Archive | November 7th, 2011

Sole Military Super-Bloc: NATO Issues Daily Reprieves To The World

By Rick Rozoff

On October 31 North Atlantic Treaty Organization chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen arrived in the Libyan capital of Tripoli at the end of seven full months of the military bloc’s war in the country and effused: “It’s great to be in Libya, free Libya.”

Like Scipio Africanus the Younger almost twenty-two centuries earlier in what is now Libya’s western neighbor Tunisia, then Carthage, Rasmussen planted the banner of a conquering power on the soil of North Africa. Perhaps NATO will grant Rasmussen, too, the honorific agnomen Africanus after the military bloc’s first war and first conquest on the continent.

While basking in the triumph of what Western commentators have celebrated as NATO’s first complete and uncontested military victory – “the most successful in Nato history” in Rasmussen’s words – in the Libyan capital, the secretary general was questioned by a reporter about plans to replicate the Libyan model in Syria and stated: “My answer is very short. NATO has no intention (to intervene) whatsoever. I can completely rule that out.”

However, to belie his claim he immediately added: “Having said that, I strongly condemn the crackdown on the civilian population in Syria. What has happened in Libya sends a clear signal. You cannot neglect the will of the people.”

The 227-day war against Libya waged first by U.S. Africa Command from March 19-31 and thereafter by NATO is, according to the NATO chieftain, “a clear signal” to Syria, but “NATO has no intention” to commence military actions against Syria. Scant assurance to the nation’s government and populace alike, to be sure.

On the day Muammar Gaddafi was brutally killed, Senator John McCain, ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and presidential candidate in 2008, threatened the president of Syria, the prime minister of Russia and unnamed Chinese leaders with the less than eloquent admonition that they “got a reason to be uneasy” according to one account. He told the BBC on October 20: “I think dictators all over the world, including Bashar al-Assad, maybe even Mr. Putin, maybe some Chinese, maybe all of them, may be a little bit more nervous.” He repeated the parallel between Libya and Syria three days later while in Jordan.

Had Rasmussen been someone other than who he is, which is to say an honest individual, his comments in the Libyan capital would have been limited to the line of Tacitus about a Roman campaign in the century following the Third Punic War: Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant. (They plunder, they slaughter, and they steal: this they falsely name Empire, and where they make a wasteland, they call it peace.) Libya has been destroyed. What is left of the city of Sirte presents a vivid image that suits all too well the Roman historian’s words.

Back at home in NATO Headquarters in Brussels three days later, Rasmussen gave his latest monthly press briefing, in which he stated:

“Let me stress that NATO has no intention whatsoever to intervene in Iran, and NATO is not engaged as an alliance in the Iran question.”

He began his comments with this account: “This week I had the privilege to visit Tripoli, the capital of free Libya. It was the first time ever that a NATO Secretary General set foot in the country and something none of us could have imagined only a year ago.”

During the question and answer period which succeeded his presentation he responded to a question on Libya by stating:

“We would be prepared to offer the same kind of assistance as we have offered to other partners within defence and security sector reforms. That is, overall to help put defence and security agencies under civilian and democratic control. We can also help in organizing a modern defence, modern structures. In more specific terms we can help when it comes to institution-building like the building of a defence ministry, how to organize General Staff of the Armed Forces, just to mention some examples.

“NATO has a lot of expertise within defence and security sector reform, and actually a number of our Allies have gone through a similar transition from dictatorship into democracy, so they have a very valuable experience to offer. And I talked with Chairman Jalil and made clear that we are ready to assist Libya within such reform efforts if requested…”

Given the alliance’s history over the past twenty years, what he in fact pledged was that NATO will train – from scratch and in English – the armed forces of the new Libyan proxy regime as it has done previously and is still engaged in doing in other nations and provinces it has invaded and in other manners subjugated: Bosnia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Libya, which until now has been the only North African nation not to be pulled into NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue military partnership – Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria are members as are Israel, Jordan and Mauritania – will become the eighth member and a joint asset of NATO and U.S. Africa Command.

The chief of what is not only the sole extant military bloc in the world but the largest and longest-lived multinational armed alliance in history may have taken to issuing regular disclaimers concerning attacking new nations well outside the so-called Euro-Atlantic zone, but how much credence the secretary general’s pronouncements should be given is best indicated by how unconscionably NATO lied its way into full-fledged wars in three continents over the past twelve years.

With 28 full members at present, after a 75 per cent increase between 1999-2009, and over 40 partners around the world, the North Atlantic bloc has integrated the militaries of a third of the world’s nations for deployments to war and post-war zones in the Balkans and South Asia, with Africa the next destination.

Its latest trophy is the battered, bloodied and brutalized body of Muammar Gaddafi, murdered after a U.S. Hellfire missile and French laser-guided bombs struck his convoy outside Sirte on October 20, eight months before what would have been his seventieth birthday. So bereft of the most elementary notions of decency and values, moral and aesthetic, are the governments of the West and the people they deserve (as a British writer a century ago reversed the well-known dictum of Joseph de Maistre), that the only stimulants left to awaken their satiated and dehumanized sensibilities are – as they are inured to violence, even on a mass scale – necrophilia and fiendish, ghoulish Grand Guignol. The lower tier of American culture, mass-market escapist entertainment, is consumed by a fascination with vampires, flesh-eating zombies and the like and graphic depictions of foreign leaders and former leaders being mauled and murdered are simply more lurid diversions for jaded ennuyés.

In reference to the murder of Gaddafi and his son Muatassim, the public display of their corpses and the sports enthusiast-like celebration of those gruesome acts by the likes of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Russian representative to NATO Dmitry Rogozin lambasted them as emblematic of sadistic triumphalism, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin denounced them as disgusting and Deputy Speaker of the State Duma Ivan Melnikov characterized the first as “a striking illustration of American and their NATO allies’ policy in the North-African country,” according to Interfax in the third instance.

They are in fact grotesque, in the sense that Hegel defined the word, as the idealization of the ugly.

In his own words, the last-cited Russian official warned: “I think that the entire world should watch today the published photographs and video records of Gaddafi’s murder. It is not just a dead former leader of Libya. It’s the symbol of the sovereignty of an independent country that was torn to pieces by Americans.”

The day after Gaddafi’s murder the same news agency cited another deputy of the lower house of parliament of the same, Communist, party, Vadim Solovyov, as affirming: “The American economy is in need of inexpensive oil, so the U.S. government is even ready to wage wars, if only oil arrives… Any country with large reserves of energy resources – Iran, Syria, Venezuela or Nigeria – could come next.”

NATO ground, air and naval forces continue their murderous rampages in Afghanistan, across the border into Pakistan, in Kosovska Mitrovica, in Libya and off the coast of Somalia in the Gulf of Aden and adjoining waters (where NATO killed the captain of a Taiwanese fishing vessel and wounded two Iranian fishermen in separate attacks earlier this year).

A Stop NATO feature in August provided an, admittedly incomplete, list of nations that NATO, actuated by its first Strategic Concept for the 21st century adopted at the bloc’s summit in Lisbon last November and its initial implementation in Libya this year, could attack or otherwise intervene in next: Algeria, Belarus, Bolivia, Central African Republic, Chad, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, Cyprus, Ecuador, Eritrea, Iran, Lebanon, Madagascar, Mali, Moldova-Transdniester, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Palestine, Somalia, the South Caucasus (Abkhazia, Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia), Sudan-South Sudan, Suriname, Syria, Uganda, Venezuela, Western Sahara, Yemen and Zimbabwe.

In the interim the Obama administration announced the deployment of special forces to four of the above nations and on the day of Gaddafi’s murder the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s subcommittee on African affairs, Senator Chris Coons, was reported by Associated Press as asserting that “Moammar Gadhafi’s death and the promise of a new Libyan regime are arguments for the measured U.S. military response in central Africa where the U.S. has sent roughly 100 troops” to Uganda, Congo, the Central African Republic and South Sudan.

That the nations of the world require almost daily assurances, however untrustworthy, that they will not be attacked by the mightiest multinational military formation in history is an indictment of the age that submits to living under such ongoing and ubiquitous threats. The time is ripe and in fact long overdue for issuing a call for an international anti-NATO initiative addressed to individuals, organizations, political parties and governments to convene an extraordinary session of the United Nations General Assembly to demand the disbanding of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as a – as the gravest – threat to world peace.

Posted in LibyaComments Off on Sole Military Super-Bloc: NATO Issues Daily Reprieves To The World

Washington’s Man in Libya

From: Mathaba













Stephen Lendman (photo): “After ousting independent leaders, Washington replaces them with puppets. Mustafa Abdul Jalil is interim chairman. Until October 23, Mahmoud Jibril was prime minister.”

by Stephen Lendman

Abdurraheem el-Keib replaced Mahmoud Jalil. Keib is a dual US/Libyan citizen. He lived in America, holds a doctorate in electrical engineering, and taught at North Carolina State University and the University of Alabama for years.

A businessman and prominent Tripoli family scion, he also taught at the UAE’s Petroleum Institute. Big Oil giants fund it.

He played no part in the conflict. Last August, Washington parachuted him in as their man. Past puppet rulers were installed the same way.

After WW II, Syngman Rhee came in from Hawaii to run South Korea. In 1955, Ngo Dinh Diem became South Vietnam’s president the same way, brought in from New Jersey.

In February 2004, after US marines ousted Haiti’s Jean-Bertrand Aristide, south Florida’s Gerard Latortue was anointed interim prime minister. Ordinary people had no say each time.

Keib’s not only Washington’s man, he’s Big Oil’s man, chosen to assure they control Libya’s oil, gas and whatever else they want. Forget about sovereign rights. Only imperial and corporate ones matter.

It’s the American way, also the British, French, Italian, German and Canadian, wanting their share of war spoils.

Libya’s puppet Transitional National Council (TNC) “elected” Keib. Some election, about as legitimate as America’s money controlled ones. They’re all theater, not democracy. Corporatists win every time. Voters are entirely left out.

Keib will choose puppet cabinet ministers and be Washington’s man until something called “elections” next year, or maybe the year after if postponed. It hardly matters. Democracy’s not on the ballot.

Keib’s interim government will form a constitutional counsel to replace Gaddafi’s Green Book direct democracy with Western-style power. It’ll be written to serve monied interests. Libyans will have no say.

NATO’s “successful mission” slaughtered tens of thousands, ravaged the country, and replaced a people’s regime with imperial rogues. Jamahiriya loyalists won’t tolerate them. Expect protracted conflict for years.

Rebel rats want their own power centers and spoils. Insurgent leader Anwar Fekini told The New York Times:

“We are the ones who are holding the power – the people with the force on the ground – and we are not going to give that up until we have a legitimate government that will emerge from free and fair elections.”

“(W)e will use all available means,” he added, “first of all our might on the ground.”

According to The Times:

Rebel leaders already expressed resolve “to step into the political process.” Anonymous Misrata ones threatened to intercede for their demands. Ongoing clashes suggest continuing power struggles. Practically everyone in Libya is armed to do it.

NATO created a violent, unstable environment to justify becoming paramilitary occupiers. Entire cities were destroyed. Sirte is now a ghost town. Tawergha’s 30,000 population was terrorized and displaced. Others also died. Reports are it’s burned to the ground or still burning.

Ravaged Libya will take years to rebuild. Much will stay undone. People needs will be unmet. Imperial interests only will be addressed. That’s what pillaging is all about. Massacres will continue like sport. NATO-style liberation revels in them.

It will have Libya enter a “Mediterranean Alliance.” African unity will be weakened. Resources won’t be nationalized. Plunder instead is planned. Everything achieved under Gaddafi is gone. Libyans retain nothing but their spirit to fight on. Tribal leaders vow to join them.

Jamahiriya spokesman Moussa Ibrahim announced an alliance being formed. United Leaders of All Tribes are preparing a “Document of Honor,” a declaration of unity and solidarity against imperial invaders.

Resistance will formalize and spread. Fighting continues across Libya, including inside Tripoli, as well as at the international and military airports. Other battles raged in Bani Walid, Gheryan, and elsewhere. Only southern and central Libya remain calm in Jamahiriya hands. Al Qaeda elements now control Benghazi, but territory shifts back and forth so front lines can change day to day.

NATO waged war with proxy killers. From early 2011 through end of October, media scoundrels called them freedom fighters. Language now is changing them into terrorists.

Occupying forces will come from 13 countries, including America, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Qatar, and others. One or more US super-bases will be built to launch new wars. Israel wants its own to target enemies and work jointly with Washington.

On October 27, Security Council Resolution 2016 passed unanimously. No-fly zone prohibitions ended. Orwellian language “(w)elcome(d) the positive developments in Libya which will improve the prospects for a democratic, peaceful and prosperous future there.”

The UN Secretary-General was “notified….to take all necessary measures….to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack….”

In other words, Resolution 2016 lets NATO keep control. Blue Helmet paramilitary occupiers are coming. Libya’s now a Western colony. Plunder and exploitation are planned. Protracted conflict is assured.

Human misery grows daily. So do body count numbers. Already they top 100,000. Perhaps five-fold that number were injured, some seriously, others permanently maimed.

NATO’s “responsibility to protect” served its interests only. Millions of suffering Libyans lost everything. The stench of death is everywhere. A once peaceful, prosperous country no longer exists. A ravaged charnel house replaced it.

NATO plans replicating its model globally. Without opposition, what’s to stop imperial ravaging one country at a time.

Only people power can. They must fill the void. Libyans are committed. Jamahiriya loyalists are “everywhere.” Saif al-Islam Gaddafi vows to fight on. Reports about his surrender plans were bogus.

“Bani Walid is under Libyan control after heavy fighting inside and around the city. Fighting continues in Zawaya,” Tripoli, Tobruk, and elsewhere. Jamahiriya loyalists are reorganizing to keep struggling.

NATO’s official mission ended. Theirs just began “and will become part of a larger war (for) Africa against the colonial ambitions of the Anglo-America Empire.”

The more it rampages, the more it’s reviled, the more resistance grows against it. Don’t bet against it longer term.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at

Also visit his blog site at and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening. #

Posted in LibyaComments Off on Washington’s Man in Libya

Washington Wants Its Imperial Model Replicated in Libya

From: Mathaba

Stephen Lendman: “Washington ran NATO’s imperial war against Libya to colonize, occupy and plunder another vassal state. Democracy and humanitarian considerations are non-starters. Only wealth and power matters.”

by Stephen Lendman

Libyans will be ruthlessly exploited. Decades of vital social gains are lost. NATO, the American-European military alliance turned Libya into a charnel house. Tens of thousands of corpses bear testimony.

Major media scoundrels lied about war objectives from inception. Now they cheer-lead ravaged Libya’s success. Correspondents there see one thing and report another. They make pimps, prostitutes and dope peddlers look respectable in comparison.

Peaceful nonbelligerent Libya was ravaged, raped, and devastated. Many thousands became homeless refugees.

Impoverishment and misery afflicts them. Kosovars, Iraqis, Afghans, and others know it’s coming wherever NATO shows up. Only sustained liberating struggles can change things. Libyans are committed for the long haul to achieve it.

On October 30, Mathaba headlined, Libyan Freedom Fighters vow to fight on against NATO and its rebels,” saying:

NATO’s “war is far from over.” In fact, it just began. In Tripoli, Bani Walid, and other cities, Libyans are committed to live free and restore direct democratic Jamahiriya government.

“Enraged by the acts of retribution by the NATO-rebels, tribesmen say their men are already trying to regroup into a new insurgency movement in and around the strategic desert” area south of Tripoli.

“The Warfalla men of Tripoli and elsewhere are sending around text messages, saying:”

“We need to gather and do something about this. Let’s gather! Let’s gather!”

Home-based in Bani Walid, Warfalla’s Libya’s largest tribe and most influential with around one-sixth of the population. Their members are everywhere across the country. They reject NATO colonization, occupation, plunder and enslavement.

Like Sirte, Bani Walid was ravaged. Both cities resemble ghost towns after thousands fled NATO terror bombing and indiscriminate rebel rat shelling. However, people are slowly returning, “only to discover that many family homes had been ruined. There is still no water and electricity.”

Angry tribesmen vow to fight back to the death. On October 29, Mathabadiscussed what they lost headlining, 16 Things Libya Will Never See Under NATO-Rebel Regime,” listing benefits Gaddafi provided, including:

•    government-supplied electricity, water, and practically free gasoline;

•    interest-free loans from Libya’s state-owned bank;

•    housing as a human right for everyone;

•    newlyweds given $50,000 for their first apartment to help start family life;

•    free education and healthcare;

•    literacy raised from 25% in 1969 to 83% – higher than in America;

•    farmers given free land, equipment, seeds and livestock;

•    state subsidies to study abroad and receive specialized medical treatment if not available at home;

•    half the cost of new car purchases;

•    gasoline at $0.14 per liter;

•    no state debt or banker occupation;

•    average professional salaries paid graduates unable to find employment in their fields until finding jobs;

•    sharing a portion of Libya’s oil wealth with everyone, credited to personal bank accounts;

•    mothers giving birth given $5,000;

•    subsidized food, including 40 loaves of bread for $0.15;

•    one-fourth of Libyans are college graduates; and

•    Gaddafi’s Great Man-Made River system made the desert bloom to supply water to households and for agriculture.

Thanks to NATO, it’s all gone. Libyans lost everything, many of them their lives, other lost loved ones. Their liberating struggle’s committed to regain all they can. They’ll never accept NATO depravity. They’ll live again free or die.

Transitional National Council (TNC) leaders are “increasingly coming under diplomatic pressure. Both the Pan African Parliament and the African Union” want an “all inclusive” government formed. Infighting, however, prevents inclusiveness. For example, Misrata rebel rats refuse to turn in weapons to Libya’s new Ministry of Defense.

NATO’s war falls far short of successful. Jamahiriya loyalists attacked Tripoli’s international airport. Heavy fighting shattered calm across the city. Resistance in other areas continues. Major media reports suppress it, falsely claiming NATO won.

Nonetheless, territory shifts back and forth repeatedly. Urban warfare “changes from one minute to the other.” However, “resistance is reportedly strong.”

NATO claims Operation Unified Protector ends 23.59PM October 31. Its campaign came to Libya to stay, not leave. Only its name will change.

Libya’s liberating struggle didn’t end. It just began. Saif al-Islam Gaddafi vows to lead it. Reports about surrendering to International Criminal Court (ICC) imperial control are misguided and false.

Stay tuned. More updates will follow.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at

Also visit his blog site at and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening. #

Posted in LibyaComments Off on Washington Wants Its Imperial Model Replicated in Libya

Journalists held in Zio-Nazi camp

It seems that at least one of Kit and Jihan, and probably both, is still in Israeli detention. This AFP story was filed minutes ago. My understanding is that among the journalists, Jihan and Hassan refused to sign the deportation order. 

A group of 21 activists who tried to sail to Gaza in breach of an Israeli blockade of the territory remain in Israeli custody, pending legal proceedings, the interior ministry said on Sunday. 

“There are 21 passengers detained who refused to be expelled immediately and are engaged in proceedings against their deportation before an Israeli judge,” interior ministry spokeswoman Sabine Haddad told AFP. 

“Only after these proceedings are complete… can they be deported,” she said. The 21 activists were among 27 passengers and crew aboard two ships intercepted by the Israeli navy as they tried to run the blockade of the Gaza Strip. 

Israeli commandos boarded the Irish-flagged Saoirse (Freedom) and the Canadian ship Tahrir (Liberation) in international waters off Gaza on Friday before the navy escorted them to the port of Ashdod, the Israeli military said. 

On Saturday, Israel freed six of the passengers — an Arab-Israeli, two Greek crewmen, and three journalists from Egypt, Spain and the United States. 

She said the remaining 21 people were still being held at a detention facility in Ramla near Tel Aviv, after questioning by immigration authorities. 

Those still in Israeli detention are from Australia, Britain, Canada, Ireland and the United States. 

The attempt to sail to Gaza was the latest in a string of activist missions aimed at breaching Israel’s blockade of the territory. 

In May 2010, six ships led by the Turkish Mavi Marmara tried to reach the coastal strip, but were intercepted by Israeli commandos, who stormed the boats, killing nine Turkish activists and sparking a diplomatic crisis with Ankara. 

Earlier this year, a second flotilla tried to reach Gaza, but several ships were sabotaged — which activists blamed on Israel — and the one boat that made the sailing was intercepted before it could reach Gaza. 

Israel says its blockade is necessary to prevent weapons from entering the coastal territory, which is run by the Islamist Hamas movement. Two months ago, a UN report on the 2010 flotilla raid accused the Jewish state of acting with “excessive force” but found that its naval blockade of Gaza was legal. 

Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy

Posted in Human RightsComments Off on Journalists held in Zio-Nazi camp



Introduction by Gilad Atzmon: The following is a brave attempt to locate my criticism of Jewish identity politics and the Israeli Lobby at the heart of contemporary political discourse. Shabana Syed, wrote a very courageous article.

Shabana Syed for

“…it’s also obvious to every person who reads me that there is not a drop of racism, bigotry or anti Semitism in any of my writing.” – Gilad Atzmon

Gilad Atzmon


(LONDON) – Gilad Atzmon the famous ex Israeli musician, philosopher writer whose new book “The Wandering Who?” has caused fury amongst pro Israel groups is no stranger to controversy; a few months ago he caused a stir when Sheikh Raed Salah a respected figure amongst Arab Israelis visited the UK and was arrested for no other reason except that the Israel lobby in Britain demanded it, Atzmon wrote: “Welcome to the United Jewish Kingdom”.

His words may have astonished a few but were prophetic, considering the current political and economic climate against a background of the power of pro Israel lobbies in Britain and America.

AIPAC’s control of American Congress is well known; America is suffering one the worst economic crisis, yet Congress has voted to continue the 3 billion aids package to Israel.

When Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu stood in Congress in May to say that Israel will never go back to the 1967 borders, he received 29 standing ovations and according to ABC’s Jonathan Karl, “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech before a joint meeting of congress had all trappings of a State of the Union address by a president with sky-high approval ratings.”

Instead of dealing with constituents who are facing economic disaster 81 Congress members took a free all expenses paid holiday to Israel this year. Alison Weir founder of “If Americans Knew” wrote: “This is an extraordinary situation. No other lobby on behalf of a foreign country comes anywhere near to controlling such wealth or taking so many of America’s elected representatives on a propaganda trip to their favorite country.”

The power of the pro Israel groups is Britain is not so visible as political commentator Peter Oborne attempted to reveal in a Dispatches documentary “Inside Britain’s Pro Israel Lobby”.

A report by Rajeev Syal in The Observer stated that Britain’s most active pro-Israeli propaganda organisation Bicom “which flies journalists to Israel on fact-finding trips and organises access to senior government figures – has received nearly £1.4m in two years from a billionaire donor whose father made a fortune manufacturing arms in Israel.” It was also revealed that the billionaire was the pro Israeli Poju Zabludowicz.

In Britain any criticism of Israel is muzzled and suppressed through howls of “anti Semitism”. The BBC has already been caught many times propagating the hasbara propaganda; when Israeli commandos attacked the Mavi Mara in international waters killing 9 Turkish peace activists the BBC’s Panorama programme on the subject was slated by many for its pro Israel biased approach.

Atzmon’s book aptly named “The Wandering Who?” looks at these powerful lobbies and examines Jewish identity politics and the Jewish Diaspora’s relationship with Israel”. The book has caused a similar stir as Salman Rushdie’s ‘Satanic Verses’, only this time around it is not a “bunch of bearded Muslim extremists against free speech”, but rather the most powerful and richest controlling group, therefore the media has ignored ‘calls for a book burning’.

Atzmon is the subject of a vicious smear campaign which hasn’t hindered or subdued him, he is one of a few writers who breaks the norms and political taboos and ‘says it like it is’. He neither tip toes or sugar coats the facts even though as he puts it “you will have to face an orchestrated smear campaign, you will be then called ‘anti Semite,’ a ‘new historian’ and even a ‘holocaust denier”.

It has been easy for pro Israel supporters to stifle and suppress critical discourse against Israel, however in the case of Gilad Atzmon their attempts to silence him is causing them a massive problem, as the terms used to silence most critics won’t stick on Atzmon. How can one call Atzmon who was born a Jew and brought up in Israel, served in the Israeli army, had a relative who died in the holocaust, “anti Semitic or racist?”

According to ‘The Community Security Trust’ which monitors anti Semitism and was also one of the pressure groups that was behind Teresa May arresting Sheikh Salah, the book is “utterly contemporary cultural racism”.

Another critic Ben Cohen in New York Jewish Week argues that Atzmon is an anti Semite who “traffics in anti Semitic tropes – for example describing the “credit crunch as a ‘Ziopunch’, or declaring that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is an accurate reflection of the global power of American Jews..”

Atzmon who lives in Britain is not only famous for his music but also one of the most prominent advocates of Palestinian rights, his life philosophy stems not from any form of ‘tribalism’ but from a deep belief in humanity. His book has received critical acclaim and been endorsed by prominent academics like Professor John Falk, Professor John J Mearsheimer and Professor William A Cook.

Mearsheimer has also been the subject of a smear campaign after he endorsed Atzmon’s book as ‘Essential to an understanding of Jewish identity politics and the role they play on the world stage.’

Defending his book Atzmon writes “it’s also obvious to every person who reads me that there is not a drop of racism, bigotry or anti Semitism in any of my writing. In my entire writing career I have never criticized Jews as people, ethnicity or race. Nor do I criticise Judaism. What I do is to scrutinize Jewish ideology and culture and I argue that if Israel defines itself as the ‘Jewish State’ and drops bombs on civilians from airplanes decorated with Jewish symbols, then it is our moral duty to question what this ‘Jewishness’ is all about.”

He also examines the baffling question of “what it is that leads Diaspora Jews to identify themselves with Israel and affiliate with its politics.”

The book also explains the workings of Zionist groups and the Machiavellian methods used to acquire power and control, and if we examine the recent political scandals that have been unfolding, the picture becomes clearer.

The ‘Phone hacking Scandal’ earlier this year revealed to what extent Murdoch, who is aligned to the powerful Jewish lobbies in UK and US, controlled the British political establishment. Gordon Duff Senior editor at Veterans Today wrote: “Who is Rupert Murdoch, though born in Australia is an Israeli citizen and Jewish. Why is this important? Murdoch is now admitted to have controlled the political systems in Britain and America for two decades. He has had the power to choose national leaders, make policy, and pass laws at will.”

It was said that he was the 24th member of the British Cabinet encouraging the then Prime Minister Tony Blair to invade Iraq. He was heavily involved in dictating the policies he expected from David Cameron for his electoral support, and when the scandal was exposed, Cameron had to answer many questions one of them being, why he had employed as director of communications Andy Coulson who had been part of Murdoch’s News International Corporation. The scandal also led to the resignation of two top terrorism police officers.

The recent scandal involved Liam Fox the British Defense Secretary and his companion Adam Werrity, who with no official capacity had accompanied Fox on Official government business as his adviser. It was also revealed that Fox and Werrity had been funded by the Israeli lobby and of course Poju Zabludowicz the billionaire behind Bicom.

It is also interesting to note that Netanyahu and Ehud Barak believe the biggest threat to world peace is Iran, and Fox and Werrity’s agenda had been to push for conflict with Iran.

Fox is just one of the many British MP’s who along with nearly the whole of the British Cabinet and are the ‘Israel first brigade.’ Atzmon affirms “ with 80% of our leading party’s MP’s being Conservative Friends Of Israel’s (CFI) members, we have good reason to believe that treachery is now institutional amongst UK elected politicians.”

Craig Murray, former Ambassador and Human rights activist in the Daily mail warns:

“By working closely with an unofficial aide with extraordinary access but no security vetting and murky funding sources, Fox had potentially compromised national security…..Let us hope that Fox’s fall will remind future Defense Secretaries that there is only one country whose interests they should seek to defend – and that is this one.”

The current political scenario may explain why this government imprisoned Palestinian activist Sheikh Salah for no particular reason and took an unprecedented step to quickly amend Britain’s Universal Jurisdiction law so that Israeli war criminals who committed crimes against humanity in the 2006 Gaza war will not face arrest when they visit Britain.

Also it may explain why when it came to security at London Olympics 2012 Cameron has pushed aside Britain’s capable M15 and bought in Israel’s Mossad to train British operatives a fact that was revealed in Israel’s Daily YNet in May this year

If we look at Atzmon’s statement “Welcome to United Jewish Kingdom” against the background of all the facts surfacing and the contents of his book, maybe it is not an illusion when you enter Britain and see the Olympics 2012 logo proudly displayed and yes you will be forgiven if for a moment you think it spells “Zion”.


  The Wandering Who on  or




 Gilad Atzmon’s transformation from a typical Jewish Israeli kid to someone who began questioning the Israeli narrative began when he heard Charlie (“Bird”) Parker with Strings on a late night jazz program. “I was totally knocked down. The music was more organic, poetic, sentimental and wilder than anything I had ever heard before.” Parker was the beginning of Atzmon’s journey away from being a believer in the Zionist ideology and his “chauvinist, exclusivist tribe” to being one of its staunchest critics.

What completed the change in his life was a visit to Ansar as a young Israeli soldier. Ansar was “a notorious Israeli internment camp in South Lebanon” in 1981 during the first Israel-Lebanon war. “I studied the detainees,” he writes; “They looked very different to the Palestinians in Jerusalem. The ones I saw in Ansar were angry. They were not defeated, they were freedom fighters and they were numerous. As we continued past the barbed wire I continued gazing at the inmates, and arrived at an unbearable truth: I was walking on the other side, in Israeli military uniform, and I was nothing but a ‘Nazi’.” (page 6)

What a shocker for this grandson of a former prominent commander in the right-wing Irgun terror organization, raised on the notion of Jewish righteousness and Arab duplicity, to finally awaken to the truth about his country. “At the time of the Oslo Accords in 1993, I just couldn’t take it anymore. I saw that Israeli ‘peacemaking’ was nothing but spin. Its purpose … was to further secure the existence of the Jewish State at the expense of the Palestinians. For most Israelis, shalom doesn’t mean ‘peace’, it means security, and for Jews only.” Moving to London, he began work on a Master’s Degree in philosophy at the University of Essex, began his career as a jazz musician, and began digging deeply into modern Israel’s character for answers to his questions about its origins, its inhuman treatment of Palestine’s Arabs, and its contemptuous regard for international law.

Central to Atzmon’s discourse is a discussion of what the word “Jew” stands for, a question that seems to him to be “taboo within Western discourse”. It is clear why. Begin to ask the question, and you are likely to get yourself accused of being an anti-Semite. And this is exactly what has happened to Atzmon. Though he presents a harsh criticism of Jewish politics and identity, there is not “a single reference to Jews as ethnicity or race” anywhere in the book. “In my writing, I differentiate between Jews (the people), Judaism (the religion) and Jewish-ness (The ideology).” If you’re “searching for blood or race-related interpretation of Zionism (you) will have to look for it in someone else’s book.” It certainly is not present here.

In Chapter One, Atzmon asks two simple-but-significant questions: Who are the Jews, and what do people mean who call themselves Jews? (page 16). “As far as self-perception (my emphasis) is concerned, those who call themselves Jews (can) be divided into three main categories: (1) Those who follow Judaism; (2) Those who regard themselves as human beings who happen to be of Jewish origin; and (3) Those who put their Jewish-ness over and above all other traits” (page 16).

Atzmon points out that it is this third category that is the core of Zionist ideology and the major cause of modern Israel’s problems. “You may be a Jew who dwells in England, a Jew who plays the violin or even a Jew against Zionism, but above all else you are a Jew” (page 17). Jewish-ness is “the fundamental characteristic of one’s being,” that stops “the Jew from assimilating or disappearing into the crowd.” “The Jew would always remain an alien” (page 17), one of the Chosen Ones in a sea of goyim, a people who must have their own homeland in which they can dwell in peace.

It is from those who put their Jewish-ness before all else that Israel’s most enthusiastic supporters (like AIPAC, the America Israeli Public Affairs Committee) and spies (like Jonathan Pollard) come. In Israeli parlance, Jewish-ness is more than a tribal identifier, it is a political commitment (p. 20) that Atzmon calls “third category brotherhood” (p. 21). The Zionist movement’s greatest strength has been transforming “the Jewish tribal mode into a collective functioning system” (p. 21) that vigorously attacks all who stand in its way.

According to Zionist dogma, the Jews are the descendants of Israel’s original Jewish population exiled from their ancient homeland through conquest. But are they “one people”, the descendants of a common ancestor? Apparently not, as Israeli historian Shlomo Sand shows in his book The Invention of the Jewish People (Verso, 2009), a book that I have read and reviewed. As Atzmon explains on page 135, in the 19th century “intellectuals of Jewish origin in Germany … took upon themselves the task of inventing a people ‘retrospectively’ out of a thirst to create a Jewish people” (p. 135), thus creating a raison d’etre for the creation of the modern Jewish State.

Yet as Sand convincingly shows, the “Jewish people” are a conglomeration of peoples, the descendants of converts to Judaism, not an ancient people long separated from their homeland. What Atzmon does here with Sand’s help is pull the rug out from under the modern Jewish State by showing that the preamble to Israel’s Declaration of Independence — “After being forcibly exiled from their land, the people remained faithful to it throughout their Dispersion and never ceased to pray and hope for their return to it and for the restoration in it of their political freedom” — is based on “mythistory”, not fact. Little wonder why Atzmon’s book has created a loud outcry about Atzmon’s book from Israel’s most ardent supporters.

Gilad Atzmon wrote his book out of a desire to probe deeply into the country in which he was born and raised. It is also a journey of self-examination and awakening. Why does Israel act the way it does? Why has it always treated Palestine’s Arabs with such contempt? Why are its laws written to benefit only its Jewish citizens, relegating all others to second class citizenship? Why does it engage in acts that are commonly viewed as barbaric and reminiscent of the behavior’s of Hitler’s SS and Gestapo? Why does it view itself as always needing security while denying the Palestinian people and its Arab neighbors that right? Why is it so blind to the reaction its behaviors cause?

Atzmon’s discovery and questioning reminds me of my own awakening when, back in the summer of 1954, my best friend Claude explained to me what it meant to grow up African-American (the term used back then was American Negro) in my home town Seattle, Washington. I was devastated. It still brings tears to my eyes. How could anyone treat my friend like that — so damage his feeling of self-worth and value? How could I be so totally unaware this was happening to people in my home town? The experience was transformational, totally changing my thinking on the subject of race.

The Wandering Who? is a valuable contribution to understanding how tribalistic thinking leads to narrow-mindedness and barbarism. Is his book controversial? Of course. A book that asks the kinds of questions Atzmon asks about Israel and its behavior is automatically labeled controversial by Israel’s apologists. Reading them is like listening to a group of abusive men loudly proclaim their innocence by finger-pointing at their accusers. I’m much more apt to listen to their accusers than I would if they’d shut up. But they don’t. A recent rant by Alan Dershowitz is a wonderful example of what I mean:  .

If you’re looking for a good book about Israel and its modern history, I highly recommendThe Wandering Who? It’s a solid 5-Star book.


  The Wandering Who on  or


This Is How Israel Runs The British Press


Introduction by Gilad Atzmon:

The following is a glimpse into the Israeli Hasbara’s/Mossad’s/Sayanim’s operation in the UK. It explains how Israel and its agents manage to dominate  news coverage in Britain and beyond. It seems from the following leaked email as if BICOM (British Israel Communication & research Centre) runs the News desk for the BBC, Sky and the FT. I guess that last week the Guardian also joined the party. It is now  an offical Israeli propaganda outlet.

Shockingly enough, not a single British paper was brave enough to report the story or publish the leaked email. Surely they know who their masters are. The message is pretty clear. British press is not trustworthy. It is as  Zionised as our political system.

Bicom ’embarrassed’ by misdirected email


There were red faces at Bicom this week when an email from its
director intended for donors was in fact sent to the organisation’s
media database.

The email, sent by Lorna Fitzsimons, the director of the organisation,
“dedicated to creating a more supportive environment for Israel in
Britain”, stated: “Throughout the weekend, Bicom staff were in contact
with a whole host of BBC and Sky news desks and journalists, ensuring
that the most objectively favourable line was taken, and offering
talking heads, relevant to the stories unfolding.”

She added: “Bicom has one of BBC News’ key anchors on a bespoke
. When planning her very first trip to the region, Sophie
Long got in touch with Bicom to see if we could help her out with
meeting in the region. Sophie is now spending three days of her trip
with Bicom Israel, taking a tour around the Old City, meeting [Israeli
government spokesman] Mark Regev…as well as visiting Ramallah and

Most embarrassing, however, was the revelation that Fitzsimons – a
former NUS president and Labour MP for Rochdale – had “briefed
Jonathan Ford, the Financial Times leader writer for his upcoming
leading article” in the paper.

She noted Bicom had “regular contact with the Editor at Large of
Prospect Magazine, David Goodhart, helping to inform him about the
forthcoming UN vote on Palestinian statehood”.

A Bicom spokesman told the Jewish News that this “administrative
error” was “slightly embarrassing”. He stressed that Fitzsimons had
not been “asked to resign or had offered her resignation”.

—–Original Message—–
Lorna Fitzsimons []
Mon 12/09/2011 16:44

BICOM’s rapid response to events over the weekend and continuing work
on September and the UN

Please find the correct analysis attached.

I thought you would be interested to hear of BICOM’s response to
events overthe weekend in Egypt as well as ongoing issues in the

Events over the weekend

* Over the weekend, BICOM’s rapid response to the unfolding events in
Egypt included distributing our analysis on Egyptian/Israeli relations
to key UKMedia contacts, generated extremely favourable responses.
Attached here is the link to today’s analysis on this subject.

BICOM Analysis: Israel-Turkey relations after the Palmer Report–israel-turkey-relations-after-the-palmer-report
which details the events that took place, their aftermath and
associated implications. In particular, the briefing examines the
explanations for hostilities between Israel and Egypt, and the
responses to the events in Israel, Egypt and internationally.

Throughout the weekend, BICOM staff were in contact with a whole
host of BBC and SKY news desks and journalists, ensuring that the most
objectively favourable line was taken, and offering talking heads,
relevant to the stories unfoldingBICOM’s Senior Analyst Dr. Noam
Leshem, briefed the BBC World News Editorial Board on Saturday
afternoon regarding the fall-out fromthe Israel Egyptian Embassy
siege. After contact with the BICOM Media Team,SKY News changed their
narrative in explaining the prior events in the region which lead up
to this weekend, eventually acknowledging that both Egyptians AND
Israelis were killed in Sinai a fortnight ago.

This Week

* BICOM has one of BBC News’ key anchors on a bespoke
delegation. When planning her very first trip to the region, Sophie
Long got in touch with BICOM to see if we could help her out with
meeting in the region. Sophie is now spending three days of her trip
with BICOM Israel, taking a tour around the Old City, meeting Mark
Regev and Dr. Alex Yacobsen, as well as visiting Ramallah and Sderot.

* My second article for the Huffington Post UK entitled ‘How to make
the next9/11 less likely: myth busting and truth telling,’ will be
published today.It is a timely response, synthesising the messages
which can be taken from 9/11 with the current, unnerving events
unfolding between Egypt and Israel. The American version of the
Huffington Post has 1.2 million readers in the UK,and 38 million in
the U.S.

September & the UN

* I briefed Jonathan Ford, the Financial Times leader writer for his
upcoming leading article in tomorrow’s paper.

* BICOM had regular contact with the Editor at Large of Prospect
Magazine,David Goodhart, helping to inform him about the forthcoming
UN vote on Palestinian statehood. The uniquely tailored BICOM
Spotlight -
has the most up to date news, as well as BICOM analyses and podcasts
on the Palestinian drive to the UN.

I hope you find this of interest. Yours, Lorna

Background Sophie Long:-

Sophie Long is one of the main presenters on the BBC News Channel.

She has covered many big stories and can regularly be found anchoring
the channel’s output on location.

During the last General Election she was on the road with Nick Clegg
in that extraordinary campaign. Her coverage was acclaimed for its wit
and insight.

She regularly presents bulletins on BBC1.

After graduating from King’s College London with a degree in War
Studies, Sophie travelled extensively, including a period working as
an election monitor in Cambodia. It was there whilst working as a
researcher for Reuters she crystallised her ambition to pursue a
career in the media.

The BBC of course are impartial. They say so themselves.

The Agreement accompanying the BBC Charter requires us to do all we
can to ensure controversial subjects are treated with due impartiality
in our news and other output dealing with matters of public policy or
political or industrial controversy. But we go further than that,
applying due impartiality to all subjects.


  If you really want to understand it all, The Wandering Who is your book –  or

Posted in CampaignsComments Off on This Is How Israel Runs The British Press

Zio-Nazi Hijacking of Freedom Wave flotilla “Violent and Dangerous”, Activists beaten.


Irish Ship to Gaza Coordinator Dr Fintan Lane was able to make a phone call Sunday 6th Nov afternoon from the ‘Israeli’ prison in which he and 13 other Irish citizens are being held. He communicated the following to the Irish Ship to Gaza team in Dublin:

“The takeover of the MV Saoirse was violent and dangerous. Despite very clear protests from the occupants of the two boats that they did not want to be taken to Israel, they were forcibly removed from the boats in a violent manner. The whole takeover took about three hours. It began with Israeli forces hosing down the boats with high pressure hoses and pointing guns at the passengers through the windows. I was hosed down the stairs of the boat. Windows were smashed and the bridge of the boat nearly caught fire.

The boats were corralled to such an extent that the two boats, the Saoirse and the Tahrir, collided with each other and were damaged, with most of the damage happening to the MV Saoirse. The boats nearly sank. The method used in the takeover was dangerous to human life. The Israeli forces initially wanted to leave the boats at sea, but the abductees demanded that they not be left to float at sea, for they would have been lost and possibly sunk. All belongings of the passengers and crew were taken from them and they still do not know if and what they will get back. The 14 Irish citizens remain in Givon prison.’

The phone call was very rushed and ended abruptly with Fintan saying, “I have to go.” Claudia Saba, spokesperson for Irish Ship to Gaza, who received the call from Lane, said: “The account received from Fintan Lane flatly contradicts the Israeli narrative that Israel ‘took every precaution necessary to ensure the safety of the activists on board the vessels’. It is a small miracle that no one was seriously injured during this obviously very violent boarding of the Freedom Waves boats.” Irish Ship to Gaza spokesperson Laurence Davis added: “This account confirms our fear that the hijacking of the boats was very violent, and explains the time lag between the point at which we lost contact with the boats on Wednesday at 11:12 am (Irish time) and news of the passengers’ arrival at Ashdod not before 5pm.”

In an interview he gave to, Greek captain of the Tahrir Giorgos Klontzas has confirmed the use of violence on him by Israeli soldiers during his interrogation.

The last direct contact that Palestine Aid Received from Trevor Hogan their delegate (aboard the Irish boat Saoirse) is this text message, received at 10:08 PM Nov 3, 2011 Palestinian time “Kidnapped, being held against our will by Israeli Army in international waters. Boat nearly destroyed. Need government to press for immediate release.” Trevor then called girlfriend moments later and said, “Did you get the text? Send it out.” Then the phone line went dead.

Majd Kayal, delegate aboard the captured Canada Boat to Gaza and recently released from Givon Prison, confirms the IOF’s “peaceful” take-over of the Tahrir was anything but peaceful. An ‘IDF’ video clearly shows the ‘Israeli’ military firing a water cannon at the Tahrir on rough seas, endangering the lives of those aboard. Delegates offering non-violent resistance to the takeover of the civilian ship in international waters were threatened and then beaten by soldiers. One delegate, 45-year-old David Heap, professor at the University of Western Ontario, was particularly badly beaten. ‘Israeli prison authorities are continuing to prevent Heap’s family from contacting him by phone.

“As a Palestinian, I was not surprised at how the IDF treated us,” said Kayal, after his release, noting this kind of abuse is a daily reality for the 1.5 million people of Gaza, who are indefinitely detained in an open-air prison. “However, for the Canadians and other Westerners on board, it was a complete shock.”

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Zio-Nazi Hijacking of Freedom Wave flotilla “Violent and Dangerous”, Activists beaten.

US lawmaker apologizes for “anti-Semitic” remark


by crescentandcross in Uncategorized 


ed note–there is an old saying, that ‘where there’s smoke, there’s fire’…If the Jews are so sensitive to things being said about them that allude to ‘stereotypes’ that have dogged them throughout history, perhaps then they should do a collective examination of conscience and see what THEY THEMSELVES have done to create this stereotype.

After all, it is perfectly permissable to portray Arabs as dark, swarthy, smelly, religious fanatics, Italians as criminally-inclined, Catholic priests as pedophiles, Germans as Nazis, and on and on and on, the justification being that there is a verifiable history of behavior on the part of these various peoples that has created this stereotype. WHY NOT FOR THE JEWS THEN, and this in an age of unprecedented Jewish-controlled Wall Street greed and chicanery?

Texas Republican Rep. Larry Taylor uses phrase ‘don’t Jew them down’ to describe insurance companies’ bargaining with claimants; later issues apology stating: ‘I regret my poor choice of words, sincerely apologize for any harm they may have caused’

A US lawmaker from Texas has apologized after making anti-Semitic comments at a hearing of the Joint Legislative Committee on Windstorm Insurance.

According to reports, Republican state representative Larry Taylor used the phrase “don’t try to Jew them down,” in reference to insurance payments for victims of the Katrina Hurricane. Immediately after making the comment, Taylor said “that’s probably a bad term.” He later apologized publicly.

In a letter written shortly after his remarks, Taylor wrote: “At a legislative oversight committee hearing today, I inadvertently used a phrase that many people find offensive. I corrected myself immediately when I realized what I had said. I regret my poor choice of words and sincerely apologize for any harm they may have caused.”

‘Age-old anti-Semitic stereotype’

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) slammed Taylor’s remarks, and sent him a stern letter in which it denounced the act.

Shortly after, Taylor issued another apology letter addressed to the pro-Israel organization, in which he stated: “Anti-Semitism and intolerance have no place in our society and in our government. I understand the impact of my comments and am deeply sorry for the message that was sent. I have a deep respect for the Jewish people and their history, and hope to work to strengthen that relationship in the future.”

ADL Southwest Region Associate Director Dena Marks responded to Taylor’s apology, noting that “Representative Taylor called us this morning and told us he made a mistake yesterday and did not mean to offend anyone. He also sent us a letter so that we would have his apology in writing.

“After our conversation with Representative Taylor, we believe he understands that the phrase ‘Jew them down’ comes from an age-old anti-Semitic stereotype, that he realizes it offends people, that he won’t use it again. We recognize and appreciate he took quick action to correct himself and apologize.”

Posted in USAComments Off on US lawmaker apologizes for “anti-Semitic” remark

IsraHell attack will unleash Iran’s wrath



Hossein Ebrahimi, a senior member of the Tehran’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, warned Saturday that Iran’s response to a possible attack by Israel will be “crushing.”

“Before (being able to take) any action against Iran, the Israelis will feel our wrath in Tel Aviv,” he told the State-run IRNA news agency.

Ebrahimi noted that “since the beginning of the Islamic Revolution, the US, UK and Israel have frequently threatened Iran… This is not a new development.”

Iran, he added, assessed Israel’s military capabilities during the Second Lebanon War, “and found it to be weak.”

“The Israelis entered the (Lebanon) war with the capabilities they had but earned nothing but humiliation,” Ebrahimi said. “I do not think that Israelis along with the Americans and Britons will commit such a folly.”

“If the threat is carried out they will see the political might of the (Islamic) establishment, the solidarity of the Iranian nation, and the strength of the country,” he added.

“The Iranian regime is insane,” a Tehran-based blogger told Ynet on Saturday.

Hamid (alias) said that Israel should, nevertheless, take the threats uttered by the Islamic Republic’s leaders seriously: “We are used to such threats… The Iranian people are not afraid – they have no reason to be. We know that if the Revolutionary Guards sense any real threat, they will launch world war three. Israel knows better than to want that.”

Hamid said that in the event of an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, Tehran’s army will immediately launch rockets at Israel, while its navy will attack US navy ships in the Persian Gulf.

The regime, he added, may also choose to fire rockets at Iraq, Afghanistan and even Europe. “The regime is insane – tell Mr. Netanyahu not to attack.”

Hamid ventured that any attack would only boost the Iranian people’s support of the ayatollah’s regime – which already enjoys a 70% approval rate.

Iran, he concluded, “should pursue nuclear technology only in order to be perceived as a (nuclear) power in the eyes of the West.”

Posted in IranComments Off on IsraHell attack will unleash Iran’s wrath

Shoah’s pages


November 2011
« Oct   Dec »