MONITORING THE AGE OF DARKNESS, IGNORANCE, GREED AND STUPIDITY
& THE ZIONIST WARS FOR GLOBAL DOMINANCE.
SETTING STRAIGHT THE RECORD OF HISTORY.
KALI YUGA REPORT 120509
1 - Time for a military coup in Israel ? - Alan Hart
2 - A putsch against war : Israel’s hawks in open revolt against war on Iran - Uri Avnery
3 - The Lutfallah II Arms-Smuggling Scandal FRANKLIN LAMB +
America's unrequited love for Israel Benzion Netanyahu’s Role in Crafting the “Strategic Asset” Myth - Maidhc Ó Cathail +
Sarkozy won in Israel - Gilad Atzmon
4 - 1,600 on hunger strike and the world doesn’t even bat an eyelid : Compelling eyewitness dispatch from the Israeli internment jails - DAVID ROSE +
Candidate who wants Olmert's job once 'sought deaths of 70 Palestinians a day' - Donald Macintyre
5 - UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon distracts the World from the 6 year UN sanctioned holocaust in Gaza
6 - Will Sadat’s Camp David and the Zionist Embassy be Next ? - FRANKLIN LAMB
7 - Disinformation On Every Front - Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
8 - NATO’s school of death - Manlio Dinucci
9 - The BBC relishes in distortion of facts – US Navy Seals did not kill Bin Laden - Peter Eyre
10 - FLASHBACK - Barksdale Missile Number Six : The Stolen Nuclear Weapon
11 - “We are Preparing for Massive Civil War in America,” Says DHS Informant - Dominique de Kevelioc de Bailleul
12 - Al Qaeda Is a Complete Fabrication – a Made in the USA production
13 - Hillary Clinton Admits the U.S. Government Created al-Qaeda & Other Videos
14 - HOW TO GET RID OF THE FED
15 - Foreign Policy Theater of the Absurd Is America a Free Country ? - Justin Raimondo
16 - A Vital (and Unlearned) Lesson from Julius Caesar - Glenn Greenwald
17 - The Terror in Tel Aviv: What International Media Purposely Ignores… - Roy Tov
18 - The Empire versus Iran and Syria: A New World War for a New World Order ? - Jooneed Khan
19 - Russian Opposition Caught Filing into US Embassy in Moscow - Tony Cartalucci
20 - South Africa’s Rape Culture - Hannes Wessels
21 - Kissinger Promises China ... 'Jeb Bush Will Be Next President' !
22 - Zionist Plans To Assassinate US Citizens - Including Presidents
23 - Terrorist Plots, Hatched by the F.B.I. - DAVID K. SHIPLER
24 - The Real Issue Is Israel's Human Rights Record A statement by Norman G. Finkelstein upon publication of Beyond Chutzpah
25 - Introduction to Mary's Mosaic - Peter Janney
26 - The Family Farm Is Being Systematically Wiped Out Of Existence In America
27 - Book Reveals True Occult Nature of Judaism
28 - Nelson Mandela : When is Terrorism Not Terrorism ? - Henry Makow Ph.D.
29 - Daring To Criticize Israel - Stephen Lendman
30 - Peter Beinart on American Jews and Israel - Kevin MacDonald +
ALICE BAILEY On Judaism
31 - Anti-White Hatred Is Mainstream in the Media and the Schools - Kevin MacDonald
32 - Synagogue of Satan ? The Theological Significance of the Destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in AD 70, Part 1 - Andrew Fraser,
33 - Using Primary Sources To Clarify the Nanking Incident - Tomisawa Shigenobu
34 - Exponentially increase your vehicle’s fuel mileage by using only the gas vapor from the top of your gas tank
35 - A BRILLIANT IDEA FROM A MEMBER OF THE MANHATTAN PROJECT
36 - Eight Signs the Illuminati Orchestrated WW2 - David Richards +
Are World Wars Orchestrated ? - Henry Makow Ph.D.
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'!
1 - Time for a military coup in Israel ?
Posted on 05. May, 2012 by Alan Hart in Israel
By Alan Hart
The mounting public criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by past and present members of the Zionist state’s defense and intelligence establishments triggered the recall of a comment made to me by one of its former Directors of Military Intelligence. The comment was: “If we had a government consisting of only former DMI’s, we’d have had peace with the Palestinians long ago.”
I must confess (and do so cheerfully) that I can’t remember which of two former Israeli DMI’s said that to me. It was either General Chaim Herzog, one of the founding fathers of Israel’s Directorate of Military Intelligence who went on to become the Zionist state’s ambassador to the UN and then its president, or General Shlomo Gazit, the best and the brightest of them all. In private conversations with me both men were refreshingly honest.
Herzog, for example, said the following to me on the second day of the June 1967 war: “If Nasser had not been stupid enough to give us a pretext for war, we would have created one in a year to 18 months.”
But it was Gazit who hit the nail of truth most squarely and firmly on the head in one of our conversations.
For about two decades he was the head of research at the Directorate of Military Intelligence. Then, in 1973, he was called upon to become DMI, with a brief to overhaul the agency to make sure there could never again be an intelligence failure of the kind that had occurred in the countdown to the Yom Kippur war. He was, in short, the man to whom the government of Israel turned for salvation in the aftermath of what it had perceived at the time, wrongly, to be a real threat to the Zionist state’s existence.
Over coffee one morning in early 1980 I took a deep breath and said to Shlomo (then Major General Retired): “I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s all a myth. Israel’s existence has never, ever, been in danger.”
Through a sad smile he replied: “The trouble with us Israelis is that we’ve become the victims of our own propaganda.”
The latest and widely reported public criticism of Netanyahu (and all of his leadership colleagues, Defense Minister Ehud Barak in particular), was voiced by Yuval Diskin, who retired last year as the director of Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, the equivalent of America’s FBI and Britain’s MI5.
Diskin told an audience in the central Israeli city of Kfar Saba that he had “no faith” in the ability of the current leadership to handle the Iranian nuclear threat. “I don’t believe in a leadership that makes decisions based on messianic feelings… I have observed them from up close… I fear very much that these are not the people I’d want at the wheel.”
Diskin was even more explicit and damning in his criticism of the Netanyahu government’s dealings with the Palestinians. In response to Netanyahu’s assertion that the peace process is stalled because he does not have a willing Palestinian partner, Diskin said: “This government has no interest in talking with the Palestinians, period. It certainly has no interest in resolving anything with the Palestinians, period.”
The bad news for past and present members of Israel’s defense and intelligence establishments who are aware that Netanyahu is leading Israel and quite possibly the region and the world to disaster is that all the signs are that he, the deluded Netanyahu, will win Israel’s next election and remain prime minister. As the Ha’aretz headline put it, Netanyahu the clear favourite heading into Israel’s upcoming elections.
The analysis and comment under that headline was written by Yossi Verter. As he put it:
“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu can rest easy after reading the results of the latestHa’aretz-Dialog poll. Not only does he trounce all his rivals on the question of who is most fit to lead the country, but an absolute majority of Israelis reject the aspersions cast on him last week by former Shin Bet security service chief Yuval Diskin. Judging by this poll, Netanyahu is the only candidate with a realistic slot of becoming prime minister after the election slated to take place in another four months. Asked which candidate is most suited to hold the job, 48 percent of respondents said Netanyahu. That is considerably more support than the other three candidates received put together.” Shelly Yacimovich, Labour’s leader. got only 15 percent support; Avigdor Lieberman, Yisrael Beiteinu’s leader, only nine percent; and Shaul Mofaz, who recently replaced Tzipi Livni as Kadima’s leader, only six percent.
Also worth noting are some of the statements Livni made in her resignation speech.
Israel's leaders, she warned, are putting the country's existence at risk by choosing to ignore the mounting impatience on the part of the international community. She said: “Israel is on a volcano, the international clock is ticking, and the existence of a Jewish, democratic state is in mortal danger. The real danger is a politics that buries its head in the sand, and it doesn’t take a Shin Bet chief to know that.” (In my view the fact that Israel is neither a Jewish nor a democratic state does not rob Livni’s warning of all of its significance. And I imagine she is in complete agreement with Verter who wrote in an April article for Ha’aretz that “Israel is becoming a pariah state because the extreme right has taken it over almost entirely.”)
It is possible, even probable, that Livni was forced to stand down by Mofaz because of her unwillingness “to sell the country to the ultra-Orthodox” (her words). She was not sorry, she said, for her refusal to give in to “political blackmail” on that account.
She also said: “And I'm definitely not sorry for the main issue I promoted – even if the Israeli-Palestinian conflict isn't in vogue right now, there's an urgent need to reach a permanent agreement with the Palestinians as well as with the Arab world,”
A good and necessary question is the one posed by Yoel Marcus in his latest article for Ha’aretz. He wrote:
“The big riddle is what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was thinking when he decided to move up the elections. Why not elections at the scheduled time? After all, another year and a half in a safe government is nothing to sneeze at. In addition, he is running the country with a solid majority of 65 seats. Nobody can bring him down.”
Marcus’s conclusion was this:
“As we approach the last minute to decide on Israel's character, Netanyahu is aiming at a resounding victory in the elections to be in a better position to do nothing.”
Doing nothing will mean, among other things, letting Zionism’s colonization and slow but sure ethnic cleansing of the occupied West Bank including East Jerusalem continue.
Netanyahu knows that to do that he will need to be in the strongest possible political position at home to tell a second-term Obama to go to hell if he dares to use (or even thinks about using) the leverage he has to oblige Israel to be serious about peace with the Palestinians. And that, I think, is the key to understanding the real reason why Netanyahu is going for early elections.
As Ari Shavit put it in his article for Ha’aretz, “The prime minister of Israel is determined to get to the Israeli election booth before the president of the United States gets to the American election booth in November.” Shavit told his readers that it’s not unknown for American presidents to use their influence during Israeli election campaigns to improve the prospects for an uncompromising rightwing prime minister being replaced by a more pragmatic one. Netanyahu knew that he could be exposing himself to that risk if he did not seek a new mandate until months after Obama had been re-elected.
The question that takes me back to my headline is this.
Given the apparent certainty of a Netanyahu election victory, and if a second-term Obama won’t or can’t use the leverage he has to oblige Israel to be serious about peace, is there nothing that can be done to stop the countdown to a Zionist-made catastrophe for the region and possibly the world? (The question would still be relevant in the unlikely event of Mitt Romney defeating Obama). In other words, is there anything that could be done to change the dynamics of what is happening in Israel?
My answer is determined by my understanding of what the real problem in Israel is.
The shortest possible description of it (the real problem) is in Shlomo Gazit’s response to me 32 years ago – “The trouble with us Israelis is that we have become the victims of our own propaganda.”
From the best and the brightest of Israel’s former Directors of Military Intelligence that was and remains a statement of awesome significance, verbal “shock and awe” one might say, but it needs some unpacking.
The expanded main point is that the vast majority of Israeli Jews have been brainwashed by their political leaders and, as a consequence, believe a version of history about the making and sustaining of what used to be called the Arab-Israeli conflict that is simply not true.
The two biggest of the many propaganda lies Israel’s political leaders have told their people are (1) that they have lived (and still live) in constant danger of annihilation; and (2) that Israel has never had (and still doesn’t have) a Palestinian partner for peace.
It follows, surely, that what the vast majority of Israeli Jews need if their brains are to be unwashed, something that must happen if they are to be equipped to play their necessary part in giving real peace a real chance, is the truth. The question is – Who could tell them the truth with a reasonable chance of being believed?
In my opinion it is most unlikely that there will ever be an Israeli politician in government, or aspiring to be in government, who will tell the truth.
In my opinion there is only one power on earth which could tell it – Israel’s military in association with the state’s various security agencies.
And that in summary and principle is why I believe that what Israel needs most of all is a military coup, to put in place for a limited period, not more than one year at the most, a military administration which would be committed to telling Israeli Jews the truth of history as it relates to the making and sustaining of the conflict, and what their real options are. Essentially there are two. Peace on terms acceptable to the vast majority of Palestinians or catastrophe for all.
This truth-telling exercise and the informed and honest great debate it would make possible would set the stage for a referendum, after which the military would hand power back to the politicians who would be obliged to formulate policy in accordance with the wishes of the majority of voters as expressed in the referendum.
If the referendum indicated that a majority of Israel’s Jews had allowed the truth to open their minds and hearts and enabled them to understand that justice for the Palestinians had to be their government’s policy priority, there would be peace. (Initially, and for reasons of realpolitik, it would have to be in the form of a two-state solution made possible by the ending of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and the lifting of its siege of the Gaza Strip. But it’s not impossible that, as Arafat hoped, a generation or two of peace based on two states could lead by mutual consent to one state for all, perhaps in a confederation with Jordan).
If a majority of Israel’s Jews wanted to cling on to Zionist mythology and continue down the path laid out by Netanyahu, there could only be catastrophe for all at some point, triggered, probably, by a final Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
As I have outlined it, the merit of the military coup approach to changing the dynamics of what is happening in Israel is that it would give Israel’s Jews the opportunity to save themselves from their deluded political leaders.
What I have suggested makes good sense to me in principle, but I am not presuming that it has a practical application.
2 - A putsch against war : Israel’s hawks in open revolt against war on Iran
By Uri Avnery
5 May 2012
Uri Avnery looks at how a number of leading hardliners in Israel’s military and security establishments have spoken out against the Israeli government’s plans for an attack on Iran’s nuclear installations and called into question the fitness for office of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak.
Generals and secret police chiefs get together for an attack on the politicians.
In some countries, they arrest the president, occupy government offices and TV stations and annul the constitution. They then publish Communique No. 1, explaining the dire need to save the nation from perdition and promising democracy, elections, etc.
In other countries, they do it more quietly. They just inform the elected leaders that, if they don’t desist from their disastrous policies, the officers will make their views public and precipitate their downfall.
“… we are now seeing a kind of verbal uprising against the elected politicians by a group of current and former army generals, foreign intelligence and internal security chiefs. All of them condemn the government’s threat to start a war against Iran, and some of them condemn the government’s failure to negotiate with the Palestinians for peace.”
Such officers are generally called a “junta”, the Spanish word for “committee” used by South American generals. Their method is usually called a “putsch”, a German-Swiss term for a sudden blow. (Yes, the Swiss actually had revolts some 170 years ago.)
What almost all such coups have in common is that their instigators thrive on the demagoguery of war. The politicians are invariably accused of cowardice in face of the enemy, failure to defend national honour, and such.
Not in Israel. In our country we are now seeing a kind of verbal uprising against the elected politicians by a group of current and former army generals, foreign intelligence and internal security chiefs. All of them condemn the government’s threat to start a war against Iran, and some of them condemn the government’s failure to negotiate with the Palestinians for peace.
Only in Israel.
”The stupidest idea I have heard in my life”
It started with the most unlikely candidate to lead such a rebellion: the ex-Mossad chief, Meir Dagan.
For eight years, longer than most of his predecessors, Dagan led the Mossad, Israel’s foreign intelligence service, comparable to the British MI6. (“Mossad” means “institute”. The official name is “The Institute for intelligence and Special Operations”.)
Nobody ever accused Dagan of pacifism. During his term, the Mossad carried out many assassinations, several against Iranian scientists, as well as cyber attacks. A protégé of Ariel Sharon, he was considered a champion of the most aggressive policies.
And here, after leaving office, he speaks out in the harshest terms against the government’s plans for an attack on Iran’s nuclear installations. Not mincing words, he said: “This is the stupidest idea I have heard in my life.”
This week he was overshadowed by the recently relieved chief of the Shin Bet. (Shin Bet and Shabak are different ways of pronouncing the initials of the official Hebrew name “General Security Service”.) It is equivalent to the British MI5, but deals mostly with the Palestinians in Israel and the occupied territories.
For six years, Yuval Diskin was the silent chief of the silent service. His shaved head could be seen entering and leaving meetings of secret committees. He is considered the real father of “targeted eliminations”, and his service has been widely accused of extensive use of torture. Nobody ever accused him of being soft on Arabs.
And now he has spoken out. Choosing a most unusual venue – a get together of some two dozen pensioners in a small-town cafe – he let fly.
Incompetent politicians with messianic delusions and a poor grasp of reality
According to Diskin – and who would know better? – Israel is now led by two incompetent politicians with messianic delusions and a poor grasp of reality. Their plan to attack Iran is leading to a worldwide catastrophe. Not only will it fail to prevent the production of an Iranian atom bomb, but, on the contrary, it will hasten this effort, this time with the support of the world community.
Going further than Dagan, he stated that the only factor preventing peace negotiations with the Palestinians is Netanyahu himself. Israel can make peace with Mahmoud Abbas at any time, and missing this historic opportunity will bring disaster upon Israel.
As chief of the Shin Bet, Diskin was the No. 1 official government expert on Palestinians. His agency receives and collates all the evidence, spy reports, interrogation results and information gathered from listening devices.
Leaving no room for doubt, Diskin said that he knew Netanyahu and Barak from close up, did not trust them and thought they were unfit to lead the nation in a crisis. He also said that they are deliberately deceiving the people. He did not omit to mention that they live in extreme luxury.
Anyone who thought that these accusers were lone voices, and that the whole choir of current and past security chiefs would rise and condemn them unanimously, was disappointed. One after another these experts were quoted by the media as agreeing with the two in substance, though not necessarily on their style. Not a single one questioned their assertions or denied what they said.
The current chief of staff and the Mossad and Shin Bet chiefs let it be known that they share the views of the two on Iran. Almost all their predecessors, including all the recent military chiefs of staff, told the media that they agree, too. Suddenly there was a united front of experienced security leaders against a war with Iran.
Media clowns and parrots
The counterattack was not late in coming. The entire battery of politicians and media hacks went into action.
They did what Israelis almost always do: when faced with serious problems or serious arguments, they don’t get to grips with the matter itself, but select some minor detail and belabour it endlessly.
Practically no one tried to disprove the assertions of the officers, neither concerning the proposed attack on Iran nor concerning the Palestinian issue. They focused on the speakers, not on what they said.
Both Dagan and Diskin, it was asserted, were embittered because their terms of office were not extended. They felt humiliated. They are venting their personal frustration. They are speaking out of sheer spite.
If they did not trust the prime minister, why did they not get up and resign while they were in office? Why didn’t they speak out before? If this was a matter of life and death, why did they wait?
Alternatively, why don’t they continue to shut up? Where is their sense of responsibility? Why do they help the enemy? Why don’t they speak only behind closed doors?
Diskin, it was added, has no idea about Iran. It was not in his area of responsibility at all. Dagan knew about Iran, but had a limited view. Only Netanyahu and Barak knew all the facts and the entire spectrum of opportunities and risks.
Sources “close to the Prime Minister’s Office” also had another explanation: Dagan and Diskin, as well as their predecessors, were just stupid. Taken together with Dagan’s and Diskin’s assertion that Netanyahu and Barak are not rational (and perhaps not quite mentally balanced), this means that our national security depends entirely on a group of irrational and stupid leaders – and that this has been the case for years.
A frightening thought: what if everything they say about each other is true?
Unfit to be prime minister
The man accused by his security advisers of messianic tendencies was exposed to personal scrutiny by another event this week.
His father, Ben-Zion Netanyahu, died at the age 102, having remained of clear mind to the end. At the public funeral, he was eulogized by Binyamin. As could be expected, it was a kitschy speech. The son addressed his dead father in the second person – (“You taught me”… ”You formed my character”, etc) – a vulgar practice I find particularly distasteful. He also shed tears on camera.
There is no doubt that the father had a huge influence on his son. He was a professor of history, whose whole intellectual life was centred on one topic: the Spanish inquisition – a traumatic chapter in Jewish history comparable only to the holocaust.
Binyamin Netanhayu’s father “once remarked publicly that Binyamin was unfit to be prime minister, but would make a good foreign minister – an uncannily accurate judgment, if one sees the job of the foreign minister as marketing.”
Ben-Zion Netanyahu was an extreme rightist, obsessed by the idea that Jews might be exterminated at any moment, and therefore cannot trust any goy [gentile]. He held Menachem Begin in contempt, considering him a softy, and never joined his party. His intellectual attitude was reinforced by a personal trauma: his eldest son, Yoni, the commander of the spectacular Entebbe raid, was the only soldier killed in this operation.
It seems that he didn't have such a high opinion of his second son. He once remarked publicly that Binyamin was unfit to be prime minister, but would make a good foreign minister – an uncannily accurate judgment, if one sees the job of the foreign minister as marketing.
The home in which “Bibi” grew up was not a very happy one. The father was a deeply embittered man. As a historian, he was never accepted by the academic world in Jerusalem, who disavowed his theories. (Mainly, that the Inquisition did not persecute the Marranos – Jews who had accepted Christianity rather than leave Spain – because they practised Judaism in secret, but out of pure anti-Semitism. This was an attack on one of the most cherished tenets of Jewish mythology: that these Jews had remained true to their faith to the point of sacrificing their lives at the stake.) Not getting a professorship in Jerusalem, the father emigrated to the US, where Binyamin grew up. The father never forgave the Israeli establishment.
The myth of the great historian labouring at his titanic task was a daily reality at home, in America and, later, back in Jerusalem. The three sons had to walk on tiptoe, not being allowed to make any noise that could disturb the great man, nor to bring their friends home.
All this shaped the character and world view of “Bibi” – the spectre of imminent national annihilation, the role model of the fiercely rightist father, the shadow of the older and much more admired brother. When Binyamin now speaks endlessly about the coming “second holocaust” and his historical role in preventing it, this need not be just a ploy to divert attention from the Palestinian issue or to safeguard his political survival. He may – frightening thought!!! – actually believe it.
The picture that emerges is exactly that painted by Yuval Diskin: a holocaust-obsessed fantasist, out of contact with reality, distrusting all goyim, [gentiles] trying to follow in the footsteps of a rigid and extremist father – altogether a dangerous person to lead a nation in a real crisis.
Yet this is the man who, according to all opinion polls, is going to win the upcoming elections, just four months from now.
3 - The Lutfallah II Arms-Smuggling Scandal
by FRANKLIN LAMB
It would be an incautious stretch to suggest any sort of parity between Watergate and the unfolding Lutfallah II arms shipment-to-Syria drama, that each day brings more revelations. But some of what we are daily learning about the who, what and why of Lutfallah II reminds some of us of a Watergate, type atmosphere including “bit by bit, drip by drip” revelations, denials, setting up fall guys and remarkable examples of incompetence.
The still unfolding Lutfallah II weapons running misadventure, in which a claimed Syrian-owned vessel registered in Sierra Leone but apparently flying the Egyptian flag, was detained off the Lebanese port of Batoun, by the Lebanese Army Marines because it was sailing too high in the water, and appeared “suspicious,” and was then found to contain 300,000 pounds of weapons may erupt unpredictably with serious political consequences for the region.
“Deepthroat”, the FBI mole who met secretly with Woodward & Bernstein and leaked confidential US government information to the duo, as revenge against President Nixon for rejecting him as successor to the deceased FBI Director, J.Edgar Hoover, outed himself in 2005. “Deepthroat”, after a quarter century of hundreds of sleuths trying to divine, if he/she even existed, turned out to be none other than Deputy Director of the FBI, William Mark Felt, Sr. “Deepthroat” repeated advice to the Washington Post reporters was to “Follow the Money!”
They did. The rest is history.
If a ‘deep throat’ appears in Libya, Qatar of elsewhere, and offering advice to reporters who appear in Benghazi and Misrata in order to dig into what really happened, it might be that he will counsel: “Follow the weapons”.
Eyewitness Hassan Diab is a Libyan researcher who has been working with a group of American and International lawyers preparing a case against NATO to be filed with the International Criminal Court. Hassan and three of his friends actually saw the ship Lutfallah II being loaded in Benghazi, Libya. Hassan claims that it is well known at the docks that Qatar and Saudi Arabia control a total of five warehouses in the area of Benghazi & Misrata and supplied the weapons and money to hire the Lutfallah II container vessel.
Libyans in the area are reporting that the intercepted arms are from both Gadaffi stockpiles left over from NATO’s Libya campaign and some from the Qatar-Saudi six month weapons pipelines into Libya. When NATO declared a cessation of its bombing on Halloween night, October 31, 2011 the scramble for weapons began and Qatar stored and purchased whatever weapons came to its notice and from various militias who were willing to do business.
Libyans and foreign dock workers at Benghazi Port, who observed the Lutfallah II being loaded, saw three containers filled with 150 tons of weapons put onboard, although the initial plan, according to the owner of the boat was to ship as many as 15 containers. It is estimated that they would have carried more than 2000 tons of weapons.
A Lebanese judicial source, who is a sitting judge based at Beirut’s La Maison des Avocates and advises the Lebanese government on procedural rules that ought to be followed in this case, confirmed to me and also to the Beirut Daily, As-Safir, that the Lutfallah II shipment was funded by two Syrian businessmen living in Saudi Arabia. In addition, the ship’s captain in Syria as is the gentleman who claimed ownership of the shipment. All are affiliated with the Syrian opposition and all are seeking regime change in Syria.
According to a late breaking report, all have been arrested and remain in custody despite claims that they thought the cargo was general merchandise. Libya does not export anything much but its light crude oil and the Lutfallah II is clearly no oil tanker. Crew members of the container are facing trial on charges of illegal gun-running.
The owner reportedly told his interrogators, including Military Prosecutor Judge Saqr, that “It would be against Lebanese law and international maritime law for me to demand to examine the content of the containers.” Some international lawyers would argue that the law is exactly the opposite in both, and that international law establishes not just the owner’s right to inspect cargo being carried on his ships–for hazardous or contraband cargo etc– but that maritime law clearly mandates his responsibility to do so. Likewise, his insurance company.
The US-Saudi backed Future Movement was not involved in the arms shipment according to party official Mustafa Allouch. However, he later told Lebanon’s OTV that “The Syrian people have the right to find the appropriate means to defend themselves.” The Free Syrian Army has denied any links to the weapons-carrying vessel.
Hezbollah official Ammar Musawi praised the Lebanese army for its seizure of a Syria-bound illegal arms shipment and urged the authorities “to prevent Lebanon from turning into a conduit of destruction toward its neighbor”. “For the sake of Lebanon’s stability, I urge our authorities to exert greater effort to prevent Lebanon from turning into an arena through which the tools of crime cross into Syria, as the involvement of some Lebanese in fueling the situation in Syrian will have negative repercussions on Lebanon,” Hezbollah International Relations Director said.
On 5/2/12, Syria’s ambassador to Lebanon, Ali Abdel-Karim, following a meeting with Lebanese Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour, accused Gulf countries, including Qatar and Saudi Arabia, of being behind the Syria-bound arms shipments.
“The ship was bound for the Syrian opposition; this is sure given that the political and security leaderships in Qatar, Saudi Arabia and other countries are behind these acts, which undermine the security of Syria, Lebanon and the region.”
Many questions remain in need of answers. Any serious first year law student would ask the questions that presumably Lebanese investigating judges and the media will ask. A few of the more obvious ones would include:
Who funded the shipment discovered in the cargo bay of the Lutfallah II? Who had custody over the original 12 containers of what was planned, according to the jailed owner, as a shipment of over two million tons of “general merchandise”?
Who supplied the weapons and from which warehouse locations in Libya were they taken? Who controls the warehouses? Who made the decision to hold back 12 of the original contract and why? Where are the 12 containers? Who prepared the ships manifest? What was the involvement, if any, of the Syrian owner of the Lutfallah II.?Why was the Lutfallah II not searched at the port of Alexandria as well as Turkey? It docked at both. Why was it given ‘green light passage’ by Israel and UNIFIL?
Eyewitnesses claim some activity on the Lutfallah II was evident while it was docked in Turkey? What was the activity? Which, if any, Lebanese politicians and political parties were involved. Who was to meet and take custody of the shipment once it arrived at the Tripoli, Lebanon dock? Which land routes into Syria were to be used following the offloading of the cargo at Tripoli Port?
It is not for this observer to offer advice to investigative journalists, whether free-lance or corporate, but as a fairly long-term US Congressional aid in the post-Watergate era who actually read the transcripts of US Senator Howard Baker’s Watergate Hearings, I would have thought that one or more might want to book a flight to Benghazi, Libya, toute de suite, with an inclination to: Follow the Money and follow the Weapons!
America's unrequited love for Israel Benzion Netanyahu’s Role in Crafting the “Strategic Asset” Myth
Sunday, May 6, 2012
By Maidhc Ó Cathail
From the Cold War to the War on Terror, Israel and its partisans have stressed the Jewish state’s role as a strategic asset to the United States in the Middle East. A recent Haaretz article, however, provides further evidence that this claim is little more than a self-serving myth.
In the article titled “David Ben-Gurion’s diary invites a rethink of Benzion Netanyahu’s extreme Zionist image,” Israeli historian and journalist Tom Segev reveals that the current Israeli Prime Minister’s late father offered his propaganda services to Ben-Gurion’s government on at least two occasions. Writes Segev:
In 1956, Netanyahu proposed that Ben-Gurion employ him as a public diplomacy (hasbara) functionary, in the guise of a history professor, at one of the universities in America. He sought to work under the auspices of the Prime Minister’s Office, and tailor his activity to its policy.
Ben-Gurion’s diary notes Netanyahu’s experience in such “public diplomacy”:
He told of a series of meetings with American statesmen, among them Dean Acheson, who had been secretary of state in the Truman administration. It seems that he spoke with them primarily about the danger of Soviet penetration of the Middle East.
The diary doesn’t record whether or not Netanyahu got the job, but from 1957 to 1968 he worked as a professor in Dropsie College in Philadelphia. If his 1956 propaganda proposal had been turned down, it certainly didn’t deter him from trying again:
In June 1968 Netanyahu paid another visit to Ben-Gurion, by then in retirement, and once again proposed a plan for Israeli propaganda in America. We must take action against the American left, he said referring to what was then called the New Left. Almost all are communist Jews, Netanyahu told Ben-Gurion, and once more proposed concentrating Israeli propaganda on the danger of Soviet penetration of the Mideast: If the Soviet Union takes over the Middle East, it will control the United Nations, he suggested arguing, and praised two of the Israel supporters he had found on the right flank of the Republican Party: Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon.
But if Israel really had been such an obvious strategic asset to the U.S. during the Cold War, there wouldn’t have been any need for Netanyahu and other hasbara agents to remind the Americans of Israel’s usefulness in countering “the danger of Soviet penetration,” would there?
Sarkozy won in Israel
Monday, May 7, 2012
Nicolas Sarkozy lost French presidential election runoff to socialist candidate François Hollande who won 51.9% of votes. In Israel however, Sarkozy is a real winner. According to Ynet, 92.8% of French Jewish citizens living in Israel voted for Sarkozy. The man with the yarmulka (in the left) won the Jews' hearts but lost his own people.
Sarkozy may want to spend the next 2-3 days reading La Parabole d'Esther. Anatomie du Peuple Élu, so he understands this discrepancy..
4 - 1,600 on hunger strike and the world doesn’t even bat an eyelid :
Compelling eyewitness dispatch from the Israeli internment jails threatening a new Arab Spring
By DAVID ROSE
6 May 2012
The last letter Thaer Hahlaleh wrote to his wife Shireen was delivered by the Red Cross a few days before he began to refuse all nourishment on February 29.
'My detention has so far been renewed seven times and they still haven't charged me with anything,' it said.
'I can't take any more. I am going on hunger strike because the situation has become unbearable.'
Today, assuming he survived last night, will mark the 68th day of his protest, a period in which Hahlaleh, 33, has consumed nothing but water and a little salt.
Rallying point: Protesters wearing symbolic chains gather outside a jail near the West Bank city of Ramallah last week in support of the hunger-strikers
He and a second hunger-striker, Bilal Diab, are in a critical condition in an Israeli military hospital.
It's worth noting that only two out of the ten Irish Republican hunger-strikers who died in the Maze prison in 1981 lasted longer without food than Hahlaleh and Diab.
But the pair are not the only protesters – about 1,600 Palestinians in Israeli jails have refused to eat anything for more than three weeks.
This is one of the biggest hunger strikes in history, and the prisoners' supporters believe that if they start to die, their deaths will prove as significant as those in Northern Ireland 30 years ago.
Last week, I sat with Hahlaleh's family at their home in Kharas, a prosperous village in the Israeli-occupied West Bank which is blessed with
stunning views of the Hebron mountains.
Defiant: A protester chained and blindfolded stands inside a mock prison cell during a rally outside the Israeli embassy residence in Ankara, Turkey
Also present was Ola Tamimi, 23, a student and blogger from the West Bank’s top university, Birzeit.
'Since the Arab Spring began last year, young Palestinians have looked at what happened in Tunisia and Egypt with envy.
But we needed a focus for something similar to happen here,' she said.
'Now I think we have found it, and through our blogs and social media we are getting organised.
'If someone dies, it will create a dramatic situation. Students have already started to demonstrate outside the prisons, but none of us is talking about bombing or shooting.
Maryland terror teen who dreamed of joining Al Qaeda pleads guilty to web conspiracy with blue-eyed 'Jihad Jane'
Defiance of a monster: 9/11 mastermind refuses to answer to judge as his Guantanamo trial for 2,976 murders begins
Former CIA chief claims Pelosi DID know they were waterboarding suspected Bin Laden henchman
Prisoners can be honest and motivated workers, Ken Clarke tells business as he urges the High Street to give ex-offenders jobs
'This will be a movement of non-violent resistance, with hunger strikes among those not in prison, massive demonstrations and non-co-operation with the Israelis.'
Hahlaleh and Diab are among those subjected to 'administrative detention' – internment by any other name.
The pair are alleged to be members of Islamic Jihad, a banned organisation behind many of the thousands of rockets fired at Israel in recent years from the other section of the Palestinian territories, the Gaza Strip.
Both men deny the claim, and no evidence has ever been produced and tested in court.
According to Shireen Hahlaleh, her husband has been held under administrative detention for more than six years in total.
Demo: Supporters of the Islamic Hamas movement call for the release of prisoners held in Israeli jails during the protest in Ramallah
'This time he was arrested in June 2010, two weeks before I was due to have our first child, our daughter Lamar,’ she said. 'We were just getting ready for the birth.
'Can you imagine the state of mind he left me in? The previous time they arrested him was 14 days after our wedding. They seem to choose their moments carefully.
'The baby has only seen her father six times. My husband has a young family. Why would he want death? He wants life. But he is desperate.'
Thaer's brother Shaher is also on hunger strike. The 35-year-old, serving an 18-year sentence for helping to organise attacks on Israelis, began his fast on April 17 in protest at a toughening of the prison regime.
Some of the harshest measures brought in include a widespread use of solitary confinement – in some cases for years at a time – severe restrictions on family visits, and frequent strip-searches for both prisoners and visitors.
The measures were introduced following the abduction of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit by the Islamist organisation Hamas in 2006.
Anger: Palestinians burn Israeli flags during the Ramallah rally for the hunger striker
West Bank student: 'Since the Arab Spring, young Palestinians have looked at what happened in Tunisia and Egypt with envy'
Although Shalit was freed last October, jail conditions have not improved – to the prisoners’ fury.
'Now that Shalit has been freed and conditions are as bad as ever, they
feel they have nothing to lose,’ said Shaher’s wife Nada.
'I was refused permission to visit my husband at all for seven years. When his daughter goes to see him, she is strip-searched although she is only 13.
'I was pregnant with her when Shaher was arrested. She didn’t meet him until she was almost five.
'Empty stomachs are the only weapons the prisoners have, and the people on the outside support them totally.’
In Kharas, as in many other areas on the West Bank, protesters gather every day to highlight the plight of the hunger-strikers.
These rallies are addressed by political leaders and prisoners’ families, and they are notable for one thing: although Palestinian politics have been characterised for years by bitter and sometimes violent divisions, representatives of all the main factions appear to be uniting around the prisoners' cause.
Getting detailed information from the Israelis on the exact numbers of hunger-strikers, the length of their fasts and the locations where they are held is difficult.
Resistance: Protesters say their movement is one of non-violence
Widespread: Around 1,600 Palestinian inmates have joined the hunger strike
Officials say little other than to give assurances that they have access to medical care.
Yet despite the intense security, it is clear that the protests are co-ordinated, with news passing freely from jail to jail – and to the outside world.
In villages in the north of the West Bank, I gained an insight into how the strikes are being organised when I spent a morning with Khader Adnan, a former administrative detainee.
He was the first prisoner to go on hunger strike and came close to death during a fast that lasted 66 days. He was freed two weeks ago after agreeing to end his protest.
Now something of a celebrity, Adnan was visiting former prisoners and their families.
Among those he caught up with in the village of Anabta was Mouayad Abdus Samad, who was freed last month after serving 25 years of a life sentence imposed for the murder of two Israeli soldiers.
Samad revealed that inmates use smuggled mobile phones to communicate with those beyond the prison walls.
The phones are often bought from Israeli prisoners at astronomical cost: the going rate is currently about £5,000.
'We hide them in hollowed-out cavities in the walls. We reckon one phone usually lasts about a month before it’s discovered,’ said Samad.
The release of Adnan, he added, had electrified Palestinian inmates: for the first time, it seemed it might be possible to ‘make Israel blink'.
Allegations: A rocket is held aloft by a masked member of Islamic Jihad, the banned organisation which Israel is claiming Hahlaleh and Diab are members of
Samad added: ‘We have studied the Northern Ireland hunger strikes carefully. Ten were martyred, and we are ready to follow their example.’
To do so, self-evidently, takes determination. Adnan gave me a detailed account of the physical effects of his strike, which saw him lose more than four stone – a third of his body weight.
'The Irish started dying at 46 days,' he said. 'Apart from sheer hunger, my symptoms started on day four, with a constant, blinding headache.
'After a while, the headaches began to subside but then from day 38 to 57, I was vomiting every day. I found it very hard to keep down even water.
'On the 57th day I developed an excruciating abdominal pain – far worse than the pain a woman feels when giving birth. That night I vomited seven times.
'But after that, until I ended my fast on the 66th day, I was stable. However, doctors told me my potassium levels were very low, which meant my heart could malfunction at any time.'
In Israel, there is little awareness of the potential crisis. 'It’s not part of our narrative,' said one supporter of the right-wing Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu.
Mr Netanyahu faces elections in September, but the stalled Palestinian peace process will barely register in the campaign.
Protest: A Belfast mural of Bobby Sands who died in the 1981 hunger strike
'Israel knows that because of the Iranian nuclear issue and the Arab Spring, the Palestinian file is at the bottom of the agenda,' added Pazit Ravina, a leading Israeli reporter and columnist.
While I sat with Hahlaleh's family, news came via a telephone call from the Red Cross of dramatic events at the Supreme Court in Jerusalem, where Hahlaleh and Diab were petitioning for release.
In the middle of the hearing, Diab lost consciousness and had to be rushed to hospital.
For the judges, however, there was no sense of urgency. Having heard arguments from the men's lawyers, they adjourned the case without reaching a decision. They will not sit again until today at the earliest.
Like the young bloggers at Birzeit, veteran Palestinian leaders scent an unexpected political opening, one that may be weighted equally with peril and possibility.
'I am really worried about these men and if there are deaths, I believe there may well be an intifada [a rebellion against Israeli occupation],’ said Nabeel Shaath, a member of the central committee of Fatah, the party of the Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas.
'We are doing our best to make sure that it will be unarmed and non-
violent, but we can’t be sure we’ll succeed. By definition, uprisings
cannot be planned in advance.'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2140108/1-600-Palestinians-hunger-strike-world-doesn-t-bat-eyelid-Compelling-eye-witness-dispatch-Israeli-internment-jails--threatening-new-Arab-Spring.html#ixzz1uB87RZkU
Candidate who wants Olmert's job once 'sought deaths of 70 Palestinians a day'
Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem
A leading candidate to be Israel's next premier called for a death toll of 70 Palestinians a day when he was head of the military during the second intifada, according to a best-selling book by two Israeli journalists.
The account of a briefing given in May 2001 to senior West Bank army commanders reinforces the image of hawkishness enjoyed by Shaul Mofaz. He has emerged as the main rival to the Foreign Minister, Tzipi Livni, for the leadership of the Kadima party being vacated by Ehud Olmert. Mr Mofaz is expected to stress his security credentials as a former chief of staff and defence minister in his campaign to defeat Ms Livni, the most popular among the Israeli public of the candidates to succeed Mr Olmert as party leader.
According to the book Boomerang, by Ofer Shelah, of Yedhiot Ahronot, and Raviv Drucker, of Channel Ten, Mr Mofaz convened a meeting of brigade and regimental commanders covering the occupied West Bank at Jerusalem's Ammunition Hill. It occurred early in the premiership of Ariel Sharon when the intifada was well under way.
The book, which was well reviewed, and was based on extensive interviews with officials and documentary research, chiefly made news when it was published in 2005 because of its contention that Mr Sharon had, in large part, dismantled the Jewish settlements in Gaza to deflect the threat of a corruption indictment.
The two prominent journalists say in the book that the chief of staff at one stage of the Jerusalem meeting – "in an exceptional act" – ordered the person customarily responsible for recording the pronouncements of the military's top officer on such occasions to stop doing so. The general then warned, says the book, without placing his remarks in direct quotes, that there would be "no more messages to the Palestinian Authority so that it will act". The authors say that Mr Mofaz instead laid down that they call "a price to be set exactly". The authors say that he said he wanted "10 slain Palestinians" in each territorial brigade area.
The book goes on to record that one senior officer then whispered to the Central Command commander, Yitzhak Eitan, that he would be well advised to ask for such an order in writing and added: "It comes to 70 killed a day".
It then says that General Eitan convened the same group of officers the following day and "made clear that what Mofaz said [was] not to be understood as an order and should not be treated as a directive for action."
But it adds that one officer, the brigade commander in the Hebron area, Colonel Yehuda Albek, "preferred the Mofaz version" to that of General Eitan. The next day, he began an action near Dahariya against Palestinian police "who had not committed any hostile acts". A policeman was killed and several wounded. When the colonel was summoned to command HQ to explain the operation to his concerned superiors, he said that it was in line with the remarks made earlier by the chief of staff, says the book.
There was no immediate response from Mr Mofaz's office yesterday to inquiries about the book's account.
Meanwhile, Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the right-wing Likud, called for an immediate election, which the polls show he would win. "It doesn't make any difference who heads Kadima. They are all party to a string of failures by this government," he said. Mr Netanyahu could get his way if the victor of the Kadima leadership contest fails to form a workable coalition to stay in office. In that case elections could be called for early next year – with the possibility that Mr Olmert could remain as caretaker prime minister until then.
5 - UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon distracts the World from the 6 year UN sanctioned holocaust in Gaza
Saturday, April 14th, 2012
In a press conference last week, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon said it is time to stop the killing. Not in Gaza, where the Israeli military continues to attack and kill thousands of Palestinian civilians, but in Syria. Moon has been calling for sanctions against and UN monitors for a country that is engaged in a civil war, not against and for a country that has been engaging in a 6 year holocaust of the Gaza civilian people. The UN and the US are not condemning nor calling for the end of the killing by Israeli forces against the Palestinian people.
The UN and the United States has no legal bases to impose sanctions or foreign monitors against Syria. Syria is engaged in a civil war. The UN and the US have a duty and moral obligation to impose sanctions against Israel and to send monitors to safe guard the civilian population of Gaza. Israel has been launching and continues to launch major military campaigns of aggression against the Palestinian civilian population, for 6 years now.
No State, not even the United States or group of States, including the United Nations, has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the domestic affairs of any other State. Consequently, armed intervention and all other forms of interference or attempted threats against the personality of the State or against its political, economic and cultural elements, are in violation of international law. That means the United States and Ban Ki Moon are breaking international law. They are both intervening, directly, in the internal affairs of Syria. Both the United States and Ban Ki Moon broke numerous international laws when they imposed sanctions against and then attacked Libya and murdered their elected leader Muammar Gaddafi. Israel isn’t attacking and killing its own people. Israel isn’t fighting a civil war. The unabated holocaust of the Palestinian civilian populations isn’t a domestic affair. The Palestinian people are not under the authority of the God forbidden state of Israel. The Palestinian people have their own leader and their own state. The Israeli military attacks against the Palestinian people is the illegal use of force against the territorial integrity, political independence and sovereignty of the Palestinian state and its people.
Condemnation of and segregation from anything connected to or affiliated with the so-called modern day “State of Israel” is based on the Talmud, the key fundamental doctrine of the Oral Tradition handed down by God to Moses on Mt. Sinai.
The Talmud in Tractate Kesubos (p. 111a), teaches that Jews shall not use human force to bring about the establishment of a Jewish state before the coming of the universally accepted Moshiach (Messiah from the House of David). Furthermore it states that we are forbidden to rebel against the nations and that we should remain loyal citizens and we shall not attempt to leave the exile which G-d sent us into, ahead of time.
UN Charter Article 2 states:
7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.
Sanctions against any state is an act of war. UN Resolutions against any state is a violation of the state’s right to self-government. It violates the sovereignty of a state.
A crime against peace, in international law, refers to “planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of wars of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing” This definition of crimes against peace was first incorporated into the Nuremberg Principles and later included in the United Nations Charter.
This definition of the crime of aggression belongs to jus cogens, which is supreme in the hierarchy of international law and, therefore, it cannot be modified by, or give way to, any rule of international law but one of the same rank.
The “territorial integrity” rule means that it is a crime of aggression to use armed force with intent permanently to deprive a state of any part or parts of its territory, not excluding territories for the foreign affairs of which it is responsible;
The “political independence” rule means that it is a crime of aggression to use armed force with intent to deprive a state of the entirety of one or more of the prerequisites of statehood, namely: defined territory, permanent population, constitutionally independent government and the means of conducting relations with other States;
The “sovereignty” rule means that it is a crime of aggression to use armed force with intent to overthrow the government of a state or to impede its freedom to act unhindered, as it sees fit, throughout its jurisdiction.
1928, the Kellogg-Briand Pact, known as the General Treaty for the Renunciation of War, said:
The High Contracting Parties solemnly declare in the names of their respective peoples that they condemn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies, and renounce it, as an instrument of national policy in their relations with one another.
The interdiction of aggressive war was confirmed and broadened by the United Nations’ Charter, which states in article 2, paragraph 4 that;
All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
The U.S. Army’s Law of Land Warfare (Field Manual 27-10) states:
498. Crimes Under International Law – Any person, whether a member of the armed forces or a civilian, who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment. Such offenses in connection with war comprise:
a. Crimes against peace.
b. Crimes against humanity.
c. War crimes.
To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole. ~ Robert H. Jackson
That is exactly what the United States and the United Nations has been doing since the end of WWII – planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of wars of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing and threatening and using force against the territorial integrity or political independence of states – Korea, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union, Russia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and now against Iran and Syria.
Since the UN has threatened and has actually used deadly force against the territorial integrity or political independence of states, no state should ever recognize the authority of the UN as you have none. The UN leaders and decision makers have not been elected by the people of any state. The UN is a de facto, rogue, anti-sovereign, terrorist organization that imposes illegal sanctions against sovereign states and uses military force to overthrow the leaders of sovereign states .
The UN is an organized crime syndicate. They have mass murdered millions through UN sanctions and UN illegally authorized wars of aggression. They are guilty of; war crimes, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, complicity in torture, torture, mass euthanasia, mass poisoning, mass murder, genocide, espionage, sabotage, and numerous other heinous crimes against mankind. It is about time the World put the UN out of the murdering business. It is about time the World outlawed the outlaw terrorist organization called the United Nations.
What is the true purpose of the United Nations? Immediately after WWII the Peacekeeping League of Nations was destroyed by the Nazi Germans in retaliation for defeating them in WWII. In its place the Nazi Germans formed you, the war mongering and mass murdering UN. The UN (the negative prefix un means – Opposite of; contrary to: unrest.) was formed to bring about global unrest. Once global unrest was achieved a New World Order governed by “The Four principles” (The Fourth Reich) – * One Leader * One Budget * One Programme and * One Office would be implemented.
Many now know and understand the clandestine agenda of the UN. It is easy to understand once you uncover the link between the UN and the Reich. Reich is the territory or government of a German state, as the Holy Roman Empire (the Vatican), or First Reich , from 962 to 1806; the German Empire, or Second Reich, from 1871 to 1919 (Germany’s WWI); the Weimar Republic, from 1919 to 1933; and the Third Reich, from 1933 to 1945 (Nazi Germany’s WWII). The Nazi formed United Nations launched the “Delivering as One” initiative in 2007 – the Fourth Reich.
The Nazi war criminals formed many of the lawless International and national organizations we have today, including NATO (created by commanding officers and ex-multinational conscripts that made up the German Waffen SS army units), the CIA (created by former Gestapo agents to spy on, sabotage, torture and kill agents, military personal and political figureheads of the Soviet Union ), the WHO (created by former Auschwitz death camp scientists and physicians), NASA (created using former Nazi rocket scientists who were smuggled into the US in Operation Paperclip).
John F Kennedy knew of and tried to warn the World of the threat these groups posed to the safety and security of the nation he lead as president of the United States when he stated:
“For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence — on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match.”
How many women and children have been murdered by the Israeli government in Gaza in the last 6 years of the Israeli military operations in Gaza? Many times more than in Syria and Libya combined. In just one Israeli military operation in Gaza in March 2009 Israel’s armed forces slaughtered 189 Palestinian children under the age of 15. In that 3 week Israeli military campaign against Gaza 1,370 Palestinians were killed. Last month, March 2012, Israel killed 23 and wounded 73 civilians in Israeli air strikes on Gaza.
Israel launched its holocaust 6 years ago, in the summer of 2006, by invading southern Lebanon. After a 34 day bombing campaign of densely populated Beirut, over a thousand Lebanese civilians were killed, the Lebanese civil infrastructure was severely damaged, and the campaign displaced approximately one million Lebanese. After the ceasefire, some parts of Southern Lebanon remained uninhabitable for months due to unexploded cluster bomblets, a weapon banned by the UN security council for use in urban areas.
Has the United States or the UN imposed sanctions against Israel or threatened military action against Israel for Israel’s indiscriminate mass killing of the Palestinian civilian population? Has either sent in UN monitors to protect the Gazan civilian population? You know they haven’t. Don’t care. Perhaps you might after you see for yourself who the Israeli government and their IDF troops are really killing. Perhaps you might if you saw their faces and read their names.
Sayyid `Amir Abu `Ishah 12 years old
Al-Mu`iz Li-Din Allah Jihad An-Naslah 3 years old.
Bara’ah Eyaad Shalhah 7 years old.
Shahd Hussein Abou Sultan 8 years old.
Aisha Nizar Rayan 3 years old.
Yusef Muhammad Ad-Dayah two years and a half
Reem Nizar Rayan 5 years old
Osama Bin Zaid Nizar Rayan 3 years old
Maryam Nizar Rayan 10 years old
Hassan Atta Azaam 22 months
Fawzia Fawaz Saleh 3 years old
Isma`il Abdullah Abu Sanimah 15 years old
Omar Hussein Dardouna 14 years
Short URL: http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=6013
Egypt Just Annulled Mubarak's Natural Gas Giveaway……
6 - Will Sadat’s Camp David and the Zionist Embassy be Next ?
by FRANKLIN LAMB
The Egyptian people are demanding the return of their sovereignty. According to recent opinion surveys they believe it was partially ceded to Israel by the two post-Nasser dictators, Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak, at the behest of American administrations, from Nixon to Obama.
The removal of three humiliating shackles for Egyptians, the gas give-away scheme, the 1979 Camp David Accords and the US forced recognition of Israel, constitute a strategic national security objective for most of Egypt’s 82 million citizens. According to the results of an opinion poll, conducted for Press TV and published on October 3, 2011, 73 percent of the Egyptian respondents opposed the terms of the agreement. Today the figure is estimated at 90%.
For the past eight years, the 2004 gas deal has been widely unpopular, and one of the charges in the current indictment against Mubarak is that the deposed President sold Egypt’s gas as part of a sweetheart deal involving kickbacks to family members, associates and Israeli officials. Mohamed Shoeib, the chairman of state-owned Egyptian Natural Gas Holding Company, told AFP last week that the gas deal was “annulled with the Israeli East Mediterranean Gas Co (EMG), because the company failed to respect conditions stipulated in the contract.”
Once Mubarak was toppled and his 14 secret police agencies began to lose some of their omnipresence, the gas line to Israel was severed 14 times in 12 months by a series of explosions that cut off 40%, of Israel’s supply which was used to generate electricity.
In the recent parliamentary elections and now during the presidential campaign, Egyptians have been debating relations with Israel publicly for the first time. Previously Mubarak was Israel’s protector and like some other Arab leaders still clinging to power, ignored his people’s demands for actively supporting the liberation of Palestine.
In late January 2012, an Alexandria University student briefed this observer and a small group of Americans and Europeans sitting on benches opposite the ancient city’s majestic Great Library. He explained, recalling the demands of the Tahrir Square protests on January 25, 2011, “Our slogans at Tahrir Square were bread, freedom, dignity, and social justice. That was almost exactly one year ago. God willing, we will soon achieve the demands of our historic revolution which include canceling Camp David and withdrawing recognition of the Zionist regime still occupying Palestine. Egypt must again lead the Arab Nation’s sacred obligation to liberate Jerusalem and all of Palestine from the river to the sea.”
A stunning hijabed female student continued the dialogue, giving us her opinion: “The USA bought some of our leaders with billions in generous cash from your people but without any real benefit to ours. Camp David was essentially a private agreement by Sadat and then Mubarak. Our people had no say and were never asked whether we agreed. If we protested, we were jailed or worse. Now, the Egyptian people are gaining power despite a likely military coup by the SCAF military junta before the scheduled June elections.”
Israeli officials, in tandem with the US Zionist lobby are claiming that the abrogation of the gas agreement constitutes an “existential threat”. According to a researcher at the US Congressional Research Service in the Madison Building on Capitol Hill whose job includes keeping track of Israeli claims, it’s the 29th“existential threat” the Zionist colony has identified in its 64 year history. These perceived existential threats range from the internationally recognized Right of Return for Palestinians ethnically cleansed from their homes during and since the 1948 Nakba, to various Palestinian groups, more than two dozen UN Resolutions including, 194 and 242, Hezbollah naturally, international solidarity movement projects, a Jewish academic or two, Iran for sure, the rise of internet blogs, and potentially virtually every Christian, Arab and Muslim on the planet, not to mention the claimed rise of global anti-Zionism which the US Zionist lobby has recently decreed was always just another form of virulent anti-Semitism.
Despite all these perceived “existential threats” including recently the so-called “Road Map”, Israeli leaders continue to eschew any substantive negotiations which could mean Arabs and Jews sharing Palestine as part of one democratic, secular state on the basis of one person one vote, minus any “chosen people’ lunacy.
Yuval Steinitz, Israel’s finance minister warned that Egypt’s questioning its relations with Israel was “a dangerous precedent that threatens the peace agreements between Israel and Egypt.”
Ampal, the Israeli company which buys the gas, said that it considers the termination of the contract “unlawful and in bad faith”, and demanded its full restoration. Ampal, is planning to use international arbitration to attempt redress and is sending a corporate delegation to Washington to meet with AIPAC and administration officials to ask them to get the Egyptian action nullified and to force Egypt to keep selling its natural gas at below market prices. One congressional staffer joked in an email that Israeli companies get way better constituent services out of Congress than American companies, or even the voters who elect its members.
Israeli political analyst Israel Hayom wrote last weekend:” The painful conclusion from the collapse of the gas agreement with Egypt is that we are regressing to the days before the peace agreement with Egypt and the horizon does not look rosy at all. Camp David is in mortal danger. The painful conclusion is, once again, that we have no genuine friends in the region. Certainly not for the long term.”
The ADL’s Abe Foxman lamented, “Israel gave Egypt a great deal in exchange for the Camp David peace agreement, much more than we should have. Among other things, a free trade zone, in which we veritably pushed for the establishment of sewing workshops and an Egyptian textile industry so that they would be able to easily export cheap cotton and other goods to the United States as well as to Israel. We made the Egyptians a respectable people in the eyes of the American public. And this is how we are repaid what they owe us?”
Never idle for long, AIPAC began circulating a draft resolution this week to its key Congressional operatives aimed at having the US Congress condemn the cancellation of the gas giveaway and demanding its immediate renewal under threat of the US terminating aid to Egypt. The lobby has also begun to squeeze the Obama administration, threating a cut off of Jewish donors if nothing is done to convince Egypt “to get real” in the words of ultra-Zionist Howard Berman, the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
The political reality is that American diplomats, AIPAC, and Israeli officials, sometimes difficult to distinguish from one another, have been bracing for a breach in Egyptian-Israeli relations since last spring’s demonstration in Tahrir Square. They rightly fear that Camp David and the Israeli embassy in Cairo will be next on the chopping block as the Egyptian people stand up.
Regarding the expected closing of the Israeli embassy, according to the daily Yedioth Ahronoth: “What we have at the moment is a swift deterioration in relations: Israelis can no longer set foot in Egypt, and the Egyptian consulate in Tel Aviv does not have a mandate to issue entry visas. Anyone who insists on going to Egypt from Israel even with a foreign passport can expect to get into trouble. His name could join the list of “spies” and “Mossad agents” They don‘ t want us. It’s that simple and it is very dangerous now for Israelis to be in Egypt.”
According to Netanyahu spokesman Mark Regev, “There is also no one who will rent a building to the Israeli embassy in Cairo, for the small embassy staff headed by Ambassador Yaakov Amitai. Due to security considerations, we have cut drastically their work week. The staff lands every Monday afternoon and leaves early Thursday. Every time an address is found for the embassy (at an exorbitant price), the local security officials shoot down the deal. As far as the Egyptians are concerned, the Israeli diplomats can stay in Jerusalem until their next president is elected and then we will see what happens.”
7 - Disinformation On Every Front
By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
Global Research, May 5, 2012
URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=30706
Some readers have come to the erroneous conclusion that the Matrix consists of Republican Party disinformation as if there is no disinformation from the left. Others think that propaganda is the business of Obama and the Democrats. In fact, propaganda from the right, the left and the middle are all part of the disinformation fed to americans.
If I may give some examples: The other day Chuck Colson, one of the Nixon officials imprisoned for Watergate crimes, died. This gave NPR the opportunity to relive the Nixon horror.
What precisely was the Nixon horror? Essentially, there was no such thing. Watergate was about President Nixon lying about when he learned about the Watergate burglary.
When Nixon learned about the burglary, he did not act on it prior to his reelection, because he reasoned, rightly, that the Washington Post would blame him for the burglary, although he had nothing to do with it, in the hopes of preventing his reelection.
By going along with a cover-up, Nixon enabled the Washington Post to make an issue of the precise date on which Nixon learned of the burglary. White House tapes indicated that Nixon had learned of the burglary before he said he learned of it. So Nixon had permitted a cover-up and had to go, but what was the real reason?
What was the Watergate burglary? We don’t really know. A group of men including former CIA operatives were hired by the Committee to Re-elect the President to break into a Democratic campaign office in the Watergate complex. We don’t know the purpose of the burglary. Some claim it was to wire-tap the telephones in the belief that the Democratic Party was getting re-election money from communists in Cuba or elsewhere. Others claim that the burglars were looking for a list of call girls, that compromised a White House official, as his fiancee was allegedly one of the call girls.
Looking back from our time during which Bush and Obama have deep-sixed the US Constitution, violated numerous US and international laws, and behaved as if they were caesars unconstrained by any law or any morality, Nixon’s “crimes” appear so trivial as to be unremarkable. Yet, Nixon was driven from office and is regarded as a criminal.
What was Watergate really about?
I doubt we will ever know. But I can offer one possible explanation. Nixon, like John F. Kennedy before him, alarmed the military/security complex with his plans to withdraw US troops from Vietnam (Vietnamization) and his determination to open communication with communist China and improve relations.
As President Eisenhower warned in his last address to the American people, conflict brings power and profit to interest groups that benefit from conflict. Nixon, like Kennedy before him, was perceived as a threat by these powerful interests, because he was working to reduce conflict.
James W. Douglass in his documented book, JFK and the Unspeakable, attributes the assassination of President John F. Kennedy to the CIA, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Secret Service. Douglas reports that these powerful government institutions were concerned by Kennedy’s refusal to approve Operation Northwoods, to back the CIA’s invasion of Cuba, and to confront the Soviets militarily over the Cuban missile crisis and by Kennedy’s plans to end US military intervention in Vietnam. JFK also told his brother Robert that after his re-election he was going to break the CIA into a thousand pieces.
The right-wing view that Kennedy was too soft to stand up to communism was intensified when it was learned that Kennedy was working with Nikita Khrushchev through back channels to defuse the Cold War. In his “A Strategy of Peace” speech (June 1963), Kennedy announced the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and the suspension of atmospheric nuclear testing.
“What kind of a peace do we seek?,” Kennedy asked. “Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war.” With his words and deeds, President Kennedy made himself into a threat against the interests of the military/security complex.
There was enough suspicion of JFK’s assassination that yet another president assassinated by another “unhinged lone gunman” might raise more eyebrows. Nixon was disliked by the media, which made him a good candidate for political assassination. The Watergate burglary provided the opportunity. The Washington Post did the job with reports of “Deep Throat” meeting with reporters in spooky underground parking lots after midnight. Little, if any, information of consequence was contained in these reports. Instead, the newspaper’s reporting transferred the spooky danger of the deserted parking garages to Nixon and an aura of evil was attached to Nixon that eroded his support.
It is interesting that it is only presidents who work to reduce conflict who become targets for assassination. Reagan’s anti-Soviet rhetoric was strong enough to fool the left-wing, but the military-security complex knew of Reagan’s intention to end the Cold War. The CIA, formerly headed by Reagan’s vice president, opposed Reagan’s plan to put the pressure of an arms race on the creaking Soviet economy. The CIA argued that the centrally planned Soviet economy allowed the Kremlin to control investment and that the Communist Party could allocate whatever percentage of Soviet GDP to the military as was needed to win the arms race. In other words, the CIA argued that the US would lose the arms race if Reagan raised the stakes as a means of bringing the Soviets to negotiate the end of the Cold War. Did the CIA really believe this, or was the military/security complex trying to keep the profitable Cold War stalemate going?
Washington cannot exist without conflict. Now that the “Muslim threat” is wearing thin, Washington is stirring up a conflict with China. Washington is sticking its nose into every dispute China has with its neighbors and building up its military presence in the Asian-Pacific. As I wrote in my previous column, a China threat is being created as a long-term threat to take the place of the former Soviet threat.
Moving on to another topic, americans are told that education is the answer to unemployment. Get that university degree and live happily every after.
As RT recently reported, the truth is that more than half of recent US university graduates are unemployed or very underemployed. So much for the mantra that “education is the answer.”
“Education is the answer” serves the colleges and universities who want the tuition payments. It serves the companies who make student loans. It helps the offshoring corporations disguise that they are the main cause of unemployment.
Education is not the answer when high value-added, high wage manufacturing and professional service jobs, such as software engineering, are moved offshore in order to enhance short-term profits for shareholders and multi-million dollar bonuses for CEOs, while domestic employment and purchasing power are destroyed. Unless American university graduates can emigrate to China and India, there is no one to employ them. Yet, we still hear the call to run up student loan debts beyond the ability of salaries to repay the loans.
Professional tradable service employment in the US is so scarce that the University of Florida has abolished its computer science department. As few of the graduates can find employment, the university has reallocated the department’s budget to football, a paying sport.
Americans plugged into the Matrix are programmed to believe that they have correct information provided by a varied and “independent media.” In fact the media is owned by 5 or 6 mega-media companies run by corporate advertising executives and Washington.
Recently, Bloomberg gave us the report that “Japan, Denmark and Switzerland are among the countries to rally this week to [IMF chief] Lagarde’s call for a bigger lending capacity beyond the current $380 billion to shield the world economy against any deepening of Europe’s debt turmoil.”
This Bloomberg report is nonsensical. The loans are not shielding the world economy. The loans are shielding the private banks from their own mistakes at the expense of the world economy. The Bloomberg report shows how completely the Western media is involved in forcing ordinary peoples to subsidize private bankers. It could not be more clear; yet, there is no embarrassment at Bloomberg for serving as the bankers’ propagandist.
Indeed, there is only honor. Serving the Matrix is where lie the rewards. Those who oppose the Matrix are the outcasts whose efforts might, as in the film, save the race of humans from the domination of evil, or else, if they lose, confine the outcasts to prosecution and death.
Across every front Americans are fed lies. The official media line is that the Japanese Fukushima nuclear threat from the earthquake and aftermath is well contained and over. However, the fact of the matter appears to be that an amazing radioactive inventory of both spent and unused fuel rods is in damaged cooling pools that could suffer collapse at any time (especially if there is another earthquake), thus releasing enormous radioactivity (reference link). This possibility presents a greater threat than the initial molten cores of the reactors themselves. Michael Chossudovsky points out that the media is yet to acknowledge the widespread contamination resulting from the Fukushima disaster, and there may be worse to come.
But who cares? Back to the Matrix and the “reality show.”
THE ART OF WAR
8 - NATO’s school of death
by Manlio Dinucci
At Monsanto, Portugal, NATO has established a study center for self-evaluation and formulation of proposals to improve military effectiveness. Under the authority of the Allied Command Transformation established in 2003, its role is to ensure that the Organization, previously responsible for warding off a "Soviet threat," is now properly geared for its new task of supporting the neo-colonial conquests of the "war on terror" era.
22 APRIL 2012
Contrary to appearances, NATO also learns. The Atlantic Organization "always draws the lessons from its operations, and we’re already doing that with Libya,” observed Adm. James G. Stavridis, supreme NATO commander in Europe.
To this end NATO has endowed itself with the appropriate tool, the Joint Analysis & Lessons Learned Centre (JALLC): a sort of school where "lessons learned" are taught. Thus, NATO can permanently learn how better to make war. At the beginning of the campaign against Libya in March 2011, the JALLC sent a team of analysts to monitor the operations from the allied command center in Naples. The "lessons learned" were outlined in a confidential report presented last February, a copy of which the New York Times has now obtained a copy.
What should the allies, in particular the European ones, have learned? That the war against Libya was not a model operation as pretended, but revealed serious shortcomings. First and foremost, the fact that the European allies and Canada have had to rely disproportionately on the United States. Even with U.S. aid, NATO possessed only 40% of the electronic warfare aircraft which would have been necessary for that operation. And it was the U.S. that supplied its partners with the near-totality of the most advanced precision target ammunition: 7,700 bombs and missiles were used in the attack against Libya (much of which was probably provided by the U.S. military base at Camp Darby near Pisa, Italy).
The need to remedy these shortcomings is being urgently addressed. "President Obama has requested that the Pentagon begin preparing preliminary military options in Syria." However, "an operation in Syria would pose a bigger challenge than the seven-month campaign that drove Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi of Libya from power." In fact, Syria’s armed forces and air defense systems are more efficient and more difficult to destroy through airstrikes. Moreover, the Syrian opposition is more dispersed and disjointed than the one in Libya during the war, "making allied efforts to coordinate with the rebels more difficult." Accordingly, to attack Syria, the European allies and Canada would have to "rely heavily on U.S. capabilities."
In anticipation of this and other wars (Iran is also in the crosshairs), Canada and the members of the Alliance are trying to step up the pace to optimize their own military capabilities. It is against this background that last February an agreement was reached to create in Sigonella (Sicily) the AGS (Alliance Ground Surveillance) which, together with the Global Hawk drones installed on this base, will provide NATO with a detailed chart of the territories to be attacked, allowing also the strike of moving vehicles. Immediately after, in March, European defense ministers agreed on an "ambitious proposal" which addresses another shortcoming: the lack of planes for the in-flight supply of the fighter-bombers, which during the Libyan war were made available in large part by the United States.
Congratulations, you have learned the lesson—say the JALLC teachers—but now you must get even more involved: "Buying expensive aircraft and technical equipment, could take years to put in place." That is the lesson learned from the war in Libya. Students who successfully pass the test go on to the next war.
Il Manifesto (Italy)
Eyre International – Bringing You The News No One Else Wants To Bring You
The Hidden Truth Behind The News
9 - The BBC relishes in distortion of facts – US Navy Seals did not kill Bin Laden
“OMG this is so gruesome to watch” “It gets better Hilary watch how they fake his death”
“Hey Admiral Mullen did you see the huge splash as his body hit the ocean – boy that was something”
We are currently seeing the good old BBC trying to hit the headlines over sensational stories that have suddenly emerged on the first anniversary of Bin Laden’s dramatic shootout in North Pakistan last year.
I guess most Brits used to be proud of our once respectable and once professional BBC but that has long gone since they came under the same Zionist control as all the other media outlets in this country.
Believe it or not the BBC had a reputation for presenting the facts as they unfolded but know we are seeing news that can only be described as third rate and certainly far from the truth!!
Let’s look at a couple of stories they are bouncing around the world at the moment:
This was published on the 2nd May 2012 with the headline:
Osama Bin Laden: The night he came for dinner by M Ilyas Khan – BBC News, Islamabad.
The first paragraph absolutely bowled me over with laughter when it stated:
What happens when your surprise dinner guest turns out to be the world’s most wanted man? A year on from the death of Osama Bin Laden, two men tell how they came to host the then leader of al-Qaeda.
My first comment would have to be “no doubt he had the appearance of a ghost” ……..which I will explain later.
This sensational story went on to say - Late one night in the summer of 2010, on the fringes of the Waziristan region in north-western Pakistan, half a dozen men of a local tribal family waited nervously for the arrival of a guest whose identity they didn’t know.
They had been alerted to this visit weeks earlier, by someone they describe simply as an “important person”. They were not given any names, and the exact time of the guest’s arrival was conveyed to them just a few hours in advance.
At about 23:00, when the world around them was in deep sleep, they heard the rumble of the approaching vehicles.”A dozen big four-wheel drive jeeps drove into the compound,” recalls one family elder who agreed to speak to me about it. “They seemed to converge from different directions.” One of the 4x4s drove up close to the veranda, and from its back seat emerged a tall and frail-looking man. He wore flowing robes and a white turban.The waiting men couldn’t believe their eyes. Standing before them was none other than Osama Bin Laden, the most wanted man in the world.
My first humorous comment would have to be rather late arrival for dinner don’t you think!!
This is where this story really becomes even more fanciful:
There was a slight commotion among the guards when one of the hosts requested that his 85-year-old father be allowed to see Bin Laden. “Consider this to be his dying wish,” he pleaded. The message was passed to Bin Laden, who agreed to see the old patriarch. Four armed men escorted the son home to fetch his father. The old man was only told about Bin Laden’s presence once they were back inside the compound. They said the old man spent 10 minutes with Bin Laden, pouring out his admiration and prayers for him, and offering time-tested advice on tribal warfare, all in his native Pashto language, which Bin Laden apparently didn’t understand.
Oh my God just imagine this old man wanting to see this high ranking terrorist before he died…….I can assure you that had this meeting ever taken place he would have died from shock when you get to understand the truth behind Osama Bin Laden!!
Let’s now look at yet another BBC ”Flight of Fancy”
Defence Minister Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar has said that the government of Pakistan and the armed forces played a huge part in the killing of Osama bin Laden, adding that a mobile chip was used to locate him.
He gave this statement on the first anniversary of Bin Laden’s killing during an interview to the BBC in their Urdu news service:
According to BBC correspondent Aijaz Meher, the defence minister said that Pakistan had an agreement with the US that whenever Pakistan retrieved any material in Arabic and English, it will be given to US and if the US found any material in Urdu, it would give it to Pakistan.
“I do not know how big a leader Osama bin Laden was,” said the defence minister. Time will tell how positive his contributions to the Muslim countries proved to be.”
He said that materials recovered from Osama bin Laden’s residence were with the army and investigations were underway.
Finally we had another overstated review on BBC Radio 5 Live on the 1st May 2012 with the title:
Is the world a safer a year since Osama Bin Laden’s death?
One year ago a team of Navy Seals attacked a compound in Abbottabad in Pakistan, killing Osama Bin Laden.
President Obama appeared on television later that night to announce the news to the rest of the world, in which he outlined that the fight against Al Qaeda was not over. The BBC asked former US Ambassador to Pakistan William Milam, and former CIA officer Michael Scheuer, if the world was a safer place since Osama Bin Laden’s death. Both were involved in the hunt for the al-Qaeda leader. Here is their response:
The ex Ambassador stated that the main structure of Al Qaeda has gone and although some aspects still exist it is no longer a threat in Afghanistan. He went on to say that a new way to look at our struggle in Afghanistan and Pakistan and a way to begin I think, the withdrawal of our forces from Afghanistan because Al Qaeda , the core Al Qaeda, is not the major enemy, the one we went after its not probably our major enemy any more.
The BBC then asks Michael Scheuer if he thought Al Qaeda was a diminished force. The ex CIA responded: “if you look at A Qaeda as to where it was in 20o1 on a map you will see that there only large logistical base, their base for recruiting, their base for planning and their base for storing munitions was Afghanistan. Today there still supporting the Taliban inside of Afghanistan. There active throughout Pakistan, there very active in Yemen in fact they own territory there. There active in Somalia in support of Al Shibab. There active across the rim of Africa, from Tunisia over to Mauritania reaching south towards Nigeria, Niger and other places. There active in Palestine and they have recovered to great extent and are causing havoc in Iraq and of course their lone wolves here in North America and Europe where that are very active . So I think the place to start discussion on this issue is not pivoting off Bin Laden death but looking where the organisation is and what its up too at the moment.
As you can clearly see there is a continued emphasis that Al Qaeda is very much alive and spreading around the world and yet very little reference to the fact that Al Qaeda is almost none existent in Afghanistan and that the Taliban (their new enemy) is flourishing and continues to controls almost all of the country………It was clear by this interview that an exit strategy was desperately being sought and that in actual fact the war had totally failed and had not made any headway in bringing democracy to the people of Afghanistan. I believe that once again the Taliban will take over the country!!
On the issue of Al Qaeda I again repeat what I have said so many times before that Al Qaeda does not and has not ever existed and it was a US devised name to spread hysteria into the hearts of people in an attempt to justify an action or to force their own hidden agenda into law and at the same time continue with their well known Geo Political Plan.
So now let’s look at this pathetic approach by Obama to glorify the apparent dramatic death of Osama Bin Laden and the not so tough decision he had to make…….. I can assure you that what you read and watched on TV about this incident was far from reality……..one could just see Bin Laden laughing in his grave from all this attention…….which is where he had been for some years previous!!
What you saw pan out on the big screen was nothing more than what can only be described as one of the best cover up events ever and just to think this was all to make President Obama look good as his popularity waned!!
The timeline for his final year alive was as follows:
In the first half of 2001 OBL’s health started to continue on a downward spiral as he had been suffering from many serious illnesses. He was very tall (6 feet 5 inches) and suffered from Marfan Syndrome - a range of expressions, from mild to severe. The most serious complications are defects of the heart valves and aorta. It also affect the lungs, the eyes, the dural sac surrounding the spinal cord, the skeleton and the hard palate to name but a few!!
For Bin Laden the main areas of concern were clearly major heart issue, kidney and the fact he was a diabetic.
In July 2001 he flew by private jet to Dubai and spent one week in a US Hospital in Dubai with kidney problems and was in actual fact operated upon on the 4th July 2001. The CIA denied that this event actually occurred despite the fact that they visited him several times, including a visit by the CIA Station Chief, Larry Mitchell on the 12th July 2001 as well as members of his family. During his stay in Dubai he was treated by a British doctor. Still very sick he flew back to Pakistan (a private jet) on the 14th July 2001 for recuperation and was not heard from again for some considerable time.
On September the 10th 2001 he again appears at the Military Hospital in Rawalpindi for kidney dialysis with full military protection. You will note that this is the day before 9/11 and he was reported to be very sick at the time.
On the 12th of September 2001 a Pakistan newspaper reported that OBL had denied any involvement in 9/11.
OBL assistant gave the following message from OBL on 16th September 2001 “I categorically state that I have not done this” and also that he had an agreement with the Taliban not to be in such activity.
20th September 2001 President Bush blamed OBL for 9/11.
22nd September 2001 OBL again made a statement to a Pakistan newspaper that he was not involved in 9/11.
23rd September 2001 Secretary of State Colin Powell stated he would produce evidence re OBL and 9/11. Powell talked about this many times but no such evidence appeared.
24th September 2001 a letter from OBL urged the Muslims of Pakistan and Afghanistan to stand firm against aggression from the “Crusaders.”
It was around this time that the Taliban responded to a request by the US to hand over OBL. They stated they would be happy to do so if evidence oh his complicity in 9/11 could be produced. The offer was declined by the US.
1st October 2001 the Taliban offered to put OBL on trial in an Islamic Court in Pakistan which met with OBL approval. This idea was vetoed by the Pakistan Government and within days the bombing started.
Tony Blair the British PM at the time stated the following:
“I have seen absolutely powerful and incontrovertible evidence of OBL’s link to the events of 9/11. It was evident this statement related to the “Bin Laden Dossier” a few days prior to the bombing. The dossier was at the time referred too as “Little more than conjecture, supposition and assertions of fact.” This original document is no long available!!
According to those in the know, OBL’s communications were intercepted by the Intel of Pakistan, Saudi, US and Egypt up until the 14th of December 2001 when they ceased.
OBL’s funeral took place in Pakistan on the 16th of December 2001 as reported in both Pakistan and Egyptian newspapers.
A four page will dated the 14th of December 2001 existed.
A posthumous video was released on the 27th December 2001 (His final broadcast) but this was a Pentagon fake.
It is clear that he died on the 14th of December 2001 and that the story of the epic mission last year was a total fabrication……..being an aviation consultant I can assure you that the entire helicopter operation that was supposed to have taken place from Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan to OBL hideout and the subsequent return and onward flight to a US Carrier in the Arabian Sea is a figment of the imagination.
The US Navy Seals team 6 who were involved, identified and praised by the President himself are all now dead. The media did mention about a helicopter striking the fence when going in to the compound and that the seals actually survived that crash and then lay charges and blew up the wreckage. However this statement is incorrect for two very good reasons:
Witness’s in Pakistan say a helicopter lifted off and blew up above the fence line and that their were no survivors….bodies were everywhere and secondly the relatives of the deceased claim they have information that not only confirms this story but also the fact that the surviving team 6 members were either assassinated or died in another Chinook aircraft that was shot down with 22 US Navy Seal Team 6 on-board!!
The other mystery about the Chinook crash is the fact that all these people were all on one helicopter that belonged to the National Guard which generally is a no no as US Navy Seals always fly in either Navy or Army special ops helicopters.
It should also be noted that publicity regarding the death of any US Navy Seal is not normal, they are the unsung hero’s and normally die without any recognition for obvious reasons. It became clear that much publicity was used in this case as it allowed the President to show not only his ability to run the military but also to show the compassionate side of him……which he certainly does not have…..he even was there to receive the bodies back.
It is a known fact that if anyone takes part in an assassination, especially a high profile one such as this, the government take them out in order to remove any witnesses to the event. One can only hope that the relatives of the deceased and other Navy Seals decide to talk as it became clear to them all that Bin Laden was not at this location……..which I knew anyway as he died back in December 2001………one could imagine the fear within the White House, especially Obama if this had leaked out……which it has now !!
Ranger Pat Tilman believed murdered
One could go on forever with other incidents and false flags such as the possible murder of Ranger Pat Tilman or that dramatic rescue of Jessica Lynch the young private who was rescue from a hospital in Iraq….the US Navy Seals broke down doors, put holes in walls and extracted her in such a spectacular way……..but it was all fake…..she did not end up in an heroic gun battle that caused her to be shot and with two broken legs etc………she had been in a truck accident and the US Government seized an opportunity to make a sensational story out of it……..reporters returned to the hospital much later to learn she was treated for a broken leg and the doctor said the US Forces broke in and pointed a gun at him….he commented that they didn’t have to break in….just simply ask and he would have let them in as there was no Iraqi military at the hospital.
One could write a book of many other murders and assassinations but enough is enough……..at least I hope you now believe that Osama Bin Laden passed away naturally many years ago……..oh and he was employed by the CIA!!
Peter Eyre – Middle East Consultant – 6/5/2012
10 - FLASHBACK - Barksdale Missile Number Six : The Stolen Nuclear Weapon
On August 30, for the first time since 1968, nuclear warheads in combat position were carried by an American bomber. Numerous international treaty provisions were violated in the process.
That Thursday, a B-52H Stratofortress flew from Minot AFB in North Dakota to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana while carrying twelve cruise missiles. Either five or six of those missiles were armed with nuclear warheads.
This story becomes even more troubling when you recall that since 1991, by Presidential Order, no nuclear weapons are ever allowed to be carried on weapons positions on aircraft, unless they are intended to actually be used on a target during a real war. The upshot of this very strange mission is that there appears to be a W80 nuclear warhead unaccounted for inside the United States.
The W80 is a very small and easily concealable warhead, just 32 inches long and a foot wide, weighing under 300 pounds. It is a two-stage weapon. Detonating the plutonium primary alone produces a yield of 5 kilotons. Allowing the deuterium-tritium secondary to operate boosts the yield to 150 kilotons. Hiroshima was 15 kilotons.
The case of the W80 is made from aluminum and highly enriched uranium, which forms part of the fission mass. The W80 can therefore be detected with radiation meters, but only if not shielded. Buried in the bilge of a commercial ship, it would be difficult, even with an intentional search, to locate. And since 18 feet of water provides the same radiation damping as a foot of lead, a W80 warhead in a waterproof container attached to the keel or the skegs of a commercial ship (without the crew even knowing it) would be impossible to detect from a distance.
If I were a CIA or Mossad type play-acting at being a "dangerous muslim Iranian terrorist" (Reg. Trademark The White House), the perfect means for a false-flag attack presents itself, using the W80 attached to a commercial ship at the shore of Lake Michigan to shower Chicago with radioactive mud, which is consistent with the announced preparations for mass evacuations and Chicago-area hospitals training to deal with radiation injuries.
11 - “We are Preparing for Massive Civil War in America,” Says DHS Informant
Posted by Dominique de Kevelioc de Bailleul on May 03, 2012
In a riveting interview on TruNews Radio, Wednesday, private investigator Doug Hagmann said high-level, reliable sources told him the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is preparing for “massive civil war” in America.
“Folks, we’re getting ready for one massive economic collapse,” Hagmann told TruNews host Rick Wiles.
“We have problems . . . The federal government is preparing for civil uprising,” he added, “so every time you hear about troop movements, every time you hear about movements of military equipment, the militarization of the police, the buying of the ammunition, all of this is . . . they (DHS) are preparing for a massive uprising.”
Hagmann goes on to say that his sources tell him the concerns of the DHS stem from a collapse of the U.S. dollar and the hyperinflation a collapse in the value of the world’s primary reserve currency implies to a nation of 311 million Americans, who, for the significant portion of the population, is armed.
Uprisings in Greece is, indeed, a problem, but an uprising of armed Americans becomes a matter of serious national security, a point addressed in a recent report by the Pentagon and highlighted as a vulnerability and threat to the U.S. during war-game exercises at the Department of Defense last year, according to one of the DoD’s war-game participants, Jim Rickards, author of Currency Wars: The Making of the Next Global Crisis.
Through his sources, Hagmann confirmed Rickards’ ongoing thesis of a fear of a U.S. dollar collapse at the hands of the Chinese (U.S. treasury bond holders of approximately $1 trillion) and, possibly, the Russians (threatening to launch a gold-backed ruble as an attractive alternative to the U.S. dollar) in retaliation for aggressive U.S. foreign policy initiatives against China’s and Russia’s strategic allies Iran and Syria.
“The one source that we have I’ve known since 1979,” Hagmann continued. “He started out as a patrol officer and currently he is now working for a federal agency under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland Security; he’s in a position to know what policies are being initiated, what policies are being planned at this point, and he’s telling us right now—look, what you’re seeing is just the tip of the iceberg. We are preparing, we, meaning the government, we are preparing for a massive civil war in this country.”
“There’s no hyperbole here,” he added, echoing Trends Research Institute’s Founder Gerald Celente’s forecast of last year. Celente expects a collapse of the U.S. dollar and riots in America some time this year.
Since Celente’s ‘Civil War’ prediction of last year, executive orders NDAA and National Defense Resources Preparedness were signed into law by President Obama, which are both politically damaging actions taken by a sitting president.
And most recently, requests made by the DHS for the procurement of 450 million rounds of hollow-point ammunition only fuels speculation of an upcoming tragic event expected on American soil.
These major events, as shocking to the American people as they are, have taken place during an election year.
Escalating preparatory activities by the executive branch and DHS throughout the last decade—from the Patriot Act, to countless executive orders drafted to suspend (or strip) American civil liberties “are just the beginning” of the nightmare to come, Hagmann said.
He added, “It’s going to get so much worse toward the election, and I’m not even sure we’re going to have an election in this country. It’s going to be that bad, and this, as well, is coming from my sources. But one source in particular said, ‘look, you don’t understand how bad it is.’ This stuff is real; these people, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), they are ready to fight the American people.”
“What they [DHS] are expecting, and again, this is according to my sources, what they’re expecting is the un-sustainability of the American dollar,” Hagmann said. “And we know for a fact that we can no longer service our debt. There’s going to be a period of hyperinflation . . . the dollar will be worthless . . . The economic collapse will be so severe, people won’t be ready for this.” Sign-up for my 100% FREE Alerts
Source: Full TruNews interview, May 2, 2012
12 - Al Qaeda Is a Complete Fabrication – a Made in the USA production
Posted by PC February 26th, 2012
The essence of any communication campaign is to successfully deliver the message to the targeted recipients and make them react to it the way you wished. - Allied Media Corps
In the BBC’s documentary called “The Power of Nightmares“ top CIA officials openly admit that Al Qaeda is a total and complete fabrication, never having existed at any time. al Qaeda is code for illegal CIA false flag attacks against the United States and other countries. The highly revealing BBC documentary digs deep into the roots of the war on terror, only to find that much of the widespread fear in the post-9/11 world has been fabricated by those in power for their own interests. Fear has been used widely in the media to manipulate the public into giving up civil liberties and turning over power to elite groups with their own hidden agendas.
The Power of Nightmares clearly demonstrates that the nightmare vision of a powerful, united terrorist organization waiting to strike our societies is largely an illusion. Wherever the BBC team looked for Al Qaeda, from the mountains of Afghanistan to the sleeper cells in America, they found that we are chasing a phantom enemy. The documentary exposes the Bush administration’s need for a reason that complied with the Laws so they could go after “the bad guy of their choice” namely laws that had been set in place to protect us from mobs and “criminal organizations” such as the Mafia. They paid Jamal al Fadl, hundreds of thousands of dollars to back the U.S. Government’s story of Al Qaeda, a “group” or criminal organization they could “legally” go after.
“Al Qaeda is not an organization. Al Qaeda is a way of working … but this has the hallmark of that approach.” People the US claim to be Al Qaeda are not Al Qaeda they are actually POWs and Resistance Fighters, taken from the countries the US illegally attacked. They are POWs and Resistance Fighters who have been illegally deported, tortured and murdered by the US and NATO forces . The people who are fighting to free their country and countrymen from the illegal US and NATO invasion and occupations are called Al Qaeda by the US government because the US government needed an enemy. If the US people knew the truth that Al Qaeda doesn’t exist the US would not be in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Al Qaeda is the US government propaganda, used to falsely and illegally justify the US and NATO invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. Both attacks, wars and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan are deemed by US, Canadian and International Law as crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, wars of aggression and war crimes.
The Iraqi, Afghan and Taliban people the US call terrorists are guilty of no crime. The Iraqi, Afghan and Taliban people are doing exactly as any country would do if attacked and occupied by a foreign state’s military – they are resisting. They are freedom fighters. Their actions of killing US and NATO soldiers are legal as their battles against the US and NATO forces are one of self-defense whereas the actions of the US and NATO are clearly attacks of aggression – war crimes. The US, Canadian and NATO countries are the terrorists. The US, Canadian and NATO countries are the enemy as they attacked Iraq and Afghanistan. Iraq and Afghanistan did not attack the US, Canada or any other NATO country. The people of Iraq and Afghanistan are the innocent victims of US, Canadian and NATO wars of aggression, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and war crimes – kidnapping, deporting, torture and murder.
CIA "Terrorist Buster" Logo
On June 16, 2004 staff members of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States testified that Osama bin Laden met with a top Iraqi official in 1994 but found “no credible evidence” of a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda in attacks against the United States. No link has ever been found between Al Qaeda and Iraq or Al Qaeda and Afghanistan because Al Qaeda does not exist. Al Qaeda Is a Complete Fabrication. The CIA is trying to tell us something that they publicly can’t with their “official” terrorist buster logo. They are stating that terrorists are like ghosts. Everyone is afraid of them, but nobody has proof they even exist.
Unconstitutional – The War on Our Civil Liberties
Another eye-opening video available online for free viewing is Unconstitutional. In this documentary, interviews with ranking members of Congress, top legal experts, and even a former CIA chief describe many insidious efforts to take away freedoms guaranteed under the US Constitution for over 200 years.
Compelling video footage shows US citizens, from law-abiding store clerks to a US Olympian, who have been the victims of unconstitutional policies established under the Patriot Act. Members of Congress describe the replacement of the previously agreed upon Patriot Act by another version quietly slipped into its place just hours before the final vote in Congress, leaving no one time to read the many devastating changes inserted at the last minute.
Unconstitutional: The War on Our Civil Liberties, is the third in a series of Public Interest Pictures films that follows Unprecedented: The 2000 Presidential Election and Uncovered: The War on Iraq. True to their legacy, Unconstitutional provides the facts and stories that illuminate administration lies, wrongheaded policies, and the real victims of these actions–the American people. Here, you’ll get the real story behind the USA PATRIOT Act and other administration policies that tries, illegally, to strip the US people of their Constitutional Rights and Freedoms. Their goal is to one day permanently suspend the United States Constitution after launching another attack against their own country, the US, and falsely blame the totally fictitious terrorist organization they call Al Qaeda. They will launch another 9/11 style attack against the US but this time they will declare Martial Law.
The martial law in the U.S. is closely tied with the right of habeas corpus, which is in essence the right to a hearing on lawful imprisonment, or more broadly, the supervision of law enforcement by the judiciary. The ability to suspend habeas corpus is often equated with martial law. Article 1, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution states, “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”
In United States law, martial law is limited by several court decisions that were handed down between the American Civil War and World War II. In 1878, Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids military involvement in domestic law enforcement without congressional approval.
On October 1, 2002 United States Northern Command was established (in direct violation of the Posse Comitatus Act) to provide command and control of Department of Defense homeland defense efforts and to coordinate defense support of civil authorities.
On June 15, 1995, Norman Olson, along with militia leaders from other states, testified before the United States Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism. Olson’s opening statement included the following:
One other important point needs to be made. Since The Constitution is the limiting document upon the government, the government cannot become greater than the granting power. That is, the servant cannot become greater than its master. Therefore, should the chief executive or the other branch of government or all branches together act to suspend The Constitution under a rule of martial law, all power granted to government would be cancelled and differed back to the granting power. That is the people. And I’ll conclude with this statement: Martial law shall NOT be possible in this country as long as the people recognize the bill of rights as inalienable.
Al Jazeera used by the US government as it’s propaganda media outlet for its “War of Terror”
Al Jazeera is the largest and most controversial Arabic News Channel in the Middle East, offering news coverage 24 hours a day from around the world and focusing on the hottest regions of conflict. Founded in 1996, and based in Qatar, the Al Jazeera news network is the fastest growing network among Arab communities and Arabic speaking people around the world. It has been the main propaganda news media for the US immediately following the September 11, 2001 attacks, when the US government paid Al Jazeera to broadcast videos in which Osama bin Laden and Sulaiman Abu Ghaith defending and justifying the attacks. That broadcast has since been proven by both US government and International government officials as fakes. The fake video tapes that were sent to Al Jazeera through the CIA was created in the US at Allied Media Corp.
Every time Al Jazeera reported on a new video or audio from Al Qaeda or bin Laden which makes threats against the US the audio or video was actually made in the studios of Allied Media Corp – click on screenshot image above. The financial trail connects the Bush administration to Allied Media Corp. Government documents reveal the work that Allied Media Corp was paid to do for the Bush administration to terrorize the American people. The Bush administration was able to strip the American people of their inalienable rights and freedoms because of the video and audio tapes that were made by Allied Media Corp and aired by Al Jazeera. The US government paid Allied Media Corp to produce video tapes and audio tapes that made terrorist threats against the American people. This is essentially the US making threats against itself.
Allied Media Corp erased it’s connection with Al Jazeera when George W Bush left office. They lost their contract to supply the U.S. government with high quality audio and video tapes of Al Qaeda and Bin Laden making threats against the U.S. Its contract was recently renewed by the Obama administration and its website has an entire section dedicated to Al Jazeera. Allied Media Corp will be responsible for Al Jazeera programming. Al Jazeera will again be a made the U.S. Middle East propaganda tool.
When George W Bush left office Allied Media Corp tries to erase all links between them and Al Jazeera. They feared Obama would try the Bush administration for war crimes. To further distance itself from its former main financial backer, the U.S. government, Allied Media Corp marketed itself under the name AMC. They tried to erase its involvement in U.S. government propaganda and terrorism via Bush administration ordered fake Al Qaeda tapes. Allied Media Corp not only erased all Al Jazeera connections it contacted independent news agencies including nbGazette.com (PRESS Core’s former name) to get the independent news agencies to erase any and all reports that connected Allied Media Corp and Al Jazeera. This was our response. The truth cannot be concealed. The truth cannot be altered. History cannot be changed.
The following link is proof of a link between Allied Media Corp and the fake al Qaeda audio and videos. Allied Media Corp makes Al Jazeera terrorists threat videos. They didn’t have a contract with Obama government but now that the U.S. government is trying to sell the public on an imminent al Qaeda threat against the U.S. they have been given another contract to restart the propaganda against Muslims.
Every video, every audio tape of bin Laden or the phantom Al Qaeda making threats against the US has been made in the USA. The studios of Allied Media Corp made the videos and audio tapes for the former Bush administration to further the US War of Terror and wars of aggression against its own people and other sovereign nations. The post 9/11 video tape of bin Laden supposedly confessing to carrying out the attacks against the US was a fake and the person we are suppose to believe is bin Laden is an actor. George W Bush used Allied Media Corp to create videos and audio tapes of actors portraying bin Laden and al Qaeda making threats against the US in order to influence and coerce Congress into giving him dictatorial powers and rob the US people of their civil rights and freedoms.
bin Laden did not take away your freedom the Bush White House did. bin Laden did not attack the U.S. on September 11, 2001 your own government did. bin Laden didn’t bankrupt the U.S. your own government did – throughout history all major empires have collapsed as a result of very costly prolonged wars of aggression campaigns. bin Laden and Saddam Hussein didn’t kill over 1 million innocent Iraqi civilians your U.S. government did – first the Clinton administration, then George W Bush and Dick Cheney’s administration and now Obama’s administration. Al Qaeda is and always has been a Made in the USA terrorist organization. Terrorism is a Made in the U.S. political agenda.
Just as dreams are not real, neither are these nightmares. The idea that we are threatened by a hidden and organized terrorist network is an illusion. It is a myth that has spread unquestioned through politics, the security services and the international media. The terrorist organization Al Qaeda does not exist and never did. Al Qaeda is the US government’s code name for illegal CIA terrorist operations against foreign states and the US people.
The Vatican’s Nazi SS (Latin name for Holy See is Sancta Sedes or SS) formed the CIA
At the end of WWII the US smuggled hundreds of top Nazi SS officers, Gestapo agents and scientists involved in experiments on the Jewish people in the concentration camps. Operation Paperclip (Project Paperclip) saw hundreds of Nazi officials given asylum in the US (Fort Bliss) from prosecution for their crimes against humanity. Scientists who committed atrocities by using human beings as lab rats formed the US biological weapons division of the US military. Nazi scientists who developed the first operational jet fighter, the Messerschmitt Me 262, and V-2 rocket formed the US ballistic missile weapons programs and later formed NASA. Nazi Gestapo (German Intelligence Agencies) agents were brought to the US and formed the FBI and the Central Intelligence Agency – the CIA.
CIA to use remotely controlled Predator drones in 9/11 commemorating attacks against U.S.
Knights of Malta’s CIA, FEMA and DHS collaborating nuclear threats against US.
Vatican’s own Jesuit Knights of Malta planning to detonate nukes in the United States
PAUL W KINCAID's COMMENT
September 9, 2011 - 2:54 pm
Who are the real terrorists? Just look at the facts.During the Bill and Hillary Clinton administration it wasn’t al Qaeda, Saddam Hussein, bin Laden or any other terrorist group who caused the death of as many as 1.5 million civilians, it was the United States government. Sanctions imposed on Iraq by the UN and Bill and Hillary Clinton starved 1.5 million civilians – the majority being children.
Since September 11, 2001
Middle East attacks against US = 0
Number of US civilians killed by Iraqi military = 0
Number of US civilians killed by Afghan military = 0
Number of US civilians killed by the Taliban = 0
Number of US civilians killed by Saddam Hussein = 0
Number of US civilians killed by Iran = 0
Number of US civilians killed by Libyan military = 0
Number of US civilians killed by Muammar Gaddafi = 0
Number of Iraqi bombers used in 9/11 attacks = 0
Number of Afghan bombers used in 9/11 attacks = 0
Number of Libyan bombers used in 9/11 attacks = 0
Number of US citizens killed by bin Laden on 9/11 = 0 – When the US FBI was asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”
Number of US citizens killed on 9/11 by al Qaeda = 0
Number of Iraqi civilians killed by US = 2,500,000 + (by UN / Clinton sanctions and in George W Bush / Dick Cheney war and occupation.
Number of US citizens killed by Bush / Cheney and their administration on 9/11 = 3000+
Number of US Soldiers killed since 9/11 by Bush / Cheney and Obama / Gates / Leon Panetta = 4485 in Iraq War and 1904 in Afghanistan
The only country in the World to use nuclear bombs on civilian cities – the US. Dropped them despite the fact that Japan was already negotiating a surrender to end the war. On Aug. 6, 1945, and again on August 9, the U.S. government dropped the first and second atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Tens of thousands of people died instantly, with thousands more dying later.
Number one piece of evidence against the Bush administration for the pre-9/11 planning for unprovoked wars of aggression against 7 countries: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan & Iran. – “Rebuilding America Defenses” – Written in part by former United States Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfwitz and advocating the redeployment of U.S. troops in permanent bases in strategic locations throughout the world where they can be ready to act to protect U.S. interests abroad including the takeover of the Midle East oil.
Operation name for the Bush administration’s FAKE TERROR ATTACKS against their own country on September 11, 2001 where they killed more than 3000 US citizens as a pretext for global war – “Operation Northwoods”
9/11 Commission testimony that gives evidence that vice-president Dick Cheney is guilty of treason for ordering the US Air Force and Pentagon Missile Defense system to stand down – aiding and abetting an attack on the US. Then US Secretary of Transportation, Norman Mineta, testifies that Dick Cheney was operationally aware of a US AGM-86C Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missile, transmitting flight 77’s transponder signal, as it approached the Pentagon and ordered the US military not to interfere or stop the incoming attack.
The Bush administration committed the largest heist in US history of US funds on September 10, 2001 and then used the fake terrorist attacks on the following day to hide their crime. Then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld announced that the Pentagon lost $2.3 Trillion and the next day the US used a cruise missile to destroy the accounting offices of the Pentagon. The US AGM-86C Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missile (CALCM) hit the exact spot where Pentagon staff where investigating the theft.
CRUDE OIL PRICES in September 2001 was $20.82
CRUDE OIL PRICES September 9, 2011 is $86.75
CRUDE OIL PRICES February 26, 2012 is $109.62
Today the US National debt has passed $15.447 Trillion
As of April 2008, the total U.S. federal debt was approximately $9.5 trillion
November 2000, U.S. federal debt was approximately $5.674 trillion
The criminal events (not an act of war as no foreign country, no foreign government and no foreign military, took part in the criminal acts against the US) of New York 11 September 20001, and the criminal event of Madrid on 11 March 2004, and other criminal events commonly connected to Islam, are clearly not related to Islam. Al-Qaeda was established by the C.I.A in the 1980s (Under the president Ronald Reagan / vice-president George HW Bush administration).
Al-Qaeda is a 'made in the USA' phantom enemy which enables the C.I.A. to commit crimes against humanity and other atrocities in the name of Muslims. The Mujahadeen of Afghanistan were organized, trained and funded by the C.I.A. (Hamid Karzai was the CIA money man) using the Pakistani ISI as a “cut-out” in order to lure the Soviet Army into Afghanistan at the end of 1979. The Mujahedeen was C.I.A. terrorism with an Islamic name and a handful of “Islamic” perpetrators. Afghanistan has been destroyed by these fanatics in furtherance of American foreign interests.
The CIA’s Al-Qaeda terror operations has caused immense damage to Islam, to Muslims worldwide and to the interests of the peoples of all Arab and Muslim countries. The actions of the CIA’s Al-Qaeda serve to promote the interests of the U.S. (the official purpose of the CIA) and Israel, which are clearly interested in “reshaping” the Middle East in such a way that they can more easily rape and plunder the region at will.
The C.I.A is committing terrorist acts in order to give the U.S. an excuse to extend their power into and invade the Arab countries rich in oil like Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. The C.I.A. is using the code name al-Qaeda to engender fear and hate of Islam and Muslims worldwide. This corresponds to an old and tried ploy of colonizers: to slander and denigrate the target population so that it is acceptable and even called for to commit genocide against them.
The country that has and is still violating international law by authorizing the use of torture on ordinary civilians and POWs is the United States.
13 - Hillary Clinton Admits the U.S. Government Created Al-Qaeda
Kelly Thomas Video: 'Dad, They Are Killing Me'
Warning - Video Contains Scenes Of Shocking Police Violence
The sounds of the baton and a fist hitting the homeless man can be heard on an audio recorder that one of the officers had on his belt. Several spectators in the courtroom left during the video, and the judge paused it at one point as people in the crowd groaned.
Israelis Are Running for Their Life (video)
They are tired of living in a war zone, they are exhausted of maintaining a tribal communal bunker while not even being able to find an affordable one bedroom flat in Tel Aviv.
The Dirty Truth About Israel (video)
Learn more about the morbidity of the Jewish national project.
Documentary claims hemp oil is a miracle cure - Cancer, diabetes, arthritis, burns, ulcers, migraines you name it -
Michael Tellinger On CNBC Africa 7 May 2012 - Constitutional Court Case taking on the BANKS…
Exposing the criminal activity of the Reserve Bank – owned and controlled by Rothschilds, Rockefellers, & J.P. Morgan
Video of Gilad Atzmon's 4tet @ Hideaway, London (pretty strong music)
it was an incredible gig in an incredible venue!!
Gilad Atzmon - alto sax
Frank Harrison -piano
Chris Hill - bass
Asaf Sirkis - dr
This is reminiscent of the fearsome Adam Gadahn, who, on youtube, was constantly exhorting Muslims to go out and buy guns in the USA and then kill the American infidels. Then there was Yousef Al Khattab, who took up the slack for Adam Gadahn when Gadahn was exposed as a jewish kid from L.A, and the grandson of one of the board members for the ADL. Yep. Adam's real name is Pearlman. Later Khattab was also exposed as Joseph Cohen. And of course he was also Jewish. A very good video on the subject http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsUtvOW6SR0&skipcontrinter=1
This non stop psyops proves that this nation is composed mostly of nitwits and fools who are easily played and manipulated. The British Broadcasting Corporation did an excellent series on Al Caeda. If you want to take the time to acquaint yourself with the facts on how this organization was "created" for geo political reasons here is the link for this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ltowJPCH4I&feature=related and, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnV_pNe_BB0&feature=related
FREE RENEWABLE BIOFUEL ( http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=4302 )
Uganda Africa construction video on how to make your own backyard biogas plant. Daily gas production capacity of the above constructed digester is 2.6 cubic meters (time stamp 3:23). That is equivalent to 2600 liters or 16.4 barrels of oil or 687 US liquid gallons. For comparison an empty 20 lb barbecue propane tank will hold about 4.7 gallons of propane. Biogas can be used to heat your home, cook your food and power gas electric generators. In the US and Canada you can use your existing prefab concrete or plastic septic tanks and produce your own biogas to fuel your home. Just bury a sealed plastic drum, barrel or tank next to the septic tank and run a plastic tube from the top of your septic tank to the buried sealed plastic drum, barrel or tank. Then add a propane gas valve and fitting, like the ones from a barbecue, to the top of the sealed buried drum, barrel or tank and you have your very own natural gas supply.
14 - HOW TO GET RID OF THE FED
Each of the U.S. Federal Reserve Banks can be dissolved today by an act of Congress or "forfeiture of franchise for violation of law." How the American people can end the unconstitutional control of their money using the Federal Reserve interest bearing counterfeit Note is codified in the United States Code,TITLE 12 CHAPTER 3 SUBCHAPTER IX § 341. General enumeration of powers. What laws have the Federal Reserve violated that would warrant their immediate forfeiture? Counterfeiting, money laundering, trafficking of counterfeit Federal Reserve Notes, securities fraud, fraud, insider trading, extortion, and embezzlement.
Only the Congress of the U.S., which comprises of the Senate and the House of Representatives has the power to coin and issue the U.S. money supply and regulate the value thereof? [Article 1 Section 1 and Section 8] Nowhere, in the Constitution does it give Congress the power or authority to transfer any powers granted under the Constitution to a private corporation. Therefore the Federal Reserve is null and void.
HOW TO GET RID OF THE FED
Each of the U.S. Federal Reserve Banks can be dissolved today by an act of Congress or "forfeiture of franchise for violation of law." How the American people can end the unconstitutional control of their money using the Federal Reserve interest bearing counterfeit Note is codified in the United States Code,TITLE 12 CHAPTER 3 SUBCHAPTER IX § 341. General enumeration of powers. What laws have the Federal Reserve violated that would warrant their immediate forfeiture? Counterfeiting, money laundering, trafficking of counterfeit Federal Reserve Notes, securities fraud, fraud, insider trading, extortion, and embezzlement.
Only the Congress of the U.S., which comprises of the Senate and the House of Representatives has the power to coin and issue the U.S. money supply and regulate the value thereof? [Article 1 Section 1 and Section 8] Nowhere, in the Constitution does it give Congress the power or authority to transfer any powers granted under the Constitution to a private corporation. Therefore the Federal Reserve is null and void.
U.S. WARS OF AGGRESSION
The United States government had already decided before September 11, 2001 to start wars of conquest. U.S. General Wesley Clark (Ret.), explains that the United States government planned to invade 7 countries that had never attacked them nor threatened to attack them: Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Iran. "We got a good military and we can take down governments" ~ Clark says
MAKING OF THE FOURTH REICH
Very few know that the UN, the WHO, the IMF and NATO were all created to form a Fourth Reich. A document known as the Red House Report, gives us a detailed account of a secret meeting at the Maison Rouge Hotel in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. There, Nazi German officials ordered an elite group of German industrialists to plan for Germany’s post-war recovery, prepare for the Nazis’ return to power and work for a ‘strong German empire’. The UN (government branch), the WHO (medical branch), the IMF (financial branch) and NATO (army) are the framework of the Fourth Reich. Every country that supports the UN, the WHO, the IMF and NATO are surrendering their political, territorial and economic sovereignty to the Fourth Reich. Every nation on Earth should all immediately withdraw their support for the UN, the WHO, the IMF, NATO and every organization that threatens their territorial, political and economic sovereignty - that includes the Globalist G8, G20 and the new Nazi Occupied Europe called the EU. The Fourth Reich is being established by a secret organization called The Round Table (i.e. Council on Foreign Relations) which is dedicated to creating a one world government (a Reich - German for Empire) run by wealthy financiers (the Rothschild, Rockefeller, Prescott Bush heirs), under socialism.
Did Afghanistan attack the U.S., Canada, any other NATO country or any UN, EU, Middle Eastern, African or other country? The answer is unequivocally NO! Did Iraq attack the United States any NATO country or any UN, EU, Middle Eastern, African or other country? The answer is unequivocally NO! Did Libya attack the United States, France, the UK, Canada any other NATO country or any UN, EU, Middle Eastern, African or other country? The answer is unequivocally NO!
A military conflict waged without the justification of self-defense is a felony criminal offense - a war of aggression. To initiate a war of aggression is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime. Crimes against peace is (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances; (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i). Aggression is an unprovoked armed attack by a State against the territory, the people, or the land, sea or air forces of another State.
War crimes are serious violations of international humanitarian law. Individuals, including heads of state, are criminally responsible for the crimes: "murder, the ill-treatment or deportation of civilian residents of an occupied territory to slave labor camps", "the murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war", the killing of prisoners, "the wanton destruction of cities, towns and villages, and any devastation not justified by military, or civilian necessity".
MILITIA REQUIRED BY LAW.
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, the supreme law of the United States, is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that protects the right of the American people to keep and bear arms and to form a militia. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The right "to keep and bear arms" means an individual has the right to own and carry weapons anywhere and at any time in the United States of America. The "Shall not be infringed" means the government can never make any laws to infringe this right. Why? Because a militia, a military force composed of ordinary citizens is necessary to the security of a free State.
ENERGY SAVING TIP
The "incandescent" bulb is a very economical light and heat source. The $1 incandescent light bulb uses the electricity that feeds them to produce not only light but heat. It is the single most important technological discovery of man. The incandescent light bulb mimics the sun by giving us both light and heat. Without the incandescent light bulb man would not be able to travel at night. No vehicle, airplane or boat can safely navigate their way through the darkness of night using a florescent light bulb. The incandescent light bulb is a very efficient heat source. The 100-watt bulb, in particular, produces so much heat that it's used in theHasbro Easy-Bake Oven.
The "incandescent" bulb is 100 times more energy efficient than the power hungry electric baseboard heaters. Baseboard heaters consume as much as 2000 watts. A smart energy conscious society would replace electric baseboard heaters with "incandescent" heaters - like the ones now being developed by FuelReducer.
If you've made the switch from incandescent to florescent light bulbs did you know that several carcinogenic (cancer causing) chemicals are released when florescent light bulbs are switched on.
All fluorescent lamps, CFLs contain mercury. Mercury poses a very serious health and environmental risk. They are so dangerous that governments now regulates the handling and disposal of fluorescent bulbs. In some states if you break a fluorescent light bulb, you will be required to pay thousands of dollars for a hazardous clean up crew because mercury is a very potent neurotoxin. It is a very toxic chemical, for anyone who gets in contact and breathes the vapor, but even more so for children and babies in the womb.
Diseases like cancer, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s disease, asthma, insomnia, allergies, and migraine headaches are all linked to fluorescent lights.
The worst ongoing environmental disaster on Earth is underway in the oil sands of Alberta, Canada — home to the most energy-intensive and dirtiest industrial enterprise on Earth.
15 - Foreign Policy Theater of the Absurd
You gotta laugh – to keep from crying
by Justin Raimondo, May 07, 2012
A Russian general has threatened military action if the US and its NATO allies go ahead and build a “missile shield” in Eastern Europe: “A decision to use destructive force preemptively will be taken if the situation worsens,” say Russian chief of staff Nikolai Makarov. That the “shield” is of dubious effectiveness, and is mainly a cash cow for US defense companies, are not factors the Russkies are willing to take into consideration: their main beef seems to be the implied insult of Washington claiming the shield isn’t designed to protect against future aggression emanating from Moscow, but against an alleged Iranian missile threat to Europe. Hey, they seem to be saying: what about us? Aren’t we a threat, too?
Well, no – they aren’t. Russia’s population is falling rapidly, and their economy isn’t doing too hot, either. What the oligarchs didn’t loot and spirit out of the country has been either seized and mismanaged by the state, or else is part of the burgeoning black market. The last thing Moscow needs is an empire: they can barely manage what they already have. That hasn’t stopped Washington from manufacturing a phony narrative that imagines a “resurgent Russia” motivated by revanchism and a desire to refight the cold war.
So here we have the spectacle of a phony threat being uttered as a response to yet another phony threat: the Russians aren’t going to preemptively attack Poland, and neither they nor the Iranians represent a real danger to the West. Yet the actors in this little drama are intent on playing out their roles to the end, no matter how disconnected from reality their actions and pronouncements may seem.
Welcome to the foreign policy Theater of the Absurd.
While this absurdist trend has long dominated our domestic politics, it is lately taking over the foreign policy realm: just look at the machinations over Chen Guangchen, the blind Chinese dissident who can’t seem to make up his mind about where he wants to live. First he escapes from house arrest and travels hundreds of miles to the US embassy in Beijing, where he claims asylum. Then he leaves the embassy, saying he doesn’t want to live in exile – but changes his mind almost as soon as he’s out the door, demanding from his hospital bed to be flown “in Hillary Clinton’s plane” to the US with his family. His latest stunt: phoning his demands in to US congressional hearings, with Republican legislators at the other end of the line. This has our State Department in the uncomfortable position of negotiating not only with the Chinese authorities but also with Chen, hoping he will shut up long enough for the public to forget how they allowed themselves to become his captive.
In Syria, Damascus has responded to the international outcry over thousands of deaths reported in the government’s crackdown on armed rebel groups by callingparliamentary elections: over 20 parties, half of them pro-government, are fielding candidates. The opposition has responded with more violence, fueled by arms coming to the rebels from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf sheikdoms, and the US has preemptively declared the UN-brokered peace talks a “failure” even before the elections are held.
Intent on “regime change,” Washington will not be satisfied with anything short of ousting dictator Bashar al-Assad and his Baath Party. The Syrians realize this, of course, but are pretending to go along with their “reform” program for the sake of delaying an all-out military effort by the US and its allies. Both sides claim to want “peace” – and are preparing for war.
Meanwhile, in an election year trip to Kabul, President Obama had his “mission accomplished” moment, minus the banner in the background, declaring the Talibanall but defeated and the Afghans ready to “step up” and take the burden off our shoulders. He did this after having negotiated a preliminary agreement with the government of Hamid Karzai that would bind the US to Afghanistan’s defense for the next 12 years. As Antiwar.com’s John Glaser pointed out, the Taliban, far from being defeated, has effective control of most of the country outside the capital city of Kabul. As for the Afghan security forces: when they aren’t cutting and running, they areshooting at us.
Here at home, discussion of foreign policy in an election year faithfully reflects this absurdist leitmotif: all but certain GOP candidate Mitt Romney criticizes the regime-changing drone-launching Obama for not being aggressive enough, albeit without coming through with any policy recommendations of his own. After a decade of war, the American people are opposed to more military adventurism, but neither of the major candidates embraces this reluctance: instead, they are competing with each other to see who is the most war-like.
Isn’t “democracy” wonderful?
Over in Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is gearing up for early electionsin September, which (he hopes) will give him a mandate to provoke a war with Iran just before Americans go to the polls. However, anyone who so much as suggests the Israelis and their energetic amen corner in the US are trying to get Uncle Sam to fight their battles for them is promptly labeled an “anti-Semite,” and marginalized. An absurdist foreign policy requires absurdist domination of domestic politics.
The US has been inveighing for years against Iranian unwillingness to negotiate over its nuclear program: however, now that Tehran had taken the plunge it’s the Americans who seem downright cranky, while the Iranian perspective is described as “sunny.” The formerly glowering ayatollahs, who once reveled in their intransigence against the “Great Satan,” are now issuing fatwas against nukes and declaring theirwillingness to suspend uranium enrichment, while the Americans are refusing to consider lifting sanctions and are darkly pessimistic in their public comments.
The whole issue is moot, in any case, since there is absolutely no evidence Tehran is pursuing the acquisition of a nuclear weapons arsenal, an effort our own intelligence agencies are telling us was abandoned in 2003 and not restarted. Obama campaigned for the presidency on the basis of his willingness to meet with the Iranian leaders and negotiate an end to the crisis, but now that they have taken him up on his pledge Washington is suddenly playing hard to get.
Inexplicable, eh? When you think about it, however, it makes a kind of Bizarro World“sense”: after all, it’s only appropriate that the central ring of our multi-ring circus foreign policy features a nonexistent effort at “engaging” the Iranians over their nonexistent nukes.
The ultimate absurdity, of course, is the spectacle of a bankrupt “superpower” trying to lord it over the rest of the world, while their creditors close in for the kill. With the workforce rapidly shrinking, and the national debt expanding at an exponential rate, foreclosures are once again on the upswing, the housing market may be doomed to sink for the next decade or so, and the American middle class is disappearing. Perhaps another war will distract most people from noticing their descent into penury, but one wonders how long that old trick will work.
Is America a Free Country ?
by Justin Raimondo, April 23, 2012
The “war on terrorism” has inaugurated a new era in the American polity, a sea-change that has not only threatened to overturn traditional limits on government power but also corrupted the political culture – and opened the way to the terminal crisis of the Constitution.
In a revealing series of interviews on Amy Goodman’s “Democracy Now” program, three individuals targeted by the American surveillance state – William Binney, former top NSA official, Jacob Applebaum, an internet security specialist who works with WikiLeaks, and Laura Poitras, an Oscar-nominated documentary film-maker whose work has brought her to the attention of US authorities and led to her harassment by US government agents – give compelling evidence that the answer to the question in the title of this piece is clearly an emphatic no.
Binney resigned his position with the National Security Agency (NSA) after 40 years in protest at the government’s increasingly totalitarian methods of data-collection and retention, without judicial oversight. The government has targeted him: in 2007, his home was invaded by FBI agents after he went to the Senate Intelligence Committee with revelations about illegal NSA spying on American citizens: they pointed guns at him, and warned that he would “not do well” in prison. Applebaum and Poitras have been detained, searched, and interrogated every time they have re-entered the US from abroad – Poitras over 40 times – and had their laptops seized and presumably copied. None of these individuals have been charged with a crime.
The degree to which our constitutionally-protected liberties have been usurped is shockingly described by Binney:
“AMY GOODMAN: Do you believe all emails, the government has copies of, in the United States?
WILLIAM BINNEY: I would think—I believe they have most of them, yes.
GOODMAN: And you’re speaking from a position where you would know, considering your position in the National Security Agency.
BINNEY: Right. All they would have to do is put various Narus devices at various points along the network, at choke points or convergent points, where the network converges, and they could basically take down and have copies of most everything on the network.
While this level of surveillance started during the Bush administration, under President Obama, says Binney:
“The surveillance has increased. In fact, I would suggest that they’ve assembled on the order of 20 trillion transactions about U.S. citizens with other U.S. citizens.
AMY GOODMAN: How many?
WILLIAM BINNEY: Twenty trillion.”
What are they doing with all those emails? They’re targeting their enemies, domestic as well as foreign, and combining this information with “meta-data” – i.e. financial records, credit card transactions – to create comprehensive profiles of those on their enemies list. There’s nothing to stop them from “leaking” this information to anyone, for any purpose – because it all takes place in the dark. And if they want to find something on you, they will find it and use it. This, in short, is what it means to say one lives in a police state. Glenn Greenwald wrote about this in a recent column, and he said something very important that we should all focus on:
“So just look at what happens to people in the U.S. if they challenge government actions in any meaningful way — if they engage in any meaningful dissent. We love to tell ourselves that there are robust political freedoms and a thriving free political press in the U.S. because you’re allowe d to have an MSNBC show or blog in order to proclaim every day how awesome and magnanimous the President of the United States is and how terrible his GOP political adversaries are — how brave, cutting andedgy! — or to go on Fox News and do the opposite. But people who are engaged in actual dissent, outside the tiny and narrow permissible boundaries of pom-pom waving for one of the two political parties — those who are focused on the truly significant acts which the government and its owners are doing in secret — are subjected to this type of intimidation, threats, surveillance, and climate of fear, all without a whiff of illegal conduct.”
All modern dictatorships employ the same method of limited freedom in certain realms, expanding and contracting the parameters of the permissible according to the tactical advantage of the moment, and yet always upholding the first principle of any and all tyrannies: that the government grants such “rights” as “free speech” and “free assembly” at its sole discretion. Which means they can be rescinded at a moment’s notice.
This state of conditional freedom that allows these governments to maintain the official fiction they are “liberal” democracies. With Fox News and MSNBC braying at one another, and the airwaves filled with corporate-funded political ads detailing the dirt on this or that candidate, the illusion of liberality persists. Yet all one has to do is challenge the “national security” prerogatives of an ever-expanding American empire – as Binney, Applebaum, and Poitras did – and suddenly one is transported into the world of It Can’t Happen Here, Sinclair Lewis’s masterful evocation of what a distinctively American dictatorship might look like, Orwell’s 1984, or some other dystopian vision of a totalitarian future. Reading these warnings today, one cannot escape their archaic air: not because the visions projected in these novels turned out to be wrong, but precisely because they have already come true.
Take Orwell’s classic work, which posited a world in a state of perpetual warfare (check!), where constant and universal surveillance is the norm (check!), where “thoughtcrime” is ruthlessly punished, and where most ordinary people (the “proles”) are basically left alone, with totalitarian methods of repression directed almost exclusively against rebellious elites (check!) This last item is the point Greenwald made in his piece, and it bears repeating and elaboration. The idea is to make it possible to exert control without affecting how most people live their lives. If you aren’t a “whistle-blower,” a Julian Assange, or a Bradley Manning: if you don’t revealclosely-guarded government secrets, if you aren’t making documentaries about how the Americans conquered and lorded over the Iraqis, then you have nothing to worry about. There are no political prisons, no gulags – but if you step out of bounds the government has enough information to discredit, destroy, and/or imprison you. Two journalists – Tom Vanden Brook, a writer for USA Today, and Ray Locker, an editor – who were writing about the Pentagon’s use of military contractors to whitewash its sorry record in Iraq and Afghanistan, found that a website and a false Twitter account in their names made a sudden appearance, in what appeared to be a coordinated effortto discredit them and their work.
The contractors deny all involvement, and, yes, this happened under the Obama administration – last week. Barack Obama is an essential element of the developing totalitarian trend in the United States: indeed, I would argue his reelection is theessential factor pushing this process forward. “Lean forward!” barks MSNBC – but forward to what?
This is a question I needn’t ask myself, for the simple reason that I was never a supporter of the President, and am an unlikely candidate for membership in the Obama cult. My political views might be described as somewhat to the “right” of Ayn Rand, when it comes to domestic issues, and far to the “left” of Noam Chomsky when it comes to foreign policy. In short, I’m a libertarian, and so my jaundiced view of the President is not all that surprising. Yet even I am surprised by the deafening silence in the “liberal” community – and the lack of real anger on the left at Obama’s escalation of the war on our civil liberties. Leading “progressives” are apparently indifferent to this administration’s vindictive pursuit of “whistle-blowers” – insiders like Binney who cry foul at government abuses – and the lack of outrage is … outrageous.
I know it’s an election year, and partisanship is to be expected – but I would think that, as we descend into an authoritarian abyss from which there is no return, American liberals and “progressives” would consider it significant enough to declare a moratorium on partisanship and exert some pressure on their political leaders. Why is it left to us libertarians, and rare dissident liberals like Greenwald, to speak out against the accelerating encroachments of the National Security State?
I’ll tell you why: because the American left is dead, killed off by their support of a candidate who personified their turn to identity politics. The left’s undying allegianceto the President and his policies has sealed their rejection of the old-fashioned liberal anti-imperialist pro-civil libertarian stance, exemplified by The Nation when it was edited by Oswald Garrison Villard and which briefly resurfaced during the Vietnam era. Instead of going forward, American liberalism has retreated back to the era of FDR, when being on the “left” meant supporting not only the Welfare State but also calling for bigger and better ways to buttress the Warfare State. Modern liberals, like their ideological antecedents of the 1930s, disdain the Constitution as an archaic dead-letter that needs to be converted into a “living” document. What’s all this talk about the alleged sacredness of the Constitution, they grumble: it all sounds like so much “constitutional fundamentalism” to them. Democratic Rep. Mike Quigly of Illinoisopines that such concepts as “free speech” and “due process of law” are so vague that they “don’t define themselves,” and are up for creative interpretation.
The neoconservatives who have taken over the conservative movement and the Republican party are certainly not going to jump into the breach and take up the cudgels on behalf of the Constitution. They only invoke it when it offers to upend the President’s economic and social initiatives, such as Obamacare, but when it comes to this administration’s assault on basic civil liberties they say “Faster, please!”
With the left co-opted, and the right pushing for an even more draconian crackdown on what is left of our constitutionally-protected rights, we are left with only Ron Paulholding up a copy of the Constitution and demanding its restoration. Unfortunately, even that voice will be stilled – at least, insofar as presidential politics is concerned – after the Tampa convention, in August, when the Republicans anoint Mitt Romney, neocon tool and sacrificial lamb. What this means is that the authoritarian trend in American politics will continue, unabated and unopposed. In this context, it is appropriate to recall the warning of John T. Flynn, former New Dealer-turned-constitutionalist, a financial writer purged from The New Republic and polite liberal society for his vocal opposition to the policies of Franklin Delano Roosevelt:
“Fascism will come at the hands of perfectly authentic Americans, as violently against Hitler and Mussolini as the next one, but who are convinced that the present economic system is washed up and that the present political system in America has outlived its usefulness and who wish to commit this country to the rule of the bureaucratic state; interfering in the affairs of the states and cities; taking part in the management of industry and finance and agriculture; assuming the role of great national banker and investor, borrowing millions every year and spending them on all sorts of projects through which such a government can paralyze opposition and command public support; marshaling great armies and navies at crushing costs to support the industry of war and preparation for war which will become our greatest industry; and adding to all this the most romantic adventures in global planning, regeneration, and domination all to be done under the authority of a powerfully centralized government in which the executive will hold in effect all the powers with Congress reduced to the role of a debating society. There is your fascist. And the sooner America realizes this dreadful fact the sooner it will arm itself to make an end of American fascism masquerading under the guise of the champion of democracy.
“…. They began to flirt with the alluring pastime of reconstructing the capitalist system. They became the architects of a new capitalist system. And in the process of this new career they began to fashion doctrines that turned out to be the principles of fascism. Of course they do not call them fascism, although some of them frankly see the resemblance. But they are not disturbed, because they know that they will never burn books, they will never hound the Jews or the Negroes, they will never resort to assassination and suppression. What will turn up in their hands will be a very genteel and dainty and pleasant form of fascism which cannot be called fascism at all because it will be so virtuous and polite.”
Those words were published in 1944, and they are truer today than on the day they appeared in print. The dictatorship of the virtuous is being prepared, ever so politely, by those who pose as the champions of a “liberalism” corrupted beyond recognition. As we pass from a condition of liberty to one of conditional freedom, this is the political agency ensuring a smooth transition.
Read more by Justin Raimondo
Promises to Keep – May 3rd, 2012
Bringing the ‘War on Terrorism’ Home – May 1st, 2012
China’s ‘Reformist’ Crooks – April 29th, 2012
Marco Rubio and Our Wretched Destiny – April 26th, 2012
The Regime-Change Machine – April 24th, 2012
16 - A Vital (and Unlearned) Lesson from Julius Caesar
When a band of Roman traitors was uncovered, he urged they not be killed due to the precedent it would set
By Glenn Greenwald
May 08, 2012 " Salon" - -- In 63 B.C., Julius Caesar delivered a speech to the Roman Senate in which he conveyed a crucial point, one highly relevant to many of our current controversies. A conspiracy of prominent Roman citizens, led by the patrician Catiline, had been caught attempting to foment a massive civil war in order to overthrow the Roman government. Their crimes were widely reviled — it was pure treason — and, due to multiple confessions, their guilt beyond dispute. Common citizens were demanding their deaths. When the Roman Senate convened, Cicero asked what should be done to them, and several Senators — beginning with consul-elect Decimus Junius Silanus — railed against the profound evil of the conspirators and advocated their execution.
As recounted by the historian Sallust, Julius Caesar then stood and noted that Roman law forbids the execution of Roman citizens even for heinous crimes, and that executing the conspirators would thus require the creation of a radical and dangerous precedent: dangerous because to vest the power in the State to kill its own citizens, even if justified in the specific case where it is first done, would be to vest the power generally and thus ensure its inevitable abuse. Thus, even as Caesar professed his boundless contempt for the traitors (“I consider no tortures sufficient for the crimes of these men”), he vehemently argued against allowing passions to lead the Senate to embrace punishments “foreign to the customs of our country” — not primarily on moral grounds but on pragmatic ones:
But, you may say, who will complain of a decree which is passed against traitors to their country? Time, I answer, the lapse of years, and Fortune, whose caprice rules the nations. Whatever befalls these prisoners will be well deserved; but you, Fathers of the Senate, are called upon to consider how your action will affect other criminals. All bad precedents have originated in cases which were good; but when the control of the government falls into the hands of men who are incompetent or bad, your new precedent is transferred from those who well deserve and merit such punishment to the undeserving and blameless.
The Lacedaemonians, after they had conquered the Athenians, set over them thirty men to carry. These men began at first by putting to death without a trial the most wicked and generally hated citizens, whereat the people rejoiced greatly and declared that it was well done. But afterwards their licence gradually increased, and the tyrants slew good and bad alike at pleasure and intimidated the rest. Thus the nation was reduced to slavery and had to pay a heavy penalty for its foolish rejoicing. . . .
For my own part, I fear nothing of that kind for Marcus Tullius or for our times, but in a great commonwealth there are many different natures. It is possible that at another time, when someone else is consul and is likewise in command of an army, some falsehood may be believed to be true. When the consul, with this precedent before him, shall draw the sword in obedience to the senate’s decree, who shall limit or restrain him?
This is the point I’ve tried to make literally hundreds of times over the last several years. If you’re faced with this question — should President X have the power to impose Punishment Y on Bad Person Z? — and you answer in the affirmative based on your adoration for or trust in current President X, or your belief in the wisdom and justness of Punishment Y in the specific proposed case, or your acute scorn for Bad Person Z, you’re actually doing much more than ratifying this power in a single instance, even if that’s the limit of your intention. Whether desired or not, you’re affirming — and entrenching — the legitimacy of the principle itself, ensuring that this power will be exploited in ways you can’t control. When enshrined without checks, the endorsed punishment power will inevitably — necessarily — endure, and even grow, beyond the reign of the leader you trust to future leaders you don’t, and will be applied against not only those you believe are deserving of it but those you know are not.
In our contemporary political debates, “Punishment Y” can be limitless, secret surveillance, and torture, and due-process-free and oversight-less citizen assassinations ordered in the dark, and indefinite detention, and extra-judicial killings carried out by drones. As for the question Caesar posed — when a future malevolent leader, “with this precedent before him,” shall invoke this newly created power in malignant ways, “who shall limit or restrain him?” — the answer is: nobody. That’s the point of his rhetorical inquiry. He even answered it himself: “All bad precedents have originated in cases which were good; but when the control of the government falls into the hands of men who are incompetent or bad, your new precedent is transferred from those who well deserve and merit such punishment to the undeserving and blameless.”
When that happens — and it will, if it isn’t already happening — those who bear the greatest culpability will be those who cheered for the precedent in the first instance without regard for what they were endorsing. After Caesar spoke, Marcus Cato delivered an angry, vengeful, rousing speech demanding death to the accused traitors, and a majority of Senators was swayed. Still, it’s extraordinary how clearly this lesson was understood more than 2,000 years ago by one of history’s most influential and admired figures, and how steadfastly disregarded it is now.
Copyright © 2011 Salon Media Group, Inc.
17 - The Terror in Tel Aviv : What International Media Purposely Ignores…
Posted: 08 May 2012
Shapira Neighborhood Kindergarten
After a Molotov Cocktail Attack
Terror in Tel Aviv
On April 27, 2012, five Molotov Cocktails were thrown in Shapira Neighborhood, a poor area in Tel Aviv’s south. One of them hit a kindergarten, where children were sleeping (see picture); the others hit private homes. In one case, the terrorists opened the window of a house—where people were sleeping—and threw an ignited bottle inside. God’s unsleeping angels made sure nobody was hurt.
The event was barely mentioned in the Hebrew media and was completely ignored by the international one. The main report on the event was done by the Israeli website Maavak (“struggle” in Hebrew; www.maavak.org.il). I almost forgot to mention that the victims were black people; the attackers were Jews.
The terror attack followed agitation by a racist Jewish group led by Michael Ben Ari, a Knesset member on behalf of the National Union party. This party is a union of four ultra-nationalist political parties, namely Moledet, Hatikva, Eretz Yisrael Shelanu, and Tkuma.
In the current Knesset it has four members, out of the 120. Michael Ben Ari is leader of the Eretz Yisrael Shelanu (“The Land of Israel is Ours” in Hebrew) faction. They are right of Netanyahu’s coalition, and do not form part of the current extremist coalition; simply, they are even more extreme.
Michael Ben Ari is the first outspoken disciple of Rabbi Meir Kahane to be elected to the Knesset. Rabbi Meir Kahane was an American-Israeli ultra-nationalist rabbi that founded both the Jewish Defense League (JDL) in the USA, and the Kach (literally “So;” roughly “This is the Way”) political party in Israel.
In 1984, Kach gained one seat in parliamentary elections, and Kahane became a member of the Knesset. In 1988, the Israeli government banned Kach as “racist” and “undemocratic” under the terms of an ad hoc law; Kahane was subsequently assassinated in New York, in 1990.
In 1994, following the Cave of the Patriarchs massacre perpetrated by Baruch Goldstein, a Kahane follower, Kach was outlawed completely. Following the massacre, the US State Department listed it as a terrorist organization. Recently, Michael Ben Ari was denied a visa to the USA (see USA Denies Visa to Jewish Knesset Member).
South Tel Aviv
The attack was aimed at Sudanese and Eritrean refugees. In Israel there are several thousands (estimations vary between 4,000 and 8,000) refugees who arrived from Sudan and are seeking refuge from the ongoing military conflicts in their home country. Small numbers of Eritrean and Ethiopian refugees can also be found.
All of them arrived by land, after a perilous trip across the Sinai and Negev deserts; reports on the horrors faced by them along the way should be enough to grant recognition as refugees to the survivors upon arrival. In order to accomplish the feat, they use the help of local Bedouins, the only masters of the dessert (see Explosion in Sinai).
Israel has formally recognized as refugees only a few hundreds of them; the rest work as illegal workers, hiding in the vast population of foreign workers building up the Zionist dream. They replaced the Palestinians, who are not welcome anymore in Tel Aviv. In this precarious and rather violent conditions, Sudanese workers face deportation back to war and death. Yet, racism in Israel runs deeper.
On the Jewish Heart
Contrary to what one may think, the Jewish state doesn’t show neither compassion nor mercy. In Jewish Compassion I reported the case of Evelyn Belseng, 38, who came to Israel from the Philippines in 2002 to work as a caregiver at Kibbutz Kfar Menachem. After her employer died in 2006, she went to work in Ashdod.
In December 2007, she met Michael David, a religious Israeli Jew from Gedera. “We met through a childhood friend of Miki’s,” she said in an interview. “I worked at the time in Ashdod and it was important for me to keep my job, so we met mostly on Saturdays and he would sometimes come visit me.
My employers met him and were very supportive of us.” In early May 2009, after living together for two years, Michael went to the Interior Ministry in Rehovot and made residence arrangements for her since her Israeli visa was due to expire later that month. An official recommended that he begin the process of having her recognized as a common-law spouse.
But the process of obtaining the necessary documents, mostly from the Philippines, was time-consuming and expensive. It is almost impossible for someone defined as Jew by Israel’s Internal Affairs Ministry to marry somebody defined by that fine and egalitarian institution as a “goy,” a non-Jew. “Meanwhile our son Gilad was born, and Miki assumed that when we registered him, everything would be fine,” she said.
After the child was born, David asked the family court in Rishon LeTzion to recognize Belseng as his partner, because he couldn’t legally marry her in Israel; she is a hated goy. Later that year, he became sick with cancer, which drained their energy. They therefore concentrated on trying to settle Gilad’s status.
In June 2010, the Family Court recognized David as Gilad’s biological father and ordered the child registered in the population registry, meaning he became an Israeli citizen. Ten days later, David died. Due to David’s death, Belseng’s residency process was halted and in August 2010 she was issued a deportation order, which wasn’t enforced. Israel is about to deport a toddler citizen. Probably they will say he is a potential terrorist.
Are you Falash Mura or Beta Israel?
Wolleka Synagogue, Ethiopia
It is not easy to be a foreign worker or a refugee in Israel, because nobody helps them. Few even report attacks on them. Israel had developed over the years a public image that doesn’t allow the publication of these cases.
Yet, reality is different. No better way of reinforcing the new image portrayed here than with the cases of Beta Israel and the Falash Mura, two groups of Ethiopian citizens seeking Israeli citizenship under Law of Return.
The Law of Return gives automatic and immediate citizenship to every Jew arriving in Israel. A Jew is defined in that law as a person born Jewish (with a Jewish mother or maternal grandmother), with a Jewish ancestry (with a Jewish father or grandfather) or a convert to Orthodox Judaism (Reform and Conservative converts are recognized only if the rites were performed outside the State of Israel, other groups are rejected).
The basis for this racist law is what is known as “Jus Sanguinis” in Latin, namely “Blood Law.” In ancient times, it was used to attribute citizenship on the basis of family relations. However, the Law of Return denies citizenship to Jews who have converted to other religions out of their free will. Did their blood change during the conversion process? (see Is Israel Sovereign? for more on this)
Beta Israel Community Area
Somehow, Israel’s public image consistently fails to convey the reality of the Zionist state. While asked to link northeast Africa and Israel, most people will immediately mention Beta Israel, a group of Jewish Ethiopian citizens that immigrated to Israel through the Mossad-run Operation Moses (1984), Operation Sheba (1985) and Operation Solomon (1991).
According to tradition the name “Beta Israel” originated in the 4th century when the community refused to convert to Christianity during the rule of Abreha and Atsbeha, the monarchs of the Aksumite Empire who embraced Christianity.
In 1973, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, then the Chief Sephardic Rabbi of Israel, ruled that the Beta Israel were Jews and should be brought to Israel. That was the foundation for their arrival at Israel according to the Law of Return. Other notable poskim (“deciders” in Jewish Halakha Law), from non-Zionist Ashkenazi circles, placed a Halakhic “safek” (“doubt;” Halakha is the Jewish parallel of the Muslim Sharia) over the Jewishness of the Beta Israel.
Such dissenting voices include the notorious rabbis Elazar Shach and Yosef Shalom Eliashiv. Later on, a 1999 study by Lucotte and Smets studied the DNA of 38 unrelated Beta Israel males living in Israel and 104 Ethiopians living in regions located north of Addis Ababa and concluded that “the distinctiveness of the Y-chromosome haplotype distribution of the Beta-Israel from conventional Jewish populations and their relatively greater similarity in haplotype profile to non-Jewish Ethiopians are consistent with the view that the Beta Israel people descended from ancient inhabitants of Ethiopia and not the Levant.” Other studies reached similar conclusions. Despite these, the Halakha ruling issued by Rabbi Ovadia Yosef still holds.
In contrast to the discrepancies regarding their Jewishness, there is no doubt on the link between Beta Israel and the Falash Mura. Both groups acknowledge that Falash Mura were people from Beta Israel who accepted Christianity in various waves of conversion since the 15th century.
In comparison to the roughly 130,000 Beta Israel living now in Israel, the number of the Falash Mura is small; apparently less than 10,000 still live in Ethiopia. They are not recognized as Jews by the State of Israel, and thus are not allowed to reach the state under the clauses of the Law of Return applied to their brothers from beta Israel.
In February 2003, the Israeli government decided to accept religious conversions of Falash Mura people organized by Israeli rabbis, and that converted Falash Mura can then migrate to Israel as Jewish. Yet, Israeli government continued to limit, from 2003 to 2006, their entry to about 300 Falash Mura immigrants per month.
In November 2010 the Israeli cabinet approved a plan to allow 8,000 Falash Mura immigrate to Israel; since then nothing has been done. Due to their Christianity, Falash Mura reaching Israel independently would be treated as illegitimate foreign workers and deported if caught. Meanwhile, their Beta Israel brothers live mainly in “development towns” and are widely discriminated by the Israeli society.
As a former IDF officer, I remember IDF pamphlets explaining how to treat Ethiopian soldiers, which included rather racist remarks. Eventually, this discrimination is accepted by the international community. What would be the reaction if Germany was to legislate a law allowing the immigration of Christian Turks to Germany, but denying the immigration of Muslim Turks to its territory? Why is Israel allowed to perpetrate a parallel crime?
It is very difficult to read this. You can’t be only half-racist. You can’t just endorse positive-discrimination towards certain groups. If you do so, violence would appear as it recently did in Tel Aviv. Racism is racism, and Jewish racism is not different from Nazi racism. The State of Israel cannot enjoy immunity for such crimes; sanctioning them is calling for a A New Holocaust.
18 - The Empire versus Iran and Syria : A New World War for a New World Order ?
By Jooneed Khan
Global Research, April 28, 2012
Confronted with a declining World Order it can no longer control, does the West want to re-assert its will through a new world war, which this time would be really global?
A terrifying scenario emerges from the ceaseless escalation of pressures and threats against Syria and Iran, pitting, for the first time since the NATO-OECD Empire won the Cold War two decades ago, the Western trio of the UN veto club (U.S., U.K., France) against its non-Western duo (Russia and China).
These two latter superpowers, key players of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) spanning the Eurasian mega continent, have blocked the trio's plans to carry out a Libya-II in Syria, and to choke Iran with an array of sanctions that include cutting off its oil exports -- while keeping the military strike option "on the table."
This is the first time the Russians and Chinese have, together, raised obstacles in the way of the apparently unstoppable march of the victors of the Cold War -- and the destroyers of the former Soviet Empire.
But the march of the NATO-OECD Empire is becoming less and less triumphal. With support from most of the non-Western countries of the Non Aligned Movement and the G77, Russia and China are reasserting the primacy of international law and UN diplomacy in tackling the Syria and Iran issues, hobbling further the Western propensity to drown every "crisis," real or fabricated, under a carpet of bombs, missiles and boots on the ground -- with dire unintended consequences for all!
From Euphoria to Quagmire and Decline
Still basking in its victory over the ex-Soviet Empire, the NATO-OECD Empire dismembered the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s and extended NATO to the European limits of Russia -- which did not react militarily. Moscow reacted only when NATO tried to take hold in the Caucasus, through Georgia and Azerbaijan.
Despite the French "lone wolf" episode in Rwanda, the Empire also reinforced its hegemony over the Great Lakes region of Africa -- as compensation for the fall of Apartheid in the South of the continent. Neither Russia nor China budged. And China coolly swallowed the repeated provocations of the Empire along its borders -- through Tibet, Xinjiang, Burma, Taiwan, North Korea.
But as the 21st century set in, the Empire began to falter. The attacks of September 11, 2001 precipitated implementation of a New World Order according to George W. Bush's PNAC (Project for a New American Century): "You are either with us or against us."
For the first time in its history, NATO invoked Article 5 of its Charter to attack and occupy Afghanistan -- bypassing the UN. Two years later, again without UN approval, the Empire attacked and occupied Iraq.
But very soon it hit a quagmire. By 2012, these wars will have cost $4 trillion, according to the Oakland Institute -- while OECD economies stagnate or decline. Throughout the West, crises won't stop, unemployment is up, debt is ballooning -- while the weight and influence of the "Rest" (China, India, Brazil, Iran, South Africa, et al.) keep growing globally.
The Empire saps the UN and Boosts NATO
This shifting balance of power has compelled the old G7 to turn to the G20 to manage the world economy. But the G7 keeps stalling much called-for UN reform and Security Council enlargement, as it clings to its waning political supremacy.
More resolutely, the G7 continues to boost its military superiority: 21 of the 34 States of the OECD are members of NATO, which has pushed the limits of the "North Atlantic" to the Indian Ocean, Central Asia and Africa (with Africom) -- while also targeting Australasia and the Pacific.
As real productivity migrates away from the West, the unsteady economies of the NATO-OECD Empire depend more than ever on the "Military-Industrial Complex" that Dwight Eisenhower warned us against. According to the Swedish SIPRI Institute, NATO countries devoted more than $1 trillion (1,000 billion) last year to military expenditure.
With allies like Saudi Arabia ($42 billion, 11 per cent of GDP, 8th place), Australia ($20 billion, 1.9 per cent, 14th) and Israel ($13 billion, 6.3 per cent, 18th), NATO and its friends accounted for more than two-thirds of a global military expenditure of $1.6 trillion in 2011. With $698 billion (4.8 per cent of GDP, 1st place), the U.S. alone accounted for 43 per cent of world defence spending. Canada ($22.8 billion, 1.5 per cent) came 13th.
In comparison, China spent $120 billion (2.1 per cent of GDP, 2nd place), Russia $58 billion (4 per cent, 5th), India $41 billion (2.7 per cent, 10th), Brazil $30 billion (1.6 per cent, 11th) -- with $7.7 billion for Iran (1.8 per cent, 25th) and $2.2 billion for Syria (4 per cent, 53rd)!
The Empire and the Israel-Oil-Emirates-Turkey axis
This is the backdrop to the incessant roll of NATO-OECD drums of war over Syria and Iran. The twin crises are inseparably linked: through Syria, its key Arab ally, and its bridge to the (Shiite) Lebanese Hezbollah and the (Sunni) Palestinian Hamas, it's Iran which is the target, Iran which broke free of the Empire more than 30 years ago.
1. The Syria-Hezbollah-Hamas-Iran axis holds Israel in check;
2. The Shiite awakening, Arab and Persian, and unambiguously republican, threatens the feudal Sunni monarchies of the Gulf, beginning with Saudi Arabia and its puritan wahhabi brand of Islamic fundamentalism;
3. After destroying Saddam Hussein's secular and anti-monarchist Baath regime (and Iraq along with it), the Empire, backed by the Oil Emirates, Israel and Turkey, is frantically trying to steer, even hijack, the Arab Spring;
4. Turkey, a member of both NATO and the OECD, sees itself as a Sunni republican rival of Iran -- drawing on its new "moderate" Islamist regime and on its Ottoman past as ruler of the Arabs for nearly 700 years;
5. Syria has its own secular Baath regime, which has been pressured by the Arab Spring and by its allies to open up to pluralism and hold general elections on May 7 -- but the Empire keeps battering it ruthlessly, because what it wants is "regime change";
6. Meanwhile the Empire is doing all it can to maintain the status quo in Yemen, and in Bahrain, home of the U.S. 5th Fleet in the Gulf, where a Sunni royal family rules over a Shiite majority;
7. The Sunni oil emirate of Qatar continues the propaganda war for the Empire via Al Jazeera TV, even though key journalists are leaving and accusing the network of fabricating false video reports on Libya and Syria. Qatar shares with the atoll of Diego Garcia, in the Indian Ocean, the HQ of the U.S. Central Command (Centcom).
A military victory for a New World Order?
The campaign in the U.S. leading to the November presidential and Congressional elections, now pitting Mitt Romney against Barack Obama, is an additional factor that heightens the threat of a new world war, in the context of the inexorable decline of the NATO-OECD Empire.
Romney and his Republican rivals have publicly called for "doing everything, covertly and deniably, to isolate, choke and destabilize Iran, to kill its nuclear scientists, to destroy its facilities, and to bring down the regime." Short of declaring war on Iran, Obama the Democrat is doing all that, but Romney believes, with Israel and the hawkish camp in Washington, that only war will work.
Some hawks are Evangelical Zionists who pontificate on U.S. TV about biblical prophecies, and call for U.S. support for the "King of the North" (Israel) in the necessary Armageddon against the "King of the South" (Iran) -- although my reading of the map points to Saudi Arabia as "King of the South"! For them, this war is absolutely essential to the Second Coming of Christ.
These hawks think that a victorious war against the Iran-Syria axis will provide the West with the opportunity to impose a (divinely sanctioned) New World Order tailored to the interests of the NATO-OECD Empire.
The opposite camp fears another costly quagmire, like in Afghanistan-Iraq-Pakistan, and further decline of Empire. But the U.S., Britain and France also find the war option tempting, as they recall how they imposed their own global dispensation after World Wars I and II. They won the Cold War, but they do not have the means other than a "Hot War" to establish a Diktat which is universally scorned.
After demonstrating its military superiority and getting a real stranglehold over Arab and Persian oil, the Empire would force countries like China, India, Japan, Indonesia, and South Africa, among others, to depend on its benevolence for stable and secure supplies for their crucial energy needs. The UN could then be reformed and the Security Council enlarged, but in a way that would allow the Empire to keep its decisive political power within the architecture of the world system.
As it continues moving away from a uni-polar to a multi-polar world, the "Rest" obviously sees things differently. The Empire "just doesn't get it" and keeps reaching for the caveman's club, says the Rest. But the West keeps doing all it can to provoke a larger, global showdown, which the Rest has no appetite for and is determined to avoid.
Talks, Freeze, Sanctions and Terrorist Wars
Such are the dark schemes hovering on the Iran-Syria crisis. Iran just met with the P5+1 (the five UN Security Council "permanents," plus Germany) in Istanbul to explain and defend its nuclear program, once again. Iran was quick to reassert its peaceful nuclear rights under the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and countered its inquisitors by calling for global nuclear disarmament. The P3 trio deemed the meeting "positive." Discussions will resume in Baghdad in May.
But on the ground inside Iran, where the eight-year war waged by Saddam Hussein on behalf of the Empire ended in 1988, terrorists groups linked to the West continue to operate relentlessly. They are, in the main, the MeK (Moujahidine-e-khalq), the Kurdish Komoleh and PJAK, and the Sunni Jundallah, based in Pakistan. Nuclear scientists are being assassinated. Neighbouring Azerbaijan also has an eye on the territory of 16 million Azeris living in Iran.
Iran's assets and accounts are frozen and the West refuses to sell it all kinds of goods, including spare parts critical to the safety of its civilian airlines. A campaign is now on to obtain a worldwide boycott of its oil exports. Iran has preemptively cut off oil supplies to some European countries, triggering a rise in prices and in unemployment.
But India and China continue to purchase Iranian oil. They refuse to bow to what they call "internal U.S. rules," and argue that Iranian oil is essential for their development. The Empire is playing India against China by giving New Delhi access to its nuclear technology -- and squeezing Pakistan, which seems to value its friendship with China more than its old dependence on the West. India, looking out for its own interest, has signed a deal with Iran to settle their bilateral trade in riyals and rupees. However, India may not resist the siren song of the West if the NATO-OECD Empire were to take over or disable Pakistan's nuclear arsenal in the fog of war.
War Preparations, from Syria to the Caucasus
India and Iran, together with Pakistan and Afghanistan, enjoy observer status in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which is prepared to upgrade them to full membership. And the SCO is lined up solidly behind Iran, together with Latin America, where Uncle Sam is in retreat, and with many African and other Asian countries. The entry of both India and Pakistan, together with Iran, as full-fledged members of the SCO, an emerging powerhouse of neighbourly co-operation, trade and security under the joint leadership of Russia and China, is too much of a nightmare for the declining NATO-OECD Empire to contemplate.
Russian troop movements have been reported in the Caucasus along the Georgia and Azerbaijan borders. Georgian opposition members say new hospitals built in the country with U.S. help are part of war contingencies. Azerbaijan has purchased arms worth $1.6 billion from Israel, which imports one-third of its oil needs from Baku. The risks of a generalized conflagration are high, and will only rise with the approach of the U.S. elections -- as most eyes will be on the U.S. "withdrawal" from Afghanistan.
On Syria, the Empire says it supports the mediation efforts of Kofi Annan as Special Envoy for the UN, and the Arab League, which is itself in deep transition. But the Empire has declared in the same breath that it is financing and arming the forces that are carrying out war operations inside Syria from nearby Lebanon and Turkey. The Empire is feeding a civil war in Syria and shows it will countenance no compromise.
Propaganda and Police State Measures
The option of an outright military strike against Iran and Syria has been frenziedly promoted by Israel, itself a nuclear power, though undeclared, which refuses to sign the NPT and submit its nuclear facilities to IAEA inspection. The U.S. repeats that the military option against Iran "remains on the table" -- hanging as a Damocles sword over the Middle East, and the world.
With Al Jazeera and Al Arabiyya, the Western media keeps on demonizing Iran and Syria for a coming overt war led by NATO and its allies -- "this sounds just like the propaganda we heard before the attack on Iraq," said Ron Paul, the black sheep of the Republican hopefuls.
These same media meanwhile are silent on the growing trend within the Empire towards measures typical of police states -- the assaults on rights and freedoms, and on citizen privacy, the militarization of police as seen in the brutal repression of the 99 per cent, the authority to arrest, torture, detain, and even kill, citizens on "suspicion of terrorism" -- all in the name of "national security."
German writer and Nobel laureate Günther Grass was hit by widespread censorship in the West for his poem What Must Be Said, which criticizes nuclear Israel for clamouring for war against Iran "where the existence/Of a single atomic bomb is unproven," and for endangering "the already fragile world peace." Israel quickly declared him persona non grata. As the Rest refuses to rise to the bait of the West over Iran, we may yet avoid war. But if the new, dreaded war does come to pass, those who will oppose it within the very NATO-OECD Empire know what treatment to expect.
19 - Russian Opposition Caught Filing into US Embassy in Moscow
By Tony Cartalucci
Global Research, May 6, 2012
Unbelievable: Russian Opposition's Confab At US Embassy
In mid-January 2012, just days after Michael McFaul arrived in Moscow to begin his stint as US Ambassador to Russia, Russian opposition leaders lined up outside the US Embassy (Russian) to meet him in a bizarre confab that reeked of both treason and duplicity.
Images: Caught red-handed - Russia's opposition, long accused by the Kremlin of being foreign-funded, and who have well documented ties to the US State Department, are caught filing into the US Embassy in Moscow in January of 2012, just days after agitator Michael McFaul began his stint as US Ambassador to Russia. (click on image to enlarge)
Approached by journalists inquiring as to why they had all come to greet the US Ambassador, their responses ranged from silence to dismissive gibes. Later, the group of opposition leaders emerged responding only with "Вы сурковская пропаганда," or "you’re Surkov’s propaganda," meaning the journalists represented government efforts to undermine their work and legitimacy. It is a common response given by Russia's opposition members when media attempts to question them about their increasingly overt ties to Wall Street and London.
Video: This video captured outside the US Embassy in Moscow, Russia, shows prominent leaders of Russia's US-funded, backed, and directed opposition attending a confab with newly appointed US Ambassador Michael McFaul. Both the opposition leaders and McFaul himself are directly connected to the US State Department's National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
Present at the US Embassy confab were regular mainstays of the Western media's coverage of anti-Vladimir Putin protests, including Boris Nemtsov, Yevgeniya Chirikova of the US State Department's National Endowment for Democracy (NED) funded "Strategy 31," Lev Ponomarev of the NED, Ford Foundation, Open Society, and USAID-funded Moscow Helsinki Group, and Liliya Shibanova of NED-funded GOLOS, an allegedly "independent" election monitoring group that served as the primary source of accusations of voting fraud against Putin's United Russia party. Clearly, this wasn't the first time both words and cash had been exchanged between the Russian opposition and the US State Department, but is perhaps the most overt example of such flagrant conspiring yet.
Image: A screenshot from NED's official website, listing GOLOS as a recipient of NED funding, which in turn is provided by the US State Department. (click image to enlarge)
Image: A screen shot from the "Moscow Helsink Group" clearly subsidized from abroad. The significance of this group & its affiliates leading protests, indicates nothing less than foreign-funded sedition unfolding in the streets of Russia. (click image to enlarge)
US Ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul himself, is a card carrying member of both Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), two organizations notorious for extraterritorial meddling in the foreign affairs of sovereign nations and demonstratively funding, supporting, and directing Russia's so-called opposition. It was accurately predicted in October 2011's, "Agitator Nominated for Next US “Ambassador” to Russia," that McFaul's primary goal would be to continue with America's "disingenuous front of “resetting” with Russia, while simultaneously subverting the Russian government with US-funded political unrest." It appears that McFaul has begun his work in earnest.
Despite damning exposure of the Russian opposition's ties to Wall Street and London, the Western media, even as recently as this weekend during protests against Russian President Vladimir Putin's inauguration, insists that such connections are the creation of Kremlin-controlled propaganda. The Associated Press in their article titled, "Putin Returns to Presidency in a Changed Russia," accuses Putin of portraying the protesters as "in the pay of the Americans and intent on bringing about a revolution that would take Russia back to the instability and humiliations of the 1990s." AP adds, "with Kremlin-controlled television still the main source of information for most Russians, many believed him."
In reality, Putin's assessment of the opposition is verified by the National Endowment for Democracy's own website, the "About Us" pages of the opposition's various websites, and confirmed by confabs conducted by the opposition themselves with foreign interests in foreign embassies on Russian soil. And indeed, many of those leading Russia's opposition are members and representatives of the corrupt oligarchies that plundered Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990's. The treason is so overt, it begs the question as to whether the United States has indeed become this recklessly brazen, this desperate, or playing at a broader geopolitical gambit yet revealed.
With Russian opposition leaders on video climbing over themselves to get into the US Embassy to confer with regime-change specialist (Russian), US Ambassador Michael McFaul, and as their funding and affiliations become more widely known to the public, their work and legitimacy will be undermined by public awareness of the facts, not "Surkov’s propaganda."
20 - South Africa’s Rape Culture
by Hannes Wessels
April 24, 2012
Media reports suggesting South Africa has been “shocked” by the viral rape video involving a young Sowetan girl are almost certainly exaggerating the public reaction. South Africans are inured to this sort of news. Last December a male nurse in Bloemfontein was charged with raping a cancer patient while a female nurse pinned the victim to a bed. With an estimated one in 25 rapes being reported—and then only one in 25 charges resulting in conviction, meaning that only one in every 625 rapes leads to conviction—rape is a way of life. Most South African males seem ambivalent about the illegality of forcible entry.
In South Africa youths jokingly refer to gang rape as “jackrolling,” and the poor Sowetan girl savaged in this incident was known as “Jackpot.” Retarded and in her teens, she was allegedly raped repeatedly by at least seven men between the ages of 14 and 20. Mental-health organizations say the mentally impaired are vulnerable because they are unable to make a cogent report to the authorities.
“Women’s liberation has yet to reach the Dark Continent.”It was not long ago that Jacob Zuma, South Africa’s jocular president (he has just taken his fourth wife) was on trial for rape and the country’s public was availed of all the lurid details. The gist was that a young girl found herself exposed and defenseless in a strange home when the future president demanded sexual relief. After a lengthy trial that included Zuma’s revelation that he once showered after having unprotected sex with an HIV-positive woman, Zuma was acquitted.
In the midst of the trial Julius Malema, now the leader of the ANC Youth League, entered the fray with visible glee and publicly ridiculed the girl’s claim of rape. Instead of complaining, Malema said the poor girl should have been grateful for the masculine attentions the country’s future president showered on her. This view attracted raucous applause from a wide spectrum of African supporters. Old habits die hard, and in the traditional African culture, total female submission to male demands is the norm.
This fact, along with evidence to suggest that African males have higher testosterone levels and libidos compared to the majority of their white or Asian counterparts, sets the stage for excess. It has also helped spread HIV around the continent.
In such a “rape culture,” foreplay is for sissies, condoms are scorned, and females are encouraged to present with dry vaginas. If this cannot be naturally achieved, then ash, urea, and even sand are allegedly employed to facilitate traumatic entry. Invariably, there is vaginal damage, some of it serious, which accelerates the risk of STD transmission. While these observations might smack of unacceptable brutality, to some of those involved it is little more than agreeable sexual activity.
These differences in perceptions sometimes lead Africans to question whether Europeans are fit to judge their sexual proclivities. Critics are routinely damned as interlopers, while Western so-called “colonial” laws and Christian values are condemned as “racist.” It is widely accepted that the average African woman’s role is clear-cut. With few exceptions, they are there only to bear babies and burdens.
South Africa does not stand alone in some of these sexual excesses. As we have seen in recent African military conflicts, being a “soldier” armed with a gun guarantees unlimited opportunities for sexual gratification along with obvious perks such as looting and pillaging.
In some parts of Africa, female genital mutilation—the removal of the clitoris with the help of a razor or a piece of broken glass—is rampant. The UN estimates that between 130-140 million African women have endured such forcible primitive surgeries.
Women’s liberation has yet to reach the Dark Continent.
Please share this article by using the link below. When you cut and paste an article, Taki's Magazine misses out on traffic, and our writers don't get paid for their work. Email firstname.lastname@example.org to buy additional rights. http://takimag.com/article/south_africas_rape_culture_hannes_wessels/print#disqus_thread#ixzz1uB8YoIi1
21 - Kissinger Promises China ... 'Jeb Bush Will Be Next President' !
A Must Read !!!
Sun Apr 29 2012 04:31Submitted by SadInAmerica
'A shocking report prepared by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for Prime Minister Putin on the just completed meeting between China’s Vice Premier Li Keqiang and former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger states that the Chinese were told that former Florida Governor John Ellis “Jeb” Bush , brother to the former US President and son of another, will be elected as the next American leader despite his currently not even being on the ballot.
Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping met with Jeb Bush yesterday at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing where both pledged to advance cooperation between their two countries and, this report says, agreed that once Bush had taken office a ‘new era’ would begin in US-China relations.
Jeb Bush - Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping
According to this report, Kissinger told Keqiang that the Republican Party election process to select their nominee to run against President Obama was “completely manipulated” to ensure that their 2012 Convention would be “deadlocked” thus allowing for Jeb Bush to be nominated as a “consensus candidate” and thus his parties leader.
The path to a deadlocked convention, this report says Kissinger told the Chinese, lies in neither current Republican frontrunners Governor Mitt Romney or Congressman Ron Paul having enough delegates to ensure their nomination on the first ballot after which their supporters will be free to nominate anyone they so choose.
In order to ensure a deadlocked convention, this report continues, Kissinger noted that Romney will obtain his delegates from what are called Primary States while Paul will receive his from those holding caucuses and “open” primaries, with neither of them receiving enough votes to secure their nominations.
Political analysis on the US election do, indeed, note that Paul’s path to the Republican nomination lies in the caucus and open primary States which shows what is called his “secret path to victory.”
To the most shocking aspects of this report are the comments attributed to Kissinger that claim the entire American electoral system is under the control of their National Security Agency (NSA ) which controls the computers used in their elections and whose outcome is determined by their elites, not the citizens themselves.
In a dire move bolstering Kissinger’s claim of a rigged US election was yesterdays news that the giant global election firm SCYTL , which describes itself as the worldwide leader in secure electronic voting and electoral modernization, had purchased the United States most dominant election results reporting company thus insuring these people would never have true or total access as to who would actually win any of their elections.
Even worse, this report continues, the purchase by SCYTL of the private corporate site controlled by SOE software , which operates under the name ClarityElections.Com and controls the election results in over 525 US jurisdictions , was its being financed by the global investment giant Carlyle Group that was founded by the Bush and Bin Laden families nearly 25 years ago.
When queried by Chinese officials as to why Obama was allowed to be elected instead of Jeb Bush in the last US election, this report continues, Kissinger replied that the American public was not prepared for a continuation of the Bush-Clinton Dynasties that have, in fact, ruled the United States since the 1981 coup d'état staged against President Ronald Regan after he was nearly assassinated by the son of the then Vice President George H.W. Bush’s main business partner .
Kissinger further stated to the Chinese, this report says, that Obama was a “safe choice” to be an “interim leader” as besides his being a member of the Bush family (Obama is former President George W. Bush’s cousin by blood ) his mother, Ann Dunham/Soetoro , was a “prized” CIA asset who 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 and whose “handler ” was George H.W. Bush who a few years later became Director of the Central Intelligence Agency .
Kissinger added, this report says, that by putting Obama in office they were, also, able to secure the passing of draconian new laws in the United States that otherwise wouldn’t have been allowed to pass due to the overwhelming objections of American liberals and progressives, but who now are all but silent as the last vestiges of the US Constitution are being swept away.
Being ignored by these American liberals and progressives, however, are that the laws being passed by the Obama regime are intended to be used against them and include the power of the US President to designate anyone he so chooses as a “terrorist,” kill them without charges or trial, hold American citizens in prison, also without charges or trial, and, under a new law being pushed through the US Congress, would give the US government the power to strip Americans of their citizenship without being convicted of being “hostile” against the United States.
Though the claims made by Kissinger to China detailing how the election process in the United States has now been completely destroyed are beyond appalling, it does not, on the other hand, come as surprising from a “war criminal” who once boasted “It is not a matter of what is true that counts, but a matter of what is perceived to be true.”
To the American people themselves it remains to be seen if they will ever awaken to what is true…one can only hope they will, before all is lost…forever.'
youtu.be/qLOwTy5kOMU ; www.chinadaily.com.cn/usa/china/2012-01/18/content_14471730.htm ;www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1555.htm
22 - Zionist Plans To Assassinate US Citizens - Including Presidents
Bush & Obama? Israeli assassinations and US Presidents
Alison Weir is executive director of If Americans Knew and president of the Council for the National Interest.
January 25, 2012
On January 13th the Atlanta Jewish Times featured a column by its owner-publisher suggesting that Israel might someday need to “order a hit” on the president of the United States.
In the column, publisher Andrew Adler describes a scenario in which Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu would need to “give the go-ahead for U.S. based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel.”
The purpose? So that the vice president could then take office and dictate U.S. policies that would help the Jewish state “obliterate its enemies.”
Adler writes that it is highly likely that the idea “has been discussed in Israel’s most inner circles.”
Numerous Jewish leaders quickly condemned Adler, who has now apologized for the column, resigned, and put the newspaper up for sale. An Israeli columnist noted that the hatred being stirred up against Obama is similar to conditions in Israel that led to the murder of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin by a Jewish extremist.
Many of those criticizing Adler claim that he had defamed Israel by suggesting that it would ever do such a thing. Abe Foxman, head of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League (ADL) proclaimed: “There is absolutely no excuse, no justification, no rationalization for this kind of rhetoric. It doesn’t even belong in fiction.”
In reality, however, Adler’s expectation that Israel’s inner circles have explored such a course of action, and would be willing to undertake it, may be entirely accurate. The fact is that Israel has killed and plotted to assassinate people throughout the world; a number have been Americans. One alleged plot was chillingly similar to Adler’s suggestion.
Secret Service warned of Israeli assassination plans
There is evidence that in 1991 an Israeli undercover team planned to assassinate a U.S. President. The intended victim was George Herbert Walker Bush.
The first person to write of the plot was a former 11-term Republican Congressman from Illinois, Paul Findley. In a 1992article in the Washington Report for Middle East Affairs, Findley described the alleged scheme and how it was revealed.
Findley writes that the U.S. Secret Service had received a warning that elements of Israel’s spy agency might target Bush when he went to Madrid for the opening day of the peace conference to be held that year.
According to Findley, a former Mossad agent named Victor Ostrovsky who had written a book exposing Israel’s spy agency told a group of Canadian parliamentarians that he had received secret intelligence suggesting that the “the Mossad's hatred of Bush – and support for Vice President Dan Quayle – might lead to an attempt on the president's life.”
Israel considered Quayle much closer to Israel than Bush. Bush had particularly angered Israel by attempting to pressure Israel into ending its illegal settlement expansion on confiscated Palestinian land by withholding loan guarantees until Israel ended this practice.
Findley writes that Ostrovsky’s statements were relayed to Findley’s friend and former colleague Paul “Pete” McCloskey, a prominent former Republican Congressman from California who had recently been named by Bush to the National and Community Service Commission.
McCloskey, a decorated Marine veteran and graduate of Stanford law school who had at one time been considered a presidential contender, flew to Ottawa to debrief Ostrovsky in person and evaluate his information.
Findley reports that Ostrovsky told McCloskey that the Mossad wanted "to do everything possible to preserve a state of war between Israel and its neighbors, assassinating President Bush, if necessary." Ostrovsky said that a PR campaign was already underway in both Israel and the United States to "prepare public acceptance of Dan Quayle as president."
Convinced that Ostrovsky was legitimate and his information significant, McCloskey jumped on the next flight to Washington, where he reported Ostrovsky’s intelligence to the Secret Service and State Department.
The apparent plot never went forward, perhaps because Ostrovsky and McCloskey had given it away.
Ostrovsky gave more details about the plot two years later in his 1994 book, “The Other Side of Deception: A Rogue Agent Exposes the Mossad's Secret Agenda,” published by HarperCollins.
In the book Ostrovsky writes that an extremist group within Mossad was responsible for the plan. He says they kept the plan secret from then Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, though they believed that Shamir would have ordered such a hit himself if he hadn’t been constrained by politics. In the lead-up to Israel’s 1948 founding war, Shamir had headed up a terrorist group known for its assassinations.
In his review of Ostrovsky’s book, Ambassador Andrew Killgore, a retired career foreign service officer and publisher of the Washington Report, called the book an “insider's probing exposé of some Middle East realities that have been hidden too long from all but Israeli eyes.”
Ostrovsky writes that the Israelis planned a “false flag” operation in which they would pin the assassination on Palestinians. They kidnapped three Palestinian militants from Beirut who were to be the scapegoats, took them to Israel's Negev desert, and held them incommunicado.
“Meanwhile,” Killgore writes, “Mossad-generated threats on the president's life, seemingly from Palestinians, were leaked. These were designed to throw suspicion on the organization of rogue Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal. Names and descriptions of the three terrorists were leaked to Spanish police so that, if the plot was successful, blame would automatically fall on them.”
Ostrovsky reports that after the assassination plot was eventually cancelled, the three Palestinian prisoners were “terminated.”
If the plot had gone forward, this would not have been the first time that Israel targeted Americans for death. Nor would it be the first false flag operation.
In 1954 the Mossad planned to firebomb American installations, libraries, and other gathering places in Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood was to be blamed for the attacks, thus causing American animosity toward Egypt. An accidental early detonation of one of the devices caused the plot, known as the Lavon Affair, to unravel before it could kill or mutilate the intended Americans.
In 1967 Israeli air and sea forces perpetrated an almost two-hour assault in which they tried to sink a US Navy shipwith a crew of 294. While the attack failed to sink the ship, it succeeded in killing 34 Americans and injuring 174. Some analysts have conjectured that this was also a false-flag operation; it is highly likely that Egypt would have been blamed for the attack if the ship had gone down.
In 1973 Israeli fighter pilots were ordered to shoot down an unarmed U.S. reconnaissance plane (at the time the U.S. was delivering massive weaponry to Israel to prevent it from losing the “Yom Kippur” war with Egypt and Syria). While the Israelis were unable to reach the altitude of the U.S. plane, they did manage that same year to shoot down a civilian Libyan airliner that had strayed over Israeli territory, killing 104 men, women, and children. One was an American.
In 1990 a Canadian-American scientist and father of seven, Gerald Bull, was assassinated in Belgium. All indications are that it was an Israeli Mossad hit team that drilled five bullets into the back of his head and neck. (Israel has assassinated a number of scientists of various nationalities. The most recent is a 32-year-old Iranian father with a young son.)
In 2003 it came out that Israeli leaders had officially decided to undertake assassination operations on U.S. soil. An FBI spokesman, queried about the Israeli plans, said only: "This is a policy matter. We only enforce federal laws."
In recent years a growing number of American peace activists have been intentionally killed, maimed, and injured by Israeli forces, including 23-year-old Rachel Corrie, 21-year-old Brian Avery, 37-year-old Tristan Anderson, 21-year-old Emily Henoschowitz, and 21-year-old Furkan Dogan.
All of this has been minimally reported in the U.S. press. While major news media from England to Israel to Australiacovered the Jewish Times’ apparent endorsement of a possible Israeli assassination of a U.S. President, the scandal has been largely missing from U.S. media. Even Atlanta’s AP bureau inexplicably initially decided not to write a report on it, only finally sending out a story many days later.
Such news omissions concerning Israeli partisans are not rare. In 2004 a fanatic Israel loyalist wrote a letter saying that he was going to burn down Presbyterian churches while worshippers were inside (he was furious at the Presbyterian Church’s decision to divest from companies profiting from the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian land). This grisly threat also received minimal media play.
Despite Israeli violence against Americans (even while American taxpayers have given Israel far more of our tax moneythan to any other nation) American presidential candidates, with the exception of Ron Paul, continue to vie over who is most devoted to Israel.
It is ironic that Adler considers Obama so bad for Israel, given that Israeli analysts have rated him second only to Mitt Romney in his fidelity to Israel. And Obama has now released a seven-minute video that may catapult our first African-American president into first place in pandering to an apartheid nation.
But perhaps he’ll be safe from assassins.
Adler, Andrew. "What Would You Do?" Atlanta Jewish Times 13 Jan. 2012: 3. Print. Online athttps://www.documentcloud.org/documents/284979-ajt.html
"Jewish Times Publisher Resigns over Obama Assassination Column." Atlanta Journal Constitution. 23 Jan. 2012. Web. 23 Jan. 2012.
"Jewish Publisher Is an Idiot - but His Hatred Is Shared by Many." Haaretz (blog). 21 Jan. 2012. Accessed 22 Jan. 2012.http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/west-of-eden/jewish-publisher-is-an-idiot-but-his-hatred-is-shared-by-many-1.408466
Anti-Defamation League. ADL Condemns 'Outrageous' Column By Atlanta Jewish Times Publisher. 20 Jan. 2012. Web.
"List of Israeli Assassinations." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. Accessed 22 Jan. 2012.
While the Wikipedia entry appeared on the day it was accessed to contain an accurate list, it is important to remember that anyone can edit Wikipedia at any moment and inaccurate changes can be made. Israeli partisans have consistently attempted to promote an Israeli agenda on the Internet. Seehttp://www.councilforthenationalinterest.org/news/israellobby/item/1300-israeli-students-to-get-$2000-to-spread-state-propaganda-on-facebook and http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/142374 andhttp://www.ifamericansknew.org/media/wikip.html
Findley, Paul. "Special Report: Peril in Being President." Washington Report for Middle East Affairs (February 1992): 10. Print. Online at http://www.wrmea.com/component/content/article/137/6255-special-report-peril-in-being-president.html
Ostrovsky, Victor, and Claire Hoy. By Way of Deception. New York: St. Martin's, 1990. Print.http://books.google.com/books/about/By_way_of_deception.html?id=nKJBF8RS2LMC
Murphy, Dan. "US Says No Plan to Cut Israel Loan Guarantees, but It's Been Tried before." Christian Science Monitor [Boston] 11 Jan. 2010, Global News Blog ed.http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2010/0111/US-says-no-plan-to-cut-Israel-loan-guarantees-but-it-s-been-tried-before
“Pete McCloskey Leading from the Front.” Dir. Robert Caughlan. Perf. Narrated by Paul Newman. The Video Project, 2009. Film. Web.
Nakhleh, Issa. "Chapter Seven: Zionist Crimes and Terrorism in Palestine 1948." Encyclopedia of the Palestine Problem. Intercontinental, 1991. Online at http://www.palestine-encyclopedia.com/EPP/Chapter07_1of7.htm
MacIntyre, Donald. "Israel's Forgotten Hero: The Assassination of Count Bernadotte - and the Death of Peace." The Independent [London] 18 Sept. 2008. Print. Online at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israels-forgotten-hero-the-assassination-of-count-bernadotte--and-the-death-of-peace-934094.html
Killgore, Andrew. "The Other Side of Deception: A Rogue Agent Exposes the Mossad's Secret Agenda." Washington Report on Middle East Affairs April-May (1995): 58-81. Print. Online athttp://www.wrmea.com/component/content/article/161-1995-april-may/7775-the-other-side-of-deception-a-rogue-agent-exposes-the-mossads-secret-agenda.html
Melman, Yossi. "Targeted Killings - a Retro Fashion Very Much in Vogue." Ha'aretz [Israel] 24 Mar. 2004. Print. Online at http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/targeted-killings-a-retro-fashion-very-much-in-vogue-1.117714
"Iran's Nuclear Scientists Are Not Being Assassinated. They Are Being Murdered." The Guardian. 16 Jan. 2012.
Curtiss, Richard H. "The Lavon Affair: When Israel Firebombed U.S. Installations Print." Washington Report on Middle East Affairs July (1992). Print. Online at http://www.wrmea.com/component/content/article/141/6852-the-lavon-affair-when-israel-firebombed-us-installations.html
Moorer, Admiral Thomas H., General Raymond G. Davis, Rear Admiral Merlin Staring, and Ambassador James Akins. "Findings of the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Israeli Attack on the USS Liberty, the Recall of Military Rescue Support Aircraft While the Ship Was Under Attack, and the Subsequent Cover-up by the United States Government." Congressional Record October 11 (2004): E1886-1889. Print. Online athttp://ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/ul-commfindings.html
"The USS Liberty - Compilation of Articles." If Americans Knew. Web.
“Sharon Pattern from of Old.” United Press International, 17 Apr. 2002. Online at http://rense.com/general30/down.htm
"Who Remembers LAA Flight 114?" Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (September 19, 1983): 3. Print. Online at http://www.wrmea.com/component/content/article/56-september-1983/278-who-remembers-laa-flight-114.html
Redford, John. "Gerald Bull, Gunsmith." Apr. 1992. Web. 21 Apr. 2012.
"The Man Who Made the Supergun." FRONTLINE. PBS. 12 Feb. 1991. Television. Transcript. Online athttp://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/programs/transcripts/911.html
"Think of the Prestige." The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction (Sept, 1992). Print. Online at http://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/SGbull.htm
Sale, Richard. "Israel to Kill in U.S., Allied Nations." United Press International 15 Jan. 2003. Print. online athttp://www.rense.com/general33/trarg.htm
Some researchers suspect earlier operations on U.S. soil, one presenting evidence suggesting an Israeli connection to the strange 1949 death of U.S. Secretary of Defense James Forrestal:: Martin, David. "New Forrestal Document Exposes Cover-up." 17 Sept. 2004. Web. 2012.
Sheehan-Miles, Charles. "Israel Goes Too Far." Alternet.com. Alternet, 27 Jan. 2003. Web. 21 Jan. 2012.
Weir, Alison. "The Manufactured Controversy Over Former Senior White House Correspondent Helen Thomas."CounterPunch June 9 (2010). Web. 2012.
Porter, Gareth. "UN Report: American Citizen Executed By Israelis During Mavi Marmara Raid." Alternet (September 27, 2010). online athttp://www.alternet.org/investigations/148314/un_report:_american_citizen_executed_by_israelis_during_mavi_marmara_raid/
"Atlanta Jewish Times Owner 'very Sorry' for Obama Column." Atlanta Journal Constitution. 20 Jan. 2012. Web. 22 Jan. 2012.
"Atlanta Jewish Times Owner Says Sorry for Obama 'hit' Column." The Guardian. 20 Jan. 2012.http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/20/newspaper-owner-sorry-obama-hit-column?newsfeed=true.
Shalev, Chemi. "Uproar after Jewish American Newspaper Publisher Suggests Israel Assassinate ..." Haaretz. 20 Jan. 2012. Web. 24 Jan. 2012. http://www.haaretz.com/news/international/uproar-after-jewish-newspaper-publisher-suggests-israel-assassinate-barack-obama-1.408429 .
"Editor Laments Column's Call to Assassinate Obama." Sydney Morning Herald. 23 Jan. 2012.http://www.smh.com.au/world/editor-laments-columns-call-to-assassinate-obama-20120123-1qdul.html.
Chang, Pauline J. "Arsonist ''Promises Violence'' Against Presbyterian Church over Divestment Policy." The Christian Post (Nov. 12, 2004). Print. Online at http://www.christianpost.com/news/arsonist-promises-violence-against-presbyterian-church-over-divestment-policy-3180/
"U.S. Military Aid and the Israel/Palestine Conflict." If Americans Knew. Web.
Rosner, Shmuel. "Israel Factor: Only Romney Better than Obama." Jerusalem Post 11 Nov. 2011. Online athttp://www.jpost.com/Features/InThespotlight/Article.aspx?id=244925
Abunimah, Ali. "In Scandalous New Campaign Video, Obama Takes Israel Pandering to Dangerous Levels." Electonic Intifada Blog. 21 Jan. 2012. Web.
ReMillard, Frances H. "Is Israel an Apartheid State?" ICAHD-USA. 6 Mar. 2010. Web. 24 Jan. 2012.http://icahdusa.org/2010/03/is-israel-an-apartheid-state/.
23 - Terrorist Plots, Hatched by the F.B.I.
By DAVID K. SHIPLER
Published: April 28, 2012
THE United States has been narrowly saved from lethal terrorist plots in recent years — or so it has seemed. A would-be suicide bomber was intercepted on his way to the Capitol; a scheme to bomb synagogues and shoot Stinger missiles at military aircraft was developed by men in Newburgh, N.Y.; and a fanciful idea to fly explosive-laden model planes into the Pentagon and the Capitol was hatched in Massachusetts.
Enlarge This Image
But all these dramas were facilitated by the F.B.I., whose undercover agents and informers posed as terrorists offering a dummy missile, fake C-4 explosives, a disarmed suicide vest and rudimentary training. Suspects naïvely played their parts until they were arrested.
When an Oregon college student, Mohamed Osman Mohamud, thought of using a car bomb to attack a festive Christmas-tree lighting ceremony in Portland, the F.B.I. provided a van loaded with six 55-gallon drums of “inert material,” harmless blasting caps, a detonator cord and a gallon of diesel fuel to make the van smell flammable. An undercover F.B.I. agent even did the driving, with Mr. Mohamud in the passenger seat. To trigger the bomb the student punched a number into a cellphone and got no boom, only a bust.
This is legal, but is it legitimate? Without the F.B.I., would the culprits commit violence on their own? Is cultivating potential terrorists the best use of the manpower designed to find the real ones? Judging by their official answers, the F.B.I. and the Justice Department are sure of themselves — too sure, perhaps.
Carefully orchestrated sting operations usually hold up in court. Defendants invariably claim entrapment and almost always lose, because the law requires that they show no predisposition to commit the crime, even when induced by government agents. To underscore their predisposition, many suspects are “warned about the seriousness of their plots and given opportunities to back out,” said Dean Boyd, a Justice Department spokesman. But not always, recorded conversations show. Sometimes they are coaxed to continue.
Undercover operations, long practiced by the F.B.I., have become a mainstay of counterterrorism, and they have changed in response to the post-9/11 focus on prevention. “Prior to 9/11 it would be very unusual for the F.B.I. to present a crime opportunity that wasn’t in the scope of the activities that a person was already involved in,” said Mike German of the American Civil Liberties Union, a lawyer and former F.B.I. agent who infiltrated white supremacist groups. An alleged drug dealer would be set up to sell drugs to an undercover agent, an arms trafficker to sell weapons. That still happens routinely, but less so in counterterrorism, and for good reason.
“There isn’t a business of terrorism in the United States, thank God,” a former federal prosecutor, David Raskin, explained.
“You’re not going to be able to go to a street corner and find somebody who’s already blown something up,” he said. Therefore, the usual goal is not “to find somebody who’s already engaged in terrorism but find somebody who would jump at the opportunity if a real terrorist showed up in town.”
And that’s the gray area. Who is susceptible? Anyone who plays along with the agents, apparently. Once the snare is set, law enforcement sees no choice. “Ignoring such threats is not an option,” Mr. Boyd argued, “given the possibility that the suspect could act alone at any time or find someone else willing to help him.”
Typically, the stings initially target suspects for pure speech — comments to an informer outside a mosque, angry postings on Web sites, e-mails with radicals overseas — then woo them into relationships with informers, who are often convicted felons working in exchange for leniency, or with F.B.I. agents posing as members of Al Qaeda or other groups.
Some targets have previous involvement in more than idle talk: for example, Waad Ramadan Alwan, an Iraqi in Kentucky, whose fingerprints were found on an unexploded roadside bomb near Bayji, Iraq, and Raja Khan of Chicago, who had sent funds to an Al Qaeda leader in Pakistan.
But others seem ambivalent, incompetent and adrift, like hapless wannabes looking for a cause that the informer or undercover agent skillfully helps them find. Take the Stinger missile defendant James Cromitie, a low-level drug dealer with a criminal record that included no violence or hate crime, despite his rants against Jews. “He was searching for answers within his Islamic faith,” said his lawyer, Clinton W. Calhoun III, who has appealed his conviction. “And this informant, I think, twisted that search in a really pretty awful way, sort of misdirected Cromitie in his search and turned him towards violence.”
THE informer, Shahed Hussain, had been charged with fraud, but avoided prison and deportation by working undercover in another investigation. He was being paid by the F.B.I. to pose as a wealthy Pakistani with ties to Jaish-e-Mohammed, a terrorist group that Mr. Cromitie apparently had never heard of before they met by chance in the parking lot of a mosque.
“Brother, did you ever try to do anything for the cause of Islam?” Mr. Hussain asked at one point.
“O.K., brother,” Mr. Cromitie replied warily, “where you going with this, brother?”
Two days later, the informer told him, “Allah has more work for you to do,” and added, “Revelation is going to come in your dreams that you have to do this thing, O.K.?” About 15 minutes later, Mr. Hussain proposed the idea of using missiles, saying he could get them in a container from China. Mr. Cromitie laughed.
Reading hundreds of pages of transcripts of the recorded conversations is like looking at the inkblots of a Rorschach test. Patterns of willingness and hesitation overlap and merge. “I don’t want anyone to get hurt,” Mr. Cromitie said, and then explained that he meant women and children. “I don’t care if it’s a whole synagogue of men.” It took 11 months of meandering discussion and a promise of $250,000 to lead him, with three co-conspirators he recruited, to plant fake bombs at two Riverdale synagogues.
“Only the government could have made a ‘terrorist’ out of Mr. Cromitie, whose buffoonery is positively Shakespearean in its scope,” said Judge Colleen McMahon, sentencing him to 25 years. She branded it a “fantasy terror operation” but called his attempt “beyond despicable” and rejected his claim of entrapment.
The judge’s statement was unusual, but Mr. Cromitie’s characteristics were not. His incompetence and ambivalence could be found among other aspiring terrorists whose grandiose plans were nurtured by law enforcement. They included men who wanted to attack fuel lines at Kennedy International Airport; destroy the Sears Tower (now Willis Tower) in Chicago; carry out a suicide bombing near Tampa Bay, Fla., and bomb subways in New York and Washington. Of the 22 most frightening plans for attacks since 9/11 on American soil, 14 were developed in sting operations.
Another New York City subway plot, which recently went to trial, needed no help from government. Nor did a bombing attempt in Times Square, the abortive underwear bombing in a jetliner over Detroit, a planned attack on Fort Dix, N.J., and several smaller efforts. Some threats are real, others less so. In terrorism, it’s not easy to tell the difference.
David K. Shipler is the author of “Rights at Risk: The Limits of Liberty in Modern America.”
24 - The Real Issue Is Israel's Human Rights Record
A statement by Norman G. Finkelstein upon publication of Beyond Chutzpah
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/, August 25, 2005
Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard University is currently best known for his advocacy of the "most excruciating" torture against terrorist suspects such as a "needle being shoved under the fingernails." The alleged purpose of this torture is to extract a truthful confession but its real consequence, as human rights organizations have pointed out, is to produce whatever statements are necessary to end the suffering. For 15 months Dershowitz has applied a variant of this truth-seeking technique -- less physically painful but no less excruciating -- to prospective publishers of Beyond Chutzpah, which offers a critical examination of Israel's human rights record and Dershowitz's defense of it. Enlisting one of the most powerful law firms in the country after his personal initiatives proved unsuccessful, Dershowitz has repeatedly threatened to bankrupt highly respected publishers with litigation if they didn't cancel publication of my book. He could then proclaim that the cancellation confirmed the "truth" that Beyond Chutzpah didn't meet scholarly standards.
Dershowitz justified these blackmail tactics on the ground that Beyond Chutzpah libels him. Yet, when I first began to expose his gross scholarly misconduct, Dershowitz publicly declared at UCLA (on 21 October 2003) that he wouldn't respond with a libel action because he believed "so strongly in the First Amendment and full freedom of speech." Ironically, just as he was threatening my publishers with expensive and time-consuming lawsuits, Dershowitz denounced Holocaust denier David Irving, who had sued Deborah Lipstadt for libel, with these words: "Before Irving lost his case [against Lipstadt], several publishers had refused to issue books critical of Irving, out of fear of his bringing expensive and time-consuming lawsuits. That was a chilling of free speech" (Afterword to Lipstadt's History on Trial; his emphasis).
My publisher, University of California Press, was understandably at great pains to fend off a potential lawsuit by Dershowitz; for an academic publisher the associated costs would have been ruinous, to the point of making certain victory meaningless. On occasion our relationship became strained and at one point it appeared as if we had reached an impasse. However, through the skillful mediation of Nation magazine senior editor Roane Carey (who was the freelance editor of Beyond Chutzpah) and others, a satisfactory compromise was reached that protected the interests of both publisher and author, and, most importantly, preserved the integrity of the book. I would like personally to extend my heartfelt thanks to all who supported me and the press during this difficult period.
Unable to suppress publication of my book, Dershowitz has instead declared victory on the ground that certain allegations about his scholarly misconduct have been removed from the final text. Resorting to blackmail and censorship is not normally reason for boasting. It's also difficult to understand how the publication of a book copiously documenting that The Case for Israel is among the most spectacular academic frauds ever published on the Israel-Palestine conflict should be cause for his gloating.
More to the point, is it accurate to state that allegations of mine have been removed? An appendix to Beyond Chutzpah irrefutably demonstrates that Dershowitz not only massively lifted information and ideas from another author, Joan Peters, without attribution, but that he did so from a book, Peters's From Time Immemorial, universally dismissed as a fraud. It is left to readers to decide whether Dershowitz committed plagiarism as defined by Harvard University -- "passing off a source's information, ideas, or words as your own by omitting to cite them." The appendix also explicitly recounts my previous conclusion that Dershowitz didn't have "a clue of his book's content" and that he was "manifestly ignorant of the content of his own book" (Beyond Chutzpah, pp. 95, 254). Again, it is left to readers to draw the only possible inference. In light of the comprehensive falsification of sources in The Case for Israel that I have documented, Dershowitz might have been better advised to disclaim authorship. As I stated to him on Democracy Now!, "For your sake, I truly hope you did not write this book."
Finally, I would like to comment on Dershowitz's repeated claim that I stated that my late mother was a Nazi collaborator (kapo). In an article for FrontPageMagazine.com ("Why is the University of California Press Publishing Bigotry?," 5 July 2005), Dershowitz alleged that "[Finkelstein] suspects his mother of having been a kapo ('really, how else would she have survived?' he asks rhetorically)," while in a statement posted on his Harvard University Law School webpage, Dershowitz wrote that "He suspects his own mother of being a kapo and cooperating with the Nazis during the Holocaust" (www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/Dershowitz/statement). A more elaborate version of this claim appears in his new book The Case for Peace:
Finkelstein even doubted his own mother's denial that she was a kapo, asking whether her frequent statements that "the best didn't survive" constituted "an indirect admission of guilt?" The most he was willing to do was "assume" that his mother answered him "truthfully." But he questioned even that assumption: "Still, if she didn't cross fundamental moral boundaries, I glimpsed from her manner of pushing and shoving in order to get to the head of a queue, which mortified me. . . . Really, how else would she have survived?"
My late mother was a survivor of the Warsaw ghetto, Maidanek concentration camp and two slave-labor camps. Every member of her family was exterminated. After the war she was a key witness in an INS Nazi deportation hearing and at the trial of Maidanek concentration camp guards in Germany (where I was also present). She has been written up in many histories of these postwar hearings. Here is the excerpt from my memoir that Dershowitz consulted to reach his conclusion:
Except for allusions to relentless pangs of hunger, my mother never spoke about her personal torments during the war, which was just as well, since I couldn't have borne them. Like Primo Levi, she often said that, being "too delicate and refined, the best didn't survive." Was this an indirect admission of guilt? Much later in life I finally summoned the nerve to ask whether she had done anything of which she was ashamed. Calmly replying no, she recalled having refused the privileged position of "block head" in the camp. She especially resented the "dirty" question "How did you survive?" with the insinuation that, to emerge alive from the camps, survivors must have morally compromised themselves. Given how ferociously she cursed the Jewish councils, ghetto police and kapos, I assume my mother answered me truthfully. Although acknowledging that Jews initially joined the councils from mixed motives, she said that "only scum," reaping the rewards of doing the devil's work, still cooperated after it became clear that they were merely cogs in the Nazi killing machine. When queried why she hadn't settled in Israel after the war, my mother used to reply, only half in jest, that "I had enough of Jewish leaders!" The Jewish ghetto police always had the option, she said, of "throwing off their uniforms and joining the rest of us" -- a point that Yitzak Zuckerman, a leader of the Warsaw ghetto uprising, made in his memoir. (It was always gratifying to find my mother's seemingly erratic or harsh judgments seconded in the reliable testimonial literature.) Still shaking her head in disbelief, she would often recall how, after Jews in the ghetto used the most primitive implements or even bare hands to dig bunkers deep in the earth and conceal themselves, the Jewish police would reveal these hideouts to the Germans, sending their flesh-and-blood to the crematoria in order to save their own skins. One of the first acts of the ghetto resistance was to kill an officer in the Jewish police. On a sign posted next to his corpse -- my mother would recall with vengeful glee -- read the epitaph: "Those who live like a dog die like a dog." Still, if she didn't cross fundamental moral boundaries, I glimpsed from her manner of pushing and shoving in order to get to the head of a queue, which mortified me, how my mother must have fought Hobbes's war of all against all many a time in the camps. Really, how else would she have survived? (www.NormanFinkelstein.com, "Haunted House")
Comparing the actual text with his presentation of it gives a hint of how Dershowitz typically reports sources in his publications. I will forgo comment on the moral character of an individual who defames a survivor of the Nazi holocaust after her death.
25 - Introduction to Mary's Mosaic
by Peter Janney
History would be an excellent thing, if only it were true - Leo Tolstoy
It’s all about witness, brother. Every person who bears witness has to have the depth of conviction of a martyr. You have to be willing to die.
That’s the statement allowing you to live.
- Professor Cornell West, Princeton University (Rolling Stone. May 28, 2009)
So it was in 1964, just before 12:30 P.M. on a crisp, sunny mid-October day in Washington, D.C., that a beautiful, affluent middle-aged white woman was murdered on the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal towpath during her accustomed walk after a morning of painting at her nearby Georgetown art studio. For more than five hours, her identity remained unknown to police – but not, I would discover many years later, to an elite high-level group of operatives within the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). She was eventually officially identified by her brother-in-law, Benjamin C. Bradlee, at the D.C. Morgue shortly after 6:00 P.M. that evening. Mary Pinchot Meyer had been brutally put to death.
Nearly five decades have passed since I sat at my family’s dinner table on the night before Thanksgiving in 1964 where I first learned that my best friend’s mother had been murdered. In the intervening time span of nearly half a century, nothing has dimmed the memory of what took place that night, nor the seminal childhood event of losing my best friend Michael eight years earlier in 1956. Sometimes tormented, even haunted, I came to realize the necessity of a deeper reckoning – and not just emotionally or psychologically, as my chosen profession dictated, but some final resolution of knowing a more complete, unvarnished piece of the truth, and the direction from which it lay.
“We either make ourselves miserable, or we make ourselves strong,” wrote the author Carlos Castaneda. “The amount of work is the same.” As I meticulously attempted to unveil the facts surrounding Mary Meyer’s murder, I repeatedly took refuge in Castaneda’s words as the aftershocks of this event reverberated throughout my life in unimaginable ways. My journey – a rigorous, thorough research endeavor informed by my education as a Princeton undergraduate and later by my training as a clinical psychologist – began in 1976. It ended exactly 30 years later in shocking fashion.
There was nothing pretty or easy about waking up early one morning in 2006 and finally realizing that my own father – Wistar Janney, a career high-level CIA officer – had been involved in the “termination” of Mary Pinchot Meyer, someone I had grown to love and care about. Yet there is an another horror in the death of Mary Meyer, a horror that reaches far beyond the personal. It is the intimate and undeniable connection between her murder and that of her lover, President John F. Kennedy, on November 22, 1963 in Dallas, Texas. After more than twenty years of my own study, I share the belief – based on substantiated evidence and research by a host of dedicated researchers and historians – that President Kennedy was ambushed by elements of his own National Security apparatus in what amounted to a coup d'état. It is clear that a highly compartmentalized, elite segment of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the U.S. Military, the U.S. Secret Service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), as well as certain well-known organized crime figures, and finally Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson, all colluded to overthrow the elected government of the United States.
Certainly, no one individual, or a group of disaffected anti-Castro Cubans, or even elements of the Mafia, could have undertaken such an a conspiracy independently, as some authors over the years have wanted to maintain. The forces behind President Kennedy’s assassination not only had the means and power to conduct such an operation, but the extraordinary mobility and reach to launch a second conspiracy of monumental proportions – a cover-up of enormous magnitude that included a secret autopsy to alter the forensic evidence of President Kennedy’s wounds, while staging the illusion of an “official” autopsy that amounted to a well-planned fraud – all of which has now been fully documented.1 No domestic or foreign entity, other than America’s own National Security apparatus, had the leverage, flexibility, mobility, and authority to orchestrate such a massive enterprise, which included the manipulation of all major media outlets.
Today, the CIA continues its efforts to cover up its role in the Kennedy assassination. According to author Joan Mellen, a special committee of archivists and librarians at the National Archives was convened in 2000 to examine a set of sealed records relating to the Kennedy assassination in order to determine whether they should be released to the public. Before any determination could be made, however, the group was visited by a man identifying himself as a representative of the Agency.
“He warned them that under no circumstances must they ever reveal to anyone what they had viewed in those documents,” said Mellen in her book A Farewell to Justice. So chilling had the CIA man’s threat been, “no one talked.”2
Twenty-five years earlier in 1975, Senator Richard Schweiker of Pennsylvania, half of a two-man subcommittee within the Senate Church Committee, authorized to investigate the Kennedy assassination, had reviewed yet unseen classified documents at the National Archives and came to this conclusion: “We don’t know what happened [in Dallas], but we do know Oswald had intelligence connections. Everywhere you look with him, there are the fingerprints of intelligence.”3 In 2007, referring to Oswald’s 1959 phony “defection” to Russia, Schweiker told author David Talbot that the ex- Marine Oswald “was the product of a fake defector program run by the CIA.”4 Schweiker was never convinced the CIA at any time came clean with what it knew. “I certainly don’t believe the CIA gave us the whole story,” said the former Senator.5
In 1979, the Congressional House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) concluded their three-year investigation with a finding of “probable conspiracy” in the assassination of President Kennedy, thereby calling into question the entire veracity upon which the foundation of the 1964 Warren Report had been built. Recommending the Department of Justice investigate further, nothing ever took place – except that the most sensitive, most revealing files uncovered by the House Committee were “lawfully” locked away until the year 2029.
A ‘shadow government,’ what Cold War intelligence historian L. Fletcher Prouty once called “The Secret Team,” (and what Winston Churchill once referred to as the “High Cabal” that ruled the United States 6), has eviscerated America’s fledgling experiment in democracy. “On top of this,” wrote Prouty in 1992, “we have now begun to realize that one of the greatest causalities of the Cold War has been the truth. At no time in the history of mankind has the general public been so misled and so betrayed as it has been by the work of the propaganda merchants of this century and their ‘historians.’”7
The tapestry of President Kennedy’s killing is enormous; the tapestry of Mary Meyer’s, much smaller. And yet they are connected, one to another, in ways that became increasingly apparent to me as I dug ever more deeply into her relationship with Jack Kennedy and the circumstances surrounding her demise. To understand the complex weave of elements that led to her death is to understand, in a deeper way, one of the most abominable, despicable events of our country’s history.
Therein lies the cancerous tumor upon the soul of America. The CIA’s inception and entrance into the American landscape fundamentally altered not only the functioning of our government, but the entire character of American life. The CIA’s reign during the Cold War era has contaminated the pursuit of historical truth. While the dismantling of America’s republic didn’t begin in Dallas in 1963, that day surely marked an unprecedented acceleration of the erosion of constitutional democracy. America has never recovered. Today in 2012, the ongoing disintegration of our country is ultimately about the corruption of our government, a government that has consistently and intentionally misrepresented and lied about what really took place in Dallas in 1963, as it did about the escalation of the Vietnam War that followed, and which it presently continues to do to about so many things.
Once revered as a refuge from tyranny, America has become a sponsor and patron of tyrants. Like Rome before it, America is – in its own way – burning. Indeed, the Roman goddess Libertas, her embodiment the Statue of Liberty, still stands at the entrance of New York harbor to welcome all newcomers. Her iconic torch of freedom ablaze, her tabula ansata specifically memorializing the rule of law and the American Declaration of Independence, the chains of tyranny are broken at her feet. She wears ‘peace’ sandals – not war boots. While her presence should be an inescapable reminder that we are all “immigrants,” her torch reminds us that the core principles for which she stands require truth telling by each and every one of us. As long as any vestige of our democracy remains, each of us has a solemn duty to defend it, putting our personal and family loyalties aside. “Patriotism” – real patriotism – has a most important venue, and it’s not always about putting on a uniform to fight some senseless, insane war in order to sustain the meaningless myths about “freedom” or “America’s greatness.” There is a higher loyalty that real patriotism demands and encompasses, and that loyalty is to the pursuit of truth, no matter how painful or uncomfortable the journey.
“Historical truth matters,” said the former Princeton historian Martin Duberman, now a Distinguished Professor of History Emeritus at CCNY. “As a nation, we care little for it, much preferring simplistic distortions that sustain our national myths about ‘freedom,’ ‘opportunity,’ and ‘democracy.’ You can’t grow into adulthood when you’re fed pabulum all your life. And that’s why we remain a nation of adolescents, with a culture concerned far more with celebrityhood than with suffering.”8
Before this book, there has been only one published volume about the life and death of Mary Pinchot Meyer – Nina Burleigh’s A Very Private Woman (1998). Many people in Washington who had known Mary Meyer felt Burleigh’s account left out important details that were either overlooked or not considered, thereby creating more questions than answers. Some, like myself, having given Burleigh considerable input, were further disappointed by her conclusion that Mary had indeed been murdered by the downtrodden, helpless Raymond (“Ray”) Crump, Jr. This had not been the conclusion reached by two other attempts before the Burleigh volume was published.
Most outstanding was author Leo Damore’s book project Burden of Guilt, which had been scheduled for publication in 1993. Damore’s research for this manuscript was ground-breaking. With his 1988 publication of Senatorial Privilege – The Chappaquiddick Cover-Up, an incriminating exposé of Senator Ted Kennedy’s nightmare on Martha’s Vineyard and the death of Mary Jo Kopechne, Leo Damore established a reputation as a thorough, prodigious researcher. New York Times editorial columnist David Brooks, then writing in The Wall Street Journal, spoke of Damore as “a disciplined and relentless writer who makes his case more devastating because he never steps back and editorializes.”9 Senatorial Privilege landed Damore on the New York Times bestseller list for a number of weeks. Two of Damore’s previous books,In His Garden: The Anatomy of a Murder (1981) and The Crime of Dorothy Sheridan (1978), found renewed readership with the success of Senatorial Privilege.
Robertson Davies, one of Canada’s foremost men of letters, once remarked that Damore’s work spoke to “a strong moral backbone. He writes of the moral choices people must make in their lives and the consequences of these choices – made or not made.”10 A graduate of Kent State University School of Journalism and a reporter for the Cape Cod Timesfrom 1969-1974, Leo Damore first published The Cape Cod Years of John Fitzgerald Kennedy in 1967. Drawing on anecdotes from neighbors, employees, friends, and acquaintances, the book sought not to sensationalize or focus on Kennedy’s politics, sex life, or even his presidency, but to focus on capturing the flavor of the area where the young John Kennedy and his family spent their summers. “Leo wrote his simple but eloquent biography in a scholarly fashion,” noted fellow Cape Cod journalist Frances I. Broadhurst, “painstakingly drawing from all local sources available in print or through hundreds and hundreds of interviews.”11
After the release of Senatorial Privilege, Damore returned to his research on Mary Pinchot Meyer that had originally been sparked by President Kennedy’s longtime friend and closest advisor Kenneth (“Kenny”) P. O’Donnell. Kenny O’Donnell and Dave Powers were President Kennedy’s two closest aides and confidantes, part of the “Irish Mafia” that served the political careers of both Jack and his brother Bobby. In 1966, Damore had the good fortune to be introduced to O’Donnell by attorney James (“Jimmy”) H. Smith, Esq. of Falmouth, Massachusetts. Both would work for O’Donnell’s unsuccessful Massachusetts gubernatorial campaign in 1970. Shortly before O’Donnell’s death in 1977, Leo Damore did a favor for the ailing Kennedy insider, having located an estranged family member. In appreciation, O’Donnell agreed to allow Damore to interview him in depth about Mary Pinchot Meyer, her involvement in the Kennedy White House, and her love affair with the President. That interview would inspire Damore’s fascination with what he termed “the Goddess behind the throne . . .”
I first met Leo Damore in the winter of 1992. He had already been researching Mary Meyer’s life for nearly three years. Our friendship grew quickly. For nearly two years, we spent hours talking on the phone, interspersed with my visits to his Connecticut residence. Knowing Mary Meyer’s family and some of her community as I did, I was often able to assist in his understanding certain dynamics of some of the people in Washington. While Leo shared with me a good deal of what he had uncovered, it was by no means everything, as I discovered many years later.
In the spring of 1993, a groundbreaking event occurred in the course of Damore’s research. It allowed him, he told me, to finally solve the murder of Mary Meyer and uncover why certain forces within our government had targeted her for “termination.” However, late that same year, Leo began a mysterious downward spiral of paranoia and depression, the causes of which may never be fully known. Several of his closest friends reported he believed his phone had been wire-tapped, and that he was being followed. He told one close friend that he was convinced he’d been poisoned. In October of 1995, Leo Damore shot himself in the presence of a nurse and policeman. An autopsy later revealed an undiagnosed brain tumor, but this was not without suspicion. Damore never completed a finished manuscript for his book Burden of Guilt, but his research – most of which eventually came into my possession – became one of the cornerstones for my own sojourn, as did my friendship with him.
As news of Leo’s death spread, two well-known authors and one newcomer would begin vying to pick up what Damore had started. The first was the prominent investigative journalist Seymour Hersh. In November of 1995, less than a month after Leo’s death, Hersh wrote to Damore’s principal research assistant Mark O’Blazney, seeking Damore’s materials, saying that he knew how “active and very diligent Damore had been in his research – some of those he sought to interview told me of his requests, not only for his book Senatorial Privilege but in his current pursuit about the story of Mary Meyer. I also know from his earlier work that few had come to understand the [Kennedy] family as he had, essentially from his earlier book on Ted [Kennedy].”12 Hersh’s courtship of O’Blazney, who closely guarded Leo’s vault, was short-lived, however. O’Blazney rightly claimed that Damore had bequeathed his research to him, since the author had been unable to remunerate O’Blazney for the work he had done during the last year of his life. As members of the Damore family considered mounting a legal battle for ownership, Hersh decided it was too big a bother, though he always suspected the real story behind Mary Meyer and her death to be a giant bombshell.13
Within a year, two other journalists came upon the scene almost simultaneously. The first was John H. Davis, an author of six books, who was a well-known, respected Kennedy assassination researcher, himself a Kennedy insider and a first cousin to Jackie Kennedy. Davis had an inside track to the Kennedy family that gave him a unique perspective. As a relative who had ingratiated himself, he knew many of the confidential workings of the Kennedy clan, including some family members’ real beliefs about the Kennedy assassination. Davis himself had absolutely no confidence whatsoever in the Warren Report. In particular, his book Mafia Kingfish: Carlos Marcello and the Assassination of John F. Kennedy(1988) has remained a highly respected work with regard to the role of organized crime in JFK’s assassination. With the assistance of attorney James (“Jimmy”) H. Smith, Davis acquired access to Leo Damore’s research on Mary Meyer. In May 1996, editor Fred Jordan at Fromm Publishing International offered Davis a hefty book contract that included an immediate advance of $110,000. The book was to be titled John F. Kennedy and Mary Pinchot Meyer: A Tale of Two Murdered Lovers, and was scheduled to be completed by June 30, 1997. Davis took the same position in his attempt as his predecessor Leo Damore: namely, that Mary Meyer hadn’t been wantonly murdered, but assassinated because ‘she knew too much.’
While John Davis was at work on his Mary Meyer book, author Noel Twyman published Bloody Treason – The Assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1997. The book was exhaustive in its research, ultimately laying the blame for the President’s assassination at the front (and back) door of the CIA. Davis was unequivocal: Twyman had “completely solved the crime of the century.” Bolstered by Damore’s research, Twyman’s book further substantiated for Davis why the CIA had a keen interest in Mary Meyer after the Warren Report was made public.
But like Leo Damore, John Davis would never complete his book about Mary, despite his access to Damore’s discoveries and what certain members of the Kennedy family had shared with him. There may be several explanations for this. Both John Davis and Leo Damore ultimately linked the murder of Mary Meyer to the assassination of President Kennedy, which Davis had firmly come to believe had been masterminded by the CIA. Was it just mere coincidence that the two attempts to demonstrate a CIA conspiracy in the demise of Mary Meyer would never be published during this period? I don’t think so. John H. Davis was a cum laude graduate of Princeton, and like Leo Damore, a prolific author and respected researcher. It was possible that Davis’s alcoholism, well known to his close friends, prevented the book’s publication, and the fact that he eventually suffered a severe stroke, though that didn’t occur until 2002. When I interviewed Davis in New York in 2004, his disorientation and confusion were apparent; intermittently, he was incoherent. But his friend Jimmy Smith, who had been Damore’s attorney and close friend, recalled a chilling telephone conversation with Davis in early 1999.
“John,” inquired Jimmy Smith, “what the hell is going on with the book on Mary Pinchot Meyer?” “Oh, I’m not doing that,” replied Davis. “I decided I wanted to live . . .”14 When I queried Smith about this remark, he said he was sure Davis’s life had been threatened, that an attempt would have been made on his life had he published John F. Kennedy and Mary Pinchot Meyer: A Tale of Two Murdered Lovers. Davis’s previous books on the Kennedy assassination and the Mafia made him no stranger to the world of organized crime. He likely would have been able to discriminate between a serious threat and one that wasn’t.
Journalist Nina Burleigh contacted me in 1996 to talk about Mary Meyer. Our initial interview lasted several hours. I was heartened at the time by some of her insights, and for the next two years or so, continued to offer suggestions when asked. Though Nina would eventually acknowledge my assistance, as well as quote me throughout, I was very disappointed by her conclusions in A Very Private Woman. Despite some well-researched biographical information on Mary’s early life, Burleigh’s portrayals of Mary’s relationship with Timothy Leary, the nature of her relationship with Jack Kennedy, and her final disposition toward Mary’s alleged assailant Ray Crump, Jr. and his attorney Dovey Roundtree were not only short-sighted, but ultimately inaccurate and misinformed.
Who then bears the “burden of guilt,” as Leo Damore once coined it, for the murder of Mary Pinchot Meyer? And who among us would weep for the ruined life of the wrongfully prosecuted Raymond Crump, Jr. – a defenseless, meek young African-American man scapegoated for a crime he couldn’t have possibly committed? Who would dare to step forward to undertake the journey for the deeper truth of what really occurred? Author Leo Damore may well have given his life for this story. It is his burden – and Mary Meyer’s – that I have ultimately endeavored to shoulder.
Members of my immediate and extended family, as well as Wistar Janney’s remaining friends and community, may find my conclusions all too outrageous and troublesome. Everyone is, of course, ultimately entitled to his own opinion – but not to his own set of facts. And the hidden history of this narrative – the true facts beneath the surface – much of which is revealed here for the very first time, strongly support the conclusions that I have established.
Whatever remaining anguish – mine, as well as the blemish upon the soul of America – my faith dictates that eventually it will have a redemptive impact – only because truth, when it is confronted and finally understood, has the power to heal.
Chapter Notes: Introduction
1 Lifton, David S. Best Evidence – Disguise and Deception in the Assassination of John F. Kennedy. New York: Dell Publishing Company, 1982. See also, Horne, Douglas P. Inside The Assassination Records Review Board: The U.S. Government’s Final Attempt to Reconcile the Conflicting Medical Evidence in the Assassination of JFK., Vols. I-V. Published privately (ISBN-13: 978-0-9843144-0-9).
2 Mellen, Joan. A Farewell to Justice. Dulles, Virginia: Potomac Books, 2005. pp. 383-384. Author Mellen further discussed and confirmed this event in an interview with this author on November 19, 2006.
3 Fonzi, Gaeton. The Last Investigation. New York: Thunder's Mouth Press, 1993. p. 31. Also: Fonzi, Gaeton, interviewed by the author. February 24, 2010.
4 Summers, Anthony. Conspiracy. New York: Paragon House, 1989, pp. 143-149. That Lee Harvey Oswald was part of a 1959 false defection program administered through the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) in Nags Head, North Carolina was first discussed in an interview that Summers conducted with former CIA officer Victor Marchetti, who confirmed this account in an interview with this author on October 4, 2007. According to author Joan Mellen, the ONI program was overseen by the CIA’s counterintelligence chief James Jesus Angleton. Upon Oswald’s return to the U.S. in 1962, he was, in fact, “debriefed” by a CIA officer named Aldrich (“Andy”) Anderson. The debriefing report was read by CIA officer Donald Deneseyla who confirmed this in an interview for this book on May 25, 2007, as well as in the 1993 PBS Frontline program, “Who was Lee Harvey Oswald?”
5 Talbot, David. Brothers - The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years. New York: Free Press, 2007. p. 381.
6 Prouty, L. Fletcher. JFK – The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy. New York: Citadel Press, 1996. p. 81.
7 Ibid. p. xxii.
8 Duberman, Martin. Waiting to Land – A (Mostly) Political Memoir, 1985-2008. New York: The New Press, 2009. p. 288.
9 Brooks, David. “Bookshorts: Kennedy’s Big Mess; Savitch’s Sad Life.” Wall Street Journal. August 16, 1988. p. 26.
10 Gale Reference Team. “Biography – Damore, Leo J. (1929-1995).” Contemporary Authors (Biography). Thomson Gale, 2004.
11 Broadhurst, Francis I. “A refreshing view of Kennedy.” Cape Cod Times, November 18, 1993.
12 Letter from Seymour Hersh to Mark O’Blazney dated November 1, 1995.
14 Smith, James H., interviewed by the author. April 6, 2004. Smith recounted verbatim the conversation with his friend John H. Davis.
Read the Foreword by Dick Russell
26 - The Family Farm Is Being Systematically Wiped Out Of Existence In America
An entire way of life is rapidly dying right in front of our eyes. The family farm is being systematically wiped out of existence in America, and big agribusiness and the federal government both have blood all over their hands. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the number of farms in the United States has fallen from about 6.8 million in 1935 to only about 2 million today. That doesn't mean that there is less farming going on. U.S. farms are producing more than ever. But what it does mean is that farming is increasingly becoming dominated by the big boys. The rules of the game have been tilted in favor of big agribusiness so dramatically that most small farmers find that they simply cannot compete anymore. Back in 1900, about 39 percent of the U.S. population worked on farms. At this point, only about 2 percent of all Americans now live on farms. Big agribusiness, the food processing conglomerates, and big seed companies such as Monsanto completely dominate the industry. Unless something dramatic is done, the family farm is going to continue to be wiped out of existence. Unfortunately, it does not look like things are going to turn around any time soon.
The way that the farming industry is structured today, it is simply not economically feasible to operate a small family farm. According to Farm Aid, every week approximately 330 farmers leave their land for good.
Many old timers are trying to hang on for as long as they can. A very large percentage of family farmers are in their fifties, sixties or seventies at this point. Today, only about 6 percent of all farmers are under the age of 35.
Most young people these days are not too eager to choose farming as a career. A lot of young adults that grew up on family farms have decided that investing hundreds of thousands of dollars in a business that requires you to work 12 hours or more per day most of the year for very meager wages is simply not worth it.
In recent years, many family farmers have been forced to find second jobs in order to support their families. Many farm families are constantly on the verge of financial ruin. It is a really tough life for many of them.
Sadly, less than 25 percent of all farms in America bring in gross revenues in excess of $50,000. The following comes from the EPA website....
It has been estimated that living expenses for the average farm family exceed $47,000 per year. Clearly, many farms that meet the U.S. Census' definition would not produce sufficient income to meet farm family living expenses. In fact, fewer than 1 in 4 of the farms in this country produce gross revenues in excess of $50,000.
On top of everything else, the federal government and many state governments just keep endlessly piling more rules and regulations on to the backs of farmers.
Big agribusiness has the resources to deal with all of these regulations fairly well, but most family farms do not.
With each passing year, the farming industry becomes even more centralized. If current trends continue, big agribusiness will eventually control nearly all of it. The following is from the EPA website....
By 1997, a mere 46,000 of the two million farms in this country accounted for 50% of sales of agricultural products (USDA, 1997 Census of Agriculture data). That number was down from almost 62,000 in 1992.
In certain industries the amount of consolidation has been absolutely stunning. For example, between 1970 and today the United States has lost 88 percent of its dairy farms.
Another factor that is shaping the farming business is the incredible power that the giant food processing conglomerates have accumulated.
Today, there are 10 corporations that control most of the things that Americans eat and drink on a daily basis. If you doubt this, just check out this chart.
The giant food processing conglomerates have a massive amount of influence over how food is grown in the United States today. Small farmers that try to go against the tide often have a very rough go of it.
That is also true when it comes to seeds.
For example, approximately 80 percent of all corn grown in the United States is grown using seeds that have been genetically modified by Monsanto.
If you want to try to defy companies such as Monsanto, you are playing a very dangerous game. The predatory business practices of Monsanto have been well documented. Monsanto has taken countless numbers of farmers to court, and they are absolutely ruthless.
Plus, it certainly does not help that there is a constant revolving door between Monsanto and federal government agencies. If you doubt this, just check out the chart about Monsanto on this page.
Amazingly, in spite of all this there are still some small farmers that are able to overcome all of these obstacles and run successful businesses.
But that is where the federal government comes in.
In recent years, the federal government has become absolutely obsessed with going after small farmers.
For example, a recent Food Freedom News article detailed what the feds have been doing to Randy and Karen Sowers. They were keeping their cash deposits under $10,000 so that they would not have to fill out a bunch of paperwork, and the federal government came down on them like a hurricane....
“Structuring,” explains Overlawyered.com, “is the federal criminal offense of splitting up bank deposits so as to keep them under a threshold such as $10,000 above which banks have to report transactions to the government.”
While being questioned, the Sowers were finally presented with a seizure order and advised that the feds had already emptied their bank account of $70,000. The Dept. of Justice has since sued to keep $63,000 of the Sowers’ money, though they committed no crime other than maintaining their privacy.
Without funds, they will be unable to make purchases for the spring planting.
When a similar action was taken against Taylor’s Produce Stand last year, the feds seized $90,000, dropped the charges, and kept $45,000 of Taylor’s money.
Knowing that most farms operate on a very thin margin, such abuse of power wipes out a family’s income, and for a bonus, the feds enhance the monopoly power of Monsanto, Big Dairy and their supply chain.
At many other small farms across America, the feds have conducted military-style raids at the crack of dawn over the smallest infractions.
Some examples of this were detailed in a documentary entitled "Farmaggedon". The following is a short trailer for that film....
The sad truth is that the federal government has been using your tax money to go after small farmers in absolutely vicious ways.
For example, the feds raided one Amish farm at 5 AM one morning.
So what was the big crime that the feds were so concerned about?
Well, the Amish farm was selling raw milk.
Oh the horror!
The feds seem content to leave big agribusiness pretty much alone, but they are constantly going after small farms in hundreds of different ways.
Did you know that the Department of Labor is instituting new regulations that will ban children from doing many kinds of farm chores?
Just another way to kill off the family farm in America.
America is changing, and not for the better.
Just like the middle class, the family farm is heading for extinction.
Eventually, the big corporations and the federal government will have near total control over food production in America.
So what do you think about all of this? Please feel free to post a comment with your thoughts below....
27 - Book Reveals True Occult Nature of Judaism
By Michael Hoffman
The soothsayers and augurs of the Talmud and Midrash are fully on display in this revealing study, which celebrates the power and influence of astrology within Rabbinic Judaism (leavened with a few escape clauses in the author's Introduction).
In these pages you'll find Aquarius as the mazal of Yisrael, and Judah as Cancer the Crab!
The vast majority of the revered rabbinic "sages" from the Taanaim through the Rishonim periods practiced and advocated astrology and reincarnation, both of which are part of the magical arts of the earliest pagan cultures, from Egypt to Babylon (Daniel 21:2). This belt of transmission infected the heirs of Pharisaic Judaism, today known as Orthodox Judaism.
The exception to this occultism is the "Rambam," Moses Maimonides, who famously wrote (publicly) against astrology. In this regard he was vastly outnumbered by his brother rabbis -- both his contemporaries and antecedents.
Moreover, for Christians and Black people at least, Maimonides is not exactly a hero since he advocated the murder of Christ and his followers (in "Avodat Kochavim"), and cursed Blacks as subhuman creatures mid-way between the simian and the human (cf. The Guide of the Perplexed, Vol. 2 [chapter 51]) by Rabbi Maimonides in the uncensored Shlomo Pines translation).
The author of "The Secrets of the Stars," Rabbi Ari Storch, offers a handy and accurate reference to the passages in rabbinic texts highly favorable to astrology and for this reason alone, this book is worth its purchase price.
One caveat: it might be prudent to purchase the first edition, published in 2011. It may be that subsequent editions will be bowdlerized for purposes of hasbara, once it is realized that this book bears witness to all but the most obtuse Christians and goyim that the dogmas of Orthodox Judaism are abhorrent to the Biblical faith (Isaiah 47: 11-15). Any Bible-literate person knows that astrology is an abomination in the eyes of God. Orthodox Judaism with its passion for astrology is convicted of being "full of things from the East" (Isaiah 2:6)
Hoffman is the author of Judaism's Strange Gods
2 New Outstanding Books!
Deanna Spingola explores real history. Was the Civil War fought to end slavery—or was it a brutal invasion of one coutry by antoher in a bid to set up a tyrannical regime over the United States? Was Abraham Lincoln a closet Marxist? Is America an imperialist nation responsible for one bloody war after another, on behalf of rich elitists and corporations? Is the CIA a criminal operation? Were native American Indians murdered for their lands, gold, and other resources? A Shocking report!
Click Here to Order Now!
684 Pages • $35.00
Victor Thorn does it again with a tremendous exposé of one of the most incredible hoaxes ever pulled off—the holocaust myth. He documents a pack of lies, unmasking the“Anne Frank” scam, the “Six Million Jews”fairy tale, and the“gas chambers” myth. Were German prisoners tortured at Nuremberg and forced to sign false confessions? Was the holocaust hox a scheme to gain a homeland and trillions in reparations for the Jews? Thoroughly documented facts and evidence.
Click Here to Order Now!
186 Pages • $20.00
28 - Nelson Mandela : When is Terrorism Not Terrorism ?
May 3, 2012
Left, Nelson Mandela and Joe Slovo in Moscow give the clenched fist salute in front of the blood-drenched Hammer and Sickle flag of Illuminati Jewish Bolshevism.
The African National Congress waged a terrorist war against South Africa's Apartheid regime for 30 years. The plight of Black South Africans is now worse under ANC rule.
by Henry Makow Ph.D.
Terrorism is not terrorism when the Illuminati Jewish banking cartel is behind it.
From 1961-1990, the Illuminati-sponsored African National Congress waged a terrorist war against the Apartheid government of South Africa. It was characterized as a "peoples' struggle" in the Zionist-controlled mass media.
However, when the Palestinians employ terror against the Apartheid regime of Israel, they are "terrorists." Never mind that Israel was built on Zionist terror against the British. When the Illuminati bankers or their shills use it, terror is freedom fighting. (Syria today is another example.)
In South Africa during the 1960's and 70's, barely a week went by without terrorism -- dynamite at a fuel depot, a car bomb outside Air Force headquarters in in a city center. The ANC's guerrilla force -- known simply as MK, or more formally as Umkhonto we Sizwe translated "Spear of the Nation"was founded in 1961 by Nelson Mandela and his handler, the Communist Jew Joe Slovo.
At first, the targets were infrastructure but two decades later MK was killing civilians without compunction -- grenades would be bowled into a hamburger joint, or trip wired limper mine planted in an arcade -- and Mandela did not object.
"Notable among these attacks were the January, 8 1982 attack on the Koeberg nuclear power plant near Cape Town, the Church Street bombing on May, 20 1983, killing 19, and the June 14 1986 car-bombing of Magoo's Bar in Durban, in which 3 people were killed and 73 injured." (Wikipedia)
Of course, Mandela had been in jail since 1963 when MK headquarters at a farm outside Johannesburg was raided. The ANC was funded and run by Communist Jews who in turn were shills for the Illuminati bankers. Mandela posed as a farmhand.
The farm was purchased and run by Jewish Communist Arthur Goldreich, left.
In 1985, when the government offered to release Mandela if he would repudiate terrorism, he refused. In 1990, he was let out anyway and vowed the MK would continue to wreak havoc. It was not necessary.
The government was ready to negotiate a handover of power. In 1994, Mandela and F.W. de Klerk shared a Nobel Peace Prize. Queen Elizabeth II in her 1996 Christmas message hailed Mandela as a great statesman. (The account of MK terror above is indebted to Philip Gourevitch's review of the novel "Absolution" in The New Yorker, April 30, 2012, p.70)
ANC IS A COMMUNIST JEWISH FRONT
Thanks to Michael Hoffman II, we know:
"The African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa was guided by two Communist Jews, Albie Sachs, "one of its foremost intellectuals"( London Sunday Times, August 29, 1993) and Yossel Mashel Slovo (Joe Slovo, 1926-1995).
Slovo was born in a shtetl in Lithuania and grew up speaking Yiddish and studying the Talmud. He joined the ANC's terrorist wing, the Umkhonto we Sizwe, in 1961 and eventually became its commander. He was named Secretary General of the South African Communist Party in 1986. ("Joe Slovo," Jewish Chronicle, January 13, 1995).
Slovo had been the "planner of many of the ANC terrorist attacks, including the 1983 car bomb that killed 19 people and injured many others... Slovo, who had traveled to the Soviet Union many times, was awarded a Soviet medal on his 60th birthday...Slovo is a dedicated Communist, a Marxist Leninist without morality of any kind, for whom only victory counts, whatever the human cost, whatever the bloodshed...Slovo disputes little of his image as 'the Communist mastermind' behind the ANC's armed struggle.
(Albie Sachs, left)
'Revolutionary violence has created the inspirational impact that we had intended, and it has won for the ANC its leading position,' Slovo said." ("Rebel Strategist Seeks to End Apartheid," L.A. Times, Aug. 16, 1987, p. 14). When Nelson Mandela's ANC took over South Africa, Slovo was named Minister of Housing."
Keep reading for South African housing conditions.
COMMUNISM IS A RUSE
Wrapped in bogus idealism, Jewish social & political activism serves the Illuminati's secret satanic agenda. Jewish activists are dupes or opportunists. The ANC, like Communism in general, deceived the masses into overthrowing the government and installing Illuminati frontmen like Nelson Mandela.
The plight of Blacks in South Africa is much worse under the "peoples' government." The number of people living on $1 a day doubled from two to four million. The unemployment rate doubled to 48% from 1991-2002. (It is 24% today.)
In 2006, only 5,000 of the more than 35 million black South Africans earned more than $60,000. A quarter of the entire population lived in shacks without running water or electricity. A quarter have no access to clean water. 40% have no telephone.
The HIV/AIDS/TB infection rate is 20%. Life expectancy dropped by 13 years. 40% of schools have no electricity.
Where is the ANC'S concern for the people? Obviously it was a ruse that enabled the bankers to gain control over South Africa's resources, just as they took Russia's 70 years before . Source
Terrorism is an instrument of the Illuminati Jewish central banking cartel based in London.
Ninety five percent of the world's terror, including 9-11, can be traced to this source via the world's intelligence services, especially the CIA, Mossad and MI-6. They are funding the Taliban so Americans can waste their energy in endless war.
We live in a society that is breathtaking in its hypocrisy. But that is the strategy, to pretend to be one thing while becoming its opposite.
SUNDAY HERALD, UK: Nelson Mandela is ... named as an MI6 agent who... allowed UK spying operations to be based in South Africa. Allegations of Mandela's recruitment by the British intelligence service ... revealed in a controversial new book, 'MI6: Fifty Years of Special Operations,' by the acclaimed intelligence expert Stephen Dorril.
Nelson Mandela Mocks Idea He Was MI-6 -- What do you expect?
Al Queda an MI-6 Operation
29 - Daring To Criticize Israel
By Stephen Lendman
Addressing this issue responsibly risks rebuke, ostracism, or job loss. For some, it's a career ender. Scoundrel media writers and broadcasters are vulnerable. So are university professors.
Joel Kovel lost his Bard College position for writing books like "Overcoming Zionism" and calling Israel "a machine for the manufacture of human rights abuses."
DePaul University denied Norman Finkelstein tenure. It then fired him for speaking out and writing books like "The Holocaust Industry."
Political activism and honesty about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict also cost tenured professor Denis Rancourt his University of Ottawa job.
UCLA Professor David Delgado Shorter's now targeted. His academic freedom's at stake. On April 4, department chair Professor Angelia Leung rebuked him. She said his web site was being reviewed for posting inappropriate material pertaining to the academic and cultural boycott of Israel. More on that below.
California Scholars for Academic Freedom (CSAF) include 134 academics at 20 state universities. "The group formed as a response to various violations of academic freedom that were arising from both the post-9/11/2001 climate of civil rights violations and the increasing attacks on progressive educators by neo-conservatives."
Arab, Muslim or Middle East scholars are especially vulnerable. So is anyone criticizing Israel. CSAF's "goal of protecting California scholars" broadened in scope. Its members "recognize that violations of academic freedom anywhere" threaten it "everywhere."
On April 18, CSAF wrote UCLA Academic Senate chair Professor Andrew Leuchter. It addressed Shorter's rebuke and the broader academic freedom issue.
It expressed concern that Leuchter "overstepp(ed his) authority (by) honoring of complaints by a clearly partisan political group over collegiality and protocol regarding treatment of tenured faculty at UCLA...."
The AMCHA Initiative made the complaint. AMCHA is Hebrew for "your people." The organization "strives to bring together Jewish people from all over California so that they might speak in one voice in order to express their concern for the safety and well-being of Jewish college and university students."
It also one-sidedly supports Israel and Zionist ideology. Its record includes harassing faculty members critical of Israeli policy. It airs views openly in the press. Targeting academic freedom shows how far it's willing to go. Its history includes accusing UC campuses of ignoring anti-Semitism and allowing anti-Israeli protests. On issues regarding the Jewish state, it tolerates no criticism.
Shorter felt its wrath. At issue was also judging him " 'in the court of public opinion' by releasing information to the press without his knowledge."
In the 2012 winter quarter, he taught W33: Tribal Worldviews. He used a university provided web site for course material. It covered "indigenous uses of media around the globe to assert their claims of sovereignty."
His site contains source materials and URLs related to struggles throughout the world. UN documentation on Palestine is included. They're called indigenous people. In March, the course ended. So did access to the site. Only students could view it.
In response to Professor Leung's concern, Shorter emailed her his syllabus and a URL about groups targeting US professors for their Palestinian course materials.
On April 11, Leung gave him a choice. Either teach about a petition or be a signatory, not both. In response, Shorter said he'd consider the implications of Leung's demand.
He requested deferring comment until next academic year. Clearly, Leung was academically and constitutionally out of line. Academic and speech freedoms are inviolable.
UCLA and other US higher education institutions have other rules. So do Canadian and perhaps European ones as well. On April 12, Leuchter emailed his complaint. He copied signatories endorsing it. They included “US Senators and University Administrators." He said:
"posting of such materials is not appropriate. Professor Shorter's chair assures me that he understands his serious error in judgment and has said he will not make this mistake again."
In response, AMCHA issued a press release. It claimed victory over an anti-Israeli professor. It quoted Leuchter verbatim. It made it appear that UCLA found "his actions were inappropriate."
On April 13, the Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Education, and the Los Angeles Times contacted Shorter to comment about university disciplinary action. No one told him his private conversation was communicated broadly to outsiders.
On April 16, the LA Times headlined, "UCLA professor told not to link class material to anti-Israeli campaign," saying:
Academic freedom's at issue. So aren't First Amendment rights. None are more important. All are risked without this one.
"Leuchter said (Shorter) agreed not to repeat" linking his web site to one "call(ing) for a boycott of Israel." Shorter said "he made no such promise." He awaits a more detailed campus policy explanation regarding issues this important. He added that linking "to the Israeli boycott was just a number of suggested links for the class to explore in his" course.
He didn't provide them as required reading. In class, he also discussed other views. Since he changes courses annually, he didn't know if he'd use the same links. Constitutionally he can use any he wishes freely.
Tammi Rossman-Benjamin heads AMCHA. She’s UC Santa Cruz Center for Jewish Studies lecturer. She said by email:
"Although I believe it was appropriate for Professor Shorter to be cautioned about his misuse of his class website, our primary purpose in raising the case of Professor Shorter was not to demand that action be taken against him, but rather to force UC administrators and faculty to grapple with the question of whether the UC academic freedom rules protect a professor who uses his classroom and university resources to engage in political activities, including the boycott of Israel."
Leuchter concurred, saying faculty may freely express views in classrooms or course material short of "advanc(ing) a political agenda." Apparently he includes facts critical of Israel.
He said Shorter faces no disciplinary action. He described what he did as a judgment error. Perhaps repeating it will be cause for dismissal. It wouldn't be the first time on US or other Western campuses.
CSAF asked why Leuchter never met or spoke to Shorter while defamatory information about him was being circulated. What kind of investigation was conducted, it asked? Clearly, "your actions....constitute a violation of the normal protocols of due process at the University of California or most other universities."
CSAF wants definitive answers regarding UCLA policies and Academic Senate authority to investigate a faculty member without his knowledge, then requesting his chair rebuke and warn him. Doing so amounts to unwarranted "censure."
CSAF also wants Leuchter to explain how he justified distributing information about Shorter behind his back to a partisan organization like AMCHA, and why he challenged his academic freedom.
Silencing anyone critical of Israel "makes a mockery of (UCLA's) faculty protocol...." CSAF deserves answers regarding these vital issues.
A Final Comment
Perhaps Leung, Leuchter, and other like-minded academics need brushing up on what life in occupied Palestine is like. It's not pretty, nor has it been for decades. Visiting to see things firsthand might help.
Spending time in Gaza during Israeli air and ground assaults might prove enlightening. So would learning about the effects of siege, watching Israeli soldiers use Palestinian children for target practice, and fishermen criminally assaulted at sea.
Maybe watching homes bulldozed, farmland razed, and trees uprooted repressively would be hard to forget. Seeing soldiers attack peaceful protesters with tear gas, rubber bullets, water cannons, and live fire would enlighten more.
Conversations with Palestinians might be best of all. Firsthand accounts from wives would explain life without husbands. Parents could talk about lost children. Sisters and brothers could say what its like without lost siblings. Discussions about thousands of political prisoners would reveal much about a repressive state.
Life in deep poverty without jobs would be described. So would daily fear of Israeli incursions, attacks, arrests, detentions, torture, and other unspeakable abuses for praying to the wrong God.
Enough time in occupied Palestine might soften views now held. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. So is seeing things firsthand to know what's really going on.
Israel is criticized for a reason. Persecution, racism, occupation, and apartheid are unjustifiable. So are crimes of war and against humanity.
Compromising academic and speech freedoms puts all other rights at risk. Without them, classrooms are more indoctrination than education. Professors understanding that deserve praise, not rebukes or ostracism.
Freedom in America and other Western societies hang by a thread. Protecting it in classrooms may be step one to having a chance to save it.
Professors on the front lines of right over wrong are heros, not villains. Students lucky enough to have them know best of all.
Imagine if all academics taught the right way. Imagine a better world at peace. Instead of a dream, it could be reality. Imagine how different things could be.
If enough people cared enough and worked for it, it would be. It won't happen any other way.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at email@example.com.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
30 - Peter Beinart on American Jews and Israel
Kevin MacDonald on May 4, 2012
I suppose I shouldn’t have been surprised, but I was. Peter Beinart, who has become a leading voice of the liberal critique of Israel, had this to say in describing Jews who support AIPAC:
There is nothing wrong with the people themselves. Most AIPAC people are not ideological. They don’t see themselves as right wing. They’re mostly moderate Democrats. They just want to do something for Israel. They want to feel connected to Israel. They go to their synagogue dinner, they go to the Federation dinner, and they go to the AIPAC dinner. (Haaretz, “Is archliberal Peter Beinart good for the Jews?“)
A recurrent theme at TOO is that Diaspora Jews are engaged in hypocrisy—supporting apartheid Israel bent on ethnic cleansing and oppression of Palestinians, with a Jews-only immigration policy, while supporting America as a proposition nation with no ethnic identity, massive non-White immigration, and vilifying any manifestations of ethnic/racial identity by Whites. My image of AIPAC supporters was that they are conscious gung-ho supporters of settlers, ethnic cleansing, and apartheid—the technical term is ‘neocon’. But Beinart seems to be saying that American Jews simply have a blind spot. The hypocrisy fails to register with them. They are good liberals who will vote for Obama and just want to support Israel; they don’t pay much attention to what Israel does, or their attitudes are shaped by the AIPAC propaganda machine. In a rather gentle way, Beinart is trying to get them to see their hypocrisy, probably to no avail.
So these liberal Democrats go to an AIPAC conference and get to experience some real power, as pretty much the entire American political class comes on bended knee to
tell you how great you are, and to tell you what you want to hear. For WASPs, it wouldn’t be such a powerful experience. For Jews, especially older Jews, it’s a very powerful experience, especially when you tell people that you’re using this power to save the Jewish people in the way that your parents and grandparents couldn’t in the 1940s.
Hmmm. WASP power is far more apparent than real, since they have been displaced in pretty much all the elite positions in America. Hence the title of Eric Kaufmann’s The Rise and Fall of Anglo-America. On the other hand, AIPAC is an awesome display of power by the new elite. And with power goes the prerogative of making war, as we have become all too aware of in the last 20 years.
Beinart’s basic proposal that American Jews are tuning out of supporting Israel as it heads down the path of apartheid and ethnic cleansing. But that is at least questionable. Isi Liebler, a prominent Australian Zionist now living in Israel, begs to differ. Liebler, who labels Netanyahu a “centrist,” writes that “a recent poll conducted by supporters of President Obama designed to understate the role of Israel as a factor determining how American Jews vote. But even this poll recognized that 73% of all Jews – not merely the committed ones – considered that Netanyahu, the bête noir of left liberals, represented ‘true Jewish values’” (“Most Israelis and Jews are under no illusions”).
I won’t comment on what this says about Jewish values, but it should be noted that there is a history where Diaspora Jews rally around the (Israeli) flag in a crisis. For example, many Jews who seemed indifferent to Israel suddenly became obsessed with the fate of Israel during the wars of 1967 and 1973. And while Liebler describes Netanyahu as a centrist, Uri Avnery, an Israeli peace activist, describes him (more accurately) as “a Holocaust-obsessed fantasist, out of contact with reality, distrusting all Goyim, trying to follow in the footsteps of a rigid and extremist father [Benzion Netanyahu]– altogether a dangerous person to lead a nation in a real crisis.”
Dangerous for the entire world. Just recently Israel took possession of itsfourth nuclear-capable submarine from Germany—a development that should scare pretty much everyone. Without doubt, the fanatics are now in control in Israel and, given Israeli demographics ,this will only get worse.
ALICE BAILEY On Judaism
Bailey was highly critical of Judaism. She wrote: "The word 'love' as it concerns relation to other people is lacking in their religious presentation, though love of Jehovah is taught with due threats; the concept of a future life, dependent upon conduct and behavior to others and on right action in the world of men, is almost entirely lacking in The Old Testament and teaching on immortality is nowhere emphasized; salvation is apparently dependent upon the keeping of numerous physical laws and rules related to physical cleanliness; they go so far as to establish retail shops where these rules are kept – in a modern world where scientific methods are applied to purity in food. All these and other factors of less importance set the Jew apart, and these he enforces no matter how obsolete they are or inconvenient to others."
Because of writings like these, the American Chassidic author Rabbi Yonassan Gershom wrote that Bailey's plan for a New World Order and her call for "the gradual dissolution—again if in any way possible—of the Orthodox Jewish faith" revealed that "her goal is nothing less than the destruction of Judaism itself." Gershom also wrote that "This stereotyped portrayal of Jews is followed by a hackneyed diatribe against the Biblical Hebrews, based upon the "angry Jehovah" theology of nineteenth-century Protestantism. Jews do not, and never have, worshipped an angry vengeful god, and we Jews never, ever call God "Jehovah."
31 - Anti-White Hatred Is Mainstream in the Media and the Schools
April 30, 2012
A while ago I commented on Lee Siegel’s horror about Mitt Romney being so egregiously White. I mean, his whole family is White; and there are lots of children. And they’re rich and good-looking. A veritable nightmare for a card carrying member of the hostile elite.
NYTimes caption from Siegel's blog: Mitt Romney, a Republican presidential candidate, with his extended family in 2007.
Now another well-connected member of the hostile elite, Michael Tomasky, continues the theme. According to Tomasky, Romney may try all he wants. He can choose a Latino VP candidate (likely to be Marco Rubio who, as Pat Buchananphrases it, recently “took his final vows as the newest neoconservative”). He can change his tune on immigration. But he can’t overcome his fatal disability: “Romney is just sooooo white. Even whiter than the Osmonds.”
Whiter than the Osmonds!! The horror!
Not only is Romney disgustingly White, Tomasky also accuses him of never having listened to Tito Puente. And then the clincher: “Has he ever known a Latino person, outside of those who clean his houses and trim his lawns? It’s quite possible that he does. But he sure doesn’t look like he does.”
Tomasky’s clairvoyance is amazing. He can tell that Romney has never listened to Tito Puente just by looking at him. This brings to mind Siegel’s complaint that Romney “is nearly always in immaculate white shirt sleeves.” When White people wear clean white shirts it’s a sure sign of pathological Whiteness. A sure sign that the person wearing them represents “the bygone world of Babbitt, of small-town Rotarians” and would have no idea who Tito Puente is.
The hatred of Siegel and Tomasky for White people is palpable. You can feel it in your bones. The media is full of them. People like Menachem Rosensaft, Jonah Goldberg, Steve Weinberg, and Arthur Goldwag. Or Harold Meyerson who wrote in The Washington Post in 2008 that “the Republicans now more than ever are the white folks’ party . . . the party of the American past. Republican conventions have long been bastions of de facto Caucasian exclusivity, but coming right after the diversity of Denver, this year’s GOP convention is almost shockingly — un-Americanly — white. Long term, this whiteness is a huge problem.”
The hatred we now see in the mainstream media was of course prefigured by anti-White intellectuals, writing in rarified academic settings or little literary magazines. Susan Sontag‘s famous “The white race is the cancer of human history” first appeared in The Partison Review, the flagship journal (along withCommentary) of the New York Intellectuals, in 1967. Or Freud and theFrankfurt School; the list is endless. It’s the story of the rise of Jews as an elite hostile to the traditional people and culture of America. It’s a culture that pervades the academic world.
The problem is that these attitudes are not fringe elements. They are entirely mainstream.
But Tomasky is right that Latinos won’t vote for Romney. And it’s not just because Romney is quintessentially White or because he isn’t in favor of every last Mexican being able to immediately immigrate to America. It’s also because Latinos as a low-IQ, low-achieving group naturally want a big governmentwith lots of entitlements and government sinecures.
What should frighten every White person is that the hostility toward Whites is mainstream among the non-White constituencies of the hostile elite—Blacks and Latinos in particular. Just recently there are two reports where school officials have explicitly condoned anti-White attitudes and, in the case of the Kansas City school system, even anti-White behavior.
Writing in The American Thinker (“Was Boy in K.C. Fire Attack a Victim of His School’s Racist Teaching?“), Selwyn Duke shows that the Kansas City school system tolerates teachers who encourage harassment of White students and who provide a constant stream of anti-White propaganda in their classes. This is occurring at a school where 13-year-old Allen Coon was subjected to “a vicious racial attack … in which two older black teens doused him with gasoline and set him alight, saying, ‘This is what you deserve. You get what you deserve, white boy.’”
The tow-headed Allen looks like “the classic all-American white boy,” says his mother, and “after the first week [of school] he was nothing but racially harassed.” She says that “he was called every racial slur you can imagine,” such as “honkey,” “cracker,” “whitey,” and “guero” (a Spanish slang term for whites that can be used in a derogatory way). He was, she reports, pushed into lockers and was jumped in the bathroom. And even before the recent attack, he was sometimes menaced by groups that would follow him part of the way home.
Even more damning, though, is that multiple educators were complicit in the harassment. Mrs. Coon related an incident in which a teacher she identifies as Ms. Carla Kinder called Allen “Casper” and then “got all the students to get involved.” Other times, the students would initiate the harassment, and the teachers would pick up the baton. “They would tease him; people would make fun of him, and they’d chime in,” said Coon.
Of course, there was a media blackout of the explicitly racial assault against Coon which occurred around the same time as the wall-to-wall coverage of the Trayvon Martin shooting where the attempt by the media and Black activists to portray Martin as an innocent victim of a racially motivated killer gets more and more ridiculous the more we know about Martin and Zimmerman.
While Kansas City tolerates Black teachers spewing hatred toward Whites, the Los Angeles school system encourages Latino hatred toward Whites. Writing inAmerican Renaissance, Mary Morrison (a pen name, for obvious reasons) is on ground zero with the failed educational system (“White Teacher in an LA School“). As a teacher, she is in a system where students come to school with Ipods and Iphones, but no books, no paper and no pencils. It’s a system where teachers are routinely blamed for the failures of their low-IQ, low-achieving students: ”And what is needed? More teacher oversight, more professional development, better, newer methods of teaching, and textbooks loaded with photos that reflect “changing demographics” so ‘students of color’ can see ‘others who look like them.’” Right.
But the main point is that the system is quite tolerant of hatred toward Whites—precisely the concerns motivating the Arizona ban on ethnic studies courses in the K-12 curriculum (see here and here). Students at East LA’s Roosevelt High School enter the school by walking by a 400-foot mural “depicting Europeans hanging and burning Mexicans, smashing their babies’ heads against rocks, and feeding the flesh of Mexicans to their ‘war dogs.’” The anti-White LA Times is quite happy with such depictions (while ignoring Latino ethnic cleansing of Blacks from many areas of Los Angeles), noting that the mural “‘presents a colorful depiction of the rape, slaughter and enslavement of North America’s indigenous people by genocidal Europeans.’ When the board of trustees of the Los Angeles Unified School District was asked whether this was an appropriate sentiment for high school students, its official response was that the mural ‘merely presents a different perspective’ and that there was ‘no intent to remove it.’”
Imagine their response to a mural with messages promoting the achievements of Whites and the legitimacy of having a sense of White identity and interests. Just a different perspective, right?
What we are seeing now are just the faint glimmerings of the future of White victimization as Whites become a minority. However bad it is now, it will be vastly worse in the future. When there are officially condoned anti-White propaganda and actions at a time when Whites are still 2/3 of the population, imagine what it will be like when Whites are less than half. The hostile elites who control the media and who already condone government-facilitated anti-White hatred will be increasingly powerful as their constituents become an ever larger component of the population. At present there is a facade of official multicultural utopianism. First promoted by Horace Kallen and representing the bedrock attitude of the organized Jewish community since World War II, the future is depicted as a glorious harmony of races, all working together in pursuit of moral perfection.
But the gloves are coming off. Beneath the utopian optimism there is a real hatred that will ultimately endanger all Whites. Those who most effusively promote utopian multiracial harmony are those with the fiercest racial hatreds.
Millions of Whites are walking zombie-like into this future, with no mainstream political option that will do anything to save them. (Mitt Romney’s Whiteness may trigger the atavistic hatred that people like Tomasky and Siegel have toward Whites. But Romney will do nothing to alter the situation.)
Unless White Americans fundamentally restructure the Republican Party or begin to listen to the American Third Position, there will be many more Allen Coons in the future.
32 - Synagogue of Satan ?
The Theological Significance of the Destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in AD 70
May 1, 2012
Destruction of the Jerusalem Temple by Francesco Hayez
Trudy Pert suggests that the crisis of modern Christianity deepened when mid-nineteenth century Protestant theologians embraced the higher criticism. Especially in Germany, the traditional devotional approach to the Bible was replaced by the “objective” techniques of historical and literary criticism. As a consequence, educated Christians turned their attention away from the “supernatural Christ” to the “historical Jesus.” A new sort ofKulturprotestantismus, or cultural Christianity, was born: Jesus Christ became a teacher of ethics rather than the incarnation of the divine. The crisis was real enough; it reflects a continuing failure by Christians to recognize the pivotal moment when the “supernatural Christ” burst back into human history to avenge both the crucifixion of the “historical Jesus” and the persecution of his faithful followers during their forty year mission to the ends of the earth.
In AD 70, Roman armies under Titus besieged Jerusalem to crush a long-running Jewish rebellion. Their triumph was a bloody affair; not only was the city sacked and pillaged but, according to the contemporary Jewish historian Josephus, the dead, most of whom “were pure and holy” Jews, numbered over one million.[i] The Romans also systematically destroyed the massive Temple complex. In doing so, they ripped out the redemptive heart of Old Israel. The massive Temple complex was the hub around which revolved the ritual observance of the Mosaic Law underlying Israel’s covenant with Yahweh. For Jews and Romans, alike, the destruction of the Temple was an act of world-historical significance. But the meaning of that cataclysmic event was not confined to the realm of secular history.
Divine providence played a leading role in the fall of Jerusalem. Certainly, the disaster that befell the Jews came as no surprise to first century Christians. Forty years earlier, standing outside the Temple with his disciples, Christ had foreseen that “not one stone here will be left on another” when he came again at the “end of the age. The Day of the Lord’s return was not to occur in some far distant future, perhaps thousands of years later. Christ assured the crowds who heard him that “this generation will certainly not pass away until these things have happened.”(Matthew 24:2-3, 34) In the period between the advent of Christ and his return in AD 70, one of the most important things to happen to Old Israel was the profound transformation in what it meant to be a Jew.
During Christ’s ministry it was already becoming clear that the only truly righteous Jews, the saving remnant of Israel, were those faithful to the risen Christ. On the eve of the destruction of the Temple, Christ tells John of Patmos that those “who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars” are in reality the “synagogue of Satan.” (Revelation 3:9) As E. Michael Jones observes, the “Jews” who rejected Christ effectively redefined themselves; they transformed Judaism into a false religion in which carnal Israel became its own Messiah.[ii]
Prior to the Vatican II Council in the Sixties, Roman Catholic tradition held that God was through with Israel at the Cross and “that Jews were collectively cursed for all time because of the crucifixion.” The crucifixion, therefore, was seen as the central event in the redemptive history of mankind. The problem with this interpretation is that the Mosaic Law remained in force until the destruction of the Temple. Jewish Christians were still circumcised in the flesh as well as in the heart. Indeed, Christ had made it clear that not one jot or one tittle of the Law would be disturbed until the end of the age when all of God’s promises to Israel were to have been fulfilled (Matthew 5:18). The preordained end of Old Israel came when God used the Roman armies to demolish the Temple; only then did the Law cease to bind the New Israel. It was at that historical moment—not in our still distant future—that Christ came again in the glory of the Father. This was the parousia (the Second Coming in modern parlance) prophesied by the inspired writers of the New Testament.
The Last Judgement
It was at the parousia that Christ rendered his final judgement on Old Israel. It was then that the Lord avenged, fully and completely, the Jewish crime of deicide and the subsequent persecution of the early church. The end of the Old Covenant left the widely-scattered Jewish diaspora high and dry. Those who refused to accept the New Covenant were compelled to re-invent Judaism as a highly particularistic ethno-religion younger than and set in opposition to Christianity.
The Talmud became “the defining document” of those who insisted that the advent of Christ had changed nothing and that the Old Covenant remained valid. Two versions of those rabbinical writings developed over several centuries; the one reached its final form in fifth century Palestine, the other was completed in Babylon in the seventh century AD. Modern Judaism, whether it flatly rejects the Messiah or seeks instead to reclaim a merely mortal, “kosher Jesus,” remains in a permanent state of denial, refusing to accept that God was finished with Old Israel in AD 70. For Christians, of course, the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple marked the creation of a new heaven and a new earth. After the demolition of the Temple, the gospel found a new spiritual home in the Christian nations which became the true, spiritual, seed of Abraham.
In fact, the destruction of the Temple was the consummation of the historical/redemptive process that began with the advent of Christ, his ministry, death and resurrection and was continued by the apostles after down to the end of the Old Covenant age in AD 70. These were the last days (Greek: eschaton) of the Jewish age foreseen by the Old Testament prophets; they marked the fulfilment of God’s promises to Israel. Salvation was indeed from the Jews (John 4:22) but those who rejected Jesus the Christ were no longer the faithful seed of Abraham; instead, Christ declared, they belonged to their “father, the devil.” Not surprisingly, therefore, they carried out their father’s desire by killing Jesus (John 8:44). But the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ or even the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 2) did not in themselves secure the final victory of Christ over the synagogue of Satan.
Only in AD 70 when the gospel of the kingdom had been preached to the whole world (Greek: oikumene) did the time and the season become ripe for the fateful intersection of secular and redemptive history which inaugurated the Christian age. In the New Jerusalem that arose out of the ashes of the Old, the leaves of the tree of life were for the healing of all nations not just carnal Israel. Anchored in the hearts of Christ’s faithful followers, the early church (ie the spiritual Body of Christ) burst into history as a temple not made with hands.
Unfortunately, few Christian theologians now attach more than a merely “local” importance to the first-century destruction of the Jerusalem Temple. Jews, of course, continue to deny the apocalyptic significance and divine provenance of what can be called the First Holocaust. Any suggestion that the Roman armies which laid waste to Jerusalem were the providential instrument of divine vengeance designed to punish the Jews for the crime of deicide is automatically labelled anti-Semitic.
Most liberal Protestants and post-Vatican II Catholics hew to the philo-Semitic party line, denouncing “the doctrine of supersession” for teaching (falsely they say) that Jews have been rightly punished for the sin of rejecting their Messiah. Theology texts routinely decry the examples of “this teaching and its terrible consequences” that “can be found in all periods of church history.”[iii] Most Christians prefer to shut their eyes to the theological meaning of the terrible events of AD 70.
Progressive theologians, in particular, dare not acknowledge that the destruction of the Temple amounted to a decisive victory of the early church over the synagogue of Satan—the historical moment when Yahweh’s Old Covenant with ethnic Israel was superseded by the New Covenant creation of Christ’s spiritual kingdom. Ignoring the fiery holocaust which consumed the Temple, mainline Protestant intellectuals piously affirm the allegedly “deep and inseparable relationship of Israel and the church.”[iv] This postmodern, “Judeo-Christian” ideology finds little support either in the Bible or in the writings of the early church fathers.
Preterism versus Futurism
For much of the postwar era, the ruling liberal consensus successfully relegated the events of AD 70 to the status of a historical footnote. In recent years, however, a Bible studies movement known as “preterism” (from the Latin, pretermeaning “past”) has presented a serious challenge to academic orthodoxy. For preterists, the cataclysmic collapse of ancient Judaism in AD 70 was the preordained fulfilment of biblical prophecies promising the creation of a new heaven and new earth. In particular, they interpret the Book of Revelation as a prophecy of the disaster that was to befall Old Jerusalem in the then very near future. Revelation thus brings to a close the biblical story of the old heaven and the old earth which began with the creation of the cosmic templein the Book of Genesis. AD 70 marks the end of the transition from the Old to the New Covenant, the moment when the Kingdom of Christ overturns, once and for all, the racially exclusive Law of Moses by opening its doors not just to Jews but to all nations.[v]
Because preterists consign Old Covenant Israel to the dustbin of history, their “fulfilled eschatology” has been denounced as heretical, especially by evangelical Protestants and Christian Zionists who cling to an apocalyptic vision of the end times associated with a still future Second Coming of Christ. Pre-millenial dispensationalists interpret the foundation of the State of Israel in 1948 as a sign that the Christian age will end with the imminent return of Jesus to rule from a physical throne in a rebuilt Temple in Old Jerusalem. Preterists, on the other hand, flatly deny that the Jews are still God’s chosen people. Not only does modern Israel not possess a divinely-ordained title to Palestine, but the Kingdom of God established in AD 70 has no end.
The Bible, therefore, is the story of how the Kingdom was born into a world without end as well as a warrant authorizing the church to extend its spiritual dominion over all the nations of the earth. But the world will not end tomorrow or even in the next century. In fact, it is likely to endure for millions more years; there is, therefore, no urgent need to establish the universal dominion of the Kingdom any time soon. Indeed, that goal is now utterly beyond reach, given the weakened condition of modern Christianity. The spiritual enfeeblement of Christendom is in large part the consequence of the futurist eschatology that most Christians now profess. Western Christians look to the church mainly for an assurance of personal salvation in a hopelessly sinful and unrepentant world.
Churches have become private, voluntary associations; the Old Faith has been pushed out of the public square and religious experience is confined to the private, inner life of individuals. The Bible, accordingly, has ceased to be the sacred charter of an ecclesiastical authority presiding over a way of life, a communion, and faith practiced in public and in private by all manner of men and women. For mainline Protestants, the Bible is merely the man-made medium through which we hear human witnesses to the Word of God, the otherwise inaccessible divine Logos incarnate in Jesus Christ. Liberal theology no longer views the Bible as a warrant to baptize all the nations so as to expand the spiritual dominion of Christendom to the ends of the earth. Those who look to Christ’s Second Coming sometime in our future are unable to make coherent sense out of either Genesis or the Book of Revelation which deal, respectively, with the beginning and the end of Old Israel. Nor can they account for the time-texts elsewhere in the New Testament suggesting that Christ would return on a cloud of glory before the present generation of those listening to him had passed away.
In recent decades, the preterist tradition has helped Christians to rediscover the full meaning of the Word of God. Clearly, if the eschatological prophecies concerning the last days of Israel and the coming of the Kingdom were fulfilled with the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in AD 70, Christians must think more deeply about the future. For preterists, the Kingdom of God is a presently existing reality in a world without end. Within the preterist tradition, therefore, the Bible is recovering its former status as the foundation charter of the new covenant creation, not as a fossilized text, but as the seedbed for the renewed spiritual dominion of Christendom.
The dominion theology implicit in preterism not only provides a warrant for the eventual conversion of the Jews; it mandates “nothing less than the complete conversion of our planet through the gospel of Jesus Christ.” The restoration of Christendom cannot be limited to the quest for mere personal salvation or a quick religious “fix” for depressed and downtrodden individuals. It offers healing to the nations. For almost two thousand years, those who call themselves Jews have resisted and denied the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Of all peoples, therefore, Jews have the greatest need for the healing power of his saving grace.
Needless to say, contemporary Jews condemn campaigns to convert them as an intolerable recrudescence of Christian anti-Semitism. In an effort to ward off such accusations from Jews and the inevitable charges of heresy coming from their fellow Christians, some preterist writers seek support for their interpretations of the events of AD 70, not just in the Bible, but in the writings of the early church fathers.[vi] The remainder of this essay assesses whether patristic writings do lend weight to the preterist tradition. We will seek answers to four questions that arise out of preterist interpretations of the fall of Jerusalem.
Go to Part 2.
Andrew Fraser is a former law teacher and the author of The WASP Question: An Essay on the Biocultural Evolution, Present Predicament, and Future Prospects of the Invisible Race (Arktos Media, 2011).
[i] Paul L Maier, ed, Josephus: The Essential Writings (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1988), 367.
[ii] E Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and its Impact on World History (South Bend, IN: Fidelity Press, 2008), 37.
[iii] Daniel L Migliore, Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology second edition (Grand Rapids, MI: William B Eerdmans, 2004), 324.
[iv] Ibid., 324.
[v] Timothy P Martin & Jeffrey L Vaughn, Beyond Creation Science: New Covenant Creation from Genesis to Revelation (Whitehall, MT: Apocalyptic Vision Press, 2007). For a comprehensive introduction to preterism, see almost any of the books authored by Don K Preston, eg Like Father, Like Son: On Clouds of Glory (Ardmore, OK: JaDon Management, 2010.
[vi] See, eg Gary DeMar and Francis X Gumerlock, The Early Church and the End of the World (Powder Springs,GA: American Vision, 2006).
33 - Using Primary Sources To Clarify the Nanking Incident
Former Chairman, Study Group for the Examination of the Nanking Incident
Auditor, Committee for the Examination of the Facts about Nanking
The Second Sino-Japanese War began in 1937. In December of that year, the Japanese
were victorious in the Battle of Nanking. The allegation that, when occupying Nanking,
Japanese military personnel set upon the civilian residents of the city, raping and killing
them, was later leveled against Japan. The accusers further alleged that the Japanese
murdered 200,000-300,000 persons, including prisoners of war, in what is commonly
known in Japan as the “Nanking Incident,” and in the West as the “Nanking massacre”
and the “Rape of Nanking.” It is very likely that their position derives from unguarded
acceptance of a book entitled What War Means
and from judgments handed down at
the Tokyo Trials.
What War Means was published by the Chinese Nationalist government. The book was
the product of an intense propaganda campaign launched after the Chinese suffered
devastating military defeats and retreated first from Shanghai, and then Nanking as well.
The Kuomintang (Nationalist Party) government’s Central Propaganda Department
hired H. J. Timperley, a correspondent for the Manchester Guardian to convince readers
throughout the world that the Japanese were fighting a war of aggression in which they
used abhorrent tactics. All the while, he masqueraded as a neutral foreign journalist.
When the Pacific War ended, the US Occupation Forces made incapacitating Japan both
materially and spiritually their first priority. Materially, they stripped the nation of what
remained of its combat capability. Spiritually, they implemented the WGIP (War Guilt
Information Program), which used the media to inform the public that Japan had waged
a war of aggression, and that its armies used combat tactics that were extremely brutal.
As a particularly egregious example of Japanese behavior during the Second
Sino-Japanese War, the WGIP cited the Nanking Incident, in which the Japanese
allegedly murdered 200,000 Chinese soldiers and civilians. WGIP’s version of the
events that transpired after the fall of Nanking distorted perceptions of the war between
Japan and China, but gained international acceptance nonetheless.
About 10 years ago, I made a careful examination of all primary sources available in
Japan concerning the Nanking Incident. I then entered all relevant information (about
6,000 items) into a database. I used the computer to analyze the information in my
database from every possible angle in my search to discover what really happened in
Nanking. The results were published in 2003 under the title Nankin jiken no kakushin
(At the core of the Nanking Incident). I believe that my findings represent the truth, i.e.,
what was at the core of the Nanking Incident, as the title suggests.
This paper is a summary of the essential points in that book. I have set aside all
preconceptions, and have laid before the reader what I believe to be the true meaning of
what the source documents reveal.
Timperley, Harold J., ed., What War Means: Japanese Terror in China (London: Victor Golanz
Formally, International Military Tribunal for the Far East (May 1946-November 1948). While the
war with China continued, Japan fought against the US and the other Allies in the Asian-Pacific
region from 1941 until Japan’s surrender in August 1946.
Kitamura Minoru, The Politics of Nanjing: An Impartial Investigation, trans. Hal Gold (New York:
University Press of America, 2007); Higashinakano Shudo, Nankin jiken Kokuminto gokuhi bunsho
kara yomitoku (Top-secret Chinese Nationalist documents reveal the truth about the Nanking
Incident) (Tokyo, Soshisha, 2006); for English translation, see
Chapter 1: The Venue of the Nanking Incident................................................................................1
I. The popular perception ..................................................................................................................1
II. The actual situation in Nanking....................................................................................................2
III. Japanese soldiers encounter a ghost town...................................................................................3
Chapter 2: The “Original” Nanking Incident ................................................................................10
I. Sweep Operations ........................................................................................................................10
II. Movement of Japanese troops after capture of Nanking ............................................................12
III. Crimes against civilians in Nanking .........................................................................................14
Chapter 3: Dissolution of the Safety Zone, the International Committee, and the Nanking
Appendix: Population Statistics for Nanking from Contemporaneous Records.........................24
READ ALL AT :
34 - Exponentially increase your vehicle’s fuel mileage by using only the gas vapor from the top of your gas tank
Posted by Paul W Kincaid Thursday, April 5th, 2012
You can convert the liquid fuel in your gas tank into a very high fuel efficiency gas vapor simply by modifying the gas tank. You don’t need to drill or cut into the gas tank at all. You need only to remove the fuel pump / fuel sending unit and replace it with a vacuum line and a filtered air intake line that is attached to an aerator you install on the bottom of the gas tank and have it vacuum the accumulated fuel vapor from the top inside of the tank. This simple system converts the liquid fuel in your gas tank into a gas vapor through a process called aeration.
The filtered air intake (install a check valve between the filter and gas tank to only allow one way air flow to the tank) draws in oxygen into the bottom of the gas tank through the air intake line and attached aerator. The aerator creates very tiny air bubbles that attracts liquid fuel molecules as it rises to the surface of the liquid fuel. Once the air bubbles breaks the surface of the liquid fuel the air becomes a gas vapor. This gas vapor is then sucked up (vacuumed) into the vacuum fuel line and feed into the gas combustion engine. A fuel aerator functions much like an aquarium aerator which are used worldwide to oxygenate a fish tank.
You can add a secondary air tank to the system and have the engine vacuum draw the gas vapor from it. You could use a mass produced air compressor type tank as the gas vapor collecting and feed tank. They are already made to withstand very high pressures and the tank will act like a reserve tank when the engine is off. This way you will always have a good supply of gas vapor to draw upon.
This will actually work. For 8 decades now the oil companies and your government have known that much greater fuel efficiency is possible for all vehicles. Since the 1930s Ford had the technology to produce cars that got as much as 200 mpg – as demonstrated by Charles Nelson Pogue and the Ford Motors of Canada.
In 1933 Charles Nelson Pogue made headlines when he drove a 1932 Ford V8, 200 miles on a gallon of gas during a demonstration conducted by The Ford Motor Company in Winnipeg, Manitoba using his super-carb system.” How was he able to travel so far on just 1 gallon of liquid gasoline? He vaporized the liquid fuel from the gas tank. He used heat (hot air) to convert the liquid fuel into a very high mileage gas vapor. The vaporization occurred just before it entered the cylinder heads of the engine. But you can convert liquid gasoline into a high mileage gas vapor fuel simply by using a vacuum to suck air into the gas tank and and through an aerator and as the aerator produced air bubbles rises through the liquid fuel they attract fuel molecules and becomes a highly combustible gas vapor.
In early 1936 Breen Motor Company, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada tested the Pogue carburetor on a Ford V-8 Coupe and got 26.2 miles on one pint of gasoline. 1 US pint = 0.125 US gallons. That means the Ford V-8 Coupe got 209.6 mpg. In Dec. 12, 1936 Canadian Automotive Magazine stated that the standard carburetor gets about 25 mpg at only 9% efficiency. The Pogue carburetor achieved 100% efficiency.
Need more proof that these things actually work? Need concrete evidence that all liquid gasoline combustion engines can run more efficiently on a gas vapor.? The proof that all gasoline powered engines run more efficiently on vapor than on liquid is propane and natural gas. How many taxi companies Worldwide have converted their vehicles to run on the cheaper and environmentally friendly propane or natural gas? Taxis throughout the US and Canada have kept the stock gasoline combustion engine but have modified them to run on propane or natural gas.
Propane and natural gas have been used as a commercial motor fuel for more than 80 years and billions of miles. Propane and natural gas powered engines offer cleaner emissions along with 10 to 15 percent less carbon dioxide, 20 percent less carbon monoxide and 50 to 60 percent less hydrocarbons and nitric oxide.
Most carburetor and fuel-injected engines can easily be converted to operate on propane or natural gas simply by installing a conversion kit. And propane and natural gas’s minimal sooting, owing to its low carbon content, means increased engine life, fewer oil changes and longer spark plug life.
Don’t be discouraged by claims that if you run you engine on only gas vapor or a leaner (less fuel more air) fuel mixture you’ll kill your engine. Propane and natural gas are the leanest types of fuel (they are both gas vapors) yet they have been used for over 80 years and they have caused no damage to the engine. They have actually extended the life of the engine. I have personally seen propane powered taxi cabs with over a million kilometers on their odometer.
Damage to an engine is caused by overheating (faulty coolant system), lack of oil, and carbon buildup in the engine from using liquid carbon fuels like gasoline and diesel. All gas vapor powered engine run cooler and cleaner than any liquid fuel feed engine. All gas vapor powered engines can travel a lot further than liquid fueled engines. Pogue proved this 80 years ago. Pogue gas vapor carburetor allowed the Ford V-8 Coupe to travel 800% farther than its stock liquid fueled counterpart.
Even the US government knows that gas vapor and not liquid fuel is what runs all internal combustion engines. FEMA – “All internal combustion engines actually run on vapor, not liquid. The liquid fuels used by gasoline engines are vaporized before they enter the combustion chamber above the pistons.” This claim was stated in the following FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) document – www.woodgas.net/files/FEMA_emergency_gassifer.pdf This report was published in 1989.
So if millions of vehicles Worldwide are already running on propane and natural gas it is safe to say that all liquid gasoline combustion engines can run on propane, natural gas or aerated fuel vapor. It is a lot cheaper to modify the existing liquid gasoline tank and produce aerated fuel vapor than to buy and install a propane or natural gas conversion kit.
Portable gas generator liquid fuel to gas aeration fuel system made in 2005, © Paul W Kincaid
Here is an easy way to increase the fuel economy of all portable gas generators. It uses a vacuum line and a filtered air intake line to draw gas vapor from the liquid fuel. Gas vapor generation is enhanced by adding a circulation hose to the fuel petcock. The engine vacuum will draw fuel out through the fuel petcock and into the attached circulation hose and spray out into the top of the tank. The only thing you will need to install on the vacuum line that feeds the vapor to the gas combustion engine is a marine fuel primer pump – shown below. Pump the primer several time to draw enough air into the gas tank to generate enough gas vapor to start the engine. Once the engine fires engine vacuum will take over.
All portable gas generators wastes a lot of fuel. Liquid fuel is simply sprayed into the cylinders which isn’t a very efficient use of the very expensive fuel. Add the fact that the CO2 output of these generators are much higher than automobiles. You cannot run a gas generator indoors because the levels of CO2 are extremely high and it will kill you in a very short period of time.
The above described system to generate gas vapor from liquid fuel drastically lowers the emissions of the portable gas generator. In the process it can potentially increase the fuel efficiency by at least 10 fold. Less fuel will be wasted and the portable gas generators can run a lot longer. If you gas generator now runs 4 hours on a tank of fuel you could run it for 40 hours using the same amount of liquid fuel.
If 1 gallon of liquid fuel equals 160 gallons of gas vapor how long do you think a portable gas generator will run if you feed it only gas vapor? Potentially 160 times longer. If your liquid to gas vapor system runs at full efficiency you could essentially run your gas generator for 640 hours (160:1 x 4) or 26.6 days. Even if you only get 10 times more running time, your fuel costs has decreased by 1000%.
If you don’t want to drill holes into the tank of your new and expensive gas generator you can convert your gas generator to a gas vapor system simply by drilling and setting the ports into the gas cap or a replacement gas cap that you can buy from the manufacturer. This way you can experiment with the above gas vapor fuel system and still have an original gas generator, if you mess up.
Short URL: http://kincaids.ca/frenergy/?p=402
Group of high school students built 300 mpg all-electric car
A new electric car that can get more than 300 miles per gallon. You read right – three, zero, zero…
Feb 2 2012 / No Comment / Read More »
Just 12 volts is all we need to power the World.
How much electrical energy do we need to power the World? Just 12 volts. The amount of energy in one…
Feb 2 2012 / No Comment / Read More »
200+ mpg is possible today.
Would you buy a gas electric hybrid that delivered 200+ mpg (miles per gallon)? Sure you would, if the price…
Jul 24 2011 / No Comment / Read More »
Dodge EV and other all-electric vehicles silently overcoming dependency on oil.
The all-electric Dodge EV is just what the World has been waiting for. It and cars like it will put…
Mar 30 2011 / No Comment / Read More »Water is too essential to all life on Earth to waste even 1 drop of it on gas or oil
You and everyone else in the World needs fresh water to live. Water is essential for sustaining all life on…
Dec 31 2011 / No Comment / Read More »
Cities begin producing their own renewable fuel by using sewage sludge.
These are not oil reserve tanks. They are sewage treatment tanks. The fuel of the future for every city around…
Sep 11 2011 / No Comment / Read More »
US had technology in the 1990s to run cars, gas generators and army tanks using water.
US inventor Stanley Meyer developed an electric cell which split ordinary tap water into hydrogen and oxygen with far less…
Apr 7 2011 / No Comment / Read More »
Car that runs on nothing but water unveiled in Japan. No gasoline, no battery recharging and no emissions.
Japanese company Genepax presents its eco-friendly car that runs on nothing but water. The car has an energy generator that…
Let’s get the World running on Electricity in 2012.
How to permanently lower your fuel bill to zero.
Save money and instantly reduce your electrical consumption by 4500 watts
The clandestine purpose of the Northern Gateway, Enbridge and Keystone Pipelines – grand theft fresh water.
Drive-charge electric motor will allow electric cars to travel farther than gasoline cars, without stopping to recharge and cost $0.00
Exponentially increase your vehicle’s fuel mileage by using only the gas vapor from the top of your gas tank.
How to convert 1 gallon of liquid gasoline into 160 gallons of highly combustible fuel vapor and increase your nation’s fuel supply by 16,000%
How everyone can afford to own a brand new, self-charging, all-electric car.
Infinite, free and unmetered energy to power your home and autos.
Radiant energy receiver - Antenna to bridge rectifier to grounded capacitor
In 1886 Heinrich Rudolph Hertz, a German physicist, demonstrated that an electric current swinging very rapidly back and forth in a conducting wire (an antenna) would radiate electromagnetic waves into the surrounding space. Later English scientist Michael Faraday demonstrated that when radio waves are exposed to an antenna electricity is created. When these electromagnetic radio waves passes in or out of the antenna an electric current will register on a meter. Rapid back-an-forth movement produces a useful flow of electricity. This alternating movement of EM oscillations against an antenna is the basis of today’s alternating current (AC). Both Hertz and Faraday proved that an antenna can harness an infinite source of free electrical energy. An antenna taps a source of power described as “everywhere present in unlimited quantities”.
FREE RENEWABLE BIOFUEL
Uganda Africa construction video on how to make your own backyard biogas plant. Daily gas production capacity of the above constructed digester is 2.6 cubic meters (time stamp 3:23). That is equivalent to 2600 liters or 16.4 barrels of oil or 687 US liquid gallons. For comparison an empty 20 lb barbecue propane tank will hold about 4.7 gallons of propane. Biogas can be used to heat your home, cook your food and power gas electric generators. In the US and Canada you can use your existing prefab concrete or plastic septic tanks and produce your own biogas to fuel your home. Just bury a sealed plastic drum, barrel or tank next to the septic tank and run a plastic tube from the top of your septic tank to the buried sealed plastic drum, barrel or tank. Then add a propane gas valve and fitting, like the ones from a barbecue, to the top of the sealed buried drum, barrel or tank and you have your very own natural gas supply.
ELECTRIC CARS BUILT 1ST
Thomas Edison in his 1914 electric car. The electric car has been around longer than the gasoline car. They were being manufactured and sold before the advent of the gasoline powered cars .
GAS TO ELECTRIC
Video shows you just how easy it is to convert a gasoline powered car into an all electric powered car. If a home mechanic can easily do it the automakers most certainly can too.
FAIR USE NOTICE:
The above videos may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 106A-117 of the U.S. Copyright Law.
This new power for the driving of the world’s machinery will be derived from the energy which is everywhere present in unlimited quantities.
70% of the Sun’s radiant energy penetrates the Earth’s atmosphere. 30% is...
Feb 2 2012 / No Comment / Read More »
Ethers – unlimited free energy for electric cars
Since the early 1900s free unmetered energy was discovered and the technology...
Jun 22 2011 / No Comment / Read More »
The 1931 Pierce-Arrow electric motor car that got its energy from thin air.
Nikola Tesla powered this all steel frame and body 1931 Pierce-Arrow with...
Feb 2 2011 / No Comment / Read More »
Free and infinite source of energy discovered and covered up 80 years ago
Enough energy is coming to the Earth to light one million, one hundred ninety-three thousand, six hundred, (1,193,600)...
Jan 30 2012 / No Comment / Read More »
A secret that it will transform the entire global electrical power industry.
If there was a way for every person on Earth to reduce their electrical power consumption 10 fold...
Sep 3 2011 / No Comment / Read More »How to convert 1 gallon of liquid gasoline into 160 gallons of highly combustible fuel vapor and increase your nation’s fuel supply by 16,000%
How much does 1 gallon of liquid gasoline displace as a vapor? The saturated vapor volume of an...
Apr 3 2012 / 2 Comments / Read More »
Water is too essential to all life on Earth to waste even 1 drop of it on gas or oil
You and everyone else in the World needs fresh water to live. Water is essential for sustaining all...
Dec 31 2011 / No Comment / Read More »
Replicating Nikola Tesla’s electric car technology would end oil dependency forever.
Nikola Tesla removed the gasoline engine of a 1931 Pierce-Arrow automobile and replaced it with an electric...
Apr 8 2011 / No Comment / Read More
35 - A BRILLIANT IDEA FROM A MEMBER OF THE MANHATTAN PROJECT
"... a free supply of ascorbic acid to every person would lower the cost of health care in a major way..."
Theodore P. Jorgensen
4932 High Street
Lincoln, Nebraska, 68506
Dear Sir or Madam as the case may be,
The easiest thing for me to do is not to write this letter. But if you continue to read it I think you will understand why I have written it. This letter concerns vitally important ideas, probably far more than you can imagine. The calendar tells me that I am in my 99th year ( this is not a misprint ) and I must tell you a few things about myself.
I am a retired physics professor, with a Ph.D. from Harvard. I spent the war years working on the Atomic Bomb at Los Alamos. On my return to teaching, I originated and directed an atomic accelerator project at the University of Nebraska, which continues to be financed to the present time by the Federal Government. I was retired from the University in my 70th year. Since that time my mental activities have been mainly involved with studying the swing of a golf club which allowed me to write a best seller on the Physics of Golf.
I grew up on a subsistence homestead in northwestern South Dakota. The many grasshoppers on the prairie gave my mother the idea that these were prime turkey food. She could get fertile turkey eggs only when her turkeys were fed cod-liver oil. She fed it to her turkeys and also to her five children. Thus at the age of about thirteen years I became interested in nutrition.
Vitamin C was discovered to be ascorbic acid in 1931. Soon chemistry had developed to the stage where this substance could be synthesized. When a supply of pure ascorbic acid could be obtained, this substance was used in medical research. Unfortunately the substance was thought to be a vitamin and since it was known that vitamins were effective in very small amounts, for many years research using ascorbic acid was done using very small amounts of the substance. It took many years before it was discovered that ascorbic acid could be used to produce fabulous results when used correctly in medical and clinical research.
It was discovered that vitamin C was not a poisonous substance when used in the human body. It was also discovered that solutions of ascorbic acid in proper concentrations would kill bacteria and viruses. Happily a patient's blood could, through the proper use of ascorbic acid, be made able to kill them too. The concentration needed in a specific case had of course somehow to be decided.
It was also discovered that most animals produced there own ascorbic acid and that human beings, apes, monkeys, and guinea pigs, could not make any at all. The conclusion of the thinking on this problem was that the animals which could not make ascorbic acid had a genetic defect involving one enzyme which was lost millions of years ago because ascorbic acid was so easy to be obtained in the food then available.
It was early decided that the Recommended Daily Allowance, the RDA, for a healthy human male would be arbitrarily set at the 60 mg per day. The rate chosen for monkeys was substantially larger than that for humans.
The amount of ascorbic acid needed for a man to allow him to have optimum health is of course unknown. Some idea of the amount he should have would be what his body would make if he had this ability. This leads to the consideration of the rate of ascorbic acid made by healthy animals. Such studies have been made and the values range far above those of the current RDA for humans.
Another effect of ascorbic acid must be mentioned. The level of cholesterol in a persons blood varies inversely with the level of the ascorbic acid in the blood. When I learned of this I decided to perform an experiment on myself. My cholesterol level had been running at 240 units for several years. My doctor told me he could give me a drug to lower the cholesterol level but he was afraid of the damage that might be done by the drug. An experiment had been reported that a person's cholesterol level depended on the amount of white sugar ingested. With this information in mind, I decided to eliminate sucrose in my diet as much as I could in our culture while I arbitrarily set my intake of ascorbic acid at five gram per day. Much to my doctor's surprise, my cholesterol level fell from 240 units down to 180 units. I know of similar experiments with similar results. Also I have not had a cold since I have been taking the larger amount of ascorbic acid.
When I learned that a solution of ascorbic acid in a proper concentration would have properties for killing both bacteria and viruses and that the concentration of ascorbic acid in a person's blood could be adjusted to such a concentration by the amount of ascorbic acid ingested, I was led to try to find examples of this use of ascorbic acid in medical literature.
Dr. Robert F. Cathcart of Los Altos, California has found a method of determining the amount of ascorbic acid to be used in any given case. He found that the amount of ascorbic acid to use was just less than the amount which would produce a laxative effect in the patient. Dr. Cathcart reports that he has treated 9000 patients with many kinds of infections and not a single patient treated with ascorbic acid has had to go to a hospital. There are other reports by doctors who have had phenomenal similar effects in which they determined the amount of ascorbic acid by trial.
It was also discovered that most animals produce their own ascorbic acid and that human beings, apes, monkeys, and guinea pigs could not make any at all. The conclusion of the thinking on this problem was that those animals which could not make ascorbic acid had a genetic defect involving one enzyme which was lost millions of years ago because ascorbic acid was so easy to obtain in the foods then available.
In order to obtain the amount of ascorbic acid a human being should have, work was done to find what other animals made for their own use. The result of this study put the value of ascorbic acid at 2.3 to 10 grams per 154 pound man in good health.
It is virtually impossible for any person to obtain this much ascorbic acid per day from ordinary or casual ways. This also indicates that human beings are living with dangerously low levels of ascorbic acid. The above information gives some idea of the reason our cost of health care is so high and our average age of death is so low. This problem is a national disgrace and should be attacked on a national basis. There are two reasons why this should be done.
One reason is that a free supply of ascorbic acid to every person would lower the cost of health care in a major way. The other is that in this age of possible terrorist attacks with chemical and biological agents (bacterial and viral) we are vulnerable because we have not applied and extended the knowledge we do have to the practice of medicine. Any practical approach to the ascorbic acid problem would require the whole prestige and authority of the federal government.
I can only leave the solutions of these problems of the public health and the implementation of corrections to the younger generations. As you can see, I think we can and should work toward a solution. Have I convinced you of this possibility too?
Theodore P. Jorgensen
ED NOTE : ILLUMINATI = THE FRANKIST/SABBATIST/SATANIST INTERNATIONAL JEWISH BANKERS (ROTHSCHILDS, LASARDS, SCHIFFS, ETC.).
36 - Eight Signs the Illuminati Orchestrated WW2
May 7, 2012
(left, Masonic Go'fers and traitors at Yalta. Brother Hitler occupied elsewhere.)
Operating behind their agents, Churchill, Hitler, Stalin, and FDR - the Illuminati waged a merciless war on humanity, destroying nations and murdering 60 million people.
This article is indebted to 'Anomalies in History - World War 2' by Robert Pye, a list of various discrepancies in the war that reveal the Illuminati controlled both sides.
by David Richards
1) Wall Street Funded the Nazis
Without the capital provided by Wall Street, there would have been no Hitler and no WW2.
In his book 'Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler' Professor Anthony G Sutton writes that "General Motors, Ford, General Electric, DuPont," and other "U.S. companies intimately involved with the development of Nazi Germany were ... controlled by the Wall Street banks," such as "the J.P. Morgan firm, the Rockefeller Chase Bank and to a lesser extent the Warburg Manhattan bank."
Standard Oil provided a steady supply of oil throughout the war. The oil was shipped to Spain then piped through Nazi-controlled France into Germany.
General Motors and Ford provided 90 % of Nazi armored trucks. IBM produced the Hollerith machines that helped SS Officers manage the round up of dissidents for concentration camps.
2) Why did Hitler pause at Dunkirk, letting the British escape?
The German Army had the massive British expeditionary force at their mercy at Dunkirk in May 1940 but, on Hitler's orders, held back for three days, thereby allowing 338,000 British and French troops to escape. The German generals, waiting approval to launch a full-scale assault, were left scratching their heads.
This military blunder is inexplicable by conventional standards.
Why did Hitler hold back? The Illuminati wanted WW2 to be a long and bloody conflict - but one Germany would lose. The destruction of the British Army would have given the Nazis an almost unassailable advantage in the war, so Hitler had to let them escape.
3) Why didn't Hitler commandeer the French fleet?
The Nazis were never serious about exploiting France.
France signed an armistice with the Germans on 22nd June 1940, stipulating that the French fleet would be largely disarmed and confined to harbor, under French control. What insanity! If Hitler had commandeered the French fleet, he would have had overwhelming naval superiority in European waters!
This fleet could have been used to seal the Straits of Gibraltar, the only route the Allies had into the Mediterranean Sea.
Hitler was a Trojan horse designed to destroy Germany's national, cultural and racial pretensions, therefore integrating the country into a world government. This is why, instead of executing a sensible strategy to defeat the Allies, he launched a suicidal invasion of the USSR.
4) Why did Stalin take no steps whatsoever to repel the planned German invasion of 22 June 1941?
The goal of the Nazi-Soviet war was to burn out the German war machine. Stalin's refusal to preempt the Nazi invasion is evidence that the war was staged.
For months preceding the war, there was a huge build up of Nazi forces on the Soviet border. Soviet spies had infiltrated Nazi ranks and could tell Stalin all their moves, but 'Uncle Joe' refused to attack first. Even when the Nazis had four and a half million soldiers and 650,000 vehicles amassed on the Soviet border, Stalin refused to mobilize his defenses!
This gave the Nazis a chance to gain a foothold in Russia and launch a full-scale attack, ensuring a long and bloody conflict.
5) Why did Churchill order the return of 50,000 Cossacks after the war?
In school we are taught that WW2 was a simple story of Good (Allies) vs. Evil (Axis). However, the acts of genocide committed by the Allies render this narrative absurd.
During the war, a large number of Soviet POWs who were opposed to the Stalinist regime offered to fight alongside the Nazis. Most of these were ethnic Cossacks or similar groups persecuted under Communism.
After the war, the Allies forcibly repatriated these men to the Soviet Union, knowing full well that Stalin would kill every last one of them - which he did.
6) Why did Churchill and Truman give Eastern Europe to the Soviets?
Following decisions made at three conferences - Tehran, Yalta and Potsdam - Eastern Europe was handed over to the Soviets. The official reason is that 'Stalin demanded it'. However, given the military might of the US and the destruction of the Red Army in the conflict with the Nazis, far smaller concessions were possible.
The real reason is that Communism is a tool of the Illuminati and they wanted Soviet Union to expand and bring countries into the NWO. They also wanted the West (capitalist) vs. East (communist) dialectic to be the political paradigm of the second half of the 20th century.
7) The Americans knew about Pearl Harbor in advance
The Illuminati goaded Japan into attacking America.
Aware that Japan received 80% of its oil imports from the US, in 1941 Roosevelt imposed an oil embargo on the country. This was followed by a steel embargo, forcing the Japanese into a war footing with the US.
Evidence abounds that the Americans knew the attack was coming but did nothing to stop it.
They removed the main vessels from Pearl Harbor just prior to the attack, suggesting that they wanted a calamity but didn't want to lose their best ships.
Most damningly, when the first bombs landed early on Sunday morning, a professional Movietone cameraman was lying in wait to record the attacks. This is why the Americans had color footage of the event. This footage proved invaluable as a propaganda tool in American cinemas. A public previously hostile to war would soon cheer atomic bombs vaporizing Japanese cities.
The war with Japan fulfilled a few Illuminati goals.
1. The destruction of the nationalistic Japan elite. Since the end of the war, Japan has ruled almost solely by one US-backed political party.
2. It allowed their communist sock puppet Mao Zedong to rise to power. After defeat by the Americans, the Japanese had to abandon their colonies in China, allowing the Nationalists and Communists to fight over control of the entire country. In 1946 American General C. Marshall was sent to China with orders to unify the country. To ensure that Mao took power, he put an arms embargo on the Nationalists (Tragedy and Hope, Carroll Quigley, pg. 907).
8) Firebombing campaigns - Sacrifices To Satan
During WW2 there were many firebombing campaigns on densely populated cities.
The most famous is Dresden, in which Churchill murdered 100,000 German civilians. (Victims pictured left.)
The same bombers could have been ordered to bomb the factories of IG Farben, or the German rail network, or the German supply lines to the Eastern front, or German shipping and ports. But no. The incineration of thousands of women and children took precedence.
The Americans committed similar sacrifices in Japan. We all know about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but it is rarely mentioned that US forces savagely firebombed 67 Japanese cities. It is estimated that 500,000 civilians were burned to death in the raids.
These needless attacks were the Illuminati 'shock doctrine' in full effect. The intention was to demoralize the world populace and make it accept the authority of the UN.
Considering that the Illuminati are Satanists, these raids also have a deeper meaning. The sacrifice of children by fire is the most potent satanic ritual. The worship of Moloch is the best-known example of this practice. The immolation of these children, along with their mothers, was a deliberate and systematic series of occult sacrifices.
The Illuminati rely on deception to commit their crimes. To this end they lie, trick and deceive, but they also count on our naivety and ignorance.
Under even minimal critical analysis, the official story of WW2 collapses like a house of cards.
Are World Wars Orchestrated ?
May 14, 2005
By Henry Makow Ph.D.
Muslims are rioting in Afghanistan today because US interrogators at Guantanamo Bay flushed copies of the Koran down the toilet.
How do the rioters know this?
It was reported in Newsweek, a publication owned by the family of Eugene Meyer, a past Director of the War Finance Board (WW1), Governor of the Federal Reserve and President of the World Bank. His Washington Post company has had a long relationship with the CIA.
Nothing appears in the mass media without an ulterior purpose. The Illuminati is promoting a clash of "civilizations" between Islam and the US.
In the present run-up to World War Three, it is worth asking if this sinister cabal also orchestrated World War Two, which saw the genocide of 70 million human beings.
A detail in Prince Michel Sturdza's aptly titled The Suicide of Europe (1968) set off my alarm bells.
Sturdza was Romanian Foreign Minister from Sept.-Dec. 1940. He was a leader in the pro-Nazi, anti-Communist, nationalist Christian "Legionary" movement. The Nazis, who like their Communist counterparts were NWO, were opposed to all nationalist movements. They soon overthrew the Legionaries and put these patriots in concentration camps.
Before assuming his post in 1940, Sturdza was visiting Berlin. No one wanted to speak to him with the exception of Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, the wily chief of the Abwehr, German Army Intelligence.
Canaris had a request that both surprised and shocked Sturdza. He asked him to cooperate with Canaris' counterpart in Bucharest, a certain Moruzov who Sturdza suspected was a Communist agent.
Pressed on this, Canaris said Moruzov was providing the "best information concerning Soviet Russia's military preparations."
Before leaving Berlin, Sturdza received a visit from Canaris' deputy, a Captain Muller, "bearer once more of his chief's insistences, which left my wife and me perplexed."
"Captain Muller informed us that Great Britain had never been and would never be defeated. He added: "What I am about to tell you, coming from a Prussian officer, might perhaps be considered as an act of high treason. Pay attention however. Don't under any circumstances take the responsibility as Minister of Foreign Affairs in your country, of pushing it into a war where you have Great Britain as an adversary. You will be crushed. Great Britain is always victorious."
This was a peculiar thing for a German Army Intelligence official to say especially since Germany appeared invincible in August 1940. It had just conquered France in June and sent the British packing .
Sturdza thought he was being tested and was non-committal. "I had not the faintest idea that I had been in contact with the greatest spy ring and traitors known to the military history of any country." (Page 162)
Indeed Canaris, who may have been of Greek-Jewish origin, sabotaged the Nazi war effort. Sturdza believes his spy ring was the main cause of the Nazi defeat. After a failed attempt to assassinate Hitler, its members were brutally murdered by the Gestapo.
Naturally, they are portrayed as courageous heroes: principled humanists who resisted fascist tyranny. I respect this and hope it is the case.
Yet, the statement, "You will be crushed. Great Britain is always victorious," suggests a different agenda, a larger design.
The headquarters of the Communist-Capitalist International is in the City of London. The Bank of England financed the Nazi war machine just as they financed the Bolshevik revolution. The bankers orchestrated World War Two to destroy the great nation states of Europe and wipe out the cream of the new generation. For example, the Soviets slaughtered 15,000 Polish officers in the Katyn forest even though the Poles could have helped resist the Nazis onslaught.
Was Canaris Illuminati or an illuminati dupe? Apparently he wanted to overthrow Hitler and end the war early, but the Allies insisted on "unconditional surrender," i.e. maximum slaughter. No nationalist forces were to remain. The German army had no choice but fight to the end.
I don't see the Second World War as "the good war." It was fabricated to concentrate wealth and power, and to degrade and demoralize humanity. Both sides were guilty of unspeakable atrocities.
The two great wars, and the upcoming third are designed to bring about Illuminati one-world dictatorship and mind control.
Mankind is in the grip of a multigenerational diabolical conspiracy, and is too mesmerized by sex and money to realize it.