Archive | March 10th, 2012

Christian – Zionist Right Explained: Money from Above; Votes from Below


by Tom Valentine


The educational video “Roots of Christian Zionism” presented here, is illustrative of teaching by example. I wish fervently that this great education will go viral over the Internet.

It teaches me that my own bombast can never be effective in convincing others that they are obviously wrongheaded in their views. The calmer, Christian way is better, watch and see for yourself. Then be sure local pastors see it.

Charles Carlson is a quiet. mild-mannered gentleman who serves by example as he most thoroughly dissects the history of Zionism’s control of American Church goers—and their millions of lockstep votes.

I have ridiculed these otherwise normal Americans in my VT columns for the past year, and when I retired from Radio Free America after 16 years of broadcasts back in 2004, I first used “oxymoron” to define them. And I vowed to carry on a campaign against “Churchianity” which is no longer New Testament Jesus centered. Not long ago I literally called for popular support: Oxymorons – Take it Viral; Musicians and Sports Stars Needed.

Oxymoron is not a pleasant word, it is not respectful, and I have not intended it to be. I have no respect whatsoever for Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann or Rick Santorum all oxymoron war mongers.

I presume VT readers are largely aware that many of my columns during this past year have attacked the huge voting block of “Christian Zionists’ for their oxymoronic beliefs that propel us all into war, destruction and chaos—their twisted idea of end times.

Ooops, there I go again; never mind, pay attention to this video and see how a Christian deals with the diabolical problem of how Zionism conquered America’s potent Christian Majority with the power of money/media control.


The Roots of Christian Zionism: How Scofield Sowed Seeds of Apostasy


Posted in Campaigns, PoliticsComments Off on Christian – Zionist Right Explained: Money from Above; Votes from Below

The Great JFK Non-Debate: Jim Fetzer vs. Gary Mack


by Jim Fetzer


“Badge Man” as discovered by Gary Mack and Jack White

As those of us engaged in research on the death of JFK are well aware,Gary Mack has the position of Curator of The 6th Floor Museum in Dallas, which most of us regard as functioning as an apologist for the “official account” of Lee Oswald as the lone assassin of JFK. At one point in time, Gary Mark appeared to be a serious student of the assassination, who, in collaboration with legendary photo and film analyst, Jack White, discovered the image of shooter dressed as a Dallas policeman in one of the most famous photographs of the assassination, the Moorman Polaroid.The presence of this figure, who appears to have been captured at the moment he fired his shot, led to many students of the case forming an initially favorable impression of Gary Mack as a student of JFK.

He was even featured in Nigel Turner’s brilliant documentary series, “The Men Who Killed Kennedy”, where, in a segment released in 1988, Mack is quoted as observing,

We are not a free country anymore. Because the people that are smart enough and powerful enough to take out a President like that, and get away with it for 25 years, are probably involved in other areas of the Government. In other words, the country is being run by people we did not vote for.

Since he assumed the role of Curator, however, many other students of JFK have observed what has seemed to be his passage to “the dark side”, where Wim Dankbaar, for one, has summarized how many of us regard him today, where his mission, as well as that of his collaborators, appears to be to discredit all new and credible evidence for conspiracy. It was therefore fascinating that, during a thread initiated by an interview with K.D. Ruckman re the “Oswald in the doorway” debate on “The Real Deal” of 20 February has now been published:


K. D. Ruckman “JFK: More on Oswald in the Doorway”

Ralph Cinque engaged in an exchange with David Lifton, Gary Mark, David Healy, Jerry Dealey, Bernice Moore, John Costella, Jack White, David Mantik, and me, which would lead to my challenging Gary Mack to a public debate about the assassination of JFK.


Dr. Ralph Cinque
Mar 2 (4 days ago)

to dlifton, gmack, shake_aeffects, jerry, me, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik

KD Ruckman added the observation that besides the right collars matching, the notched t-shirts matching, and the left lapels matching, you’ll also notice that with the foldover on the left side of both that you see Oswald’s bulging about half-way down, whereas the bulge on Doorman’s seems to occur lower, close to the bottom. Keep in mind that in all of the images of Oswald in that shirt, it hangs a little differently each time. Every time Oswald shifted, the shirt shifted and hung a little different, and that’s just the way it was. So, this is still an excellent match, and it is perfectly consistent with the comparison of other images.

But notice also that the bottom vee, and I mean the vee formed by the exposed white t-shirt at the bottom of the shirt at the point where the outer shirt is finally buttoned, that the point of that vee looks the same on both. Not only is the look of it the same, but the location of it is exactly the same on both.


Not only is it highly unlikely that Lovelady would have left his shirt unbuttoned IN THE EXACT SAME MANNER AND TO THE SAME POINT AS OSWALD, but in none of the pictures we have of Lovelady was his shirt that unbuttoned. Just compare the unbuttonings of Doorman, Oswald, and then Lovelady. In no image is Lovelady’s shirt as unbuttoned.


Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 22:02:39 -0800
Subject: Re: Robert Groden Altgen’s photo
From: dlifton
To: GMack; shake_aeffects; jerry;
CC: bmoore1242; john.costella; jwjfk; dmantik; doctorcinque

To all:

I fully agree with Gary Mack on this issue. Also: I appreciate how much time it takes (and that he has taken) to engage in this sort of debate, and write these long and detailed emails, especially when the “evidence” is often what this or that person claims “to see” in a photo.

In these emails, Gary has laid out the evidence, and I think its rock solid.

FWIW: I concluded decades ago—circa 1973, when (while working as “researcher” on Executive Action) I first found the footage of Oswald being marched by Lovelady, at the Homicide and Robbery Bureau—that it was Oswald in the doorway. I shared that information, and the imagery, with Groden, who obviously pursued it further. Good for him!

So, FWIW: I do not agree at all with the arguments made by Cinque and Fetzer. I would characterize them as obscure, weak, and far-fetched—and very subjective.

So that’s my position: I’m positive it was Lovelady in the doorway.

Moreover: If Oswald was in the doorway (which, I must emphasize, I don’t believe at all, but if it were true. . ). . .others would have said he was there (and not weeks or months later, but immediately). Moreover, he certainly would have told his brother and his wife. But there’s no such evidence in the record. He said no such thing to his brother or his wie; and, as to the others in the stairway area, FBI agents were questioning all these people, within a very short while. If Oswald was actually standing on the stairs, word of that would have spread like wildfire.

Think about it: What better evidence for Oswald to possess—evidence easier to enunciate and promulgate—than the simple statement: “Of course I didn’t shoot Kennedy! I was standing outside watching the parade!” etc

But Oswald never made any such statement, and besides—for all the reasons enumerated by Gary, and so evident in the imagery—it was (in fact) not Oswald on the stairs of the TSBD. It was Billy Lovelady.

FWIW (and taking a broader view): I think this is a good example of the role coincidence plays in this event, because, if I was a plotter (and I do believe there was a serious plot that day) who would ever expect that someone would be standing in the doorway area who looked so similar, in a photograph, to the patsy who was being framed? That is really one helluva coincidence, and carries with it an important lesson as to the role coincidence can (and sometimes does) play.

So that’s my take on the situation.



Gary Mack:


I suggested to both Cinque and Fetzer, in a 1/30/2012 email, that they contact AP Images to obtain a copy of the photo from the camera original negative. An alternate source, I suggested, would be Robert Groden who had access to the original negative while employed by the HSCA as a consultant. Robert succeeded, where others on the committee photo panel failed, in making sufficiently clear blowups from the negative that made it obvious the man in the doorway was wearing the same shirt as the man in the other Dealey Plaza home movies and in the Homicide & Robbery Bureau office as filmed by WFAA-TV. Robert kept first generation copies of some of his work on the Altgens photo and he showed them to me some 30 years ago. There is no doubt whatsoever the man in the doorway is Billy Lovelady. I interviewed the man (and his wife) in 1979 and their coworker, Buell Frazier, says to this day that it was Billy Lovelady on the steps, not Oswald. The theory offered by Cinque and Fetzer was pounded into oblivion a long, long time ago.

Gary Mack

Mary Moorman’s JFK Polaroid

From: David Healy [mailto:shake_aeffects]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2012 2:14 PM
To: Jerry Dealey; ‘James Fetzer’; Gary Mack
Cc: bmoore1242; john.costella; jwjfk; dmantik; dlifton; ‘Dr. Ralph Cinque’
Subject: Re: Robert Groden Altgen’s photo

for a reasonable review of this image, what is needed, is this: a 1200dpi digital scan of the photos original negative, PERIOD! Then pass that around… Come on….wake Gorden up!


From: Jerry Dealey
To: ‘James Fetzer’; ‘Gary Mack’
Cc: bmoore1242; john.costella; jwjfk; dmantik; shake_aeffects; dlifton; ‘Dr. Ralph Cinque’
Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2012 11:28 AM
Subject: Robert Groden Altgen’s photo


Robert Groden loaned me his enlargement of the Altgens Doorway, for 3 weeks. It is a photographic blow-up, on Kodak paper, and he says it has not been modified by computer in any way.

I scanned it at 1200, and added a Watermark (per Robert’s request). Not sure it is any clearer than the Anthony Marsh scan, which was probably professionally scanned, instead of using my poor scanner.

But I said if I got him to give me one, I would provide it. He was hesitant, because his book is at press, and he spends a lot of time on the Oswald/Lovelady discussion. He originally also thought it was Oswald, but after studying the original negative and prints from it (which this is supposed to be), he agree it was Lovelady. He never believed in alteration, however.

Not that it will change anyone’s mind, if they have a bias to “alteration” theories. But I said I would forward it.

Jerry Dealey


James Fetzer
Mar 2 (4 days ago)

to Ralph, dlifton, gmack, shake_aeffects, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik


It is profoundly embarrassing that eminences such as Robert Groden and David Lifton would ignore the relevant evidence and side with Gary Mack in a case of this magnitude. Groden has not even been able to bring himself to acknowledge that the Zapruder film has been faked, which in my opinion undermines his standing as an expert on any issue of photography and film. Lifton has done great work on so many aspects of the case that his incompetence in this instance is inexcusable.

Gary Mack, of course, is the keeper of the flame when it comes to the official account of the assassination of JFK and, in my opinion, cannot be taken at face value on any issue of importance. I am adding this post only because you have heard from Gary and now from Lifton and Groden, at least indirectly. I commend you and DK for your brilliant contributions to this issue, which provides a stunning indictment of the government for its complicity in the assassination and cover-up.

Are these people completely aware of the discoveries of DK in relation to altering images of Billy Lovelady in order to create false impressions that he looked more like the man in the doorway, even to the extent of shortening his left arm in some of these photos? It seems to me that, if Groden, Lifton and Mack persevere in their denial of photographic fakery–which extends to the use of a Lovelady imposter in the doorway area–then their de facto complicity in this matter is beyond any doubt.

Keep up your excellent work! I look forward to future publications on this together.

Warm regards,



Gary Mack
Mar 2 (4 days ago)

to me, Ralph, dlifton, shake_aeffects, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik

Yes, Jim, you should be embarrassed. I am not.

Groden, Lifton and I are in agreement on some issues, probably more than we realize, and this is one of them.

I work with history, not theory, and neither you nor Ralph have offered any evidence that has or will change history. Nor do you have knowledge of what you don’t know…..and that is precisely why I will always be way, way ahead of you on your Lovelady theory.

Gary Mack

James Fetzer
Mar 2 (3 days ago)

to Gary, dlifton, shake_aeffects, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph


Your attempts to bamboozle the public are well-known and copiously documented. Consider, for example, the appendix to “Mary in the Street Revisited”,, where David Lifton called you out for stage-managing Mary Moorman’s attempts to show what she had done on 22 November 1963.

To suggest you and David are on the same team is as disingenuous as your efforts to undermine stunning new research that establishes–beyond a reasonable doubt, in my view, since no alternative explanation is reasonable–that Lee was in the doorway at the time of the assassination. But what else should we expect?




Madeleine Blows the Whistle on LBJ


Gary Mack
2:33 PM (17 hours ago)

to me, dlifton, shake_aeffects, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Au contraire, Jim, my personal research efforts – since the infamous Roscoe White nonsense in 1990 – have included helping keep the public from being bamboozled by bogus conspiracy tales.

Oswald in the doorway is one such theory that makes return visits now and then when newbies latch onto them without having done any real research, then ignoring the evidence that shows the story to be false. I watch for what they do with the information I pass along and note whether they follow it or not. That’s what tells me if they are seriously interested in learning something new.

And you know what, Jim? It’s a foolproof method that rarely fails. I used the same approach with known frauds like Madeleine Brown and others.

As for Mary Moorman, as I explained to David a long time ago, she and I have been good personal friends since 1981 when I explained how to get her pictures back from the Clerk of the House after the HSCA closed up shop. I’ve heard her tell her story many, many times. Sometimes she says it one way and other times she leaves out the part about stepping back onto the grass before taking her famous picture. We even joked about it on the phone the night before we filmed her in the Plaza!!

So I stood where the producer wanted me for the camera and she stood where all the untouched, non-faked, films and photos show her at the moment of the head shot. The recreation for the 2003 Discovery Channel program, Death in Dealey Plaza, is historically accurate. Why? Because no one, and that includes Sydney, haven’t proven otherwise. You may have convinced yourselves, but so what? I know why you folks are wrong and why the pictures are correct.

Gary Mack

James Fetzer
2:45 PM (17 hours ago)

to Gary, dlifton, shake_aeffects, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph


I know that, as a matter of formality, you have to have the last word. So you have it! But everyone on this list knows how things stand and your role in preserving the Oswald myth.


Gary Mack
2:50 PM (17 hours ago)

to me, dlifton, shake_aeffects, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Just show me evidence, Jim, not opinion – evidence. I DO know the difference.

Gary Mack


Dr. Ralph Cinque
3:05 PM (16 hours ago)

to gmack, me, dlifton, shake_aeffects, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik

Talking about pictures being correct, the Altgens photo correctly shows Oswald’s shirt and t-shirt: the collars, the lapels, the loose fit, and the notched t-shirt. And it’s highly significant that neither you, nor any other state shill, even tries to deny it. Instead, you just change the subject.

Clothing is very specific and personal. It comes in all forms, and it gets worn in different ways. The likenesses in clothing between Oswald and Doorman are too great to dismiss. Besides the structural features of the clothing being the same, the fact that both shirts are unbuttoned to the exact same point is highly significant. Oswald’s shirt was very unbuttoned, and by necessity because the buttons were missing. But, Lovelady’s buttons were not missing, and in no image of him from that day is his shirt as unbuttoned as we see on Oswald or Doorman. Take a look at my latest collage which shows the bottom part of the shirts of Oswald and Doorman. Notice how the level is exactly the same. Do you really think that by coincidence Lovelady was comported the exact same way that day?

And regarding past investigations, when did the Warren Commission or the HSCA ever address the issue of Doorman’s clothing? His t-shirt being notched like Oswald’s was ignored. His outer shirt being loose and disheveled like Oswald’s was ignored. Where is the issue of the unbuttoning of the shirt addressed? When are the collars and lapels examined? They weren’t. Those investigations were a joke. Heck, the HSCA didn’t even react when Billy Lovelady suddenly and unexpectedly died right before he was to testify before them. You’d think they would have looked into it. But, they were probably relieved.


Look at the picture, Gary. You’re seeing the same guy wearing the same shirt. And don’t bother to deny it. It can’t be denied.

Ralph Cinque

James Fetzer
3:16 PM (16 hours ago)

to Gary, dlifton, shake_aeffects, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

When our next article is out, I will let both you and the rest of the link know. Thanks.


Gary Mack
3:27 PM (16 hours ago)

to Ralph, me, dlifton, shake_aeffects, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik

It is true that investigators spent very little time on this issue. Why is that? Because they all found out very, very quickly that Oswald was not the man on the steps. So they worked on areas that could yield far more useful information rather than waste time on a disproven theory.

You see, Ralph, they came up with the same problem you face and still haven’t answered: If Lovelady was that man, why did all those coworkers who knew Oswald or Lovelady or both lie to investigators about who was really there?

Gary Mack

James Fetzer
4:09 PM (15 hours ago)

to Ralph, gmack, dlifton, shake_aeffects, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik


And it is just begging the question to assume that these witnesses “lied”. They may have not notice him at the back of the crowd; they might have had their testimony changed; they may have been intimidated into not telling what they knew. I think most rational agents, possessing information that would disprove the government’s account of the assassination of the President of the United States, might pause before stepping forward. Craig Roberts and John Armstrong have a book about those who did not.



James Fetzer
7:42 PM (12 hours ago)

to David, Gary, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

To besmirch a courageous woman like Madeleine Duncan Brown is completely despicable. What she has to say in TEXAS IN THE MORNING has been corroborated by Billy Sol Estes, A TEXAS LEGEND, Barr McClelland, BLOOD, MONEY & POWER, E. Howard Hunt’s “Last Confessions”, and the final 9th segment of “The Men Who Killed Kennedy”. When you start calling people phonys and frauds, you had better understand that the case against you is overwhelmingly stronger than any case against them. I had more than 100 conversations with Madeleine and interviewed her at Lancer. She was the real deal.



“The Men Who Killed Kennedy: ‘The Guilty Men’”

Gary Mack
8:22 PM (11 hours ago)

to me, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Real deal? Hardly. Real fraud….beginning in 1982 when she claimed JFK’s friend, Speaker of the House Sam Rayburn, was involved with LBJ in the assassination. I have her on video tape saying just that. You do know Rayburn died two years before the Kennedy assassination, don’t you? Madeleine didn’t, at least she didn’t when she made that claim THIRTY years ago… she changed her story to make it more believable to the rubes.

And there is more, Jim, much more. And it’s all just as bad if not worse. When I used the word fraud, I was being kind. As you’ll learn in my future project. Remember this, Jim, you don’t know as much about the subject as I do.

Gary Mack


James Fetzer
8:54 PM (11 hours ago)

to Gary, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Let’s put that proposition to the test. Let’s have a two-hour, public debate, divided into 15 minute segments. I will take the first, you the second, and so forth, where if either of us is unable to fill up our allotted time, it shifts to the other debater as bonus. We could do it at COPA or at Lancer. I will bring my laptop and you can bring whatever you like. I will present my case and you can attempt to rebut it, where I have the first and you the last word. OK? All we need is a screen and an LCD projector. And if an audience shows up, so much the better. Deal?

Dr. Ralph Cinque 8:56 PM (11 hours ago)

Regardless of what the truth is about Madeline, and I don’t claim to know, it…

Gary Mack
9:16 PM (10 hours ago)

to me, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Why would I waste my time on someone who doesn’t know the subject? No thanks.

Did you know the Murchison party started about 8pm? No wait, 11pm, no wait, it was about 1 in the morning, that’s i!. Madeleine told me all three versions over time some twenty + years ago. Made me laugh and laugh and laugh. Didn’t know about that, did you? That’s why a debate is so pointless. There is so much you don’t know. Same with Ralph. I’ll put it out there when I’m good and ready, Jim.

Gary Mack


James Fetzer
10:04 PM (9 hours ago)

to Gary, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Let’s see. How many books have you edited on JFK? How many national conferences have you chaired or co-chaired? How many research articles have you published? How many interviews (not puff pieces)? We all knew that you would not dare to accept my challenge, Gary Mack. We all knew. No one had any doubt. There was no way you would accept. None.

James Fetzer
10:52 PM (9 hours ago)

to Gary, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Let me make it very simple for you, Gary. If what you claim about yourself were true, even remotely, you would be EAGER to demonstrate your superior knowledge. You are NOT, for the obvious reason that, as usual, you are faking it. Isn’t your background in marketing and advertising? I taught courses in logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning for 35 years. Why are you such a phony? I would wipe the floor with you.

It is ironic I was doing an interview with a witness who was corroborating Madeleine’s report about the social event at the home of Clint Murchison, Sr., when your post came up. And just now, in poking around about you, I came across this at Wim’s web site, which I think pretty much sums up how most of us feel about you, just for the record:

Email received 28 june 2007:

I also happen to believe that Gary Mack is an apologist for the Lone Gunman Theory/Warren Commission Report. Here is the latest example I’ve discovered. Madeleine Duncan Brown has appeared in several interviews describing a party which occurred the night before the JFK assassination at which several powerful people were in attendance. The list includes LBJ, Hoover, Nixon, and many of Johnson’s rich, Texas oil buddies.

Gary Mack is on record for doing his utmost to pick her story apart. For example, he claims that Hoover never had a black chauffeur – thereby proving that Brown’s testimony was wrong. In fact, what Brown said was – and anybody can view it on Youtube in the latest “Men Who Killed Kennedy (The Guilty Men, segment 3) – was that “a” black chauffeur was present. Well, the above-mentioned TV show interviews one May Newman who corroborates that it was in fact oil tycoon Clint Murchison who had the black chauffeur and that it was he, the black chauffeur, who drove Hoover around that evening. Mack could have learned this in a second had he simply watched the program and not been drawn to distraction by picking at straws.

Here’s what I think about Gary Mack. I remember him being featured extensively in the original Men Who Killed Kennedy back in 1988, and he appeared to be a JFK researcher who seemed to be sincerely interested in uncovering the obvious conspiracy of JFK’s murder. Since then, however, he has done a complete about-face, and become a shill for the Warren Commission Report and all of its proponents. I wonder if his position as Curator of the 6th Floor Museum has only served to corrupt his honesty and objectivity. After all, he does spend most of his days rubbing shoulders with the very same power base which was responsible for JFK’s death in the first place. He wouldn’t want to lose that cushy, well-paying job by rocking the boat, now would he?


The hole in the windshield (1), the man in the doorway (2), the Dal-Tex shooter’s location (3), and the early response by LBJ’s security detail, while JFK’s is still scratching their heads


James Fetzer
10:26 PM (12 hours ago)to Gary, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph


I have now reiterated my challenge to Gary Mack on the EF and the DPF under the title, “The Great JFK Debate: Jim Fetzer vs. Gary Mack”.  Unless he’s a “no show”!


Gary Mack
10:51 AM (11 hours ago)to me, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

I already gave you my answer…..did you miss it?

Gary Mack

James Fetzer
11:14 PM (11 hours ago)to Gary, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph




Exactly what I would expect from a phony and a fraud.  If what you have claimed about yourself — the possession of superior knowledge — were true, even remotely, you would be EAGER to demonstrate your superior knowledge. You are NOT, for the obvious reason that, as usual, you are faking it.  Isn’t your background in marketing and advertising? I taught courses in logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning for 35 years. Why are you such a phony? I would wipe the floor with you — and you know it.

You seem to believe you can promote the most ridiculous rubbish — that Oswald’s weapon could have fired the shots that killed JFK, when they were supposed to be high-velocity and his weapon was not; that he was on the 6th floor, when witnesses have placed him in the 2nd floor lunch room just before and immediately after; that he was guilty, when he was obviously framed (as the backyard photographs prove); that the film is not a fabrication (as dozens of proofs have established) — and lie with impunity!

Your attack on Madeleine Duncan Brown typifies the sleaze that exudes from your every pore. You are promoting THE BIG LIE to the American people–and doing it with a straight face!  You are betraying the nation by promoting a false history of one of our most crucial events, when you have to know better.  I cannot abide phonies and frauds, especially those who commit intellectual treason against the USA.  I am hardly surprised that you would duck and run for cover.  You are an embarrassment and a disgrace.


Gary Mack
11:38 AM (11 hours ago)

to me, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Building up your ego by putting others down with your childish accusations again, eh Jim?  Do you feel better now?  Good.  :)

Please tell me which conspiracy theory is the correct one, for I certainly wouldn’t want to waste any time on the others.  Thanks.

Gary Mack

James Fetzer
11:51 PM (10 hours ago)

to Gary, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Come on, Gary.  If you had the courage of your convictions, you would not duck and run from a public debate.  You have declared that you have “superior knowledge” of the JFK assassination.  I have challenged you to prove it.  A man of integrity would stand by his beliefs–unless, of course, they were merely states as a subterfuge.  Now that I have challenged you to a debate to settle the proposition, you evade it.  What other inference should be drawn than that you are not going to debate because you know that you would lose?  You made the assertion, Gary.  Let’s go mano-a-mano and settle this publicly. 


Gary Mack
12:06 (M (10 hours ago)to me, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

There is nothing to “settle,” Jim.  I get to choose where and how I present the results of my research.  That’s not up to you, it’s up to me.  You can whine, hold your breath and stamp your feet all day but it won’t change anything.

But I do appreciate learning how you and Ralph go about formulating your Lovelady/Oswald theory.  I see you now have him standing back in the doorway shadows, right?  Which side?  The left or right (as one looks at the doorway from the street)?

Gary Mack    


James Fetzer
11:51 PM (10 hours ago)

to Gary, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Come on, Gary.  The doorway man question has been settled, you just don’t understand it yet.  More interesting are your views on the “correct theory” of the assassination of JFK.  Before you went over to the dark side, you did some good work with Jack White, including the identification of “Badgeman” in the Moorman photograph.  So is Badgeman part of the ”correct theory” of the assassination?  You have also expressed support for the dictabelt evidence. Does the police dictabelt support the “correct theory”? Was Oswald the lone assassin or not? Give us your take on the “correct theory” about JFK.


Gary Mack
12:40 PM (9 hours ago)to me, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

I understand doorway man perfectly.  And the theory has fatal flaws everywhere I look….and I told you and Ralph what I think and why. Take it or leave it.

If you will consult my 1982 newsletter, you’ll find the name is Badge Man, please try to spell it correctly.  The Badge Man and acouistics theories were mine and I still think they are correct.  They are MY theories, and so far history says they are not convincing.  I disagree.  So until they are resolved, they remain just theories.  Just like Doorman is a theory and my experience tells me the theory is wrong.

So what’s the problem?

Gary Mack

James Fetzer
1:13 PM (9 hours ago)

to Gary, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

So there was at least a second shooter on the grassy knoll, who took at least one more shot, which means that Lee was NOT “the lone assassin”.  And since the dictabelt seems to record at least six or seven shots, probably more, there have to have been even more shooters at various locations.  Is that your position?  Because if it is, then The 6th Floor Museum has been doing a piss-poor job of explaining what happened to JFK on 22 November 1963.  Or is this just you talking out of both sides of your mouth?


Gary Mack
1:41 PM (8 hours ago)to me, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Please remove the private emails of mine that you posted on the Ed Forum without permission.  My correspondence includes a Confidentiality notice at the bottom.  Thank you. 

Gary Mack

James Fetzer
2:32 PM (8 hours ago)

to Gary, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

What’s the matter, Gary?  Are you afraid the public is going to catch on to your deceptive role in relation to concealing the truth about the assassination of JFK?  In the public interest, I have now published “The Great JFK Non-Debate: Jim Fetzer vs. Gary Mack”, I believe places the issues under discussion here in the proper context.


James Fetzer
2:39 PM (8 hours ago)to Gary, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, RalphGary,You don’t seem to understand the meaning of the word, “theory”, no doubt because it is ambiguous and it serves your purpose to treat all theories as though they were mere rumors or speculations.  But what Ralph and I and KD have done is to take the issue of Doorway Man out of the category of rumor and speculation and turn it into an empirically testable, explanatory hypothesis, like the theories of evolution and of general relativity.  I recommend you read my “Thinking about ‘Conspiracy Theories’: 9/11 and JFK”, which is accessible on-line. Jim

Gary Mack
2:38 PM (8 hours ago)to me, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph


You do not have permission to publish my private emails.  Remove them immediately and confirm that you have done so.  Thank you.Gary Mack

James Fetzer
2:50 PM (7 hours ago)to Gary, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Well, I have just checked with Gordon Duff, the senior editor of Veterans Today, who has informed me


gordon duff 2:46 PM 
anything on the internet is in public domainno expectation of privacyonce written, it is published for resuse


James H. Fetzer 2:46 PM 
Great!  I appreciate that.  Excellent.  Thanks.


gordon duff 2:46 PM 
and criticism.


Consider this a free tutorial on internet privacy and the lack of a right to privacy, compliments of Gordon.


Gary Mack
2:29 PM (7 hours ago)to me, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, RalphSince you have ignored the Confidentiality Notice, which covers Museum property, there will be no further correspondence between you and me on ANY matter.Gary MackJames Fetzer
4:00 PM (6 hours ago)

to me, David, dlifton, jerry, bmoore1242, john.costella, jwjfk, dmantik, Ralph

Well, the “Confidentiality Notice” has no standing.  It’s another form of fakery, which we now know is your very “bread and butter”.   As others have written to me, the spelling of “Badge Man” as “Badgeman” are both commonplace.  So are you now also supposed to be an expert in English?  What rule are you citing?  Why are you so self-righteous?




You also appear to be extremely reluctant to connect Badge Man or the dictabelt to the existence of a conspiracy.  If those are your two greatest contributions to research on the death of JFK, then why are you not promoting conspiracy?  Do you believe you can consistently maintain the lone assassin theory + Badge Man + the acoustic evidence? 


This is one more reason I would wipe the floor with you in a public debate.  Running and hiding are obviously your best tactics, under the circumstances, although I believe this thread has already exposed you as a charlatan and a fraud.  And you are welcome to use any of my posts here in any context you like.  Just publish them in their entirety.



As it happened, I was having a serendipitous conversation with Connie Kritzberg, who was a reporter for The Dallas Times Herald and interviewed Mary Moorman, Jean Hill, Malcolm Perry, M.D., and Kemp Clark, M.D., the afternoon of the assassination. She and I were discussing her friend, Madeleine Duncan Brown, with whom she co-authored a book on the assassination, DALLAS DID IT!, and the social event at the home of Clint Murchison, Sr., at the very time Gary Mack was attacking Madeleine’s credibility. Our hour-long conversation will be broadcast on “The Real Deal”,, this Friday from 5-7 PM/CT, the second hour.

Gary Mack has asserted several times now that he possesses knowledge that is superior to mine about the JFK assassination. I have therefore challenged him to a two-hour, public debate, divided into 15 minute segments. I will take the first, he the second, and so forth, where if either of us is unable to fill up our allotted time, it shifts to the other debater as bonus. We could do it at COPA or at Lancer. I will bring my laptop and he can bring whatever he likes. I will present my case and he can attempt to rebut it, where I have the first and he the last word. All we need is a screen and an LCD projector. If an audience shows up, so much the better.

As I have made very clear during the course of this exchange, I regard Gary Mack as an apologist for the “official account” of the assassination. He is a very “big cheese” as the curator for The 6th Floor Museum, but I view him as a phony and a fraud who spends his time bamboozling the public about the who, the how, and the why of the death of our 35th president. He claims to possess superior knowledge. Let him therefore demonstrate it. Why should he duck and run from a public debate, especially on the occasion of the 50th observance of the death of JFK? Let’s duke it out and see which of us is right. It’s time for him to put up or shut up!

Posted in USAComments Off on The Great JFK Non-Debate: Jim Fetzer vs. Gary Mack

China: Rise, Fall and Re-Emergence as a Global Power

The tables have turned, and the formal ascent of China as a global power, having spent much of modern history in turmoil and strife.

China’s re-emergence as a world economic power raises important questions about what we can learn from its previous rise and fall and about the external and internal threats confronting this emerging economic superpower for the immediate future.


by James Petras



The study of world power has been blighted by Eurocentric historians who have distorted and ignored the dominant role China played in the world economy between 1100 and 1800.

John Hobson1] brilliant historical survey of the world economy during this period provides an abundance of empirical data making the case for China’s economic and technological superiority over Western civilization for the better part of a millennium prior to its conquest and decline in the 19th century.

The People’s Bank of China jolted the financial world in March with a proposal for a new global monetary arrangement. Image : Matt Collins

China’s re-emergence as a world economic power raises important questions about what we can learn from its previous rise and fall and about the external and internal threats confronting this emerging economic superpower for the immediate future.

First we will outline the main contours of historical China’s rise to global economic superiority over West before the 19th century, following closely John Hobson’s account in The Eastern Origins of Western Civilization.  Since the majority of western economic historians (liberal, conservative and Marxist) have presented historical China as a stagnant, backward, parochial society, an “oriental despotism”, some detailed correctives will be necessary.  It is especially important to emphasize how China, the world technological power between 1100 and 1800, made the West’s emergence possible.  It was only by borrowing and assimilating Chinese innovations that the West was able to make the transition to modern capitalist and imperialist economies.

In part two we will analyze and discuss the factors and circumstances which led to China’s decline in the 19th century and its subsequent domination, exploitation and pillage by Western imperial countries, first England and then the rest of Europe, Japan and the United States.

In part three, we will briefly outline the factors leading to China’s emancipation from colonial and neo-colonial rule and analyze its recent rise to becoming the second largest global economic power.

Finally we will look at the past and present threats to China’s rise to global economic power, highlighting the similarities between British colonialism of the 18 and 19th centuries and the current US imperial strategies and focusing on the weaknesses and strengths of past and present Chinese responses.

China:  The Rise and Consolidation of Global Power 1100 – 1800

In a systematic comparative format, John Hobson provides a wealth of empirical indicators demonstrating China’s global economic superiority over the West and in particular England.  These are some striking facts:

As early as 1078, China was the world’s major producer of steel (125,000 tons); whereas Britain in 1788 produced 76,000 tons.

China was the world’s leader in technical innovations in textile manufacturing, seven centuries before Britain’s 18th century “textile revolution”.

China was the leading trading nation, with long distance trade reaching most of Southern Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Europe.

China’s ‘agricultural revolution’ and productivity surpassed the West down to the 18th century.

Its innovations in the production of paper, book printing, firearms and tools led to a manufacturing superpower whose goods were transported throughout the world by the most advanced navigational system.

China possessed the world’s largest commercial ships.  In 1588 the largest English ships displaced 400 tons, China’s 3,000 tons.  Even as late as the end of the 18th century China’s merchants employed 130,000 private transport ships, several times that of Britain. China retained this pre-eminent position in the world economy up until the early 19th century.

British and Europeans manufacturers followed China’s lead, assimilating and borrowing its more advanced technology and were eager to penetrate China’s advanced and lucrative market.

Banking, a stable paper money economy, manufacturing and high yields in agriculture resulted in China’s per capita income matching that of Great Britain as late as 1750.

China’s dominant global position was challenged by the rise of British imperialism, which had adopted the advanced technological, navigational and market innovations of China and other Asian countries in order to bypass earlier stages in becoming a world power[2].

Western Imperialism and the Decline of China

The British and Western imperial conquest of the East, was based on the militaristic nature of the imperial state, its non-reciprocal economic relations with overseas trading countries and the Western imperial ideology which motivated and justified overseas conquest.

Unlike China, Britain’s industrial revolution and overseas expansion was driven by a military policy.  According to Hobson, during the period from 1688-1815 Great Britain was engaged in wars 52% of the time[3].  Whereas the Chinese relied on their open markets and their superior production and sophisticated commercial and banking skills, the British relied on tariff protection, military conquest, the systematic destruction of competitive overseas enterprises as well as the appropriation and plunder of local resources.  China’s global predominance was based on ‘reciprocal benefits’ with its trading partners, while Britain relied on mercenary armies of occupation, savage repression and a ‘divide and conquer’ policy to foment local rivalries.  In the face of native resistance, the British (as well as other Western imperial powers) did not hesitate to exterminate entire communities[4].

Unable to take over the Chinese market through greater economic competitiveness, Britain relied on brute military power.  It mobilized, armed and led mercenaries, drawn from its colonies in India and elsewhere to force its exports on China and impose unequal treaties to lower tariffs.  As a result China was flooded with British opium produced on its plantations in India – despite Chinese laws forbidding or regulating the importation and sale of the narcotic.  China’s rulers, long accustomed to its trade and manufacturing superiority, were unprepared for the ‘new imperial rules’ for global power.  The West’s willingness to use military power  to win colonies, pillage resources and recruit huge mercenary armies commanded by European officers spelt the end for China as a world power.

China had based its economic predominance on ‘non-interference in the internal affairs of its trading partners’.  In contrast, British imperialists intervened violently in Asia, reorganizing local economies to suit the needs of the empire (eliminating economic competitors including more efficient Indian cotton manufacturers) and seized control of local political, economic and administrative apparatus to establish the colonial state.

Britain’s empire was built with resources seized from the colonies and through the massive militarization of its economy[5].  It was thus able to secure military supremacy over China.  China’s foreign policy was hampered by its ruling elite’s excessive reliance on trade relations.  Chinese officials and merchant elites sought to appease the British and convinced the emperor to grant devastating extra-territorial concessions opening markets to the detriment of Chinese manufacturers while surrendering local sovereignty.  As always, the British precipitated internal rivalries and revolts further destabilizing the country.

Western and British penetration and colonization of China’s market created an entire new class:  The wealthy Chinese ‘compradores’ imported British goods and facilitated the takeover of local markets and resources.  Imperialist pillage forced greater exploitation and taxation of the great mass of Chinese peasants and workers.  China’s rulers were obliged to pay the war debts and finance trade deficits imposed by the Western imperial powers by squeezing its peasantry.  This drove the peasants to starvation and revolt.

By the early 20th century (less than a century after the Opium Wars), China had descended from world economic power to a broken semi-colonial country with a huge destitute population.  The principle ports were controlled by Western imperial officials and the countryside was subject to the rule by corrupt and brutal warlords.  British opium enslaved millions.

British Academics:  Eloquent Apologists for Imperial Conquest

The entire Western academic profession – first and foremost British  imperial historians – attributed British imperial dominance of Asia to English ‘technological superiority’ and China’s misery and colonial status to ‘oriental backwardness’, omitting any mention of the millennium of Chinese commercial and technical progress and superiority up to the dawn of the 19th century.  By the end of the 1920’s, with the Japanese imperial invasion, China ceased to exist as a unified country.  Under the aegis of imperial rule, hundreds of millions of Chinese had starved or were dispossessed or slaughtered, as the Western powers and Japan plundered its economy.  The entire Chinese ‘collaborator’ comprador elite were discredited before the Chinese people.

What did remain in the collective memory of the great mass of the Chinese people – and what was totally absent in the accounts of prestigious US and British academics – was the sense of China once having been a prosperous, dynamic and leading world power.  Western commentators dismissed this collective memory of China’s ascendancy as the foolish pretensions of nostalgic lords and royalty – empty Han arrogance.

China Rises from the Ashes of Imperial Plunder and Humiliation:  The Chinese Communist Revolution

The rise of modern China to become the second largest economy in the world was made possible only through the success of the Chinese communist revolution in the mid-20th century.  The People’s Liberation ‘Red’ Army defeated first the invading Japanese imperial army and later the US imperialist-backed comprador led Kuomintang “Nationalist” army.  This allowed the reunification of China as an independent sovereign state.  The Communist government abolished the extra-territorial privileges of the Western imperialists, ended the territorial fiefdoms of the regional warlords and gangsters and drove out the millionaire owners of brothels, the traffickers of women and drugs as well as the other “service providers” to the Euro-American Empire.

In every sense of the word, the Communist revolution forged  the modern Chinese state.  The new leaders then proceeded to reconstruct an economy ravaged by imperial wars and pillaged by Western and Japanese capitalists.  After over 150 years of infamy and humiliation the Chinese people recovered their pride and national dignity.  These socio-psychological elements were essential in motivating the Chinese to defend their country from the US attacks, sabotage, boycotts, and blockades mounted immediately after liberation.

Contrary to Western and neoliberal Chinese economists, China’s dynamic growth did not start in 1980.  It began in 1950, when the agrarian reform provided land, infrastructure, credits and technical assistance to hundreds of millions of landless and destitute peasants and landless rural workers. Through what is now called “human capital” and gigantic social mobilization, the Communists built roads, airfields, bridges, canals and railroads as well as the basic industries, like coal, iron and steel, to form the backbone of the modern Chinese economy.  Communist China’s vast free educational and health systems created a healthy, literate and motivated work force.

Its highly professional military prevented the US from extending its military empire throughout the Korean peninsula up to China’s territorial frontiers.  Just as past Western scholars and propagandists fabricated a history of a “stagnant and decadent” empire to justify their destructive conquest, so too their modern counterparts have rewritten the first thirty years of Chinese Communist history, denying the role of the revolution in developing all the essential elements for a modern economy, state and society.  It is clear that China’s rapid economic growth was based on the development of its internal market, its rapidly growing cadre of scientists, skilled technicians and workers and the social safety net which protected and promoted working class and peasant mobility were products of Communist planning and investments.

China’s rise to global power began in 1949 with the removal of the entire parasitic financial, compradore and speculative classes who had served as the intermediaries for European, Japanese and US imperialists draining China of its great wealth.

China’s Transition to Capitalism

Beginning in 1980 the Chinese government initiated a dramatic shift in its economic strategy:  Over the next three decades, it opened the country to large-scale foreign investment; it privatized thousands of industries and it set in motion a process of income concentration based on a deliberate strategy of re-creating a dominant economic class of billionaires linked to overseas capitalists.  China’s ruling political class embraced the idea of “borrowing” technical know-how and accessing overseas markets from foreign firms in exchange for providing cheap, plentiful labor at the lowest cost.  The Chinese state re-directed massive public subsidies to promote high capitalist growth by dismantling its national system of free public education and health care.  They ended subsidized public housing for hundreds of millions of peasants and urban factory workers and provided funds to real estate speculators for the construction of private luxury apartments and office skyscrapers. China’s new capitalist strategy as well as its double digit growth was based on the profound structural changes and massive public investments made possible by the previous communist government.  China’s private sector “take off” was based on the huge public outlays made since 1949.

The triumphant new capitalist class and its Western collaborators claimed all the credit for this “economic miracle” as China rose to become the world’s second largest economy.  This new Chinese elite have been less eager to announce China’s world-class status in terms of brutal class inequalities, rivaling only the US.

China:  From Imperial Dependency to World Class Competitor

China’s sustained growth in its manufacturing sector was a result of highly concentrated public investments, high profits, technological innovations and a protected domestic market.  While foreign capital profited, it was always within the framework of the Chinese state’s priorities and regulations.  The regime’s dynamic ‘export strategy’ led to huge trade surpluses, which eventually made China one of the world’s largest creditors especially for US debt.  In order to maintain its dynamic industries, China has required huge influxes of raw materials, resulting in large-scale overseas investments and trade agreements with agro-mineral export countries in Africa and Latin America.  By 2010 China displaced the US and Europe as the main trading partner in many countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Modern China’s rise to world economic power, like its predecessor between 1100-1800, is based on its gigantic productive capacity:  Trade and investment was governed by a policy of strict non-interference in the internal relations of its trading partners.  Unlike the US, China did initiate brutal wars for oil; instead it signed lucrative contracts.  And China does not fight wars in the interest of overseas Chinese, as the US has done in the Middle East for Israel.

With the exception of its Northern frontier which borders on the Russian Federation, Mongolia and Kazakhstan, China is surrounded by US military bases.

The seeming imbalance between Chinese economic and military power is in stark contrast to the US where a bloated, parasitic military empire continues to erode its own global economic presence.

US military spending is twelve times that of China.  Increasingly the US military plays the key role shaping policy in Washington as it seeks to undercut China’s rise to global power.

China’s Rise to World Power: Will History Repeat Itself?

China has been growing at about 9% per annum and its goods and services are rapidly rising in quality and value.  In contrast, the US and Europe have wallowed around 0% growth from 2007-2012.  China’s innovative techno-scientific establishment routinely assimilates the latest inventions from the West (and Japan) and improves them, thereby decreasing the cost of production.  China has replaced the US and European controlled “international financial institutions” (the IMF, World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank) as the principle lender in Latin America.  China continues to lead as the prime investor in African energy and mineral resources.  China has replaced the US as the principle market for Saudi Arabian, Sudanese and Iranian petroleum and it will soon replace the US as the principle market for Venezuela petroleum products.  Today China is the world’s biggest manufacturer and exporter, dominating even the US market, while playing the role of financial life line as it holds over $1.3 trillion in US Treasury notes.

Under growing pressure from its workers, farmers and peasants, China’s rulers have been developing the domestic market by increasing wages and social spending to rebalance the economy and avoid the specter of social instability.  In contrast, US wages, salaries and vital public services have sharply declined in absolute and relative terms.

Given the current historical trends it is clear that China will replace the US as the leading world economic power, over the next decade,  if the US empire does not strike back and if China’s profound class inequalities do not lead to a major social upheaval.

Modern China’s rise to global power faces serious challenges.  In contrast to China’s historical ascent on the world stage, modern Chinese global economic power is not accompanied by any imperialist undertakings.  China has seriously lagged behind the US and Europe in aggressive war-making capacity.  This may have allowed China to direct public resources to maximize economic growth, but it has left China vulnerable to US military superiority in terms of its massive arsenal, its string of forward bases and strategic geo-military positions right off the Chinese coast and in adjoining territories.

In the nineteenth century British imperialism demolished China’s global position with its military superiority, seizing China’s ports – because of China’s reliance on ‘mercantile superiority’.

The conquest of India, Burma and most of Asia allowed Britain to establish colonial bases and recruit local mercenary armies.  The British and its mercenary allies encircled and isolated China, setting the stage for the disruption of China’s markets and the imposition of the brutal terms of trade.  The British Empire’s armed presence dictated what China imported (with opium accounting for over 50% of British exports in the 1850s) while undermining China’s competitive advantages via tariff policies.

Today the US is pursuing similar policies:  US naval fleet  patrols and controls China’s commercial shipping lanes and off-shore oil resources via its overseas bases.  The Obama-Clinton White House is in the process of developing a rapid military response involving bases in Australia, Philippines and elsewhere in Asia.  The US is intensifying  its efforts to undermine Chinese overseas access to strategic resources while backing ‘grass roots’ separatists and ‘insurgents’ in West China, Tibet, Sudan, Burma, Iran, Libya, Syria and elsewhere.  The US military agreements with India and  the installation of a pliable puppet regime in Pakistan have advanced its strategy of isolating China.  While China upholds its policy of “harmonious development” and “non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries”, it has stepped aside as US and European military imperialism have attacked a host of China’s trading partners to essentially reverse China’s  peaceful commercial expansion.

China’s lack of a political and ideological strategy capable of protecting its overseas economic interests has been an invitation for the US and NATO to set-up regimes hostile to China.  The most striking example is Libya where US and NATO intervened to overthrow an independent government led by President Gadhafi, with whom China had signed multi-billion dollar trade and investments agreements. The NATO bombardment of Libyan cities, ports and oil installation forced the Chinese to withdraw 35,000 Chinese oil engineers and construction workers in a matter of days.  The same thing happened in Sudan where China had invested billions to develop its oil industry.  The US, Israel and Europe armed the South Sudanese rebels to disrupt the flow of oil and attack Chinese oil workers[6].  In both cases China passively allowed the US and European military imperialists to attack its trade partners and undermine its investments.

Under Mao Tse Tung, China had an active policy countering imperial aggression:  It supported revolutionary movements and independent Third World governments.  Today’s capitalist China does not have an active policy of supporting governments or movements capable of protecting China’s bilateral trade and investment agreements.  China’s inability to confront the rising tide of US  military aggression against its economic interests, is due to deep structural problems.  China’s foreign policy is shaped by big commercial, financial and manufacturing interests who rely on their ‘economic competitive edge’ to gain market shares and have no understanding of the military and security underpinnings of global economic power.  China’s political class is deeply influenced by a new class of billionaires with strong ties to Western equity funds and who have uncritically absorbed Western cultural values. This is illustrated by their preference for sending their own children to elite universities in the US and Europe.

They seek “accommodation with the West” at any price.  This lack of any strategic understanding of military empire-building has led them to respond ineffectively and ad hoc to each imperialist action undermining their access to resources and markets.  While China’s “business first” outlook may have worked when it was a minor player in the world economy and US empire builders saw  the “capitalist opening” as a chance to easily takeover China’s public enterprises and pillage the economy.  However, when China (in contrast to the former USSR) decided to retain capital controls and develop a carefully calibrated, state directed “industrial policy”  directing western capital and the transfer of technology to state enterprises, which effectively penetrated the US domestic and overseas markets, Washington began to complain and talked of retaliation.

China’s huge trade surpluses with the US provoked a dual response in Washington:  It sold massive quantities of US Treasury bonds to the Chinese and began to develop a global strategy to block China’s advance. Since the US lacked economic leverage to reverse its decline, it relied on its only “comparative advantage” – its military superiority based on a world wide  system of attack bases,  a network of overseas client regimes, military proxies, NGO’ers, intellectuals and armed mercenaries.  Washington turned to its vast overt and clandestine security apparatus to undermine China’s trading partners.  Washington depends on its long-standing ties with corrupt rulers, dissidents, journalists and media moguls to provide the powerful propaganda cover while advancing its military offensive against China’s overseas interests.

 China has nothing to compare with the US overseas ‘security apparatus’ because it practices a policy of “non-interference”.  Given the advanced state of the Western imperial offensive, China has taken only a few diplomatic initiatives, such as financing English language media outlets to present its perspective, using its veto power on the UN Security Council to oppose US efforts to overthrow the independent Assad regime in Syria and opposing the imposition of drastic sanctions against Iran.  It sternly repudiated US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s vitriolic questioning of the ‘legitimacy’ of the Chinese state when it voted against the US-UN resolution  preparing  an attack on Syria[7].

Chinese military strategists are more aware and alarmed at the growing military threat to China.  They have successfully demanded a 19% annual increase in military spending over the next five years (2011-2015)[8].  Even with this increase, China’s military expenditures will still be less than one-fifth of the US military budget and China has not one overseas military base in stark contrast to the over 750 US installations abroad.  Overseas Chinese intelligence operations are minimal and ineffective.  Its embassies are run by and for narrow commercial interests who utterly failed to understand NATO’s brutal policy of regime change in Libya and inform Beijing of its significance to the Chinese state.

There are two other structural weaknesses undermining China’s rise as a world power. This includes the highly ‘Westernized’ intelligentsia which has uncritically swallowed US economic doctrine about free markets while ignoring its militarized economy.  These Chinese intellectuals parrot the US propaganda about the ‘democratic virtues’ of billion-dollar Presidential campaigns, while supporting financial deregulation which would have led to a Wall Street takeover of Chinese banks and savings.  Many Chinese business consultants and academics have been educated in the US and influenced by their ties to US academics and international financial institutions directly linked to Wall Street and the City of London.

They have prospered as highly-paid consultants receiving prestigious positions in Chinese institutions.  They identify the ‘liberalization of financial markets’ with “advanced economies” capable of deepening ties to global markets instead of as a major source of the current global financial crisis.  These “Westernized intellectuals” are like their 19th century comprador counterparts who underestimated and dismissed the long-term consequences of Western imperial penetration.  They fail to understand how financial deregulation in the US precipitated the current crisis and how deregulation would lead to a Western takeover of China’s financial system- the consequences of which would reallocate China’s domestic savings to non-productive activities (real estate speculation), precipitate financial crisis and ultimately undermine China’s leading global position.

These Chinese yuppies imitate the worst of Western consumerist life styles and their political outlooks are driven by these life styles and Westernized identities which preclude any sense of solidarity with their own working class.

There is an economic basis for the pro-Western sentiments of China’s neo-compradors.  They have transferred billions of dollars to foreign bank accounts, purchased luxury homes and apartments in London, Toronto, Los Angeles, Manhattan, Paris, Hong Kong and Singapore. They have one foot in China (the source of their wealth) and the other in the West (where they consume and hide their wealth).

Westernized compradores are deeply embedded in China’s economic system having family ties with the political leadership in the party apparatus and the state. Their connections are weakest in the military and in the growing social movements, although some “dissident” students and academic activists in the “democracy movements” are backed by Western imperial NGO’s.  To the extent that the compradors gain influence, they weaken the strong economic state institutions which have directed China’s ascent to global power, just as they did in the 19th century by acting as intermediaries for the British Empire.  Proclaiming 19th Century “liberalism” British opium addicted over 50 million Chinese in less than a decade.  Proclaiming “democracy and human rights” US gunboats now patrol off China’s coast.  China’s elite-directed rise to global economic power has spawned monumental inequalities between the thousands of new billionaires and multi-millionaires at the top and hundreds of millions of impoverished workers, peasants and migrant workers at the bottom.

China’s rapid accumulation of wealth and capital was made possible through the intense exploitation of its workers who were stripped of their previous social safety net and regulated work conditions guaranteed under Communism.  Millions of Chinese households are being dispossessed in order to promote real estate developer/speculators who then build high rise offices and the luxury apartments for the domestic and foreign elite.  These brutal features of ascendant Chinese capitalism have created a fusion of workplace and living space mass struggle which is growing every year.  The developer/speculators’ slogan  “to get rich is wonderful” has lost its power to deceive the people.  In 2011 there were over 200,000 popular encompassing urban coastal factories and rural villages.  The next step, which is sure to come, will be the unification of these struggles into  new national social movements with a class-based agenda demanding the restoration of health and educational services enjoyed under the Communists as well as a greater share of China’s wealth. Current demands for greater wages can turn to demands for greater work place democracy.  To answer these popular demands China’s new compradore-Westernized liberals cannot point to their ‘model’ in the US empire where American workers are in the process of being stripped of the very benefits Chinese workers are struggling to regain.

China, torn by deepening class and political conflict, cannot sustain its drive toward global economic leadership.  China’s elite cannot confront the rising global imperial military threat from the US with its comprador allies among the internal liberal elite while the country is  a deeply divided society with an increasingly hostile working class.  The time of unbridled exploitation of China’s labor has to end in order to face the US military encirclement of China and economic disruption of its overseas markets.  China possesses enormous resources.  With over $1.5 trillion dollars in reserves China can finance a comprehensive national health and educational program throughout the country.

China can afford to pursue an intensive ‘public housing program’ for the 250 million migrant workers currently living in urban squalor.  China can impose a system of progressive income taxes on its new billionaires and millionaires and finance small family farmer co-operatives and rural industries to rebalance the economy.  Their program of developing alternative energy sources, such as solar panels and wind farms – are a promising start to addressing their serious environmental pollution.  Degradation of the environment and related health issues already engage the concern of tens of millions.  Ultimately China’s best defense against imperial encroachments is a stable regime based on social justice for the hundreds of millions and a foreign policy of supporting overseas anti-imperialist movements and regimes – whose independence are in China’s vital interest.  What is needed is a pro-active policy based on mutually beneficial joint ventures including military and diplomatic solidarity.  Already a small, but influential, group of Chinese intellectuals have raised the issue of the growing US military threat and are “saying no to gunboat diplomacy”.

Modern China has plenty of resources and opportunities, unavailable to China in the 19th century when it was subjugated by the British Empire. If the US continues to escalate its aggressive militaristic policy against China, Beijing can set off a serious fiscal crisis by dumping a few of its hundreds of billions of dollars in US Treasury notes.  China, a nuclear power should reach out to its similarly armed and threatened neighbor, Russia, to confront and confound the bellicose rantings of US Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton.  Russian President-to-be Putin vows to increase military spending from 3% to 6% of the GDP over the next decade to counter Washington’s offensive missile bases on Russia’s borders and thwart Obama’s ‘regime change’ programs against its allies, like Syria[10].

China has powerful trading, financial and investment networks covering the globe as well as powerful economic partners .These links have become essential for the continued growth of many of countries throughout the developing world.  In taking on China, the US will have to face the opposition of many powerful market-based elites throughout the world.  Few countries or elites see any future in tying their fortunes to an economically unstable empire-based on militarism and destructive colonial occupations.

In other words, modern China, as a world power, is incomparably stronger than it was in early 18th century.  The US does not have the colonial leverage that the ascendant British Empire possessed in the run-up to the Opium Wars.  Moreover, many Chinese intellectuals and the vast majority of its citizens have no intention of letting its current “Westernized compradors” sell out the country.  Nothing would accelerate political polarization in Chinese society and hasten the coming of a second Chinese social revolution more than a timid leadership submitting to a new era of Western imperial pillage.


Martin Jacques: Understanding the rise of China


Posted in ChinaComments Off on China: Rise, Fall and Re-Emergence as a Global Power

Media Mayhem Creates National Disaster

War of the WorldsWar of the Worlds

by Stewart Ogilby


Clever criminals have gained control of America’s media. Political propaganda and deliberately misleading messages are constantly being fed to the public. Television has become the primary instrument for promoting aggressive wars that result in the murders and sufferings of millions of men, women, and childen throughout the world. This horror is now glibly referred to on TV as “collateral damage”.

Attractive well-dressed actors and announcers are paid to read from monitors and to say what TV bosses demand. These “media whores” are accessories to murder by promoting warmongers, criminals who pay others to murder that they may monopolize the world’s wealth. Their bosses are not creators. They are humanity’s parasites.

For several years I have, among others, been doing my best to figure out what did and didn’t happen on 911. I was fooled for several years. Only recently have I been able to discard the lies and visual deceit presented that day on television and echoed in newspapers. These media are controlled today by associates of criminal war profiteers and their bankers. Together, they are mass murderers and must be held accountable as such.

Money is no problem for people who actually control the currencies of most nations, our own included. In addition to controlling TV and newspapers, 911 perpetrators upload a huge number of online videos, most of which purport to be “exposures” or a part of a “truth movement”. They swamp the internet with similar articles. They help fund a number of “truth groups” that have attracted hundreds of well-meaning people. Memorial web sites, tributes, bogus obituaries, and human interest tid-bits of “murdered victims” are all over the place.

The entire terrorist narrative is designed to invoke the emotion of fear. Denial provides humans with emotional solace. It is understandable that most people, overwhelmed by media deceit and conditioned to trust authority, are unwilling to confront peer criticism. This strategy is employed by those who design the psy-op component to any criminally antisocial activity.

The 911 narrative is a paradigm for the extent to which modern media is able to control public perception and mold public opinion. Below are five short articles by me, all of which have appeared online at VeteransToday.comand at They should be read in the order presented to gain insight, however initially questioned, about what did happen and, more importantly, what didn’t happen on September 11, 2001.

  1. Urban Renewal With A Twist?
  2. Television’s Illusions Enthrall America’s Cavemen
  3. The 911 Narrative Remains Broad And Retititious
  4. The Hoax – A Fable For Our Times
  5. Examining the 911 Script Is Not Inappropriate

I wish to express my gratitude to those who have devoted considerable time and effort in attempting to make sense of the confusion and contradictions surrounding even intelligent controversies and discussions of what the 911 events were all about. Honest researchers, albeit often mislead, have been useful in raising pertinent questions and offering speculations and tentative conclusions. Of course, it is impossible to unquestioningly separate honest researchers from frauds and disinformation shills. Even the latter provide grist for the analytical mill.

For months I viewed two online forums, and, with skepticism. I would be remiss in not expressing my deep appreciation to Mr. Simon Shack of the former forum for his brilliantly presented evidence of massive televised fraud on 911. Techniques of digital animation and photograph manipulation that existed in 2001 had been perfected well enough to pull the wool over the eyes of us all.

The fact that even more clever fraudulent videos, supposedly of the events of that day, have been released over years since 911 evidences the lengths being taken by its perpetrators to perpetuate that day’s narrative. Consequently, it is not surprising that portions of their huge lie continue to be accepted by most persons. I urge everyone to carefully study Mr. Shack’s web site and to go through that site’s The Vicsim Report. Then ask yourself the hard question: Exactly what was 911 all about?

A reader of one of my columns asked why, if the NYC plane, witnesses, implosions, and rubble video was faked, the Pentagon event was not accompanied by a faked plane video as well. These sorts of questions and attempted answers prove or indicate nothing. My reply was as follows: “Why didn’t they do a more accountable job of putting together airliner “passenger lists”? Why didn’t they doctor the Bureau of Transportation Statistics to show those phony flights as having existed that day? Why did they arrange for the New York Times and other papers to publish names of Arab hijackers that they clearly realized would be located alive and well, and why do they continue to use those names? Why did they release obviously fraudulent Bin Laden videos? Why did they pull off the anthrax hoax right after 911? Why did they morph and photoshop victim photos? Why didn’t they just implode the NYC buildings, asbestos and all, without all that hoopla? There are many more “whys” that could be listed. The answer: ‘Ask them’.”

Initailly “good for Israel” as Netanyaho expressed, 911 may prove to have been a serious error. The New Yorkers may have acquired the participation of the Mossad in their hoax, the fundamental goal of which was to further their own financial ambitions. Without question, they secured the participation of America’s TV moguls. If ultimately exposed, the NY schemers may be delighted to acknowledge that they did not mass murder 3000 on that day. Their activities are quite unfortunate for America’s honorable Jews insofar as the potential for anti-Semitism goes. A handful of criminals acted in primarily their own self interest.

You can bet that everyone involved will go to whatever lengths necessary to avoid the disclosure of that hoax. The antecedents to Afghanistan and Iraq wars were scripted and presented to the American public as cleverly as the events of 911 and their subsequent “anthrax attack”. That the latter has been exposed as utter fraud does not seem to have seriously impacted either 911 myths or justifications for our nation waging illegal aggressive warfare.

When it was suggested to Thomas Jefferson that something be done to stop the journalistic attacks of Callender, Jefferson cautioned that press freedom must be inviolable. It is unrealistic to expect any eighteenth century man to have anticipated the disaster befalling our nation as a result of corporate government’s monopoly of the airwaves, a natural resource nearly as necessarily free for the benefit of an evolving humanity as the air itself.

We Americans are paying a terrible price for not heeding warnings of Jefferson and others with regard to being eternally vigilant in securing a government that represents us, We The People of the United States of America, and in protecting a Constitution created to form a unique form of human organization in which Liberty, which means freedom from tyranny, would be preserved. – finis

Posted in CampaignsComments Off on Media Mayhem Creates National Disaster

Who Is the Real Enemy?

Many Israelis cheered the gruesome deaths of 12 Palestinian kids, killed when an Israeli truck crashed into them. Photo:

by Paul Balles


A story appeared in Israel’s Haaretz newspaper last month about what happened after nine Palestinian children and one adult were killed in a school bus accident north of Jerusalem.

In “Enemies, a hate story”, Gideon Levy described the coverage of the story as “Workmanlike overall if faceless and depersonalized.”

The accident would have been followed by “a lot more blood and tears” if the children had been Jewish, adds Levy.

But worse than ignoring the tragic deaths of the children when an Israeli truck overturned their bus were the nasty, hateful things that Israelis had to say on the internet.

They revealed their names and their Facebook photos, spewing forth nauseating, hate-permeated racism that seemed to exceed anything seen here previously,” wrote Levy.

“Relax, these are Palestinian children,” Benny Dazanashvili wrote on Twitter.

“It seems these are Palestinians … God willing,” posted Tal Biton.

“I hope every day there is a bus like this,” chipped in Itai Viltzig.

“Dozens, if not hundreds, of Internet surfers said a prayer of thanks – for the terrible death by fire of young children on a school field trip – and the responses were featured on the web pages of the prime minister and the Israel Police and the Walla! Web portal,” wrote Levy.

The only light came from Meira Baruch, who wrote: “I’m 63 years old. Only a few times in my life have I been ashamed to be a Jew. Today I am ashamed. How can anyone rejoice over the death of little children?”

What Levy says next should be covered in every major newspaper and TV station in the West: “Enemies, a hate story. In the past few years, anti-Arab hatred and racism have reached monstrous proportions and are no longer restricted to a negligible minority.”


These Israelis are inviting a blowback of hatred from Palestinians who have generally been placid. Of all who should know better, young Jews should have learned how high a price accompanies racial hatred.

Levy comments on the difference in attitudes between the Palestinians and Israelis: “Palestinians I have met over the years, all of them victims of the occupation, speak about their dream of living together in peace while the majority of Israelis dream of “the separation”.

Herein lies the problem for both Israelis and Palestinians. If the Israelis dream of “the separation” they anticipate the elimination of all but Jews from Palestine.

Many of these Israelis still have illusions of eliminating Palestinians by forcing them out of both Gaza and the West Bank and into refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Egypt.

Despite the talk about a two-state solution, the evidence of real Israeli intentions exists in the Wall (meant to divide farm lands), the theft of water sources and the continued development of settlements.

On many occasions recently, Palestinians have reported unprovoked abuse by Israelis in the settlements. The government does nothing to stop this kind of behaviour; fitting only what Gideon Levy called “a dream of separation”.

On February 22, PLO Executive Committee member and lawmaker Hanan Ashrawi called on the European Union to rescue the two-state solution. “We call on European countries to translate policy into action and implement new creative initiatives to rescue the two-state solution before Israel destroys the chances for peace.”

Ashrawi’s is the voice Levy referred to as the Palestinian’s “dream of living together in peace.” Her call to the European Union to act conveys her hope that the Europeans may help the peace process where others have failed.

Meanwhile, Israel approves building over 500 settlement units.

Posted in USAComments Off on Who Is the Real Enemy?

Congress Without Conscience and The Broken Safety Net: Part Two in a Series


by Eileen Fleming


This week in D.C. thousands of Jewish and Christian AIPAC lobbyists have inundated the Capitol to push Congress to vote YES on Senate Resolution 380, introduced by Zionist Senators Lieberman, Casey and Graham, who call for a military attack on Iran.

War is the ultimate failure of intelligence and so far 44 members of Congress have co-sponsored this AIPAC bill and are listed here.

This week in Florida a Congress without a Conscience, zeroed out of the 2013 budget, $2.38 million for the homeless that Governor Rick Scott had earmarked.

If Scott signs onto the revisions, another failure of intelligence will result for Florida will also loose $77 million in 2013 Federal funding for HUD’s office of homelessness which will close down many homeless shelters.

As a resident of Florida and foremost a Christian of Conscience [meaning I take Jesus very seriously and he warned that whatever one does or does not do for the “least among us” one is doing it or not unto God] I left a voice message for Florida House Speaker Dean Cannon – 850-488-2742, and Senate President Mike Haridopolos – 850-487-5056, to express my disappointment in the legislature’s failure to fund homeless services.

In my role as a reporter I also asked, “What does the state intend to do with all the homeless people when these shelters close down? And do you have a Conscience?”

As of this writing-neither have responded.

Florida’s proposed 2013 Budget has millions for projects in leaders’ hometowns including $10 million for Senate President Mike Haridopolos, a Baptist and Republican from Merritt Island, for his Space Coast “economic development commission,” which will promote commercial research.

House Speaker Dean Cannon got $5 million for the “Central Florida Life Sciences Incubator Consortium,” a group that includes the Tavistock Group, the real-estate developer behind Orlando’s Lake Nona, a private upscale residential golf and gated community.

Dean Cannon’s website and WIKI page do not include any religious affiliation, but he is supported by Conservative Ministers of Central Florida as well as Central Florida Realtors, Builders and Contractors.

Florida Budget negotiators agreed on the size of cuts to hospitals, nursing homes and mental health programs and lawmakers are also considering robbing $300 million from universities’ reserve accounts!

Sen. John Thrasher, R-St. Augustine noted, “The reserve issue is problematic. A lot of schools thought they were doing the right thing by saving money, but they can be hit the hardest.” [1]

Hitting Hard:

Recently, Mitt Romney admitted that he was “not concerned about the very poor” but would fix America’s social safety net “if it needs repair.”

It most certainly does and Governments have obligations and people have rights!

America is a Member State of the UN UNIVERSAL DECLARATION of HUMAN RIGHTS and Article 25 affirms:

“Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.”

Taking Control:

During America’s Great Depression, the Mormon Church launched a welfare system designed by church leaders to match multitudes of unemployed faithful with nearby farms that needed temporary labor so that goods and services could be bartered or traded.

Heber Grant, one of the church leaders in 1936, explained, “Our primary purpose was to set up insofar as it might be possible, a system under which the curse of idleness would be done away with, the evils of a dole abolished and independence, industry, thrift and self respect be once more established among our people. The aim of the Church is help the people to help themselves. Work is to be re-enthroned as the ruling principle of the lives of our Church membership.” [2]

Reverend Martin Luther King. Jr. warned from his cell in Birmingham jail:

“There was a time when the church was very powerful–in the time when the early Christians rejoiced at being deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Whenever the early Christians entered a town, the people in power became disturbed and immediately sought to convict the Christians for being “disturbers of the peace” and “outside agitators.”‘

“Small in number, they were big in commitment and by their effort and example they brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contests. Things are different now. So often the contemporary church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. So often it is an arch defender of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church’s silent–and often even vocal–sanction of things as they are.

“If today’s church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twenty-first century.”

King wondered if organized religion was too inextricably bound to the status quo to save our nation and the world. King knew that “Any nation that year after year continues to raise the Defense budget while cutting social programs to the neediest is a nation approaching spiritual death.”

The Mormon Church has members on the ground around the world to bring food and supplies to the impoverished and victims of natural disasters.

Recently the Department of Defense visited the Bishops Central Storehouse in Utah, and Gov. Romney’s church dedicated the Bishops Central Storehouse, which contains a two-year supply of food to support the Mormon Church’s welfare system in the U.S. and Canada for church members in need. 

Its humanitarian program also sends food, medical supplies and other necessities to the needy of all faiths worldwide. 

The facility is equipped with emergency generators, 43 tractors, 98 trailers, a one-year supply of fuel, parts and tires for the vehicles and was built to withstand earthquakes with a magnitude as high as 7.5.

When Hurricane Katrina struck, the Mormon storehouse worked with a military sense of efficiency and strategy, but most of the inventory in the central storehouse goes to supply more than 100 smaller storehouses and hundreds of soup kitchens and homeless shelters run by religious communities around North America.

Seventy percent of the items on the shelves are produced by the church itself and the remainder are purchased at steep wholesale discounts.

Most people depend on the food at the storehouse for an average of three to six months because the church’s goal is to help them return to independence and they offer employment counseling and family services.

The primary source of capital support is the Mormons’ monthly fast and church members are asked to donate what they would have spent on two meals, but many give much more.

Follow the Money:

In 1949, the United States provided Israel with its first form of U.S. foreign aid: a $100 million Export-Import Bank Loan. This loan to Israel marked the beginning of an evolutionary process that resulted in Israel becoming the largest recipient of total U.S. foreign assistance in the post-World War II era. From 1949 to 2008, the United States provided Israel with more than $103.6 billion of total foreign assistance, composed primarily of military aid—$56.0 billion—and economic aid—$30.9 billion.

All military loans to Israel were ended in 1985 under the Reagan Administration, and replaced exclusively with military grants during a period of economic crisis in Israel.

In July 1996, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed Congress and initiated a process to phase out U.S. economic aid to Israel while simultaneously increasing military aid during a 10-year Memorandum of Understanding covering FY1999-2008.

As Israel no longer needs any economic aid, Netanyahu praised the United States for giving Israel, “apart from political and military support, munificent and magnificent assistance in the economic sphere. With America’s help, Israel has grown to be a powerful, modern state. I believe that we can now say that Israel has reached childhood’s end, that it has matured enough to begin approaching a state of self-reliance.”

Talking Childhood:

Annually more than 83,500 of Florida’s children experience homelessness.

Homeless children have increased rates of acute and chronic health problems and are sick four times more often than children with a permanent roof over head.

Homeless children go to bed hungry at twice the rate of their peers and experience three times the rate of emotional and behavioral problems.

Homeless children are four times more likely to have delayed development and twice as likely to have learning disabilities.

A homeless child is a state of emergency for people of conscience!

It has been written, “a little child shall lead them”-Isaiah 11:6

Amen on that and Amen means So Be It!

I am Eileen Fleming for US HOUSE of Representatives and I approve of this message which will be continued in Part 3 of this ongoing series.

Part One: Days of Awareness and About The Money: Part 1

  1.  Florida legislators grapple with big budget decisions in final hours
  2. What the Mormons Know about welfare
  3. How Much Is Military Aid to Israel?

Posted in USAComments Off on Congress Without Conscience and The Broken Safety Net: Part Two in a Series



Israeli Air Strikes Kill 10 in Gaza Strip

Militant Commander Reportedly Among the Slain

by Jason Ditz,

A possible Israeli attack on Iran has been the topic of many discussions this week, but attention turns elsewhere today as Israeli warplanes have launched multiple air strikes against the Gaza Strip, killing at least 10 people and wounding 10 others .

One of the strikes, just west of Gaza City, reportedly killed Zuhair al-Qaissi, the commander of the Popular Resistance Committee (PRC) which was behind  the capture of Israeli soldier Gilad Schalit.

The strikes also killed a number of lower ranked members of the PRC as well as the Islamic Jihad’s military brigade. The PRC and Fatah’s al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade issued statements taking credit for rocket fire against Israel, and four Israelis were reportedly wounded.

Israeli military officials have been predicting a massive invasion of the Gaza Strip would be launched within the next few months, though today’s escalation does not necessarily mean that such an invasion is imminent, it raises the prospect that Israel, perhaps dissuaded from attacking Iran for the time being, will feel the need to start an alternative war in Gaza.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on NAZI’S STRIKES GAZA

Duff On Press TV-Obama and Netanyahu (videos)

Duff on Press TV International Service This Week

‘Obama needs AIPAC money for reelection’

Press TV US Desk



Second video on US military capabilities in the Persian Gulf.



A noteworthy editor says US President Barack Obama turns to the Israeli lobby in order to win support for his upcoming presidential reelection bid.

Press TV has conducted an interview with Gordon Duff, senior editor of Veterans Today, to further discuss the issue.

The following is a transcription of the interview.

Press TV: Tell me your take on US President Barack Obama’s address to AIPAC.

Duff: Normally we take these things with very little seriousness. AIPAC was exposed for the dozenth time last week in a civil trial against one of its own members, Steve Rosen, as a spy organization spying against the United States and selling American weapons secrets to China and Russia.

As far as for the president’s speech, the only things to be listened to is that he told AIPAC what they wanted to hear in exchange for as much election year support as imagined. This is a very important thing for him this year. He will need as much money as he could.

When he ended saying he preferred diplomacy, the truth is that relations between Obama and Netanyahu are horrific. He and President of France Sarkozy had an off-on microphone moment insulting Netanyahu several weeks ago. Obama has been quoted from White House insiders and US news insulting Israel in the most obscene imaginable terms during the last week.

US military chief General Dempsey recently returned from Israel where he had informed them that the US has no intention of supporting them and ordered Israel to stand down.

The news that, of course, that the media’s hearing is utterly false, but it pretty much always is.

Press TV: Now, let’s look at what you said. You’re saying that this is just for an election, it’s an election year. But in general, what does that say? This is not a group that represents the interests of Americans. It is a group that represents, basically, a foreign country. What does this mean as far as American domestic and foreign policy that when a president of the United States has to say that, basically, they’re loyal to Israel in order to get elected.

Duff: The problem is that AIPAC has tremendous influence with American Jews. 78 percent of American Jews, in the last election, supported President Obama. They are much of the money behind the progressive or liberal movements in the US. Politics trumps everything.

Not only does the president have to win the election, but he had lost one of the houses in the Congress which has destroyed his potential agenda. His healthcare program is being threatened. Our program to demilitarize is being threatened. Our debt situation is utterly out of hand, and so is the strong tax reform program.

And those programs require broad support among Jewish Americans and, frankly, in order to get support in those programs he will tell anyone anything they need to hear. The only things that ever matter are what people hear quietly.

What’s told in public, we call it politics here – we let it go in one ear and out the other, if we have good sense.


‘US military too weak to invade Iran’

Interview with Gordon Duff, with Veterans Today

Tue, 06 Mar 2012 16:28:40 GMT

US president Barack Obama has insisted on his country’s unbreakable ties with Israel.

Speaking to reporters alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington on Monday, Obama said the US is committed to the security of Israel and that the two sides’ militaries and intelligence agencies have close consultations on matters related to their foreign policies.

Obama said his discussions with Netanyahu will focus on Iran’s nuclear energy program, adding that his administration is keeping all options on the table for dealing with Iran.

Tehran strongly rejects the allegations. The Islamic Republic stresses that its nuclear energy program is purely civilian.

Press TV talks with Gordon Duff, with Veterans Today from Ohio, to shed more light on the issue. What follows is a transcript of the interview:

Press TV: Barack Obama has told Benjamin Netanyahu that “The bond between our two countries is unbreakable. The United States will always have Israel’s back when it comes to Israel’s security”. Many in the US and beyond believe that Israel has become a liability for Washington rather than an asset. What do you think?

Duff: Well, it is almost obligatory for any American president who goes to an AIPAC meeting or who meets with an Israeli Prime Minister to use those exact same words. More realistically, the choice America has been given by Turkey, whether Turkey is a more valuable strategic partner sitting over the Bosporus, controlling the Black Sea, or Israel where we have no bases and frankly we have several major airbases in Turkey.

The message that was not transmitted to the world is that the US is seeking a diplomatic solution and another message that was not transmitted is that the rise in the price of oil that this crisis has caused is enriching a lot of people who have been manipulating the oil markets and has been damaging the economies in the West almost irreparably and is far more serious than any war could be.

We do not see a war coming. What we are seeing is suffering at the gas pump.

Press TV: In a part of his speech at AIPAC on Sunday, Obama touted what he has done in support of Israel. Let me just read you a section of what he said: “When the Goldstone report unfairly singled out Israel for criticism, we challenged it. When Israel was isolated in the aftermath of the flotilla incident, we supported them. When the Durban conference was commemorated, we boycotted it, and we will always reject the notion that Zionism is racism”.

Are these the kind of things that Obama should be proud of admitting or ashamed of?

Duff: I believe there are things he should be ashamed of. I also believe though that –I am being perhaps overly forgiving– he is running against a cast of Republican candidates for president that are a hundred times where all but Ron Paul have sworn to invade Iran whether the US is capable or not and it is my assessment that the US is not militarily capable of a war against Iran.

So whatever he says to stay in office is for Iran, is for the world going to be the best thing because he is running against people who are far more extreme and hover reprehensible the thing he has said have been who go far beyond this. Crazy rhetoric in the United States has become the norm. It is not worth listening to. We certainly do not listen to it here. We have begun to think that it is funny.

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Duff On Press TV-Obama and Netanyahu (videos)

Obama, Netanyahu & Esther


By Gilad Atzmon



The Biblical Book of Esther that was given to President Obama by Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday was far from being a cryptic message. The Book of Esther is a genocidal recipe. It is there to educate Jews how to infiltrate into foreign administrations. In my latest book The Wandering Who I explore the role of The Biblical text in shaping contemporary Jewish political Lobbying and its open attempt to dominate American and British foreign policies.

In contemporary American politics we detect the following.

  • Esther’s and Mordechai’s role is played by AIPAC and American Jewish Committee (AJC) – Both openly push for a war against Iran.
  • President Obama is the Persian king Ahasuerus. Like the Persian king, Obama is asked to kill the ‘enemies of the Jews’
  • Haman, the ‘murderous Antisemite’ is clearly Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Iranian people. In the Biblical tale, both Haman and his sons end up massacred.
  • And sadly enough repudiated queen Vashti, is played by the American people and humanity. seemingly, our prayer for peace and harmony is clearly ignored.


The Book of Esther (The Wandering Who? by Gilad Atzmon, Chapter 19)

‘Haman said to King Achashvairosh, “There is a nation scattered and separated among the nations [the Jews]throughout your empire. Their laws are different than everyone else’s, they do not obey the king’s laws, and it does not pay for the king to tolerate their existence. If it pleases the king, let a law be written that they be destroyed, and I will pay to the executors ten thousand silver Kikar-coins for the king’s treasury.”’ (The Book Of Esther, Chapter 3) 

The Book of Esther is a biblical story that forms the basis for the celebration of Purim, probably the most joyously celebrated Jewish festival. The book tells of an attempted Judeocide, but also of Jews who manage to change their fate. In the Book of Esther, the Jews rescue themselves, and even get to mete out revenge.

It is set in the third year of the reign of the Persian king Ahasuerus (commonly identified with Xerxes I). It is a story of a palace, a conspiracy, the aforementioned attempted Judeocide and a brave and beautiful Jewish queen – Esther – who manages to save her people at the very last minute.

Ahasuerus is married to Vashti, whom he repudiates after she rejects his command to show herself off to his assembled guests during a feast. Esther is selected from amongst many candidates to be Ahasuerus’s new bride. As the story progresses, Ahasuerus’s prime minister, Haman, plots to have all the Jews in the Persian empire killed in revenge for a refusal by Esther’s cousin Mordechai to bow to him in respect. Esther, now queen, plots with Mordechai to save the day for the Persian Jews. At the risk of endangering her own safety, Esther warns Ahasuerus of Haman’s murderous anti-Jewish plot. (As she had not disclosed her Jewish origins beforehand, the king had been unaware of them.) Haman and his sons are hanged on the fifty-cubit-high gallows he had originally built for Mordecai. As it happens, Mordecai takes Haman’s place as prime minister. Ahasuerus’s edict decreeing the murder of the Jews cannot be rescinded, so he issues another one allowing the Jews to take up arms and kill their enemies – which they do.

The moral of the story is clear. If Jews want to survive, they had better infiltrate the corridors of power. In light ofThe Book of Esther, Mordechai and Purim, AIPAC and the notion of ‘Jewish power’ appears to be an embodiment of a deep Biblical and cultural ideology.

However, here is the interesting twist. Though the story is presented as a record of actual events, the historical accuracy of the Book of Esther is in fact largely disputed by most modern Bible scholars. The lack of clear corroboration for any of the book’s details with what is known of Persian history from classical sources has led scholars to conclude that the story is mostly or even totally fictional. In other words, the moral notwithstanding, the attempted genocide is fictional. Seemingly, the Book of Esther encourages its (Jewish) followers into collective Pre-TSS, making a fantasy of ‘destruction’ into an ‘ideology of survival’.  Indeed, some read the story as an allegory of quintessentially assimilated Jews, who discover that they are targets of anti-Semitism, but who are also in a position to save themselves and their fellow Jews.

Reading the Haman quotes above, while keeping Bowman in mind, the Book of Esther shapes an exilic identity. It sews existential stress and is a prelude to the Holocaust religion, setting the conditions that turn the Holocaust into reality.  Interestingly a very similar, threatening narrative is explored in the beginning of Exodus. Again, in order to set an atmosphere of a ‘Shoah to come’ and a liberation to follow, an existential fear is established:

‘Now there arose a new king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph. And he said unto his people, “Behold, the people of the children of Israel are too many and too mighty for us; come, let us deal wisely with them, lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when there befalleth us any war, they also join themselves unto our enemies, and fight against us, and get them up out of the land.” Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh store-cities, Pithom and Raamses.’ Exodus 8-11

Both in Exodus and The Book of Esther, the author of the text manages to predict the kind of accusations that would be leveled against Jews for centuries to come, such as power-seeking, tribalism and treachery.  Shockingly, the text in Exodus evokes a prophesy of the Nazi Holocaust. It depicts a reality of ethnic cleansing, economic oppressive measures that eventually lead to slave labour camps (Pithom and Raamses). Yet, in both Exodus and the Book of Esther it is the Jews who eventually kill.

Interestingly, the Book of Esther (in the Hebrew version of the Bible; six chapters were added to the Greek translation) is one of only two books of the Bible that do not directly mention God (the other is Song of Songs). As in the Holocaust religion, in the Book of Esther it is the Jews who believe in themselves, in their own power, in their uniqueness, sophistication, ability to conspire, ability to take over kingdoms, ability to save themselves. The Book of Esther is all about empowerment. It conveys the essence and metaphysics of Jewish power.

From Purim to Washington

In an article titled ‘A Purim Lesson: Lobbying Against Genocide, Then and Now’, Dr Rafael Medoff expounds on what he regards as the lesson bequeathed to the Jews by Esther and Mordechai: the art of lobbying. ‘The holiday of Purim,’ Medoff says, ‘celebrates the successful effort by prominent Jews in the capitol [sic] of ancient Persia to prevent genocide against the Jewish people.’[1] This specific exercise of what some call ‘Jewish power’ (though Medoff does not use this phrase) has been carried forward, and is performed by modern emancipated Jews: ‘What is not well known is that a comparable lobbying effort took place in modern times – in Washington, D.C., at the peak of the Holocaust.’[2]

Medoff explores the similarities between Esther’s lobbying in Persia and her modern counterparts lobbying inside FDR’s administration at the height of the Second World War: ‘The Esther in 1940s Washington was Henry Morgenthau Jr., a wealthy, assimilated Jew of German descent who (as his son later put it) was anxious to be regarded as ‘one hundred percent American.’ Downplaying his Jewish-ness, Morgenthau gradually rose from being FDR’s friend and adviser to his Treasury Secretary.’[3]

Clearly, Medoff also spotted a modern Mordechai: ‘a young Zionist emissary from Jerusalem, Peter Bergson (real name: Hillel Kook) who led a series of protest campaigns to bring about U.S. rescue of Jews from Hitler. The Bergson group’s newspaper ads and public rallies roused public awareness of the Holocaust – particularly when it organized over 400 rabbis to march to the front gate of the White House just before Yom Kippur in 1943.’[4]

Medoff’s reading of the Book of Esther provides a glaring insight into the internal codes of Jewish collective survival dynamics, in which the assimilated (Esther) and the observant (Mordechai) join forces with Jewish interests on their minds. According to Medoff, the parallels to modern times are striking: ‘Mordechai’s pressure finally convinced Esther to go to the king; the pressure of Morgenthau’s aides finally convinced him to go to the president, armed with a stinging 18-page report that they titled “Report to the Secretary on the Acquiescence of This Government in the Murder of the Jews.”  Esther’s lobbying succeeded. [Ahasuerus] cancelled the genocide decree and executed Haman and his henchmen. Morgenthau’s lobbying also succeeded. A Bergson-initiated Congressional resolution calling for U.S. rescue action quickly passed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee – enabling Morgenthau to tell FDR that “you have either got to move very fast, or the Congress of the United States will do it for you.” Ten months before election day, the last thing FDR wanted was an embarrassing public scandal over the refugee issue. Within days, Roosevelt did what the Congressional resolution sought – he issued an executive order creating the War Refugee Board, a U.S. government agency to rescue refugees from Hitler.’[5]

Doubtless Medoff sees the Book of Esther as a general guideline for a healthy Jewish conduct: ‘The claim that nothing could be done to help Europe’s Jews had been demolished by Jews who shook off their fears and spoke up for their people – in ancient Persia and in modern Washington.’ In other words, Jews can and should do for themselves. This is indeed the moral of the Book of Esther as well as of the Holocaust religion.

What Jews should do for themselves is indeed an open question. Different Jews have different ideas. The neoconservatives believe in dragging the US and the West into an endless war against Islam. Some Jews believe that Jews should actually position themselves at the forefront of the struggle against oppression and injustice. Indeed, Jewish empowerment is just one answer among many. Yet it is a very powerful one, and dangerous when the American Jewish Committee (AJC) and AIPAC act as modern-day Mordechais and publicly engage in an extensive lobbying efforts for war against Iran.

Both AIPAC and the AJC are inherently in line with the Hebrew Biblical school of thought. They follow their Biblical mentor, Mordechai.  However, while the Mordechais are relatively easy to spot, the Esthers – those who act for Israel behind the scenes – are slightly more difficult to track.

Once we learn to consider Israeli lobbying within the parameters drawn by the Book of Esther and the Holocaust religion, we are then entitled to regard Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the current Haman/Hitler figure. In addition to the AJC and AIPAC, President Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Lord Levy are also Mordechais, Obama is obviously Ahasuerus, yet Esther can be almost anyone, from the last Neocon to Dick Cheney and beyond.


[1] Medoff, Rafael, ‘A Purim Lesson: Lobbying Against Genocide, Then and Now’; see

[2] Ibi

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid

[5] Ibid

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Obama, Netanyahu & Esther

‘Ignore The Intelligence Reports, Let’s Make War’


Let’s shred and vaporize a few million more innocents… But first we’ll strangle them with sanctions, say our elected leaders.

by Stuart Littlewood


Is this what we voted for?

Is this what Western diplomacy has come to in the 21st century?

Thank heaven for Dr David Morrison’s very timely briefing document entitled “Iran hasn’t got an active nuclear weapons programme, says US intelligence” .

Morrison is the noted political researcher from Northern Ireland. He sets out the position in easy-reading form so that even our dimmest politicians can understand.

George Bush defends National Intelligence Estimate on Iran. The whole world sighs a collective sigh of relief!

As he points out in a covering note, US Intelligence believes Iran hasn’t got an active nuclear weapons programme and Israeli Intelligence agrees.

“When this became the view of US intelligence in 2007, President Bush had to abandon any thought of taking military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities.

As he wrote in his memoir Decision Points: ‘How could I possibly explain using the military to destroy the nuclear facilities of a country the intelligence community said had no active nuclear weapons program?’

“Today, President Obama should be asking himself the same question, since US intelligence is still saying that Iran has no active nuclear weapons program.”

So too should Cameron, Hague and the entire EU.

Dr Morrison’s report boils down to this…

  • According to the US intelligence community Iran hasn’t got an active nuclear weapons programme and Israeli intelligence agrees.
  • The US intelligence community set out this view in a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) in November 2007 and it remains their opinion today. Their assessment was that Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003. “We assess with moderate confidence Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007 …”  (NIEs express the consensus view of the 16 US intelligence agencies).
  • The November 2011 IAEA report on Iran’s nuclear activities did not say that Iran has an active nuclear weapons programme despite the impression given by the media and ministerial rantings.
  • Iran has declared to the IAEA 15 nuclear facilities (including its uranium enrichment plants at Natanz and Fordow) and 9 other locations. These are all being monitored by the IAEA. In its February 2012 report, the IAEA confirmed yet again there was no diversion of nuclear material from these facilities.
  • The IAEA on 4 December 2007 noted that the NIE tallied with the Agency’s statements over the last few years that, although Iran still needs to clarify aspects of its nuclear activities, the Agency has no concrete evidence of an ongoing nuclear weapons program or undeclared nuclear facilities.
  • On 16 February this year, the present Director of the National Intelligence Agency, James Clapper, reported to the Senate Armed Services Committee: “We assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons… We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons… That is the intelligence community’s assessment …”
  • On the same day US Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, gave the same assessment to another Congressional committee, saying that Iran has not made a decision on whether to proceed with development of an atomic bomb. A month earlier, when asked about Iran’s nuclear programme on Face the Nation on CBS, he replied: “Are they [the Iranians] trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No.”

So why the mis-match between intelligence and the loud clamour for war – economic and military? The answer, presumably, is because war is good.. good for business. Hence war can be highly beneficial to a senior politician’s post-political career.

A Middle East nuke-free Zone… really?

The international community, including the US and the EU, says it is committed to a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone in the Middle East. The only impediment, of course, is Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons, which menace the whole region and perhaps beyond. Some experts believe that Israel has around 400 nuclear warheads and, naturally, various means of delivering them.

Iran has none.

Crude politics is being allowed to trump the national interest ( Credit: Telegraph)

Iran’s nuclear facilities are open to IAEA inspection; Israel’s are not.

Furthermore, UN Security Council resolution 487, in 1981, called on Israel “urgently to place its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards”. Israel has ignored it for over 30 years.

Yet the US and the EU choose to impose vicious economic sanctions on Iran, and threaten military action, while taking no such measures against Israel… not even uttering a word of criticism.

Britain’s Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne in December at the Conservative Friends of Israel Annual Business Lunch said: “I think Israel is right to identify this [Iran’s nuclear programme] as one of the greatest threats to peace and human life in the world at the moment… Any excuse that Iran had that there was a peaceful purpose for what they were doing has been blown out of the water.  There was a report recently from the IAEA which made that clear.”

Did it? Has Osborne actually read the IAEA report or is he mouthing off some Tel Aviv script?

He said he recently authorised the imposition of new sanctions “stronger than any we’ve ever imposed before with a country” cutting off the British financial system from the Iranian banking system.

He added: “David Cameron, myself and other prominent members of the government, as well as the many Conservative MPs who are here are all good friends of Israel.”

And at a dinner of the Community Security Trust in London recently Osborne went so far as to announce his support for the present mayor of London, Boris Johnson, in the coming election, saying that Boris, like him, was a lifelong friend of Israel, and the leader of London should be committed to securing the interests of Israel.

As if any mayor of London should bother himself with the interests of a foreign racist regime! That is not what the people of London elect him to do, nor did the people of Britain elect Osborne to fly the Israeli flag on the roof of the Treasury.

What they say and do make it very clear that prime minister David Cameron, foreign secretary William Hague and Middle East minister Alistair Burt are also Israel’s ardent stooges. Cameron is a self-declared Zionist, Hague a member of the Friends of Israel since he was a juvenile in short trousers, and Burt was not just a member of that fan club but an officer.

Here’s a flavour…

Cameron: “We will not stand by and allow Iran to cast a nuclear shadow over Israel or the wider region” – CST Annual Dinner, 2 March 2011.

Cameron: “I’ve read the reports, and I have had the briefings: they are stockpiling enough uranium to make a nuclear weapon over time. Of course, that’s a huge threat to the world but it’s a particular threat to Israel. Since we came into power we have wasted no time in securing tougher sanctions. We backed tough sanctions in the United Nations – and we championed and led, at meeting after meeting, even tougher sanctions at the European level. Iran needs to know if they continue on this course they will feel international pressure and international isolation”. – CFI Annual Business Lunch, 13 December 2010

Hague: “Iran’s actions not only run counter to the positive change that we are seeing elsewhere in the region; they may threaten to undermine it, bringing about a nuclear arms race in the Middle East or the risk of conflict”. – Middle East Statement, 9 November 2011.

Burt: “Israel’s strength is a regional bulwark for good… Iran does not just threaten Israel. It threatens those who would be Israel’s allies in the Gulf, and in the Arab world who need Israel as part of a common cause against a regime dangerously loose… Israel’s strength is not a regional threat, but an anchor of regional stability. And the world needs Israel’s values, of tolerance and justice…”

– speaking to Bar-Ilan University, Israel, 10 January 2012

Burt: “We share Israel’s determination to prevent Iranian proliferation. Israel is not facing the threat of a nuclear Iran alone…” – same Bar-Ilan meeting.

Burt: “I care as someone who has for decades counted himself as an ardent friend of Israel.” – same Bar-Ilan meeting.

These people at the heart of British government claim Iran is pursuing military objectives through its nuclear programme but provide us with not a shred of evidence. In the circumstances their propaganda offensive linked with Washington’s sounds insane and is unraveling fast because no amount of media lies can hide a crude fabrication. Nobody’s buying it.

If our leaders have trouble understanding the NIE and IAEA reports, help is now at hand. I suggest they get themselves a copy of Dr Morrison’s ‘idiot’s guide’ before they land this country – and indeed the whole West – in more trouble than we can handle and bring down the world’s everlasting hatred on our heads.


Just as I was signing off I skimmed Obama’s annual speech to AIPAC. It’s a regular reach-for-the-sickbag occasion where the American President has to account for his commitment to the Zionist Project and plead for his job. Yessir, “over the last three years, as president of the United States, I have kept my commitments to the state of Israel. At every crucial juncture, at every fork in the road, we have been there for Israel. Every single time.”

Richard Goldstone looks on after delivering his report before the Human Rights Council at the UN office in Geneva, 29 September 2009.


“When the Goldstone report unfairly singled out Israel for criticism, we challenged it. When Israel was isolated in the aftermath of the flotilla incident, we supported them… and we will always reject the notion that Zionism is racism. When one-sided resolutions are brought up at the Human Rights Council, we oppose them…”

And so forth. As an exercise in groveling it has no equal, and the theme is always the same: Israel’s security. But for “security” read “dominance”, requiring all the other nations in the region to remain vulnerable and unresisting to predatory Israel’s nuclear and military superiority, and its ever expanding borders.

“I’ve made it clear that there will be no lasting peace unless Israel’s security concerns are met,” says Obama. “That’s why we continue to press Arab leaders to reach out to Israel…  That’s why just as we encourage Israel to be resolute in the pursuit of peace we have continued to insist that any Palestinian partner must recognise Israel’s right to exist and reject violence and adhere to existing agreements.”

If only Israel would do the same.

And who’d have thought Obama would stoop to making mischief with that old Ahmadinejad mis-quote – saying that “no Israeli government can tolerate a nuclear weapon in the hands of a regime that threatens to wipe Israel off the map.”

And what about this gem: “A nuclear-armed Iran would thoroughly undermine the nonproliferation regime that we’ve done so much to build.”

Obama tells AIPAC the only way to truly solve this problem and end the sanctions pain is for the Iranian government to forsake nuclear weapons, although, as he must have been told time and time again, they don’t have any while Israel is bristling with them.

Obama sure does cut a sad figure these days.


Posted in USAComments Off on ‘Ignore The Intelligence Reports, Let’s Make War’

Shoah’s pages