Archive | August 5th, 2012

Syria: Zio-NATO Puppet’s Face a Growing list of Accusations of Executions, Murder


Syria Rebels Face Growing List of Crimes

The rebel militias fighting to topple the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad face a growing list of accusations of executions, murder, and war crimes, but aid and support from the US and its allies continues to flow.

The accusations have increased ever since a video appeared online showing the apparent aftermath of a mass slaughter of pro-Assad fighters who were killed execution-style after being captured by the Free Syrian Army. An eyewitness account from a Turkish reporter confirmed the event, which Human Rights Watch called an apparent “war crime.”

The men “were forced into a building, then brought before a court of the Free Syrian Army on the back of a pickup truck, after which they were lined up and shot at lightning speed,” the Turkish reporter wrote.

And this does not appear to be an isolated incident. “A McClatchy reporter traveling with a unit of the Free Syrian Army was told that rebels had captured about 45 Assad loyalists in fighting in Al Tal, north of Damascus. Asked later what had become of the prisoners, a rebel said eight had been executed, 25 had been released and the rest were being held in hopes of a future prisoner exchange,” reports McClatchy news.

A string of media reports have uncovered similar stories of both extra-judicial executions and torture. Almost three months ago, a United Nations investigation found that both Syrian government forces and rebel militias trying to topple President Bashar al-Assad committed serious human rights abuses.

“We strongly condemn summary executions by either side in Syria. We condemn actions like that,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters this week. The Obama administration doesn’t seem to be shying away from their support of the rebels, though.

The increase in rebel crimes has increased in tandem with expanded US support as well as the increased infiltration of al-Qaeda and other Sunni extremists.

The CIA is supposedly employing a “vetting process” to avoid having the aid get into the hands of Islamic extremists, but the process is made up of untrustworthy, third-party sources and intelligence officials have recently told the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times that the truth is that the US doesn’t know who is getting the money and weapons.

Apparently, even arming and strengthening al-Qaeda isn’t enough to disrupt Washington’s plan to change the regime in Syria, in order to eliminate Iran’s main ally in the Middle East and to gain an even stronger foothold in the region.

But extremist infiltration of the Syrian opposition carries other problems. The Obama administration runs the risk of helping to bring these extremists to power if and when the Assad regime finally does collapse. Moreover, as happened in Afghanistan after the US proxy war there with the mujihadeens, the potential for deadly blowback is very real.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Syria: Zio-NATO Puppet’s Face a Growing list of Accusations of Executions, Murder




From Pepe Escobar, we learn:

(4 August 2012 –

1. Assad’s opponents in Syria, the Free Syrian Army, are fighters from Iraq, Kuwait, Algeria, Tunisia, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Chechnya, France and Britain.

(‘UK jihadists’ operating in Syria)…

The Free Syrian Army commanders are not Syrians, but Iraqi Sunnis. 

2. Many of the anti-Assad forces proclaim their allegiance to Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb…

“They paraded their al-Qaeda flag…”

3. Assad’s opponents kidnap, rape and slaughter pro-Assad regime civilians.

“They go after Christians with a vengeance.” [1]

4. The Iraqi Sunnis are also killing Shi’ites in Iraq.

There has been a wave of anti-Shi’ite bombings in Iraq, with over 100 people dead.

These bombing have been claimed by the Islamic State of Iraq, al-Qaeda’s local franchise.

5. The anti-Assad Syrian rebels cannot win against the Syria military – “not even with the Saudis and Qataris showering them with loads of cash and weapons.”

The “rebels” do not control any territory.

6. As the Sunni versus Shia war spreads, “a tsunami of weapons will keep inundating Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and of course Turkey, boosting assorted guerrilla outfits, Kurdish included…”

Turkish troops kill 115 Kurdish rebels as offensive blocks escape …

7. Controlling the Sunnis are the USA, NATO, Israel and the Saudis.

8. Israel sees Iran-Syria-Hezbollah as an “axis of evil”.

9. Russian President Vladimir Putin supports Assad.

Putin does not want the CIA’s jihadis to destabilise Russia, which has a sizeable Moslem population.

“Last week, Thierry Meyssan wrote on Voltaire that Prince Bandar was killed along with his assistance Mishaal Al-Qarni in a bomb blast on July 26.

“The same day, Prince Bandar appeared with Prince Khalid bin Sultan at a function.

“He was also present at the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques’ reception for princes in Jeddah.”

Thierry Meyssan and Prince Bandar bin Sultan

Posted in SyriaComments Off on THE USA’S SUNNI ARMIES

The War Criminals In Our Midst


Sourced from this article by Paul Craig Roberts, slightly edited with pictures and captions by Lasha Darkmoon. (Insertions in italics by Darkmoon)

“Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business,” — Jewish neoconservative Michael Ledeen, in a speech given in the early 1990s.

Since that time, it’s not only “every 10 years or so” that the American Superbully picks up some “crappy little country” and throws it against the wall, it now happens all the time: with drone warfare, targeted assassinations, legalized torture, and threats and intimidation against ANY country the Jews don’t like.

The State Department has an office that hunts German war criminals. Bureaucracies being what they are, the office will exist into next century when any surviving German prison guards will be 200 years old. From time to time the State Department claims to have found a lowly German soldier who was assigned as a prison camp guard. This ancient personage, who had lived in the US for the past 50 or 60 years without doing harm to anyone, is then mercilessly persecuted, usually on the basis of hearsay.

I have never understood what the State Department thinks the alleged prison guard was supposed to have done — when Prussian aristocrats, high-ranking German Army generals, and national hero Field Marshall Rommel were murdered for trying to overthrow Hitler.

What the State Department needs is an office that rounds up American war criminals.

These exist in abundance and are not hard to find. Indeed, recently 56 of them outed themselves in public by signing a letter to President Obama demanding that he send in the US Army to complete the destruction of Syria and its people that Washington has begun.

Here are the names of  some of these war criminals, all still at large and well known to the public: Max Boot, Paul Bremer, Elizabeth Cheney, Eric Edelman, Jamie Fly, John Hannah, William Inboden, William Kristol, Michael Ledeen, Clifford May, Robert McFarlane, Martin Peretz, Danielle Pletka, John Podhoretz, Stephen Rademaker, Karl Rove, Randy Scheunemann, Dan Senor, James Woolsey, Dov Zakheim, and Radwan Ziadeh.

At the Nuremberg Trials of the defeated Germans after World War II, the US government established the principle that naked aggression — the American way in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Pakistan, and Yemen — is a war crime. Therefore, there is a very strong precedent for the State Department to round up those neoconservatives who are fomenting more war crimes.

But don’t expect it to happen.

Today, war criminals run the State Department and the entire US Government. They are elected to the presidency, the House, and the Senate, and appointed to the federal courts as judges.

American soldiers such as Bradley Manning, who actually behave in the way that the State Department thinks German soldiers ought to have behaved, are held in dishonor: they are thrown into dungeons, and they are tortured while a court martial case is concocted against them.

Hypocrisy is Washington’s hallmark. All but the most delusional are now accustomed to their rulers speaking one way and behaving in the opposite. It is now part of the American character to regard ourselves as members of the “virtuous nation,” “the indispensable people,” while our rulers commit war crimes around the globe.

Whereas we have all been made complicit in war crimes by “our” government, it still behooves us to know who are the active war criminals in our midst who have burdened us with our war criminal reputation.

You can learn the identity of many of those who are driving the world into World War Three by perusing the signatures to the contrived letter to Obama from the neoconsevatives calling on Obama to invade Syria in order to “rescue” the Syrian people from their government. These are the war criminals whose policies have resulted in the wanton murder of large numbers of Arabs and Muslms in Syria, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon.

According to the letter signed by 56 neoconservatives, only the Syrian government is responsible for deaths in Syria. The Washington sponsored and armed “rebels” are merely protecting the Syrian people from the Assad government. According to the letter signers, the only way the Syrian people can be saved is if Washington overthrows the Syrian government and installs a puppet state attentive to the needs of Israel and Washington.

Among the 56 signatures are a few names from the Syrian National Congress, believed to be a CIA front, and a few names from dupes among the goyim.

The rest of the signatures are those of Jewish neoconservatives tightly allied with Israel, some of whom are apparently dual-Israeli citizens who participate in the formation of US foreign policy. The names on this list comprise a concentration of evil. The goal of these people is not only to bring Armageddon to the Syrian people but also to the world.

Here in alphabetical order, for your convenience, are the names of these 56 criminals, a disproportionate number of them being Jewish and with strong ties to Israel. All of them, apart from a  few dissident Muslims on the list,  have one thing in common: they are all Israel Firsters, fanatical supporters of “Israel, right or wrong”,  who put Israel’s interests before the interests of the American people:

Khairi Abaza, Ammar Abdulhamid, Hussain Abdul-Hussain, Tony Badran, Paul Berman, Max Boot, Ellen Bork, L. Paul Bremer, Matthew R. J. Brodsky, Elizabeth Cheney, Seth Cropsey, Toby Dershowitz, James Denton, Mark Dubowitz, Nicholas Eberstadt, Eric S. Edelman, Jamie M. Fly, Reuel Marc Gerecht, Abe Greenwald, John P. Hannah, William Inboden, Bruce Pitcairn Jackson, Ash Jain, Kenneth Jensen, Sirwan Kajjo, Lawrence F. Kaplan, Irina Krasovskaya, William Kristol, Michael Ledeen, Tod Lindberg, Herbert I. London, Clifford D. May, Ann Marlowe, Robert C. McFarlane, Joshua Muravchik, Martin Peretz, Danielle Pletka, John Podhoretz, Stephen Rademaker, Karl Rove, Jonathan Schanzer, Randy Scheunemann, Gary J. Schmitt, Daniel S. Senor, Lee Smith, Henry D. Sokolski, Daniel Twining, Peter Wehner, Kenneth R. Weinstein, Leon Wieseltier, R. James Woolsey, Khawla Yusuf, Dov S. Zakheim, Robert Zarate, Radwan Ziadeh. 

(See here)

Five years from now, if there is a military coup or revolution, all these people could find themselves in front of a firing squad.

The letter to Obama is part of the propaganda operation to demonize the Syrian government with lies in order to get rid of a government that supports Hizbollah, the Muslims in southern Lebanon who have twice driven the cowardly but much-praised  Israeli army out of Lebanon, thus preventing the Israeli government from achieving its aim of stealing the water resources of southern Lebanon.

Not a single sentence in the letter is correct.

Listen to this one for example: “The Assad regime poses a grave threat to national security interests of the United States.”

What utter total absurdity! And the morons who signed this letter pretend to be “security experts.”

How do we evaluate the fact that 56 people have no shame whatsoever and will lie to the President of the United States, telling him to his face the most absurd and obvious falsehoods in order to advance their personal agenda at the expense of not merely the lives of Syrians but, by leading the world into a catastrophic world war, of life itself on this earth?

These same neocon architects of Armageddon are also plotting against Iran, Russia, the former Soviet central Asian countries, Ukraine, Belarus, and China.


It seems they just can’t wait to start a nuclear war.

Posted in EducationComments Off on The War Criminals In Our Midst

How All Masonic Movements Work


(left. In 1952, Bella Dodd, a former member of the executive
of CPUSA testified about Communist subversion to a Senate Committee.)

Communism & Zionism are both Masonic movements. The rank & file are betrayed. Humanity now is the rank-&-file.

by Mary Henry

Bella Dodd’s Senate Committee testimony reveals how all Masonically-structured movements work whether in government, religion or business.

Good people get involved because they wish to change  society for the better.

People know there is strength in numbers and enjoy the camaraderie of like minded people.

These organizations show themselves eventually when the originally perceived goals of the joiners do not seem as important to the leadership anymore or are even contradictory to the original intent.

It is much easier to infiltrate a group of people who already belong to an organization with a central figure and a  leader or leaders who have established a general appeal.



Common discontent and even anger owned by the masses is potent for fueling the progress and spread of the Masonic agenda.

Recently, hundreds of thousands of Spaniards are protesting additional austerity cuts in Spain to bail out the nation due to the banking crisis .There have been violent clashes with police; even police clashing with their own police brothers who off duty and joined the protesters in the streets.

American News has not been giving full coverage to  these events choosing to concentrate on the Olympics instead.

People have also taken to the streets in Saudi Arabia.
Greeks have been protesting  along with Italians. Syria is an ongoing revolution. Egypt, and so on……..

The common suffering and loss of hope has to do with austerity cuts inflicted on the populace because of the banking debacles and widespread unemployment.

There is nothing new in the  historical pattern for governmental change except for lies used as smokescreens to disguise a core goal.

The group that will emerge to solve the banking debt crisis and offer hope to the unemployed and financially distressed will eventually succeed in establishing a global government.


Read below what Bella Dodd had to say as to how the Teacher’s Union was targeted by Communists. Note the use of “cells’ in the pattern. It is also interesting to read how many Communists pleaded the Fifth Amendment. Note how curriculum was considered important.

Having home schooled my youngest all the way through to college level, I now laugh when I hear all the solutions offered to fix our nation’s public school system!

I met with our own local public school Superintendent and Curriculum Planner on several occasions. I met with several people on school boards in my state and knew many teachers who themselves chose to home school their own children.

I also had the opportunity to speak with many educated in the USSR under Communism and came to one conclusion.

Curriculum is one big tool used to change society and change the trajectory of government. This means is not immediate but is employed for the long term goal of nation changing.

In the USSR, I was told that no matter which grade level or state one moved to, the curricula was always the same. All the children learned to speak English starting in the fourth-grade level.

The method and texts to learning mathematics, reading and composition  were always the same as were the historical and civic materials. Loyalty to the ethic of Communism was taught as the paramount virtue above family and friendship.

By the middle-school age, the career path of each student was already established.


Profiteering by educational publishing companies here has created all types of new theories and textbooks.

In the early 1990’s, one school board member told me that committees for the oversight of public educational texts had decided to promote women and homosexuals in public school systems.

In other words, a textbook would only be approved if an equal number of homosexual military heroes, artists ,writers and statesmen along with females were used to balance out the males.

Many librarians were forced to trash or sell older literature to be replaced with politically correct materials.

Books featuring titles similar to “I have two Mommies” were to be highlighted, opened and standing on end on the helves in the children’s reading rooms.

Librarians were also concerned that the new cards would be used to track types and themes of reading material  individuals borrowed  from the libraries.

Conspiracy theory or happenstance? You decide.

Posted in PoliticsComments Off on How All Masonic Movements Work

Report: MEK to join Zionist Terrorists in Aleppo

Sources revealed that some members of the terrorist Mujahedin-e Khalq group (MEK, a.k.a. MKO and PMOI) are going to leave Iraq to join the anti-Assad terrorists through Syria’s northern borders.

“A number of U.S. and Turkish officers accompanied by several commanders of Kurdish Peshmerga forces had a meeting with some high ranking members of the terrorist Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization in Erbil, Iraq,” well-informed Iraqi security sources told the Arabic language Top News TV channel.

The sources added that the meeting decreed that Peshmerga forces transfer a number of MKO elements from Iraq to Turkey and then to the northern parts of Syria in order for these anti-Iran terrorists to join the so-called Free Syrian Army.

Directed by Nasser Qandil, Lebanese politician and former Member of Parliament, the news channel added that U.S. and Turkish officials have told the MKO that “Saudi Arabia and Qatar are committed to jointly pay the costs of relocation and resettlement, expected to be roughly $ 250 million,” as well as $ 100 million per month for the militias.

On the other hand, the Americans guaranteed to facilitate the MKO’s secret withdrawal from Iraq to Turkey.

A few days ago, the sources added, Nouri al-Maliki caught Americans off guard by telling them that Iran is aware of the plot of temporary relocation of MKO members to Erbil and they have warned against the move.

“Opposed by the Iraqi Prime Minister, the plan will be done gradually and secretly,” informed sources predicted.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Report: MEK to join Zionist Terrorists in Aleppo

Kidnapped Syrian TV host executed by Zio-NATO Puppets


Syrian television presenter Mohammed al-Saeed, kidnapped from his Damascus home in mid-July, has been executed, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said on Saturday.

“The television presenter, a well-known figure on state TV, has been executed, and the Al-Nusra Front has claimed responsibility for the killing,” the Observatory’s Rami Abdel Rahman told AFP.

Al-Nusra, a little-known racist Islamist militant group, claimed the kidnapping and execution of Saeed in a statement on Friday.

“The heroes of western Ghouta (in Damascus province) imprisoned the shabih (pro-regime militia) presenter on July 19,” said Al-Nusra. “He was then killed after he had been interrogated.”

Posted on a forum featuring the Al-Qaeda flag, Al-Nusra’s statement showed a photograph of Saeed looking frightened, with his back against a wall in an unknown location.

“May this be a lesson to all those who support the regime,” it said.

Contacted by AFP, state TV director Maan Saleh said: “We have no material proof of this killing.”

Last month, international media rights watchdog Reporters Without Borders issued a statement on Saeed’s kidnapping, and urged his captors to release him.

“News media and journalists — both professional and citizen journalists — should not be targeted by any of the parties in a war or civil war,” it said at the time.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Kidnapped Syrian TV host executed by Zio-NATO Puppets

Rabbi’s sentence angers victims


Despite tearful pleas from victims, a judge sentenced a one-time religious instructor for a prominent Brookline school to 10 years probation Thursday for sexually abusing three of his students in Boston during the 1975-1976 school year.

The sentence for Rabbi Stanley Z. Levitt, who pleaded guilty Wednesday to four counts of ­indecent assault and battery on a child, stunned and angered the victims, who gathered in the ­Suffolk Superior courtroom to face their abuser and witness the sentencing. Levitt was also ordered to stay away from children, register as a sex offender, and wear a GPS monitor.

“He should have served jail time,” said Michael Brecher, who along with the two other former students at the Maimonides School, an Orthodox Jewish school, said that Levitt touched him sexually when he was a sixth-grader.

Delivering a victim-impact statement before the sentencing, Brecher said Levitt groped him while Brecher was recovering at Boston Children’s Hospital after part of his finger was sliced off in a classroom door.

“As I lay helpless in a hospital bed, traumatized already by the events of that day, he affected my spiritual, psychological and, I ­believe, physical life and growth profoundly,” said Brecher, who added that he has suffered from severe depression since the ­encounter nearly 40 years ago.

According to Suffolk prosecutors, the other assaults took place at Levitt’s home in Brighton.

Prosecutors had asked Judge Geraldine Hines to imprison ­Levitt for 2½ years, but she adhered to a plea agreement reached last fall between prosecutors and Levitt’s lawyer, Scott Curtis, that recommended probation.

Levitt had agreed to plead guilty last December, then ­reversed course at the last minute, angering the three victims who had traveled to Boston for the hearing.

The rabbi changed his plea again this week to guilty, a move prosecutors said was due to their strong case against him. However, this time they asked for a prison sentence, rather than probation.

The request for a harsher sentence was sought in part because of comments the rabbi made to the Globe after entering his not-guilty plea last year, said Jake Wark, spokesman for the Suffolk district attorney’s office. As Levitt exited the courtroom last December, he said, “The only victim here is me.”

“We’re absolutely dis­appointed,” Wark said. “We had recommended what we thought was a reasonable sentence of incarceration.”

Levitt, 66, remained silent throughout the hearing. He ­occasionally scribbled a note to his lawyer and shook his head in disagreement as two of the victims told of their abuse.


Rabbi–”Sexual abuse within Jewish community should not be reported to police”

Agudath Israel of America, Rabbinical Council of America come under fire after rabbi says abuse should be reported to rabbis, not police.

NEW YORK – Two Orthodox Jewish groups have released statements attempting to clarify their positions on reporting child abuse.

Agudath Israel of America and the Rabbinical Council of America were responding to what the former called “misleading claims about our stance on reporting suspected child abusers to law enforcement agencies.”

The statements come in the wake of criticism over comments by a leading American Orthodox rabbi, Shmuel Kamenetsky, that abuse should be reported to rabbis rather than police. Kamenetsky is the vice president of Agudah’s Supreme Council of Rabbinic Sages.

Agudah in its statement referred to rabbinic arguments that authorities should be notified when a certain threshold of evidence is met, but “where the circumstances of the case do not rise to threshold level … the matter should not be reported to authorities.”

However, in order to distinguish whether the threshold has been met, the statement continued, “the individual shouldn’t rely exclusively on their own judgment … rather, he should present the facts to a Rabbi.”

Kamenetsky said in a speech July 12 in Brooklyn — while a search was being conducted for an 8-year-old Brooklyn boy, Leiby Kletzky — that the sexual abuse of a child should be reported to a rabbi, who then would determine if the police should be called. Leiby’s dismembered body was found the following day in a dumpster and in the apartment of Levi Aron, who has been indicted for murder.

The speech came under criticism after a recording appeared July 17 on the Failed Messiah blog, which reported that Kamenetsky was repeating Agudah’s official policy banning Jews from reporting sexual abuse to police.

In the recording, Kamenetsky corrects a man who begins a question to the rabbi by saying, “As far as I know, your yeshiva is of the opinion that victims should report these crimes to the authorities.”

“Only after speaking to a rav,” Kamenetsky said.

Survivors for Justice, an advocacy, educational and support organization for survivors of sexual abuse and their families from the Orthodox world, described Kamentsky’s comments as “dangerous,” and called on Agudah to issue a retraction.

The RCA in its statement said that “Consistent with Torah obligations, if one becomes aware of an instance of child abuse or endangerment, one is obligated to refer the matter to the secular authorities immediately, as the prohibition of mesirah (i.e., referring an allegation against a fellow Jew to government authority) does not apply in such a case.”

It also says that “As always where the facts are uncertain, one should use common sense and consultations with experts, both lay and rabbinic, to determine how and when to report such matters to the authorities.”

Posted in USAComments Off on Rabbi’s sentence angers victims

Allen West: Obama Lacks ‘Commitment to the Safety and Security of the Jewish Homeland’




“The Obama administration is embarrassed to say” that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, the ad shows. Mitt Romney, according to the ad, has no problem saying that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.

Asked for his response to the ad, Congressman Allen West of Florida said, ”President Barack Obama continues to refuse to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and this alone is indicative of his lack of commitment to the safety and security of the Jewish homeland.  As I have stated time and time again, Jerusalem is both the religious and historical capital of the State of Israel. Governor Mitt Romney clearly understands this, he stated this while he was in Jerusalem, and I am confident that as president he will work tirelessly to reaffirm our country’s commitment to Israel and the Jewish people.”

The ad is airing in Florida, West’s home state.

“Next year,” the ad concludes, “President Mitt Romney in Jerusalem, the capital of Israel.” 

This entry was posted on August 4, 2012, 4:37 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry throughRSS 2.0. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  1. #1 by NAeem on August 4, 2012 – 4:46 pm

    Oh a Uncle Tom rears his ugly head this time. Lets send this Tom to tel aviv and im sure the JEWS will welcome him well by putting his ass in a concentration camp.

  2. #2 by 1776blues on August 4, 2012 – 4:56 pm

    Alan West is disgusting. I’d tell him to move to Israel but the Israeli’s won’t allow it!

  3. #3 by SazzyLilSmartAzz on August 4, 2012 – 5:12 pm

    #2 by 1776blues on August 4, 2012 – 4:56 pm
    LOL Blues!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  4. #4 by 30.06 on August 4, 2012 – 6:58 pm

  5. #5 by Woofie on August 4, 2012 – 8:40 pm

    Where did they dig up this shameless Uncle Tom Zionist? Whitey had to have elected him; he can’t be fron a black district. Worse than Clarence Thomas. I hate republikans as much or even more than zionists.

  6. #6 by bostonblah on August 4, 2012 – 9:15 pm

    from “wood” allen west to cornell west , when will these silly unkle tomstein shwartzas wake up to who has been oppressing them ,and call out the jew

  7. #7 by Amy Aremia on August 4, 2012 – 9:18 pm

    We are in an election year, why do the candidates feel that they must bow to Israel, and not to those who will be voting for the next President of the USA and has nothing to do with Israel. It should be Israel beholden to he US, for without the US there woul be no Israel..

  8. #8 by Matthew/Boston on August 4, 2012 – 9:27 pm

    Lots of Jews in your home district, congressman?

  9. #9 by MJ on August 4, 2012 – 9:51 pm

    Mark didn’t know where to paste this.
    Topless feminists protest against Sharia at Olympics
    I think their protest will be counter productive.

  10. #10 by Cheryl D. Uzamere on August 4, 2012 – 11:06 pm

    There is a big problem of discrimination of Ethiopian Jews by white-skinned Ashenazi Jews. Obviously Mitt Romney and Allen West do not know this. Perhaps Allen West should pull his tongue out the the Ashkenazi Jewish community’s asshole and read this article:


    Some 5,000 people were demonstrating in Jerusalem on Wednesday in protest of the racism against Ethiopian immigrants in Israel.

    The protesters blocked a major road in Jerusalem and marched in front of the Knesset while holding signs that read, “Blacks and Whites – We’re all Equal”, “Social Justice,” “Our Blood is Only Good for Wars.”

    Israelis protest racism against Ethiopian immigrants, January 18, 2012.Emil Salman

    The protesters were marching toward Kikar Tzion in Jerusalem, where they plan on holding a mass rally.

    Among the protesters was Mulet Araro, a 26-year-old student from Kiryat Malachi, who set out on foot to Jerusalem from his home on Monday.

    “I believe that a small group can create change,” Araro said. “The struggle does not stop here – all means are valid except violence.”

    Social activist Daniel Bahart said the protesters had a list of demands and are ready to propose solutions as well.

    “We hope at least one of the decision makers will come down to us, hear us and respond to our demands. Of course we expect [Immigraant Absorption Minister] Sofa Landver to talk to us,” he said.

    Landver said last week, in response to protests against discrimination of Israelis from Ethiopia, that they should be grateful for what they have received from Israel.

    “We have problems and we will not rest until things change. As of now the response to racism has been merely cosmetic. There are still numerous racists in the schools who receive wages from the state, there is segregation in schools, nightclubs…we’ll continue demonstrating until these issues are solved,” he said.

    Meretz Knesset members Ilan Gilon and Nitzan Horowitz on Monday submitted a proposal to the ministerial legislation committee banning discrimination in renting or selling a home on the basis of nationality, skin color, sexual inclination, handicap and political association.

    However the committee put off discussing the proposal for a month, in what Gilon called a deliberate attempt to scrap it once the public uproar died down.

    “It is clear the cabinet is trying to bury the proposal and silence the Ethiopian immigrants’ outcry,” Gilon said.

    A week ago, hundreds demonstrated in Kiryat Malakhi to protest discrimination in the wake of the reported refusal of housing committees to sell apartments to Israelis of Ethiopian origin.

  11. #11 by  on August 5, 2012 – 2:07 am

    romney’s deep bowel movement in jerusalem 7/29

    in Poland..

    that’s some serious holitosis.

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Allen West: Obama Lacks ‘Commitment to the Safety and Security of the Jewish Homeland’

Ehud Barak Admits Iran Has Defensive Posture, No Weapons Program


The most important and most frequently ignored distinction in the debate about Iran and its nuclear program is that Iran’s current postures are defensive in nature, not offensive. Right-wing pundits constantly harangue about Iran’s supposed intentions to annihilate Israel, wipe Israel off the map, and so on – and this, they claim, is why it’s so important to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. This assumes Iran would want a nuclear weapon for offensive purposes, which is incorrect.

Now, US and Israeli intelligence agencies agree that Iran has no nuclear weapons program. But there are aspects of the program, like increased enrichment in recent years, that is meant to place Iran in a technical range of capability, to produce a weapon on short notice if they decide to do so. As has been discussed at for years, Iran is operating under constant threat from the US and Israel. The US has Iranmilitarily surrounded, has conducted covertattacks along with Israel, constantly threatens Iran with preemptive military strike, and is heaping harsh economic sanctions. In this environment, Iran has tried to abstain from developing nuclear weapons while having the know-how needed to get there; this essentially is an attempt to have a deterrent without actually having a deterrent. They don’t get in trouble for having a weapon, but they are able to ward off attack or invasion.

As renowned international relations theorist Kenneth N. Waltz recently wrote inForeign Affairs, “Such a breakout capability might satisfy the domestic political needs of Iran’s rulers by assuring hard-liners that they can enjoy all the benefits of having a bomb (such as greater security) without the downsides (such as international isolation and condemnation).”

This distinction is almost always ignored by the pundits and the politicians, despite its supreme importance. But now, one of the most reckless hawks on Iran, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, has acknowledged this distinction out loud. Appearing on CNN (via Micah Zenko), Barak admitted that “[Israel and the US] both know that Khamenei did not yet ordered, actually, to give a weapon, but that he is determined to deceit and defy the whole world.” Wolf Blitzer asked, “What does that mean, that the ayatollah has not given the order to build a nuclear bomb?” Barak replied:

It’s something technical. He did not tell his people start and build it — a weapon on — an explodable device. We think that we understand why he does not give this order.

He believes that he is penetrated through our intelligence and he strongly feels that if he tries to order, we will know it, we and you and some other intelligence services will know about it and it might end up with a physical action against it.

So he prefers to, first of all, make sure that through redundancy, through an accumulation of more lowly enriched uranium, more medium level enriched uranium and more centrifuges and more sites, better protection, that he can reach a point, which I call the zone of immunity, beyond which Israel might not be technically capable of launching a surgical operation.

Here it is admitted that Iran is thinking rationally and defensively. The real concern, Barak says, is allowing Iran to enter a “zone of immunity” wherein it can deter attack or invasion. How dare the ayatollahs deprive Washington and Tel Aviv of the right to attack a weak and defensive Iran!

The whole story about how ‘we need to attack an aggressive Iran determined to get nuclear weapons’ falls apart under Barak’s admission above. First, if Iran has no nuclear weapons program (something admitted widely in US and Israeli officialdom), then there is no conceivable imminent threat and thus no attack is justified. If Iran is demonstrably intimidated by the threats from the US and Israel – that is, if it is acting defensively vis-a-vis its nuclear program – then current US/Israeli capabilities are proving sufficient to deter an Iranian attack whether it has a bomb or not (As Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, told the Senate in February: Iran “is unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict or launch a preemptive attack”), and thus an attack is not justified.

Finally, what the pro-war crowd can’t seem to grasp is that an attack on Iran would be most likely to push them towards reconstituting their nuclear weapons program. As Thomas Pickering, former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs and former U.S. Ambassador to the UN under George H.W. Bush, warned recently:

[A military strike] has a very high propensity, in my view, of driving Iran in the direction of openly declaring and deciding, which it has not yet done according to our intelligence, to make a nuclear weapon to seemingly defend itself under what might look to them and others to be an unprovoked attack.

Iran has great possibilities for asymmetrical reactions including against Israel through Hezbollah and Hamas who have accumulated a large number of missiles. […] It is a series of potential escalatory possibilities that puts us deep in the potential for another land war in Asia, something that I think we’ve spent the last number of years trying to get out of.

This has been virtually confirmed after a classified war simulation held a few months back forecasted that a “strike would lead to a wider regional war, which could draw in the United States” and kill many, many people. As Ha’aretz reports, this Congressional Research Service report estimates that Iran could completely recover from a strike on its nuclear program within six months.

So, seriously, what is driving the ‘bomb Iran’ crowd at this point?

Update: One commenter has pointed out that having nuclear capability, or ‘know-how’ as I call it, is not an indication of any military dimension to Iran’s program. Indeed, in the same Foreign Affairs piece I quoted above, Ken Waltz explains, “[One] possible outcome is that Iran stops short of testing a nuclear weapon but develops a breakout capability, the capacity to build and test one quite quickly. Iran would not be the first country to acquire a sophisticated nuclear program without building an actual bomb. Japan, for instance, maintains a vast civilian nuclear infrastructure. Experts believe that it could produce a nuclear weapon on short notice.”

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, IranComments Off on Ehud Barak Admits Iran Has Defensive Posture, No Weapons Program

Is Iran “The Most Destabilizing Nation in the World” or an Essential Partner for Building Stability in the Middle East?


Standing reality on its head—at least in the eyes of most Middle Easterners—presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney declared during his recent visit to Israel that the Islamic Republic is “the most destabilizing nation in the world.” In fact, reputable surveys conducted by international and regional polling groups—see here and here—show that, by orders of magnitude, largely Sunni Arab populations see Israel and the United States as much bigger threats to their security and interests than Iran.  Al Jazeera asked our colleague, Seyed Mohammad Marandi of the University of Tehran, to comment on Governor Romney’s remark; to see the segment, click here or on the embedded video below.   

Mohammad’s observations that, given the record of American policy in the Middle East (and all the death and destruction it has caused), the United States is hardly in a position to “complain very much about Iran” and that, from an Iranian perspective, there is not a lot of difference between Romney and President Obama are well presented.  His explanation why the “soft war” that the Obama Administration is currently conducting against the Islamic Republic is not that different from a “hot war” is especially eloquent.  We, though, want to pick up on Mohammad’s response to the interviewer’s suggestion that it is Iranian intransigence which is blocking progress in the nuclear talks and prompting tougher sanctions:

“The Iranians have been talking.  The Iranians are basically saying that ‘we are willing to negotiate.’  But the Western position is ‘you give up everything and then we’ll start talking.’  The Iranian right to enriching uranium is a right that all sovereign countries have.  And the Iranian Revolution itself was partially about dignity and independence. The Iranians are not going to accept being a second-rate country.  This is not the Saudi regime or the Jordanian regime.  This is a country that is fiercely independent.  So the Iranians will continue to enrich uranium within the framework of the NPT and international law.  The United States cannot stop Iran from doing so.  If the United States was reasonable and rational, if the Europeans were rational, then the Iranians would be willing to give further assurances to ease tensions.  But the United States isn’t really after that, in the eyes of Iranians.”  

We think that is an important statement, both of the Iranian position and of reality.  We have long argued that, if Washington accepted the principle and reality of internationally safeguarded enrichment in Iran, it would become eminently possible—not to say relatively easy—to negotiate a satisfactory resolution to the Iranian nuclear issue.  But the United States—even under the Obama Administration—does not want to do that, for recognizing Iran’s right to enrich implies recognizing the Islamic Republic as a legitimate political entity representing legitimate national interests.  We think that is unlikely to change after the U.S. presidential election in November, regardless of whether Romney or Obama wins.   

America’s unwillingness to recognize the Islamic Republic as a legitimate actor with legitimate interests is thwarting diplomatic prospects on other fronts.  Last week, the Iran’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Mohammad Khazaee, made a statement during a Security Council discussion on the “Situation in the Middle East,” see here.  Khazaee’s statement offered a substantive analysis of regional dynamics in the Middle East: 

“The Middle East region is witnessing a widespread transformational thunderstorm that has hit across this region…the region is witnessing dramatic changes and people are aspiring for democracy and opposing dictators supported by some powers in the West.  At the same time the situation in the Middle East region is getting ever more complex.  There are more and more threats from terrorism, extremism and foreign interventions which are all impediments to growth, development and stability in the region.

In this situation, any miscalculations, making wrong decisions and fuelling the fire will affect the whole region and harm many people, as well as all stakeholders…This becomes too risky when in a given situation there is a deliberate attempt to change the realities on the ground through force and armed conflict and creating a fait accompli.” 

On the basis of this analysis, Khazaee argued that there needs to be a

“resetting or a revision of approaches towards the developments in the region.  The west must revise its approach about the Middle East.  There seems to be only one approach ahead of us that could bring peace, stability and prosperity and that is cooperation rather than confrontation, genuine response to the desires of the people rather than forcing them to accept what seems to be an artificial and superficial solution.” 

Turning specifically to Syria, Khazaee noted that, in the Islamic Republic’s view,

“the current crisis should only be resolved through national dialogue and in a peaceful manner…There are numerous efforts by certain states to further complicate the situation in Syria by providing financial aid and arms to armed groups.  Sabotage and terror as well as violence against innocent people must be brought to an end.  The regional countries should cooperate with one another to resolve the Syrian crisis so that the final result would be to the benefit of Syrian people, the region and the international community.” 

Of course, there is nothing really new in this statement of Iranian policy; we discussed Tehran’s perspective on Syrian developments in our last post, see here.  It is striking, though, that even some American foreign policy elites are now beginning to argue that Washington should be engaging Tehran over Syria.  These include Vali Nasr, the new dean of the Johns Hopkins University’s Nitze School of Advanced International Studies who previously advised the late Richard Holbrooke, President Obama’s special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, see here.  

Of course, Iran’s view of the possibilities for regional cooperation is not limited to Syria.  For some time, we have pointed out that the Islamic Republic has emerged, over the last decade or so, as an indispensable actor in virtually all of the major political and strategic dramas unfolding across the region, including post-conflict stabilization in Afghanistan, creating a more stable and secure Persian Gulf, and fighting jihadi extremism—precisely as American standing and influence have been declining.  The Arab Spring has only accelerated and intensified these trends.  As we have repeatedly argued, the United States cannot achieve any of its stated, high-priority goals in the region absent better relations with the Islamic Republic. 

But hegemonic ambition dressed up as do-gooder liberalism makes it difficult for the United States to assess accurately its strategic situation.  The Obama Administration’s approach to the Middle East provides a striking demonstration of this point. 

In his Al Jazeera appearance, Seyed Mohammad Marandi offers a clear overview of the American policies—including the policies of the Obama Administration—that have eviscerated the United States’ standing among the vast majority of Middle Easterners.  But American commentators willfully overlook the fact that, according to reputable international polls, regional publics hold U.S. policy in even deeper contempt today than they did when President George W. Bush left office.  Indeed, the dominant assessment in Washington foreign policy circles—and in the Administration—holds that the United States isn’t doing that badly at navigating the Arab Spring; moreover, the “mainstream” view posits that the Islamic Republic is the biggest “loser” from the Arab Spring.  One does not have to be a neoconservative to believe these things; this has become the new conventional wisdom in Washington, espoused by people who would strenuously and sincerely reject any effort to lump them in with neocons; see, for example, hereand here.

On the basis of this (utterly mistaken, in our view) assessment, the United States—whether under a reelected Obama Administration or a new Romney Administration—will almost certainly continue its current, failing, and ultimately corrosive attempt to reassert hegemony in the Middle East.  

  1. #2 by SazzyLilSmartAzz
  2. #5 by Ingrid B

    Yes, Sazzy, Marandi is good, and honest, and I stopped watching Al Jazeera some time ago. I`m surprised that the interviewer, cold, dismissive as she was, allowed him to speak as much as she did. It used to be a “trick” of AlJazeera`s, to invite a “balanced view” person into a debate situation, then keep interupting them. Marandi always kept his cool, and got his point accross. Maybe AlJazeera is losing viewers..

Posted in IranComments Off on Is Iran “The Most Destabilizing Nation in the World” or an Essential Partner for Building Stability in the Middle East?

Shoah’s pages