Archive | July 21st, 2012


TUT Podcast July 21, 2012

by crescentandcross




We are still ‘under the weather’ as far as our internet at home goes folks, but

not to fear. We will get it done somehow, even if it is a little touch and go for a

while as I figure out how to get a repairman out here to undo what a lightning

strike did yesterday.

IN THE MEANTIME, I hope you enjoy the program I did earlier this week with

the fearless & tireless fighter for for the truth Tyler from the youtube channel



Download Here


Posted in InterviewComments Off on THE UGLY TRUTH RADIO PODCAST

Learn to shoot in IsraHell: American tourists take aim in Zio-Nazi settlement


Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Learn to shoot in IsraHell: American tourists take aim in Zio-Nazi settlement

‘Don’t be duped by Western humanitarian rhetoric on Syria’ – Russia’s UN ambassador


Russia and China have for the third time vetoed a UN Security Council resolution on Syria which would entail tragic consequences for Damascus. Russia’s ambassador to the UN told RT why a diplomatic solution to the crisis remains the only option.

In an exclusive interview with RT, Vitaly Churkin gave his explanation of what is going on in Syria and why he thinks the conflict has spread beyond that country’s borders.

RT: Russia’s decision to veto this latest resolution has caused consternation and widespread criticism of Moscow’s stance – is Russia supporting the Assad regime?


Vitaly Churkin: Of course not. It is all about what needs to be done in order to settle the crisis. Unfortunately, the strategy of our Western colleagues seems to be to try to whip up tensions in and around Syria at every opportunity. And this time they took the occasion of the need to extend the mandate of the monitoring mission in Syria and attached a number of unacceptable clauses to their draft resolution. So, we needed to veto together with China that unacceptable draft to allow Kofi Annan more space to work on the document which was adopted by foreign ministers of a number of countries of the so-called “action group”, which calls for setting up transitional national body and that requires of course the dialogue between various parties. So, in this context, to introduce a resolution which would only entail pressure and almost inevitable sanctions on the Syrian government did not look like a good idea to us at all and we blocked the decision, which in our view was counter-productive.

RT: So, Moscow is not supporting the Assad regime, but America, Britain and France say Russia’s failed the Syrian people – how do you react to that?

VC: You know, they are quite good and bad and loud about their propaganda. I think that’s what they have been doing by criticizing Russia and China stridently. Today it was the British and French [UN] perm reps who went out of their way, unfortunately, piling all sorts of falsehoods on the foreign policies of Russia and China. They should focus more on the need to help Kofi Annan. Unfortunately, they have not done anything at all in order to set and train a productive and positive process in Syria. Instead, they have been working with the so-called “Friends of Syria”. In fact, this is a group of countries who are enemies of the Syrian government, I would not call them the enemies of the Syrian people, but certainly those who want to topple the Syrian government, disregarding the consequences which are extremely tragic; such a policy inevitably entails [tragedy] because the government or President Assad is not simply one individual or a group of individuals. They represent a certain segment of the Syrian population, of a certain power structure, which has existed there for decades. To break it would cause and is causing considerable trouble and bloodshed. To reform it through dialogue, this would be a much more reasonable line of action and this is what Russia has been advocating.

RT: But dialogue has not achieved anything so far. Isn’t there now an overwhelming global sense that something has to be done to stop the killing of innocent people – what about intervention on humanitarian grounds, is that not acceptable to Moscow? I know that Moscow is very concerned about Chapter 7 leading to perhaps military intervention. But what about some form of intervention to stop the killing?

VC: In a way, the monitoring group which we are trying to maintain is a way of political intervention – of practical intervention – n trying to deter violence. Unfortunately, it has not happened, it has not been successful. You said the dialogue has not achieved anything. The problem is the dialogue has not started yet. The opposition groups refuse to enter into dialogue with the Syrian government, which says it is prepared for dialogue. They should try that offer of the Syrian government to enter into dialogue. And this is a major missing link, a major impediment in the way of Kofi Annan’s activity. You know, humanitarian intervention unfortunately only sounds humane, but the fact of the matter is that any military intervention for whatever reason is inevitably going to cause more bloodshed. And we know those greatest humanists in the world – US and UK – intervened in Iraq, for instance, citing all sorts of noble pretexts, in that particular case – non-existent weapons of mass destruction. What it caused – 150 thousand civilian deaths alone, to say nothing about millions of refugees, displaced persons and the whole dislocation in the country. So, don’t be duped by humanitarian rhetoric. There is much more geopolitics in their policy in Syria than humanism. Unfortunately, the practical consequences of their policies there is that the conflict and bloodshed is not abating.

RT: You’ve mentioned geopolitics and I understand you mentioned the fact that what’s happening in Syria is going to spread to Iran eventually. Can you explain that? That Iran is the eventual goal?

VC: I did refer to Iran, but in a slightly different context. I would not rule out that then they would move on to Iran, but I was not referring to that. In my remarks at the [Security] Council of the United Nations earlier today I was referring to their clear interest. And this is a major motivation of their policy and their effort to topple President Assad -in curbing Iranian influence in the Middle East and that entire region. And it is also a major motivation of the other Middle Eastern fighters for democracy – Saudi Arabia and Qatar – who are concerned about what they see as Iranian interest; in Bahrain as well. They claim the Shia protests there is sort of Iranian-sponsored even though some observers – including your colleagues and journalists who have experience on the ground – believe that it happens to be genuine protests against the system which is not entirely democratic, to put it mildly. So, a clear geopolitical dimension is there in the policies of a number of countries, who are extremely aggressive vis-a-vis Syria. And it has nothing to do with the interests of the Syrian people.

RT: What is the worry for Moscow, all these geopolitical implications you’ve explained so clearly, why is Moscow so worried about this? In what way could Moscow be affected?

VC: We are not worried about geopolitical implications even though we believe that greater confrontation with Iran is hurting, is unnecessary and we are directly involved in efforts to resolve peacefully the problem of the Iranian nuclear program. And this growing tension between Iran, the West and the Saudis is not helpful. Our concern is that the Syrian people have to suffer the consequences of this geopolitical struggle and our concern is that the focus of everybody’s policy must be the benefit of the Syrian people. And the only way they can put an end to this tragic conflict is to get to the negotiating table.

And there is a good ground, there is a document which was a consensus document adopted by the “group of action” -foreign ministers in Geneva- two and a half weeks ago which says that a transitional national body needs to be set up and it can not be set up by sanctions, it can not be set up by more pressure on just one side – the Syrian government which is claiming that it is ready for such dialogue, it designated its representative for such a dialogue. But so far the interest from the opposition is not there and we see extreme opposition groups; armed opposition groups resorting to more and more violence and even terrorist attacks like the one we saw yesterday in Damascus. This is not to say that the Syrian government has not resorted to excessive violence at times, they made very serious mistakes and blunders over the months but the time to end it is now. Unless we want to continue it for years, [we need to] enter into a dialogue.

RT: Russia is really stuck by its principles of non-intervention. Is there not a danger of being isolated, bearing in mind the continual vetoing of the sanctions of the UN Security Council and the supplying of military hardware to Syria. Of course Moscow says it is not being used against civilians, but what is it to do for Russia’s reputation and, indeed, its relations after this crisis is over?

VC: We’ll see. I think doing the right thing and not simply following somebody’s catastrophic policy is something which makes me proud and something which eventually will be born out as the right course of action and the right policy under these very difficult circumstances. And about vetoes – if I am not mistaken, the US has cast 60 vetoes on the Palestinian issue alone. So, why don’t you question my American colleagues about the impact of the image of the US in the Middle East of those continuous vetoes? Sometimes even vetoing their own presidential and secretary of state’s public statements. So, the veto is a part of the UN Charter and there is nothing wrong about casting it when you feel the need to do so.

RT: Can we talk about what happens next now? No agreement in the UN Security Council, but Russia has said that it would like to see the extension of the UN observer mission to Syria. But the monitors haven’t made any visible impact on the mission so far. So what’s the point in keeping the mission alive when so far it has failed?

VC: What would be the point of their departure? We think that we have at least more chances to get objective information if it is there If the situation were to improve, they would be on the ground already, so, they would be able to participate more actively in political process and also in dealing with the humanitarian situation. Pulling them out is going to entail negative consequences. Unfortunately, now and again we seem to be entering another diplomatic battle. Now we are going to have a discussion about really making it technically rollover without loading it with political conditions and implications.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on ‘Don’t be duped by Western humanitarian rhetoric on Syria’ – Russia’s UN ambassador

Mossad agents run false flag terror operations in Bulgaria and other states


By Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich

On July 18, 2012, attack on an Israeli tourist bus in Bulgaria took the lives of 5 Israeli nationals, a Bulgarian, and the mysterious suicide bomber. It is reported that the suspect, a young Caucasian, had a fake Michigan driver’s license. According to Israeli Haaretz , a top Bulgarian official warned that it would be a “mistake” to blame a specific country or organization for the attack. However, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had other ideas.

Quick to point the finger at Iran, Mr. Netanyahu called it an “Iranian terror network spreading throughout the world”. He added: “Exactly 18 years after the attack on a Jewish community center in Argentina, the Iranian terror continues to hurt innocent people.” Apparently, it takes a village and some to set Iran up.

These serious allegations with a potential for disaster, demand scrutiny on several levels. The most fundamental question which needs to be addressed is who benefits from these attacks. One must question the location – location, location, location. And finally, analyze the empirical data.

Who Benefits?

In spite of Israel and its Washington lobbies pushing for a war against Iran, of late, prominent voices have adopted a less bellicose stance towards Iran and its nuclear program. The possibility of any military action against Iran which would undoubtedly lead to a closure of the world’s most important oil chokepoint, the Strait of Hormuz, has prompted politicians around the globe to opt for a diplomatic solution to end the impasse with Iran.

Somewhat optimistically, Iran is investing its efforts in diplomacy. While continuing to work towards a mutually acceptable solution with the P5+1, Iran is making extensive preparations for the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit it will be hosting in Tehran in August. Over the past three centuries, Iran has never initiated a war and it would seem unlikely that at this juncture Tehran would resort to terrorism and solicit condemnation and possibly war. On the other hand, the targeting and killing of Israeli citizens by Iran would serve to support and justify Netanyahu’s call for military action against Iran.

For Netanyahu, domestic dissatisfaction aside, Israel’s policy of settlement expansion, a policy which government appointed jurists called legal , has brought international condemnation. With the moderate Kadima party pulling out of government, leaving Netanyahu in charge of hard-line coalition opposed to Middle East peace, Israel needs support from its allies more than ever. Undoubtedly, Israel would have greater support as a victim instead of an aggressor.

Location, Location, Location

In addition to the Bulgaria attack, Mr. Netanyahu has blamed Iran for attacks in other countries, including the apparent foiled attack in Cyprus and the accusations leveled against Iran for plotting an attack in Kenya .

Bulgaria – Bulgaria and Israel have very cordial relations. In July 2011, an Israeli-Bulgarian declaration pledged wide range cooperation . A year later, on July 8th, Bulgaria’s former foreign minister Solomon Passy told The Times of Israel that Israel should aggressively seek to join NATO and the EU. Passy said: “Israel is part of Western civilization and of the Euro-Atlantic political culture and that’s why Israel shouldn’t be shy to vocally say that it wants to become a member of NATO, the EU and OSCE [Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe],”. Ten days later, an attack against Israel took place in Bulgaria.

Thailand – Thailand and Israel have had cordial relations with moderate and steady trade. In January 2012, Thailand recognized Palestine as an independent state . A month later, Israel blamed Iran for “terrorist attacks” in Bangkok. Allegedly, one of the perpetrators had carried his “Iranian” passport on him to carry out the mission.

India – India and Israel have had very amicable relations. On July 17, 2003, JINSA’s executive director delivered a speech in Washington to the US-India Political Action Committee International Conference on Terrorism in India in which he put Israel, the United States, and India in the same boat – as the number one on the terrorist hit list (Bonney 2008 ). In 2008, ’India launched Israels spy satellite into orbit. In spite of its close ties to Israel, India has not stopped trade with Iran. In fact, two days prior to the Israeli embassy staff in India were targeted on February 13, 2012 , India defended its oil trade with Iran .

Georgia- Israel’s relations with Georgia are unique. It was widely reported in 2008 that Israel had the green light to attack Iran from Georgian territory. Israel is thought to have played a prominent role in the Russian-Georgian conflict (see link for full details of the relationship. In 2010, Georgia and Iran entered a new phase in their relationship and Nino Kalandadze, the Georgian deputy foreign minister expressed that “ties will further deepen ”. As with India, Iran was blamed for the bomb attempts in Georgia .

Given the nature of Israel’s relations with these countries, one cannot definitively conclude why these countries were picked by the perpetrators of these crimes. Perhaps these Israeli allies are not safe for Israelis, or they are safe for false-flag operations.

Empirical Data

Mr. Netanyahu made a clear reference to 1994 saying: “Exactly 18 years after the attack on a Jewish community center in Argentina, the Iranian terror continues to hurt innocent people.” The 1994 bombing in Argentina was blamed squarely on Iran without any evidence while all other voices were silenced. Prominent voices such as Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles who suggested that [Argentine] government and military figures may have sought to embarrass the Menem government because of its decision to release the files” being investigated in the AMIA building at the time.

An important project being carried out at the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association building was a review of previously secret government files that reportedly reveal how Nazis entered Argentina following World War II helped by Argentine officials. The review of the files had gone on for two years, but had not been completed at the time of the bombing. “Speculation centered on the possibility that former Argentine government and military officials, fearful of exposure, were responsible for the bomb attack.”

This is but one of the many instances where allegations against Iran have been made without any proof. However, there have been many instances where Israeli false flag operations have come to light.

Many reports as well as a detailed account (“Operation Cyanide”) reveals the Israeli plan to kill everyone on board the USS Liberty in 1967 and put the blame on Egypt. The survivors prompted President Johnson and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara to order the investigation to conclude the attack was a case of mistaken identity. 

Israel has always had a knack for stealing passports and other IDs to carry out false flag operations. According to The New Zealand Herald (September 21, 2004), Mossad agents tried to steal New Zealand passports, causing friction between New Zealand and Israel. It is not the first time this has come to light, according to the same source. Mossad agents had stolen Canadian passports to assassinate a Jordanian leader. These are not isolated cases.

In January 2012, it came to light that Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents. According to two U.S. intelligence officials, while toting U.S. passports and posing as CIA officers, they recruited Jundallah operatives. One month later, in February, NBC reported that according to US officials, Israel armed and trained the terrorist MEK.

While there is plenty of empirical data to support that Israelis are not shy about false flag operations, one would be hard pressed to accept that Israel would carry out a false flag operation and kill its own. Not so.

The 1976 Operation Entebbe was a great tribute to Israeli courage and praise of Israeli commandos of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) who rescued Israeli citizens at Entebbe airport in Uganda. But newly released British government documents reveal that the 1976 rescue of hostages, kidnapped on an Air France flight and held in Entebbe was a false flag operation – the file claims that Israel itself was behind the hijacking .

This “rescue operation” which became known as “operation Jonathan” in honor of the unit’s leader – Yonatan Netanyahu, the current Prime Minister’s brother. Yonatan was killed in the false flag operation – as were four other Israelis.

When it comes to Israel’s political agenda, no sacrifice is too great. A move against Iran will reverberate throughout the world. It is important for political leaders around the globe to understand that it may take a village to implement a political agenda, but it is up to them to make sure that the agenda does not destroy the global village.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Mossad agents run false flag terror operations in Bulgaria and other states

The End of Canada’s Sovereignty as a Nation State? Towards a U.S.-Canada Economic and Security Perimeter

By Dana Gabriel

Global Research

Over the past several months, the U.S.-Canada Beyond the Border action plan has taken significant steps forward. This includes efforts to modernize and expand infrastructure at key land ports. In a move that went largely unnoticed, both countries also recently agreed on a statement of privacy principles that will guide information sharing across the border. Meanwhile, a separate joint initiative has been announced which addresses energy and environmental issues.

President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Stephen Harper launched the U.S.-Canada Clean Energy Dialogue (CED) in 2009 to promote new ways to reduce greenhouse gases and combat climate change. The CED Action Plan II released last month, outlines the next phase of activities both countries will undertake. This includes continued work on carbon capture and storage, as well as integrating the electricity grid. In a press statement, Canada’s Minister of the Environment Peter Kent explained that the CED, “strengthens our efforts to collaborate on innovative clean energy solutions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

He also commented on how “It is our hope that the transformation of our economies and our joint work will identify clean energy solutions that will contribute to making sustainable energy a reality for all.” Whether real or exaggerated, environmental issues are also advancing North American integration. If you look at some of the words being used and the goals being pushed, they are tied to Agenda 21. Under the guise of protecting the environment, many solutions being offered are in the form of more taxes and control over our lives.

In June, Canada reached an agreement with the State of Michigan to build a second bridge between Windsor and Detroit which is one of North America’s busiest land crossings. A press release described how, “The new Detroit River International Crossing will facilitate the movement of people and goods between Canada and the U.S. by ensuring that there is sufficient border crossing capacity to handle projected growth in cross-border trade and traffic.” It goes on to say that the, “announcement demonstrates that the Government of Canada is working to advance the goals of the Action Plan on Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness.” During a speech, Prime Minister Stephen Harper called the new bridge, “an investment in the future of the North American economy, of North American trade and of North American manufacturing.” With the existing Ambassador Bridge being privately owned, motivation for the project is largely based on being able to further control border trade and traffic in the region. It is also part of the necessary transportation infrastructure needed for a trade corridor that would span from Windsor, Ontario to southern Mexico.

The U.S. and Canada recently issued a Statement of Privacy Principles that will shape information sharing arrangements under the perimeter security deal. The charter covers areas such as oversight, accountability, redress, retention, data quality and information security. Attorney General Eric Holder acknowledged in a Department of Justice news release that “These privacy principles reflect the shared commitment of the United States and Canada to implement our Beyond the Border Action Plan.” The Freedom of Information and Privacy Association warned that, “What the government just announced will certainly provide more access to Canadians personal information to the U.S. and other governments.” The Canadian Civil Liberties Association have also voiced concerns on privacy safeguard provisions that were not included which, “may permit the lowest standard between the two countries to prevail.” Ever since the perimeter security action plan was first unveiled in November 2011, there have been fears associated with personal data collected and exchanged at the border. This latest announcement has done little to ease these worries with respect to privacy rights and civil liberties.

As part of their commitment under the Beyond the Border agreement, both countries have also announced the establishment of Joint Port Operations Committees at eight Canadian airports that offer U.S. pre-clearance service. The move is designed to, “help facilitate legitimate cross-border trade and travel and promote collaboration on overall port management.” In June, the Beyond the Border Executive Steering Committee met to oversee progress on the implementation of the action plan. They announced that in the interest of transparency and accountability, a joint public report will be issued in December. Public Safety Minister Vic Toews also recently gave an update on other aspects of the perimeter security deal. He stated, “We are making great progress. We have, for example, added NEXUS lanes, made air cargo screening programs mutually recognizable and installed new passenger screening machines to end duplicate screening in Canadian airports.” Toews added, “More work continues every day to fully implement this new shared vision that represents the most significant step forward in Canada-U.S. cooperation since the North American Free Trade Agreement.”

Despite some minor setbacks with regards to bilateral relations, Canada has moved closer to its American partner under Prime Minister Harper. The Beyond the Border deal provides the essential framework for U.S.-Canada integration with the action plan being incrementally implemented. This piece by piece approach has allowed many different initiatives to go unnoticed and fly under the radar. Some of these individual steps may seem insignificant, but combined together they are further merging economic and security ties between both countries. This is paving the way for a North American security perimeter which would mean sacrificing what is left of our sovereignty and independence.

Posted in CanadaComments Off on The End of Canada’s Sovereignty as a Nation State? Towards a U.S.-Canada Economic and Security Perimeter

War On All Fronts Washington’s three-front war: Syria, Lebanon, Iran in the Middle East, China in the Far East, Russia in Europe

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

Global Research

The Russian government has finally caught on that its political opposition is being financed by the US taxpayer-funded National Endowment for Democracy and other CIA/State Department fronts in an attempt to subvert the Russian government and install an American puppet state in the geographically largest country on earth, the one country with a nuclear arsenal sufficient to deter Washington’s aggression.

Just as earlier this year Egypt expelled hundreds of people associated with foreign-funded “non-governmental organizations” (NGOs) for “instilling dissent and meddling in domestic policies,”  the Russian Duma (parliament) has just passed a law that Putin is expected to sign that requires political organizations that receive foreign funding to register as foreign agents.  The law is based on the US law requiring the registration of foreign agents.

Much of the Russian political opposition consists of foreign-paid agents, and once the law passes leading elements of the Russian political opposition will have to sign in with the Russian Ministry of Justice as foreign agents of Washington.  The Itar-Tass News Agency reported on July 3 that there are about 1,000 organizations in Russia that are funded from abroad and engaged in political activity.  Try to imagine the outcry if the Russians were funding 1,000 organizations in the US engaged in an effort to turn America into a Russian puppet state. (In the US the Russians would find a lot of competition from Israel.)

The Washington-funded Russian political opposition masquerades behind “human rights” and says it works to “open Russia.”  What the disloyal and treasonous Washington-funded Russian “political opposition” means by “open Russia” is to open Russia for brainwashing by Western propaganda, to open Russia to economic plunder by the West, and to open Russia to having its domestic and foreign policies determined by Washington. 

“Non-governmental organizations” are very governmental. They have played pivotal roles in both financing and running the various “color revolutions” that have established American puppet states in former constituent parts of the Soviet Empire. NGOs have been called “coup d’etat machines,” and they have served Washington well in this role. They are currently working in Venezuela against Chavez.

Of course, Washington is infuriated that its plans for achieving hegemony over a country too dangerous to attack militarily have been derailed by Russia’s awakening, after two decades, to the threat of being politically subverted by Washington-financed NGOs.  Washington requires foreign-funded organizations to register as foreign agents (unless they are Israeli funded).  However, this fact doesn’t stop Washington from denouncing the new Russian law as “anti-democratic,” “police state,” blah-blah.  Caught with its hand in subversion, Washington calls Putin names. The pity is that most of the brainwashed West will fall for Washington’s lies, and we will hear more about “gangster state Russia.”

China is also in Washington’s crosshairs.  China’s rapid rise as an economic power is perceived in Washington as a dire threat. China must be contained. Obama’s US Trade Representative has been secretly negotiating for the last 2 or 3 years a Trans Pacific Partnership, whose purpose is to derail China’s natural economic leadership in its own sphere of influence and replace it with Washington’s leadership. 

Washington is also pushing to form new military alliances in Asia and to establish new military bases in the Philippines, S. Korea, Thailand, Vietnam, Australia, New Zealand, and elsewhere. 

Washington quickly inserted itself into disputes between China and Vietnam and China and the Philippines. Washington aligned with its former Vietnamese enemy in Vietnam’s dispute with China over the resource rich Paracel and Spratly islands and with the Philippines in its dispute with China over the resource rich Scarborough Shoal. 

Thus, like England’s interference in the dispute between Poland and National Socialist Germany over the return to Germany of German territories that were given to Poland as World War I booty, Washington sets the stage for war.

China has been cooperative with Washington, because the offshoring of the US economy to China was an important component in China’s unprecedented high rate of economic development. American capitalists got their short-run profits, and China got the capital and technology to build an economy that in another 2 or 3 years will have surpassed the sinking US economy.  Jobs offshoring, mistaken for free trade by free market economists, has built China and destroyed America.

Washington’s growing interference in Chinese affairs has convinced China’s government that military countermeasures are required to neutralize Washington’s announced intentions to build its military presence in China’s sphere of influence.  Washington’s view is that only Washington, no one else, has a sphere of influence, and
Washington’s sphere of influence is the entire world. 

On July 14 China’s official news agency, Xinhua, said that Washington was interfering in Chinese affairs and making China’s disputes with Vietnam and the Philippines impossible to resolve. 

It looks as if an over-confident US government is determined to have a three-front war: Syria, Lebanon, and Iran in the Middle East, China in the Far East, and Russia in Europe. This would appear to be an ambitious agenda for a government whose military was unable to occupy Iraq after nine years or to defeat the lightly-armed Taliban after eleven years, and whose economy and those of its NATO puppets are in trouble and decline with corresponding rising internal unrest and loss of confidence in political leadership.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on War On All Fronts Washington’s three-front war: Syria, Lebanon, Iran in the Middle East, China in the Far East, Russia in Europe

Was Mahatma Gandhi an Illuminati Pawn?



Left. Gandhi in London shortly after being called to the Bar in 1891. During his period as a law student in London, he joined the Theosophical Society and may have been recruited by MI-6. 

Ghandi was assassinated because he was an Illuminati agent who had betrayed the Hindu cause.

By Timothy Watson, Ph.D.

As a Freemason employed by MI6, Gandhi’s main role was to partition India in order to set it up for future conflict.

This would serve the future depopulation agenda by fomenting regional wars. It would also justify the New World Order plan to implement world government to restore the peace.

The Illuminati used the same M.O. in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Kuwait, and a host of other divide-and-conquer national bifurcation schemes. The Illuminati relentlessly implement their motto ordo ab chao(order out of chaos). It is their teleology.

The Round Table was a world government body set up by Illuminati agent Cecil Rhodes. When Gandhi attended the Round Table Conference in 1931, Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald presented him with the Communal Award for partitioning India.

Gandhi gave a speech at the Round Table Conference promoting “Communitarianism”, a buzz word used to disguise the Illuminati goal of establishing a worldwide socialist dictatorship under the cover of “communalism”.


In the 1890’s, the young Gandhi set off to London to study law. His London Diary recorded this period in his life, but all but 20 pages have mysteriously disappeared.

The surviving pages actually describe Gandhi’s initiation to the Third Degree of Freemasonry in coded language, something only a Freemason scholar would notice.

The original 120-page volume would have been his Freemason diary. If the surviving 20 pages are any indication, it appears to be a record of his initiation through the various degrees of the Order.

Since he is known to have entrusted the Diary to a close family relation, the fact that it has gone missing is highly suspect. The more likely explanation is that it is being withheld from the public to conceal Gandhi’s Freemason affiliations.


left, Gandhi in the Ambulance Corps)

Gandhi later became a sergeant major in the British Army. His ambulance team joined the British in their campaign to suppress a “Kaffir” uprising in South Africa. Gandhi acted as a recruitment officer for the British Army in the Boar War, WWI and WWII and as an apologist for the British Empire in his Indian Opinion newspaper.

Gandhi was assassinated and Natharam Godse was arrested in the square before hordes of onlookers. He surrendered, compliantly raising his hands over his head and handed his weapon over to the authorities.

Gopal Godse, brother of Gandhi assassin, Natharam Godse, wrote a book called May It Please Your Honour based on the courtroom testimony of his brother, which the world never got to hear.

Natharam Godse conducted his own defense in order to present his true motivations. He conducted his own defense, but the Congress Party of India ensured that not a word was published in any of the Indian newspapers.

The police stole the notebooks out of the reporters’ hands and destroyed them, issuing a stern warning that not a single word of his testimony be printed.

Godse’s courtroom testimony brought tears to the eyes of the packed gallery. Sobs conveying the deep emotion of those present could be heard throughout the court. Godse testified that Gandhi was in regular correspondence with known terrorists, including the head of the Muslim League, a terrorist organization responsible for slaughtering thousands of innocent civilians, especially in Calcutta.

He also alleges that Gandhi conspired with the Amir of Afghanistan to front an invasion of India in order to found a Muslim caliphate, but that the plot was somehow thwarted.


Gandhi even promoted Hindustani as the lingua franca of India. Hindustani is Urdu under a different name. Godse, left, understood that this was subterfuge. It amounted to the Islamizing of India.

Forcing a foreign tongue upon a great nation like India was treasonous. Mr. Shastri, Mr. C.Y. Chintamani, the editor of Allahabad and even the Mahatma’s lifelong friend, the late C.F. Andrews, confirmed that Gandhi’s speeches and writings added up to an open invitation to the Amir of Afghanistan to invade India. It was de facto high treason. Is there another word for a leader plotting to have his country invaded by an alien power?

The Hindu-Muslim unity Gandhi claimed to covet so strongly was now a fleeting mirage. If Godse’s defense were on public record, everyone would know the truth. If the press had not been muzzled, the word would be out.

Instead, the treasonous Congress Party suppressed the truth and prevented the face behind the mask of divinity from being revealed. 

Posted in IndiaComments Off on Was Mahatma Gandhi an Illuminati Pawn?

Silverstein’s 9-11 Partner Owns Olympics “Gateway”



The new Westfield Stratford City Mall, bordered on its north side by the new Stratford International Station, dominates the Olympics site, dwarfing the Aquatics Centre and Olympics Stadium to the south

Westfield Stratford City Mall, Europe’s largest urban shopping mall, opened Sept. 2011 in the heart of East London.

The mega-mall will also double as the London Subway gateway to the Olympics.

By Salman An-Noor Hossain

Former Israeli commando Frank Lowy, 81, recently opened the Mega Mall adjacent to Olympic Stadium and Stratford subway station.

Frank Lowy was Larry Silverstein’s partner in the World Trade Center on Sept 11. 2001.

Over two-thirds of all those attending the Olympics stadium are expected to transit through Westfield’s new “Stratford City Center.

Lowy, a dual Australian and Israeli citizen, is co-founder of the Westfield Group, operator of over 100 shopping centers in Australia, New Zealand, the United States and UK. They also own Marriott Hotels.

Both these companies have suffered a long list of “terrorist attacks” for which large insurance claims were made.

A commercial promoting the London Underground as the main mode of transportation between different game sites in the Olympic village has marked the Stratford stadium with a red line connecting to it.

The Stratford station is also a part of both the Jubilee Line and Jubilee Extension Line.  Insider “Red Ox” said on this site (Comments) that either the Jubilee and/or Jubilee Extension had been targeted for terrorist bombing since 1989 (23 years ago)! This  information was given to him by Stella Rimington, ex-head of the Mi-5.

More ominous facts:

1) Insurance Companies To Pay Out At Least $7 Billion In Vested Interests in Case of Terrorism

This also happened prior to the 9-11 and 7-7 terrorist attacks. Certain companies and individuals are going to capitalize from the death and misery. Misery sure does love Insurance company!

The state-backed British Insurance company Pool Re is covering up to $7 Billion on the Olympic terror threat. Pool Re Chief Executive Steve Atkins said his team had closely scrutinized its customers’ exposure to the Olympic Games. to prepare itself for a potential attack during the event.

Pool Re’s biggest loss to date is the 260 million pounds it paid out after the Bishopsgate bomb in the City of London in 1993, and another 240 million pound plunge from the 1996 Manchester bombing. It is also expected to lose tens of millions from the July 7th 2005 terrorist attacks. It seems like Lowy is going to be just like his friend Lucky Larry (Silverstein) in the aftermath of the 9-11 attacks!!!

2) Mossad and Shin Beit Running “Anti-Terror” Security Drills

According to a May 2011 news article from Ynet News, the Mossad is involved in Olympics security. A source at the British Olympic Association said that “certain Israeli elements are advising us on securing the Olympic games.”

In addition, the Sayeret Yahalom (Hebrew language: יהל”ם – יחידה הנדסית למשימות מיוחדות) is a special elite combat engineering unit of the Israeli Engineering Corps of the Israel Defense Forces. The name “Yahalom” (Diamond in Hebrew) is an abbreviation of “Special Operations Engineering Unit”. They specialize in covert engineering missions that include everything from Commando and “Counter-Terrorism” missions, planting and defusing explosives (Explosive Ordinance Disposal), landmines, and unexploded ordinance both on land and at sea.


3) “Spooks: Code 9” Series Pre-programming?

The BBC-3 serial drama “Spooks: Code 9”, leaked classified information about a terrorist atrocity  on August 10th 2008.

One of the MI-5 agents in the series explained the term “Code 9” – “A nuclear attack on London. In bomb terms, the blast was relatively small – but the death toll wasn’t. Over one hundred thousand (100,000) incinerated and many more given a death sentence by radiation”.

Why did they call the series Spooks: Code 9? The original Spooks series was just called “Spooks”.

The word “Code” indicates that a coded message is being conveyed. Are the events the series fictionalizes being planned to happen in the real world?

In episode one of the series, one of the characters strangely asks to have five and a half hours (or 330 minutes) to find the killer of a colleague. Why exactly five and a half hours on the dot?


The one-eye symbolism is the same symbolism as the all-seeing eye on the back of the US dollar and is a favourite symbol of the “Illuminati”. Underneath the One-eyed symbol, it says the word “WAR”.

The “Illuminati” are using this symbol to indicate that the events portrayed in the series, are planned to take place in the real world and in the foreseeable future.

These clues and the many others in previous articles may be harbingers of what is to come after the Olympics open July 27.

Posted in UKComments Off on Silverstein’s 9-11 Partner Owns Olympics “Gateway”


Posted by 

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Representative Michele Bachmann (R., Minn.) stirred controversy today by claiming that several key members of the Obama Administration had links to a shadowy extremist group called the Democratic Party.

While Representative Bachmann produced no evidence to back up her charges, she said she had proof that “members of this sinister cabal have infested the highest echelons of our government to take away our guns and replace them with gay health care.”

Representative Bachmann said that the member of the Administration with the closest ties to the organization is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: “I have it on good authority that she is related to a former leader of the group.”

The Minnesota Congressperson’s shocking accusations drew widespread calls for her to back down, from such disparate quarters as Senator John McCain (R., Ariz.) and the National Institute of Mental Health.

“Congresswoman Bachmann’s comments are baseless, irresponsible, and beneath contempt,” said Senator McCain. “Having said that, I think I would have chosen her as my running mate over Mitt Romney.”

Speaker of the House John Boehner said that he now regretted making Representative Bachmann a member of the Intelligence Committee, calling that decision “an example of a good-natured prank that went too far.”

Despite the controversy swirling around her, however, Representative Bachmann refused to cave: “I don’t know the meaning of the word surrender. Also, science, math, apple, and cat.”



A War Israel is Just Begging for an Excuse to Start


By Gilad Atzmon

Just hours after the attack on Israeli tourists in Bulgaria, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu and his Defence Minister Ehud Barak were quick to announce that Iran and the Hezbollah were behind the attack. In fact, it didn’t take the Israeli PM more than two hours to blame another country for committing an act of war on Israeli citizens in a third country’s territory. Of course, Netanyahu didn’t provide any evidence to support his thesis. In fact, even today, three days after the attack, no clear leads suggesting any Iranian or Hezbollah’s connection are available.

What was it then that made Netanyahu so determined? Is it because he himself was privy to the knowledge that Israeli agents have been murdering Iranian scientists for years? Did Netanyahu react the way he did because he thought to himself that considering Mossad’s assassinations in Tehran, Israel may well have brought on itself an Iranian retaliation? Was Bibi projecting?

I obviously do not have access to Netanyahu or Barak’s minds, but Israel has certainly by now made it clear that its desperation to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, even if such an attack would escalate into a global nuclear conflict. In order to grasp such morbidity we have to bear in mind that collective self-annihilation is inherent to Israeli culture. As it happens, the story of Masada and Samson, both heroic suicidal narratives, are cherished in Israel. Yet, as much as Netanyahu and Barak are keen to launch a world war, it is far from being clear whether the Israeli masses are quite as keen to sacrifice themselves on the Jewish national altar.

I guess that both Barak and Netanyahu’s rush to blame Iran must be seen as an indication of their clear eagerness to attack the country. By now, the two Israeli leaders have managed to rid themselves of any significant voices against such an attack. The former head of Mossad Meir Dagan and IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Askenazi, both of whom opposed military action against Iran, are now excluded from any decision-making process. Veteran Major-General Shaul Mofaz, the leader of the Kadima party, who also opposed an attack on Iran, left Netanyahu’s coalition last week. It seems as if no one within the Israeli cabinet is there to stop Barak and Netanyahu’s genocidal enthusiasms.

Furthermore, from an Israeli military perspective the current chaos in Syria is interpreted as a ‘window of opportunity’. Israeli generals assume that Assad’s regime, fighting for its survival, would refrain from joining any attack on Iran. Also Israelis believe that without Syria’s backing, Hezbollah also would stay out of it. In Israeli military terms, this means that the north of Israel is in no imminent danger of Hezbollah’s medium and short range missiles – at least for the time being.

The Israelis are, as usual, deluded. For some peculiar reason, they fail to grasp the possible devastating consequences of such a conflict. Barak, for instance, commented ‘optimistically’ last week that a clash with Iran may ‘cost the lives of up to 500 Israelis.’ First, it is interesting to learn about the ease in which an Israeli Defence Minister is happy to sacrifice 500 of his people. Second, it is far from being clear on what Barak’s estimate is based. Considering the common assumptions that Iran would retaliate immediately launching a first wave of more than 1500 missiles in the direction of Tel Aviv, Barak must believe that each Iranian rocket is capable of destroying no more than one third of an Israeli. Barak is indeed an optimist.

It is also far from being clear whether Israel possesses the military capacity to hit Iran and imperil its nuclear project. Earlier this year, American analysts suggested that the Israeli Air Force doesn’t posses the necessary might to attack Iran. For example, it lacks the airborne re-fuelling capacity needed to dismantle the Iranian nuclear project. It is also far from being clear whether Israel would attack Iran without an American green light and it is widely accepted that it is more than unlikely that Obama would provide such an approval ahead of the American election.

I guess the meaning of it all is pretty simple: whether Israel attacks Iran is obviously an open question. However, we have a clear indication that the Israeli leadership is more than keen to do so. Barak and Netanyahu are begging for a pretext to launch a global conflict. The meaning of it is totally is clear – the Jewish state and its pro-war lobbies are the ultimate threat to world peace. This threat must be taken care of immediately.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI1 Comment

Shoah’s pages


July 2012
« Jun   Aug »