Archive | October 26th, 2013

How Bush’s grandfather helped Hitler’s rise to power


Rumours of a link between the US first family and the Nazi war machine have circulated for decades. Now the Guardian can reveal how repercussions of events that culminated in action under the Trading with the Enemy Act are still being felt by today’s president.


George Bush’s grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.

His business dealings, which continued until his company’s assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.

The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator’s action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

The debate over Prescott Bush’s behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the “Bush/Nazi” connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis’ plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler’s rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.

Remarkably, little of Bush’s dealings with Germany has received public scrutiny, partly because of the secret status of the documentation involving him. But now the multibillion dollar legal action for damages by two Holocaust survivors against the Bush family, and the imminent publication of three books on the subject are threatening to make Prescott Bush’s business history an uncomfortable issue for his grandson, George W, as he seeks re-election.

While there is no suggestion that Prescott Bush was sympathetic to the Nazi cause, the documents reveal that the firm he worked for, Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), acted as a US base for the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen, who helped finance Hitler in the 1930s before falling out with him at the end of the decade. The Guardian has seen evidence that shows Bush was the director of the New York-based Union Banking Corporation (UBC) that represented Thyssen’s US interests and he continued to work for the bank after America entered the war.


Bush was also on the board of at least one of the companies that formed part of a multinational network of front companies to allow Thyssen to move assets around the world.

Thyssen owned the largest steel and coal company in Germany and grew rich from Hitler’s efforts to re-arm between the two world wars. One of the pillars in Thyssen’s international corporate web, UBC, worked exclusively for, and was owned by, a Thyssen-controlled bank in the Netherlands. More tantalising are Bush’s links to the Consolidated Silesian Steel Company (CSSC), based in mineral rich Silesia on the German-Polish border. During the war, the company made use of Nazi slave labour from the concentration camps, including Auschwitz. The ownership of CSSC changed hands several times in the 1930s, but documents from the US National Archive declassified last year link Bush to CSSC, although it is not clear if he and UBC were still involved in the company when Thyssen’s American assets were seized in 1942.

Three sets of archives spell out Prescott Bush’s involvement. All three are readily available, thanks to the efficient US archive system and a helpful and dedicated staff at both the Library of Congress in Washington and the National Archives at the University of Maryland.

The first set of files, the Harriman papers in the Library of Congress, show that Prescott Bush was a director and shareholder of a number of companies involved with Thyssen.

The second set of papers, which are in the National Archives, are contained in vesting order number 248 which records the seizure of the company assets. What these files show is that on October 20 1942 the alien property custodian seized the assets of the UBC, of which Prescott Bush was a director. Having gone through the books of the bank, further seizures were made against two affiliates, the Holland-American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation. By November, the Silesian-American Company, another of Prescott Bush’s ventures, had also been seized.

The third set of documents, also at the National Archives, are contained in the files on IG Farben, who was prosecuted for war crimes.

A report issued by the Office of Alien Property Custodian in 1942 stated of the companies that “since 1939, these (steel and mining) properties have been in possession of and have been operated by the German government and have undoubtedly been of considerable assistance to that country’s war effort”.

Prescott Bush, a 6ft 4in charmer with a rich singing voice, was the founder of the Bush political dynasty and was once considered a potential presidential candidate himself. Like his son, George, and grandson, George W, he went to Yale where he was, again like his descendants, a member of the secretive and influential Skull and Bones student society. He was an artillery captain in the first world war and married Dorothy Walker, the daughter of George Herbert Walker, in 1921.

In 1924, his father-in-law, a well-known St Louis investment banker, helped set him up in business in New York with Averill Harriman, the wealthy son of railroad magnate E H Harriman in New York, who had gone into banking.

One of the first jobs Walker gave Bush was to manage UBC. Bush was a founding member of the bank and the incorporation documents, which list him as one of seven directors, show he owned one share in UBC worth $125.

The bank was set up by Harriman and Bush’s father-in-law to provide a US bank for the Thyssens, Germany’s most powerful industrial family.

August Thyssen, the founder of the dynasty had been a major contributor to Germany’s first world war effort and in the 1920s, he and his sons Fritz and Heinrich established a network of overseas banks and companies so their assets and money could be whisked offshore if threatened again.

By the time Fritz Thyssen inherited the business empire in 1926, Germany’s economic recovery was faltering. After hearing Adolf Hitler speak, Thyssen became mesmerised by the young firebrand. He joined the Nazi party in December 1931 and admits backing Hitler in his autobiography, I Paid Hitler, when the National Socialists were still a radical fringe party. He stepped in several times to bail out the struggling party: in 1928 Thyssen had bought the Barlow Palace on Briennerstrasse, in Munich, which Hitler converted into the Brown House, the headquarters of the Nazi party. The money came from another Thyssen overseas institution, the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvarrt in Rotterdam.

By the late 1930s, Brown Brothers Harriman, which claimed to be the world’s largest private investment bank, and UBC had bought and shipped millions of dollars of gold, fuel, steel, coal and US treasury bonds to Germany, both feeding and financing Hitler’s build-up to war.

Between 1931 and 1933 UBC bought more than $8m worth of gold, of which $3m was shipped abroad. According to documents seen by the Guardian, after UBC was set up it transferred $2m to BBH accounts and between 1924 and 1940 the assets of UBC hovered around $3m, dropping to $1m only on a few occasions.

In 1941, Thyssen fled Germany after falling out with Hitler but he was captured in France and detained for the remainder of the war.

There was nothing illegal in doing business with the Thyssens throughout the 1930s and many of America’s best-known business names invested heavily in the German economic recovery. However, everything changed after Germany invaded Poland in 1939. Even then it could be argued that BBH was within its rights continuing business relations with the Thyssens until the end of 1941 as the US was still technically neutral until the attack on Pearl Harbor. The trouble started on July 30 1942 when the New York Herald-Tribune ran an article entitled “Hitler’s Angel Has $3m in US Bank”. UBC’s huge gold purchases had raised suspicions that the bank was in fact a “secret nest egg” hidden in New York for Thyssen and other Nazi bigwigs. The Alien Property Commission (APC) launched an investigation.

There is no dispute over the fact that the US government seized a string of assets controlled by BBH – including UBC and SAC – in the autumn of 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy act. What is in dispute is if Harriman, Walker and Bush did more than own these companies on paper.

Erwin May, a treasury attache and officer for the department of investigation in the APC, was assigned to look into UBC’s business. The first fact to emerge was that Roland Harriman, Prescott Bush and the other directors didn’t actually own their shares in UBC but merely held them on behalf of Bank voor Handel. Strangely, no one seemed to know who owned the Rotterdam-based bank, including UBC’s president.

May wrote in his report of August 16 1941: “Union Banking Corporation, incorporated August 4 1924, is wholly owned by the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart N.V of Rotterdam, the Netherlands. My investigation has produced no evidence as to the ownership of the Dutch bank. Mr Cornelis [sic] Lievense, president of UBC, claims no knowledge as to the ownership of the Bank voor Handel but believes it possible that Baron Heinrich Thyssen, brother of Fritz Thyssen, may own a substantial interest.”

May cleared the bank of holding a golden nest egg for the Nazi leaders but went on to describe a network of companies spreading out from UBC across Europe, America and Canada, and how money from voor Handel travelled to these companies through UBC.

By September May had traced the origins of the non-American board members and found that Dutchman HJ Kouwenhoven – who met with Harriman in 1924 to set up UBC – had several other jobs: in addition to being the managing director of voor Handel he was also the director of the August Thyssen bank in Berlin and a director of Fritz Thyssen’s Union Steel Works, the holding company that controlled Thyssen’s steel and coal mine empire in Germany.

Within a few weeks, Homer Jones, the chief of the APC investigation and research division sent a memo to the executive committee of APC recommending the US government vest UBC and its assets. Jones named the directors of the bank in the memo, including Prescott Bush’s name, and wrote: “Said stock is held by the above named individuals, however, solely as nominees for the Bank voor Handel, Rotterdam, Holland, which is owned by one or more of the Thyssen family, nationals of Germany and Hungary. The 4,000 shares hereinbefore set out are therefore beneficially owned and help for the interests of enemy nationals, and are vestible by the APC,” according to the memo from the National Archives seen by the Guardian.


Jones recommended that the assets be liquidated for the benefit of the government, but instead UBC was maintained intact and eventually returned to the American shareholders after the war. Some claim that Bush sold his share in UBC after the war for $1.5m – a huge amount of money at the time – but there is no documentary evidence to support this claim. No further action was ever taken nor was the investigation continued, despite the fact UBC was caught red-handed operating a American shell company for the Thyssen family eight months after America had entered the war and that this was the bank that had partly financed Hitler’s rise to power.

The most tantalising part of the story remains shrouded in mystery: the connection, if any, between Prescott Bush, Thyssen, Consolidated Silesian Steel Company (CSSC) and Auschwitz.

Thyssen’s partner in United Steel Works, which had coal mines and steel plants across the region, was Friedrich Flick, another steel magnate who also owned part of IG Farben, the powerful German chemical company.

Flick’s plants in Poland made heavy use of slave labour from the concentration camps in Poland. According to a New York Times article published in March 18 1934 Flick owned two-thirds of CSSC while “American interests” held the rest.

The US National Archive documents show that BBH’s involvement with CSSC was more than simply holding the shares in the mid-1930s. Bush’s friend and fellow “bonesman” Knight Woolley, another partner at BBH, wrote to Averill Harriman in January 1933 warning of problems with CSSC after the Poles started their drive to nationalise the plant. “The Consolidated Silesian Steel Company situation has become increasingly complicated, and I have accordingly brought in Sullivan and Cromwell, in order to be sure that our interests are protected,” wrote Knight. “After studying the situation Foster Dulles is insisting that their man in Berlin get into the picture and obtain the information which the directors here should have. You will recall that Foster is a director and he is particularly anxious to be certain that there is no liability attaching to the American directors.”

But the ownership of the CSSC between 1939 when the Germans invaded Poland and 1942 when the US government vested UBC and SAC is not clear.

“SAC held coal mines and definitely owned CSSC between 1934 and 1935, but when SAC was vested there was no trace of CSSC. All concrete evidence of its ownership disappears after 1935 and there are only a few traces in 1938 and 1939,” says Eva Schweitzer, the journalist and author whose book, America and the Holocaust, is published next month.

Silesia was quickly made part of the German Reich after the invasion, but while Polish factories were seized by the Nazis, those belonging to the still neutral Americans (and some other nationals) were treated more carefully as Hitler was still hoping to persuade the US to at least sit out the war as a neutral country. Schweitzer says American interests were dealt with on a case-by-case basis. The Nazis bought some out, but not others.

The two Holocaust survivors suing the US government and the Bush family for a total of $40bn in compensation claim both materially benefited from Auschwitz slave labour during the second world war.

Kurt Julius Goldstein, 87, and Peter Gingold, 85, began a class action in America in 2001, but the case was thrown out by Judge Rosemary Collier on the grounds that the government cannot be held liable under the principle of “state sovereignty”.

Jan Lissmann, one of the lawyers for the survivors, said: “President Bush withdrew President Bill Clinton’s signature from the treaty [that founded the court] not only to protect Americans, but also to protect himself and his family.”

Lissmann argues that genocide-related cases are covered by international law, which does hold governments accountable for their actions. He claims the ruling was invalid as no hearing took place.

In their claims, Mr Goldstein and Mr Gingold, honorary chairman of the League of Anti-fascists, suggest the Americans were aware of what was happening at Auschwitz and should have bombed the camp.

The lawyers also filed a motion in The Hague asking for an opinion on whether state sovereignty is a valid reason for refusing to hear their case. A ruling is expected within a month.

The petition to The Hague states: “From April 1944 on, the American Air Force could have destroyed the camp with air raids, as well as the railway bridges and railway lines from Hungary to Auschwitz. The murder of about 400,000 Hungarian Holocaust victims could have been prevented.”

The case is built around a January 22 1944 executive order signed by President Franklin Roosevelt calling on the government to take all measures to rescue the European Jews. The lawyers claim the order was ignored because of pressure brought by a group of big American companies, including BBH, where Prescott Bush was a director.

Lissmann said: “If we have a positive ruling from the court it will cause [president] Bush huge problems and make him personally liable to pay compensation.”

The US government and the Bush family deny all the claims against them.

In addition to Eva Schweitzer’s book, two other books are about to be published that raise the subject of Prescott Bush’s business history. The author of the second book, to be published next year, John Loftus, is a former US attorney who prosecuted Nazi war criminals in the 70s. Now living in St Petersburg, Florida and earning his living as a security commentator for Fox News and ABC radio, Loftus is working on a novel which uses some of the material he has uncovered on Bush. Loftus stressed that what Prescott Bush was involved in was just what many other American and British businessmen were doing at the time.

“You can’t blame Bush for what his grandfather did any more than you can blame Jack Kennedy for what his father did – bought Nazi stocks – but what is important is the cover-up, how it could have gone on so successfully for half a century, and does that have implications for us today?” he said.

“This was the mechanism by which Hitler was funded to come to power, this was the mechanism by which the Third Reich’s defence industry was re-armed, this was the mechanism by which Nazi profits were repatriated back to the American owners, this was the mechanism by which investigations into the financial laundering of the Third Reich were blunted,” said Loftus, who is vice-chairman of the Holocaust Museum in St Petersburg.

“The Union Banking Corporation was a holding company for the Nazis, for Fritz Thyssen,” said Loftus. “At various times, the Bush family has tried to spin it, saying they were owned by a Dutch bank and it wasn’t until the Nazis took over Holland that they realised that now the Nazis controlled the apparent company and that is why the Bush supporters claim when the war was over they got their money back. Both the American treasury investigations and the intelligence investigations in Europe completely bely that, it’s absolute horseshit. They always knew who the ultimate beneficiaries were.”

“There is no one left alive who could be prosecuted but they did get away with it,” said Loftus. “As a former federal prosecutor, I would make a case for Prescott Bush, his father-in-law (George Walker) and Averill Harriman [to be prosecuted] for giving aid and comfort to the enemy. They remained on the boards of these companies knowing that they were of financial benefit to the nation of Germany.”

Loftus said Prescott Bush must have been aware of what was happening in Germany at the time. “My take on him was that he was a not terribly successful in-law who did what Herbert Walker told him to. Walker and Harriman were the two evil geniuses, they didn’t care about the Nazis any more than they cared about their investments with the Bolsheviks.”

What is also at issue is how much money Bush made from his involvement. His supporters suggest that he had one token share. Loftus disputes this, citing sources in “the banking and intelligence communities” and suggesting that the Bush family, through George Herbert Walker and Prescott, got $1.5m out of the involvement. There is, however, no paper trail to this sum.

The third person going into print on the subject is John Buchanan, 54, a Miami-based magazine journalist who started examining the files while working on a screenplay. Last year, Buchanan published his findings in the venerable but small-circulation New Hampshire Gazette under the headline “Documents in National Archives Prove George Bush’s Grandfather Traded With the Nazis – Even After Pearl Harbor”. He expands on this in his book to be published next month – Fixing America: Breaking the Stranglehold of Corporate Rule, Big Media and the Religious Right.

In the article, Buchanan, who has worked mainly in the trade and music press with a spell as a muckraking reporter in Miami, claimed that “the essential facts have appeared on the internet and in relatively obscure books but were dismissed by the media and Bush family as undocumented diatribes”.

Buchanan suffers from hypermania, a form of manic depression, and when he found himself rebuffed in his initial efforts to interest the media, he responded with a series of threats against the journalists and media outlets that had spurned him. The threats, contained in e-mails, suggested that he would expose the journalists as “traitors to the truth”.

Unsurprisingly, he soon had difficulty getting his calls returned. Most seriously, he faced aggravated stalking charges in Miami, in connection with a man with whom he had fallen out over the best way to publicise his findings. The charges were dropped last month.


Buchanan said he regretted his behaviour had damaged his credibility but his main aim was to secure publicity for the story. Both Loftus and Schweitzer say Buchanan has come up with previously undisclosed documentation.

The Bush family have largely responded with no comment to any reference to Prescott Bush. Brown Brothers Harriman also declined to comment.

The Bush family recently approved a flattering biography of Prescott Bush entitled Duty, Honour, Country by Mickey Herskowitz. The publishers, Rutledge Hill Press, promised the book would “deal honestly with Prescott Bush’s alleged business relationships with Nazi industrialists and other accusations”.

In fact, the allegations are dealt with in less than two pages. The book refers to the Herald-Tribune story by saying that “a person of less established ethics would have panicked … Bush and his partners at Brown Brothers Harriman informed the government regulators that the account, opened in the late 1930s, was ‘an unpaid courtesy for a client’ … Prescott Bush acted quickly and openly on behalf of the firm, served well by a reputation that had never been compromised. He made available all records and all documents. Viewed six decades later in the era of serial corporate scandals and shattered careers, he received what can be viewed as the ultimate clean bill.”

The Prescott Bush story has been condemned by both conservatives and some liberals as having nothing to do with the current president. It has also been suggested that Prescott Bush had little to do with Averill Harriman and that the two men opposed each other politically.

However, documents from the Harriman papers include a flattering wartime profile of Harriman in the New York Journal American and next to it in the files is a letter to the financial editor of that paper from Prescott Bush congratulating the paper for running the profile. He added that Harriman’s “performance and his whole attitude has been a source of inspiration and pride to his partners and his friends”.

The Anti-Defamation League in the US is supportive of Prescott Bush and the Bush family. In a statement last year they said that “rumours about the alleged Nazi ‘ties’ of the late Prescott Bush … have circulated widely through the internet in recent years. These charges are untenable and politically motivated … Prescott Bush was neither a Nazi nor a Nazi sympathiser.”

However, one of the country’s oldest Jewish publications, the Jewish Advocate, has aired the controversy in detail.

More than 60 years after Prescott Bush came briefly under scrutiny at the time of a faraway war, his grandson is facing a different kind of scrutiny but one underpinned by the same perception that, for some people, war can be a profitable business.

Posted in USAComments Off on How Bush’s grandfather helped Hitler’s rise to power

Mask of Zion Report

Mask of Zion Report Oct 24, 2013

by crescentandcross

The one and only Jonathan Azaziah opens another excellent edition of the Mask of Zion report with the debut of his latest song “Blue Bacon” off of his debut album “Son of Kufa Volume 1: Rise of The Anomaly” and presents some disturbing information about how deep the forces of Organized Jewry have gone in the training of American and British police. Second half of the program is dedicated to critical updates on the Saudi, Lebanese and Syrian fronts. Brilliant as always.


Download Here


Posted in InterviewComments Off on Mask of Zion Report

‘US must stop doing biddings of I$raHell in Syria’

Ken O’Keefe, a former US marine from the city of London, has joined Press TV’s Debate program to further elaborate on the role of the United States and its Western and regional allies in Syria’s war on terror.

What follows is an approximate transcription of the interview.

Press TV: Well, let me come to you Ken O’Keefe on Lee Kaplan’s (other guest of the show from Berkley) statement there, how he said that you have democracies like Western democracies that are backing this so-called Friends of Syria group.

What is your take on that? I mean here we have all these countries that, in particular, do not have democracies, like Qatar and Saudi Arabia in particular.

O’Keefe: Well, thankfully we are reaching a point in human history where the only people who believe the sort of nonsense that would portray America and its allies as wishing for freedom, justice, democracy and all of these notions, in the rest of the world is remarkably nonexistent.

Nobody with half a brain believes for a second that the United States cares about the Syrian people, nor democracy, nor any form of justice. The proof of that, of course, is in the million to two millions dead in Iraq, millions of orphans , millions of refugees; Afghanistan likewise, decimated; a country in tatters. We also can look at Libya and how our humanitarian interventions have benefitted that country there and anyone who thinks that the United States or its allies have any moral standing in the world and, actually, wish what is best for the people of Syria, again, are either seriously ignorant and stupid or heavily compromised.

So, the truth of the matter is of course that the real reason why we are in Syria and largely in that region, is to carry out wars for the state of Israel. The Jewish state of Israel has a long-term agenda of the Greater Israel Project and to destabilize the surrounding nations and making sure that there is no form of representative Arab nationalist unity in which a strong leadership that represents the true interest of the people can emerge and that the people themselves can enjoy some form of dignity and liberty in their lives.

It is the West that has created the hotbed of Takfiri fake Islam that allows these psychopaths to be armed by our governments and our allies, Qatar and Saudi Arabia among them, and these psychopaths, of course, are not completely predictable. They will do a lot of what we like but let’s make no mistake about it; these people are nothing more than Frankensteins that we have created and it will come back to the West and this is … , one very last point I need to make in this regard, is that, that is actually part of what the Western agenda wants.

When these psychopaths return to the West, we will then use their violent actions back in London or in America or other parts of Europe to justify even further draconian laws, so that our governments can become even more tyrannical and the concentration of power can become even tighter.

So they are predicting … , they know this is going to happen and those of us who have any kind of intelligence whatsoever can see this as it is happening.

Press TV: Ken O’Keefe, your response to what Lee Kaplan said?

O’Keefe: Well, I would like to thank Lee Kaplan for providing yet another example of how people can be so completely and totally ignorant or totally bought and paid for. I have already got into a private, sort of, banter between this man and myself in the past, I am not going to do it again.

The fact is that I am a human being who wishes his best for all people on this planet and it is not a black and white scenario where you either support Bashar al-Assad or you support the so-called rebels; this is a black and white version … , it is very similar to the Republic and Democrat, Liberal left, Right paradigms; these are false paradigms created to try to trap us … , into a certain paradigm, a certain perspective, and I do not buy into that, I am not going to feed into it.

The fact is that the real crime, the ultimate crime is the crime of aggression, the international crime of aggression; those that initiate violence based on false pretexts and lies and carry out state-sponsored terrorism in the form of war are the greatest criminals of all and by that definition, which is the only sensible definition of international crimes, ultimately my birth nation, the United States, and its compatriots in England and in Israel are the biggest purveyors of violence on the planet.

I am not mistaken at all in my facts, the only person that would buy into the sort of rubbish that this gentleman is speaking of, are the kind of people that, again, are bought and paid for, are completely and totally brain-dead.

So, the fact is that Syria is nothing more than a global chessboard agenda, and in that agenda there is a goal of destabilizing these nations surrounding Israel. Once they are destabilized, it is possible to go in whether it is a year from now, five years from now and get your puppets in place to be able to extract the resources, or to be able to put in permanent military bases and ultimately to have continuing and ongoing complete control over this region which of course has profound utility for the purposes of the empire specifically with the energy reserves and again with permanent military bases that will continue the policy of full spectrum dominance.

There is no confusion here, those of us who care about this world and actually want to see it move for the better, are recognizing the obvious history of our birth nations in the West and what they have done.

We are the biggest criminals of all and it is us in the West who need to take care of our governments because ultimately we are complicit with their crimes and these crimes can hardly be measured, they are that hideous and they are that consistent.

Press TV: Well, Ken O’Keefe, I would like to get your reaction to what Saudi Arabia has done and Prince Bandar has come out and said that he is going to end its cooperation over the Syria war with the United States and I assume with the rest of the countries, 11 countries that are supposed to support the Friends of Syria group.

Does this mean … , do you think that Saudi Arabia is going to take the ball in their hands and just go with it? We are getting several reports indicating that they have done so, actually, in Syria by forming 50 brigades and having a head running these brigades.

What is your interpretation of this piece of news?

O’Keefe: I am reading these same reports and what is absolutely clear is, historically we know that every empire that has ever existed has reached a peak and eventually it falls. There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the American empire peaked probably right in the aftermath of 9/11, the ultimate false flag operation, and since that time it has carried out the agenda that it always wished to carry out in the new Pearl Harbor fashion, it found its excuse to carry out unjustified wars that amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity and now in the aftermath, in the wake of all of the horror, pain, suffering, death that has resulted in the policy of full spectrum dominance, we see now that the people of America and the world are finally realizing what they should have realized some time ago and that is that the American agenda has nothing to do, whatsoever, with any sort of justice and the empire is falling apart.

It is not much longer before we will see that the US dollar will no longer be the reserve currency of the world, thank god other nations of the world are building their relationships with other nations, developing their trading outside of the US dollar and eventually when the US dollar is no longer the reserve currency which is only a matter of time, all of the power and the corruption and the tyranny that has stemmed from the petrodollar system will be no more and in that case what is going to happen to the American people is that they are going to enjoy what it is like to be a third world nation and this is why the American people need to realize that your sons and daughters are more valuable than what Israel intends to do with them.

You do not need to fight any more wars for Israel, you do not need a foreign state dictating to your government, which swore to uphold the US constitution, what policy should be carried out especially wars for Israel and the American people are going to suffer more than anyone else in the end if they do not get their house in order.

The fact is that the United States of America sadly and shamelessly has been running roughshod over the world and when we talk about terrorism, it is beyond ridiculous to talk about America fighting a war on terror.

The American nation has been responsible for state-sponsored terrorism that has resulted in the death of probably two to four million in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia; countless people in Korea, countless people through proxy wars in Central and South America, two million perhaps, in Iraq; I do not know how many thousands and thousands in Afghanistan, proxy wars in Pakistan, Yemen. We have fought wars all over the world, nobody has exterminated the lives and created more suffering than the United States of America and this is the truth and at some point the American people are going to have to face up to this truth because it does the American people no good whatsoever to continue to bury their heads in the sand.

Press TV: Ken O’Keefe, let us move on here, President Assad, in a recent interview, raised a few questions, I would like to get your answers to these questions if you can. He said: which forces are taking part, regarding the Geneva II; he said what relation do these forces have with the Syrian people? Do these forces represent the Syrian people or do they represent the states that invented them?

O’Keefe: Well, there is absolutely no question. Once again there is simply no moral standing for these people that are negotiating for a so-called settlement in Syria. Let us get, for instance, to the point about Bashar al-Assad agreeing to dismantle the chemical weapons program which by comparison to Israel or the United States, it is so minuscule, it is hardly to be considered even relevant.

The United States of America has stockpiled the biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, as does Israel. Why are not Israel and the United States disarming and dismantling these stockpiles of weapons?

Syria for all the crimes it is accused of committing, is not even in the same league as Israel or the United States in terms of using weapons of mass destruction, even if you were to blame every single death in the Syrian conflict on Bashar al-Assad, which is completely ridiculous, but even if we were, it would not even come close to the amount of people who have been slaughtered and the lives that have been destroyed by both the United States and Israel and their British partner, who helps legitimize every war crime they commit.

The fact is that Syria teaches us one lesson, that is extremely important and this is a very, very critical point for people to understand. The propaganda has been incessant, it has been nonstop and it has been telling the people of the world, over and over and over again, about the new Hitler, Bashar al-Assad, and it has been doing everything in its power to manipulate the people into yet another war and you know all it took, all it took to stop the British parliament for voting for another bombing campaign and even preventing the US Congress, which is the most sycophantic, disgraceful, traitorous body of government on the planet, they were not even allowed to vote on this subject of bombing Syria because you know what? The people simply do not buy it anymore and that is the power that we have as people.

No longer do we need to allow these corrupt governments to carry out policies of unending wars. We do not even need to protest it, we simply need to see the truth for what it is and not give our consent and if these … and if these traitors want to try to carryout policies that they are carrying out with 90 percent disapproval ratings, let them do it because it will be the end of them forever.

The time has come for the United States and the other Western governments to have representative governments that actually represent the will of the people and the people around the world do not want war. They do not believe that bombing other nations is going to make the world a better place.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on ‘US must stop doing biddings of I$raHell in Syria’

Al Qaeda’s Corridor Through Syria


On Tuesday night, suicide bombers and gunmen attacked Iraqi checkpoints along Highway 11, which runs from Baghdad to Syria via Ramadi. They bombed the checkpoint at Rutba as well as points just west of Ramadi. Thirty-seven people were killed in these attacks, a majority of them security officers. Highway 11 is Iraq’s southern route into Syria. The other road from Baghdad to Syria is Highway 12, which runs from Ramadi northwards to the towns of Anan and Rawah, along the Euphrates River and into the Syrian city of Raqqa. Last week, gunmen of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Shams (ISIS) attacked the towns of Anan and Rawah, destroying a bridge and trying to destroy the electricity transmission towers. The Iraqi army was able to deter the ISIS attack on Rawah, and so held off ISIS’s attempt to take the towns that would give it effective control of Highway 12. Iraq’s Deputy Prime Minister Saleh al-Mutlaq said that last week’s attack was a “hopeless attempt by al Qaeda [ISIS] to establish a foothold in Iraq.” It seems likely that ISIS decided to try and take Highway 11 after its attack on Highway 12 was repulsed.

Over the past month, ISIS has made remarkable gains. Its operation, named Expunging Filth, has either expelled or absorbed the Free Syrian Army units along the spine of northern Syria. The Syrian-Turkish border town of A’zaz has been in ISIS hands for a month. Since April, ISIS began to draw in all the smaller Salafi factions, including Jabhat al-Nusra (not always without rivalry) and parts of Ahrar as-Sham (whose commander, Abu Obeida al-Binnishi, ISIS killed in September). A new report from the International Crisis Group from October 17 notes that ISIS is now “the most powerful group in northern and eastern Syria and was benefiting from control of oil fields.” Analyst Aymenn Jawad al-Tamimi says that ISIS cannot be shaken from its strongholds in the north and east by any combination of FSA and its allies. Indeed, over the past few months, the ISIS has severely degraded the capacity of the Free Syrian Army, having killed one of its important battalion chiefs Kamal Hamami in July and having drawn in many of its local level fighters. The Free Syrian Army is no longer a serious threat to the Syrian government.

Deplorable situation

The main secular voice of this uprising in Syria, Yassin al Haj Saleh, who was underground in Syria during the civil war, fled the country on October 12. In an open letter, “Farewell to Syria, for a while,” Mr. Saleh wrote that the city of his birth, Raqqa, had been taken over by “the spectres of horror of our childhood, the ghouls.” The situation in Raqqa, Mr. Saleh writes, is deplorable. It was hard to watch “strangers oppress it and rule the fates of its people, confiscating public property, destroying a statue of Haroun al-Rashid or desecrating a church, taking people into custody where they disappeared in their prisons.” Mr. Saleh’s departure indicates that things are worse there than they were this summer when researcher Yasser Munif travelled in the north and found that in Raqqa “people are more and more critical of the ISIS and al Nusra.” It appears that the space for that internal criticism of ISIS is now narrower. Billboards promoting the views of ISIS are legion across Raqqa, with intimations that the rivalry between the various Islamist factions is at mute. As el-Tamimi notes, in public rallies flags of both ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra fly side by side.

In July 2013, ISIS led a mass jailbreak from Iraq’s Abu Ghraib to free 500 prisoners. The group used an array of car bombs, suicide bombers and gunmen in that operation. ISIS directed these fighters toward the Iraqi-Syria border, where they hope to take control of the crossing points as part of their attempt to form a corridor that runs from Ramadi to Tripoli in northern Lebanon (a clash in the city killed a 13-year-old boy on October 23). The attacks of the night of October 22 are part of this scenario.

ISIS and its form of radicalism are a product of Saudi Arabian and Qatari financing of the rebellion. Money from the Gulf Arabs alongside foreign fighters and a motivated group of Syrian fighters have given ISIS the advantage. At the same time, as Saudi and Qatari money has allowed its proxies to have the upper hand against other rebels on the battlefield, Saudi and Qatari influence has prevented unity and an agenda to develop among the political leadership of the rebellion. Over three years, the National Council for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces (the SNC) has been unable to draft a clear programme for Syria. Its absence is not a sign of lack of imagination, but of the subordination of the SNC to the petty fights among its Gulf Arab benefactors. The SNC stumbled when it essentially allowed a palace coup to remove Mo’az al-Khatib from his post. After much infighting, the SNC finally appointed Ahmad Saleh Touma as its prime minister. Ghassan Hitto resigned because he was seen to be too close to the tarnished star of Qatar. The current president is Ahmad Jarba, closely linked to the Saudi government. By late September, the Islamists rejected the SNC. The leader of the Tawhid Brigade from Aleppo, Abdul Qader Saleh, intimated on Twitter that they would consider forming an Islamic alliance (al-tahaluf al-islami). Scholar Aron Lund suggests that the Islamists have not gone beyond this suggestion. The marks of Gulf Arab infighting are all over the Coalition.

Saudi agenda

Despite the gains in northern Syria by ISIS, Saudi Arabia’s agenda for the country is blocked. In the absence of foreign intervention, ISIS is not going to be able to overthrow the government in Damascus — which is one reason why it has moved to seize Syrian border posts (with Turkey, Lebanon and Iraq). A dangerous confrontation is likely in the Western Ghouta region near Damascus, but this is not going to lead to any major strategic advance for anyone. It will be a bloodbath with no substantial gain, as so much of this war has become. Unable to move to the centre, ISIS claims the margins of Syria. Saudi Arabia expected the U.S. to bomb Syria in September, weaken the Assad regime and allow its proxies to seize power (Saudi Arabia is also disappointed that the U.S. has accepted the Iranian overtures for talks). With no clear road to Damascus, ISIS has turned more forcefully to nihilistic violence in the regions it controls — not quite the outcome hoped for by Saudi Arabia. That is the reason Saudi Arabia’s liaison to the Syrian rebels, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, made his remarks about reassessing the U.S.-Saudi relationship, and this is why Saudi Arabia refused to take the U.N. Security Council seat it had just won. Saudi Arabia backed the Taliban in the 1990s thinking the group would moderate its ideology over time. Nothing like that happened. It seems that the Kingdom is willing to make the same wager in Syria, despite the adverse historical record.

Violence such as what broke out on October 22 night has become commonplace in Iraq, with several thousand killed this year (almost 500 this month alone). The Syrian war, blocked into a tragic stalemate, has moved into Iraq, a country already battered by war and devastation in its recent history. Here the “faces that harden behind a mask of gloom” as Syrian poet Adonis put it, watch civilisations crumble for the cheap ambitions of geo-politics. The shadow of al-Qaeda settles into Iraq and Syria, hardening the faces of ordinary Syrians and Iraqis further. The entry of a full-blown ISIS assault in Lebanon cannot be far, as the fighting in Tripoli and on the border towns suggest. Talk of ceasefires and negotiations in Geneva is distant from the desolation that has come to envelop the roads that link Beirut to Baghdad, a journey that could have been made in some peace a century ago but is now tormented with guns and frustration.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Al Qaeda’s Corridor Through Syria

Revisited Kashmir on the Black Day


By Sajjad Shaukat

Although 27th of October is celebrated every year as the “Black Day” by the Pakistanis and the

Kashmiris all over the world as a protest against Indian illegal occupation of Kashmir on October

27, 1947, yet the issue is still alive due to continued struggle of the Kashmiri people.

During the partition of the Sub-continent, the people of the state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K)

which comprised Muslim majority decided to join Pakistan according to the British-led formula.

But, Dogra Raja, Sir Hari Singh, a Hindu who was ruling over the J&K, in connivance with the

Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Governor General Lord Mountbatten joined India.

The design to forcibly wrest Kashmir began to unfold on August 16, 1947, with the

announcement of the Radcliffe Boundary Award. It gave the Gurdaspur District—a majority

Muslim area to India to provide a land route to the Indian armed forces to move into Kashmir.

There was a rebellion in the state forces, which revolted against the Maharaja and were joined by

Pathan tribesmen. Lord Mountbatten ordered armed forces to land in Srinagar.

When Pakistan responded militarily against the Indian aggression, on December 31, 1947,

India made an appeal to the UN Security Council to intervene and a ceasefire ultimately came

into effect on January 01, 1949, following UN resolutions calling for a plebiscite in Kashmir

to enable the people of Jammu and Kashmir to determine whether they wish to join Pakistan

or India. On February 5, 1964, India backed out of its promise of holding plebiscite. Instead,

in March 1965, the Indian Parliament passed a bill, declaring Kashmir a province of India-an

integral part of the Indian union.

The very tragedy of Kashmiris had started after 1947 when they were denied their genuine right

of self-determination. They organized themselves against the injustices of India and launched a

war of liberation which New Delhi tried to crush through various forms of brutalities.

However, various forms of state terrorism have been part of a deliberate campaign by the Indian

army against Muslim Kashmiris, especially since 1989. It has been manifested in brutal tactics

such as crackdowns, curfews, illegal detentions, massacre, targeted killings, sieges, burning

the houses, torture, disappearances, rape, breaking the legs, molestation of Muslim women and

killing of persons through fake encounters.

A recent report on human rights violations by Indian Army and its paramilitary forces in

Indian Occupied Kashmir disclosed that since 1989, there have been deaths of 93,274 innocent

Kashmiris, 6,969 custodial killings, 117,345 arrests and 105,861 destructions of houses. Indian

brutal security forces have orphaned over 107, 351 children, widowed 22,728 women and gang

Besides Human Rights Watch, in its various reports, Amnesty International has also pointed

out grave human rights violations in the Indian controlled Kashmir, indicating, “The Muslim

majority population in the Kashmir Valley suffers from the repressive tactics of the security

forces. Under the Jammu and Kashmir Disturbed Areas Act, and the Armed Forces (Jammu

and Kashmir) Special Powers Act and Public Safety Act, security forces personnel have

extraordinary powers to shoot suspected persons.”

Particularly, in the last few years, rights groups discovered nearly 3,000 unnamed graves in the

various districts of Kashmir. In this respect, in August, 2011, Indian Jammu and Kashmir State

Human Rights Commission (SHRC) officially acknowledged in its report that innocent civilians

killed in the two-decade conflict have been buried in unmarked graves. The report indicated

2,156 unidentified bodies which were found in mass graves in various regions of the Indian-held

Kashmir. Notably, foreign sources and human rights organisations have disclosed that unnamed

graves include those innocent persons, killed by the Indian military and para-military troops

in the fake encounters including those who were tortured to death by the Indian secret agency

In its recent report, China’s leading News Agency Xinhua has unearthed more gruesome details

about the unmarked graves in Poonch of the Indian occupied Kashmir. The report revealed the

statement of Sofi Aziz Joo, caretaker of a graveyard as saying, “Police and Army used to bring

those bodies and direct me to bury them. The bodies were usually bullet-ridden, mutilated, faces

disfigured and sometimes without limbs and heads.

In the recent past, by showing a sense of great optimism for peace of the region, Pakistan agreed

with Indian old demand to strengthen the Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) in order to

resolve the outstanding issues, especially main dispute of Kashmir. But, as part of delaying

tactics regarding the solution of the Kashmir issue, Indian rulers availed various crises so as to

suspend the process of Pak-India talks. For example, in 2002, under the pretension of terrorist

attack on the Indian parliament, New Delhi postponed the process of dialogue. Again, in 2008,

India suspended the ‘composite dialogue’ under the pretext of Mumbai terror attacks which were

in fact, arranged by its secret agency RAW in connivance with Indian home-grown terrorists.

Besides, by acting upon a preplanned scheme, Indian soldiers crossed over the Line of Control

(LoC) in Kashmir on January 6, 2013 and attacked a Pakistani check post, killing one Pakistani

soldier and injuring many troops. In order to justify its open aggression, India concocted a

fabricated story of accusing Pakistan Army of killing its five soldiers on August 6, 2013. In

this context, Indian External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid, Defence Minister AK Antony

and the opposition fundamentalist party BJP including Indian media blamed Pakistan Army for

killing its five soldiers, while Indian deliberate violations of the LoC continues unabated.

Notably, on September 29, 2013, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Indian Prime

Minister Manmohan Singh held a meeting on the sidelines of the annual UN summit. Their

dialogue ended with optimistic note, but in his speech in the General Assembly on September

28, Prime Minister Singh had allegedly said, “It is equally important that the terrorist machinery

that draws its sustenance from Pakistan be shut down.” Showing New Delhi’s contradictory

approach, he also said that Jammu and Kashmir was an integral part of India, and in this context

there could never be a compromise.” Under the pretext, New Delhi again suspended the Pak-
India peace process. So, India is not serious in resolving this dispute, as it is determined to keep

In fact, inactive approach of the so-called US-led civilized international community to this

dispute has further encouraged New Delhi to continue its brutalities on the Kashmiri masses. In

this connection, renowned Indian conductor Zubin Mehta conducted a concert the “EHSAAS-e-
Kashmir” (Feelings for Kashmir) on September 7, 2013 in the Indian-occupied Kashmir. Nearly

2,000 guests attended the concert, hosted by the German embassy in the Shalimar Gardens in

Srinagar. It was a ham-handed attempt to give a glossy sheen to the ongoing military occupation

On the other side, Srinagar and other parts of the Kashmir Valley were completely shut down

in response to a day-long strike called by Kashmiri leader Syed Ali Shah Gilani. And freedom

fighters protested, saying the concert was an effort to legitimize Indian rule in the disputed

region. In this respect, a demarche has been issued to German Ambassador in Pakistan and

Pakistan Embassy in Germany.

Nevertheless, it is a good sign that on February 7, 2013, the representatives from Pakistan,

Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Niger—the Contact Group on Jammu and Kashmir of the Organisation

of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) including Kashmiri leaders met on the sidelines of the 12th Islamic

Summit Conference in Cairo. OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu reaffirmed the

OIC’s support for the people of Kashmir, struggling for their right to self-determination, as

enshrined in UN Security Council resolutions. He announced a joint team of the OIC which

would visit J&K to assess the needs of Kashmiris and find effective measures to help them. No

doubt, interest of the OIC and especially Saudi Arabia is essential for the solution of Kashmir

Nonetheless, Kashmiris, living both sides of the LoC observe “Black Day” on October 27 to

protest against the Indian illegal occupation of Jammu and Kashmir. On this very day, Pakistanis

and Kashmiris across the globe express solidarity with the freedom fighters of Kashmir,

demanding their legitimate right of self-determination from India which continues various forms

of state terrorism in order to suppress their popular movement.

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

Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Affairs

Posted in Pakistan & KashmirComments Off on Revisited Kashmir on the Black Day

Drone Pilot With PTSD Told That He Killed 1,626 People

By JG Vibes

Man is traumatized after becoming a mass murderer 

A Reaper MQ-9 Remotely Piloted Air System (RPAS) prepares for takeoff in Afghanistan. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

A Reaper MQ-9 Remotely Piloted Air System (RPAS) prepares for takeoff in Afghanistan. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

(INTELLIHUB) — Drone warfare is a disturbing practice on many levels but one of the most troubling things about this is it allows people to be completely detached from the violence that they are participating in.

However, recently a story has emerged about one of these drone pilots who actually became sickened by their job and refused to continue.

Brandon Bryant first made the news months ago when he came forward to tell his story about how he killed a small child with a drone, and was told by his supervisors that the child was just “a dog with 2 legs”.

Now Bryant is in the news again after learning the total death toll that he was responsible for during his time as a drone pilot.

Bryant was horrified to learn that during his time as a drone pilot he killed at least 1,626 people.  During these murders Bryant was in a translucent state that he called “zombie mode”, where he would just go through the mechanical motions without even realizing that he was taking peoples lives.

When he finally had a change of heart and decided to leave, the Air Force offered him a $109,000 bonus to stay and continue killing people, but he declined.

Now Bryant has dedicated his life to speaking out against drone warfare, and reaching out to other potential drone pilots to let them know that operating a drone is not a videogame, it is killing people by remote control.


[1] Report: Former drone operator shares his inner torment – WTKR


Posted in USA, Pakistan & KashmirComments Off on Drone Pilot With PTSD Told That He Killed 1,626 People

Obscuring the Details: A Panoramic Look at America’s Case Against Syria

Global Research

The US federal government and the various agencies, media organizations, individuals, foreign governments, non-governmental organizations, lobbies, forces, and other entities that are tied to it have done everything in their power to obscure the details involving the chemical attacks that took place in Syria on August 21, 2013. The aim has been to justify the US-led foreign campaign that was launched against Syria in 2011 by making the Syrian government appear culpable of grievous crimes. The chemical attack on Ghouta has now come to represent the crux of the matter.

From the very start there was double-speaking coming from Washington and its cohorts about what happened in Ghouta. The Obama Administration and America’s allies deliberately ignored that chemical weapons were used in Syria prior to August 21, 2013. They have pretended that the United Nations investigation team that had arrived in Syria when chemical weapons were used in Ghouta had just stumbled there coincidentaly or with the purpose of «inspecting» the Syrian government’s chemical weapon depots.

Ignoring the Original Mandate of the UN Investigators

In reality, the UN team that arrived in Syria in August was not a team of weapons inspectors. It was a team of «investigators.» Even more importantly, the Syrian government had invited the UN investigation team to Syria in March 2013. This was because the insurgents had launched chemical attacks on March 19, 2013. The US and its allies tried to blame Syria, but they were embarrassingly contradicted by Carla Del Ponte, one of the UN investigators responsible for Syria, that said all the evidence pointed to the insurgents and not the Syrian government. Although she backed her conclusion with facts, Del Ponte was dismissed by the US, and NATO even abnormally took the time to make a statement against here. Moreover, the insurgents were even caught trying to sneak sarin gas into Syria from Turkey by Turkish security forces in May 2013.

Because the insurgents were behind the chemical attacks in March 2013, Syria’s government originally wanted the UN investigators to have the authority and mandate to officially assign blame on which party used the chemical weapons. The US, however, put all types of obstacles in place to prevent the UN from issuing a report that the US-supported insurgents were using chemical weapons. It was the US, Britain, and France that prevented an UN investigation that could assign responsibility for any chemical weapon attacks from taking place. Instead they wanted a politicized inspection team that would try to demonize Syria and write reports against Damascus. This led to a deadlock in the United Nations over the type of team that the UN would send to work in Syria. A settlement was eventually reached. The US and its allies eventually reduced the mandate of the UN inspectors to one of only determining if chemical weapons were used.

The United Nation’s team even spells out the fact that they had originally entered Syria to investigate the March 2013 chemical attacks all in their September 2013 report’s Letter of Transmittal signed by Ake Sellstrom, the head of the UN mission, Scott Cairns, the head of the OPCW (Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) component of the UN mission, and Maurizio Barbeschi, the head of the World Health Organization (WHO) component of the UN mission. The UN team states the following on the report’s third page: «Having arrived in the Syrian Arab Republic on 18 August 2013, we were in Damascus on the 21 August preparing to conduct on-site inspections in connection with our investigation into the allegations concerning the use of chemical weapons in Khan al-Asal and in Sheik Maqsood and Saraqueb. Based on several reports of allegations on the use of chemical weapons in the Ghouta area of Damascus on 21 August 2013, you instructed us to focus our investigation efforts on the Ghouta allegations. We, therefore, proceeded to conduct on-site inspections in Moadamiyah in West Ghouta and Ein Tarma and Zamalka in East Ghouta».

Cooked US Intelligence and Implausible White House Stories

The narrative that the US government and its allies present about Ghouta is contradictory to logic and highly implausible. Added to the fact that the US has a track record of lying to create pretexts for aggression, Washington’s claims should be heavily scrutinized. So should the same group of non-governmental organizations that have consistently backed American wars and conjured instant reports to justify US foreign policy and war.

President Obama and John Kerry claimed that the Syrian military used chemical weapons while it was advancing militarily in Ghouta. This is contrary to any procedure that would be followed by an organized military force. An advancing military would not gas an area when it was entering it with its forces. Obama and Kerry might as well have claimed that the Syrian military had decided to reduce the number of its own troops by killing them.

Furthermore, there was no tactical need to use chemical weapons in Ghouta whatsoever. Ghouta did not have a large amount of anti-government fighters. Nor was Ghouta under the full control of the insurgents. Despite being in worse situations, the Syrian military never bothered using chemical weapons earlier in the conflict when things were dire for the Syrian government.

On the contrary, using chemical weapons would be a self-defeating and suicidal move by the Syrian government. Why would the Syrian government use chemical weapons when the combined UN team of OPCW and WHO investigators arrived in Syria to investigate the use of chemical attacks? Moreover, why would the Syrian military decide to use chemical weapons unnecessarily?

No evidence has been provided that the Syrian government was responsible for the chemical attack on Ghouta. On the contrary the US has only made claims and a series of contradictory statements. Using cooked Israeli evidence, Washington has claimed that the orders to use chemical weapons were intercepted, but has failed to provide the transcripts or to give any names of Syrian officials. In its own intelligence report the US government has also said that it knew in advance that the chemical attacks were going to happen. If the US government is to be believed, this would mean that the Obama Administration did not mention it and did nothing to prevent the use of chemical weapons from happening.

It turns out that the US government was given some type of advanced warning by the Iranian government about a chemical attack in Syria. The warning, however, was that the insurgents planned on using chemical weapons. This has been matched by statements from insurgents themselves that Saudi Arabia had provided the chemical weapons to the insurgents. Russian officials have also assessed that the chemical attacks in Ghouta were part of an intelligence operation conducted by Saudi Arabia.

Chemical Weapon Hypocrisy

It is not true either that the Syrian government lied about not having chemical weapons. Even though it was widely known, Damascus never denied or acknowledged that it had chemical weapons. The Syrian government always strategically applied a policy of deliberate ambiguity that neither confirmed nor denied that Syria had chemical weapons in its military arsenal. Anyhow, there was acknowledgement from Syrian officials that Syria possessed chemical weapons when Syrian officials said that they were worried that the insurgents would try to get their hands on the chemical weapon stocks inside Syria or use chemical weapons to frame the government.

Aside from Prime Minister Ehud Olmert admitting that Israel has nuclear weapons in 2006, the deliberate ambiguity of Syria is the same policy that Israel has tried to apply in regards to its biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons of mass destruction. Despite the same policy being used by both Damascus and Tel Aviv, the US government and media apply double standards by falsely accusing Syria of lying about its possession of chemical weapons while they say nothing about Israel. Instead both the US government and media refuse to admit or recognize the fact that Syria was applying a policy of ambiguity.

President Obama even had the audacity to call the August 2013 use of chemical weapons in Syria the worst chemical weapon attack of the 21st Century. He ignored the use of chemical weapons against Iraqi combatants and civilians in Fallujah and Israeli chemical weapon attacks on Lebanon and Gaza. As heinous a crime as the chemical attacks on Ghouta were, more Iraqis were killed by the United States in its chemical attacks on Fallujah.

Even looking back at the last century, it was the United States and its British allies that armed Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons by knowingly providing him the materials and technology needed to gas both the Iraqi Kurds and Iran. Not once did the US condemn the use of chemical weapons by the Iraqi government in the 1980s while Baghdad was aligned with Washington. The British Defence Ministry was even directly helping Saddam Hussein’s government develop his chemical and biological weapons in Iraq while the Pentagon helped the Iraqis organize their attacks on Iran and sent US military officers to examine the success of Iraqi chemical warfare against the Iranians. Instead the US deliberately went out of its way to blame the Iranian victims of being responsible for the chemical weapon attacks.

Making Self-Serving Interpretations of the UN Report

It is clear from the radically different interpretations that the US and Russia have about the Final Communiqué of the Action Group for Syria that was made in Geneva on September 30, 2012 that Washington deliberately makes self-serving interpretations of anything from its agreements to international law and multilateral deals. While the consensus that was reached in the final communiqué at Geneva in 2012 called for a peaceful and democratic solution to the conflict in Syria, the US and its allies deliberately choose to pretend that their agenda was adopted by Russia, China, and the rest of the world. By this Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the league of foreign ministers supporting regime change in Damascus falsely claimed the Action Group for Syria called for a transitional government that would not include any role for President Bashar Al-Assad.

The case has been the same in regards to the UN team’s September 2013 report about the nature of the chemical weapon attacks in Ghouta. The initial UN report has been interpreted in self-serving ways by the US and its cohorts. The fact that an old Soviet-manufactured projectile was used on August 21 is being highlighted as an indicator of the Syrian government’s guilt, because the Syrian military uses Soviet-made and Russian-made weapons.

Just because a Soviet weapon was used does not mean that the Syrian military was behind the attack. Old Soviet weapons are in wide use, including by the insurgents in Syria. Even more importantly, the Soviet-made BM-14 series projectile is not in use in the Syrian military’s arsenal. Moreover, the Soviet Union never exported this model to Syria nor did Soviet officials ever supply any sarin gas warheads to any country. It has also been reported that the three Arab countries that received this projectile were Egypt, South Yemen, and Libya.

Human Rights Watch (HRW), which has been actively lobbying for a war against Syria, has even produced a map to indict the Syrian government as being responsible for the attack. The map, which is featured in a report published by HRW in September 2013, points the finger at 104 Brigade of the Syrian Republic Guard for the chemical attacks. This has been refuted, because only special military units can use or launch chemical weapons in Syria and 104 Brigade is not one of them. Furthermore, there is chain of command that needs to be followed; chemical weapons can only be used with a high-level clearance and approval from Syria’s upper echelons.

The US government has fallaciously tried to equate the UN’s verification that sarin gas was used as some type of evidence that the Syrian government was responsible. While sarin samples have been verified by the United Nations, the authenticity of the evidence that has been provided by the US that the Syrian government is guilty needs to be examined. The US-supported insurgent’s videos that were appraised as real by US intelligence and presented to the world by the Obama Administration as evidence have not been verified. On the contrary, these videos have dubious scenes where the same bodies reappear in different locations.

From Strategic Deterrence to Liability

The Obama Administration has deliberately hidden behind the word «norm» and its plural («norms») as a means of trying to substitute it for an aura and façade of legality when it claims that Syria is in violation of international norms. Norms are expected patterns of behavior and not compulsory laws that must be enforced by the international community. Moreover, if the US wanted to follow international law it would obey what the Chemical Weapons Convention stipulates clearly, which says that when there is a violation all the signatories of the Chemical Weapons Convention must gather and then collectively decide what to do. There is no international law in place that allows the United States to unilaterally decide what to do or present itself as the enforcer of international agreements.

Syria was never in violation of international law through it position of chemical weapons either. This is because, like Egypt, Syria never signed the Chemical Weapons Convention. The reason behind this decision was that both the Egyptian and Syrian militaries decided to hold on to their chemical arms as strategic deterrents against Israel’s biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons of mass destruction. Although Israel became a signatory state to the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1993, just like Myanmar, the Israelis did not ratify the Chemical Weapons Convention. This is why Syria chose not to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention until after the chemical attack in Ghouta.

It became clear to the Syrian government in 2013 that the liability of Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal outweighed its use as a strategic deterrent. As a result of the Syrian conflict, Syria’s chemical weapons have become less likely to prevent a foreign attack or invasion of Syria. The liability has become too great and as a result the Syrian government decided to give them up. This has pleased both the US and Israel, because it has given them a strategic advantage over Syria and its regional allies.

Now that Damascus has joined the Chemical Weapons Convention it should be noted that the Syrian government is not responsible for destroying its chemical weapons stock either under the agreement it has with the OPCW. It is the OPCW and the United Nations that are the responsible parties. The responsibility of Syria is to identify and declare all of its chemical weapons stock and to provide the OPCW access to them for destruction. It is possibly that the US may also try to obscure these facts as well to manipulate the situation.

America’s Goal is to Crush the Syrian Nation in an Indirect War of Attrition

The US government does not care about making the world a safer place. Syria’s chemical weapons have been a smokescreen all along. Speaking to Perviy Kanal (Channel One/First Channel), Russia’s largest network, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov let it be publicly known that the US was threatening to end working with the OPCW and to sabotage the agreement to destroy Syria’s stockpile of chemical weapons if the Russians refused to give political compensations to the US. What Washington has wanted in return for an agreement to destroy Syria’s chemical weapons is that Russia and China allow a United Nations Security Council resolution that authorizes the use of force to be passed.

Before the chemical attacks on Ghouta, the anti-government forces in Syria were suffering one major defeat after another at the hands of the Syrian military. As the internal pressure against Syria began declining, the external pressure began increasing. The Israeli aerial assaults on Syria and the Turkish border incidents and threats were meant to bring the Syrian military’s winning momentum to an end. These Israeli and Turkish moves were meant to change the balance of power and direction of battle momentum in Syria. Their aim was to do this by psychologically disorienting and weakening the Syrian military and government with crippling doses of fear while motivating and encouraging the anti-government militias to intensify their attacks.

The psychological attempts to bolster the anti-government militias against the Syrian military and its supporters failed. The Syrian military’s victories continued throughout 2013. The anti-government militia incursions into Latakia were blocked and their offensive surge from the Jordanian border was beaten by the Syrian military. Hezbollah also intervened to help purge the anti-government forces from the Lebanese-Syrian borders.

This has brought the US and its allies closer and closer into direct confrontation, in some form or other, instead of indirectly attacking Syria via their proxies. The US government, however, prefers to secure its objectives without using its own resources or exerting itself in any costly ventures. This is why Washington’s initial option has been to threaten and to give the perception of being ready to use military force before actually using military force.

The US strategy in Syria is that of an indirect war of attrition. America loses the conflict in Syria if either combating side in Syria wins. The US government and Israel want the fighting in Syria to continue as long as possible between all combating sides. Washington and Tel Aviv do not want to see anyone coming out totally victorious. This is even acknowledged by US analysts with high-level ties to the Pentagon and US government. This objective is candidly outlined in an article written on August 24, 2013 by Edward N. Luttwak, a military analyst and senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, in the New York Times.

The real target of the US-led campaign in Syria is the Syrian nation and not merely the government in Damascus. The government could matter less. The US and Israeli objectives in Syria are to crush Syria as a nation-state, even if their own insurgent allies or Syrian National Coalition clients win and form the government in Damascus.

Posted in USA, SyriaComments Off on Obscuring the Details: A Panoramic Look at America’s Case Against Syria

Was Jesus Really Crucified: New Evidence Proves Otherwise


Lisa Spaulding, Journalist and Researcher

“Agron Belica’s controversial book, vigorously challenges the conventional view of John the Baptist as little more than the baptizer of Jesus and the herald of his messiahship”
– Dr. Jay R. Crook Author of The Bible: An Islamic Perspective

Agron Belica at Harvard Book Store
Agron Belica at Harvard Book Store

(WASHINGTON DC) – It is said that history is written by the winners. As one engaged in research and journalism and who keeps that old saw in mind, I am always interested in new ideas and new interpreta-tions of accepted truths.

Cover design by Lisa Spaulding

This carefully researched study of one of the most important events in human history certainly answers to both of those interests.

The author re-examines the conventional ideas about the relationship between the Baptist and the Christ that most people have accepted for centuries as gospel truth. He uncovers mani-fest discrepancies in the biblical narratives that have dominated European and even Muslim thought and, moreover, between them and lesser-known external sources such as the writings of Josephus.

The calm logic of his analyses overturn convention and lead inexorably to startling new visions of John and Jesus and even the Passion itself.

The Passion of the Baptist, Not the Christ is a well-written and interesting book. It is recommended reading for those interested in redressing the distortions of “history written by the winners.”


Award winning journalist Tim King with Agron Belica

Tim King
Editor in Chief

If all of Agron Belica’s research and the conclusions he draws from it prove to be valid, then the traditional view of John the Baptist/Yahya, both scholarly and conventional, Jewish, Christian and Muslim, will be subjected to a tidal wave of revision and reconsideration. This will also affect most extant translations of the Quran into English, with the exception of The Sublime Quran by Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar which incorporates all of his results that relate to Quranic verses. Additionally, the great collections of medieval Islamic commentaries, both Sunni and Shia, which often repeat such colorful Biblical stories as the beheading of John the Baptist, will have to be viewed more critically. Such revisionism is sure to meet with a strong opposition.
Dr. Mahmoud M. Ayoub
Professor of Islamic Studies and Christian-Muslim Relations Hartford Seminary, Hartford CT:

(This book) by Agron Belica is an engaging analysis of the life and mission of the two kindred religious personages, John the Baptist (Yahya) and Jesus (`Isa). Even though the central argument of the book, namely that the man who was hung on the cross was John and not Jesus, may be academically open to question as it rests on circumstantial evidence, the book will add much to the discussion of an epoch-making event that has shaped world history.

The book is informative and entertaining. It is certainly worth reading.
Dr. Harte Weiner
Lead Editor, Ph.D., Stanford University:

Agron Belica is a first generation American of Albanian descent. He is devoted to a few things. One is his family, another is his religion, and yet a third is intellectual and spiritual religious inquiry. His book is a tribute to this devotion and inquiry. It is a brilliant and original look at the Gospels and the Quran, as well as the earlier Mosaic texts. In this book, the self-taught Belica, with no formal education, points out linguistic and spiritual parallels between generations of key characters in three religious histories. A devout and inquiring Muslim, using the close reading of the Quran as his guide, Belica, is able to look back at the central story of the crucifixion through a new lens, the Muslim lens, using key passages from a number of religious scriptures to build a fascinating new argument. His thoughts, insights and interpretations are remarkable, profound, and leave the reader in awe.

Belica notices that a son is born to the prophet Zachariah at about the same time as a son is born to Mary. He systemat-ically and spell-bindingly leads us through the parallels between these two prophets, the second of whom we have come to know as Jesus. Both are raised in secrecy, and bring prophesy and healing. Both are spared somehow the decree of Herod at birth, only to befall religious ostracism and apparent physical mutilation beheading/crucifixion at the time of apparent earthly death.

Belica takes us through the similarities in these prophet’s lives, their coming into the lives of their parents, as the sons had done, in response to prayer, or in the unlikely moment, for Mary, of her chastity. The coming together of Zachariah and Mary is cemented with the former shielding Mary from harm as her foster-father. Belica brings us back further in scriptural history to draw other such parallels when it comes to prophets, and he draws upon the Arabic roots of the names of these figures, from Adam to Zachariah’s son, to convince the reader of his novel contribution to scriptural reading. But I’m not going to give that away! For that, you must read the book yourself!

This book is slim, but both erudite and yet easy to follow, in its step by step progression through the many scriptures, seemingly so familiar is Agron Belica with every passage, the apt ones come easily to mind for him, and strike an immediate cord in us, no matter how familiar or unfamiliar we are with the text and story. And yet, this book is no recipe for persuasion. It is much more sophisticated than that. Written in a devout and true Muslim spirit, it is also—as mentioned at the beginning of this review—an inquiry and a wholly new contribution to that body of sculptural scholarship.

Agron Belica advances a theory which sheds an entirely novel light on the views that are commonplace today, and, through an examination of linguistics, passages, intent, and meaning, causes us to re-examine, in an exciting, clue-ridden way, what we have assumed to be true about the three major religions for centuries, concentrating on his own Muslim faith.

Dr. Jay R. Crook with Agron Belica

Dr. Jay R. Crook
Author of The Bible: An Islamic Perspective:

Agron Belica’s controversial book, vigorously challenges the conventional view of John the Baptist as little more than the baptizer of Jesus and the herald of his messiahship. The result of years of study, it expounds his revolutionary theories about the life, work, and significance of the neglected prophet.

The John/Yahya that Belica’s work brings forth from the shadows of history is a major prophet in his own right, with an independent stature and mission. The book is a thought-provoking and fascinating re-examination of the prophet’s place in history.
Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar


There are two methods of gaining knowledge in the great religious traditions of the world in general, and Islam, in particular. One method is knowledge that is imitated (taqlid) or transmitted by hearsay from generation to generation like the sciences of language, history and law. With this method, a person never asks “Why?” but accepts what is taught by an authority. In the Islamic tradition this leads to ijtihad, ijtihad specifically referring to developing expertise in jurisprudence (fiqh) to the level of being able to use independent judgment in understanding Islamic law (Shariah). Such a person is known as a mujtahid. Whoever is not a mujtahid, whoever has not reached that level, must “imitate” or “follow” a person who has, whether that person is dead (Sunni Muslims) or alive (Shia Muslims).

The second method of gaining knowledge is what is of most interest to us in this book review, that of tahqiq or intellectual knowledge where one may have a teacher for guidance but it is knowledge that cannot be passed from one generation to another. Each person has to discover it for himself or herself by “polishing the heart,” by becoming a person who sees with the eye of Oneness or tawhid, a person who deeply senses his responsibility to God, His creation and His humanity.

The person who gains knowledge with this method is called “a seeker of truth” (muhaqqiq).

Intellectual knowledge (tahqiq) builds on transmitted knowledge but goes deeper. Transmitted knowledge includes memorizers of the Quran and the Hadith but only with intellectual knowledge can one understand what God and the Prophet are saying. Those who lack this intellectual endeavor have, one might say, not sought the means to see with the eye of “Oneness.”

Questions like “why” are not the only ones that the intellect of the seeker of truth asks because the underlying distinction is to think, “to think for oneself,” and not to stop at “imitation alone.”

Not everyone has been burdened with this capacity as the Quran says in 2:286, but one person who has is Agron Belica. He is a seeker of truth, seeker of the Reality (haqq), a person who has verified knowledge, not on the basis of imitating the opinion of others, but on the basis of having realized the truth for himself as well as being one who acts in accord with haqq, all the time realizing his belief in the One God, the one creation and the one humanity.

A faith tradition may survive without a living mujtahid, but it rapidly disappears without a living muhaqqiq. Without a living seeker of truth, a seeker of reality, the faith tradition cannot remain faithful to its principles because it cannot understand those principles.


A faith tradition may survive without a living mujtahid, but it rapidly disappears without a living muhaqqiq. Without a living seeker of truth, a seeker of reality, the faith tradition cannot remain faithful to its principles because it cannot understand those principles.

Agron Belica’s basic premise is to follow the Quran and the New Testament which all assert that Jesus is the Messiah. However according to the Quran and the Hadith, it only appeared to the people who bore witness to the Messiah that he had been crucified.

In reality, according to the intellectual endeavor of the author, it was “he who lives” (Yahya), the Concealer of Secrets (hasura), as the Quran refers to him who was placed on the cross and lived, a view held by early Christian Gnostics as well, but later declared to be a heresy. The Concealer of Secrets concealed the secret of his identity and that of the Messiah in order to save the Messiah. The Messiah was then allowed to carry on his prophetic mission (perhaps traveling even as far as Kashmir where many believe that he is buried).

At the same time that Mary retired to a sanctuary, Zechariah becoming her protector, Zechariah prayed for an heir. The son of Mary was close in age to the son of man (the Concealer of Secrets fathered by Zechariah). They may have even been cousins who resembled one another. They both began their prophetic mission around the same time yet neither revealed themselves as to who they actually were.

The author traces these and other parallels in the lives of the son of Mary and the son of man for a fascinating read. In the great tradition of seekers of truth in the past, Agron Belica brings harmony to ancient mysteries. He shows the possibility of how thing may be in the Presence of the Oneness of God and he does so through scriptures – the Quran, Hadith and the New Testament.

This is a book that should be read by everyone who wants to discern the Reality of the story of the Messiah.
M. Dennis Paul, Ph.D.
Creator of Thought Addiction programs:

I am impressed with the amount of detail Agron, as well his editor and good friend Jay Crook, have used in composing this remarkable thesis. No easy task, Agron sets about trying to justify, clarify, and rectify, as applicable, the disparities within various retellings of the history of John the Baptist and his relationship to Jesus the Christ. It is apparent to some that political movements of the time either changed, restricted or completely eliminated various contributions to the bible. It is conceivable that all such scriptural offerings in all the various religions underwent various pressures of a similar type.

Agron opens several windows with which to air questions and suggestions that might lead to greater reasoning, awareness and understanding… part of a great gift we often take for granted (or, in some cases, refuse to employ). It is telling that some men will welcome a flame with which they may explore caverns of thought previously cursed by darkness while others will curse the flame and cling to the walls of darkness swearing that this is all there is… and all that should be. My brother Agron is most definitely the former.


Video Produced by Lisa Spaulding
The Passion of the Baptist, Not the Christ by Agron Belica:

Posted in EducationComments Off on Was Jesus Really Crucified: New Evidence Proves Otherwise


X Factor's Simon CowellX Factor’s Simon Cowell

The Jewish Chronicle reports today that music mogul Simon Cowell has boosted the Israeli Army with a sizeable donation at a gala dinner in Los Angeles.

The X Factor chief gave a sum thought to be in the region of £150,000 at the annual fundraising event hosted by the American Friends of the IDF.

The event was hosted by ultra Zionist Power Rangers creator Haim Saban, who pledged to donate $1 million if Mr Cowell joined him to sing the show’s theme song, “Go, Go Power Rangers”.

Mr Cowell did break into song, but quickly said he would make a donation himself if Mr Saban allowed him to stop.

The event is understood to have raised around $20m in total for the IDF.

Lionel Richie also performed for the 1,200 guests. The audience included serving Israeli soldiers.

And here is Cowell’s take on biological determinism and blood related matters:

Mr Cowell has previously spoken of his Jewish roots and work with communal charities in Britain. Last year he told a Norwood dinner: “My dad is Jewish. He never told me or my brother or his wife. It’s in my blood and drew me to the charity.”





The Daily Mail reports today tha Israel and not America was behind the hacking of millions of French phones, it was claimed today.

In the latest extraordinary twist in the global eavesdropping scandal, Israeli agents are said to have intercepted more than 70 million calls and text messages a month.

Up until now the French have been blaming the U.S., even summoning the country’s Paris ambassador to provide an explanation.

But today’s Le Monde newspaper provides evidence that it was in fact Israeli agents who were listening in.

Read more:–Extraordinary-twist-spying-saga-revealed.html#ixzz2ioRXT9hn 



Shoah’s pages