Archive | October 27th, 2014

“Mornings in Jenin” chosen as first book in Palestine-inspired reading campaign



Susan Abulhawa’s Mornings in Jenin offers an insight into the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. (Aslan Media)

Early next year, book groups around the US will delve into a historical saga set in the city of Jenin, bringing together readers to learn about the story of modern Palestine. The reading campaign — which will hopefully spread arond the world — is called “One Book — Many Communities.”

The group Librarians and Archvists With Palestine has announced the campaign based on the “one book — one town” idea, which brings together people across many towns and cities to read and talk about the same book. Discussions will take place throughout January 2015, and Librarians and Archivists have put together a toolkit for organizers, bookmark and poster templates and a central website to publicize events, wherever they are.

The first novel chosen is Susan Abulhawa’s Mornings in Jenin, a historical saga set in Palestine and the US which follows the impact of the Nakba — the 1948 ethnic cleansing of Palestine — on a family who, settle in the refugee camp in Jenin after being forced out of their home village.

The campaign kicks off in New York with a launch on 8 November, where Abulhawa will be appearing at the Bluestocking Bookstore.

In an email exchange, Hannah Mermelstein of Librarians & Activists With Palestine told me a little more about the “One Book” campaign, what the group hopes to achieve, and why she feels that literature is a good medium for teaching people about Palestine:

Sarah Irving: What is it about Mornings in Jenin that makes it a good book to kick off a campaign like this?

Hannah Mermelstein: Mornings in Jenin is a very accessible novel that is both deeply moving and organized chronologically as it takes the reader through four generations of a Palestinian family. So it is both a good introduction to Palestinian literature and to Palestinian history. The novel is partially inspired by Ghassan Kanafani’s Returning to Haifa, so it provides the opportunity for further reading and learning for those who want that. It was written in English by a Palestinian-American author whom we know; we were able to discuss the idea with Susan Abulhawa and she will be coming to our launch event in New York City. It’s also been translated into more than 25 languages, so folks around the world can participate.

SI: Do you have future books already lined up, or will that come later?

HM: Not yet. Suggestions welcome!

SI: What do you think is special about literature in terms of spreading interest in and knowledge of Palestine?

HM: For many, reading a novel is more appealing than reading a historical tome, so this kind of literature is able to reach a wider audience than we might otherwise reach. People are also more willing and able to accept fictional characters for who they are — flawed and perhaps with different opinions than one’s own — than they are to read nonfiction or political analysis with which they disagree. During Israel’s assault on Gaza this past summer, Librarians and Archivists With Palestine read Palestinian poetry and excerpts of literature on the New York City subways, and I think the reaction was more positive than if we had simply gotten on the train and said, “End the siege of Gaza. Boycott Israel.” The bookmarks that we handed out said that, but in our spoken words we were able to draw people in and to share Palestinian voices directly, since most of us are not Palestinian.

Posted in Palestine AffairsComments Off on “Mornings in Jenin” chosen as first book in Palestine-inspired reading campaign

Turkey may be stalling Kurds on purpose: Analyst


Turkey may be stalling Kurds on purpose: Analyst

by  Jim W. Dean, VT Editor    

Turkey may be intentionally stalling the movement of Kurdish fighters into Syria to help fight back an offensive by the Takfiri ISIL terrorists on the Syrian town of Kobani, an analyst tells Press TV.

You can watch the 6 minute Skype interview (longer than usual) at PressTV here.

This is not an active window...please click link above.

This is not an active window…please click link above.

“Turkey knew the Kurds had to get in very quickly and there could be a stalling game here,” Jim W. Dean, the managing editor of Veteran’s Today, said in an interview with Press TV on Wednesday.

“They could drag this out for a week, two weeks,” he added, stating that Turkey actually said they had the “intention” of letting the fighters in but had to ‘work out the details.’

The remark comes as the United States has welcomed Turkey’s decision to allow Kurdish fighters to cross the border into Syria to help defend the besieged border town of Kobani.

The cemeteries are winning in Kobani

The cemeteries are winning in Kobani

A US official said the entrance of well-trained fighters into Kobani could give a major boost to the Kurds currently defending the flashpoint city.

Dean went on to say, “The key thing is that Kobani not only needs fighters, but they also need weapons. I’ve not seen a single soldier with an RPG; I haven’t seen one with a sniper scope yet. And these are things that are absolutely necessary.”

The Pentagon admitted on Wednesday that the ISIL terrorists had captured a bundle of US weapons airdropped in the Syrian border town of Kobani earlier this week.

The US military had dropped 28 bundles filled with grenades, mortar rounds and other supplies in the area, which were intended for Kurdish fighters.

Posted in TurkeyComments Off on Turkey may be stalling Kurds on purpose: Analyst




To discover the deepest truth of the JFK assassination, one has to tear up not one, but many lies stacked on top of each other. Pealing off the government lie is just the beginning.

Just like in the case of 9/11, the mainstream “JFK truth movement” is really a cloud of partial truths meant to hide the core truth (the Zionist coup).

by Laurent Guyénot

The hijacked plot theory

In a previous article, I have argued that the 9/11 “inside job” theory is a secondary cover-up under the major cover-up of the official Bin Laden myth. I called it the “reversible false flag”. I also proposed to solve some difficult questions by the hypothesis that a minor false flag plot orchestrated by US military intelligence had been hijacked by the Zionist-Neocon criminal network and turned into a much more dramatic event designed to blackmail the US into the War on Terror.

After researching for some years the Kennedy assassination, I have progressively come to the conclusion that the same patterns apply to the JFK assassination. This theory of a hijacked plot in the JFK assassination has been elaborated by Gary Wean, a detective sergeant for the Los Angeles Police Department, in his bookThere’s a Fish in the Courthouse (1987), quoted by Michael Piper in his groundbreaking Final Judgment. Relying on a well-informed source in Dallas (identified as Republican Senator John Tower in his 1996 second edition), Wean raises the possibility that the Dallas coup was “a double-cross of fantastic dimensions”, in which a failed assassination attempt staged by the CIA had been hijacked by what he refers to as the Mishpucka (the Family,in Hebrew), the Russian Jewish Mafia, whose evil power reaching in the highest spheres Wean has been investigating for years in California. The Mishpucka wanted Kennedy dead and turned the operation into a successful assassination, then escaped investigation by hiding behind the CIA’s scheme. JFK researcher Dick Russel has independently added weight to that theory by interviewing Cuban exiles who believe they had been manipulated (The Man Who Knew Too Much, 1992). The assumption is that the CIA and their Cuban exile associates intended to spare Kennedy’s life but force him to retaliate against Castro.

Oswald poses for posterity

Oswald poses for posterity

It was a false flag operation: Oswald, the patsy, had been groomed with the “legend” of a pro-Castro communist activist, which was sold to the public by news media on the day of the assassination. But real snipers were added to the CIA’s staged assassination, by a Zionist-sponsored network who didn’t care about Cuba but wanted Kennedy dead.[1]

The hypothesis of a “hijacked plot” (one plot inside another) is consistent with the bare facts of the JFK assassination. The bullets fired from theSchool Book Depository behind the presidential limousine all missed their target. Seconds later, bullets were fired from the grassy knoll, on the front left of the limousine, and two at least hit the President. So it is plausible that two snipers (or two teams of snipers) were used: the CIA sniper was shooting from the sixth floor of the School Book Depository, where some witnesses saw him. He missed purposefully, and then quickly escaped through a back door. Oswald, who was working in the School Book Depository, would be arrested in the afternoon, as planned. The snipers shooting from the grassy knoll were not CIA, and took the CIA by surprise, forcing them into damage control mode.

Meet Jacob Rubenstein

The hijacked plot theory is fully consistent with the profiles of the two main known actors in the drama: Lee Harvey Oswald, the patsy falsely accused of killing the President, and Jack Ruby, the man who killed the patsy and thereby closed the case. Oswald has been extensively investigated, and his CIA, FBI and Military Intelligence connections well documented. But not as much has been written about Jack Ruby; it is unfortunate, because Ruby’s trail should logically lead directly to those whom he was covering, and that can only mean Kennedy’s true murderers. Few people even know that his real name was Jacob Leon Rubenstein, that he was the son of Jewish Polish immigrants, that he had introduced himself in the Dallas Police station as a translator for Israeli reporters, and that, before dying, he told his defense lawyer William Kunstler, on several occasions, that he killed Oswald “for the Jews”[2] (his rabbi Hillel Silverman made the same declaration).[3]Only from Collins Piper do we learn these truly “unspeakable” things, as well as the fact that Rubenstein was associated with a Jewish international crime syndicate led by Meyer Suchowljansky, aka Lansky, a generous donator to the Zionist cause (his granddaughter, Mira Lansky Boland, became an ADL official). This “Yiddish Connection” included the infamous Benjamin “Bugsy” Siegelbaum, one of the bosses of Murder Incorporated as well as the legendary founder of Las Vegas.

Jacob Rubenstein in action

Jacob Rubenstein in action

Ruby was a friend and associate of Siegel’s successor Mickey Cohen. Cohen claims in his memoirs to have been “engrossed with Israel”, boasts of his financial contributions and arms smuggling for the Zionist cause, and, according to Gary Wean who had him under surveillance, had contacts with Israeli terrorist and future Prime Minister Menachem Begin. For those who haven’t read Piper’s book, it must be said that Ruby is only one of many Zionists involved in the cover-up. Another one is Arlen Specter, assistant counsel to the Warren Commission, who came up with the “single bullet theory”, threatened reluctant witnesses (such as Jean Hill who recounted it to researcher Jim Marrs for his book Crossfire: The Plot that Killed Kennedy, 1989), and stubbornly defended it against common sense (sticking to it in his 2000 biography, entitled without irony Passion for Truth).

At his death in 2012, Specter, the son of Russian Jewish immigrants, was officially mourned by the Israeli government as “an unswerving defender of the Jewish State,” and by AIPAC, as “a leading architect of the congressional bond between our country and Israel,” while the Committee to Free Jonathan Pollard reminded that he was “among the first to join the call for Pollard’s release.”[4]

The CIA gets double-crossed

Another important clue supporting the “hijacked plot” theory is the consequence of the assassination. Since the assassination was clearly set up as a false flag operation, with Oswald framed as Castro’s agent, it is obvious that the goal was to justify retaliation against Cuba. But that goal was never achieved. Johnson hushed up the rumor of Oswald’s communist background, and thwarted the plan for attacking Cuba. Why? The dominant theory among reputedly serious JFK researchers, such as David Talbot[5], James Douglass[6] or Mark Lane[7], fails to answer that question. These authors prove convincingly that a faction within the National Security State (mostly CIA and Pentagon) was desperately trying to start a war against Castro, and that, after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, they were prepared to deceive the President in order to do that. But they fail to demonstrate that the CIA was prepared to assassinate the President: there is a huge difference between setting up a secret operation behind the President’s back and committing high treason by murdering their own President. And none of the three authors mentioned above succeed in naming the mastermind of the plot within the CIA; rather, the accusation falls on the National Security State at large, which is far from satisfying.

Mossad mole James Jesus Angleton

Mossad mole James Jesus Angleton

In fact, the single character who stands out as the most suspicious is James Angleton, who controlled the CIA’s Israel Office from 1954 to 1974. His biographer Tom Mangold (Cold Warrior) states: “Angleton’s closest professional friends overseas […] came from the Mossad and […] he was held in immense esteem by his Israeli colleagues and by the state of Israel, which was to award him profound honors after his death.”[8]Angleton played a major role in the cover-up of by acting as intermediary between the CIA and the Warren Commission.

Johnson: mastermind or Zionist accomplice?

Those who accuse the CIA for JFK’s assassination credit Johnson for having thwarted the plan for a war with Cuba, which might have led to a world war.But they ignore the massive evidence that Johnson was heavily involved in the plot, evidence gathered by such researchers as Roger Stone[9] or Phillip Nelson[10].

However, those who name LBJ as the mastermind, in turn, fail to explain why the plot was designed as a false flag assassination to accuse Cuba, if Johnson finally intended to thwart that scheme. That Johnson was a psychopath willing to murder to achieve his life-long ambition makes no doubt. But it is impossible to believe that he could deceive and/or control the Federal government, by the sheer power of his manipulative personality, even with complicity from Texas Oil tycoons. Even with the support of FBI director Edgar Hoover, he could not have prevented the media from investigating.

Only the thesis incriminating Israel can solve these contradictions. Israel had a vital interest in eliminating Kennedy. The President was determined to prevent Israel from achieving its goal of a nuclear arsenal, and wrote Prime Minister David ben Gurion that “this Government’s commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized”[11] if he didn’t comply with his demand of immediate international inspection of the Dimona complex. Ben Gurion retired on the day he received Kennedy’s letter, dated June 15, 1963, which may be interpreted as a dive into the deep underworld of secret operations. Kennedy was also committed to the right of return for the nearly 800,000 Palestinian refugees expelled from their neighborhoods and villages in 1947-48, that is, for the implementation of 1948 UN Resolution 194. For these two reasons at least (and there were more, such as the Kennedy’s effort to restrict the American Zionist Council, the forerunner of AIPAC, under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938), the Zionists wished Kennedy dead. So did Johnson.

Roger Stone’s case against Johnson

Roger Stone’s case against Johnson

As a matter of fact, Johnson had always been Israel’s man, ever since his 1948 Senate campaign masterminded by Abraham Feinberg, the financial godfather of Israel’s atomic bomb, who had already financed Truman’s 1948 presidential campaign[12].

His coming to power in 1963 was greeted with relief in Tel Aviv, as commented the Israeli newspaper YedioAhoronot: “There is no doubt that, with the accession of Lyndon Johnson, we shall have more opportunity to approach the President directly if we should feel that US policy militates against our vital interests.”[13]

Indeed, a growing amount of evidence shows that in 1967 Johnson not only gave Israel a green light for the improperly called Six Day War (a preemptive attack followed by annexation), but had the CIA provide the Israelis with all necessary information to target Egypt’s military bases.

Johnson appears to have known in advance of the Israeli false flag attack of the USS Liberty on June 8, 1967, and to have planned using it for declaring war on Egypt (officially a Soviet ally).

In 2013, Associated Press reported about newly released tapes from Johnson’s White House office showing LBJ’s “personal and often emotional connection to Israel,” and pointed out that during the Johnson presidency, “the United States became Israel’s chief diplomatic ally and primary arms supplier.” An article from the 5 Towns Jewish Times running under the title “Our First Jewish President Lyndon Johnson?” elaborates on that and, after recalling Johnson’s continuous support of Jews and Israel in the 1940s and 50s, then his role in the crafting of the pro-Israel UN Resolution 242 in November 1967, concludes: “President Johnson firmly pointed American policy in a pro-Israel direction.

In a historical context, the American emergency airlift to Israel in 1973, the constant diplomatic support, the economic and military assistance and the strategic bonds between the two countries can all be credited to the seeds planted by LBJ.” The article also mentions that, “Research into Johnson’s personal history indicates that he inherited his concern for the Jewish people from his family. His aunt Jessie Johnson Hatcher, a major influence on LBJ, was a member of the Zionist Organization of America.” And, in a additional note: “The facts indicate that both of Lyndon Johnson’s great-grandparents, on the maternal side, were Jewish. […] The line of Jewish mothers can be traced back three generations in Lyndon Johnson’s family tree. There is little doubt that he was Jewish.”[14]

The missing link

The only missing link to prove the collusion between Johnson and Israel in the Kennedy assassination would be proof that Ruby was Johnson’s man. This link is provided by former Nixon operative Roger Stone who said in an interview with The Daily Caller, that in November 1963, upon seeing Ruby on television, “Nixon said, ‘The damn thing is, I knew this Jack Ruby. Murray [Chotiner] brought him to me in 1947, said he was one of ‘Johnson’s boys’ and that LBJ wanted us to hire him as an informant to the Committee. We did.’ I think Nixon immediately recognized that LBJ was using one his operatives to do ‘clean up’ work on the murder of John Kennedy.”[15] In light of this, it is interesting to mention a dubious FBI declassified memo dated November 24, 1947 which attempts to portray Ruby as Nixon’s man but has come to be regarded as a hoax by most serious JFK researchers. It states that “one Jack Rubenstein of Chicago […] is performing information functions for the staff of Congressman Richard Nixon, Republican of California,” and that he should “not be called for open testimony” by a congressional committee investigating organized crime.[16]This forgery has several flaws: first, Nixon was a freshman in the role as junior counsel in 1947, and only started prosecuting Alger Hiss (the only likely context for this memo) the next year. Secondly, it refers to “Jack Rubenstein” living in Chicago in November of 1947, when Ruby had in fact already changed his name and moved to Dallas by that time.Finally,the document carries a zip code when they did not exist at the time.

That Ruby acted on Johnson’s orders is a likely explanation to Ruby’s odd statements to the Warren Commission: “If you don’t take me back to Washington tonight to give me a chance to prove to the President that I am not guilty, then you will see the most tragic thing that will ever happen.” Ruby made himself more clear: “there will be a certain tragic occurrence happening if you don’t take my testimony and somehow vindicate me so my people don’t suffer because of what I have done.”He feared that his act would be used “to create some falsehood about some of the Jewish faith,” but added that “maybe something can be saved […], if our President, Lyndon Johnson, knew the truth from me.”[17] Ruby seems to have wanted to send through the Commission a message to Johnson, or rather a warning that he may spill the beans about Israel’s involvement if Johnson did not intervene in his favor. We get the impression that Ruby expected Johnson to pardon him (after all, he had killed the murderer of the President out of compassion for his wife, he had declared when arrested). That impression gets reinforced when we compare the respect he shows Johnson, referred to as “our President, who believes in righteousness and justice,” to the implicit accusation he would make against that same Johnson in a 1965 press conference[18], then again in a 1967 handwritten letter smuggled out of prison, in which he called Johnson “a Nazi in the worst order” in a handwritten letter.[19] Ruby’s violent resentment suggests a sense of betrayal.

Jacob Rubenstein accuses Johnson in 1965

Ruby’s statement to the Warren Commission was leaked to journalist Dorothy Kilgallen and published in the New York Journal American, August 18-20, 1964. Kilgallen also interviewed Jack Ruby and boasted afterwards of being about to “break the real story” and publish “the biggest scoop of the century” in a book titledMurder One. The book was never published: Kilgallen was found dead by an overdose of barbiturate and alcohol on November 8th, 1965. Her last published line said about the Kennedy assassination: “That story isn’t going to die as long as there’s a real reporter alive, and there are a lot of them alive.”[20]

It may be concluded that the three major theses (CIA, LBJ or Israel) can be boiled down to two, LBJ and Israel playing on the same team. And the contradictions between those two remaining theses can be solved by the theory that a CIA secret operation (a failed assassination of JFK) was hijacked by a Johnson-Israel conspiracy, who could thereafter force the CIA to keep the lid on the truth and shield them.

The House Select new cover-up

This process explains what happened in the 1970s, when the US Intelligence agencies became  target of investigations in the wake of the Watergate scandal. That’s when the CIA, to defuse the heat, pulled out another false culprit for JFK’s assassination: the mafia. Gaeton Fonzi, who was hired as a researcher in 1975 by the Church Committee (the Select Committee to StudyGovernmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities, which published between 1975 and 1976 fourteen separate reports on the abuses perpetrated by intelligence agencies) and by the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1977, published a book on the subject in 1993,The Last Investigation. His conclusion is that when Robert Blakey, a criminal law professor specialized in Organized Crime, was asked to take the reins of the Committee following the forced resignation of Richard Sprague, it was with the tacit understanding that he should lay the blame on Organized Crime: “In the end, the final report did what it was carefully structured to do: Create the impression that Organized Crime was involved in the conspiracy. That was the one point that Blakey wanted to etch in the national consciousness and leave in history’s memory. It was his personal bid to finally lay to rest the question of President Kennedy’s assassination. When the report was released, the theme of the front-page headline in the Washington Post was echoed by the media across the country: “MOBSTERS LINKED TO JFK DEATH.”[21]

George de Mohrenschildt

George de Mohrenschildt

It is interesting to note that George De Mohrenschildt was found dead hours after being asked by Fonzi for an interview, on March 29, 1977. The common belief is that Oswald was “shepherded by intelligence asset George De Mohrenschildt, at the instigation of Dallas CIA agent J. Walton Moore”.[22] That piece of information is dubious for several reasons: first, it is contradicted by the fact that Moore was officially FBI rather than CIA. Second, it rests on a printed interview given by De Mohrenschiltd to journalist Edward Epstein a few hours before his death: so De Mohrenschiltd was in no position to confirm or deny the words that Epstein ascribed to him.

In fact, De Mohrenschildt’s published interview contradicts his own manuscript account of his relationship to Oswald, revealed after his death[23]. Moreover, Epstein’s main source for his book Legend: the Secret World of Lee Harvey Oswald(1978) is Jesus Angleton, who was actively spreading disinformation at the time of the HSCA, defending the theory that Oswald was a KGB agent with CIA connections.

De Mohrenschildtd’s death was ruled a suicide. The Sherriff’s report mentions that in his last months he complained that “the Jews” and “the Jewish mafia” were out to get him.[24]Needless to say, Epstein doesn’t recall De Mohrenschildt mentioning such fear.

Relating to Congressional researcher Fonzi, it is also interesting to quote what he was told by Vince Salandria, a widely respected pioneer in JFK research: “All the critics, myself included, were misled very early,” said a totally disillusioned Salandria. “The cover story was transparent and designed not to hold, to fall apart at the slightest scrutiny.” Salandria apparently regarded the trail of a national conspiracy followed by most genuine JFK researchers as a deception, since in fact, “the interests of those who killed Kennedy now transcend national boundaries and national priorities. No doubt we are dealing now with an international conspiracy”. Salandria had also come to regard the public setting for Kennedy’s execution, including its capture on film by Abraham Zapruder, as part of a strategy of terror: “The forces that killed Kennedy wanted the message clear: ‘We are in control and no one—not the President, nor Congress, nor any elected official—no one can do anything about it.’ It was a message to the people that their Government was powerless. And the people eventually got the message.”[25]Salandria did not seem to be thinking of Israel, but who else than the Zionist criminal network can be described an “international conspiracy” controlling the President and Congress regarding to Foreign affairs?

Who owns the media ?

Who else, by the way, could possibly have controlled the mainstream media and the pseudo-alternative networks for 50 years to shield Israel from suspicion in the Dallas coup? Books focusing on the CIA keep emphasizing the CIA control over the news media, but that is a myth, largely propagated by the news media themselves. Deborah Davis, for example, has overblown Operation Mockingbird in her biography of Katharine Graham, the daughter of Eugene Meyer who bought The Washington Post in 1933.Davis claims that Philip Graham (Katharine’s husband and longtime director of the Post)as well as Joseph Alsop, the newspaper’s most influential columnist, were “owned” by CIA,[26] but a stronger case can be made for their loyalty to Israel. Kennedy assistant Arthur Schlesinger has recorded that it was Graham and Alsop who convinced Kennedy to take Johnson as his running mate, as soon as it became clear that Kennedy would beat Johnson at the Primaries. They were certainly not appointed by the CIA. Nor does Kennedy’s decision “defies historical reconstruction” as Schlesinger claims (strangely for a historian).[27] As Alan Hart explains, through Graham and Alsop, who could exert huge influence on public opinion, “Kennedy was forced by Israel’s supporters to take Johnson as his vice-presidential running mate.”[28]Everyone knows which interest group has the strongest hold on the American media, and it is not the CIA or any other government institution.

It is possible, of course, that the CIA used some media to condition the public for its false flag failed assassination by Oswald-the-deranged-communist. Only hours before Kennedy’s assassination, national television was preparing the public for it: Ed Herbert, news director/on-air anchor for a local television station in Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas, KTVT-TV, spent over two minutes talking about presidential assassination, while waiting for JFK to appear for his speech in Dallas. He mentioned that Kennedy broke security rules by getting too close to the crowd, and mentioned a precedent in September 6th 1901 when president William McKinley was shot dead by Leon Czolgosz, a 21-year-old anarchist “with a long history of mental illness”. He seemed to be reading from a script.[29]

Dallas news anchor predicts JFK assassination hours in advance

But it was certainly not the CIA who directed suspicions toward itself in other medias. It was Zionist journalist Arthur Krock of the New York Times who, a month and a half prior to Kennedy’s death, had already biased the skeptics toward the theory of a CIA plot, by quoting in his daily column on October 3rd, an unnamed “very high official” who claimed that the White House could not control the CIA, and “If the United States ever experiences a ‘Seven Days in May’, it will come from the CIA.” Seven Days in May is a 1962 political thriller about a military coup against the White House. Krock was leading his readers to guess that his “very high official” was Kennedy himself; it must at least have been quite obvious to those who knew that Krock had direct access to Kennedy, and that Kennedy had privately commented on the novel Seven Days in May as a realistic plot.[30]

And one month after Kennedy’s assassination, it was the turn of the Washington Post to use a very similar trick, by publishing an op-ed signed by Harry Truman, in which the former president said he was “disturbed by the way CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government.” “I never had any thought when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations,” and at the point of becoming across the globe “a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue […] there are now some searching questions that need to be answered.”[31] Truman was hinting at the CIA’s role in toppling foreign governments and assassinating elected leaders abroad. But given the timing of his article, one month to the day after Dallas, it could only be understood by anyone with ears to hear, and at least subliminally by the rest, as an indictment of the CIA in the Kennedy assassination. This article, widely reprinted in the 1970s after the creation of the Church Committee and the House Select Committee on Assassinations, is regarded as Truman’s whistle blowing. Yet its mea culpa style is completely unlike Truman, and it was in fact not written by Truman, but by his longtime assistant and ghostwriter, David Noyes. Truman probably never saw it prior to its publication in the Washington Post morning edition, but he may be responsible (and not the CIA) for its deletion from the afternoon print runs.[32] Noyes’ role as Truman’s ghost writer is documented in Sidney Krasnoff’s book, Truman and Noyes: Story of a President’s Alter Ego (Jonathan Stuart Press, 1997), which the publisher advertises as “an EXTRAORDINARY story of the relationship between a Missouri born Baptist, with no formal education beyond high school and a Russian born Jew with an eighth grade education.”

Arnon Milchan in good company

Arnon Milchan in good company

A strong case can be made that the “JFK truth movement”, as it may be called, steered skeptics toward the CIA trail from the very beginning, by a carefully planned “controlled opposition”.

Medusa Touch, produced by Arnon Milchanin 1978

Medusa Touch, produced by Arnon Milchanin 1978

There are suspicions that Mark Lane, the earliest dedicated JFK researcher, who had changed his name from Levin to Lane to conceal his Jewish background, did exactly that, with his pioneering Guardian article published 4 weeks after the assassination, followed by 5 books from 1966 to 2011.

Edward Epstein, mentioned above, is also suspected of having forged De Mohrenschiltd’s interview in 1977 (Epstein has recently argued that Dominic Strauss-Kahn had fallen victim of a conspiracy).[33]

And it is well-known that Olive Stone’s influential 1991 filmJFK, which says nothing of the Israeli Mossad connection that Jim Garrison stumbled upon, was produced by Arnon Milchan, described in a 2011 biography as “one of the most important covert agents that Israeli intelligence has ever fielded”.[34]

Back in 1978, by the way, Arnon Milchan produced The Medusa Touch, a film depicting a remote controlled aircraft crashing and exploding into a skyscraper.

Needless to say, such remarks are anathema to the community of politically correct JFK researchers, as I have discovered; the unwritten rule is to stick to the Inside Job thesis.Which raises again the question of the controlled opposition.

But those who find offensive any suspicions of Israel in the assassination of an American president, should be reminded of the editorial published in The Atlanta Jewish Times by its owner and editor in chief Andrew Adler, January 13, 2012, under the heading“What would you do?”

An old Zionist trick : kill a US President to replace him by his Israel-friendly Vice-President.

An old Zionist trick : kill a US President to replace him by his Israel-friendly Vice-President.

Adler calls on Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to “give the go-ahead for U.S.-based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current Vice-President to take his place and forcefully dictate that the United States’ policy includes its helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies.”[35]



[1] Michael Collins Piper, Final Judgment: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy,American Free Press, 6th ed., 2005, p.  290-7.

[2]William Kunstler, My Life as a Radical Lawyer, Carol Publishing, 1994, p. 158

[3]Steve North, “Lee Harvey Oswald’s Killer ‘Jack Ruby’ Came From Strong Jewish Background”,The Jewish Daily Forward, November 17, 2013,


[5]David Talbot, Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years, Simon & Schuster, 2007.

[6]James Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He died and Why it Matters, Touchstone, 2008.

[7]Mark Lane, Last Word: My Indictment of the CIA in the Murder of JFK, Skyhorse Publishing, 2011.

[8]Tom Mangold, Cold Warrior: James Jesus Angleton: the CIA’s Master Spy Hunter, Simon & Schuster, 1991.

[9] Roger Stone, The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ, Skyhorse, 2013.

[10]Phillip Nelson, LBJ: The Mastermind of JFK’s Assassination,XLibris, 2010.

[11]Warren Bass, Support any Friend: Kennedy’s Middle East and the Making of the U.S.-Israel Alliance, 2003, p. 219.

[12] Alan Hart, Zionism, the Real Enemy of the Jews, vol. 2: David Becomes Goliath, Clarity Press, 2009,p. 250.

[13] Stephen Green, Taking Sides: America’s Secret Relations With a Militant Israel, William Morrow & Co, 1984, p. 186.

[14]Morris Smith, “Our First Jewish President Lyndon Johnson? – an update!!”, 5 Towns Jewish Times, April 11, 2013:


[16]Copy at

[17]Read Ruby’s deposition on:

[18] Watch on

[19] Nelson, LBJ: The Mastermind, op. cit., p. 604-7.

[20]Talbot, Brothers, op. cit., p. 262-3.

[21]GaetonFonzi, The Last Investigation: A Former Federal Investigator Reveals the Man behind the Conspiracy to Kill JFK, 1993, Skyhorse, 2013, kindle pos. 405-76.

[22] Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable, op. cit., p. xxiii.

[23] George de Mohrenschilldt, I am a Patsy! on:

[24] Read the Sheriff’s Office report on:

[25]GaetonFonzi, The Last Investigation: A Former Federal Investigator Reveals the Man behind the Conspiracy to Kill JFK, 1993, Skyhorse, 2013, kindle pos. 773-88.

[26]Deborah Davis, Katharine the Great, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1979, p. 249.

[27] Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., A Thousand Days: John F. Kennedy in the White House, 1965, First Mariner Books, 2002, kindle pos. 1030.

[28] Alan Hart, Zionism, the Real Enemy of the Jews, vol. 2: David Becomes Goliath, Clarity Press, 2009p. 257.


[30] Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable, op. cit., p. 12-13 and 186-196;

[31] “Harry Truman Writes: Limit CIA Role to Intelligence”, Washington Post, December 22, 1963, quoted in Mark Lane, Last Word: My Indictment of the CIA in the Murder of JFK, Skyhorse Publishing, 2011p. 246.

[32]Benjamin F. Onate, “What Did Truman Say About CIA?” Studies in Intelligence Vol XVII/3, (Fall, 1973), p. 9-11.

[33]William Kelly quoting the HSCA report, volume XI, p. 77-8, on:

[34]Meir Doron, Confidential: The Life of Secret Agent Turned Hollywood Tycoon- ArnonMilchan, Gefen Books, 2011.

[35]Joe Sterling, “Jewish paper’s column catches Secret Service’s eye”, CNN, January 22, 2012:




Top Dogs Use Their Running Dogs To Whip the Other Dogs: Is It Our Fault?



Top Dogs Use Their Running Dogs To Whip the Other Dogs: Is It Our Fault?

by Jack Speer Williams

If I were any more whipped, they’d serve me up as delicate dollops of cream toppings on their double espressos.

I wish I enjoyed anything as much as my dog enjoys everything – except for his annual bath.

The whipped dogs of the American electorate, however, have little to be happy about, what with the scarcity of decent-paying jobs, rising prices on every front, crime on the streets and in our homes, with every day bringing us more police brutality.

In trying to locate the cause of such dire problems, Americans point their fingers all about, except in the correct direction – toward themselves.

American voter ignorance is at the root of every major problem our country has.

Democratic and Republican voters whimper like the whipped dogs they are when voting in our fixed national elections, never realizing how pathetic they are being with their arrogant ignorance.

I speak out boldly because I loathe seeing well-meaning people being made fools of.

Democrats, who want the affluent to pay more taxes, have no idea that that very concept is being promoted by the richest oligarchs in the world, who pay no taxes; in fact, most income taxes are given to those magnates in some form or another, with very few Democratic voters having a clue about it.

Republicans seem to love war; but the left is also viciously pro-war, that is, if a Democratic president is pursuing them, as in World War I, II, Viet Nam, the Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, and so forth.

Many Republicans are so uninformed that they actually believe the media’s constant assertion that war is good for our economy. The truth is our wars are destroying our economy, as does most government borrowing and spending.

A vital economy is built by many smart entrepreneurs producing goods and services that are needed and wanted at affordable and reasonable prices. A viable economy produces things that sustain life, not end it.

But more to the point, never will America return to its glory days of production, affluence, and freedom through national elections until we have a far better educated electorate.

First of all, Americans need to understand that national elections are rigged electronically. As Mark Twain wrote, “If voting made a difference, they wouldn’t let us do it.” They let us vote because it gives the ignorant masses the illusion of living in a democracy.

Yesterday’s Voter Fraud is mild compared to today’s Election Fraud. Voter fraud was the old, dated Chicago style of payoffs and single voter intimidation.

Election fraud swings millions of votes and is much easier, more effective, and costs practically nothing.

Moreover, election fraud is much easier to hide as it involves far fewer undercover operatives.

Try researching Judith Moriarty or Bev Harris for the truth about US election fraud, especially the kind that uses the Diebold optical-scan system.

Election fraud has never been easier to pull off and hide. So don’t go expecting the government to do anything about it.

Today, informed voters will tell themselves, I know who I voted for, but will ask themselves, Who did this machine vote for?

But even without election or voter fraud, the overwhelming majority of the American electorate have become too whipped with propaganda to elect pro-survival candidates.

Democrats, who want to tax the rich at ever higher rates, will stupidly select candidates that are secretly supported by foreign-based oligarchs, who pay no taxes at all to any country.

Our Republicans support mouth-foaming warmongers (who have never seen a day of combat), who are also secretly sponsored by the very same oligarchs who fund the Democratic candidates. Both parties are the wings of a single bird of prey destroying our economy and greatly jeopardizing our national security – all under the sly direction of foreign oligarchs and their puppets in governments.

Unfortunately, most Democratic and Republican voters are stuck so solidly into the created Left/Right Paradigm that political logic will not help them; they are in dire need of spiritual remedies.

There may be many theories about how to argue politics with a Democrat or Republican. None work. Point is, don’t argue with ignorance, as you will only end up empowering it. Simply give them facts, which can be proven, and leave it at that.

With the continuous barrage of heavy propaganda from the corporate media, obviously Democratic and Republican voters are America’s whipped dogs. If that is so, who are our Running Dogs?

They are the overt back slappers and covert back knifers that naturally spring from the Left/Right Paradigm that has our nation in total lockdown.

Looky me run … looky me run. I’m a Runnin’ Dog! Vote for me!

The Running Dogs are our elected and appointed public officials; they are the corporate CEOs, our university/college presidents, our tenured professors, our media moguls, famous actors, and all those who seem to benefit from our sick and dying society.

Running Dogs never attack the real ills of our society. Instead, the oligarchs (Top Dogs) have their tax-freethink-tanks invent problems, the solving of which create even bigger problems, but give the Running Dogs news bites to mouth loudly and often on TV. One such concoction is their anthropogenic (man-made) global warming scare.

The corporate mainstream media has even hidden what might be the biggest bombshell in scientific history. But some time ago, thanks to the reporting of the alternative media, we learned that an enormous sixty-one megabytes of global warming and climate change research data (emails, documents, and code) was released by whistleblowers.

This information exposed the climate scientists at the University of East Anglia in Great Britain as the frauds they have proven themselves to be.

This decade of incriminating emails and documents clearly proved that those global warming “scientists” had manipulated scientific data to hide the decline in global temperatures. They also hid the fact that there has been no statistically significant global warming for fifteen years, while our world has experienced a rapid and significant cooling for nine years.

Have any of these scientists been indicted on the criminal charges of misappropriating public funds? Not to my knowledge. Several European lawmakers, however, did call for formal charges to be brought against the truthseekers, the whistleblowers. It seems that some governments in Europe are as criminal as ours.

It is sad to watch the great actor, but pitiful oligarch spokesman, Robert Redford giving his spiel about how we created global warming (now cleverly called climate change).

Al Gore and his criminal ilk in all three branches of the federal government are Running Dogs, running for their own benefit, and to hell with what is best for humanity.

Mr. Gore and his sponsors stand to greatly benefit financially from the carbon taxes likely to be imposed on Americans as a result of the man-made (anthropogenic) global warming hoax.

And where will these increased taxes go? They will go where all taxes go by way of the federal government – some to the Running Dogs, but the majority to the Top Dogs.

Knowledgeable scientists who have not been bought off by the Top Dogs will tell you that Earth’s weather is predominately determined by our Sun, which occupies about 99% of the mass of our solar system. The Sun easily trumps all the SUVs and flatulating cows on earth in causing global warming.

Skipping Wikipedia (a Running Dog operation), research Global Warming Hoax, while again noting that “global warming” had to be altered to “climate change.” It had become increasingly obvious to everyone that the earth was no longer warming.

But with a “climate change” scareno matter what the weather does, carbon taxes can be levied and the horrors of the United Nations’ Agenda 21 can be implemented.

What is Agenda 21? I do not dare tell you about it, as it is so outrageous you would not believe me and would likely dismiss this entire article as a result.

TIP: Agenda 21 has turned the word sustainable into code for tyranny.

At the bottom rungs of the Running Dog operation is a canine species called Attack Dogs.

Attack Dogs have been trained and used throughout history to assault on command, without any thought given to the ethics of the order. Dogs who are trained to attack but refuse to do so are terminated. Attack Dogs take their authoritative orders from the cowardly Running Dogs, who worship violence and mayhem as long as they are not physically involved in it.We still serve and protect. It’s who we serve and protect that’s changed.

Through I.Q. and psychometric testing, applicants for attack dog careers are chosen on the basis of those who have average-to-low intelligence and a most pronounced lack of empathy for any form of life. This explains, in part, the reason we have, relatively recently, seen such a prevalence of thuggery emanating from police departments.

The number of psychopaths issued a gun and a badge is higher today than ever before.

Have our collective local police forces become the largest, taxpayer-funded street gang in America?

Turning mentally unstable cops loose on the public, with the authority to use deadly force, with full power of arrest, is a Top Dog ploy, implemented by the Running Dogs.

According to Amnesty International, from 2001 to 2008, cops using their “non-lethal” Tasers murdered 351 American citizens.

Electronic Village has reported that from 2009 to 2014, cops Tasered to death 283 American citizens.

When confronting armed suspects, of course, police officers are expected to use their guns and bullets. We were told, however, that “non-lethal” Tasers were to be used on unarmed citizens in order to incapacitate them, not to kill them with seventeen blasts from a crazed cop on steroids.

Speaking of steroids, they have secretly become pandemic amongst cops, under the direction of agents from our intelligence services.

Adding anabolic steroid to the diets of thousands of mentally unbalanced cops is certainly an issue that should be investigated by the Congress.

But, no; we have Congressional hacks like Representatives Henry Waxman and Elijah Cummings investigating steroid use by professional baseball players.

Perhaps nothing better demonstrates the criminal deception and hypocrisy of our fraudulent government, as it continues to create problems that do not exist while forever ignoring our critically serious problems, than this witch-hunt into professional baseball.

Would you not rather watch a roid-loaded professional athlete perform on a playing field than have a cop on roids, in your face, waving around a Taser gun he is apt to shoot you with, repeatedly, until you have a heart attack?

For anyone who is skeptical about how serious a problem this is, please do a computer search using the wordsCops on roids.

Worse yet, from the foreign, banker owned military/industrial complex, funded by American taxpayers, have come billions of dollars of stunningly sophisticated military hardware that have been given to the police forces of our cities, big and small.

The militarization of our community police includes their use of automatic rifles, grenade launchers, shot guns, cannons, and armored vehicles.

Surely by now you must be asking yourself a simple question: Why would our American government be giving our local police departments such a vast array of military might?

Next, I would like to introduce you to the basic source of what has become our dog-eat-dog existence.

The Top Dogs are actually werewolves. For them, every night has a full moon.

Now on to the Top Dogs. Who are they? Well, that’s an easy question to answer if we only name the lower tier of Top Dogs, as plenty of proof exists for that. They are commonly called the Illuminati, the New World Order, the Club of Rome, the Committee of 300, or the International Monetary and Banking Cartel. They are the secret coterie of psychopaths who are given the job of ensuring that the Running Dogs of our society continue our slide into the Orwellian world of the Big Brother, police-state control grid, while pretending to be guarding our best interests.

But as I’ve stated, they are only the lowest tier of Top Dogs and are always being replaced, while those at the top remain stagnant.

Who are those of the upper tiers?

They are a small, tightly held, sub rosa pack of inhuman werewolves, who are always on the hunt for more blood – human blood.

What are their names?

They do not have names as we know names. If they did have names, very few humans would know of them.

Why does God allow such fiends to prey on his children?

Other than to say we inhabit a freewill universe, that is a question that would require esoteric answers, well beyond the scope of this article and my ability.

But in a freewill universe, negative beings are allowed to impose their will on positive beings, if the majority of positive beings agree to it.

Does a freewill universe allow these tyrannical wolves to cull and enslave mankind?

Yes, if man agrees to be culled and enslaved.

From whom do the werewolves gain their power?

From us, the human beings of earth.

I will, however, give you one piece of esoterica that has been proven again and again in hundreds of thousands of pages of government legislation, codes, white papers, and regulations. In these laws, the fiends tell us of their plans for us. And with our ignorance or apathy of those laws and intentions, we give them the required permission to enact them. That is how it works in a freewill universe.

And, by way of many more hundreds of thousands of pages of text, the Dark Forces are also careful to tell us of their tyrannical plans, using their unconstitutional directives, reviews, and orders below to do so.

  • Presidential Directives (PDs, Classified)
  • Presidential Review Directives (PRDs)
  • Presidential Decision Directives (PDDs)
  • National Security Reviews (NSRs)
  • National Security Directives (NSDs)
  • National Security Presidential Directives (NSPDs)
  • Homeland Security Directives (HSDs)

And the widely publicized Executive Orders (EOs).

All of these directives, reviews, and orders have the full force and effect of constitutionally passed legislation by our Congress.

They put these despotic measures in our faces and dare us to do anything about it.


By universal law, the negative forces on Earth have to state their intentions and gain your agreement on them before they can implement any part of their plans. Your ignorance of or lack of disagreement with their intentions qualifies as agreement.

Clearly, no person can read all of the tyrannical measures planned for us, but the alternative media, provided by the Internet, can give us a start.

But still, you are probably wondering why those secret Top Dogs of the upper echelons of control overwhelm us with so many laws.

First of all, they are required, by a power greater than themselves, to warn us of their intentions.

But since the dogs own and control the mainstream media, they can formulate public opinion in any way they wish. And they wish to portray anyone who ever reads and attempts to report on government laws, orders, directives, or reviews as being no more than a conspiracy theorist.

It is ironic, but what the dogs call a conspiracy theorist is actually a well- informed conspiracy investigator. He or she is a person who delves into government papers and reports on conspiracy nuts, the Top Dogs – dogs, who for strange reasons, want to eliminate a large portion of mankind, while enslaving the rest.

In any case, the dogs care not a whit if they tell us exactly what they have done to us, are doing to us, and will do to us.

Moreover, there is another gravely important reason for there being so many hundreds of thousands of pages of laws, orders, reviews, directives, and other nonsense: Ignorance of laws is no defense against being prosecuted for violating them.

The Top Dogs, who are actually more like werewolves, prey on ignorance … and … innocence.

Innocence tastes best to them; but by universal law such a delicacy must be justified ­and that is where ignorance enters our lives.

Ignorance is so important to the dogs that some of their laws are classified.

Using the old “national security” ruse, Presidential Directives are classified. This is how America has “legally” been torturing men, women, and children, for years, in military bases all over the world. This torture is being done in the name of American citizens, making them accomplices in heinous practices that are far better left to the horrors of the Spanish Inquisition of the Dark Ages.

The despicable American policy of torturing human life degrades our entire population of Whipped Dogs, but empowers the Top Dogs and their servants – the Running Dogs.

In a sane society, governments would issue laws no more complicated than the general populace could easily read, digest, and agree with.

Certainly, a sane government would not overwhelm us with tomes of laws, while hiding some of them in order to trap us.

I’m no intergalactic lawyer, but it seems to me that the government’s classified laws are in violation of the universal directives, an infraction that could reverberate on the Top Dogs.

There are pending laws, however, that the government and the corporate media are being very vocal about –Hate Crimes Legislation.

The major media has long conditioned us for the need of more laws to curb hate and violence. But the Top Dogs’ corporate media has never revealed to us that within those coming hundreds of thousands of pages of laws, orders, and directives will be long passages that will label honest whistleblowers as national security risks to be picked up and imprisoned as dangerous US Domestic Extremists who hate democracy.

The Top Dogs and their minions, the Running Dogs, are, however, no more than a reflection of the low morals, unenlightenment, and lack of ethical behavior of their Whipped Dogs.

The power of both the Running Dogs and Top Dogs is derived from their corrupted Whipped Dogs. This fact is the basis of the long and vicious attack on man’s nobility, decency, and sense of fair play. As the Whipped dogs are further impoverished, demoralized, and degraded, the Top Dogs, and their sycophants (Running Dogs), are that much more empowered.

Restore what is best in man and the dogs – whipped, running, attack, and top – all cease to exist.

Fortunately, in our freewill universe, the collective mass of consciousness can relatively quickly change the direction of a nation or even a world from dogly dogma to Godly salvation.

That process entails enough people understanding the intentions of the Top Dogs and simply disagreeing with them.

No demonstrations, riots, revolutions, imprisonment, or killings are needed or wanted.

We simply need to understand and disagree, and enlighten others to do the same.

If we are to avoid a dark dystopia, a completely and utterly enslaved and depopulated world, we must now act quickly to educate ourselves and all the others we can.

Be a spark, a stimulation, a catalyst, a guide, a pointer to truth; but let those you try to help come to their own self realizations.

The truth is like a lion. You don’t have to defend it. Let it loose. It will defend itself.

St. Augustine

So the sweet little old lady friend of yours is not doing you, your family, your friends, or the world any favors when she tells you …

So stop already with the bad news. At my age, I just wanna stay strictly focused on nice positive things.

But rest assured, there is a growing groundswell of us who are Dog-Tired of all the mad dogs who are causing our country to go to the dogs.

Are you amongst us – the dog-tired? I’ll wager you are.

Posted in USAComments Off on Top Dogs Use Their Running Dogs To Whip the Other Dogs: Is It Our Fault?

I$raHell is Burning Down Assets

Israel is Burning Down Assets

Amanpour and Rouhani

CNN’s Christiane Amanpour and author Gareth Porter have both been “burned” over bizarre actions recently. Where there may have been some doubt, almost everyone “in the know” now is aware or at least “believes” both of these individuals work for Israeli intelligence.

Does this prove they are Israeli spies? Of course not, well “sort of.” OK, maybe it does mean yes, but in the grey world of spies and such, nothing is “black and white.”

Last week two minor events happened, both tied to Iran, both tied to the press and both with disturbing consequences. Two “assets,” or may we say “alleged assets” were “burned.”

An asset is an individual who works for an intelligence agency. Sometimes they are spies, but more often they simply “do the bidding” of the agency that controls them.

Each “asset” has a handler, someone near them that controls what they do, and “assets” are usually people who appear to be close to one cause but serve another, often because they are paid or blackmailed.

The term “burn” means something else. An asset, let’s say Christiane Amanpour, supposedly the Mideast expert and “powerhouse” behind CNN, can be of value for decades. Amanpour, if she is an asset, has certainly been this and more – able to influence events.

Gareth Porter at Tehran’s New Horizon Conference

Gareth Porter, author

Gareth Porter, author

This is what happened. There was a conference in Iran last week called New Horizon. Gareth Porter, a minor author with a background as full of holes as the floorboards of a North Korean taxi, attended a conference in Tehran that he helped organize.

The original conference in Tehran was to be about the 1960s and the “free thinking movement” in the US, protest music, political movements and how Americans now look on that period as Hunter Thompson has called it, “a high water mark” in American culture.

I was an organizer and had prepared a guest list of artists, authors, political figures from the time and a number of my friends from Veterans Today, Editors Jim Dean, Leo Wanta, Mike Harris, Kevin Barrett, Jim Fetzer and others.

Frankly, the “VT crowd” would have carried it, as these are largely “leftovers” from the 1960’s who are still active today and who are “hard wired” to the geopolitics of the Mid East as well.

However, Porter had penned a book seemingly favorable to Iran – one published at a semi-vanity press – just the kind of thing Iran looks for. They turned over the conference to Porter who choose whom he wanted to come — a list that now included at least 3 Mossad assets and excluded anyone with intelligence training who would have caught what he was doing.

While at the meeting, he presented his book and, almost immediately, drafted a press release calling other conference attendees “anti-Semites,” “Holocaust deniers” and “haters.” Of course, these were people he invited. As American humorist Jim W. Dean so often says, “You just can’t make things like this up.”

Porter’s accusations were repeated around the world, particularly in the Israeli press and in the US and Britain. Iran was humiliated. They had been warned this would happen, mind you. Porter had been put on a “person of interest” list, suspected of having infiltrated the anti-war movement following Vietnam and of having affiliations in groups that were believed to be intelligence agency fronts.

Like any “con,” it takes someone looking for something “too good to be true” to be taken in, and Iran is infamous for failing to carefully check on those it gathers unto its bosom.

Then the other shoe dropped. I love that phrase, as it so aptly describes a multi-faceted intelligence operation. Those who thought the fallout over Porter’s deception was a disaster didn’t expect what was to come from Christiane Amanpour.

CNN’s Translation crisis

Amanpour is in Tehran continually, a favorite of Iran though her articles and blog postings are invariably hostile to Iranian policies. Christiane “Amanpour” is actually Christiane Rubin, a former Iranian and now dual US/Israeli citizen, the wife of a suspected Israeli intelligence asset.

FARS News media

This is what she did; during an interview with President Rouhani — one that ran simultaneous to the Gareth Porter fiasco which was filling the press with “Iran’s ‘hatefest’” — Amanpour published a hugely altered version of Rouhani’s responses, characterizing him as unstable, warlike and an anti-Semite.

From the Iranian response as published by Fars News Agency:

“TEHRAN (FNA) – American news channel CNN fabricated the remarks made by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in response to the network’s question about the Holocaust.

The CNN aired its interview with Rouhani on Tuesday but the news channel added to or changed parts of his remarks when Christiane Amanpour asked him about the Holocaust.

Here is the exact transcript of the Farsi text according to the CNN broadcast:

من قبلا گفتم که من تاریخ دان نیستم و ابعاد حوادث تاریخی را تاریخ دانان باید تبین کنند، بیان کنند و توضیخ بدهند. اما به طور کلی هرگونه جنایتی که در تاریخ علیه بشریت اتفاق افتاده باشد و از جمله جنایتی که نازی ها انجام دادند چه در مورد یهودیان و چه در مورد غیر یهودیان از نظر ما کاملا محکوم است همانطور که امروز هم اگر جنایتی انجام شود علیه هر ملتی یا هر دینی یا هر قومیتی یا هر اعتقادی، ما آن جنایت و نسل کشی را محکوم می کنیم بنابراین کار نازی ها محکوم است, ابعادی که شما می گویید به عهده مورخین و محققین است که آن ابعاد را روشن کنند. من محقق تاریخی نیستم.

Here is the exact English translation of President Rouhani’s remarks:

Rouhani’s: “I have said before that I am not a historian and historians should specify, state and explain the aspects of historical events, but generally we fully condemn any kind of crime committed against humanity throughout the history, including the crime committed by the Nazis both against the Jews and non-Jews, the same way that if today any crime is committed against any nation or any religion or any people or any belief, we condemn that crime and genocide. Therefore, what the Nazis did is condemned, (but) the aspects that you talk about, clarification of these aspects is a duty of the historians and researchers, I am not a history scholar.”

And here is what the CNN translation says:

CNN Question: “One of the things your predecessor (President Ahmadinejad) used to do from this very platform was deny(ing) the holocaust and pretend(ing) it was a myth, I want to know you, your position on the holocaust, do you accept what it was, and what was it?”

CNN’s Translation: “I’ve said before that I am not a historian and then, when it comes to speaking of the dimensions of the Holocaust, it is the historians that should reflect on it. But in general I can tell you that any crime that happens in history against humanity, including the crime that Nazis committed towards the Jews as well as non-Jews is reprehensible and condemnable. Whatever criminality they committed against the Jews, we condemn, the taking of human life is contemptible, it makes no difference whether that life is Jewish life, Christian or Muslim, for us it is the same, but taking the human life is something our religion rejects but this doesn’t mean that on the other hand you can say Nazis committed crime against a group now therefore, they must usurp the land of another group and occupy it. This too is an act that should be condemned. There should be an even-handed discussion”.

FNA NOTE: The Red parts have been added or completely altered. The Yellow parts are the product of conceptual, and not precise, translation.

Yet, the underlined parts are the worst parts of the fabrications which totally change what President Rouhani has said.”

She is an Iranian with an Israeli passport

What Fars failed to report, however, is that Amanpour, who has interviewed President Rouhani many times, actually conducted the interview in Farsi, personally oversaw the mistranslation and published the fabricated story under her personal byline, not CNNs.

What Fars also failed to note was that Amanpour’s actions, which required great daring and audacity, were timed to carefully coincide with the media backlash provoked by an almost identical action by Gareth Porter.

One might ask, why would Israel, and this is assuming that both Porter and Amanpour are Israeli intelligence assets, something a cursory examination of their background supports, choose this time to “burn” or expose both?

Is it because the West is ready to drop sanctions on Iran tied to a nuclear settlement Israel is trying to sabotage?

The ironic part of this, of course, is that Porter’s book supposedly cites Israeli crimes involved in having Iran accused of nuclear weapons development in the first place.

To simplify it more, Porter may well have been sent to Tehran to scuttle the Iran nuclear settlement that Iranians believed his book was written to defend.

Then again, Israel is facing major fallout after their genocidal attacks on Gaza. A politically meaningless, but greatly symbolic vote in the UK parliament recently — representing the first condemnation of Israel from Britain — has Tel Aviv in shock.

Then again, it is largely dual citizens — Ukrainian-Israeli oligarchs who have led the genocide against the Russian-speaking areas of the Ukraine — a genocide that has met unexpectedly stiff resistance.

Would Amanpour and the “lesser” Porter be tossed onto the “credibility scrapheap” over downturns of this kind?

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on I$raHell is Burning Down Assets

U.S. Leaders: “Listen to this Irish Senator”


Irish Senator Averil Power

Irish Senator Averil Power

Ireland joins Sweden and the British House of Commons to express support for Palestinian statehood.

A similar motion is pending before the Spanish Congress.

by James M. Wall

Irish Senator Averil Power (at right) stood before the Senate of Ireland this week and offered a motion which calls for the Irish Government to:

“formally recognize the State of Palestine and do everything it can at the international level to help secure a viable two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”


The government parties agreed to the motion “without us actually having to push it to a vote,” Power said.

Are you listening, U.S. leaders?

If you are listening, be aware, Ireland is way ahead of you in taking a stand for justice for Palestine.

The Times of Israel recalls that “Ireland was the first European country to recognize the Palestine Liberation Organization.”

Grahame Morris, Labour MP for Easington vote on Palestine statehood motion.

Grahame Morris, Labour MP for Easington vote on Palestine statehood motion.

Ireland joins Sweden and the British House of Commons to express support for Palestinian statehood. A similar motion is pending before the Spanish Congress.

In support of her motion, Senator Power told the Irish Senate:

“By joining Sweden and other EU states in recognizing Palestine, we will make it clear that statehood is a right of the Palestinian people. It is not an Israeli bargaining chip for them to play in their sham negotiations.”

Senator Power, who is from the center-right Fianna Fáil (Republican Party) added:

 “In doing so we will create pressure on Israel to pursue a genuine peace process that has a real prospect of delivering peace and justice for both Israelis and Palestinians alike.”

In her speech, Power accused Israel of having implemented an “apartheid regime in the West Bank that denied Palestinians basic human rights that their Israeli counterparts take for granted.”

She added, “Without wider recognition of the State of Palestine, Palestinian representatives are in a weaker position at the negotiation table”.

Are you listening, U.S. leaders? 

In recent months, a few U.S. religious bodies have heard voices denouncing injustice.   Two U.S. Christian bodies–the Central Pacific Conference  and the Connecticut Conference, both in the United Church of Christ–have voted to endorse the BDS movement to apply economic pressure on Israel to “pursue a genuine peace process”.

Other Christian denominational bodies are considering future resolutions that would urge Israel to take seriously the moral imperative to end its occupation of Palestine.

These religious bodies move slowly, but in time, some state, regional and national assemblies will debate, and vote on, actions that support justice for Palestine.

In their deliberations, they will want to listen to foreign political leaders with a conscience, parliamentarians like Irish Senator Averil Power, and rather unexpectedly, the president of Israel, Reuven Rivlin (at left), who had stern words for his nation Sunday:

Reuven Rivlin

Reuven Rivlin

“The time has come to admit that Israel is a sick society, with an illness that demands treatment, President Reuven Rivlin said at the opening session on Sunday of a conference on From Hatred of the Stranger to Acceptance of the Other.

Both Rivlin and Prof. Ruth Arnon, president of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, which organized the conference at its premises on the capital’s Jabotinsky Street, spoke of the painful and bloody summer, and the resultant resurgence of animosity between Arabs and Jews that had escalated to new heights.

Referring to the mutual expressions of hatred and incitement, Arnon said that Jews, who in the Diaspora had been exposed to anti-Semitism and persecution, should be more sensitive to the dangers of incitement. ‘But are we?’, she asked.”


Are you listening, U.S. academic institutions, with your donor base strongly influenced by pro-Israel American citizens?

Israel’s occupation of Palestine is both immoral and illegal. It is also true that the occupation is rooted not just in Israel, but in the West, most especially the U.S.

Salman Masalha wrote in Ha’aretz, a centrist Jerusalem newspaper, that the occupation is international:

“The truth must be stated: If the West, led by the United States, truly wanted to bring about an end to the Israeli occupation and a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it would have done so long ago.

The West has some very effective means at its disposal that could change the situation. But instead of employing these means, what do we get? A flood of declarations. Again and again, Western leaders make the same hypocritical proclamations calling the settlements in the occupied territories illegal and an obstacle to peace.

These declarations are as old as the occupation itself, stretching all the way back to June 1967.

The world hasn’t learned that toothless declarations won’t stop the real-estate theft called “Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel.” The multitude of declarations made over the years haven’t removed a single Zionist trailer from a single Palestinian hilltop. Throughout the years of the occupation, such declarations have served as nothing more than mild pain relievers for a body that is in critical condition.

So, enough hiding behind all the bland verbiage. The time has come to call a spade a spade:

The occupation in Palestine isn’t just an Israeli occupation – it’s a Western occupation; a European, American and Russian occupation, and more. As such, the Palestinian argument must be directed to the entire Western world: Stop trying to sell us empty lip service.

The time has come to ask the world to take operative steps that hold the potential to compose the final movement of the unfinished symphony of the immoral Israeli occupation.”

American leaders  and those that they lead, must all share responsibility for this “immoral Israel occupation”.

The photo of Senator Power is from YouTube and The Times of Israel. The photo of President Rivlin is from Mondoweiss.

Posted in USA, EuropeComments Off on U.S. Leaders: “Listen to this Irish Senator”

Cold War II: Interview with Nikolay Patrushev, Secretary of the Russian Security Council


Sharmine Narwani: Very important translated interview with Russia’s Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev where he slams the US’s ongoing ambitions for hegemony – well, everywhere – and provides insights on how Washington never really ended the Cold War. Published in Rossiyskaya Gazeta on October 15, I’m told this is a rough translation. This is hard-hitting stuff – a fascinating read.

“The sobering up of the Ukrainians will be harsh and painful”

Nikolay Patrushev, Secretary of the Russian Security Council.

Nikolay Patrushev, Secretary of the Russian Security Council.

by Ivan Yegorov

Rossiyskaya Gazeta, October 15, 2014

In an interview for Rossiyskaya Gazeta the secretary of the Russian Security Council explained how Russian analysts were predicting the development of the situation in Ukraine a year ago. And he also gave an assessment of the role of the United States and NATO in the events in eastern Ukraine, explained why these events are a continuation of Zbigniew Brzezinski’s plan for the disintegration of the USSR and Russia, and assessed prospects for the development of the multipolar world and the possibility of a future struggle for hydrocarbon resources.

[Yegorov] Nikolay Platonovich, the realities of recent months are a coup d’etat in Ukraine, military operations by the Ukrainian authorities against the inhabitants of Donetsk and Luhansk regions, and a frenzied anti-Russian course by Kiev. Would it have been possible to predict this turn of events only a year ago?

[Patrushev] Our specialists were warning of the high probability of an escalation of the situation in Ukraine in the context of political and economic instability, particularly under external influence. At the same time it should be acknowledged that the probability of an imminent instant seizure of power in Kiev with the support of militant groups of open Nazis was not considered at that time. Let me remind you that prior to the coup you mentioned, Moscow was implementing in full all its partnership commitments to Kiev.

We were constantly providing material and financial aid, without which Ukraine was in no condition to cope with economic difficulties that had become chronic in nature. To support our neighbours, material and financial resources amounting to tens of billions of dollars were mobilized. Unfortunately for many people in Ukraine this aid became, in time, so customary that its importance for the country’s survival was simply forgotten.

As for longer-term predictions, the Ukraine crisis was an entirely expected outcome of systematic activity by the United States and its closest allies.

For the past quarter of a century this activity has been directed towards completely separating Ukraine and the other republics of the former USSR from Russia and totally reformatting the post-Soviet space to suit American interests. The conditions and pretexts were created for colour revolutions, supported by generous state funding.

Thus, Victoria Nuland, US assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, has repeatedly stated that during the period 1991 through 2013 Washington spent 5bn dollars on “supporting the desire of the people of Ukraine for stronger, more democratic government”. According to figures from open sources alone, for instance US Congress documents, the total amount of state funding for various American programmes of “aid” to Ukraine in the period 2001 through 2012 came to at least 2.4bn dollars. That is comparable with the annual budget of some small countries. The US Agency for International Development spent about 1.5bn dollars, the State Department nearly half a billion, and the Pentagon more than 370m dollars.

According to congressional records, organizations such as the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Peace Corps, and the Open World Centre took part in Ukrainian aid programmes, in addition to the well-known USAID and other departments. It is not hard to guess for whom and why American volunteers and staffers of diplomatic missions have been “opening the world” throughout the 23 years since the breakup of the Soviet Union.

[Yegorov] Maybe this money went to a good cause and helped to build a real “democratic” society in Ukraine, as the Americans understand it?

[Patrushev] I do not know what kind of a good cause that could be, if as a result of this activity in Ukraine an entire generation was raised that is completely poisoned with hatred of Russia and with the mythology of “European values”. It has not yet realized that these values, even in the positive sense of the term, are not actually designed for Ukrainians. Nobody intends to set about boosting living standards in Ukraine or establishing these young people in Europe, which is itself having great difficulty coping with extremely serious challenges and threats.

I think the “sobering up” of the Ukrainians will be harsh and painful. It remains to be hoped that this will happen relatively quickly, and a whole string of objective factors could promote that. I would like to note another factor that is of fundamental significance. Irrespective of the subsequent development of events, the significance of the one for the other – Russia and Ukraine – will persist. Ukraine will simply not be able to develop successfully without Russia, whether anyone likes it or not.

Such is the objective interdependence of economic, logistical, and other links that has developed over the centuries. But whereas for Russia the total severance of these links would be a painful blow, for Ukraine it would be disastrous. It is no accident that current President Petro Poroshenko was obliged, in the wake of his ousted predecessor, to raise the question of postponing the implementation of economic section of the already signed association agreement between Ukraine and the EUIt is to be expected that the victory euphoria of other Kiev rulers will also give way to 
It is noteworthy that the then CIA Director William Casey decided to enlist prominent scholars in tha more sober assessment of the real state of affairs.

[Yegorov] Some experts think the Ukraine crisis was only a pretext for a new deterioration in the West’s relations with Russia. Is that so?

[Patrushev] It is true that if the catastrophe in Ukraine had not happened some other grounds would have been found to step up the policy of “containment” of our country. This course has been pursued unswervingly for many decades; only the forms and tactics of its implementation change.

As you know, after World War II the confrontation between the USSR and the West headed by the United States took the form of a “cold war”. The military-political component of this standoff was entrusted to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), formed on the initiative of the United States on 4 April 1949. An analysis of NATO’s practical activity indicates that in creating the alliance the United States was pursuing two main objectives.

First, a military bloc directed against the USSR was formed under American leadership.

Second, Washington forestalled the emergence in Western Europe of an autonomous grouping of states that could have competed with the United States. It should be recalled that the territory of the United States itself, which essentially established unilateral military control over the allies, is not included in NATO’s zone of responsibility.

After the breakup of the USSR and the termination of the Warsaw Pact, which united Europe’s socialist countries and which by definition represented the main danger to NATO, not only was the bloc not disbanded, it began to expand even more in quantitative and military terms.

[Yegorov] But surely NATO was not the only factor that influenced the breakup of the Soviet Union?

[Patrushev] In the cold war period a whole string of ideological doctrines emerged in the West that served as justification for an anti-Soviet political course. One of the authors of this kind of research was Zbigniew Brzezinski, an American political scientist and statesman of Polish extraction. He established the so-called strategy of “vulnerabilities” in relation to the USSR, and under President Reagan this became the basis of American policy towards our country. The implementation of the strategy was guided by the National Security Council headed by the president of the United States. The identification and definition of “vulnerabilities” and the task of organizing ways of converting them into substantial problems for the USSR were entrusted to the US Central Intelligence work, first and foremost economists but also experts from the business world who had real experience of business wars with competitors. As a result of large-scale analytical work, the USSR’s “vulnerabilities” in the political, economic, ideological, and other spheres were defined and systematically studied.

Our country’s main “vulnerability,” as defined by the CIA, was its economy. After detailed modelling, the American experts identified its “weakest link”, namely the USSR budget’s extremely high dependence on the export of energy resources. A strategy of provoking the financial and economic bankruptcy of the Soviet state was formulated, envisaging two interconnected objectives: the bringing about of a sharp reduction in revenue to the USSR’s budget from foreign trade, combined with a substantial increase in expenditure on resolving problems created from outside.

A reduction in world oil prices was envisaged as the main measure for reducing the income side of the budget. This was successfully achieved by the mid-1980s when, as a result of US collusion with the rulers of a number of oil extracting countries, an artificial surplus of crude was created on the market and oil prices fell almost by a factor of four.

A growth in the Soviet Union’s expenditure was provoked in several areas: the transition from the strategy of American opposition to the USSR in Afghanistan to the strategy of dragging it deeply into the Afghan war; the incitement of antigovernment demonstrations in Poland and other states in the socialist camp with a view to provoking Moscow into additional expenditures on stabilizing the situation in Eastern Europe; the whipping up of the arms race, among other things by introducing the SDI [Strategic Defence Initiative] bluff, and so forth.

It should be said that at that time the Americans succeeded in achieving their objectives. The outcome of their activity was a substantial excess in the USSR’s expenditure over income, which ultimately provoked a profound economic crisis that extended into the political and ideological spheres. Shortsighted attempts by the Soviet leadership to alleviate the situation through foreign financial aid gave Washington additional levers of influence over Moscow. The “recovery” measures proposed by the West and implemented through the IMF and the World Bank to liberalize foreign trade without a smooth transition from the previous monopoly system led to the final collapse of the economy.

In the assessment of American experts, it was the strategy of “vulnerabilities”, which demonstrated the colossal effectiveness of economic variety of cold war compared with “hot” war, that was decisive in promoting the elimination of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact.

[Yegorov] After the breakup of the USSR, could Russia still somehow have opposed the new redivision of the world, or was the surrender of its positions and its former allies, such as Yugoslavia, already predetermined?

[Patrushev] By the end of the 20th century a kind of sociopolitical “fault line” had formed in this region, standing out most clearly in the disintegration of the multiethnic and multifaith Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The leaders of the United States and the leading NATO countries exploited a military-political situation that was developing favourably for them in order to realize their long-term aims in Southeast Europe.

In the 1990s the Russian Federation, for well-known reasons of an internal and external nature, lost the dominant influence in the Balkans that the Soviet Union had enjoyed and embarked on the path of conciliation with the West. It was in the Balkans that the unilateral and totally uncompensated surrender by Russia of its positions in the international arena was manifested most distinctly. In 1991-1996 the bodies that shaped our country’s foreign policy did not officially even have any such concept as “national interest”. They nurtured groundless expectations of gratitude for obedience from the Western partners and some kind of special benefit for our country from close and unconditional cooperation with the United States. In practice our American partners almost immediately stopped taking us seriously and only gave us a condescending “slap on the shoulder”, so to speak, from time to time.

The NATO bloc, under cover of peacekeeping and without encountering serious objections from our side, operated increasingly confidently outside its own zone of responsibility, sought the rights to lease strategic infrastructure facilities for lengthy periods, and effectively brought the organs of military command and control of a number of Balkan countries under its own control by various means. The Alliance’s subunits became firmly established in the region. Other states taking part in peacekeeping missions, including Russia, set themselves no such objectives, having reconciled themselves to the role of junior partners and preferring not to see the self-evident fact: The war in the Balkans could perfectly well be regarded as a rehearsal and a prologue to larger-scale steps to redivide the world.

[Yegorov] Is it likely that it was these steps that led to the clash of interests between Western countries and Russia in the entire post-Soviet space?

[Patrushev] The United States has been behaving particularly assertively and shamelessly over the past 20 years in and around this space. Encouraged by the weakening and subsequent elimination of the USSR, American ruling circles did everything possible to ensure dominance over the major sources of raw materials resources in our country and in Central Asia, as well as the transit routes for their export. Washington planned to extend its sphere of direct influence to the regions of the Black Sea, the Caucasus, and the Caspian.

All these territories were named a US zone of strategic national interests. The only remaining obstacle to the realization of the Americans’ plans to take complete control of the corresponding deposits and transport corridors was Russia, which preserved its military potential to inflict unacceptable damage on the United States.

American strategists saw the solution to this difficulty in the final collapse of the system of state power and the subsequent dismemberment of our country. The first region that was supposed to leave Russia was the North Caucasus.

Particular importance was attached to Chechnya, which declared its independence and was temporarily under the effective control of the West. Extremists and their supporters in Russia were offered support by the special services of Britain, the United States, and allies in Europe and the Islamic world.

In these conditions the Russian leadership adopted a firm, principled stance of defending the unity of the state. Ultimately, as a result of the firm political will displayed by Russian President Vladimir Putin and at the cost of enormous efforts, it proved possible to stop attempts to detach Chechnya from Russia and then to consolidate the Republic’s place within the Federation.

After 11 September 2001 the world community recognized the terrorist threat as the main threat and a global threat, reaching the understanding that countering this threat requires common efforts. As a result there was, in particular, a slight weakening of the West’s attacks on Russia because of its campaign against international terrorists in the Caucasus, while we did not object to the operation by the Americans and their allies in Afghanistan. The announcement of the formation of a broad antiterrorist coalition followed.

At that time Washington displayed a certain readiness to collaborate, although in actual fact it did not intend to abandon the policy of “containment” with regard to Russia. More and more new NATO facilities moved up to our borders. International law was supplanted by the law of force (let us recall the aforementioned dismemberment of Yugoslavia, followed by Serbia, the occupation of Iraq, and the invasion of Afghanistan by the so-called coalition forces).

After 7-8 August 2008, when the Georgian leadership, with US support, attempted to annihilate South Ossetia, the world once again changed substantially. For the first time in many decades Washington provided direct support to a foreign state that had perpetrated an attack on Russian citizens and peacekeepers.

Everything was staked on surprise. The Georgian dictator believed that a military incursion on the opening day of the international Olympic Games would put Russia in a difficult position, and the Georgians, taking advantage of this, would carry out their “blitzkrieg”. However, the Russian leadership reacted promptly to the sharp deterioration in the situation and the necessary measures were adopted to halt the aggression.

[Yegorov] It was at that time that people started talking about the shaping of a new geopolitical reality – the multipolarity of the modern world. How did the United States react to this?

[Patrushev] After the August events in the Caucasus, Washington was clearly alarmed by Russia’s obvious intention to take its place among the world powers of the 21st century and uphold the principle of equal opportunities and full autonomy in global politics. And also to convert the state’s financial income from the exploitation of natural resources into real economic and defence potential and human capital.

The American leadership clearly also disliked the prospects of Russia’s collaboration with China and India, the introduction of the practice of summits in the BRICS format, the successful activity of other organizations in which Russia occupies leading positions (the CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization], the SCO [Shanghai Cooperation Organization], and the EAEC [Eurasian Economic Community]), and the formation of the Customs Union.

In the context of the growing world financial and economic crisis, major new players in the international arena such as the PRC, India, Brazil, and Iran as well as the growing economies of Southeast Asia and South Korea became increasingly significant factors for the United States. Hence, incidentally, the emergence of new conceptual principles such as the American-Chinese special partnership, the strategic collaboration between the United States and India, the establishment of direct dialogue between Washington and Iran, and so forth.

Indications of the need to resume the beneficial dialogue with Russia on a whole range of issues began to emerge from the new administration of President Barack Obama. This positive inclination on the part of the American authorities could only be welcomed.

However, it soon became clear that Washington is not inclined towards real cooperation. It confined itself to mere statements of friendliness and the devising of certain negotiation tracks from which the benefit to Russia, in the end, proved almost zero. After a while even totally nonbinding positive dialogues of this kind came to an end and the US attitude towards our country began once again to be reminiscent of cold war times.

[Yegorov] And the logical culmination of this policy was the Ukraine crisis?

[Patrushev] The coup d’etat in Kiev, accomplished with clear US support, followed the classical pattern tried and tested in Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East. But never before has such a scheme affected Russian interests so profoundly.

Analysis shows that by provoking Russia into retaliatory steps the Americans are pursuing the very same objectives as in the 1980s with regard to the USSR. Just like back then, they are trying to identify our country’s “vulnerabilities”. At the same time, incidentally, they are pursuing the objective of neutralizing European economic competitors who have, in Washington’s opinion, grown excessively close to Moscow.

I would like to remind you that Washington has always sought to have levers of pressure on Russia. Thus, in 1974 the famous Jackson-Vanik Amendment was adopted, restricting trade relations with our country. It appeared to have completely lost its relevance immediately after the breakup of the USSR, but it was still in force right up to 2012, when the so-called “Magnitsky List” was promptly adopted in its place.

The current sanctions are in the same category. The US Administration’s activity in the Ukrainian sphere is taking place within the framework of an updated White House foreign policy course aimed at holding on to American leadership in the world by means of the strategic containment of the growing influence of the Russian Federation and other centres of power. In this context Washington is actively making use, on its own terms, of NATO’s potential, seeking to use political and economic pressure to prevent any vacillations on the part of its allies and partners.

[Yegorov] Why is the American elite clinging so stubbornly to the right to control other people’s natural resources at a time when the Western expert community is declaring the importance of the development of alternative energy sources that are supposedly capable of taking the place of oil and gas in the near future?

[Patrushev] In actual fact, specialists are certain that no real substitute for hydrocarbons as the basis of power generation will emerge in the next few decades. Furthermore the understanding prevails in the West that the total capacity of nuclear, hydro, wind, solar, and other power stations will meet no more than one-fifth of world demand.

Nor should another important aspect be forgotten. In the modern world we can observe a steady growth in the shortage of food and drinking water for the growing population of the planet. The absence of the most elementary means of existence pushes desperate people into manifestations of extremism and involvement in terrorism, piracy, and crime. This is one reason for the acute conflicts between countries and regions and also for mass migration.

The shortage of water and irrigated land is not infrequently the cause of friction, for instance, between the Central Asian republics. The problem of water resources is acute in a number of other countries in Asia and particularly in Africa.

Many American experts, in particular former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, assert that there are vast territories “under Moscow’s power” that it is incapable of exploiting and which therefore “do not serve the interests of all humanity”. Assertions continue to be heard about the “unfair” distribution of natural resources and the need to ensure so-called “free access” to them for other states.

The Americans are convinced that people must be thinking in similar terms in many other states, particularly those neighbouring on Russia, and that in the future they will, as is nowadays the custom, form “coalitions” to support the corresponding claims on our country. As in the case of Ukraine, it is proposed to resolve problems at Russia’s expense but without taking its interests into account.

Even during periods of a relative thaw in relations between Russia (the USSR) and the United States, our American partners have always remained true to such notions.

Therefore irrespective of the nuances in the behaviour of the Americans and their allies the Russian leadership still faces this task as a constant: To guarantee the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Motherland, to defend and multiply its riches, and to manage them correctly in the interests of the multiethnic people of the Russian Federation.

Source: Middle East Shuffle

Imperial Pax Americana

Published on Oct 13, 2014
What is the health of the American empire? How does the American empire differ from all other empires in history? What factor will inevitably be the collapse of the American empire? Is it supporting policies that actually play against US interests?

CrossTalking with Eric Draitser, Bruce Fein and Vassilis Fouskas.


Posted in RussiaComments Off on Cold War II: Interview with Nikolay Patrushev, Secretary of the Russian Security Council

Denuclearize or lose our species: Multigenerational effects of exposure to radiation


Denuclearize or lose our species: Multigenerational effects of exposure to radiation

by Christopher Busby and Majia Nadesen

“PRESS RELEASE: Atomic Test Veteran Children and Grandchildren affected by fathers’ exposures to internal radiation from Uranium and Plutonium at the test sites”–Christopher Busby

To hear it from Jim Stone, Fukushima poses no serious risk to civilization or to the survival of the human species. The idea is merely a profit-making myth.

“Fukushima was bad, but it is Japan’s problem. All the stories about the Pacific dying are bold faced lies spewed for ratings to generate ad revenue. You still cannot go into many of the nuclear testing zones in Russia because it is too radioactive.

“America was more careful, and does not have similar problems. The 30 KM radius around Fukushima (which extends out 100 km to the North) is Japan’s equivalent of Russia’s old testing zone, which is a big disaster for Japan. But as far as the rest of the world? It is meaningless and will stay that way no matter what happens at Fuku.”

The problem is that real experts on radiation and health, such as Christopher Busby, internationally acclaimed expert on precisely this subject, and Majia Nadesen, who has just published a book about Fukushima, have a very different story for us–one with ominous implications for the future.

Interview with Majia Nadesen on “The Real Deal” (15 October 2014):

New research has disclosed that exposure to radiation turns out to have cross-generational DNA effects that current regulations and policies do not reflect, which was not the result that was expected; and that, if we continue to rely upon nuclear weapons and nuclear energy, the survival of the species is in jeopardy, after all. Read and weep.

New Study questions Japanese data underpinning current radiation risk model

by Christopher Busby

The results of a study of the health of children and grandchildren of British servicemen stationed at the atomic weapons test sites at Maralinga in Australia and Christmas Island in the Pacific will be published in the open peer-reviewed journal Epidemiology this week. Christopher Busby and Mireille Escande de Messieres conducted a case-control and cohort study of 605 children and 749 grandchildren of members of the British Nuclear Test Veterans Association (BNTVA) and compared congenital defects and cancer incidence with 311 control children and 498 control grandchildren of age-matched individuals. Results showed that, compared with controls:

  1. There was three times the number (105) of miscarriages in wives of veterans.
  2. There was 9.7 times adverse congenital conditions (57) in veteran children.
  3. There was 8.4 times adverse congenital conditions (46) veteran grandchildren.
  4. These rates were confirmed also by comparison with national EUROCAT data.
  5. The existence of the same highly statistically significant rate in both generations points to genomic instability as likely cause, a trans-generational genomic switch discovered after Chernobyl and shown in animal studies to affect many generations.
  6. The cause is argued to be Uranium, the main atom bomb constituent, which rained out at the test sites as sub micron particles in “black rain”. Recent research shows Uranium causes genomic effects at very low radiation doses because it binds to DNA and amplifies the radiation damage both through proximity and in other ways.
  7. Black rain of Uranium was also a feature of the Hiroshima Atomic bomb and Uranium has been measured several kilometers from the Hiroshima epicenter. The authors re-analyse adverse birth outcome rates in the official Hiroshima database and show that rates in the control groups defined in the study as “zero dose” have twice the rate than all Japan for the post A-bomb period.
  8. The Ministry of Defence, in arguing recent court cases rely upon the fact that dosimeters at the test sites show low doses. However these devices do not register Uranium or other alpha emitters. Uranium was not looked for at the sites.
  9. The study findings are supported by similar genomic effects found in Iraq populations exposed to Depleted Uranium particles (e.g. Fallujah sex-ratio, cancer and birth defects), USA and UK Gulf veterans, Uranium miners and workers and Navajo and other local populations living near Uranium waste tailings. All of these groups show chromosome defects consistent with their exposures to Uranium.

Speaking from Riga, Latvia, Dr Busby remarks: This multi-generational effect is an unexpected finding. There are implications for the current radiation risk models which legally underpin all nuclear power development and also the use of radioactive weapons. Although weakly radioactive, when ingested and inhaled Uranium has properties which enable it to directly damage DNA in ways that are not incorporated into current legislation. Uranium was not measured at the test sites and is not routinely measured near nuclear sites or in the environments either.

Fukushima: Dispossession or Denuclearization?

by Majia Nadesen

We pose the question starkly: Humanity must choose between denuclearization or dispossession.

Front cover (Majia)

We document that nuclear power and weapons are connected and their complex fundamentally dispossesses citizens of liberal guarantees, including rights to property, free speech, and the pursuit of happiness.

We explore crisis management of the Fukushima disaster to demonstrate dispossession of rights of property, free speech, and the pursuit of happiness, through examples that include lost livelihoods and Fukushima children’s rising rates of thyroid cancer, among other topics: See Oiwa, Yuri (2014, August 24), Thyroid cancer diagnosed in 104 young people in Fukushima.The Asahi Shimbun,

We examine the history of radiation health effects to demonstrate historical conflicts between nuclear industry safety-guidelines and scientific studies of the biological effects of “internal emitters,” which are ingested and/or inhaled radionuclides.

We describe distortions in nuclear industry safety models deriving from invalid modeling techniques.

We demonstrate that nuclear power is market distorting because it externalizes its true costs and relies extensively on generous government subsidies.

We show that governments too often prioritize nuclear interests over democratic principles and practices: For example, we investigate media and popular resistance within Japan to the newly passed “state secrets” law, which is seen by many as directly threatening free speech and public health: See Toshihiro Okuyama and Hiroo Sunaoshi (2013, December 17) State secrets law raises concern about safety of nuclear power plants. The Asahi Shimbun,

We disclose strong public support in Japan and elsewhere for decentralized alternative energy production and we describe oligarchic energy industries’ efforts to maintain centralized control when challenged by the decentralizing production tendencies of alternative energy, such as solar: See Ex-Japanese PM on How Fukushima Meltdown was Worse than Chernobyl and Why He Now Opposes Nuclear Power. (2014, March 11).Democracy Now.

We are concerned that in the absence of public activism the choices made by governments and industry will prioritize short term profits and vested interests. “Dispossession” is the cumulative effect of these decision criteria in action.

Nuclear remains seductive in our Hobbesian world of vying nation-states, despite myriad acknowledged hazards, including aging and decaying infrastructures, recurrent nuclear “accidents,” unceasing contamination, and terrorism. Nuclear seduces even when its effluents threaten the ecosystem and, perhaps, even the human genome.

Fukushima steaming photo

Fukushima Steaming? August 13 2014

Vested nuclear interests reign, but democracy is not yet vanquished. We see public demand for systematic denuclearization as critical for long-term human sustainability. The time for political action wanes as scientists predict nuclear power plant accidents will occur with regular frequency: See Severe nuclear reactor accidents likely every 10 to 20 years, European study suggests (2012, May 22). Max-Planck-Gesellschaft

Mikhail Gorbachev noted in his Memoirs that prior to the Chernobyl disaster there had been 151 significant radiation leaks at nuclear power plants around the world.[i] He warned that one or two more accidents would produce contamination far worse than after a nuclear war.[ii] With Fukushima we are living in a highly contaminated age as research subjects with no options to discontinue the experiment.

Change in energy policy is necessary for human sustainability. If we do not denuclearize, we are going to be dispossessed.


Back cover (Majia)

We are a diverse group of scholars living on four continents. What unites us is our vision for a sustainable future based in decentralized, sustainable energy.

Contributing editors to Fukushima: Dispossession or Denuclearization? are Antony Boys, Andrew McKillop, Majia Nadesan and Richard Wilcox. Harvey Wasserman, Christopher Busby, Paul Langley, Adam Broinowski, Christian Lystbaek, and The Fukushima Five contribute chapters. Cover artwork by William Banzai7.

Proceeds from the book: Proceeds from the book will be donated to the Fukushima Collective Evacuation Trial Team, a team of lawyers who are fighting in the courts in northern Japan to have children in Koriyama City, quite badly contaminated with radiation after the March 11, 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster, evacuated to safe areas at government expense.


[i]  M. Gorbachev (1995) Memoirs. (London: Doubleday), p. 191.

[ii]  C. Neef (24 March 2011) This Reactor Model Is No Good’ Documents Show Politburo Skepticism of Chernobyl,Spiegel.

Christopher Busby is an internationally acclaimed British scientist, a member of the Royal Society of Medicine and of the International Society for Environmental Epidemiology, known especially for his studies of the negative health effects of very low-dose ionising radiation.

Posted in JapanComments Off on Denuclearize or lose our species: Multigenerational effects of exposure to radiation

Ending ISIS Power in Libya


Will Seif al Islam lead the expulsion of the ISIS affiliate, Al Fajr Libya?

  …by  Franklin Lamb,        … with the Abu Baker al-Siddiq Brigade, Zintan, Libya

Saif Al Gaddafi

A second interview by this observer with Seif al Islam Gadhafi, formerly the heir apparent to his father Moammar, was sought and finally arranged as a follow up to an earlier one focusing of my interest in the Imam Musa Sadr case.

That case involves a great crime against a great man and conciliator and his historic cause, and exposes those who betrayed him in Lebanon and two other countries while swearing their personal devotion and shedding crocodile tears over the past 36 years.

That research is nearing completion and publication awaits DNA results from body samples more credible than the ones offered by the Bosnia laboratory two years ago and immediately demonstrated to be fraudulent.

The story of why that particular lab was chosen and by who goes to the essence of the current stonewalling campaign with respect to informing the public about what exactly happened to Imam Sadr and his partners on 8/3l/1978 in Tripoli, Libya. It also identifies who instructed Gadhafi to kill them over the strong objections from the PLO’s Yassir Arafat who spoke with Gadhafi and tried to save the trio of Lebanese Shia.

But our discussion soon turned to other subject as Seif’s jailers may have taken seriously my joke that if they extended the original 20 minutes I was granted to two hours, I would deliver to them 10 US Visas and they could fill in any names the might choose.

Truth told, of course I could not even get myself a passport renewal as former US Ambassador Jeffrey Feltman reportedly sneered at a US Embassy Christmas party a few years back, “Lamb will serve ten years hard time in the Feds for hobnobbing with terrorists (Hezbollah in those days…who knows today?)  when we get him back home.”  I admit that Jeff and I both have a problem with Hezbollah.

His is because Hezbollah just may liberate Palestine and mine is that Hezbollah needs to do more in Lebanon and use 90 minutes of Parliament’s time, where it has the power, to grant Palestinian refugees in Lebanon the right to work and to own a home. But that is also another story and Hezbollah continues to report that they are ‘working on the problem but it’s politically complicated.”

Meanwhile, Da’ish (IS) is metastasizing fast in Libya through its main affiliate al Fajr Libya (Libya Dawn) and plans to add Tripoli, to its Islamic Caliphate along with Baghdad, Damascus, Amman and Beirut during the coming months and if necessary, years.  This, according to Seif al Islam and representatives of the Zintan brigades based southwest of Tripoli as well as two representatives of other tribes and militia moving toward supporting the still vital Gadhafi regime remnants.

Libya may be the lowest hanging ripe fruit within easy reach of Da’ish (IS) and its growing number of affiliates, according to US Ambassador Deborah Jones during a recent visit to the US Embassy in Malta, to discuss her own problems in Libya which include the 8/31/14 take-over by al Fajr Libya (FL) of the US embassy compound barely a month after it was evacuated and moved to Tunisia for the second time since February of 2011.

Secretary of State John Kerry reassured the media in Washington recently that “the embassy was not really closed, but had moved out of Libya”.  One Religion Professor at Tripoli University joked last week that “Kerry is correct, the US embassy is here but it’s in a state of occultation. We can’t see it but it’s around and watches us.”

A Libyan photographer who was at the embassy compound when Al Fajr Libya (FL) arrived reported that the Da’ish (IS) affiliate had moved into buildings inside the embassy complex claiming that they would ‘protect it’ as they carted off boxes of documents for ‘safe keeping.’ FL is described by a former Dean at Tripoli U. as between al Nusra and Da’ish (IS) with a fragile partnership between the two and presenting to the public “ A Good cop-Bad cop tag-team with differences to be worked out once all the infidels are vanquished.

Libya, as with the Arab Maghreb, is on the cusp of a new wave of Islamist groups, and is moving beyond al-Qaeda of Bin Laden, Zawahiri, and Abdelmalek Droukdel, to Baghdadi’s ISIS and its widely perceived logical offshoot ISIM being planted in North Africa and the Sahel. The threat of the Da’ish (Islamic State is already deeply anchored and expanding in the now lawless Libya, according to UN envoy Bernardino León.

Several Libyan organizations recently announced their loyalty to IS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi. This has confirmed a speculation that IS has penetrated Libyan public institutions. The Ansar al-Sharia group, affiliated with ISIS, has declared authority during the last several days over the coastal city of Darna which is located strategically between Benghazi and the Egyptian border – just 289 km (179 miles) and 333 km (206 miles), respectively.

Countless militia are forming, merging, changing names and lying low as perceived interests dictate.  Soldiers of the Caliphate in Algeria was retitled, revitalized and repackaged to enhance its appeal on social media as has the Furqan Brigade of the AQIM in Tunisia. Ansar Al-Sharia is another one becoming very active.

The Uqba bin Nafi Brigade, has just declared allegiance to ISIS as has the Islamic Caliphate in the Islamic Maghreb. al-Ummah Brigade, which operates out of Libyan coasts and airports, another is  Al-Battar is attracting pro-ISIS elements. Majlis Shura Shabab al-Islam (the Islamic Youth Shura Council), or MSSI.

According to Libyan sources and journalist Adam al-Sabiri, writing in Al Akbar, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi asked these elements to deploy to the Libyan front to counter the attacks by the Libyan army led by Khalifa Haftar as part of Operation Dignity seeking to “purge Libya of terrorists.”

Libyan friends, some from three years ago, advise that more people have been killed in the past three years than during the 2011 revolution and they now fear a Somalia-like “failed state” given all the weapons, lawlessness, and growing number of Islamists. The South of Libya has not been spared the lawlessness, as tribal battles continue for control of a lucrative smuggling trade. Friends point out that the country no longer even bothers to celebrate the National Holiday commemorating the 10/23/2011 “total liberation of Libya.”

“It’s a cruel joke” my friend Hinde advised as she explains that many Libyans yearn for the stability of the Gadhafi days. “Maybe wanting to turn the clock back is the same in Iraq and Egypt and Syria?” she wondered.

“The rampant regional, ideological and tribal conflicts are worse than the rule of the dictator,” said Salah Mahmud al-Akuri, a doctor in Benghazi. “Some Libyans are looking back to the old regime.”

Amidst all the chaos, Libyan Prime Minister Abdullah Al-Thinni claimed last week that groups loyal to the IS, such as al Fajr Libya, are presently in control of the city of Derna and other Libyan towns and have begun summoning townspeople to public squares to witness declarations of fealty to Da’ish (IS), even beginning their signature public executions.

Libya’s “government” claims that its “army” is preparing to expel Fajr Libya (FL) and retake the capital, as more militia rush to join FL. Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thani’s said in a statement this week that he gave orders to the government forces to “advance toward Tripoli to liberate it and to free it from the grip of al Fajr Libya”. The Libyan embassy in Washington told a House Foreign Affairs committee staffer that they expect that residents in Tripoli will launch “a civil disobedience campaign until the arrival of the army.”

Walking around the former “Green Square” this observer saw no signs of this rather he observed citizens stocking up on necessities or packing their cars. Later, Thani added, military forces in the strife-torn country “have absolutely united to also recapture Libya’s second city Benghazi from the local IS affiliate, al Fajr Liyba (FL). Leading one to wonder whether the Libyan “army” will fare better than Maliki’s did in Mosul and Anbar.

According to students and staff at Tripoli University, (known as Fatah University during the Gadhafi decades) a few of whom this observer first met in the summer of 2011, and who lived the political events in their country since while some of their friends and relatives, as in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, are preparing to leave and start a new life somewhere.

Hasan, a Gadhafi supporter I was with nearly daily three years ago in Tripoli still curses what, “NATO| did this to our country.  The Gadhafi regime was changing as you know Franklin, but the reformers were prevented from making the changes that Seif al Islam and his associates got their father to agree to.

Remember when Saif said “My father wants to live in a tent where he is most happy and write a history of the Jamahiriya (land of the masses). He will offer advice but have just a ceremonial role out of politics?  You remember that?  We believed Seif didn’t we?. Anyhow,  khalas!, Libya is finished! NATO gave it to Da’ish just as they gave Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria to Iran.”

Libya is now moving beyond al-Qaeda of Bin Laden, Zawahiri, and Abdelmalek Droukdel, to Baghdadi’s ISIS and its widely perceived logical offshoot Islamic State in the Islamic Maghreb (ISIM-Damis) now expanding in North Africa and the Sahel. Former rebels who fought against Gadhafi have formed powerful militias and seized control of large parts of Libya in the past three years.

Back in mid-august of 2011, the late American journalist Marie Colvin and I stood on the balcony of the Corinthia Hotel opposites the still empty Marriott where some kid was practicing sniping from the roof, at my expense, as I pointed out to Marie a body floating just off the beach of the Mediterranean across the road.

We walked over and examined it and decided while it was dressed in religious garb the man may have been an army deserter; there were increasing numbers in those days, because of his military style boots. We alerted some militia guys driving along the corniche who said they would report the body and before long an ambulance did arrive.

Two of the militia waded out waist deep and pulled in the bloated body to shore, unlaced his tan leather boots while holding their noses from the stench. They then threw the new boots in the back of their pick-up and drove off with no more than a smiling ‘shukran habibis’ (thanks dears). Later that day Marie and I counted a column of 143 pickups with AK-47 jubilant fist waving rebels entering along the coastal road toward downtown Tripoli having come from battles in the east around Misrata.

In the next few days we discussed how there seemed to be countless ‘free-cigarettes, $200 on the first of each month and your personal Kalasnikov’ militia popping up like mushrooms after a summer rain. Three years ago one of their battle cries was “Death to Gadafi—Yes to Freedom!” Today one hears around Tripoli another slogan from the lips of young men many of whom may be the same, chanting, “Death to the kafirs (disbelievers,” or infidels) Yes to Islam!Abas (that’s all!”

Seif el Islam still resides at his cell in Zintan which, even though jail is jail, has been upgraded from when he was captured in the Sahara making his way toward Niger and his finger was cut off as a warning.

Seif, has proposed talks and is ready to participate in bringing together Libya’s warring parties and aiding the transition to what he claims he was working on before the February 17, 2011 uprising in Benzhazi which quickly spread.

Seif’s team would likely include his father’s cousin and confident Ahmed Gaddaf al-Dam, former Deputy Foreign Minister Khaled Kane, long-time Libyan diplomat, the widely respected Omar el Hamdi now is Cairo, and Seif’s sister Aisha, now living with his mother and children in the Gulf.

Seif has no illusions of returning Libya to the past, but argues that elements of the former regime deserved to be heard. “We were in the process of making broad reforms and my father gave me the responsibly to see them through. Unfortunately the revolt happened and both sides made mistakes that are now allowing extreme Islamist group like Da’ish to pick up the pieces and turn Libya into an extreme fundamentalist entity in their regional plans.”

With respect to Seifs trials, whether ins the Tripoli courthouse or at the International Criminal Court in the Hague, the odds of  either  happening anytime soon, ior at all, are fading as negotiations for an arrangement are reportedly progressing.

A solution is being sought, according to sources at the Justice Ministry in Tripoli because there are many problems with Seifs case which was supposed to begin earlier this year, and the case has been criticized by a number of international actors. Not least for which how Libya and the ICC have handled their cases.

For example, Human Rights Watch has accused the Libyan government of failing to provide adequate legal representation and the ICC it has been unable to compel the Libyan government to allow it access — just one of many challenges to the ICC’s legitimacy in recent years.  Meanwhile it is likely that Seif’s jailers, who increasing respects and admires him, may have other ideas that would enhance their own standing in Libya.

In addition, certain NATO countries are said to be privately discussing with Washington, Paris London and Bonn the idea of finding a role for Seif and certain of his associates and family members in “the new Libya.”

According to Seif, and former regime officials, several NATO countries have sent messages claiming they did not intend for his father to be killed but were searching during the summer of 2011 for a refuge for his father in Africa. Seif does not believe them.

Seif al Islam still has substantial influence among tribes still loyal to Gaddafi as well as former regime officials in the army and government. The delegation Seif could assemble, including Ahmad  Gadaff al-Dam, would benefit from the latter’s still strong connections with Arab governments, Morocco, Egypt, Algeria, Saudi Arabia and the UAE as well as some European countries.

More on this and other subjects related to Seif and the growing international recognition over the need for  expulsion of Islamists from Libya, and a possible significant role for Seif, are expected to be discussed publicly soon.

Posted in LibyaComments Off on Ending ISIS Power in Libya

Good News: Syria shoots down army jets operated by Zio-Wahhabi Rat’s


Posted by: Sammi Ibrahem, Sr

Syria shoots down army jets operated by ISIL


Syria shoots down army jets operated by ISIL

[ Editor’s note:  I have no idea what ISIL thought they were going to be able to do with these planes other than provide some target practice for the Syrian Air Force.  If they were going to use them in a suicide mission, they would have done that quickly before they were destroyed.

Reports say they are “hiding” the third one, but with our satellites being able to look into buildings with full spectrum radar, I can’t image that being very successful. The ISIL air force was not a good idea for them.

I am curious that there might be some back-channel communication with Damascus on this operation. The US could have easily bombed these on the ground. But by “letting” Assad get them, they killed both the pilots — much better deal. Color me suspicious… Jim W. Dean ]

The Syrian government has admitted that the ISIL Takfiri militants have conducted flights by three captured planes belonging to the Syrian army.

Syrian Information Minister Omran al-Zoubi said the country’s forces managed to shoot down two of the three after they made trial flights over the northwestern city of Aleppo on Tuesday.

“Regarding… that terrorists control three jets in al-Jarrah military air base in Aleppo, there are three old aircraft that the terrorists were testing so the Syrian Arab Army immediately destroyed two of them on the runway as they were landing,” Zoubi said.

I still can't image how Syria could have left operational MIGS behind

How could Syria have possibly left operational MIGS behind?

He noted that the Syrian government is not worried about the third plane as it “cannot be used” by the militants. The information minister added that the plane might be a pretext for the Turkish government to work for the imposition of a no-fly zone over Syria.

The so-called Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said on Friday that the ISIL was preparing pilots trained under former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein for future airstrikes against Syria.

Reports by Syrian opposition media said that the militants targeted two MiG 23 fighter jets in Aleppo’s Neirab military airbase.

Meanwhile, Syrian army forces continued making advances against Takfiris in the south by launching a vast operation against militants of the al-Nusra Front.

The Takfiri terrorists, who currently control parts of Syria and Iraq, have committed widespread acts of violence, including mass executions, abductions, torture and forcing women into slavery in the areas they have seized in Iraq and Syria.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Good News: Syria shoots down army jets operated by Zio-Wahhabi Rat’s

Shoah’s pages