Archive | October 17th, 2011

US Zionists sharply divided over how to censor Palestine speech on campus


Submitted by Ali Abunimah

Sharp disagreements have intensified among leading US pro-Israel groups on the best methods to suppress criticism and discussion of Israel’s apartheid, occupation, colonization and human rights abuses, or support for Palestinian rights, on US college campuses.

The dispute centers on the use of US civil rights statutes to lodge complaints against universities, alleging that discussion of Israel amounts to an infringement of the civil rights of Jewish students who might be made “uncomfortable” by hearing such discussions.

The Forward reports:

Simmering divisions within the Jewish community are expected to come to a head this month over efforts to use federal civil rights laws to sanction some forms of alleged anti-Israel activity on campus.

The Jewish Council for Public Affairs, American Jewry’s primary umbrella group for addressing domestic issues, will vote at its upcoming board meeting on a resolution that, in its current draft, cautions Jewish groups to guard against suppressing free speech and to invoke civil rights laws only after exhausting other measures.

“Lawsuits and threats of legal action should not be used to censor anti-Israel events, statements, and speakers in order to ‘protect’ Jewish students,” the draft resolution warns, “but rather for cases which evidence a systematic climate of fear and intimidation coupled with a failure of the university administration to respond with reasonable corrective measures.”

In September, The Electronic Intifada revealed that a leading pro-Israel group, StandWithUS, has been colluding with Israeli government officials to bring just such a civil rights complaint against Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, the university once attended by Rachel Corrie.

Earlier this month, the US Department of Education Office of Civil Rights (OCR) launched an investigation into Columbia University over a claim that a Jewish student had been “steered” away by an adviser from a class taught by Professor Joseph Massad. Massad has been the target of persistent defamation campaigns by pro-Israel groups.

The campaign to abuse US civil rights law to censor unfavorable speech and scholarship about Israel is the brainchild of Kenneth Marcus of the Institute for Jewish Community Research, who is also a member of the pro-Israel group Scholars for Peace in the Middle East. Marcus was previously head of the OCR.

Blogger Richard Silverstein has done much to shed light on what he calls Marcus’ “campus Jihad against anti-Israelism.”

Marcus, Silverstein observes,

is one of the key intellectual authors of a new campaign to exploit newly written federal civil rights statutes (Title VI) which forbid campuses from creating a hostile environment for various ethnic and religious groups, including Jews. Marcus and his friends at Stand With Us are uniting to explore campuses where they can apply their new theory. To do so, they must find campuses where they can recruit sufficient Jewish students to complain that they are afraid to be Jews on campus because of the environment of fear and intimidation created by pro-Palestinian groups.

It might be added that Marcus’ strategy can be seen as inherently anti-Semitic because it assumes incorrectly and historically that all criticism of Israel equals criticism of Jews. It also infringes on the rights of all students, including the many Jewish students and faculty, who want to talk, study and act for justice and equality in Palestine. In other words, it falsely stereotypes all Jews as mindless supporters of Israel’s atrocious policies and associates them with those policies.

It seems that at least some in the pro-Israel community fear that this aggressive campaign of censorship and intimidation may do more to cast Israel’s defenders as thugs, than to improve Israel’s image on campuses.

Posted in CampaignsComments Off on US Zionists sharply divided over how to censor Palestine speech on campus

Putin Versus The American Drug Cartel

Is Vladimir Putin the only man in the World Who Can Break the Global Drug Trade?

By Mike Harris

In several recent communications with US, Ukrainian and Russian friends, about the current set of conditions within the former Soviet Union I have been able to confirm that the CIS Countries are under covert assault by the CIA, Mossad, and Drugs Inc.

It appears that the cold war has gone into a new and deadly direction.

Currently Russia and the CIS countries are suffering from a new drug epidemic from the vast quantities of cheap, high quality heroin from Afghanistan. Since the US occupation, the Opium production in Afghanistan has increased one hundred thousand fold.

While this plague of cheap heroin affects the western countries as well, the vast majority of this deadly product is being trucked into Russia and the CIS countries.

High Quality – And Cheap!

The net result is that another generation of young Russian white people is again being destroyed by Zionist interests. Currently 30% of the population under the age of 35 living in Russia and the CIS countries have tried or are using heroin.

The heroin is very pure and high quality, it is very cheap and highly addictive. Currently 75% of the opium produced in Afghanistan is destined for Russia and the CIS states.

Since the USA controls  the source of this cheap high quality heroin, the USA is responsible for this plague upon the people of the Eastern bloc.

It is well documented that US soldiers and private contractors are both protecting the poppy fields and safeguarding the cultivation.

The USDA is even providing agricultural advice (at US taxpayer expense), to increase the yield per acre of opium poppies. The USA is sponsoring this chemical attack upon the Russian people and their allies.

My youngest brother reported to me that his Marine unit was ordered to protect convoys of drug smugglers. And a friend in the State Department has independently collaborated this same fact. I will do everything in my power to have a real war on drugs. Including working with Putin, former GRU, and Spetsnaz units. From reader… JT Ready

It is well documented that the CIA has been involved in drug trafficking since former President George H.W. Bush, served as the CIA Director was in charge, when the CIA took to drug trafficking, primarily to fund off the books projects and avoid congressional oversight of CIA activities. (Recall the Iran-Contra scandal where 47 members the Reagan Staff were convicted and imprisoned)

Will Putin Put Bounties on Bagging Drug Smugglers?

In the USA the proceeds of CIA drug sales now buys elected officials, Judges and even entire police departments and law enforcement agencies, both in the USA and Mexico.

I have received unconfirmed reports from what I consider to be highly reliable sources that Vladimir Putin is currently recruiting an anti-drug task force to wipe out the drug distribution networks within Russia and the CIS countries.

I have been told this effort will be brutal and complete. It will make the old Stalinist purges look tame.

Mr. Putin is in my opinion a true patriot for his country and his people. He will do whatever is necessary to protect his country and the nation which he responsibly looks after.

He will not allow the formality of trials to stop his efforts. In the USA law enforcement community the standard is,not what you know; it is what you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Mr. Putin is not constrained with western liberal democratic politeness which allows drug traffickers and murders to walk away unscathed and enriched.

I have inferred that Mr. Putin is creating his own version of the “Untouchables” with his own Russian version of Elliot Ness to stop the heroin trafficking by CIA and Mossad assets into Russia and the CIS countries. He is recruiting from former KGB/intelligence types and from Spetznaz units.

The word I get is that Mr. Putin is not concerned with convictions; he is focused on stopping the drug traffic into his homeland. I for one hope Mr. Putin takes no prisoners, that the death count is as high as possible and that he is truly successful in eradicating the drug trafficking networks from Russia.

Where the Poppies Grow – Will the Hunt Begin Here ?

I have also heard that Mr. Putin will not restrict his activities to Mother Russia, that he is forming special units to reach out and kill those involved, where ever they are hiding.

The targets include but are not limited to: certain US politicians who are under USA protection and cover providing the required chemicals to process raw opium into heroin.

Mr. Putin is going after anyone and everyone who has the blood of young Russians on their hands.

Personally, I wish Mr. Putin the very best.

He is the quality of leader that we need in the USA, a man who takes his responsibility to his country and people seriously, and will not sell out to the highest bidders, like the CIA, Mossad and the Israel lobby.

Big Russian Bust

I abhor the effects that toxic drugs have on the youth of the world.  I volunteer my support and assistance to his effort to put Drugs Inc. out of business.

Will Putin Put the Heat to the Drugsters?

Maybe when he is done putting the CIA and Mossad out of business in Russia, maybe the USA will hire him to do the same in our country.

It seems our own government has no desire to stop the drug epidemic in the USA; too many of our own politicians are getting very wealthy from our domestic illegal drug problems.

Mr. Putin, I hope you ask me to volunteer to help; I am willing and able to destroy the monsters that addict our children to drugs so that they can get rich.

My prayers are with you, that you remain strong,  that you stop this horrible problem, and eliminate those who profit from the misery of drug addiction.

 Editing:  Jim W. Dean, VT

American Drug War Economics – Volume 1

Posted in RussiaComments Off on Putin Versus The American Drug Cartel

Cheney In The Bunker; Cheney in Canada


A Credibly Accused War Criminal Reflects on Al-Qaeda and the War of 1812

by Anthony J. Hall

Cheney, Torture, Pedophilia, and the Vancouver Club

(October 8, 2011) – Former US Vice-President Dick Cheney met a large and extremely committed contingent of citizen jurists who assembled by the many hundreds at the Vancouver Club on September 26, 2011. Cheney had come at the invitation of the Mon Mot Book Club. His visit was calculated to give a Canadian boost to the beginning of his tour to promote his political memoire, In My Time.i 

When Cheney took charge of the microphone at the Vancouver Club, those assembled outside to protest his presence in Canada far outnumbered those who had paid $500 each to hear this modern-day warlord regurgitate his slogans of crusade and conquest.

Professor Anthony Hall elaborates on the themes in this article in his magnum opus “Earth into Property: Colonization, Decolonization and Capitalism” (2010)

Throughout British Columbia and the Pacific Northwest the site of Dick Cheney’s speaking event is widely regarded as an important site of privilege and prestige. The Vancouver Club is also a place permeated with the aura of hushed-up scandal. In 1994, for instance, lawyer Jack Cram was hauled to jail from his home after referring to Whistler and the Vancouver Club in allegations that a pedophile ring was selling sex with Aboriginal children to rich and influential clients, including some in the criminal justice system.

Cram’s allegations were intertwined with his charge that systemic corruption had undermined the integrity of processes for litigating the scope and reach of Aboriginal title in the lands of British Columbia, a province that developed outside key features of the rule of law in British North America. Unlike most other Canadian provinces, BC’s founders long averted any fundamental reckoning with the legal principle outlined in the Royal Proclamation of 1763 stipulating that treaties must be negotiated with Indigenous peoples before large-scale Euro-North American settlement could proceed on their Aboriginal lands. In his affidavit outlining his experiences and understandings, Cram explained how he had been injected against his will with drugs inducing prolonged incoherence while he was being held in Crown custody.ii

The merger on September 26 of the sordid histories of the former US Vice-President, the Vancouver Club, and the violations of Aboriginal title in British Columbia helped energize our contingent of citizens jurists when we deputized ourselves to demand that police enforce domestic and international law on Dick Cheney. Many layers of pathology, therefore, lay beneath this very public display of frustration with the failure of law enforcement agencies to do their job when it comes to dealing with the highest order of international crime.

Professor Anthony J. Hall Explains Why Dick Cheney Ought to Be Arrested in Canada

Even more than the supposed #1 man in the Bush administration, Cheney came to epitomize for many the arrogant contempt of the US executive branch for any legal restraints whatsoever on the exercise of its coercive military capacities anywhere in the world. For millions, Cheney pretty much came to personify the axis of oppressiveness linking Wall Street and the Pentagon. His personae has become a virtual caricature of vampire capitalism whose operatives have been sucking economic vitality from society even as the war machine thrives through the commodification of fear, misery and death.

There are many ways to describe the new frontiers of criminality charted by Dick Cheney when he was the most influential hands-on operative in the war cabinet of President George W. Bush. Cheney presided over the most radical wing of neo-con militarism whose members, including Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and Condolezza Rice, moved towards the imperial cockpit of American presidential power in the Bush White House through their shared involvement in the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). Once the neo-cons took office in 2001, 9/11 provided the psychological shock equivalent to “the new Pearl Harbor” that PNAC’s planners had declared necessary in order to align public opinion behind the agenda to further militarize, empower and expand the American Empire.iii

It is the legacy of the 9/11 Wars, but especially the preoccupation of its American protagonists with torture, that most undisputedly makes Dick Cheney a credibly-accused war criminal. The case for his arrest for the crime of ordering and directing torture has been widely advanced including by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. In the view of anti-war jurist Gail Davidson, the body of evidence is overwhelming that when he was in office Dick Cheney “authorized, directed, ordered, supervised, and failed to prevent the commission of a wide range of crimes against humanity and war crimes.”iv

Freshly-installed in the House of Commons as Canada’s official opposition, the New Democratic Party added its influential voice to the chorus of those calling for Cheney to be held legally accountable for his now self-confessed criminal activity while in office. In doing so the NDP send out an important signal that the 2011 Canadian election really has transformed the political landscape of the country that used to be considered the third locus of power in the North Atlantic Triangle.v

Don Davies, Canada’s Official Opposition Critic for Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism.

As Don Davies, Official Opposition Critic for Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, wrote on September 23 to the Harper government’s Immigration Minister, Jason Kenney, “Mr. Cheney has publicly, unequivocally and on numerous occasions admitted to authorizing, approving and failing to prevent acts of torture in circumstances that engage each and every provision of Immigration and Refugee Protection Act quoted above. These acts include approving the use of water boarding (simulated drowning), sleep deprivation and other treatments prohibited by both Canadian and international law.”

The NDP’s Immigration critic, Don Davies, devoted particular criticism to the treatment meted out to Canadian citizen Omar Khadr by the US government at its illegal Guantanamo Bay incarceration facility. Khadr’s arrest and incarceration while he was a child soldier in Afghanistan constitutes a gross violation of many international treaties and protocols. Prime Minister Stephen Harper is a party in these violations of the international laws pertaining to child soldiers.

Omar Khadr prisoner since age 14, Born September 19, 1986 (age 25) Toronto, Ontario, Canada

In his explanation of why Dick Cheney should not be allowed into Canada, Davies wrote: The Supreme Court of Canada in Canada (Justice) v. Khadr confirmed that the government administration in which Mr. Cheney was a senior official engaged in treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, that violated the Geneva Conventions, Canada’s domestic law and Canada’s international legal obligations.The Federal Court of Canada has similarly found in Khadr v. The Prime Minister et. al. that US treatment against prisoners (and of a Canadian citizen, no less) violated the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Punishment and Treatment and further that Mr. Khadr’s detention itself was illegal under international

Cheney in the White House Bunker on the Morning of 9/11

Most of the organizations sponsoring the protests at the Vancouver Club ended their analysis with considerations of Cheney’s role in those criminal activities mounted in the name of the Global War on Terror. Many of the protestors on the ground, however, (myself included) were moved to act by additional considerations. We saw the occasion of Cheney’s literary self-promotion in Vancouver as an opportunity to draw attention to the former US Vice-President’s crucial, but still-largely unexplained role at the levers of control over the US military apparatus on the morning of September 11, 2001.

As is well understood by many millions of critical thinkers around the world who have gone to the trouble of looking beyond the massive propaganda for aggressive war that we were fed on 9/11 and every day since, Dick Cheney is a central figure in the originating events as well as in the subsequent course of the 9/11 Wars. Indeed, there is already more than enough evidence on record to make Cheney a primary suspect in the most audacious and consequential crime of the twenty-first century.

If we lived in a world with a credible rule of law, a condition that obviously does not prevail in these times when the imperatives of truth are sacrificed again and again to the imperatives of war, then Dick Cheney would have been arrested long ago. He would have long since been picked up by police and interrogated about his abundant connections to the lies and crimes of 9/11. The line of questioning would aim especially at Cheney’s role or lack thereof in the incoming projectile’s hit on the Pentagon, the imperial headquarters of the American war machine that inexplicably was left completely undefended on 9/11.

There are dozens of federal videos recorded from many angles capturing an abundance of true pictures of what actually happened at the Pentagon on the morning of 9/11. The federal government is hiding these crucial records of this highly contested event. As subsequent history would show, the weird sequence of dense and violent occurrences at the Pentagon on the morning of 9/11 would prove crucial in advancing the turn towards the universal prison of a global police state.

Dick Cheney in the White House bunker, speaking to administration officials (from left) Joshua Bolten, Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin (standing), Condoleezza Rice and I. Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby. Source: David Bohrer / White House

Many of the unanswered questions about Cheney’s role in the defining crime of our times come down to his activities on the morning of 9/11 in the so-called Bunker, the installation under the White House known technically as the Presidential Emergency Operations Center. The questions begin with the existence of several disparate accounts, including several from Cheney himself, about the timing of the former US Vice-President’s entry to the Bunker.vii Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta asserts that when he entered the military control facility at about 9:20 am on the morning of 9/11 Cheney was already present and giving orders. Cheney’s own, sometimes-internally-contradictory accounts would put him in the Bunker sometime around 10 am.

This question of timing is crucial. It speaks to the credibility of Mineta’s important testimony concerning the directives that Cheney allegedly gave as the flying object that would hit the Pentagon at 9:37 am approached its target? The continuing uncertainties concerning this matter are part of a larger array of unanswered questions concerning the positioning of Dick Cheney at the helm of the US war machine on the morning of 9/11.

It is important to know, for instance, with whom Cheney communicated through on-the-record communications devices in the Bunker as well as, possibly, off-the-record phone calls in the attending hallway? Was it mere chance or something more sinister that put Cheney at the levers of imperial control in Washington while the US president was intently reading a story about a pet goat to school children in Sarasota Florida? Why was there no fighter jet escort assigned to the president’s Air Force One when Bush and his entourage finally took off from Sarasota Airport after their prolonged stay at the Emma E. Booker Elementary School during the height of the destruction in New York and Washington?

Even before Air Force One took off, the secret service became aware in Sarasota of threats to attack the presidential aircraft. These threats continued throughout the morning of 9/11? Who sent out these threats, including the warning received onboard that “Angel Is Next.” Angel was then the secret code word for Air Force One? Did the would-be attackers of Air Force One have access to the White House’s secret communications codes, including those that activate control over the USA’s nuclear arsenal? What was the relationship of Dick Cheney to those that threatened to assassinate the US president and his entourage by attacking Air Force One on the morning of 9/11? What was the nature of the communications between the VP and the imperiled US president who was drawn away on 9/11 from the nation’s capital into the American Mid-West?

Like George Bush himself, Dick Cheney was never required by the 9/11 Commission to give testimony under oath about what transpired when the most elaborate military machine the world has ever seen was made to stand idly by as three World Trade Centers in New York were pulverized and as a small projectile penetrated multiple walls of the Pentagon. This failure of response occurred during the hours when Cheney was at the executive helm of a US military apparatus that he personally had helped to design and build up over the course of a long and controversial career in business and government.

With the possible exception of Donald Rumsfeld, no one in the United States understood quite as well as Dick Cheney how the emergency measure procedures of the US executive branch are supposed to function under centralized control in times of great crisis. Cheney’s core involvement at the very heart of one of the most terrible tragedies ever to befall America makes his testimony under oath absolutely crucial to obtain while he is still alive. How much longer will Cheney’s maimed heart beat like it did when he held forth at the Vancouver Club under Canada’s police protection.

News about the threat on Air Force One was a subject of intense discussion between George Bush and Dick Cheney on 9/11. Moreover, the subject was quite widely discussed in official circles and the mainstream media in the immediate wake of 9/11 because it touched on allegations that the US President had acted in a cowardly fashion by not returning immediately to his command posts in Washington. The well-documented threat on Air Force One on 9/11, including the protagonists’ possession of the secret codes need to communicate with this famous airplane, thus form part of the evidence indicating the perpetrators of the crime included infiltrators with access to the national security apparatus of the US superpower.

This evidence runs contrary to the imagery dispensed almost immediately by the mainstream media that the culprits were entirely external to US officialdom specifically as well as to the security services of the West more generally. None other than Noam Chomsky, America’s most widely-quoted dissident academic, promptly repeated this most misleading aspect of the official fable of 9/11. Chomsky asserted in one of the first book-length discussions of the September 11 debacle that “There is no serious doubt that [9/11] attack was ‘external.’” In the face of considerable evidence to the contrary, Chomsky mused without evidence that the 9/11 episode “was surely an enormous shock and surprise to the intelligence services of the West, including the United States.”viii

Dick Cheney is in the best position to speak directly to the nature of his discussions on 9/11 with the inept figurehead of the Bush presidency. George Bush’s already minimalist role in his own adminstration was pushed even further to the to the margins of federal decision making during the most crucial period of the 9/11 crisis. Why was the US President essentially missing in action during the most consequential hours of his presidency?

Cheney can and must speak to what actually happened when he, as the Bush regime’s primary hands-on operative, took firm control of federal war powers during the originating acts of the Global War on Terror. Was Cheney involved, for instance, in some sort of negotiations on the morning of 9/11 between the US president and those threatening to kill George Bush and his entourage by blasting Air Force One from the sky? Was some sort of deal worked out on 9/11 to induct the US president as a full partner in the plot that was about to reconfigure the landscape of global geopolitics? As Webster Tarpley has appropriately asked, “Was Cheney communicating the demands of the coup faction to Bush? Was Cheney reporting these demands or was he urging Bush to accept them?”ix

The many unanswered questions concerning Dick Cheney’s role in 9/11 need to be seen in the context of his history of long-term involvement at or near the executive functions governing the most secretive branches of the American war machine, an immense and unwieldy contraption that grew into a monstrosity during the course of the Cold War. The ongoing disaster in the US-designed and US-made GE Mark I reactors at Fukushima forms a fitting metaphor for the condition of America’s spewing nuclear-propelled mechanisms for global domination. Dick Cheney has presided in one way or another over the construction of these mechanisms militarized control. Cheney has thrived in the most lucrative zone of crony capitalism where the many of the largest US-based corporations depend in large measure for their profits on lucrative military contracts funded by federal paymasters in the US executive branch.x

As Peter Dale Scott has demonstrated in The Road to 9/11, a peer-reviewed academic publication published by the University of California Press, Cheney and his initial patron in government, Donald Rumsfeld, are veteran Cold Warriors with a long history of collaboration in elaborating the very structure of laws, policies, institutions and political arrangements that jumped into prominence with the events of 9/11. At the basis of this structure is an emergency-measures regime of unbounded executive authority. This package of procedural and logistical devices for subordinating all functions of governance to the executive authority of the US Commander-In-Chief is misleadingly named Continuity of Government (COG).

Scott has argued that the COG provisions for reconfiguring the US Constitution in times of grave danger were probably invoked by Cheney when he was in the Bunker. Scott writes that on 9/11 “Cheney and Rumsfeld suddenly began to act out parts of a script they had rehearsed years before.” Both men placed high priority on 9/11 to arranging helicopter lifts to whisk Paul Wolfowitz and others to some secret COG underground base.xi

Cheney first jumped to national prominence in 1975 he was when successfully recommended by Donald Rumsfeld as his replacement for the job of President Gerald Ford’s Chief of Staff. At the time Cheney was only 33 years old. Since then Cheney has served as a Congressman for Wyoming, as a Director of the Council on Foreign Relations, as Defense Secretary for George H.W. Bush, as an adviser to the Jewish Institute for National Security, and, between 1995 and 2000, as the Chairman of the Board and CEO of Halliburton Corporation. Halliburton is well known military company poised between Big Oil and the energy and other logistical requirements of the US Armed Forces.

From the Cold War to the Global War on Terror Al-Qaeda Made to Replace the Soviet Union as the Empire’s Necessary Global Enemy

War on Terror Roller Coaster Ride with all-purpose boogeyman Osama Bin Laden Image Credit: Dees Illustrations

The demise of the Soviet Union in 1992 was a real problem for Dick Cheney and the powerful corporate and class interests he so evocatively embodied and represented during his long career. The sudden demise of the premier enemy of the capitalist side in the Cold War posed a major threat to the continuing dominance of the national security state whose agents regularly move along the lucrative axis of corporate enrichment linking the White house, the Pentagon and Wall Street. Without the Soviet system to oppose, the operatives of the war machine began to encounter new obstacles blocking interventions throughout the world to augment the wealth of some of world’s largest companies as well as their primary beneficiaries. The continuing viability of the permanent war economy that has prevailed since the US entered the Second World War was seriously imperiled when the prospects of global peace improved with the dismantling of the Berlin Wall.

The demise of the Soviet Union embodied a particularly significant check on the fortunes of those elites that had benefited most from building up the vast military-industrial apparatuses, together with the instruments of psychological warfare, that were collectively devoted to the cause of militant anti-communism in the Cold War. Without a major global enemy to oppose global citizens around the world would be free to move beyond state-imposed dictates distinguishing friend from foe.

The opening up of this broader capacity for liberty and self-determination in the global community threatened to strip elites of their historic imperative to decide who is savage and who is civilized, who belongs on our side and who should be considered the enemy, who is to be encompassed by “us” and who is to be set apart as the Other, the alien, the aberrant.

From China to Mauritius to Djibouti and beyond, the dominant interpretation given 9/11 from day one strengthened the capacity of elites the world over to depict those that refused to conform to the imperatives of neocolonialism and ruling class privilege as terrorists or potential terrorists.xii

The further empowerment of the powerful began by apparently strengthening the international hand of both Israel and the global superpower. As Benjamin Netanyahu told an audience at Bar Ilan University in looking back on 9/11, “We [in Israel] are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq. [These events] swung American public opinion in our favor.”xiii

On 9/11 Israel’s position was strengthened and the permanent war economy of the United States was dramatically rejuvenated.xiv Old Cold War elites such as Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were in a single day renewed in their prestige and importance even as they and the federal agencies over which they presided quickly began directing huge new flows of federal funding to contractors of all kinds as they busied themselves building up what I refer to in Earth into Property as the privatized terror economy.

The transformation of these new flows of money into thousands of new businesses, scores of new government agencies and major real estate developments throughout the United States has been well documented by Dana Priest and William M. Arkin in 2010 in an important series of articles in The Washington Post entitled “Top Secret America.”xv Many hundreds of thousands of individuals during a time of economic contraction in Top Secret America helped to broaden the political base of those with a vested interest in bowing reverentially to the sacred myth of 9/11 as an attack mounted externally by enemy aliens acting independently.

“They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.”

It became strategically inexpedient for ambitious careerists in many fields, but particularly in journalism, academia, and politics, to engage with the abundant evidence of massive frauds and cover-up supporting the constructed mythology of the 9/11 fable. The original psy op of 9/11 provided the archetype for the war propaganda permeating the Global War on Terror. At the core of this propaganda is the sacred myth of 9/11 as a primordial ritual of blood sacrifice and martyrdom of our own at the hands of vengeful infidels.

The power of this symbolism packs the psychology of the 9/11 Wars with the punch of religious zealotry. The genocidal outgrowths of the Global War on Terror continue in this era when Benjamin Netanyahu, Barack Obama, Stephen Harper, Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron provide the public face for “the West’s” most recent waves of assault on those that Franz Fanon once labeled as the wretched of the earth.

A system of professional rewards and punishments has had the effect of protecting the beneficiaries of the lies and crimes of 9/11.

This perversion of critical inquiry has subverted the quality of many forms of public discourse especially in schools of higher learning and across media venues of all kinds. In the place of serious commentary on the most consequential crime of the twenty-first century we have been served up a pitiful brew of psychobabble from the likes of Jonathan Kay, Michael Shermer and David Aaronovitch.

These well-paid propagandists for aggressive war have cobbled together an unconnected array of investigations and investigators, good, bad and indifferent, and artificially grouped them together as an undifferentiated mass of “conspiracy theories” and “conspiracists.” The aim of these crude efforts of guilt-by-association has been to divert attention away from genuine illuminations of power’s corrupt workings, but most especially those that shed light on the lies and crimes of 9/11.xvi

The renewal of the permanent war economy in the United States was not the only agenda advanced as the events of 9/11 gave rise to the Global War on Terror. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s Benjamin Netanyahu and the Likudnik faction on the right wing of Israeli politics continued to develop a plan to transform Israel’s local enemies into the West’s enemies in the name of a war on international terrorism. This plan found affirmation in Netanyahu’s 1986 text, Terrorism: How the West Can Win and his subsequent publication a decade later,Fighting Terrorism: How the West Can Defeat Domestic and International Terrorists.xvii

The export of Likudnik techniques for demonizing Arab and Muslim peoples in the perceptions of many occurred against a background where the Cold War’s end was rendering it more difficult for the apartheid regime of South Africa to smear as communists its opponents in the outlawed African National Congress. The lessons of South Africa’s transformation after the Cold War were noted by those who had collaborated with the White supremacist state in developing nuclear weapons.

For many reasons, therefore, the route of least resistance in maintaining those hierarchies of power supported by the Cold War was to replace anti-communism with a global war on terrorism. The all-purpose boogeyman of al-Qaeda would be made to stand in for the defunct Soviet state as the global enemy to be defeated through military interventions especially in resource-rich Eurasia and police-state encroachments at home.

Netanyahu’s vision of an anti-Islamicist merger of right-wing Israeli and American militarism in the post-Cold War era found expression in the membership, planning and lobbying of the Project for a New American Century. It subsequently found expression in the composition and priorities of the Bush war cabinet. Islam’s treatment by the dramatists of the Global War on Terror as an alien tradition outside the Judeo-Christian heritage of Western Civilization was based in part on the embrace of Professor Bernard Lewis’s brand of academic Orientalismxviii as broadened and popularized by Professor Samuel Huntington in his article and book entitled A Clash of Civilizations.xix

The New Labour government of Prime Minister Tony Blair formed another component of the converging interests that combined to exploit the instantaneously-produced interpretation of 9/11 as an act of war initiated by enemy aliens of Islamic faith. As John Pilger has convincingly demonstrated, Blair’s government came to power in 1997 with the concerted backing of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire.xx Blair’s zealous embrace of the 9/11 Wars demonstrated yet again that Anglo-America could unite in a strategic fashion across the schism of divided sovereignties. This split of the better part of a whole continent began with a prolonged civil war starting in British North America in 1776 and culminating in the emergence of the United States from the War of 1812 as a viable Imperial Republic.xxi

During the Second World War Prime Minister Winston Churchill and President Franklin Delano Roosevelt had joined together in the Atlantic Charter, creating the basis of the United Nations through the defeat of the fascist Axis linking Germany, Italy, and Japan. In the 1980s President Ronald Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher worked together to extend an agenda of deregulation and privatization to the business sector. The shared preoccupations of Reagan and Thatcher was accompanied by their joint attack on the Keynesianism of the social welfare state even as they lobbied to build up the machinery of war through military Keynesianism.

The intimate Anglo-American partnership of Roosevelt and Churchill, and then of Reagan and Thatcher, was repeated in a transformed context by the duo of Blair and Bush. The basis of this partnership was edified in the summer of 2005 with the explosion of bombs in the London Underground system. On the surface, this event of 7/7 seemed to give the Blair government added domestic justification for British involvement in the Global War on Terror. As Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed and others were quick to point out, however, there is ample evidence that the 7/7 bombings were not what they were made to seem. xxii As with 9/11 or the assassination of JFK, the public was fed an elaborate interpretation of what had happened on 7/7 almost immediately. Tony Blair was lightening fast with his presentation of a well-prepared speech.

In the privatized terror economy fear becomes a primary commodity of transaction. The all-important ingredient of fear can be aroused and manipulated in many ways including through the implementation of false flag terrorism. False flag terrorism describes a category of violent events concocted secretly by protagonists seeking to arouse public antipathy towards groups singled out for future invasions and attacks.

Those benefiting most from the privatized terror economy can derive much advantage from false flag terrorism which may involve the development of assets and double agents among demonized groups. These assets can be encouraged and helped to commit acts of violence, or they can be set up as patsies to be blamed for crimes made to look like the work of enemy aliens acting autonomously. In this fashion the power of public fear is mobilized to clear the way for, say, foreign wars or violations of civil liberties at home. In this fashion the promise of security can be commodified and marketed by private mercenary companies such as Blackwater/Xe. In this fashion, public opinion can be harnessed for the advancement of many agendas of business and government.

An important laboratory for the development of the privatized terror economy was the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, whose machinations were exposed as part of the same continuum of corruption that came to light in the Iran-Contra scandal. The Pakistani-based, Saudi-funded global financial institution known as the BCCI provided a venue of transaction bringing together national security agencies including the CIA with specialists in drug dealing, pipeline planning, construction and protection, regime change, nuclear proliferation, money laundering, sponsored jihad, and political bribery.xxiii

Even this brief overview of the variety of interests served by the dominant interpretation of what happened on 9/11 helps to suggest the power of the historical forces moving through the actions and words of Dick Cheney when he was very busy in the Bunker under the White House during the most decisive hours of September 11, 2001. In his new memoire Cheney repeats the account of his actions that contradicts the testimony of former Transportation Secretary, Norman Mineta. Mineta continues to insist that Cheney was already in the Bunker and busily engaged in directing operations when the Transportation Secretary entered this facility at 9:20 in the morning of 9/11.

Cheney attempts to cover himself by twice affirming in his memoire that the events he helped influence through the still-unknown array of executive orders he gave on 9/11 are to be seen as part of “the fog of war.” xxiv Clearly Cheney intends for this fog of war to continue to shroud public understanding of what actually took place during the hours when the US Vice-President was at the controls of the military-industrial complex as a tsunami of transformation was made to sweep over global geopolitics.

The characterization by Cheney and Bush of 9/11 as an act of war requiring retaliation, rather than as a complex crime requiring careful investigation, has created a crisis of credibility and legitimacy. This crisis has contributed substantially to the loss of trust and confidence of millions of citizens in our own governments, in our own instruments of public policy and in the media venues we depend on for accurate information. Certainly the failure of the responsible authorities to do a credible investigation of the events of 9/11, including what transpired with Cheney in the Bunker, helped to harden the determination felt by many of the citizen jurists who gathered at the Vancouver Club on September 26 to insist that the rule of law must be upheld through the arrest of Dick Cheney for many suspected crimes.

From Merciless Indian Savages to Unlawful Enemy Combatants

Cheney begins his book with a prologue outlining his version of what happened on 9/11. Cheney indicates that he ended this momentous day by flying in a helicopter over the Pentagon. Cheney claims that this bird’s eye view caused him to consider historical comparisons. He writes,

As Marine Two gained altitude, we could see the Pentagon. The building was lit up by the rescue teams still at work, and smoke was rising from it. All day long I had seen images of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on TV. Seeing the site of an attack firsthand brought home the vulnerability of the United States and the dangers that America faced. I thought about the fact that the city of Washington had come under attack in 1814 at the hands of the British. Now 187 years later, al Qaeda had demonstrated that they could deliver a devastating blow to the heart of America’s economic and military power. On this day all our assumptions about our own security had changed. It was a fundamental shift.xxv

There is much more than meets the eye in Cheney’s conflation of the US conflict with Great Britain in the War of 1812 and his allegation that on 9/11 America faced a surprise attack from an independent and autonomous organization of enemy aliens known as al-Qaeda. The War of 1812 renewed many of the old antagonisms of the civil war in British North America that gave rise to the secessionist forces taking up arms after 1775 to create the United States.

While the British Armed Forces did succeed in briefly assaulting Washington with only minimal resistance from the dispirited locals, the War of 1812 had started primarily as an Indian war posing the combined fighting forces of Tecumseh’s Indian Confederacy of Canada against and an Indian fighting army composed of recruits largely from Tennessee and Kentucky. The Indian role in the conflict was so important because at the onset of hostilities the great bulk of the British Army was deployed in fighting Napoleon’s forces in Europe. There were few British soldiers left to defend the expansive frontiers of Canada against Napoleon’s ally, the US government.

Tecumseh is one of Canada’s founding fathers. Tecumseh and his Indian allies fought with the British against US expansionists in the War of 1812.

The armed resistance of the Indian Confederacy of Canada to the westward expansion of the United States in the War of 1812 constitutes by far the most serious Aboriginal check throughout the entire history of the future superpower’s transcontinental expansion. This confederacy was led by Tecumseh, whose nemesis, the future US President William Henry Harrison, identified “as one of those uncommon geniuses which spring up occasionally to produce revolutions and overturn the established order of things.”xxvi Tecumseh’s goal was to push back American power in alliance with British imperial forces. Tecumseh hoped that the Indian Confederacy’s British allies would agree that it was in their interests to impose permanent limitations on the expansionary proclivities of US empire builders by recognizing in international law a permanent Indian state—a buffer state; an Aboriginal Dominion– north of the Ohio River.

A military strategist and adept law giver, Tecumseh followed in the footsteps of Pontiac who had led an earlier assault on British power that proved instrumental in persuading the imperial government to designate much of the North America’s interior as lands reserved to the Indians as their hunting grounds. As Tecumseh well understood, the United States had been created to push aside this imperial obstruction to the more rapid westward expansion of Anglo-American settlements.

Tecumseh consistently brought his considerable knowledge of history to his explanations of the plight of Indigenous peoples at a time when their Aboriginal lands were the being rapidly devoured and transformed into the primal capital of a New World country geared to the needs of immigrants and their descendents. Much like the Global War on Terror, therefore, the War of 1812 brought to the surface many of the most profound kinds of questions about the nature of colonialism on the frontiers of empire. Many of these questions orbited around the relationship between conquest, the rule of law, resource exploitation, land title, jurisdiction and the treatment of Indigenous peoples.

The War of 1812 was fought on the US side, therefore, largely to break up the thick web of connections that had developed between some officials of the British imperial government and the Indians of the North American interior. Chronicler Julius W. Pratt gave voice to this perspective by describing the War of 1812 as a US effort to obliterate the “unholy alliance” of the British in Canada “with the Western Indians.”xxvii Canadian fur trader of James McGill looked at the War of 1812 from the opposite side. A dominant force in Montreal’s continent-spanning consortium known as the North West Company, McGill wrote, “The Indians are the only Allies who can avail in the defense of the Canadas. They have the same interests as us, and alike are objects of American subjugation, if not extermination.”xxviii

These British alliances in the vast Indian Country of North America were in large measure inherited from the French-Aboriginal fur trade of Canada. After the British conquest of the imperial forces of France on the Plains of Abraham in 1759, a new class of British mercantilist, many of Scottish background, took over the French-Aboriginal fur trade. Hiring many metis and candiens as voyageurs they expanded the reach of the British imperial fur trade all the way to the shores of the Beaufort Sea in the north and the Pacific coast in the west. Many key figures who built up the North West Company as an instrument of empire were veterans of the British imperial Indian Department. Its founder, Sir William Johnson, had distinguished himself by expanding British influence through the cultivation of friendly relations with Indian communities beyond the frontiers of Anglo-American settlements. His advice to his superiors in the British Board of Trade and Plantations was codified in the Royal Proclamation of 1763.

The Royal Proclamation of 1763 was a revolutionary text that prohibited the acquisition of Indian lands by war. This decision by the English Crown to afford elementary human rights to the indigenous peoples in British North America compelled the land speculator reactionaries in the Thirteen Colonies to secede and found the USA.

There is no doubt that the limited but significant recognition of Indian rights in the Royal Proclamation was essential in the alignment and forces that made Indigenous peoples allies of the British and enemies of the United States in the War of 1812. This understanding shone through in the late nineteenth century in a pivotal court case important in determining the balance of power in relations between provincial and Dominion authorities in Canada.

The St. Catherine’s Milling case flowed from discordant interpretations of the meaning of an important constitutional provision referring to “lands reserved to the Indians.” In his minority decision on the case, Supreme Court of Canada Judge Samuel Henry Strong referred to the importance of the Royal Proclamation in stemming “Indian wars and massacres” in British North America after 1763. Judge Strong ruled that “Indian nations from that time became and have since continued to be the firm and faithful allies of the Crown and rendered it important military service in two wars, the war of the Revolution and that of 1812.”xxix

The Indian provisions in the Royal Proclamation of 1763, which are being applied to this day in the negotiation of Indian treaties in British Columbia, form a kind of antithesis to the anti-Indian provisions in the American Declaration of Independence. The Royal Proclamation was designed to incorporate Canada into British North America after the conflict remembered in the United States to this day as the French and Indian War. Among its several provisions the Royal Proclamation set out an orderly procedure for the westward expansion of Anglo-American settlements. This expansion, it was stipulated, could not take place without the prior consent of Indian people. If a particular parcel of reserved Indian land was to be sought as settler land, the appropriate Indian group would be consulted in negotiations that, if successful, would give rise to the terms of a new treaty of Crown-Aboriginal alliance.

Even this limited recognition of Indian rights was rejected by many farmers and land speculators seeking to expand their fortunes by acquiring new wealth from the transformation of Indian Country into private property. The so-called Paxton Boys in the frontier regions of Pennsylvania went on a killing spree to demonstrate their hostility to the Royal Proclamation of 1763. They directed their lethal rage at pacifist Moravian Indians who had settled with their missionary in the Susquehanna Valley. Some of these same Paxton boys went on to achieve fame in the Continental Army of the nascent United Their hostility to the Royal Proclamation was shared by the likes of Benjamin Franklin and General George Washington, politicians with a deep interest and involvement in the land speculations advanced by many Anglo-American colonization companies. The United States was created in part to advance the expansionary plans of some of these colonization companies and the land speculators behind them.xxxi

In drafting the American Declaration of Independence Thomas Jefferson gave voice to the hostility felt by many Anglo-Americans to the limits placed on frontier expansion by even the limited recognition afforded Aboriginal rights in the Royal Proclamation of 1763. Even though the Royal Proclamation had only been sporadically and half-heartedly enforced, the drafter of the most consequential political manifesto ever issued ended the document’s condemnations aimed at the British monarch with the following accusation: “He [King George]has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.”

An Academic Red Coat Responds to the Tea Party.

This provision in the founding document of the United States deserves much more attention that it thus far been afforded. The accusation is telling that King George was considered guilty of some terrible crime for trying to incorporate Indigenous peoples into the British Empire on the basis of the rule of law. The US was founded on a primal criminalization of those societies indigenous to the lands that the new polity was about to appropriate. The Indigenous peoples on the new republic’s western frontiers were afforded the identity of natural-born terrorists convicted without trial of being so violent and anarchistic that they could be counted on to visit undistinguished destruction even on women, children, the elderly and the disabled.

Thus it can be said the Global War on Terror really began not on 9/11 but rather on July the 4th, 1776, when the technique was introduced of demonizing as bloodthirsty savages those Indigenous peoples standing on valuable natural resources. The extension after 1776 of the American Declaration of Independence’s criminalization and racial profiling to Indigenous peoples on successive frontiers was demonstrated again and again in scores of Indian wars and unpunished vigilante killing sprees facilitating the trans-continental expansion of the United States. In the twentieth century, when Red Coats and Red Indians were no longer perceived as a threat, the Red Communists were cast in the role of the enemies of America’s Manifest Destiny to dominate the world through the universalization of its political economy of militarization and domination.

With the demise of the main Red Communist foe the empire of private property required a new enemy to replicate the role of merciless Indian savages in the twenty-first century. Emerging from the US-backed mujahedeen that was armed and financed by the United States to overthrow the Soviet-backed puppet regime of Afghanistan, al-Qaeda was cast on 9/11 as the necessary Other to be defeated in the order to expand the frontiers of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But this pursuit of happiness, which tends to translate into the pursuit of property, has clearly runs its course as the kleptocracy that once fed off the theft of resources of Indigenous peoples has turned to the theft of family property from an increasingly dispossessed and imperiled middle class.

Dick Cheney’s ease in moving from the enemies of the nascent US empire in the War of 1812 to the new enemies of the Anglo-American-Israeli empire in the 9/11 Wars helps to clarify the persistence of primal patterns of imperial expansion into the twenty-first century. The justification for the imperial expansion that began in 1492 was based on the claim that the Spanish conquest of America was directed at saving savages from an eternity of hell through the salvation of the Roman Catholic faith. The meme of civilization’s imperative to ascend over savagery found its way into the founding manifesto of the United States of America. As Dick Cheney’s reflections on the history of his own country attest, it seems the Global War on Terror has brought the Imperial Republic back to its Indian fighting roots.

The finer spirit of the Indian provisions in the Royal Proclamation of 1763 would seem to point the way to a route of escape from the anti-Indian provisions of the American Declaration of Independence as now globalized through a fraudulent interpretation of the events of 9/11. The heritage of the Royal Proclamation extends from the politics of Pontiac, Sir William Johnson and Tecumseh all the way to the process, however imperfect, of negotiating Crown-Aboriginal treaties in British Columbia. Alternatively Dick Cheney is the inheritor of the legacy of the Paxton Boys who murdered many Indigenous peoples with impunity. Hence one of the core dilemmas of our time was embodied by the hosting of Cheney in a venue associated with the sexual brutalization of Aboriginal children by rich and influential pedophiles who are treated as if they are above the law.

End Notes

Dick Cheney with Liz Cheney, In My Time: A Personal and Political and Memoire (New York: Threshold Editions, 2011)

ii Hall, Earth into Property: Colonization, Decolonization, and Capitalism (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2010), pp. 350-431

iii James Mann, The Rise of the Vulcans: The History of Bush’s War Cabinet (New York: Viking 2004); Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire and the Future of America (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008), pp, 191-193

iv Carlito Pablo, “Vancouver Lawyer Gail Davidson Seeks Dick Cheney’s Arrest,” 8 September, 2011

v John Bartlet Brebner, North Atlantic Triangle: The Interplay Between Canada, the United States and Great Britain (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1945)

vi Don Davies’ Letter to Immigration Minister Jason Kenney re Dick Cheney, 23 September, 2011

vii In posing questions about Cheney’s functioning in the Bunker I follow closely the questions posed and internal contradictions in the available evidence identified by Peter Dale Scott in chapters 12-14 of The Road to 9/11, pp. 194-245

viii Noam Chomsky, 9/11 (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2002), pp. 17-18

ix Webster Griffin Tarpley 9/11 Synthetic Terror, Made in the USA (Joshua Tree California: Progressive Press, 2006), p. 280

x See Hall, “From Hiroshima to Fukushima, 1945-2011: A Nuclear Narrative of Hubris and Tragedy,” Veterans Today, 28 March, 2011

xi Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11, pp. 236-237

xii See Doug Saunders, “The Fourth World War,” The Globe and Mail, 6 September, 2003, pp. F6-F7

xiii Haaretz Service and Reuters, Report: Netanyahu Says 9/11 Terror Attacks Good for Israel, 16 April, 2008

xiv See Robert Scheer, The Pornography of Power: Why Defense Spending Must Be Cut (New York: Twelve, 2009)

xv Top Secret America

xvi Hall, “Scholarship, Scams and Credentials in an Academic House of Cards,” Salem-News, 28 October, 2010

Hall, “Waging the Battle for Reality: A Review Essay on a Propagandists’ Journey in Search of the ‘Conspiracist Underground,’” Salem-News, 29 May, 2011

xvii Both texts are published in New York by Farrar, Straus and Giroux, the former in 1986 and the latter in 1997

xviii Bernard Lewis, Islam and the West (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993”

xix Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996)

xx John Pilger, Hidden Agendas (London: Vintage, 1998) pp. 468-471

xxi Fred Anderson and Andrew Cayton, The Dominion of War: Empire and Liberty in North America, 1500-2000 (New York: Viking, 2004)

xxii Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, The London Bombings: An Independent Inquiry (London: Gerald Duckworth and Company, 2006)

xxiii Tariq Ali, A Banker for All Seasons: Bank of Crooks and Cheats Incorporated (London: Seagull, 2008); Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11, pp. 114-117

xxiv Dick Cheney, In My Time, pp. 3, 329

xxv Ibid, p. 10

xxvi William Henry Harrison cited by Herbert Charles Walter Goltz, “Tecumseh, the Prophet and the Rise of the Northwest Indian Confederacy (Ph.D. thesis, University of Western Ontario, 1973), p. 255-256

xxvii Julius Pratt cited in Patrick C.T. White, A Nation on Trial: America and the War of 1812 (New York: John Wiley, 1967), p. 99

xxviii James McGill cited in G.F. G. Stanley, “The Indians and the War of 1812,” in Morris Zaslow, ed., The Defended Border: Upper Canada and the War of 1812 (Toronto: Macmillan, 1964), p. 178

xxix Reports of the Supreme Court of Canada, Vol, 13, pp. 609-610, cited in Hall, “The St. Catherine’s Milling and Lumber Company versus the Queen: Indian Land Rights as a Factor in Federal-Provincial Relations in Nineteenth Century Canada,” in Kerry Abel and Jean Friesen ed., Aboriginal Land Use in Canada: Historical and Legal Aspects (Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1991), p. 279

xxx David Dixon, Never Come to Peace Again, Pontiac’s Uprising and the Fate of the British Empire in North America (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2005), pp. 247-275

xxxi Clarence Walworth Alvord, The Mississippi Valley in British Politics, 2 Vols. (Cleveland: The Arthur H. Clark Company, 1917)

Related Post :

Dick Cheney in Canada: Breakdown of the Rule of Law

Posted in USAComments Off on Cheney In The Bunker; Cheney in Canada

NATO, the “Collective Defense” and the True Issue?


by Paul V. Sheridan

There was a time when one could justify the existence of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), especially in light of that vile murderous “multiculturalist” sewer that was funded, in part, by Jakob Schiff; that sewer was called the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR).  But justification today?

Claudio Bisogniero, the current Deputy Secretary General of NATO, has ranted regarding “the planning of collective defense.”  You can observe his ramblings here:

The operative word is, of course, defense.  These days, defense from what?  A Libyan invasion of Europe? Libyan withdrawal from the world monetary system; a criminal syndicate that is forcibly maintained by the Moneychangers?  ‘Libyan attacks against the zionist state?  Or is Mr. Bisogniero referring to defending us against Libyan resistance to the “spreading of democracy” ala Iraq?

Perhaps Mr. Bisogniero, and his Moneychanger lackey counterparts currently residing in Washington, Paris, London and Tel Aviv, were referring to the aggression and dangers posed against NATO by the Libyan children shown in the following video (WARNING: Extremely realistic):

We should note that the Moneychanger lacky, the informed founder of Wikileaks Julian Assange, somehow just cannot bring himself to openly identify and declare who exactly (at least in terms of well-known heritage, history and culture) is now running the superpowers in “the United States and Europe” (and therefore NATO).  Why is that Mr. Assange?  Is an answer to that question not the true issue; an issue that a gatekeeper like Assange is paid to avoid?

Is it not the least bit ironic that Assange would be babbling about the “problems” of Muammar Gaddafi while on Russian televison; Russia, a land once brutalized by the very same well-known heritage, history and culture?  Perhaps we should ask Assange’s boss Rupert Murdoch.  I am confident that the children depicted in the second video above will one day know that answer to the ‘true issue’ question.

Part of the answer to my ‘true issue’ question can be found here; a list that needs to include Bisogniero, Assange and Murdoch, as these also represent “The company that we keep.”

Posted in EuropeComments Off on NATO, the “Collective Defense” and the True Issue?

Pushing the Anthrax Envelope


Barry Kissin responds to NY Times admission that CIA-military “may have” made Ameri-thrax

by Kevin Barrett

How long before they admit that 9/11, the other phase of the same event, was equally false-flag?

The US government officially admits that the 9/11-follow-up anthrax mailings were a false-flag attack, originating from the US military-intelligence community, designed to demonize Muslims.

How long before they admit that 9/11, the other phase of the same event, was equally false-flag?

Barry Kissin, expert on the anthrax aspect of the 9/11-anthrax event, will be my guest on Truth Jihad Radio next Monday, October 17th, along with former BBC lead Mideast correspondent Alan Hart.

Barry writes:

A very real breakthrough occurred Monday on the front page of the NY Times. See Scientists’ Analysis Disputes F.B.I. Closing of Anthrax Case

The comment on this article I posted at was as follows:

Bingo! “If Dr. Ivins did not make the powder, one conceivable source might be classified government research on anthrax, carried out for years by the military and the Central Intelligence Agency.”

This theme is developed further in the paper by the three scientists that is the focus of this article: “[T]he most likely sites of production of the letter anthrax are laboratories that work with dry spores:  Battelle, Dugway, and DRES.  Battelle, for example, is well-known for its aerosol study capabilities … There is no evidence that relevant samples were ever collected at Dugway, Battelle or other potentially suspect sites.”

The cover-up of military-industrial-intelligence involvement is not only the work of the Bush Administration. The national security complex now dictates to the Obama administration. Witness that on March 15, 2011, the Obama administration announced it would oppose any reopening of Amerithrax because a reopening would “unfairly cast doubt on [the FBI’s] conclusions”!

For an outline of the contours of the cover-up, see memo

Posted in USAComments Off on Pushing the Anthrax Envelope

“Champion of IsraHell” in UK Cabinet self-destructs


Drove coach and horses through government’s Ministerial Code for mysterious buddy

by Stuart Littlewood

The dodgy relationship between Britain’s defence secretary, Dr Liam Fox, and his friend Adam Werrity has been entertaining the media and public here for the last several days.

Werrity, a onetime flat-mate of Fox’s and best man at his wedding, has been traipsing around the world after the defense secretary, popping up “by amazing coincidence” in the same cities and organizing and appearing at meetings where Fox discussed state business. And he turned up at Fox’s London office so many times that tongues began to wag.

Werrity falsely claimed to be an adviser to the defense secretary and even handed out business cards inscribed with that title.


Fox has now admitted meeting his bosom-buddy on 18 overseas visits and in 22 get-togethers at the Ministry of Defence HQ – altogether 40 times in the 16 months Fox has been in office, even though Werritty has no security clearance and no official position.

Craig Murray, our former ambassador to Uzbekistan sacked for daring to speak out against torture and other human rights abuses, had this to say…

I had presumed that Fox’s “ex-flatmate” Adam Werritty was of his own age, a flatmate from students days or impecunious early employment. I also presumed that Werritty had been Fox’s best man back in a similar period. I am surprised to find that the 40 year old Fox picked up the 24 year old Werritty at a meeting in Edinburgh Unversity only ten years ago, shortly after that Werritty moved into his flat, and after they had known each other just four years, Werrity was apparently Liam’s closest buddy on earth and became his best man.

Fox accommodated Werritty in taxpayer funded accommodation and around the best man period was funding him on his MPs expenses – before the “Atlantic Bridge” fake charity wheeze. Fox was found by the expenses scandal investigation to have “overclaimed” over £20,000 in mortgage payments and was forced to pay it back. It is unclear why Fox was not prosecuted. He also charged mobile phone bills of over £17,000 to the taxpayer. There must now be an investigation of how many of those calls were to Adam Werritty.

The fact that when Liam Fox was shadow health secretary, Werritty ran a health consultancy, and when Fox became defence secretary, Werritty became a defence consultant, tells you all that you need to know about this relationship.

Is this what passes for “the highest standards of propriety”?

The Prime Minister has foolishly declared “full confidence” in Liam Fox and was echoed by Conservative MPs, who closed ranks around their colleague and dutifully spouted the same drivel. But in the foreword to the Ministerial Code, issued in May 2010, David Cameron wrote: “In everything we do – the policies we develop and how we implement them, the speeches we give, the meetings we hold – we must remember that we are not masters but servants. Though the British people have been disappointed in their politicians, they still expect the highest standards of conduct. We must not let them down.”

The Code’s first words – its General Principles – make it clear that “Ministers of the Crown are expected to behave in a way that upholds the highest standards of propriety… Ministers must ensure that no conflict arises, or appears to arise, between their public duties and their private interests”.

On overseas visits the Code says ministers “should be satisfied that their arrangements could be defended in public”. Furthermore the relevant Permanent Secretary’s approval must be obtained before a special adviser accompanies a minister overseas.

One of the great mysteries is why Fox’s senior civil servants didn’t say: “Who is this guy, what’s he doing hanging around here, get rid of him.”

In the event of an allegation about a breach of the Code and the Prime Minister, having consulted the Cabinet Secretary feels that it warrants further investigation, he will refer the matter to the independent adviser on Ministers’ interests (Sir Philip Mawer). Enforcement “is not the role of the Cabinet Secretary”.

So why is the Cabinet Secretary, Sir Gus O’Donnell, heading enquiries? Did the PM actually stop to read what he was writing a foreword to?

The Ministerial Code also spells out the Seven Principles of Public Life, including the one about Integrity… “Holders of public office should not place themselves under any financial or other obligation to outside individuals or organisations that might seek to influence them in the performance of their official duties.”

But they might as well not be there. You see, Liam Fox is a high-ranking Israel flag-waver, a stooge the Zionist lobby doesn’t wish to lose… as are others in the Cabinet.

When he was Shadow Defense Secretary, Fox was proudly quoted on the Conservative Friends of Israel website saying: “…We must remember that in the battle for the values that we stand for, for democracy against theocracy, for democratic liberal values against repression – Israel’s enemies are our enemies and this is a battle in which we all stand together or we will all fall divided.”

Yesterday The Jewish Chronicle reported: “The Defence Secretary is known as a champion of Israel within the government. Speaking at the Herzliya Conference in February, which Mr Werritty also attended, he urged tougher sanctions against Iran, Mr Werritty’s area of expertise.”

Iran is suddenly Werrity’s area of expertise? Is there no end to the man’s advisory talent?

We simple-minded citizens expect a person accepting appointment as a Minister of the Crown to take the trouble to read and understand the Code and, as a man of honour, live by it. Fox has apologized to Parliament for “blurring” the distinction between his professional responsibilities and personal loyalties. But that’s not enough. He appears to have thrown caution and common sense to the wind and driven a coach and horses through the Code.

Aside from his obvious lack of judgment we have to consider the implications of his distorted reading of the Middle East and infatuation with a foreign military power that poses a nuclear threat to the region and is contemptuous of international law and human rights.

This “champion of Israel” dangles by his finger-nails pending further enquiries. Will he fall on his sword or wait to be tossed over the battlements?

‘Free Palestine’ Book Now On Internet

Posted in UKComments Off on “Champion of IsraHell” in UK Cabinet self-destructs

Implications of Indo-Afghan Strategic Accord


by Asif Haroon Raja

In the aftermath of 9/11 when George W. Bush junior’s administration decided to invade Afghanistan to get hold of Osama bin Laden, the alleged master mind behind the terrorist attacks, and his protectors, Indian leaders saw it an opportunity of the century to destroy their arch rival Pakistan once and for all. With this end in view, Indian lobby in USA in collaboration with American Jewish lobby began a whispering campaign to convince the American policy makers to include Pakistan as a target country as well. In Vajpayee’s view, Afghanistan contained symptoms of terrorism but the roots of cancer were in Pakistan, which if not rooted out wouldn’t cure the disease.

India was disappointed when Bush didn’t buy his suggestion of tackling Pakistan and Afghanistan simultaneously. Not only the proposal was over ruled, the US decided to make Pakistan an ally and a frontline state to fight terrorism. Bush however shared his inner thoughts with Vajpayee saying that wisdom demanded severing Kabul-Islamabad alliance and dealing with the two Muslim states one by one. He suggested that since Pakistan was militarily strong and had nuclear weapons and delivery means, hence it would be prudent to apply indirect strategy of secret war against Pakistan so as to first sufficiently enfeeble it from within and then deliver the hammer at an opportune time.

Assurances were given to dejected Indian leader that Pakistan will be taken on board as a tactical partner for short term gains and after occupation of Afghanistan and consolidation of gains, coordinated proxy war will be unleashed against Pakistan from Afghan soil on the scale similar to the one launched against Soviet forces in Afghanistan. The listener was also assured that India will not only be facilitated to make inroads inside Pakistan under the garb of treaty of peace and friendship, but also helped to enhance its presence in Afghanistan so that it becomes the strongest nation in South and East Asia.

Notwithstanding the US reassurances to India to destabilize, secularize and denuclearize Pakistan before return of US-NATO forces from Afghanistan, and its grant of handsome economic, military and nuclear packages, India got frustrated with the slow pace of progress achieved against Pakistan’s premier institutions. It flabbergasted Indian leaders to find Pakistan continuing to defy India and refusing to accept India’s hegemony. Ten years of massive not so covert war beefed up with propaganda war couldn’t make any dent in Pakistan’s defensive capability and nuclear deterrence. The ISI continues to remain the most potent intelligence organization in the region which has single-handed kept top six intelligence agencies on the hop.

While continuing with its efforts to browbeat Pakistan through its acts of sabotage and subversion in FATA, Swat, Balochistan and Karachi in particular and other regions of Pakistan in general including Gilgit-Baltistan, Indian officials kept poisoning the ears of US officials so as to drive a permanent wedge between Pak-US relations and then provoke USA to strike Pakistan. RAW helped by CIA, Mossad, MI-6, RAAM and Afghan National Directorate of Security (NDS) played a key role in coloring the perceptions of US leaders. RAW also worked consistently to make the Afghans hate Pakistan and has made considerable success within non-Pashtun Afghans.

Indian psychological operators have also been trying hard to create space for India within Pashtun dominated regions of Afghanistan but have achieved peripheral progress. Their progress is confined to those who have not forgiven Pakistan for its betrayal and are still resentful. Majority of Pashtuns well understand that India has remained closely linked with former Soviet Union and with Moscow installed regimes in Kabul.

They have not forgotten that India had supported Soviet invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, and later on had extended full support to Ahmad Shah led Northern Alliance during the rule of Taliban. They know that India is now a strategic partner of USA and has a big hand in the ongoing destructive policies of USA against the Pashtuns. They can discern that India is not in favor of ISAF’s pullout program and has been advising Washington to delay the departure for as long as possible.

Fearing that if Taliban recapture power they would undo India’s political, social, cultural and economic gains in Afghanistan, RAW helped CIA and other agencies in their efforts to divide and weaken Taliban. India backed up Tajik origin Burhanuddin Rabbani’s peace efforts, which were also essentially aimed at dividing Taliban. Indian officials mollycoddled Rabbani when he visited India on Manmohan’s invitation in July this year and encouraged him to work for broad based government in Kabul dominated by Northern Alliance elements and to take on board moderate Taliban and liberal Pashtuns only.

Knowing that India is a strict follower of Chankyan tactics, the Taliban do not rule out the possibility that RAW might have engineered the assassination plot of Rabbani so as to further fuel bitterness between Pakistan and Afghanistan, between Pakistan and USA, widen the gulf between the two major ethnic communities and also between ruling regime and Taliban. Rabbani’s efforts to bring hard line Taliban like Haqqani network in the loop and make them share power and his friendly relations with Islamabad were not to the liking of India. Given the high stakes of India in Afghanistan, possibility of RAW having a hand in murder of Rabbani cannot be ruled out since India is the only country that stands to gain by his demise. Another factor which needs deliberations is Rabbani’s very close ties with Iran and his frequent visits to Tehran to seek guidance of Iranian leaders. His hobnobbing with them must have been a cause of consternation for USA.

Besides, Pakistan was getting on the nerves of both USA and Karzai. OBL killing drama didn’t fetch the results as were expected. Rather it backfired and stiffened Pakistan. Karzai was getting edgy since he was not making any headway in his talks with Taliban and suspected Pakistan to be playing a spoiling game. Occurrence of several cross border attacks on Pakistan’s western border villages and security posts was one way of expressing his exasperation. Like USA, he too suspected hand of Pakistan behind series of attacks in and around Kabul in quick succession, which rattled him. His acute nervousness could have driven RAW and CIA to unnerve him further by plotting Rabbani’s murder so as to propel him to sign the Indo-Afghan strategic partnership pact, which till that event he was hesitating to sign.

India’s fan Hamid Karzai and chosen puppet of Washington had agreed to sacrifice the interests of his own community of Afghan Pathans and to sup with non-Pashtun warlords and drug barons in return for power. He also gave a commitment to his patrons in Washington to enhance Indian presence and to diminish Pakistan’s influence in Afghanistan. He also consented to allow Afghan soil to be used as launching pad for five intelligence agencies to conduct covert war against Pakistan and others. By allowing opening up of large numbers of Indian consulates specific to Pakistan, he facilitated India’s cross border terrorism and subversion. In order to camouflage RAW-RAAM clandestine operations, he accused Pakistan of indulging in cross border terrorism. He has played a typical role of a collaborator to promote Indo-US strategic designs in the region.

Fabricated stories have been constantly fed to US policy makers in Kabul and Washington that Pak Army and ISI are linked with Afghan Taliban and Al-Qaeda and are playing a double game to earn dollars from USA as well as to earn goodwill of Taliban so as to create space for Pakistan in future Afghanistan. Haqqani network is the ongoing popular theme being played. Indo-Afghan vicious media campaign based on lies ultimately had an impact on Pentagon and White House.

The US military command in Kabul already under intense pressure of Obama’s administration and home public, was desperately in need of a scapegoat to hide its failures in Afghanistan. When the US propaganda brigade led by Admiral Mike Mullen assaulted Pakistan’s ISI frontally and accused it of having a hand in 13 September attack in Kabul and in murder of Rabbani, Indian leaders sniggered and taunted Washington that it had not paid any heed to their repeated counsels to include Pakistan as a target and not to make it its ally and now they have been proved right.

The NDS blamed for security lapse jumped to the conclusion that suicide bomber who killed Burhanuddin Rabbani on 20 September in Kabul was a Pakistani whose name was Ismatullah hailing from Chaman, and the planning was done in Quetta. What it implied was that the plot was hatched by Quetta Shura headed by Mullah Omar. It towed the US line by alleging that the ISI was behind the conspiracy. Verdict given by NDS is based entirely on the confessional statement of an Afghan national Hameedullah. Wikileaks had commented in detail about poor security standards and non-professional approach of the NDS which is heavily influenced by RAW. Pakistan rejected the allegations terming them as false and baseless and in protest refused to cooperate with NDS, which asked for investigations and handing over the accused.

The would-be suicide bomber pretending to be an emissary of Mullah Omar had stayed in a guesthouse in Kabul as an honored guest for four days, waiting for Rabbani to return from Iran. It was on Karzai’s urgent calls that Rabbani rushed back to Kabul. Instead of taking the NDS to task for its incompetence as to how the suicide bomber carrying a bomb tucked under his turban was allowed to meet Burhanuddin without body search, myopic Karzai promptly accepted NDS report as gospel truth. He almost fainted on recollecting that he had consented to meet the bomber but as an after thought referred him to Rabbani. His referral gave reason to non-Pashtuns to cast suspicious eyes on him.

Suffering from bout of despondency, he resignedly stated that there was no point continuing with the process of negotiations with Taliban. In order to deflect the attention of those suspecting him, not only he accused Pakistan of assassinating Rabbani but also called off tripartite conference. To lessen his sense of grief and insecurity and also thumb nose at Pakistan, Karzai air dashed to New Delhi and hastened to ink Indo-US Strategic Partnership Treaty on 4 October about which talks had been going on since the visit of Manmohan Singh to Kabul in last May.

The US also played its part to egg on its string-puppet, since it has made up its mind to carve out primary role for India in Afghanistan and its overseer in South Asia, and to shrink Pakistan’s role. Manmohan assured Karzai that India would stand by Afghanistan when the foreign troops would depart from his country. The pact promises increase in trade and cultural relations and training of Afghan security forces. Two energy agreements were also signed which added a new dimension to their relationship.

What would be of particular concern to Pakistan, will be the deepening of Indo-Afghan security and intelligence cooperation, which will certainly be at the peril of Pakistan’s security? Pakistan well knows as to why miserly India which believes in the policy of extracting a lot from others and giving little in return is investing so much and taking so much pain to enhance its presence in Afghanistan. It has been an earnest desire of India to encircle Pakistan and make it submit to its hegemony voluntarily, failing which attack Pakistan from two directions. India’s water strategy and ongoing covert war are also aimed at forcing Pakistan to bend on its knees.

India has already made deep inroads in various fields of Afghanistan and has also succeeded in making the entire non-Pashtun community antagonistic to Pakistan. It is aspiring to become the key player in Afghanistan after the departure of ISAF and is keen to take on training of ANA and Afghan Police as well as share security problems of the country. Pakistan had offered its services for this purpose but Karzai who hypocritically calls Pakistan as twin-brother of Afghanistan preferred India where he got his education.

Indo-US strategic partnership has given an official stamp to Indo-US-Afghan nexus directed against Pakistan. 170,000 strong ANA trained, equipped and brainwashed by Indian military in unfriendly Afghanistan will have grave implications for Pakistan’s security since it will pose two-front threat to Pakistan in any future Indo-Pakistan war. This should also be seen in the backdrop of Indian airbase in Tajikistan where it has deployed long-range Sukoi jets. The US, which of late is behaving more like a foe than an ally, wants to leave behind Pakistan burdened with multiple domestic problems and sandwiched between hostile India and Afghanistan.

In the wake of fast gathering clouds pregnant with dangers, isn’t it time for Pakistan to sign strategic accords with China, Iran and Saudi Arabia, further cement its ties with friendly factions within Afghanistan and also give peace a chance and detach itself from self-destructive war on terror. Our assets that have now become assets of USA and India should be won back and asked to take on their traditional responsibility of defending the western border. These steps if taken will go a long way in giving Pakistan breathing space and checkmating ominous designs of our adversaries.

Posted in IndiaComments Off on Implications of Indo-Afghan Strategic Accord

Boston: Time to Call them “Pigs” Again


As Predicted, the Police State Back to Its Old Ways

By Gordon Duff,

Veterans Today is a publication for those who wore the uniform to defend their countries, in our case, 28 countries from Israel to Libya to Russia, Serbia, the United States, Greece, Turkey, the list goes on. 

The number used to be 28, its much higher now.  Many of us are former law enforcement, some highly decorated. 

What went on in Boston and New York has made me more than ashamed.  I saw it coming, the deterioration in law enforcement in the US, that “us v. them” that had infected so many bad police departments.

Wall Street Took the Shirt Off My Back

There is no limit to how far Wall Street will go to defend its parasitic ways.  It took 24 hours for proof of Wall Street concocting the Iran terror alert, the phony assassination plot to come to light.

As with other terror issues, the Detroit Crotch Bomber, 9/11, 7/7 and now this one, the money trail is easy to follow.  (Threats toward Iran were generated, we have confirmed, to push up flagging oil prices due to low demand and the glut of oil we are now finding almost everywhere we look.)

My “day job” involves training police and counter-terrorism forces.  Among my personal contacts are the heads or former heads of Britain’s Special Branch, SAS, Frances security services, Pakistan, Ghana, Nigeria, the Soviet Union, Russia, Egypt, Jordan, Greece, that list goes on forever also, heading into some controversial areas.

My co-workers are former CIA, FBI and their equivalents from half a dozen western countries.  We do what we do to pay the bills, school fees for kids, grandchildren.  One good friends, a former Long Beach cop, decades with the FBI, former diplomat, is somewhere even too nasty to name.  He is nearly 70, working 12 hours a day.  Some of us are older.

None of us condone what we have seen here in the United States.  This is the height of unprofessionalism.  What do we talk about?  We talk about the rigged justice system that lets off financial crooks, lets off spies with political connections, that blocks investigations into terrorism. 

Many of us, certainly the older crowd, were in Vietnam, some training Diem and Thieu’s police, me with a Marine Special Landing Team, or others SEALs, CIA, Special Forces, doing every imaginable job.

My Mean and Lean Nam Team

The challenge there was to keep our eyes open.

It didn’t take a genius to see the corruption and what was wrong with the war, even those of us who, for years, tried to justify the war as a fight against communism.

I saw Vietnam as it was, a con job that murdered off a generation of the best Americans and enriched a criminal conspiracy of freebooters and political hacks here at home.  The Vietnam War was a sickness of the soul and had to be stopped.

I worked to do that as did so many others, tens of thousands of combat veterans, most of whom died young, agent orange, suicide, America knows the story they just don’t listen, don’t learn.

We did it all again.

The people who wear the uniform, who are prepared to give their lives to defend America are easy picking.  Those of us who know Afghanistan well, and I certainly do, the players there, the folks in Pakistan, know how utterly insane that war is.

Billions in heroin is being shipped out, reports coming in from our veterans aren’t just about “walking through the poppies” but loading trucks, guarding heroin processing.  Other more classified accounts that I will list as unsubstantiated, involve contracting firms, not “mercenaries,” these are quality people, friends, who have seen “too much.”  Even I won’t talk about it.

No American hero is safe, not Pat Tillman, shot down by Americans in Afghanistan, not the veterans attacked by police in Boston.

In New York, off duty cops are getting $50 bucks an hour, some paid in cash, working for the banks.  They are working “private security” with pepper spray and full arrest powers which they are using.  We call it corruption, a department now


falled into the same sewer it was during the Serpico years, the Knapp Commission of the 70′s and the Mollen Commission of the 90′s.

Now NYPD is even worse, never having gotten out of the sewer of the Kerick/Giuliani days.

There is a reason I mention Afghanistan.  There were no “hijackers” there.  Solid sources went public awhile ago, Osama bin Laden was never a terrorist and has been dead for nearly 10 years.

I heard it from his CIA handlers, I heard it from top Marine Corps officals, I heard it from those who briefed General Petraeus, Secretary Gates and Secretary of State Clinton.  I know they had been told, those who told them, told me.

We went to Afghanistan to create a war, not to free people.  The Taliban ruled Afghanistan because America wanted the Taliban to rule Afghanistan.  This is the history, the real history.

When it was profitable to run up hundreds of billions in a useless war, we attacked on no premise whatsoever, starting a war that would last even longer than Vietnam.

It is a war where a billion dollars a month in “nation building” funds is stolen, according to the General Accounting Office, and a billion dollars a week of heroin is shipped out of the country, according to the Russian government.

Vietnam was started by Wall Street.  The “Global War on Terror” was orchestrated there, the real planners of 9/11 work there, part of the endless “revolving door,” Wall Street to Washington and back.

When an American fights for America he has to fight Wall Street, he has to fight Boston too.  The Koch Brothers, the dark center of the worldwide conspiracy against America live there, Rupert Murdoch, homes in dozens of countries, he is “Boston” too.

What have we learned?

Bernie Showboating in Iraq – Catch the AK-47’s !!

We know that the Department of Homeland Security gives guns to the cartels.  It does more, much more and law enforcement officials are now facing investigation.

Funny thing, for those who don’t remember it, the original nominee for Director of Homeland Security was Bernie Kerick, a New York Police Commissioner, nominated by President George W. Bush on the recommendation of former New York mayor, former prosecuting attorney Rudy Giuliani.

Instead, Kerick went to prison. We didn’t just create the Department of Homeland Security, a two edged sword, equally capable of creating acts of terror, of phony terror warnings, of the “Chertoff effect.”

Editors Note: When Bernie went to Iraq as a police consultant the troops learned real quickly that he was just polishing up his resume to charge high fees for his services when he got home. He sucked up a lot of security personnel for his big photo op tour and left our people disgusted… Jim W. Dean

You don’t know what that means?  Imagine a doctor who passes out diseased and poisoned candy to patients who go to a hospital he owns.

I am actually describing the real nursing home business, doctors who put patients on Haldol, a major cause of dementia, then put them in nursing homes because of the dementia brought on by Haldol.  On more than one occasion, we find the doctors own the nursing homes.

I have taken elderly patients, family members, one my own mother, out of such facilities, had them taken off these drugs.  They recovered from their “treatment,” no “dementia,” only greed.

Whose Homeland Are They Really Protecting?

When the Department of Homeland Security was created, when the Patriot Acts were passed, the mechanisms for seizing America’s guns was created, oddly by the party of the National Rifle Association, who oversaw every aspect of it.

The organizations that talk the most about the constitution, about saving American freedoms, about the right to bear arms, are fronts for Wall Street, dictated to by them.

Time to clean these groups out as well.

We are told that everything decent we create will be bought, controlled, used against us.  We’ve seen it.  We can stop it.

The Tea Party movement, originally created to investigate 9/11 was hijacked and rerouted to save us from “socialism.”  There was no “socialism,” only Wall Street pumping in their cash, aided by AIPAC, the Israeli lobby.

Now we watch Republican candidates fall all over each other, they can’t say enough about protecting the banks or giving money to finance Israel’s wars or about “winning” our own, wars we lost before they even began.

No war is ever won, not by anyone but Wall Street. 

The demonstrators who are in the streets across America, the “99%” that really represent the people of the United States, what the Tea Party should have been, are there for us.  Against them is the “1%” with their congress, with their unconstitutional laws, with their crooked courts, with their rigged elections and with their police departments whose only real purpose anymore is looking the other way.

I said “police departments,” not “police.”  Many real police are veterans, blackmailed into lives of crime to feed their families. They too are one paycheck from homelessness, like nearly every other American that make up the 99%.

The JFK Days – To be Replaced by Johnson’s

During the 60s and 70s, America still had a free press.  That is gone.  We still had a constitution, that went away in 2001.

The 8 years of “Bush the Lesser,” a coup de etat against America, the installation of the police state, detention without trial, blanket wire tapping without court orders (overturned eventually), illegal wars, torture made “legal,” and, of course, Wall Street behind it all.

Wall Street is more than simply theft.  Wall Street is torture, murder, oppression and the onset of a new “dark age.”

The police, thus far, are there to help them.

With no free press, Americans won’t be hearing the truth.  You can read it here.

Why do Americans have guns? The answer is simple.  Our guns are to protect us.  The problem, of course, is that the guns are useless when those who own them are being led around by the nose.

Wake up! The political system is owned and operated, Wall Street, the Israeli Lobby, the crooked press, our “out of control” police.

There is no saving it or there is no saving us. Nobody disagrees with this, no sane person anyway.

Banksters Have Been Busy – Offense and Defense

The enemy is simple, the American financial system.  The heart of it is what is called “the Federal Reserve.”

The “Fed” is a criminal group of banks that runs up debt and prints counterfeit money.  The “Fed” is illegal.  The “Fed” is criminal.

The “Fed” is how gangs took over America, a global cabal of organized crime and bled America dry.

The “Fed” is the heart of Wall Street, the heart of worldwide crime, the engine of poverty and despair, the mother of wars and suffering.

It is a criminal conspiracy.  Criminals belong in prison.  It is our job to bring America to a stop until that happens.  The criminals?

Much of our government, 5 Supreme Court justices, many of those who run our military and security agencies, those who run our banks, the insurance industry, “pharma” and oil, the list is huge.

The crooks are the planners, the manipulators and the weak that follow them, those who looked away on 9/11, those who looked away when America began kidnapping, torturing, wiretapping, when America began stifling free speech.

The America generations fought for has withered.  The proof?  One hour of watching Fox News alone is proof but it isn’t just them, its every paper, its movies, its books, its in your email, its everywhere, America has only one product it produces anymore.  We are the lie factory for the world.  Time for real courts and arrests, for real police, real investigations, time to end it here and now.  Time for a list.

You Too Can Become an Influence Peddler!

The list has to be huge, the problem is huge and the threat?  They are turning us into slaves, they are destroying the lives of our children and grandchildren.  “They” are unAmerican, purely unAmerican in every way.  There is no room for them here, not outside prison.

Thus far, much of our own government is the enemy too, bought and paid for.  Elections are bought with money.

Anyone who has taken one cent of corporate cash, one free vacation, one free golf outing, a job for a wife, a huge cash bonus for a book no one will read, every one of the “Gingrich’s,” the “Doles” and so many more need to be recognized, need to be named and must be shunned by the American people.

It took a “New Pearl Harbour” to push Americans into looking away while gangsters took everything.  Every time you hear about 9/11 hijackers and Al Qaeda, its the same story, the criminal acts of Wall Street blamed on terrorists who never existed.

Invade a country, see them fight back, suddenly they are terrorists.  There have always been a few nut cases, anarchists, extremists but there never has been a worldwide terror conspiracy.

That’s a “bedtime story” written by the Neocons and Wall Street, sold on 9/11 by government (s) that turned on their own people, criminal gangs who believed that “breaking a few eggs” would make the “omelet” they wanted.

Now the police, the courts, our entire government has turned against the people.  They live on money we pay them, they work for us. Time to fire the lot of them.

Posted in USAComments Off on Boston: Time to Call them “Pigs” Again

CNN Video/Guardian UK: Iran Assassination Plot “Not Credible”


The alleged plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the US does not fit with what is known about the supposed perpetrators

EDITORS NOTE: The money may have come from Mossad, and the “assassination plot”was not a plot to assassinate anyone, but simply a $100,000 venture to “frame” Iran for an assassination plot plan.

Who benefits?  Who had the connections, the ability and the opportunity?  Who had $100,000 bucks they could afford to throw away? There is no need to be a conspiracy theorist,  it is all so transparent!

Unanswered questions over the alleged Iranian assassination plot

by Julian

It has the ring of a far-fetched Hollywood thriller and even the senior law enforcement official involved in the investigation admitted to journalists that the alleged plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the US did not fit with what was known about the methods and practices of the supposed perpetrators, the Quds force of the Revolutionary Guards.

But $100,000 was clearly transferred by someone as a downpayment on the assassination. Washington is taking the case seriously enough to make unprecedented allegations against Tehran and threaten further isolation.

The affair leaves several questions unanswered:


Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader

It appears very unlikely that Iran‘s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, would approve such a brazen plot with such unpredictable consequences, in effect going to war with Iran’s three greatest enemies –Saudi Arabia, the US and Israel – at the same time.

The watchwords of Khamenei’s 23-year tenure have been caution and regime stability. He has attempted, not always successfully, to calibrate the nuclear programme to avoid uniting the UN security council against Iran, while pushing on steadily.

Iran, under his guidance, has worked very hard to mitigate the international impact of sanctions and is sensitive to its standing in the Islamic world. Things are generally going well for Tehran in the triangular relationship with the US and Saudi, as Washington and Riyadh had fallen out badly over the Arab spring and Palestinian recognition. Why would Khamenei and his regime risk all this on such a bizarre plot?


Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is also a problematic suspect. The president has little influence on the Quds force and is currently on what passes in Tehran for a charm offensive, releasing two US hikers after two years in custody and proposing a new uranium deal last month. Ahmadinejad is in a tense standoff with Khamenei and in the past has backed a limited accommodation with the west. Would he risk his own precarious position to back a plot and would he have the power to orchestrate such a venture without the supreme leader’s knowledge and approval?


The Quds force has previously gone to great lengths to ensure its fingerprints are not found on attacks abroad. It almost always operates through trusted proxies such as Hezbollah and Iraqi Shia militias, with which the Iranians share a common faith, and which the Revolutionary Guards have trained in most cases. Despite years of investigations, there is suspicion but no proof of Iranian involvement in the 1983 bombing of the US embassy in Beirut and the 1996 attack on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia.

In this latest alleged plot, the Quds force was purported to be working with a Mexican drugs cartel, the Zetas, with an Iranian-American used-car salesman as middleman (the plot was said to be codenamed Chevrolet). The link was made because the car salesman, Mansour Arbabsiar, was allegedly a cousin of a “big general” in the Quds force and a friend of the aunt of a Texas “associate” of the Zetas. Arbabsiar revealed the Iranian nature of the plot to this man, who turned out to be a US government informant. Why would the Quds force now throw its professionalism and caution to the wind?


The key evidence that the alleged plot was serious was the $100,000 wire transfer. It came from a foreign bank account, but that cannot be an Iranian account because such transfers are impossible under US law. The money must have come from a third country, but which? And how can the US authorities be so sure the foreign accounts were under the control of the Quds force?


Arbabsiar boasted that his cousin, who is said to have instigated the plot, “worked for [the] government [of Iran] but he’s working outside. He’s working like … like [a named non-Iranian intelligence agency]“. Arbabsiar’s absent co-defendant, Golam Shakuri, was allegedly a Quds colonel working for the cousin. Who is this cousin and how sure are the US authorities that he is a senior member of the Quds force?


Arbabsiar was told by his cousin and another high-ranking member of the Quds force that the head of the force, presumably Kassim Suleimani, approved of the plot and would eventually meet Arbabsiar. But is there any proof that he was involved?


Could the alleged conspiracy be the work of an extremist cell within the Quds force? In that case, the unit is far more fragmented that previously thought and we should shortly see top people in the organisation disappearing from view.

There is a precedent for such a cell: in 1999 the deputy minister of intelligence, Saeed Emami, was arrested and accused of carrying out a series of murders of intellectuals, known as the chain murders, without official authority. He was also reported to have tried smuggling missiles to Brussels to attack Nato. Emami was reported to have killed himself in prison.


Could the alleged plot be provocation by an outside agency seeking to start a conflict between Iran and its enemies? In that case, Arbabsiar is consciously misleading his interrogators or is being used by his cousin and his associates, who are working for this third party. If that was the case, how did Arbabsiar correctly identify a senior Quds officer whose identity is not widely known?

Posted in IranComments Off on CNN Video/Guardian UK: Iran Assassination Plot “Not Credible”


Friends of Al-Aqsa

24 Hour Hunger Strike in Solidarity with Palestinian Prisoners


Shoah’s pages


October 2011
« Sep   Nov »