Archive | May 14th, 2012

US sees Yemen as laboratory to test new weapons’

An interview with Mark Glenn, Crescent & Cross Solidarity Movement

A lot of these theaters of conflicts particularly where drones are being used, I believe this is the US military’s way of testing out their new toy. Whether or not the drones are effective, whether or not the drones are called for, I think that this is just a giant laboratory, in a sense, for the United States military to be testing out these weapons in order to demonstrate their effectiveness on the weapons market.”

The United States has come under fire for increasing its drone attacks in Yemen, with human rights groups urging Washington to come clean on its deadly drone attacks.

Washington has stepped up its drone attacks in Yemen since the country’s new President Abdrabuh Mansur Hadi took office in February.

Press TV has conducted an interview with Mark Glenn, Crescent & Cross Solidarity Movement, to further discuss the issue. The following is a transcription of the interview.

Press TV: If you may, tell us and our viewers what’s going on in Abyan, and the operations that have taken place in the “al-Qaeda held site” as claimed by Sana’a.

Glenn: We have to look at the timing of this. I certainly don’t think it was a certain coincidence that John Brennan is flying into Yemen to meet with Yemen’s new leader [while] at the same time this massive government operation against al-Qaeda is taking place.

Yemen is an impoverished country and needs US dollars specifically in the form of military aid because there’s basically no industry and no economy in the country outside of the money that the United States gave Yemen for military expenditure.

The fact that Yemen’s army is such an important part of its economy in that the United States is funding this, obviously it’s important that at a time when Obama’s [counter Arab advisors] are going to be meeting with the new president, that it looks like the new president is busy doing the bidding of the United States in order to keep those dollars continuing.

Press TV: If you may, share your thoughts with us regarding the expansion of the drone strikes in Yemen. One account back in 2009, in the al-Majala region, which left many women and children dead, no one has been held accountable for that incident.

Glenn: Yes, of course. This is just one of dozens if not hundreds, if indeed not thousands, of similar incidents where innocents have been killed not just in Yemen but in Pakistan and in Afghanistan.

I think for the most part, it’s more politically expedient to use drones to carry out these operations rather than to actually have American boots on the ground which may as well bring American casualties which, of course, have political limitations for an election year.

The case in Yemen, the United States doesn’t have a proportional and exceptionally large force of troops there, it would make sense to use drones in this region and also for research and development as well.

A lot of these theaters of conflicts particularly where drones are being used, I believe this is the US military’s way of testing out their new toy. Whether or not the drones are effective, whether or not the drones are called for, I think that this is just a giant laboratory, in a sense, for the United States military to be testing out these weapons in order to demonstrate their effectiveness on the weapons market.

We cannot rule out the financial issue in all of this that while our president is maybe talking about keeping our men safe from al-Qaeda and terrorism as well, he has to answer to the powerful military and industrial complex that helps get him elected.

In order for that military and industrial complex to keep humming along, they need wars in order to be able to test out their various products so that they will be able to sell them on the world market.

Posted in YemenComments Off on US sees Yemen as laboratory to test new weapons’

Did JCS Chief Dempsey Just End the War on Islam?


by Kevin Barrett


Since the Zionist-instigated false-flag attacks of 9/11, the United States of American has been at war with the religion of Islam.

The neocon cabal of Zionist Christians and Jews behind 9/11 have tried to disguise their war on Islam as a “war on terror.” But occasionally one of them blurts out the truth: “I always thought it was a mistake not to say what Iraq really was, that is, a war against an expanding Islam,” opined neocon think-tanker James Schall of Georgetown University.*

The election of Barack Obama turned down the rhetorical volume of the war on Islam, but didn’t fundamentally change the policies: continued criminal occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, support for anti-Muslim operations in Somalia, Sudan, and elsewhere, drone strikes and kidnappings of Muslim leaders and innocent bystanders, false-flag attacks attributed to Muslims, rabid islamophobia blanketing the media, preparations for war with Iran, and the looting of the US treasury and destruction of the American economy to pay for it all. (All of this despite the fact that no Islamic country poses the slightest geo-strategic threat to the United States, while China surges past us economically and, soon, militarily, fueled by money and stolen military technology from the Rothschilds and their Zionist crime center in Occupied Palestine.)

But now, a cornerstone of the war on Islam – the brainwashing of US military personnel to hate, fear, and mass-murder people because they happen to be Muslim – has been removed by none other than General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Mikey Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation reports:

On Tuesday, April 24th, 2012, the nation’s top soldier, Chairman of the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) General Martin Dempsey, initiated a truly seminal message. He finally generated thelong-overdue, mandatory edict that all training and educational materials throughout the U.S. military must be immediately reviewed within one month’s time to ensure that no anti-Muslim or anti-Islam references or content remain. Henceforth, officers and enlisted members will no longer be taught and institutionally indoctrinated that “the United States is at war with Islam and we ought to just recognize that.”
In the elective class “Perspectives on Islam and Islamic Radicalism,” officers from all four branches of the military were indoctrinated with vile Islamophobic programs masquerading as “anti-terrorist” education.
What JCS Chairman Gen. Dempsey seeks to investigate is a heinous curriculum of systemic, anti-Muslim hatred that has warped the cultural competence of United States service members, leading to grim results in combat theaters within which the U.S. has been engaged since 9/11. In 2012 alone there have been reports of bodies being urinated on by U.S. Marines, the proud and brazen display of the Nazi Waffen-SS banner by U.S. Marines, soldiers posing with corpses, and most insultingly, the burning of copies of the Qur’an at Bagram Air Field.
The long-overdue review of the appalling Islamophobic materials used to train our servicemen and servicewomen is a classic case of the proverbial closing of the barn door long after the farm animals have left. President Obama’s surprise visit to Afghanistan on Tuesday, May 1, 2012 starkly illustrated this fact. The ink had barely dried on the Strategic Partnership Agreement signed by himself and Afghan President Hamid Karzai before car bombs and gunfire rattled Kabul in a daring Taliban attack centered on the high-security Green Village compound.
In hindsight, the Department of Defense-sanctioned anti-Muslim training programs have proven to be a quintessentially formidable propaganda asset in the Taliban fight against the “Crusading” NATO forces. Indeed, they provide grist for the mill of regional resentment and strain alliances to a breaking point.

Listen to my interview with Mikey Weinstein:

But will Gen. Dempsey’s changes stick? The false-flag attacks of 9/11/2001 created tremendous islamophobic momentum in US and Western popular culture and the minds of policy-makers – as they were designed to do. Philip Zelikow, the self-professed expert on the creation and maintenance of public myths like Pearl Harbor, which continue to impact public opinion and policy down through the generations presumably helped write the script for the 9/11 attacks with this multi-generational effect in view. The purpose of 9/11 was not only to launch wars on Iraq and Afghanistan, but more importantly to bring the US into a long-term, multi-generational war against Israel’s enemies – namely, the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims. One order by Gen. Dempsey to the military won’t be enough to overcome this momentum.

If General Dempsey really wants to end the war on Islam, he should go to whatever lengths are necessary to expose the truth about 9/11. To that end, he ought to consider a Constitutional Counter-Coup in which all those complicit in 9/11 and its cover-up are suddenly and without warning detained and charged by military courts rather than the neocon-owned federal judiciary. Obviously the media criminals who have been covering up 9/11 would need to be detained and charged, in order to prevent them from lying their way out of the predicament they created for themselves. And, equally obviously, US forces would have to be put on high alert, with all the big guns pointed at Israel, to prevent more 9/11-style chicanery and deter resistance to the Constitutional Counter-Coup.

Posted in USAComments Off on Did JCS Chief Dempsey Just End the War on Islam?

Crunch Time in Syria: The UN Protocol’s Jihadist “Loophole”


It is crunch time in Syria. Allow the jihadist battle to take flight there, and there is no telling how far and wide this fight will spread. The Annan Plan is the “only game in town,” and the Syrian Army the only military force that can take action against these militants.

by Sharmine Narwani


A man wearing a black shirt bearing an Al-Qaeda flag (L) speaks with a UN observer as monitors meet with rebels and civilians in the village of Azzara in the province of Homs on 4 May 2012. (Photo: AFP- Joseph Eid)

We have arrived at a determining moment in the Syrian crisis. The choices are startlingly simple:

1) Cautious, incremental movement toward political reconciliation and reform spearheaded by the Syrian government and closely monitored by Kofi Annan’s UN mission, Moscow, Tehran and Beijing.

2) Dangerous escalation of violence and militarization that will increasingly include foreign jihadists and is likely spill over into the broader Middle East.

Major General Robert –Head of UN Mission in Syria

After only one week of observing events in Syria first-hand, United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMIS) commander Major-General Robert Mood spelled out the dwindling options:

The 600-pound gorilla in the room is the growing presence of al-Qaeda and other jihadists operating inside the Syria.

“I can tell you from my engagement that whomever I meet, they tell me that they want to move on the basis of Kofi Annan’s Six Point Plan, and that includes the Free Syrian Army locally, and that includes Local Coordination Committees. I am fully aware that there are others with a different agenda, that have other ideas, but I have yet to see a credible alternative to Kofi Annan’s Six Point Plan. So one way to put it is that it is, for now, the only game in town.”

Perhaps he should have said the only “sane” game in town.

Because there is that other “game” – the one that seeks forced regime-change at any cost, even if it means having dangerous Salafi militants fight the battle NATO cannot.

Those with “different agendas” and “other ideas” are a diverse group with goals distinctly opposed to demilitarization, reconciliation and reform along the Annan/Syrian/Russian track.

So far, we understand them to include countries and organizations still intent on materially assisting or weaponizing the armed opposition – in contravention of the spirit of UN Security Council Resolution 2043. After all, only days after Syria approved the Annan Plan, Friends of Syria member states committed millions of dollars in “non-lethal aid” to the rebels. Members Saudi Arabia and Qatar pledged to provide salaries for the fighters and financially reward defectors from the regular Syrian Army, while the Turkish, GCC and western-backed Syrian National Council (SNC) overtly went begging for funds to increase weapons supplies to armed groups inside Syria.

If Annan does things right, these nations and groups can be bullied and cajoled into compliance via a more robust set of UN Protocols, expressly drafted to change their behaviors.

No, the 600-pound gorilla in the room with “different agendas” and “other ideas” is not so much the GCC-NATO backed armed militias scattered throughout the country’s opposition strongholds. It is the growing presence of al-Qaeda and other jihadists operating inside the Syrian theater.

Militant Jihadists: Turning Point in Syria

In early February, unnamed US officials confirmed that al-Qaeda was responsible for the December 23 and January 6 bombings in Damascus and was also likely behind the double suicide blasts in Aleppo on February 10. This unexpected confirmation from Washington rang alarm bells, but not enough to slow down NATO-GCC efforts to incautiously promote regime change in Syria.

That changed slightly a few days later when al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri delivered his eight-minute internet speech “Onward, Oh Lions of Syria” urging fellow jihadists from neighboring Muslim countries to join the battle in Syria. Chat rooms on jihadist websites revealed that militants from Iraq, Libya, Lebanon and elsewhere were already engaged inside the country. Video clips circulated on the web showed gruesome violent crimes by militant Islamists against both Syrian security forces and other Islamists, while radical sheikhs were televised ordering acts of retribution against civilian members of Syria’s ruling Alawite sect.

Our problem today is that we don’t have control over who carries arms.

On Syria’s border with Lebanon, jihadist activities have skyrocketed. The Libya-origin arms shipment destined for Syria and intercepted by the Lebanese Army two weeks ago was no lone incident – it was the fourth such “capture.” And just ten days ago, a fellow reporter captured on film Jihadists transporting heavy weapons like Stinger shoulder-held surface-to-air missiles, Cobra anti-tank missiles and Sam-7 surface-to-air missiles into Syrian territory.

In a recent BBC Arabic interview, National Coordination Committee (NCC) official Haytham Manna, a leading opposition figure, surprised many by acknowledging the role of “non-Syrians” in the armed groups: “Jihadist groups that fought from Afghanistan to Bosnia and therefore this third group for us constitutes a grave danger. For your information, I can share names of 3 members of the Free Syria Army who were killed at the hands of Arab fighters – non-Syrians.”

Says Manna: “Our problem today is that we don’t have control over who carries arms.”

So now it appears the jihadist element inside Syria is going to put the international community to a test.

Kofi Annan urges ‘one voice’ while he mediates Syrian crisis – The Nation

The shaky April 12 ceasefire under the Annan Plan has been rocked recently by a series of bombings and targeted assassinations, with both sides accusing the other of violations.

The fact is, even if the Syrian government were to withdraw all troops from populated areas, and Major-General Mood’s contacts within the main armed opposition groups agreed to lay down arms, there are parties on the ground in Syria that are currently operating outside of the UN’s reach.

The UN draft Protocol which lays out the terms for the “cessation of armed violence” between the two sides, only refers to the non-governmental party vaguely as “armed opposition groups and relevant elements.”

This is no longer sufficient.

There can be no cessation of hostilities in Syria unless all groups cease fighting. There can be no guarantees until there is clarity about who is in the fight.

This does not necessarily mean the end of Annan’s efforts. It does mean, however, that the final UN Protocol document needs to be revised to specify the various parties held accountable on the “armed opposition” side. And if there are groups that will not cooperate with the mission and will continue to carry out armed operations, there must be clear and precise provisions for how and when the Syrian security forces can deal with these armed entities.

Al-Qaeda: Syria, Then Where?

The fatal attacks come at a time when Moscow is working overtime to negotiate power-sharing roles in a new Syrian political environment with members of the Syrian domestic opposition.

Churkin to RT — The latest resolution on Syria, unanimously passed in the Security Council, may finally put things “on the right track” in the troubled country, …

On Tuesday, Syria’s representative at the United Nations Bashar al-Jafari provided the Security Council with a surprise CD containing confessions from more than two dozen jihadists, placing the UN body on notice. A well-connected intelligence source confirmed last week that among the documentation compiled on foreign fighters – some killed, some captured – are nationals of at least two European states.

The Russians have been spitting mad about the fact that the UN Protocol “ties the regime’s hands” in dealing with the Syrian jihadist element, and in the past week they have made little effort to hide this problem.

In a statement, the Russian foreign ministry slammed recent “terrorist attacks
…for escalating violence in the country to thwart the implementation of the peace plan.”

These fatal attacks come at a time when Moscow is working overtime to negotiate power-sharing roles in a new Syrian political environment with members of the Syrian domestic opposition.

U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice went on the rhetorical offensive against Syria…

But Washington too has a big role to play in Syria in the next few weeks, and it needs to make its mind up fast.Geoffrey Aronson, director of research at the Foundation for Middle East Peace, points out that the Obama administration is rudderless on Syria – “unable to support a solution with the regime and its allies,” they “snipe at the Annan mission from the sidelines” with no real plan in mind:

Lacking a strategic compass, Washington finds itself not leading from behind but being dragged from behind in support of the policies and agendas of others — including in the Gulf and among the Syrian National Council — that promise at best to continue bleeding the regime, its opponents, and the long-suffering Syrian people, and that threaten the institutional and even the territorial integrity of the Syrian state.

Al-Qaeda is no longer a small hierarchical group – today, it is more of an “idea” whose informal “membership” consists of individual cells that are difficult to snuff out. This is an opportunistic and expansionist ideology that has at its very roots an axe to grind with the United States, Israel and the rulers of Saudi Arabia – the latter nation being the largest source of funding for this brand of militant jihadism in the world.

If “spoiler” groups inside Syria continue to receive funding and support from external parties – unchecked and ignored by the UN Security Council – and ongoing violence threatens to sidetrack political reform and reconciliation, there are likely to be repercussions against regional states participating in these provocations.

Parties opposed to western hegemony in the Middle East see the battle in Syria as an existential one, and sources say that if all cards are exhausted, the fight can opportunistically be moved to vulnerable bordering states – and even into the Persian Gulf where jihadists have their own axe to grind with pro-US, pro-Israel monarchies.

Parties opposed to western hegemony in the Middle East see the battle in Syria as an existential one.

A single major explosion in Riyadh or World Cup-intent Doha can fundamentally rock the internal dynamics and external outlook of those countries.

On Tuesday, Kofi Annan briefed the Security Council on his Plan in Syria: “If it fails, as the Secretary-General has warned, it will affect the whole region.” He added that he was not just speaking of the Syrian government or armed groups “but also the governments which have influence on the opposition.”

It is crunch time in Syria. Allow the jihadist battle to take flight there, and there is no telling how far and wide this fight will spread. The Annan Plan is the “only game in town,” and the Syrian Army the only military force that can take action against these militants.

Define this common enemy in a revised UN Protocol – and draft a Security Council-approved plan to target these foreign fighters. Or else stop complaining about Al Qaeda explosives smuggled onto flights destined for the United States and beyond.

Original Source: Al-Akhbar English


Security Council changed prerogatives in Syrian crisis – Churkin to RT



Related Posts:

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Crunch Time in Syria: The UN Protocol’s Jihadist “Loophole”

Zio-Nazi Looted Palestinian Books


On the fate of the looted Palestinian books from 1948 – please watch and send on:


Witness – The Great Book Robbery

By Al Jazeera English Channel| 1 video

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Zio-Nazi Looted Palestinian Books

Zio-Nazi High Court rejected Palestinian Detainees’ Appeal


[PCHR_e] Urgent statement: The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) on the occasion of its international board meeting in Paris on May 12th 2012, strongly denounces the situation of Palestinian prisoners in Israel

Urgent statement


The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) on the occasion of its international board meeting in Paris on May 12th 2012, strongly denounces the situation of Palestinian prisoners in Israel, who have been on hunger strike since April 17th 2012 in protest against administrative detention, as well as living conditions and ill-treatment in the prisons.

FIDH is particularly worried about the deteriorating health situation of Mr. Bilal Diab and Mr. Tha’er Halahleh as a result of their hunger strike and ill-treatment, and fears for the safety of their lives. Last week, Israel’s High Court of Justice rejected these detainees’ appeal to be released from administrative detention. This decision comes despite the reports by Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) that Diab and Halahleh’s lives are in imminent danger as they have been on hunger strike for more than 72 days.

According to FIDH member organization in Gaza, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) “at least 2,000 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli prisons and detention facilities have been on hunger strike since 17 April 2012 in order to denounce their ongoing administrative detention as well as other violations of their rights.  These demands include: improving their living conditions in the Israeli prisons; ensuring family visitations, particularly for the prisoners from the Gaza Strip; allowing detainees to receive education; and putting an end to the solitary confinement policy, repression and night searches”.

Diab and Halahleh stand amongst  around 300 Palestinians suffering from the Israel’s policy of administrative detention, according to FIDH member organization B’tselem. The procedure allows for the detention of Palestinians in Israeli prisons without charges brought against them, and without being informed of any evidence, under the auspices of “security concerns”. According to B’tselem, in December 2011, 60% of those detained have had their detention extended.

FIDH calls upon the immediate release of Diab, Halahleh , and all others who are arbitrary detained.

Furthermore, FIDH calls on the Israeli authorities to abide by their international obligations and respect the international humanitarian and human rights laws and in particular Article 14 paragraph 3 (a) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights(ICCPR) which provides that everyone should be entitled to “be informed promptly and in detail in a language which he understands of the nature and cause of the charge against him”. The policy of administrative detention contravenes with the basic international human rights standards as the evidence against persons are  submitted in secret to the military court and neither the defendants nor their lawyers are informed of this evidence. Accordingly, FIDH recalls that the right do fair trial and information about charges cannot be compromise for security concerns.


Posted in Palestine Affairs, Human RightsComments Off on Zio-Nazi High Court rejected Palestinian Detainees’ Appeal

It Will Lead To War


By Ron Paul

Statement on H.R.4133 – United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012, May 9, 2012

Mr. Speaker: I rise in opposition to HR 4133, the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act, which unfortunately is another piece of one-sided and counter-productive foreign policy legislation. This bill’s real intent seems to be more saber-rattling against Iran and Syria, and it undermines US diplomatic efforts by making clear that the US is not an honest broker seeking peace for the Middle East.

The bill calls for the United States to significantly increase our provision of sophisticated weaponry to Israel, and states that it is to be US policy to “help Israel preserve its qualitative military edge” in the region.

While I absolutely believe that Israel – and any other nation — should be free to determine for itself what is necessary for its national security, I do not believe that those decisions should be underwritten by US taxpayers and backed up by the US military.

This bill states that it is the policy of the United States to “reaffirm the enduring commitment of the United States to the security of the State of Israel as a Jewish state.” However, according to our Constitution the policy of the United States government should be to protect the security of the United States, not to guarantee the religious, ethnic, or cultural composition of a foreign country. In fact, our own Constitution prohibits the establishment of any particular religion in the US.

More than 20 years after the reason for NATO’s existence – the Warsaw Pact – has disappeared, this legislation seeks to find a new mission for that anachronistic alliance: the defense of Israel. Calling for “an expanded role for Israel within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), including an enhanced presence at NATO headquarters and exercises,” it reads like a dream for interventionists and the military industrial complex. As I have said many times, NATO should be disbanded not expanded.

This bill will not help the United States, it will not help Israel, and it will not help the Middle East. It will implicitly authorize much more US interventionism in the region at a time when we cannot afford the foreign commitments we already have. It more likely will lead to war against Syria, Iran, or both. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.


The Israel Lobby Never Sleeps

By Philip Giraldi

There has been no media reporting on H.R.4133 — United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012 introduced into the House of Representatives of the 112th Congress on March 5th “To express the sense of Congress regarding the United States-Israel strategic relationship, to direct the President to submit to Congress reports on United States actions to enhance this relationship and to assist in the defense of Israel, and for other purposes.”

The sponsors include Eric Cantor, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and Howard Berman (all of whom are Jewish) and also Steny Hoyer of Maryland, who is Norwegian but might as well be Jewish given his frequently expressed love for Israel. The bill provides Israel with a blank check drawn on the US taxpayer to maintain its “qualitative military superiority” over all of its neighbors combined. It is scheduled for passage on a “suspension of the rules,” which means it will not actually be voted on and will be approved by consent of Congress.

It is perhaps no coincidence that on Monday the Republicans in the guise of the redoubtable Howard “Buck” McKeon released their proposal for increased defense spending (yes, increased) for 2013. It includes a cool $1 billion for Israel to upgrade its missile defenses. That’s on top of the $3 billion it already receives plus numerous co-production programs that are off the books and defense spending that is not considered to be part of the annual grant. Perhaps “Buck” should consider changing his sobriquet to “Warbucks.” Buck is not Jewish but he is a Mormon, perhaps a sign of what will be coming if we are so unlucky as to vote into office the born again Hawk Mitt Romney. Mitt has a foreign policy team consisting of more than thirty stalwarts, mostly drawn from the Bush Administration, and nearly all of whom are neocons. It features Robert Kaplan, John Bolton, and Dan Senor.

Israel and its partisan hacks in Congress are utterly shameless. At a time when the country is screaming for some measure of restraint in government spending, Israel is the one budget line that only sees increases.

Posted in USAComments Off on It Will Lead To War


U.S. Court Judgment, December 2011 (Havlish v. Iran)
By Julie Lévesque

The U.S. court judgment issued in December 2011 (Havlish v. Iran) which blames the Iran government for the 9/11 attacks is part of the propaganda ploy, which consists in demonizing the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is part and parcel of America’s ongoing war against Iran since the overthrow of its U.S.-backed monarchy in 1979.

Like many similar lawsuits in America, this legal procedure’s ultimate goal is to draw off important sums of money from the Iranian government leading to the possible confiscation of assets, thereby further strangling the country’s economy, already targeted by U.S. sanctions, while simultaneously reinforcingIran’s image of  a “state sponsor of terrorism”.

This ruling allows the families involved to claim damages from the Iranian government as well from a number of Iranian State corporations, the amount of which is still unknown, but could reach billions, like last December’s judgement which found Iran liable for the 1983 Beirut bombings.

This judicial procedure is nothing more than another vicious weapon in the fabricated “War on Terror” to be used against another Muslim country, with a view to destabilizing Iran as well as justifying ongoing military threats. It also says a lot more about the people behind the lawsuit than about the accused. The expert witnesses who testified against Iran are very active in warmongering neocon circles. They belong to a web of architects of the 21st century Middle-Eastern wars, ranging from high profile propagandists to intelligence and military officers, including former U.S. officials.

In addition, all three branches of the U.S. government, under both Republicans and Democrats, contributed to make this and other legal attacks against Iran possible, while preventing comparable cases against the Saudi monarchy, most notably a case accusing Saudi Arabia for the 9/11 attacks. Although the evidence pertaining to the role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11 remains classified, the available evidence in the public domaine indicates more connections between Al Qaeda and the Saudi monarchy than those allegedly pertaining to Iran.

But what makes this case absurd is that in September 2011, a few months before the judgment, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has questioned the official 9/11 narrative, was accused by Al-Qaeda leaders of  “spreading conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks”. The semi-official media outlet of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, insisted that al-Qaeda “had been behind the attacks and criticised the Iranian president for discrediting the terrorist group.”

Part I of this analysis (below) will focus on the evidence on which the judgement is based.

Part II (forthcoming) examines  the profile of the expert witnesses and their links to the U.S government, various anti-Iran lobbies and think tanks. Part III centers on the role of various branches of the US government in facilitating judicial procedures against Iran. Part IV explores how the U.S. authorities have been protectingSaudi Arabia from similar legal suits.

Part I 

The “War on Terror Rests” on Kangaroo Courts

Osama bin Laden, allegedly responsible for 9/11, was apparently killed over a year ago by a U.S. Special Operations Team in violation of international law.

Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) detained in Guantanamo and four others have recently been accused of orchestrating the 9/11 attacks. Their detention, mistreatment and accusations before a military tribunal also violate international law. According to this court judgement, Iran is also to blame for 9/11.

Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda are accused as well in Havlish v. Iran, but we will focus on Hezbollah and the Iranian defendants, including many entities such as the Ministries of Finance and Energy. Since it is a default judgment, the defendants were not present in court and no cross-examination took place.

Considering the fact that bin Laden has never been formally accused of the 9/11 attacks, due to lack of evidence, and that the evidence against KSM and the other accused has been obtained through torture and is classified, it is no surprise that the case against Iran also relies on “shaky evidence”. In fact, it seems that in logic of America’s “Global War on Terror” anybody can be accused of the 9/11 attacks with trumped up charges.

Havlish v. Iran reads like a typical kangaroo court case. Iran’s responsibility for 9/11 is mostly based on previous attacks and foiled attempts in the U.S. and other countries and all the so-called evidence is actually a collection of assumptions which are turned into facts from one sentence to another without any addition of factual evidence to support it. Some claims are inconsistent, purely subjective and what is said to be the strongest evidence is a clumsy distortion of facts, which can be easily refuted by sound factual evidence.

Ironically, this attempt to link Iran to 9/11 demonstrates a notoriously twisted legal procedure, not to mention a cruel lack of corroborating evidence.

To set the stage, numerous attacks unrelated to 9/11 are presented with alleged financial or material backing from Iran and/or Hezbollah, the Shia Muslim militant group. We can see a pattern and key people emerge: very often the U.S. and Israel accuse Iran of those attacks which have either not been resolved, or have been blamed on other governments and terrorist groups, or other organisations are said to have claimed responsibility for them.

Here are some examples:

– The Israeli embassy bombing in Buenos Aires in 1992:

The US and Israel have accused Iran and Hezbollah of those attacks, without providing corroborating evidence. The Department of State blamed a suicide bomber from Hezbollah driving a truck, but according to a report ordered by Argentina’s Supreme Court, the bomb was in the building: “The engineers established, with 99 percent certainty, the exact location where the explosives were and the quantity that was used.” The case has not been solved. (March 17, 1992: Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires Is Bombed, Hezbollah and Iran Accused Despite Lack of Evidence.)

– The 1993 WTC bombing:

Former CIA Director James Woolsey tried to prove Iraq was responsible for the 1993 bombing and hinted at possible links with Iran in an interview from October 2001. (Gunning for Saddam. Interview R. James Woolsey, Frontline, PBS, October 2001.)

An internal CIA report concluded however that the CIA was partly responsible for the bombing since “Several of the bombers were trained by the CIA to fight in the Afghan war.” (February 26, 1993: WTC Is Bombed but Does Not Collapse, as Bombers Had Hoped, History Commons.)

– The foiled Eiffel tower attack with a hijacked French airliner:

The Algerian group GIA (Groupe islamique armé) claimed responsibility for the hijacking. According to the famous U.S. think tank Council on Foreign Relations the origins of the GIA are the same as al-Qaeda:

Like lots of violent Islamic movements around the world, many militants in the GIA appear to trace their radicalization to Afghanistan, where they fought as mujahadeen, or Islamic guerillas, against the Soviet army from 1979 to 1989. (Lauren Vriens, Armed Islamic Group (Algeria, Islamists), Council on Foreign Relations, May 27, 2009.)

It is worth mentioning the creation of al-Qaeda by the U.S. government is well documented and has been admitted by Robert Gates and Zbignew Brzezinski:

According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. (Le Nouvel Observateur, January 15-21, 1998, p. 76. Translation taken from Counterpunch Zbigniew Brzezinski: How Jimmy Carter and I Started the Mujahideen.)

 – The 1995 assassination attempt on Mubarak:

Conducted by the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, a group led by Ayman Al-Zawahiri, and closely affiliated with Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. (Nate Jones, Document Friday: Mubarak, al-Bashir, al-Zawahiri, and bin Laden. The 1995 Assassination Attempt in Addis Ababa, The National Security Archives, February 4, 2011.)

– The Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers attack in 1996:

The Saudis blamed Hezbollah for the attacks, “but US investigators still believe bin Laden was involved”.

In June 2001, a US grand jury will indict 13 Saudis for the bombing. According to the indictment, Iran and Hezbollah were also involved in the attack. [US CONGRESS,7/24/2003] (June 25, 1996: Khobar Towers Are Bombed; Unclear Who Culprit Is, History Commons.)

Former US officials will later claim that even after the bombing, the CIA instructed officials at its Saudi station not to collect information on Islamic extremists in Saudi Arabia. (After June 25, 1996: CIA Agents Told Not to Track Militants in Saudi Arabia, History Commons.)

– The 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen:

An American judge found Sudan guilty of those attacks through its support for al-Qaeda.

Four experts on terrorism, including former CIA Director R. James Woolsey, testified in person or by deposition Tuesday to support the families’ contention that al-Qaeda needed the African nation’s help to carry out the attack. (Associated Press, Federal judge rules Sudan responsible for USSCole bombing in 2000, NBC News, March 14, 2007.)

Clearly, this series of attacks by no means constitutes “evidence” of Iran’s involvement in 9/11.

In addition to the absence of links between Iran and 9/11, the nature of the assumptions and presumptons in the judgment is striking. The terms “proof” or “evidence” are simply nowhere to be found. Instead, formulations such as “Iran must have”, “would have” “it is likely that Iran”, are numerous. In the end, all these suspicions and beliefs are put together and presented as solid evidence of Iran’s participation in the 9/11 attacks. Yet, even in abundance, assumptions can not become facts. Here are some examples:

(41) “Ministry of Economic Affairs and Finance […] had to have been involved in Iran’s […] financial support for terrorists […] al-Qaeda in particular”

(42) “Iranian Ministry of Commerce and Ministry of Petroleum must have been aware of weapons shipments bound for terrorist groups.”

(252) Lopez and Tefft “state it is their expert opinion to a reasonable degree of professional certainty that the Iranian Regime’s use of terror, and specifically, its material support of al-Qaeda and terrorist attacks, including 9/11, is beyond question.”

(259) Bergman “asserts that the authorities in the Israeli and American intelligence services believe that Hizballah’s Imad Mughniyah conceived, designed, planned commanded and/or carried out terrorist operations […] in Syria in February 2008.”

(269) “[…] document dated May 14, 2001 from Ali Akbar Nateq Nouri and concludes it appears to be authentic. […] reveals both high level links between the Iran Supreme leader’s intelligence apparatus and al-Qaeda […]”

(274) Timmerman states he was told by the 9/11 commission staff members that the Iranians were fully aware they were helping operatives […] of an organization preparing attacks against theUnited States.”

Other “evidence” of Iran’s link to 9/11 includes “Iranians travelling to Afghanistan” and al-Qaeda and Hezbollah operatives being on the same flight to Beirut. Again that proves nothing. Another issue raised to prove Iran was behind the attacks is Iran’s financial support to Hezbollah, which in turn supported and trained al-Qaeda. If such a link is admitted, then the U.S. should be the first to blame for 9/11 since al-Qaeda is aU.S. creation, “an intelligence asset” as acknowledged above by Brzezinski as well as Secretary of StateHillary Clinton.

But the “strongest” evidence brought up in this case against the Islamic republic relates to the stamping of Saudi passports by Iranian immigration. Iran is accused of being a “state sponsor of terrorist travel because it did not stamp the Saudi terrorists’ passports”. That is a half truth. It is true that Iran did not stamp the “Saudi terrorists’ passports”, but not because they were known to be terrorists, but simply because Iran does not stamp ANY Saudi passport.

If that, according to “expert” testimonies, is the strongest evidence proving Iran’s links to the 9/11 attacks, then the whole case has absolutely no grounds. Moreover, if one follows this logic, the U.S. should be found guilty of the attacks, since the alleged hijackers were delivered U.S. visas and the intelligence agencies were aware of their presence on American soil. Most importantly, they did nothing about it.

Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Shaffer was part of a secret military unit called “Able Danger”, which collaborated with international intelligence agencies and the Defense Intelligence Agency. The unit had identified and tracked terrorists allegedly involved in 9/11, including Mohamed Atta, more than a year before the attacks.(Pentagon opens doors to 9/11 attacks,; 9 11 Prior Knowledge Able Danger Hearing for Lt Col Anthony Shaffer in Congress C SPAN,, September 24, 2009)

Lt Col Anthony Shaffer

Lt Col Shaffer testified at the 9/11 Commission. Navy Captain Scott Phillpott also testified to the 9/11 Commission staff about Able Danger and the identification of Mohammed Atta in January and February of 2000. Not only were their testimonies, as well as any other information relating to Able Danger, completely ignored in the report, but the latter states that “American intelligence agencies were unaware of Mr. Atta until the day of the attacks”. (Philip Shenon, Navy Officer Affirms Assertions About Pre-9/11 Data on Atta, August 22, 2005.)

Needless to say, the 9/11 Commission Report is a collection of “omissions and distortions”, a very well orchestrated cover-up, a reality to which even the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Commission, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton adhere, claiming it was “set up to fail”.

The case against Iran is largely based on the 9/11 Commission Report, and three of the “expert witnesses” who testified were part of that commission. Among them is Dietrich Snell, one of the lead investigators and the man Captain Phillpott testified to about Able Danger. (Douglas Jehl and Philip Shenon, 9/11 Commission’s Staff Rejected Report on Early Identification of Chief Hijacker, August 11, 2005.)

Part II of this article (forthcoming) will focus on the expert witnesses who testified against Iran in the court case.

Posted in IranComments Off on IRAN ACCUSED OF BEING BEHIND 9/11 ATTACKS

Zio-Nazi Army Training Jewish Paramilitary Group in New York



Israeli Army Training Jewish Paramilitary Group in New York


Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Zio-Nazi Army Training Jewish Paramilitary Group in New York

New Syria-linked clashes in Lebanon’s Tripoli


The West Austrlian

TRIPOLI, Lebanon (AFP) – One person was killed and seven others were wounded in fresh clashes on Sunday in Lebanon’s northern city of Tripoli between factions supporting and opposed to the revolt in neighbouring Syria, security sources said.

The man was killed in Bab al-Tebbaneh as residents of the mainly Sunni Muslim district traded gunfire with locals in the Jabal Mohsen area inhabited by Alawites, a Shiite sect of which Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is a member.

A resident of the largely Sunni district of Kobbe was killed in similar clashes on Saturday, which also left five injured.

In a separate incident, an army officer was killed by sniper fire as clashes broke out on Saturday night between the army and a group of young men demonstrating for the release of a fellow Islamist, the sources said.

Seven people, including a woman and a child, were shot and wounded in less intense fighting on Sunday night despite an accord for the army to be deployed in hotspots, raising the weekend casualty toll to three dead and 17 wounded.

Several residents fled to safer areas as the army deployment was delayed.

Gunfire first broke out on Saturday between the Islamists and the army as the young demonstrators, sympathisers of the revolt in Syria, tried to approach the offices of the pro-Assad Syrian Social Nationalist Party.

About 10O young men blocked the northern and southern roads into Tripoli, setting up camp at the southern entrance of Lebanon’s second city.

Black flags bearing the profession of Islam, “God is Greatest”, were planted alongside the Syrian flag of independence, a symbol of revolt in the neighbouring country.

“We will not leave until my brother is released,” said Nizar al-Mawlawi, whose 27-year-old brother Shadi was arrested by Lebanese security forces.

According to a statement from the security services, Shadi al-Mawlawi was arrested as part of an “investigation into his ties to a terrorist organisation,” without going into details.

Syrian authorities have repeatedly charged that arms and fighters are being smuggled in from Lebanon to help the rebels fighting to overthrow Assad.

Lebanon is divided between the opposition, backed by Washington and hostile to the Syrian regime, and the camp of the Shiite group Hezbollah, which dominates the government and is supported by Damascus and Tehran.


Syria clashes kill 27; fighting hits Lebanon

Sunni angry men block the Syria Street which divides the Sunni and Alawite areas, Lebanon, 13/5/12

Four killed in Lebanon; Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood calls for international investigation into Damascus bombings that killed 70.

Violence in Syria killed 27 people on Sunday and spread to neighboring Lebanon, where four people were killed in clashes between supporters of President Bashar Assad and opponents.

In Syria, at least 27 people were killed Sunday, mostly civilians, according to activists, as rebels fought security forces.

Another 10 people were injured in the Lebanese port city of Tripoli, when clashes broke out between residents of the Jabal Mohsen neighborhood, mainly populated by Alawites, and rivals from the Sunni Muslim-dominated district of Bab al-Tabbaneh, said witnesses. Assad is a member of the Alawite sect, an offshoot of Shiite Islam.

The violence was sparked when Lebanese authorities detained a Sunni Muslim cleric, Sheikh Shadi al-Mawlawi, according to local media reports. His followers accused the government of arresting al-Mawlawi because he was helping Syrian refugees in Tripoli, while authorities said he is under investigation for his alleged ties to a terrorist organization.

The Syrian government has repeatedly complained that arms and fighters are being smuggled into its territory from Lebanon to assist opposition rebels seeking to oust Assad’s regime.

Most of those killed in Syria were civilians, who were shot dead in random fire in the central provinces of Hama and Homs, and the northern province of Idlib, according to the opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

Clashes between army defectors and troops also erupted in the cities of Daraa, Deir al-Zour and the capital Damascus.

In Daraa, clashes killed five members of the government security forces, while an army defector was killed in an ambush in Deir al-Zour, the observatory reported.

Reports from Syria cannot be independently verified, as the government has barred most foreign media from the restive areas since a pro-democracy uprising started against Assad’s rule in March 2011.

The persistent violence in Syria has reinforced doubts about the durability of a United Nations-brokered ceasefire that came into effect on April 12.

Last month, the UN Security Council approved the dispatch of observers to Syria. Their number is expected to reach 300 by the end of May.

The ceasefire is a key element of UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan’s plan aimed at ending 14 months of bloodshed in the country. Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood group called on Sunday for an international investigation into the bombings that killed up to 70 people in Damascus on Thursday.

“The Muslim Brotherhood announces its rejection to any form of indiscriminate violence, rejects the terrorist attacks and condemns these methods which can never be the methods of revolutionaries,” the group said in a statement.

“We call for a transparent international investigation in these attacks,” the group added, as it blamed the government for the suicide bombings.

A radical group linked to al-Qaida claimed Saturday that it was behind the twin bombings, which were the deadliest since a pro-democracy uprising started against Assad’s regime in March 2011.

The group, calling itself Al-Nusra Front to Protect the Levant People, said in an online statement attributed to it that the bombings were in retaliation for the regime’s bombardment of residential areas in the country.

The statement’s authenticity could not be independently verified.

Meanwhile, two Turkish journalists detained in Syria for the past two months have returned to Turkey after having been released following mediation by Iran, state news agency Anatolian reported Sunday.

The pair were first flown to the Iranian capital Tehran, before being flown home on the Turkish prime minister’s private jet.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on New Syria-linked clashes in Lebanon’s Tripoli

Zio-Nazi Issues Demolition order Against the School


IDF closes Palestinian school to make way for West Bank training zone

The Palestinian elementary school, located in the Jinba cave village in the southern Hebron hills.

Civil Administration issues demolition order against the school, though residents have no access to any other.


A Palestinian elementary school was shut down last week after Israel’s Civil Administration confiscated the vehicle used to transport teachers to it.

Teachers initially tried coming to the school, located in the Jinba cave village in the southern Hebron hills, by donkey, but this proved disruptive since they were often late.

On Sunday, the administration also confiscated the car of a veterinarian employed by the Palestinian Authority when he came to the village to vaccinate sheep. The vehicles were seized as part of a stepped-up enforcement campaign in Area C, the part of the West Bank under full Israeli control.

The Civil Administration also issued a demolition order against the school, though residents have no access to any other school: The nearest is in Yatta, 20 kilometers away.

In addition, it ordered an access road, tents, mud huts, sheepfolds and solar energy facilities razed, reinstating demolition orders frozen by agreement with the state prosecution in 2007.

In 1999, the area was declared a live-fire exercise zone by the Israel Defense Forces, meaning people aren’t allowed to live there. The residents were evicted but petitioned the High Court of Justice, which issued an interim injunction allowing them to return until it issues a final ruling. Ever since, the case has been stuck in court, with the state requesting and receiving continual postponements of the deadline for filing its response. Last month, the state promised to file its response within 30 days.

The residents’ attorney, Shlomo Lecker, told Haaretz that the wave of confiscations and demolition orders is a serious violation of the High Court’s injunction. “It’s the state that asked to delay hearing the petition for the last 12 years, and you can’t expect hundreds of residents of the cave village to have their lives put on hold for such a long time – that the access road to the site would be blocked, and they would be denied the possibility of giving their children compulsory education,” he said.

Dror Etkes, who has monitored West Bank settlement activity for years, told Haaretz that three settlement outposts had recently expanded into the live-fire zone: Avigail, Mitzpeh Yair and Havat Ma’on. “But as far as I know, there are no restrictions on their movement in the area, and none of their vehicles have been confiscated,” he said. “I also don’t know of any active army exercise area within this live-fire zone. In most of it, there never were any exercises.”

The Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories said the court would hear the petition against the army’s declaration of the live-fire zone in a few days, and the state would give its response there.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, EducationComments Off on Zio-Nazi Issues Demolition order Against the School

Shoah’s pages