Archive | November 11th, 2017

British Journalist’s Press Pass Could Be Revoked Over Comments for Russian Media

Image result for Marcus Papadopoulos CARTOON

The Chief Editor of the UK magazine Politics First Marcus Papadopoulos told Sputnik on Thursday that he was affronted by the proposal to revoke his press pass to the UK parliament because of his regular appearance as an expert and analyst in Russian media.

On Thursday, The Times newspaper published an article in which two members of parliament from the Labour Party, Alison McGovern and John Woodcock, proposed that “Russian propagandist” Papadopoulos should be deprived of his press pass to the UK parliament. The politicians accused Papadopoulos of “spending much of his time on Russian and Iranian state broadcasters espousing ‘propaganda from a foreign power’”.

“This is an appalling and reprehensible attempt by British politicians and journalists to silence debate. At stake is here is freedom of speech in Britain… The allegations against me are utterly untrue and are politically motivated,” Papadopoulos said.

Papadopoulos noted that the Labour Party politicians who criticized him were “vehemently anti-Russian” and made such accusations because he had an opposite view on the UK and the US policy on Russia and Syria.

“The two Labour MPs in question, who made this baseless accusation, are on the right of the Labour Party — being heavily involved in the right-wing pressure group, Progress — and are vehemently anti-Russian and staunch supporters of the terrorist groups in Syria. That is the real reason for their complaint about me. Because I hold a diametrically opposed view of British and American foreign policy concerning Russia and Syria,” Papadopoulos said.

Papadopoulos added that McGovern and Woodcock were fierce critics of Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party leader, and are unpopular among the party’s members.

Posted in Media, UKComments Off on British Journalist’s Press Pass Could Be Revoked Over Comments for Russian Media


Posted by: Sammi Ibrahem, Sr

by Ziad Fadel


The usual suspects have been put under house arrest.  These criminals include Prince Al-Waleed bin Talaal, one of the richest men in the world and the most visible of all the ersatz “nobles” of Arabia along with a gaggle of other princes and entrepreneurs, not to mention a son of a former king.  But, get this, the Saudis also have arrested the Prime Minister of Lebanon, Saad Al-Hareeri.  But, get this and remember this:  Both Ahmad Jarbaa and Riyaadh Hijaab are also in the old slammer.  The last two are “leaders” of the gentrified opposition to Dr. Assad’s presidency in Syria.  Hmmmmm.  What could be going on here?

Benny Mileikowski (a/k/a Netanyahu)  has serious troubles in the brothel which is the Zionist Apartheid State.  He is facing 4 separate investigations into his malfeasance as PM.  As the article below correctly points out, he is in need of a diversion.  With public trust eroding and accusations of betrayal appearing more frequently, he must pull something out of his yarmulka to reunite his disgruntled constituency.  He needs a new war.

King Muhammad bin Salmaan, unlovingly referred to as MBS, has similar problems.  While not being accused of corruption himself for the simple reason that he’s the king’s son, he has accused others of the same thing.  He has watched his country’s failures in Yemen and Syria burgeon into serious migrainous headaches which the Iranian government continues to exploit to the detriment of Sunni hegemony in the region.  He, too, needs a diversion.

The alliance of KSA and the ZE is no secret any longer.  Heck, Mileikowski keeps announcing it in every speech like a commercial during the Super Bowl.  The relationship is so tight now that neither party to the alliance can imagine survival without the other.  And the threat?  Why, it’s that old bogeyman,  Iran.  While the Zionists don’t need to declare war with Lebanon or Hizbollah, (their track record is sufficient to establish that relationship), the Saudis have just made it so by declaring a missile fired from Yemen at the Riyaadh airport an “act of war” since,according to the Saudis, the missile was fired by agents of Hizbollah.  So, war it is.

MBS met with Vladimir Putin and discussed the issue of HZB in Lebanon.  I was told by people who are in the know that the Russian president was noncommittal when asked by the imbecile heir apparent what he would do if the KSA had to defend itself against Iranian aggression.  Because Vlad would not give him a straight answer, the princeps principiiflew back to Arabia with the impression that Russia might do nothing to interfere as long as petroleum pricing was stabilized.  That’s what the miserable child molesting parasite actually thinks.

The Zionists in Tel Aviv do not share that view.  Mileikowski himself raised the issue with Vlad the last time they met and, I am told, the Zionist leader was shocked by Vlad’s candor.  He was told that Iran was a “strategic” ally of Russia and that Moscow would not stand still if any party attacked it.  We, at SyrPer, are certain that the Zionists are planning to invade Lebanon to destroy Hizbollah (again!) but are hesitating out of fear that Russia might use its formidable naval and aviation assets to defend Hizbollah.  Another problem might also lead to a stoppage in the Jewish emigration from Russia to the Zionist Settler State, in effect, reducing the amount of Slavic/Khazar DNA in Palestine.

Yet, the Zionist plan is by no means shelved.  We believe that the Zionist invasion will be of a type not necessarily sufficient to incur the wrath of the Kremlin.  It might be a limited assault whose purpose would be to diminish the reputation of HZB as a fighting power and, thus, encourage the Lebanese Army to finish the job.  This will not work.  Instead, we think cooler heads will prevail by using KSA’s broad economic power to debilitate the Lebanese state and its institutions.  We envision massive attacks on the Lebanese Central Bank through withdrawals of accounts from KSA depositors which will discourage investment, tourism and borrowing power.  This too will not work.  It will simply open up Lebanon for a major Iranian incursion designed to supplant the miserable Saudis on every level.

The Arabians and their Ashkenazi Zionist confederates are watching in horror as Donald Trump continually showcases his obesession with North Korea.  Like children seeking attention they don’t deserve, they jump up and down for recognition only to be predictably ignored.

The reason must be that the Pentagon (which has the Prez’s ear) sees no benefit in riling the Persian peacock and its ursine ally in Moscow.  With the entire American  5th fleet docked in Bahrain one has only to imagine the level of destruction the fleet will sustain when Iran unleashes a barrage of ground-to-sea Yakhont-like missiles at the sitting target only a few miles away from its coastline.  Moreover, the brass at the MoD knows full well the power of Iran’s ground forces and the natural tendency to congeal as a fighting force whenever the country is invaded by alien forces.  Unlike North Korea, Iran has no military nuclear program any more and is certified by the being in compliance with a treaty signed by all major powers including Germany.  It will be a fool’s errand for any spokesperson to defend an invasion of Iran under such circumstances and a disastrous result could also lead to Trump’s impeachment.

Such rational analyses don’t impress the stupefyingly ignorant apes of Arabia.  Today, MBS hurled new accusations against Iran for the attempted bombing of the Riyaadh airport – conflating HZB and Teheran as though they were one and the same serpent.  Thinking he has the backing of the U.S.A., he might be gearing up for some provocative action against the Islamic State – a provocation certain to energize the American armed forces.  He’s barking at the moon.

Iran has now reacted to the crazy rhetoric from Arabia by warning its Wahhabist enemy about its military power.  With his forces bogged down in Yemen, his proxies in Syria in a shambles and his fate tied to Russia’s whims, MBS is hankering for some real tough love, American style.  MBS is leading his country into a game of Russian Roulette with all the chambers loaded.  So sad.  Sigh.

I have a new source of information here in the U.S. concerning the “Deep State”.  I will be shifting gears to explain how this Deep State impacts Syria and the Greater Middle East. I am absorbing new information and will digest it soon enough.  My source is named Chris.


ALBUKAMAAL:   Word is the entire town is now surrounded.  As I told you before in another posting, it would only take a few days to eliminate the vermin inside.  I have many details, but, cannot present them now because as I write I am getting deeper into the cocktail hour.


Stop the War Dirty Propaganda


Stop the War            Coalition

Newsletter – 10 November 2017

A Chance For Change – Urgent Stop the War appeal

It’s been another week of turmoil for the warmongering Tories * ” AND LABOUR”. WAY NT LABOUR AND TORY SHAME ON YOU Please help us continue to campaign against their war policies by donating to our appeal.” YOU SUPPORT THE WAR IN LIBYA AND SYRIA  YOU ARE NOT STOP THE WAR YOU ARE THE PARTY OF WAR ” Listen to this message from Lindsey German below:


We need to intensify our campaigning and we are asking for your generous help. ” PLEASE DO NOT DONATE TO PART OF WAR ” Your donations will enable us to promote the anti-war arguments more widely, support new ‘Stop the War’ groups springing up around the country, sustain an increased level of staffing and upgrade our communications.

Posted in UKComments Off on Stop the War Dirty Propaganda

Saudi Zio-Wahhabi regime last card in Lebanon: Use Nazi Mafia to strike Hezbollah

Saudi Arabia’s last card in Lebanon: Use Israel to strike Hezbollah

Will Mohammed bin Salman go as far as striking a deal with Israel in which he offers full normalisation in return for Israel destroying Hezbollah and Iran in Lebanon?

In the words of famous Lebanese historian Kamal Salibi, Lebanon is a non-country where Christians and Muslims once lived side by side but failed to have a common vision for their homeland. In the Lebanese house of many mansions, as he calls his country, the Christians looked to Europe while the Muslims aspired to remain anchored in a wide Arab nationalist framework.


The night of the long knives in Saudi Arabia

So the many mansions occasionally fought each other while the idea of Lebanon survived and even flourished under violence, sectarianism and corruption.

With the current crisis that resulted from Prime Minister Saad Hariri’s resignation announced in Riyadh, the many mansions are once again on the verge of being shaken to their foundations.

More mansions

Writing immediately after the civil war that ravaged the country for 17 years, our dear historian did not anticipate the current Lebanese crisis in which Saudi Arabia and Iran created more mansions to be added to the historical Lebanese ones.

He did not anticipate that Iran will replace Saudi Arabia as the main regional player in a country that has been within the Saudi sphere of influence since the creation of the Arab league after World War II.

Saudiised Sunni Lebanese prime ministers – they have to be Sunni according to the constitution – have always combined their financial interests in Saudi Arabia where they made their fortunes with being prime ministers in Lebanon. They held dual nationality and operated freely in two countries.

Today Lebanese Sunnis plaster pictures of Saudi kings across streets in their neighbourhoods

From Hussein Owayni, Riyad Solh to Rafiq and Saad Harriri, there is a history of finance and politics, and sometimes marriages with senior Saudi princes, cementing a precarious relationship, often controlled by Riyadh for its own purposes, and benefiting Sunni families. The grandfather of Walid bin Talal, now detained, was Lebanese prime minister Riyad Solh.

But above all, such prime ministers were instrumental in defending Saudi political interests in Lebanon. In the 1950s Saudi Arabia feared the Hashemites gaining a hold over the minds of the Lebanese Sunnis and later Egyptian Gamal Abd al-Nasser’s Arab nationalism threatening to infiltrate the minds and hearts of the many Saudis who came to study in Lebanon.

When the so-called free Saudi princes (mainly Talal and Mansour bin Abdul-Aziz) gathered at the St George Hotel on the corniche in Beirut in the early 1960s to demand a constitutional monarchy and launch attacks on King Saud and Faisal as stooges of imperialism, the Saudi regime thought that only trouble can come out of Lebanon.

An image of Beit Beirut in 1998 (Yarob Marouf)

The Saudi strategy

Today this is history but the shift towards Hezbollah is equally threatening to Saudi Arabia. The latter blamed Iran and Hezbollah for the Yemeni Houthi missile that was intercepted in the skies of Riyadh on 4 November.

Saudi Arabia accuses the two of training and arming the Houthis, whom it has been fighting since 2015. Saudi Arabia considered Lebanon as declaring war on it after the missile incident.

Lebanon is one of those places where society and its sectarian mansions has always been stronger than the state

Since the 1950s the Saudi strategy was to promote a Lebanese Sunni bourgeoisie loyal to the Saudis and determined to eradicate nationalist and leftist threats coming from the heart of Beirut.

While the Lebanese Sunni bourgeoisie was co-opted, ordinary Sunnis in Tariq al-Jadidah and Ras Beirut chanted pro-Nasserite slogans and saw themselves as the minaret of Arab nationalism.

Together with the Palestinian refugees, they became synonymous with Beirut al-Wataniyya, nationalist Beirut. When Nasser unexpectedly died in 1970, they flooded the streets and mourned their hero.

Today Lebanese Sunnis plaster pictures of Saudi kings across streets in their neighbourhoods. These counter the portraits of Khomeini, Khamenei and other Iranian figures that decorate the plasterboards and walls in the Shia neighbourhoods.


Saad Hariri’s resignation? Part of Saudi’s latest push to confront Iran

Against this history of Saudi-Sunni connections, since the 1980s Iran began to consolidate a Shia mansion that had been ignored and marginalised by the Lebanese historical sectarian politics drawn by the French under the mandate, and ravaged by successive Israeli occupations of the south where the majority lived.

Since the 1970s there have been many violent Israeli intrusions that led to impoverishment, expulsions and destruction of towns, villages and agricultural fields. Without Iran’s support to Hezbollah, southern Lebanon would have been most probably still under Israeli occupation.

A poster of Saad Hariri in Beirut (MEE/ Ali Harb)

The collapse of the Hariri mansion

The Sunni bourgeoisie of Beirut, Sidon and Tripoli among other cities became vital to Saudi Arabia maintaining its foothold and guarding Lebanon from the excessive Iranian intrusion.

Former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri boosted the confidence of the Sunnis in Lebanon while also building his financial empire in both Lebanon and Saudi Arabia. Under post-war reconstruction efforts, he emerged as a financial tycoon who wiped out small traders and businessmen in favour of global capitalist intrusion.

Today the famous central Solidaire area is a dying hub of finance and entertainment beyond the means of most Lebanese.

With his assassination in 2005, his son Saad became the face of Sunni power, albeit a declining one in Lebanon. Money earned in Saudi Arabia was translated into philanthropy in Lebanon. Patron-client relations became the core of the Sunni za’amat, leadership, like other sectarian leadership.

Saudi Arabia seems to have lost its historical importance in Lebanon as Iran consolidated its presence there

But since King Salman came to power in 2015, coinciding with a sharp decline in oil prices, the Hariri financial mansion collapsed in Saudi Arabia and the political one began to show serious cracks in Lebanon.

Saudi Oger, Hariri’s flagship company, dismissed many of its employees who were left unpaid. They returned to Lebanon with no prospect of employment in a declining economy. They started selling their million-dollar apartments but there were no buyers on the horizon. The real estate boom collapsed in Lebanon.

Saudi Arabia seems to have lost its historical importance in Lebanon as Iran consolidated its presence there.

So the last card Saudi Arabia can play to snub Iran was to summon Saad Hariri, its man in Beirut, to Riyadh where he surprisingly and unexpectedly read his resignation letter on the same night that Mohammed bin Salman started his anti-corruption purge.


Saad Hariri’s Saudi problem: Desperate needs, desperate deeds

The agreement that stabilised Lebanon and led to the election of a president after a vacuum of two years, and the return of Saad Hariri to the premiership is now in jeopardy.

But Lebanon is one of those places where society and its sectarian mansions have always been stronger than the state. It continues to operate without a central power since this central power has no means to provide for citizens any substantial welfare services or economic prosperity, let alone protection against successive Israeli invasions.

Like Palestinians, Lebanon has more Lebanese people in the diaspora than inside the country.

Fragile peace

If the Saudi-Iranian regional rivalry erupts into violent confrontation of some sort in Lebanon, not only the Lebanese but also thousands of Palestinian and Syrian refugees will be drawn into such conflict.

A new refugee crisis may be at the doorsteps of Europe again. This should deter any European country from encouraging or becoming complicit in Saudi designs to destabilise the fragile peace between the many Lebanese mansions.

Saudi Arabia will only be able to destabilise Lebanon if it works with Israel, the only country with the military capabilities to threaten Lebanon’s fragile peace

Fortunately EU ambassadors in Lebanon expressed support for the Lebanese state and showed no intention of contributing to a volatile situation by supporting Saudi claims that Lebanon declared war on it.

Saudi Arabia will only be able to destabilise Lebanon if it works with Israel, the only country with the military capabilities to threaten Lebanon’s fragile peace. Will Mohammed bin Salman go as far as striking a deal with Israel in which he offers full normalisation in return for Israel destroying Hezbollah and Iran in Lebanon?

This should not be ruled out as the young prince does not seem to think of the consequences of his actions.

If his domestic repression and detention of his own cousins is something to go by, the international community, especially those who will be directly affected by his actions in Lebanon, should work to put pressure on him to restrain his illusions of becoming the master of Arab affairs from the Levant to Aden.

The international community should also show solidarity with Lebanon by pre-emptively condemning any Israel aggression on Lebanon.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, Lebanon, Saudi ArabiaComments Off on Saudi Zio-Wahhabi regime last card in Lebanon: Use Nazi Mafia to strike Hezbollah

Open letter to British Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson

Image result for Boris Johnson CARTOON
Dear Mr. Secretary Boris Johnson,
This letter may take you by surprise since I am neither a British citizen nor live in the U.K.  However, after reading the sad story of a young British lady languishing in an Egyptian prison for over a month in the Independence UK and who may face the death penalty, I call upon you to demand her immediate and unconditional release.
Laura Plummer is a 33-year-old British citizen was arrested at an Egyptian airport for carrying painkillers (Tramadol and Naproxen) in her suite case for her husband who lives in Egypt and who suffered from back pain due to a car accident. The medicine was a small amount, legal to use in the U.K., and it was not hidden inside her luggage.
Ms. Plummer was asked by the airport officials that she would have to sign a document in Arabic, a language that she neither could read nor write. She assumed she will be free to leave after she signed a 38-page statement. Instead, she was taken to a 15 ft by 15 ft prison cell with one commode and she was held with 25 other prisoners.
Laura Plummer is being held on a Mickey Mouse charge of “drug trafficking” and she is suffering on a daily basis with barely enough food and water to survive. Laura has to sleep on the floor like the other 25 prisoners and they all have to share one toilet.
Following Laura’s arrest, her mom and her two sisters visited her in prison in Egypt and the family was distraught to the fact that they could not recognize her. Her family even said she looks like a zombie and is suffering hair loss due to stress. To add salt to the wound, the family was conned by a bogus Egyptian lawyer who ran off with £10,000 after being paid.
I should point out here that, in the past, Egyptian police were accused of raping anti-government protesters and having sexually assaulted both male and female pro-democracy demonstrators following their arrest. The International Coalition of Expatriate Egyptians has published the first report that document cases of rape and sexual abuse inside Egyptian prisons and police stations. ICEE made a submission to the UN Human Rights Commission and Amnesty International about the violations. Egyptian Interior Ministry refused to answer any questions to news organizations seeking comments.
In August 14, 2013, during a pro-democracy rally in Cairo, Mohammad Sultan, a US-born Egyptian, was shot in the arm, then arrested under trumped-up charges, detained for more than a year without trial, then he was sentenced to death. Mohammad spent 400 days on a hunger strike in the prison to protest his illegal detention. As he was hanging between life and death in jail, the Egyptian court let him go free and back to the US after he agreed to give up his Egyptian citizenship.
Having just read this story of the Muslim mother of five (ages 6-16) who spread ISIS propaganda on Facebook and who was spared jail for terror offenses by a British court, the judge was moved by the eldest son’s letter pleading with his judge to free his mom and to end the family’s suffering. I therefore decide to write to you about Laura’s story and by sharing this letter with one hundred news organizations.
I wish to impress upon you the urgency of Laura Plummer’s situation. I chose to do my moral duty towards my fellow human and a Christian if you will, just like the British judge showed mercy and compassion towards the Muslim mother and her five children in his court. Therefore, I am writing this about the dilemma of Laura Plummer and her family by urging you to fly to Egypt, call for a face-to-face meeting with Miss Plummer, and to demand her immediate and unconditional release.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
Warm regards,
Mahmoud El-Yousseph

Posted in UKComments Off on Open letter to British Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson

The Nazi-Wahhabi alliance beating the drums of war

The Israeli-Saudi alliance beating the drums of war

Netanyahu’s new alliance with Saudi Arabia’s crown prince might provide the military punch he needs to forge a successful series of attacks on regional enemies

Over the past 24 hours, the drumbeat of war in the Middle East has risen to a fever-pitch. Saudi Arabia has provoked both an internal domestic, and a foreign crisis to permit Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to realise his grandiose vision of the Saudi state.

Internally, Salman suddenly created an anti-corruption commission and within four hours it had ordered the arrest of some of the highest level royal princes in the kingdom, including at least four sitting ministers and the son of a former king.

The most well-known name on the list, and one of the world’s richest men, was Alwaleed bin Talal.

Under duress

Just a few hours earlier, after being summoned to Saudi Arabia for consultations, Lebanese Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri told a Saudi TV audience that he was quitting his job due to “death threats” against him. Why the prime minister of a country would resign in the capital of a foreign nation is inexplicable.

Coverage of Hariri’s statement noted that he spoke haltingly into the camera and looked off-camera several times, indicating that the statement may have been written for him and that he may have delivered it under duress.

Given the strong-arm tactics used by bin Salman to both secure his own title as crown prince, and the subsequent arrest of scores of prominent Saudis deemed insufficiently loyal to him, it would not be at all out of character to summon the leader of a vassal state and offer an ultimatum: either resign or we will cut you off (literally).

Middle East Eye editor David Hearst agrees: “It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that when he left Lebanon, Hariri had no intention of resigning, that he himself did not know that he would resign and that this resignation had been forced on him by the Saudis.”

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah called Hariri “our prime minister” in his own address to the nation after the “resignation”. This doesn’t sound like a man who wanted Hariri out of power. Lebanon’s president announced he would not accept Hariri’s resignation till he returned in person to affirm it.

Further, Saudi Arabia announced that Hariri would not be returning to Lebanon due to the so-called threats on his life. Something doesn’t smell right.


Saad Hariri and his deep-rooted Saudi links

Both Hariri and his late father earned their wealth thanks to Saudi largess. They also owed their own leading role in Lebanese politics to Saudi patronage.

The assassination of Rafik Hariri in 2005 came after threats levelled against him by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, which partly explains lingering hostility between the Syrian regime and the Saudi royal family.

This hostility was likely a prime factor in Saudi Arabia becoming the principal financier of the Syrian armed opposition groups, including some of the most bloodthirsty militants affiliated with Islamic State (IS) and al Qaeda.

Saudi National Guard forces (REUTERS)

Bin Salman’s new ally

After losing in Yemen and Syria, bin Salman appears willing to try yet a third time, turning Lebanon into a political football to even scores with foreign enemies. Unfortunately Hariri, like his father before him, is being squeezed to within an inch of his life. This time, by the Saudis instead of the Syrians.

The Saudi crown prince appears eager to ratchet up the conflict with Iran. Bin Salman, like his new ally, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, appears willing to exploit and manipulate hostility to a foreign enemy in order to bolster his own domestic stature.

Given that he’s hellbent on establishing his own dominance in Saudi internal politics, such an enemy is very helpful in holding rivals at bay.

Israel has responded in kind. On Monday, the foreign ministry sent an urgent cable to all diplomats demanding that they mouth a pro-Saudi line regarding the Hariri resignation. Haaretz’ diplomatic correspondent, Barak Ravid, tweeted the contents of the cable:

1 \ I published on channel 10 a cable sent to Israeli diplomats asking to lobby for Saudis\Hariri &against Hezbollah 

האיום האיראני: ישראל מיישרת קו עם סעודיה נגד מעורבות טהראן וחיזבאללה בלבנון

משרד החוץ שיגר מברק הנחיות לכל שגרירויות ישראל בו התבקשו לפעול נגד המעורבות של חיזבאללה ואיראן במערכת הפוליטית בלבנון

This indicates that Israel and Saudi Arabia are developing the sort of “no-daylight” relationship that Israeli leaders used to tout with their American counterparts. Together with their combined military might and oil wealth, these two countries could pose a highly combustible commodity.

Bin Salman may have also learned another lesson from Israel: that it is fruitless to seek the help of outside powers in waging such conflicts. He saw Netanyahu spend years fruitlessly begging two US presidents to join him in a military adventure attacking Iran.

His new alliance with Saudi Arabia might provide the military punch he needs to forge a successful series of attacks on regional enemies.

Both the Saudis and Israelis watched ruefully as former US President Barack Obama’s Iran nuclear deal, negotiated despite vociferous opposition from Netanyahu, removed this card from their political deck. Netanyahu had played the card for years in drumming up opposition to Iran’s purported nuclear programme.

He was furious he could no longer use it to defang domestic political challenges or invoke national crisis.

Over the past few months, both countries have lost another critical regional “card:” Their Syrian Islamist allies have folded under a joint onslaught from the Syrian regime and its Iranian-Russian backers.


It feels like a battlefield these days in Saudi Arabia

A few years earlier, Netanyahu had joined Saudi Arabia in intervening in Syria, attacking military facilities associated with Iran or Hezbollah. He pursued this policy as a method of deterrence, to diminish the arsenal available to the Lebanese Islamists during the next war with Israel. But he acted no less in order to bolster his security bona fides among security-obsessed Israelis.

But with the civil war winding down and Saudi-Israeli proxies having failed, Netanyahu can no longer offer the Syrian bogeyman to Israeli voters. He has four major corruption scandals facing him. More and more of his closest confidants are being swept up in the police investigation.

Netanyahu desperately needs a distraction. A war against Lebanon is just the ticket. It would do wonders to unite the country just long enough to see the charges evaporate into thin air.

But there would be a major difference in this coming war: Saudi Arabia will join this fight specifically to give Iran a black eye. So attacking Lebanon will be only part of its agenda while attacking Iran directly will be the real Saudi goal.

With Israel joining the fight, the two states could mount a regional war with attacks launched against targets in Lebanon, Syria, and Iran, possibly sparkingy counter-attacks against Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the Gulf states.

Netanyahu desperately needs a distraction. A war against Lebanon is just the ticket (REUTERS)

Foreign enemy

As I mentioned above, bin Salman appears to have learned a critical political lesson from his Israeli ally: you need a foreign enemy in order to instil fear within your domestic constituency. You must build that enemy into a lurking, ominous force for evil in the universe.

That’s one of the reasons bin Salman is intervening in the Yemen civil war. Despite a Saudi massacre inducing mass starvation and a cholera epidemic, bin Salman has been able to invoke Muslim schisms in order to paint Iran as “the aggressor” and threat to Saudi interests.


The night of the long knives in Saudi Arabia

More recently, he declared his neighbours in Qatar to be persona non grata for not siding fulsomely enough with the Saudis against Iran. With bin Salman, you are either with him or against him. There is no middle ground.

Fortunately, most of the rest of the human race seeks that middle ground.

Those who eschew the middle end up being dictators or madmen. That seems to be the direction in which the Saudi royal is headed.

In Lebanon, his strategy seems to be to provoke a political and financial crisis. Saudi Arabia provides a huge level of financial and commercial support to Lebanon.

Bin Salman seems to believe that if he withdraws such support, it will force the Lebanese to rein in Hezbollah. Though it’s not clear how the Lebanese are supposed to restrain a political movement that is one of the largest and most popular in the country.

The Saudi prince is trying the same strategy which so far failed with Qatar. There he declared a boycott. He strong-armed all the states which relied on him for largesse to declare a blockade. Borders were closed. Flights were cancelled. Trade was halted.

But instead of folding, the Qataris (with Iranian encouragement no doubt) have taken their case to the world and fought back. They show no signs of folding.

The Russia factor

It’s unclear how the Saudis believes he will force a much larger and distant state like Lebanon to submit. He can turn off the spigots and declare a boycott. Indeed, Bahrain, one of the Saudi vassal states, directed its citizens to return from Lebanon and declared a travel ban like the Qatari ban which preceded it.

All this will only strengthen Hezbollah’s hand. It will also serve as a tacit invitation to Iran to play a much larger role in Lebanon. When there is a vacuum, it will be filled.

There is an even larger power looming behind this all: Russia. The stalemate in Syria between the Saudi-funded rebels and Assad permitted Putin to intervene decisively and effect the eventual outcome of that conflict. If Putin perceives a similar Saudi strategy in Lebanon, I see little reason Iran and Russia might not team up in the same fashion to support their allies on the ground.

It’s interesting to note that King Salman made the first ever visit by a Saudi royal to Moscow this past month and held talks with Vladimir Putin.

Wouldn’t one like to know what they discussed? It certainly had to have involved Syria and Lebanon, since those are the two places in which Saudi interests either conflict, or potentially conflict with Russia’s.


Salman’s ‘moderate Islam’: A disneyland for robots, not open society 

Perhaps the Saudi king warned Putin not to take advantage of chaos in Lebanon as he did in Syria. I doubt that Putin would be much intimidated given the Saudi failure in Syria.

Russia’s future actions will be determined by how much Putin feels he has to gain if he were to side with Hezbollah and Iran in a future conflict in Lebanon.

It’s important to remember that during the days of the Soviet Union, with the US a dominant force in the region, it supported most of the frontline Arab states in their conflict with Israel.

Putin is well-known for seeking to restore the former glory that was the Soviet empire. No doubt, it would please him no end to engineer a fully fledged Russian return to power and influence in the Middle East.

Military strategists in Riyadh and Tel Aviv

Israel is the elephant in the room here. It borders Lebanon and has fought two major wars there, along with a 20-year failed occupation of the south. Hezbollah is Israel’s sworn enemy and Iran, the movement’s largest backer, is also one of Israel’s chief adversaries.

The Saudis have the financial wherewithal to support a protracted conflict in Lebanon (they also spent $1bn in support of Israel’s sabotage campaign against Iran). They may be more than willing to bankroll another Israeli invasion.

Bin Salman, like his new ally Netanyahu, appears willing to exploit and manipulate hostility to a foreign enemy in order to bolster his own domestic stature

For their part, the Saudis may be willing to create yet another Lebanese government cobbled together by collaborators and bought-off politicians, while shutting Hezbollah out of political power.

Similarly, the history of Israeli intervention is filled with such sham political constructs. In the West Bank, they created the “village councils”. In south Lebanon, they created the South Lebanese Army. And in Syria, they funded the al-Nusra rebels fighting the regime in the Golan Heights.

One can only hope that the military strategists in Riyadh and Tel Aviv aren’t mad enough to contemplate such a scenario. But given the gruesome history of Lebanon, and its role as a sacrificial lamb in conflicts between greater powers, one cannot rule it out.

Finally, the US which had played a decisive role in preventing an Israeli attack on Iran for years, is now led by a president who’s quite enamoured both of Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Trump’s first foreign visit as leader of the country was to Saudi Arabia. His warm relations with Netanyahu and support for Israel’s most extreme policies is also well-known. No one should expect this administration to restrain either the Saudis or Israelis. If, anything, they may goad them on.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, Saudi ArabiaComments Off on The Nazi-Wahhabi alliance beating the drums of war

Analysis of Vietnam-Perkasie


The following is an analysis of a book of self-experience, Vietnam-Perkasie, written by a Marine who served during the Vietnam War. There is also a bit of author analysis regarding the Vietnam War and those who served there included here.

The Vietnam-American War was very different from the previous wars that America had been involved in.  This war had no defined battle front, defied the use of conventional means of waging war, had allies whose commitment to the cause were in doubt, endured anti-war sentiment on the home front, returned soldiers to a nation who did not regale them as heroes, seemed to lack a clear purpose and obtainable objective, and plunged hundreds of thousands of America’s young males into an alien world with experiences that ranged from supreme boredom to the heights of terror and fear for life and limb.

W.D. Ehrhart’s story, Vietnam-Perkasie, offers vast insight into his experiences leading up to, during, and immediately following his thirteen-month military tour as a Marine in Vietnam.  This intelligent, sensitive young man experienced personal growth that would have taken several years to develop had he not followed his patriotic sense of duty to his country.  This time spent in Vietnam slapped him with decades’ worth of experiences in a very small frame of time.

Probably the most profound metamorphosis in Ehrhart was that regarding his views of reasons for the United States’ involvement and subsequently his part in Vietnam.  Before his enlistment he strongly believed in the American ideology for the halt of Communism.  He felt his duty was to contribute to this cause.  He convinced his parents to sign for his enlistment in the Marines, as he was underage.  “Is this how you raised me?  To let somebody else’s kids fight America’s wars?”  (Ehrhart, 10).  Even the rigors of boot camp, with the caustic drill instructors, could not dissuade him from his commitment to his country.  During his graduation from boot camp he stated that “I burst into a broad grin, barely able to control the pride struggling to get out of me in a mighty shout” (Ehrhart, 19).  Upon his arrival in Vietnam, Corporal Saunders, who he would replace, informed him that he was indeed not in a country that would welcome him with open arms.  “Better pay attention, kid.  We get sniped at along this road all of the time.  Half the people you’re waving at are probably VC” (Ehrhart, 21).  Ehrhart witnessed harsh treatment of detainees and tried to get Saunders to stop it.  He was informed that the “detainees” may very well be VC or at the least VC sympathizers.  “There people know where those mines are and who’s planting ‘em and who’s doing the sniping” (Ehrhart, 26).

His perception of the ARVN as capable fighting partners began to decline when the ARVN did not leave their compound to assist the scouts who were being ambushed.  The ARVN had even fired upon and killed two men with a .50-ciliber machine gun (Ehrhart, 30). Taggart’s torture of an old man to find out who had dug a bunker, was disturbing to him but soon he is telling a new recruit the reasons behind the cruel treatment of someone who appears to be too feeble to be an enemy.  “Two weeks ago a God damned kid maybe eight or nine years old runs up and tries to flip a grenade into the jeep.  A grenade!  I had to blow ‘im away” (Ehrhart, 56).  He describes Vietnam as Indian country and starts to vocalize that there is not light at the end of the tunnel and no end to the number of VC available to fight (Ehrhart, 61).  As he becomes more and more immersed in the war he forgets the voices and faces of Jenny and his mother.  By the time of his second kill he was charged with the excitement of it.

In his experiences to date, the first time that cold hard facts about the home front could touch this jungle, was when Calloway received a letter from his wife that informed him that she was pregnant by his best friend and wanted a divorce to marry him.  Calloway’s swift suicide, in front of his men, shocks all and brings what is happening a world away right into that jungle.  Ehrhart writes home that the U.S. is winning the war and this is a way for him to try to convince himself that his reasons for being there were just, as much as to keep the folks at home from worrying.

Ehrhart’s job of plotting the harassment and interdiction fire was done in a haphazard way. Due to the lack of reliable sources this seemed to be the only way to get a report out when one was required.   He knew too much about the inner workings of the war to trust what the outcome would be.  “But day after day and week after week and month after month of F/6s and F/3s and C/3s had proven the rating system to be as crazy as the rest of the war” (Ehrhart, 104).  His distrust of the United States basis for waging attacks was rooted in knowing that often there was no legitimate rhyme or reason to the shelling and bombing strategy. Falsified body counts and slanted news coverage did nothing to bolster his confidence in his military.

He reflects on how during his earlier years he had avoided personal confrontations.  Perhaps he had come a long way from that little boy or teenager, but not really.  He could still feel revulsion at the death of the old man on Barrier Island.  He thought of the old woman that he had shot just because she happened to be running and then of his Quaker friend Sadie Thompson’s final words to him, that in essence said, “ do not kill anyone” and he could still feel sick with what he had done.  He also realized that the South Vietnamese “democracy” that he is fighting to establish and maintain is a sham.  There was continued mistrust of the ARVN troops and their apparent lack of enthusiasm and cooperation.  After all the Americans had come over to their country to keep Communism at bay, and the least they could do was to fight along side the Americans.

The R and R to China Beach was not as much fun as was anticipated.  There may have been too much time to think of what was going on in the “real” world plus the letters from Jenny had started to drop off drastically.  Gerry and Bill did not choose to stay the full amount of time that they were allotted.  What were they missing back at camp?  Perhaps they had become too accustomed to the constant adrenaline rush.  When the “Dear Bill” letter finally arrived, all of the previous traumatic experiences came crashing in on Ehrhart. His thoughts of his future with Jenny and surviving long enough to get back to the world had been his anchor during his trip on the turbulent, deadly sea of Vietnam.  “A perfect chain, like a rosary, a lifeline, a beacon.  Gone just like that?” (Ehrhart, 132).

Ehrhart had a discussion with Trinh about Trinh’s view on what the United States was doing to the South Vietnamese by supporting the current government of Ky and Thieu.  “This is not America, Corporal Ehrhart” (Ehrhart, 146).  Trinh said that the South Vietnamese did not want the Americans there, nor had the South Vietnamese people asked for American help.  “Ky and Thieu and the rest of those fat bloated bandits who are getting filthy rich from this war-they asked for help (Ehrhart, 148).

Ehrhart’s meeting with Dorrit comes at an especially low time in his life. Jenny is gone; he has much anger toward her, the South Vietnamese, and himself. This new relationship came at a time when he needed the will to go on with his life.  He almost deserted and stayed with her.  This shows how much he had changed from the staunch supporter of his country and of the American involvement in this war. He expresses his frustrations about what he has seen and done during the previous months. He vocalized the wrongs that he could see with the waging of the war.  He talked about what he had done and how he was no longer proud of himself. The apparent futility of what he was being asked to do. “Round and round and round, just chasing our own tail” (Ehrardt, 169). His anticipation of a future relationship with Dorrit helps to take some of the sting out of Jenny’s abandonment. In nine months he has changed from the eager new Marine enlistee to someone who would get out of the uniform as soon as possible.  “I knew that once I left Vietnam, I would never again go anywhere that required a uniform and the forfeiture of my right to come and go as I chose” (Ehrhart, 184).

Ehrhart’s father was a minister but he had decided before going to Vietnam that he was an agnostic.  His talks with Father Lignon became more and more strained until he tried to avoid contact with the clergyman.  He had decided that he was not doing the correct thing by being in South Vietnam. He did not believe that he should continue to ask forgiveness for what he did, all the while knowing that he would just go out and do it again. “Either you are a Christian, or you’re not a Christian.  There’s nothing ambiguous about ‘Thou shalt not kill’” (Ehrhart, 196).  He refused the offer of the chaplain to write him up for a deferment as a conscientious objector.  He would complete what he had started with his enlistment.  When he reads that Dorrit has been murdered he immediately reacts to the news; he is upset, but seems to quickly adjust to her death.  Her death seems to affect him less than Jenny’s rejection. He after all had seen others, whom he had known far longer, die in his presence.

The fighting when helping the MACV compound near Hue exhilarates him.  This is the first time that he feels that he is allowed to fight back. He is free to fight with full force and in doing so acts out his frustrations.  He had come to fight Communism and now could not think of a reason for him being there in the first place. His youthful aspirations and sense of patriotic duty had turned to self-doubt and questions of his purpose.  He states:

And I fought back passionately, in blind rage and pain, without remorse or conscience or deliberation.  I fought back at the mud of Con Thieu, and the burning sand of Hoi An, and the alien blank faces in the marketplace in Dien Ban; at the Pentagon generals, and the Congress of the United States, and the New York Times; at the Iron Butterfly, and the draft-card burners, and the Daughters of the American Revolution; at the murder of Dorrit von Hellemond, and the son-of-a-bitch who had taken Jenny flying in his private airplane; at the teachers who had taught me that America always had God on our side and always wore white hats and always won; at the Memorial Day parades and the daily Pledge of Allegiance and the constant rumors of peace talks and the constant absence of peace; at the movies of John Wayne and Audie Murphy, and the solemn statements of Dean Rusk and Robert MacNamara; at the ghosts of Roddenbery and Maloney and Rowe and Basinski and Calloway and Aymes, and Falcone and Stemkowski…at freedom and democracy and communism and the monumental stupidity with which I had delivered myself into the hands of the nightmare; at the small boy with the grenade in his hand…I had no idea-had not the slightest inkling –what I was fighting for or against. (Ehrhart, 246-247)

As his time in Vietnam became shorter, he became more nervous about returning.  In his war of bullets, mines, snipers, and bombs he has no trouble putting the eventual homecoming into the back of his mind. “The solid immediacy of survival made the turning easy” (Ehrhart, 263).

His return to the States was very disturbing.  He justifiably came back with a heightened awareness of the generalized anti-war environment.  He unexpectantly found that he did not hate the hippie that he met in the airport, but instead felt contempt for the two older men, one who was a World War II Marine veteran, who befriended him.  Everything they said about the war just seemed to show how little they knew of what really was happening in this war. This war was far different than America’s previous wars. He had gone at the age of seventeen to fight in a war, but he was not old enough to buy his own car or to purchase insurance for it.  He was not trusted to be with the high school students on their trip, but was asked to speak to them of his experiences. He faced hypocrisy everywhere he turned and he had experienced enough in the past months that he was not going to turn a deaf ear or blind eye to it.

These young men who came to Vietnam had lives that they had to put on hold.  The ones who had families, wives, or girlfriends to return to used these people who remained at home as their anchors.  Any change in the status of their relationships back home often times had cataclysmic results.  From the day they arrived they counted down the days till they could again be home and safe from constant threats of death. When they returned home they were greatly changed by their experiences while those at home were seemingly unchanged and often unwilling to recognize the turmoil the returning soldiers felt.    Some of the men went to fight the Communists and some just went because their number came up and they had no luxury of a deferment.  The constantly revolving door of people into and out of the platoons often disrupted the fluidity of operations. These operations were often haphazard with little hope of accomplishing anything.   Eventually as they spent more time in country they realized that the war was not nearing an end and that those in charge of their lives did not really care about them.  They experienced the futility of taking a small patch of ground, often at great expense of life and wounded, and then leave to let the enemy come in again. Deep friendships were made and just as quickly terminated as they were killed or wounded and evacuated.  They would often hear later that their wounded friend had indeed died.  There was no time or way to say farewell at funerals and wakes. Their distrust of the ARVN became elevated as they witnessed their allies’ apparent lack of enthusiasm for the war.  The Americans did not understand the South Vietnamese way of life.  Some of the men reverted to the worst possible form of humanity when confronted with the fear of what the enemy would do to him if he did not do first to the enemy. They came from a world where they had been taught that to kill was a sin or against the law and were then thrust into one in which they often had to kill to survive or were even rewarded for killing. Often those who were sent to Vietnam were those who were the least qualified for the task.

Vietnam-Perkasie is an honest account of the feelings of a very young man.  His patriotism in the beginning is contagious.  His descriptions of incidents and his reactions to these various incidents give the reader the sense that he or she is the one in the story.  It is easy to feel a great deal of compassion for this young man.  There seems to be a lifetime that passes during the few months that this story spans. Ehrhart has every facet of his life traumatized and seems to be quite forthright in how these events make him feel.  This could be the story of any young Marine who was in this war. The only weakness that this book has is that the reader, who has become very involved with the young Ehrhart, must leave him while he is in great despair.  The “real” world, for him was no sanctuary and the “normal life” he longed for was not to be found there.

Posted in USA, VietnamComments Off on Analysis of Vietnam-Perkasie

1964: On This Day in History, McNamara says U.S. has no plans to send combat troops to Vietnam


What the Heck? On this 10th day of November in 1964, at a news conference, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara says that the United States has no plans to send combat troops into Vietnam.

On this 10th day of November in 1964, at a news conference, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara says that the United States has no plans to send combat troops into Vietnam.

When asked whether the United States intended to increase its activities in Vietnam, he replied, “Wait and see.”

By 1969, more than 500,000 American troops were in South Vietnam.


Buy Book on – The Secretary of Defense for the Kennedy and Johnson administrations provides a perceptive and candid account of how–and why–America became involved in Vietnam, discussing his own activities and the legacy of decisions made during the 1960s.

During President John F. Kennedy’s term, while McNamara was Secretary of Defense, America’s troops in Vietnam increased from 900 to 16,000 advisers, who were not supposed to engage in combat but rather to train the Army of the Republic of Vietnam.

The number of combat advisers in Vietnam when Kennedy died varies depending upon source. The first military adviser deaths in Vietnam occurred in 1957 or 1959 under the Eisenhower Administration, which had infiltrated Vietnam, through the efforts of Stanley Sheinbaum, with an unknown number of CIA operatives and other special forces in addition to almost 700 advisers.

The Truman and Eisenhower administrations had committed the United States to support the French and native anti-Communist forces in Vietnam in resisting efforts by the Communists in the North to unify the country, though neither administration established actual combat forces in the war.

The U.S. role—initially limited to financial support, military advice and covert intelligence gathering—expanded after 1954 when the French withdrew. During the Kennedy administration, the U.S. military advisory group in South Vietnam steadily increased, with McNamara’s concurrence, from 900 to 16,000.

U.S. involvement escalated after the Gulf of Tonkin incidents in August 1964, involving two purported attacks on a U.S. Navy destroyer by North Vietnamese naval vessels.

Records from the Lyndon Johnson Library have perhaps indicated that McNamara misled Johnson on the attack on a U.S. Navy destroyer by allegedly withholding calls against executing airstrikes from US Pacific Commanders.

McNamara was also instrumental in presenting the event to Congress and the public as justification for escalation of the war against the communists.

In 1995, McNamara met with former North Vietnam Defense Minister Vo Nguyen Giap who told his American counterpart that the August 4 attack never happened, a conclusion McNamara eventually came to accept.

President Johnson ordered retaliatory air strikes on North Vietnamese naval bases. Congress approved, with only Senators Wayne Morse (D-OR), and Ernest Gruening (D-AK), voting against, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, authorizing the president “to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the U.S. and to prevent further aggression.” Regardless of the particulars of the incident, the larger issue would turn out to be the sweeping powers granted by the resolution.

U.S. President Lyndon Johnson with his Secretary of State McNamara

It gave Johnson virtually unfettered authority to expand retaliation for a relatively minor naval incident into a major land war involving 500,000 American soldiers. “The fundamental issue of Tonkin Gulf involved not deception but, rather, misuse of power bestowed by the resolution,” McNamara wrote later.

In 1965, in response to stepped up military activity by the Viet Cong in South Vietnam and their North Vietnamese allies, the U.S. began bombing North Vietnam, deployed large military forces and entered into combat in South Vietnam. McNamara’s plan, supported by requests from top U.S. military commanders in Vietnam, led to the commitment of 485,000 troops by the end of 1967 and almost 535,000 by June 30, 1968.

The casualty lists mounted as the number of troops and the intensity of fighting escalated. McNamara put in place a statistical strategy for victory in Vietnam. He concluded that there were a limited number of Viet Cong fighters in Vietnam and that a war of attrition would destroy them. He applied metrics (body counts) to determine how close to success his plan was.

McNamara with Australian Prime Minister Harold Holt at The Pentagon in July 1966

McNamara with Australian Prime Minister Harold Holt at The Pentagonin July 1966

Although he was a prime architect of the Vietnam War and repeatedly overruled the JCS on strategic matters, McNamara gradually became skeptical about whether the war could be won by deploying more troops to South Vietnam and intensifying the bombing of North Vietnam, a claim he would publish in a book years later. He also stated later that his support of the Vietnam War was given out of loyalty to administration policy.

He traveled to Vietnam many times to study the situation firsthand and became increasingly reluctant to approve the large force increments requested by the military commanders.

McNamara said that the Domino Theory was the main reason for entering the Vietnam War. In the same interview he stated, “Kennedy hadn’t said before he died whether, faced with the loss of Vietnam, he would [completely] withdraw; but I believe today that had he faced that choice, he would have withdrawn.”

Other Important Events on this Day in History

Posted in Saudi ArabiaComments Off on 1964: On This Day in History, McNamara says U.S. has no plans to send combat troops to Vietnam

What Is Happening In Saudi Arabia?

Marwa Osman on The Corbett Report

Corbett Report Extras

The Lebanese Prime Minister has “resigned” on Saudi tv. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman has rounded up a dozen other princes in the House of Saud in a startling move that threatens to upset the kingdom. Reports saying that King Salman will step aside for the crown prince abound. What the hell is happening? Joining us to help sort through the rubble of this incredible week is Marwa Osman, a political analyst and commentator in Beirut.


Posted in Saudi ArabiaComments Off on What Is Happening In Saudi Arabia?

Nazi regime Plans To Double The Number Of Colonists In The Jordan Valley


The Nazi regime is preparing a plan to double the number of Nazi Jewish colonists in the Jordan Valley of the occupied West bank.

The new plan was presented by Israeli “Housing Minister” Yoav Galant, who previously served as the Nazi Commander of the Southern Command in the Nazi army, and aims at doubling the number of colonists in the Jordan Valley, to reach approximately 12000.

As part of his plan, the Nazi regime would be providing serious incentives to entice Zionist families to live, build and work in the Jordan Valley, through direct cooperation with various government ministries, to control the entire area.

Nazi Minister said that “Israel’s leaders all agree that the Jordan Valley, will always be part of the state under any possible future peace agreement.”

Mahdi Daraghma, a member of a Local Council in the Jordan Valley, said the army has already ordered the eviction of Palestinians from Ein al-Hilwa and Khirbet Um al-Jamal, and the al-Maleh area in the Northern Plains, within the coming eight days.

Daraghma added that the families received sixty orders to evacuate their dwellings, barns and agricultural sheds, an issue which would displace 200 Palestinians.

He also said that the new orders were issued on November 1st, and the families only received them on the evening of November 9th.

This means that the Nazi army could invade these communities and displace the families at any given moment.

Nazi colonies in the occupied territories, including in and around East Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley, are illegal under International Law, and the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZI, JordanComments Off on Nazi regime Plans To Double The Number Of Colonists In The Jordan Valley

Shoah’s pages


November 2017
« Oct   Dec »