Archive | November 13th, 2012

The IsraHell Nightmare




Peace in Israel is the establishment’s worst nightmare.

Tony Cartalucci

Israel is an excuse, a mandate, a perpetual casus belli, and both an ideological as well as literal beachhead in the Middle East. Created and propped up by the West, in particular the US and United Kingdom, it has served as the medium through which Western foreign policy flows in and out of the Arab, and to a greater extent, the Muslim World.

It is through a carefully cultivated strategy of tension that this perpetual casus belli is maintained. Without the constant perceived fear of Israel’s demise and the “moral imperative” to prevent it, real or imagined, it would be difficult to justify Western involvement in nations that otherwise pose no perceivable threat to America or Europe. A “clash of civilizations” is likewise being created within the West itself to augment this paradigm, but it has yet to “come of age,” and still depends heavily on Israeli-Arab tensions to sustain itself.


Image: Israel does not bulldoze homes because it thinks it will eventually eliminate its enemies by doing so. To maintain a perpetual strategy of tension to justify perpetual meddling by neo-colonialists in the Middle East, Israel bulldozes homes specifically to create more enemies. To think otherwise, would be to falsely assume Israel’s current leadership is actually invested in the self-preservation of the nation-state. They are not.

It is clearly in the best interests of Western corporate-financiers seeking to remain involved in the Middle East and reassert hegemony over the region, to keep this strategy of tension viable and as heated as possible. The policies of Israel are so ham-handedly provocative, it is surprising that more people do not see the truth behind them – that Israel’s heavy-handed belligerence is a calculated decision to keep the tension ratcheted up as high as possible. For what other reason could a nation-state want to deliberately, slowly, and systematically bulldoze the homes of impoverished men, women, and children? Self-preservation by eliminating it enemies? Or the perpetual creation of new enemies?

It is not just a theory that the West and Israel purposefully cultivate and exploit the hatred incurred by their calculated, blatantly provocative policies.

Like a dam straddling a river, the force of tension against the dam produces energy from which those who constructed it, benefit. The hatred, fear, and violence perpetuated between the Jewish people and their perceived enemies has been a prominent driving force behind Wall Street and London’s century-long campaign of invasion, occupation, subversion, and exploitation across the Muslim World.

A recent example of this was using regional hatred toward Israel to implement the opening phases of the US-engineered “Arab Spring.” Because any regime Israel feigned support for would be instantly poisoned by a political “touch of death,” Israel openly and oafishly feigned support for Egypt’s president, Hosni Mubarak, claiming it had sent weapons and riot control gear to assist his government in suppressing “anti-American/anti-Israeli” protesters. In reality, the protests in Egypt’s streets were planned years in advance, beginning as early as 2008 in New York City by confabs organized by the US State Department.

In essence, the West and Israel played people’s emotional persuasions like a fiddle, and executed one of the most profound geopolitical re-orderings in recent history.

The same ploy would be used against Libyan leader, Muammar Qaddafi. Qaddafi was accused of being “Jewish,” hiring Israeli mercenaries, using Israeli weapons, and of any other conceivable link imaginable to likewise inflict him with the “touch of death” incurred by this strategy of tension. And perhaps the most absurd example of all, were early attempts to use the same tactic against Syria, exemplified best in Hareetz of Israel’s op-ed titled “Israel’s Favorite Arab Dictator of All is Assad.”

None of these ploys would have worked, had Israel and its Western-sponsors not maintained seething hatred against themselves throughout the world.

What if?

Now let’s imagine an Israel led by a government genuinely concerned about not only the self-preservation of Israel, but its stability, peace, and prosperity. Would such a nation bulldoze houses leaving destitute families sitting in the rubble before the cameras of the international press? Would such a nation indoctrinate its population to hold an irrational hatred that fuels a destructive conflict that exploits and expends the summation of the Israeli people’s talent, economic activity, time, energy, and attention?


Image: Israel is also suffering protests against economic woes and social injustice – begotten by the misappropriation of Israeli resources both human and financial. The nation could easily redirect its immense military budget into real economic development and progress – if it could oust leaders who seek to maintain Israel as a beachhead for Western hegemony instead of growing it into a self-sustaining nation-state. 

The answer is definitively no. A nuclear-armed Israel which faces no serious existential external threats, that turned away from this current Israeli-Arab strategy of tension would lead to region much like Southeast Asia, where profound cultural differences between neighbors have been largely set aside because each nation is too busy developing itself. Israel would benefit, its neighbors would benefit. Extremists on both sides would find themselves with dwindling supporters.

The only losers would be the policy makers from think-tanks like the Brookings Institution, and the corporate-financier interests which fund them. They admit nations like Iran and Syria pose no threat to either Israel’s or America’s national security, and in fact state that provocations must be made to bait such nations into war. Without the Israeli-Arab strategy of tension, without Arabs and Israelis dying every month, year after year, such provocations and the wars they seek to start would become exponentially more difficult to justify or sell to the public – if not entirely impossible.

A future where Israel lives in peace with its neighbors is possible. The answer is not waging war against its neighbors who neither desire nor will benefit from conflict with a nuclear-armed, Western-backed militant state, but by recognizing the current Israeli government itself as the single most pressing existential threat Israel and its people face. By removing and replacing them with people genuinely invested in “Israel the nation-state,” instead of “Israel the beachhead,” a true path to peace and prosperity can be found and embarked upon.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI1 Comment

Iran/USA: Who is Threatening Who?


Posted in ZIO-NAZI, IranComments Off on Iran/USA: Who is Threatening Who?

Petraeus’ biographer Paula Broadwell under FBI investigation over access to his email, law enforcement officials say


ed note–for whom was she trying to ‘improperly’ access Petraeus’ emails?

The biographer for resigning CIA Director David Petraeus is under FBI investigation for improperly trying to access his email and possibly gaining access to classified information, law enforcement officials told NBC News on Friday.

Paula Broadwell is the author of Petraeus’ biography, “All In.” She had extensive access to Petraeus in Afghanistan and has given numerous television interviews speaking about him. 

Law enforcement and multiple U.S. officials told NBC News that emails between Petraeus and Broadwell were indicative of an extra-marital affair.

Earlier, law enforcement officials said they do not believe the FBI investigation will result in any criminal charges. They also stressed that Petraeus is not under investigation.

The CIA declined all comment on the case. Broadwell could not be reached for comment.

Broadwell’s Twitter account describes her as a national security analyst and Army veteran. A biography on her website, which went offline Friday evening, said she is married to a radiologist and has two children, both boys. The family lives in Charlotte, N.C. The biography said she is a West Point graduate and a research associate at Harvard University’s Center for Public Leadership and a doctoral candidate in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London.

Posted in USA1 Comment

Why David Petraeus’s Gmail account is a national security issue


The beginning of the end came for CIA Director David Petraeus when Paula Broadwell, a younger married woman with whom he was having an affair, “or someone close to her had sought access to his email,” according to the Wall Street Journal’s description of an FBI probe. Associates of Petraeus had received “anonymous harassing emails” that were then traced to Broadwell, ABC’s Martha Raddatz reported, suggesting she may have found their names or addresses in his e-mail.

The e-mail account was apparently Petraeus’s personal Gmail, not his official CIA e-mail, according to the Wall Street Journal. That’s still a big deal: Some of the most powerful foreign spy agencies in the world would love to have an opening, however small, into the personal e-mail account of the man who runs the United States’ spy service. The information could have proved of enormous value to foreign hackers, who already maintain a near-constant effort to access sensitive U.S. data.

If Petraeus allowed his Gmail security to be compromised even slightly, by widening access, sharing passwords or logging in from multiple addresses, it would have brought foreign spy agencies that much closer to a treasure trove of information. As the Wall Street Journal hints, investigators were concerned about Petraeus’s Gmail access precisely because of the history of foreign attempts to access just such accounts:

Security officials are sensitive to misuse of personal email accounts—not only official accounts—because there have been multiple instances of foreign hackers targeting personal emails.

A personal e-mail account like Petraeus’s almost certainly would not have contained any high-level intelligence; he probably didn’t keep a list of secret drone-base coordinates on his Google docs account. But access to the account could have provided telling information on, for example, Petraeus’s travel schedule, his foreign contacts, even personal information about himself or other senior U.S. officials.

Private e-mail services like Google’s, though considered significantly more secure than most, still have susceptibilities to foreign intrusion. And it happens. Technology writers have sometimes discussed what one writer called the “password fallacy,” the false sense of safety created by access systems such as Google’s that balance security against ease of use. Even with Google’s extra security features, the company must also avoid making security so onerous as to drive away customers, making it an easier target for foreign hackers even before Petraeus possibly started sharing access and thus diluting the account’s integrity. And, as a Wired magazine investigation demonstrated in August, personal e-mail accounts often allow hackers access to other personal accounts, worsening both the infiltration and the damage.

All of this might sound a little overly apprehensive – really, U.S. national security is compromised because the CIA director’s personal Gmail account might have been a little easier to hack? – until you start looking at the scale and sophistication of foreign attempts to infiltrate U.S. data sources. Chinese hacking efforts, perhaps the best-known but nowhere near the only threat to U.S. networks and computers, suggest the enormous scope and ferocious drive of foreign government hackers.

Some Americans who have access to sensitive information and who travel to China describe going to tremendous lengths to minimize government efforts to seize their data. Some copy and paste their passwords from USB thumb drives rather than type them out, for fear of key-logging software. They carry “loaner” laptops and cellphones and pull out cellphone batteries during sensitive meetings, worried that the microphone could be switched on remotely. The New York Times called such extreme measures, which also apply in other countries, “standard operating procedure for officials at American government agencies.”

Even still, the publicly reported incidents of successful Chinese hacking – such as a March intrusion that stole a $1 billion, 10-year research project overnight – suggest that the efforts might be near-continuous and the successes rampant. A 2010 Chinese infiltration of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce ended up funneling weeks of corporate data; even after the chamber thought it had reestablished security, it discovered that an office printer and a corporate apartment thermostat were still sending data – who knows what kind? – back to China. You have to wonder what a similar infiltration into the private e-mail account of the director of the Central Intelligence Agency might have turned up.

Of course, the CIA director is not the Chamber of Commerce, which may explain why the FBI’s counter-intelligence monitoring is so sensitive that just Broadwell’s access to his Gmail account triggered an investigation. But the fact that the FBI looked so hard and so carefully – and that Petraeus lost his directorship of the CIA over an intrusion that many of us might consider minor or even routine – underscores the potential risk to U.S. intelligence entailed in Petraeus’s, or Broadwell’s, alleged misuse of his personal account.

Posted in USAComments Off on Why David Petraeus’s Gmail account is a national security issue

Zio-Nazi’s says may escalate as Hamas joins Gaza clashes



Israel said it was poised to escalate attacks on the Gaza Strip on Sunday following a surge of rocket and mortar salvoes by Hamas and other Palestinian factions.

A missile strike wounded four Israeli troops on jeep patrol along the Gaza boundary on Saturday, triggering army shelling that killed four Palestinian civilians and, in turn, dozens of short-range rocket launches out of Gaza that paralyzed Israel’s southern border towns.

Two Gaza militants died in the ensuing Israeli air strikes. Two workers were wounded later when a plastics factory in northern Gaza Strip caught fire after it was hit by an Israeli tank shell, emergency workers said.

Israel’s Iron Dome defense system knocked out a longer-range “Grad” rocket that was aimed at the southern city of Beersheba, the army said.

Thousands of Palestinians marching in the funerals of six people killed in the past 24 hours cried: “Revenge, revenge”. One man said an Israeli tank fired at children then fired on adults who rushed to the scene.

The Israeli military said the tank had shot back at the spot where shortly before militants had fired an anti-tank missile at the army patrol. “It is very unfortunate that these terrorists use their own people as human shields,” said Major Arye Shalicar, a spokesman for the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).

Israel went to war against Hamas in the winter of 2008-2009 but has shown little appetite for a new round that could strain fraught relations with the new Islamist-rooted government in neighboring Egypt, which made peace with Israel in 1979.

But conservative Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may be reluctant to seem weak ahead of a January 22 general election that opinion polls currently predict he will win.

“The world needs to understand that Israel will not sit with arms crossed when faced by attempts to hurt us. And we are prepared to harshen the response,” Netanyahu told his cabinet in remarks aired by Israeli broadcasters.

After not openly taking part in Saturday’s fighting, which included the firing of dozens of Palestinian short-range rockets and mortar bombs, Hamas issued a joint statement with five other factions claiming responsibility for Sunday’s fresh salvoes.


Though hostile to the Jewish state, Islamist Hamas has in the past avoided clashes as it consolidates its Gaza rule and convince Egypt’s new rulers it can be a stabilizing force.

Israeli officials have at times noted Hamas’s efforts to impose calm in Gaza, which it has governed since 2007, and maintain a policy of holding it solely responsible for any violence from the coastal territory, whoever is firing.

Four Israelis were wounded by rockets on Sunday, a military spokeswoman said. Southern Israeli municipalities ordered residents to shelters and shuttered some schools.

Islamic Jihad, a smaller faction than Hamas which often operates independently, said one rocket crewman was killed by an Israeli air strike on Sunday, after another member was killed on Saturday while photographing the fighting.

Defence Minister Ehud Barak, a centrist in Israel’s coalition government, played down speculation that the upcoming election was affecting Gaza policy.

“I don’t think the election should be a consideration in how we respond. It is not meant to make us avoid action … nor is it meant to provoke us into grabbing some kind of opportunity for an operation,” Barak told Israel’s Army Radio.

The 2008-2009 Gaza coincided with an election campaign and some Israeli analysts see the same dynamics building.

Barak described Saturday’s jeep ambush as part of a Palestinian strategy of raising the cost of Israel’s countermeasures against cross-border infiltration. Israeli forces often mount hunts for tunnels and landmines on the inside of the Gaza boundary, creating a no-go zone for Palestinians.

“Of course we don’t accept their attempt to change the rules,” Barak said. “The essence of the struggle is over the fence. We intend to enable the IDF to work not just on our side but on the other side as well.”

Palestinians said four of Saturday’s dead were civilians hit by a tank shell while paying respects at a mourning tent in Gaza’s Shijaia neighborhood. Israel denies targeting civilians.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, GazaComments Off on Zio-Nazi’s says may escalate as Hamas joins Gaza clashes

Syria: leader of rebels warns they might ‘turn into terrorists’ (as if they weren’t already)


Syria: leader of rebels warns they might 'turn into terrorists'

The leader of the ” Free Syrian Army ”  ZIO-NATO puppet has called on the outside world to back the rebels before they all “turn into terrorists”.

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph in his base in Zionist rebel-occupied Syria, Zionist Mustafa al-Sheikh unveiled a new leadership of the Higher Military Council of the Zionist FSA, which he heads.

He also said he welcomed David Cameron’s decision to engage with the rebels and even consider organising arms supplies, but he added that war was spreading to surrounding countries, the rebels were fractured and speed was of the essence.

“If there’s no quick decision to support us, we will all turn into terrorists,” he said. “If you apply the pressure that’s been applied to Syria, it will explode in all directions. Terrorism will grow quickly.”

Zionist  Sheikh was the first of a number of regime army generals to defect to the rebels, joining Zionist Riad al-Assad at the head of the Zio-NATO FSA. The rebels fighting the battles on the ground though are not only divided among themselves but often refuse to recognise his leadership.

Aware that this is a major reason for the reluctance of Western powers to arm them or encourage their Middle Eastern allies to supply rebel forces, on Friday announced a new unified command structure, dividing Syria into five commands each with a defected general at its head.

He said that Britain and other countries should tie aid to this manifesto – alleging that at the moment other rebel groups are better funded. Zionist puppets Saudi Arabia and Zionist puppets Qatar, and private fund-raisers, are said to favour Zionist rebel groups over those with a secular bent.

Zionist regime in Qatar is currently hosting a fresh attempt to unite the political leaders of the opposition, which has been dogged by rows within the Syrian National Council and between it and other ideological groupings.

The Syrian Zionist National Initiative will consist of a core of 60 members, a military committee and a judicial committee. The 60 will then appoint a technocratic government to ‘run the revolution in Syria’, including the administration of rebel-held areas.

“The Qataris are sick of funding a circus. This is why this new initiative has been proposed. This is why the opposition know there has to be an outcome from the meetings,” a western diplomat told the Daily Telegraph.

If it is agreed, Middle Eastern diplomats involved in drawing up a blueprint for a transitional Syrian government say it has been promised huge financial backing, including $280 million (£175 million) from the United States.

There will also be discussion of military support.

What form that would take or who would supply it is less clear. But Jamal al-Wa’ard, an SNC member, said: “We have negotiated a mechanism by which we can defend ourselves against Assad’s planes,” suggesting it had been promised better anti-aircraft weapons, such as modern shoulder-mounted missiles.

The new initiative does not solve the problem of how to get aid into Syria, or whether rebels fighting on the ground will agree to take orders from politicians who have spent in some cases decades in exile. Sceptics also say it is too bureaucratic and complex to appeal to ordinary Syrians.

“This reminds me of when we started the SNC. It is the same plan all over again,” said Khaled Salah, an executive SNC member.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Syria: leader of rebels warns they might ‘turn into terrorists’ (as if they weren’t already)

As Sanctions Hit Iran’s Most Vulnerable, the Man Who Dared to Feed Sanction-Starved Iraq Remains in Prison



by John Pilger

In 1999, I traveled to Iraq with Denis Halliday, who had resigned as assistant secretary-general of the United Nations rather than enforce a punitive UN embargo on Iraq. Devised and policed by the United States and Britain, the extreme suffering caused by these “sanctions” included, according to Unicef, the deaths of half a million Iraqi children under the age of five.

Ten years later, in New York, I met the senior British official responsible for the imposition of sanctions. He is Carne Ross, once known in the UN as “Mr.Iraq.” I read to him a statement he made to a parliamentary select committee in 2007: “The weight of evidence clearly indicates that sanctions caused massive human suffering among ordinary Iraqis, particularly children. We, the US and UK governments, were the primary engineers and offenders of sanctions and were well aware of this evidence at the time but we largely ignored it or blamed it on the Saddam government. [We] effectively denied the entire population a means to live.”

I said, “That’s a shocking admission.”

“Yes, I agree,” he replied. “I feel very ashamed about it.”

“Before I went to New York,” he said, “I went to the Foreign Office expecting a briefing on the vast piles of weapons that we still thought Iraq possessed, and the desk officer sort of looked at me slightly sheepishly and said, ‘Well actually, we don’t think there is anything in Iraq.’”

That was 1997, more than five years before George W. Bush and Tony Blair invaded Iraq for reasons they knew were fabricated. The bloodshed they caused, according to recent studies, is greater than that of the Rwanda genocide.

On February 26, 2003, one month before the invasion, Dr. Rafil Dhafir, a prominent cancer specialist in Syracuse, New York, was arrested by federal agents and interrogated about the charity he had founded, Help the Needy. Dr. Dhafir was one of many Americans, Muslims and non-Muslims, who for 13 years had raised money for food and medicines for sick and starving Iraqis who were the victims of sanctions. He had asked US officials if this humanitarian aid was legal and was assured it was – until the early morning he was hauled out of his car by federal agents as he left for work. His front door was smashed down and his wife had guns pointed at her head. Today, he is serving 22 years in prison.

On the day of the arrest, Bush’s attorney-general, John Ashcroft, announced that “funders of terrorism” had been caught. The so-called “terrorist” was a man who had devoted himself to caring for others, including cancer sufferers in his own New York community. More than $2 million was raised for his bail and several people pledged their homes, yet he was refused bail six times.

Charged under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, Dr. Dhafir’s crime was to send food and medicine to the stricken country of his birth. He was “offered” the prospect of a lesser sentence if he pleaded guilty, and he refused on principle. Plea bargaining is the iniquity of the US judicial system, giving prosecutors the powers of judge, jury and executioner. For refusing, he was punished with added charges, including defrauding the Medicare system, a “crime” based on not having filled out claim forms correctly, and money laundering and tax evasion, inflated technicalities related to the charitable status of Help the Needy.

Then-governor of New York George Pataki, called this “money laundering to help terrorist organizations” to “conduct horrible acts.” Pataki painted Dr. Dhafir and Help the Needy’s supporters as “terrorists living here in New York among us,” adding that they were “supporting and aiding and abetting those who would destroy our way of life and kill our friends and neighbors.” For jurors, the message was powerfully manipulative. This was America in the hysterical wake of 9/11.

The trial in 2004 and 2005 was out of Kafka. It began with the prosecution successfully petitioning the judge to prohibit the word “terrorism” from being mentioned. “This ruling turned into a brick wall for the defense,” says Katherine Hughes, who was an observer in court. “Prosecutors could hint at more serious charges, but the defense was never allowed to follow that line of questioning and demolish it. Consequently, the trial was not, in fact, what it was really about.”

It was a political show trial of Stalinist dimensions, an anti-Muslim sideshow to the war on terror. The jury was told darkly that Dr. Dhafir was a Salafi Muslim, as if this was sinister. Osama bin Laden was mentioned, with no relevance. That Help the Needy had openly advertised its humanitarian aim and that there were invoices and receipts for the purchase of emergency food aid was of no interest. Last February, at a hearing following a decision by a federal appeals court asking judge Norman Mordue to consider an alternative way of calculating Dr. Dhafir’s sentence, Mordue, re-sentenced Dr. Dhafir to 22 years – a cruelty worthy of the gulag.

With their terrorist case won, the prosecutors held a celebration dinner, “partying,” wrote a Dhafir supporter to the local newspaper, “as if they had won the Super Bowl.” The prosecution had “perpetuated a monstrous lie” against Dhafir, said the letter, against a man “who had helped thousands in Iraq suffering unjustly…. The trial was a perversion of American justice.”

No executive of the oil companies that did billions of dollars of illegal business with Saddam Hussein during the embargo has been prosecuted. “I am stunned by the conviction of this humanitarian,” said Halliday, “especially as the US State Department breached its own sanctions to the tune of $10 billion.”

During this year’s US presidential campaign, both candidates agreed on sanctions against Iran, which they claimed posed a nuclear threat to the Middle East. Repeated over and over again, this assertion evoked the lies told about Iraq and the extreme suffering of that country. Sanctions are already devastating Iran’s sick and disabled. As imported drugs become impossibly expensive, sufferers of leukemia and other cancers are the first victims. The Pentagon calls this “full-spectrum dominance.”

Posted in Iran, IraqComments Off on As Sanctions Hit Iran’s Most Vulnerable, the Man Who Dared to Feed Sanction-Starved Iraq Remains in Prison

The Looming Sunni-Shia Crisis

No one — not Washington, nor the establishment press — seems ready to confront the Sunni-Shia conflagration that threatens to rock whatever narrow foreign policy hold the U.S. has in the region, promising a bleak landscape of war for years to come.

Foreign policy had been largely sidelined in American political discourse over the last year, but now that President Obama has secured a second term, and the roiling conditions in the Middle East before November 6 haven’t subsided — they will become harder to ignore.

“No one is paying attention to this,” says Adil Shamoo, an Iraqi-American author and professor at the University of Maryland. Shamoo was born and raised in Iraq and is a Chaldean Christian who is horrified at the sectarian strife that has divided his native country since the American invasion of Iraq nearly 10 years ago. He sees the American presence there as unleashing the simmering tensions between the Sunni and long-repressed Shia majority, leading to institutional discrimination and a backlash against other religious minorities, particularly the now-dwindling Iraqi Christian population. Worse, he sees the conflict playing out throughout the region today.

“I think it’s the most dangerous development in the Middle East, in the Muslim world,” he told TAC in a recent interview, “because you’re talking about hundreds of millions of people potentially fighting each other and it has become real now.”

The American presidential debates completely ignored the issue of sectarian violence erupting in places like Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Bahrain, and Pakistan — even though U.S. foreign policy directly concerns each country. Washington placed the new Shia-dominated government in Iraq into power. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has since handed down four death sentences against Sunni Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi, who is in exile. The U.S. still supports the Sunni monarchy in Bahrain, despite widespread reports of human rights abuses and the torture of political prisoners. The government there has actually started revoking the citizenship of dissenters.

Violence in Syria is already spilling over into Lebanon, which has implications for Israel, neighboring Jordan, and even Washington’s tenuous negotiations with Iran, a stalwart ally of Syria.

American policies affect many of these powerful dramas unfolding today — Washington being both an extra and a principal player. It is key that the world’s “superpower” does not rush to its usual inclination, to steal the show, warns Shamoo. “There is a reservoir of good will towards Americans, but there is a bigger reservoir of anti-Americanism,” he said. The next several weeks and months will tell how the president grapples with each explosive flash point.


The uprising in Syria, launched by the majority Sunni, some 74 percent of the country, is struggling to topple the authoritarian rule of President Bashar Al Assad, who represents the minority Alawites, a sect of Shiism which broke off from the main branch of Shia a thousand years ago.

“We want just what they got in Tunis and Egypt,” Mahmoud Razak, a shop-keeper in the outer suburbs, told The Guardian recently. “Freedom and the chance to progress in life. But we thought it would take 19 days like it took [in Egypt]. It’s now 19 months. We didn’t know it would be this difficult.”

In the meantime, Syria has become the epicenter in the long-anticipated Sunni-Shia confrontation, with besieged President Assad reportedly drawing support from Iran and Lebanon via Hezbollah, as well as Shia fighters from Iraq, and the minority Kurds, who (with possibly their own long-term sights on independence) f, enjoined by Kurdish compatriots from over the Turkish border. Noted the New York Times:

Some Iraqi Shiites are traveling to Tehran first, where the Iranian government, Syria’s chief regional ally, is flying them to Damascus, Syria’s capital. Others take tour buses from the Shiite holy city of Najaf, Iraq, on the pretext of making a pilgrimage to an important Shiite shrine in Damascus that for months has been protected by armed Iraqis. While the buses do carry pilgrims, Iraqi Shiite leaders say, they are also ferrying weapons, supplies and fighters to aid the Syrian government.

“Dozens of Iraqis are joining us, and our brigade is growing day by day,” Ahmad al-Hassani, a 25-year-old Iraqi fighter, said by telephone from Damascus. He said that he arrived there two months ago, taking a flight from Tehran. The Iraqi Shiites are joining forces with Shiite fighters from Lebanon and Iran, driving Syria ever closer to becoming a regional sectarian battlefield.

Meanwhile, arms and financial assistance are flowing to the rebels from the Gulf States and Turkey, all predominantly Sunni. Jihadi fighters have streamed in seeking the same ideological struggle playing out in Muslim power vacuums from Afghanistan to North Africa, according to recent reports. The majority of these religious jihadis among the opposition in Syria are Syrians, according to the Guardian, however:

… it has become clear that extremist Salafi or jihadi groups, some linked to al-Qaida, are now a significant element of the armed opposition. Alongside fighters from al-Qaida in Iraq or Fatah al-Islam from Lebanon is the mysterious Jabhat al-Nusra, which has claimed responsibility for suicide bombings in Damascus and Aleppo. It is sympathetic to al-Qaida. Others hail from Jordan, Libya and Algeria.

In October, the Washington Post reported that at least 150 Islamists from Jordan were fighting in Syria with Jabhat al-Nusra, and a number of “ultraconservative Islamists” or salafists, who have been arrested in Jordan, ostensibly preparing for jihad in Syria. Jordan, ruled by the Sunni monarchy of King Abdullah II, has its own fervent democracy movement to contend with, as well as refugees from Syria who continue to pour into the country. Abdullah has maintained official ties with Assad, but like other states in the region, Jordan has encouraged Assad to step down.

The Syrian opposition is feeling the burden of a religious war building on their efforts at democracy, too, according to writer Martin Chulov:

For the most part, the opposition movement is staying true to the ethos that led many of the country’s towns and citizens to mount a challenge to President Bashar al-Assad’s absolute state control over their lives. But around the fringes, there are signs that the revolution’s original values are starting to fray. The narrative of a defiant street versus a draconian state, so simple in March 2011, is now far more complicated.

Mary Wakefield, reporting for The Spectator, recently toured the shaky corridor along the Bakaa Valley, between Lebanon and Syria. It is a paranoid and scarred place. “Everyone in the region is either for or against Bashir al-Assad’s regime, it’s a bipolar world: Christians and Shia mostly for, Sunnis mostly against.”

For these and many other reasons, the Obama administration has refrained from getting involved in the conflict with anything other than “non-lethal support.” Becoming a lead player on this stage could have serious repercussions beyond the soft lines of the Syrian territorial map.


In October, a 70-kilogram bomb targeted and killed the Sunni head of the Lebanese Internal Security Forces-Informational Branch, Gen. Wissam al-Hassan, in a predominantly Christian quarter of Beirut.

According to reports, Hassan was an ally of the U.S. and Israel in monitoring the activities of Hezbollah and pro-Syrian forces within Lebanon. Both Syria and Hezbollah have been accused of plotting Hassan’s murder, instigating a massive wave of anti-Shia/Syrian violence in the city. Some have even called for a toppling of the Lebanese government, of which Hezbollah is a ruling faction. According to the Wall Street Journal:

Because of Gen. Hassan’s ties to the West, Arab and Western officials said they believed last Friday’s car bombing in central Beirut …was a warning from Syria and Iran. Its aim, these people say, was to warn anti-Syrian politicians in Lebanon and the West not to work for the overthrow of Mr. Assad’s regime in Damascus.

Both Syria and Hezbollah officials have denied involvement. As the Washington Post explains:

At the same time, Hezbollah’s political rivals in Lebanon are out for blood, led by a Sunni-led bloc still inflamed by painful memories of the assassination of former prime minister Rafik Hariri in a car bomb attack in 2005. The group has vowed to topple the government led by Prime Minister Najib Mikati, which could significantly weaken Hezbollah’s political power

“We are targeting Najib Mikati, but we mean Hezbollah,” said Nouhad Mashnouk, a member of parliament with the bloc opposed to the Syrian government. Both Hariri and Hassan were key leaders of the Sunni Muslim community, and their violent deaths have deepened the sectarian divide between Shiite and Sunni Muslims in Lebanon.


Not all Shia-Sunni tensions are connected to Syria, at least not yet.

Just last month, the Bahraini ruling Sunni monarchy banned all street protests nationwide. The decree came 21 months after the Shia, which represent 70 percent of Bahrain’s population, took to the streets in their own version of the Arab Spring, demanding democracy and an end to the institutional discrimination keeping their people largely unemployed and living in quasi-apartheid conditions.

The strife has caused some 50 deaths, mostly activists, in the last two years, amid major police crackdowns that left Shia protesters filled with birdshot or tortured in government prisons, according to human rights observers. The interior minister nonetheless blamed the campaigners for abusing the privilege and shut all the rallies down, promising legal repercussions if they took to the streets from this point forward.

This has put the American government in a bind, since Bahrain and its biggest ally, Saudi Arabia (which has been accused of covertly fueling sectarian tensions throughout the Middle East), are its own best friends in the region. The Bahraini monarchy also has a cozy relationship with western media and especially, Washington lobbyists, insulating it from the kind of scrutiny that say, Egypt faced during its revolution. The White House has been criticized not being more vocal about the violence against protesters and the obvious stifling of dissent.


According to a recent report by Michael Georgy for Reuters, more than 300 Shia have been killed by Sunni extremists in Pakistan in the last year. The group Lashkar-e-Jhagvi or LeJ, has “grown more robust and appears to be operating across a much wider area in Pakistan than just a few years ago.” They’ve been linked to both the Taliban and al Qaeda and are responsible for some of the most violent terror attacks in recent times, targeting the Shia, which account for about 20 percent of Pakistan’s population.

Revenge comes in the form of Shia extremist attacks, sometimes backed by Iran, Georgy writes: “Sunni and Shi’ites, who have lived together for decades, now cope with sectarian no-go zones.”

Dealing with a Sunni-Shia showdown on a grand scale has been a “no-go zone” for most Washington lawmakers and even the foreign policy establishment, which seems to prefer addressing one conflict area at a time. The spillover from the Syrian conflict could wreak havoc on places already made fragile by years of war, poverty, and corruption.

Kelley Beaucar Vlahos is a Washington, D.C.-based freelance reporter and TAC contributing editor.

Posted in Middle EastComments Off on The Looming Sunni-Shia Crisis

TUT Broadcast: Netanyahu promising ‘cooperation’ with a re-elected Barack Obama

TUT Broadcast Nov 12, 2012

by crescentandcross

Netanyahu promising ‘cooperation’ with a re-elected Barack Obama

BS…All a ruse to throw everyone off guard in preparation for some dirty trick Israel is planning viz a viz war with Iran


Download Here


Posted in USA, InterviewComments Off on TUT Broadcast: Netanyahu promising ‘cooperation’ with a re-elected Barack Obama

Lest We Forget–The Hanukah Massacre on Gaza–Judaism in its Finest Hour



“When the LORD your God brings you into the land you are to possess and casts out the many peoples living there, you shall then slaughter them all and utterly destroy them…You shall make no agreements with them nor show them any mercy…You shall destroy their altars, break down their images, cut down their groves and burn their graven images with fire. For you are a holy people unto the LORD thy God and He has chosen you to be a special people above all others upon the face of the earth…”

–Book of Deuteronomy, 7:1-8

The aerial assault on Gaza thus far resulting in several hundred deaths and close to a thousand casualties (much of which will result in even more deaths) must–if it is to be understood correctly–be placed within the historical context of the religious ideas expounded by Judaism since its inception and which today constitute the philosophical lifeblood of the state of Israel.

It is an increasingly popular fad these days amongst those taking the moral high road against Israel’s 60 year-long orgy of violence and bloodshed against the indigenous Semites of Palestine, Lebanon and other surrounding areas to erect a separation wall between “Zionism” as a violent, racist political movement and “Judaism” as a “holy religion” devoted to the worship of God. Such arguments, whether made by groups such as Neturei Karta or “Rabbis For Human Rights” or whoever maintain that the two ideologies are as  different from each other as the lion is to the lamb. Some go so far as to refer to Herzl, the founding father of Zionism as a “heretic” who abandoned the “godliness” of Judaism in favor of a secular, Marxist ideology responsible for creating the modern Jewish state.

However, despite some very impressive arguments made by prominent individuals and groups in trying to paint this picture the fact is that the aforementioned argument is as real as any other fantasy created by Jewish Hollywood that defies the laws of reason or reality. Modern day Zionism and Judaism are synonymous, and it has been the fundamental misunderstanding of this fact that has brought the situation to where it is today, both in the Holy Land and in the present “Clash of Civilizations” between the West and the Islamic world.

Judaism is based upon the Old Testament, and in particular, the first five books that constitute “The Law”, referred to as “The Torah”. As many undoubtedly remember from their Sunday school classes, it begins with the story of creation, the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve, Noah’s ark and other seemingly harmless tales of persons and events.

The point at which it transforms into the creature responsible for so much of today’s mayhem is when Abraham, a landless, penniless nomad living in modern day Iraq, begins hearing voices in his head telling him he has been favored by a God named Yahweh who than promises him a future of wealth, land, power and superiority over all other persons, encapsulating this idea with “I will bless those who bless thee and curse those who curse thee”. Shortly thereafter, he again hears voices in his head telling him to engage in the barbarity of human sacrifice by killing his own son Isaac in worshipping this God named Yahweh. With knife at the throat of his son and a mere few seconds away from becoming a murderer, he is then prevented from doing so by an angel, and some 3 generations later, his descendents (made up by 12 tribes) come to be known as “Israelites”.

Not long afterwards an Israelite named Moses also begins hearing voices from this same god, telling him to rescue the Israelites being “oppressed and persecuted” by the Egyptians. After a series of plagues brought against the oppressors–seemingly a fulfillment of Yahweh’s promise to “Curse those who curse” the descendents of Abraham, Moses–again, under the direction of the voices he is hearing–orders the Israelites to steal all the gold and silver of Egypt and to follow him to the land “promised” them by Yahweh residing between the two great rivers, the Nile and the Euphrates. Before entering this land however, Moses instructs the Israelites that they are to kill all the inhabitants, man, woman and child–”infant and suckling” and to rob them of all their possessions. An extermination campaign is mounted, in effect a “holocaust” of the Semitic peoples in the promised land, left unfinished by Moses but taken up again by his protégé Joshua and other subsequent leaders such as Saul and David.

By the time all is said and done, 31 cities inhabited by non-Israelite peoples–including but not limited to the Midianites, Canaanites, Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites, Hivites–have been completely destroyed. The only non-Israelites allowed to remain alive are young girls “who have never slept with man” who then become concubines for the Israelites as well as those adults who resign themselves to live as “carriers of water and hewers of wood”–in effect, slaves for God’s chosen people.

So in other words, Zionism–the idea that the “Chosen people” were promised the land encompassing modern day Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and elsewhere and were given the commandment to expel, murder and enslave the peoples and civilizations already there got its start with Abraham and was later put into practice by Moses and those who came after him. By definition then, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Saul, David and all the other “Patriarchs” (the George Washingtons, Thomas Jeffersons and John Adams of “Israel”) were Zionists.

Putting this into context, any other person or group of persons claiming to have received divine messages from some “higher power” telling them they were superior creatures and commanding them to invade, slaughter, enslave and rob other peoples not like them would–rightly–be branded criminally insane, delusional, fanatical and locked away for life. As it is today though, this situation is not categorized as such. Rather, it has been made into a “holy” religion that guides the actions of a nuclear-armed nation.

As all who understand the situation in Palestine can attest, the moment the Jews made their “exodus” from the various lands they previously inhabited and returned to “redeem and make clean” the Promised land, they have repeated the very same process of killing, expelling and enslaving today’s version of the ancient Midianites, Canaanites, Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites, Hivites, etc of Moses’ heyday. NOTHING HAS CHANGED. The Jews of today are in effect trying to implement 21st century BC ideas in a 21st century AD world with results no different than what took place as recounted in the Old Testament. It is this history that forms the foundation of their existence as a people and now as a nuclear-armed, messianic nation. The only difference between the Israelites of old and those of today is that when today’s Israelites “smite” the non-Israelite inhabitants living in close proximity to them they do not hack them to pieces with the edge of a sword or an axe but rather blow them to pieces with hellfire missiles, Apache attack helicopters and one-ton bombs made in the USA.

This being the case, it only stands to reason then that massacres such as what took place 2 days after Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ occur. Just as Christians go to church on Sundays and Muslims to mosque on Fridays to commemorate the persons and circumstances of their respective faiths, so too must the Jews engage in the same type of holy war against the non-Israelite peoples living in or near their “promised land” as a means of “keeping holy the Lord’s day”. This genocide against civilians is the glue that holds them together as a people and prevents what is an already organically-fractured nation from disintegrating from within. The fact that this latest massacre took place during the religious festival of Hanukkah, (the festival of lights) where the Jews celebrate the “temple” being rescued and redeemed from the Assyrians over 2,000 years ago lends even more credence to the notion that for them it is all about religion and has nothing to do with the stated justifications of “security”. That the Gazans were starved for months upon months prior to this recent holocaust is yet one more manifestation of this religious mindset, and in particular the commandment to “Cut down the groves” of the non-Israelites living in the promised land.

A recent case (covered by Palestinian journalist Khalid Ameyreh) taking place in Israel just prior to the Gaza massacre  adds even more proof to this idea encompassing the theme of “Judaism VS the world”. Said case involves one Daniela Weise, a rabidly anti-Gentile “Israelite” who regularly quotes from the Old Testament, telling hundreds of Jewish fanatics it is a mitzvah (religious commandment) to attack Arabs and murder them because “their lives have no sanctity and their property belongs to us” and adding that “The Bible shows us the way we should be dealing with the Arabs. The Bible can’t be wrong“. In another similar case, an American tourist in Israel recently engaged in a discussion with a Jew where the following exchange took place–

Israeli Jew–“You are a Christian, aren’t you?”


Israeli Jew–“Do you believe in the Bible?”


Israeli Jew–“Well then, you know God ordered the ancient Israelites to wipe off the goyim (gentiles) from the holy land of Israel. If that was right then, why can’t it be right now?”

As all are told (and have been on a daily basis now for the last century) Israel is not like other nations. Both secular and religious leaders have gone to great lengths in trying to sell the idea that the Jewish state is the “embodiment of God’s word” on earth. As former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir once quipped Israel is “The fulfillment of a promise made by God Himself…It would be ridiculous to ask it to account for its legitimacy.”

What all of this means in the final analysis is that as long as Israel (a nation founded on the Old Testament tales of genocide, rape, pillage, expulsion and enslavement of “the other”) exists, massacres such as the one taking place against the Palestinians in Gaza will be a regular occurrence, just as they have been throughout the last 60 years. Having been nursed on the poisoned milk of tribal supremacism first envisioned by a greedy, covetous, ambitious nomad hearing voices in his head complimenting his own delusions of grandeur and later adopted by the great “Patriarchs” manifested in violence and bloodshed of innocents as extolled in the religion known as Judaism means that the Jewish state MUST engage in these acts as a means of paying homage to the deity Yahweh.

Although 2,000 years too late, it is imperative now more than ever that the world come to grips with these facts, and until it does that “great day of reckoning” commonly referred to as Armageddon will continue to barrel towards civilization like an out-of-control freight train. The curing of any disease begins with isolating the cause, and in the case of the present circumstance involving the Jewish state being at war with the entire world (and more specifically against the Arabs in Palestine) it is the recognition of the “I will bless those who bless thee and curse those who curse thee” mindset coupled with the justification of genocide and enslavement of “the other” that threatens all life on earth.

Anyone needing proof of this should simply visit some of the photos of the most recent massacre taking place against the Palestinians–Christian and Muslim alike–who are and have been sacrificed now for the last 60 years upon the altar of twisted Judaistic thinking. This most recent massacre taking place during the Jewish “festival of lights”, where Gaza was “lighted up” with balls of fire after 200,000 lbs of high-explosives were dropped on schoolchildren is proof positive that Israel is not a nation of people devoted to a righteous, loving God, but rather a civilization of vampires making up the caricature of the beast described in the Book of Revelation that threatens all life on earth. And unless the rest of the world comes to this “revelation”, they too will soon find themselves in the same place as those today being exterminated in the interests of appeasing the “God” of the Jews.

(c) 2008 Mark Glenn

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, GazaComments Off on Lest We Forget–The Hanukah Massacre on Gaza–Judaism in its Finest Hour

Shoah’s pages


November 2012
« Oct   Dec »