Archive | October 26th, 2014

Ottawa shooting: Yet another false flag?



By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor, with Jim Fetzer

Was the recent shooting in Ottawa yet another false flag?

We don’t have any absolute confirmation yet. But there were plenty of indications.

First, just hours before the shooting, BBC News reported that Canada had raised its terror threat. As everyone knows, they don’t raise the terror threat level every day. Here in the USA it has been stuck on “orange” for years. If it ever starts blinking red, you can assume that a new 9/11 false flag op is on the way.

Then right after the shooting, the Mounties (RCMP) urged the public NOT to post any photos or videos of the shooting. The authorities obviously want to quickly seize control of the narrative and avoid embarrassments likethe Boston Bombing photos showing that Craft International operatives, not the Tsarnaev brothers, carried out the attack.

For more on the suspicious circumstances surrounding the attack in Ottawa, read blacklisted professor Denis Rancourt’s article here at VT.

It’s getting harder and harder for the Empire’s scriptwriters and spinmeisters to control public awareness. As I write this, “Ottawa false flag” gets over 150,000 Google hits, while “Ottawa shooting false flag” gets 77,000.

To keep us confused, they’re doing “cognitive infiltration” – a  term coined by Obama’s Information Czar Cass Sunstein, who urged the government to “cognitively infiltrate conspiracy groups” and spread “beneficial cognitive diversity” – and “disable the purveyors of conspiracy theories” like those surrounding 9/11.

In an attempt to “innoculate” the public against the “conspiracy virus,” Sunstein’s minions are preempting alternative takes on the Ottawa shooting with articles presenting and “debunking” the “conspiracy theories.” They have been forced to publish articles such as “Ottawa War Memorial Shooting: The Top 5 Conspiracy Theories” because today, whenever something like this happens, everybody’s first thought is “yet another false flag?”

On today’s False Flag Weekly News, VT Editor Jim Fetzer and I discussed the Ottawa shooting and the other false flag/conspiracy stories the mainstream won’t touch.

Posted in CanadaComments Off on Ottawa shooting: Yet another false flag?

Oil Oligarchs continue global takedown


Oil Oligarchs continue global takedown

The Ultimate Goal of the Struggle for the Middle East

 … by  Viktor Titov 

The seven golden domes of St. Petersburg

The seven golden domes of St. Petersburg

[ Editor’s note: Viktor has done a well-researched article and laid his points out as well as can be expected in the fur ball of competing interests we see continuing on in the Mideast.

Oil has played a role, but that is not a stroke of genius, as all main sources of revenue play a key role in conflicts, with local adaptations.

In East Africa the rebels live off of NGO’s to a degree, shaking them down for payoffs to get aid in for starving populations. They don’t live off the land, but NGOs. Franklin Lamb, VT’s Lebanon correspondent, described how this is going on in Syria, with ISIL getting supplies the same way.

But I disagree with my learned friend on control of the oil being the number one strategic goal going on here. It is not secret that there has been a glut of oil for some time, even during the recession.

But the oil futures hustlers were able to run the price up when it should have fallen, as in past worldwide recessions. You will notice how no country anywhere really made a stink about that at the time, one of the biggest robberies in history.

There are untapped oil reserves sitting all over the place, but no reason to drill, as all the customers already have sources. Still unknown to most, Africa is floating on an ocean of oil, which the current Jihadi problems are helping to hold back development. The oil producers on the coasts, like Niger, don’t mind that because huge development would push the price down.

The big game is not the fight over the resources, but the “customers”… in terms of the means to supply them, and the price. And control over the pipelines is the life-and-death game, as their delivery costs beat everything else.

Pipelines are also a semi-monopoly, locally anyway, because once someone has customers anchored with a pipeline, that turns into a forever annuity until low-temperature fusion breaks out of jail and eliminates the need for most of the hydrocarbons.

Controlling the land over which the Gulf States can export to Europe is the big energy play going on here. While the Syrian Army was tied down protecting Damascus, that left the northern part of the country much easier to take, and where the pipeline route to the Mediterranean is. That is where you saw the Gulf States making the investment to hold that ground.

These young recruits were left behind...and were executed. No officer has even been arrested for that negligence.

These young recruits were left behind… and were executed. No officer has even been arrested for that negligence.

Viktor missed that with the price of oil going down and cutting the profit margins of high cost producers, like shale oil, the extraction costs in the Gulf states are the lowest.

So they have lots of margin to absorb a price reduction. That is why the Saudis have led the price reductions, as that is how you maintain market share, by not letting a competitor get his camel’s nose in the tent.

ISIL can only operate effectively at a certain combat level, but it cannot hold territory against a modern army that will fight. And the problem there is most of the Mideast armies are “paycheck” ones… people just in it for the job, not the fighting.

Iraq had a hollowed out national army, only 24,000 in the whole country. A third of those were home on half pay, while the officers got the other half ( a common scam). It was a pretend-a-army in the national sense. When the time came to fight, the pay was not high enough. The troops and the officers ran away, not even having the ability to conduct a fighting withdrawal.

They have everything they needed to fight ISIL to a standstill, but everybody thought it was someone else’s job to do it… someone very low paid to be used as cannon fodder. The guys in the bottom ranks figured that out, and took off, trying to catch up with their officers. You just can’t make this stuff up… Jim W. Dean ]


ISIS supporter rides through town

ISIS entourage rides through town with machete

While going through numerous articles and analytical commentaries by Russian, Arabic and Western political experts on the success of ISIS (the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria), one may start to believe that something inexplicable or even inconceivable is happening, and that the entire world is looking helplessly on at the events in the Middle East.

For some reason, it has only crossed the minds of a few that any phenomenon can be explained not only by facts but also by elementary logic. There’s no secret as to why ISIS has gained a firmer foothold in the region and is gradually expanding the borders of its influence and control.

In order to better understand these, we need to go back in time to trace the moment when this group was formed in order to remind ourselves who stands to gain from it’s unbelievably rapid rise to power.


  1. Originally, ISIS was created to fight the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, and at this stage it was not by any means the most powerful military group of the anti-Syrian opposition. The formation of this terrorist unit was largely facilitated by the USA and Saudi Arabia.Riyadh provided financial assistance while Washington trained ISIS fighters in camps in Jordan and Turkey. There are reports that a number of the training camps was built in Saudi territory. In these camps, in addition to purely military training, the militants under the supervision of instructors from the CIA and the Pentagon as well as Saudi special forces, were brainwashed in accordance with the ideology of the Salafi movement.

    At the same time, Saudi Arabia, along with a number of private Islamic sponsors in Kuwait, Qatar and the UAE, provided the money for the recruitment of Islamists and terrorists from failing radical movements into the ranks of ISIS. Among those enlisted were Algerians, Moroccans, Libyans, Egyptians, Yemenis, Afghans, Chechens, Dagestanis and EU citizens of different origins. It’s a well known fact that ISIS is mainly composed of Iraqis and Syrians, although these are generally used as cannon fodder.

  1. By May 2014, as the Syrian army was enjoying success on the field of battle and the civil war in Syria became less intense, ISIS fighters were nowhere to be found. But then the parliamentary elections in Iraq were held, and the pro-Iranian Shiite politician Nouri al-Maliki was reelected by the newly formed Council of Representatives, yet he still failed to form a government. At this point, his rapprochement with Iran and Russia along with the support he showed to the Syrian government in Damascus enraged the leaders of Saudi Arabia. They feared, along with Washington officials, the possible creation of a “Shiite arc” from Tehran to Beirut, feeling increasingly impotent to affect the situation on the ground in Iraq, which had been restoring its oil output, and all this against the background of the intensifying conflict in Ukraine and a shaky rapport with Iran.Both Syria and Iraq were supposed to play a part in Washington’s plan of weakening the Russian economy which must have led to a sharp decline of Moscow’s role in gas markets. Then oil prices were supposed to go down in order to initiate financial collapse in Russia, since oil sales are Russia’s main source of revenue.
  1. In these circumstance, ISIS had been unexpectedly sent from Syria to Iraq, where it seized 30% of Iraq’s territory in a matter of days, including such cities as Mosul, Tikrit, Samarra, Baakubu, along with the oil fields near Mosul and Kirkuka and oil processing facilities. ISIS militants have practically managed to surround Baghdad. At this point the Iraqi army was literally falling apart, therefore all of its modern military equipment that had been provided by the United States, ended up in the hands of the militants. The ISIS terrorists managed to locate most of Iraq’s small arms stockpiles with ease, since the American side knew perfectly where it had built them. Despite Nouri al-Maliki’s repeated calls for military assistance, Obama made a peculiar announcement about the country’s need to find ways of reconciliation with the Sunnis, the very people whom ISIS represents, that were instantly followed by similar calls from Riyadh.ISIS in Iraq, Syria

    ISIS in Iraq & Syria

    There even were a number of proposals to create some form of a government of national unity. Unity with whom? ISIS terrorists? At the same time Washington refused to provide the pro-Iranian Shiite Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki with military assistance, when the strikes against the positions of the Islamists were needed the most.

    But US special troops were sent to allegedly ensure the security of the US Embassy in Iraq, although it was clear that was part of preparations for the consequent evacuation of the diplomatic mission.

    Military support from Iran, Russia and Syria, resulted in air strikes against ISIS positions in the western and north-western parts of Iraq, turning the tide of battle for Iraq. Additionally, those players provided assistance to the government of Nouri al-Maliki for the effective mobilization of Shiite fighters and for the bolstering of Baghdad’s defences, along with the defences of Najef and Kerbella – Shiite sanctuaries. Elite troops from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps were sent to Iraq, as well as Russian SU-27 military planes, both becoming crucial elements of those defences.

  1. During July and August the skirmishes across Iraq came to a stall, but military troops had partially succeeded in pushing the Islamists back, largely due to the assistance of Pershmerga units – Kurdish paramilitary troops. Then on 29, July ISIS proclaimed an Islamic caliphate, the territorial claims of which didn’t simply encompass the densely populated Muslim regions of the entire world, but also Spain, Portugal, Greece, Ukraine, the Caucasus, the Crimea, the Volga Region, parts of India and even China. As for the Caliph, Abu-Bakr al-Bagdadi, born in 1971 near Samarra (Iraq), assumed this position. He is known as one of the leaders of the anti-Assad armed opposition. On top of all, it’s a known fact that he received training from US intelligence agencies.In May 2013, Bagdadi and other “leaders” of the anti-Assad front met with the infamous instigator, US Senator John McCain. and even was photographed with him near the Syrian town of Idliba. The pictures of these “opposition fighters” together with McCain who had been smiling broadly throughout the meeting were put on the Internet. These very fighters were later called by all international players, including Barack Obama himself, terrorists, murderers and a threat to international peace and security.
  1. But then something rather unpleasant happened – ISIS started to behead US and British citizens who had been taken hostage. The whole process was filmed and uploaded to the Web. At this point Obama had to react somehow, although he clearly did so slowly and unwillingly. But first, US Secretary of State John Kerry went to Jedda to rally Arabian allies, as a result, an international conference on the fight against terrorism was held in Paris. Later on September 24, in opening session of the UN General Assembly, Obama called for an urgent meeting of the UN Security Council, despite the fact that the US Constitution allows no President of the United States to chair the Security Council.soros-obama-puppet.jpg  620×320  (1)
  2. The Security Council adopted a resolution on the creation of an anti-terrorist coalition, while its mandate remains unclear even to present day. There is no mentioning of a ground operation against ISIS, but at the same time the US and a number of Arab countries, plus Great Britain and France started to carry out missile and bomb strikes against Islamic State positions in Syria and Iraq. Oil processing facilities in Syria have been destroyed, but Damascus had given no consent to the “coalition forces” to operate inside Syria’s air space.That’s understandable – one has to invent a pretext before going in to bomb the positions of the Syrian army.Additionally, while it was creating an anti-terrorist coalition, Washington decided to resume its aid to the “moderate” Syrian opposition, while providing additional training to “moderate” militants in camps near Syria’s borders. By expending hundreds of Tomahawk cruise missiles and thousands of tons of “smart” bombs costing US taxpayers well over a billion dollars, the US succeeded in pushing ISIS forces towards the Kurdish town of Kobani with a population of nearly 50,000 people. At this point, the world would witness the Islamists slaughtering the local Kurdish population — but the world would say nothing, remaining motionless, looking silently as terrorists wiped out an entire city in broad daylight. Still the US, Great Britain, France, Germany and Turkey kept on insisting that they were not planning to put boots on the ground in order to fight this threat.
  1. The hypocrisy of the US and the West is understandable. They are watching just as calmly the crimes of Ukrainian Nazis in Donbass, the downing of a Malaysian airliner shot-down by Kiev near Donetsk and the incident in Odessa where peaceful protesters were burned alive by nationalist thugs. There’s a simple explanation for this fact – oil and gas, the battle for the control of hydrocarbons.And for the sake of this very battle, Washington is using the Islamic State, its own creation. After all, the Islamic State is not planning to establish a universal caliphate built upon Sharia laws. It’s aimed at seizing control of all the oil and gas reserves in the Persian Gulf. But first it will have to ensure a secure footing in the territories of Syria and Iraq in order to build an army and establish government bodies, and then it will be able to carry on jihad elsewhere.
  2. Saudi Arabia - Sorry guys, you're just not depraved enough for American needs.“Sorry Saudi Arabia, you’re just not depraved enough for America’s needs.”

    It would seem that Saudi Arabia is starting to realize that it has miscalculated. The ISIS forces are not going to wage war on Turkey or Iran, since those Islamists will be annihilated by the regular armies of Ankara and Tehran. ISIS is going to strike southern Iraq with its rich reserves of oil and gas and then Baghdad since, after all, it was the capital of the Arabian caliphate. The next stop of ISIS militants will be Kuwait and the eastern regions of Saudi Arabia, rich in oil, and their final destination is Qatar and the UAE. Saudi intelligence services have finally figured it out, though it’s too late now, that it is easier for the United States to control the flow of hydrocarbons of the entire Persian Gulf from one centre, even if it is governed by the Islamic State, than to engage in complicated political games with a number of large regional players – Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, the UAE, Kuwait and Qatar. And the fight has clearly begun.

    As it became known, on October 14, Nouri al-Maliki fled Baghdad together with 140 Iraqi officers and generals. His location is still unknown. The US has started a rigid propaganda campaign to discredit the Iraqi army and show its inability to fight ISIS militants effectively. Therefore Washington has voiced a “solution” that implies the creation of a number of Sunni National Guard units.The West is even willing to provide the “defenders of Iraq” to be armed and trained. The Western media is focusing on the request for military assistance that came from a Sunni Governorate of Al Anbar in Iraq, even though the central government clearly opposes this step. The escape of Nouri al-Maliki was considered a preventive step initiated by Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi with Tehran’s silent consent. Washington and Riyadh are satisfied with it too, as the power of Iraqi Shiites will be weakened this way.Their strategic goal is to divide the country into three parts along sectarian lines. Sunni regions in this case will come under the authority of ISIS.

    Recent publications in the Saudi media have already shown Riyadh’s growing displeasure with the US, that had been amplified with Washington’s actions aimed at dropping oil prices. The more shale oil the US is selling today, the lower the price of the Saudi’s conventional oil. Should the price fall by another 10-15 dollars – the Kingdom can kiss all of its social care programmes goodbye, along with a number of other Arabian monarchies except for the tiny Qatar.This would lead to the continuation of the color revolution movements, this time in the Arabian world.

    The events can easily go down the path of a Libyan scenario. And once Arabia is gone, Iran will fall. Yemen is at the brink of disaster already.

Obama-NWO-puppet-1024x768.jpg  1024×768

… Obama is nothing but a mere finger puppet, hence those forces that run America today can easily get rid of him once he’s done. We can only hope that Moscow will be prepared to counter the renewed US attacks aimed at the redistribution of the world’s oil and gas.

Turning to China can prove to be a beneficial step, but Russia cannot allow itself to be transformed into Beijing’s junior partner. We still have to search for partners in the region, especially among the Arabic countries, to ensure that they are fully aware of Washington’s designs.

It’s essential to create a strategic union with Iran, and to consolidate Russia’s collaboration with Turkey in order to succeed.

Posted in Middle EastComments Off on Oil Oligarchs continue global takedown

America’s Fukushima?


Shut Down Diablo Canyon


By Dr Stuart Jeanne Bramhall

Whistleblower Michael Peck, a senior member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), is calling for the Diablo Canyon nuclear reactor to be shut down — pending an assessment of its ability to withstand a major earthquake. Peck, who was Diablo Canyon’s lead inspector for five years, asserts the NRC isn’t applying its own safety rules for the plant’s operation. Unlike other federal whistleblowers, who Obama and the FBI are busy locking up, Peck is participating in an NRC review process that permits employees to appeal a superior’s ruling.

Located on the Pacific Coast halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco, Diablo Canyon is California’s last nuclear power plant. It’s located adjacent to four seismic faults, the Shoreline, Hosgri, Los Oso and San Luis Bay. The Shoreline fault was only recently discovered; the Hosgri, located three miles from the plant, is the largest and most dangerous. It was discovered in the 1970s, after construction on Diablo Canyon was nearly complete. According to Peck, a 2011 Pacific Gas and Electric (PG& E) seismic study indicates all four faults are capable of producing significantly more “peak ground acceleration” (75% more in the case of San Luis Bay) than previously believed.

Citing these findings, Peck concludes that Diablo Canyon, based on the NRC’s own safety standards, lacks justification to continue operating. He’s asking the NRC to shut it down until PG&E can demonstrate that its piping, cooling and other systems can withstand higher stress levels than called for in its original design.

In 2012 when the NRC ruled Diablo Canyon could continue operating without reassessing its seismic safety, Peck filed a formal objection. In it he called for PG&E to be cited for violating safety standards. When his supervisors overruled him, he filed a second objection, triggering the current review.

Dave Lockbaum, from Union of Concerned Scientists, supports Peck’s position. He has researched four decades of records when the NRC, and its predecessor the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), faced similar situations. In all prior cases, the NRC/AEC disallowed nuclear facilities to operate with similar unresolved earthquake protection issues. For example, in March 1979—two weeks prior to the Three Mile Island accident—the NRC ordered a handful of nuclear power reactors to shut down and remain shut down until earthquake analysis and protection concerns were corrected.

Diablo Canyon Up for Re-licensing

Diablo Canyon is currently licensed to operate until 2025. In 2009, PG&E applied for a 20 year license extension. The re-licensing process was suspended immediately following the 2011 Fukushima disaster. Japan’s magnitude 8.9 earthquake, which was far larger than believed possible, knocked out Fukushima’s power and cooling systems, causing three core meltdowns. This led the NRC to require US nuclear power plants to re-evaluate seismic risks. These reports are due by March 2015.

Friends of the Earth has petitioned the NRC  to intervene in the Diablo Canyon’s re-licensing proceedings.

According to FOE senior adviser Damon Moglen of Friends of the Earth: “It’s now clear that Diablo Canyon could never get a license to be built at its current Central Coast site. The NRC must consider this seismic data as part of public licensing hearings.”

A Question of Magnitude

Predictably PGE, via their spokesperson Blair Jonesdisagrees. Jones maintains the NRC has “exhaustively analyzed” earthquake threats for Diablo Canyon and demonstrated it’s seismically safe. According to Jones, the core issue involving earthquake ground motions was resolved forty years ago with seismic retrofitting (Diablo Canyon was originally designed to withstand a 6.75 earthquake – with the upgrade it can supposedly withstand a 7.5 earthquake). The obvious assumption being that none of the four faults surround Diablo Canyon could cause a 7.6 magnitude or higher earthquake.

PG&E’s position is understandable, as nuclear power plants aren’t cost effective to begin with. They only become profitable with massive taxpayer subsidies. If the NRC requires quire them to retrofit Diablo Canyon to current earthquake standards, a permanent shutdown is highly likely. In 1976, the Humbolt Bay nuclear power plant in northern California, which was within 3,000 yards of three faults, was shut down to reinforce its ability to withstand possible earthquakes. Retrofitting it became more difficult and costly than projected and it never re-opened.

Our Non-regulating Regulatory Agencies

A Fukushima-style earthquake and meltdown at Diablo Canyon could wipe out agriculture in California and parts of the Midwest for centuries. Yet like many federal regulatory agencies, the NRC is more concerned about protecting PG&E’s bottom line than the health, safety and food security of the American public.



Michael Peck, who holds a doctorate in nuclear engineering is presently a senior instructor at NRC’s Technical Training Center in Tennessee.

Posted in USAComments Off on America’s Fukushima?

Police kill shooter and lose suspect in Ottawa — Canada’s 911?

by Denis G. Rancourt

I live in Canada’s capital city Ottawa, walking distance from where a Canadian soldier was murdered at the War Memorial on the morning of October 22, 2014.

The shooter, with the help of an accomplice and driver (according to authentic eye witnesses media-interviewed at the scene), then made his way into the particular parliament building (Centre Block) in which the Prime Minister was meeting his cabinet — where he was shot dead by police.

The entire Parliament Hill, City Hall, provincial courthouse, Rideau Centre shopping mall, University of Ottawa, and so on, went into “lock down” for the morning and most of the day. Car traffic dropped to almost zero, as folks were told to stay away from the downtown core.

This morning (October 23rd) the city police chief announced that there was “only one shooter” who had been killed, that there was no remaining threat to the public, and made no mention of the driver. The Mayor put things in perspective by pointing out that there have been a total of four murders in Ottawa this year. Ottawa’s population is approximately 1 million.

Canada has been at war in multiple countries for over a decade, in full support of the US-Israel war machine that regularly attacks civilian populations with aerial bombings and violent occupations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Gaza, …, as part of geopolitical terrorism aimed at overthrowing governments and controlling territory and resources.

Canada is a warring nation annexed to the US superpower. It is amazing that the Canadian public appears to generally accept the notion that this murder of a soldier in Canada is an act of “terrorism”. It is either an act of war, if it was directed by those being attacked by Canada, or it is a murder. It is not an act that can realistically intimidate a nation. Rather, it is being spun into “terrorism” to justify increased militarization and police-state policies.

The persons most likely to benefit from this murder are Prime Minister Harper and his political party, if the spin and public reaction work out to their benefit. The military-surveillance establishment and those committed to sycophantism towards the US are the other clear beneficiaries of this murder. Those attacked by Canada will derive no benefit whatsoever from the killing of the soldier, to the contrary, and no external group has claimed responsibility.

The last time there was a “terrorism” attack in Ottawa it was the 2010 arson of the entrance of an empty bank, in relation to G20 held in Toronto. The video of the attack showed three criminals (including the videographer) but only two persons were charged, and only one person was prosecuted and found guilty and jailed.

It turned out that the condemned arsonist had for years been closely followed and accompanied by a police infiltrator who was never cross-examined, and who disappeared from Ottawa.

Now, we have a similar scene. Who is the driver? Who is behind the premeditated murder and attack on Centre Block? We can dream that a thorough police investigation of the homicide will be made and made public, but without a live suspect there will not ever be a trial.

Days prior to the October 22 murder, a former soldier struck two soldiers with his car in a parking lot (in St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Quebec), and killed one of them. The driver was chased. His car overturned in a ditch. When he emerged he was shot dead by two police officers, alleging he had a “large knife”. The only suspect was shot dead rather than apprehended. Harper mused in Parliament that the hit-and-run was a “terrorist” attack. There won’t be a trial.

Understanding domestic crimes and informing the public appears to be the last concern. Justifying Canada’s militarization and its wars is high on the agenda.

Posted in USA, Human RightsComments Off on Police kill shooter and lose suspect in Ottawa — Canada’s 911?

War on ISIL exposes US disastrous leadership


War on ISIL exposes US disastrous leadership: Analyst  Jim W. Dean,  VT Editor

[ Update:  The much heavier bombing around Kobani has turned the battle around. It appears the Kurds and US command got a GPS grid layout on the city to be able to call in the building where the attacking ISIL guys had set up fighting positions, and then a bomb or two would come to visit them.

Press TV had mis-identified an B1 bomber dark image photo as a fighter bomber. But the B1 has eight engines and can carry a bomb load that is just incredible, and it can stay aloft for a long time.

The plane gets a strike order, punches in the GPS coordinates for the selected bomb or two… and off they go. The Pentagon should have been using the B1 sooner, because we had them sitting on the Qatar airfield along with all the B-52s… Jim W. Dean ]

The US failure to fight the ISIL Takfiri group shows the West’s terrible leadership, a political commentator says.


 For the YouTube video you will need to turn your volume up all the way. The conversion process is cutting the volume by half for some reason. But if you have any clarity issues just click here for the Press TV link.


Jim W. Dean, managing editor of Veterans Today, told Press TV that the failure to fight the militant group “humiliates” the US and exposes a “disastrous leadership” on the part of the West.

He strongly criticized the US-led coalition against the ISIL, saying each of the allied countries was “exploiting” the situation on behalf of “their “own national benefit.”

The analyst noted that Turkey has “done nothing” to confront the ISIL.

The commentator also expressed regrets that the US was “begging” the Ankara government to let the coalition forces use a Turkish military base for attacking the ISIL positions.

Washington and its allies were advancing the vicious agenda of using ISIL to gain a foothold in Syria and to bring down the legitimate government of the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the analyst stated.

However, the removal of al-Assad has become an impossible task for the US allies as the Syrian public and army fully support the Damascus government, the expert concluded.

The remarks come as Kurds in Turkey are angry at the government for preventing them from crossing into neighboring Syria to join the fight against ISIL terrorists in the Syrian Kurdish town of Kobani.

Ankara also refuses to intervene along its border with Syria where ISIL militants have besieged the mainly Kurdish town.

According to reports, the Takfiri militants have taken half of the Syrian city.

Posted in USAComments Off on War on ISIL exposes US disastrous leadership

Blackwater guards convicted in 2007 Baghdad shooting


Blackwater guards convicted in 2007 Baghdad shooting

… from Russia Today,  Moscow

[ Editor’s Note:  Prosecutors did a good job, as these convictions will dampen the “anything goes” attitute that grew out of the situation in Iraq of “shoot first and ask questions later”. It was one of the issues that framed the US as an occupation army, the civilians were expendable in any and all situations… Jim W. Dean ]

A Washington, DC jury has convicted one former Blackwater guard of murder and three more from the private military company of voluntary manslaughter in connection with infamous 2007 shooting in Baghdad that left 14 civilians dead and 17 others injured.

The jury of eight women and four men deliberated for 27 days before convicting Nicholas A. Slatten, of Sparta, Tennessee., of first-degree murder. The panel also convicted Paul A. Slough of Keller, Texas; Evan S. Liberty of Rochester, New Hampshire; and Dustin L. Heard of Knoxville, Tenn., of at least three counts of voluntary manslaughter, the Washington Post reported.

The jurors are still deliberating on more charges, as US District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth allowed the jury to announce only those verdicts they had agreed upon so far, the Associated Press noted.

The four former Blackwater Worldwide employees faced federal homicide and firearm charges for the firing machine guns and grenades into a Baghdad traffic circle. They have been found guilty on at least some of the charges, according to the Post.

During the 10-week trial, federal prosecutors argued that the defendants opened fire without provocation, firing wildly into the crowded area because they harbored deep-rooted hostility towards Iraqis. The government also claimed the guards later boasted of their indiscriminate shooting.

The 2007 shooting, which happened at Nisur Square in Baghdad, scandalized the Iraqi public and raised tensions with the US four years into the Iraq war. The guards were accompanying a State Department convoy through the streets of Baghdad when they opened fire at a traffic roundabout. The Blackwater troops reportedly faced no provocation, yet they opened fire on a mother and her son in a white Kia vehicle and then continued to fire indiscriminately.

The maximum sentence for conviction of first-degree murder is life imprisonment. The gun charges carry mandatory minimum prison terms of 30 years. The maximum prison term for involuntary manslaughter is eight years; for attempted manslaughter it is seven years.

Posted in USAComments Off on Blackwater guards convicted in 2007 Baghdad shooting

ZIONISM UNMASKED: ‘Anti-Semitic’ – the Label that Stops Criticism ”5”


Dr. Paul Balles for Salem News

When you can’t criticise a propaganda machine for its promotions, both free speech and democracy are dead.

Misuse of
Misuse of “antisemitism” illustration by Carlos Latuff

(BAHRAIN) – If you indulge in ad hominem attacks (attacking the person rather than the issue), you can expect the same in return. The issues related to the anti-Semitic label are many.

First, the expression “anti-Semitic” is a misnomer. It’s defined as “hating Jews or Judeophobia.” The label “anti-Semitism” is wrong because not all Jews are Semites, and many Arabs are.

In 2004, the US Congress passed the Global Anti-Semitism Review Act. The Act defines a person as being anti-Semitic for holding any of a number of beliefs. My comments follow each of the 14 items supposedly revealing anti-Semitism.

1. Any assertion, “that the Jewish community controls government, the media, international business and the financial world.”

According to this, it doesn’t matter whether the assertion is true or not. Truth is not an issue. Simply making such a statement violates the Act. In itself, that fact provides strong evidence of control of the US government.

2. The expression of “Strong anti-Israel sentiment.”

Any criticism of Israel can thus be considered anti-Semitic. Israel can mangle Gaza and get away with it.

3. Expressing “Virulent criticism” of Israel’s leaders, past or present.

Menachem Begin may have led the Irgun in the slaughter and dispossession of thousands of Palestinians, but it’s anti-Semitic to say so.

4. Any criticism of the Jewish religion or its religious leaders with its emphasis on the Talmud and Kabbala.

It’s perfectly acceptable, as free speech, to vilify Islam, but any criticism of Judaism violates the Act.

5. Any criticism of the United States Government and Congress for being under the undue influence by the Jewish-Zionist community, which would include Jewish organizations such as AIPAC.

Truth matters not to the ridiculous legislators who passed this ludicrous act.

6. Any criticism of the Jewish-Zionist community for promoting globalism or what some call the “New World Order.”

When you can’t criticise a propaganda machine for its promotions, both free speech and democracy are dead.

7. Placing any blame on Jewish leaders and their followers for inciting the Roman crucifixion of Christ.

In order to accommodate the anti-Semitism label, simply rewrite history.

8. Citing any facts that could in any way diminish the “six million” figure of Jewish holocaust victims.

I violate the act simply by citing the fact that five million non-Jews died at the hands of the Nazis. This goes beyond stifling free speech.

9. Claiming that Israel is a racist state.

That’s not a claim. It’s a fact. Israel is full of racist laws. It insists on preserving its racist character and its right to impose apartheid in the West Bank and Gaza.

10. Making any claim that there is a “Zionist Conspiracy.”

A rational provision for such a claim would insist on evidence as proof of its validity. To disallow making such a claim is existentially (Israelis love that word) dictatorial.

11. Offering proof that Jews and their leaders created Communism and the Bolshevik revolution in Russia.

It just became illegal to offer proof. Minds are made up. Don’t confuse them with the facts.

12. Making derogatory statements about Jewish persons.

Why limit it to Jewish persons?

13. Asserting that spiritually disobedient Jews do not have the Biblical right to re-occupy Palestine.

Why limit it to the spiritually disobedient?

14. Making any allegations of Mossad involvement in the 9/11 attack.

I just did in a column published a week ago.

The Act passed by the US Congress makes me anti-Semitic. It’s an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution. I’m a critic of Israel when they commit wrongs and a critic of America when it does wrong. Despite Congress, that’s not anti-Semitic.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on ZIONISM UNMASKED: ‘Anti-Semitic’ – the Label that Stops Criticism ”5”

Anti-Semitism: Zionism’s Indispensable Alibi ”4”


Iraqi Jews

Maidhc Ó Cathail Salem-News

Operations Ezra & Nechemia: The Aliyah of Iraqi Jews.

Contrary to the widespread perception that Zionism opposes anti-Semitism, its adherents have occasionally revealed a more ambivalent attitude to Jew-hatred. In 1895, Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism, prophetically wrote in his Diaries, “Anti-Semites will become our surest friends, anti-Semitic countries our allies.” Even the suffering inflicted on European Jewry by the Nazi holocaust doesn’t seem to have unduly tempered such cynicism. In 1995, Jay Lefkowitz, an American government official, told the New York Times Magazine, “Deep down, I believe that a little anti-Semitism is a good thing for the Jews— reminds them who they are.”(OSAKA, Japan) – Although Zionism typically represents itself as the solution to anti-Semitism, the truth is less flattering. In fact, hostility toward Jews is indispensable to the cause of Jewish nationalism. If anti-Semitism didn’t exist, Zionists would have to invent it. And in many cases that is precisely what they have done.

If Zionist extremists can’t provoke the desired level of anti-Semitism to advance their goals, they are even prepared to fake it. A 1952 article in Davar, the official organ of Mapai, the party of the then Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, suggested sending a team of saboteurs “to help redeem Jews” from the countries where they are “absorbed in sinful self-satisfaction.”

“The task of these young men,” the article explained, “would be to disguise themselves as non-Jews, and, acting upon the brutal Zionism, plague these Jews with anti-Semitic slogans, such as ‘Bloody Jew,’ ‘Jews go to Palestine,’ and similar ‘intimacies.’”

Lest anyone doubt that the Israeli government would ever contemplate carrying out such a cynical plot to encourage Jews to move to Israel, the “rescue” of about 125,000 Iraqi Jews in the early 1950s involved far worse acts. “In attempts to portray the Iraqis as anti-American and to terrorize the Jews,” wrote former CIA officer Wilbur Eveland in Ropes of Sand, “the Zionists planted bombs in the U.S. Information Service library and in synagogues. Soon leaflets began to appear urging Jews to flee to Israel.”

Whatever about posing as “Arab anti-Semites,” one might think that Zionists would draw the line at a post-Holocaust sponsorship of Nazism. Yet this is exactly what a leading Canadian Zionist organization has been accused of. “In the 1960s, the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) paid John Garrity, a small-time mercenary, to build up the fledgling Canadian Nazi Party,” reveals Ezra Levant in Shakedown. When the embarrassing truth emerged, it was justified by the CJC as an attempt to learn more about neo-Nazism. However, the real purpose, according to the Jewish Canadian writer, was to provide “a pretext for the addition of ‘hate’ laws to the criminal code.”

While “hate” sounds like something that all decent people would condemn, one man’s hate may be another man’s righteous indignation. Zionists, for example, tend to conflate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, and, therefore, as something that could be considered a “hate crime.”

But are Professors Mearsheimer and Walt engaged in hate propaganda by documenting the harmful influence of the Israel lobby over US foreign policy? Or is former US President Jimmy Carter a “bigot” for comparing the Israeli occupation of Palestine to apartheid South Africa? Are the survivors of the USS Liberty who refuse to remain silent about Israel’s deliberate attack on their ship merely motivated by hatred of Jews? Is Professor Norman Finkelstein a “self-hating Jew” for exposing the Holocaust Industry’s corruption of history and memory in the service of an extortion racket? And is UN special rapporteur Richard Falk also “self-hating” for likening Israel’s actions against the besieged Gazans to what the Nazis did to Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto?

In each of these cases, by no means an exhaustive list, the charge of anti-Semitism, rather than serving to protect Jewish people from defamation, has been used to obscure Zionist crimes.

However, as Zionist criminality becomes increasingly transparent, there will most likely be a sharp rise in anti-Semitism worldwide. No doubt much of it will be the result of genuine, albeit misdirected, anger as the extent of Zionist crimes against humanity becomes more widely known. But considering Zionism’s history of faking attacks on Jews, we can expect at least some of this “hate” to be the work of Jewish extremists who disingenuously claim to be fighting anti-Semitism.

Perhaps it’s time for those who are genuinely concerned about combating hatred in the world to heed the words of Israel Shahak. As the great Israeli humanist concluded in his classic Jewish History, Jewish Religion, “Although the struggle against antisemitism (and of all other forms of racism) should never cease, the struggle against Jewish chauvinism and exclusivism … is now of equal or greater importance.”

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Anti-Semitism: Zionism’s Indispensable Alibi ”4”

Anti-Semitism Zionist Myth v Truth and Reality ”3”


Alan Hart Salem-News

Today much of what supporters of Israel, right or wrong, claim to be anti-Semitism is actually anti-Israelism, which in my view is best described as anti-Zionism.

zionists cause antisemitism sign
Courtesy: Alan Hart

(LONDON) – There are two definitions of anti-Semitism in its Jewish context. One was born in real history and represents a truth. The other is part and parcel of Zionist mythology and was invented for the purpose of blackmailing non-Jewish Europeans and North Americans into refraining from criticising Israel or, to be more precise, staying silent when its leaders resort to state terrorism and demonstrate in many ways their absolute contempt for international law.

Anti-Semitism properly and honestly defined is prejudice against and loathing and even hatred of Jews, all Jews everywhere, just because they are Jews.

Anti-Semitism as defined by Zionism, the colonial, ethnic cleansing enterprise of some Jews, has come to mean almost all criticism of Israel’s policies and actions, in particular its oppression of the Palestinians, and, also, criticism on the basis of revelations from the documented truth of history which expose Zionism’s propaganda for the nonsense that it is. Put another way, anti-Semitism as defined by supporters of Israel, right or wrong, is anything written or said by anybody that challenges and contradicts Zionism’s version of events. In effect Zionists say, “If you disagree with us, you’re anti-Semitic.”

As a blackmail card to silence criticism of Israel and prevent informed and honest debate about who must do what and why for justice and peace in the Middle East, Zionism’s false charge of anti-Semitism has worked wonderfully well to date. Why? In the long (and still present) shadow of the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust, a European crime for which, effectively, the Arabs were punished, there are few things Westerners in public life, politicians and media people especially, fear more than being accused of anti-Semitism.

Unable to refute the substance of documented and objective messages of challenge and criticism, Zionism’s policy always was, and still is, to shoot the messengers with false charges of anti-Semitism.

For complete understanding of what anti-Semitism is and is not, it’s necessary to know what Zionism is and is not.

Zionism claims to be the nationalist movement of the Jews, all Jews everywhere. If this was so, the assertion that anti-Zionism is almost by definition a manifestation of anti-Semitism might appear to have a degree of credibility. But this Zionist claim does not bear examination.

As I document in detail in my book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, the truth is that from Zionism’s foundation in 1897 until the Nazi holocaust, its colonial enterprise was endorsed and supported by only a tiny minority of the world’s Jews and was opposed by many of them.

Also true is that from Israel’s unilateral declaration of independence in 1948 until the final countdown to the 1967 war, most Jews of the world had no great affinity with Israel. That changed when most Jews believed – because they were conditioned by Zionism and the mainstream Western media to believe – that poor little Israel was in danger of annihilation. In that light, Israel’s stunning victory was a source of great pride for most Jews of the world.

Though most Jews didn’t and still don’t want to know it, the truth was different. The Arabs did not attack first and were not intending to attack. The 1967 war was one of Israeli aggression.

Today much of what supporters of Israel, right or wrong, claim to be anti-Semitism is actually anti-Israelism, which in my view is best described as anti-Zionism. And contrary to the assertions of Zionism’s spin doctors, anti-Zionism is not by definition anti-Semitism.

Short or long, any discussion of anti-Semitism should include the fact that Zionism needs it. The first to acknowledge this was none other than Theodore Herzl, Zionism’s founding father. In one of his diaries, not published until 1962, Herzl wrote the following:

“Anti-Semitism is a propelling force which, like the wave of the future, will bring Jews into the promised land. Anti-Semitism has grown and continues to grow – and so do I.”

He was right. Without the anti-Semitism unleashed by Adolf Hitler in his Germany and Nazi occupied Europe, Zionism’s colonial enterprise would have been doomed to failure for lack of enough Jewish support.

Today Zionism needs anti-Semitism or what it can present as anti-Semitism to go on justifying its policies and actions.

Any discussion of anti-Semitism should also take note of the words of Yehoshafat Harkabi, Israel’s longest serving Director of Military Intelligence. In his book Israel’s Fateful Hour, he wrote: “I believe it was a damaging error on Menachem Begin’s part to insinuate that criticism of Israel is a manifestation of anti-Semitism.” In the same book Harkabi gave this warning:

“Israel is the criterion according to which all Jews will tend to be judged. Israel as a Jewish state is an example of the Jewish character, which finds free and concentrated expression within it. Anti-Semitism has deep and historical roots. Nevertheless, any flaw in Israeli conduct, which initially is cited as anti-Israelism, is likely to be transformed into empirical proof of the validity of anti-Semitism. It would be a tragic irony if the Jewish state, which was intended to solve the problem of anti-Semitism, was to become a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism. Israelis must be aware that the price of their misconduct is paid not only by them but also Jews throughout the world.”

From the early 1980’s when those words were written, Israel’s “misconduct” has been the prime cause in the rise of what Zionism presents as anti-Semitism, but which is actually anti-Israelism/anti-Zionism. Today the biggest danger to the Jews of the world is, as Harkabi warned, that anti-Israelism/anti-Zionism will be transformed into anti-Semitism, with the consequence at some point of another great turning against Jews.

My own view is that such a catastrophe will happen unless the citizens of the mainly Gentile Western world, among whom most Jews live, are made aware of the difference between Judaism and Zionism. As I have previously written and never tire of repeating, knowledge of this difference is the key to understanding two things.

One is why it is perfectly possible to be passionately anti-Zionist (opposed to Zionism’s still on-going colonial enterprise) without being in any way, shape or form anti-Semitic.

The other is why it is wrong to blame all Jews everywhere for the crimes of the hardest core Zionist few in Israel.

In my analysis, the day when citizens of the Western world understand those two things and what anti-Semitism is and is not, is the day that will mark the beginning of the end of Zionism’s freedom and ability to impose its will on the Palestinians, the whole of the Arab world and the governments of the major Western powers, and to remain above and beyond international law.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Anti-Semitism Zionist Myth v Truth and Reality ”3”

The Complicated Faces of Anti-Semitism ”2”


Dr. Alan Sabrosky Salem-News

Exploring the three faces of anti-Semitism; two defined by assorted Gentiles and the third by Zionists.

Images: Alan Sabrosky and

(JACKSON, Miss.) – I cannot speak for the situation elsewhere, but in the US, I doubt if there is a another definable group that equals or surpasses Jews in their achievements in so many different fields, their support for civil liberties and civil rights, and their philanthropy or general support of charitable causes.

But when Israel enters the equation, those truly admirable qualities are often set aside. Israeli bigotry, atrocities and crimes against humanity are largely ignored, excused or vociferously supported, and Jewish-dominated institutions such as the mainstream media pointedly refrain from publishing or reporting blatant contemporary examples of Israeli misconduct.

This brings to mind a conversation I had a few years ago with a Jewish friend whose parents met in a Nazi concentration camp. We were discussing something historical, and she remarked that Jews had been persecuted by almost everyone throughout their history. Said I (paraphrasing), well, what’s wrong with you? Said she, what’s wrong with us? Sure, I replied, it simply isn’t natural for any people to be so consistently disliked. Look at it in personal terms. If a few people I meet don’t like me, I can easily say the problem is with them. But if virtually everyone I meet hates or despises me, it is pretty hard to escape the conclusion that there is something fundamentally wrong with me, or with how I behave.

The Basis of Anti-Semitism

Now, Jews inveigh often and loudly against Anti-Semitism, which is itself a bit odd, coming from a people whose — well, “Anti-Gentilism” (i.e., everyone else) for lack of a better term — seems embedded in their religion and culture. The Books of Judges and Deuteronomy are awash in bloodshed, with Deuteronomy endorsing the slaughter of people who worshipped a different God. Now, those people were not threatening Jews; they just had chosen a different way to seek answers to the eternal questions of life and death. But to Jews, at least in their core scripture, this sufficed for their extermination, and their livestock and possessions as well. This trait alone would make Jews unwelcome — how many people willingly reside next to their own executioners, simply for the crime of existing?

Then there is the problem of dealing with a people whose religion includes a major holiday — Passover (or Pesach) — based on mass infanticide. True, the side of the Passover coin presented to the world is that of God “passing over” the Jewish homes en route to punish the Egyptians for keeping them in captivity. But the other side of that Passover coin is the punishment itself, the killing on behalf of the Jews of all of the first-born of Egypt: not just of Pharaoh, or of Pharaoh’s priests and ministers and generals, who might reasonably have been held responsible for that captivity, but of the poor peasants and fishermen and even prisoners as well, who had no conceivable role in it at all. Hating people who praise their God for murdering your children is not at all irrational — it would be as if America made the firebombing of Dresden and the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki into national holidays, and added some divine glorification to it as well. Not pretty, to say the least.

The Three Faces of Anti-Semitism

From this derive the three faces of anti-Semitism, two defined by assorted Gentiles and the third by Zionists. The first is essentially the Roman view, highlighted in the Jewish War that ended in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Temple and the dispersal of the remnants of the population. This did not see Jews as the problem, but rather an armed Jewish state — i.e., how Jews collectively behave in an organized polity. Even while the armies of Titus were battering Jerusalem down, thriving Jewish communities existed in virtually every city of consequence throughout the Empire, including Rome itself.

The second defines Jews as a people and as individuals as disposable for any of a variety of reasons. It predominated in much of Christian Europe for centuries (and parenthetically was almost unknown in the Muslim world), and culminated in the Nazi Holocaust. This would make no distinction between an Israel Shamir and a Yitzhak Shamir, or even me; all could go.

And the last form is the so-called “new” anti-Semitism, defined by assorted Israeli governments and Israel’s advocates overseas as any criticism whatsoever of any Israeli domestic or foreign policy, and thus an “existential threat” to Israel itself. This is now the favored usage of the term by Israeli partisans, intended to protect Israel from criticism or sanctions abroad, and to stifle debate over its actions.

Anti-Semitism Reconsidered

Of these three forms of anti-Semitism, the last is an understandable political ploy for a country that cannot survive open disclosure of its attitudes, internal practices and policies. Being nonsense does not make it ineffective, of course, given the extent of its media support and the money poured into political coffers on its behalf.

The second is neither ridiculous nor nonsense. It is an exercise in criminal idiocy that merits condemnation, whether perpetrated by (e.g.) the Inquisition, the Black Hundreds or the Nazi SS.

But the first is on the mark, and the pragmatic Romans got this right. Whether the scriptural affinity for bloody-mindedness reflects the Jewish culture or affected it over time is immaterial. Either way, the outcome is an exceptionally nasty people within an armed and independent Jewish state, ranking at least up (or down) there with the Huns and the ancient Assyrians.

The oddity is that as individuals without an organized Jewish state, what one sees is admirable achievements instead of aggressive abominations. Without a Jewish state, the dark side of Judaism has no way to express itself, so the admirable side of the Jewish cultural coin — and there is a great deal to admire — shines instead. Getting there without a catastrophe is our task in the years ahead.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on The Complicated Faces of Anti-Semitism ”2”

Shoah’s pages