Archive | July 17th, 2017

Over 80,000 Rohingya children ‘wasting’ from hunger in Myanmar

Image result for Rohingya children PHOTO

The United Nations has warned that tens of thousands of Rohingya Muslim children under the age of five are in dire need of treatment for “acute malnutrition” in Myanmar’s western state of Rakhine.

The World Food Program (WFP) reported on Monday that 80,500 children living in the areas are “wasting” and will need treatment for acute malnutrition within the next 12 months.

According to WFP spokesperson in Myanmar, the “wasting” condition, which is a rapid weight loss that can become fatal, impairs the functioning of the immune system.

“Based on the household hunger scale, about 38,000 households corresponding to 225,800 people are suffering from hunger and are in need of humanitarian assistance,” said the report.

The agency warned that “households with children under the age of five,” and those that composed of only one female adult, had the highest frequency of episodes of severe hunger.

The report was based an assessment in April of villages in the Rakhine state, which has been under a military lockdown since October 2016, when the military launched a campaign to hunt down those who allegedly staged deadly attacks on police posts.

A quarter of all Rohingya households composed of only one female adult because the men had left due to the military campaign, it added.

Since the beginning of the army’s operation, some 75,000 Rohingya have fled Rakhine to Bangladesh, according to UN estimates. Those who remain are now reeling from a food crisis.

There have also been numerous accounts by eyewitnesses of summary executions, rapes, and arson attacks against Muslims since the crackdown began.

The United Nations Human Rights Council agreed in March to send an international fact-finding mission to Myanmar, but the country’s de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi has so far denied entry to members of the mission.

Posted in South AsiaComments Off on Over 80,000 Rohingya children ‘wasting’ from hunger in Myanmar

Palestinians protest Radiohead’s support for apartheid ‘Israel’

Image result for British rock band, Radiohead, CARTOON

A group of Palestinians from the UK, besieged Gaza, occupied West Bank and Israel have co-authored a letter to the British rock band, Radiohead, over their controversial decision to hold a concert in Israel later this week.

The band’s decision to go ahead with the concert is a “slap in the face to Palestinians across the world” and a “betrayal of all social justice movements”, the group said. They urged Radiohead to reconsider their decision, which activists say grants legitimacy to an apartheid regime and gives support to political oppression.

Earlier this month Radiohead, who became a worldwide hit in the 1990s, announced their decision to play at a concert in Israel. Their decision angered fans and supporters of the global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel’s half a decade occupation of Palestine. Protests against the decision by the rock band, however, fell on deaf ears as the group insisted on playing in Israel while maintaining that “music, art and academia is about crossing borders, not building ones”.

In the two page letter, the group, which consists mainly of Palestinian academics and students, accused Radiohead of hypocrisy and supporting apartheid. They describe Radiohead’s “excuses” as no different to the excuse used by artists who played in South Africa during the height of the anti-apartheid movement against white rule. “Based on your responses to BDS, we wonder if you too would have performed in Sun City while Nelson Mandela and others rotted in Robben Island prison?” they asked.

They pointed out that hundreds of South African organisations and trade unions support the BDS campaign because in Israel they see very similar – if not exactly the same – system of political subjugation. “Indeed many South Africans,” the group stressed. “who have visited Palestine concluded that the situation is ‘worse’ than apartheid.”

The group urged Radiohead to open its eyes and see the routine violence and indignity faced by Palestinians, the daily human rights violations and abuses carried out by Israel before re-considering their decision.

Describing details of the their ongoing persecution, the group said:

We are segregated, held and humiliated at hundreds of checkpoints, we watch our houses be demolished, we are denied freedom of movement, equal access to water, healthcare, education and face a separate discriminatory legal system. We live under Israeli F16s and Elbit Drones, we face Merkhava tanks, and electricity cut to three hours a day. This, Radiohead, is known as apartheid and ethnic cleansing.

In their letter, they urged Radiohead to take a moment and think what it is like to live in Gaza: “[A] child as young as eight has had to endure three brutal Israeli bombing campaigns,” they wrote, adding: “Think what it must be like to live in perpetual exile in refugee camps sometimes only a few kilometres from home and yet forbidden from returning.”

Radiohead was also encouraged to consider the discriminatory political system that governs the lives of Palestinians: “Think what it must be like to live under an intricate system of apartheid that forbids you from travelling on certain roads, living in certain places and even accessing fundamental resources such as water.”

“Millions of us are imprisoned behind walls and barriers and if we want to cross we have to beg our occupiers for permission which is often denied to us. Everyday Palestinians in Gaza are dying because they cannot leave the outdoor prison Israel has created and access lifesaving medical care.”

Everyday Palestinians are stopped at checkpoints, harassed, turned away and sometimes even shot.

The Palestinian group described their frustrations over Radiohead’s attitude towards activists attempting to raise these concerns. The letter mentions that when activists tried to bring this matter to the attention of the band they were called “fucking people” and that one of the members stuck their middle finger at them.

“These people were not just allies of Palestinians who have fought tirelessly for our freedom, they were also Radiohead fans,” the group said. “Fans who have seen you engage with politics and various causes for social justice around the world over the decades.”

The letter cites activist and author Naomi Klein who is a strong supporter of the Palestinian cause including BDS. Radiohead is apparently an avid fan of the Canadian author but in the letter the Palestinian group accuse the band of hypocrisy, because of their claim to support social justice on the one hand while also attacking the global BDS movement.

One of the activists who signed the letter spoke to MEMO about her campaign to stop Radiohead performing in Israel. British-Palestinian, Huda Ammori, a student at Manchester University, mentioned that Radiohead performed at her university on 5 July. Activists from Manchester Palestine Action held a demonstration outside the venue and spoke to thousands of Radiohead fans about the need for a cultural boycott of Israel. She said that she managed to push her way to the front to protest Radiohead’s decision by showing solidarity to the Palestinian case for all the spectators to see.

“Radiohead performing in Israel is a mockery of the suffering of the Palestinian people. Radiohead have continued to disregard the Palestinian people and have mocked the supporters of the Palestine cause,” Ammori said. She pointed to the hypocrisy of Radiohead. “They claim to care about ‘social justice’ by showing some support for the people of Tibet and through their lyrics,” she said, “however, now their lyrics scream hypocrisy.” Performing music, she added, should not have to be a political choice, “however when it comes to apartheid, performing in Israel is a political choice. A choice between standing with the oppressor or standing with the oppressed.”

In Israel, the letter explained, Radiohead would be playing in front of an audience which “will be mostly Israelis who have served in the Israeli armed forces that are slaughtering our people; 1,400 Palestinians in 22 days in the winter of 2008-9 then more than 2,200 in 50 days in 2014, including over 500 children.”

They concluded their letter saying: “We are the abused, the imprisoned, and the occupied and we expect people of integrity to show solidarity and to not patronise us. We will not stop fighting for justice and we will remember those who stood with us when it was not fashionable to do so, who refused to entertain apartheid. And as with South Africa, history will judge you when we have our freedom.”

To read the full letter please click here

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on Palestinians protest Radiohead’s support for apartheid ‘Israel’

Nazi regime demolish Palestinian-owned building in East Jerusalem


Image result for demolish Palestinian HOME CARTOON

Nazi regime demolished a Palestinian-owned building on Monday morning in the occupied East Jerusalem neighborhood of al-Zaayyem, according to witnesses.

Bulldozers escorted by Nazi police forces and employees of Nazi Jerusalem municipality razed the home to the ground for lack of a building permit.

Last week, Nazi forces targeted Palestinian-owned buildings in occupied East Jerusalem for two consecutive days.

Construction licenses are very expensive and difficult to obtain for Palestinians, notably in the Jerusalem area, in a bid by Nazi regime to force Palestinians out and change the demographic balance of the city.

While Palestinians frequently take their cases to Nazi courts after Nazi land confiscation and home demolition notices are ordered, they seldom win their cases in court.

Thirty-three percent of all Palestinian homes in the occupied city lack Nazi-issued building permits, potentially placing at least 93,100 residents at risk of displacement, the United Nations reported in 2012.

Only 14 percent of East Jerusalem land is zoned for Palestinian residential construction, while one-third of Palestinian land has been confiscated since 1967 to build illegal Nazi Jewish-only settlements, according to the Association for Civil Rights (ACRI).

According to UNOCHA, Nazi regime demolished a record 1,093 structures in the occupied Palestinian territory in 2016, including 190 in East Jerusalem, displacing 1,601 Palestinians. They were the highest West Bank demolition and displacement figures recorded by OCHA since it started doing so in 2009.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, Human RightsComments Off on Nazi regime demolish Palestinian-owned building in East Jerusalem

US has Too Many Spies in Moscow, Russian Diplomat Says


US has Too Many Spies in Moscow, Russian Diplomat Says

“Even hinting at possible steps toward cooperation between our countries is currently seen in the U.S. as political suicide,” one Russian senator commented.

Russia has accused the United States of having too many spies operating within its diplomatic offices, and of refusing to cooperate on diplomatic issues.

“There are too many employees of the CIA and the Pentagon’s espionage unit working under the roof of the American diplomatic mission whose activity does not correspond at all with their status,” Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Maria Zakharova said on Friday according to TASS.

Zakharova also has said that Russia is considering expelling a number of these employees, and significantly reducing the number of U.S. officials working in Moscow.

“The number of personnel at the U.S. embassy in Moscow significantly exceeds the number of our personnel working in Washington. So, one of the options is that, apart from expelling the corresponding number of U.S. diplomats, we will just have to even the number of personnel,” she said.

The warning is partially a response in retaliation to the United States’ expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats in Washington last year, who were kicked out at the same time two Russian diplomatic compounds were seized by the Obama administration.

The U.S. justified the move accusing Russia of interfering in electoral processes, something which Russian officials have denied.

Russia has been increasingly frustrated with the U.S.’s refusal to give back the compounds, and allow Russia to replace the expelled diplomats.

If the issue is not resolved, Zakharova said Russia will be forced to take “reciprocal measures.”

“Everything depends on the reaction of the U.S. side, its concrete actions, and on the results of the consultations which will now take place in Washington,” she added.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that Russia rejected the idea of linking the dispute to other political issues.

However, Russian Senator Konstantin Kosachev criticized the “cynical” approach the U.S. was taking toward diplomacy and dialogue.

“Even hinting at possible steps toward cooperation between our countries is currently seen in the U.S. as political suicide,” he said.

Posted in USA, RussiaComments Off on US has Too Many Spies in Moscow, Russian Diplomat Says

Zionist Macron: Anti-Zionism Is a Reinvented Form of anti-Semitism

Macron: Anti-Zionism Is a Reinvented Form of anti-Semitism

Speaking at a ceremony commemorating the victims of the mass roundup of Jews in Paris in WWII, the French president assailed Le Pen and said France must take responsibility for the Vichy regime and Nazi collaboration

Bibi embraces his new puppet. Macron could not have made his supplicancy more obvious if he had fellated Bibi in front of the Arc de Triomphe.

[Editor’s note: Macron is showing his true colours as a thoroughly compliant stooge for the Judeo-Zionist organised crime cabal. The term ‘anti-semitism’ has long been weaponised and used to defame anyone who dares to criticise the Zionist criminal enclave known as Israel; by stating that criticism of Zionism and Israel is a new form of anti-semitism, Macron is doubling down on the weaponisation of language on behalf of his criminal Zionist masters.

By kissing up to Israel, and the Zionist criminals so blatantly, Macron is staining France’s dignity just as much as Petain’s Vichy did in WW2. Clearly, France is now completely under the thumb of the Zionist crime cabal and will follow whatever agenda has been laid out for them, so do not be surprised if Macron involves France in the Syrian debacle in the near future and expect France to staunchly support Israel at every opportunity. Ian]


Macron: Anti-Zionism Is a Reinvented Form of anti-Semitism

French President Emmanuel Macron delivered forceful remarks on Sunday at a ceremony marking the 75th anniversary of the deportation of Jews from Paris, attacking his political rival Marine Le Pen and other figures who claimed that the Vichy government which collaborated with the Nazis during WWII didn’t represent France. 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attended the ceremony in Paris alongside Macron.

“There are those who say Vichy wasn’t France,” Macron said. “It’s true that Vichy wasn’t all of France, but Vichy was the government of France and the French establishment It was responsible for deporting French Jews, and not the Germans.”

Macron said that denying or hiding France’s role in WWII is a disgrace.

“We have a responsibility to realize where and when we have failed,” he said. “The underground and those who rescued Jews saved France’s dignity, but the Vichy government was the reality. It’s convenient and easy to see Vichy as something perpetrated by foreign agents but it was the reality. You can’t build pride on a lie.”

Macron condemned Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism in France today, saying that it has taken a new shape, and that anti-Zionist and anti-Israel expressions should be opposed. “It’s a new type of anti-Semitism,” he said.

At the ceremony, Netanyahu lauded Macron’s statement from a few days ago that France in a war of civilizations against radical Islamic terrorism.

“Your struggle against militants Islam is our struggle,” he said. “We must stand against them together and defeat them together.”

Following the ceremony, Netanyahu arrived at the Élysée Palace for a sit-down with Macron.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, FranceComments Off on Zionist Macron: Anti-Zionism Is a Reinvented Form of anti-Semitism

Nazi regime: When Moshe Dayan Tried to Steal First Nuclear Device

‘The De Facto Coup D’état’: When Moshe Dayan Tried to Steal Israel’s First Nuclear Device

A recently published book in the United States sheds light on a mysterious and dramatic incident in the history of the Israeli nuclear project, detailing how Yitzhak (Yicha) Yaakov was sent to take control of a nuclear device south of Tel Aviv. The real target, though, was much larger and even more important: the prime minister

Then-Prime Minister Levi Eshkol and Defense Minister Moshe Dayan onboard a helicopter while touring army installations in the West Bank, September 1967. 

‘The De Facto Coup D’état’: When Moshe Dayan Tried to Steal Israel’s First Nuclear Device

A few years ago, a book was published in the United States that deals, among other things, with the history of the Israeli nuclear project. The author lives in the United States and there have been no reviews of the book anywhere. Assuming that the security services in Israel were not aware of its existence, up until a few days ago the only copy in Israel was in the hands of your correspondent. It is hoped that following the publication of this article, more information concerning the fascinating and mysterious affair revealed in its pages will come to light.

In the book, the author recounts his personal history, focusing on the nuclear history of the State of Israel. A fascinating part of the book deals with the nuclear aspect of the Six-Day and Yom Kippur wars, describing the author’s role in the nuclear project.

An additional key section of the book describes an unknown nuclear dimension from the days immediately preceding the Six-Day War. And since the book was published abroad, it is possible to write about it in Israel as a “foreign source.” The Defense Ministry’s security authority – known by its Hebrew acronym, Malmab – and the censors can purchase the book, just like any reader.

This is a story that may sound like fiction – a terrifying thriller, even – but the author’s familiarity with the details is credible.

He stresses that he has in his possession diaries and notes from the period, but they are not continuous and memory is not perfect. However, the information he gives shows without a doubt that his story – even if certain details are not precise – includes, in my opinion, more than a grain of truth.

Additional sources – among them the testimony of Yitzhak (Yicha) Yaakov, which was published recently in the United States – also lend support to the credibility of the book.

Amid the deluge of publications marking the 50th anniversary of the Six-Day War, this story should also be told.

On the eve of the war in 1967, the author – at the time a student, following his military service – was already working at the Negev Nuclear Research Center near Dimona. When he started working at the reactor a few years earlier, the defense authorities trained him for the position of nuclear radiation inspector and he was soon assigned to “Institute 2.” According to various foreign sources, this is one of the most sensitive and secret places at the NNRC, where plutonium is separated (and which, according to foreign sources, Israel has enough of to build a nuclear bomb).

In his book, the author attests to his firsthand familiarity with accidents that occurred at the reactor, ones we know about from other sources.

It should be stressed that the author was not opposed to the nuclear project: He worked at the reactor and saw the equipping of Israel with nuclear weaponry as a moral obligation. He describes his work at length, and details his activity as a radiation inspector during the years prior to the Six-Day War.

The “Tegert fort” at Gedera being constructed in 1940. 

‘A civil war’ at the fort entrance

The author has titled the most fascinating chapter in his book “The De Facto Coup D’état,” which he links to the struggles between David Ben-Gurion and Moshe Dayan (who at the time were both in the opposition left-wing party Rafi, which was established in 1965) and then-Prime Minister Levi Eshkol. The author relates that during the period before the war broke out, he received instructions from his manager (called “Merkaz,” and whose name he did not know) to accompany a nuclear device to a location somewhere south of Tel Aviv.

The author notes that the site to which the device had been transferred is located 35 kilometers (about 22 miles) south of the city; this is more or less the distance between Tel Aviv and Gedera, to which, we know from other sources – including Yaakov’s recently published testimony – the nuclear device was moved.

Additional confirmation of the reliability of this can be found in the author’s statement to the effect that the events about which we will elaborate took place inside a “Tegart fort” (part of a chain of forts built for the British Mandatory Police at the initiative of an officer called Charles Tegart), which apparently was then used by the Defense Ministry.

The author does not specifically name the location, but I believe his description resembles with remarkable accuracy the Qatra police compound near Gedera, which for years had served the defense forces.

The author spent the last three days of May 1967 in the large police building, along with dozens of security personnel, who had no knowledge of what was hidden in one of the rooms. The author writes that the nuclear device was in Gedera, while the “trigger” – a kind of atomic detonator – was kept at a different location. The author also states that ahead of one possible order or another, aircraft stood on standby at a nearby airport to transport the nuclear device.

The routine for the author and the security guards changed suddenly on the night of June 1 – the day of Dayan’s appointment as defense minister and four days before the outbreak of hostilities.

Shortly after Dayan’s appointment was announced, Yaakov reported to the location. At the time, he was head of the weapons research and development program in the Operations Directorate – according to foreign sources, the branch responsible for developing Israel’s unconventional weaponry – and one of the overseers of the nuclear realm.

Yitzhak (Yicha) Yaakov. Went to the compound at Gedera on June 1, 1967, and demanded that he be given joint command of the nuclear device.

Yaakov demanded to be let into the compound to take over command. The author, who together with the guards was responsible for securing the compound – and especially the nuclear device – refused, and Yaakov departed in protest. To himself and his subordinates, the author explained that there had presumably been a misunderstanding.

However, to the surprise of the author and the security guards, Yaakov returned the next morning – this time with truckloads of armed soldiers. In no uncertain terms, he demanded that he take charge of the compound.

The author, who stuck to his refusal, vividly describes the heated atmosphere that quickly developed. He recounts Yaakov’s explicit threats, to the effect that if he were not allowed in, he would return with tanks. His instructions to his subordinates were to use live fire in order to break through (the compound was designed to prevent hostile takeover from the outside). It was clear to the astonished security guards that this was, as one of them said, nothing less than “a civil war.”

The author quickly contacted his superior, “Merkaz,” who was already aware of the events and ordered him to await instructions. These came the next morning, and the order was clear: allow Yaakov to take joint command of the nuclear device.

The author relates that the events reminded him of the book “Seven Days in May” (1962), which depicted an attempted military coup against the president of the United States.

The author – who, as noted, called this chapter “The De Facto Coup D’état” – writes that the guards of the nuclear device in the three days prior to Dayan’s appointment were civilians.

According to the author, these guards operated under the direction of then-Police Minister Eliyahu Sasson and, therefore, were under the responsibility and authority of Prime Minister Eshkol, the leader of Mapai, and were not subordinate to the new defense minister, Dayan.

The replacement of the guards by soldiers is interpreted by the author as a move whereby Dayan and Yaakov expropriated the responsibility for the nuclear device and its supervision from the civilian authority (Eshkol) and transferred it into the hands of the military, with the clear aim of being “the landlord.”

The author relates that he met with his boss, “Merkaz,” after the Six-Day War. The latter was frustrated and expressed his dissatisfaction at the transfer of responsibility for the nuclear device to the army.

The author’s story is seemingly full of details relating to other publications we know of concerning the nuclear dimension of the war: from the proposal by Shimon Peres to conduct a nuclear test instead of going to war, to Yaakov’s trial at the start of the 2000s, which was covered extensively in the media, and oral and written testimony he gave about his role in events prior to the nuclear test (which did not happen). Details in this book also touch on the international context of the Israeli nuclear program.

Avner Cohen, a onetime Israeli nuclear researcher who now lives in the United States, last month published conversations he had with Yaakov in 1999, which touched upon the preparations for conducting a nuclear test on the eve of the war.

Reading the extracts from Yaakov’s recollections that Cohen published on the Wilson Center website, we find that, as part of the preparations for the test, there was “some problem” with the transfer of the “device.”

David Ben-Gurion, center, next to Levi Eshkol, Shimon Peres and Moshe Dayan in the 1960s. A putsch in three stages.

Yaakov also noted that the meeting point with the elite Sayeret Matkal unit, which was responsible for carrying out some of the stages in the test, was supposed to take place “in the old police station in Gedera” – but he gave no further details.

The real target – Eshkol

Dayan’s appointment to the position of defense minister was part of a three-phase effort to implement a putsch against the Eshkol government, led by the people in Rafi, the political party that had broken away from Mapai two years earlier – Ben-Gurion, Dayan himself and Peres.

One of the main reasons for this clash between Ben-Gurion and Eshkol’s people had to do with the nuclear issue: Ever since the War of Independence, Ben-Gurion, Dayan and Peres had sought to turn Israel into a formal nuclear power. According to various publications, Eshkol held an entirely different view, shared by people in his government: Israel had to acquire knowledge so it would have the possibility of becoming a state with nuclear capability. However, it did not need to become a nuclear state (i.e., conduct a test, declare its nuclear capability and include nuclear weaponry in its military arsenal).

Eshkol believed that completion of the nuclearization process should be completed only if other nations in the region pursued this path. In the early 1960s, this dispute found a solution with the famous nuclear ambiguity compromise, whereby Israel continued its nuclear developments but did not take any measures that would make it a nuclear state.

Who really held the keys?

On May 28, 1967, a few days before Dayan became defense minister, according to foreign sources Israel’s first nuclear device was completed (current Haaretz Editor Aluf Benn was the first to discuss this in his 1991 Hebrew article “The big projects”). On that very same day, according to the narrative in the book under discussion here, the device was moved to the location south of Tel Aviv and near Gedera – which the author of the book makes explicit is the Qatra police compound.

Peres, who according to foreign publications was involved in the nuclear project even though he was in the opposition, suggested making demonstrative use of the device, nullifying the ambiguity policy and confirming Israel as a nuclear state, like the other five nuclear states at the time. It is possible to read about the operational aspects of the plan in Yaakov’s recently published statements, which shed light on events that were unknown until now.

It is interesting to note that a few days after the Six-Day War, the Americans were concerned about Dayan’s soaring prestige in the eyes of the Israeli public, and linked this to the strengthening of the pro-nuclear group in Israeli politics. An internal memo from the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv noted that “It would be fair to assume that Israel will be pushed closer to the nuclear track and development of the means necessary for nuclear weaponry.”

How is the author’s fascinating story connected to the Rafi politicians’ pro-nuclear position? And how is the attempt to carry out a (partially successful) putsch against Eshkol and his policy connected to what is described in Yaakov’s recollections as an attempt to carry out a nuclear test?

These questions cannot, of course, be answered in full on these pages (I discuss them in more detail in my 2015 book “The Struggle Over the Bomb”). It is necessary to distinguish between the author’s report as a participant and his interpretation of the events, but in his book he does propose an unambiguous answer: “The finger on the nuclear device was no longer that of the elected civilian official.”

In other words, one of the manifestations of the political putsch against Eshkol was the attempt to wrest control of the nuclear device from the prime minister.

The author’s observation about the possibility of a miniature “civil war” surrounding the struggle for the nuclear device in the center of Israel raises difficult and fascinating questions about the issue of control of the nuclear project. Did the tense drama that was described by Eshkol’s military secretary, Yisrael Lior, as a “bloodless coup,” also include an attempt to take control of the nuclear device?

It is impossible to ignore Yigal Allon’s unambiguous statement shortly before his death in 1980 when talking about the nuclear policy advocated by Dayan and Peres (who were both bitter foes of Allon): “I don’t see any reason to flex a nuclear muscle before the Arab world,” he said during an interview at the Leonard Davis Institute. “I don’t see any reason! … I think this is infantile strategic political thinking, to the point of disqualifying these people from being at the top of the political and strategic decision-making pyramid. So much so that I hope I never have to say this publicly. To my mind this outlook is enough to disqualify a person!”

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Nazi regime: When Moshe Dayan Tried to Steal First Nuclear Device

Fighting Syria terror groups tops UN agenda


The UN’s de Mistura wants to eliminate the terrorist as symptoms, but not destroy the cause.

by  Jim W. Dean

[ Editor’s Note: The UN Dance with terrorism continues. While Special Syria Envoy Staffan de Mistura appears to take the high road by pushing the anti-terrorism battle in Syria as the number once issue, that concern comes to a screeching halt for the terrorist proxy supporters.

He went close to the line, stating that to end the conflict, the continual supplies flowing into the terrorists would have to be stopped, but he would not name names. Via this abject failure, he becomes an enabler to the terror supporters, but I am not picking on de Mistura. He has a lot of company in not being able to see the terror supporter elephants in the living room.

I thank Press TV for the many interview opportunities to say what few will say. If you ever hear of my demise via a heart attack, you can assume it was triggered by an invitation to be on 60 minutes or CNN to discuss these verboten topics.

Despite a clean audio check before the interview, something went wrong after we started. You will have to focus to hear, but it is understandable and not an audio issue on your end. This has never happened before. And I can’t imagine that focusing on state-sponsored terrorism had anything to do with it… JD ]

Jim’s Editor’s Notes are solely crowdfunded via PayPal –

This includes research, needed field trips, Heritage TV Legacy archiving, and more – Thanks for helping out

Another ceasefire, where the terrorists regroup and come back stronger

The United Nations special envoy for Syria has called the fight against UN-designated terror groups a priority in resolving the country’s deadly conflict.

Staffan De Mistura was speaking at a press conference at the end of the seventh round of Syria peace talks in Geneva. De Mistura underlined the need for the full implementation of UN Security Council resolutions particularly those concerning arming and financing terrorist groups.

He further reiterated that Syria’s conflict could only be solved through an inclusive political process. The Syrian government negotiators and the opposition delegation did not hold face-to-face meetings during the seventh round of negotiations in the Swiss city. The next round of Syria peace talks is scheduled for September.

Posted in SyriaComments Off on Fighting Syria terror groups tops UN agenda

The Khazarian Bankster Cult That Destroyed Libya


The Neocons and AIPAC treat us all, including the Libyan people, as subjects or sub-humans. You can say that this is the premise upon which they build their entire ideology. The Neocons used America to dispose Gaddafi because they thought that he was basically challenging the Neocon hegemony in Libya.

Vladimir Putin with Gaddafi.

Mariam Alfatah graduated from the London School of Economics. She is a Libyan and has witnessed how the Powers That Be and their marionettes obliterated her country. You may disagree with just about everything Alfatah is going to say, but try to understand some of the arguments and evidence that she is going to put forth and interact with them responsibly.

We agree that ideas should be proved or disproved by reason and logic, not by emotion or name calling. If what she is saying lacks logical consistency, explanatory power, explanatory scope, and historical context, then readers are welcome to provide serious evidence to the contrary. The interview is a little long largely because Alfatah had to explain a number of issues and present evidence to support her claims.

Jonas E. Alexis: You said that there was a “Holocaust” and “a genocide” in Libya in 2011. Virtually everyone knew that the invasion was a Neocon war.[1] In fact, long before the war got started, thirty-seven Neocons sent Obama a letter saying that Gaddafi must go.[2] Neocon talking-head Bill Kristol himself said on eve of the invasion:

“Our ‘invasions’ have in fact been liberations. We have shed blood and expended treasure in Kuwait in 1991, in the Balkans later in the 1990s, and in Afghanistan and Iraq—in our own national interest, of course, but also to protect Muslim peoples and help them free themselves. Libya will be America’s fifth war of Muslim liberation.”[3]

More importantly, virtually every serious scholar knows by now that the Neoconservative movement is a Jewish ideological enterprise which has never been good for America.[4]

Stephen Halper and Jonathan Clarke, themselves philo-Semitic scholars, declare that the Neoconservative movement is “in complete contrast…to the general cast of the American temperament as embodied by the Declaration of Independence.”[5]

Jewish legal scholar Stephen M. Feldman argues that the Neocons got their political and intellectual position “by leading an assault on the hegemonic pluralist democratic regime that had taken hold of the nations in the 1930s.”[6]

What Feldman is implicitly or reluctantly saying is that the Neocons essentially attacked the moral and political fabric of America and progressively turned the country into an empire that always looks for monsters to destroy in the Middle East and elsewhere.[7] This came into full bloom during the Reagan administration.[8]

These warmongers have told us ad nauseam that they were trying to establish “democracy” and “freedom” in places like Libya. Obviously Libya has been in chaos ever since these “geniuses” landed in the country. Describe for us why these warmongers were and still are worse than psychopaths. You can also talk about what really happened when they invaded Libya.

Mariam Alfatah: First of all, it must be stated that the Neocons and AIPAC treat us all, including the Libyan people, as subjects or sub-humans. You can say that this is the premise upon which they build their entire ideology, and I will prove that throughout this interview.

The Neocons used America to dispose Gaddafi because they thought that he was basically challenging the Neocon hegemony in Libya. This is an important point. One of the writers at VT, David Swanson, talked about this in one of his articles, which was published by the Guardian itself.[9]

Keep in mind that Libya, under Gaddafi, controlled its own oil. I agree with Swanson completely when he said that “The Libyan government controls more of its oil than any other nation on earth, and it is the type of oil that Europe finds easiest to refine. Libya also controls its own finances.”[10]

What was more interesting was that Gaddafi challenged African countries to follow his lead![11] He helped establish satellites in many African nations. Some of those nations used to get their satellites from the French, which cost them millions of dollars. Now they were getting them at a fairly reasonable price from Gaddafi. To the warmongers and psychopaths, that was a dangerous move.

There is more: Gaddafi challenged African nations to stop importing what one may call GMO food from the West. He also said that Italy should compensate the Libyan people for their colonization from 1911 until 1945. Finally, Gaddafi had a plan to transform Libya into a second Dubai, where tourists would flock there by the millions. In his view, this would have created a shining monument for all of Africa. So, if you peel back the ideological onion, you can easily see why Gaddafi was a target.

There was no way for Gaddafi to survive the Neocon onslaught without serious backup from other countries. The Neocon system in the West, particularly in America, certainly didn’t want to stop their aggressive expansion in Libya and indeed in Africa. Therefore they had to summon pathetic lies and use false pretexts to invade Libya in 2011. Since the fall of the Jamahiriya, Libya has not experienced any political, financial or even social stability. None at all. Practically overnight, Libya was transformed from one of the richest growing countries in the world when it comes to oil and other resources to a failed state.

After the invasion, the West put “Abdulhakim Belhaj” in charge, one of the most wanted terrorists in the world. If you don’t believe me, you can even go to Wikipedia and it will tell you a little bit about Belhaj. He joined the Taliban and was even associated with al-Qaeda. The Gaddafi government warned the West about Belhaj right after the 9/11 attack. That was back in 2002.

The Gaddafi government even presented strong evidence which suggested that Belhaj was a terrorist and was advancing his ideology and covert activity at an alarming rate. Once again, even Zionist media like the BBC would agree with what I’m saying here. The BBC fairly reported in 2011 that Belhaj was in “Jalalabad, Afghanistan, from where he ran and financed training camps for Arab mujahideen fighters.”[12] We all know that the mujahideen are terrorists, even though the United States funded and trained them.[13] This is from Wikipedia—and it gets really interesting:

Tracked by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), after a tip-off from MI6 gained from London-based informants, Belhadj was arrested with his pregnant wife in 2004 at Kuala Lumpur International Airport, Malaysia. Transferred on the same plane to Bangkok, he was then placed in the custody of the CIA, where he was retained at a secret prison at the airport. Returned to Libya on the rendition aircraft N313P, he was held at the Abu Salim prison for seven years.”

Now this is the guy that the Neocons put in power in Libya! This is the kind of democracy and freedom that they are imposing on us Libyans. What were the results of the Libya invasion? Well, over 100,000 civilians lost their lives, including women and children.

It gets worse. At least 2 million Libyans had to move out of the country; some went to Tunis, Egypt, Algiers, and the UAE. The living conditions from 2011 till 2014 in Tripoli was tolerable but Benghazi and the eastern part of Libya became a living hell. Kidnapping, raping, and shooting were like playing video games in those regions.

The invaders even used Sarin gas in Ban Walid, but no Zionist Media covered that vital story. Sirt, a city in Libya, was invaded by ISIS, which we all know got their financial backing from the US, Qatar, Turkey, and even Israel. Al-Qaeda also took over Benghazi.

I could go on and on, but the main point here is that since the invasion in 2011, Libya has never been the same. The UN began to implement draconian ideas which the Libyan people rejected. Let me finish answering your question by saying that Gaddafi wanted to live. It is said that he told the invaders that he was willing to go into exile in the desert if they would not bomb Libya and turn the country into rubble. The response was: “We want you dead, not in exile, as we know you will fund a coup d’état. No, we will bomb Libya and rebuild it.”

In March of 2011, Qaddafi’s son, Saif, came out on national TV and very angrily said that he would find every single traitor (he called them “rats”) and killed them all. I think CNN broadcast his announcement with, of course, the usual editing to make it sound like he was ready to cause a massacre.

The assassination of US Ambassador Christopher Stevens was an inside job, an order from the American administration, carried out by ragged rebels who were trained by American agents. By the way, there were 36 CIA agents who were saved by Qaddafi’s army; even though we had lost the war we still saved the asses of the Americans; what an irony.

The next US Ambassador, Safira Deborah, did everything in her power to finance and assist the so-called “Libyan Dawn,” which was but a faction of a terrorist group known as LIFG. They were also financed by Qatar and Turkey. Deborah praised Belhaj till she had to run for her own life in July of 2014.

Deborah fled first to Tunis then later to Malta. While in Malta she did a lot of bad mistakes which probably caused her to be fired. After Deborah, the new ambassador kept quiet and didn’t show his face much. It was no coincidence that Libyan officials began to sign contracts with Israel.

Abdulhakim Belhaj

Jonas E. Alexis: Vladimir Putin has specifically condemned the United States and NATO for invading Libya. He has obviously observed that the United States has a history of using categorical lies and fabrications to invade sovereign nations in the Middle East. Do you know if Putin ever corresponded with Gaddafi?

Mariam Alfatah: In 2011 Putin was only a prime minister and Medvedev was the president of Russia.  Gaddafi seemed to have spoken with Putin during a UN conference. As I understand it (from people who were in the room) Putin told Qaddafi that Russia would say NO to the “no fly zone.” I have no reason not to believe my sources.

Medvedev also seemed to have agreed with Putin. But it seemed that the elitists put an ideological spell on Medvedev and blackmailed him; so he basically ignored what was really taking place in Libya. Libyan officials knew that Medvedev wanted to be liked by the Americans. The result was total catastrophe.

Both Russia and China lost billions of dollars by not politically or militarily mobilizing against the Powers That Be; they knew from the get go that the Neocon “no fly zone” was a farce. Russia helped Libya as much as they could without breaking international rules. So, Gaddafi was in contact with Putin but how often I do not know.

Jonas E. Alexis: In your view, do you believe that the vast majority of Libyans supported Gaddafi’s leadership? For example, Assad won the Syrian election by a landslide.[14] Was that the case with Gaddafi?

Mariam Alfatah: Yes. At the time of the bombing Libya’s population was over 6.5 million, and Qaddafi had the support of 6.3 million. Even the Washington Post reluctantly admitted that “Many Libyans appear to back Gaddafi.” Take it from their own pen—and this was when the invaders were creating chaos virtually everywhere:

“But six days into the allied bombardment of Libyan military targets, it is clear that Gaddafi can count on the fierce loyalties of at least a significant segment of the population in the vast stretches that lie beyond the enclave of rebel-held territory in the east…

“Even Gaddafi’s opponents, who dare murmur their dissent only out of earshot of regime loyalists, concede that the man who has governed Libya for nearly 42 years does command genuine support.”[15]

But the Washington Post knocked itself out by saying, “That a man who boasts he lives in a tent and whom Ronald Reagan once dubbed ‘the mad dog of the Middle East’ still commands devotion four decades into his rule is one of the enduring mysteries of this idiosyncratic country.”[16]

That is really worse than stupid. How can they say this is an example of “enduring mysteries” when the vast majority of Libyans knew that Gaddafi, despite his faults, really helped the country? This is not an example of “enduring mysteries;” this is a classic example which conclusively shows that the Neocon ideology has always been in opposition to the vast majority of the people on this planet. So, people like you, Jonas, are right in calling this ideology satanic.

There was a rally in July of 2011 in Tripoli. I was there. There were also over 3 million people in Green Square! There is a video on my blog that you can access and see for yourself.

If the West had allowed Libyans to vote freely, Qaddafi would have won by a landslide like Assad. You see, if we didn’t want Gaddafi we would have removed him from power a long time ago. He would have been assassinated. You have to understand that we follow our tribe leaders.

I am sure if any of the tribe leaders didn’t want him, they would have taken him out. What’s also important about these issues is that the UN and Western allies refused to talk to those leaders! If I can use a rough analogy, it would be like the United States going to war with another country without contacting Congress.

Qaddafi had succeeded in uniting nearly all the tribes. This was almost an impossible task because you just couldn’t get those people to sit down at the same table. They sometimes fought against each other. But Gaddafi was able to unite them.

Note: It took us 3 years to get the majority of the tribe leaders in one room and to agree that we cannot leave Libya to foreigners or to installed puppets. Now do you see what the Neocons did to my country?

Jonas E. AlexisBusiness Insider has been a Zionist outlet, but I think they were somewhat fair to publish your letter. I was quite surprised when they declared: “But even as Qaddafi commits atrocities, the rebels are engaged in some of the same violence. And Washington has been forced to look the other way.”[17]

In your letter, you told Business Insider that “Personally, I do not care about Qaddafi but what you are doing is wrong. You are not telling the truth. You are lying to your readers.”[18] Can you expand on that for us?

Mariam Alfatah: My political views are democratic; Qaddafi was a military leader. That is what I meant. People may think that I am an apologist for Gaddafi. That would be categorically false. Gaddafi “nationalized” my father’s business and for 10 years my father was basically out of job.

But I was also furious with NATO and the West precisely because they wanted to decide our fate. They told us ad nauseam that the Libyan invasion was a true revolution. Total nonsense. If it was a revolution, why did the terrorists and blood-thirsty animals have to get help from NATO?

We knew that there were 200,000 people who were in exile and were against Qaddafi. Most of them were religious fanatics and scumbags who stole from the Libyan people. I may not like Gaddafi but I cannot lie about what he did. He did a lot of good things. Under Gaddafi, education was free and it was obligatory that people get a decent education. In 1969, prior to the revolution, we had an 80% illiteracy rate. Under Gaddafi, that percentage dropped dramatically. Let’s not forget that though Qaddafi was brought in by the CIA, he would kick them out a few years later.

Qaddafi was no threat to Europe or America. On the contrary, he was the one keeping the refugees and “migrants” out of Europe.[19] Beginning in 1970, Libyan women started gaining their freedom.  Unlike some other Arab countries, we could travel on our own, we could buy lands, etc.

Gaddafi even made a law which said that women or teenagers are not to be forced to marry anyone. Women who were forced to marry could go to the police; the police would examine the situation and, if a particular woman is found to be telling the truth, then the marriage would be rendered invalid.

Yes, we had our ups and downs, but we didn’t deserve this current chaos. We had our own kind of democracy but it was not the democracy that the war machine wanted. Ironically, we Libyans had more freedom than any American now has. The only thing we couldn’t do publicly was to criticize the Qaddafi family. But Libyans had free health care, free education, no water bills, etc.

For example, in Europe I bought a car that cost me 16,000 euros; in Libya I would have bought the same car for 8,000 euros. So, we were perfectly comfortable with not being able to criticize Qaddafi publicly precisely because we had the things we needed. Why would anyone unfairly criticize a government that puts a roof over your head? Isn’t that why the average Russian now loves Vladimir Putin? Do you think they would love to see him dead? I don’t think so!

Free speech is overrated in the West; here in Europe and in the US people talk about free speech all the time, but we all know the role that the CIA, FBI, and the NSA can play when you don’t join the party line. Look what happened to Edward Snowden and other genuine whistleblowers.

Some US spies were even saying that they would love to see Snowden’s head on a silver platter. One NSA analyst said in 2014: “In a world where I would not be restricted from killing an American, I personally would go and kill him myself. A lot of people share this sentiment.”[20] So much for “freedom of speech” in the West!

Posted in LibyaComments Off on The Khazarian Bankster Cult That Destroyed Libya

Zionist Media will Never Talk About Sex Slave as a “Booming Market” in ISIS


Sex slave “is a booming market in IS. Young girls also became a mere commodity once they are in hands of jihadists… [Khadija] added, recounting that the militants planned to sell a 10-year-old girl for some $10,000.”

Sex slavery in ISIS is real.

CNN and other fake news outlets will never talk about how ISIS is cremating and decapitating civilians in Syria, but those same outlets want to tell us all that the Assad government is out to kill virtually every civilian in the region.

Last February, CNN risibly reported that Russia and the Syrian government “deliberately targeted civilian areas of Aleppo.”[1] But when independent reporters and even UN Peace Council actually went to Syria and talked to the civilian population, they found that the population universally rejected the claim that there is a civil war in Syria. As the UN Peace Council declared last year:

This is not a civil war in Syria. That’s probably the first thing we heard, and we heard it over and over again [among the civilian population]. It is not President Assad against his own people. It is President Assad and the Syrian people, all together, in unity, against outside mercenary forces [and] terror organizations. The names change every day or every other day to try to protect their identity and maybe keep the connection between the country that funded it and that group…There are mercenary forces, supported by Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, United States, and underneath it, Israel.”

Who’s underneath all of this? Israel. It is not a mere hypothesis; it’s not an opinion. It is a brute fact. As former IDF director Efraim Halevy later admitted, Israel has supported terrorist organizations on the border of the Golan Heights in order to fight the Assad government. The Wall Street Journal has reluctantly made reference to this last month.[2]

There is another important point here. The Zionist media will never go to Syria and talk to the vast majority of the civilian population precisely because that would ruin the Israeli propaganda. They will never report what ISIS is doing on the ground.

For example, “women who managed to break free from the clutches of Islamic State terrorists” and those who are fleeing “rampant violence and sex slavery” declare that the Zionist media are lying about what is actually happening in Syria. One lady by the name of Khadija declared:

“Everybody, who takes a stand against them [ISIS], they behead. And people don’t know when this is going to happen. They are not on righteous path. This is the state of tyranny and Satan. My husband renounced them, and told me to do the same. There was a lot of evil in the places where women live. Children were suffering from scabies, lice. When children were ill, they did not receive treatment at hospital.”[3]

Russia Today reported: “If women were found to be in violation of the strict code of conduct, imposed by IS, they were locked up in prison-like detention facilities by female watchers, put in charge of “women dormitories.” Ask CNN if they will report this: “One woman bled to death during labor after the dormitory’s superintendent refused to help her.” Khadija lamented:

“That poor woman went to the garden, while bleeding heavily, stayed there till morning in a rainy and cold weather. Nobody paid attention to her. And in the morning her husband came, saw her body lying in the garden and passed by, without paying any attention, as nothing happened, as if [she] were a dog.

“In another case, a woman became crippled after her plea to be sent to hospital was rejected despite her saying that he leg was rotting. While it appears that for a lot of women the life under IS was a living hell, it was not uncommon for the militants to have a sex slave in addition to a wife.”[4]

Sex slave, the report continues, “is a booming market in IS. Young girls also became a mere commodity once they are in hands of jihadists… [Khadija] added, recounting that the militants planned to sell a 10-year-old girl for some $10,000. It was reported the girls as young as 8 are sold at such slave markets. Some 3,000 to 5,000 Yazidi women are believed to be held captive by IS as sex slaves.”

If you are still a fan of the Zionist Media, perhaps you need to pick up the phone and ask them why they haven’t reported about this sex slave. If they cannot give you a rational explanation, just tell them that they are all fake. You may want to tell them something like this: “Hey, there is a book by a Princeton philosopher by the name of Harry G. Frankfurt that came out in 2005.[5] You may want to pick that book up and read it. That will help you folks a great deal.”

[1] Eliza Mackintosh, “Report suggests Russia, Syria deliberately targeted civilian areas of Aleppo,” CNN, February 13, 2017.

[2] Rory Jones, “Israel Gives Secret Aid to Syrian Rebels,” Wall Street Journal, June 18, 2017.

[3] “‘She bled to death, nobody paid attention’: ISIS wives share chilling stories of life in ‘caliphate,’” Russia Today, July 15, 2017.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Harry G. Frankfurt, On Bullshit (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005).

Posted in USA, MediaComments Off on Zionist Media will Never Talk About Sex Slave as a “Booming Market” in ISIS

Report exposes abuse and neglect of illegally detained prisoners in Israel


Marianne Azizi writes:

Between 1996 and 2013 the number of prisoners in Israel has doubled but in 40 per cent of cases the space they occupy is less than 3 square metres.

A report by the public defender shows that only 11 per cent of prisoners have living space of more than 4.5 sq m, a quarter of the inmates are assigned a maximum of 2.9 sq m and more than half of the prisoners (59 per cent ) live in 3 sq m or less. Some 43 per cent of cells hold nine prisoners or more, and 75 per cent have more than four prisoners, though prison and detention regulations stipulate no more than four beds per cell. Across the Western world, the average space per prisoner is 8.8 sq.m.

Less room than for a dog in a kennel

It’s the heat of summer in Israel, and the prisons are full to bursting with illegal detainees. The presumption of innocence hardly counts. Hearings for alternative arrangements, such as bail and house arrest, especially in the Tel Aviv district, don’t even dent the numbers.

In Nitzan Prison, Ramle, where two Israeli human rights defenders, including lawyer Zvi Zer, have been held for almost five months, the conditions are simply awful. Prisoners are allocated less space than for a dog in a kennel and don’t even have glass in the windows. The heat is excruciating.

Zvi Zer, human rights lawyer illegally detained for five months

Zvi Zer, human rights lawyer illegally detained for five months

Cells which should hold six people are packed with up to 10 prisoners. Many prisoners have to sleep on mattresses infested with insects and suffer from mosquito bites from the glassless windows), resulting in open wounds and infections.

The food is described as meagre at best. At Nitzan Prison the authorities tried to impress the inspectors on the day of their visit by giving prisoners sausages and rice. After the visit, prisoners described this as a rich meal – and only for show.

Illegally detained prisoners are prevented from buying supplementary food in the prison canteen to top up their rations. The shower/sanitation facilities are horrendous. Some describe the toilet as a hole in the ground, with toilet paper rarely provided. One released detainee described his eight-day solitary confinement in Jerusalem as follows:

I was chained hands and feet, with a hole in the ground to perform toilet duties. I had no shower, nor toilet paper for three days, and each time I yelled for assistance I was just ignored or shouted at.

Cells stink with the foul, rancid odour of prisoners. There is no availability for counselling or other help for detainees. Prisoners charged with different types of offences can end up sharing the same cell – a tax evader sitting with a serial killer, for example!

Pleading “guilty” as the only means of escape

Imagine if you were arrested for a democratic protest, which is frowned upon in Israel. These are the conditions you may find yourself in. It is commonly known that this method of humiliation and mental torture can result in the state prosecutors securing pleas of “guilty” – because that could be the only way for someone who has committed no crime to go home.

Illegal detention in the Tel Aviv district is compounded by former police prosecutor-turned-judge Abraham Heiman who is proud of being the only judge never to give house arrest or bail.

At the end of July, the Israeli courts go into recess until September, with little thought for the detainees suffering for alleged crimes with no ability to defend themselves.

The irony is that those who wrote about the corruption in the judicial system, the police and government ministries are the ones who are now incarcerated for months in appalling conditions while others under investigation for those crimes are given a few days’ house arrest and are able to carry on with their lives and work.

This situation contravenes the Israeli Supreme Court ruling that freedom and dignity should be afforded to all citizens, even those who are detained, and that alternatives to detention should be explored for the sake of the health and wellbeing of people who are only suspected of crimes.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Report exposes abuse and neglect of illegally detained prisoners in Israel

Shoah’s pages