Archive | May 6th, 2012

For IsraHell, Punishing Palestinians is Not Enough


An ongoing hunger strike by nearly 2,000 Palestinian inmates stands as a reminder of their humanity, but Israelis are more interested in revenge.

Dear friends,

Our people are passing through a very critical period as they watch their young  men , hostages in Israeli jails on the brink of death as they brandish the only weapon of reisistance and assertion of their humanity, within their means—their hunger and, consequently, their lives!!Some have been on a hunger strike for 65 days and their health is deteriorating fast, as expected.

Today we were greatly concerned as we listen to the hair raising tales of mothers and families of prisoners.

They urged us to stand by them  and to rescue their sons from certain death. What a horrible feeling it must be, for a mother, who had erstwhile given every moment of  her life  to bring up her child, to watch him die slowly without being able to do a thing about it!!  Yet those mothers  carry their pain with great dignity and patience, while Israel, instead of responding to their human and  legitimate demands,  is bent on breaking the will of these valiant men by ignoring their plight and  aggravating the inhuman measures against them..

We appeal to you , dear friends ,  to heed our call and and raise your voices in protest.
Please use  all means within your  reach  to put an end to  Israeli grievous violations  against the rights of our prisoners and against international law and conventions. This can be done by putting pressure on your own governments who have been shamelessly  oblivious of Palestinian suffering and Palestinian rights as they have been supporting Israel unconditionally and under all circumstances .

( Rima Tarazi a great activist. She manages the Palestinian symphony orchestra created in memory of a great Palestinian Prof. who passed away because of Leukemia, She can be reached

Please read the  article  below written by Israeli journalist Amira Haas…


by Amira Haas

In faraway, frozen Finland – otherwise known as the infirmary of Ramle Prison – the lives of four detainees who have been on a hunger strike for at least 60 days hang in the balance. Nearly 2,000 inmates in the Nafha, Ashkelon, Gilboa and other prisons around Israel have been on hunger strike for two weeks. The very fact of their decision to refuse food and their willingness to risk being punished by the authorities stands as a reminder of their humanity.The Israel Prison Service does not have to make much of an effort to conceal this mass action from Israeli eyes.The great majority of Israelis label all incarcerated Palestinians as conscienceless murderers or common terrorists, at the least.


They have little interest in acts of personal or collective courage on the part of Palestinian detainees that serve as reminders that they are human beings.

Administrative detainees have been held without trial for years under emergency regulations inspired by the British Mandate.

It’s not important. Hundreds of prisoners from the Gaza Strip haven’t seen their families for six or more years. Why should anyone care?

When Gilad Shalit was in captivity in Gaza, the cancelation of visits for Gazan prisoners in Israel was presented as “proportionate pressure.” After his release, Israelis don’t care that this sort of proportionality goes on, and that family visits were not restored. So what? Why should we care that Palestinians are kept in isolation for years on end and barred from seeing their families for three, five or 10 years?

Diab determined to continue his hunger strike…

Any normal prison administration would welcome prisoners’ demand to go back to studying through the Open University. Studies reduce stress and tension levels in prison. But the name of the game here is submission.

Palestinian prisoners are given names and faces in the Israeli news media only if they can demonstrate their “contemptibility.” Their names and faces are not mentioned in the context of their personal, family and national history for more than 60 years: expulsion, exile, destruction of their homes, the injury and killing of friends and family members by Israeli soldiers, or trifles such as beatings by soldiers or expropriation of their land by government officials.

Palestinian prisoners are mentioned in terms of the number of life sentences they are serving. But Israel’s revered army generals, retired and on active duty, are responsible for killing many more Palestinian (and Lebanese ) civilians than the number of Israeli civilians killed by the Palestinian prisoners.

History – praise be to Clio, the Greek muse of history – is no longer written only by the victors. But the conquerors still decide who is the hero, who is the soldier who acts as the judge and who is the defendant who is declared a terrorist even before he is convicted. The Palestinians are not recognized as prisoners of war whose weapons are less advanced, less sophisticated than those of their jailers.

Israelis are not satisfied with the various measures to worsen their prison conditions. When it comes to Palestinians, punishment is not enough. Prison must also be never-ending revenge that extends what Israel tries to do outside its walls as well: to break up the collective, to weaken the individual, to deter others from resistance to the foreign regime.

The hunger strike is, in effect, a protest against these goals. Not all of the Palestinian prisoners have joined it. In prison, as outside of it, Palestinian political and social cohesion has declined, and many of the inmates lack the cultural and social awareness of their predecessors. Nevertheless, the hunger strike underlines the fundamentally political nature of the collective of Palestinians incarcerated in Israel.

·         Read this article in Hebrew.

Editing: Debbie Menon

Pink Floyd – Song for Palestine


 ”Lets Remember Our Prisoners” Song by: Morad Zighari ( U FREE Network)

Posted in Palestine AffairsComments Off on For IsraHell, Punishing Palestinians is Not Enough

Top Ten Reasons IsraHell tried to Censor Bob Simon’s Report on Palestinian Christians


by Juan Cole

Informed Comment – Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren not only called the head of CBS news in an attempt to quash a report on the displacement of Palestinian Christians by the Israeli Occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, but he briefed Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu of the far right wing Likud Party on his attempt.


“Well, there is a first time for everything, Bob”

Here are the top ten reasons Israel’s Likud Party would have wanted to censor American television news on this occasion (and of course we don’t know all the occasions they have successfully done so):

1. The report told Americans that there are Palestinian Christians. Right wing Israelis have attempted to displace, expropriate and erase the Palestinian nation, and to convince Americans that Palestinians don’t exist or if they do are enemies of the U.S. When the foe of the US was the Soviet Union, they made the Palestinians Communists. When the foe became al-Qaeda, they made the Palestinians violent fundamentalists. But if some percentage of Palestinians is Christians, then that fact disrupts the propaganda. In fact, millions of Palestinians are descended from the 700,000 or so Palestinians ethnically cleansed by the Israelis from what is now Israel in 1948, of whom about 10 percent were Christian.

2. The report mentioned that some Palestinians are Lutherans, Catholics and Episcopalians, establishing a link of commonality between them and Americans. The Israeli Likud Party wants Americans identifying only with Israelis, not with Palestinians.

3. The report told Americans that Israel is occupying and colonizing Palestinian land. Most Americans think it is the other way around because of the success of Likud disinformation.

4. The report let it slip that Palestinians in the West Bank need a permit to travel to Arab East Jerusalem and are subjected within the West Bank to humiliating check points that turn a 7 mile journey into an all-day ordeal. This system sounds an awful lot like the old South African Apartheid.

5. The report allowed Palestinians to speak for themselves and to refute Oren’s anti-Palestinian talking points. It is a key principle of right wing Israeli propaganda that Palestinians should never be allowed to challenge the Israeli narrative on American television.

6. The report allowed a prominent Palestinian businessman and Coca Cola distributor to say that he knew of no Palestinian Christians who were leaving the West Bank and Jerusalem because of Muslims but that rather they were leaving because of Israeli oppression.

7. It allowed the Palestinians to point out that the West Bank now looks like Swiss cheese, with Israeli colonies grabbing the good land and water, and the stateless Palestinians pushed into the holes.

8. The report described the Palestinian Kairos Document, calling for nonviolent, peaceful struggle by Palestinians against Israeli Occupation and land grabs. Likud propaganda insists in racist fashion that all Palestinians are inherently angry and violent and that their protest against being made stateless and homeless by Israel is irrational.

9. The report quotes an Israeli scholar who puts “Political Judaism” on par with “Political Islam.” It is a key principle of Likud propaganda that no movement in Israel may ever be compared to movements in the Muslim world.

10. The report allows Palestinians to point out that the way the Israelis built the Separation Wall isolated Bethlehem, Jesus’s birthplace and a city that still is 18% Christian, had made it “an open-air prison.”

Bob Simon’s report on Christians in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian West Bank and Jerusalem is here:


United Methodist Kairos Response – Answering the Call from Holy Land Christians



Posted in Palestine AffairsComments Off on Top Ten Reasons IsraHell tried to Censor Bob Simon’s Report on Palestinian Christians

Obama Rejoins ICC, US No Longer “Rogue” State


American War Criminals Now Subject To Laws US Enforces on Others

     … by Gordon Duff, Senior Editor

In a surprise move, President Obama signed an executive order rejoining the International Criminal Court, an organization established originally by the United State to enforce international law and punish war criminals.

The US left the court under Bush in order to protect those responsible for kidnapping, drug running and torture. 

They may now be arrested, even if American office holders or members of the military or CIA, which, oddly enough, many of those responsible for such heinous crimes are.

Almost all facing prosecution are, curiously enough, members of the Republican Party and are trying to spin a return to freedom and justice as America giving up rights.  The only right sacrificed are the rights some of the 1% and key officials had to murder, rape, steal and run drugs.

They may now be arrested under the same laws that applied to Gaddafi, Saddam and other “war criminals” that America has seen fit to bring to justice.

A careful read of one of the trickiest documents I have ever seen limits arrests of US elected officials as long as they are in office.  Language protecting the military is less clear if not clear at all.

In doing so, Obama even puts himself at risk but the risk is far higher to Ashcroft, Gonzales, McCain, Lieberman, Bush (all), Cheney and a list of war criminals who may number in the thousands.

As to how far the ICC is willing to go is questionable.  The organization tends to arrest only those of dark skin or targets of American foreign policy.

Perhaps that will change with the Arab Spring and elections in Europe which has gotten rid of some and may  eventually remove nearly all the old leaders, most of whom are potential suspects in war crimes.

When we see Interpol put the cuffs on McCain and Lieberman and “perp walk” them out of the Senate, we will know we may get America back.

Posted in USAComments Off on Obama Rejoins ICC, US No Longer “Rogue” State

Targeting Murdoch


by Stephen Lendman


Quelle surprise! Britain’s parliament discovered what media critics and people wanting real news and information knew decades ago.

Murdoch’s world features demagoguery, managed news, scandal, sleaze, and warmongering. He’s the prototypical presstitute famed journalist George Seldes (1890 – 1995) denounced in books like “Lords of the Press.”

He called them “the most powerful force against the general welfare of the majority of the people.” He exposed their tactics long before Project Censored.

Major media scoundrels are villainous global pirates. Murdoch’s the worst of the bunch. Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) once called Fox News “the most biased name in news….with its extraordinary right-wing tilt.”

Viewing, it added, is like watching “a Harlem Globetrotters game (knowing) which side is supposed to win.” It’s hard-right, pro-business, pro-war, pro-occupation, anti-populist, sleazy and biased, combined with juiced-up infotainment and junk food news.

It’s a virtual mouthpiece piece for extremist Republicans. It long ago stopped pretending it’s legitimate. It mocks real journalism. It’s not tolerated on air.

Famed Chicago columnist Mike Royko (1932- 1997) once said “no self-respecting fish would (want to) be wrapped in a Murdoch paper….”

Former Fox employees complain about management cooking the facts to make stories acceptable to right-wing audiences. Those unwilling to go along are fired. Former Bush aid Lee Atwater once said Fox boss Roger Ailes operates on “two speeds – attack and destroy.” He also demands programming conform to his views.

Murdoch’s a force for evil, not good. Heir apparent son James was groomed to succeed him. He currently serves as News Corp. chairman and CEO. He’s part of its scandalous operations like his father.

At age 82, Rupert nears retirement. It may come sooner than he wishes. James turns 40 in December. Whether he’ll ride out the storm remains to be seen. If he wasn’t Murdoch’s son he’d have been gone long ago.

On May 1, the London Guardian headlined “Rupert Murdoch ‘not fit’ to lead major international company, MPs conclude,” saying:

A parliamentary committee declared him “not a fit person” to run a major company. Its report also targeted James. At issue was last year’s News of the World phone-hacking affair.

Last July, London Guardian writers Nick Davies and Amelia Hill broke the story. Milly Dowler and her family were victimized. Their voicemails were hacked.

Related police corruption came out. So did information about Murdoch, James, as well as other executives and editors having private meetings with Prime Minister David Cameron never disclosed.

Observers wondered if father and son would weather the storm. They’re still wondering. Tarnished and exposed, News Corp. retains clout. Readers, viewers, and shareholders will likely decide its future.

Tuning it out makes it bleak. What UK, US, and other lawmakers decide remains unknown. More on that below.

Guardian writers said “Labour MPs and the sole Liberal Democrat on the committee, Adrian Sanders, voted together in a bloc of six against the five Conservatives to insert (specific) criticisms of Rupert….and toughen up the remarks about his son James.”

Other News International (NI) employees got harsher treatment. Language like “complicit” in a cover-up, deliberately withholding vital information, and falsely answering questions was used.

For his part, Rupert didn’t “take steps to become fully informed about phone hacking.” He “turned a blind eye and exhibited willful blindness to what was going on in his companies and publication.”

For decades, he’s been known as a hands-on boss. As a result, these accusations bite. The committee concluded that NI’s culture “permeated from the top.” It “speaks volumes about the lack of effective corporate governance at News Corporation and News International.”

“We conclude, therefore, that Rupert Murdoch is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company.”

James was described as exhibiting a “lack of curiosity (and) willful ignorance even” when phone-hacking 2009 and 2010 settlement negotiations were ongoing.

The committee added:

“We would add to these admissions that as the head of a journalistic enterprise, we are astonished that James Murdoch did not seek more information or ask to see the evidence and counsel’s opinion when he was briefed by Tom Crone and Colin Myler on the Gordon Taylor case.”

It steered clear of drawing conclusions on evidence about Milly Dowler because of an ongoing police phone hacking investigation. In March 2002, she was abducted and murdered.

MPs said company executives showed contempt for parliament “in the most blatant fashion.” They willfully tried to obstruct and mislead.

NI executive chairman Les Hinton was accused of “inexcusably” misleading MPs on his role in authorizing a 243,000 pound Clive Goodman payoff. Convicted of phone hacking, he formerly served as NI’s royal editor.

“We consider, therefore, that (Hinton) was complicit in the cover-up at (NI), which included making misleading statements and giving a misleading picture to the committee,” MPs said.

NI’s legal affairs manager Tom Crone and journalist/editor Colin Myler were also accused of deliberately concealing vital information from the committee. In addition, they lied when asked questions.

Besides unresolved internal NI issues and legal ones, accused executives may be called before parliament to apologize. If so, they’ll be the first ones forced to in half a century.

In response, they deny all accusations. A News Corp. statement said:

“News Corporation is carefully reviewing the select committee’s report and will respond shortly. The company fully acknowledges significant wrongdoing at News of the World and apologises to everyone whose privacy was invaded.”

A more detailed press release added:

“Hard truths have emerged from the Select Committee Report: that there was serious wrongdoing at the News of the World; that our response to the wrongdoing was too slow and too defensive; and that some of our employees misled the Select Committee in 2009.”

“News Corporation regrets, however, that the Select Committee’s analysis of the factual record was followed by some commentary that we, and indeed several members of the committee, consider unjustified and highly partisan. These remarks divided the members along party lines.”

“We have already confronted and have acted on the failings documented in the Report: we have conducted internal reviews of operations at newspapers in the United Kingdom and indeed around the world, far beyond anything asked of us by the Metropolitan Police; we have volunteered any evidence of apparent wrongdoing to the authorities; and, we have instituted sweeping changes in our internal controls and our compliance programs on a world-wide basis, to help ensure that nothing like this ever happens again anywhere at News Corporation.”

“As we move forward, our goal is to make certain that in every corner of the globe, our company acts in a manner of which our 50,000 employees and hundreds of thousands of shareholders can be justly proud.”

UK media regulator Ofcom said:

“We note the publication of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee report. Ofcom has a duty under the Broadcasting Acts 1990 and 1996 to be satisfied that any person holding a broadcasting licence is, and remains, fit and proper to do so.”

“Ofcom is continuing to assess the evidence – including the new and emerging evidence – that may assist it in discharging these duties.”

On May 1, the Guardian headlined, “Rupert Murdoch’s Fox broadcast licenses targeted by US ethics group,” saying:

Citizens for Responsibility in Washington (CREW) wrote FCC chairman Julius Genachowski. It want Murdoch’s television licenses revoked on grounds of character. It cited UK parliament’s committee calling him “not a fit person” to run a major international company.

CREW director Melanie Sloan said father and son failed the test US media law requires. “If they are not passing the character standard under British law, it seems to me that they are not going to meet (it) in America.”

FCC regulations require broadcast licenses only given to people of good character who serve the “public interest” and speak with “candor.”

By that standard, all US, UK, and most other Western media fail the test. FCC officials won’t likely act. US regulatory agencies don’t regulate corporate America. They serve it. Genachowski already suggested he won’t touch this.

CREW hopes new information will force his hand. It also wants Congress to act. Bipartisan complicity will also steer clear. Murdoch’s safe in America. Britain’s another matter.

New Corp. owns 39.1% of pay TV giant BSkyB. If Ofcom judges NI “not a fit and proper” owner, it may order Murdoch to sell part or all of his lucrative holding. Shuffling key management and editorial positions may minimize the damage. The rot starts at the top and filters down.

Policy analyst Michael Pryce-Jones calls the “company in crisis.” It needs to shake things up quickly. Its board should act on a succession plan. Rupert “cannot stay on as CEO and chairman of this company.”

If James wasn’t his son, he’d have been sacked months ago. Shareholders may have the last word. Readers and viewers can hold them accountable by tuning them out and walking away.

Imagine the joy of a Murdoch free world. Imagine a better one freed from all scoundrel media. Imagine credible choices replacing them. It’s an idea whose time has come.

Posted in UKComments Off on Targeting Murdoch

I am a Sianist


by Kevin Barrett

I am a Sianist.

No, that’s not French for Zionist.

It’s short for Andalusianist.

Never heard of it, you say?


You will soon. We Andalusianists – not al-CIA-duh, a.k.a. the wahhabi foreign legion – are the real Muslim threat to take over the world.

The Zionists have their myth. They claim that they’ve been exiled from their promised land for centuries, and they’re going to take it back – “and if you don’t like it, my hairy friend Samson here will nuke all the capitals of Europe.”

We Sianists have a better myth – and a better “promised land.” We were driven out of Andalusia (Islamic Spain) more than five centuries ago. And unlike the Zionist myth, our myth lines up squarely with actual history.

The Zionists are using their myth as a springboard to world domination. They aren’t interested in just that little patch of land the UN “gave” them (after they’d bribed Truman with a suitcase full of cash) in 1948. Their appetites are not satisfied by the extra land they stole via terrorist ethnic cleansing in 1948, or Nazi-style war of aggression in 1967. They aren’t even going to be satisfied with the whole area between the Nile and the Euphrates that they think their tribal idol Yahwe granted them.

Zionism, let’s face it, is a world domination scheme concocted by the Rothschilds and their bankster buddies. They’ve brainwashed those who identify as Jews to imagine themselves as a persecuted “chosen people” who need a ruthless and powerful state to protect them. And they’ve brainwashed Christians and secularists to join or acquiesce. Just as the Egyptian Pharoahs brainwashed ordinary Egyptians into building the pyramids, the Zionists are brainwashing ordinary Jews and Christians and secularists into building their New World Order.

Sianism is a very different kind of world takeover scheme.

Unlike Zionism, Sianism does not posit a superior race of “chosen people.” In Islamic Andalusia, Jews, Christians and Muslims lived side-by-side, generally with a considerable degree of mutual tolerance and respect.

Speaking of the Muslim rulers of Islamic Spain, Washington Irving wrote:

“As conquerors, their heroism was only equalled by their moderation, and in both, for a time, they excelled the nations with whom they contended. Severed from their native homes, they loved the land given them as they supposed by Allah and strove to embellish it with everything that could administer to the happiness of man. Laying the foundations of their power in a system of wise and equitable laws, diligently cultivating the arts and sciences, and promoting agriculture, manufactures and commerce, they gradually formed an empire unrivaled for its prosperity by any of the empires of Christendom, and diligently drawing round them the graces and refinements that marked the Arabian empire in the East at the time of its greatest civilization, they diffused the light of Oriental knowledge through the western regions of benighted Europe.” (Tales of the Alhambra, 52-53).

Andalusia was crushed by the brutal Christian fanatics who gave us the Inquisition. Maria Menocal’s book The Ornament of the World: How Jews, Christians and Muslims Created a Culture of Tolerance in Medieval Spain shows that our supposedly tolerant modern world is in many ways a totalitarian descendent of Inquisition-style Christianity.

For example, here in the USA, all 300 million of us are forced at gunpoint, under pain of kidnapping and torture, to have basically the same marriage rules and drug preferences. We Muslims, who consider alcohol an abomination far worse than heroin and cocaine, can’t stop people from drinking, selling, serving and advertising alcohol in our own streets and neighborhoods and cities; in fact, we have a hard time even making it known to our non-Muslim friends and acquaintances that drinking in front of us is just as shocking and abominable to us as shooting up heroin or cocaine would be to them.

It isn’t just Muslims who are strapped to the procrustean bed of other people’s drug preferences. Those who consider marijuana, peyote, or sacred mushrooms to be gifts from God are kidnapped and brutalized by uniformed thugs if they practice what they preach.

Likewise, there is a totalitarian movement afoot to force the entire USA to accept something that very few of the tens of thousands of human cultures that have existed on earth have ever accepted: gay marriage. Yet polygamy, accepted (though not necessarily a norm) in the vast majority of cultures known to ethnologists, is banned – even for those whose religion allows for it.

In a million other ways – zoning ordinances, tax codes, surveillance systems, factory-style education, and on and on – the modern world is built on a totalitarian, one-size-fits-all model. If any group wants to live their own way, be they hillbillies making moonshine, Mormons marrying multiple wives, primitivists living in simple mod-con-free dwellings, hippies growing marijuana, gypsies living in temporary roadside camps, street vendors selling where they choose, occupiers setting up encampments in public spaces, or Branch Davidians preaching oddball religious interpretations – they are brutally suppressed by goons dressed up in silly uniforms, and nobody even blinks.

The totalitarian, Inquisition-built West not only lacks freedom, but beauty as well. And it’s getting uglier all the time. Every day more of the earth is paved and overrun by noisy, toxin-farting metal beasts. Houses get more and more hideous every generation. Totalitarian lawns, with the same virtually-identical blade of grass repeated billions of times thanks to pesticides and chemicals, are our answer to Andalusia’s lush gardens. Half the population is overweight, and the other half is undernourished from eating plastic food. People spend their time frying their eyeballs with cathode-ray tubes. Nobody, except for a few specialists, knows how to tell a story or make music.

We Sianists – far more than Bin Laden Construction & Demolition Enterprises Ltd. (a branch of the US Army Corps of Engineers & Negev Desert Enterprises Ltd.) – are the real threat to this wonderful Western way of life.

We want a world in which people spend their time doing something useful, such as: growing and preparing healthy, nutritious food; building simple dwellings that blend with rather than obliterate the landscape; embellishing the beauty of nature rather than paving it over; entertaining and enjoying each other, not being “entertained” (i.e. lobotomized) by corporations; communing with and getting closer to God or whatever word we’re using for Him/Her/It; making our own decisions by participating in families and small communities, rather than letting the government (elected or unelected) make decisions for us; and so on.

The supreme art, in the Andalusian way of looking at things, is that of gardening. The word paradise (in Arabic, jinna) means garden. But “gardens” in the Middle Eastern languages that gave us the garden as the image of paradise aren’t just vegetable and flower gardens. The words orchard and park and forest need to be invoked as well. Gardening in this larger sense means embellishing nature (i.e. God’s creation) by working with it rather than against it. Ideally, the whole world should be “gardens” (largely natural areas embellished judiciously by humans) interspersed with plenty of wild nature (God’s creation unblemished by human hands). And the people living in harmony with this planetary garden should respect and enjoy each others’ different ways of life and paths to God.

Christian culture has inherited a loathing of nature. Today’s totalitarian “pave the earth” culture is the direct descendant of the doctrine of Original Sin and the Fall: Nature, including human nature (especially its wildest component, sex) is evil and fallen and needs to be cleaned up, covered up, paved over, plasticized, homogenized, covered with clear plastic wrap and sold for a dollar ninety nine at your local convenience store.

Post-Christian culture is even worse. The Faustian, satanic strand of post-Enlightement culture hates God, Creation and humanity just about equally. While pretending to a certain “humanism,” this is really just another egotistical “I am the greatest, everybody and everything else sucks” chosen-people-ism. Today’s specialists are trained to think they are better than everyone and everything else, so they have the right to blasphemously build nuclear devices, artificial life, and God knows what next. They may have already killed our planet – one of the nicest ones for zillions of miles around.

We Sianists obviously have our work cut out for us.

But so did the Zionists back in, say, 1890. Their world takeover scheme was at least as crazy as ours. And it had the disadvantage of being so unpleasant that it could only be sold through lies.

Sianism – call it the “planet garden” project – is a whole lot more reasonable…and more fun.

This will become more obvious as the old system comes crashing down.

Maybe we won’t even need to buy up the media, the government, and the UN – or blow up any skyscrapers – to sell it.

Posted in EducationComments Off on I am a Sianist

Ain’t Nobody Gonna Like This

Church Bombing in Alexandria Said to be Mossad Attack by Egyptians

Reality Check on Christian Roots and Mid East Reality

by Gordon Duff, Senior Editor


What you think you know about Christianity is a lie.  The gospels we use now are “rehashed” Roman Empire propaganda, not the pure word of Christ. 

As much of Christ’s real words as possible were destroyed. 

The real Gospels, Nag Hammadi, Thomas, Magdalene, some from the Dead Sea Scrolls, never to be released or translated, kept like nuclear secrets, Christianity today is a game.

The real Christian world is the Middle East.  The first real Christians were from Palestine, all Jews who converted.  Very few Jews left Palestine, there is no record of it, no “exodus” to the remote areas of the Roman Empire to live among the Visigoths in 200AD.

This is cartoon religion and less than cartoon history.

Christianity in the Western Empire, Rome, Britain, Gaul, disappeared.  It first returned with St. Patrick in Ireland and Irish monks returned Christianity to what we call Britain, France and even Italy.

There was no pope in Rome. There was no Rome.  Go there.  It had been taken down stone by stone, abandoned, no water, no food supply, nothing left.

The Visigoths visit Rome to do their thing

Ninety five percent of the world’s Christians lived in the Middle East, Judea or Palestine, Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Jordan, Syria, Iraq and Persia.  For hundreds of years there was no Muslim religion.

Another unpleasant secret.  Mohamed the Prophet reformed the Jewish religion, believed Christ to be a primary Prophet of Islam and established his religion on totally Jewish roots but accepting Christ and his teachings as paramount.

When I tour the Middle East, I visit Mosques but I also visit churches, the oldest in the world.

The real pope was the Bishop of Jerusalem but the power of the church increasingly moved to Constantinople, into the hierarchy of the Roman Empire who rewrote religion into politics, threw out holy writings and created a political religion that was designed to meld easily into the cacophony of Roman and Greek mythology, the many gods.

Didn’t Solomon worship many gods?  When someone says “hold no other gods above me,” they are polytheistic, not monotheistic.  To the Romans, Jupiter was the head god, to Solomon, Yahweh was, to the Greeks it was Jove.

To the Danes it was Odin.

The Twelve Trips

Sorry kids, but these were all polytheistic religions, especially Judaism.  The issue was which god was in charge, not how many gods.

The other issue was “graven images” or worshiping animal shapes and pictures.  Jews and Muslims are iconoclasts, they don’t do photos with god or the prophets.

The issue, of course, is that, when reviewing the holy books, there is mention of a messiah.  Was it Christ?  Christians say yes.  Jews say Christ lives in “piss and shit” while Muslims believe he was a great prophet.

What reality is, we never are told.  There were two Roman empires, one real one, the Eastern one, Greek, Christian after Constantine, somewhat Christian at least.

Constantine would have appointed himself god or at least pope if he had been able to get away with it.  He was one of the great liars of all time.

The west was gone, destroyed by the barbarians, nothing remained.  There were early Jewish settlements in France but Jews who worshiped Christ and built churches.  These became the Cathars and were killed in the holocaust of the Albigensian Crusade.  Read about them in something other than the Da Vinci Codes.

Magdalene died in France, according to those there, mother of Christ’s children, wife of Christ and founder of the Church.  Millions of Catholics believe this and believe she is the real “Mary.”

Go to Spain or Southern France and learn of Christianity where thousands of years are treated as yesterday.

To Americans who call themselves Christians, they could more appropriately be called “Paulists.”  The “Apostle Paul” was never an apostle, nor was “Matthew, Mark, Luke or John.”

Constantine had the real gospels destroyed.  Wonder what he didn’t like about them?

Paul was a “convenience,” he fit the Roman religion well and was chosen to be the founder of the polyglot religion that became the Christianity that Muslims rebelled against.

Oh, they didn’t tell you that?

Then there are Jews.  None were left in the “holy land.”  They didn’t take the bus to Warsaw but converted to Christianity, the official religion of the empire and later, many became Muslims, accepting Mohamed as a Prophet.  We call those Jews, pure Semites, “Palestinians.” 

Some are Jews, very few, some are Christians but were forced to flee the “holy land” by, well, we aren’t allow to say, and others are Muslims by converting from Christianity to a version of reformed Judaism called Islam which allows Christ to be a great Prophet.

This allows the “messiah” issue to be sidestepped.

There were a few Jews who had settled in Roman cities but those cities were gone, the numbers of Jews we don’t know and the truth about where they settled in Europe very different from what we are told.

Those that remained, I am guessing, stayed near the Mediterranean, moved to Persia and Iraq or Morocco.

This is guessing, there is NO history.

None moved to Germany and Poland and became the current “post-holocaust” settlers of Israel.  There is no historical support for that.

Some say that all European Jews were coverts, Khazars who were pushed west by waves of barbarians.  All of this, especially attempts at fictional racist history, is pure fabrication.

There is no real study of any of this, politics took it over 2000 years ago and it only got worse and worse.

Everything is lies now.

I have driven hundreds of thousands of miles, visited Mosques and churches, synagogues, lit endless candles, filmed where I can, talked to who I could, read what exists and am still hopelessly ignorant and learning each day.

What is clear is this:  Those who talk of religion with few exceptions are nuts.  Some are great men.  Very few know the difference and this has made religion a bane on mankind, or this is how I see it.

Religion will survive.  It is said that the Templars intended to join the 3 religions of the Book, Christianity, Islam and Judaism, into one through a great conclave.  Popes have talked about it as have others.

Instead, religion has provided “cover” for terrorism, church bombings, wars between Sunni and Shiite Muslims and Jews against the world.

I wonder how many actually believe any of it.  In France, only 11% are actually Catholic.  I know many who go to church in America but say it is for “the good of their business.”

Few know their religion and fewer still believe.

The attraction is there, denial of death, eternal life, seeing long lost dead friends, pets, getting back your old cars, all of this is written into fiction about religion, ghost stories, phony fables, “bible stories” with no basis whatsoever and the books themselves, some of them are pure freakishness.

What is the story today?  The “holyland” is emptied of Christians, who made up 35% of the population not that long ago.  They left for 2 reasons, one being that they feel pressure from the Muslim majority among their own Semites and secondly, that they are recognized as “non Jews” in Israel and subjected to being walled off, apartheid abuses and even violence.

One point I can be clear about, it is an Israeli policy to foster violence against Christians across the Middle East and blame it on Muslims.

Then again, Christians in Lebanon and elsewhere have been discriminated against by Muslims.  It is very real and continually lied about.  Problem is, it is easy to exploit.

One can see great evil in religions.  One of the great ironies of religion is how well Israel gets along, secretly, with the Wahhabist sect which is the most insane form of Islam.  They teach that Jews and Christians are monkeys, same as Judaism, under the King Torah, teaches Jews that “goyim” are cattle to be bred and slaughtered.

People who believe this scare the hell out of me.

People who teach these things, all of them, whatever religion, are war criminals and need to be kept away from the public.

There are laws and courts that cover this but only Jews are effective at getting their way.  Problem is, they also build the car bombs that blow up churches and mosques that keep the wars going and then sell “security and counter-terrorism” equipment to stop their own deeds.

They have been caught so many times, the funniest spraying swastikas on synagogues, a recruiting method of their organizations.

During WW2, Zionists joined with Hitler because they wanted him to expel Jews to Palestine where they could then kill the British occupiers.

This is in every history book, an iota of truth that stands alone.

Who is to blame?  Common men of good will exist in the majority in all religions, and in a greater majority outside all religion entirely.  We call that “enlightenment.”

A few profit from war and hate and love to manipulate, breed fear, stage phony acts of terrorism and this has been going on forever.   Every peaceful demonstration has “agent provacateurs” ready to throw bombs, always working for the police or that mysterious “New World Order” we hear so much about.

What is the extreme message, what would Christ or Mohamed say, what would a “righteous Jew” say (sic)?

Those who preach hate should die by the sword.

Real international law enforced by real international courts, not the “joke” ICC or the phony United Nations and the gangsters that run well over 100 nations as “elected leaders” will ever take mankind to a world of peace, understanding and plenty.

This is why oligarchy, now called “the 1%” is never called what it really is, organized crime.

It is how “they” got to choose candidates, run the police, own the courts, control the news, twist entertainment into “hate speech” and breed war and fear.

We let them.

The message, of course, is that we can stop, but only if we become educated, if and when we stop lying, when we physically remove those who work to twist our thought, breed hate and live off our blood.

I suspect that if Jesus were ever to return he would nuke the whole place.  Religion, as Fr. Malachi Martin once told me, proves only one thing, Satan exists.

He said he wished it were otherwise.


Malachi Martin, former Vatican Secretary of State and best selling author said the fastest growing religion in the world is Satanism.  According to Martin, the most vulnerable populations were Catholic Jesuits, Jews, Evangelical Christians and certain sects of Islam.  Iran recognizes Satanists, those who worship or consort with “jinns” as a security threat.

Western security organizations come upon continual references to Satanism and Satanic rituals among America’s oldest and most powerful families, within the military academies and throughout the news and entertainment industry.

Most secret societies are Satanists, the groups talked about in blogs as running the world or cultivating new and more “evil” leaders.  Their rituals are all Satanic, disguised behind phony tradition and “hazing.”  Blood sacrifice, child murder, these are common crimes among the powerful, crimes that surfaced during the Franklin affair.  Pedophiles are not the issue, Satanism is… and child kidnapping and murder in Washington, is known of and accepted by all in government.

Does this explain a thing or two?

Almost all Satanists attend regular worship as Christians, Muslims and Jews, the use of “cover” a key part of their belief system.

Fr. Malachi Martin claims that many, some very powerful, some seemingly ordinary, but in numbers beyond imagination, are inhabited by demons and that religion is in denial of this.

If you meet someone “infested or possessed,” they will tell you, or could if they would, that they are the rational ones, the enlightened, that their “god” is the only real god and that “that other guy” went on vacation long ago.  This is why so many Jesuits are Satanists, like the coven here in Toledo, look into Father Gerald Miller.  Try to get past the edited versions.

I mention this only in passing.   When I think of Dr. Aafia, kidnapped, raped, tortured, children killed, all done by American military officers, or of the Rodriguez torture policies or the look of Bush and Cheney I have moments when  I fear Martin may be right and that my own rationalism and humanism may be hiding a supernatural world of endless evil that fills our lives every day and can never be described with conventional rational beliefs.

I read the Wikipedia of former General Paul Vallely related to a defense firm today.  Is this a total lie, a “hit piece” by Wikipedia or is he “one of them.”  If I am wrong about religion then are most religious wrong about  something else?


Posted in EducationComments Off on Ain’t Nobody Gonna Like This

Intelligence Rupture Over Iran: Israeli Apparat Falling Apart


By Dr. Ismail Salami

Three nuclear Pinocchios

Producing from his pocket a sheet of paper which contained a biblical quote from the Prophet Zachariah, former Shin Bet chief said, “I will tell you things that might be harsh. I cannot trust Netanyahu and Barak at the wheel in confronting Iran. They are infected with messianic feelings over Iran,” thereby dealing a heavy blow to the Israeli regime.

A rift the size of a potential coup is taking shape between the Israeli government and the military-intelligence men over Iran, a fact which threatens the ruling Israeli political apparat on the one hand and exonerates Iran of all years-long groundless allegations on the other.

In fact, Iran has become a recent obsession with the present and past Israeli intelligence men insofar as the very mention of the name is enough to cause anger in the Israeli officials.

In point of fact, the fire started when Israel’s Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Benny Gantz said he does not believe Iran will pursue nuclear weapons after years of efforts made by Tel Aviv and its allies to convince the world otherwise and swept through the Zionist barley. In an interview with the Israeli daily Ha’aretz, he described Iran’s leadership as “very rational” who would not make such a decision.

Also speaking at the Majdi Forum in Kfar Saba, a Tel Aviv suburb on Friday, former Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) director Yuval Diskin said Barak and Netanyahu are deluded into believing that they have “messianic” missions and added that they lie about the projected effectiveness of an Israeli strike on Iran.

“There’s a false image being presented to public and that’s what bothers me. They [Netanyahu and Barak] are giving the sense that if Israel doesn’t act, Iran will have nuclear weapons. This part of the sentence apparently has an element of truth. But in the second part of the sentence, they turn to the – sorry for the expression – the ‘stupid public’ or the layman public… and tell them if Israel acts, there won’t be [an Iranian] nuclear program. And that’s the incorrect part of the sentence,” Diskin said.

Iran is a taboo word in the dictionary of the Zionists and anyone who speaks a word or words implicating a defense of or support for the Islamic Republic is considered an enemy. That is why Diskin’s scathing comments were interpreted as stemming from ‘personal desperation’. Some described him as being the latest in a line of “moronic intelligence chiefs”. Israeli Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz called his remarks “crude and inappropriate”, saying it is “clear that the timing and style of his comments stem from personal rather than substantive motives.” However, Israeli opposition leader Shaul Mofaz said Sunday he took Diskin’s criticism of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak very seriously and rejected claims that the comments were made out of personal, political considerations.

On the other hand, some Israeli military and intelligence people joined in sympathy and supported Diskin in his criticism of Netanyahu. Former Mossad chief Meir Dagan expressed support for Diskin, saying he was a serious man and spoke his own “internal truth.” Also, Former IDF chief of staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi defended Diskin on Sunday and said, “I know Diskin and he spoke what was on his heart out of genuine concern.” In the meantime, Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert joined a chorus of voices warning against rushing into war with Iran, saying, “There is enough time to try different avenues of pressure to change the balance of power with Iran without the need for a direct military confrontation with Iran.”

Generally, there are two different fronts concerning Diskin: the first group includes those who have served in the intelligence organizations and are cognizant of the true nature of Iran nuclear program and therefore silently or loudly criticize their government for its ‘bomb, bomb Iran’ rhetoric. And the second group includes those who follow the Zionist leaders including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who lie about the Iranian nuclear program and serve as nuclear Pinocchios in the international arena and play an important role in misleading the international community on Iran.

A strong feeling of fear is eroding the Israeli regime from within and without. On the one hand, the regime has come under the close scrutiny of the intelligence people who are exposing the lies of the regime about Iran which is per se a very bad sign for Israel. On the other hand, the Zionist regime is fearful that the talks (slated for May 23 in Baghdad) between Iran and the P5+1 group of world powers could ultimately end with a deal that would allow Tehran to continue enriching uranium. At all events, the regime is toddling on political razor’s edge and that it is already caught between a rock and a hard place.

So, in order to sabotage the 5+1 talks, the Israeli regime has sent National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror to Europe to hold talks with European officials. Amidror arrived in Brussels on Monday and held talks with Helga Schmid, the EU deputy secretary general for political affairs, who is responsible for preparatory talks with Iran ahead of the Baghdad meeting. Amidror was also expected to travel on Wednesday to Berlin where he was to meet top German officials, among them Hans-Dieter Lucas, Germany’s representative to the Iran talks. A top Israeli official has described Amidror’s Europe tour as “extremely sensitive,” saying his visits are aimed at obtaining more information about the contents of the previous round of talks in the Turkish city of Istanbul and knowing the P5+1’s strategy about the Baghdad meeting.

Apparently, what is happening is not in the least in the best interests of Israel.

By way of countering the anti-regime remarks by the top military and intelligence people in Israel, Netanyahu and Barak have in recent days embarked on toning up their war rhetoric against Iran. In fact, the Zionist duo are steadfast in sowing the seeds of extremism, fear and hatred in order to give a cloak of legitimacy to a possible strike against the Islamic Republic.

Posted in IranComments Off on Intelligence Rupture Over Iran: Israeli Apparat Falling Apart

Sadat’s War on IsraHell: A heroic or a Collusive Act


“Conciliation between Cairo and Tel Aviv was not Kissinger’s idea, besides he never expected the bold diplomatic move by Sadat whom he never took seriously. But all that was to change after the October war 1973″

Dr. Ashraf Ezzat

Anwar el-Sadat the former Egyptian president (1970-1981) who launched a daring military war against Israel to liberate the occupied land of the Sinai Peninsula in 1973, whose military commanders and valiant soldiers made an astonishing crossing of the Suez Canal and took over the impregnable Bar Lev line and who also surprised the whole world with his visit to Jerusalem in 1977 and later with his peace treaty with Israel in 1979 was not a hero of war and peace, as he is dubbed in Egypt, rather he was a conniver , a co-conspirator with the Americans and Israelis and a traitor to his Syrian allies and Arab friends.

According to one of the most controversial articles that has been circulating the web since last February, president Sadat got into conspiracy with the Israelis, betrayed his ally Syria, condemned the Syrian army to destruction and Damascus to bombardment, allowed General Sharon’s tanks to cross without hindrance to the western bank of the Suez Canal, and actually planned a defeat of the Egyptian troops in the October War 1973.

Vladimir Vinogradov

The author of that unsubstantiated article talks of some secret file, written by the Soviet Ambassador in Cairo at the early 1970s, Vladimir M. Vinogradov, apparently a draft for a memorandum addressed to the Soviet politbureau, describes the 1973 October War as a collusive enterprise between US, Egyptian and Israeli leaders and orchestrated by Henry Kissinger.

Though such a memorandum was never published by the former soviet ambassador nor confirmed by the Russian diplomatic circles, nevertheless, and for the sake of shedding more light on this highly important war, I thought we might delve into the historical records of the October 1973/ yum Kippur war and reexamine the chronicles of the ferocious three week- military confrontation between Egypt and Israel, and see if the alleged story of Mr. Vinogradov held any water.

October 6 /Yom Kippur War

The war was initiated by Egypt and Syria on Oct. 6, 1973, on the Jewish holy day of Yom Kippur and during Ramadan, the holy month of fasting in Islam, and continued until Oct. 25, 1973.

The war, which eventually drew both the United States and the Soviet Union into indirect confrontation in defense of their respective allies, was launched, above all by president Sadat, with the diplomatic aim of convincing a chastened—if still undefeated—Israel to negotiate on terms more favorable to the Arab countries and especially Egypt.

“It was aimed as a limited operation; the land was not my aim, at all. I wanted only to prove to the whole world that the Israeli theory of security would collapse and we could cross the Suez Canal and capture the Bar Lev line.” declared Sadat in a 1974 documentary by (abc)

I believe we should bear that goal of Sadat clearly in mind before we carry on with our reexamination of the October war for this rationale will help us understand some of the shadowy chronicles of the war.

Six-Day War 1967

The previous Arab-Israeli war, the Six-Day War (1967), was perhaps more than a just war for the Arabs and for Egyptians in particular. The 1967 defeat was so unexpected and bitter that the Egyptians dubbed it “Naksa” – the grave setback.

The withdrawal from Sinai in that humiliating manner has plunged the Egyptian nation and its army into a deep psychological trauma near to defeatism.

The most strategic outcomes of this war was not the land Israel grabbed over the six-day attack, rather it was the breakdown of president Nasser’s project of pan-Arabism along with his rejection to acknowledge the existence of Israel.

President Nasser

The Arabs under Nasser’s leadership believed they could easily settle the conflict with Israel militarily. The 1967 war proved them wrong.

President Nasser was an outright socialist who made his opposition to the neo-imperialism represented in the United States and the neo-colonialism embodied by Israel no secret.

And since his popularity in the Arab world was indeed unprecedented and unshakable, the United States had to give credit to Israel for the eclipse of his glory in the Middle East. And from then on, Israel has touted its place as the indispensable ally of the United States in the Middle East.

When Sadat took over after Nasser died in 1970, he actually inherited a heavy burden. Egypt was a broken nation suffering from a failing economy, haunted by the shameful Naksa and aspiring to restore its pride by a military revenge no matter how long it took or how much sacrifices it required.

As 80% of Egypt military capability was destroyed in 1967, the Israelis, according to most military experts, agreed that Egypt would need at least another 10 years before it could engage in any military confrontation with Israel especially after Israel had fortified its positions in Sinai behind the infamously formidable Bar Lev line that stretched along the eastern coast of the Suez canal.

Unlike Nasser, Sadat despised socialism and in a way anticipated that the Soviets’ influence in the Middle East would recede, in that respect he was a true visionary, and he firmly believed that the United States, according to his own perspective, would want to step in and take the place of the Russians.

Sadat’s initiative

Embarking on his presidency, it didn’t take Sadat long before he managed to set his priorities straight. He knew he needed to get rid of the old guards of Nasser’s era, he knew he should begin weaning Egypt from relying solely on the Soviet Union and he wanted from his first day in office to, believe it or not, go to Israel and sign a peace treaty with the Jewish state. Watch Walter Cronkite, CBS anchorman,  remembering Sadat’s early initiative.

Anwar Sadat with Golda Meir in Israel 1977

Yes, shaking hands with the Israelis was Sadat’s own idea to spare Egypt long years of backbreaking military confrontations, restore the Egyptian sovereignty over Sinai and hopefully his opportunity to get into a new alliance with the white house.

In other words, the conciliation between Cairo and Tel Aviv was not the idea of Kissinger who never expected such a diplomatic move.  Sadat for two years hoped that the white house would take notice of his new initiative by any means even if it meant sending a message with the American actress Shirley Temple when she was in Cairo 1972

Just as Nasser made no secret of his animosity to the Americans and the Israelis, Sadat was making it loud and clear from the very beginning, especially to the western main stream media, that he was embarking on a brand new path in the Arab-Israeli conflict and that the white house should take notice, for he really meant business.

But unfortunately, President Nixon never lent him enough attention and Kissinger himself, whom the alleged report accuse of choreographing the 1973 war, never took Sadat seriously and instead thought that he was just bluffing.

With diplomacy stalemated, during 1972 and 1973, Sadat’s decision to launch a joint attack with the Syrians on the Israeli forces occupying Sinai and the Golan heights was not based on merely retaliatory motives or only aimed at settling the score with the Israelis, rather it was his last resort to get the Israeli diplomacy into negotiating a withdrawal from Sinai under the auspices of the Americans.

The surprise of the October war

President Sadat

The war began with a massive and astonishing Egyptian crossing of the Suez Canal during the first three days – according to the plan of Marshal Saad Shazly, Egypt’s chief of staff, after which the Egyptians dug in a territory (12 km deep east of Suez Canal) that was protected by the powerful Egyptian air defense (soviet SAM missile) umbrella and settled into a semi-stalemate.

On the other hand, the Syrians coordinated their attack on the Golan Heights to coincide with the Egyptian offensive and initially made threatening gains against the greatly outnumbered Israelis. Within a week and after the massive American airlift of reinforcement and resupply of munitions Israel recovered and launched a four-day counter-offensive, driving deep into Syria.

To relieve this pressure on the Syrian front and bending to the Syrians and Russians, the Egyptians went back on the offensive and operated outside the range of SAM missiles- so much to the furious opposition and dismay of marshal Shazly, and the Egyptian forces were decisively overpowered; an Israeli armored division then counterattacked at the gap between the second and third Egyptian armies headed by General Ariel Sharon, crossed the Suez Canal, and advanced southward and westward in over a week of heavy fighting.

On October 22 a United Nations-brokered ceasefire quickly unraveled, with each side blaming the other for the breach. By October 24, the Israelis had improved their positions considerably and completed their encirclement of Egypt’s Third Army.

This development led to tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union and consequently U.S. military raised their alert levels to DEFCON (Defense Condition) III. Eventually, a second ceasefire, closely monitored by Kissinger, was imposed cooperatively on October 25 to end the war.

Back to Vinogradov’s alleged memorandum.  In conclusion, he asks some questions: how the Egyptian crossing of Suez Canal could be a surprise if the Russians evacuated their families a few days before the war? Why did the Egyptian forces not proceed after the crossing but stood still? Why did they have no plans for advancing? Why there was a forty km-wide unguarded gap between the 2d and the 3d armies, the gap that invited Sharon’s raid?

A military accomplishment and a prelude to peace

Egyptian forces crossing Suez Canal and seizing Israeli Bar Lev line, October 1973

The published memoirs of Marshal Saad Shazlyalong with the recently declassified U.S. archival material, unearthed by the National Security Archive, provide critically important information on policies, perceptions, and decisions of the parties involved in the October War 1973.

During the late winter and spring of 1973, Henry Kissinger held several secret meetings on Middle East issues in New York and France with Muhammad Hafez Ismail, Sadat’s national security adviser. In one of the meetings Kissinger told Ismail“don’t expect to win on the negotiating table what you lost on the battlefield.” In other words, Washington could do little to help as long as Egypt was the defeated power.

So according to Kissinger and considering the then stalemated status quo, Sadat had no alternative but to start a sudden and swift war with the element of deception/surprise as one of his most strategic tools for, if not winning the whole war, securing at least the first phase of crossing the Suez Canal into Sinai.

Document 7 of the declassified American national security archive stated “Neither Israeli nor U.S. intelligence recognized the imminence of war in early October 1973. AMAN, the Israeli military intelligence organization, and the leadership generally assumed that national military power would deter war and downplayed the possibility of conflict until 1975 when Egypt and Syria had better air capabilities. Moreover, Israeli military and political leaders had a condescending view of Arab fighting abilities”

During the weeks before the war, the Soviets believed that the situation was growing more dangerous, but like the Americans and the Israelis they did not see the resumption of fighting [as] at all likely. Yet, they had begun to evacuate dependents because they had learned of the decision for war, but not its exact timing.

A suspected Russian Intelligence Services (RIS, or KGB) official, Leo Yerdrashnikov (whose official cover was deputy director of the local Tass office in Cairo) also sheds light on when the Soviets learned of Sadat’s decision. On 3 October, Sadat told Soviet Ambassador Vladimir Vinogradov that war was imminent. Moscow did not, however, learn when the war would start until the morning of 6 October. (Note 19)

And as the Russians knew that the war was imminent, so did the Israelis whom were tipped off by an Egyptian Top Source (who may have been a double agent) Moreover, in late September Jordan’s King Hussein warnedPrime Minister Golda Meir that Syrian forces were taking an “attack position.” These developments concerned the Israelis but AMAN ruled out major war.

The received wisdom in the American intelligence establishment was that the Arabs would not initiate war as long as the military balance favored Israel. In other words, Tel Aviv’s preponderant military power deterred war. This was the prevailing view of Israeli intelligence and U.S. intelligence bought into it. A few weeks later, Assistant Secretary of State Intelligence and Research Ray Cline observed, “Our difficulty was partly that we were brainwashed by the Israelis, who brainwashed themselves.” (Note 24)

As for the reluctance of the Egyptian army to advance deeper into Sinai after crossing the canal, it was simply, and according to Shazly’s plan (The High Minarets) a suicidal tactic to operate out of the cover range of the SAM anti-craft missile especially that the Israelis had the superiority in the air forces and outnumbered the Egyptian tanks on the ground.

And wasn’t it for the Syrians’ plea for the Soviet Union to interfere and urge Sadat to advance into Sinai, the Egyptian armored divisions wouldn’t have pressed on.

Sadat believed that, with the miraculous crossing of the Suez Canal and the seizing of Bar Lev line and the whole eastern coast of Sinai, he got all he ever needed to start maneuvering diplomatically. Debunking the Israeli invincibility, under the nose of the Americans, was indeed Sadat’s idea of winning the military conflict in October 1973

As for the gap that showed up in the Egyptian lines along the western side of the canal, a game changer in the war, was easily detected by the Israelis once the two armored units – the 4th&21st –  were ordered by Sadat on October 12, to thrust deeper into Sinai and try to reach the strategic Mitla and Gidi Passes.

Expanding the military operations beyond the protective range of the SAM umbrella was absolutely a wrong military decision by Sadat. But I wouldn’t rule out the possibility that Kissinger and the Russians, trying to break the stalemate on the battlefield, influenced Sadat’s decision.

And while the Russians and the Americans helped Sadat to put an end to the October war, they both had no say in how or when it started. Let’s make no mistake about that.

YouTube Sadat and October 1973 War/ Edited by Ashraf Ezzat

Almost 40 years have gone since October war during which the Israeli side got the security, the recognition and the peace they needed, while the Egyptian side got back all of its occupied land and above all restored the pride they lost in 1967.

General El-Shazly, during October war…

To most analysts and observers this sounds as a fair deal but actually it isn’t, not for many Egyptians any way.

And nobody could sum it up better than the man who fought the war himself, Marshal Saad Shazly.

Shazly looked back at how the October war started and how it ended up in a way that led to the Camp David treaty and eventually neutralized Egypt in the Arab-Israeli conflict, and concluded

“This brilliant military victory was turned into a political defeat, when Egypt was removed from the camp of resistance, to Israeli occupation of Arab lands to the camp of appeasement.

This shift in the balance of power in the region and the vacuum created by the absence of Egypt, allowed Israel to try to eliminate resisters one by one, starting with Lebanon, Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon again, Iraq again and now current rhetoric indicates that Iran and Syria are next.”

Posted in EgyptComments Off on Sadat’s War on IsraHell: A heroic or a Collusive Act

Solidarity and Realpolitik: My Response to Jeff Halper

By Susan Abulhawa

Some years ago, I was on a panel with three men, Jeff Halper among them, at a Sabeel conference in Pennsylvania. Each panelist was asked to give their vision for a solution to the ‘Palestine/Israel conflict’.  Because I was sitting at the end of the table, I was the last to speak.  I listened to each one of my fellow participants lay out different versions of a two-state solution, each more depressing than the other, each with irrelevant nuances (all previously articulated by Israel, by the way) on how to make the refugee problem just go away.  They spoke the tired talk of land swaps, compromise, several surreal highways that bypass humanity for miles on end, and more creative solutions designed to circumvent the application of human rights where Palestinians are concerned.

When my turn came, I spoke of Palestinians being accorded the same basic rights that apply to the rest of humanity, including the right to return to one’s home after fleeing a conflict.  I spoke of equality under the law regardless of religion.  I spoke of a construct that would prevent one group from systematically oppressing another.  I spoke of human dignity and the universal right to it.  I spoke of equal access to resources, including water, regardless of religion.

I will never forget Jeff Halper’s response, which he was eager to voice even before I had finished speaking.  He began with a smile, the way an adult might smile at the naive remarks of a small child.  He needed to give me a lesson in reality, and proceed to tell me, in the patronizing way of someone who knows best, that my vision lacked “how shall I say it…Realpolitik”.

I did not waiver then, nor have I since, on my position that Palestinians are not a lesser species who should be required to aspire to compromised human dignity in order to accommodate someone else’s racist notions of divine entitlement.

That said, I do not consider Jeff Halper racist and I acknowledge the mostly positive impact he has had in bringing attention to one of Israel’s enduring cruelties, namely the systematic demolition of Palestinian homes as a tool to effectuate ethnic cleansing of the native non-Jewish population.  But in my view, that does not entitle him to speak of what Palestinians should or shouldn’t do.  I also don’t think it qualifies him as an anti-zionist when he clearly accepts the privilege accorded to Jews only.  After all, Jeff Halper is an American from Minnesota who made aliyah (Israel’s entitlement program that allows Jews from all over the world to take up residence in my homeland, ultimately in place of the expelled natives). Perhaps is it my lack of Realpolitik, but I cannot reconcile embracing the very foundation of zionism on one hand, and calling oneself an anti-zionist on the other.

In a recent interview on Al Jazeera’s website with Frank Barat, he did just that.  He also laid out a dismal scenario for the future of Palestinians, based on what Israel is very likely plotting, namely the annexation of Area C and the pacifying of the Palestinian Authority (also likely) with economic incentives and mini Bantustans they can call a state.  But he missed the mark, repeatedly, when it came to Palestinians themselves, as if he sized us all up with a glance and decided he was not impressed. Despite the burgeoning nonviolent resistance taking place all over Palestine, in various forms ranging from demonstrations, significant solidarity campaigns, hunger strikes, and more, he says that “[Palestinian] resistance is impossible” now.  At best, he trivializes the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which is the first coordinated nonviolent movement of Palestinians inside and outside of Palestine that has also managed to inspire and capture imaginations of individuals and organizations all over the world to stand in solidarity with the Palestinian struggle for freedom.  Again, my lack of Realpolitik here, but to me, creating a situation where it is possible to force the implementation of human rights and restore dignity to Palestinian society is in itself an end.  Jeff Halper seems unable to consider anything other than a negotiated agreement to be an end.

He enumerates all that is wrong with internal Palestinian issues.  Of course there are problems. We know our leadership is doing little more than pick up the trash and keep people in line while Israel steals more and more of our land.  We are not happy about it either.  But he seems to suggest that he, along with other Israelis I presume, have been carrying the burden of resolving this conflict.  In one instance he says:

“We’ve (I assume Israeli leftists?) brought this to governments, we’ve raised public awareness, we’ve had campaigns, we’ve done this for decades, we’ve made this collectively, one of two or three really global issues. But without Palestinians we can only take it so far.”

Then he adds:

“I am trying to challenge a little bit my Palestinian counterparts.  Where are you guys?”

If I read this correctly (and I will grant the benefit of the doubt that it was not meant as it reads), then he clearly sees himself at the forefront of the Palestinian struggle where his Palestinians counterparts are disorganized, haphazard, or not present.  He even suggests that at this crucial time, “Palestinians have to take over,” further supporting the suggestion that Palestinians are not at the helm of the resistance.

He also asserts that importing Jews from all over the world to live in colonies built on land confiscated from private Palestinian owners is “not settler colonialism”.  What is it then?

But back to his strange assertion that Palestinians “should take over” (from whom?), he describes an instance where he refused to participate in the global march to Jerusalem because the Palestinian organizers (who took over?) did not want to include the world “Israel,” the name of the country that denies our very existence and seeks in every way to eradicate us.  Is it that Jeff Halper wants “Palestinians to take over” as long as Palestinians do so in a way that does not offend the sensitivities of the very people deriving privilege at their expense?  That is not how solidarity works.

I don’t presume to tell Israelis what they should or should not do but I would like to see Israelis concentrate on their own failures rather than ours.  I would sure like to hear those who have made aliyah acknowledge that it was not their right to do so; that making aliyah is a crime against the native people who have been and continue to be forcibly expelled to make way for those making aliyah. I would like to hear an apology. The trauma that Palestinians feel is very much part of the Realpolitik and it is not unlike the trauma in the Jewish psyche.  It comes from the same humiliation and anguish of not being considered fully human. Of being treated like vermin by those with the guns. If Halper truly understood that, perhaps dropping the word “Israel” – a word that hovers over the rubble of our destroyed homes and suffuses the pain at our collective core – would have been a no brainer expression of solidarity.

Posted in CampaignsComments Off on Solidarity and Realpolitik: My Response to Jeff Halper

Armenian Genocide Holocaust)

By: David Davidian

One cannot support the conclusion, “Many may be surprised to read that the Armenian Genocide Holocaust) was perpetrated, not by the Turks, but by Turkish Jewry known as Crypto-Jews.” However, by the selective deletion of facts, a partially informed readership might not dismiss it.

If one studies the history of the era, one will conclude that the Germans, with whom the Turks had strong military ties, had the most influence over the Turks and their genocide of the Armenians. However, this is a topic for another study. By selectively deleting facts and ignoring the overall history one could even claim [again incorrectly] that Freemasonry was responsible for the genocide of the Armenians. Zionist machinations were not insignificant, but they were not aimed at the destruction of the Armenians or to take control of their businesses. Their goal was to populate Palestine with Jews. Better than just Jews populating Palestine would be to have a non-Muslim mandate over the process and Palestine itself. Thus, it was in the interest of Zionists for the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, if simple “equality and brotherhood” as promised by the progressive factions in the Young Turk movement wasn’t realized.

The Young Turk movement contained many elements, with initially Armenians in its ranks. The Young Turks deposed the Sultan and came to power in 1908, After the second Balkan war in 1913, Turkey lost control of its last remaining major areas of the Balkans. The promise of “equality and brotherhood” gave way to a coup by proto-fascists, including Talaat, Jemal, and Enver Pashas, who saw the empire disintegrating especially as the winds of WWI were forming. Young Turk leaders saw the national unifying programs of leaders such as Germany’s Bismarck and Italy’s Garibaldi as role models. The proto-fascists among the Young Turks knew after the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire by European powers, ethnic Turks might be left with only a small patch of real estate that wasn’t majority Arab, Greek, Armenian, or Kurd. Under guise of WWI the Turks began a campaign to remove or forcibly digest those ethnic groups that would be in the way of a new Turkish entity, an entity that was considered the heartland of Ottoman Turkey. That area was Anatolia, and its eastern expanse was the homeland of the Armenians.

The process of Turkifying Anatolia began decades before even the First Zionist Congress and it continues today with the suppression of Turkey’s Kurds. A goal that was initially vague and unsophisticated was catalyzed by the Young Turks and was made the national policy of the Turkish Republic by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. The process is quite clear. And what is clear is that today’s Turkish state enjoys the success of that genocide. A shirt made of Turkish cotton could find as its origins an Armenian cotton field or factory.

It is claimed, “Zionists wanted to control the empire by inciting internal ethnic conflicts to get rid of Armenians and to take over their businesses and political positions.” There is no evidence of this claim and moreover nobody but ethnic Turks or Turkifiable Muslim immigrants took over Armenian property and business.

It is claimed, “So they promised Christian Armenian leaders to regain independent Armenia if they help dismantle the empire, and at the same time they promised Muslim Kurdish leaders to form independent Kurdistan if they exterminated Armenians.” Armenian political parties demanded equal treatment before the law and at best demanded autonomy. Zionists could not deliver an independent Armenia to the Armenians – they couldn’t even populate Palestine with a critical mass of Jews! If the Young Turk leaders were indeed Zionists, there is an additional contradiction here.

It is claimed, “The Armenians were duped by Zionists’ promises and publically endorsed the Balfour Declaration hoping that UK would protect them from the Turks and support them in forming an independent Armenian State.” The Balfour Declaration was made in 1917, by 1916 the majority of Armenians had already been murdered.

It is claimed, “Crypto-Jews, then, led Sultan Abdul Hamid to believe that Armenian revolutionaries were conspiring with foreign Christian missionaries to take over the empire, and prompted him to order the Young Turks, mainly crypto-Jews, to commit atrocities against Armenians to put down any revolution. Well, considering it was the Young Turks who overthrew Sultan Abdul Hamid, this would have been quite impossible.

The intent in this comment is not to debase or point out all that is missing but rather to demonstrate the absurdity of a Zionist genocide of the Armenians. In a series of articles in the New York Times, it was reported:

“On Jan. 8, [1915] Jemal Pasha [top leader of the Young Turks along with Talaat and Enver Pasha] ordered the destruction of all Jewish colonization documents within a fortnight under penalty of death. In many cases land settled by Jews was handed over to Arabs, and wheat collected by the relief committee in Galilee was confiscated in order to feed the army. … A proclamation issued by the commander of the Fourth [Turkish] Army Corps describes Zionism as a revolutionary anti-Tukish movement which must be stamped out.”

Jemal Pasha twice tried to expel all Jews from Jerusalem and both times the Germans, top ally of the Turks, intervened. However, in April 1917 8,000 Jews were brutally deported from the Jaffa region. Zionist leaders were terrified that the Turks may be planning for these Jews the same fate as handed the Armenians. This was even before before the pro-British Nili spy ring of Zionist Jews was discovered by the Turks in October, 1917, and its leading figures killed. Why would Zionists need spies to spy on Turkish intention if the Turks were led by crypto Jews? They wouldn’t.

There continues to be no lack of just causes in this world. They all have their legitimate battlegrounds. Identifying the field of battle is part of the challenge.


Posted in EducationComments Off on Armenian Genocide Holocaust)

Shoah’s pages