lines across the Khyber Pass to be shut.

Talking to diplomats in Islamabad, it seemed clear that other Western countries, Britain included, are frantically trying to heal the rift - and persuade the Americans to be more sympathetic to Pakistan’s own plight: some 30,000 Pakistani civilians have died in terrorist-related violence since 9/11, a death toll much higher than any other country’s.

Meanwhi le, local sources suggested that Pakistan is already coming to terms with the possibility that the worst-case scenarios for Afghanistan will come to pass, in which case Pakistan will need its own drone technology. They said they are already working on acquiring it - with the help of another emerging great power: China.


24 - Is A False Flag Nuke On the Table?
Posted on Pakalert on April 18, 2011

by Zen Gardner

The “mini-nuke terror threat on America” war drums are pounding louder by the day.

Last year it was Obama and other stooge politicians warning us, then Homeland Insecurity, and now it’s threat letters in Chicago. (Remember the false flag anthrax letters?)

Obama was particularly clear almost exactly one year ago:

“The single biggest threat to U.S. security, both short-term, medium-term and long-term, would be the possibility of a terrorist organization obtaining a nuclear weapon. This is something that could change the security landscape in this country and around the world for years to come.

If there was ever a detonation in New York City, or London, or Johannesburg, the ramifications economically, politically and from a security perspective would be devastating.

We know that organizations like al-Qaida are in the process of trying to secure nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction, and would have no compunction at using them.”Source

Spoken like a true insider. He knows very well who the real perpetrators would be in such a horrendous event. He’s putting the word out there to strike international fear, and introduce the possibility into the public consciousness, and tell you in advance who the perpetrators will be. He’s also putting national leaders on notice.

And now this latest spate of so-called terrorist nuke warnings in Chicago.

It’s starting to feel like not if, but when…and where.

We certainly know the “why”.

Problem. Reaction. Solution.
And the “solution” to a nuke attack will be nasty. Can you imagine if the unthinkable happened on American soil? It would be 9/11 on steroids.

You want war with Iran? You got it.

You want to take out any other possible “rogue terrorist-harboring” state and roll on through the mideast? Done.

And crying, freaked out, mindless manipulated Americans will wave their flags wildly and cheer it all on.

Poor programmed sheeple.

“But what’s this? Oh well, we need Homeland Security tightened for sure–there’s terrorists everwhere of every kind!”

Martial law enforced, the Constitution suspended (permanently it will turn out), and an Orwellian police statethat will ensue that will make 1984 look like kids play. And which people will accept with open arms.

Other countries would follow suit, as in post 9/11, preparing the way for the next stage of the NWO takeover.

It Could Be Anywhere – With Same Effect
Mind you, this scenario could also follow a nuke attack on another country, with the excuse being “See, there are nukes floating around, and we need to clamp down in our own country to catch these terrorists.” And then put out their made up suspect list of anyone they want to incarcerate under suspicion, which the freaked out American populace would gladly support.

Would They Do Such A Thing?
If a false flag nuke is deployed, it will be engineered by a secret Satanic cabal of insane power-mongers in cahoots with elements of our own government and many shadowy agencies.

Would they nuke an innocent city of civilians to accomplish their plan?

Look at history. Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

If the PTBs can cold-bloodedly kill 4000+ on 9/11 as well as other preplanned events like Pearl Harbor, Oklahoma City, etc., never mind many, many millions more in wars that preceded and followed, you think they would have any qualms about taking out a city to accomplish their plan?

How To Create An Enemy
This all comes to life every time the media ramps up the nuke-terror-talk scare, just as they kept repeating preceding 9/11. That way when it happens, people can easily be steered to the supposed perpetrators.

Clever little devils. And now they’re creating new Bin Laden’s to blame.

The designated “bad guys”. Ahmadinejad, the new Osama bin Laden? Or will they blame Gaddafi? Doesn’t matter.

Here’s how it works:

All that is necessary for success of “false flag” or “black ops” events is for the government to have its story ready and to have a reliable and compliant media. Once an official story is in place, thought andinvestigation are precluded. Any formal inquiry that is convened serves to buttress the already provided explanation.

An explanation ready-at-hand is almost a give-away that an incident is a “black ops” event. Notice how quickly the U.S. government, allegedly so totally deceived by al Qaida, provided the explanation for 9/11. When President Kennedy was assassinated, the government produced the culprit immediately. The alleged culprit was conveniently shot inside a jail by a civilian before he could be questioned. But the official story was ready, and it held. Source

A Nuclear Strike Dream
In 2007 my wife had a vivid dream of seeing and being vaporized by an atomic explosion off the coast of LA. She doesn’t dream or remember her dreams very often, but it’s a picture that’s not easy to shake.

I’m only sharing this as information, not a prediction.

At the very least it underlines the fact that all these mini-nuke scares the Controllers are again throwing at us could be foretelling and are following the same old pattern…

Not A Nightmare
Take the dream below for what you will. It’s not necessarily prophetic by any means. My wife who had the dream doesn’t even believe it to be true. But the image lingers. And there was no fear and a very happy ending

She was sitting in a high end house on a hill in sort of a canyon area looking west over the Santa Monica section of the LA coast. The big wall-sized window was oriented slightly south to where it looked over the slope down towards the city area.

She was on the phone with Steve Jobs for some reason. The iphone had been announced but not released yet so that was interesting.

Suddenly out over the ocean, slightly to her right, a nuclear atom bomb went off. She had a few moments to recognize what it was before the hot racing explosion whipped through the glass and she was vaporized.

She was still conscious as her body and everything around her just disappeared. She had been with several people and everyone was still there..only they had all made a split second transformation into spirit or a form of conscious awareness together.

She said everyone was still who they were, they just didn’t have bodies anymore. (That’s what awaits us..fear not.)

That was it.

We thought if it really was a prophetic dream, which we were skeptical of, it may have meant the explosion would be around the date of the release of the first iphone, which as you know was some time ago, way back in 2007. Obviously it wasn’t.

But images like that stick with you.

I don’t know what the Steve Jobs part could mean, if anything. I do know the idea of a remote controlled detonation off shore has been discussed in the mainstream media as they’ve discussed the idea of a port city being an easy target, using either a container or rogue vessel out at sea to launch a missile and that would sink itself so it couldn’t be traced.

Again, to entrain the public’s mind of the possibility and make it clear who did it when it happens.

Same M.O. during WW2. Fight there to protect here. Orwellian hogwash.
Again, the media busy imprinting the possibility and sanitizing the horror by directing your fear and anger at a pre-determined, demonized distant enemy for the sake of “homeland security”.

But Something Like This Could Happen
Neither of us hold this dream as fact by any means. As you know everything is fluid and there are interim fulfillments of future possibilities and a whole lot we don’t understand. Dreams can have all kinds of reasons and influences behind them.

What makes me include this is to impress on people that a nuclear false flag is a very real possibility. Most of you know this, but some of you may be skeptical.

There are a lot of good articles covering this subject. Gordon Duff, prolific researcher/writer said this last year:

A powerful group within the United States, one with influence over the press and the ability to derail an investigation as was done with 9/11, has been “tasked” with laying the groundwork for a terrorist attack on America, one using nuclear material. See “False Flag Nuke Attack On U.S. Justified”

LA Nuke Not Likely
I find it doubtful it would be LA they’d take out, or part of it, considering the Illuminati stronghold that Los Angeles is. If they do it, it will probably be a more “expendable” city. But who knows.

However, if a tide of high ranking Illuminati cockroaches start scurrying out of the city it might be time to reconsider. Or any city, for that matter.

Could It Be Phoenix?
33rd Degree Masonic Phoenix “Order Out of Chaos”
I’ve often wondered if it would be Phoenix they’d target due to the very strong occult symbolism of the mythical Phoenix used throughout Freemasonry and other secret and royal societies. And its location.

These long-term seeing Illuminists like to “kill a few birds with one stone” and pre-plan as such. The fallout from a nuke there would drift towards Texas and the gulf area, a part of the country they’ve targeted for years via the engineered and exacerbated Katrina hurricane and deliberately botched non-recovery, and opening an oil volcano and then dumping mega amounts of the nerve toxin corexit.

They don’t play nice, and are on a mission of deliberate chaos and destruction.

The 33rd Parallel
Phoenix is located squarely on the 33rd parallel…an extremely significant number and location.

Phoenix, Roswell and the White Sands first A-bomb test site, Georgia Guidestones, Baghdad and Hiroshima and Nagasaki–to name a few sites and cities on or very near the significant 33rd parallel.

There’s also San Diego. No one’s bound to their evil intent on these grid lines. We use the energy line for good.

They, however, channel other lower, wicked densities. The world’s 6th largest military installation is stationed in the San Diego area, and it’s known to be an Illuminati stronghold and hugely infested with NWO tech and bio tech companies and other corporate behemoths.

No coincidence.

The number 33 enigmatically stretches as a latitude line across many diverse cultures in many different times. Known in numerology as the Master Teacher, 33 is the most influential of all numbers, indicating selfless devotion to the spiritual progress of humankind. The other two master numbers, 11 (vision) and 22 (vision with action) form the base of a two-dimensional pyramid, and added together equal 33 (guidance to the world), the apex of the pyramid. [1] On the reverse of the Masonically inspired Great Seal of the United States is the pyramid with the all-seeing eye of divine Reason at its apex. According to ritual Freemasonry, XXXIII is considered sacred because in most cases there is no higher degree or level to which a Mason may aspire. Source

Phoenix occult symbolism..self immolation and resurrection
“The Phoenix … is believed to be a divine bird going back to Egypt … This Phoenix destroys itself in flames and then rises from the ashes. Most occultists believe that the Phoenix is a symbol of Lucifer who was cast down in flames and who they think will one day rise triumphant. This, of course, also relates to the rising of Hiram Abiff, the Masonic ‘christ’.” [Dr. C. Burns, Masonic and Occult Symbols Illustrated , p. 123]

It Would Be Horrific.
I don’t want to bring anything into reality by creating these thoughts and images, but this esoteric stuff is the kind of thing that drives them, as well as occult dates. Sorry, I know it’s dark, but it’s true. We need to be aware of how they work.

Any way you slice it, it’s a horrendous thought.

But nothing is inevitable.

However, given the track record of these culprits it sure looks like the nuclear false flag option is on the table somewhere, sometime–and it could be soon.

My point here is they could do it. Have no doubt. We have to be aware of the possibility so if it does happen, not to let the tide of fear and frenetic activity sweep us into wrong actions or a state of panic.

Precog At Work
First they have to create the precognitive image in your mind so it will accept the event. Something Hollywood and the media do continually through “predictive programming.”

Predictive programming is a subtle form of psychological conditioning provided by the media to acquaint the public with planned societal changes to be implemented by TPTB. If and when these changes are put through, the public will already be familiarized with them and will accept them as ‘natural progressions’, as Alan Watt calls it; thus lessening any possible public resistance and commotion. Predictive programming therefore may be considered as a veiled form of preemptive mass manipulation or mind control, courtesy of our puppet masters. (See here)

In addition, they distance and sanitize the event by creating the “monsters” who would do such a thing. They’ve been at it for years in the media pounding us with these images of terrorism, and cauterizing the public to the pain and horrors of war.

Mind you, these devils have been raining down terror and death the past 10+ years in Afghanistan and Iraq, and now they’re lobbing horrendous missiles and bombs into even more countries to “liberate” them.

Yeah, from their bodies. That’s about all the liberation they’re gonna get.

The Next False Flag Could Be Elsewhere
Researchers have conjectured about this possible event intermittently since 9/11. It just seems a “natural” course of events for these very UN-natural PTBs. (Powers That Be)

If such a device were deployed in or near Israel for example–boom, war with Iran and anyone else. Israel has a free past to do whatever they want. But as Obama implied in the above quote, it could be anywhere in the world. The Bali bombing, for example, propelled Australia into the NWO program just on the eve of a nationwide protest against the war.

No coincidence.

But don’t put it past the pro-Zionist Controllers to sacrifice their own. They did it engineering the Nazi regime and its galvanizing war crimes to create Israel, and are doing it daily in using Jewish people as a human shield for their deceptive perfidy and propagation of Zionism. Insidious.

They’re Liars – And False Flags Are The Perfect Tool
The list of how many times this tactic has been used on the fearful, media-drinking lemmings of the world is staggering. From all the world wars to the Reichstag fire to Oklahoma City and 9/11 and many more, big and small, they work like a charm.

That’s why our whole world is trauma based, it keeps humanity on edge and reacting instead of respondingconsciously.

And what followed each staged event?

War…More control over populations….More centralized power..More fear…

With less freedom…less truth…less love.

Personally, I don’t like someone walking into my room and turning the lights off and telling me to sit down and shut up.

Do you? That’s what they’re doing to the world.

We don’t have to take it.
I do not advocate violence, but peaceful non-cooperation. And that starts with freeing our minds and spirits and living confident, fearless lives of love and truth, and helping others do the same.

Disengage from the matrix. Loving actions come spontaneously.

“If you’re not free to follow life’s signs and live in synchronicity, you’re not free.” – Zen

Much Love, Zen



25 - Koroush Ziabari – An analysis

When Koroush was eleven he published a book named "A house on the hill”. He has since published the book “7+1” and has gone on to interview many prominent intellectuals, statesmen, as well as journalists. His biography on Veterans Today, as well as his blog Cyberfaith speak volumes about the writing abilities of this young man.



As someone who is also of Iranian origins I was immediately interested in the writings of this brilliant young man. I started to read his work more carefully, analysing his writing, as well as delving into the motivations of his idea's. One of the things that struck me was how easy it is for this young man to travel, unimpeded to and from Iran. Iran is a very restrictive society. While it isn't as restrictive and fundamentalist as Saudi Arabia it still regularly imposes travel bans on its citizens. The question as to why the regime hadn't imposed such restrictions on Kourish immediately came to my mind, as he is a prime candidate for the seeking of asylum in either a European country, the USA, Canada or Australia. However, it seems that Kourosh is more than happy to travel the globe, interviewing influential people, and statesmen, without ever contemplating such thoughts.

As it is no secret that Iran is a dictatorial state, willing to ruthlessly crush all dissent (as witnessed during the uprising in Iran), I decided to find out what reason this young man has to keep returning to Iran.

One of the things I stumbled upon is a interview conducted by Joseph Benfield in 2007. In the interview, titled 'An American Blogger Asks me' Kourosh states, to the question of how patriotic he is:

How Patriotic are you about your country?

I can confess that I am so nationalist and patriotic to my country because of its delightful and honorable history… I cannot express exactly what do I feel about Ancient Persia.


At this time Kourish was only 16, heavily influenced by the teachings at school, where the past is used extensively to foment nationalism.

While Kourosh writes critical articles in regards to the internet censorship in Iran, in 2008 he wrote an article rejecting the notion of 'freedom'.

I don’t know exactly that what disasters would happen under the flag of “freedom” and “democracy” in the future, but it would be better to evacuate the entire world from that type of democracy which just deals with “insult”, “aspersion” and “outrage”.

I am wondering that whether this “Made in the West” democracy has other functions rather than spreading disagreement among people and exacerbating the atrocities.

As a non-aligned, independent and freelance journalist, I prefer to be “stupid”, “uninformed” or “unlettered” if blasphemy and insulting the values of billions of people is a sign of “intellectuality” and “freedom of speech.”Source

At this time he was seventeen or eighteen. As a young man it is expected of him to be somewhat ignorant of the world and not understand the principle foundations of 'freedom'. However, without having read Satanic Verses (which is a book of immense beauty and one I have read more than once) he metes out judgement, not just on a single book but also directs his anger towards the entirety of Western society.

He can be forgiven, for he is young, after all and doesn't know much about the world at this point. He is also ignorant of Iran's own history. My grandmother remembers Mossadeq well, despite her 87 years, when she recalls him she does it with the deepest sadness, for Iran was a free country during his short rule.

In 2009, after having interviewed Noam Chomsky, he wrote an article criticising foreign intervention in Iran on behalf of Mir-Hossein Mousavi, he writes an article named Iran's Crisis: What The Youth Think. This article is no longer available.


However for the 'Foreign Policy Journal' Koroush wrote an article about the uprising in Iran. He writes of the unrest:

Rebels and non-political insurgents who were seeking an opportunity to spread violence and unrest amidst the political tensions, attacked the citizens, devastated the public properties, broke down the buses and other transportation facilities and reportedly killed 10 people.

It struck me as odd that Kourosh didn't write that the violence was being perpetrated upon the demonstrators by the Basij units as well as Hezbollah.

In order to prevent the expansion of protests and make the demonstrators stay off the streets and to disallow the abusive movements of riots which the Supreme Leader said “are separated from the electoral fans and supporters of Mir-Hossein Mousavi”, riot police and plainclothes were brought to action, and according to the national intelligence services, a group of U.S.-linked terrorists who had planned to explode bombs in 20 populous spots of Tehran (the mega-capital of Iran with 10m population) were discovered.

The uprising was crushed with scores being left dead, many disappearances and executions. Not once does he note that the demands of the demonstrators are legitimate, only echoing what Kamenei had said.

On page three of his article I came across the following:

Ali Larijani, the moderate conservative Speaker of Parliament who is seen to be one of the most rational and reasonable figureheads in the conservatives’ campaign also told the nation in a live TV speech that “those who under the mask of political fans of a certain movement or candidate impose damages to the public properties or paralyze the daily life of ordinary people are not among the protestors who want their votes to be preserved and virtuously.”

The following BBC link contradicts everything Kourosh says about Larijani.


His tone, as well as the obscuring of the truth alarmed me. Here Kourosh is parotting the official line. Is this why the regime do not fear kourosh defecting or not returning to Iran?

My parents would not call Larijani a moderate, instead they call him a vampire (referencing is love for executions).

Scrolling down the page of his Cyberfaith blog I came across an interview with Ali Akbar Javanfekr, President Ahmadinejad's Media Advisor. Kourosh writes of him:

Javanfekr is among the rare governmental politicians who blog regularly. He updates his blog more than once a week and receives an average of 50 comments for each of his posts. The interesting fact is that he responds to all of the comments individually and many of the ordinary citizens have found this a brilliant opportunity to propound their personal messages to the president or their economic, financial and social problems to be pursued by the advisor.

The article has since been removed by Timeturk.com. As reference I will give the source on Kourosh's Cyberfaith blog.


For Javanfekr to put aside enough time for an interview Kourosh would either have been preselected or found to be a useful tool, there simply is no other reason for him to have been given access to someone so influential in the regime.

As for the article I would go so far to say that one does not need to read the entire article to be able to see the positive light in which Javanfekr is portrayed, revealing once again the true loyalties of this young man.

Ignoring his other articles, of which many are about sports, Iran's nuclear programme and Zionism I would like to concentrate on the article posted in the last Kali Yuga Report, as well as a few of his most recent writings. I hope I have given somewhat of a basis to work from in regards to his ideology and political stance.

In his article named Iran: A defence which deserves being called “holy” Kourosh goes into the Iran-Iraq depth and explores the alliance behind Iran's defence.

I will take some quotes from the article and explain what not only Kourosh does not explain but also hides.

From this point onward, United States took several steps to normalize its already strained relations with Iraq. One of these steps was pressuring the Export-Import Bank of the United States to provide Iraq with financing, enhancing its credit standing and enabling Baqdad to obtain loans from other international financial institutions.

While it is true that the United States backed Sadam, providing him with weaponry, nowhere in any article does Kourosh mention that Khomeini's base in exile was in France and that Iran was being backed by the UK, the US, Russia, China and even Israel during the eight year conflict.

Michael Ledeen, a consultant of National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane, requested assistance from Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres for help in the sale of arms to Iran.[25][26] At the time, Iran was in the midst of the Iran–Iraq War and could find few Western nations willing to supply it with weapons.[27] The idea behind the plan was for Israel to ship weapons through an intermediary (identified as Manucher Ghorbanifar).

There is an immense amount of information regarding the Iran-Contra affair, in which the US sold arms to Iran, through Israel, to fund the Contra's. I am not going to link or list them, as they are not within the scope of this article.0000000

In the summer of 1983, Iran lodged a set of complaints against Iraq to the United Nations, informing the international body of Iraq’s employment of chemical weapons against the Iranian civilians in violation of Geneva Convention. Influenced by the United States and its European allies, the United Nations did not heed the calls, but the secret documents of the U.S. Department of State confirmed Iran’s allegations against Iraq. Intelligence documents revealed that Iraq had used chemical weapons against Iranian forces and Kurdish insurgents as well.

Iraq started its chemical weapons programme in the early 1980's, to counter defeats on the field of battle. Iran, seeing Iraq's huge investments in this field decided to invest in chemical warfare themselves. While records are contentious it is believed that Iran also deployed bio-chemical warfare agents against Iraqi targets.

The following quote easily clarifies that Iran is just as guilty as Iraq.

In April 1984, the Iranian delegate to the United Nations, Rajai Khorassani, admitted at a London news conference that Iran was “capable of manufacturing chemical weapons … [and would] consider using them.” In 1987, according to the U.S. Department of Defense, Iran was able to deploy limited quantities of mustard gas and cyanide against Iraqi troops. The change in Iran’s policy with regard to chemical warfare was publicly announced in December 1987, when Iranian Prime Minister Hussein Musavi was reported to have told parliament that Iran was producing “sophisticated offensive chemical weapons.”

As Iran’s chemical warfare capabilities grew, it became more difficult to determine which side was responsible for chemical attacks during the Iran-Iraq war. In March 1988, the Kurdish town of Halabja in northern Iraq, sandwiched between Iranian and Iraqi forces, was caught in chemical weapon crossfire that left thousands of civilians dead. A 1990 U.S. Department of Defense reconstruction of the Halabja incident reportedly concluded that both Iran and Iraq used chemical weapons in Halabja.


While the Halabja gassing has been discredited there is no doubt that Iran not only had its own weapons programme but also deployed these weapons.

The Iranian regime is claimed to have developed a new magnesium-potassium based gas that causes fear and panic in those who inhale it. It has been dubbed 'fear gas'. This gas was extensively used against demonstrators in the uprising of 2009.


Tear gas was also heavily relied upon to suppress the unrest. Tear gas itself is also a chemical warfare agent.

The Iraq-gate scandal revealed that an Atlanta-based branch of Italy’s largest bank, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, which was predominantly reliant on the United States for its funding and budget, transferred over US$ 5 billion to Iraq from 1985 to 1989.

It is believed that up to a billion US Dollars worth in arms were sold to Iran during the Iran-Contra affair. Even today the US continue to sell arms to Iran, as Iran's three F14's can only be maintained through the purchase of machinery from the US arms industry.


Now, 20 years have gone since those bitter days and Iran is marking the conclusion of 8-year war with Iraq from September 22 for one week. This week is named the Week of Holy Defense in honor of the magnanimous, righteous and praiseworthy resistance of Iranians against a congregation of bullying powers who supported a bullying dictator to dissolve the manifestation of Iranian nation’s will. Iranians defended themselves nobly and their moral resistance against the coalition of global tyrants deserves to be called a holy defense.

The Khomeini tyranny recruited soldiers from the poorest of society by promising that martyrs would be secured a place in heaven in Iran's holy war with Iraq. To enhance this belief soldiers were given a key, which would open the gates of heaven for them, where 72 virgins awaited them. Interestingly Iraq also called the war holy.

When I was a child I remember going to school only a few days. During the Iran-Iraq war the Hezbollah and other fanatic organisations used to raid primary schools, rounding up scores of children to be used as either child soldiers or mine clearance.


It is a shame that these links have expired, or are no longer available. It is an even greater shame that Kourosh ignores these crimes against humanity, perpetrated by the Iranian regime upon the people of Iran and wastes so much time discrediting demonstrators who demand for justice and freedom,

I also remember bombers flying overhead, or the lights going out during a nightly bombing raid. We used to eat dinner by candle light as buildings shook, from the explosion of bombs. One day I cursed these Iraqi devils. My grandmother quickly reprimanded me, reminding me that we're all god's children and that Iran, itself, has carried out many atrocities. Unfortunately many Iranians have come to know of these crimes first hand. The People's Mojahedin have an extensive list of people executed by the very same regime Kourosh at times defends.

This list can be found here and contains the names, pictures and ages.

The Iranian regime has no qualms executing anyone regardless of age, sex or religious belief and they have held children below six in Evin.

As I have stated several times before Kourosh is extremely young and I have come to see the truth as to why the regime not only allow him to roam the planet freely, but also why they do not fear his exposure to foreign 'idea's' and 'ideologies' could contaminate his mind to such an extent that he would defect. The reason for this is that Kourosh is an agent of the regime.

He could knowingly and willingly be a disinformation agent, spreading the propaganda of the regime far and wide, or he's blinded by misguided nationalism, believing the falsehoods he's told by the regime. He is, without a doubt, a devout Muslim who is unable to see past the fundamentalist ideologies of the founding of the regime. This would place him far out of touch with the youth who took to the streets in the hope of overthrowing the tyranny that has ruled them since France, the UK and US imposed Khomeini on them since 1978. These beliefs are shared by a very small group of people, who use religion as a means to ensure their iron fist doesn't lose its immense grip. The fact that Kourosh is able to interview prominent members of the regime and has not once interviewed a single Iranian dissident or real moderate proves that he cannot be relied upon or even trusted. Everything he says has been tainted by the hand of the mighty propaganda machine in Tehran.



26 - Deconstructing the US Military : America's Global War against Planet Earth

By Dana Visalli

Global Research, April 18, 2011

While in Kabul in March of this year, I visited the U.S. military base in that city, Camp Eggers . Knowing I would need a pretext to gain entry, I typed up a letter offering to give a presentation on wildlife in Afghanistan , which I had been studying. When approaching the base, one passes through an initial checkpoint, where a Hummer topped with a machine-gun nest stands guard. Then there is a 100-yard walk down a narrow corridor between high concrete blast walls, at which point one arrives at a guarded entry point through the wall. I showed my passport and letter, and was escorted through a second layer of blast walls to a little wooden information booth in this still-peripheral circle of defense. The pimply young lad manning the booth was flustered by my request; he had never seen anything quite like it. He did what all soldiers do when faced with something new; he phoned his superior for orders on how to proceed.

Permission was granted to pass to the next entry level. At hut #2 another friendly young male soldier by the name of Ryan was equally baffled by my written request, and he dialed up his commanding officer for instructions on what to do with me. Then, with Ryan as my escort, I made it into the inner sanctum of the base, where soldiers and military contractors strolled leisurely around the streets of the former Kabul residential area. After being passed around to several more levels of authority, I finally ended up at the office of Morale, Welfare and Recreation. The female officer in charge there was as confused by my presence as everyone else had been, and after reading my proposal asked rather sternly, “How did he get on the base?” She reprimanded Ryan for bringing me to the center of Camp Eggers, then realized that she would have to phone her commanding officer because there was no standardized protocol on how to deal with me. As we retraced our steps, Ryan remarked that he certainly could not be held accountable for letting me on the base because all he had done was follow orders. In fact, the primary concern of everyone I interacted with at Camp Eggers was to follow the directives of their superiors; no one appeared to have the capacity to take responsibility for their actions.

In the mid-1960s, political scientist Hannah Arendt published a book-length study of how some of the great evils of history, such as slavery and the Holocaust, managed to occur. Her book, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil, concluded that generally such crimes are not carried out by fanatics or sociopaths, but rather by ordinary people who accepted the premises of their superiors and their state and therefore do what they are told to do, and participate with the view that their actions are normal. The word “banal” is definedas “something that is trite, normal, and commonplace.” The root of the word comes from the Old French word ban, referring to feudal military service, which was compulsory and thus commonly accepted. Thus, military culture is by definition synonymous with banal, which my acquaintances at Camp Eggers demonstrated as they strove to find orders to follow and avoid responsibility for their actions.

Most members of the military establishment receive extensive training in combat techniques, including of course how to kill other human beings. One common drill at boot camp is to have recruits lunge repeatedly at mock human targets with mounted bayonets, shouting “Kill! Kill!” as they stab their imaginary victims. After months of such training, killing itself becomes banal, something normal and commonplace. The military culture of thoughtless submission to authority combined with heavy conditioning to snuff out human life creates a wide path towards the “great evils” that Hannah Arendt addressed.

Examples of what a sane society would call evil acts abound in the annuals of our current wars. For example, in 2010 a group of five American soldiers murdered a number of Afghan civilians “for sport,” and collected fingers of their victims as trophies. Killing for them had become normal and banal; it was in fact what the soldiers were trained to do.

In March of 2011 two U.S. Army Blackhawk helicopters came upon 10 Afghan children ages 7 to 13 gathering brush to warm their huts and attacked them with heavy machine gun fire. When the parents of the children arrived on the scene, attracted by the gunfire, they could only collect body parts of their children. For the pilots of the helicopters, killing was their job, a normal part of military life.

On March 12, 2006, four U.S. soldiers entered the home of a 14-year old girl in the Iraqi city of Mahmudiya, took her mother, father and sister into a bedroom and shot them, and then gang-raped the girl. Afterwards, they shot her in the head and attempted to burn her body. They then reported the deaths as being the result of an insurgent attack.

On March 25, 2003, Marine Sgt. Eric Schrumpf was participating in the U.S. invasion of Iraq when he spotted an Iraqi soldier in his field of view behind a female Iraqi citizen. He couldn’t get a clear shot with the woman blocking his line of sight, so he shot her to get her out of the line of fire. “I’m sorry, but the chick was in the way,” Schrumpf explained. Later he elaborated, “We had a great day. We killed a lot of people.”

Over the long term, most soldiers committing such murders become victims of their own lack of judgment, unable to live with the profoundly antisocial acts they have committed. Sergeant Schrumpf is himself now debilitated by PTSD, and can scarcely function in civilian society. He has attacked people in movie theaters because he mistakes their cans of Coke for military weapons. "I'll never be the same again," says Schrumpf, who seems somehow mystified by the etiology of his emotional dysfunction.

Similar stories of the fruits of combat duty are limited only by time available to tell them. After serving in the Marines during the 2003 invasion of Iraq , Lance Cpl. Walter Rollo Smithreturned home and soon killed his wife, Nicole Marie Speirs, the 22-year-old mother of his twin children. He drowned her in a bathtub without any evident provocation or reason. In reflecting on his heinous crime, Smith said, “I know for a fact that before I went to Iraq , there’s no way I would have taken somebody else’s life.”

After serving in the Army in Iraq in 2004, Spc. Brandon Bare, 19, of Wilkesboro, N.C, came home and stabbed his wife Nabila Bare, 18, at least 71 times with knives and a meat cleaver. About three dozen of the wounds were on her head and neck. Killing is what he was trained to do.

Mental angst and dysfunction in soldiers returning from combat is commonplace. A recent study indicates that 62% of soldiers returning from the war in Iraq have asked for mental health counseling, with 27% showing dangerous levels of alcohol abuse. Suicide rates among soldiers and vets have increased dramatically in recent years. Over 100,000 Vietnam vets have now killed themselves, far more than died in the Vietnam War. More than 300,000 veterans of the U.S. military are currently homeless, another study reveals.

If war is in fact destroying the youth of America by turning them into trained and traumatized killers, one could at least hope that the wars themselves have some value to American society.

Objective evidence indicates otherwise. The actual conduct of war bears more resemblance to a circus act than the noble endeavor it is often portrayed to be. To cite one of the many examples of the senselessness of war related in the book Achilles in Vietnam, author and Vietnam vet Jonathan Shay describes how, “During one patrol in the dry season, a U.S. Army squad ran out of water and was not resupplied. They walked for a day and a half in search of water in Vietcong-controlled territory. When men started to collapse from dehydration in the heat, an officer’s plea for emergency resupply was heeded: a helicopter flew over and “bombed” the squad with cases of Tab, seriously injuring one of the men. The major whose helicopter dropped the Tab was recalled to evacuate the casualty. There was no enemy activity. I subsequently read in the division newspaper that the major had put himself in for and had received the Bronze Star for resupplying the troops and evacuating the wounded ‘under fire.’ ” Remember that story the next time you see a soldier’s chest full of medals.

The Vietnam war itself was fought because at the end of World War II, Ho Chi Minh declared Vietnam ’s independence from the colonizing French, reading from the U.S. Declaration of Independence to emphasize his people’s reasonable claim to self-determination. Instead of supporting this universal urge that humanity has for freedom, the U.S. supported the French effort to regain their colony for 10 long years (1945-1954). After the French were defeated, the U.S. fought the Vietnamese for another 22 years (1955-1975). Thus, 32 years of brutal mayhem took place, when all the Vietnamese people were asking for was their independence. The American lives that were ruined—the 58,000 combat deaths, 100,000+ suicides, 300,000 homeless men—were all expended for nothing, as were the 3.4 million Vietnamese who died in that war. To briefly mention another of our recent wars, today the nation of Iraq lies in ruins, the people impoverished, a million dead and 5 million living as refugees, while the entire basis of the U.S. invasion in 2003 is widely acknowledged to have been a complete fabrication.

War itself is not only “a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed,” as Dwight Eisenhower noted in a speech in 1953, but war is also destructive to the physical earth, the very source of human life, and indeed of all life. The U.S. has dropped 15 million tons of bombs on the earth’s surface in last 60 years, spread 1 million tons of napalm on fields and forests, and sprayed 20 million gallons of defoliants on some of the most diverse rainforests on the planet. By any measure, the U.S. military is conducting a war against the earth itself. Such an inane effort does not come cheaply. The total cost of all military expenses for 2012 is estimated to be $1.2 trillion dollars, one-third of the total federal budget. It is the U.S. military that is driving the U.S. itself into bankruptcy.

In summary, the U.S. military is destroying the lives of its own young men while at the same time it devastates other human cultures; it threatens the economic survival of the United States while it is fraying the ecological fabric that makes life on earth possible.

Mikhail Gorbachev once noted that the Soviet system was evil and had to be dismantled. The U.S. military is a similarly evil force loosened on the world. As was done to the repugnant Soviet system, the equally repugnant U.S. military should be completely dismantled, with all soldiers and ships and planes and weapons brought home from the vast web of 1000 American military bases spanning the globe. The savings in terms of human lives, human suffering, ecological integrity and American dollars will be immeasurable. We can then begin to rebuild a national defense consisting of a small militia that can guard our borders and “repel invasions,” as called for in the U.S. Constitution, all the while remembering that the best defense is the making of friends.

Dana Visalli is an ecologist, botanist, and market gardener living in Washington state


27 - EVOLVING STORY : Israeli Ambassador Leaves Cairo Amid Speculations of Opening Egypt’s Border with Gaza Soon

April 19, 2011

posted by Dr. Ashraf Ezzat
“Egypt doesn’t need investment from the enemy” says Egypt’s minister of finance.
“Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel should not be taken for granted” says Egypt’s foreign minister.
Dr. Ashraf Ezzat
When asked to comment about the terrorist attacks that hit New York on 9/11, Likud leader

Benjamin Netanyahu told an audience at Bar Ilan Universitythat the September 11, 2001 terror attacks would be beneficial for Israel.

And the years that followed 9/11 proved that Netanyahu was right.

Israel has been the only party that really benefited from 9/11. Those terrorist operations had been enough of a provocation for the United States to wage its military wrath upon two of Israel’s formidable foes namely, Iraq and Afghan-Pakistani Muslim front.
And when again asked his opinion on the pro-democracy popular uprising in Egypt that took place last January, Netanyahu expressed his concerns this revolution might change the Egyptian foreign policy toward Israel.

And the days that followed the Egyptian revolution proved that Mr. Netanyahu had been right again.

Ousting Mubarak should not be viewed as only an end to decades of corruption and autocratic domestic Egyptian policy but also to the equally corrupt foreign policy and a considerable share of this has-to-change policy is the Egyptian-Israeli’s.
The Middle East is one of the most politically volatile and inflammatory regions in the whole world. The Arab-Israeli conflict is on top of the Middle East political agenda and with Egypt as a main player in that conflict.

Peace treaty misinterpreted
When the foreign policy of a prominent and leading nation in the Middle East, such as Egypt, has been neutralized and rather crippled for well over 30 years, then something seriously wrong must have been plotted behind closed doors.
Who would benefit from a politically secluded Egypt?

Taking refuge in the Camp David accords and the peace treaty signed with Egypt in 1979, Israel with her backyard nice and quiet and her interest’s best served by a pro-Zionist Mubarak, managed to enjoy the most fruitful 30 years politics could offer.
The peace treaty was meant to put an end to the military confrontation between Egypt and Israel not to put an end to the political and the soft power of Egypt and this is where Mubarak went terribly wrong misinterpreting this treaty.

Signing a peace treaty with Israel doesn’t mean that Egypt should keep silent about the Israeli aggression and the ongoing daily grab of the Arab land in Palestine; it doesn’t mean watching a big Arab country like Iraq shamefully dismantled without moving a finger, it doesn’t mean approving of the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and tightening the inhuman blockade on Gaza, it doesn’t mean turning a blind eye to the hostile wars of Israel in Lebanon and Gaza and it certainly doesn’t mean that the only comment any Egyptian foreign secretary could make concerning Israel’s wrongdoings is, “see no evil, hear no evil”.

Changing tones
Getting used to years of tailoring and knowing in advance every Egyptian official response, Israel has lately been dismayed by the harsh statement made by the Egyptian minister of finance, Samir Radwaan, when he was asked to comment on the possibilities for Israeli investments in the country, he went on and simply replied “Egypt doesn’t need investment from the enemy”
May be this was meant to be off the record and not made an official statement by Mr. Radwaan who could have been giving vent to his anger and discontent over the 80 billion dollars loss deal Mubarak made with Tel Aviv that supplied Israel, for long years, with all its requirements of Egypt’s natural gas by the cheapest prices ever that Tel Aviv itself called the “Gas theft”

The minister of finance was not alone in these late accusations, by Mr. Netanyahu, of anti-Israeli hostile comments,Dr. Nabil el-Araby, the new Egyptian foreign minister, who while being interviewed on Egyptian TV lately, said thatthe peace treaty with Israel should not be taken for granted, and that the Egyptian side is absolutely entitled to revise its terms whenever needed and also said that there are still items in the treaty that Egypt has not benefited from nor activated yet concerning the security arrangements in Sinai and along the borders with Israel.

Dr. el-Araby, was not referring to going back on Egypt’s obligations concerning the Camp David accord; rather he was talking of a new foreign policy that would serve Egypt’s best interest.
On Friday April 8, Thousands of angry Egyptians, on hearing the Israeli news of the latest military attacks on Gaza, marched to the Israeli embassy in Cairo and practically besieged the building with protesters who didn’t only denounce the Israeli attacks but also demanded the Israeli ambassador to be expelled and the instant freeze of the supply of Egypt’s natural gas to Israel.
Hardly a week has passed since the march on the Israeli embassy before Israel is once again faced with news leaked from the office of the Egyptian foreign minister that spoke of the intentions of Egypt to open the borders with Gaza soon.
This news was broadcasted on al Jazeera/Arabic channel on Saturday April 16, and on the following day there were breaking news of itzhak Levanon, the Israeli ambassador in Egypt leaving Cairo on a flight to Tel Aviv without comments or any statement about his sudden visit to Israel. And on the same day the Egyptian government gave a special permit to the family of the late Italian activist, Vitorrio Arrigoni, to pass through the Egyptian crossing point into Gaza and bring his body back home.
But Whatever discussions Mr. levanon might be engaged in through the coming days in Tel Aviv, one thing is certain, he is going to assure Tel Aviv that Egypt is regaining its political power back and that the long years of Egypt playing “ see no evil, hear no evil” as far as Israel is concerned is gone.

For more articles by Dr. Ashraf Ezzat visit his website


By Brother Nathanael Kapner

Articles May Be Reproduced Only With Authorship of Br Nathanael Kapner
& Link To Real Jew News (SM)

Send Your Contribution To:
Brother Nathanael Kapner; PO Box 1242; Frisco CO 80443

E-mail: bronathanael@yahoo.com

Primary Source: “Stalin’s Agricultural And Five-Year Plans,”

Dr. E.L. Magerovsky, Association of Russian-American Scholars; Other Sources Below

JEWS WANT THE WORLD to believe that they have a monopoly on “Holocaust Remembrances.” But Ukraine’s President Viktor Yushchenko has thrown the Jews a curve by dedicating 2008 as “Ukrainian Holocaust Remembrance Year” Here.

This “holocaust remembrance” recalls the murder by forced starvation of *6 million* Ukrainian Christians by the Jewish Bolsheviks. The Ukrainians call this holocaust “Holodomor” which means “Famine-Genocide.” Of course the Zionist Jews deny it. Just like they deny all of their numerous crimes against humanity.

Historian Valentyn Moroz of the Institute for Historical Review wrote:

— “The Ukrainian village had long been recognized as the bastion of national traditions. The Bolsheviks sought to strike a fatal blow at the village structure because it was the lifespring of the vital national spirit.” — Here.

Indeed, Bolshevik Jews were the chief architects of the Ukrainian forced-famine which eliminated Ukrainian clergy and 6 million Ukrainian Orthodox Christians!


1) Lazar Kaganovich: Stalin’s political figurehead of the Central Committee. In 1928, Kaganovich led the implementation in the Ukraine of Stalin’s first Five-Year Plan.

~ The aim of Stalin’s first Five-Year Plan in the Ukraine was to destroy family farms through starvation making the peasants “landless” and thereby introducing “collectivization” by which the Ukrainian peasants were forced to become employees of the state. This forced-famine reached its crises point in 1932.

2) Genrikh Yagoda: Founder of the NKVD (Soviet Secret Police). Assisted in the firstFive-Year Plan of starving Ukrainian peasants.

3) Nikolai Yezhov: Appointed by Yagoda as Head of the NKVD. Assisted in the first Five-Year Plan of starving Ukrainian peasants. (Yezhov took on a “Russian” name like most Bolshevik Jews. His wife was an active Jew).

These Bolshevik Jews seized livestock, crops, grain, and farm implements from the Ukrainian peasants. Any Ukrainian citizen who resisted them was shot. Desperate Ukrainian clergy and peasants ate anything to survive: bugs, grass, and leather shoes.

See: “Jewish Journalist Exposes Jewish Murderers” Here


“Fresh from the controversy over shifting positions on the Armenian genocide, the Jews could be caught up in another controversy over Ukrainian-genocide recognition,” reports the Baltimore Times Here.

Yushchenko has pressed the genocide issue since taking office in 2005. In 2007 more than two dozen countries recognized the Holodomor as genocide. Yet the Jews of the Ukraine and around the world refuse to recognize it!

Ukraine’s chief Rabbi Yakov Dov Bleich said:

— “We can’t equate the Holocaust of the Jews in Germany with the Holodomor in Ukraine. Ukrainian Jewish leaders do not support recognizing the Holodomor as genocide.” — Baltimore Jewish Times, Nov 14 2007.


I GREW UP AS A JEW. Jews want a monopoly on the world’s “sympathy.” But the Jews do not deserve the world’s sympathy as the Ukrainian Christian clergy and peasants deserve it. For they were *innocent victims* of the forced famine.

JEWS HAVE *NEVER* been the innocent victims of any “holocaust.” I have proved this by my many articles such as HERE backed up with historical facts!___________________________________

For More See: “Jewish Murderers Of The Russian Revolution” Click Here

And: “Jews Murdered The Russian Imperial Family” Click Here

And: “Jews Plotted The Armenian Holocaust” Click Here


29 - The `First Holocaust': Origins of the 'Six Million'
Don Heddesheimer

Even before World War II, the iconic figure of Six Million Jewish victims was already widely used in propaganda, as shown in these items, reproduced here in facsimile. During the years following the First World War (1914-1918), propaganda claims were widespread that East European Jewry was on the brink of annihilation. These claims regularly invoked now-familiar buzzwords such as "extermination" and "holocaust," as well as the now-familiar Six Million figure. In 1919, for example, The New York Times was telling readers that six million Jews in Poland and Russia were threatened with imminent holocaust: All this is from the 2003 book, The First Holocaust, by Don Heddesheimer.

As documented in the book The First Holocaust, the Zionists have continuously and hysterically attempted to claim that six million Jews were dead, dying or in grave danger in Europe and Russia since the late 1800's. Any time there was turmoil in Europe, albeit turmoil often instigated by Jews in the first place, prominent Zionist figures and Jewish-controlled media organizations world wide continuously whipped up a frenzy with phony sob stories to get people to feel sorry for Europe's Jews and donate money to Jewish charities. It turns out that this mythical six million figure, long since discredited even by mainstream Holohoax historians, comes from a Jewish-Talmudic religious myth that says "ye shall return minus six million" or "you shall return to the land of Israel with six million less", and of course WW2 birthed the modern state of Israel which was established in 1948. Israeli Jews often excuse their systematic genocide of Palestinians and theft of Palestinian lands by bringing up the so-called Holocaust™ of WW2, which any serious researcher and critical thinker knows by now is a fraud of collosal proportions. The Zionists have so much influence that they turned a delusional Jewish religious prophecy into "historical fact".

From History & Scriptural Origins of the Six Million Number;

[Quote 1] Jewish prophecies in the Torah require that 6 million Jews must "vanish" before the state of Israel can be formed. "You shall return minus 6 million." That's why Tom Segev, an Israeli historian, declared that the "6 million" is an attempt to transform the Holocaust story into state religion. Those six million, according to prophecy, had to disappear in "burning ovens", which the judicial version of the Holocaust now authenticates. As a matter of fact, Robert B. Goldmann writes: ". . . without the Holocaust, there would be no Jewish State." A simple consequence: Given six million Jews gassed at Auschwitz who ended up in the "burning ovens" (the Greek word holocaust means burned offerings), therefore, the prophecies have now been "fulfilled" and Israel can become a "legitimate state". --Unknown

[Quote 2] Regarding the 'six million' number you should know the following: In the Hebrew text of the Torah prophesies, one can read "you shall return". In the text the letter "V" or "VAU" is absent, as Hebrew does not have any numbers; the letter V stands for the number 6. Ben Weintraub, a religious scientist, learned from rabbis that the meaning of the missing letter means the number is '6 million'. The prophesy then reads: You will return, but with 6 million less. See Ben Weintraub: "The Holocaust Dogma of Judaism", Cosmo Publishing, Washington 1995, page 3. The missing 6 million must be so before the Jews can return to the Promised Land. Jahweh sees this as a cleaning of the souls of the sinful people. The Jews must, on the return to the Promised Land, be clean -- the cleaning shall be done in burning stokes. --A Correspondent

A Jewish publicist cries wolf to (ironically enough) GERMANY that there was an impending Holocaust of "six million Jews" in Russia during the aftermath of the first Communist uprising there. This lame sob story was nothing more than a ploy to cover up the fact that the Communist uprising that took place in Russia a year earlier (1905) was the handiwork of his fellow Jews who perpetrated widespread atrocities against Russian patriots (anti-Communists) who didn't want a despotic Judeo-Bolshevist government.

1908- Donmeh Jews organize a coup d'etat in the Ottoman Empire and seize power from the Sultan.

1910- In the American Jewish Committee's annual report it is claimed that since 1890 Russia has had a policy to 'expel or exterminate' six million of its Jews. (Source: Sept. 1911 to Sept. 1912 AJC Yearbook pg. 15)

1911- Max Nordau, co-founder of the World Zionist Organization together with Theodore Herzl, warns of the "annihilation of six million people" at the Zionist congress in Basle, Switzerland. This was 22 years before Hitler came to power and 3 years before WW1 started.

1915- The Jewish 'Young Turks' who previously overthrew the Sultan and took control of the Ottoman Empire in 1908, orchestrate a mass murder of at least 1 million Armenian Christians.

1917- Jewish powerbrokers lobby the British government to support the Zionist project of making Palestine the national homeland for the Jews. The British government issues the "Balfour declaration". The letter is addressed to Jew big-wig Lord Rothschild.
This same year radical Jewish Marxists, led by the Jew Leon Trotsky (real name: Lev Bronstein), financed by so-called "capitalist" Jewish international bankers Schiff, Warburg and Rothschild, violently take over Russia and establish the first Zionist state, the 'Soviet Union'. Czar Nicholas II, his wife and daughters, are kidnapped & murdered. The Communist Jews would go on a 60 plus year reign of terror slaughtering some 40-60 million Russian and Eastern European Gentiles in Gulags, death camps and by artificial famines.

1918- The British take control of Palestine, and occupy the country militarily. Eventually the British Mandate for Palestine is administered, against the will of the Arabs living there.

1919- 1921- White Russian patriots gain ground on the Jewish Bolshevik usurpers of their nation. In a vein attempt to disguise their heavy involvement in murderous Bolshevism, Jews reel out the "six million" myth once again.
Shortly after WW1 Jews claim a Holocaust of "six million Jews". It doesn't fly too far, nobody buys it.

1932- Jews perpetrate genocide. The Jewish-dominated Soviet Secret Police (NKVD), led by Bolshevik Jews Kaganovich, Yagoda, Beria, etc, orchestrate an artificial famine in the Ukraine to put down nationalist resistance to a Bolshevik takeover, on orders of Stalin. The result is 7 million dead Ukrainian men, women and children. It is now known as the "Holodomor".

1933- Hitler comes to power in Germany and immediately begins printing his own currency thus breaking the grip of the usurious Jewish banking establishment of Europe, led by the Rothschilds.

World Jewry declares war on Germany. Jews launch global economic boycott of German goods in an effort to economically strangle Germany to death and topple Hitler's new government.

This act of treachery leads to Jews being declared "enemies of the state" by the Nazis and eventually interned in camps during WW2. Almost the same thing happened to Japanese-Americans after Pearl Harbour. Although, unlike the Jews, Japanese people never waged an economic war on America, they were interned simply for their race.




30 - Don Heddesheimer : The First Holocaust

Jewish Fund Raising Campaigns with Holocaust Claims During and After World War One

Chapter 5 : Following The Money
This chapter sketches the very puzzling story of where the money raised in these fund raising drives went in Russia at least according to the published sources. We will also cover a few important points of historical background and touch on the political situation in the Soviet Union in the early twentieth century, a period that is largely forgotten or misunderstood today.

The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee's own yearly expenditures chart shows the amounts of money the 'Joint' says they spent from 1914 through 1934 on relief. They had two classifications of aid: emergency or general relief which included soup kitchens, clothing, emergency medical care and rehabilitative or reconstructive relief which consisted largely of setting up and operating trade schools, banks, and farms. At the end of World War One, people were generous with their contributions, but in the early 1920s collections dropped off year by year. In 1926, as featured in the last chapter, the promoters really got creative and were successful in boosting collections. The aid raised during the war and in the immediate postwar period was channeled into emergency relief, which they also called general relief. Later, most of the money was spent on reconstruction, or rehabilitative relief. By 1926, they were spending 81% of the money on reconstruction, and in 1927, 86% according to their own figures.

Less than 20 percent of the funds sent to Poland actually went into emergency relief in 1927 according to chairman David A. Brown. The remainder was devoted to "constructive undertakings" such as establishing cooperative banks in Poland, financing tradesmen and artisans, and promoting Jewish agricultural settlements.[138] Also in 1927, a Max Steuer who had gone to Europe to investigate the relief programs charged that 40% of the money raised"disappeared in the manipulations by the bankers on the subject of exchange."

Mr. Steuer quoted a Dr. Greenebaum, a member of the Polish Parliament, who said that until recently, "after the money had been transmitted, the exchanges were so manipulated on the other side that at least 40 percent of the money was consumed before a single dollar was distributed to any person for whom it was intended." Steuer made other charges but also made it clear that he was referring to Polish bankers and not American bankers.[139]

As one would expect, Steuer received a scathing in the press for questioning the actions of the 'Joint'. On Monday, September 12, 1927, The New York Times editorialized:[140]

"Mr. David A. Brown cited figures which would indicate that in Poland less than 20 percent of the funds went into emergency relief. The remainder was devoted to 'constructive' undertakings. Mr. Henry Moskowitz in a recent public statement expresses the opinion that a study of the Joint Distribution Committee's accounts would show that in Poland the bulk of the relief money went into the establishment of cooperative banks and other agencies for the purpose of financing small tradesmen and artisans. Incidentally, this may suggest what Mr. Steuer had dimly in mind - very dimly - when he made his startling charges, and particularly his reference to manipulation of the exchanges. If American dollars were converted into Polish zloty for the creation of bank capital, it is conceivable that some losses may have been incurred through the fluctuations of the Polish exchange."

The Jewish Daily News was more blunt. They editorialized that Mr. Steuer had simply removed himself from the role of a Jewish communal leader.[141]

The actions of the Committee were defended by both Louis Marshall and Felix Warburg. Warburg deplored the wide publicity and insisted that Steuer had placed an exaggerated value on hearsay testimony and was trying his case in the newspapers. Warburg further stated that no good purpose had been served by Steuer's statement and that the problem had been corrected.

Speaking at the Constructive Relief Conference in October of 1927, Felix Warburg responded that the policy of the Joint Distribution Committee has been based on a deep seated respect for the Jewry of the old world and that the European Jews, long before the war, had developed many conspicuous national and international philanthropic associations. He said that the leadership of European Jewry had never been questioned and that it was the general policy of the 'Joint' to work within existing Jewish organizational structures in Europe.[142] Warburg wasn't recorded as saying anything about the starvation statistics that had been claimed during the fund raising campaigns of the year before. But he did offer the opinion that 1919 and 1920 were the blackest years in modern Jewish history. During those two years, according to Warburg:

"Widespread massacres and pogroms resulted in the murder of several hundred thousand Jews. On the other hand, it witnessed a phenomenal revival of Jewish activity, accompanied by intense social strife, and by a renaissance of cultural and economic theories incident to the universal movements for national self-determination and the recognition of racial minority rights."

Warburg also claimed that there had been Ukrainian pogroms in the course of which nearly 200,000 Jewish men, women and children perished by fire and sword, constituting one of the blackest pages of history.[143]

The public quickly forgot about Steuer's little criticism. In 1932, Felix Warburg was selected as second only to Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis in an honor roll of the ten leading Jews in the United States. Others in that top ten included United States Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo and Harvard law professor Felix Frankfurter as well as New York Times publisher Adolf Ochs and Rabbi Stephen Wise.[144]

What kind of a person was Felix Warburg? He was described as fun loving, a person who knew how to relate to many different types of people. While highly respected and genuinely liked as a leader within the New York establishment, he was not an intellectual, a doer, not a thinker. Married to an heiress while maintaining numerous girl friends openly, he was the kind of person who is incapable of embarrassment, possessed of a cast iron gut, and publicly credible whether or not he was being particularly truthful. The rap on Felix was that he was the family flyweight and not bright enough for the Hamburg bank.[145]

In reading this next section, it's only fair to first point out the obvious, that to most of the general public, Felix Warburg was an extremely wealthy Republican banker. We will assume that he didn't at first want to have anything to do with Soviet Russia. To me, saying that Jews were attracted to communism is about as fair as saying that Germans were attracted to National Socialism. But it is a fact that the private charity he headed funded agricultural colonies in the Soviet Union, claiming that millions of Jews were starving in Europe, year after year.

Jewish agricultural colonies in Russia had been tried before under czarist rule. Before the Communist revolution, there were Chibbat Zion branches in operation all over Russia. This socialist agricultural movement was financially supported by Baron Edmund de Rothschild who called them "my colonies" and put in agents to supervise them. This didn't mean that Baron Rothschild approved of the Czar any more than Warburg was attracted to communism. It's possible that both Rothschild and Warburg thought that they could have a positive and moderating effect on these respective regimes by being involved in a business relationship with them. Or they could have become involved for other reasons, such as to facilitate emigration from Russia, or to set up temporary settlements of people who could later be moved to Palestine.

Of course there's the obvious humanitarian reasons. With the benefit of hindsight, any attraction to Marxist ideology seems odd and incredible. But we must briefly mention a few of the writers and thinkers whose works were influential during that period and whose ideas could have motivated leaders and opinion makers from Rothschild and Warburg on down to the lowliest commissar and GULag enforcer. They are largely forgotten now perhaps for the good reason that their ideas have not stood the test of time.

A Hebrew novelist extolled readers to cease to be Jews in a theoretical religious sense and to become Jews in their own right as a living and developing nationality. Nachman Syrkin predicted that the Jews would redeem the world which crucified them and that their role in human history was a uniquely chosen role, which in the future through the agency of Zionism would usher in the socialist millennium.[146] Syrkin said in 1918 that the Jewish people is socialist not by necessity but because the revolution was declared on Mt. Sinai.[147] A chief rabbi of Palestine, Abraham Kook, wrote that a consistent application of all the laws of the Torah in social and economic matters would not tolerate the capitalist system. Moses Mendelssohn, who was the founder of Jewish rationalism, argued:[148]

"The progress of modern civilization has come to be regarded as a sort of 'Messiah' for the final solution of the Jewish problem."

Dov Ber Borochov was a leading exponent of Marxist Zionism. He wrote The National Question and the Class Struggle in 1905, which was widely read by Jews living in Russia at the time. Writing in the scientific, jargon ridden, lumberingly constructed style of Marxist analysis[149] Borochov argued that just as the class struggle is waged for the material means of production, there is also a national struggle waged for "spiritual" (language, customs, mores) and territorial conditions of production. Borochov theorized that the normally antagonistic classes within a conquered or oppressed nationality unite in identifying with the oppressed proletariat. According to Borochov, even upper classes of an oppressed nationality think and act like oppressed proletariat because of the history of the whole nationality having been oppressed. By this twisting of Marxist gibberish, Jewish nationalism was transformed into a progressive movement of national liberation by interpolating the class struggle into Zionism.

The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia explained Boroshov's theory this way:[150]

"Borochov's chief ideological contribution was his Marxist analysis of the economic structure and social situation of the Jewish people, pointing to the physical inevitability of territorial concentration in Palestine as a means of occupational redistribution and normalization."

Sokolow's History of Zionism first published in 1919, chronicles that during the Communist revolution of 1917 at Odessa, a port on the black sea, entire battalions of Zionist soldiers bore through the town behind blue and white banners proclaiming: "Liberty in Russia, land and liberty in Palestine". A hundred and fifty thousand men followed these banners to which the military Governor of Odessa insisted on showing honor publicly.[151] In the course of the Russian civil war between the reds and the whites, the Jewish population rallied massively to the Red Army, and its intelligentsia was recruited into the Soviet state apparatus.[152] Leon Trotsky, as the head of the Red Army in 1919, accepted the proposition from Paole Zion that Jewish "national battalions" be constituted to organize the defense of the Jewish population and win it over to the new Bolshevik regime.[153] In 1922, it was reported that a strong Jewish army organized for self-protection was well equipped with rifles, ammunition, and machine guns and numbered 500,000 strong. In a town called Spalla, the Jewish Volunteer Army, well armed, engaged in guerrilla warfare with a band of several hundred bandits, which ended with the Jews entering the town. Order was established immediately and several thousand former residents who escaped a series of massacres two or three years before began streaming in from all parts of Russia and Rumania. The Jewish army was founded by young Zionist groups and therefore had religious as well as racial significance.[154]

Beginning in 1924, Jewish colonies totaling 1.5 million acres were established in the Crimea, the Zaporozje, Cherson, and Odessa districts, in Caucasia and in White Russia. Also in 1924, at a luncheon at Kuhn & Loeb in New York, a program was worked out to involve the Joint Distribution Committee in some of these projects. The Joint Distribution Committee began financing Soviet Jewish agricultural settlements in Ukraine and the Crimea with a mixture of donated money, loaned money, and Soviet funding. These settlements became a bizarre hybrid of Park Avenue charity and Marxist agriculture. Some of the Jewish settlements founded by Agro-Joint were Zionist colonies settled by people who saw the Crimea as a stepping-stone on the road to Palestine. Thirteen of the colonies had Hebrew names. According to statistics published in Yehuda Bauer's book, My Brother's Keeper, which was financed with a generous grant from the Joint Distribution Committee, there were 112 Agro-Joint colonies in the Crimea in 1928.[155] The Soviet government contributed 500,000 rubles for the Agro-Joint settlements each year and placed this budget at the disposal of Agro-Joint.[156]

The new Soviet government considered the Jews to be a formerly oppressed nationality entitled to their own territorial regions. In accordance with the Soviet scheme of national autonomy, these regions were governed as autonomous Jewish districts. Schools, Colleges, law courts, police forces and the entire machinery of government were conducted in Yiddish. There were also traveling theaters, publications, movies, radio and lectures. Jewish workers were recruited for new factories all over Russia. In Asia near the Manchurian border, the New Jersey sized territory of Biro-Bidjon was, in time, also declared a territory exclusively for Jewish settlers. It was prestigious being Jewish in the Soviet Union during the 1920s and the first half of the thirties and perhaps long after that. It was a time of state protection for Russian Jews. They were assumed to be faithful allies of Soviet Power and therefore to be trusted in promoting policy. The Soviet government gave the Jewish theater a first class building in the middle of Moscow and large state subsidies for its work, and its creative figures received generous titles and medals which guaranteed them privileges and material comforts within the Soviet system.[157]

In the spring of 1927, Felix Warburg went to the Soviet Union, traveling from Vladivostok to Moscow, claiming to have toured forty of the Agro-Joint colonies in the Crimea and Ukraine. Warburg's party traveled by private railroad car and toured more remote regions in two chauffeured limousines. Felix laid a cornerstone for a Felix Warburg high school and visited a settlement named Felix Warburg No. 4 and 5.[158] Upon his return he told a fund raising rally in Chicago:[159]

"I wish you had been with us on our trip through Russia. Good friends had warned us not to make the trip, that it was dangerous, that we were going to a country where everything would be supervised and we would get predigested food in regard to the things we wanted to see. Nothing of the kind has happened. In no country we visited were we as free from formalities and granted such absolute freedom as in Russia.[...] The work in Russia has been a great success, not only from the sentimental standpoint but also from the financial standpoint. It is difficult to realize that untrained Jewish people from the cities should have been brought to these farms and in the third year should begin seriously to pay back the loans, heavy loans, but that is the truth. Everything given to them is noted down by them in a book. Whenever they look at the book they know what they owe to the mutual credit society, and they know what they owe to the Kassas and they know what they owe to the Jews of America."

Julius Rosenwald, the owner of Sears, was a heavy donor to the American Jewish Joint Agricultural Corporation and a settlement was also named after him.

To the Communists it was blood and not religion that determined Jewishness. Anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union was prosecuted as a crime against the Jewish nationality. It was a crime against racism. Communists supported what they called "spiritual" aspects of the people. These spiritual aspects were myths, folkways, customs and so forth and should not be confused with religion, which the communists opposed. While religious Christianity, Islam, and Judaism were persecuted as religions within the communist system, the Jewish people were favored as an historically oppressed nationality like the Georgians or the Armenians.

In 1928, the Central Committee of the Communist party in Moscow appointed a special committee to combat anti-Semitism. The special committee's program provided for a systematic campaign by trained personnel beginning within the Communist Party and also within schools including colleges. The campaign against anti-Semitism was introduced into the schoolbooks, motion pictures, the press, and literature. Public debates on anti-Semitism were held and excursions to the Jewish colonies arranged. A campaign against anti-Semitism was also conducted in the Red Army and in the trade unions. It became a crime against the state. The highest disciplinary penalties were provided in the program recommended by the committee for those found guilty of anti-Semitic practices and particularly for those opposing the Jewish colonization work.[160]

The head of the Moscow State Theater and seven other officials of the State Theater were dismissed for their anti-Semitic practices.[161] A Moscow dispatch to The Jewish Telegraph Agency reported that four "Pogromists" were sentenced to death and nine to prison terms of from one to ten years.[162] During a conference on combating anti-Semitism held in the All-Russian Communist Club, a Moscow District Court Judge stated that disciplinary punishment had been inflicted upon seventy persons in Moscow during the first ten months of 1928 for anti-Semitic propaganda.[163]

The battle against anti-Semitism became an election campaign issue in White Russia.[164]

"Communists, fight ignorance, alcoholism and anti-Semitism read a poster placarded in the streets."

In a separate report, two ringleaders found guilty of attacking the Jewish Colony No. 3 were sentenced to death. Two other members of the band were sentenced to imprisonment followed by deportation. The Chief of Police and his assistant received eighteen-months jail sentences and the chairman of the regional Soviet was sentenced to one year in prison.[165]

The Communist press was reporting that the principal cause of anti-Semitism in industrial centers was the influence of the "Kulaks" (wealthier peasants) upon former peasants now working in factories. A reporter from The Jewish Telegraphic Agency investigated and reported in a dispatch from Minsk:[166]

"Jewish and non-Jewish workers interviewed by the correspondent agreed in blaming the Kulaks for using their influence over the new factory hands for the purpose of promoting anti-Semitic disturbances and thus making trouble for the Soviet government. The Kulaks are especially incensed at the government's insistence upon its plan for the eventual socialization of agriculture."

In one show trial eight workers including three Communist party members were charged with tormenting a Jewish working girl. In order to achieve the maximum publicity, it was staged in the largest available hall and advertised throughout Russia. The President of the White Russian Supreme Court presided over a bench of judges, and the chief prosecutor of the White Russian Republic personally conducted the case for the state. The President of the White Russian Academy of Sciences and the dean of the Minsk faculty of Law also appeared as "prosecutors on behalf of public opinion". Intending to serve as a warning to other offenders, the sentences at Soviet show trials tended to be draconian. According to the indictment, a Jewish girl was first habitually mocked and later roughly handled. She was told she would be put in an oven and then water was thrown over her. Then she tripped and fell on her face and finally was brutally kicked on the ankle with a wooden clog. Such rowdyism was all too frequent with White Russian workers during that period. Almost an exactly similar case occurred almost simultaneously in a nearby town at another factory with a non-Jewish girl as the victim, but no action was taken.[167]

Why did the Bolshevist party decide to hold a full-dress political anti-Semite 'show trial' at the White Russian capital Minsk? A major reason given in a New York Times report covering this trial was that the Soviet elections were about to begin and the Communists hoped to use these elections to smash the power of the Kulaks once and for all. In White Russia much land had recently been taken from the Kulaks and a small part of it was utilized to form new Jewish land colonies. As a result there had been a certain amount of terrorization of the new Jewish colonists. The Communists then hit back with this slogan:[167]

"All anti-Semitism comes from the Kulaks."

It was also decided to thrash out this case with the utmost publicity because such acts were prevalent in the area and an increase could have become politically dangerous in an atmosphere of discontent generated by a bad harvest, crushing taxation on the villages and a shortage of goods in the towns. Even the official "Jewish section" of the Communist party directorate in Moscow often soft-pedaled anti-Semitism in order not to supply enemies of the Soviet regime and the anti-Socialist Jewish press abroad with opportunities for "fantastic pogrom propaganda."[167]

The eight defendants were accused of "counter revolution" although the alleged facts hardly seemed to justify such a terrible charge. The Soviet Chief Prosecutor (Krylenko) at this trial wanted the death penalty by shooting for Class One offenders found guilty of counterrevolutionary activities and prison for an indefinite term for Class 2 offenders. He stated:[167]

"Under no circumstances will these criminals belonging in Class 2 be allowed to return home. After their release from prison they will be exiled for life to remote places out of harm's way."

The central issue at the trial was whether the defendants were guilty of an act of a counter-revolutionary nature (Class One). The judge sought to establish the connection of the defendants' acts with the influence of the Kulaks, wealthy peasants, and Nepmen. Nepmen were new economic policy men - small businessmen who had been allowed to operate under Lenin after the famine of 1921-1922, but were later taxed out of existence. The four major defendants were found guilty of anti-Semitism and rough treatment of their fellow worker and received prison terms.[168]

In a separate show trial four months later, 24 other Russian workers charged with anti-Semitism received prison sentences. The trial attracted wide attention, and hundreds of people crowded the court to hear the decision, which was issued at 5 o'clock in the morning. At the same time during a meeting held in Moscow, Anatole Lunatcharsky, Commissioner of Education, said he could understand those who opposed the Soviet Government but could not see how followers of communism could maintain the claim that "Jews govern us".[169]

The Soviet war on anti-Semitism coincided with the period after Lenin's death in 1924 when Joseph Stalin was jockeying for power. He was a man who spent a lifetime portraying himself as an internationalist and as a determined foe of anti-Semitism. Stalin's bitterest enemy, Leon Trotsky, called Stalin a clerk, an embezzler of ideas, timid and unintelligent, but never said anywhere that Stalin was motivated by anti-Semitism.

Stalin, an early editor of Pravda, had first came to public attention with the publication of his article "Marxism and the National Question" in the Communist theoretical journal Enlightenment one year before the start of World War One in 1913. This article dealt with what Marxists should do after the revolution with all of the non-Russian nationalities that had been conquered and forcibly made a part of Russia by the Czars. Stalin argued for the creation of locally autonomous regions (colonies, reservations) for the historically oppressed nationality groups where their language, folkways and traditions would be respected. In this politically charged article, Stalin wrote at length on the Jewish nationality, describing them as not a nation but something mystical, intangible and otherworldly. This article established Stalin as the Bolshevik authority on the national (actually the nationalities) question. Lenin appointed Stalin the Commissar of Nationalities Issues in the first Bolshevist government. In April of 1922, at Lenin's insistence, Stalin was elected to the newly created post of general secretary of the Communist party.[170]

Less than a year after becoming the undisputed dictator of the Soviet Union with his public statements viewed as national policy, Stalin made his most famous statement about anti-Semitism. Stalin characterized it as "the most dangerous survival of cannibalism":[171]

"National and racial chauvinism is a remnant of man hating customs characteristic of the era of cannibalism. Anti-Semitism is an extreme expression of racial chauvinism and as such is the most dangerous survival of cannibalism. It is useful to the exploiter for it serves as a lightning rod enabling capitalism to evade the blows of the toilers.

'It is a danger to the working people for it is a false path leading them into the jungles and away from the right road. Communists cannot but be irreconcilable enemies of anti-Semitism. In the Soviet Union it is rigidly prosecuted and militant anti-Semites are punishable by death under the law."

Stalin's "cannibalism" and "lightning rod" analogies were standard communist orthodoxy. Karl Kautsky, a principal theorist of the second Marxist International, wrote in 1903 that the czarist regime used the Jews "as a lightning conductor during the storms that gather over the autocracy". Lenin always condemned anti-Semitism in the clearest and most intransigent fashion. In 1918, he signed a decree calling it a "mortal danger for the entire revolution and as a menace to the workers and the peasants". Engels saw the struggle against anti-Semitism as a priority task of the international workers' movement writing in Arbeiterzeitung, the daily newspaper of the Austrian Socialists, that "we owe much to the Jews [...] Marx was of pure Jewish blood, Lassalle was Jewish, very many of our best comrades are Jewish".[172] And Karl Marx said:

"The stiffest form of opposition between Jew and Christian is religious. How is this to be resolved? By abolishing religion".

Marx also said that man emancipates himself from religion politically by relegating it from public to private law.[173]

Typically, Stalin's supporters were dedicated, not particularly intellectual party officials who had never been outside the Soviet Union. His group brought a rigid, totalitarian, small mindedness to Marxist social theory. When the theories proved to be unworkable, they became even more dogmatic, brutal, and even murderous in their insistence on carrying them out. Lazar Kaganovich was probably the biggest and certainly the most durable butcher during the Stalinist era. Sometimes using the alias Kosherovitz,[174] he was the Soviet official most responsible for the Ukrainian famine of 1932-1933. Some have even argued that Kaganovich was the real master at the Kremlin and Stalin a mere puppet.[175]

The only English language biography about this killer of over twenty million people was written by Stuart Kahan, an American writer whose aunt Rosa was Stalin's third wife and who is therefore also the nephew of Lazar Kaganovich, but more about that later. Kahan worked as a journalist for the New York Times. In the 1980s, he visited and interviewed Kaganovich who was retired and living in a Moscow apartment. A courageous book based on interviews with family members commingled with family history and lore, it is a fascinating and highly readable biography. But it spares the family and treats even Lazar Kaganovich in a relatively friendly manner, to the extent that it is ethically possible. While the only available biography about this biggest mass killer of the twentieth century is largely positive, it's amazing that this book exists at all.

Kahan wrote that during the first year of the 'Great Terror' Kaganovich supervised the killing of nearly half a million people as mass purges swept across the country like a deranged prehistoric animal.[176] While he was in power, eight towns' names were changed to Kaganovich in addition to the Moscow subway initially being named after him. He was assigned to the Cheka (later called the OGPU, then the NKVD, and still later the KGB), an investigative agency that became a political police force of organized terror. Stalin assigned Kaganovich the task of keeping his second wife under surveillance and reporting back on her activities. After she committed suicide, Kaganovich introduced Stalin to his younger sister Rosa who was a medical doctor at a clinic in Moscow and within a year Rosa Kaganovich became Stalin's third and last wife.

His perennial sidekick during that period was a young Nikita Khrushchev who as a Shabes Goy in the Ukraine lit the Sabbath lights and started the stoves for the Jewish high politicos on Saturdays.[177] Khrushchev wrote in his biography that as a Russian peasant he first met Kaganovich in 1917 and owed his early career to Kaganovich. Kaganovich was Khrushchev's boss from 1928 to about 1938 and again from 1946 to 1948.[178]

Kahan wrote that Kaganovich took great pleasure in having 16 major Cossack villages removed to Siberia because he blamed the Cossacks for persecuting Jews under the Czars.[179] He participated in demolishing the church of Christ the Savior in Moscow for a new palace of Soviets. The holy week monastery was turned into a theater for use by party members:[180]

"People were afraid to laugh. It was as if a huge blanket had been dropped over their mouths."

Kahan wrote of an interesting and possible account of Stalin's death. According to Kahan, after Stalin's first stroke Rosa (Dr. Rosa Kaganovich Stalin, Stalin's wife) prescribed for him pills called dicoumarol, an anticoagulant also used in rat poison. Large amounts are lethal, but taken in small amounts, dicoumarol retards blood clotting making another stroke less likely. After his first stroke, Stalin took dicoumarol twice a day. Later Rosa secretly quadrupled the dosage, which eventually poisoned him. The problem with the story is that Kahan implicates Molotov, Bulganin, and others in the inner circle as plotters in Stalin's demise. It is not very likely that Stalin would have no friends in his own inner circle but this theory protects Rosa and Lazar Kaganovich from total responsibility.[181] Maybe Stalin really was killed by a Jewish doctor, namely his wife. An autopsy might tell us for sure.

Hard to believe stories about killer doctors have been around for a long time in the Soviet Union. An earlier 'doctors plot' was one of the excuses for the Soviet Great Terror of the 1930s. Briefly, this earlier tale and its resultant consequences went like this: In 1934, Bukharin, Yagoda, and other rightists in contact with Trotsky were plotting to assassinate Stalin, Voroshilov, Kirov, Menzhinsky, Molotov, Kuibyshev, Kaganovich, Gorky, and Zhdanov, just about the entire Soviet leadership. They plotted to accomplish this through physicians slowly ruining the health of these leaders. As directed by the plotters, the physicians deliberately gave bad advice and mistreatment for illnesses especially to the cardiovascular system. Injections and stimulants were administered in a way calculated to surreptitiously kill the patient. In that way, Menzhinsky was murdered and his position in the leadership was assumed by Yagoda.

When Gorky, the internationally famous literary figure, contracted a serious case of influenza and died, it was soon rumored that his doctor deliberately aggravated his condition, murdering Gorky. Soon they were saying that Trotsky had ordered that "Gorky must be physically exterminated at all costs" due to Gorky's prestige and because he was very devoted personally to Stalin. These and similar fictional 'crimes' were prosecuted at three trials held at the height of the Great Terror before the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR in August 1936, January 1937, and in March 1938.[182] At the 1936 trial, Zinoviev and Kamenev were brought from prison where they were serving out terms on previous convictions. The prosecutors established that an intimate relationship had developed between Leon Trotsky on the one hand and Alfred Rosenberg and Rudolf Hess of National Socialist Germany on the other hand. At the conclusion of the third trial in 1938, the murdering doctors and other plotters were convicted and shot by a firing squad.

During the great terror, from 1936 to 1938, Stalin approved a plan to summarily shoot tens of thousands of people establishing target figures for shootings by province. There was socialist competition between NKVD departments to find the most spies. N.I. Ezhov, Stalin's secret police chief at the height of the Great Terror, cynically and knowingly forced confessions from innocent people. Stalin personally signed death sentences including a record 3,167 in one day. Eventually Ezhov was arrested, convicted, and shot for the crime of "leftist overreaction" and was replaced by Beria.[183] The old line Bolsheviks were arrested and shot in a move that may have actually been popular with some of the lower classes because there was so much bitterness accumulated against the misery that the revolution had caused to the Russian people.[184]

Closing this chapter with a note concerning the Soviet 'doctors plot' of the 1950s, according to author Kahan, six of the fifteen doctors who were charged were Jewish, but the official news of the arrest only reported nine of the fifteen names, including all of the six Jewish names. It therefore looked to the world like most of those arrested were Jewish, which is typical of the misconceptions that are repeated to this day. For example, online Encarta Encyclopediareports:

"In 1953 fifteen doctors, most of them Jewish, were arrested and charged with murdering important Soviet officials on orders from the Joint Distribution Committee, a Zionist organization."

Go figure.


31 - One of the World's Oldest Astronomy Sites : Egypt's Nabta Playa

Egypt's Nabta Playa, some 6,000 to 8,000 years old, is "one of the world's earliest known examples of archeoastronomy." Astrophysicist Thomas G. Brophy suggests the hypothesis that the southerly line of three stones inside the calendar circle represented the three stars of Orion’s Belt and the other three stones inside the calendar circle represented the shoulders and head stars of Orion as they appeared in them in the sky.

These correspondences were for two dates -- circa 4,800 BC and at precessional opposition -- representing how the sky "moves" long term. Brophy proposes that the circle was constructed and used circa the later date, and the dual date representation was a conceptual representation of the motion of the sky over a precession cycle.

Using their original measurements and measurements by satellite and GPRS measurements by Brophy and Rosen they confirmed possible alignments with Sirius, Arcturus, Alpha Centauri and the Belt of Orion. They suggest that there are three pieces of evidence suggesting astronomical observations by the herdsmen using the site, which may have functioned as a necropolis. "The repetitive orientation of megaliths, stele, human burials and cattle burials reveals a very early symbolic connection to the north." Secondly, there is the orientation of the cromlech mentioned above. The third piece of evidence is the fifth millennium alignments of stele to bright stars.[8]
They conclude their report by writing that "The symbolism embedded in the archaeological record of Nabta Playa in the Fifth Millennium BC is very basic, focused on issues of major practical importance to the nomads: cattle, water, death, earth, sun and stars.

Although at present the western Egyptian desert is totally dry, this was not the case in the past. There is good evidence that there were several humid periods in the past (when up to 500 mm of rain would fall per year) the most recent one during the last interglacial and early last glaciation periods which stretched between 130,000 and 70,000 years ago. During this time, the area was a savanna and supported numerous animals such as extinct buffalo and large giraffes, varieties of antelope and gazelle.

Scientists Showing Concern Over Solar Storms
By Mitch Battros - Earth Changes Media
Apr 19, 2011

Extreme solar activities such as solar flares, cme's, and coronal holes can affect life on Earth. Satellites and power grinds are vulnerable to a direct hit leaving them useless. Extreme weather events can also be a result of charged particles hitting the Earth's magnetic field.

Sunspots => Solar Flares (charged particles) => Magnetic Field Shift => Shifting Ocean and Jet Stream Currents => Extreme Weather and Human Disruption (mitch battros 1998)

Dr. Rami Qahwaji of Nasa's Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) says; "if we are to protect these assets, we need accurate solar weather forecasting." Scientists from the Visual Computer Center at Bradford University are developing advanced imaging tools to help scientists visualize what's happening on the Sun. With new instruments they can now make sense of the data and predict the extreme solar activities that could affect our lives here on Earth.

So great is the wealth of data about the Sun now being gathered by space missions such as SOHO, STEREO and the Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) that scientists back on Earth can struggle to keep pace. To combat this data overload, Dr. Rami Qahwaji will present the tools at the RAS National Astronomy Meeting at Llandudno on Tuesday 19th and Wednesday 20th April.

"These techniques are very important," said Qahwaji. "We are now able to process images on the ground so that the resolution is double that of the source images. Most satellites are limited by the amount of data that they can store and download. The ability to turn medium resolution images into high resolution in the lab means that satellites can take smaller images but more frequently, which will help with real-time monitoring of the Sun and predicting space weather.

It also means that scientists can zoom in on the features that interest them, without downloading huge files. There is lot of potential for this technology. For example, it can help overcome small information loss caused by noise and can be used to generate high-definition 3-D images."

In addition to enhancing image resolution, the Bradford group has been developing 2- and 3-D visualization tools to help scientists understand the complex processes that drive solar activity. By processing hundreds of solar images, they have created automated maps that summarize solar activity over an entire solar rotation and models of magnetic field lines, generating 3-D visualizations of magnetic loop locations on the Sun's rotating globe.

"This is the first time that SDO data has been used to create these synoptic maps and we have also created the first automated 3-D model of magnetic loops," said Qahwaji. "As well as being a useful tool for scientists, we hope that the public will find the 3-D model an interesting way of finding out what's happening on the Sun."

The group is now collaborating with Trinity College Dublin on the development of a new flares predictions system called SMART-ASAP. This computerized system analyses recent images to extract physical properties from solar magnetic features that are analyzed further using artificial intelligence techniques to predict whether extreme solar activities will occur.



32 - Mysterious Cosmic Blast Keeps on Going

By Ron Cowen, Science News b.. April 8, 2011

Astronomers have witnessed a cosmic explosion so strange they don’t even know what to call it. Although the blowup, discovered with NASA’s Swift satellite on March 28, emits high-energy radiation like a gamma-ray burst would, the event has now lasted for 11 days. Gamma-ray bursts last for an average of about 30 seconds.

Also unlike a gamma-ray burst, the explosion has faded and brightened, emitting staccato pulses of energetic radiation lasting for hundreds of seconds.

“It’s either a phenomenon we’ve never seen before or a familiar event that we’ve never viewed in this way before,” says Andrew Fruchter of the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore. The outburst might have been generated by a star torn to shreds when it ventured too close to a black hole in its host galaxy, he suggests. Gas from the star falling into the black hole could have triggered the gravitational monster to emit a jet of X-rays and gamma rays that by chance happens to point directly at Earth.

A radio-wavelength image taken May 29 along with a Hubble Space Telescope image taken in visible light on April 4 supports that model. The images show that the explosion took place 3.8 billion light-years from Earth, at the center of a galaxy where a supermassive black hole would lie. It’s also possible that the star might have been ripped apart by a smaller black hole, Fruchter notes.

“Tidal disruption of a star by a black hole seems very plausible,” says Andrew MacFadyen of New York University. The blast’s duration “is much longer than anything we’d naturally expect from [explosive] collapse of a single star,” which is the traditional model for producing a gamma-ray burst, he says.

But Stan Woosley of the University of California, Santa Cruz says the event might be explained by the gravitational collapse of a giant star into a black hole, a scaled-up version of the process that usually produces a gamma-ray burst. In Woosley’s scenario, the core of the giant star collapses to form a black hole but it takes days for the outer layers to fall in and emit radiation, accounting for the unusually long duration of the observed explosion


1) Inset, left: This view of a puzzling cosmic explosion combines images from the Swift satellite’s ultraviolet-optical telescope (white and purple) and its X-ray telescope (yellow and red), recorded over a 3.4-hour period March 28, 2011. (Stefan Immler/NASA GSFC, NASA, Swift)

Right: The Hubble Space Telescope was able to pinpoint the location of a ecently observed cosmic explosion, showing that it took place in the center of a galaxy that lies 3.8 billion light-years from Earth. This image may support the idea that the fireworks come from a star that fell into a supermassive black hole at the core of the galaxy. (A. Fruchter/STScI, NASA, ESA)

2) Graph shows how the cosmic explosion’s brightness has fluctuated over time. (NASA/Swift/Penn State/J. Kennea)

33 - "Is the Trillion-Dollar Worldwide 'Sickness Industry' Robbing You of Vibrant Health?"

Something a bit sinister is going on right before your eyes.

Health and disease, along with our food supply, have become big business. Big business to the tune of a trillion dollars.

The big players involved are in it to win. Unfortunately that means you your health -- lose. It’s just that simple.

You lose... unless... you educate yourself and others, and take action.

Let me explain.

You’re surrounded by scientific evidence proving that nutritional therapy can be --

more effective
less harmful
less invasive, and
more economical
-- than most conventional medical treatments.

But are you hearing about these findings on the evening news? How about from your healthcare provider? Your neighborhood pharmacist?

Now don’t get me wrong. I firmly believe these folks have your best interests at heart. They just don’t know any better.

Hippocrates Knew the Real Truth
Ask any medical student about Hippocrates, the Greek Father of Medicine born 460 B.C. They’re likely to recite to you his infamous oath, "Do no harm."

But did you know Hippocrates also asserted, "Let thy food be thy medicine and thy medicine be thy food"? This respected scholar believed the body had an innate ability to heal itself through food.

Since Hippocrates’ day, the Western world’s approach to treating illness and disease has changed. Food and nutrition no longer play a role in medicine.

In fact, less than six percent of graduating medical students in the United States receive any formal training in nutrition.

What’s taken food’s place?

Just one word: drugs.

Enter the massive pharmaceutical industry. It’s become a half-trillion dollarper year worldwide conglomerate -- and a 300,000 billion dollar industry in North America alone. Their presence is found everywhere... even in medical schools.

Modern day medical education and practice revolves around "one pill for every ill". Open your favorite magazine. Turn on the TV. One-fourth of the commercials on American television advertise drugs.

This "one pill for every ill" philosophy makes money for the pharmaceutical giants -- and for the medical industry. And of course, the more prolonged the treatment, the more money, right?

Let’s face it. Good nutrition and good health just don’t make money.
Think about it. Is it really in the best financial interests of Big Business -- the pharmaceutical, medical, and agricultural industries -- to promote natural, fresh food and nutrition to keep people free from disease?

Looking at other cultures untainted by the Western world, we see people eating locally grown, unprocessed food. Their incidence of chronic and acute illness, such as heart disease and cancer, pales in comparison.

These cultures use their food as medicine and their medicine as food.

So why isn’t that the case in the Western world? After all, certainly everyone realizes "we are what we eat", don’t they?

Perhaps not. For various reasons, four general myths abound concerning health and disease, and many people believe these myths to be true. How about you? Do you believe these...?

Western medicine is safe and effective with research dollars leading to breakthrough cures for disease.
Eating a well-balanced diet ensures you of all required nutrients for optimum wellness and longevity.
Supplements are not necessary, and in fact, may even be dangerous because of their drug-like action.
Genetics determine your risk of disease and there’s little you can do to affect that risk.
Busting the Myths
These four myths are downright dangerous. Why? They are veiling the truth and preventing you from gaining the knowledge you need to take control of your health.

Let’s look at each of these myths more closely, starting with the current state of health and wellness and the impact of Western medicine.

The numbers are staggering:

Each year:39,000 people die from unnecessary surgery and hospital error
80,000 people die from other hospital-caused infections
106,000 people die from adverse drug reactions
I think we all agree that Western medicine can be a life saver in times of acute illness or accidents -- there’s no doubt. But 225,000 deaths each year -- 616 a day -- from unnecessary causes?

How about the effectiveness of Western drugs and medical treatments with serious diseases? Just look at these escalating present-day numbers:

Each year:652,486 people die from heart diseas
553, 888 people die from cancer
I’ll let you draw your own conclusions.

The Two Biggest Killers on the Rise
Today, heart disease and cancer account for two-thirds of all deaths in the United States.

We’re told that cancer survivor rates are climbing. But are they really? If you look closely, you’ll see it’s merely the reporting that’s changed.

Looking at these two grim statistics tells a different story about these killers:

Cardiovascular disease causes one-half of all deaths and one-half of these victims show no symptoms before dying!
Regardless of an astounding $39 billion spent on cancer research since 1972, the death rate from cancer has doubled. Where’s the cure?
CANCER... The Biggest Business of All
Did you know that the only 'acceptable' treatments for cancer in most countries are surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy?

Here’s the real stunner...

Even if your healthcare providers know about effective alternative treatments, they can’t tell you about them... or they risk losing their licenses.

Not unless, of course, these treatmentshappen to be "complimentary" to surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy.

Imagine instead your healthcare provider sitting down with you and discussing a different -- and proven effective -- treatment plan consisting of natural, organic foods, supplements and 'superfoods'.

Which leads us to Myth #2...

Your Food Supply is in Serious Jeopardy
Today, eating a well-balanced diet does not ensure complete and optimum nutrition for preventing and treating illness.

Manufacturing technology and the massive transport of food limit our choices for healthy food selections. Big-box supermarkets line their shelves with processed foods high in sugars and starch, along with factory-farmed meat, dairy, fish, and eggs. The most popular dining out options provide fast and even-faster-fast food devoid of any real nutritional value.

Even if you do choose healthy, fresh food, you’re still not guaranteed of its nutrient quality.

Over-farming and abundant chemical fertilizers deplete our soils of their nutrients. Today’s synthetic fertilizers replenish the soils with only three minerals -- potassium, phosphorus, and nitrogen. However, healthy soil requires fifty-two minerals for plants to flourish.

Plants growing with weakened, mineral-deficient structures easily succumb to disease and pests. This forces conventional farmers to apply known-toxic pesticides and herbicides to protect their crops.

The end result is mineral-deficient, toxic food.

Local Sustainably and Organically Grown - The Foods of Choice
Food grown organically or sustainably in local, naturally fertilized, nutrient-rich soil is simply your best choice in food.

In fact, a 2005 research study by the Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences (DIAS) found that rats fed an organic or naturally fertilized diet displayed:

Calmer behavior
Sounder sleeping habits
Higher vitamin E blood levels (with organic diet)
Less body fat
Improved immune function
A 2003 study in the prestigious peer-reviewed Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry revealed that fruits and vegetables grown organically or sustainably contained significantly higher levels of cancer-fighting antioxidants -- up to 58 percent higher.

The research suggests that pesticides and herbicides actually cause the plant to shut down production of its natural defense phenolics. Natural chemicals produced for defense against invading pests, phenolics possess powerful antioxidant activity.

Of course, as I’ve warned my readers previously, not all certified organic foods are equal. Now with two feet firmly planted in the organics industry, Big Business has altered the founding principles of the organic label. To receive the true benefits from organic foods, be careful where you purchase them.

Seek out local farmers, food coops, farmers’ markets, and community-supported programs in your area. You want to buy from and support the ‘real sources’ close to home -- the people who truly care about the integrity and quality of your food.

To thrive well, follow these simple steps:

Eat organic or sustainably-grown, naturally fertilized foods from local farmers you trust and support.
Include raw foods at every meal for their natural, digestion-enhancing enzymes.
Select from a wide variety of colorful, fresh, natural whole foods, and avoid processed foods whenever possible.
Choose specific foods according to your Nutritional Type guidelines.
And, now, for Myth #3...

Watch Out for those Dangerous Supplements!
Have you ever heard the following statements...?

"If you take an extra vitamin pill, it might be dangerous."
"Vitamins are like drugs so they should be regulated."
"If vitamins have therapeutic value, then they must be dangerous."
According to the American Association of Poison Control Centers, during the last twenty-three years, there have been 10 deaths associated with vitamin supplements. That’s it. Less than one death per year -- and not even proven -- just suspected. In fact, there’s no scientific proof that vitamins can cause harm.

Compare that to the whopping total of 106,000 victims from lethal drug side effects per year -- and these were patients using prescription drugs as prescribed!

It’s well documented that medical doctors used high doses of vitamins back in the 1940’s to prevent and treat illness... that is, until it became frowned upon by Big Business. Dr. Linus Pauling, renowned two-time Nobel Prize winner is one of many physicians who successfully worked with high-dose supplementation.

From either food or supplements, vitamins enable your body to heal itself. Ideally, nutrients come from a healthy, natural diet complete with all the required vitamins and minerals. But, as you’ve seen, that’s not always possible. High quality supplements offer a next best option. Either way, they’re essential.

And now concerning the 4th and final dangerous Myth...

"It’s in Your Genes, So Why Bother?"
Quite frankly, the answer may surprise you.

Examining the role of heredity in cancer risk, the gold standard ‘Nurture vs. Nature’ Swedish study of 44,000 pairs of twins found only a 10 to 20 percent causal factor related to genes. Even with twins, environmental factors, such as diet, lifestyle, and smoking play a substantially greater role in determining whether a person develops cancer than do genetics.

There’s much you can do. However, it all starts with getting the education you need to make that important first step.

A Journey Down the Rabbit Hole
My good friends James Colquhoun and Laurentine ten Bosch have created an independent, scientific-based DVD documentary titled Food Matters that explores the politics and realities of food and health care.

James and Laurentine, with the help of some of the top natural health and nutrition experts in the world, escort you down a mystical "rabbit hole" to uncover startling truths about the 'Sickness Industry' and the 'hushed' alternative treatments critical for your well-being. Most importantly, they provide a radiant beacon of hope with steps you can do today to take control of your health and begin healing.

James sums it up nicely, "It’s about education, not just medication."

I applaud the brazen efforts of these two nutritionists for daring to go where no one else before them has. This is such important information -- and much aligned with my personal health philosophies. It’s time to get it out to everyone who will listen. I encourage you to order a copy of Food Matters today and watch it with your friends and family.

Here are some of the experts you’ll meet in Food Matters with their inspiring solutions and new approaches to healing:

Andrew W. Saul, Ph.D. - Therapeutic Nutrition Specialist and Author
- A consulting specialist in natural healing for over 30 years and veteran lecturer for three colleges.
David Wolfe -- World Authority on Raw Foods and Superfoods
- Coaches Hollywood celebrities and leading business people on nutrition and wellness.
Victor Zeines, D.D.S., M.S. -- Holistic Dentist and Nutritionist
- Practicing Holistic Dentistry for over 25 years.
Dr. Dan Rogers -- Trained Medical Doctor and Naturopath
- Successfully treating ‘incurable’ patients since the late 1970’s with nutrition-based detoxification and healing from within.
Professor Ian Brighthope -- Medical Doctor and Surgeon
- Over 20 years of practical clinical experience
- Specialized in Nutritional and Environmental Medicine
Charlotte Gerson -- Founder of the nonprofit Gerson Institute
- Daughter of Max Gerson, founder of Gerson Therapy
- Dedicated to Gerson Therapy, an alternative, non-toxic treatment for cancer and other diseases
In this 90-minute research-backed, stunning documentary DVD you’ll discover:

Why all the so-called 'cures' for everyday health issues aren’t working, regardless of the billions spent in research and development.
The true cause of disease and how to treat it -- what works, what doesn’t, and what’s killing you.
How to use the right kinds of foods and supplements to help treat chronic and serious illnesses -- even deadly cancer.
Why even lightly steaming your food can be detrimental to your health and what to do instead.
How to disease-proof your body and enjoy optimum health and longevity.
Natural and effective remedies for treating mental illness -- including depression.
How to use raw foods and detoxification for rapid and permanent weight loss.
How to actually reverse heart disease without drugs and surgery
Read what some well-known industry leaders are saying about Food Matters...

"Food Matters is a must see for those looking to take control of their health."
John Gray, PhD, NY Times Best Selling Author of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus

John Robbins, author of Diet for A New America

"Anyone who is serious about their health needs to see this stunning film."
Christiane Northrup, MD, author of Mother-Daughter Wisdom, The Wisdom of Menopause and Women’s Bodies, Women’s Wisdom

"Thought provoking, informative, and compelling, this film matters."
Rory Freedman, Coauthor of #1 NY Times Best Seller Skinny Bitch

"This eye-opening documentary is important to anyone who has ever taken the safety of our nation’s food supply for granted. Food Matters is destined to be a classic."
Jordan Rubin, NY Times Best Selling Author of The Maker’s Diet

"Food Matters has a very inspirational message to everyone. It will transform your approach to your food and to your life."
Marie Diamond, Feng Shui Master featured in The Secret, www.MarieDiamond.com

"If you’re looking for a way to treat disease naturally, then Food Matters is a great place to start"
Marci Shimoff, NY Times bestselling author of Happy for No Reason and featured teacher in The Secret

"Food Matters is to getting healthy as The Secret is to becoming wealthy."
Ed Bauman, Bauman College: Holistic Nutrition and Culinary Arts

"YES! Food Matters! This riveting, inspiring film is a giant step forward in awakening people’s consciousness about what we are putting into our bodies and how we are nourishing ourselves and our planet."
Alissa Cohen, Author of Living on Live Food

"What you put into your mouth is more important to your health and well-being than most can possibly realize. Food Matters is a riveting and informative film that will help you understand just how important whole foods really are to your well-being."
Mike Anderson, author of The Rave Diet & Lifestyle

"An informative look into what’s wrong with the modern food supply and why we must act now to change it."
Linda Page, Ph.D., Traditional Naturopath, author of the bestselling book, Healthy Healing 12th Edition: A Guide to Self-Healing For Everyone

There’s Still Time for You to Make That First Step
As Laurentine says, "There are simple lifestyle changes that we as individuals can make to combat serious illness, and with access to solid information, people invariably make better choices for their health."

Whether it’s turning around a serious or chronic condition or just protecting your health, I want you to have the solid information you need. There’s still time to take that first -- or even fourth -- step in taking control of your health. Order your copy of Food Matters today.

Watch the Food Matters Trailer NowFood Matters DVD

List Price: $29.95
Your Price: $19.97
You Save: $9.98 (33.32%)


Fukushima update: TEPCO admits radiation leaks will continue for at least three more months, maybe longer
(NaturalNews) Thanks to an announcement by TEPCO, we now have a "target date" for addressing the radiation leaks from Fukushima. Believe it or not, TEPCO now says it plans to "reduce" the radiation leaking within three months. Notice that there...

Nevada Senate Bill 412 to establish medical monopoly, squelch natural and alternative medicine
(NaturalNews) A new bill to be presented before the Nevada Senate Committee on Commerce, Labor & Energy, on Friday, April 15, is even worse than the recent SB 31 bill that almost passed unamended in North Carolina (http://www.naturalnews.com/031953_medical_practice_licensing...

National bipartisan caucus emerges to combat unconstitutional abuse by TSA
(NaturalNews) Several state legislators are outraged over the US Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) continued and escalating assaults against individual freedom, personal privacy, and even the Constitution itself, through the use of naked...

Natural immune modulators may provide a key to beating immune disorders
The immune system is normally our natural first line of defense against illness and bad health. However, sometimes immune systems function abnormally due to deficiencies and disorders where the body either loses its natural immunity or else...

CT scans used to monitor success of cancer treatments cause more cancer, study finds
(NaturalNews) Men diagnosed with testicular cancer often choose to undergo regular computed tomography (CT) scans that monitor progress after treatment. But a new study published in the journal Cancer explains that these CT scans actually cause...

Remove radiation from your produce with Calcium Bentonite Clay
There has been a lot of press lately about radiation from the Fukushima disaster being found in our food supply. Many people around the world are being told to avoid drinking milk and eating vegetables due to the contamination. Even though...

New record: 26 million Americans now have diabetes
(NaturalNews) More Americans than ever now have type 2 diabetes, according to statistics recently released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Twenty-six million Americans now have the disease, which is ten percent more than...

Optimal vitamin D levels and acai fight arterial plaque, lower heart disease risk
Critical research into the importance of vitamin D on vascular health was carried out at the Emory University School of Medicine and reported to the American College of Cardiology. Researchers provided evidence that increasing levels of vitamin...

Discover the amazing power of maqui berry, the antioxidant superfruit
(NaturalNews) Deep in the Patagonia region of southern Chile grows a wild berry known as maqui that natives have been eating for ages. This powerful superfruit, which is now beginning to make its way into the U.S., is considered to be the most antioxidant...

Cure depression with homeopathy
Depression can be a debilitating problem to have. It can make home life difficult and work a nightmare. So it is not surprising that those affected seek help. The medical answer to depression is to offer you one of a handful of drugs which...

Life transitions and the onset of allergies
(NaturalNews) Ask 20 or more people who suffer with an allergy at what point in their life the symptoms began. Did, by chance, the allergy "set in" during a time of transition? You may be surprised to discover that, although many people remain unconscious...

Navigate the dark waters of coffee - Health claims versus reality
For many stressed out and exhausted adults, there is no moment of the day more appealing than one which merges bold taste with an infusion of energy via a hot cup of coffee. However, this particular union has a great deal of depth to its...

Boost the immune system of a formula-fed baby
When a new mother is eating a balanced diet and providing her body with the proper nutrients, breastfeeding is always the preferred method of nourishment for a baby. Not only does breastfeeding promote bonding between mom and baby, but breast...

With superbugs contaminating fresh meat, the truth comes out about the FDA Food Safety Bill
(NaturalNews) Remember all the hubbub about the S.510 "Food Safety Bill" and how it would make your food safe to eat? Well, it turns out those expanded FDA powers do absolutely nothing to even address the safety of fresh meat products, and yet new research...


Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:

Δημοσίευση σχολίου