Archive | January 12th, 2013

Hitler’s British Handler



A meeting between F.W.Winterbotham, Head of the Air Section in the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), and SIS agent Baron de Ropp, right, on the Baltic shore in East Prussia, 1936. 

Was Baron William de Ropp
Hitler’s British handler?

“When Churchill was questioned in Parliament about British failure to support [German army efforts to overthrow Hitler,] he replied that the government had a deliberate policy of not dealing with German nationalist leaders who were considered to be a greater evil than Hitler.”  

by Henry Makow Ph.D. 
(“The British Agent at Hitler’s Ear” updated from Oct. 2009)

The name “Baron Willam de Ropp” isn’t well known. There is just one photo available, and only a short Wikipedia entry. Yet he was a British agent who may have been Hitler’s handler.

Hitler’s “daring” diplomatic & military coups, which astounded the world, were based on advanced knowledge of British intentions provided by de Ropp.

That’s not Baron de Ropp in the picture. That’s Ernst (“Putzi”) Hanfstaengl, another Allied agent at the heart of Hitler’s entourage. Both men add credence to the argument that the Illuminati created Hitler to foment world war. More about Putzi later.

According to Ladislas Farago, William de Ropp was “one of the most mysterious and influential clandestine operators” of the era. Born in Lithuania in 1877, educated in Germany, he moved to England in 1910.  After serving the British in World War One, he moved to Berlin and contacted fellow Balt, Nazi theoretician Alfred Rosenberg who introduced him to Hitler.

De Ropp worked closely with Rosenberg, who headed the Nazi Party Foreign Office. The Nazis considered him their agent in England where he organized support for the Nazi cause among a powerful segment of the Britsh elite known as the “Cliveden Set.”  He organized visits of high officials and exchanges of information. In this congenial atmosphere, the Luftwaffe naively opened its secrets to the British.This was part of a larger Illuminati plan (“Appeasement”) to make Hitler think England would support his conquest of Communist Russia.

Farago: “A close personal relationship developed between the Fuhrer and de Ropp. Hitler, using him as his confidential consultant  about British affairs, outlined to him frankly his grandiose plans…a trust no other foreigner enjoyed to this extent.” (“The Game of the Foxes” p.88)

In  “King Pawn or Black Knight,” (1995) Gwynne Thomas writes:   “The Nazi leader took an instant liking to him, particularly when he discovered that de Ropp had powerful connections among English society and was well informed about much of what was happening in London. De Ropp not only enjoyed [Hitler’s] confidence but became his spokesman in dealings with the many important British people Hitler wished to influence…there is strong evidence that de Ropp was instrumental in raising funds in the City of London to finance several of the Nazi election campaigns which ensured that by the end of 1933 the Nazi party was totally established and in control.” (p.25)

A British agent funded, advised and represented Hitler. At what point was Hitler himself a “British” agent?


After the Illuminati put Hitler in power, they kept him there by sabotaging German opposition.

On May 4, 1938, Ludwig Beck, Chief of the German General Staff had called for the overthrow of Hitler, warning that the country was headed for disaster.


On May 10, 1938, Prime Minister Chamberlain held a news conference at Cliveden House stating that Britain was seeking a pact with Germany and Italy, and favored the breaking up of Czechoslovakia. As a result of this British acquiescence, the German army dropped its resistance to Hitler’s war plans.

In 1939, De Ropp spelled out the British stand in the event of a German attack on Poland.

“Rosenberg was told the British would fight a defensive ‘war’, that is to say, would take no action in defense of Poland or in retaliation for Germany’s attack on that country. In particular there would be no aerial bombardment of German territory- and the Germans agreed to reciprocate, a decision which held throughout the ‘phony war’ period.”

“This ‘deal’ struck between de Ropp and Rosenberg would leave open the possibility of quickly ending the war because, de Ropp said, ‘neither the British Empire nor Germany would wish to risk their future for the sake of a state which had ceased to exist’. ”

Thus, by double crossing the Poles, the British-based Illuminati succeeded in giving the Nazis a common border with Stalin. It was only a matter of time before war would break out between them.

The task now was to entrap Hitler in a two-front war by provoking an attack on the West. Possibly, Baron de Ropp assured him that the British and French would roll over.

After the war began, De Ropp moved his base of operations to neutral Switzerland but, according to Ladislas Farago, “several times during the war he was summoned to Hitler for consultations.” (89)

Remember, William de Ropp man was a British agent.  The question remains, was Hitler a conscious British (i.e. Illuminati ) agent himself?  My sense is that the Illuminati sponsor misguided people whose natural goals are in line with the Illuminati agenda and guide them. But it is equally possible Hitler was a conscious agent and de Ropp was his handler.

In the Lyndon Larouche-sponsored book, “The New Dark Ages Conspiracy: Britain’s Plot to Destroy Civilization”(1980)  the author Carol White writes,

“The truth about Hitler is that he was not only created by the British and British-allied networks, but that the British government led by Winston Churchill continued to use Hitler throughout the war. If this fact was not clearly understood by the allied forces, it was strongly suspected in Germany itself.” (p.126)

White goes on to list numerous German army overtures to the British regarding the overthrow of Hitler. All were rebuffed. 

“When Churchill was questioned in Parliament about British failure to support these efforts, he replied that the government had a deliberate policy of not dealing with German nationalist leaders who were considered to be a greater evil than Hitler.” (p.144) 

In terms of the Illuminati Jewish goal to destroy Germany as an independent force in the world, this is very revealing. The Illuminati protected Hitler. He was their man.


“Putzi” Hanfstaengl (1887-1975) is another mysterious character who identified himself as an American agent in his memoirs. He may have an Illuminati background, possibly a Jewish  mother, a “Heine.” He hobnobbed with FDR and other members of the US elite at Harvard and later in NYC where he ran his father’s art business.

He moved to Germany in the 1920’s and was introduced to Hitler by the American Military attache in Berlin, Truman Smith. Smith asked him to “keep an eye on Hitler.”


Hanfstaengl became a part of Hitler’s inner circle often soothing the Fuhrer with his piano playing. More materially, Hanfstaengl financed the expansion of the Nazi newspaper into a daily. He composed the Nazi marching songs, basing them on Harvard football anthems. He hid Hitler after the failed Beer Hall Putsch and his pretty wife prevented the distraught Fuhrer from committing suicide.  Hanfstaengel was Hitler’s Foreign Press Chief from 1933-1937. Again, this man was an American agent.

Finally, Truman Smith deserves a mention. Although a member of the State Dept. he helped organize Nazi support in the US. He organized Charles Lindbergh’s tours of Luftwaffe facilities. Later, in Washington, he organized political and military opposition to US participation in World War Two. (Farago, pp.556-557)

Essentially, Hanfstaengl and Smith’s role paralleled that of Baron de Ropp. They encouraged Hitler (and Germans in general) to believe they had the support of the British American establishment (i.e. Illuminati) in their foolhardy crusade against Russia.


Baron William de Ropp, Hanfstaengl and Smith are further evidence that World War Two was contrived by the Illuminati to destroy the nation states of Europe and provide a rationale for Israel. By Illuminati, I am referring to the satanic secret society within Freemasonry that executes the agenda of  the central banking cartel.

From the TV news to movies, from the Internet to the classroom, our perception of reality is created by the Illuminati (Cabalist) Jewish banking cartel. History is theater scripted by these psychopaths to degrade and enslave mankind while increasing their own power and wealth.

Posted in GermanyComments Off on Hitler’s British Handler

Sammi Ibrahem’s Wake Up America: Interview with Iranian journalist Kourosh Ziabari

Sammi Ibrahem’s Wake Up America Jan 11, 2012

by crescentandcross

Interview with Iranian journalist Kourosh Ziabari


Download Here


Posted in InterviewComments Off on Sammi Ibrahem’s Wake Up America: Interview with Iranian journalist Kourosh Ziabari


In his apartment facing the American embassy just one street away, the rabbi of the Jewish community in Yemen, Yahya Moussa, sits chewing on qat and smoking a water pipe, with a photo of former President Ali Abdullah Saleh hanging beside him. Pointing at the photo, Moussa says, “We love him and we can’t erase his love from our hearts.” With these words, he expressed his gratitude for the help Saleh offered the Jews when “the Houthis (the military arm of the Yemeni Shiite parties) gathered to steal our money, destroy our properties and sanctuaries, and kick us out of our houses.” Moussa does not accept any justification claiming that Saleh did this only as part of his role as president of the country at the time and he beats around the bush, saying, “The Jews never forget a good deed, no matter how simple it was.”
[ed notes:from across american embassy mind you…like houthis are storming the jewish quarters across the american embassy to steal properties lollll dirty filthy scumbag rabbi worshipping saleh ”sigh”,i wonder what kind of dumbed down arabs swallow this kind of nonsense…a pro saleh(saudi puppet)jewish rabbi in yemen defaming houthis sigh…whats mind boggling is this fraud who praises saleh is same shill who for years complained at the lack of jewish representation in yemeni politics,not even faulting his so cherished saleh lol does it matter?anyway now yemen is ruled by a jew Yemen’s Zionist Jew Dictator | Rehmat’s World





A loud explosion rattled Tel Aviv on Thursday noon in what appears to be part of a feud between criminals, police sources confirmed to Xinhua.Two people were lightly injured and were evacuated to the nearby Ichilov hospital, Magen David Adom Emergency Services CEO Eli Bin told Xinhua. Police sources said they have taken the option of a terror attack off the table regarding Thursday’s explosion.According to eyewitnesses who’ve spoken to Channel 2 news, a motorcyclist clung to a Mazda car and then detonated an explosive device, setting the car ablaze.
In addition, a bus nearby, with no passengers on board, was damaged following the explosion.The explosion took place on the Menachem Begin main road, near Tel Aviv train station. Not far from the site, a bus exploded after a nationalistic-motivated attack during Operation Pillar of Defense in November 2012, injuring 37 people.Police forces at the scene blocked the area for traffic and instructed residents to stay clear of the scene.The Tel Aviv District Police has embarked on an investigation into the circumstances of the incident.
[ed notes:let me weigh in on this…one it could be they are syaing it wasnt terrorist related because the bnbing was next to one of the zionist ministries,and admitting resistance wa sable to carry such an operation deep within israhell and its ministries would completely embarass the zionist govt!,on the other hand it could be criminal as they are now claiming and possibly a showdown between different political camps due to coming israhelli elections…zionists are known to kill each other for power as well…


The Zionist Puppets Saudis behead poor Sri Lankan maid

.When Nafeek was first accused of killing, no translator was provided to explain to her what she was being charged with or what the consequences of an admission of guilt might be. As a newly arrived domestic servant from Sri Lanka, she did not speak Arabic. No lawyer was provided either but she was coerced into admitting guilt. This was used against her in the kangaroo courts that characterize the legal system in Saudi Arabia. In court she denied the charge and said she was coerced into admitting her guilt by threats from her employer.Ranjan Ramanayake, a Sri Lankan MP who campaigns for Sri Lankan workers abroad, described the Saudi government as “dictators” who would never execute Europeans or Americans, only Asians and Africans.
There have been many instances of Americans or Europeans being caught committing crimes but after a short jail sentence, they are released after calls from their government to the Saudi authorities. The harsh and cruel punishment is reserved for poor people from third world countries.As the case dragged on and it became increasingly clear that the heavily biased court would not listen to her side of the story, appeals for clemency were made to King Abdullah. Both Nafeek’s parents as well as the Sri Lankan government made appeals on separate occasions. The family hoped that the Saudi monarch would listen to the pleas to spare their daughter’s life who had gone to Saudi Arabia with high hopes of earning a livelihood and to provide for her desperately poor family back home.
Their hopes turned into nightmare when within weeks of her arrival in the kingdom, she was accused of murder.Why she would want to murder an infant was never explained although it was alleged that she had had an argument with the infant’s mother. This is an absurd allegation since domestic servants, especially from poor third world countries, are treated as slaves in Saudi Arabia. How could a 17-year-old dare to argue with her employer, especially when she had been in the kingdom only a few weeks? Her parents sent this poor girl to earn a living, only to be executed by beheading.

Posted in Saudi Arabia1 Comment


Zionist (Moslem) Arab serving in Zio-Nazi deployed in Hebron ...Zionist (Moslem) Arab serving in Zio-Nazi deployed in Hebron - "It is my State, it is my service, and I must carry out my duties as best as I can." Yediot Ahronot 10 January 2013!/photo.php?fbid=450341188347527

[ed note:note to propagandists at Hasbarah and cant be Muslim and join Nazi,onecannot even be Muslim and support the Nazi apartheid state of Israhell this pathetic-attempt is as absurd as using a black man in jim crow south in America claiming hes from South so he stands with Klu Klux Klan lol


A Significant Defeat for the Zionist Lobby?


A significant defeat for the Zionist lobby?

By Alan Hart

I would like the headline to be a statement but it has to be a question.

As I write it looks as though the Zionist lobby realises that it overplayed its hand in smearing Chuck Hagel in the hope of causing President Obama to back off nominating him for the post defense secretary. The implication is not that the lobby’s stooges in the Senate will refrain from giving Hagel a hard time at his confirmation hearing, but that they will not risk, at least for a while, further public exposure as Israel Firsters by causing the nomination to be rejected.

How much Obama himself is to be credited with outflanking the Zionist lobby on this occasion is a good question. There is certainly a case for saying that by authorising the leaking of Hagel’s name well in advance of the presidential nomination, Obama was deliberately provoking the Zionist lobby (and its neo-con associates) confident in the knowledge that there would be enough eminent and respected Americans, including some Jewish Americans, who would come forward to defend Hagel and rubbish the Zionist lobby’s smear campaign.

There were and Justin Raimondo put it this way. “When the ultra neo-cons of the Emergency Committee for Israel launched their propaganda offensive to cleanse the body politic of Hegelian revisionism, they took their campaign to ‘Criticize Hagel, Criticize Obama’ to such ridiculously vicious lengths that they inspired a vigorous pushback from the sort of people who had put up with their nonsense for too long: grizzled veterans of the diplomatic, political, and military corps who had sat in silence during the Bush years as the neo-cons played havoc with the country’s foreign policy.”

If as seems most likely Hagel is confirmed, it will be a defeat for the Zionist lobby, but how significant will that actually be? Will it be an indication that the lobby is beginning to lose its grip and, if it is, that we can look forward to a second-term Obama making best use of his greater freedom by doing whatever is necessary to get a real Middle East peace process going?

It all depends, I think, on why, really, Obama wanted the Republican Hagel as his top man in the Pentagon.

There are some who believe that Obama sees in Hagel a man who will assist him to put America’s own best interests first by ending the Zionist lobby’s control of policy for Israel-Palestine. In this way of interpreting Obama’s motivation, great attention is paid to one particular statement Hagel made when he was a senator and which, some like to believe, inspired the president to conclude that he, Hagel, was the best man for the job. This was Hagel’s statement:

“The political reality is that … the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here … I’ve always argued against some of the dumb things they do, because I don’t think it’s in the interest of Israel … I’m not an Israeli senator. I’m a United States senator. I support Israel, but my first interest is, I take an oath of office to the Constitution of the United States, not to a president, not to a party, not to Israel.”

But the prospect of having a much respected Republican ally for second-term effort to break free from the Zionist lobby’s controlling grip may not have been the main reason, or even a reason, for Obama’s decision to nominate Hagel. It could be that David Brooks hit the nail on the head in an op-ed analysis for the New York Times.

Under the headline Why Hagel Was Picked, Brooks opened up with this observation:

“Americans don’t particularly like government, but they do want government to subsidize their health care. They believe that health care spending improves their lives more than any other public good. In a Quinnipiac poll, typical of many others, Americans opposed any cuts to Medicare by a margin of 70 percent to 25 percent.”

Brooks then noted that the line tracing federal health care spending “looks like the slope of a jet taking off from LaGuardia,” and that Medicare spending “is set to nearly double over the next decade.” This, he added, is the crucial element driving all federal spending over the next few decades and pushing federal debt to about 250 percent of G.D.P. in 30 years. “There are no conceivable tax increases that can keep up with this spending rise.”

In my view what Brooks went on to say contains the key to real understanding of not only why Obama wanted Hagel, but also what we can and cannot expect from a second-term Obama presidency on policy for Israel-Palestine.

So far, Brooks noted, defense budgets have not been squeezed by the ever rising demand for expenditure on Medicare. (The military budget has more than doubled since 9/11). “But that is about to change.”

To set up his main argument Brooks drew off one advanced by Oswald Spengler, the German historian and philosopher (1880 – 1936) who wrote The Decline of the West. Spengler, Brooks said, “was certainly correct when he told European leaders that they could either be global military powers or pay for their welfare states, but they couldn’t do both.”

Brooks continued:

“Europeans, who are ahead of us in confronting that decision, have chosen welfare over global power. European nations can no longer perform many elemental tasks of moving troops and fighting. As late as the 1990s, Europeans were still spending 2.5 percent of G.D.P. on defense. Now that spending is closer to 1.5 percent, and, amid European malaise, it is bound to sink further.

“The United States will undergo a similar process. The current budget calls for a steep but possibly appropriate decline in defense spending, from 4.3 percent of G.D.P. to 3 percent, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

“As the federal government becomes a health care state, there will have to be a generation of defense cuts that overwhelm anything in recent history. Keep in mind how brutal the budget pressure is going to be. According to the Government Accountability Office, if we act on entitlements today, we will still have to cut federal spending by 32 percent and raise taxes by 46 percent over the next 75 years to meet current obligations. If we postpone action for another decade, then we have to cut all non-interest federal spending by 37 percent and raise all taxes by 54 percent.

“As this sort of crunch gradually tightens, Medicare will be the last to go. Spending on things like Head Start, scientific research and defense will go quicker. These spending cuts will transform America’s stature in the world, making us look a lot more like Europe today.

Chuck Hagel has been nominated to supervise the beginning of this generation-long process of defense cutbacks. If a Democratic president is going to slash defense, he probably wants a Republican at the Pentagon to give him political cover, and he probably wants a decorated war hero to boot.”

For absolute clarity, “to boot” in the sentence above means “as well” or “also”. It does not mean  that Hagel was selected for the prime purpose of assisting Obama to put the boot into the Zionist lobby


The conclusion I think the Brooks analysis invites is this. Throughout of all his second term, Obama’s main focus will be on his legacy – “How will I be seen in history?” His priority will therefore be oversight management of America’s economy, to prevent it collapsing on his watch and possibly provoking at some point a revolution of rising discontent which could see America burning; and that is not going to allow Obama the time and the mind space to do what is necessary to cause (or try to cause) the Zionist state to be serious about peace on terms most Palestinians could just about accept.  I also think this is most likely to be the case even if in his head and his heart Obama would like to read the riot act to Israel.

My guess is that Obama will content himself with the thought that Israel is becoming more and more of a pariah state because of its own actions and that Zionism is on the road to self-destruction.

The alternative speculation, as outlined by Raimondo, is that it’s because of the Legacy Factor that Obama will make resolving the conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel a top priority. Raimondo put it this way:

“The domestic economic situation is not going to improve much over the next four years, and I think the President knows that this will be an uphill battle. So where does that leave his legacy?

“Most Presidents move on the foreign policy front in their second terms, and this one will be no exception. And where this President is likely to make his move is where two of his Democratic predecessors tried, and failed, to make their respective marks, and that is in finally forging a lasting peace accord in the Middle East.”

It is, of course, true that if Obama became the peacemaker he would go down in history as not only a great president but, most probably, the greatest president in American history. But could that really be his legacy?

For the sake of discussion let’s assume that Obama can break the Zionist lobby’s iron grip on policy (an awesome assumption), and does become free to use the leverage any American president has to press Israel to be serious about peace on terms most Palestinians could just about accept, what then? Does it automatically follow that Zionism’s in-Israel leaders would say, “Okay, Mr. President, we’ll do what you want.”?

No! No! No!

In my view there is a very strong possibility, even a probability, that if a second-term President Obama did turn some real heat on Israel to back a demand that it end its defiance of international law and its occupation of the West Bank and its siege of the Gaza Strip, its leaders would say to him, “Go to hell!” There would also be a possibility that they would demonstrate their fury and teach him a lesson by creating some havoc in the region. What do I mean?

When President Carter worked with the Soviet Union to produce a joint superpower declaration of principles on the way to peace, all Arab governments and Arafat’s PLO agreed to co-operate, only Israel rejected this superpower initiative. Prime Minister Begin sent his foreign minister, General Moshe Dayan, to Washington for a conversation with Carter. Very shortly after it, the joint US-Soviet Declaration was torn up and replaced with a new memorandum of US-Israel understanding. What happened? Dayan said to Carter: “Mr. President, you must understand that my prime minister is mad. If you push him too far he could bomb the Arab oil wells.” (If Obama did put real pressure on Israel, it’s not impossible that Netanyahu would send his foreign minister to Washington to say to the president: “You must understand that my prime minister is crazy. If you push him too far he could bomb Iran.”)

Obama is not stupid. He knows that if he did seek to put real pressure on Israel, it could all go horribly wrong and leave him with a legacy that was not worth having.

For that reason I believe (I would love to be proved wrong by events) that there is almost no chance of a really serious and sustainable push for peace during Obama’s second term.

Back to my headline question. Hagel’s confirmation by the Senate will be a defeat for the Zionist lobby (and its non-Jewish neo-con associates), but whether or not it will be seen in the future as the beginning of a process that ended the lobby’s iron grip on policy for Israel-Palestine is a very big, open question.

There is, however, a sign, a very small one but still a sign, that such a process might (repeat might) be getting underway.

An important red line was crossed by those veterans of the diplomatic, political, and military establishments who dared to go public with their criticism and condemnation of the campaign by the Zionist lobby (and its neo-con associates) to demonize Hagel.

That crossing put the issue of America’s “special relationship” with Israel on the agenda for open debate. As Raimondo noted: “That has never happened before. The issue of Israel was always considered to be beyond debate, the most recent example of this uniformity of opinion being the last presidential debate between Obama and Romney in which the candidates spent a great deal of time competing with each other to see who could be more effusive in their undying support for the Jewish state.” (I do wish Raimondo and others would stop using the term “Jewish state”. How could it be that when one nearly one quarter of its citizens are Arab and mainly Muslim? Israel is a Zionist state).

In an op-ed for the New York Times, Roger Cohen was refreshingly honest about the need for debate. He wrote:

“President Obama’s decision to nominate Chuck Hagel, a maverick Republican with enough experience of war to loathe it, as his next secretary of defense is the right choice for many reasons, chief among them that it will provoke a serious debate on what constitutes real friendship toward Israel. That debate, which will unfold during Senate confirmation hearings, is much needed because Jewish leadership in the United States is often unrepresentative of the many American Jews who have moved on from the view that the only legitimate support of Israel is unquestioning support of Israel, and the only mark of friendship is uncritical embrace of a friend.”

If Jewish Americans in growing numbers end their silence on Israel’s behaviour (as a non-Jew I can say criminal behaviour) and participate in open debate, there will then be a real prospect of transforming the Zionist lobby’s temporary defeat into a permanent one.

Posted in USA, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on A Significant Defeat for the Zionist Lobby?

Applying Philosophy to Hagel’s Comments on Israel


Obama’s nominee to be the new Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel, is causing a lot of politicians and Israel firsters to be upset.

Two comments Hagel made seem to focus the most hatred on him. One statement was, “I’m not an Israeli senator. I’m a United States senator. I

hagel and obama

Hagel and Obama are no real threat to Israel and will never do anything meaningful to put America’s interests above Israel’s interests.

support Israel, but my first interest is, I take an oath of office to the Constitution of the United States, not to a president, not to a party, not to Israel.” The second statement the Israel firsters find offensive is, “The Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people. … I’ve always argued against some of the dumb things they do, because I don’t think it’s in the interest of Israel.”

The first rule of philosophy is to see things as they really are so we can arrive at the truth. Objectively and honestly looking at Hagel’s first statement above shows Hagel to be 100% correct. He was at the time of the statement (2006) a US senator and not an Israeli senator. His statement that he supports Israel seems to be true in that he voted for a war in which thousands of Americans and over a hundred of thousand of Iraqis were wounded and killed and which cost American tax payers to date well over $810 BILLION. The only beneficiary of the Iraq war is the Jewish state of Israel. His oath of office is to the Constitution of the United States and not to a president, a party or to Israel. However, if he really truly did take his oath seriously heNEVER would have voted to start an unnecessary war against Iraq.

His second statement is factually wrong in that it is not “the Jewish lobby” but it is “the Israel lobby” that has US politicians from both parties running scared. Not all Jews promote US politicians blindly supporting Israel in its bloody aggression against its neighbors at the expense of Israel’s neighbors and at the expense of Americans. His motivation for arguing against “the dumb things” the Israel lobby does is NOT because he cares about America and Americans, but because  the dumb things the Israel lobby promotes he does not think are in the best interests of Israel.

The seems to think that Hagel’s chances of winning approval from the Senate rests with the Jewish senator Chuck Schumer. Schumer is a rabid war-monger and Israel firster who actually said on a New York Jewish radio program that he believes he’s in the US Senate because God wants him there to be a protector of Israel! Schumer also attacked the Palestinian people and said he wants to “strangle” them for voting the way they did when they voted overwhelmingly in elections with international observers for Hamas in Gaza.

It’s difficult to understand why the Israel lobby and its US politicians would be worried about Hagel doing anything meaningful which would not be putting Israel’s interests over and above America’s interests. Hagel even has a fact sheet out which outlines his pro-Israel positions over the years. And as this article points out, even Israel is okay with Hagel. These facts should warn any thinking person that Hagel will not give any real opposition to a US war against Israel’s foe, Iran. (For more on this read our eBooklet The Danger of Israel [for Kindle version click here].)

Expecting true opposition and resistance to the kosher plutocracy to come from within the kosher system is foolish. It’s similar to America’s revolutionary founders looking to tax collectors and other government officials to help them free themselves from government tyranny. It’s not going to happen. The solution to the problem willonly be found in the people who are the victims of the kosher plutocracy, the people who have their children marched off to war for the benefit of Israel and the US politicians who serve Israel, the people who are pushed to financial ruin while the politicians continue to tax them to pay for more wars for Israel’s aggression and for endless hand-outs to the Jewish state of Israel.

Posted in USAComments Off on Applying Philosophy to Hagel’s Comments on Israel

North Korean EMP Attack Could Destroy U.S.A.


North Korean EMP attack could destroy U.S.A.


world news tomorrow

The Editor World News Tomorrow 


WORLD NEWS TOMORROW– USA- North Korea now has an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of delivering a nuclear weapon to the United States, as demonstrated by their successful launch and orbiting of a satellite on Dec. 12. Certain poorly informed pundits among the chattering classes reassure us that North Korea is still years away from being able to miniaturize warheads for missile delivery, and from developing sufficiently accurate missiles to pose a serious nuclear threat to the United States. Philip Yun, director of San Francisco’s Ploughshares Fund, a nuclear disarmament group, reportedly said, “The real threat from the launch was an overreaction that would lead to more defense spending on unnecessary systems. The sky is not falling. We shouldn’t be panicked.”

In fact, North Korea is a mortal nuclear threat to the United States right now.

North Korea has already successfully tested and developed nuclear weapons. It has also already miniaturized nuclear weapons for ballistic missile delivery and has armed missiles with nuclear warheads. In 2011, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Lt. General Ronald Burgess, testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee that North Korea has weaponized its nuclear devices into warheads for ballistic missiles.

North Korea has labored for years and starved its people so it could develop an intercontinental missile capable of reaching the United States. Why? Because they have a special kind of nuclear weapon that could destroy the United States with a single blow. In summer 2004, a delegation of Russian generals warned the Congressional Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Commission that secrets had leaked to North Korea for a decisive new nuclear weapon — a Super-EMP warhead.

Any nuclear weapon detonated above an altitude of 30 kilometers will generate an electromagnetic pulse that will destroy electronics and could collapse the electric power grid and other critical infrastructures — communications, transportation, banking and finance, food and water — that sustain modern civilization and the lives of 300 million Americans. All could be destroyed by a single nuclear weapon making an EMP attack.

A Super-EMP attack on the United States would cause much more and much deeper damage than a primitive nuclear weapon, and so would increase confidence that the catastrophic consequences will be irreversible. Such an attack would inflict maximum damage and be optimum for realizing a world without America.

Both North Korean nuclear tests look suspiciously like a Super-EMP weapon. A Super-EMP warhead would have a low yield, like the North Korean device, because it is not designed to create a big explosion, but to convert its energy into gamma rays, that generate the EMP effect. Reportedly South Korean military intelligence concluded, independent of the EMP Commission, that Russian scientists are in North Korea helping develop a Super-EMP warhead. In 2012, a military commentator for the People’s Republic of China stated that North Korea has Super-EMP nuclear warheads.

A Super-EMP warhead would not weigh much, and could probably be delivered by North Korea’s ICBM. The missile does not have to be accurate, as the EMP field is so large that detonating anywhere over the United States would have catastrophic consequences. The warhead does not even need a re-entry vehicle, as an EMP attack entails detonating the warhead at high-altitude, above the atmosphere.

So, as of Dec. 12, North Korea’s successful orbit of a satellite demonstrates its ability to make an EMP attack against the United States — right now.

The Congressional EMP Commission estimates that, given the nation’s current unpreparedness, within one year of an EMP attack, two-thirds of the U.S. population — 200 million Americans — would probably perish from starvation, disease and societal collapse.

Thus, North Korea now has an Assured Destruction capability against the United States. The consequences of this development are so extremely grave that U.S. and global security have, in effect, gone over the “strategic cliff” into free-fall. Where we will land, into what kind of future, is as yet unknown.

Nevertheless, some very bad developments are foreseeable. Iran will certainly be inspired by North Korea’s example to persist in the development of its own nuclear weapon and ICBM programs to pose a mortal threat to the United States. Indeed, North Korea and Iran have been collaborating all along.

If North Korea and Iran both acquire the capability to threaten America with EMP genocide, this will destroy the foundations of the existing world order, which has since 1945 halted the cycle of world wars and sustained the global advancement of freedom. North Korea and Iran being armed with Assured Destruction capability changes the whole strategic calculus of risk for the United States in upholding its superpower role, and will erode the confidence of U.S. allies — perhaps to the point where they will need to develop their own nuclear weapons.

Most alarming, we are fast moving to a place where, for the first time in history, failed little states like North Korea and Iran, that cannot even feed their own people, will have power in their hands to blackmail or destroy the largest and most successful societies on Earth. North Korea and Iran perceive themselves to be at war with the United States, and are desperate, highly unpredictable characters. When the mob is at the gates of their dictators, will they want to take America with them down into darkness?

What is to be done?

The president should immediately issue an Executive Order, drafted for the White House earlier by the Congressional EMP Commission, to protect the national electric grid and other critical infrastructures from an EMP attack. The Congress should pass the SHIELD Act (HR 668) now to provide the legal authorities and financial mechanisms for protecting the electric grid from EMP. The Congress should enhance Defense Department programs for National Missile Defense and Department of Homeland Security programs for protecting critical infrastructures.

The administration and the Congress owe the American people security from an EMP Apocalypse. Peter Vincent Pry is executive director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, and served on the Congressional EMP Commission, the House Armed Services Committee, and the CIA.

Posted in North KoreaComments Off on North Korean EMP Attack Could Destroy U.S.A.

Scapegoating Iran


Originally published by Press TV

by Kevin Barrett

Every year on the Day of Atonement, the ancient Hebrews would blame all of their problems on a goat. Then they would send the goat out into the desert. Goodbye problems!

The ancient Greeks did exactly the same thing.

Unfortunately, blaming all your problems on a scapegoat does not solve those problems. But it may offer a temporary escape in the same way that drugs can provide a brief escape from life’s problems. (The Greek word for scapegoat, pharmakos, also can mean “mind-altering drug.”)

Today, some of the ancient Hebrews’ supposed descendants, the Jews, and their Semitic cousins, the Arabs, are blaming their problems on Iran. Some imagine that going to war with Iran would somehow solve those problems.

In reality, it would just make the problems worse.

But the scapegoating mechanism is irrational. People indulge in scapegoating for emotional reasons not pragmatic ones. Those who make the mistake of blaming their problems on a scapegoat usually end up with more problems than they started with.

Let’s examine how Likudnik Israelis as well as some Arabs are making Iran the scapegoat for their own societies’ troubles.

Israel is facing several immense, existential crises. The Israeli economy is utterly dependent on American handouts that total more than a trillion dollars and counting, according to the Christian Science Monitor; and economic inequality in Israel has sparked massive protests. The different groups of Jews in Israel – orthodox, reformed, secular, ashkenazi, sephardic, settlers, peaceniks, white, black, brown – are endlessly squabbling with each other, and with the Israeli and Palestinian Arabs. Israel’s neighbors, the people of the Middle East, do not accept it as a legitimate state. The Palestinian ethnic cleansing victims are not going away, they are winning the demographic race with Israeli Jews. Israel is increasingly despised everywhere, including in the US, and has been named as the leading threat to world peace in European public opinion polls. Palestine is now accepted as a state at the United Nations. And Israel has lost three small-scale wars to Hezbollah and Hamas during the past six years. Many analysts, including Henry Kissinger, have stated that Israel will not exist ten years from now.

It is easier for Israelis to pretend that Iran is the source of all of their problems than to admit that they, the Israelis, are digging themselves deeper and deeper into a hole of their own making. After all, does not Iran support Hezbollah and Hamas? Does not the Iranian leadership call for an end to Israeli apartheid, and support a one-state solution that would put an end to Israel as a “Jewish state”? Do not Iranian leaders say out loud what almost everyone in the Middle East believes: The story of the Nazi holocaust has been exaggerated and mythologized in service to Zionism?…Maybe if we just bombed Iran, the Likudniks imagine, all our problems would go away.

In fact, any potential Israeli war on Iran would cause great suffering and severely damage the global economy. If Israel launched such a war, Iran would certainly inflict tremendous damage on Israel. Additionally, the world would turn ferociously against Israel, and the “Jewish state” would soon end. Sensible Israeli strategists know this. But emotional attachment to scapegoating Iran prevents rational thinking.

Unfortunately, it is not just Israelis who are blaming Iran for their own problems. The Saudis are spending billions of dollars trying to convince Sunni Arabs that Shias in general, and Iranians in particular, are to blame for the problems of the Arab world.

Why do some Sunni Arabs allow themselves to be brainwashed into hating Persians and Shias?

In a word: Envy. Iran, unlike most of the Arab countries, won its independence from Western imperialism in the Islamic Revolution of 1979. The Pharaoh of Iran, the Shah, was overthrown, and the Americans and Israelis ejected. Iran now controls its own resources, leads the global Non-Aligned Movement, and has succeeded in establishing a viable Islamic democracy. Unlike virtually every Arab head of state, the Supreme Leader of Iran does not take orders from the Americans or the International Monetary Fund.

Iranians, of course, have paid a price for their independence. More than half a million Iranians died defending their country from Saddam’s invasion, which was incited by the West in an attempt to destroy the Islamic Revolution. Today, the West’s all-out economic war on Iran has caused serious hardship for ordinary Iranians. But all of this suffering has not stopped Iranians from insisting on independence rather than enslavement.

The Arab countries, by contrast, are mostly vassal states. When the US orders the king of Saudi Arabia to jump, the king says “how high?” And when the Rothschild oil/banking cartel orders the king to raise the price of oil, the answer is the same: “how high?”

The Arabs could have staged Islamic revolutions, just like the Iranians did. (In fact, the Egyptian revolution is becoming an “Islamic revolution lite”; but whether the Egyptians will achieve complete independence from the West is an open question.)

The [Persian] Gulf oil sheikhs, who are allowed pampered lives of luxury in return for propping up the petrodollar empire, have managed to escape the Islamic revolution…so far. They have convinced many of their people that Iran’s Islamic Revolution is a “Shia thing” that could not be duplicated in a Sunni country. What rubbish.

The Arabs’ failure to win genuine independence is mostly their own fault. If they feel the need to blame someone for their failure, they ought to blame the actual enemies of Arab independence: The West, led by the US and Israel. Instead, following the Saudi propaganda line, many irrationally scapegoat Iran and the Shia.

What did Iran ever do to prevent Arab independence? Iran has been calling on the Arab world to follow it in winning genuine independence through Islamic Revolution since 1979!

Iran is not propping up the petrodollar dictators of the [Persian] Gulf. Iran was not propping up Mubarak. Iran is not propping up the corrupt Western puppet regimes in Algeria and Morocco and Jordan.

While issuing their standard anti-Shia rhetoric, the Saudis have joined the US-Israeli effort to destabilize Syria, the last independent Arab country. They have sent brainwashed imperial mercenaries to terrorize Syria…

The pharaohs of the [Persian] Gulf are also spreading propaganda blaming Iran for the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. In reality, Iran opposed those invasions, which were designed to surround Iran with US military bases, and set the stage for a Zionist-inspired war on Iran aimed at extinguishing the Islamic Revolution.

Sunni Arabs need to stop scapegoating the Shia, and take responsibility for their own failure to overthrow the pharaohs of the [Persian] Gulf, establish Islamic democracy, eject the US military, thumb their noses at the IMF, join the Non-Aligned Movement, progress in science and technology, and win control of their own resources and destinies.

As long as the enemies of Islam can turn Muslim against Muslim, encouraging one group of Muslims to scapegoat another, they will maintain their stranglehold over the Middle East and its immense energy resources.

Muslims must learn to work together to win their common independence, and unite in the common cause of establishing justice on earth.

Posted in IranComments Off on Scapegoating Iran

Shoah’s pages