Archive | September 23rd, 2012

Light Upon Light

by mantiqaltayr

1. The pic above is a screen shot from another WordPress blogger whom I quote from time to time, Mayada al-Shareef, an Egyptian woman with a very nice bi-lingual blog called Mermaid’s Sea. The text in the photo is text she found on another site (and can be found on many others as well), but she found that it expressed pretty much how she feels about things and her thoughts on this reflect those of many people in the Arab and Muslim worlds.

Our Egyptian mermaid also sent me a link to this article which I feel is a must read. It is entitled “The Innocence of White People” and is written by a white American Muslim named Michael Muhammad Knight.  I’d like to just put the whole post up here, but on the other hand الله يهدي الى نوره من يشاء  so I figure the people who will benefit from the whole piece will click on the link.  Here’s a good quote though to get you started.

“The reason for my silence on 9/11 is that I am not only Muslim. I am also American. I am also white. I am male and heterosexual. However, I am not asked, as an American, to reflect on the yearly anniversary of our atomic bombs falling upon Japan, or our countless military interventions throughout the world. There is no date on the calendar for me, as a white person, to demonstrate that I have properly reflected on slavery and the generations of inequality and naked white sadism between the slave era and our own unjust present; we could potentially have such a day, but often turn it into shallow self-congratulation. As a white person, I am not asked to consider the wanton murders of young black men by white cops or white civilians, or the white terrorism of shootings in gurudwaras, as directly relevant to my identity. Nor do I have a designated anniversary for reflection, as a straight man, on the horrifying statistics of rape or the ways in which heterosexism makes this country unsafe for so many.”

The piece is full of excellent points, so go read it. Here’s just one other short take from it:

” I am not trying to excuse violence. As an artist, I support everyone’s right to make shitty, cheap-looking art, and I do not believe that bloodshed is ever an acceptable way of responding to art. But in the big picture, this isn’t really about violent religion vs. nonviolent art; it’s violence vs. violence.”

Nice work Mike.

2. Thanks to for linking to this excellent piece by Chris Floyd entitled: “The Howling: Embassy Riots Pale Next to State Terror Tempest”.  The post is also on Counterpunch and probably is linked to by every decent web site on the Net.  Floyd understands that western violence is so ubiquitous that other violence is miniscule in comparison. That’s why we need the main stream media, so stupid Zionist-bullshit-fed Americans will continue to ask the stupid dumb-ass questions I keep getting asked in my daily life and then have people look at me with absolute dumbfounded stupidity – like a dog that has just been shown a card trick – when I explain that we’ve killed millions of “them” and “they” haven’t even scratched Romney’s balls in comparison.

As Floyd notes:

“In fact, the Dominationist extremists have far more support in their native lands than the riot-provoking Islamic extremists have in theirs. Muslims overwhelmingly reject violence, even in response to the relentless, murderous provocations of the Dominationists — as anyone who actually lives among large numbers of Muslims (as I do) knows perfectly well. Nor are the vast majority of Muslims taken by cheap tricks like the video posted by extremist Christians. As Ghaith Abdul-Ahad notes in an excellent analysis in the Guardian, “only a few thousand” Muslims — out of 1.6 billion — have taken part in the protests, which, he points out, are being exploited by fundamentalist Salafi sects that have been marginalized by the Arab Spring revolutions and are now trying to claw into positions of power. ”

Which brings me back to Ms. Al-Shareef’s post.  One of her reader’s commented:

” I asked an American person to see this post. He said it is the dumbest thing he had ever seen , since those who died on 9/11 were civilians , but Taliban and Saddam were can’t really compare between Americans and others.”

And that is the kind of profound Zionist-bullshit-fed stupidity that is leading this country to destruction.

3. Maybe this video might shed some light on what’s wrong with the Dominationists.

Warning: Racist Zionist war mongering thugs will find the images offensive.

Posted in EgyptComments Off on Light Upon Light

New Precedent in Pak Army

By Sajjad Shaukat

Since the Supreme Court of Pakistan has been dealing with the cases of Memogate scandal, Mehran Bank and of missing persons, our internal entities have continuously been maligning Pak Army and Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI) by ignoring the real facts.

At this critical juncture, foreign elements like US, India and Israel which have been conspiring against the integrity of Pakistan in order to complete their hidden agenda, have accelerated propaganda campaign against country’s army and ISI.

It is regrettable that leaders of the PML (N), Nawaz Sharif, Jamat-i-Islami and Chairman of Tehreek-e-Insaf Imran Khan have perennially been criticising the Pak Army and ISI so as to increase their vote bank. While our media anchors and so-called human rights groups also disrepute country’s key security intuitions by manipulating one or the other issue. In these terms, political leaders become unintentional victim—benefiting the external plotters, while some of our media commentators are impressed by the western media, and some of them are on the payroll of anti-Pakistan powers.

These internal entities are creating misperceptions and stereotypes among the general masses especially regarding the Pak Army. They have also been raising false allegations of corruption against the Army as an institution. But, fact is that if any army soldier involves himself in any such malpractice, it is his individual act, and he is punished through court martial. For example, in the past, serving Maj-Gen. Zaheerul Islam Abbasi was arrested by Military Intelligence (MI). With the charge of supplying arms to separatists in the Indian-held Kashmir, he was convicted for seven years after a court martial.

It is of particular attention that first time in the history of Pak Army and Pakistan that recently, three high-ranked officers of the National Logistic Cell (NLC), namely, Lt-Gen. Khalid Munir Khan, Lt-Gen. (retd) M. Afzal Muzzafar and Maj-Gen. (retd) Khalid Zaheer Akhtar who have been accused of being involved in a multi-billion scam have been taken back in active service so that they may face court martial.

Their calling back for investigations neither constitutes re-commissioning nor entitles them to pay, and other army facilities.

Surprisingly, a writer Ayesha Siddiqa who has always opposed Pakistan Army for the sake of opposition has again targeted it in her article, “A Law above the Law”, published in ‘The News’ on September 16, 2012. Before the initiation of the NLC case by the military court, she has already made various illogical presumptions in her article. Ms. Ayesha has created impression that Army would only fulfill formality by saving the skin of their officers. She supposed by indicating, “The army would not allow its officers to be tried and ‘humiliated’ in front of the civilians…the chief may not necessarily punish these senior officers. There is a probability that the military personnel may get away with a lighter sentence (if they are punished at all) on the grounds that this was not an act of corruption but error in decision-making.”

In fact, like her past writings, Ayesha Siddiqua’s article also shows that she is fulfilling some foreign agenda by tarnishing the image of Army, and is misguiding the common men of Pakistan.

However, an official of Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) while commenting on NLC  issue on September 14 categorically stated that the NLC case will be conducted strictly in accordance with due process of law and those proven guilty of wrong doings would be brought to justice. He further clarified that for recording of the Summaries of Evidence, it was essential to bring the accused officers under Pakistan Army ACT (PAA). In this context, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of National Assembly was also informed on September 6, this year.

It is also brought to the knowledge of the common man that NLC functions under the control of National Logistics Board (NLB) as an attached department of Planning and Development Division. NLB was established through a government of Pakistan notification. It is headed by Planning and Development minister, and its members include federal secretaries for Finance, P&D, Communications, Food and Agriculture and Live Stock, Planning Commission deputy chairman and NLC officer in-charge. NLC director general, a serving major general appointed by the GHQ, acts as NLB secretary.

Notably, Major general level officers have been designated to analyse the Summary of Evidence on behalf of Chief of Army Staff Ashfaq Kayani. The COAS would further issue directions after analysis of the summary.

It is pertinent to mention that Pakistan Army Act is a substantive act of the Parliament and is not a departmental law. Similarly, another important dimension is that without exception, armed forces all over the world are governed by separate military laws.

Hence, the misperception being created by some internal elements that the same nature of offence is being dealt with two different laws is incorrect.

There is a maxim that “justice delayed is justice denied.” In this respect, civil court takes longer period in deciding the cases. This factor results in a number of problems such as wastage of time and money of the lawyers, prosecutors and filer of the suite. Meanwhile, lawyers produce false evidence so as to save their clients, though reality of the crime exists. Moreover, it is due to much delay that lacunas are created, and thus criminals are set free, especially in the cross-cases. On the other side, military court decides the case within a short span of time through summary trial, but equal opportunity is provided to the accused to defend him. So unlike the civil court and its legal procedure, although military law is inherently stricter, yet it provides for expeditious disposal of cases which are being decided on merit, with fairness.

Some civilians also suppose that there is only thing known as a court martial. They must know that there are four kinds of court martial such as Summary Court Martial (SCM), District Court Martial (DCM), Field General Court Martial (FGCM) and General Court Martial (GCM). Difference lies regarding amount of punishment which can be awarded through them. It also includes the officer entitled to convene or sanction a court martial.

Nevertheless, some hostile elements of Pakistan say that in the past some ordinary soldiers and officers of middle tier of Pak Army have been convicted through court martial in connection with corruption. But Gen. Kayani makes no difference between the low-ranking and high-ranking army officials. Now, the accused retired officers of the NLC have been taken on the strength of the Army. This was done in accordance with Pakistan Army Act Section 92, read in conjunction with Section 40.

Reliable sources have revealed that if found guilty in relation to financial irregularities or corruption, these officers will be dealt with strict punishment. And there will be no discrimination in this regard.

It must be appreciated that for the first time, retired senior army officers have been recalled, and would be subjected to the process of investigation through court martial. So, it is new precedent in the history of the country.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power

Posted in Pakistan & KashmirComments Off on New Precedent in Pak Army

Mask of Zion Report

Mask of Zion Report Sept 20, 2012

by crescentandcross


Download Here


Posted in InterviewComments Off on Mask of Zion Report

Surrendering Islam


The Subversion of Islam
Throughout History Until the Present Day

By David Livingstone 

and Sahib Mustaqim Bleher

And those who disbelieve say, “We will never believe in this Qur’an nor in that before it.” But if you could see when the wrongdoers are made to stand before their Lord, refuting each other’s words… Those who were oppressed will say to those who were arrogant, “If not for you, we would have been believers.”

Those who were arrogant will say to those who were oppressed, “Did we avert you from guidance after it had come to you? Rather, you were criminals.”

Those who were oppressed will say to those who were arrogant, “Rather, [it was your] conspiracy of night and day when you were ordering us to disbelieve in Allah and attribute to Him equals.” But they will [all] confide regret when they see the punishment; and We will put shackles on the necks of those who disbelieved. Will they be recompensed except for what they used to do?

Holy Qur’an: Chapter 34 as-Saba, verses 31 to 33.


Muslims have flocked to the West for the last several decades in the hope of finding a better life. But while they left corruption and poverty behind in their home countries, they are now experiencing the evaporation of the illusions they entertained about the ideal life they had expected to find in the West. Instead of seeing the success of their “Dawa“, and seeing increasing numbers of Westerners embrace Islam, or at least come to appreciate its beauty, they are now being marginalized and villianized as the specter of a new Cold War, where rampant “Islamophobia” is making their lives increasingly difficult in general.

How did this happen? How did they not see this coming? Should they have stayed in their home countries? Was there something wrong with their “Dawa“? Or, is this just a temporary situation, and Westerners will eventually see the beauty of Islam as long as Muslims continue what we they are doing and try hard enough?

The fact is, Muslims are suffering from many forms of great ignorance that prevent them from not only recognizing what their true duties as Muslims are, but of understanding exactly what is happening around them.

How did this come about? For centuries Muslims lived under unified rule, led by successive empires, primarily the Abbassids and eventually the Ottoman Turks. Also, centuries of pious effort were exerted to codify the message of Islam into a legal system apt at governing the affairs of large civilizations. This system is known as Shariah and in Sunni Islam is divided into four mutually compatible schools, called Mathhabs.

This Islamic legal system was the result of great vigilance with regards to the creeping influence of corruptive ideas, which would sometimes splinter into various movements and sects. However, as long as there was a political power in place, these splinter groups could be kept in check, and the sanctity of orthodox Islam proclaimed as the dominant one.

This all ended in 1924, with the final collapse of the Ottoman Empire. From that time forward, there was no vanguard for the orthodoxy of Islam, and many of these splinter groups then began to flourish. Most prominent among them are the Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia. This sect was created by the British in the seventeenth century, in accordance with their strategy of “Divide and Conquer”, to disunite and weaken the Ottoman Empire.

The Ottoman power was able to initially quash the movement. Nevertheless, the wayward group survived into the 20th century, and following the demise of the Ottoman state, were officially installed as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia with British assistance in 1932. The Wahhabis though were merely a part of a great wave of British-sponsored Islamic “revivalism”, as part of the same strategy, that swept across parts of the Arab world, but also particularly in British-controlled India and Pakistan, fostering Wahhabi affiliated movements like the Deonbandis, and the Barelvis and so on.

Most important were the Salifi, that emerged out of Egypt, founded by British agents Jamal ud Din al Afghani, and Mohammed Abduh, leading to the creation of the Muslim Brotherhood by Hasan al Banna.

Today, all Islamic radicalism can be traced to these organizations and movements. The purpose of their establishment is clear. A plan was outlined in the nineteenth century by the notorious Albert Pike to pursue three World Wars. The first two we have witnessed, while the last of these is to be against the Muslim world.

The plan of Shaytan has been successfully pursued for centuries. Christianity has been undermined through the corruption of Gnostic ideas, and finally the great revolutions of the eighteenth century succeeded in removing Church authority from the state. And, continuous negative propaganda ever since has managed to largely discredit Christianity in the minds of Westerners.

Ultimately, towards the goal of eliminating all sign of God’s message on earth, there now remains the final obstacle: Islam.

However, Muslims are incapable of mobilizing any kind of threat to the West. Therefore, an artificial threat had to be created. This was the reason behind the creation of numerous radical “Islamic” movements, which had a dual purpose. Firstly, by creating a very false image of Islam, they led to the negative mindset in the minds of Westerners about the reality of Islam, to cause apprehension against it. Finally, the recruitment of violent agitators to carry out false-flag terror operations would provide the various pretexts necessary for embarking on military campaigns in Islamic lands and implementing police-state measures at home.

As a Muslim Ummah, we are lost. Over and over, the Qur’an repeats the warning to us about hypocrites. Until now, we have failed to apprehend the significance of these warnings. In these pages, God willing, we will be able to unravel this mystery, and expose the nefarious plots of those who have said they were Muslim, but who had
been working in collusion with our enemies to bring about our final downfall.

For the most part, we have been fooled, and we have degraded our interpretation of Islam accordingly. For the sake of our ourselves, and in turn, the rest of humanity, which is thursting for the true message of Islam, we need come to terms with this reality and return to our traditional understanding of Islam in order to revive it to its former greatness.

As pointed out in the verse above, on the Day of Judgement, the misguided masses will point the finger of blame on the conspiracy carried out by the elite.  But blame is on them for their own misguidance.  Likewise, the purpose of this information is not to now blame the modern day conspirators, but rather to acknowledge our own misguidance and reform ourselves.

As God says in the Qur’an:

Indeed, Allah will not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves.

Holy Qur’an: Chapter 13 ar-Rad, verse 11

Posted in CampaignsComments Off on Surrendering Islam

Finding the Tomb of Jesus and True Christianity

Submitted by David Livingstone

There’s a lot of hoopla these days about the possible discovery of the tomb of Jesus. It if were ever at all possible to even prove, however, it would not discredit “Christianity” in the least. But it would completely dismantle the Gnostic version that was created by Paul, which much of Christianity has adhered to for much of the last 2 thousand years. Ideally, it will lead to a rediscovery of the true meaning of Jesus’ message.

First of all, it’s perfectly to be expected that this strategy was to be eventually implemented, along with the recent assault on our perceptions of history and truth perpetrated by The Da Vinci Code, or the movie The Book of Secrets, and so on.

But the version of “Christianity” that the Illuminati claim to be discrediting is that same distortion of it for which they are themselves responsible.

I don’t mean to disparage any Christians, and I respect the light they may derive from that interpretation of Christianity. However, the evidence has suggested to me that Paul was a willing agent in the corruption of Jesus’ original message, and I suspect he may have been an agent of that family who were the prime instigators of the conspiracy, over the last 2000 years, to topple religion on this planet, and replace it with their Luciferianism. I mean the House of Herod the Great.

What is very fascinating about this family is that they were closely associated with 3 other families who were central in the origination and dissemination of Mithraism, that cult which so eventually pervaded the Roman Empire, and for which there have been numerous attempts to suggest that Christianity was merely a derivation of it.

The truth is that Mithraism belonged to the many and varied black magic rituals of the Kabbalah, ostensibly dedicated to the dying-gods of antiquity. In this case, they were purportedly dedicated to the god the Persian Magi, those sorcerers who were identified by the ancient world and the founders of all their occult doctrines, but were mistaken as the pupils of Zoroaster, the founder of Zoroastrianism. They were Kabbalists.

This is a very obscure area of history, so it may be difficult for readers to follow me, but the first evidence of the cult of Mithraism is found in the House of Commagene, in what is now Turkey, who were connected with the Herodians. The full network of these families also included the Claudio-Julian dynasty of Rome, who were emperors from the time to Caesar to Nero. Nero was the first emperor to have been initiated to Mithraism by a Magi. The other family were the Priest-Kings of Emesa in Syria, a hereditary family who for several centuries came to maintain the worship of Sol Invictus, which was interchangeable with Mithraism.

But it was also the Magi who through their astrological skill discovered the coming of the Jewish Messiah, and then reported it to Herod, who then implemented the infamous “slaughter of the innocents”. The evil mission failed. But this did not deter the Herodians in their mission to supplant Judaism with their own mystery religion.

When they failed to suppress the advent of the Jewish Messiah, they attempted to kill him, and then to co-opt his message. Their agent in this corruption was Paul. Robert Eisenmen, a leading scholar of the Dead Sea Scrolls, has written an excellent article which reveals the numerous pieces of evidence which lean to suggest that Paul was indeed such an agent.

But what is most incriminating about Paul, the Thirteenth Apostle, is his decidedly Gnostic interpretation of Christianity. As I discuss in my book, I think the Herodians attempted to kill Jesus as a form of human sacrifice, as a way, in accordance with their mysteries, that the victim would “die for their sins.”

Paul then became the missionary of this version of Christianity, without revealing its true esoteric meaning.

And so here is the complete justification as touted by Paul:

If Christ is not risen, then is our preaching in vain, and your faith also is in vain. Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ… if Christ is not raised… you are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.” (1 Cor. 15: 12-19).

But, it is only Paul’s version of Christianity that is dependent on the death of Jesus. But maybe Jesus’ message was not in his death. The majority of early Christians did not believe that Jesus was God or son of God, until they were suppressed by the emerging Christian establishment, and finally by the Nicene conference of 325 AD. In fact, the Early Church, which was composed of Jesus’ immediate followers, were orthodox Jews, and were in conflict with Paul’s repudiation of the Law.

As another example, Islam, while hailing Jesus as the Messiah and a true prophet of God, denies that Jesus was crucified, and denounces his equation with God or the son of God as pagan influence. The evidence corroborates the claim.

No, Jesus was an orthodox Jewish reformer, in the tradition of the many reformers mentioned in the Bible. He tried to reproach the Jewish priesthood of his time for their corruption, xenophobia and misanthropy. He tried to remind them that the meaning of piety was not to be found in mindless and detailed adherence to ritual, but in the implementation of justice. Above all, he wanted to teach the meaning of loving your neighbour, even your enemies.

This was a great and powerful message. It is by estranging us from this supreme tenet, and inducing us to equate religion with ritual, and patriotic association to our fellow co-religionists, that the Illuminati have managed to lull us into a degree of apathy by which we simply stand by and watch them rape and pillage their way across much of the rest of the world.

Posted in EducationComments Off on Finding the Tomb of Jesus and True Christianity

Maureen Dowd Accuses The Neocons of Fomenting War — and is Promptly Tarred as an anti-Semite


By Philip Weiss

In the last day or two we have seen one of the most remarkable policings of the discourse that I’ve ever seen; and it seems to be one man’s achievement, Jeffrey Goldberg, in asserting that the longtime New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd was anti-Semitic in saying that the Romney braintrust includes the same guys who started the Iraq war. It is remarkable because so many people inside the Beltway have heeded Goldberg; even Joe Klein in defending Dowd says that she was crude – this from a man who wrote openly of Jewish neoconservatives, which Dowd didn’t do – and so the line has held: the idea that we are allowed to debate the Jewish neoconservatives’ role in the Iraq war for the sake of Israel, well that is an anti-Semitic idea. As Goldberg says, it is the idea that the gentiles didn’t start that war, but were manipulated into it by the likes of Wolfowitz and Feith.

There has been good pushback against the Goldberg policing by MJ Rosenberg at Huffpo and Andrew Sullivan at his site. Sullivan has a photo of Dowd doctored to look like Hitler and welcomes her into the anti-Semite club. Both writers say that Dowd was right to call out the neocons for pushing the Iraq war. But in polite discourse, Goldberg has a large following. Max Fisher who is starting a new website at the Washington Post tweeted approvingly of Goldberg’s accusation– between his tweets with Goldberg discussing their favorite Jewish foods—and of course Commentary was on the case. Even New York Magazine passed along the accusation as if it might have some basis: “she peddles Jewish stereotypes and uses anti-Semitic imagery, according to a number of writers, editors, and observers.” This reminds me of the time Wolfowitz was able to deflect a question about neoconservatives at the American Enterprise Institute by joking, Don’t you mean Jewish? I am now waiting for Spencer Ackerman to trace the history of snake and puppet metaphors in the literature of Jew hatred..

I don’t think Maureen Dowd will be going back there for a while.

Goldberg’s most absurd claim is there was a “major” discussion of this issue after the Iraq war. This is not true. Walt and Mearsheimer said what Dowd is saying, and said more explicitly that the Iraq war was the Israel lobby’s work, but the discussion took place at the fringes. Goldberg saw to that. He condemned the view as anti-semitic then, and was joined by Marty Peretz, Daniel Goldhagen and Columbia University Journalism Dean Nick Lemann.

It didn’t work then and it won’t work now. Goldberg’s dismissal of Dowd because she uses metaphors like snake and puppetmaster only forces the belief that she is right back underground, sure to pop up again before long– as it did lately when Chris Matthews asserted that the neocons “pushed” a mindless president into an “idiotic” war.

Goldberg has his reasons to keep the conversation underground. He vigorously supported the Iraq war, on the basis of reports that turned out to be bogus, and before that he moved to Israel because he thought the Diaspora was unsafe for Jews. He has a keen sense of anti-Semitism lurking at every corner. This is an important part of the conversation. Joe Klein points out in defending Dowd that anti-Semitism is not a factor in American society, at all. “If what Dowd wrote constitutes anti-Semitism, then the term has no meaning,” Ilene Cohen writes. And Tony Judt made similar points when he pushed for one democratic state in Israel and Palestine– because Jews don’t need a national refuge (on ethnically-cleansed land that has seen unending conflict).

I think it would be great if we had Goldberg’s “major’ discussion. The simple question: Is Dowd right when she says this about Romney’s neocon braintrust?

A moral, muscular foreign policy; a disdain for weakness and diplomacy; a duty to invade and bomb Israel’s neighbors; a divine right to pre-emption — it’s all ominously familiar.

You can draw a direct line from the hyperpower manifesto of the Project for the New American Century, which the neocons, abetted by Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, used to prod an insecure and uninformed president into invading Iraq — a wildly misguided attempt to intimidate Arabs through the shock of overwhelming force. How’s that going for us?

My answers: the neocons did push the Iraq war out of concern for Israel’s security, they were an important factor in our going to war, and the neocons came out of the Jewish conservative community. Let me go over these points, last one first.

As Alan Dershowitz has said, “the recent neo-conservative movement in America has also been dominated by Jews.” To be clear: conservative Jews, like Irving Kristol who said in helping to found the neoconservatives in 1973, “Jews don’t like big military budgets. But it is now an interest of the Jews to have a large and powerful military establishment in the United States.” Norman Podhoretz said that Democratic doves were a “direct threat” to Israel’s security. So these neocon fathers led the movement out of a concern for purported Jewish interests. Jacob Heilbrunn in his book on neocons says the movement arose in part out of Jewish intellectuals’ resentment over their exclusion from places in the Establishment.

The next question is whether the neocons pushed the Iraq war out of concern for Israel, and here again the answer is clear, Yes. All their books on the subject, Frum, Feith, Perle, Berman, Kristol, Kaplan are inflected with the Israel issue, chiefly mentioning the fact that Saddam supported suicide bombers in Israel as a reason to take him out. Kenneth Pollack said we will be greeted with liberators and the Iraq war will thereby separate the Israel-Palestine issue from the American presence in mind of the Arab world. How are we doing with that one! Frum and Perle said, “Victory or Holocaust.” Perle, Wurmser and Feith before working for Bush had worked for Netanyahu on a related project, destroying the two state solution with the famous Clean Break paper. No doubt, these are guys who care about Israel. Joe Klein once accused these Jewish neocons of having “divided loyalties.”

The best line in Maureen Dowd’s piece is when she says that the Project for a New American Century’s manifestos prodded an uninformed Bush to invade Iraq. These manifestos must never be forgotten. They include statements like Israel’s fight is our fight. So we must do to Iraq after 9/11 what Israel did to the West Bank after the second intifadah. The thinking was echoed by Tom Friedman in his famous statement that it was necessary for the U.S. to go into the Arab world and smash something in order to convince them not to bomb themselves and blow up civilians. He was a big supporter of the Iraq war.

Did they have an effect on the war plans of Cheney and Bush? The million dollar question. I say yes. I ask readers to remember how scared we all were after 911. “If we are to think seriously about the world, and act effectively in it, some sort of simplified map of reality, some theory, concept, model paradigm is necessary. Without such intellectual construct, there is, as William James said, only a ‘bloomin’ buzzin’ confusion,’” Samuel Huntington writes in The Clash of Civilizations—which is itself such a paradigm. Huntington is right; policy requires theory; and the neocons had a very persuasive theory of Why they hate us: The Arabs had been left behind by history and were jealous of our freedom. We only had to replace their authoritarian governments with democracies to liberate that world; and the Arabs would love us. Bill Clinton said it best in his speech accepting the Democratic nomination in 92. Without vision, the people are lost. And sometimes they are lost with visions too.

Ken Pollack bought the vision, and Bernard Lewis brought it to Cheney. Tom Friedman:

It’s the war the neoconservatives wanted, Friedman says. It’s the war the neoconservatives marketed. Those people had an idea to sell when September 11 came, and they sold it. Oh boy, did they sell it. So this is not a war that the masses demanded. This is a war of an elite.

Goldberg’s claim that a bunch of powerful non-Jews in the White House started the war is inarguable. Of course Bush and Cheney started the war. No one has ever questioned that. But he is diminishing the power of mental laborers, the men and women, many of them Jewish, who did the hard labor of explaining the new world and pointing the finger at Iraq (which did not attack us; but had attacked Israel). I understand why he would seek to diminish the idea that the pen is mightier than the sword. Because he wielded one of those pens and does not want any serious accounting. So he throws mud, and muddies the waters.

Posted in USAComments Off on Maureen Dowd Accuses The Neocons of Fomenting War — and is Promptly Tarred as an anti-Semite

PCHR Concerned for the Lives of Palestinian Detainees on Hunger Strike, Reiterates Rejection of Forcible Transfer of Civilians


The Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) is concerned for the lives of three Palestinian detainees who have been on hunger strike in protest at being placed under administrative detention by Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF).  PCHR reiterates its rejection and condemnation of the policy of forcible transfer which is being implemented by IOF; a number of Palestinian detainees have been offered their release from prison, conditional upon their forcible transfer, in an effort to convince them to end their hunger strikes. Of particular concern are reports that one of these detainees will be deported to Egypt.  PCHR calls upon the international community to put pressure on Israel to immediately release the three detainees in question.

Samer al-Barq, 38, from Jayous village near Qalqilya, has been on a hunger strike since 22 May 2012 (122 days), in protest at being held under administrative detention by IOF since 11 July 2010.

Hassan al-Safadi, 34, from Nablus, has been on a hunger strike since 21 June 2012 (93 days), in protest at being held under administrative detention by IOF for 14 months.

Ayman Shanyoura, 36, from Hebron, has been on a hunger strike since 2 July 2012 (78 days), in protest at his re-arrest by IOF following his release as part of the prisoners swap deal between IOF and Palestinian resistance groups in October 2011 (the ‘Gilad Shalit deal’).

According to several sources, the three detainees are in very poor health, as they suffer from several serious health conditions, including malnutrition, general fatigue, anemia, protein deficiency, sugar deficiency, and sight deficiency.

In a press release issued on Friday, 14 September 2012, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) stated that it is “extremely concerned about the deteriorating health of three Palestinian detainees who are on long-term hunger strike”. Juan Pedro Schaerer, the head of the ICRC delegation in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory, said “These people are going to die unless the detaining authorities find a prompt solution”.

On Thursday, 20 September 2012, media sources reported that IOF were making preparations to deport one of the detainees, Samer al-Barq, to Egypt, in exchange for ending his hunger strike.

PCHR is concerned about the use of forcible transfer by IOF in respect of Palestinian civilians.  PCHR is aware of a number of similar cases in which Palestinian civilians were deported.  IOF have previously departed at least 203 Palestinian detainees; 40 of these individuals were deported abroad and 163 to the Gaza Strip, in accordance with the ‘Gilad Shalit deal’.  More recently, on 01 April 2012, IOF transferred a Palestinian detainee, Hanaa Shalabi, from the West Bank to the Gaza Strip for a period of 3 years in exchange for ending her hunger strike, which had continued for 44 days.

PCHR reiterates its condemnation of the policy of forcible transfer of civilians, which is prohibited under Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

In light of its concern for the lives of the detainees who are on hunger strike, and its rejection of the policies of administrative detention and forcible transfer:

1- PCHR calls upon the international community to immediately intervene to compel Israel to release all detainees who have been on hunger strike in order to save their lives.

2- PCHR calls upon Israel to put an end to the policy of administrative detention, which violates the right to a fair trial.

3- PCHR calls upon the international community to ensure Israel’s respect for international humanitarian law, and abstention from committing the crime of forcible transfer against Palestinian civilians.


Posted in Palestine Affairs, Human RightsComments Off on PCHR Concerned for the Lives of Palestinian Detainees on Hunger Strike, Reiterates Rejection of Forcible Transfer of Civilians

Mapping Drone Proliferation: UAVs in 76 Countries

Global Research

A new US Congress report on the proliferation of drones has confirmed a huge rise in the number of countries that now have military unmanned aerial systems. The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) has published an unclassified version of its February 2012 report on the proliferation of UAVs. The report examines both the proliferation of UAVs, commonly known as drones, and examines US and multilateral controls on the export of drone technology.

The report states that between 2005 and December 2011, the number of countries that posses drones rose from 41 to 76 (see here for full list).

(Countries that have drones according to GAO report)

According to the report:

“The majority of foreign UAVs that countries have acquired fall within the tactical category. Tactical UAVs primarily conduct intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions and typically have a limited operational range of at most 300 kilometres. However, some more advanced varieties are capable of performing intelligence collection, targeting, or attack missions. Mini UAVs were also frequently acquired across the globe during this period.”

It should be noted that currently only the US, UK and Israel are known to have used armed UAVs.

The report goes on: “Currently, there are over 50 countries developing more than 900 different UAV systems. This growth is attributed to countries seeing the success of the United States with UAVs in Iraq and Afghanistan and deciding to invest resources into UAV development to compete economically and militarily in this emerging area.”

While the report fails to highlight the danger of growing drone proliferation to global peace and security it does emphasize the danger of drone proliferation to “US interests”. The report states that “the use of UAVs by foreign parties to gather information on U.S. military activities has already taken place” and “the significant growth in the number of countries that have acquired UAVs, including key countries of concern, has increased the threat to the United States.”

Despite this, the report states “the U.S. government has determined that selected transfers of UAV technology support its national security interests”, thus highlighting the contradiction at the heart of current arms control measures. ‘Private sector representatives’ told the reports authors that “UAVs are one of the most important growth sectors in the defense industry and provide significant opportunities for economic benefits if U.S. companies can remain competitive in the global UAV market.”

Table 1: US drone sales Fiscal Year 2005-2010

The report reveals that between 2005 – 2010, the US approved over $380m of drone exports (Table 1). In total, the U.S. government approved transfers of complete UAV systems in 15 cases over the period. Eight of the 15 countries were names in the report: Denmark, Italy, Lithuania, United Kingdom, Australia, Colombia, Israel, and Singapore. Additionally, 1,278 UAV-related licenses were identified over the period.

The US and the MTCR

The main international agreement that controls the transfer of drones is the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). Although not primarily focused on drones, the MTCR controls UAVs by dividing them into two categories. Category One systems are capable of delivering a 500 kilogram warhead further than 300 kilometres, while Category II covers systems that carry a lighter warhead or have a range of less than 300km. Although all decisions are taken on a national basis (and there is no sanction by other countries if the MTCR is broken) there is a “strong presumption of denial” underpinning Category One – that is, an assumption that MTCR signatory states will not export such systems. Countries have greater discretion about exporting Category Two systems.

Drone Wars UK has previously highlighted efforts by US corporation to “relax” controls on the export of drones. However the GAO report details for the first time “six US-sponsored UAV-related proposals” to amend the MTCR over the 2005-2011 period, five of which “would have resulted in moving some UAVs currently categorized under MTCR Category I to Category II” and thus making them more easier to export. The five proposals were rejected by other members of the MTCR.

While the GAO report goes on to detail the need to improve internal US controls on the export of drones and related technology (recommending improving information databases and communication between licensing departments and intelligence agencies), it shies away from advocating the need to improve international controls.

Two weeks ago it was reported that the Pentagon has identified 66 countries that would be eligible to buy US drones under new guidelines yet to be approved by Congress. Meanwhile, Germany wants to buy armed drones; while neighbouring Poland plans to scrap its manned fighters for armed drones, just as Canada wants to spend $1 billion on armed drones and Australia too plans to spend $3 billion on drones.

The time for global controls to stop the spread of drones has never been more urgent or important. Next month the 26th annual plenary meeting of the MTCR takes place in Berlin behind closed doors. No public agenda or details of the meeting are available. We urge all those involved to see the growing dangers of drone proliferation and to resist the siren calls by those with vested interests to relax the controls that currently exist.

Table 2: List of Countries reported by US GAO to posses drones.
Algeria Egypt Lebanon Singapore
Angola Estonia Libya Slovakia
Argentina Ethiopia Lithuania Slovenia
Australia Finland Malaysia South Africa
Austria France Mexico Spain
Azerbaijan Georgia Morocco Sri Lanaka
Belarus Germany Netherlands Sweden
Belgium Greece New Zealand Switzerland
Botswana Hungary Nigeria Syria
Brazil India Norway Taiwan
Bulgaria Indonesia Pakistan Thailand
Burundi Iran Panama Trinidad & Tobago
Canada Israel Peru Tunisia
Chile Italy Philippines Turkey
China Ivory Coast Poland Uganda
Colombia Japan Republic of Korea Ukraine
Croatia Jordan Romania UAE
Czech Republic Kazakhstan Russia United Kingdom
Denmark Latvia Serbia United States
Copyright © 2012 Global Research



Posted in USAComments Off on Mapping Drone Proliferation: UAVs in 76 Countries

“The Innocence of Muslims”: Blasphemy as a Political Tactic

Global Research

The circulation on the Internet of the trailer for a film, The Innocence of Muslims, sparked demonstrations across the world and resulted in the killing in Benghazi of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya and members of his entourage.

At first glance, these events can be located in the long line leading from Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses to the burnings of the Koran by Pastor Terry Jones. Nevertheless, this new attack differs from other incidents in that the film was not directed at a Western audience but instead was uniquely conceived as an instrument of provocation directed at Muslims.

In political terms, the affair can be analyzed from two angles: from the tactical perspective as an anti-U.S. manipulation; or from a strategic one, as an anti-Muslim psychological attack.

The film was produced by a Zionist group composed of Jews of double Israeli-American nationality and by an Egyptian Copt. It was completed several months ago but was released at a calculated moment to provoke riots targeting the United States.

Israeli agents were deployed in several large cities with a mission to channel the rage of the crowd against American or Coptic targets (though not Israeli ones). Not surprisingly, their maximum effect was attained in Benghazi, the capital of Libya’s Cyrenaica region.

The population of Benghazi is known to harbor particularly reactionary and racist groups. It is useful to recall that at the time the cartoons of Mohammed appeared in September, 2005, Salafists attacked the Danish Consulate. In keeping with the Vienna Convention on diplomacy, the Libyan government of Muammar al-Gaddafi deployed troops to protect the diplomatic service then under attack. The repression of the riot resulted in numerous deaths. Subsequently, the West, seeking to overthrow the Libyan regime, financed Salafist publications which accused Gaddafi of protecting the Danish Consulate because he had allegedly been behind the cartoon operation.

On February 15, 2011, Salafists organized in Benghazi a demonstration commemorating the massacre during which shooting erupted, an incident that marked the beginning of the Benghazi insurrection that opened the way to the NATO intervention. The Libyan police arrested three members of the Italian Special Forces who confessed to having fired from the rooftops on both demonstrators and the police to sew chaos and confusion. Held prisoner throughout the war that followed, they were released when NATO seized the capital and smuggled them out of the country to Malta in a small fishing boat on which I was also a passenger.

This time, the manipulation of the Benghazi crowd by Israeli agents had as its goal the assassination of the U.S. Ambassador, an act of war not seen since the Israeli bombardment of the USS Liberty by the Israeli Air Force and Navy in 1967. This constitutes the first assassination of an ambassador in the line of duty since 1979. The act is all the more grievous considering that in a country where the current central government is a purely legal fiction, the U.S. Ambassador was not merely a diplomat but was functioning as Governor, as the de facto head of state.

It should be emphasized that in the past few weeks, the highest-ranking U.S. military officers have entered into open conflict with the Israeli government. They have issued declarations signifying their intention to halt the cycle of wars begun after September 11 (Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria) and which, in light of the informal agreements of 2001, will expand further (Sudan, Somalia and Iran). The first warning shot occurred in Afghanistan, in August 2012, when two missiles were fired at the parked plane of General Martin Dempsey, head of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. This second warning turned out to be even more brutal.

If, on the other hand, we examine this affair from the viewpoint of social psychology, the release of the film and its aftermath appear to be a frontal attack on the beliefs of Muslims. In this regard, it is similar in nature to the Pussy Riot episode trampling on the freedom of religious practice inside the Orthodox Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow and the mulitple performances of conceptual pornography the group engaged in afterwards. These are operations geared to violate societies that resist the project of global domination.

In democratic and multicultural societies, the sacred is seen as belonging to and being expressed within the private sphere. But a new collective space of the sacred has been in the process of elaboration. Western European states have passed “historical memory” laws which have transformed a historical event—the Nazi destruction of European Jews—into a religious occurrence: the “Shoa” in Jewish terminology, or the “Holocaust” as expressed in Christian evangelical parlance. Nazi crimes are thereby elevated to the level of a unique event at the expense of the victims of other massacres, including other victims of the Nazis. Questioning the dogma, i.e. this religious interpretation of historical facts, subjects one to criminal penalties, just as blasphemy was punished in the past. Similarly, in 2001, the U.S., the European Union member states and a number of their allies imposed by decree that entire national populations must observe a minute of silence in memory of the victims of the September 11 attacks. This ruling was underpinned by an ideological interpretation of the causes of the massacre. In both cases, having been killed because one was Jewish or because one was American confers a particular status on these victims before whom the rest of humanity must genuflect.

During the Olympic Games in London, both the Israeli and the American delegations attempted to enlarge their sacred space still further by imposing a minute of silence during the opening ceremony of the most-watched televised event in the world, this time on behalf of the hostages seized during the Munich Games of 1972. In the end, the proposal was rejected, with the Olympic Committee holding instead a separate ceremony. This is just a further indication of the effort to create a collective liturgy legitimating the global empire.

The Innocence of Muslims serves both as a device to bring Washington back into line at a moment when it may be stepping back from the Zionist agenda and as a means of pursuing it further by attacking the faith of still others who resist it.

Posted in CampaignsComments Off on “The Innocence of Muslims”: Blasphemy as a Political Tactic

Gaza Permanen t Military Court Issues Judgment in the Case of Italian Activist VittorioArrigoni’s Murde


On Monday morning, 17 September 2012, the Permanent Military Court is Gaza issued its judgment in the case of Italian activist Vittorio Arrigoni’s murder.  The Court convicted the first defendant (M.S.) and second defendant (T.H.) of premeditated killing and kidnapping for the purpose of killing.  They were each sentenced to life imprisonment with hard labor and 10 years of imprisonment with hard labor; the more severe of the two punishments will be applied. 

The court also sentenced the third defendant (K.E.) to 10 years of imprisonment with hard labor, after convicting him of kidnapping for the purpose of killing.  The fourth defendant (A.G.) was convicted of harboring fugitives and sentenced to one year of imprisonment.

PCHR lawyers attended today’s hearing in their capacity as the legal representatives of the Arrigoni family.  They have also attended all hearings for the case since the court began considerations on 11 August 2011.  PCHR has also followed all of the developments of the case and provided the court’s panel with letters from the Arrigoni family. 

The Italian activist, Vittorio Arrigoni, was killed,after being kidnapped in the evening of 14 April 2011, by a group that called itself the “A-Hammam Mohammed Bin Maslama Group.”  The Palestinian police found his body 15 April 2011 in a house in the ‘Amer housing project west of Jabalya, located in the northern part of the Gaza Strip. 

In light of the judgment issued in the case of Arrigoni’s murder, PCHR would like to draw attention to the following:


  • 3 of the persons who were involved in kidnapping and murdering the Italian activist were subsequently killed in armed clashes between them and Palestinian security forces that besieged the house where they werehiding in al-Nussairat refugee camp in the central part of the Gaza Strip.
  • PCHR officially demanded the court’s panel, in writing, to abstain from applying the death penalty to the defendants if they are convicted, based on its position rejecting the death penalty and in response to the Arrigoni family’s wish, which they expressed in a letter dated 16 December 2011.  The family wanted a fair trial for the defendants in accordance with the requirements of the international law and called for the death penalty to not be applied against the defendants if they were convicted.
  • PCHR, like the Arrigoni family, is satisfied by the sentences issued by the Court, which can be described, under the circumstances surrounding the case, as fair and legitimate, and considers that the murderers of Arrigoni have been effectively tried.
  • PCHR has followed this case in honor of Vittorio Arrigoni’s soul and out of its moral commitment towards international solidarity activists, who may lose their lives because of their support for the rights of Palestinian people, like what happened to Arrigoni and the American activist Rachel Corrie.

Posted in GazaComments Off on Gaza Permanen t Military Court Issues Judgment in the Case of Italian Activist VittorioArrigoni’s Murde

Shoah’s pages


September 2012
« Aug   Oct »