QANA Israel's turning point as always

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/12/07-week

Les criminels de guerre Barak, Peres, Netanayahu et leur derniere trouvaille politique pour sauver 'Eretz Yisrael', un gouvernement raciste de type apartheid-militaro-rabinique, est-ce que le criminel de guerre Sarkosy veut imposer le meme type de gouvernement aux francais, de pretendus laics ? Les masques sont tombés...

La Face D'Israël Est Entrain De Changer pour le pire...encore plus de racisme d'etat.....

QANA Israel's turning point as always

17/04/2009 They could have been fathers and mothers today telling their children the stories of what’s right and what’s wrong. They could have been grandmothers and grandfathers. They could have been vivid young men and young women working on their future. 106 people could have been anything other than mere remains and anyplace other than under the ground of Qana. 13 years ago, Qana was the scene of an obscene massacre caused by one of Israel’s “Grapes of Wrath.” Few know that the name the Grapes of Wrath has religious implications. Israeli Rabbi Moshe Cohen explained that the word “grapes” came from the fact that grapes occupied the first position among the seven fruits mentioned in the Talmud, which means that the “grapes of wrath” means anger of the Jewish people. Israel had bombed the UNIFIL headquarters in the southern town of Qana with “pinpoint accuracy” just after dozens of Lebanese refugees had sheltered there. More than half of the 106 martyrs were children. One really must have a heart of stone not to feel compassion for those children who became numbers on plastic bags and in some cases small body parts in carpets. The gruesome pictures of the massacre were published in most Arab newspapers. In the West, however, publishers spared their readers the terrible pictures of how an ill-minded entity steels the future from children. True they respect the dead, but did they respect them when they were alive. The 155mm shell that killed those children was made in the US, and so was the missile that killed the children of the Nabatiyeh massacre on that same day and the children of the Mansouri ambulance massacre earlier and the many Israeli slaughters to follow. Israel said it was returning fire at Hezbollah and that technical failures might have occurred. THE UN REPORT The UN appointed military advisor Major-General Franklin van Kappen of the Netherlands to investigate the massacre. He said in his conclusion that: “a) The distribution of impacts at Qana shows two distinct concentrations, whose mean points of impact are about 140 meters apart. If the guns were converged, as stated by the Israeli forces, there should have been only one main point of impact. b) The pattern of impacts is inconsistent with a normal overshooting of the declared target (the mortar site) by a few rounds, as suggested by the Israeli forces. c) During the shelling, there was a perceptible shift in the weight of fire from the mortar site to the United Nations compound. d) The distribution of point impact detonations and air bursts makes it improbable that impact fuses and proximity fuses were employed in random order, as stated by the Israeli forces. e) There were no impacts in the second target area which the Israeli forces claim to have shelled. f) Contrary to repeated denials, two Israeli helicopters and a remotely piloted vehicle were present in the Qana area at the time of the shelling. While the possibility cannot be ruled out completely, it is unlikely that the shelling of the United Nations compound was the result of gross technical and/or procedural errors.” SACRIFICED AT THE ALTAR OF ZIONISTS Then U.N. Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali released the report after coming under severe pressure not to release it Shamefully though the U.N. Security Council has refused to act on the report or to hold the Israelis accountable. Of course the American veto threat and tremendous pressures upon Boutros-Ghali and member states at the U.N. was behind this further demonstration of U.N. impotence and cowardice. For his crime, Ghali was later sacrificed at the altar of the Zionist masters who controlled the Oval Office. THE ISRAELI RESPONSE Israel responded by categorically rejecting the findings of the UN report and insisted that “their investigation” has shown that the UN position was hit by artillery fire “due to incorrect targeting based on erroneous data.” THE COURSE OF THE WAR Israel needed to get rid of the July 1993 understanding that put the conflict between occupation forces and the resistance in its absolute military form, excluding civilians from military operations. Moreover, then Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Perez was accused by the Likud and his own Labor party of helplessness in dealing with the Lebanese resistance attacks. Perez was facing election before the summer of 1996. With an American blessing, he exploited the international sympathy with Israel in the wake of the Palestinian resistance attacks. This sympathy was established in the Sharm el-Sheikh summit in Egypt on the 13th of March 1996, which gave Israel full rein to crush resistance forces in Palestine and Lebanon; a plan was set. Israeli occupation forces opened artillery fire at the southern village of Yater and killed several people. It was the first fruit of the Israeli plot, grapes of wrath. Bit by bit, yet in a fast pace, Israeli artillery fire and air raids expanded to reach the Bekaa region and southern populated areas. The Israeli fire was accompanied by a psychological warfare assumed by the (Voice of the South) radio, controlled by the pro-Israeli militias of chief collaborator Antoine Lahed. Beirut’s southern suburbs were targeted with four laser-guided missiles near Hezbollah’s Shoura council announcing the beginning of a fierce war. The party’s Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah announced that Hezbollah will retaliate to the Israeli aggression by bombing settlements in northern occupied Palestine. And so it happened. Rounds of Katyusha missiles fell on the settlements of Keryat Shmonah, Nahariya and Metula. On the fifth day of the aggression, it became evident that the initiative was in the hands of the resistance. The Israeli command realized that “grapes of wrath” had backlashed. To escape this situation, it intensified military assaults, while the resistance raised its tone and threatened to attack more settlements. In the meantime, Damascus, Tehran and Beirut were confronting the Israeli-American axis, while Paris and Moscow which intervened for calm down had their initiatives hindered by the American demand that concerned parties sign a document calling in one of its article for the deletion of resolution 425; the UN resolution that demanded Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon. Washington was also protecting Israel at the Security Council by vetoing any resolution that condemned Israeli aggressions against Lebanon, including the massacres in Qana, Nabatiyeh and other places. Realizing Israel was heading to abyss, the Americans launched their own initiative. Then US Ambassador to Lebanon Richard Jones told the Lebanese government of martyr Rafik Hariri that to end Israeli hostilities in Lebanon, the resistance had to stop attacking Israeli forces in the south, whereas Israeli forces preserved the right to attack Hezbollah positions if they attacked “northern Israel.” Lebanon seemed to be fighting this war alone, amid Arab silence. Beirut and the Lebanese backed the resistance and Lebanon’s allies were working on a cease-fire. The Americans acknowledged that Sayyed Nasrallah had become a major player in any attempt to reach a cease-fire. Israel’s goal to crush and disarm Hezbollah had turned into a request to stop firing Katyusha missiles at settlements in return for a stop of Israel’s military campaign. Then US Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, failed to press for Israel’s demands. After seven days of political wrangling, Christopher called up Lebanese Speaker Nabih Berri and Prime Minister Rafik Hariri for a meeting in Damascus. The April understanding, as it was later known, announced the end of the 16-day Israeli aggression. The signed understanding stated that Israel and its collaborators would not fire at civilian targets and the resistance would not attack “northern Israel” with Katyusha missiles or any other kind of weapons. The understanding included an article to form a monitoring group made up of observers from the US, France, Syria, Lebanon and Israel to oversee the implementation of the understanding. Operation grapes of wrath ended and the Israeli military assessment concluded it was a failed operation while the political aftermath saw Shimon Peres defeated in Israeli elections. Ten years later, Israel launched an unprecedented war against Lebanon, in yet another attempt to crush Hezbollah. In the “Second Lebanon War” Qana was again the turning point that changed the course of the war. Israel committed a massacre there killing dozens of people, mainly children and women, hiding from Israeli bombs. This historical village in south Lebanon has contributed at least twice in hitting the last nails in the coffin of Israel. According to the Winograd report, the Second Israeli war constituted a humiliating defeat to Israel. Religiously speaking, the Israelis believe that the beginning of their entity’s end starts with their first defeat – which took place in 2000 and then enhanced by another resounding defeat in 2006. The resistance remains strong and Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah’s promises are fulfilled. Today, despite attempt to distort the resistance and Sayyed Nasrallah’s image, his eminence’s pledge, in case of a new Israeli war, is to let the world witness new surprises that would change the course of the battle and the face of the whole region.

Israel’s Grapes of Wrath 1996 Israel’s Grapes of Wrath 1996 Israel’s Grapes of Wrath 1996 Israel’s Grapes of Wrath 1996 Israel’s Grapes of Wrath 1996 Israel’s Grapes of Wrath 1996 Israel’s Grapes of Wrath 1996 Israel’s Grapes of Wrath 1996

The ugly secret of Pentagon 9/11

The ugly secret of Pentagon 9/11.....


Severe Visibility
http://www.severevisibility.com/
A film by Paul Cross

9/11 films have become a genre, whether non-fiction or fictionalized
accounts of the events and truth of that awful day. This latest, Severe
Visibility, by actor, writer, director Paul Cross, is a riveting,
Kafkaesque film which takes places largely in the matrix of the
Pentagon, the belly of the beast on 9/11 and its aftermath. The small
cast and independent production reminds me somewhat of The Reflecting
Pool, with its relentless questioning of the official story.

In this case, the hero or anti-hero is U.S. Army Major Stanley Kruter,
who works in the ill-fated Pentagon accounting office, most of which was
obliterated along with Naval Intelligence that day, both keepers of many
lost secrets. Kruter is a Vietnam veteran winding down his military
career far from the bloody battlefields he experienced as a young man,
though they have left him troubled and suffering with bouts of
depression and anti-depressants.

Kruter, though mild-mannered, self-effacing, is a fiercely patriotic
man, somewhat at conflict with his inner peacenik for his military
career. To ease his psychic pain, he keeps a diary. His pen pal or
conscience to whom he writes and questions is no less than Thomas
Jefferson, whose determined visage graces a wall of Kruter’s small office.

It is in this room in hell on the morning of 9/11 that Kruter notices
his small TV’s reception is fluttering. As he brings the antennae cord
to the window’s metal frame, he sees a craft descending like a
lightening bolt towards the building. Just then, a friend bursts in the
doorway to ask him if he’s seen what’s happened in New York. Before he
can answer, the craft makes explosive contact with the building.

Full of self-doubt, even remorse, Kruter wonders if he saw what he
thinks he saw: not the 757 he’s told later hit the building, but a
smaller, slender, missile-like craft zooming down ground level at nearly
500 mph. Though he survives the explosion with only a nasty forehead
bruise, he is further damaged psychologically by the unthinkable truth
of what he feels he really saw. Could it possibly be? Could a soldier, a
lifer, a patriot like him even think such thoughts?

In fact, at a deposition in the Pentagon, when asked what he saw by
military brass and two FBI men, he has trouble, internal trouble,
spitting out 757. Under repeated questioning, he hesitantly clings to
the official story, afraid to even touch his original perception lest he
be thought a traitor. Of course, once he has testified that yes it was a
757, the die is cast. Whatever inner peace he had is destroyed by his
conscience.

To make matters worse, as he leaves the building he is questioned by a
foreign journalist who challenges him when he repeats it was a 757. This
only pours fuel on Kruter’s internal rage. And we are off and running
through his world, suddenly gone dark, and haunted by his deepest fears,
not to mention the relentless reporter, military inquirers, the incoming
information from eyewitness reports on his car radio and home television
that rebut the 757 perception.

Sufficeth to say, Kruter’s crisis of conscience is full-blown. And even
the title, Severe Visibility, begins to sound awfully like, Severe
Disability, a perhaps fatal case of PTSD. It is an irony and reckoning
for this veteran soldier who thought he had distanced himself in the
fortress of patriotism from the suffering and violence of the
battlefield. Or are they both sides of a coin fate flipped for him? And
the call, at all costs, is his.

Within this taut set-up, we have a graceful dramatic device for
exposition of all the facts and non-facts and what questions arose after
Pentagon 9/11. They are doled out by the relentless reporter, whom
Kruter contacts, and by Kruter himself who begins to look more closely
at photos of the front of the building, and to realize the absence of
the massive wings, tail, fuselage, engines and baggage.

Kruter also notices a file cabinet and computer screen in an exposed
office on the second floor above where the airliner was said to hit.
They survived the heat that purportedly evaporated the craft and bodies.
As he pursues the impulses of his doubt, he awakens the suspicions of
others. A military guard catches Kruter entering a cordoned off office
directly below his own. He explains to the guard he wanted to see if the
view was any different than his. It wasn’t, but the guard reports him.

The revelations that the Pentagon hit was what he really saw begin to
tighten like a hanging noose around his neck, suffocating him. He visits
his psychiatrist, begins to rely on pills and whiskey to dim his
consciousness, but it’s too late. He is approached by the two FBI men
who had been at his original deposition and is questioned again. He
realizes that his worst nightmare is beginning to come true.

I leave the rest and the best of it all for you to see -- you being
anyone who likes a good story well told, or who are interested in what
really happened at the Pentagon on 9/11. Ultimately, what Kruter finds
out catapults him into this matrix of intrigue, madness, and suspense,
setting him on a collision course with his destiny, one from which he
finds no return.

Severe Visibility was an Official Selection of the New York
International Independent Film and Video Festival of 2007.

The Bush Six to Be Indicted

Spanish prosecutors will seek criminal charges against Alberto Gonzales and five high-ranking Bush administration officials for sanctioning torture at Guantánamo. By Scott Horton.

Spanish prosecutors have decided to press forward with a criminal investigation targeting former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and five top associates over their role in the torture of five Spanish citizens held at Guantánamo, several reliable sources close to the investigation have told The Daily Beast. Their decision is expected to be announced on Tuesday before the Spanish central criminal court, the Audencia Nacional, in Madrid. But the decision is likely to raise concerns with the human-rights community on other points: They will seek to have the case referred to a different judge.

Both Washington and Madrid appear determined not to allow the pending criminal investigation to get in the way of improved relations....????

The six defendants—in addition to Gonzales, Federal Appeals Court Judge and former Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, University of California law professor and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo, former Defense Department general counsel and current Chevron lawyer William J. Haynes II, Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff David Addington, and former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith—are accused of having given the green light to the torture and mistreatment of prisoners held in U.S. detention in “the war on terror.” The case arises in the context of a pending proceeding before the court involving terrorism charges against five Spaniards formerly held at Guantánamo. A group of human-rights lawyers originally filed a criminal complaint asking the court to look at the possibility of charges against the six American lawyers. Baltasar Garzón Real, the investigating judge, accepted the complaint and referred it to Spanish prosecutors for a view as to whether they would accept the case and press it forward. “The evidence provided was more than sufficient to justify a more comprehensive investigation,” one of the lawyers associated with the prosecution stated.

But prosecutors will also ask that Judge Garzón, an internationally known figure due to his management of the case against former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet and other high-profile cases, step aside. The case originally came to Garzón because he presided over efforts to bring terrorism charges against the five Spaniards previously held at Guantánamo. Spanish prosecutors consider it “awkward” for the same judge to have both the case against former U.S. officials based on the possible torture of the five Spaniards at Guantánamo and the case against those very same Spaniards. A source close to the prosecution also noted that there was concern about the reaction to the case in some parts of the U.S. media, where it had been viewed, incorrectly, as a sort of personal frolic of Judge Garzón. Instead, the prosecutors will ask Garzón to transfer the case to Judge Ismail Moreno, who is currently handling an investigation into kidnapping charges surrounding the CIA’s use of facilities as a safe harbor in connection with the seizure of Khalid el-Masri, a German greengrocer who was seized and held at various CIA blacksites for about half a year as a result of mistaken identity. The decision on the transfer will be up to Judge Garzón in the first instance, and he is expected to make a quick ruling. If he denies the request, it may be appealed.

Judge Garzón’s name grabs headlines in Spain today less because of his involvement in the Gonzales torture case than because of his supervision of the Gürtel affair, in which leading figures of the conservative Partido Popular in Madrid and Valencia are now under investigation or indictment on suspicions of corruptly awarding public-works contracts. Garzón is also the nation’s leading counterterrorism judge, responsible for hundreds of investigations targeting Basque terrorist groups, as well as a major recent effort to identify and root out al Qaeda affiliates operating in the Spanish enclaves of North Africa.

Announcement of the prosecutor’s decision was delayed until after the Easter holiday in order not to interfere with a series of meetings between President Barack Obama and Spanish Prime Minister José Zapatero. However, contrary to a claim contained in an editorial on April 8 in the Wall Street Journal, the Obama State Department has been in steady contact with the Spanish government about the case. Shortly after the case was filed on March 17, chief prosecutor Javier Zaragoza was invited to the U.S. embassy in Madrid to brief members of the embassy staff about the matter. A person in attendance at the meeting described the process as “correct and formal.” The Spanish prosecutors briefed the American diplomats on the status of the case, how it arose, the nature of the allegations raised against the former U.S. government officials. The Americans “were basically there just to collect information,” the source stated.The Spanish prosecutors advised the Americans that they would suspend their investigation if at any point the United States were to undertake an investigation of its own into these matters. They pressed to know whether any such investigation was pending. These inquiries met with no answer from the U.S. side.

Spanish officials are highly conscious of the political context of the case and have measured the Obama administration’s low-key reaction attentively. Although Spain is a NATO ally that initially supported “the war on terror” under Bush with a commitment of troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan, relations with the Bush administration deteriorated after Zapatero became prime minister and acted quickly to withdraw the Spanish contingent in Iraq. In the 2008 presidential campaign, Republican John McCain referred to Spain as a hostile state in comments that mystified Spaniards (it appears that McCain may have confused Spain with Venezuela and Zapatero with Hugo Chávez). Recently, the United States and Spain also wrangled over Spain’s decision to withdraw its troop commitment in Kosovo as well. Both Zapatero and Obama, however, have given a high priority to improving relations between the two long-standing allies. Spanish newspapers hailed the fact that Obama referred to Zapatero three times as “my good friend” during the recent European summit meetings, a sharp contrast with meetings at which former President Bush gave Zapatero a cold shoulder.

Both Washington and Madrid appear determined not to allow the pending criminal investigation to get in the way of improved relations, which both desire, particularly in regard to coordinated economic policy to confront the current financial crisis and a reshaped NATO mandate for action in Afghanistan. With the case now proceeding, that will be more of a challenge. The reaction on American editorial pages is divided—some questioning sharply why the Obama administration is not conducting an investigation, which is implicitly the question raised by the Spanish prosecutors. Publications loyal to the Bush team argue that the Spanish investigation is an “intrusion” into American affairs, even when those affairs involve the torture of five Spaniards on Cuba.

The Bush Six labored at length to create a legal black hole in which they could implement their policies safe from the scrutiny of American courts and the American media. Perhaps they achieved much of their objective, but the law of unintended consequences has kicked in. If U.S. courts and prosecutors will not address the matter because of a lack of jurisdiction, foreign courts appear only too happy to step in.

Israel's racists in chief abound....

Israel’s Racist in Chief: ... [Lieberman] said in 2004 that 90 percent of Israel's Palestinian citizens "have no place here. They can take their bundles and get lost." This statement was especially galling since Lieberman, unlike the Palestinian majority who can trace their ancestry in the region back generations, immigrated to Israel in 1978 from Moldova and retains a heavy Russian accent.

He has suggested bombing Egypt's Aswan Dam, an act that would lead to a massive loss of Egyptian lives. As Ariel Sharon's minister of transportation he offered to bus several hundred Palestinian prisoners to the sea and drown them. He recently told the president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, one of Israel's few Arab allies, to "go to hell." And, along with Netanyahu, he advocates massive airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities.
Lieberman, from the floor of the Knesset, openly fantasized three years ago about executing the handful of Palestinian Knesset members.

Exposing two notorious Ziocons pro-Israel warmongers

Exposing two notorious pro-Israel warmongers
How Gilad Atzmon routed David Aaronovitch and Nick Cohen

By Gilad Atzmon

11 April 2009

Israeli-born jazz musician and writer Gilad Atzmon describes how, at a
debate on anti-Semitism held at Oxford University, he demolished two of
Britain’s most notorious pro-war and pro-Israel lobbyists, David
Aaronovitch and Nick Cohen.

On 1 April 2009, I participated in a panel that could have been a
breakthrough debate on issues having to do with “anti-Semitism”. The
event was part of the Sunday Times Oxford Literary Festival and it took
place at Oxford University. The discussion was moderated by the
legendary BBC reporter, Martin Bell. On the panel we had Nick Cohen and
David Aaronovitch. They were there to elaborate on the case of “the new
anti-Semitism”. Interestingly enough, Aaronovitch and Cohen were
prominent advocates of the illegal war on Iraq through the British
press. They are also notoriously famous for their Islamophobic ranting,
and, as if this were not enough, they were also caught supporting the
latest deadly Israeli campaign in Gaza. I was at the panel to argue that
anti-Semitism is a spin, a myth. I was there to deliver a very simple
message: there is no such thing as anti-Semitism.

I was looking forward to the event. I suspected that it might not be
easy confronting Britain’s loudest Zionist-conservative (Ziocon)
lobbyists on my own. In fact, I was wrong. It was a piece of cake. It
was almost an effortless task to expose and demolish the lame Zionist
argument, mainly because there is no such argument. Zionism is not a
dialogical narrative; rather, it is a pragmatic and ruthless practice
that seeks control of land and discourse.

In contrast to Aaronovitch and Cohen, I believe in dialogue and I
support every form of well-argued debate. In fact, I would debate with
anyone, whether it is a Nazi or a Zionist, whether it is a white
supremacist or a Judaeocentric Islamophobic agitator. In my world,
platform is granted to anyone who is willing to hold a well-mannered
conversation. However, on 1 April both Aaronovitch and Cohen didn’t want
to debate or to argue. They believed that finishing me off would serve
their cause. Funnily enough, not only did they fail, but they ended up
on the defensive, running out of sympathy and begging for the audience
to stop applauding me.

Sadly, the panel was not very effective in elaborating on the given
topic (“Anti-Semitism – alive and well in Europe?”). David Aaronovitch,
who happened to be the first to talk, insisted that, rather than discuss
the subject, he would score more points by citing the best of my
published jewels. He was determined to convince the audience that I was
the lowest of the low and that I should have never been invited to such
a prestigious platform. This is not a joke. Aaronovitch, who is
notoriously famous for lobbying for a war that that has left (so far)
1.5 million civilians dead, a person who is engaged in spreading vile
anti-left and Zionist Islamophobic propaganda, is convinced that he is
entitled to preach to the public on who should and who should not
participate in the discourse. Foolishly, Aaronovitch anticipated that,
once he read out my words, a gasp of resentment towards me would spread
in the marquee. The deluded man must have invested an enormous amount of
energy gathering these endless quotes. He must have read each of my
papers, picking out what he interpreted, in his deluded Zionist
world-view, as “outrageous thoughts”. For my part, I was rather thrilled
and amused. It doesn’t happen that often that people read my works with
such enthusiasm on such a prestigious platform. Neither me nor my most
devoted readers could have done a better job presenting my ideas.

Sadly for Aaronovitch, his plan didn’t work out. There was not a single
noticeable reaction in the room. There was not a single gasp of
resentment. And yet, the truth must be said, Aaronovitch is a very
talented, melodramatic performer. He brilliantly over-dramatized my
ideas, he beautifully stressed the different variations of the “J” word.
He would then slow down, stare at me with exaggerated contempt and
giggle, expecting the crowd to join him. But they didn’t.

For reasons known only to themselves, Aaronovitch and Cohen failed to
realize that Oxford University was not exactly a Yeshiva. It was not an
occupied territory either. It wasn’t down to them or the Israeli Hasbara
Committee to decide who was entitled to engage in a public debate. If
anything, the two warmongers should have had the minimum intellectual
integrity to ban themselves from the public eye for advocating a war
that has led to a genocide. The two warmongers should have had enough
honesty to realize that, if there is anti-Semitism, as they say, they
must be the root cause for such a phenomenon.

Aaronovitch failed to grasp that people who attend literary events are
largely curious and open minded; they are far more interested in
listening to enlightening ideas rather than to be indoctrinated or
patronized by a right-wing Zionist agitator.

Seemingly, Aaronovitch failed to realize that people out there do read
the news from time to time. They read about Charles Freeman and the
Jewish lobby, they read about the swindler Bernard Madoff, Lord Michael
“Cashpoint” Levy, proxy donor David Abrahams, Labour Friends of Israel,
Alan Greenspan and the credit crunch. People out there do realize that
more than just a few prominent Zionist Jews are caught in the eye of the
current storms (Iraq, finance, Gaza). Aaronovitch, who by his own
admission, has been monitoring my writing for years, should have known
that NO ONE out of the Jewish ghetto is offended by my observations
about excessive Jewish lobbying and Zionist power. If anything, my stand
against tribal politics makes me more and more popular within far bigger
circles.

Needless to say, I myself have never sought this kind of fame. I am a
jazz musician, I have a very rewarding musical career. When it comes to
my intervention on Jewish identity, I write what I regard to be the
truth, realizing that there maybe more than one truth. I publish my
thoughts in the full knowledge that my truth today may be shaken
tomorrow. My task is very simple. I try to be coherent, to make sure
that at least I can follow my own threads of thought. I am aware of the
fact that my writing may demolish some – in fact, more than once I
surprised even myself by my own ideas. Unlike Cohen and Aaronovitch, for
me this has never been a political battle, it has never been about power
or about scoring points. It was always about ethics and intellectual
integrity. Seemingly, ethics and intellectual honesty are exactly what
the Ziocons à la Aaronovitch/Cohen lack. It is evidently the shortage of
ethical commitment and intellectual integrity that pushes Cohen and
Aaronovitch back to where they belong: the insular, segregated kosher
cyber-ghetto.

Notably, both Aaronovitch and Cohen are famous for their incredibly
deceiving call to “liberate the Iraqi people”. The two Jewish Chronicle
writers claimed to know what the Iraqi people “desired”. They were
obviously wrong and the total Western defeat in Iraq proves it beyond
doubt. It is understandable and to be expected that two Zionist
Londoners would fail to grasp the true will of the Iraqi people. Yet,
one would expect Aaronovitch and Cohen to know “something” about the
middle class crowd in Oxford. At the end of the day, Aaronovitch and
Cohen were raised in the UK and educated at British universities. In
spite of their promoting of Zionist propaganda in the British media,
they are still British; they should have known better. I would have also
expected that, after 200 years of “Jewish assimilation”, the tribal
activists would learn something about their neighbours’ appetite.
Apparently, Aaronovitch and Cohen didn’t. The enthusiastic reception of
my intervention drove Aaronovitch into a vile tantrum. “Shame on you,”
he shouted at the applauding Oxford crowd. Before too long, he was
caught on tape blaming his audience for being anti-Semitic. Clearly, on
the recording, some members of the audience are heard giggling at the
embarrassing outburst of a neurotic, decaying neo-conservative.

I do realize that my performance in Oxford was actually very symbolic in
its resemblance to the success of the Iraqi resistance: despite my
rather broken English, my faulty grammar and my limited resources, and
notwithstanding being sluggish and slightly messy, the truth was on my
side – or I should say, the truth is in our side. As far as public
debate is concerned, Jewish tribalism, Zionism and neo-con precepts are
indefensible. We will win in every intellectual battle against these
warmongers just because we are ethical, genuine and coherent. All we
have to do is to survive their endless spin and slander.

Once Aaronovitch ended citing my “pearls”, Nick Cohen took the platform.
He spoke about the Elders of Zion. Like Aaronovitch, he failed to
address the subject. It is clear that Zionist lobbyists really believe
that focusing on a 19th century text would distract attention from the
current powerful elders who lobby for more and more global conflicts and
biblical plunder. Cohen, I guess, must be convinced that, as long as the
Protocols [of the Elders of Zion] are alive in our thoughts, he might be
able to advocate wars without us noticing. He must be a fool. We do see
him, we see it all and we do not like what we see.

“I refuse to accept the premise of the debate,” I told the people in
Oxford. Anti-Semitism is a misleading notion. It is there to give the
impression that opposition to Jewish politics is racially motivated.
However, Jews are not a race nor are they in any proximity of any
recognized racial continuum. Since Jews are not a race (but can be very
racist), opposition to what some of them advocate, at least currently,
is not racially orientated or motivated at all.

Anti-Semitism is nothing but spin, it is there to silence criticism of
Israel, Jewish nationalism, Jewish politics and Jewish lobbies around
the world. Rather than talking about anti-Semitism, we had better talk
about the rise of anti-Jewish feelings.

I am more than willing to admit that there is indeed more than one piece
of evidence of growing resentment towards Jewishness, and I am referring
here to Jewish ideology and Jewish politics. Yet, in a liberal society,
political and ideological criticism is supposed to be a fully legitimate
endeavour. As it happens, there is a growing rage against Jewish
politics and national politics in particular, but this shouldn’t take us
by surprise, considering the crimes that are committed locally and
globally by Zionists and neo-cons, whether it is Ehud Olmert’s genocidal
practice in Palestine or the Aaronovitch/Cohen lobbying for a war
against Israel’s enemies.

I am also willing to admit that some innocent ethnic Jews are caught in
the middle of all this. This is indeed a serious problem and I do not
have a simple answer to offer. Yet, I would mention that my wife, my
kids and a few of my band members who happen to be of Jewish origin have
never come across any form of anti-Semitic abuse. If we have ever
noticed any abuse, it was somehow always Jewish violence against us in
the form of death threats, smears, slander and spin.

In the light of this very simple observation, two questions must be asked.
First, how is it that the campaigners against anti Semitism, such as
Aaronovitch and Cohen, happen to be also muddled up with some ludicrous
Islamophobic statements?

The answer is very simple. Those who preach to us about anti-Semitism
are neither humanists nor universalists. They are simply banal tribal
activists that are committed to the interests of their ethnic group and
that group alone. The few gentiles who advocate this immoral discourse
do it for political reasons. Within the Jewish terminology, they are
called the “Sabbath Goy”1. They are there to work for the Jews and they
are fully rewarded accordingly.

Second, we have good reason to believe that Aaronovitch and Cohen know
very well that Jews are not descendants of people of Semitic origin and
do not form a racial continuum. Why then do they try to pretend that the
negation towards Jews is racially motivated?

Again the answer is rather obvious. The Jewish ethnic campaigner will
spin and cheat and spread lies because Jewish ideology (right, left and
centre) cannot be defended or argued in rational or ethical terms. All
Jewish national political discourses are exclusivist, supremacist and
racially orientated. (Although Jews are far from being a race, every
form of Jewish politics is categorically racist to the bone. It is
always about different formations of a “Jews only” club.)

To a certain extent, I was very lucky to share a platform with
Aaronovitch and Cohen for the simple reason that they are the ultimate
embodiment of tribal activism and war lobbying in this country.
Aaronovitch and Cohen, among a few other Zio-con protagonists, are the
root cause of resentment towards Jewish political lobbying. It was
almost entertaining to hear the Jewish Chronicle writer Aaronovitch
denying being a Jew, presenting the lame and pathetic argument that he
had been in a synagogue just “three times in my entire life”.
Aaronovitch obviously thought that he would get away with this new spin.
He obviously knows that Jews do not have to believe in God, they do not
have to go to synagogues. He must know also that even one visit to a
synagogue is probably far more than the vast majority of humanity has
ever experienced. What makes Aaronovitch into a Jewish tribal campaigner
is, for instance, the fact that he is listed on the Israel Hasbara2
Committee as one of their authors. The Israeli Propaganda (Hasbara)
Committee, which lists Aaronovitch as one of its authors declares that
its aim is:“To promote understanding of Judaism and Israel.”

Do you know of any goy who is affiliated with the “promotion” of Judaism
AND Israel? Oh yes, Aaronovitch, has one more spinning line he has yet
to explore. He may suggest to us that he is actually a “Christian Zionist”.

What makes Aaronovitch into a Jew has nothing to do with his religious
affiliation or belief. It has nothing to do with the ethnicity of his
parents. It has nothing to do with the shape of his nose or the tip of
his knob. What makes Aaronovitch into a Jew and a Zionist one in
particular is his affiliation with the most rabid, notorious,
nationalist Jewish political school. What made Aaronovitch so spiteful
and despised in Oxford had nothing to do with his father’s origin. It is
actually his Zionist politics and Zionized tactics, it is his commitment
to Israeli propaganda, it is the fact that he lobbied for a war that
made us all into war criminals, a war that has led to the genocide of
1.5 million innocent Iraqi civilians.

Aaronovitch and Cohen may have learned a lesson in Oxford. Aaronovitch
pledged never to see me again. Listening to the audio recording of the
event, and especially to his tantrum, he has a very good reason not to.
The contemptible Zio-con was exposed. However, in the light of his being
listed as an Israeli “propaganda author”, and bearing in mind his being
a lobbyist for an illegal war, Aaronovitch is not exactly a Western
liberal humanist. Seemingly, he is more of an Israeli patriot than a
British one. This is something that his readers in The Times must keep
in mind when Aaronovitch attempts to drag this country into another
devastating global conflict.
Notes

1. Sabbath Goy: Originally, a non-Jew who does work on Sabbath that a
Jew cannot do. In modern times, it is a non-Jew who toadies to the every
wish and whim of the Jews, especially in politics, or a non-Jew who is
heavily supportive of Israel.

2. Hasbara is Hebrew for propaganda.

The White House Murder INC, and the Tin-pot dictator in Damascus

The White House Murder INC, and the Tin-pot dictator in Damascus and bread winner for the Alawite Mafia in Syria, a thuggish minority, continues to do Israel's bidding for decades...., in perpetuating endless proxy-wars on behalf of the threesome of assassins, CIA2/MI6/MOSSAD's tricksters, in order to stay in power, Loot Syria's resources, and oppress the good peoples of Syria.

In the last two or three years, a number of old arguments regarding Syria have again become fashionable. One of them is that peace with Syria is not only “there to be had”, but that it may lead to drastic changes in Syrian behavior, in turn altering regional dynamics for the better. However, in several recent interviews, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has made statements that paint a very different picture.

In his comments, Assad clarified exactly what he meant by “peace” with Israel, and it bore no resemblance to the rosy scenarios painted by the “peace processors.” In fact, the president raised serious questions about the value of any such deal altogether.

In a recent interview with the Emirati newspaper Al-Khaleej, Assad made a remarkable – and indeed unprecedented – comment about what his concept of “peace” with Israel was. “A peace agreement,” he said, “is a piece of paper you sign. This does not mean trade and normal relations, or borders, or otherwise.”

The long-held view among people dealing with the negotiating track between Syria and Israel is that a peace deal will lead to a normalization of relations between the two countries. That was the purported basis of their talks during the 1990s. In recent years, another element was added to the argument, namely that a peace deal would distance Syria from Iran and allied militant groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas, so that Damascus might even put pressure on Hamas itself to accept peace talks with Israel. This ambitious theory was dubbed “strategic reorientation”, and it has become the basis for conceptualizing engagement of Syria today.

However, the implications of Assad’s statement to Al-Khaleej should lead to a reassessment of the Syrian-Israeli track. Assad has now articulated what he had strongly implied for years.

In 2002, at the Arab League summit in Beirut, Assad led a strenuous effort to torpedo the formula put forward by Saudi Arabia’s then-crown prince, Abdullah, which offered Israel “full normalization for full withdrawal.” Assad rejected the term “normalization” and in the end a compromise was reached on watered-down language proposing only “normal ties”.

Then last July, Assad went further, telling the Qatari satellite station Al-Jazeera that from the Syrian point of view, “the word ‘normalization’ does not exist.” He insisted that it was a Western concoction that Syria rejected. Instead, Assad used an even more downgraded term, namely “average relations”, whose Arabic root removes any link to the word “normal.” The late Syrian president, Hafez al-Assad, also told interlocutors during the 1990s that he did not accept the word “normalization.” Now, with his son’s declarations, the regime’s position can be summarized in three No’s: No normalization, no trade and no borders, by which Assad presumably meant no open borders.

What about Syria’s “strategic reorientation” away from Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah? Assad has been very clear on that as well. In a recent exchange with the American journalist Seymour Hersh, Assad said that Israel and the United States should not “waste time talking about who is going to send arms to Hezbollah or Hamas. Whenever you have resistance in the region, they will have armaments somehow. It is very simple.”

In other words, Assad intends to maintain his military support for these groups regardless of engagement with Syria. This undercuts the main claim of the peace processors of how an opening to Damascus might affect Syrian relations with Hezbollah, Hamas or Islamic Jihad. At best, Assad was admitting to his inability to halt arms supplies. At worst, he confessed that he intended to pursue active armament. This is precisely what Assad meant when he said, “resistance and peace form a single axis.”

What about Iran? Assad rejected that relations with Tehran were in any way part of the discussion. “It is not part of the peace process,” he told Hersh. Therefore, Assad’s “peace” involves no change in Syria’s regional posture and alliances, or its support for proxy warfare against Israel. “This peace is about peace between Syria and Israel,” Assad told Hersh. Meaning, you can forget the nonsense about “strategic reorientation.”

If this is Assad’s understanding of peace (or as the Syrians define it, “the restoration of rights in full”), what remains of the argument of those who read too much into Syrian-Israeli negotiations? Hasn’t Assad validated the old adage that peace with Syria is not worth the paper it’s written on?

When Egyptian President Anwar Sadat decided to change his country’s foreign policy, he broke with the Soviet Union years before finalizing his peace agreement with Israel, and he traveled to Jerusalem before signing the treaty. Sadat went ahead without any of the conditions imposed by Assad today, and without the excuses and exceptions that supporters of Syrian-Israeli negotiations offer on the Syrians’ behalf. Egypt was then the leader of the Arab world. Assad heads a country far less important in the Middle East, one that is often no more than a spoiler and should not be afforded disproportionate significance or unwarranted exceptionalism.

Scientists Confirm Large Quantities of Thermite in World Trade Center Dust...

Deek Jackson - I can't see no plane at the Pentagon

Scientists Confirm Large Quantities of Thermite in World Trade Center Dust...

The below paper, published in a peer-reviewed chemical physics journal
and authored by nine scientists working in laboratories at multiple
universities using state-of-the-art equipment, confirms the presence
of large quantities of metal microspheres of reacted thermite, and
flakes (chips) of unreacted (i.e., still active) super-thermite (also
called nano-thermite, which is thermite which has been made even more
reactive by decreasing the thermitic particle size down to the
nanometer range), in different dust samples from the collapsed World
Trade Center (W.T.C.) towers collected from multiple people at
different sites even before cleanup operations began. The physical and
chemical properties of these microspheres and flakes were analyzed
using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (S.E.M.), X-ray
energy dispersive spectroscopy (X.E.D.S.), and differential scanning
calorimetry (D.S.C.), among other methods....

http://picasaweb.google.com/strangeatr

Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank
M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley and
Bradley R. Larsen, "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from
the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe," Open Chemical Physics
Journal, Vol. 2 (2009), pp. 7-31.
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM
http://visibility911.com/downloads/media/thermite-fingerprint.pdf
http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874412500902010007
http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/oxy_redchip_slow.mov (A
video cited in the article.)

For more information on the background on this paper, including the
extensive research that went into it and the rigorous peer-review
process that it underwent, I highly recommend everyone here listen to
the below interview of Dr. Steven E. Jones, one of the paper's
authors. Also available below is an interview of Kevin R. Ryan,
another author of the paper.

"Special Report: Thermite Fingerprint," Michael Wolsey, Visibility
9/11, April 3, 2009. http://visibility911.com/reports-thermite01.php
http://media.libsyn.com/media/visibility911/visibility911_drjones0309.mp3
http://cdn4.libsyn.com/visibility911/visibility911_drjones0309.mp3
http://media.libsyn.com/media/visibility911/visibility911_kevinryan0309.mp3
http://cdn2.libsyn.com/visibility911/visibility911_kevinryan0309.mp3

Below are two other peer-reviewed papers which also pertain to the
presence of large quantities of thermite in the dust of the collapsed
W.T.C. towers:

Kevin R. Ryan, James R. Gourley and Steven E. Jones, "Environmental
anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic
materials," The Environmentalist, August 4, 2008.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/f67q6272583h86n4/fulltext.pdf
http://www.springerlink.com/content/f67q6272583h86n4/fulltext.html
http://www.springerlink.com/content/f67q6272583h86n4/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10669-008-9182-4

Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti
and James R. Gourley, "Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official
Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction," Open Civil
Engineering Journal, Vol. 2 (2008), pp. 35-40.
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCIEJ/2008/00000002/00000001/35TOCIEJ.SGM
http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874149500802010035
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2174/1874149500802010035

In addition to the presence of large amounts of thermite in the dust
of the collapsed W.T.C. buildings, another truly vital piece of
evidence that provides definitive proof that the W.T.C. towers were
brought down by controlled demolition are the videos of yellow-hot
molten metal seen cascading off the South Tower (World Trade Center
Tower 2).

That piece of evidence isn't merely a smoking gun: it's a smoking
nuclear cannon. Those videos, alone and by themselves, are
irrefragable proof that the South Tower (at the very least) had
thermite-like ("like" in the sense of producing comparable
temperatures) incendiary demolition charges with the ability to easily
slice through structural steel going off within it. There is no
innocent explanation for what those videos record.

That is to say, the only way to get around that it is thermite which
is causing that yellow-hot metal to cascade off the South Tower before
its collapse would be to posit that we are seeing a different form of
extremely powerful incendiary with thermite-like temperatures at work
in the videos. Of which, even if true, would be every bit as much
damning, since no such powerful incendiaries can be accounted for
without involving a sinister intent to plant them there.

Below are four videos which contain some of this footage:

"Shot from street level of South Tower collapsing," CameraPlanet,
Google Video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2991254740145858863

http://www.plunder.com/Video-of-Thermite-on-9-11-at-the-W-T-C-and-Physicist-Steven-Jones-Ph-D--download-84738.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/20061213231413/http://www.supportthetruth.com/vids/thermite.wmv

http://web.archive.org/web/20071116045856/http://www.checktheevidence.com/911/Molten+Metal+from+WTC.mpg

"Wtc 1, impact site close up, tower collapse close up, long shot,
people shouting," CameraPlanet, Google Video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8564772103237441151

From the color of the yellow-hot molten metal seen cascading off the
South Tower, it had to be at least over 1000 °C (as the temperature of
an incandescent object is exhibited by its color), yet jet fuel burns
in open air at 260-315 °C; nor do burning office, building, or plane
materials impart temperatures anywhere near that hot to structural
members (indeed, it would present quite a hazard if such articles were
constructed with such powerful incendiaries, and so designers of such
objects go out of their way to make sure that they are not). Thus, if
it wasn't molten iron from thermite that we are seeing come off the
South Tower, then by necessity a reaction source with a heat intensity
very much like thermite had to be present. Yet there is nothing in the
U.S. government's account that can explain such a heat source; indeed,
there's nothing innocent that could explain it, since it requires some
sort of extremely powerful incendiary.

For more on this, see the below paper by Steven E. Jones (Ph.D.;
physicist and archaeometrist; former professor in the Department of
Physics and Astronomy, Brigham Young University):

"Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?," Dr. Steven E.
Jones, Journal of 911 Studies, Vol. 3 (September 2006).
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade_Center.pdf
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/Papers/J6p2%20.doc (Older
version.)

See also:

"Experiments to test NIST 'orange glow' hypothesis," Steven E. Jones,
Ph.D., August 31, 2006
http://911review.com/articles/jones/experiments_NIST_orange_glow_hypothesis.html
http://stj911.org/jones/docs/Liquid_Aluminum_011.mpg
http://stj911.org/jones/docs/Liquid_Aluminum_012.mpg

"Experiments with Molten Aluminum," Steven E. Jones with Wesley
Lifferth, Jared Dodson, Jacob Stevenson and Shannon Walch, circa June
2006. http://www.geocities.com/psyop911/ExptAlMelt.doc
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ExptAlMelt.doc

"A description of molten aluminum poured onto rusty steel," Wes
Lifferth, Physics Shop, Brigham Young University, Journal of 9/11
Studies, Vol. 9 (March 2007).
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200703/Molten_Aluminum_Poured_onto_Rusty_Steel_by_Wes_Lifferth.pdf

Moreover, even the official FEMA scientists Jonathan Barnett, Ronald
R. Biederman, and R. D. Sisson, Jr. bolster the evidence that thermate
(i.e., thermite with sulfur added, which causes it to slice through
steel even faster by forming a eutectic alloy with it) was used to
bring down the W.T.C. towers (see "Appendix C: Limited Metallurgical
Examination" in World Trade Center Building Performance Study: Data
Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, FEMA 403, May 2002
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf ):

""
Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel,
including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent inter granular
melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. ...
No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.
The rate of corrosion is also unknown.
""

And in the below paper it is conclusively proved via chemical analysis
using scanning electron microscopy (S.E.M.), X-ray energy dispersive
spectroscopy (X-E.D.S.), and wavelength dispersive X-ray spectroscopy
(W.D.S.), that large quantities of thermite analogs (such as thermate)
were used in the destruction of the World Trade Center towers:

"Revisiting 9/11/2001--Applying the Scientific Method," Dr. Steven E.
Jones, Journal of 911 Studies, Vol. 11 (May 2007).
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf

See also the below on additional physical remains of thermite (in the
form of unreacted flakes of thermite) from the demolished World Trade
Center, collected even before clean-up operations began:

"Announcing a discovery: Red/gray bi-layered chips in the WTC dust,"
ProfJones (Steven E. Jones), 911Blogger.com, December 22, 2007.
http://911blogger.com/node/13090

"Dr. Steven E. Jones Boston 911 Conference 12-15-07 Red chips
Thermite.mov," Google Video, December 21, 2007.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4186920967571123147

Further, the below paper documents the connections between the people
at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
responsible for investigating the collapse of the W.T.C. buildings and
the rarefied military-intensive field of super-thermites. The glaring
implication being that those responsible for executing the technical
aspects of the controlled demolition of the W.T.C. (on behalf of those
who control the U.S. government) are the same people in charge of
investigating the cause of the collapses. Thereby killing two birds
with one stone: using the same technical-echelon team which collapsed
the towers to subsequently collapse any authentic investigation into
what caused the collapse of the towers--as these people aren't going
to tell on themselves. (To date NIST has refused to examine the
remains of the W.T.C. for evidence of explosives or thermite, despite
repeated requests for such an examination and despite such analysis
being specified in NFPA 921, "Guide for Fire and Explosion
Investigations," National Fire Protection Association.)

"The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites," Kevin R.
Ryan, Journal of 9/11 Studies, Vol. 22 (July 2, 2008).
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/Ryan_NIST_and_Nano-1.pdf

----------------------------------------

James Redford, author of "Jesus Is an Anarchist," Social Science Research
Network (SSRN), revised and expanded edition, March 19, 2009 (originally
published December 19, 2001) http://ssrn.com/abstract=1337761
http://www.geocities.com/jrredford/anarchist-jesus.pdf
http://www.geocities.com/jrredford/anarchist-jesus.html

Theophysics: God Is the Ultimate Physicist (a website with information on
Prof. Frank J. Tipler's Omega Point Theory and the quantum gravity Theory
of Everything [TOE]) http://geocities.com/theophysics/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/omega-point/
http://www.myspace.com/theophysics

There is no Confrontation whatsoever looming between U.S. and Israel, they are just playing good cop bad cop politics for gullible middle easterners.

There is no Confrontation whatsoever looming between U.S. and Israel, they are just playing good cop bad cop politics for the gullible middle easterners....until the next False flag to come occurs in earnest....and it will be pinned on Hezbollah and Iran...in revenge for Imad F. Moughnieh's assassination.....watchout!!!

http://picasaweb.google.com/strangeatr/THEPROOFTHEYPLANEDSEMITESHOLOCAUSTBYSELFMARCHINGINTOOBLIVION?feat=directlink#5322620954963892178

According to senior State Department sources, a major disinformation/confrontation is looming between the United States and Israel over policies ranging from Palestine to Iran.....[ State Department is a hot bed of CIA disinformation con artists, just like both houses of congress are ...]

The new Likud/Yisrael Beiteinu government of Israel is pushing an agenda that runs counter to longstanding U.S. policies in the Middle East. Yisrael Beiteinu party chairman Avigdor Lieberman, the new Israeli Foreign Minister, is seen by one State Department source as an "Eastern European fascist who practices racism."

State Department sources are now convinced that what has been called the "Israel Lobby" in Washington will soon morph into an even more problematic "Likud/Lieberman Lobby" that will push a pro-war and pro-settler policy within the Congress and the Barack Obama administration. This new and more aggressive lobby will particularly use its control over Representatives Steve Israel (D-NY) and Mark Kirk (R-IL), as well as Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), to ensure that Israel's new policies are conveyed to and acted upon by White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Obama senior policy adviser David Axelrod.

However, there are several potential breaking points between the Obama administration and the new Israeli government, according to State Department sources. One will be U.S. interaction with Hamas, the duly-elected government of Palestine. The term of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has elapsed and actual legitimate power in Palestine belongs to Hamas. This political fact means that the United States has no choice but to talk directly to Hamas.

There is also the issue of Hamas being a party that favors the ballot box over traditional Middle East power grabs, whether they are by princes, generals, religious figures, or plain thugs. According to State Department sources, Hamas has even lectured Lebanon's Hezbollah, which they claim in the past was generally opposed to achieving power through elections in Lebanon, to become more democratic. That change has occurred, according to the sources, with Hezbollah now fully engaged in the democratic process.

The popularity of Hamas, especially in the wake of Israel's genocidal war against Gaza, has alarmed the governments of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and, to a lesser extent, Jordan, because of its zeal for winning power through elections and not coups. State Department sources say that if Egypt had fair and democratic elections, the Muslim Brotherhood, which spun off Hamas in Palestine, would win handily and the Hosni Mubarak dictatorship would come to and end. The same situation exists in Saudi Arabia, where the Saud family is nervous about the popularity of Hamas and views it as a potential threat to the House of Saud.

State Department personnel are aware from field observations that the Fatah movement of Abbas in Palestine is viewed by most Palestinians as corrupt and thuggish while Hamas is seen as clean, vigorous, and appealing.

Another confrontation that looms between the United States and Israel concerns Israel's 200 nuclear weapons. With the United States engaged in direct nuclear talks with Iran and Saudi Arabia calling for an international regime to supply nuclear fuel for power plants along with safeguards that such technology cannot be converted to weapons development, there is also the likelihood that there will be a major push to create in the Middle East a nuclear-free zone. If the United States buys into such a plan, it will mean Israel will have to dismantle its nuclear arsenal. Given what State Department officials describe as Israel's suicidal "Masada complex," such a plan will be next to impossible to enact given the current drift of Israel to more theocratic and right-wing rule. As one State Department source put it, "WE cannot address the Iranian nuclear program without addressing the Israeli nuclear weapons program."

U.S. intelligence officials are also prepared to stop considering intelligence that comes to the CIA and other agencies from Mossad and other Israeli intelligence elements. The new team taking over at the Directorate of National Intelligence and the CIA are acutely aware that the Israelis have, as one insider put it, "a long history of deceptive dissemination of disinformation" to U.S. intelligence officials, adding that while some foreign sources have "inadvertently provided bad intelligence, Israel has been deliberately dishonest....." that's utter bullshit, courtesy of the Siamese twins CIA/MOSSAD for 3 decades....

U.S. defense officials also note that Israel cannot attack Iran without U.S. collusion. The United States controls the airspace over both Iraq and the Persian Gulf and any Israeli air assault would require U.S. approval. Under the present administration, that scenario is unlikely WMR is told. "The only way Bibi Netanyahu will attack Iran is if he is assured that Iran will respond by hitting U.S. military forces in the region forcing a U.S. military response," one official told WMR. The official added, "Israel, on its own, cannot wage a sustained air campaign against Iran." Vice President Joe Biden recently warned Israel from conducting any military action against Iran....

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AIPAC trial and an Update of past events: Two AIPAC employees have been on trial for spying on the US and giving classified information to Israel. They were indicted in 2005 and so far here have been the trail dates for the case that threatens the most powerful foreign lobby (which is not registered as a foreign agent, even though attorney general RFK ordered that they should register but then somebody shot him)

April 20th 2006
May 23rd 2006
August 7th 2006
October 7th 2006
June 4th 2007
September 19th 2007
Janurary 16th, 2008!
April 29th 2008
Now May 27 2009 (maybe)

On top of that Steve Rosen on of the two agents on trial, is suing AIPAC for 5 million dollars. Rosen and his fellow AIPAC employees Keith Weissman were caught taking classified information in meetings with Lawrence Franklin and employee for Douglas Feith Under Secretary of Defense for Policy who met with uncleared Israeli generals in the DoD in the run up to the war in Iraq and who created a special office called the office of special plans which cherry picked information and passed on known false information from Israel to the office of the vice president. Franklin was sentenced to 12 years in jail. Feith resigned. And Rosen is suing AIPAC. The information that Israel took pertained to Iraq and Iran's capacities to make nuclear weapons. It was essential to know what the US knew and more importantly what they did not know about Iraq in Iran in order for the Israelis to cook up cases for war.
[ . . . ]

Back when AIPAC was illegally gathering Intel on what the US knew and didn't know about Iraq AND Iran's nuclear capacities, a branch of the CIA working on tracking nuclear weapons proliferation was actively trying to figure out what the truth was. In this process they uncovered something else. Employees of the American government were illegally selling arms. The Nexus of the trade went through the ATC (American Turkish Council) a lobby for the Military industrial complex which benefited greatly from the Iraq war, and is located in the gateway of the drug trade from the "liberated" poppy fields of Afghanistan to Europe. The ATC is basically a miniature AIPAC with all the same players involved. And FBI whistle blower named Sibel got wind of these dealing through translating and before she could come out with it she had a gag order slapped on her and she was threatened with jail time....

RAWSTORY APPEARS TO BE THE WEBSITE-OF-THE-DAY

Neoconservatives backing Obama's foreign policy

"Some may notice that the neo-conservatives who masterminded the policy of global interventions are not complaining about the level of military and foreign spending. This is because rather than drawing down our costly interventions, Obama is largely staying the course on these issues. In fact, this week a group of leading neoconservatives met to discuss how best to support the President on foreign policy! I am disappointed and concerned that, in spite of a change in leadership, we will remain the policeman of the world, placing ourselves at grave danger in many ways."

The article's author writes,

"Now, it's your turn to sound off...Does Obama really represent change?"

There are 130 responses so far.

With withdrawal of Chas Freeman as National Intelligence Council chairman, the Intelligence Community loses big

With withdrawal of Chas Freeman as National Intelligence Council chairman, the Intelligence Community loses big...?

We have now confirmation of the utter "charade" of the Chas Freeman nomination of Rahm Emanuel thugs within the intelligence power turf battles... Freeman was supposed to be sacrificed from the start of the process, in order to Tame the intelligence community some more....into
complete and utter submittable subservience, obedience , to the Policies of the power behind the power in DC and the Pentagon....

In informal remarks last night at the National Press Club to a media study group founded decades ago by the late White House correspondent Sarah McClendon, Ambassador Chas Freeman, who was forced to withdrawal as Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair's choice to chair the National Intelligence Council (NIC) after a blistering attack against him from Israel's Lobby in Washington, made it clear by his remarks that the Intelligence Community was deprived of a potential supervisor who agreed with an overwhelming majority of intelligence analysts on a number of issues. The NIC oversees some 100,000 analysts in the Intelligence Community and is responsible for writing National Intelligence Estimates (NIE), upon which policies are generally based, and the lesser known National Intelligence Assessments.

The NIC also prepares the all-important President's Daily Brief. Freeman would have tried to cast away past tendencies among U.S. intelligence analysts to engage in "sycophancy" and "group think." He would have also addressed the lack of experience of U.S. intelligence analysts. For example, half of the CIA's analysts have been in their jobs for less than five years. The Bush administration also resulted in a major morale problem among U.S. intelligence analysts, a problem that continues to plague their ranks.

Freeman was opposed to Israel's war against Lebanon in 2006 and its most recent attack on Gaza. Freeman, the U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia during Desert Storm, also opposed the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, as well as expanding the original policy of eliminating Afghanistan as a base for "Al Qaeda" and its local sponsors into a policy of establishing a strong central government in the country. Freeman also suggested there is a tendency to lump various Afghan and Pashtun tribes in Pakistan into a largely bogus entity called the "Taliban."

Freeman also said he thought it ironic that while he was being accused by Steve Rosen of shilling for foreign governments, Rosen, a former official of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), was under indictment for espionage for Israel.

Freeman regretted that after the end of the Cold War, U.S. foreign policy had been "franchised" to certain interest groups.

There is still no word on who Blair will ultimately choose to replace Freeman as NIC chairman. The position does not require Senate approval but Congress, and especially the AIPAC-controlled members, have made it known that they would prefer some plain vanilla candidate who will continue business as usual. In other words, someone who will not rock the boat.

The UKUSA Alliance and the new found Siamese twins, CIA2/MOSSAD.

The UKUSA Alliance and the new found Siamese twins, CIA2/MOSSAD.

http://www.henrymakow.com/000447.html

The "Jewish" Conspiracy is British/American Imperialism, and the "court Jews" are utterly subservient to both for decades.


Conspiracy theorists like myself believe modern history reflects a long-
term conspiracy by an international financial elite to enslave humanity.

Like blind men examining an elephant, we attribute this conspiracy to
Jews, Illuminati, Vatican, Jesuits, Freemasons, Black Nobility, and
Bildersbergs etc.

The real villains are at the heart of our economic and cultural life.
They are the dynastic families who own the Bank of England, the US
Federal Reserve and associated cartels. They also control the World Bank
and IMF and most of the world's Intelligence agencies. Their identity is
secret but Rothschild is certainly one of them. The Bank of England was
"nationalized" in 1946 but the power to create money remained in the
same hands.

England is in fact a financial oligarchy run by the "Crown" which refers
to the "City of London" not the Queen. The City of London is run by the
Bank of England, a private corporation. The square-mile-large City is a
sovereign state located in the heart of greater London. As the "Vatican
of the financial world," the City is not subject to British law.

On the contrary, the bankers dictate to the British Parliament. In 1886,
Andrew Carnegie wrote that, "six or seven men can plunge the nation into
war without consulting Parliament at all." Vincent Vickers, a director
of the Bank of England from 1910-1919 blamed the City for the wars of
the world. ("Economic Tribulation" (1940) cited in Knuth, The Empire of
the City, 1943, p 60)

The British Empire was an extension of bankers' financial interests.
Indeed, all the non-white colonies (India, Hong Kong, Gibraltar) were
"Crown Colonies." They belonged to the City and were not subject to
British law although Englishmen were expected to conquer and pay for
them.

The Bank of England assumed control of the U.S. during the T.R.
Roosevelt administration (1901-1909) when its agent J.P. Morgan took
over 25% of American business. (Anton Chaitkin, Treason in America,
1964)

According to the "American Almanac," the bankers are part of a network
called the "Club of the Isles" which is an informal association of
predominantly European-based royal households including the Queen. The
Club of the Isles commands an estimated $10 trillion in assets. It lords
over such corporate giants as Royal Dutch Shell, Imperial Chemical
Industries, Lloyds of London, Unilever, Lonrho, Rio Tinto Zinc, and
Anglo American DeBeers. It dominates the world supply of petroleum,
gold, diamonds, and many other vital raw materials; and deploys these
assets at the disposal of its geopolitical agenda.

Its goal: to reduce the human population from its current level of over
5 billion people to below 1 billion people within the next two to three
generations; to literally ``cull the human herd'' in the interest of
retaining their own global power and the feudal system upon which that
power is based.

Historian Jeffrey Steinberg could be referring to the US, Canada and
Australia when he writes, "England, Scotland, Wales, and, especially,
Northern Ireland, are today little more than slave plantations and
social engineering laboratories, serving the needs of ...the City of
London...

These families constitute a financier oligarchy; they are the power
behind the Windsor throne. They view themselves as the heirs to the
Venetian oligarchy, which infiltrated and subverted England from the
period 1509-1715, and established a new, more virulent, Anglo-Dutch-
Swiss strain of the oligarchic system of imperial Babylon, Persia, Rome,
and Byzantium....

The City of London dominates the world's speculative markets. A tightly
interlocking group of corporations, involved in raw materials
extraction, finance, insurance, transportation, and food production,
controls the lion's share of the world market, and exerts virtual
``choke point'' control over world industry."

Steinberg belongs to a group of historians associated with economist
Lyndon Larouche. They have traced this scourge to the migration of the
Venetian mercantile oligarchy to England more than 300 years ago.

Although the Larouche historians do not say so, it appears that many
members of this oligarchy were Jews. Cecil Roth writes: "The trade of
Venice was overwhelmingly concentrated in the hands of the Jews, the
wealthiest of the mercantile class." (The History of the Jews in Venice,
1930)

As William Guy Carr points out in Pawns in the Game, both Oliver
Cromwell and William of Orange were funded by Jewish bankers. The
English Revolution (1649) was the first in a series of revolutions
designed to give them world hegemony. The establishment of the Bank of
England by William in 1694 was the next crucial step. Behind the facade,
England has been a "Jewish" state for over 300 years. (pp.20-24)

The Jewish banking families made it a practice to marry their female
offspring to spendthrift European aristocrats. In Jewish law, the mixed
offspring of a Jewish mother is Jewish. (The male heirs marry Jews
although the Victor and Jacob Rothschild are exceptions .) For example,
in 1878 Hannah Rothschild married Lord Roseberry. who later became Prime
Minister. In 1922 Louis Mountbatten, the uncle of Prince Philip and
cousin of the Queen married the granddaughter of Jewish banker Ernest
Cassel, one of the wealthiest men in the world. Winston Churchill's
mother, Jenny (Jacobson) Jerome, was Jewish. By the beginning of the
1900s, there were very few English aristocrat families left that hadn't
intermarried with Jews. It was said that, when they visited the
Continent, Europeans were surprised to see Jewish looking persons with
English titles and accents.

According to L.G. Pine, the Editor of Burke's Peerage , Jews "have made
themselves so closely connected with the British peerage that the two
classes are unlikely to suffer loss which is not mutual. So closely
linked are the Jews and the lords that a blow against the Jews in this
country would not be possible without injuring the aristocracy also."
(Tales of the British Aristocracy1957, p.219.)

If they aren't Jewish by intermarriage, many European aristocrats
consider themselves descendents of Biblical Hebrews. The Hapsburgs are
related by marriage to the Merovingians who claim to be descendents of
the Tribe of Benjamin.

In addition, many aristocrats belong to the "British Israel" Movement
that believes the British sovereign is the head of the Anglo Saxon "Lost
Tribes" of Israel and that the Apocalypse will see the full
reconstitution of the British Empire.

According to Barbara Aho, Rosicrucians and Freemasons, who believe in
British Israelism, have a plan to place one of their bloodline on the
throne of the rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem. This positioning of a false
messiah whom the world will worship as Christ has been carefully planned
and executed over many centuries.

According to Barry Chamish, "there would be no modern state of Israel
without British Freemasonry. In the 1860s, the British-Israelite
movement was initiated from within Freemasonry. Its goal was to
establish a Jewish-Masonic state in the Turkish province of
Palestine...Initially, British Jewish Masonic families like the
Rothschild's and Montefiores provided the capital to build the
infrastructure for the anticipated wave of immigration. However, luring
the Jews to Israel was proving difficult. They, simply, liked European
life too much to abandon it. So Europe was to be turned into a nightmare
for the Jews."

CONCLUSION

I wasted much of my life getting a conventional education, so I feel I
am beginning my education anew.

It appears that a vampire-like clique directs the world. This secretive
cabal is represented by our dominant political, economic and cultural
institutions. Western society has been subverted and western culture is
bankrupt. Democracy is a form of social control and the mass media/
education are systems for indoctrination.

Essentially the problem boils down to whether we believe man was made in
God's image and has an obligation to lift himself to a higher level of
truth, beauty and justice. Naturally monopolists have no use for this
and want to define reality to suit their own interests. They have taught
us that God is dead and man is just a fancy animal without a divine
soul. Culture today tends to deny standards, ideals and goals of any
kind. Instead, we are fed an endless diet of trivia and degradation.

Certain elite Jews are an integral part of this elite neo feudal
conspiracy. Throughout history they have had a symbiotic relationship
with the aristocracy. But ordinary Jews like the serfs were manipulated
and persecuted by their elites.

True Judaism like Islam and Christianity affirms the supremacy of God as
a moral force. A real Jew, like a true Christian or Muslim cannot
perform an immoral act. It's time to reaffirm our belief in God."


See also my "Winston Churchill, Illuminati"

See also my "The Riddle of Anti Semitism"

See also my "Is the New World Order Jewish?"

HG Wells' "The world state as extension of British Empire"

A History of Jewish Power in England

See also The Bnai Brith as British Imperialist Asset

See Also "Rothschild Churchill and the Final Solution" by Clifford Shack

Related article: Rixon Steward's Final Countdown "


http://www.henrymakow.com/000447.html