Archive | January 7th, 2013

Assad: Syrian revolution fictitious


Faced with growing international pressure, alarming civilian death toll and rebels’ achievements, Syrian president seeks to assure his public he’s ‘in control’



Syrian President Bashar Assad made his first public appearance in months on Sunday, calling for a “full national mobilisation” to fight against rebels he described as al Qaeda terrorists.

The address, which comes amid growing international pressure, an alarming civilian death toll and daily achievements by rebel forces, was another attempt by the incumbent president to assure his public – and the Arab world – that he is still in control of the war-torn nation.

Assad’s entrance to the hall was met with cheering applause by his supporters. 

“We meet today and suffering is overwhelming Syrian land. There is no place for joy while security and stability are absent on the streets of our country,” Assad said in a speech at the opera house in central Damascus.


“The nation is for all and we all must protect it Syria will not exit its crisis without full national mobilisation. There is no security inSyria. The terrorists are the enemies of the people and the enemies of Allah.” 

The “so-called revolution is fictitious,” he continued. “What is happening in Syria is revenged sicced on the people by the terrorists over their refusal to allow them to disband Syria.


“This is a conflict between the homeland and its enemies, the people and their assassins. But the people are stronger than them and the people will teach them a lesson,” he said.

“We are dealing with heretics who are fostering al-Qaeda‘s ideas… many of these heretics are not Syrians,” he stressed. He described the rebel forces as “bloodthirsty savages.” 

The civil war in Syria has regional ramifications, he said: “Some are trying to divide Syria, some neighbors here have turned against Syria and others are seeking a place in history because they have none. They seek their place in history through the Syrian people’s democracy. But Syria is stronger.”

Damascus’ enemies “wish to remove it from the regional equation. And this isn’t a war between the army and some gangs, this is about external aggression,” he continued. 

Assad also thanked Russia, China and Iran for their support: “Some countries… have refused to cower before the West and said that Syria alone must decide its fate. We salute you and we thank you for your support.


“Syria will unite against the (rebels’) ideological threat,” he continued, reiterating that “Syria will drive the terrorist ideology out… Security and political reform go hand in hand. The fact that (the opposition) is not a partner doesn’t mean we don’t want a political solution

‘Syria must manage its own affairs’

“Anyone who thinks there can be only a political solution to the situation in Syria is either ignorant or trying to help the terrorist destroy this country. We will not allow that.”

Repeatedly interrupted by roaring applause, Assad announced what he described as a peace plan, calling for a “national dialogue” after the end of military operations. He called for a “reconciliation conference with those who have not betrayed Syria,” to be followed by the formation of a new government and an amnesty.

“The first stage of a political solution would require that regional powers stop funding and arming (the opposition), an end to terrorist operations and controlling the borders,” he said.

But Syrian, he stressed, “Will not hold a dialogue with a puppet made by the West… The West is the one to close the door on talks. They have gotten used to giving us orders and we reject them.

“Syrian is willing to accept assistance, but not arbitrary tyranny. We are willing to accept advice, but not directives. Any (Western) initiative must come alongside the Syrian vision. Once the government forms a vision, any further initiative can only help. But we don’t need a foreign initiative – we can find our own political solutions. Syria has to run its own affairs.”

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Assad: Syrian revolution fictitious

Illegal Occupation of Iraq: US-UK Crimes against Humanity

Global Research


The Foreign Secretary,
The Rt. Hon., William Hague, M.P.,

And: To Whom it May Concern,
Foreign and Commonwealth Office,
London SW1.


In the light of the fact that it transpires that twenty seven Foreign Office lawyers concluded unanimously that the invasion of Iraq was illegal I write to draw your attention to just a few of the the chilling events currently taking place in Iraq under the US-UK’s despotic, imposed, puppet Prime Minister.

Firstly, here is a list of prisons, detention facilities, interrogation centres and numbers of those held in each, as far as can be ascertained in the circumstances. As you will surely know people are routinely arbitrarily detained for weeks, months, even years, often without trial, and with one, usually under a totally inadequate or corrupt legal system.

On 3rd January 2013, Nuri al-Maliki carried out the death sentence on Ahmed al-Samarrai and two other men from Mosul, on charges of his resisting the U.S. and Iran occupation. Resisting an unlawful occupation is, of course, a legal right. His body was not delivered to his family; a funeral will take place in his honor, in gatherings, in Anbar and elsewhere in Iraq. (Should you question the US occupation since they “pulled out” last December, just see the Vatican City size US embassy and its thousands of mercenaries, intelligence operators and nefarious other spooks and enforcers.)

Early this morning (4th January) al-Maliki’s forces – wearing all black clothing – entered Taji Prison and took one hundred prisoners from the western city of Ramadi to an unidentified place. Death squads come to mind – again.

Al-Maliki has also ordered an on sight shoot-to-kill policy toward protesters.

By August 31st there had been ninety six executions in 2012, with twenty six people reportedly being executed on both the 27th and 29th August. Few details of those executed or their identities were released. They are simply the disappeared in the the tradition of all despots. Iraq: “… has a huge problem with torture and unfair trials …”, Human Rights Watch, who produced the Report, pointed out.

Thousands of women are detained and subject to near routine torture and rape. They are often held with their children and even with infants.

Britain as co-architect, and liar-in-chief on the reasons for the invasion has an absolute duty, with America, to bring to heel their out of control, tyrannical government. Both countries have large embassies and the wherewithal to exert such pressure.

“Maliki is heading towards an incredibly destructive dictatorship, and it looks to me as though the Obama administration is waving him across the finishing line,” Toby Dodge, Iraq expert at the London School of Economics said earlier this year.

“The Foreign and Commonwealth Office works to promote the interests of the United Kingdom and to contribute to a strong world community”, states your website. All it is contributing to at the moment is murder, mayhem and destruction, also making a potential target of every British passport holder where ever they travel.

Which ever party is in power, or coalition, the UK’s actions and duplicity are beyond shame. Is it too much to hope that Iraq’s human rights tragedy might be addressed with urgency – a new leaf, New Year’s Resolution for 2013?

It was six years on 30th December that Saddam Hussein, whose country’s “sovereignty and territorial integrity” was guaranteed by the United Nations, was lynched under US-UK stewardship. The horror was the spectre of the years to come – ongoing.

And in the event minds in the Foreign Office should turn to Iraq’s governmental depravities and Britain’s part in creating them, please remember a frail, ill, dignified patriot in his seventies, former Foreign Minister Tareq Aziz and his colleagues, lost to all humanity in the “New Iraq.” It is surely past time he and they were reunited with their families and able to spend their remaining days, months or waning years with them. Bearing in mind the views of the Foreign Office’s own Lawyers, in paragraph 1.

Yours in very fragile hope,

Felicity Arbuthnot

Posted in IraqComments Off on Illegal Occupation of Iraq: US-UK Crimes against Humanity

Interviews with six former Shin Bet heads : The Gatekeepers


by Stephen Lendman

“The Gatekeepers” is an exploration of Israel’s Shin Bet security agency, guided by all six living domestic intelligence chiefs.

Dror Moreh is one of Israel’s leading cinematographers. Last October, his documentary featuring candid dialogues with former Shin Bet heads debuted in New York.

They attended the Israeli premier. Joseph Cedar’s drama Footnote was included. More on film content below.

In early 2013, other Western venues will show it. Over the weekend, it premiered at Tel Aviv’s Cinematheque.

Segmented titles include Forget Morality, Collateral Damage, and One Man’s Enemy is Another Man’s Freedom Fighter.

On December 18, Haaretz headlined “Israeli film makes critics’ best of 2012 list, moves closer to Oscar.”

It’s won other international awards. It stops well short of telling all. It’s still must viewing. It reveals what Israeli supporters need to know. Palestinians, of course, can explain best.

New York Times and Los Angeles Times film critics call it one of the best 2012 documentaries. It made the Academy Awards’ short list.

On November 25, New York Times film critic AO Scott headlined “Six Israeli Spymasters on a Shadowy Past and a Dark Future,” saying:

They’re retired. They reflected “about past triumphs and frustrations.” Avraham Shalom, Yaakov Peri, Carmi Gillon, Ami Avalon, Avi Dichter, and Yuval Diskin were interviewed.

They approved the film. Their views reflected former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s warning that Israel faced national suicide if decades of occupation didn’t end.

Extremist settlers reflect much about Israel’s dark side. Messianic interlopers have no place in civil society.

Perhaps fears of Israel’s demise motivated them to speak. Doing so may help save the country, they likely feel. Gillon said “We are making the lives of millions miserable.”

Outspoken Israeli intellectual Yeshayahu Leibowitz (1903 – 1994) warned that governing occupied “foreigners” would transform Israel into “a Shin Bet state.”

Zionists can’t admit that indigenous Palestinians lived in today’s Israel for centuries. Calling them “foreigners” demeans their longstanding ties to land rightfully theirs.

Israel stole it. Who in a current or past position of power dares say so?

Shin Bet heads are assassins. The six men interviewed have decades of blood on their hands. Reflection perhaps seeks redemption. 

It’s much too late to matter. Atonement isn’t in Israel’s vocabulary. It’s hard imagining they’re comments will influence current policy. It’s worse now than ever.

Moreh’s film is “amazing (and) upsetting,” said Scott. It covers ground rarely seen on film or discussed publicly. It challenges “conventional wisdom on all sides of the conflict.”

Candid interviews revealed “devastating assessments of the failings of successive (Israeli) governments.”

Yaakov Peri ran Shin Bet from 1988 – 1994. He was there during the first Intifada and Oslo. “I think after retiring from this job you become a bit of a leftist,” he said.

He and others interviewed aren’t doves. While critical of occupation harshness, they’re largely mindless about Palestinian suffering. Only Israel’s future matters. It prompted them to speak out.

Avraham Shalom headed Shin Bet from 1981 – 1986. He resigned after being accused of ordering two Palestinian prisoners killed and orchestrating a subsequent cover-up.

On the one hand, he defended Shin Bet tactics. On the other, he called Israel’s future “very dark.” He lamented about occupation harshness. It’s a legacy perhaps he’d like to forget.

He’s not alone. Others interviewed expressed similar views.

Scott called them “rare, (and) welcome (with) almost unbearable clarity.” He exaggerated to make a point.

Los Angeles Times film critic Kenneth Turan called Moreh’s documentary “more than simply eye-opening.” It’s “potent enough to alter how you see the world,” he said.

Perhaps a little, but not enough.

Moreh did what seemed impossible. He convinced six former spymasters to discuss what’s kept secret. They ran Shin Bet from 1981 – 2011. They spoke publicly for the first time.

They revealed snippets of Israel’s dark history. They stopped well short of telling all. What’s most important was omitted. Why they said anything they’ll have to explain. 

They “demonstrate(d) how soul-destroying it can be (to) mandate behavior that may seem amoral or even immoral.”

They stopped well short of agonizing over what they did. Late in life conscience pangs ring hollow. Other priorities got them to say anything.

At the same time, they support Palestinian self-determination. They expressed disdain for Israeli opposition.

They said Palestinian resistance is justified. Israeli leaders don’t address it. Confronting it violently reflects state terrorism. Israel should talk to Hamas.

Shalom shocked viewers. He called Israeli occupation no different from Nazi occupied Europe. If current Israeli, American, or other Western politicians suggested this, they’d be run out of town next election.

On December 30 Haaretz contributor Gideon Levy discussed the film. Shin Bet leaders do dirty work, he said. It affords them “an aura of prestige and esteem.”

“Oh, how we applaud our spooks.” Two former Shin Bet heads became cabinet ministers. Another was successful in business. Murder, Inc. rewards its bosses. Doves have no place in Israeli society.

“This jolting film is a must-see,” said Levy. “A feeling of nausea and of deep disgust wells up at its end.” Occupation truths are told. Some but way short of all.

Responsible assassins explained. Mea culpas were omitted. They stopped well short of admitting responsibility for unspeakable crimes.

They have lots more explaining to do. They admitted “being blinkered.” They didn’t examine the consequences of their actions.

Coming together on film “resembl(es) a mafia movie.” They speak like dons. Each did it his own way. They fell far short of entirely frank.

They were “subcontractors” in Israel’s “war on terror.” They knew their job was lawless, immoral and inhumane. Shalom claimed “There is no morality.” Might alone makes right.

When it’s too late to matter, they spoke. They’re hardly profiles in courage. Where were they when policies they mandated could have made a difference?

They prioritized assassinations, torture, and other forms of abuse. They helped institutionalize lawlessness. They made Israel a police state.

“Now they remember to say that the Palestinian problem cannot be solved with force.” It’s high time they stressed an Israeli problem.

“Rolling their eyes, they pass responsibility onto the political leadership.” They were part of its disreputable past. They could have acted responsibly.

They could have refused to commit crimes. They could have supported right over wrong. They chose other priorities. Unspeakable cruelty reflects them. They’ll carry them to their graves.

Palestinian rage followed “monstrous methods” they used. Then and now, they include beatings, torture, humiliation, other forms of abuse, and cold-blooded murder.

They admit crimes this grave. They remain unaccountable. They fall well short of remorse. They expressed no regrets. Why should they? They’re heroes. Israel “cheer(s) them on.”

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Interviews with six former Shin Bet heads : The Gatekeepers

America, Pakistan and the Game of Shadows at Durand


by Hamid Abassi


From theory to practicality, it seems that there isn’t a different between the way souls deal, or the states.

Looking closely, it gets obvious that the similarity or the connection is in no way a coincidence, but in fact it’s a soul or a collection of them which steers the states as well, providing the similar nature of actions, reactions and repercussion.

The Greek were smart enough to draw out boundaries on interaction between souls, and later the states.

As per them which stand very much valid till date, the biggest misdeed in interaction, relation or understanding remains pretending.

Though a simple word, deep within it holds a world of ambitions, misperceptions and wickedness, locked away cleverly with a outlook to fool not only in the proximity, but the source as well.

A relation having this feature whether between states or the soul has two things guaranteed i.e. neither it will be withstanding not it will benefit any involved subjects, qualifying it to be an affair of MUTUALLY ASSSURED DESTRUCTION (MAD).

The dilemma stated above, although confusing as it may seem is a true reflection of how America and Pakistan are conducting themselves in Afghanistan and the surrounding.

The 11 year odd mutual assistance, intelligence sharing, joint operations etc can be summed up in the paradigm of absolute role play toward each other, as well as the million involved.

In the week gone by a strange silence has gripped Washington and Islamabad following a drone strike which killed Taliban decorated commander Mullah Nazir. As per the agreed custom we usually hear condemnations from Islamabad whereas triumph from Washington, but this time around it has been calculated.

It happened a few times notably in Salala, Abbotabad (May 2nd) in this association that both sides have been caught pretending, and this being done by none other than themselves precisely. To Pakistan, Nazir was no alien. He stood by the state when they were sent packing by the unseen, unnoticed Taliban (Pakistan Chapter) in its Tribal Areas and Swat especially.

His control over a massive territory, a categorical stance over no aggression on Pakistani forces and his resources across the Durand was vital for ending the war within, truly and solely caused by the Allied invasion into Afghanistan post 9/11. If this raises your eyebrows, let me make things simple for you.

How did Americans pull a graceful end to Iraqi onslaught? Let’s not fool ourselves by crowning Mr Petreaus surge or Mr Maliki exemplary governance. In fact it was Americans realizing that like a body under threat from viruses, a calculated insertion of the same virus, though tamed can act as a shield against the mother virus.

This theory translated into friendly militia turned the tide for Americans in Iraq. A covert version of same theory was in practice through Nazir, which has been laid to rest by the predator strike. This gives rise to the immediate question of why we need it? Obviously inhabitants across the globe have seen how Pakistan has been left to become a shooting gallery while a coalition rest across the border, silently. Upton 45,000 souls have perished so far, with billions lost in economical chaos and millions suffering directly.

Nazir nucleus remained his assertion that it’s the invaders across the Durand which have caused this crisis, and their withdrawal will open the gates for peace on both sides. Now of course in theory it seems simple, but this withdrawal in his and others sharing same idea comes by inflicting losses on coalition forces in Afghanistan, which brings the “Do All-Say None” theory into activation. The 1st stance remains the most vital for Islamabad, but the 2nd phase goes inverse to our commitment for assisting international troops fighting in Afghanistan. So this counts for the silence witnessed on both side after his elimination.

The 2nd part of this “Game of Shadows” involves Americans in Afghanistan. Not so long ago the world woke up to the reality of Malala Yousafzai, a girl shot for her stance over women education and a progressive society away from the feeling of guns and terror. The West and America lead from the front in condemnation, without addressing the question of assassin behind her attack. It is no other than the feared Maulvi Fazalullah, safely housed in the bordering area inside Afghanistan with ample assistance to grow, recruit and conduct strikes across Pakistan.

He is directly responsible for the murder and bombing of thousands of civilians and security personnel, yet shielded perfectly in a territory which is unmistakably the domain of ISAF/NATO and the Americans. Authorities across the border have now clearly accepted that he is based in Afghanistan, as is the case previously with terrorist like Brahamdagh Bugti fighting against forces of Pakistan in Baluchistan. Shielding deliberately or through ignorance, Americans have made visible the black hole which exists in their policy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan. The tit for tat over militias, with US backing unfriendly Taliban to Pakistani troops and vice versa is the fruit of pretending that has gone around for well over a decade.

We see condemnations once again from Washington over the killing of vaccination staff in Pakistan, with no address to the fact that their covert campaign courtesy Shakeel Afridi over OBL has fueled this fire, which our society can no longer counter through advocacy.

The genesis of post 9/11 invasion of Afghanistan remains clear that the prime stakeholders remain Afghanistan (To be cleaned), America (The Victim) and Pakistan (The Ally). India, China, Iran, Russia etc have their due share, but do not mistake it with the primary one as the flames have burnt in Kabul, Washington and Islamabad exclusively. Reluctance over acceptance of each other’s concern is highly novice. American policy maker should have backed their goal of securing a peaceful and responsible Afghanistan which isn’t a threat to any state in future instead of tempering their mandate by adding containment, energy corridors and so on to this agenda.

For Pakistan, it remains highly important that once this goal has been secured, the withdrawal shall leave a setup which guarantees peaceful coexistence with Islamabad and an environment friendly enough for all states to do their routine business in Afghanistan, let it be trade, diplomacy etc. The biggest threat to this post withdrawal settlement remains Americans unchecked invitation to Indian mission in Afghanistan away from trade and commerce.

The destabilization inside Pakistan is clearly based in Afghanistan or channeled through it, but a blind eye from Washington has made the matter worse. The cat and mouse will end only when the two allies of necessity respect each other mandate and concern.

Otherwise the MAD will not be limited to the two sides of Durand, but the ripples will be heading to Washington and even further. It is time that the truth shall be revealed to ourselves, before moving it to the partner soul/ state. Affairs of Rome have always been dealt the way Romans wanted, and same should be the standard in Afghanistan.

Posted in USA, Pakistan & KashmirComments Off on America, Pakistan and the Game of Shadows at Durand

JP Morgan & the Saudi Oil Colony


By Dean Henderson

Excerpted from Chapter 3: The House of Saud & JP Morgan: Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf…



With 261 billion barrels of crude oil lying beneath its soil, Saudi Arabia remains the lynchpin in the international oil grab presided over by the Four Horsemen.  As Joseph Story, Middle East analyst and former ARAMCO executive once said, “Only one factor is involved in where the price of oil is going to go, and that is Saudi Arabia”.

In 1933 Standard Oil Company of California (Socal) negotiated the first oil concession in Saudi Arabia with Saudi Finance Minister Abdullah Sulaiman.  The Saudis were to get a 30,000 British pound loan and 5,000 pounds for the first year’s rent, all payable in gold.  But US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) had just embargoed gold exports in response to the Great Depression and Socal’s request for an exemption was turned down by FDR’s Secretary of State Dean Acheson.

Socal circumvented the embargo by procuring the gold from the London branch of Morgan Guaranty Trust.  When the Saudis asked Socal officials what they should do with their newfound wealth, Socal recommended depositing it at Morgan Guaranty Trust.  The Saudis complied.

In 1938 Socal, which later changed its name to Chevron, struck oil in both Saudi Arabia and Qatar and founded the Arabian American Oil Company (ARAMCO).  Chevron quickly brought in Standard Oil of New Jersey (later Exxon), Standard Oil of New York (later Mobil) and Texaco as partners.  This American half of the Four Horsemen would grow ARAMCO into the largest oil company in the world, nearly three times the size of Royal Dutch/Shell.

While British Petroleum (BP) and Royal Dutch/Shell, the two European Horsemen, owned the biggest share of the Iraqi Petroleum Company and dominated the Iranian Consortium, the US Horsemen now had their talons into the biggest prize yet, ARAMCO.

Other agreements were struck in the region as well.  Chevron and Texaco formed a marketing arm known as Caltex, while jointly owning Bahrain Petroleum Company.  BP joined with the Mellon family-controlled Gulf Oil to develop oilfields in Kuwait.  By 1949, BP and Royal Dutch/Shell controlled 52% of Middle East oil reserves, while five US oil giants – Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, Texaco and Gulf-controlled 42%. [1]

ARAMCO soon boasted both the largest oilfield in the world at Ghawar and the biggest offshore field in the world at Safaniya.  It also laid claim to expansive oilfields at Berri and Abqaiq.  All told ARAMCO now controls over one-quarter of the world’s crude oil reserves.  In the wake of the 1973 Arab oil embargo, ARAMCO embarked on the most expensive single industrial project in the history of mankind, a massive petrochemical and refining complex at Jubail.  The company also runs the world’s largest deep water port at Ras Tanura on Saudi Arabia’s Persian Gulf shoreline. [2]

While British Petroleum (BP) and Royal Dutch/Shell, the two European Horsemen, owned the biggest share of the Iraqi Petroleum Company and dominated the Iranian Consortium, the US Horsemen now had their talons into the biggest prize yet, ARAMCO.

The Saudi government claims to have nationalized its domestic oil sector.  The glossy ARAMCO World, which tends to show up in public libraries and dentist offices throughout the US, is the propaganda arm of the company.  It boasts that the Saudi government took a 25% stake in ARAMCO by 1973, increased its stake to 60% in 1974 and by 1980 owned 100% of ARAMCO, now known as Saudi ARAMCO.  The real story is a bit more complex.

Until at least 1988, the four US oil giants operated ARAMCO, even if the Saudi government did, in fact, own it.  Exxon’s 1990 10K filing to the US SEC lists Exxon Overseas Corporation as a wholly-owned subsidiary, then states that Exxon Overseas owns a 28.33% stake in Arabian American Oil Company.  Until he suffered a massive stroke, King Fahd had chaired the Supreme Council of Saudi ARAMCO, but board members include the former chairmen of Exxon and Chevron as well as a prominent US banker. [3]

No matter who actually owns ARAMCO, the Four Horsemen still call the shots through management contracts, service agreements and joint venture activity.  These downstream niches are where the real profit margins are to be found and the Four Horsemen have generally been moving in this direction since the early 1980’s in their worldwide operations.

Aramco Headquarters in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.  Image via Eagleamn [Public domain], via Wikimedia CommonsSaudi ARAMCO joint ventures include a huge refinery at Yanbu known as Mobil Yanbu Refining Company and an equally massive refinery at Jeddah which is 50%-owned by Royal Dutch/Shell.  Mobil owns a majority interest in Luberef, a Saudi base oil refiner and in Petrolube, a blender which exports to over 40 different countries.  Mobil and Royal Dutch/Shell are 50% owners of two ethylene crackers, one at Yanbu and one at Jubail Industrial City.

Shell owns 50% of Saudi Petrochemical Company and Saudi Arabian Markets & Shell Lubricants, 49% of both Al Jomaih & Shell Lubricating Oil and Modern Automotive Services Company, and 25% of Peninsular Aviation Services Marketing.  Motiva is a Shell/Saudi joint venture in the US, with refineries at Norco and Convent, Louisiana. [4]

Exxon owns and operates both the Al Jubail Petrochemical Company – by far the largest facility in Jubail Industrial City – and Exxon Chemical Arabia, Inc.  Its Essochem Belgian subsidiary has a joint venture with the wealthy Saudi Algosaibi family known as Oil Field Chemical Company.

Texaco has two joint ventures with Saudi ARAMCO in the United States: Texas Refining & Marketing and Star Enterprises. [5]  Sappco-Texaco Insulation Products is a venture between Texaco and Saudi Olayan Group, which is controlled by Sulaiman Olayan.  As of 1990, Texaco got 92% of its US-bound crude oil from Saudi Arabia.

According to Platt’s Oilgram News, Saudi ARAMCO also supplies Big Oil with discount crude,giving them $5/barrel off the posted spot price of whichever grade of crude the Horsemen are buying.  ARAMCO official James McPherson resigned in disgust because the company was holding back from direct competition with the US Horsemen.  McPherson then revealed a $17 million ARAMCO tax fraud to Saudi authorities.

Abdullah Tariki, Saudi Director of Petroleum and Minerals, went public with the charges and announced new transit fees that would be charged the Horsemen to compensate for the rip-off.  Within days of the proclamation Tariki was driven from office by King Fahd himself. [6]

ARAMCO’s lawyer was John McCloy, who chaired both Chase Manhattan and the World Bank.  McCloy, who helped David Rockefeller wisk the Shah out of Tehran, was one of six “Wise Men” who advised President Johnson and was an influential member of the Warren Commission, which “investigated” the Kennedy assassination.

As of 1990 ARAMCO produced over 8 million barrels of crude oil a day, ensuring the Saudi role as “swing producer”.  During the 1991 Gulf War ARAMCO underwent another expansion and now cranks out an unprecedented 10 million barrels a day.  With the Shah deposed, the Saudi half of the Twin Pillars took on much greater significance.


ARAMCO’s primary construction contractor is Bechtel, a shadowy San Francisco-based private company that is the largest engineering firm in the world.  Laton McCartney’s book Friends in High Placeschronicles Bechtel’s close ties to the US State Department and the CIA, which uses the company as an “asset” due to Bechtel’s penchant for mega-projects in remote areas of the world.  Wherever the Four Horsemen roam, Bechtel eyes and ears are close behind.  In oil-rich Venezuela it constructed the Mena Grande pipeline.  In Saudi Ed Fuller with Cairo delegation led by Senators John McCain and John Kerry with representatives from Bechtel, Mobil, Coca-Cola, Dow Chemical and General Electric.  Image by Taylorbushman via Wikimedia CommonsArabia it built ARAMCO’s “industrial city” at Jubail, the world’s largest industrial project ever.

Bechtel built Japan’s Tokyo Narita Airport and the convention center for the 1998 Nagano Winter Olympics.  It built Egypt’s Aswan Dam, the Euro-Disney Theme Park and San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge. Most every dam in the US was built by Bechtel, including the massive Hoover Dam.  It built the nation’s first nuclear power plant for ARCO in Idaho in 1951 and builds most every nuclear and electrical power plant of any size in the world.  It also builds military installations and seaports.  Pick your modern engineering marvel and there is a good chance it was built by Bechtel.  The firm is owned by the Bechtel family and currently run by Stephen Bechtel who in 1973 met personally with King Fahd to plan the Jubail Project.

Bechtel lead the charge to privatize Third World water systems and a major backer of the Free Trade Agreementof the Americas.  In 1999 Bechtel took over the provincial water system of Cochabamba, Bolivia.  According to Bolivian activist Oscar Oliviera of the Coalition for the Defense of Water and Life, the World Bank promoted the water grab on behalf of Bechtel’s Aqua Sentuary subsidiary.

Giving new meaning to the word “privatization”, rural Bolivian farmers saw their private water wells seized by the state and were forced to hook up to the Bechtel grid.  Fees shot up 300% for city dwellers who were suddenly spending 25% of their monthly income on water.  Bolivian peasants responded with four months of blockades and protests from January to April 2000.  A few were killed, hundreds injured and thousands jailed by a Bechtel-beholden Bolivian government. Finally, the government was forced to cancel the Bechtel contract.  In February 2002 at a secret World Bank court, Bechtel sued the provincial government for $25 million, claiming a loss of profits for the next 40 years.

Giving new meaning to the word “privatization”, rural Bolivian farmers saw their private water wells seized by the state and were forced to hook up to the Bechtel grid. Fees shot up 300% for city dwellers who were suddenly spending 25% of their monthly income on water.

Bechtel has, along with ARAMCO, enjoyed quasi-governmental status for five decades in the Middle East.  Past Bechtel directors include Kennedy CIA Deputy Director John McMahone and Reagan cabinet officials Secretary of State George Schulz, Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger and Arms Control Adviser Kenneth Timmerman.

George Schultz, who was Bechtel chairman before his Reagan appointment, returned to the Bechtel board in the early 1990’s and also joined the board at Chevron.  CIA Directors Bill Casey and Richard Helms both worked for Bechtel as did Philip Habib, the Carter Middle East envoy who produced the Camp David treaty between Egypt and Israel.

As of 1978 Stephen Bechtel and co-founder John McMahone owned 40% of Bechtel stock,while the other 60% was held by 60 Bechtel executives.  Bechtel owns 15% of Peabody Coal and a big chunk of the Dillon Read investment bank, where Bush Sr. Treasury Secretary Nicholas Brady worked.  Bechtel set up the Fremont Group as a holding company for Bechtel Energy Resources, Bechtel Investments Realty, Crown Pacific, Offshore Bechtel Exploration and Coldwell Banker.  Coldwell is one of the nation’s largest real estate firms and was purchased from the Carlyle Group, where James Baker III, George Bush Sr. and Frank Carlucci now work.  As of 1994 the board of Fremont Group included Stephen Bechtel, Eisenhower Defense Secretary Cordell Hull, George Schultz and Citibank chairman Walter Wriston.

In Saudi Arabian business ventures, foreign companies are required to work through agents who are Saudi nationals.  Bechtel recruited an ARAMCO dispatcher named Sulaiman Olayan to be its partner in forming the Saudi Arabian Bechtel Company.  Olayan, a penniless working class Shi’ite, would own 50% of the new company and became an instant billionaire.  Before the arrival of the Four Horsemen, Saudi Arabia had been a fairly egalitarian society.  So had Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates.  Most modern day billionaire oil sheiks had been truck drivers, mechanics and pearl divers.

The Council on Foreign Relations

Bechtel insider George Pratt Schultz is also the current director at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR),a powerful US foreign policy think tank whose geopolitical imperatives are, more often than not, adopted by the US State Department.  The CFR was created in 1922 and is headquartered in Harold Pratt House in New York City.  The building was donated by Pratt’s widow, whose husband made his fortune as a partner in John D. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil Company.

The 2013 Jan/Feb issue of CFR's journal Foreign Affairs

Schulz, a relative of Mrs. Harold Pratt, replaced CFR member Alexander Haig to become Reagan’s Secretary of State.  The CFR is the US affiliate of the Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA) in London.  Both foreign policy think tanks are loaded with powerful leaders of industry, academia and government.  They hold an enormous amount of sway over US and British foreign policies, providing the glue for the so-called “special relationship” between the US and Britain.

CFR publishes Foreign Affairs, a bi-monthly journal on the global political landscape, which is considered by many in the State Department as a kind of “how-to” guide in conducting foreign policy.  Founding members of CFR included brothers John Foster and Allen Dulles, columnist Walter Lippman, former Secretary of State Elihu Root and Colonel Edward Mandell House, who as adviser to President Woodrow Wilson pushed through the Federal Reserve Act, creating a private US central bank owned by a few wealthy banking families.

In 1912, one year before the Federal Reserve was created, House wrotePhilip Dru: Administrator.  The book describes a conspiracy within the United States bent on establishing a central bank, a graduated income tax and control of both political parties.

Past funding for CFR has come from international financiers David Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan, Bernard Baruch, Jacob Schiff, Otto Kahn and Paul Warburg.  International banks Kuhn Loeb, Lazard Freres, Lehman Brothers (now part of Barclays) and Goldman Sachs – whose directorates interlock – heavily influence CFR proceedings. [7]

CFR members are sworn to secrecy regarding goals and operations.  But Admiral Chester Ward,  a longtime CFR member, let slip that the goal of the group is, “to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the national independence of the United States…Primarily, they want a world banking monopoly from whatever power ends up in the control of global government.”

CFR members have dominated every Administration since FDR and most Presidential candidates come from its ranks.  Adlai Stevenson, Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey, George McGovern, Walter Mondale, Jimmy Carter, George Bush Sr. and Al Gore are all CFR alumni.  David Rockefeller served as CFR Chairman for some time, giving way to fellow Chase Manhattan chairman/ARAMCO attorney John McCloy.

Founding members of [The Council on Foreign Relations] CFR included brothers John Foster and Allen Dulles, columnist Walter Lippman, former Secretary of State Elihu Root and Colonel Edward Mandell House, who as adviser to President Woodrow Wilson pushed through the Federal Reserve Act, creating a private US central bank owned by a few wealthy banking families.

Every CIA Director since Allen Dulles has been a CFR member, including Richard Helms, William Colby, George Bush Sr., Bill Casey, William Webster, James Woolsey and John Deutsch.  CFR’s Foreign Affairsconsistently advocates US military intervention and is the most widely read periodical at the US State Department.

According to both former Deputy Director of the CIA Victor Marchetti and former State Department analyst John Marks, the CFR is the principal constituency of the CIA, since the elite who run the CFR are the ones who own the overseas assets which the CIA and the US military work to guard. [8]

It is through the CFR that the international bankers and the global intelligence community mingle.  The bankers and the spooks share a common goal of keeping the world safe for global monopoly capitalism. Often intelligence operatives are recruited from the banking houses where their loyalties to the banking elite have been thoroughly tested.  OSS founding father William “Wild Bill” Donovan was an agent for JP Morgan.

The revolving door between banking and intelligence swings the other way as well.  The very best CIA, Mossad and MI6 agents are recruited to become better paid private spooks for multinational corporate and banking empires as documented in Jim Hougan’s Spooks: The Haunting of America – Private Use of Secret Agents.

As author Donald Gibson wrote, “By the early 1960’s the CFR, Morgan and Rockefeller interests, and the intelligence community were so extensively inbred as to be virtually one entity.”[9]

The CFR is also the primary incubator for Presidential cabinet positions.  The Nixon Administration had 115 CFR members, while the Clinton Administration included over 100 CFR alumni.  They included CFR President Peter Tarnoff, National Security Adviser Anthony Lake, Vice-President Al Gore, Secretary of State Warren Christopher, Secretary of Defense Les Aspin and his successor William Cohen, Secretary of Treasury Lloyd Bentsen, CIA Director James Woolsey, Colin Powell, Tim Wirth, Winston Lord, Laura Tyson, George Stephenopoulos and Samuel Lewis.

In the fall of 1998 as impeachment loomed over Clinton, the President rushed to New York to try and muster support from his CFR “handlers”.  As publisher John F. McManus stated, “Bill Clinton knows well that he serves as President because the members of the ‘secret society’ to which he belongs chose him and expect him to carry out its plans.”

JP Morgan Chase

JP Morgan & Co Building, NYC, circa 1914.  Image by Irving UnderhillARAMCO’s banker has always been Morgan Guaranty Trust. The Saudi Arabian government keeps the bulk of its money at Morgan as well.  Morgan made loans to the Saudis based on oil revenues which the Saudis were receiving from ARAMCO, revenues which originated from Morgan ARAMCO accounts and were recycled back into Morgan Saudi accounts.  Just as the Shah of Iran enjoyed an exclusive relationship with David Rockefeller’s Chase Manhattan, so was the House of Saud intertwined with the Morgan Guaranty Trust.

Morgan Guaranty came into being when the old JP Morgan Bank split into three parts after the passage of the Glass-Steagal Act of 1933, which aimed to curb the power of Wall Street banks who many saw responsible for the Crash of 1929.  Morgan Stanley filled the role of investment bank, Morgan Guaranty Trust became the commercial bank and JP Morgan & Company became an exclusive private bank for the world’s super-rich, including the Bechtel family.

In 2000 Chase Manhattan the JP Morgan, unhindered after the late-1990’s repeal of Glass-Steagal, merged to form JP Morgan Chase.  The mega-banks of Rockefeller and Morgan, which for decades had recycled petrodollars for Twin Pillars Iran and Saudi Arabia, were now one.

Bechtel insider Sulaiman Olayan was a director of Morgan Guaranty Trust’s International Council.  His Olayan Group is the largest private investment firm in the Middle East and controls big chunks of Saudi Bechtel, JP Morgan Chase, Occidental Petroleum and CS First Boston.  J.P. Morgan Chase, ARAMCO and Bechtel use Olayan as their joint venture liaisonto the House of Saud. [10]

In 1950, the Saudi monarchs began collecting royalties on ARAMCO profits.  ARAMCO owners Exxon, Mobil, Chevron and Texaco lobbied the US government for tax credits on royalties paid to the Saudis, so the US taxpayer footed the bill.  This was coupled with the ridiculously low taxes these companies were paying into US government coffers.  In 1974 Mobil and Texaco were taxed at a rate of 1.6%.  Chevron coughed up 4.3%, while Exxon gave a generous 5.9% of its profits to US Treasury. [11]

Even these figures are artificially high, since often multinational corporations declare profits through subsidiaries in places like Panama or Hong Kong where there are no corporate taxes, while declaring only losses in the US.  Often these corporations pay no US taxes. Some even get tax rebates.

As author Donald Gibson wrote, “By the early 1960’s the CFR, Morgan and Rockefeller interests, and the intelligence community were so extensively inbred as to be virtually one entity.”[9]

The year the Saudis began receiving royalties, the current US/Saudi oil for arms quid pro quowas launched. Assistant Secretary of State George McGhee negotiated the US/Saudi Security Agreement.  Oil had become the driving force in the post-WWII boom occurring in the US.  ARAMCO became the vital economic link bridging Saudi Arabian crude with increased US gross domestic product.  As evidence mounted that the Saudis were sitting atop the bulk of the world’s oil deposits, ARAMCO took on national security status at the State Department.  Saudi Arabia has 261 billion barrels in oil reserves.  No other nation has much over 100 billion barrels in reserves, though Iraq, Iran, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates all hover near that figure.  Russian and Central Asian estimates are still subject to debate.

Export-Import Bank loans, guaranteed by US taxpayers, began gushing into Saudi Arabia in a frantic rush to finance infrastructure to handle this newfound oil.  Bechtel led a pack of hungry US engineering firms like Fluor Daniel, M.W. Kellogg and Foster Wheeler, who, paid by the Saudis with these Ex-Im Bank loans, built oil refineries, pipelines, deep-water ports and drilling platforms for the ARAMCO consortium.  The financial infrastructure to handle recycled oil revenues also had to be built.

In 1952, on the heels of the US/Saudi Security Agreement, the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency (SAMA) was created as the Kingdom’s Central Bank.  By 1958 SAMA was run by Pakistani native Anwar Ali, later adviser to King Faisal.  Anwar had been Chief of the International Monetary Fund’s Middle East Department.  He recruited three Western bankers as SAMA advisers.  Known as the Three Wise Men or White Fathers, these Western bankers called the shots at SAMA, with Ali serving as figurehead.

The most powerful of the three was John Meyer, Jr., chairman of Morgan Guaranty’s International Division and later chairman of the entire Morgan mother ship.  The White Fathers funneled SAMA petrodollar royalties into Morgan Guaranty accounts. In turn Morgan served as well-paid investment counselor to SAMA.  Anwar Ali’s son even landed a job at Morgan Guaranty. [12]

Dean Henderson is the author of four books: Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror NetworkThe Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries,  Stickin’ it to the Matrix and Das Kartell der Federal Reserve. To subscribe to Dean’s weekly blog,Left Hook, go to


[1] Arabian Oil: America’s Stake in the Middle East. Raymond F. Mikesell and Hollis B. Chenery. University of North Carolina Press. Chapel Hill. 1949. p.57

[2] “Arabian Might”. Economist.12-24-88. p.79

[3] “Saudi Arabia: Saudi Arabian Oil Company Profile”. Oil & Gas Journal. 8-16-93. p.38

[4] “OPEC Members get Rebuilding Pitch”. Pam Radtke Russell, Jaquetta White and Greg Thomas. The Times-Picayune. New Orleans. 9-12-06. p.C8

[5] “Arabian Might”. Economist.12-24-88. p.79

[6] Making Democracy Safe for Oil: Oilmen and the Middle East. Christopher Rand. Little, Brown & Company. New York. 1975. p.109

[7] The Rockefeller File.Gary Allen. ’76 Press. Seal Beach, CA. 1977. p.75

[8] Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History that Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons and the Great Pyramids.Jim Marrs. Harper-Collins Publishers. New York. 2000 p.36

[9] Battling Wall Street: The Kennedy Presidency. Donald Gibson. Sheridan Square Press. New York. 1994. p.133

[10] The House of Morgan. Ron Chernow. Atlantic Monthly Press. New York. 1990. p.604

[11] Power, Inc.Morton Mintz and Jerry S. Cohen. Viking Press. New York. 1976. p.216

[12] Chernow. p.606

Posted in USA, Saudi ArabiaComments Off on JP Morgan & the Saudi Oil Colony

The Despicable Washington “Pest”


Not Just Another War Mongering Scandal Sheet

By Gordon Duff, Senior Editor


Veterans Today has been at war with the Washington Post for some time.  Oddly enough, our current  readership is now larger than the Posts, despite its incessant pandering and salacious content.

Other than Jeff Stein, a genuinely funny guy, the idea of actually touching a “Washington Post” without gloves and a mask is not recommended, not for humans at least.

Our issue today involved what the Post describes as its “Editorial Board” and their pseudo-scientific conclusions regarding uranium enrichment and nuclear weapons design.  Veterans Today, as a military publication, includes, not only the DOE’s top nuclear weapons designers among its staff but senior physicists from Sandia, Los Alamos and nuclear weapons experts from the US Army, Air Force and Navy.

The ”Post” has its unnamed “Editorial Board.”  Traditionally, the post uses as its point of reference statements made by an Israeli name David Albright.  Albright, at one time, worked with VT contributors at the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Association), a group that advises the UN on nuclear issues.

Albright won notoriety for publicly describing the design of Pakistan’s ”gun type” nukes as “solid core.”  Any moron knows that a “gun type” nuke is “split core.”

Thank heavens Albright has NEVER worked with nuclear weapons.  You see, constructing a solid core of sufficient mass using weapons grade Uranium 235 will, upon manufacturing alone, initiate a fission reaction.

In terms the “Post” and Albright might understand:  “The sucker would explode.”  We could advise Albright and the Post ways to enhance their “nuclear suicide,” bringing about a more effective and genuinely devastating reaction.  Such information should be withheld from them though originally released by Popular Mechanics in an article published over fifty years ago.

Today, the Post has decided that it is simple, may I say “the Post and Benjamin Netanyahu believe” that 20% enriched uranium gas can easily be converted, in a single step, to 95% weapons grade uranium.  Here, read it yourself:

“the most dangerous part of Iran’s program by requiring a freeze in the enrichment of uranium to a level of 20 percent, which is a short step from bomb-grade, and by shutting down the underground facility known as Fordow, where that enrichment takes place. Iran would also be required to ship its current stockpile of medium-enriched uranium out of the country…
At the same time, the United States — and more so Israel — cannot easily wait many more months for a deal. If Iran continues to enrich uranium to 20 percent at its present rate, it may acquire enough to quickly make a bomb by the middle of this year, potentially giving it the “breakout capacity” that both President Obama and the Israeli government have vowed to prevent. Tehran would have crossed that line last fall had it not diverted a large part of its stockpile to fabricate fuel for a research reactor.”


Here, I believe, we now see who the Post represents.

The Post is and always has been the voice of Likudist Israel, a nation that has only been saved from nearly 200 United Nations votes for sanctions, sanctions based on war crimes, by American vetoes.  Never are such issues reported in the Post.

Today, however, we look to the Post and ask them to account for their lies.

I can explain, in terms even one of their 3rd rate community college journalism dropouts can understand:

“Twenty percent uranium gas can be converted to a metallic weapons grade nuclear core using the same methods and technology that would allow Post editors to light up one of those “doobies” they must be smoking and exhale a Chevy truck.”

What they expect America to do is to attack Iran, sending another generation of Americans to war for Israel, to war based on lies just as with Iraq and Afghanistan.

Nobody at the Post will fight.  No one from Israel will fight although bulldozing of homes in what the UN has officially deemed the “free and independent Nation of Palestine” will go on.  Children will be shot, shot in the face repeatedly, as the IDF has always done, “Sandy Hook style.”

In order to support this farce, “Mossadnik” Julian Assange is quite probably preparing to release “secret war plans” tying, as Newsweek had done a short time ago, Iran to the Sandy Hook terror attacks.

We expect no less.

In the interim, we wish Netanyahu good luck with what we hope will be our new Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel.

We do know this, Hagel can tell the difference between a nuclear weapon and Netanyahu’s infamous “Wylie Coyote” bomb cartoon.

With a little luck, “history” may well erase, not only Netanyahu but his mouthpiece, the Washington Post, “from the sands of time.”

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on The Despicable Washington “Pest”



How Israel will be destroyed without one shot being fired

Without a peace agreement, the future is clear: The Palestinians will so outnumber the Jews that Israel will be forced to give them the vote; the first bill to pass in a Palestinian-majority parliament will change the country’s name from Israel to Palestine, and the second bill will be a Palestinian ‘Law of Return.’

S. Daniel Abraham


Israel needs the Palestinian state to come into existence even more than the Palestinians do. Without it, Israel cannot continue as both a Jewish and a democratic state. If Israel doesn’t reach a two-state settlement with the Palestinians very soon, then one day – likely sooner rather than later – the Jewish state as we know it will cease to exist. And it will be our fault (I say “our” because as a Jew, though not an Israeli, nothing matters more to me than Israel’s survival).

Sergio DellaPergola, the Hebrew University professor of Population Studies and the world’s leading authority on Jewish and Israeli demographics, has concluded that already today there is no Jewish majority in the areas including Israel, the West Bank and Gaza (as long as Israel controls Gaza’s airspace and sea space, it is still considered as controlling that territory in the eyes of the world).

According to DellaPergola’s projections, the Palestinian birthrate outpaces the Jewish birthrate by far, meaning that the Arab majority between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River will gradually become more and more significant. Can Israel survive as a Jewish state when Jews become a minority in their own homeland?

I have raised this issue with some of the highest officials in the current Israeli government and they repeatedly attempt to assure me that the rapidly growing Palestinian population in no way threatens Israel’s survival. As one of them put it to me, “There is no one in Israel in their right mind who would annex or incorporate any of the Palestinian population in the West Bank, so these numbers and projections are not right.”

Such thinking is misguided. How can one assume that once the Palestinians living under Israeli rule outnumber Israeli Jews they will continue to accept their disenfranchisement? I say to Israelis who hear this argument and react defensively, arguing that Israel’s treatment of the Arabs has been mild in comparison with their treatment in other countries, and that the world has unfairly targeted Israel for criticism: This argument is irrelevant.

The real problem is not international discrimination against Israel, odious as it is. The real problem is that even if the international community stops censuring Israel for its control of the West Bank, that has no bearing on the simple fact that Israel cannot rule indefinitely over a society where the majority of its residents are non-citizens and resentful about their non-equal status. The more the number of Palestinians living under Israeli rule will be greater than the number of Jews, so it will be impossible to deny them full civil rights.

If Israel doesn’t find a way to make an agreement now, the future is clear. The day will come when Palestinians so outnumber Jews that Israel will be forced to give them the vote. When the Israeli parliament has a majority of Palestinian delegates, I suspect that the first bill to pass will be to change the country’s name from Israel to Palestine, a name that will reflect the political and cultural background of most of the country’s citizens. And the second bill will be a mirror image of the Israeli “Law of Return,” only this time it will be a bill that will enable the descendants of the original Palestinian refugees to move to Israel/Palestine. Israel as we know it will cease to exist.

All this can be averted. Abu Mazen and the Palestinian Authority want to make a deal with Israel. While many Israelis refuse to acknowledge this, I know from over 50 meetings with Abu Mazen that his advocacy of a peaceful resolution is utterly sincere. What the Palestinians want is a state of their own, alongside Israel. And public opinion polls conducted in Israel as recently as last month have repeatedly confirmed that between 70 to 80 percent of Israelis would support a peace deal that includes the establishment of a demilitarized Palestinian state, with borders that are based on the 1967 lines with equal land swaps, as well as the settlement of Palestinian refugees in the new Palestinian state rather than in Israel. The land swaps would allow the annexation of the large settlement blocs – home to the vast majority of Israelis living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem – which would be incorporated into Israel’s new, internationally–recognized borders, negating the need for their evacuation.

But as much as the Palestinian Authority wants a state, they are currently part of a diminishing number of Palestinians who believe in a two-state solution. If Israel doesn’t deal with the Palestinian Authority and help them establish a state now, the Palestinians will soon stop agitating for one. They will choose to remain stateless, and simply wait for their population to grow. Their numbers will grow and that is precisely why the Jewish state won’t survive. It will be destroyed without one shot being fired.

Since the Holocaust, we Jews have wanted to believe that our survival depends totally on ourselves, and no Jews want to believe this more than Israelis. David Ben Gurion, Israel’s founding prime minister, was fond of saying, “What matters is not what the gentiles say but what the Jews do.” Israel certainly needs to remain militarily the strongest country in the Middle East, one which is stronger than all of her neighbors combined.

But that is not enough. Israel needs one other thing as well. It needs a neighboring state of Palestine in order for Israel to survive. And if we Jews don’t understand that, and don’t act on that understanding now, perhaps the Jewish people will survive, but the Jewish state won’t.


Israel’s Palestinian propagandist

Israeli propagandist Khaled Abu Toameh

Khaled Abu Toameh, Israeli hasbara agent

By Nureddin Sabir
Editor, Redress Information & Analysis

Observers of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict expect from time to time to come across individuals and organizations whose intent is to find the worst possible news and information from the Arab and Muslim worlds and disseminate them widely while painting a rosy picture of Israel and Zionists.

Usually these tarnished messengers are themselves Israelis or organizations with close links to the Israeli intelligence service Mossad, such as Memri, foreign Jews who act as Israeli agents abroad – known as sayanim – or non-Jews who perform services on behalf of Israel – sometimes referred to as Sabbath Goyim – such as the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat Friends of Israel lobby groups in the British Parliament. Rarely, however, are they Arabs, let alone Palestinians, although, as the British and French discovered in World War II, traitors and fifth columnists can be found everywhere.

Inconvenient truths or black propaganda?

Recently, I stumbled upon an article written by one Khaled Abu Toameh in which he highlights what he describes as “inconvenient truths that the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank do not want others to know about”.

The article was originally published by the Gatestone Institute – of which more later – and republished by Your Middle East, a privately owned and funded website which takes pride in “Disrupting the global news flow with a unique online digital media about the Middle East and North Africa”.

Among the “inconvenient truths” mentioned by Abu Toameh is the fact that senior Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Fatah officials hold Israeli-issued VIP cards that grant them various privileges, including the freedom to enter Israel and travel abroad at any time they wish, and the fact that the Palestinian Authority (PA) continues to summon and arrest political opponents, journalists and bloggers who criticize its leaders.

On the face of it, neither of these facts is new or surprising. The privileges Abu Toameh refers to have existed since the signing of the Oslo accords between Israel and the PLO in 1993, a fact which he acknowledges. It is also common knowledge that the PA is uncomfortable with media freedom and freedom of expression. More generally, the fact that PA is prone to corruption and elitism is well known and had been one of the main reasons why Hamas won the legislative elections in 2006.

However, as I continued to read Abu Toameh’s article I became increasingly suspicious. According to Abu Toameh, “of the 600 Christians from the Gaza Strip who arrived in the West Bank … to celebrate Christmas, dozens have asked to move to Israel because they no longer feel comfortable living under the PA and Hamas”. Furthermore, he claims that dozens of Christian families from East Jerusalem “have moved to Jewish neighbourhoods in the city because they too no longer feel comfortable living among Muslims”.

I had never heard of Khaled Abu Toameh before stumbling upon the above article, where he is described as “an Arab Muslim” and “a veteran award-winning journalist” who “currently works for the international media, serving as the ‘eyes and ears’ of foreign journalists in the West Bank and Gaza Strip”.

But what he was saying about Palestinian Christians in particular directly contradicts what Palestinian Christian leaders have been repeatedly telling the world. One such leader, the veteran Catholic priest in Gaza Father Manuel Musallam, is adamant that Christianity in the Holy Land had been destroyed not by Muslims but by Israel. “Israel destroyed the church of Palestine and the church of Jerusalem beginning in 1948. It, not Muslims, has sent Christians in the region into a diaspora,” he told Irish ministers and MPs in 2010.

After a few seconds’ cursory research I discovered that Abu Toameh is in fact an Israeli Arab, and what triggered my suspicion was the fact that, as an Israeli Arab with full access to everywhere in Israel, and as “a veteran award-winning journalist”, Abu Toameh failed to interview even one of the dozens of Christians whom he claims prefer Israel and Jewish neighbours to their Muslim Palestinian brothers and sisters.

Surely, natural if not journalistic curiosity should have prompted him to explore why Palestinian Christians would take such a drastic step that would mean, among other things, burning their bridges with relatives and friends in the homeland and risking the stigma of being labelled as traitors.

Was it harassment from Palestinian Muslims that allegedly drove the Christians into the arms of Israel? Was it the Islamist Hamas movement making life intolerable for them? Or was the reason more benign, such as the desire to reunite with relatives from whom they had become separated by the Israeli occupation?

Alternatively, perhaps the whole story was made up, a propaganda lie intended to distract world public opinion from Israel’s crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories and its racist discrimination against its own Arab citizens.

Neo-conservative connections

With my suspicion aroused, I searched deeper and the picture that emerged was a truly ugly one.

First, I discovered that the Gatehouse Institute, the original publisher of Abu Toameh’s article, “is a neocon think tank/publishing house specializing in hyping Islamophobia. Its founder is Nina Rosenwald, a rabid neocon.”

Next, I discovered that Abu Toameh is symbiotically linked to some of Israel’s and the United States’ most right-wing, anti-Arab and neo-conservative bodies. One of these isThe Jerusalem Report, which comes under the corporate umbrella of the Israeli right-wing Jerusalem Post Group

Another of the organizations for which Abu Toameh writes is the Hudson Institute, a think-tank based in Washington DC. According to the Centre for Media and Democracy’s SourceWatch website:

While describing itself as “non-partisan” and preferring to portray itself as independently “contrarian” rather than as a conservative think-tank, the Hudson Institute gains financial support from many of the foundations and corporations that have bankrolled the conservative movement. The Capital Research Centre, a conservative group that seeks to rank non-profits and documents their funding, allocates Hudson as a 7 on its ideological spectrum with 8 being “Free Market Right” and 1 “Radical Left”.

Straight out of Israel’s propaganda sewer

Now we come to Abu Toameh himself. The self-proclaimed “eyes and ears” of foreign journalists in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in fact comes straight out of Israel’s propaganda sewer.

According to Wikipedia, Abu Toameh is listed as a speaker for the Hasbara Fellowships, an organization that brings students to Israel and trains them to be effective pro-Israel activists on college campuses. The Fellowship in fact brought him to more than a dozen talks at various university campuses.

In addition, Abu Toameh has given numerous talks sponsored by StandWithUs, a pro-Israel education and advocacy organization based in Los Angeles with branches in New York, Denver, Michigan, Chicago, Seattle, Orange County, San Francisco, Santa Cruz, the UK and Israel. Among these talks was one given at their annual conference in Los Angeles in 2008.

If that is not enough, Abu Toameh is on record as saying in 2009:

Israel is a wonderful place to live and we are happy to be there. Israel is a free and open country. If I were given the choice, I would rather live in Israel as a second class citizen than as a first class citizen in Cairo, Gaza, Amman or Ramallah.

It is no wonder, then, that our self-styled ”veteran award-winning journalist” was described by the former Palestinian ambassador to Australia, Ali Kazak, as a “traitor”.

As for Abu Toameh’s journalistic awards, in case you are wondering, two were given to him by Israel Media Watch in 2010 and 2011 and the other by the neocon Hudson Institute in 2011.

There remains one question. Your Middle East, which republished Abu Toameh’s suspect article, is an innovative and respected news website which combines news from social media, citizen journalists and news agencies to bring the kind of news and analysis which the traditional media often fail to provide. What on earth its editors were thinking of when they decided to publish Abu Toameh’s article is beyond me.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Israel’s Palestinian propagandist

Jewish Democrats ‘confident’ Hagel will follow Obama’s pro-IsraHell lead


National Jewish Democratic Council welcomes the nomination while the ADL expresses reservations, and several Republican representatives express outright opposition.


The National Jewish Democratic Council said it was confident Chuck Hagel would follow what it called President Obama’s “unprecedented” pro-Israel record.

The statement Monday morning came before Obama’s formal announcement expected later Monday nominating Hagel, a former Republican senator, for defense secretary.

“President Barack Obama’s unprecedented pro-Israel credentials are unquestionable, and setting policy starts and stops with the president,” said the statement, which was not attached to the name of an NJDC official.

“While we have expressed concerns in the past, we trust that when confirmed, former Senator Chuck Hagel will follow the President’s lead of providing unrivaled support for Israel — on strategic cooperation, missile defense programs, and leading the world against Iran’s nuclear program.”

Abraham Foxman, the Anti-Defamation League’s national director, expressed reservations about the nomination, stating that Hagel would not be his first choice. “I trust that the confirmation process will provide an opportunity for Senator Hagel to address concerns about his positions, which seem so out of sync with President Obama’s clear commitment on issues like Iran sanctions, isolating Hamas and Hezbollah and the president’s strong support for a deepening of U.S. Israel strategic cooperation,” Foxman’s statement said.

In 2007, when Hagel was considering a presidential run, the NJDC distributed an attack sheet on Hagel, noting his equivocation on such issues such as Iran sanctions and his criticism of some Israeli policies.

Hagel, after quitting politics in 2008, drew closer to his then-fellow senator, Barack Obama, over a shared opposition to intensifying the U.S. presence in Iraq.

In 2009, NJDC’s then-executive director, Ira Forman, said it would be problematic for the group if newly elected President Obama, as it was then rumored, would nominate Hagel for a top Cabinet post. Forman’s successor as NJDC’s top official, David Harris, had until Monday refused to weigh in on the matter.

A number of prominent Jewish Democrats, including Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Carl Levin (D-Mich.), have suggested they would support Hagel, but others like Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) have expressed reservations and still others have been outright opposed, including Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), the senior Democrat on the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee; former Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), a contender to replace Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) for an interim should Kerry be confirmed as expected as secretary of state; and Susan Turnbull, a former vice chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, who is active in the NJDC.

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Jewish Democrats ‘confident’ Hagel will follow Obama’s pro-IsraHell lead

Israeli Palestinian fighting with Syrian Terrorists against Assad ‘can’t go home’



Arab Israeli who joined rebel forces in Syria says they burned his passport, refuse to allow him to leave


An Israeli Arab who crossed the border from Turkey to Syria and joined the rebels fighting to overthrow President Bashar Assad’s regime told his family he is having trouble returning to Israel because the rebels burned his passport.

The man claimed the rebels told him “whoever joins us does not return to his family.”

A relative of the young Arab Israeli told Ynet, “He called me a month ago and said he and his friend were pleased with their move (joining the rebels). They said the rebels gave them food and a place to sleep and also taught them how to fight Assad’s forces.”

But according to the relative, the tone changed in a more recent conversation they held. “He called me again and said he was very frightened, that both of their lives were in danger and they can’t handle the situation.”

The relative said one of the Israelis told him that entering Syria was a mistake. “He said the rebels burned their passports and asked for our help, but there is nothing we can do. We are afraid they will be harmed.”

The Foreign Ministry said it has contacted “elements in Turkey in an effort to reach the two missing (Israelis) who are believed to have entered Syria, but so far there are no developments.”

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, SyriaComments Off on Israeli Palestinian fighting with Syrian Terrorists against Assad ‘can’t go home’

Shoah’s pages