Archive | August 16th, 2011

American congressman: US economic woes won’t affect IsraHell


US Congressman Steny Hoyer says financial challenges “will not have any adverse effect on America’s determination to meet its promise to Israel.”

The current economic crisis in the US will have no impact on US financial assistance to Israel, US Congressman Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) said Wednesday.

Hoyer, the second-highest ranked Democrat in the House of Representatives, is leading a delegation of 26 US Democratic congressmen on a tour of Israel and the Palestinian Authority sponsored by the American Israel Education Foundation, a charitable organization affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Hoyer said he wanted to “make it clear” that the financial challenges confronting the US will not “have any adverse effect on America’s determination to meet its promise to Israel in the form of aid for its qualitative [military] superiority, or for its economic security.”

Hoyer said he did not believe America’s financial challenges would have “any adverse effect on the economic relationship, or assistance, that we give to Israel.”

Hoyer said this assessment was bipartisan, and that a similar message will be brought to Israel next week when House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (RVirginia) will head up two Republican delegations, numbering 55 congressmen, to the country.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, in a meeting he had with the delegation Wednesday, thanked Hoyer and the congressmen for US security assistance and for supporting earlier this year – in a tough economic climate in Washington – the allocation of $200 million for the Iron Dome anti missile system.

Netanyahu also said that if an agreement was reached with the Palestinians, it would entail a significant investment in Israel’s security infrastructure, something that will necessitate additional allocations from Congress.

Hoyer and the delegation are slated to meet PA President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad on Thursday in Ramallah.

At the press conference, Hoyer said he will urge Abbas “that consistent with the understandings between the parties historically, the only way to seek progress is through bilateral negotiations between the two sides.”

Asked whether Congress would cut off aid to the PA if it goes through with its bid for statehood recognition at the UN, despite strong US objections, Hoyer – saying he did not want to prejudge the issue – did say “it will not enhance the Congress’s view of going forward with financing.”

“I hope that the PA changes its mind, and decides not to pursue what I believe to be a not productive path,” he said.

Hoyer pointed out that in July the House of Representatives passed a resolution by a vote of 407-6 stating that “the only way to seek a viable long standing peace will be through mutual negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.”

Hoyer said that resolution urged the PA “not to seek unilateral recognition from the UN.”

That congressional resolution, Hoyer added, made clear that the House “believes that seeking unilateral recognition will be contrary to the Camp David accords, it will be contrary to the understandings the Israelis and the Palestinians have had for a long time now: that peace was achievable, and stability, through negotiations between the two parties, not by either party seeking outside confirmation of its own position.

“Clearly both parties will have to agree to a resolution, it will not be imposed either by the United Nations, or by the United States, or by the Quartet.”

Hoyer said that Netanyahu brought up in their discussion President Barack Obama’s call for a return to negotiations to be based on the 1967 lines, with mutually agreed swaps, and said that Netanyahu believed that consistent with discussions he had with the president on this matter, that “they were in agreement, essentially.”

“The fact of the matter is that I think it was the observation of the prime minister that President Obama has spoken a number of times about that issue, and that after discussions he thinks they are pretty much in agreement about what will be done in the future.

“I think it’s clear that the president did not mean the 1967 borders [will be the final borders], he made it clear that this was subject to additional modifications, and I think the prime minister believed that to be the case as well.”

A government source, meanwhile, said that during Netanyahu’s meeting with the congressmen, the prime minister said he was opposed to returning to the 1967 lines, and that any agreement would have to take into account both Israel’s security needs and the changes on the ground that have taken place since then.

Netanyahu also said that it needed to be clear to the Palestinians that when a final line was agreed upon, that would end all claims, and there would be a need to recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people.

Posted in USAComments Off on American congressman: US economic woes won’t affect IsraHell

PA Zionist puppet’s says tired of Zionist lies



Palestinian Foreign Minister Zionist puppets Riyad al-Maliki stressed Monday that the Palestinians are determined to promote a unilateral bid for statehood. “We are sick of the Israeli government’s lies and are better off waiting until we receive our rights as a people who have suffered enormously,” he said at a dinner breaking the Ramadan fast in Wadi Ara.

KKKnesset Member Ahmad Tibi (United Arab List Ta’al) said, “The Arabs in Israel endorse the establishment of a Palestinian state and efforts to achieve UN membership status. I hope you will succeed and Netanyahu and Lieberman fail.”

The event was attended by some 1,900 members of the Arab sector. “I was always preceded by an Israeli delegation in every country I visited, and followed by an Israeli delegation in every country I left, in order to undermine the Palestinian demand for recognition in the UN,” Maliki said.

The Palestinian FM stated that thus far 120 states have recognized Palestine, estimating the number will grow further. “We are tired of the Israeli government because every time they wanted to enter into negotiations they were also busy building settlements on our lands and burning mosques, churches and houses.

“They refuse to allow us to have a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as capital. That is why we have seen that negotiations do not promote anything and we shall hand over responsibility to the UN, which must come up with solutions for us.”

Tibi addressed al-Maliki and said, “The Palestinian people deserve what other nations have gotten. Palestine will be the world’s 194th state and that is symbolic in raising the issue of refugees and UN Resolution 194 on the matter.”

The MK also called for non-violent means of endorsing the Palestinian move. “Non-violent protests have proven themselves in the Middle East,” he said.

Posted in Palestine AffairsComments Off on PA Zionist puppet’s says tired of Zionist lies

Why the Syrian Regime Won’t Fall


By Pepe Escobar

Suppose this was a Hollywood script conference and you have to pitch your story idea in 10 words or less. It’s a movie about Syria. As much as the currently in-research Kathryn Hurt Locker Bigelow film about the Osama bin Laden raid was pitched as “good guys take out Osama in Pakistan”, the Syrian epic could be branded “Sunnis and Shi’ites battle for Arab republic”.

Yes, once again this is all about that fiction, the “Shi’ite crescent”, about isolating Iran and about Sunni prejudice against Shi’ites.

The hardcore Sunni Wahhabi House of Saud – in yet another towering show of hypocrisy, and faithful to its hatred of secular Arab republics – has branded the Bashar al-Assad-controlled Ba’ath regime in Syria “a killing machine”.

True, Assad’s ferocious security apparatus does not help – having killed over 2,400 people since unrest erupted in March. That is much more, incidentally, than Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s forces had killed in Libya when United Nations Resolution 1973 was rushed in to allow foreign interventions. The Diogenes the Cynic response to this “where’s the UN” discrepancy would be that Syria, unlike Libya, is not sitting on immense oil and gas wealth.

The Assad regime issues from the Alawite Shi’ite sub-sect. Thus, for the House of Saud, this means Sunnis are being killed. And, to add insult to injury, by a regime aligned with Shi’ite Iran.

Thus, the Saudi condemnation, followed by minions of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), also known as the Gulf Counter-Revolutionary Club, plus the toothless, Saudi-manipulated Arab League. To top it off, House of Saud and Gulf wealth is actively financing the more unsavory strand of Syrian protests – the radicalized Muslim Brotherhood/fundamentalist/Salafi nebula.

By contrast, the only thing pro-democracy protesters in Bahrain received from the House of Saud and the GCC was an invasion, and outright repression.

Now for the Turkey shoot 
Turkey’s position is far more nuanced. The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) is overwhelmingly Sunni. They are playing for the regional Sunni gallery. But the AKP should be aware that at least 20% of Turks are Shi’ites from the Alevi branch, and they have a lot of empathy with Syrian Allawis.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu – the academic father of the celebrated “zero problems with our neighbors” policy – this week spent no less than six hours talking to Assad face-to-face in Damascus. He was deeply enigmatic at his press conference, implying that the Assad regime ending the crackdown and meeting the protesters’ demands was a “process”. Assad could reply he had already started the “process” – but these things, such as free and fair elections, take time.

Davutoglu explicitly said; “As we always underlined, our main criteria is that the shape of the process must reflect only the will of the Syrian people.” At the moment, the regime would reply, the majority of the Syrian people seem to be behind the government.

Davutoglu’s words also seem to imply there’s no reason for Turkey to interfere in Syria as long as Damascus is reasonable and stops killing people (Assad admitted “mistakes” were made) and introduces reforms. So the impression is left that Davutoglu was contradicting Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has vocally advocated for Turkey to “solve” the Syrian quagmire.

That would be Erdogan’s way to prove to Saudi Arabia and Qatar that the Turkish model is the way to go for the Arab world – assuming the Saudis and the Qataris foot the bill for Erdogan to pose as the Great Liberator of Sunnis in Syria, financing a Turkish army advance over Assad’s forces. That certainly sounds much more far-fetched now than it did a few days ago.

The Assad regime has done the math and realized it won’t fall as long as the protests don’t reach the capital Damascus and the major city of Aleppo – that is, convulse the urban middle class. The security/military apparatus is fully behind Assad. All Syrian religious minorities make up at least 25% of the population; they are extremely fearful of Sunni fundamentalists. Secular Sunnis for their part fear a regime change that would lead to either an Islamist takeover or chaos. So it’s fair to argue the majority of Syrians are indeed behind their government – as inept and heavy-handed as it may be.

Moreover, the Assad regime knows the conditions are not ripe for a Libyan-style North Atlantic Treaty Organization bombing campaign in Syria. There won’t even be a vote for a UN resolution – Russia and China have already made it clear.

Europe is melting – and it will hardly sign up for added ill-planned adventurism. Especially after the appalling spectacle of those dodgy types of the Libyan transitional council killing their military leader and fighting their tribal wars in the open – with the added ludicrous touch of Britain recognizing the “rebels” the same day they were killing and burning the body of their “commander”.

There’s no reason for a Western “humanitarian intervention” under R2P (“responsibility to protect”) because there’s no humanitarian crisis; Somalia, in fact, is the top humanitarian crisis at the moment, leading to fears that Washington may in fact try to “invade” or at least try to control strategically-crucial Somalia.

So the idea of the Barack Obama administration in the United States telling Assad to pack up and go is dead on arrival as a game-changer. What if Assad stays? Will Washington drone him to death – under the pretext of R2P? Well, the Pentagon can always try to snuff him with an unmanned Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle-2 – the new toy “to respond to threats around the globe”, in Pentagon speak. But oops, there’s a snag; the prototype hypersonic glider has gone missing over the Pacific.

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His new book, just out, is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Why the Syrian Regime Won’t Fall

U.S. Senator seeks to cut aid to elite Zio-Nazi units operating in West Bank and Gaza


Senator Patrick Leahy claims Shayetet 13 unit, Nazi undercover Duvdevan unit, and the Zio-Nazi Air Force Shaldag unit are involved in human rights violations in occupied territories.

U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy is promoting a bill to suspend U.S. assistance to three elite Zio-Nazi units, they are involved in human rights violations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Leahy, a Democrat and senior member of the U.S. Senate, wants assistance withheld from the Zio-Nazi Navy’s Shayetet 13 unit, the undercover Duvdevan unit and the Zio-Nazi Air Force’s Shaldag unit.

Nazi Defense Minister Ehud Barak, a long-time friend of Leahy’s, met with him in Washington two weeks ago to try to persuade him to withdraw the initiative.

According to a senior Zio-Nazi official in Tel Aviv, Leahy began promoting the legislation in recent months after he was approached by voters in his home state of Vermont.

Should American politicians intervene in Zionist defense strategy? Visit on Facebook and share your thoughts.

A few months ago, a group of pro-Palestinian protesters staged a rally across from Leahy’s office, demanding that he denounce the killing by Shayetet 13 commandos of nine Turkish activists who were part of the flotilla to Gaza last May.

Leahy, who heads the Senate Appropriations Committee’s sub-committee on foreign operations, was the principle sponsor of a 1997 bill prohibiting the United States from providing military assistance or funding to foreign military units suspected of human rights abuses or war crimes. The law also stipulates that the U.S. Defense Department screen foreign officers and soldiers who come to the United States for training for this purpose.

Leahy wants the new clause to become a part of the U.S. foreign assistance legislation for 2012, placing restrictions on military assistance to Israel, particularly to those three units.

Leahy says these units are responsible for harming innocent Palestinian civilians and that no system of investigation is in place to ensure that their members are not committing human rights violations. According to Leahy’s proposal, U.S. military assistance to Zio-Nazi regime would be subject to the same restrictions that apply to countries such as Egypt, Pakistan and Jordan.

The senior Zionist official said that the Zionist Embassy in Washington had been trying unsuccessfully now for some months to persuade Leahy to back down from the initiative.

Two weeks ago, during Barak’s visit to Washington, Zionist’s ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, asked Barak to meet with Leahy to dissuade him from promoting the legislation.

Leahy, who is on the Democratic Party’s left flank, has for many years promoted human rights issues globally. He has been sharply critical of the Zionist regime in recent years, especially following Operation Cast Lead in late 2008.

However, he also signed Congressional resolutions supporting Zionist’s right to self-defense.

Leahy, 71, has served in the Senate for 35 years. He was a personal friend of former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and has known Ehud Barak since the latter was IDF chief of staff.

Barak, who met with Leahy privately, was quoted by the senior Zionist official as telling the senator: “The difference between Zionist and terror groups or other countries in the Middle East is that we give an accounting and there is monitoring.”

Zio-Nazi Barak also said the Zio-Nazi army had a strict judiciary with broader powers than the judiciary in the United States armed forces.

Barak was also quoted as telling Leahy that Zio-Nazi military advocate general is not subservient to the military command, but rather to the attorney general, and has complete autonomy.

“If a Palestinian is injured, he can approach the High Court of Justice,” Barak said. “The investigations undergo judicial review that is independent of commanders. There are dozens of hearings every year that are based on Palestinians’ complaints against soldiers. They reach the highest and most independent authorities,” he said.

Leahy listened to Barak, but he did not say whether he would withdraw his initiative. According to the senior Zionist official, Israel does know whether Leahy has done so.

However, the official said Barak felt Leahy had understood his message, and thatZionist  Embassy in Washington was following the matter. If necessary, Barak and Leahy would hold another talk, the official added.

Leahy’s spokesman, David Carle, said the senator did not comment on his private conversations.

Posted in Gaza1 Comment

Illegality of congressional junkets, Code Pink files a complaint.


 Josh Ruebner

Josh Ruebner who works with “The US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation” has done some digging into the matter of US congress representatives trips to Israel. 81 reps. – nearly 20% of the house – are participating in all expenses paid junkets organized by the American Israel Education Foundation (AIEF) “a so-called charitable affiliate of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the most influential of the myriad pro-Israel lobbying outfits.”

Looking into the connections between AIEF and AIPAC, Ruebner exposed the fact that AIEF seems to be a front group for AIPAC, not an independent entity, and that as such – has no legal right to organize such trips.

Based on these revelations, CODEPINK has filed a formal complaint with the Congressional Ethics Committee, calling for an investigation of these junkets.

Racheli Gai.

Josh Ruebner: Robbing Peter to Pay Israel

Nearly 20 percent of the constituents of Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL) live under the poverty line, and nearly 15 percent are unemployed. Jackson’s congressional district, covering parts of the south side of Chicago and its southern suburbs, has been hit harder than many others by the crises plaguing the economy. Many of his constituents are looking at even more cutbacks in social services, higher prices for food and fuel, and ever scarcer jobs.

During this August congressional recess, Rep. Jackson, Jr. should be at home, meeting with constituents and proposing to them how he will help them cope with their difficult circumstances. Instead, the politician is proudly gallivanting around Israel, in one of three separate congressional delegations heading there this month on all-expense-paid junkets organized by the American Israel Education Foundation (AIEF), a so-called charitable affiliate of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the most influential of the myriad pro-Israel lobbying outfits.

In total, 81 representatives, nearly one-fifth of the entire House, will participate in these jaunts, which, according to The Washington Post, include “a round-trip flight in business class for lawmakers and their spouses (that alone is worth about $8,000), fine hotels and meals, side trips, and transportation and guides.”

Of course, these congressional delegations are not all fun and games. Members of Congress will be expected to sing for their lavish dinners by honoring President Bush’s 2007 pledge to provide the Israeli military with $30 billion of tax-payer-funded weapons between 2009 and 2018. So far, proposed increases in military aid to Israel have been spared from the budgetary chopping block by President Obama and a compliant Congress that treats Israeli militarism as more sacrosanct than medical care for seniors. This despite the fact that Israel misuses the funds, in violation of the Arms Export Control Act, to commit human rights abuses against Palestinians living under its illegal 44-year military occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip.

According to, constituents in Illinois’ 2nd congressional district will be asked to cough up an astonishing $53 million in federal taxes as their pound of flesh for the Israeli military during this 10-year period. With this same amount of money, each year the federal government instead could give 650 low-income families housing vouchers, or retrain nearly 900 unemployed workers for green jobs, or fund early reading programs for nearly 1,600 at-risk children, or provide primary health care to more than 43,000 uninsured people in Rep. Jackson’s congressional district.

Yali Amit, an Israeli-American constituent of Rep. Jackson, Jr. called his office to oppose his participation in the trip to Israel. He was told that Rep. Jackson, Jr. wants to learn what is happening there because of his position on the appropriations subcommittee that approves military aid to Israel. Amit retorted that “you can’t learn what goes on there on a paid trip of a propaganda arm of the Israeli government.” And you certainly can’t learn about the devastating impact that these U.S. weapons have on unarmed Palestinian civilians, nearly 3,000 of whom were killed by the Israeli military over the last decade.

The House Committee on Ethics should open an investigation to determine if it is even legal for Members of Congress to be participating in junkets organized by AIEF. The guidelines of the committee are as bright and clear as the midday sun on a Tel Aviv beach in August. “The travel provisions of the gift rule severely limit the ability of Members and staff to accept travel from an entity that employs or retains a registered lobbyist or a registered agent of a foreign principal.” (Emphasis in original.)

Legistorm, which tracks congressional travel, explains that “even though AIPAC’s primary purpose is lobbying, its nonprofit arm [AIEF] appears to provide a loophole for sponsored travel.” However, this eureka loophole that AIPAC uses does not withstand scrutiny. According to the latest publicly available tax return of AIEF, the organization has no paid employees — an astounding feat in itself for an organization that raked in more than $26 million in 2009 and a mind-blowing accomplishment for an organization running three huge congressional delegations in one month.

An examination of AIPAC’s latest publicly available tax return reveals the sleight of hand. AIPAC reports that in 2009, it very generously contributed more than $3.2 million of employee salaries to cover the staff costs of AIEF. In other words, a 501(c)(4) organization with registered lobbyists is paying for the staff of a 501(c)(3) organization to run congressional delegations that cannot be funded by an organization that employs registered lobbyists.

Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist at Public Citizen who helped draft the new post-Abramoff federal lobbying and ethics reform legislation signed into law in 2007, agrees that something is rotten in state of AIPAC. According to Holman, “The House ethics rules do not provide an exemption for 501(c)(3)s that are controlled and directed by a lobbying entity to pay for travel junkets for members of Congress. When the ethics rules were written in 2007 as part of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (HLOGA), an exemption for 501(c)(3)s was written into the Senate rules – which I called the ‘AIPAC’ loophole – but the House under Speaker Pelosi stuck to strict travel rules for its members and declined to poke a comparable loophole into its ethics rules.

“Even if there were such a loophole in House rules,” Holman continues, “which there isn’t, it appears that the 501(c)(3) wing of AIPAC is little more than a front group designed to extend its lobbying activities beyond Capitol Hill. From 2000 to 2006, lobbyist Richard Kessler similarly attempted to evade the ethics rule prohibiting lobbyist- sponsored travel junkets by setting up a 501(c)(3) that he directly controlled to pay for the trips. HLOGA was passed in 2007 to end these types of evasions.”

Constituents should be irate that members of Congress accept fancy trips from AIPAC-affiliates and contributions from AIPAC-inspired political action committee (PACs) that result in the United States prioritizing weapons to Israel above our basic economic rights. And the Committee on Ethics must investigate AIPAC’s skirting of travel regulations and shut down these trips that it has until now allowed.

Adam Horowitz: CODEPINK calls for investigation into ‘AIPAC loophole’ for Israel junkets
Aug 15, 2011

CODEPINK sent out the following press release earlier today:

The peace group CODEPINK has filed a formal complaint with the Congressional Ethics Committee, calling for an investigation of the junkets to Israel paid for by the powerful Israel lobby AIPAC but channeled through their educational front group, The American Israel Education Foundation (AIEF). This summer recess, a staggering 81 Congresspeople—one out of five members—are participating in these trips.

According to the House Ethics Rules, Congress is prohibited from participating in any multiple-day trip that is planned, organized, requested, or arranged by a lobbyist. AIPAC skirts the law by funneling the trips through AIEF.

According to the latest publicly available tax returns, in 2009 AIEF did not even have paid staff, relying on AIPAC employees to do its work. AIPAC contributed more than $3.2 million of employee salaries to cover the staff costs of AIEF in 2009. In other words, a 501(c)(4) organization with registered lobbyists is paying for the staff of a 501(c)(3) organization to run congressional delegations that cannot legally be funded by an organization that employs registered lobbyists.

“AIPAC barely tries to hide that fact that AIEF is a front group,” says CODEPINK cofounder Medea Benjamin, who filed the complaint. “The groups are housed in the same offices, have overlapping boards of directors, share staff, employ the same Chief Financial Officer and are constantly moving funds from one entity to another. It’s time for Congress to put an end to this charade by closing the AIPAC loophole.”

Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist at Public Citizen who helped draft federal lobbying and ethics reform legislation signed into law in 2007, agrees. “The House ethic rules do not allow a non-profit group like AIEF, which is controlled and directed by the lobby group AIPAC, to pay for travel junkets for members of Congress. This AIPAC loophole is rendering the travel rules meaningless and should be stopped,” says Holman.

“With constituents facing severe economic hardships, Representatives should be home in their districts during this August recess to tell voters how they will dig us out the mess they’ve created,” says Josh Ruebner, the national advocacy director at the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation. “Instead many of them are spending part of their recess in Israel on a lobbyist-funded trip, being pressured into even more tax-payer-funded weapons for the Israeli military, weapons used to commit human rights abuses against Palestinians.”

CODEPINK, which organizes citizen diplomacy delegations to Israel and Palestine, including Gaza, believes these AIPAC trips give the participants a skewed view that hides the oppressive nature of the Israeli government. “The trips are designed to push the U.S. Congress into supporting AIPAC policies of unconditional support for the Israel government, such as continuing to give $3 billion of our taxdollars to Israel and vetoing the upcoming Palestinian call for statehood at the UN,” said Benjamin. “AIPAC puts the interests of Israel before U.S. interests, which makes these Congressional junkets dangerous and downright un-American.”

Posted in USAComments Off on Illegality of congressional junkets, Code Pink files a complaint.

“Last Man Out” Makes Shocking 9/11 Disclosure


William Rodriguez, 9/11 Hero and the last man out of the Towers, with President George W. Bush at White House award ceremony; with Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad at a private 9/11 presentation.

“There was a huge explosion in the basement—several seconds BEFORE the plane hit the tower!”

Richard Roepke

William “Willy” Rodriguez is the 9/11 hero who helped save hundreds of lives, and the last person to escape alive from the World Trade Center (WTC) Towers.

Although the thrust of this narrative is meant to be about the selflessness and nobleness of heroism, be forewarned.

In its effort to reveal the essential goodness that resides in the hearts of most human beings, it also inexorably exposes the vilest evil that festers in the minds of a few.

Once past the heroism, this story begins to slice through the slimy underbelly of a vile, pathological beast that controls our lives, and gives us glimpses of the innards of this creature that grins gleefully at our gullibility and simple innocence while trampling on our most basic human rights.

This story is a wake-up call to all citizens of planet Earth.

Decorated Hero

Employed at the WTC for 19 years as a maintenance worker, Rodriguez was responsible for the upkeep and safety of the stairwells within the 110-storey North Tower. On the morning of 9/11, Rodriguez was the only person at the WTC site with the master key to the North Tower stairwell doors. [For fire containment purposes, only doors on every fourth level were normally left unlocked.]

In the immediate aftermath of the attacks, Rodriguez personally rescued fifteen injured persons from the WTC by leading—often carrying—them to safety. Having evacuated the injured from the basement levels, he rushed back into the tower and led firefighters up the stairwells. Unlocking doors to various floors as they ascended, he aided in the successful evacuation of unknown hundreds of survivors.

At great risk to his own life, Rodriguez re-entered the structure three times, and even rescued people trapped between floors in elevator cars by lowering ladders down into shafts. Having helped lead everyone he could find to safety, he finally decided to exit the building.

Rodriguez is believed to be the last person to leave the collapsing North Tower alive.

He survived the building’s collapse by diving beneath a fire truck, where he lay trapped, completely buried in a mountain of dust and rubble for over two hours. Barely able to breathe, he thought he would “die for sure” under that truck where he was literally entombed.

An agnostic, he prayed for the first time in his adult life. As he now unshakably believes, God does listen to heartfelt prayers, and miracles do happen.

A policeman who had been standing across the street had caught a fleeting glimpse of Rodriguez as he leapt under the truck a split second before the tower collapsed in an avalanche of debris.

It was this officer who later returned with help believing that the man under that truck might still be alive.

Rodriguez has been spiritually transformed by this experience and has embraced his faith again with deep reverence.

For his outstanding heroism during America’s desperate hour, William Rodriguez received a special commendation for valor from President George W. Bush at a special White House ceremony.

And that is the extent of the official story as it pertains to William Rodriguez’s involvement relating to rescue efforts following the 9/11 attacks.

But, as you shall see, his incredible heroism was but the tip of the 9/11 iceberg.

“Bombs! Bombs!”

Heroism and accolades aside, what is truly incredible about Rodriguez’s story is a shocking fact that has been concealed from public knowledge, and remains largely unknown to this day.

Rodriguez and a handful of co-workers who were down in the basement at the time of the attack, actually heard and felt huge explosions beneath their feet in the lower basement levels.

While this anomaly in itself should have been cause for serious investigation, it is the timing of these explosions that is extremely troubling:

They occurred several seconds BEFORE the first airplane impacted the tower.

The first of these explosions, which occurred about 7-8 seconds before the plane struck the tower was so powerful it literally threw Rodriguez upwards, clean off the floor, as parts of the false ceiling collapsed onto and around him.

Rodriguez heard and felt at least three explosions going off down in the basement levels within seconds of each other.

Absolute pandemonium broke out, with screams of “Bombs! Bombs!” rising above the din as terrified workers scattered in all directions, frantically seeking ways to escape.

[NB: There were a total of six basement levels. Level-2, immediately below Rodriguez’s position and the apparent location of the first explosion, was a “Mechanical Floor”—a restricted access area.]

But the “bombs” were by no means confined to the basement levels.

During his subsequent rescue efforts on the upper floors, Rodriguez claims he heard explosions going off “all over the building.”

Felipe David, a colleague, who was working at the far end of basement Level-1 across from Rodriguez, fell victim to the second explosion. David was walking towards a supply room when the entire wall suddenly exploded in front of him.

Burned beyond recognition, David managed to stagger towards Rodriguez. Willy took one look at the man and froze.

The skin on his face had almost completely peeled away exposing raw, pink flesh, and the burnt skin of his outstretched arms was hanging horrifically, “like sheets of loose cloth.”

David was the first casualty whose life Rodriguez saved by carrying him up to paramedics at street level, after which he returned to the basement in spite of police orders.

The 9/11 Commission Hearing

At the closed-door 9/11 Commission hearing, Rodriguez testified under oath that explosions were going off in the basement of the North Tower before the first plane impacted the building.

He explained in great detail to the Commissioners the numerous cases of serious injuries he had personally witnessed that were caused by these explosions.

He even provided the panel with a list of firsthand witnesses to the explosions, people who were ready to testify under oath.

One of the individuals Rodriguez recommended the panel summon was his friend and fellow employee, John Mongello.

Mongello was in the lobby of the neighboring South Tower when the first aircraft plowed into the North Tower where Rodriguez was located.

It would be another sixteen minutes before the second aircraft would rip into the one Mongello was in.

Yet, within a minute of the first plane hitting the North Tower, an elevator in the SOUTH Tower exploded to smithereens right before his eyes!

Mongello and others were literally blown backwards by the blast, as people—many, horribly burned—began to run willy-nilly shrieking in pain, shock, and sheer terror. Thick, black smoke could be seen billowing out of the now exposed elevator shaft, and the pungent smell of “gunpowder” was very evident.

Again, just as with the North Tower, this explosion occurred inside a building that had NOT YET BEEN STRUCK BY A PLANE!

How could a plane crashing into the North Tower possibly have caused elevators in the SOUTH Tower to explode?

The esteemed 9/11 Commission never bothered to find out.

Worse, and to his utter disbelief, Rodriguez later discovered that his statements were completely omitted from the official record. As a result, not one word of this decorated hero’s startling testimony appeared in the much-ballyhooed 9/11 Commission Report, a document that continues to be touted as “the most detailed, definitive study of the events of 9/11.”

Furthermore, Rodriguez was told, quite emphatically, not to speak about the explosions to others until “further investigations” had been carried out. As the world knows, this has yet to happen.

As a result of much public pressure, the Commission’s investigation records were finally made public—seven years later, in January 2009.

Rodriguez was stunned to find that his testimony was among those marked “restricted,” and thus inaccessible to the public. His crucial evidence remains restricted to this day.

Waking Up

Naturally, Rodriguez was flabbergasted by the Commission’s clearly suspect actions, but anger at the subterfuge was soon eclipsed by his far deeper anxiety.

The bombs.

He was convinced beyond a doubt there were explosives planted within the Towers. The official explanation—jet fuel, which is simply kerosene—made no sense at all.

Besides, he had overheard many exchanges on firemen’s two-way radios that day that confirmed virtually all the jet fuel had burned off, and the few remaining scattered fires looked like they could easily be knocked out.

He was convinced the explosions he had seen, felt, and heard that day were not caused by kerosene.

He believed they were caused by deliberately positioned explosives.

What cemented his belief and reinforced it even further was something he saw on television the next day:

WTC building 7 collapsing into its footprint like a house of cards. In a matter of seconds. [1]

He had walked by that building numerous times. WTC7 was a 47-storey steel-framed skyscraper that was located a few hundred feet away from the Towers, and a plane had not even struck it. But, just as with the Twin Towers, it, too, it suddenly collapsed into its own footprint later that very afternoon.

The first thought that struck him was, “That building was a fortress. How could it just have fallen like that?”

Having experienced the explosions in the North Tower firsthand, and then having seen footage of Building 7 collapse in freefall, there were no doubts whatsoever left in his mind:

All three buildings were purposely demolished with explosives.

[NB: In regard to WTC7, the 9/11 Commission Report, again, mentioned absolutely nothing about this 47-storey skyscraper’s sudden and unbelievable collapse. Nor did it mention a word about the numerous eyewitness accounts of multiple explosions within that building. Not one word. As with the explosions reported in the North and South towers, the 9/11 Commission Report completely ignored this shocking event as well.]

As to who might have planted the explosives, he was at a loss. He couldn’t conceive how the alleged terrorists could have pulled it off; they couldn’t possibly have gained access to these buildings. He was convinced there had to have been other players involved—insiders.

He found such a prospect not only ominous in the extreme, but also disorienting and confusing on many levels. Suddenly, nothing seemed to make sense. Only one thought consumed him.

Who were the killers?

Strange Recollections

Having worked at the WTC for close upon two decades, Rodriguez obviously was very familiar with its general layout. The North Tower, in particular, was nigh a second home to him. An extremely affable fellow, Rodriguez had many friends in the WTC community. His days almost invariably began with breakfast with co-workers at the employees’ cafeteria at Windows On The World, the elegant restaurant on the 107th floor.

Especially following the 1993 bombing, security in the towers was extremely tight. That was glaringly obvious wherever he went. So how did the culprits manage to gain access?

He started to look into the security company in charge of the WTC complex, Securacom, and was more than a little surprised by the identities of two of its top executives.

President George W. Bush’s brother Marvin Bush and his cousin, Wirt Walker III, were both principals of the company. Further, he found this very same company was in charge of security at Dulles airport and United Airlines—both central to the attacks.

Brushing this curious connection aside as coincidence, he began to wonder about the practical difficulties the perpetrators would have encountered in gaining access to the buildings. He tried to recall having seen any suspicious people, or strange occurrences.

Pieces began to slowly come together.

He recalled seeing small teams of men in white “HazMat” coveralls busily moving about the building in the weeks preceding the attacks. Their presence didn’t strike him as particularly odd at the time, except for the fact that they used the stairwells almost exclusively and avoided using the service elevators. But he now began to wonder about these men’s real identities and true purpose.

One particularly bizarre incident snapped into focus, one that was so frightening he recalls it made his “hair stand up.”

A few weeks prior to the attacks, he was working in a stairwell on the 34th floor, which he knew to be completely vacant. Suddenly, he heard the strangest sound—one he’d never heard inside the tower in his nearly twenty years there.

It was a powerful, ominous, “rumbling” sound of something extremely heavy being rolled about. It sounded like a “huge metal dumpster on steel wheels, containing something extremely heavy—tons—being rolled around” a floor that he knew to have been totally empty—devoid even of furniture.

Yet, Rodriguez categorically maintains there was “someone” on that floor moving some monstrous contraption about.

Oddly, he admits to having been gripped by intense fear at the time, but he was having difficulty verbalizing to me the exact nature of his apprehension. While this didn’t strike me as having been a particularly inauspicious occurrence, it was clear he had been deeply affected by it. He immediately reported the incident to the main office, but was reassured it was a vacant floor.

Rodriguez was emphatic that he felt so frightened by this incident he didn’t dare open the door to look inside because he literally feared for his life.

He intuitively sensed grave danger behind that door, and did his best to avoid the 34th floor thereafter.

[NB: It is worth considering that long-term occupancy (and thus control) of a whole floor would have granted occupants virtually unlimited and unobstructed access from all sides to the entire 47-column central core of the tower via the elevator shafts. By sequentially disabling individual elevators for ‘servicing,’ the occupants would have had clear access to the entire 1,350-ft central load-bearing core columns—from the penthouse right down the 6th level basement sitting on bedrock.]

Willy does not strike me as a man who can be frightened very easily, and this one anecdote has always intrigued me. The emotions I saw in his eyes, and his body language as he was describing the event were real. I was left with no doubt that what he experienced that day was extremely frightening and deeply impressionable.

Man on a Mission

I first met Willy in 2004 when he was touring the country with millionaire philanthropist Jimmy Walter. Walter had recently awoken to 9/11 truth, and was an indomitable firebrand.

Frenziedly mass-producing DVDs, organizing public events and seminars, and doing everything he possibly could to get the message out to the world, Jimmy was a one-man tour de force on his own mission of truth.

Such was his fervor, he once even stood in lone protest outside the White House bearing a placard that read, “9/11 was an inside job.” I recall being greatly impressed by the spectacle of such a wealthy, successful man willingly facing scorn and ridicule by going that far out on a limb in the service of a cause as incendiary as 9/11. Quite a guy, Jimmy.

Walter, seeing in Rodriguez the clear mark of authenticity, drive, and commitment, soon took Willy under his wing. Once the two teamed up, Rodriguez was telling his extraordinary story at various public gatherings that Walter was helping to organize.

Willy had been “advised” by officials to keep to himself his “different” views on the events of that day, but that wasn’t about to stop him. His deeply traumatic experience and the shocking anomalies he had witnessed simply would not allow him to keep from asking the kind of questions most found exceedingly “uncomfortable”—even outrageously ‘unpatriotic.’

The Dalliance with Politics

The White House ceremony had all but guaranteed his meteoric rise to stardom as a national hero. However, his newfound celebrity status would soon have its concomitant obligations.

More than a few high-ranking officials had advised him of the “sensitivity” of the times, and told him in no uncertain terms that it would be unwise for him to pursue his disquieting inquiries into “unfounded theories.”.

It was proving to be “very embarrassing.”

Ironically, at the same time, there was also tremendous support and encouragement being lavished by these very same officials, soliciting his participation on an altogether different agenda: To promote “patriotic unity” and emphasize to the nation the dire need for America to strike back hard at the ‘enemy.’

And things actually got rather intoxicating for a while.

Rodriguez the hero was soon inveigled with promises of political office in the Hispanic community, and carrots of all kinds were dangled before him.

He found the attempts to win him over by various Republican power-players to be almost overwhelming. The heady publicity had suddenly thrust him onto the national stage, and he was deemed by Party strategists to be the ideal Republican candidate to woo the more than 30 million Hispanic voters in the country.

Charismatic, articulate, good-looking, fluently bi-lingual and a national hero to boot, he was a natural—the perfect political candidate.

Before joining the WTC staff, Rodriguez had worked for ten years as an aide to New York Governor Mario Cuomo, helping organize press conferences for high-level policy-making events, so he even had the basic political training already under his belt. [He also possessed stage panache to boot. An avid amateur magician, he had worked in his younger days as an assistant to The Amazing Randi.]

The Republican Party even made arrangements to send him to train for political office, and offered Rodriguez millions of dollars in campaign financing to run on the national Hispanic platform. For a brief while he was a rising star with stellar prospects.

But this titillating new potential career also carried with it a huge price—one, he soon discovered, that was in tension with his probity, and sense of righteousness and duty.

It didn’t take him long to decide. He refused to be seduced into concealing a truth he believed the world absolutely needed to know.

There was no doubt in Rodriguez’s mind that the official narrative re 9/11 was far from true. He believed it was his patriotic duty to alert his fellow Americans to what actually happened that terrible day. “I had to choose whether to tell the truth, or play their game,” he told me. “I couldn’t get myself to play their game.”

Tempting as the alternatives were, the forces of truth had prevailed.

Celebrity No More

That pivotal decision caused all Republican encouragement and offers of political support to evaporate.

The decorated 9/11 hero was now quite suddenly not only a Party pariah, but also persona non grata in the halls of high power.

By taking his courageous stand, Rodriguez had unwittingly assumed a very dangerous role, one that would pose a direct threat to powers that lay behind the veneer of party politics.

He had just signed his own political death warrant.

Naturally, the muzzled media didn’t appear willing to report any of what Rodriguez had to say. As always, they felt obliged to promote whatever the propaganda ministry wanted the masses to believe.

It takes enormous courage to go against such opposition, but that’s the kind of man Willy is. He says he owes it to his many friends—more than two hundred of them—who were butchered that day by an evil shadowy group in pursuit of some diabolical geopolitical agenda.

Shocked, inconsolable and deeply disturbed to this day, he continues his campaign with extraordinary energy and an admirable sense of purpose.

When I suggested it might be time for him to throttle back a notch, he responded, “I can’t. I am driven because I have a need to find out who the real killers are. The alleged Arab hijackers couldn’t possibly have rigged all those explosives. No way.”

The Mission Goes Global

Jimmy Walter wasted no time financing a “9/11 Truth World Tour” to raise awareness about the 9/11 fraud by first taking the message across America and later, around the world.

And money was no object. Not one to approach such a grand and noble undertaking with anything less that total commitment, Walter famously offered a $1 million cash reward to any engineer or scientist in the world who could prove, in an academic technical paper, that the three towers could have collapsed the way they did without explosives.

Despite massive national publicity—the million-dollar challenge was even sent to the engineering faculties of over 100 universities, as well as a host of major architectural and structural engineering firms—there were no takers.

None. Zero. The prize remains unclaimed to this day. [But is this surprising? How does one prove water isn’t wet?]

Walter’s group was comprised of a team of world-class experts: architects, engineers, pilots, firefighters, metallurgists, chemists, and psychologists, among others [2]. The group made a slew of public presentations in major cities across the US before moving on to Europe, and later, Venezuela, Singapore, Japan and elsewhere speaking to packed audiences everywhere they traveled.

Walter and Rodriguez even made private presentations to former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. They were surprised to find both these leaders were more than a little knowledgeable about the cover-up.

Willy told me that the home of Nicolas Maduro, president of the Venezuelan Assembly, was brimming with books, videos and documents about the 9/11 cover-up. Maduro, Venezuela’s top legislator, intoned that he was ready to create an international investigative committee to look into the “international crime scene” that is 9/11, and that this would be structured via Chavez’s government.

Walter and Rodriguez also appeared on every major Venezuelan television and radio station, both private and state-owned, and gave presentations to several universities. They were also scheduled to appear on Chavez’s weekly broadcast ‘Alo Presidente’, but this was canceled at the last minute for unspecified reasons.

And things evidently got quite dicey during their trip. Rodriguez discovered that undercover FBI agents on the ground in Venezuela had asked the hotel where he and Walter were staying to turn over a list of names of residents. On hearing this, the Venezuelan National Assembly provided both men armed military protection for the entirety of their trip.

A Serious Setback

All of these valiant efforts by these two incredibly courageous men eventually amounted to naught. Quite unexpectedly, and inexplicably, all the energy, enthusiasm and momentum they had amassed suddenly appeared to have hit a brick wall.

They were informed, rather sheepishly by cohorts of the two leaders, that 9/11 was simply too big an issue to “rush into,” and that it would be advisable to postpone further action to allow time for “more research.”

Such is the awesome fear-inspiring power and global reach of the amorphous perpetrators of this monstrous crime.

Eventually, in utter frustration at his inability to make any real headway after over three years of tireless effort and colossal expense, and hampered by poor health, Jimmy Walter finally decided to call it a day.

That little adventure had cost Walter over $6 million of his personal money.

Jimmy’s parting words to me, in 2007, embodied a truth that continues to resonate and gain currency as the years roll by:

“Trying to outdo the mainstream media by throwing a few million bucks around is like trying to outshine the sun with a flashlight.”

It’s hardly surprising you’ve heard nothing about these men’s heroic initiatives on the local evening “news”—little more than bread and circuses, artfully packaged and insidiously seeded for consumption by the gullible, clueless masses.

Witnesses Begin to Drop Dead

It wasn’t long afterwards that Rodriguez got his next wake-up call. Kenny Johanneman, another of Willy’s close friends and former WTC colleague, had also been in the basement with him when the bombs were going off.

Willy, now working on behalf of the community of Hispanic victims, survivors and their families, had decided to contact everyone he knew who had been present at the WTC that day so he could record their personal experiences on video.

During a lengthy interview, Johanneman recounted his experience in great detail, holding back nothing. Johanneman, who had made it his personal mission to tell everyone he knew—and anyone else who’d listen—that he had seen “floors blow up in the basement before the plane hit,” appeared extremely eager (almost nervously so, Willy now recalls) to get his story on tape.

Three days after the interview, Rodriguez received the bad news.

Kenny Johanneman had suddenly “committed suicide.” Gunshot to the head.

This is frighteningly reminiscent of Barry Jennings, the former New York Housing Authority Emergency Coordinator and key 9/11 witness who suddenly died of unknown causes days before the release of NIST’s “amended” report on the collapse of WTC7.

Jennings is on record [3] stating, unequivocally and emphatically regarding Building 7, that “explosions were going off all over the place”—while the Twin Towers were still standing!

Jennings also stated during an interview that he was “stepping over bodies” in the main lobby of WTC7 as he was being led out by firemen. The lobby, he testified on video, “looked like a bomb had gone off inside it.”

[NB: This is virtually identical to John Mongello’s testimony about elevators exploding in the South Tower before a plane even hit that building.]

Mr. Jennings, who was known to be in excellent health, also suffered a sudden and mysterious death at age 53.

Dylan Avery, a documentary producer, commissioned a private detective to investigate Jennings’ suspicious death (and the subsequent disappearance of his wife and two children). Within days the man returned Avery’s’s check to him and, giving no reason, refused to continue with the case.

The latest casualty in the long line of 9/11 expert witnesses to die under suspicious circumstances was Dutch demolition expert Danny Jawenko, president of Exposieve Demolitie BV, a leading Dutch controlled demolition company.

Having watched a video of WTC Building 7 suddenly fall at freefall speed, Mr. Jawenko had the courage to stand up and authoritatively assert [4] that he was “absolutely positive” WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition.

On July 18, 2011, while driving home alone in his own car, Mr. Jawenko’s vehicle suddenly accelerated, swerved off the road and crashed into a tree at high speed.

Danny Jawenko was killed instantly.

The brave individuals mentioned above are just a few of a long list [5] of individuals who have made the ultimate sacrifice.

The Mission Ratchets Up

During Rodriguez’s long crusade, he also contacted the FBI, but they never followed up on his reports. [It’s almost certain they did, but were probably allowed to take it only so far.] The same holds true with the mainstream media.

CNN spent a day interviewing Rodriguez at his home, but when it was broadcast the following day it had been thoroughly edited: they glamorized the heroic rescues and the White House tamasha, of course, but wholly excised anything pertaining to the explosions. It was a total whitewash.

Some reporters have subtly warned Rodriguez to keep quiet, as his outspokenness could jeopardize his life. “You don’t know whom you’re dealing with,” one major-network insider told him. But Willy had already defiantly looked death in the face and will probably continue to tell his story, damn the torpedoes.

He says he is speaking for his friends who were forever rendered speechless, and adds, “I am living on borrowed time; I probably should be dead anyway.”

It’s probably this do-or-die attitude that has imbued Rodriguez with the guts to take his dauntless campaign as far as he has.

How gutsy is he, and how far is he willing to go?

In 2004 Rodriguez was the lead plaintiff in a RICO lawsuit filed against President George W. Bush and 155 of his henchmen, accusing them of complicity in the 9/11 attacks, conspiracy to commit murder and other crimes.

This is hardly the behavior of a man afraid of getting whacked.

But don’t hold your breath waiting for a sensational courthouse drama with Dubya sweating it out in the hot seat. The court dismissed Rodriguez’s claims against the USA, DHS, and FEMA, and gave Rodriguez until July 7, 2006 to show cause why his lawsuit should not be dismissed with respect to the other 153 defendants. Due to a falling out with his attorney, Rodriguez failed to do so, and the court dismissed the case.

But he’d be the first to tell you this was never about winning.

It was about getting the public to wake up to the facts about 9/11—the single most heinous crime and unconscionable fraud ever foisted on the inhabitants of this planet.

Preparing For The 10th Anniversary

The 9/11 Truth movement is growing almost exponentially, with literally hundreds of groups active worldwide, and more blossoming by the day. But it was a long, arduous process to get to this point.

So utterly overwhelming was the initial mainstream propaganda barrage, and so raw were people’s emotions and sensitivities in the aftermath of the attacks, those who were quick to see through the fraud couldn’t even think of organizing a handful of local activists, let alone a worldwide network.

Gradually—and thanks almost entirely to the Internet—lines of communication began to open across the country and around the world, helping activists to organize, communicate, build cohesion, and spread the word to the millions still asleep.

It was only a matter of time before people would slowly become aware of the mountains of shockingly obvious evidence freely available online—such as videos of WTC7 in freefall [1].

That would be their Eureka moment. Common sense then usually kicks in, and osmosis takes over. After all, there is a limit to denial. [Then again, perhaps not. There will always be those who, even if the perpetrators were to confess to the crime, be tried in court and hanged in the town square, would continue to insist the Muslims did it.]

As a result of the steadfast efforts of thousand of dedicated activists, what began as a trickle is now fast reaching torrential proportions.

Reaching critical mass is no longer a distant hope. Especially given the millions waking up around the world to 9/11’s odious offspring—the bogus ‘war on terror’, DHS, the militarized police state, the monumental Bankster fraud—critical mass re 9/11 is now imminent, and an absolute certainty.

Thousands of activists around the world are helping spread the 9/11 message via public presentations, free DVDs, even huge highway billboards.

All too aware of the astonishing rise in public awareness, desperate operations are currently afoot by the ‘powers that be’ to counter this worrisome trend.

Major Hollywood stars—including Robert DeNiro—have been signed up to read the fairytale script pushing the ‘Official Conspiracy Theory.’ I.e., how nineteen clueless Arabs who, without tickets or boarding passes, climbed aboard four airliners, hijacked the craft using little box-cutters, and then brilliantly outwitted the most formidable military force on the planet and its entire multi-trillion-dollar defense apparatus for almost two hours—all without a single fighter interceptor in the fearsome American arsenal so much as turning a wheel for the entire duration.

This upcoming mass-media pageant, of course, will be further bolstered by the government’s openly proclaimed—and ongoing—assault on 9/11 “conspiracy” groups.

Obama’s regulatory Czar, Cass Sunstein, has officially initiated a nakedly aggressive program of “cognitive infiltration,’ an insidious initiative where government agent provocateurs have been ordered to covertly penetrate 9/11 truth groups and attempt to structurally disable these organizations from within by sowing disinformation.

One can only wonder why this kind of deep sabotage would be necessary—unless these “conspiracy nuts” now pose a real and present danger to the ‘powers that be.’

But, take heart, dear reader: although truth lives a wretched life, it outlives a lie every time.

Every time.

Besides, it would take a lot more than a covert program of “cognitive infiltration”’ to dismantle 9/11 truth—that would first require rewriting the laws of physics.

On the side of Truth, we have literally thousands of professional architects, engineers, firefighters, pilots, scientists, and other similar groups comprised of professionals with impeccable credentials who are planning their own public relations initiatives [2].

But, in a country where 78% of its citizens get 92% of their news from television, these groups have their work cut out for them.

Despite the challenges that lie ahead, I cannot bring myself to agree with Jimmy Walter’s assessment that this would be an undertaking tantamount to “trying to outshine the sun with a flashlight.”

Rather, I would prefer to invoke the wisdom of Victor Hugo:

“No army can stop an idea whose time has come.”

The Power Of One

Meanwhile, there is one brave man packing a gargantuan flashlight who’s working wonders on his own. And he dismisses defeat as an impossibility.

I was elated to discover that Willy Rodriguez’s relentless efforts are in full swing and about to reap rich rewards.

The man is on fire. He’s been reeling off interviews with major media outlets around the world at a ferocious rate, gearing up for a full-blown one-man 10th anniversary assault on the Dark Force.

Rodriguez recently mentioned some of the interviews he already has in the bag:

Yomiuri Shinbun (Japan), Arbitron (worldwide), Shanghai Morning Post (China), Express News (Pakistan), Global National News (Canada), Telemondo (Latin America), Le Point (France), RT (Russia), Radio Televicion Espanola (Spain), Reuters, and CNN (again). There are many more in the works that will be ready by 9/11/12.

[NB: Willy was quick to mention he’d learnt a bitter lesson from his last encounter with CNN—now, he rattles off his responses as seamlessly as possible to deny cutting-room craftsmen their “edit points!”]

Rodriguez is also polishing up a brilliant new documentary all his own, “From The Rubble,” which will also be released in time for the 10th anniversary. I recently watched the raw version in its entirety.

It’s a brilliant bit of work—profoundly emotive, incredibly detailed, fact-filled and chockablock with riveting interviews with WTC employees, firemen, police officers, paramedics and other first-responders. These are all rescuers who were there, hands-on, in the thick of it, and witnessed the entire tragedy firsthand.

Even in its current rough state, I can unreservedly state it’s the most compelling 9/11 documentary I’ve seen to date.

Time To Give It Our All

Given the appalling trail of deaths of 9/11 witnesses over the past ten years [5], it would make sense that the best way to ensure the safety of surviving key witnesses like Rodriguez and others would, ironically, be for these individuals to continue to stay planted in the public spotlight.

Considering the serious threat these brave souls pose to the criminals at large, this might be the only strategy that could offer them a modicum of safety.

The more people who know about this brave man, and the many other men and women like him, the greater the chances of thwarting their ‘suicides’ or ‘heart attacks.’

On behalf of every one in the 9/11 Truth movement; in memory of the three thousand Americans who perished needlessly on that tragic day; and the million-plus innocents who have been slaughtered (and continue to be massacred) in distant lands on account of this fiendish fraud; it would be fitting, proper, and necessary to conclude with a message to all those who have awoken to The Big Lie, yet choose to do nothing: Silence is complicity.


[1] (Building 7)

[2] (Architects & Engineers) (Military Leaders) (Pilots) (Firefighters) (Scientists)

[3] (Barry Jennings Interview)

[4] {Danny Jawenko Interview)

[5] Other Mysterious Deaths of 9/11 Witnesses

Bertha Champagne – Babysitter for Marvin Bush’s family (Bush was a principal of Securacom)

“October 10 , 2003, 1200 PDT, (FTW) — WASHINGTON, At around 9 PM on September 29, Fairfax County, Virginia police responded to a 911 call describing an accident. However, they soon discovered they were not dealing with a routine emergency but the mysterious death of an employee of the 47-year old brother of President George W. Bush, venture capitalist Marvin Bush.

“Sixty-two year old Bertha Champagne, described as a long time “baby sitter” for Marvin and Margaret Bush’s two children, son Walker, 13, and daughter Marshall, 17, was found crushed to death by her own vehicle in the driveway in front of the Bush family home in the Alexandria section of Fairfax.”

Yet to be explained is how the car was still in gear, and why it began to move when Champagne approached it. Why was there a national media blackout about this strange death? Why didn’t private security guards intervene?

Had Ms. Champagne heard too much about the Bush-Securcom connection?

Beverly Eckert (Wife of 9/11 WTC Victim, Earwitness to WTC Explosion, Refused hush money) — Airplane crash

Prasanna Kalahasthi (Wife of 9/11 “Flight 11 Passenger”) — Suicide by hanging

David Graham (Dentist who saw three of the alleged 9/11 Hijackers with Pakistani businessman in Shreveport, Louisiana) — Murdered (Poisoned with anti-freeze)

Paul Smith (Pilot of ABC News helicopter that covered the collapses of the Twin Towers) — Car accident

Michael H. Doran (9/11 Victims Lawyer) — Airplane crash

Christopher Landis (Former Operations Manager for Safety Service Patrol for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Involved in the response to the Pentagon attack. Interviewed by makers of documentary “The Pentacon.” Gave makers of the film his photo collection of the Pentagon bombings) — Suicide

John P. O’Neill (FBI Counter-terrorism expert, Obsessed with pursuing ‘Al Quaeda’ trail, Suspected Clinton/Bush/FBI complicity in the cover-up) — Died in the WTC on 9/11

Deborah Palfrey (Ran an escort service that had government officials connected to 9/11 investigation on it’s list) — Suicide by hanging

David Wherley (US General who ordered fighter jets to scramble on 9/11) — Train crash

Un-named Ticket Agent (Boston Logan Ticket Agent who was said to have checked-in Atta and Alomari) — Suicide

Suzanne Jovin (Yale Student who had written a thesis on Osama Bin Laden, Her thesis adviser was an intelligence operative) — Murdered (Killer unknown)

Perry Kucinich (Brother of Congressman who advocated a new 9/11 investigation) — Fell down stairs

Salvatore Princiotta (9/11 FDNY Firefighter from Ladder 9) — Murdered

Ezra Harel (Chairman of the Israeli company that handled electronic security for all 9/11 airports) — Heart attack

Bruce Ivins (Patsy in the 9/11-linked “Anthrax” Case) — Drug overdose

…And counting.

10-min Video on mysterious 9/11 deaths: <


Posted in USAComments Off on “Last Man Out” Makes Shocking 9/11 Disclosure

Bob Marley Video Targets Famine in Somalia


“A drought, not seen in 60 years, compounded with near complete lawlessness and utter disregard for human life has made it so.”

Yahoo News

Somalian child bathed while being treated from dehydration at Dadaab camp, Kenya

American idol creator Simon Fuller, Island Records founder Chris Blackwell and The Bob Marley estate globally released a new video on Tuesday for Bob Marley & The Wailers’ 1973 song “Hide Tide Or Low Tide.”

The video shows the East Africa crisis that is affecting more than 9 million people dying of starvation.

Edited by Kevin Macdonald, director of “Last King Of Scotland” and the forthcoming “Marley” documentary, the “Hide Tide Or Low Tide” video includes recent footage of expressionless mothers caring for their children, oblivious toddlers playing amidst skeletons of wildlife, and numerous frail, sick babies.

In one of the more poignant images, a mother draws a bucket from a well only to find it filled with dirt and not one drop of water.

The “High Tide Or Low Tide” lyrics still provoke chills nearly 40 years after the song’s debut. Marley, a late icon, who used his music to encourage social change, sings about one of his mother’s prayers.

“A child is born in this world, he needs protection,” Marley sings, quoting his mother. During the song’s chorus, he pledges unconditional friendship: “In high seas or-a low seas, I’m gonna be your friend”.


For the first time since 1980’s, the United Nations (UN) has declared a famine in Africa. According to estimates more than 12 million people in the Horn of Africa need urgent help; tens of thousands have already died and hundreds of thousands more risk starvations.

The epicentre of the famine is in Somalia where more than 30,000 children under the age of five have been killed in the last 90 days. A severe drought is seen as the main cause of this tragedy.

The picture is getting murkier by the day as the drought, which is the main cause of the tragedy, is spreading to other regions as well. Not to forget insurgent groups such as the Shabab, who have pledged allegiance to the Al Qaeda, stopping people from fleeing the country and depriving victims of much needed food.

Several aid groups are trying to airlift emergency food. But the famine hit southern part of Somalia has been seen as a dangerous zone, which has claimed the lives of peace keepers and soldiers for years.

While an exceptionally severe drought may be the main cause of this tragedy, it is also a catastrophic breakdown of the world’s collective responsibility as the warning signs have been seen for months and the world has been slow to act.

Partnering with Save the Children, the Marleys, Fuller, and Blackwell are hoping to make an impact. Universal Music Global has agreed to donate all profits from the video.

Several celebrities including Lady Gaga, Beckhams and Justin Bieber are supporting the initiative and are encouraging their fans to watch the video and donate.

The innovative viral campaign with the incredible power and reach of social networks is expected to help tackle the first famine of the 21st century.

Go to to make a donation.

YouTube – Veterans Today -Bob Marley new released video “Hide tide or low tide”

Posted in Somalia1 Comment

The Greatest Depression


by Stephen Lendman


One sign is the enormous worldwide financial shock, erasing nearly $8 trillion of equity wealth since late July. Another is teetering global economies, notably across Europe and America.

Still another is growing poverty, deprivation, and despair for millions without jobs, enough income, or futures. Combined they indicate Depression in its early stages and deepening.

In 2008, trends analyst Gerald Celente predicted it, saying:

“All levels of government will be caught up in the private sector collapse as tax bases shrink and tax revenues sharply decline. Attempts to make up shortfalls by raising taxes, tuition and tolls, and imposing higher user and license fees, will do little to resolve the problems, but will do a lot to infuriate citizens.”

Indeed so disruptively across Europe – in Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Ireland, Britain and elsewhere with much more potentially anywhere for long denied social justice.

On August 6, rioting began in Tottenham, North London after police shot and killed Mark Duggan, a 29-year old father of four. It triggered other outbreaks on Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday in Brixton, Enfield, Walthamstow, Islington, Hackney, Croydon, Lewisham, Peckham, Clapham, Ealing, central London, and Birmingham, Britain’s second largest city.

They also spread to Liverpool, Manchester, and elsewhere as raging anger set Britain ablaze. On August 9, London Guardian writers Vikram Dodd and Caroline Davies headlined, “London riots escalate as police battle for control,” saying:

“Buildings were torched, shops ransacked, and officers attacked with makeshift missiles and petrol bombs (as) youths laid waste to streets right across the city. The sheer number of incidents (rage) on a breathtaking scale.”

Celente warned about it numerous times on a global scale, saying:

“When people lose everything and have nothing else to lose, they lose it.”

In Britain, across Europe, and potentially anywhere under intolerable social conditions, a spark can ignite a firestorm, triggering anything from peaceful protests to violent rage.

Britain’s ablaze from the latter. Since mid-July, Israel experienced the former, unprecedented nonviolent street protests for long-denied social justice.

On August 9, Jeff Halper’s article headlined, “The Tent Protests in Israel: Can They Break Out of the Zionist/Security/Neo-liberal Box?” saying:

Weeks of protests “constitute a grassroots challenge to Israel’s neo-liberal regime.” On August 8, 320,000 turned out, involving all sectors of Israeli society from students to seniors to mothers to taxi drivers to doctors to teachers, and many others – everyone struggling to make ends meet in a grossly unequal society. Israelis call it “proteksia,” a system of rule by money and connections, the same one destroying America.

Having finally had enough, they demand change and are going for broke to get it. At the same time, “it remains to be seen what will happen as the government stonewalls and pushes back. This is an uprising worth following. Not an Arab Spring perhaps, but a promising Israeli Summer. Not a true revolution, but a return to a welfare state that is nonetheless structurally discriminatory.”

Halper wondered what will happen if tent protests continue into September. Will Israelis “link up with their Palestinian counterparts?….Imagine a mass march from Tel Aviv to Ramallah – and back.”

The possibilities are breathtaking – a potential “new social, political and economic order,” but it remains to be seen what’s ahead. What’s encouraging is that protest organizers embraced two Arab Israeli demands – for state recognition of unrecognized Negev Bedouin villages and permission for local authorities to approve construction to help relieve a serious housing shortage, causing prices to skyrocket – what sparked protests in the first place.

On August 9, Haaretz writer Gili Cohen headlined, “Israeli government failing to provide for thousands entitled to public housing,” saying:

“The list of those (entitled) to housing, but who are still waiting for the government to provide it, stands at about 10,000 veteran citizens and another 50,000 new immigrants.”

In large cities like Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa, waiting lists can be six years or longer. Though rent subsidies are provided, they’re woefully inadequate, failing to keep pace with skyrocketing prices.

Possibly a Jerusalem District Court petition can help. Prepared by the Center for Legal Assistance, it asks for compensation for those still on waiting lists, saying it’s essential if the government can’t provide it.

According to a 2008 report, authorities sold at least 26,000 public housing apartments from 2002 – 2009 to raise revenue. At the same time, no additional units were built, contrary to the public housing law that requires doing it. As a result, the report says:

“This set of priorities is leading families without apartments and in need of public support to have nearly no chance of housing” when rents for many Israelis are unaffordable.

On August 9, Haaretz writers Ilan Lior and Jonathan Lis headlined, “Protest leaders present their vision for social justice in Israel,” saying:

Protest organizers and student leaders, along with social organization representatives and ones from youth groups “issued a joint statement Monday presenting what they see as the main principles behind their struggle for social justice.”

Their “Framework of investment for a new socio-economic agenda” Vision Document began by saying:

“For a number of decades, the various governments of Israel have opted for an economic policy of privatization that leaves the free market without reins. This economic policy….has become our daily existence – a war for survival to subsist with dignity.”

Its six principles include:

(1) Minimizing economic, gender-based and national social inequalities.

(2) Making the current economic system more equitable.

(3) Reducing the out-of-control cost of living, as well as demanding full employment.

(4) Prioritizing areas on the outskirts of cities.

(5) Providing for the needs of those most vulnerable, especially the poor, handicapped, elderly and sick.

(6) Investing more in healthcare, education, personal safety, housing, transportation and public infrastructure.

Later, protest leaders will present a second document, explaining their demands in detail. They include providing public housing, better lower cost healthcare, free education, lower classroom sizes, more social workers, teachers and doctors, full employment, higher wages, lower taxes, better benefits, ending privatizations, increasing rent subsidies, and more.

In response to growing protests, the Knesset interrupted its summer recess for a special session either on August 10 or 15. Some MKs want a later date to keep the protests alive. Showing no sign of waning, they’re, in fact, growing.

On August 8, hundreds of pensioners protested at the Tel Aviv government compound (Kiryat Hamemshala), demanding lower drug costs, canceling the VAT on essentials, and demanding no cut in their pensions.

According to Giora Rozen, other social organizations plan emergency sessions to present their demands, saying “most of (them) represent the lower strata of society. Therefore, there can’t be a solution without dealing with Israel’s poor population together with civil society organizations.”

On August 9, Haaretz writers Barak Ravid and Johathan Lis headlined, “Netanyahu: I understand my views on Israel’s economic policy need to change,” saying:

On August 8, he told Professor Manual Trajtenberg, the panel of experts head who’ll talk with protest leaders, “that (it’s) necessary to change economic policy.” Trajtenberg said more than his fundamental positions need changing, adding that:

“There’s a system in Israel to set up a committee and then kill the issue. Another panel with all the familiar faces will be no good here. Unless the political leadership unites behind the recommendations, it won’t work.”

Major social injustice issues brought hundreds of thousands onto Israeli streets. Promises won’t satisfy them. They want real change now. Trajtenberg said leveraging their outrage is vital. “(I)t’s burning in my bones. I don’t know if I’ll succeed. But we must take the risk.”

At the same time, reversing decades of social injustice under Israel’s most extremist ever right-wing government may be daunting no matter the pressure. Nonetheless, Israelis are committed to try, given how intolerable current conditions have become.

For growing numbers, failure isn’t an option. Going for broke motivates them to press on and not quit. It takes that spirit everywhere to triumph for what otherwise might be impossible.

Famed anthropologist Margaret Mead once said:

“Never underestimate the power of a few committed individuals to change the world. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”

If a few can do it, imagine what committed hundreds of thousands can achieve in Israel or anywhere. Given a deepening global Depression, what better time than now to go for it.

Posted in USAComments Off on The Greatest Depression

America’s Massive Debt and the “Isolationist Threat”


by Stephen Sniegoski


With the United States mired in seeming never ending warfare in the Middle East and Central Asia, and with America’s real national security  imperiled by a gigantic  and ever growing debt,  a number of politicians, even in the hawkish Republican Party,  are following their constituents and advocating the diminution of America’s imperial presence.   People who were relatively unmoved by  geostrategic and moral reasons are  willing to oppose America’s costly empire at  a time when the key concern is how to deal with America’s large and ever expanding debt.  A Pew poll conducted at the end of  May showed that 60 per cent of Americans attribute the increase in national debt  to  the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a number that is significantly higher than those  who lay the blame on  domestic spending (24 per cent) or  tax cuts (19 per cent). And 65 per cent advocate reducing U.S. military commitments. []

Although a majority of Americans are now advocating a reduced American presence abroad, much of the establishment has been branding this position with the pejorative term “isolationism.”  [Michael Cohen, “The Return of Non-Isolationism,” July 14, 2011, ]  It is not actually clear what the term “isolationism” actually means except that it connotes something negative.  Obviously, isolationism is not restricted to the complete or nearly complete elimination of all ties with the outside world–political, economic, and cultural.  Only a few countries have ever pursued such an extreme  policy:  for example, China (especially during the Ming  and Manchu dynasties–15th -19th centuries),  the Tokugawa shogunate of Japan (1641-1853), the Hermit Kingdom of Korea in the 19th century.  Those who brandish the term “isolationism,” while not formally defining it, usually apply it to the U.S. stance during the interwar period, in which the country refused to join the League of Nations, and especially to the staunch opponents of  America’s involvement in World War II in the period immediately  prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor.  .

Wayne S. Cole, who until his retirement was the pre-eminent historian of the American “isolationism” of the immediate pre-World War II era, provides the following description of the group commonly designated by that term: “Isolationists did not want the United States to cut itself off from the rest of the world or even from Europe . . . . Central themes in isolationist attitudes were ‘unilateralism’ and ‘noninterventionism.’ As ‘unilateralists’ they opposed ‘entangling alliances.’

They did not believe the United States could prevent wars through cooperation with European states.  They feared that international commitments would involve the United States unnecessarily in the wars that inevitably swept other parts of the world.  They determined to maintain maximum sovereignty and freedom of action for the United States.  Most of them opposed membership in the League of Nations and World Court.” (Cole, An Interpretative History of American Foreign Relations, Homewood, IL., Dorsey, 1968,  pp. 393)

Cole continues: “As ‘non-interventionists’ they believed the United States could and should have stayed out of World War I. . . . From 1939 to 1941 noninterventionists believed it was more important for the United States to stay out of the European war than it was to assure a British victory over the Axis.” (Cole, Interpretative History, pp. 393-94)

As Cole’s description should make clear, the critics of America’s wars today differ in significant ways from the pre-World War II isolationists.  Primarily, the current critics are not necessarily unilateralist opponents of international political cooperation, and often base some of their criticism of America’s wars on an internationalist standard and how such activities make enemies for the U. S. throughout the world.   It was the Bush administration, in contrast, that took a strictly unilateralist stance in invading Iraq without UN sanction.  And it was the Bush administration that showed indifference to the World Court and international law in its war policy, claiming that its citizens could not be prosecuted by the World Court for any war crimes.

In the mainstream media, the World War II isolationist position is portrayed as self-evidently wrong—selfish, short-sighted, and even, in some cases, treasonous.  As Patrick J. Buchanan points out in A Republic Not an Empire (Washington, DC: Regnery, 1999),  however, this view is not so self-evident, since the results of World War II simply replaced the danger of Nazi Germany with that of the Soviet Union, which in a number of respects  posed an even greater threat to the U.S.  And in terms of morality did the US intervention save lives? This is hardly obvious since millions of innocent civilians were killed in the war and its aftermath and millions more would be forced to live under totalitarian tyranny. [This argument is also made by Bruce M. Russett, No Clear And Present Danger: A Skeptical View Of The United States Entry Into World War II, New York, Harper & Row, 1972 ]

But even if the American isolationists had been wrong about World War II, this would hardly mean that all war interventionism is good.  Was it obviously beneficial for the United States to engage in a ground war in Indochina, invade Iraq and depose the democratic government in Iran in 1953.  Might not a policy of “isolationism” have been preferable in these cases?

Certainly during the latter part of the Cold War, mainstream liberals seriously questioned American interventionist policy.  The slogan of the Democratic candidate for president in 1972, George McGovern, was “Come Home, America.”  Even the architect of the policy of American “containment” of Soviet Communism, George F. Kennan, was highly critical of America’s global implementation of this strategy in areas that went far beyond what he considered America’s vital interests in Europe.  To add a personal note, during my undergraduate and graduate education in the 1960s and 1970s, I don’t recall one professor of history actually praising America’s global interventionism; they differed only in their degrees of criticism of U.S. policy and the motives behind it.

Yale historian Paul Kennedy’s 1987 book “The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers,” popularized the idea of “imperial overstretch” (also known as “imperial overreach”) among the educated public, which holds that an empire can extend itself to the point where it becomes so costly that it eventually overburdens the  economic base of the country, causing national decline. Such imperialist overcommitment, according to Kennedy, had brought about the decline of Spain in the early 18th century and Britain in the early twentieth century and now threatened the United States.  Since Kennedy expressed this view before the United States had begun its wars in the Middle East and Central Asia, one would think that the problem has become considerably worse.  Furthermore, it would seem that  America’s current economic crisis serves to validate this thesis.

Now to underscore the point that I have been attempting to make:   Before the fall of the Soviet Union, even much of mainstream opinion had turned decidedly against America’s global interventionism.  However, after the United States has engaged in destructive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that have killed and wounded thousands of American soldiers,  killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians, turned  entire regions against the United States and contributed to the near, if not actual, bankruptcy of the US government, mainstream commentators are now ironically warning about the dangers of “isolationism.”

Illustrating this view, David Greenberg wrote in the New York Times:  “A healthy democracy needs critics, particularly when it engages in risky overseas adventures. But the doctrinaire call to drastically scale back our global leadership role has usually led us into error, making the world a more chaotic and dangerous place. Following the path of isolationism today won’t serve America well. Nor will it help the Republicans.”  [David Greenberg, “G.O.P. vs. World,” New York Times, June 29, 2011, ]  Considering the expansiveness of America’s global military presence, warning about the dangers of “isolationism” is tantamount to warning a 400 pound man about the dangers of anorexia when he announces his intention to go on a diet!

But let us now look at the issue of “isolationism” through the lens of universalism.  How does a policy of “isolationism” apply to the external policies of other countries.  Would not it have been better if Germany and Japan had practiced a policy of “isolationism” in the 1930s and refrained from conquering their neighbors?  Does not the United States demand that Iran be “isolationist” and not get involved in affairs outside its borders?  As the late illimitable Joe Sobran wrote in the 1990s, “Americans who think America should behave like other countries are ‘isolationists,’ whereas other countries that behave like America are ‘rogue nations.’”

To better understand the situation, it would be more appropriate to refer to the critics of American global interventionism as anti-imperialists or anti-hegemonists rather than isolationists. For what America has created is hegemony or an empire. That is certainly how the rest of the world sees America’s global military presence.   And it is exactly what Americans would call comparable activities by other countries.

For example, the United States condemns Iran for intervening in the affairs of  Iraq, including its alleged support for Shi’ite militia groups there.  Iran, of course, borders Iraq and was invaded by it in 1980 in a war that lasted until 1988 in which it suffered heavy losses.  Iran obviously has an important security stake in the internal affairs of Iraq.  In contrast, according to the American view, the United States, although located roughly 8000 miles from Iraq, has a right to invade that country and replace its government with one it considers more palatable..

Similarly, Iran has provided support to  Hezbollah in Lebanon and to Hamas in Palestine to enable them to resist Israel. The U.S. condemns this as aiding “terrorism.”  When the United States has provided aid to innumerable rebel groups throughout the world, it’s presented as aiding “freedom fighters.”   It’s apparent the United States expects Iran to remain isolated within its borders, while the United States sees it to be its right to act as the global hegemon. The United States certainly does not abide by universalist standards.

The elite, including the media elite, are wedded to the existing situation either out of personal interest or by their obeisance to the regnant  ideas.  Neocons and other members of the Israel lobby need an interventionist policy to enhance the security of their beneficiary.  Much of the traditional foreign policy establishment that was cool toward initiating  war in the Middle East nonetheless does not want to draw back from international intervention in general; in fact, its lack of ardor for the war in the Middle East rested on the  belief that such military involvement in that region was detrimental to America’s overall global military presence.    And certainly the military-industrial complex has a definite financial stake in maintaining America’s existing imperial order. Most of the media elite currently repeat the conventional wisdom. .

If these were normal times, it would be highly unlikely that the popular will would overcome this establishment power.  But these are not normal times.  The government cannot simply afford to maintain its global thrust by going farther and farther into debt. The American people along with much of the business community are unwilling to preserve military spending while drastically paring down domestic programs and increasing taxation.  Both the political right and left are looking at the military spending as an area to cut.

In short, the establishment’s desire to preserve America’s globalist imperialism has been mugged by economic reality. This policy cannot be maintained for long  since it must rest on a  strong economic base.  Economic decline, however, does not preclude the U.S. from launching shorter term, shock and awe attacks in the Middle East such as bombing Iran, which would fall short of the full scale occupation of Iraq but could exceed that invasion in terms of intensity.

Posted in USAComments Off on America’s Massive Debt and the “Isolationist Threat”

The Divided Left


by David Swanson


The Satan Sandwich budget deal seems to have been left lying on the table in some television green rooms. Dylan Ratigan has begun cursing both political parties, even while still fantasizing about the President saving us. Keith Olbermann and Al Gore want a Tahrir Square in Washington, even while ignoring the actual preparations for it that are going on. Cornel West and Tavis Smiley, who are part of those preparations, were permitted onto CNN momentarily — only to be informed that they should calm down about the wealth gap since poor people “even have refrigerators!” (The refrigerators are empty, but they look good in the kitchen!)

More and more people are fed up. Press releases and email alerts are reaching absurd extremes. With Congress reduced to a 12-member committee that will set our budgetary priorities for years to come, organizations are politely asking that the committee include one or two humane individuals, or that the committee’s meetings be live-streamed or its decisions be posted publicly for 72 hours prior to being rammed down our throats. These absurd proposals come out of a divided left, one side of which is not ready to admit that nonviolent resistance is required or that Democrats ought to be held to the same standards as Republicans.

The public policy agenda of the groups building an independent nonviolent movement at is virtually identical to that of the groups filming professional videos and sending around emails The divide between these two sets of groups is largely a divide between those wanting to engage in nonviolent resistance even if the President is a Democrat and those wanting to do PR and make statements at least as long as the President is a Democrat. It’s a divide, in other words, between independents and party loyalists, and between activists and lobbyists, to generalize very roughly.

This is a crying shame, in my opinion, because the insiders on the right fund the craziest of activist groups, while respectable organizations on the Professional Left would rather rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic so as not to be seated anywhere near the sort of people who are willing to go to jail for what they believe — the sort of people we cheer for when we see them on TV in other countries. In fact October2011 has built alliances with those engaged in the same struggle in several other countries, and coordinated actions are planned in several countries in October.

Yes, some of the groups on the left that are willing to do serious activism have bizarre, crazy, or evil beliefs. But those beliefs rarely intrude on coalition work, and those groups are in a distinct minority in any coalition, serving primarily as an excuse for other groups to stick their noses in the air and rush off to draft a new Contract. Most of the participants joining in under the banner of any given group are doing so primarily because they can’t in good conscience keep sitting still. They want to act. They want to hold a poster, so they hold the one that is stuck in their hand.

If other insider-focused leftist organizations that view their own ideologies as unsoiled were to engage in activism — real activism that doesn’t shut down when our misrepresentatives are Democrats — then lots of people would take action under their banners instead, believe me.

The trouble is that we are at the point when even Al Gore wants a Tahrir Square, when the lack of resistance is going to take us barreling into fascism, and too many people are treating coalition building as polygamy (we don’t want to marry you, just stand shoulder to shoulder in the daylight!) and nonviolent resistance as a lifestyle choice (we’d all prefer to be able to accomplish what’s needed from an air-conditioned office, but that choice is no longer available).

Meanwhile many fully engaged in independent principled action would rather fail than join forces with others whom they see as corrupted or partially corrupted or — what amounts to the same thing — Democrats! Rather than struggle to maintain discipline and avoid unnecessary compromise with a vibrant movement, these activists would rather their efforts shrivel away in glorious purity. They are also reluctant to make plans for what comes the day after “Tahrir Square,” for the actual implementation of power, for the inevitable compromises that must be made. This, too, is suicidal.

When Adolph Hitler took power in 1930, many workers wanted to resist and spontaneously protested, but the Social Democratic Party leadership and its followers decided the most appropriate thing to do would be to sit still and make comments. The Social Democrats worked to establish the “constitutionality” of the power grab and to prevent “premature” resistance from spreading. Meanwhile, the Communist Party was still avoiding any alliance with Social Democrats and even backing the Social Democrats’ removal from government, basing these actions on the delusion that Hitler couldn’t last long. Before long, however, the Communist leaders were dragged off to concentration camps. The Social Democrats and the trade union leaders still refused to oppose the Nazis. Then they were dragged off to the camps as well.

It’s a good thing that can’t happen here.

Posted in USAComments Off on The Divided Left

Shoah’s pages