Archive | April 4th, 2014



By Gilad Atzmon

If you really want to understand the world we are living in, you better stick with the Zionist media. The Jerusalem Post will provide you with the names of the Jews who own the planet. The British Jewish Chronicle will teach you about arch pedophile Jimmy Seville’s ties with IsraelHaaretz will even let me speak about all those topics The Guardian (Of Zion) is there to shamelessly suppress.

Yesterday I came across a text by Dave Rich, a Hasbara mouthpiece operating within the UK ultra-Zionist Community Security Trust. Rich suggested that making a common cause between Holocaust deniers, neo-fascists, the pro-Palestinian left, and the revolutionary Islamists of Iran is precisely what Dieudonné has spent the past decade trying to achieve.”

Let us admit it, no one could have been more succinct and precise in analysing Dieudonné’s vast impact. Yet in order to fully understand Rich’s statement we’ll have to decode the kosher sound bites and rewrite the above sentence using terminology that may resemble a familiar language.

Holocaust deniers – In the real world there are no ‘Holocaust deniers’: what we have instead are history revisionists – people who understand that the making of history, is a continuous attempt to narrate the past as we move along. The so-called revisionists re-visit, re-write and revise the past. Those whom Zionists and progressives often tag as ‘Holocaust deniers’ are often enough the last True Historians.

Neo-Fascists and Fascists – Zionists and Progressives tend to attach the ‘Fascist’ label to those who refuse to surrender to the tyranny of political correctness. Those few people who insist to say what they think against all odds. Thus, those whom the Zionists call ‘Fascists’ are in practice merely a bunch ofAuthentic People.

Pro-Palestinian Left – points in the direction of the last pockets of resistance to Kosher indoctrination within the Left, namely, those few resilient subjects and organisations that say NO to George Soros’ funding. Rich is basically referring here to the Genuine Left, people and organisations that are committed to Labour, working class politics and solidarity, as opposed to Identity politics spin.

Revolutionary Islamists of Iran – is the tag Zionists and progressives often attach to Proper Resistance — those Muslims who won’t work for Israel, not even in the spring.

Now that we are familiar with the basic Zionist glossary we are ready to translate Rich’s statement into proper English.

By suggesting that Dieudonné is articulating a common cause  for “Holocaust deniers, neo-fascists, the pro-Palestinian left, and the revolutionary Islamists of Iran” Rich actually admits that Dieudonné has managed to unite the True Historians, Authentic People, Genuine Left and the Proper Resistance.

In case someone fails to realize it, what Rich is describing here is the true dissidence, an uncompromised league of people that forms the un-controlled opposition: those people and institutions that do not subscribe to Zionist hegemony funded by Soros and his ilk.

It is not a secret that the Zionists and Left are in a state of panic, and for a good reason. The ‘anti-quenelle’ campaign that was supposed to ruin Dieudonné’s career backfired colossally. Pretty much when it seemed as if the French people had been Zionised by means of ‘correctness’ and were stripped of their revolutionary inclinations, a tsunami of resentment towards kosher socialism and Jewish political power swept the ground. They panicked and struck back hard. But you cannot fight a tsunami with a boomerang.

Dieudonné’s ‘quenelle’ is already a monumental development in the history of the Jews and their stooges within the Left and the media.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, Campaigns, UKComments Off on THE UN-CONTROLLED OPPOSITION

Should David Cameron be Prosecuted for Recruiting Brits to Fight in Al Qaeda Ranks in Syria?


Global Research

According to the London Evening Standard, a top British prosecutor has “warned that Britons who travel to join the Syrian conflict will face prosecution and potential life sentences on their return.”

Sue Hemming said it was a crime to fight in another country even if it was to topple a “loathsome” dictator such as president Bashar Assad.

The head of counter-terrorism at the Crown Prosecution Service said Britons could also face charges for attending rebel training camps.

Her comments, in an interview with the Evening Standard, come as seven British residents including two London women await trial over charges connected to the Syrian conflict.

They follow a recent surge in arrests by police and a warning by the Met’s counter-terrorism chief about the growing number of young Britons either traveling to Syria or attempting to go.” (Brits who fight in Syria face life in jail, London Evening Standard, February 3, 2014)

MOAZZAM BEGG “freedom fighters”

What the British prosecutor fails to address is that the British “freedom fighters” are being recruited with the full support of the British government of Prime Minister David Cameron in defiance of UK laws.

Does this mean that those who finance and recruit terrorists at the highest levels of the British government also “potentially face life sentences” as suggested by Crown Prosecutor Hemming? Or is Her Majesty’s Government immune from prosecution?

Are we dealing with double standards in the application of British law?

There is ample evidence that the training camps are set up by the Western military alliance.

The important question for the British Crown prosecutor: who should be sent to jail? The British mercenaries or the British government?

Amply documented, the Ministry of Defense and MI6 in liaison with US-NATO-Israel are behind the recruitment and training of terrorists.

The report points to the fact that “Some observers have expressed surprise” that British “freedom fighters” ” seeking to oust Assad” should be subject to prosecution. After all its all for a “good cause”, namely “regime change” and “democracy”.

But Ms Hemming is categorical: participation in an overseas conflict is illegal.

“It is a crime for people from this country to go out and get into a conflict or go out for terrorist training,” she said, adding: “We will look at the facts in each case, but ultimately it is potentially an offence and if it’s right to prosecute then we will.

Ms Hemming refers to Section 5 of the UK Terrorism Act 2006, which “outlaws acts preparatory to terrorism and assisting another person in such activities. The maximum penalty is life.” “Sections 6 and 8 of the legislation also make it illegal to train as a terrorist or to attend a training camp. Both offences carry up to 10 years in prison.”

What this interpretation of the 2006 Act (which was adopted during the Tony Blair government) indelibly suggests is that the British “state entities” including the MoD and the British Secret Service which are directly or indirectly behind the recruitment, training and financing of the British terrorists should also be prosecuted under sections 5 which outlaws ” acts preparatory to terrorism and assisting another person in such activities.”

While Prosecutor Hemming does not address the broader issue of government responsibility, she nonetheless intimates that participation in attempts to implement regime change in Syria are illegal under the Terrorism Act of 2006.

Ms Hemming said that terrorism was defined in law as any action driven by political, ideological, religious or racial motive which seeks to influence a government or intimidate a section of the public. This meant that attempting to topple Assad was covered. She added: “Potentially it’s an offence to go out and get involved in a conflict, however loathsome you think the people on the other side are. (emphasis added)

The London Evening Standard confirms that the al-Nusra Front has been outlawed by the British Government “for its links to al Qaeda”. Yet a the same time, US-NATO-Israel (namely the Western military alliance) has been covertly financing and supporting Al Nusra.

The recruitment of Brits would not be possible without the covert support of the British Military and Secret Service, often operating through private military contractors which are put in charge with the recruitment of British jihadists.

The role of the Western military alliance in the recruitment of terrorists has been confirmed by several sources including Israeli intelligence. NATO in liaison with the Turkish High command established in 2011 a recruitment program reminiscent of the enlistment of Mujahideen in the CIA’s jihad (holy war) in the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war:

Also discussed in Brussels [NATO headquarters] and Ankara, our sources report, is a campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian rebels. The Turkish army would house these volunteers, train them and secure their passage into Syria.( Debkafile, August 31, 2011, emphasis added).

From the outset of the conflict, NATO Special Forces from Britain, France, Qatar and Turkey have been on the ground inside Syria involved in the training of rebels:

British Special forces have met up with members of the Free Syrian Army (FSA)… The apparent goal of this initial contact was to establish the rebel forces’ strength and to pave the way for any future training operations. … More recent reports have stated that British and French Special Forces have been actively training members of the FSA, from a base in Turkey. Some reports indicate that training is also taking place in locations in Libya and Northern Lebanon. British MI6 operatives and UKSF (SAS/SBS) personnel have reportedly been training the rebels in urban warfare as well as supplying them with arms and equipment. US CIA operatives and special forces are believed to be providing communications assistance to the rebels.” Elite Forces UK, January 5, 2012 (emphasis added)

How Many Brits in Al Qaeda Ranks in Syria?

According to data provided by Scotland Yard “the total number of British participants in the conflict is estimated to be in the “hundreds”, with as many as 20 thought to have died in the fighting.”

What these official figures suggest is a well organized recruitment process in the U.K.

The British government of Prime Minister David Cameron has blood on its hands. It is acting in defiance of its own legislation.

Let’s use this timely and courageous initiative of Crown Prosecutor Hemming to prosecute those responsible within Her Majesty’s government under section 5 of the 2006 Act.

Rest assured David Cameron, under Article 5, “the maximum penalty is life”.

The legal provisions of the 2006 Act are amply sufficient to build a strong case for the prosecution of the British government on charges of “preparation of terrorist acts and terrorist training.”

Read complete text of Art 5 below.

Complete Text of Terrorism Act 2006


Preparation of terrorist acts and terrorist training

5 Preparation of terrorist acts

[emphasis added on legal concepts pertaining to possible British government complicity]

(1) A person commits an offence if, with the intention of—

(a) committing acts of terrorism, or

(b) assisting another to commit such acts,

he engages in any conduct in preparation for giving effect to his intention.

(2) It is irrelevant for the purposes of subsection (1) whether the intention and

preparations relate to one or more particular acts of terrorism, acts of terrorism

of a particular description or acts of terrorism generally.

(3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable, on conviction

on indictment, to imprisonment for life.

6 Training for terrorism

(1) A person commits an offence if—

(a) he provides instruction or training in any of the skills mentioned in

subsection (3); and

(b) at the time he provides the instruction or training, he knows or suspects

that a person receiving it intends to use the skills in which he is being

instructed or trained—

(i) for or in connection with the commission or preparation of acts

of terrorism or Convention offences; or

(ii) for assisting the commission or preparation by others of such

acts or offences.

(2) A person commits an offence if

(a) he receives instruction or training in any of the skills mentioned in

subsection (3); and

(b) at the time of the instruction or training, he intends to use the skills in

which he is being instructed or trained

(i) for or in connection with the commission or preparation of acts

of terrorism or Convention offences; or

(ii) for assisting the commission or preparation by others of such

acts or offences.

(3) The skills are

(a) the making, handling or use of a noxious substance, or of substances of

a description of such substances;

(b) the use of any method or technique for doing anything else that is

capable of being done for the purposes of terrorism, in connection with

the commission or preparation of an act of terrorism or Convention

offence or in connection with assisting the commission or preparation

by another of such an act or offence; and

(c) the design or adaptation for the purposes of terrorism, or in connection

with the commission or preparation of an act of terrorism or

Convention offence, of any method or technique for doing anything.

(4) It is irrelevant for the purposes of subsections (1) and (2)—

(a) whether any instruction or training that is provided is provided to one

or more particular persons or generally;

(b) whether the acts or offences in relation to which a person intends to use

skills in which he is instructed or trained consist of one or more

particular acts of terrorism or Convention offences, acts of terrorism or

Convention offences of a particular description or acts of terrorism or

Convention offences generally; and

(c) whether assistance that a person intends to provide to others is

intended to be provided to one or more particular persons or to one or

more persons whose identities are not yet known.

(5) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—

(a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding

10 years or to a fine, or to both;

(b) on summary conviction in England and Wales, to imprisonment for a

term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory

maximum, or to both;

(c) on summary conviction in Scotland or Northern Ireland, to

imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to a fine not

exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both.

(6) In relation to an offence committed before the commencement of section 154(1)

of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (c. 44), the reference in subsection (5)(b) to 12

months is to be read as a reference to 6 months.

(7) In this section—

“noxious substance” means

(a) a dangerous substance within the meaning of Part 7 of the Anti-

terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 (c. 24); or

(b) any other substance which is hazardous or noxious or which

may be or become hazardous or noxious only in certain


“substance” includes any natural or artificial substance (whatever its

origin or method of production and whether in solid or liquid form or

in the form of a gas or vapour) and any mixture of substances.

7 Powers of forfeiture in respect of offences under s. 6

(1) A court before which a person is convicted of an offence under section 6 may

order the forfeiture of anything the court considers to have been in the person’s

possession for purposes connected with the offence.

(2) Before making an order under subsection (1) in relation to anything the court

must give an opportunity of being heard to any person (in addition to the

convicted person) who claims to be the owner of that thing or otherwise to

have an interest in it.

(3) An order under subsection (1) may not be made so as to come into force at any

time before there is no further possibility (disregarding any power to grant

permission for the bringing of an appeal out of time) of the order’s being varied

or set aside on appeal.

(4) Where a court makes an order under subsection (1), it may also make such

other provision as appears to it to be necessary for giving effect to the


(5) That provision may include, in particular, provision relating to the retention,

handling, destruction or other disposal of what is forfeited.

(6) Provision made by virtue of this section may be varied at any time by the court

that made it.

8 Attendance at a place used for terrorist training

(1) A person commits an offence if—

(a) he attends at any place, whether in the United Kingdom or elsewhere;

(b) while he is at that place, instruction or training of the type mentioned

in section 6(1) of this Act or section 54(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000

(c. 11) (weapons training) is provided there;

(c) that instruction or training is provided there wholly or partly for

purposes connected with the commission or preparation of acts of

terrorism or Convention offences; and

(d) the requirements of subsection (2) are satisfied in relation to that


(2) The requirements of this subsection are satisfied in relation to a person if—

(a) he knows or believes that instruction or training is being provided there

wholly or partly for purposes connected with the commission or

preparation of acts of terrorism or Convention offences; or

(b) a person attending at that place throughout the period of that person’s

attendance could not reasonably have failed to understand that

instruction or training was being provided there wholly or partly for

such purposes.

(3) It is immaterial for the purposes of this section

(a) whether the person concerned receives the instruction or training

himself; and

(b) whether the instruction or training is provided for purposes connected

with one or more particular acts of terrorism or Convention offences,

acts of terrorism or Convention offences of a particular description or

acts of terrorism or Convention offences generally.

(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable

(a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding

10 years or to a fine, or to both;

(b) on summary conviction in England and Wales, to imprisonment for a

term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory

maximum, or to both;

(c) on summary conviction in Scotland or Northern Ireland, to

imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to a fine not

exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both.

(5) In relation to an offence committed before the commencement of section 154(1)

of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (c. 44), the reference in subsection (4)(b) to 12

months is to be read as a reference to 6 months.

(6) References in this section to instruction or training being provided include

references to its being made available.

Posted in Syria, UKComments Off on Should David Cameron be Prosecuted for Recruiting Brits to Fight in Al Qaeda Ranks in Syria?



By Gilad Atzmon 

Dieudonné M’bala M’bala , the genius outspoken French comedian who rebelled against the primacy of Jewish suffering has been banned from entering Britain.

The Home Office has declared the performer persona non grata and warned he will not be allowed into the country. It has alerted airlines, other transport companies and border officials that the performer, whose stage name is Dieudonné, is an “excluded” individual. A spokesperson said: “We can confirm that Mr Dieudonné is subject to an exclusion order. With 80% of out Tory MPs being Conservative Friends Of Israel you would expect England becoming a ghetto.

As we all know, in recent years the British governments have launched more than just one  immoral Zionist  interventionist war. In the name of elementary ‘freedom’ we dropped bombs and killed over a million of innocent Muslims. Hence, I am curious to know how the UK Home Office justifies its latest measure against freedom of speech. Do they really believe that a French comedian who hardly speaks English endangers our homeland security?

Humour is seemingly the last pocket of resistance.  They are really afraid of being laughed at, after all, Dieudonne is telling the truth that The Guardians Of Zion can no longer suppress.




Propaganda Psy-Op? “Worldwide Wave of Action”. The “Global Spring” Begins

Global Research


The Worldwide #WaveOfAction begins April 4th and runs through July 4th…”

Washington’s Blog has brought to our attention a series of videos produced by  Wave of Action ” and “Anonymous” concerning the launching of a “Worldwide Global Awakening”, a so-called “Global Spring.”

“What do you think, Powerful or Impotent? Genius or Idiocy? Productive or Counterproductive?” asks Washington’s Blog.

The videos use powerful and emotional quotes, yet they fail to acknowledge the dramatic economic, social and geopolitical realities affecting humanity.

“Move out and do it”. But in relation to what?

Does the Wave of Action have an Action Program?

Beautiful slogans:

Can you hear me, wherever you are,

We are coming into a new World

The Glorious Future

The solar planet has been given wings

On April 4th a Global Spring begins.

Moment of Clarity

Our Time has Come

Begin to Form Affinity Groups and Then Do It.

Evolve society

Let’s make transforming the world the cool thing to do.

Let’s create a culture of transformation.”

The Manipulation of the Protest Movement

The World is indeed at a dangerous Crossroads: At the height of a Worldwide crisis characterized by the collapse of social programs, unemployment, IMF engineered global poverty and US led wars, Washington is now supporting Al Qaeda “freedom fighters” and a Neo-Nazi government in Ukraine.

Beyond the rhetoric, the music and the video-montage, none of these issues are addressed.

This Wave of Action fails to provide an understanding of global capitalism.

The word “war” or “anti-war” are not mentioned, nor is the word “austerity”.

This initiative has all the appearances of a Psy Op., a carefully staged propaganda campaign to create confusion and channel people into manipulated protest movements.


(more videos below)

What is the functioning of the corrupt structures of global capitalism?

What “revolutionary changes” are required to dismantle the underlying power structures?

The answers:

We are a leaderless movement. We do our own thing. We want a new paradigm.

But that paradigm is not clearly identified nor is it coupled with concrete proposals.

Powerful messages in the videos by Martin Luther King and Charlie Chaplin are casually distorted, manipulated and quoted out of context.

More slogans:

“The decentralized movement toward freedom is raging across the world. It cannot be stopped.

Let’s blaze a contagious nonviolent wave of action through mass consciousness, signaling the end of the old world, ushering in a new paradigm.

Let’s pick a three-month span, perhaps throughout this coming spring, and unite our collective actions into an unprecedented Worldwide Wave that cannot be ignored by anyone.

If we begin preparing now, a massive spring offensive can lead to a summer of transformation.”

“Cool Thing to Do”

Economic and social realities are obfuscated. The nature of the New World Order, the underlying economic system and its oppressive police state apparatus are carefully omitted from the videos.

Transforming the world is “the cool thing to do”, according to the “Global Spring” initiative, as long as it does not threaten the corporate elites which in all likelihood are funding this Worldwide awakening.

The names of the major actors on Wall Street, the White House and the Pentagon are not mentioned.

The US led wars on Syria, Libya, Mali, the Central African Republic, the US-NATO-EU led Coup d’etat in Ukraine are not mentioned.

Wall Street is mentioned but the nature of financial fraud and stock market manipulation is not addressed.

Ritual of dissent? This new thrust of “Manufactured Dissent” uses catch phrases, revolutionary symbols and narrative, but fails to identify who is the target of the revolutionary movement.

Who is Anonymous?

Anonymous is launching the “Global Spring” initiative. Who is Anonymous?

Anonymous symbols were visible in the Neo-Nazi protest movement in Ukraine, which serves US-NATO interests.

Anonymous has supported the violent riots against the elected president of Ukraine (see video below).

Sinister: An opposition supporter wearing a mask associated with the anarchic Anonymous movement stands on a roof in front of protests

An opposition supporter wearing a mask associated with Anonymous. The neo-Nazi symbol appears on the top of the mask.

Prior to its activities in the Ukraine protest movement, Anonymous” waged cyberattacks on Iran and Syria. The latter conducted in 2011 directed against the Syrian government, were waged in support of Syria’s “opposition” (in exile) which is also integrated by Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists. (See Syrian Ministry Of Defense Website Hacked By ‘Anonymous, Huffington Post, August 8, 2011). Since then the atrocities committed by opposition rebels against civilians has been amply documented.

The actions of “Anonymous” in Syria and Iran are consistent with the framework of the “Colored Revolutions”, which seeks to demonize the political regime and create economic and social instability.

Subsequent actions led against Syria by Anonymous (2012) were coordinated with those of the US and its allies, with a view to closing down Syria’s communications network including the internet and telephone.

While serving the interests of the US State Department in acts aggression against Ukraine and Syria, Anonymous is upheld as a progressive yet “invisible” entity supportive of “democratization”.

A Global Awakening Wave has allegedly been launched by Anonymous. Anonymous has ties to the Adbusters Media Foundation which in turn is funded by the Tides Foundation.

The Global Call was initiated by Anonymous. Is it funded by corporate foundations?

How convenient. Everybody is Anonymous, but Anonymous has been “visible” in Ukraine, Venezuela, and the Middle East in ways which are broadly supportive of Wall Street and the White House.


The Awakening Wave

Excerpts below from (many of the concepts below are contained in the videoclips)

“This new Anonymous call to action was originally posted to our social network in binary code and is quickly spreading around the internet. We are featuring it here to show our support for the proposed campaign.

The decentralized movement toward freedom is raging across the world. It cannot be stopped.

Radical change is urgently needed, so let’s make transforming the world the cool thing to do. Let’s create a culture of transformation. Let’s blaze a contagious nonviolent wave of action through mass consciousness, signaling the end of the old world, ushering in a new paradigm.

The Awakening Wave

The last time we all rallied together in a loosely knit collective fashion, the Occupy movement was born and the 99% meme brought the corruption of our political and economic system, along with the grotesque inequality of wealth, into mass consciousness in a profound and lasting way. It was the opening act, the awakening wave.

Since the Occupy camps were crushed by brutal police state force, the movement has splintered in many different directions.

It’s Time For A Worldwide Wave of Transformation

Let’s pick a three-month span, perhaps throughout this coming spring, and unite our collective actions into an unprecedented Worldwide Wave that cannot be ignored by anyone.

Let’s crowdsource a relentless global wave of action that protests the corrupt, while also rallying around and celebrating effective alternatives and solutions to the vast problems we are confronted by. Imagine thousands of nonviolent guerrilla armies swarming corrupt targets and rallying for viable solutions for a sustained three-month cycle. If we begin preparing now, a massive spring offensive can lead to a summer of transformation.

Staying true to the vital nature of the movement, you lead, in your own way. Pick whatever issues concern you most and run with them, knowing that likeminded people throughout the world will also be fighting in solidarity, in whatever way they can, at the same time you are.

Not Focused Enough?

In an attempt to dismiss and undermine us, status quo propagandists will once again criticize us by saying that our message of systemic change is not focused enough or lacks coherent goals. This feeble attempt to keep people from joining in with us will be overcome by our widespread and consistent actions, which will lead by example and inspire the cultural shift in mass consciousness that we urgently need. Our diverse crowdsourced actions will boldly demonstrate our will to expose, fight and overcome tyrannical systems. By rallying around viable solutions and protesting what we are against, the goals and freedoms that we aspire to will organically become self-evident to all.

Throughout history, when people have fought against tyranny and oppression, they didn’t have one perfect utopian model outcome agreed upon beforehand. They just knew that the invading and old systems were detrimental to their wellbeing and had to go. We are now in that position.

Don’t let the propagandists fool you. We do not need corrupt corporations or aristocratic government rulers anymore. They are obsolete. People throughout this interconnected technological world have already come up with much more effective systems to replace the tyrannical one that is currently dominating our lives. There are already many effective solutions to our problems, solutions that are held back by the entrenched forces of shortsighted greed. Once a small percentage of us withdraw our participation from corrupt entities and opt out of tyranny, the old and obsolete systems of rule will quickly fall away.

Extensive empirical evidence demonstrates that nonviolent movements toward freedom result in positive outcomes. Research has proven that it only takes approximately 3% of the population engaging in various forms of nonviolent action to create significant meaningful change, for the betterment of society. We now have the necessary critical mass of aware people who are ready, willing and capable.

Guerrilla Tactics

This time the police state will not be able to crush us. We will not have stationary targets. We will be everywhere, fluid and evasive. The movement will be an unstoppable crowdsourced, decentralized and autonomous revolutionary force.

We will engage in a diversity of nonviolent tactics, from large-scale mobilizations to small daily acts. Most of you already know the actions and tactics that are needed. Without revealing too much strategic information, here are a few basic actions to get a fire going in your mind:

> Mass gatherings, demonstrations;
> Marches, parades;
> Flash mobs, swarms;
> Shutdown harmful corporate and governmental operations;
> Worker Strikes;
> Hunger strikes;
> Sit-ins;
> Strategic defaults, debt strikes;
> Foreclosure prevention;
> Boycotting corrupt corporations;
> Move your money out of the big banks and the stock market;
> Use alternative currencies and economic systems;
> Cancel your cable television and support independent media;
> Use independent online tools that don’t sell your info and protect your privacy;
> Online civil disobedience, Anonymous operations;
> Leak information on corruption;
> Use alternative energy;
> Build your own urban and hydroponic farms, or get your food from them;
> Support local businesses;
> Join local community organizations;
> Take part in food banks and help develop community support systems;
> Start or join intentional and autonomous communities;
> Experiment with new governing systems, Liquid Democracy;
> Host teach-ins;
> Organize socially conscious events;
> Make conscious media;
> Guerrilla postering, messages on money;
> Help inspiring groups and organizations spread their message;
> Random acts of kindness and compassion;
> Mass meditations, prayer sessions and spiritual actions.

The list goes on and on. You know what you can do to play a part. Do whatever you feel inspired to do.

Radical change is urgently needed, so let’s make transforming the world the cool thing to do. Let’s create a culture of transformation. Let’s blaze a contagious nonviolent wave of action through mass consciousness, signaling the end of the old world, ushering in a new paradigm.

Now is the time.

Ride the Worldwide Wave of Transformation

Tweak this meme! This is a draft call to action, a work in progress. Feel free to make changes to it and spread it around however you see fit.”

This call to action does not identify the nature of the crisis, nor does it mention the names of the main architects of this Global New World order.

The motto is do your own thing. Its a “leaderless” spontaneous movement.

We are familiar with the logic of “colored revolutions” whereby the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and various Wall Street foundations generously fund NGOs with a view to toppling the governments of sovereign countries.

While the logic of this self-proclaimed Worldwide Wave of Transformation is different, it is geared towards manipulating people while also weakening meaningful forms of grassroots activism and organized dissent.









“What do you think, Powerful or Impotent? Genius or Idiocy? Productive or Counterproductive?”

These videos are intended to create confusion.

Our thanks to Washington Blog for having brought the above videos to our attention

Posted in Campaigns, WorldComments Off on Propaganda Psy-Op? “Worldwide Wave of Action”. The “Global Spring” Begins






Footballers Sagbo and Assou-Ekotto face FA bans for ‘quenelle’ sign comments

Hull’s Yannick Sagbo and QPR loanee Benoit Assou-Ekotto are facing possible bans after they were charged with improper conduct for social media posts relating to the ‘quenelle’ gesture.

Last month Nicolas Anelka was banned for five games and fined £80,000 for quenelling  after scoring against West Ham in December, and was sacked by West Brom.

to read more:

The quenelle salute is an anti establishment sign but it is described by Jewish organisations as an inverted Nazi salute.


It may soon come to the point where the Nazi salute is described as an inverted quenelle.  

Posted in Campaigns, UKComments Off on MORE QUENELLE VICTIMS IN BRITAIN




The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs

“Entrenchment” is the word that best describes the Middle East in March.

In Egypt, coup leader Gen. Abdel Fattah el-Sisi “hung up” his military fatigues to announce his candidacy for president. Meanwhile, those opposed to Sisi and the coup continued to face the bloody consequences, as an Egyptian court sentenced 529 Muslim Brotherhood sympathizers to death.

In Turkey, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan continued his authoritarian trend by blocking access to Twitter, where his opponents had been releasing damning audio recordings that apparently revealed corruption in his inner circle. Despite the harsh reaction to this move, Erdogan’s AKP party emerged victorious in the country’s March 30 municipal elections.

In Syria, the killing continued and little progress was made on a diplomatic solution to the civil war. The flow of Syrian refugees into Lebanon also continued, causing significant logistical and social problems for the fragile nation.

Israel continued to show its defiance throughout the month by advancing plans to construct settlements in the West Bank. New statistics also show that the country is killing Palestinians at an alarming rate.

Below is a summary of March in numbers:

529 supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood were sentenced to death by a judge in Minya, Egypt for the death of a single police officer. This is the largest capital punishment conviction in the history of modern Egypt.

3,143 Egyptians are estimated to have been killed since the July 3 military coup, according to a new Carnegie Endowment for International Peace report. The report also noted that 18,977 Egyptians have been arrested for political reasons during the same time period.

150,000 people have died in the Syrian civil war, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

1 million Syrians are now residing in Lebanon, increasing the country’s total population by more than 20 percent.

50 percent of the Syrian government’s chemical weapons have been removed, according to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons-U.N. Joint Mission.

10 million Twitter users in Turkey had their access to the social media site blocked by the government after Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused individuals of using the site to leak “fake” audio recordings exposing corruption in his inner circle.

1,009 Iraqi civilians were killed by violence, according to Iraq Body Count.

4 drone strikes were carried out by the U.S. in Yemen, killing an estimated 9 people.

10 two-seat crop dusting propeller planes armed with laser-guided missiles may be provided to the Yemeni government by the U.S., according to a leaked Central Command memorandum. The initiative would allow Yemeni pilots to continue the ongoing drone war with less overt U.S. involvement.

1 member of the House of Representatives—Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY)—voted against the U.S.-Israel Strategic Partnership Act. 410 representatives supported the legislation, which allows for Israelis to travel to the U.S. without visas and calls for Israel to receive advanced military equipment.

2,269 new homes will be built on Palestinian land in the West Bank, after a Defense Ministry committee decided to push forward the project even though it threatens peace talks.

19 Palestinians have been killed by the IDF this year, according to B’Tselem. This means one Palestinian is killed every 4.2 days.

For the 66th time, the IDF destroyed the Bedouin village of al-Araqib. Israel considers ancestral Bedouin villages in the Negev to be illegal.

2 percent of Israeli prime time news stories are about the country’s Arab population, even though Arabs make up 20 percent of the country’s population, according to the I’lam Media Research Center.

3 countries—Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain—withdrew their ambassadors from Qatar due to deepening differences over regional policy.

77-year-old Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika announced his intention to run for a fourth consecutive term. The election will be held on April 17.

Posted in EgyptComments Off on MARCH IN NUMBERS

Staying Out of Other People’s Wars


By Patrick J. Buchanan


“If these negotiations [with Iran] fail, there are two grim alternatives,” said Sen. Richard Durbin, “a nuclear Iran, or war, or perhaps both.”

Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham returned from the Munich security conference saying that even John Kerry agrees that President Obama’s Syrian policy has failed. They are urging another look at air strikes.

North Korea is warning that should the annual U.S.-South Korean military exercises go forward in March, it could mean war, possibly nuclear war.

Philippines President Benigno Aquino III this week compared his country’s situation to Czechoslovakia in 1938, and the disputed islets off his coast in the South China Sea to the Sudetenland. Like Hitler in Europe, Aquino is saying, China is on the march in Asia.

Aquino wants the world, i.e., us, to stand up to China.

At Davos, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe compared Japan’s clash with China over the Senkaku islands in the East China Sea to German-British tensions on the eve of World War I. Though they were major trading partners, like China and Japan, said Abe, Germany and Britain went to war.

China’s foreign ministry charged Abe with “saying these things for the purpose of escaping Japan’s history of aggression.”

China was enraged by Abe’s visit to the Yasukuni Shrine where Japanese war dead are commemorated, including Hideki Tojo and 13 other Class A war criminals.

Asia today is like “19th-century Europe, where military conflict is not ruled out,” said Henry Kissinger at Munich.

Cal Coolidge’s admonition not to panic — “If you see ten troubles coming down the road, you can be sure that nine will run into the ditch before they reach you” — is often wise counsel. Yet, any of these five situations could bring about a war, a war involving us.

For we are obligated by treaty to defend South Korea, Japan and the Philippines. And the Obama “pivot” to Asia is seen by Beijing as a U.S. strategic move to contain China’s rise to superpower status.

The possibility of America being dragged into a new war is growing.

For not only is Beijing bullying its coastal neighbors, the Middle East is descending into a maelstrom.

Libya is disintegrating. Egypt is moving toward a new military dictatorship. Sinai is a no man’s land. Syria is three years deep in a civil-sectarian war with 130,000 dead. Sunni and Hezbollah groups car-bomb one another in Lebanon. Iraq is being torn asunder by Sunni Islamists in Anbar, newly battling the Shia regime in Baghdad.

Tribalism tears at Yemen. Afghanistan may see a return of the Taliban when we go.

Nuclear-armed Pakistan is trying to reconcile with its own Taliban. Al-Qaida has denounced the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria for atrocities and dividing the rebel cause in Syria.

Even the jihadi terrorists are fighting one another.

Behind these conflicts is a Moslem awakening, a Sunni-Shia struggle for supremacy, the rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia for primacy in the Gulf, and the ethnonational dreams of Pashtun, Baluch, Kurds and other tribes.

Still, it is hard to see any U.S. vital interest so imperiled in these conflicts to justify plunging into another war in that hate-filled and blood-soaked region. Sarah Palin’s suggestion, “Let Allah sort it out,” begins to sound like the sage counsel of George Kennan.

Twice since last summer, anti-interventionists have routed the War Party. First, with the popular uprising that swamped calls for strikes on Syria. Second, with this winter’s blockage of new sanctions on Iran that could have torpedoed negotiations.

Yet in both cases the anti-interventionists succeeded because Obama has never at heart been a war president. And because the country does not want any more wars.

A sign of the times was ex-Reagan speech writer and veteran Congressman Dana Rohrabacher telling C-SPAN the U.S. media give too much time to McCain and Graham, who do not speak for the Republican Party when they call for military action. They speak only for themselves.

Yet, despite the victories of the anti-interventionists, the United States remains a hostage to war. Dating back to the early years of the Cold War, in the 1950s, we signed treaties obligating us to fight for scores of nations on five continents. NATO alone now requires us to defend 25 European countries, from Iceland to Estonia.

How many of these war guarantees are vital to U.S. security?

How many of these treaties, which could require us to go to war with nuclear-armed powers like Russia and China over tiny islets and minuscule nations half a world away, are truly in America’s national interest?

The 2016 primaries are the setting for the Republican Party to debate and to adopt a new foreign policy for the 21st century, a policy that rejects the mindless interventionism of the McCains and steers us around, not into, the wars of the future that are surely coming.

It’s time for antiwar conservatism — staying out of other people’s quarrels and other nations’ wars — one of the oldest and proudest traditions of the republic, to regain its rightful place in the Grand Old Party.

Posted in USAComments Off on Staying Out of Other People’s Wars

Another Color Revolution? The Deceptive Use of the Phrase “Peaceful Protests” in Venezuela

Global Research

The Venezuelan opposition and much of the media use the term “peaceful protests” to distinguish gatherings of protesting students and other young people from the more violent actions including vandalism and shootings carried out by those outside of the university community.

“Peaceful protests,” however, is a loaded term that serves to plant doubts about the intentions of the Chavista government. In the first place, the actions of the police and National Guard are portrayed as a violation of the constitutional right to peacefully demonstrate at the same time that the government is blamed for failing to get the “violent” protests under control. In the process, Venezuela is depicted as virtually a failed state or, as opposition leader Leopoldo López put it in the title of his March 25 New York Times op-ed article, “a failing state.” Another outlandish assertion that makes its way into the media is that the “violent” protesters are actually Chavista infiltrators intent on discrediting the opposition. Consequently the violence has absolutely nothing to do with the peaceful protests and the opposition in general.

Barricades setup by “peaceful protests” are removed by people living in Las Vegas de Táriba, Táchira state.

The Chavista discourse sometimes plays into this deceptive line of reasoning in an attempt to isolate the radical fringe of the opposition. In appealing to the mainstream opposition group the Mesa de la Unidad Democrática (MUD) to join the government-sponsored “Peace Dialogue,” President Nicolás Maduro and other Chavista leaders sometimes reinforce the distinction between the “peaceful” and “violent” protesters.

Protests Range from Nuisance to Fatalities

However the term “peaceful protests” is misleading if not deceptive. In the first place, nearly all of the thousands of opposition protests that have taken place over the last six weeks in Venezuela have been illegal and would not be tolerated in any democratic nation throughout the world. At best, the “peaceful protests” consist of blocking traffic lanes of major avenues, resulting in vehicle backups for miles often forcing thousands of people to lose an hour or more of their time. In addition, the “peaceful protests” sometimes include barricades, fires, and the dispersing of oil on lanes used by motorcyclists. In this sense the distinction between the “peaceful protests” and the violent ones is blurry.

In another blurring of differences, the opposition’s slogan “No More Deaths” leaves the impression that peaceful protesters have been the main victims of the violence, thus glossing over the fact that among the 36 fatalities, 6 are members of security forces, others are Chavistas, others are innocent bystanders, some are peaceful protesters and others are violent ones. Of course all 36 deaths are equally tragic, but the opposition discourse plays down the fact that many of the wounded and dead were engaging in violence. One report provided by the radio station Alba Ciudad 96.3 FM stated “We can observe that much of the international media, in their eagerness to discredit the Venezuelan government and label it murderous, assure that all of the dead are students or members of the opposition assassinated by government security forces, a claim we have proven to be completely false.” The report went on to claim that only five of the deaths were at the hands of security forces. See: Conozca los 35 fallecidos por las protestas violentas opositoras en Venezuela.”

The defense of the “rights” of the peaceful demonstrators include statements by human rights advocates that in a democracy civil disobedience is perfectly legitimate and protesters have the right to take to the streets. However, in the first place, a distinction needs to be made between disruption for disruption sake and marches of protesters who use streets rather than sidewalks due to the large number of participants. In the second place, the objective of responsible civil disobedience is to make a statement, not to cause disruptions. I have observed acts of civil disobedience in the United States, one involving the Reverend Jesse Jackson at Yale University in New Haven in which the protesters were quickly rounded up and hauled off to jail. In another rally that I witnessed at Yale, protesters against Apartheid in the 1980s had previously reached an agreement with the municipal authorities and accepted that they would be jailed and fined for their actions. There was actually no “bad feelings” between the city authorities and the protesters and the details were planned ahead of time to minimize public inconvenience. This is a far cry from what is happening in Venezuela. In many if not most cases, the number of protesters do not exceed 50 people. The question can thus be asked: Why don’t they use the sidewalks?

There is another area of convergence between the peaceful and violent protesters which is a further justification for prosecuting both. Although the opposition sometimes denies this, or tries to play it down, the protesters of both groups are calling for regime change as embodied in their main slogan “la salida” (“exit”). Some opposition leaders spuriously claim that they are merely demanding the “resignation” of President Maduro and that change of government can be accomplished within the framework of the constitution. Jailed opposition leader Leopoldo López, for instance, in his recent New York Times article, stated “a change in leadership can be accomplished entirely within a constitutional and legal framework.” These statements are deceptive. If Maduro were to resign, National Assembly president Diosdado Cabello would assume the presidency, a sequence which would not at all be to the liking of the opposition. This claim to legality is a replica of the April 11, 2002 coup when the opposition asserted that President Chávez had resigned and Pedro Carmona was merely “filling a vacuum” and thus acting in a democratic fashion. Not only was the allegation of Chávez’s resignation a blatant lie, but the procedure that followed was in complete violation of the constitution. Indeed, Carmona ended up decreeing the virtual abolition of the constitution itself.

The opposition and much of the national and international media claim that the “peaceful protesters” are demonstrating against concrete problems such as insecurity, scarcities and inflation. But the protesters have failed to put forward any specific proposals to correct these problems. Their sole aim at this point is regime change, as leaders such as María Corina Machado and López himself have explicitly stated on occasion. This is not to deny that opposition leaders have a hidden agenda of specific changes which they intend to implement once in power.

Regime Change By Any Means Except Elections

The demand for regime change on the part of both the “peaceful” and violent protesters would not be tolerated in any democratic nation in the world, beginning with the United States. The accusation, for instance, that the Communist Party U.S.A. advocated “the overthrow of the government” was the justification for jailing hundreds of party members during the McCarthy period in the 1950s. The assertion, however, was misleading since the Communists were not calling, or making preparations, for the overthrow of the government but only felt that it would inevitably someday occur. Nevertheless, Communist leaders felt the full weight of the law at the time. More recently, the FBI monitored the “Occupy Houston” movement on grounds that some protesters allegedly advocated “the overthrow of the government,” as has been revealed by transparency advocate Ryan Shapiro. Advocacy of regime change in non-democratic countries is even more perilous as shown by the recent death sentences handed down by the heavily U.S.-supported Egyptian government to 529 members of the Muslim Brotherhood.

In short, the rhetoric divide between peaceful and violent protests have served the interests of the opposition. Thus, for instance, opposition governors and mayors take advantage of this distinction in order to cover up their failure to check disruptive activity in their jurisdiction. The media, for its part, uses the binary construct in articles on the alleged excesses of security forces, such as the ones recently published in El Tiempo of Puerto La Cruz on March 25 headlined “National Guard Represses Peaceful Protests” and a similar one published in Ultimas Noticias on March 5. Not once in the forty years before Chávez’s advent to power in 1998, did the commercial media use such phraseology. •

Posted in VenezuelaComments Off on Another Color Revolution? The Deceptive Use of the Phrase “Peaceful Protests” in Venezuela

The 2008 Global Economic Crisis: How Institutionalized Fraud Widened the Gap Between Rich and Poor

Global Research

Get your copy of “The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century” on our online store!

What’s the Primary Cause of Wealth Inequality?”, Charles Hugh Smith asks. It’s financialization, which he describes as “the mass commodification of debt and debt-based financial instruments collaterized by previously low-risk assets, a pyramiding of risk and speculative gains that is only possible in a massive expansion of low-cost credit and leverage”.

Wealth inequalities have been rising since the early 80’s, when financialisation began. Unlike the aftermath of the Great Depression of 1929, in which the bottom 90% saw their incomes rise, the 2008 economic crisis brought lower revenues for the same group, Smith writes.

Meanwhile: “The top 1 percent of Americans raked in 95 cents out of every dollar of increased income from 2009, when the Great Recession officially ended, through 2012. Almost a third of the entire national increase went to just 16,000 households, the top 1 percent of the top 1 percent…”

Last week, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) published its “Society at a Glance” report, which shows the “staggering rise of poverty, hunger, unemployment and social distress in countries throughout the world in the aftermath of the 2008 economic crash.” For Andre Damon this report is a “damning indictment of the capitalist system and the social policies pursued by governments throughout the world.”

“Particularly devastating are the figures relating to the United States, the center of world capitalism, the heart of the financial crisis and the “richest country in the world”—in which poverty, hunger and social inequality have grown more than nearly any other country surveyed.” (Ibid.)

It’s important to understand that the 2008 economic crisis “was the result of institutionalized fraud and financial manipulation.” This scheme which enriched the wealthiest and impoverished the rest of us was exposed in The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century.

“In all major regions of the world, the economic recession is deep-seated, resulting in mass unemployment, the collapse of state social programs and the impoverishment of millions of people. The meltdown of financial markets was the result of institutionalized fraud and financial manipulation. The economic crisis is accompanied by a worldwide process of militarization, a “war without borders” led by the U.S. and its NATO allies.”

The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century edited by Michel Chossudovsky is a collection of texts revealing “a complex web of deceit and media distortion which serves to conceal the workings of the global economic system and its devastating impacts on people’s lives.”

We are still being deceived and lied to. If you wish to understand the Great Depression of the XXI Century,get your copy of the book on our online store.

The book is also available in other formats:

For PDF format, click here

For Kindle edition, click to visit

Special: Global Economic Crisis + Globalization of Poverty (Buy 2 books for 1 price!)

Or become a Global Research member and GET 2 BOOKS! The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century and Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War.

Posted in LiteratureComments Off on The 2008 Global Economic Crisis: How Institutionalized Fraud Widened the Gap Between Rich and Poor

Shoah’s pages


April 2014
« Mar   May »