Archive | September, 2010

Philip Giraldi: WAKE UP AMERICA


September 30, 2010

by Debbie Menon

In the damage assessment made after the arrest, it was determined that the espionage had been the most devastating ever experienced by the United States of America, both in volume and in the sensitivity of the information that had been betrayed.

Let us suppose for a moment that an individual enjoying the full confidence and trust of the United States government was given access to the most secret information possessed by the US military, to include how it would react to an attack by an aggressor armed with nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles.  Let us further suppose that that individual violated his trust in the most egregious and vile fashion, offering to sell the information to anyone, but eventually settling on a nation ostensibly friendly to the US but not in any way a formal ally. 

The individual then proceeded to deliver defense secrets literally by the carload, not only information that might plausibly have been construed as relevant to the buyer’s own security, but also strategic defense information that could conceivably have led to the deaths of millions of American citizens.  That information was then bartered and re-sold to an enemy who was in a position to use it to devastate the United States, together with sources and methods information on intelligence operations that in short order led to the deaths of many American citizens and also foreigners who had been cooperating with the United States.

Let us further suppose that the individual who stole the secrets was eventually caught because the sheer volume of what he was stealing was detected in spite of the indolence and incompetence of his superiors and he was convicted and imprisoned for life.  In the damage assessment made after the arrest, it was determined that the espionage had been the most devastating ever experienced by the United States of America, both in volume and in the sensitivity of the information that had been betrayed.

Fast forward a few years.  The country that paid the man to steal the secrets becomes a major beneficiary of US assistance and uses the money to set up a lobbying organization that effectively manages key players in the federal government and the media, making it virtually invulnerable to any criticism.  Pumped up by hubris, that country seeks on several occasions to obtain the freedom of its spy, claiming inaccurately that he was only taking information used for purely defensive purposes.  Fast forward a few more years and legislators in the US Congress known to be advocates of the foreign country that bought the secrets join in, calling for the release of the convicted spy.  The media, also compromised and in the pockets of the foreign lobby, obligingly does not report the tale of American legislators who have apparently sold out.

I am, of course, referring to Jonathan Pollard and his friends in Israel and the United States.  Pollard did more damage to the United States than any spy in history.  And it was genuine damage, not just a mass of documents that had been routinely classified.  Pollard’s Israeli handler, aided by someone in the White House who has up until now evaded arrest, was able to ask for specific classified documents by name and number.  The Soviets obtained US war plans, passed to them by the Israelis in exchange for money and free emigration of Russian Jews without any regard for the damage it was doing to the United States.  The KGB was able to use the mass of information to reconstruct US intelligence operations directed against it and a number of Americans and US agents paid with their lives. 

Pollard also revealed to the Israelis and Soviets the technical and human source capabilities that US intelligence did and did not have, which is the most critical information of all as it underlies all information collection efforts.  Compounding the problem, the United States has never actually been able to accurately ascertain all of the damage done by Pollard because the Israeli government has refused to cooperate in the investigation and has not returned the documents that were stolen.

And make no mistake, Pollard did it for money.  He has since wrapped himself in the Israeli flag and promoted himself as an observant Jew to justify his crime and to obtain his freedom.  He is reported to be a very popular person in Israel, an Israeli citizen by act of parliament, and there is a square in Jerusalem that has been renamed “Freedom for Jonathan Pollard Square.” There is also an active “Justice for Jonathan Pollard” movement in the United States supported by the heavyweight Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.  Never before has there been such a transformation, with a despicable lowlife spy who sold out his country for money turned into a hero.

Pollard is just one symptom of the asymmetrical relationship that makes many mutter “wag the dog” whenever the subject of Israel comes up.  If ever a foreign country has stuck its thumb in the eye of Uncle Sam, it is Israel in its willingness to take the United States for a ride while always demanding still more.  And when it demands more it is invariably given more, with US politicians and mainstream media ever willing to genuflect and do what is right for the kleptocracy in charge in Tel Aviv.

The latest criminal outrage is a quartet of congressmen who are calling on the Obama Administration to free Pollard to “advance the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.”  Well, first of all, everyone knows that the talks are kabuki, designed to accomplish absolutely nothing while advancing the standing of Obama prior to the US congressional elections in November.  Israel continues its creeping annexation of the West Bank aided and abetted by Washington, which will do nothing substantive to stop the illegal and immoral activity.  Abbas presumably is being bought off to stay silent while the play unfolds and Hamas, which should be sitting at the table, has been excluded.

That means that the congressmen in question, who actually took an oath to uphold the US Constitution, know that they are doing nothing but throwing yet another bone to Israel.  The congressmen are Barney Franks of Massachusetts, Edolphus Towns of New York, Anthony Weiner also of New York, and Bill Pascrell of New Jersey.  Mark their names well.  Franks and Weiner are presumably acting due to tribal solidarity, but Pascrell and Towns are the straight men in the routine, brought along to make the Free Pollard movement appear to be less than a complete ethnically based sell out.

It is time for the American people to rise up and throw these bums out.  Putting them in jail for malfeasance and corruption would be even better.  I would like to see a panel of USS Liberty survivors and widows and orphans of the dead intelligence officers question Barney Franks, Weiner, Pascrell, and Towns about their plan to free Pollard.  Better still, I would like to see some US veterans groups and their publications develop a backbone and take up the cause, finally saying that enough is enough since it is our soldiers, sailors, and airmen who have paid the price in their blood for the Israeli connection.  And then there is the intelligence community.  Its leading lobby, Association of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO), has long ignored Israeli espionage and prefers to regularly express concern about “Islamofascism.” Look in your own backyard folks, it is the Israelis who are skinning us alive, not the Muslims, and Pollard is the poster child of what exactly is being done to us. 

He is sometimes cited as proof that spies for Israel are caught and punished, but the truth is that he is the only one who has done hard time in jail and only because of the enormity of his crime while all the others have somehow slipped through our criminal justice system.  Franks, Weiner, Pascrell, and Towns are only the latest in a long line of collaborator politicians who should sometimes sit back and ponder where their loyalty actually lies.  If they persist in their Pollard campaign, they should be regarded as not fit to sit in the congress of the United States.  And that goes for anyone else who decides to lobby on behalf of Pollard.

An opportunity is coming in November to remove the snakes from Congress.  Let’s organize to get rid of Franks, Weiner, Pascrell, and Towns.  To be sure they will be replaced by others who are probably just as attached to Israel or fearful of its lobby as they are, but the time will inevitably come when allegiance to a foreign nation that is a strategic liability for the United States will become unseemly.  May that day come soon.


This article was originally published in

Philip Giraldi, a former CIA Officer, is the Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest. His “Deep Background” column appears every month exclusively in The American Conservative.

Related Posts:

Posted in USAComments Off on Philip Giraldi: WAKE UP AMERICA



Joint Press Conferences announcing new scientific evidence contradicting the official explanation of 9/11

September 30, 2010

by Debbie Menon 

New Scientific Evidence Contradicting Official 9/11 Explanation
By grtv

Quick recap of the Joint Press Conferences announcing new scientific evidence contradicting the official explanation of 9/11 and the launch of three new 9/11 Truth groups: Scientists for 9/11 Truth, U.S. Military Officers for 9/11 Truth and Actors & Artists for 9/11 Truth.

New York City / Los Angeles
September 9, 2010

Scientists for 9/11 Truth

See also:

Source: Global

Also see:

New 9/11 photos ‘prove WTC exploded from inside’

YouTube – Veterans Today –

Posted in USAComments Off on NEW EVIDENCE & EXPLANATION OF 9/11



September 30, 2010

by Dr. Ashraf Ezzat  

The exodus of the Palestinians from Palestine is the Israeli idea of an everlasting peace.

By Dr. Ashraf Ezzat

FM Clinton at an opening session of the Mid-East talks.

I don’t really believe that a lot of people will be surprised to find out that the current Palestinian-Israeli peace talks has come to a dead end once again.

Israel’s decision not to extend a ban on West Bank settlement building has nearly called off the peace talks that America was trying hard to boost.

The unwillingness of the Israeli side to freeze the construction of new settlements on the occupied Palestinian west bank has instead frozen the yet to start peace negotiations.

The USA – as usual- said that it was “disappointed” by Israel’s decision not to extend a ban on West Bank settlement building. But I think “disappointed” is an understatement, the United States should be looking for a tougher word that would reflect the stand of a super power being internationally ridiculed by a small country like Israel.

But let’s be realistic here, let`s face the facts on the ground and ask this crucial question; why would Israel want to seek peace with the Palestinians? Why should Israel even be interested in sitting with the Palestinians at the same table for negotiations?

Game of make-believe 

Usually any negotiating parties sit together to negotiate disputed items where the two negotiating parties engage into the political game of – give and take.

But then, why should Israel be engaged in such a game when she has no intention to give anything- unless it was a game of make-believe? Israel will not give up one inch of Arabic land she managed to seize by force. That, she has taken to keep; not to give back on some negotiating table. 

History of Arab-Israeli peace talks

Decades ago when the first Arab-Israeli peace talks was launched by the bold initiative of the late Egyptian president Sadat in 1977,the agreemaent of Sadat- Begin peace talks based upon “Recognition of the state of Israel in exchange for the restoration of the occupied Egyptian and Arabic land

Begin, Carter and Sadat at Camp David 1978

Well, that seemed to have worked then, first, because Egypt had just won its last military war- the October war or Yom Kippur War – against Israel 1973 and that was politically seen as a winning card to negotiate with.

Second, back in the late 1970`s Israel was dying to get any Arabic country to recognize it as a legitimate sovereign state in the region and one of the biggest Arabic countries- Egypt- was willing to satisfy that urgent political need.

So, Israel went ahead and reluctantly signed a peace treaty with Egypt –Camp David accords– in 1978 and was witnessed by the American president Jimmy Carter.

The Palestinian dilemma

The current Palestinian-Israeli so called peace talks are totally different.

The Palestinians are in no position to dictate any terms and they are stuck in no war- no peace zone. They cannot offer anything tempting to the Israelis. Some argue that security is a winning card for the Palestinians negotiators, but most of the Arab-Israeli conflict analysts don’t think so.

Who in his right mind would believe that some hand-made and improvised rockets – which the Palestinians see as the only armed resistance they got left – that are fired with minimal precision to fall astray at some deserted spot in the Israeli territories could impose any tangible threat to Israel security?

On the contrary, those random, inaccurate and infrequent rocket firing are the perfect excuse for the Israelis to play the innocent victims to the attacks of Palestinian- or the so called terrorists -and at the same time could conveniently fit in as the pretext for waging wars of extermination on Gaza and the west bank.

 The last Israeli war on Gaza resulted in 1,417 Palestinian deaths and the destruction of its infrastructure which turned Gaza into one of the biggest slums on earth. The extent of damage and the high number of civilian casualties led some critics to accuse Israel of committing a massacre. But as usual the Israelis got away with it.

Security was an issue of concern for Israel to discuss with Egypt – now neutralized by a peace treaty- or Iraq- now destroyed by 9/11 counter-attack. 

But security was never an issue – and never will be for the Israelis- to discuss with the Palestinians, otherwise they would have welcomed negotiating with the Palestinians without delay.

Israeli grab of Palestinian land 1946 to 2000

 If you doubt my thesis, take a look at the map of Palestine back in 1947- before Nakba- and now in 2010. You will be surprised to find out that the indigenous Palestinians of today hardly have any land left except  some scattered villages in the west bank and the strip of Gaza out of the whole land that used to be Palestine. You will also be surprised to know that “Jerusalem” and the area surrounding it originally belonged to the Palestinians according to UN declaration in 1947.

Ever since 1948, the Israeli grab of the Arabic land of Palestine has been viciously going on and even the remaining tiny part of the Palestinian land of today is shrinking by the minute. Who needs to talk peace with a situation like that, certainly not the Israelis. And moreover you can’t expect them to in the future. And if they do, it will be a make-believe peace negotiation aimed at wasting time for the Palestinians and gaining more time for the Israelis.

The Israelis are always after grabbing more land and more time to fortify their newer facts on the ground. Forty years ago Arabic recognition of the Israeli state was a big issue to the Israelis but not anymore now. Ten years ago Iraq was envisioned by the Israelis as a big military threat but not anymore now.

The Israeli idea of peace in the Middle East

Peace is not what Israel after; Israel has a rather different strategic goal to achieve. Israel’s ultimate – on the long run- target is to EXPEL the remaining Palestinians – now living in Gaza strip and the west bank.

That might sound a little bit strange, but with some critical thinking and reviewing the recent history of the Israeli aggression, we should come to see this as crystal clear. The israeli blockade on Gaza is not about security purposes, its not about suffocating Hamas it is about making life UNBEARABLE for the Gazan in hopes that they would eventually migrate from Gaza.

Israel now is in control of almost 90% of the land and the Israelis believe that they must have total control and leave nothing, absolutely no land for the Palestinians. And there’s only one way to accomplish this sinister plan and that is by “Ethnic Cleansing”.

When some scholars called the 1948 Palestinian exodus “ethnic cleansing,” Benny Morriscontemporary Israeli historian- responded that “there are circumstances in history that justify ethnic cleansing. I know that this term is completely negative in the discourse of the 21st century, but when the choice is between ethnic cleansing and genocide—the annihilation of your people—I prefer ethnic cleansing.”

 But Morris overlooked the fact that it was the Nazis who embarked on the genocide of the Jews, not the Arabs. Jewish, Christian and Muslim Arabs coexisted side by side peacefully in the Arabic land of Palestine for hunderds of years prior to the establishment of the zionist state of Israel.

 Morris’ comments concerning the Palestinian expulsions in 1948 have also proved controversial in an interview with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz in 2004:

 “if he was already engaged in the expulsion, maybe he should have done a completed job. I know that this stuns the Arabs and the liberals and the politically correct types. But my feeling is that this place would be quieter and know less suffering if the matter had been resolved once and for all. If Ben-Gurion had carried out a large expulsion and cleaned the whole country – the whole land of Israel, as far as the Jordan valley. It may yet turn out this was his fatal mistake. If he had carried out a full expulsion – rather than a partial expulsion – he would have stabilized the state of Israel for generations. 

So, the exodus of the Palestinians from Palestine is the Israeli idea of an everlasting peace. 

Palestinian refugees in 1948

The idea is so simple, and yet so sinister. The Zionists wanted to establish a state with an overwhelming Jewish population in an area of overwhelming indigenous non-Jewish population. So, the only option is to expel them out- in mass exodus- of their land to live as Palestinian DIASPORA. The Israelis know best how to do it; after all, they are the ones who invented the Exodus and Diaspora myths.

Israel has been involved in the so called peace talks with the Palestinians for decades now. Every time she manages to disrupt the peace talks that entailed long and tedious negotiations. Every time the Palestinians find themselves starting over the so called peace talks from scratch. A vicious circle of make-believe peace with the Palestinians alternating with hard to believe war on them. 

The Israeli’s rationale is understandable. The Israeli historian Benny Morris said that the concept of “TRANSFER” was deeply embedded in the Zionist mentality. And in his UN speech this week Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman pressed a plan for transferring Israeli Arabs out of Israel. Given that, what does that say of the Palestinian Arabs? 

Why shake hands and have peace with people you intend to kick out of their land. Why make peace when you can make their life a living HELL so that they – hopefully someday – would pack up and leave Palestine for good.

Posted in Middle EastComments Off on MID-EAST TALKS & THE PALEATINIAN EXODUS



September 30, 2010

by Gordon Duff  



By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

Mickey Weinstein and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation have been fighting the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs for a very long time.  Weinstein’s group is working to restore normal constitutional rights and practices in a military organization that has been hijacked by Christian Zionists who call themselves “Evangelicals.”  The idea is simple.  To get into the Academy or to remain there, un-raped, unbeaten, you have to attend regular “bible study” groups and continually mumble prayers.

No Jews allowed.  No homosexuals allowed.  No Muslims allowed.  It doesn’t stop there.  Reports received today tell us that women attending the Air Force Academy are being told they are “second class citizens” and subject to “male domination.”  How can someone serve as an officer in our armed forces and see themselves as a “sheep to be shepherded” by male “protectors.”  This is what the Air Force Academy is teaching.  Members who refuse to go along are threatened, attacks are reported.  We are told it is safer to announce you are a gay communist than to let fellow classmates know you are not an “Evangelical.”

The controversy over religion is mostly just a front.  The real issue is politics, not just any politics but extremist right wing politics and making sure that properly indoctrinated officers command our strategic nuclear forces.  Why to they want that?  We can’t say but were are certain that serving a “higher power” or protecting the United States from enemies, particularly “domestic,” is not on the agenda.

There have long been religious controversies in the military.  The Marine Corps is famous for attempting to build a religion out of tradition, alcohol and bar fights.  Evening prayers were simple:  “Goodnight Chesty Puller, wherever you are.”  Puller’s attempts to have beer vending machines put into barracks and whore houses opened on bases was resisted by Congress but not by many Marines.

There are clear constitutional prohibitions that make it illegal for the military to advocate any religion whatsoever.  Simply put, if it is unconstitutional, its unAmerican, you might just as well call it communist.  Disrespect for the constitution, the law of the land, is disrespect for the United States, the Founding Fathers and every American that has given their lives to keep America free.

These are the most basic tenets of American citizenship, the first things any child is taught and, not only that, violating these rights is not only unconstitutional, it is dishonorable, it involves violating an oath, it involves lying, it is a form of cheating and deception and it is also a crime.

Why does the Air Force believe it can act as though it is not only above the law, but frankly, not American at all?

The Air Force is at war, as is the United States.  In fact, 21% of those serving overseas are Air Force personnel.  However, some members of the Air Force feel that, for some reason, they should follow different laws than the rest of the military services.  First, a reminder to the Air Force.  Those other services, in particular, the Army and Marines, are the “tip of the spear” in our current wars.

21% of those in the war zone suffered only 1% of casualties.  The Marine Corps has only 10% of those in the war zone but suffered 24% of the casualties.  Army casualties are similar.

A reality check for those who demand special treatment outside the laws of the United States:  A Marine is 48 times more likely to be killed or wounded in Iraq or Afghanistan than a member of the Air Force.

48 to 1

Were the numbers the other way around and the Marines were asking for special dispensation from constitutional law, something they have never asked for, some could see why.  Do we want to bring up the fact that Army and Marine troops are regularly outnumbered in battle, often faced with nasty and even superior firepower?

For those of you in the Air Force Academy, the officers, the leadership, perhaps you should remember that the Air Force has not faced a combat challenge since Vietnam, 40 years ago.  Not one single officer at the Academy has faced a likelihood of those challenges that the Army and Marines see every day.

The actions of the Air Force, actions inconsistent with American values, are disrespectful to every American who has faced combat.

The shameful part of this is that the Air Force is an excellent organization, highly trained, highly professional and a vital part of the defense of the United States.  We cannot allow an organization like this to be shamed by a few bad apples.  We know that only a few dozen are responsible for this travesty, a few dozen that must be rooted out like the cancer they are.


Are we supposed to trust our safety and the welfare of the United States to people whose loyalties are to a religious sect that seeks a nuclear apocalypse?  When nuclear weapons disappeared at Minot Air Force Base, some of us began to ask some hard questions.  We began to wonder why there was no fighter response on 9/11. Any religious agenda that overrules an officer’s oath to the constitution will also overrule loyalty to the United States of America.  What is an officer to do, an officer trained, not trained by “brainwashed” to obey a “back woods preacher” and not his commander in chief when ordered to steal a nuclear weapon or fire an ICBM?

Anyone who doesn’t think that this is the risk, isn’t paying attention.

This is exactly what things are about.


Members of the military should be allowed to attend any religious services they wish or none at all.  This is the law.  However, this isn’t the problem, it isn’t about a religion or morality but rather about command authority.  The religious affiliations being foisted upon our officer candidates at the Air Force Academy directly contradict the nature and intent of military discipline, the system of honor at the Academy and the command structure that is represented in American law as expressed in the Constitution of the United States of America.

Article II, Section II of the Constitution states:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

No mention is made of a certain set of religious beliefs, rapture, biblical prophesy, socialism, homosexuality, prayer groups or nuclear apocalypse.   What is clear is that the group within the Air Force that is challenging the constitution is also directly tied to political movements inside the United States that are also challenging the authority of the President of the United States.  These aren’t “Evangelicals” at all but rather extremists.  Were one to survey, it would be easy to discover the truth:

Leadership within the Air Force Academy that advocates “Evangelicalism” by force also espouse political beliefs inconsistent with the “good order and discipline” of the military services of the United States, beliefs, some privately expressed, some publicly, that make honorable service impossible.  Thus, such individuals are serving with intent to deceive.

One reason for rules is simple, national security.  It should never be an issue for someone in the military as to whether they serve “g-d or country.”  They had always been one in the same, they had been until members of the Air Force took it upon themselves to define who g-d is.  The g-d at the Air Force Academy is clearly a creation of man and man alone.

It isn’t just that the Academy has taken upon itself to teach candidates that they have a higher duty than to their country.  They have gone further, so much further than that.  They have created their own religion and used their positions of trust and authority given them by the people of the United States to anoint themselves prophets. 

I am not sure any of us are safe when the most hideous weapons known to man are in the hands of, well, is there a reason we can’t call them “fanatics?”

Posted in USAComments Off on G-D’S LITTLE AIR FORCE


Sep 30, 2010

 Gestapo soldier holds a tear gas canister during a demonstration by Palestinian and foreign activists.

Locals in an Zionist-occupied neighborhood find traces of banned weaponry, used by Zio=Nazi forces in their crackdown on a recent wave of protests.The Silwan neighborhood of East al-Quds (Jerusalem) has been swept with outrage at a curfew imposed following the troops’ killing of two Palestinians on September 22, the Palestinian Ma’an news agency reported. The order prevented movement between al-Quds’ neighborhoods.

The area of the clashes was scattered after the suppression with expired and oxidized tear gas canisters.

Medical staff said those injured in the incidents displayed signs of poisoning. Residents, meanwhile, reported an increase in the symptoms of fatigue, high fever, vomiting and shortness of breath.

A 14-month-old infant has also died due to its inhalation of tear gas fired by Zio=Nazi forces, confronting the protests in East al-Quds that followed the recent killings.

A preliminary probe has been launched into the use of the weapons, while further investigation is planned.


Related Stories:

Posted in Middle EastComments Off on NAZI’S USED BANNED ARMS IN CRACKDOWN




September 30, 2010

by Gordon Duff  


By Gordon Duff STAFF WRITER/Senior Editor

Both elements of “Al Qaeda” along with its clear history as a CIA established organization make every mention of it suspicious.  Whenever there is a need for a “wag the dog”news story, “Al Qaeda” is dragged out as the whipping boy.  Never has any organization, one as mysterious and insubstantial as this one, whose supposed leader, Osama bin Laden,  has not only been dead for years but when he was alive, not only worked directly for the CIA but comes from a family directly tied to, not only the Bush family, but, in fact, close friends and business partners for decades at every level.

Since the end of the Second World War, national intelligence organizations have gained direct control over almost every non-governmental entity working for political and social change.  We aren’t just talking about trade unions and political parties.  We are talking revolutionary groups and, in particular, terrorist organizations.  Israel alone has an estimated 300 agents among the top leadership of Muslim organizations, be they the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Hizbollah or Al Qaeda.  When arrests are made or we see drone strikes or even assassinations, are they meant to destroy capabilities or are they simply helping an intelligence organization consolidate control over an operational asset, one used to manipulate world events to serve an agenda.

We know for certain that the latter is the case.

We are now told the CIA has saved American tourists in Europe from being kidnapped, dragged off the Eiffel Tower, bludgeoned at the Tower of London or lassoed at the Louvre.  This isn’t July.  America is in the middle of a depression, kids are back in school, finding an American tourist in Europe would take some work, even for CIA trained terrorists that make up Al Qaeda.  The story would have almost passed muster if it didn’t carry the embellishment of mysterious training camps and personal directions from Osama bin Laden.

This is just another scary story to go out on internet news letters filled with conspiracy tales about Obama the Muslim-Socialist from Kenya.   These are the “good conspiracies,” the ones that frighten, confuse, anger, blind and keep the public from looking “behind the curtain.”

Many experts contend that Al Qaeda is a construct made up for the news, for duping the President, not all that hard according to Bob Woodward, or the fools in congress.   Never has an organization been as ethereal or as timely.

Both elements of “Al Qaeda” along with its clear history as a CIA established organization make every mention of it suspicious.  Whenever there is a need for a “wag the dog”news story, “Al Qaeda” is dragged out as the whipping boy.  Never has any organization, one as mysterious and insubstantial as this one whose supposed leader, Osama bin Laden,  has not only been dead for years but when he was alive, not only worked directly for the CIA but comes from a family directly tied to, not only the Bush family, but, in fact, close friends and business partners for decades at every level.

If we can’t make a decent enemy out of Iran or North Korea, then we can always reinvent Al Qaeda and keep reinventing it, moving it to any part of the world that needs destabilization to promote the interests of powerful multi-national corporations or Israel.  Our current scare, a “pre-election special,”  is based on, we are told, stories received from an “informant” held by the CIA, the same CIA whose “reliable informants” sent 5,000 Americans to their death in Iraq looking for non-existent weapons of mass destruction.

We are told all this information comes from a source being held at the infamous Bagram detention center, a “source” claiming that groups trained in Waziristan under the direct supervision of Osama bin Laden are now all over Europe, top quality passports, probably made in Israel, hunting down Americans.  I don’t buy a word of it.  When CIA Director Leon Panetta said nobody had heard from bin Laden since 2001, do you think he was trying to make a point?  Won’t anyone come out and say it, bin Laden has been dead for nearly a decade.  Why don’t we admit it, keeping the ghost of Osama bin Laden alive is now seen as saving a valuable franchise, in effect, a license to lie, steal and kill.

Even when he was alive, bin Laden worked for the CIA.  He always worked for the CIA, and we are told continually, “Nobody ever quits the CIA.”  We can prove, beyond a doubt, that bin Laden was a major CIA asset in Afghanistan.  What we can’t prove is that he ever quit.  Did he go to work for Israel instead? 

This idea of terrorist training camps is also a crock.  Please, load me on a plane, get me a Pakistan visa ( I have one) and fly me into Lahore.  3 ISI agents will follow me out of the airport, one will be driving my cab.

“Hey, this isn’t the way to Waziristan!”

“Please take me to Waziristan, either north or south, I don’t care which, just get me to the nearest terrorist training camp as quickly as possible.  See if you can lose the guy following us, yes, the one on the motorbike with the AK-47.  No, the other one on the motorbike with the AK-47, the guy with the blue T-shirt. No, the dark blue shirt, plus, that guy has an MP 5 sub-machine gun and, anyway, I think that one is a girl.”

Driving in Lahore is alot like Detroit.

We aren’t saying there aren’t terrorists.  In fact, there are more terrorists today than ever before, the United States has been running a huge recruiting campaign for terrorists.  Not only do our wars recruit terrorists but our Predator attacks that have killed so many innocent civilians are bringing more and more onboard.  Even more successful is our campaign of wanton slaughter of civilians by death squads, referred to lovingly by the American press as “killing for sport.”  This recruits terrorists.


This is the conventional cover story:  Saudi Arabia gives millions of dollars to extremist Mullahs.  Poor children, boys only, go to these schools, memorize the Koran and bang their heads on the ground all day.  Upon graduation, each student is either given a suicide vest or sent to America to learn to fly aircraft into buildings.

Poor and semi-illiterate children aren’t very “telegenic,” however.  So, when television has to depict terrorists, it picks dark skinned “bad boys” who are both threatening but somehow compelling.  Most TV terrorists have one thing in common.  They are Jews.  After all, these are highly valued roles, playing the “heavy.”  Thus, our “TV terrorists” are tall, well groomed, highly educated, expensively dressed, have the best cars, stay in the best hotels, eat in the best restaurants.

Where do I sign up?

Who are the “real” terrorists then?  They are all educated, speak several languages, fly “first class” only and bounce around the planet like “jet setters.”  Funny thing is, we never find out who pays the bills, helps them through airports, sponsors and co-signs their visa applications, helps them rent apartments.

“What we do know is that none of them come from the primitive border regions of Af-Pak, where America, NATO, Pakistan and dozens of agencies, mercenary armies and assassination teams, not to mention scores of lethal drone aircraft, search day and night for, lets be honest, something that doesn’t exit and never has.”

The “terrorism franchise” driving, not only American TV, but British television as well, is far from entertainment.  Benny Hill is entertainment.  Dancing with the Stars is entertainment.  The tireless selling of terrorism, not only as a threat but, in view of the fact that these TV shows are all seen in the Islamic world as well, as an attractive alternative lifestyle, is both duplicitous and sinister. A few years ago, we learned how TV and movies influenced organized crime in the United States.

During a number of trials of organized crime figures in recent years, it was revealed that the Godfather films and others like them,  supplied the historical context used by real organized crime to establish a distinctive group identity.  Without the movies, they said they wouldn’t know how to talk like gangster, how to stage “hits” (assassinations)  or hold initiation ceremonies.  The movies told them how to organize on the basis of ancient Roman traditions. Problem is, the things they learned were fiction.  The “Mafia” as seen on television never existed and the Italian based crime organizations established to mirror fiction could very well be considered a “construct” of the entertainment industry.

Well, the exact same thing is true for terrorists.  They learn how to dress and act, how to pick out targets, even how to evade authorities from watching TV.

It is probably true that, without American television, most “terrorists” would never have imagined a career in that kind of thing.  After all, it isn’t the first thing that pops into mind after getting a degree from a university.


We aren’t talking training.  There hasn’t been a credible terrorist attack that doesn’t have the signature of an intelligence agency on it in years.  Even the “Crotch Bomber” and the “Time Square Fizzler” had clear trails, perhaps dual trails, showing them to be “terrorists” but also showing the magic hand of fate, passing through airports, doors mysteriously opening for them, helping hands everywhere.  There are even doubts about Dr. Hassan,  the “Ft. Hood killer.”  When his name was found on the “premium” guest list at a security conference for Bush officials we wondered.  When we contacted the conference and got a lame cover story and then watched the whole thing disappear as though it never happened, as is so often the case, we may have found another “hybrid.”

In a world “gone mad” with security protocols making travel a near impossibility, the only group of people capable of getting anywhere anymore are terrorists.  Is there, perhaps, a special passport they are given, like diplomatic passports but better?  Who has that kind of power?  Does a country that does things like this come to mind?


The concept of “privatization” is a recent one for terrorists.  Traditionally, most terrorist organizations were organized and financed as part of Cold War initiatives, either under the guise of anti-colonialism or, as with the establishment of the State of Israel, ethnic cleansing.  Little or nothing is allowed to be taught about the Zionist movement and its allegiances to Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Russia or the infiltration of the corridors of power and finance in London or Washington.  Zionism would be the “third movement,” neither purely communist nor capitalist but both ethnocentric and predatory but largely economic in nature.   Much less is taught about the roots of Israel and the terror war waged against, not only the residents of Palestine but the British administrative forces in the region as well.  Even less is discussed about the efforts to force Jews to relocate to Palestine and how “doors were closed,” not by anti-Semites but Zionists themselves.

In fact, Jews killing other Jews, directly or indirectly, in order to push for the establishment of Israel is one of the best kept secrets of the 20th century.


The period of the Cold War, typically 1947 through 1990, is described by most scholars as one during which there were three power bases, the “communist” East, the “capitalist” West and the non-aligned nations.  East and West were seen in a half-century struggle over the ‘hearts and minds” of the former colonial world, Africa, Latin and Central America, the Middle East and Asia, particularly Southeast Asia.

There was a special group of powers seen as both aligned and “non-aligned.”  These were spoken of as “surrogates” or “puppets” or even “rogue states.”  They were Israel, Iraq, Iran, South Africa, North Korea, Libya, Cuba, East Germany, Turkey, Taiwan, Rhodesia, Czechoslovakia and South Africa.  Another of the “great secrets” of the 20th century is that these nations often operated in unison, sharing intelligence services, weapons, jointly spying on the United States in particular, and, in general, making up a real “axis of evil” in much the vein spoken of by Presidents Ronald Reagan and George “W” Bush.

Working closely with them were “off center” groups within the intelligence agencies of the United States, Britain, the Soviet Union, Pakistan, India and others.  Helping facilitate the relationships between these nations, the “off center” intelligence groups and a myriad of customers, terrorist groups, revolutionaries and criminal organizations were the arms dealers, including Bush family members, Saudis, Israelis, Rhodesians, South Africans and hundreds of others from around the world including international bankers, diplomats and UN officials.

Osama bin Laden came from this shadowy world.  200 more names could be put behind his, constituting some of the most dangerous people in the world.  Most are still around, many are still active, still in business and growing richer every day.  When a powerful United States Senator vacations on a yacht in the Mediterranean, his host is likely to be one of these 200.  When that same Senator visits a head of state, chances are, the message he is carrying is not an American one, but from his vacation host.  It isn’t just “senators” and it isn’t just one.  These “merchants of death” control more political leaders than any other group, any lobby, even more than the State of Israel, although, and this is no secret, a significant number of these “merchants of death” are Israelis.

Their trade, bio weapons, nuclear centrifuges, German submarines, American cluster-bombs, anthrax, land mines, missiles of all kinds, shapes and sizes, is a 300 billion dollar industry, working hand in hand with global espionage and drug rings, money launderers, “military contracting” companies and, oh yes, the oil industry.

Welcome to reality as it exists, not “TV” reality but one that explains the real world. 

These three great powers, two representing opposing power blocs and the third financing both sides and playing one against the other, all used terrorism extensively around the world to support their aims.  Any populist leader or agrarian reformer would quickly find himself inundated with offers of weapons and training.  Some became dictators and potentates while others strayed and became “axis of evil” cartoon bandits.  All, at one time, served the West, the East, Zionism or all three.

Let’s look at a few names:  Castro, Chavez, bin Laden, Marcos, the Shah, Noriega, Sukarno, Saddam, Karzai, Pinochet, Duvalier, Diem, Ho Chi Minh, Chaing Kai Chek, Pol Pot, Robert Mogabe, Idi Amin, Franco, Suharto, Somoza, Trujillo, Mobutu.

This is the top of a list of those who rose to power, some at the behest of the West, some the East, many both, more than a few financially entangled with our Israeli friends and the mechanisms for generating a control far more pervasive than simple politics or economics through sovereign debt manipulation.  When you add another hundred names to the list, not just the warlords and dictators but the “liberation movements” that have been infiltrated with cash or taken over through “surgery,” assassinations and manipulation, you can develop a clear picture of how revolution, dissent and terrorism are used to support oligarchical agendas.

What is the “oligarchical agenda?”

Oligarchy is about control, about ignorance and about power through centralized wealth through distribution of, not wealth but debt. 

Were they hypotheses presented here to be valid, there would have to be a consensus as to whether a historical model of the past 50 years is described, one that seems to fit.  Are people getting poorer, less powerful and is the world increasingly controlled by unseen and unexplained forces capable of creating conflict at will and successfully hiding who they are?  Are we continually bombarded with opposing “conspiracy theory” and yet find the “world view” we are presented, the “official and certified” version,  as unsatisfying  and unable to describe the world convincingly?

Posted in PoliticsComments Off on MERCHANTS OF DEATH



Australia may have followed Julian Assange into the toilet

30 Sep 2010

Exposing state crimes in the “war on terror” comes with a price. And don’t expect governments to protect you:

Australian spy agencies may have monitored the WikiLeaks spokesman Julian Assange, and the Attorney-General would welcome prosecution of the group’s members if offences could be proved.

The new claims come less than three weeks before the expected publication by WikiLeaks of another tranche of secret US government documents, this time about the war in Iraq. It is expected to contain four times as many documents as the Afghan logs published two months ago by the website.

Speaking at the launch of an international cyber security exercise, the Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, expressed disapproval of WikiLeaks’s publication in July of tens of thousands of secret US documents relating to the war in Afghanistan. He said the publication, of 77,000 documents, had put lives at risk and criticised WikiLeaks for making such a decision ”from the comfort of an office”.

”Anything that puts those people – who are serving their country and protecting our security – at risk is entirely reprehensible, whether it’s done for notoriety or whether it’s done for commercial interests,” Mr McClelland said.

He would not comment on allegations by a WikiLeaks insider that Australian intelligence agencies had been monitoring Mr Assange while he was in Australia, or that they shared intelligence about him with agencies from the US, Britain and Sweden.

”It’s not the sort of thing that I would comment on, but … we do co-operate in respect to a number of matters internationally,” he said.


New Greens MP; sustainability doesn’t mean just selling more coal to whores

30 Sep 2010

The first Australian Green in the House of Representatives, Adam Bandt, gave his first speech in Parliament yesterday.

It’s a moving affair with many highlights but this struck me:

A sustainable future means rethinking our infrastructure priorities, industry policy and the regulation of energy supply. Maybe its something in the water in the electorate of Melbourne that makes its Member think about revenue and finance, but urgently in need of review is the allocation of public spending: every dollar that goes to backing losers in the fossil fuel industry is a dollar that isn’t creating a clean energy future. The former member for this electorate, Lindsay Tanner, also said that he thought a key question for us is ‘what will Australia sell the world in 15 years time’? A good question, but on current policy settings, it seems the answer is coal, with us on track to overtake Saudi Arabia as the world’s largest carbon exporter in the next 15 years. This is not global leadership on climate, but failure.


Hello my name is Barack and please don’t hate me for begging Israel on a daily basis

30 Sep 2010

So, two years into the Obama administration and America is again rightly viewed as hopelessly compromised in the Middle East and a backer of Israeli apartheid, repression across the region, occupations etc etc:

Approval of U.S. leadership is now similar or lower than what it was in 2008 in several of the Middle East and North African countries Gallup surveyed in 2010, erasing gains seen after the transition from the Bush administration to the Obama administration. Egypt, Syria, and Algeria are the exceptions, though in all cases approval remains relatively low.

Approval is down significantly in 2010 compared with 2009 in 6 of the 10 countries and areas surveyed both years. Egypt, where President Barack Obama gave a 2009 speech reaching out to the Muslim global community, led these declines and Morocco and Algeria also saw double-digit drops. Approval did not decline significantly in Iraq, Yemen, or Syria as the changes are within the margin of error.

Approval of U.S. leadership is highest in Algeria, Iraq, and Libya, although only a minority expresses approval. Approval ratings are among the lowest in the Palestinian Territories, Syria, and Tunisia. In the Palestinian Territories, the increase in approval between 2008 and 2009 was short-lived and approval returned to its 2008 level in 2010 as the Mideast peace process sputtered. It will be interesting to see if approval changes now that peace talks have started again. Approval in Tunisia is now lower than it was in 2009.

While America is increasingly loathed, they’re going bankrupt supporting wars that are leading nowhere except more extremism. It’s as if Washington’s blinkers are permanently parked on the tone-deaf setting, but of course the country doesn’t know any other reality:

The authors of the book “The $3 Trillion War” noted in a conference call on Wednesday that when they first released their findings two years ago, the estimates were widely criticized as being too high. Now, the researchers believe they may have been too low.

Joseph Stiglitz, who received the 2000 Nobel Prize for Economics, and Linda Bilmes, a public policy professor at Harvard University, said the number of veterans seeking post-combat medical care and the cost of treating those individuals is about 30 percent higher than they initially estimated. That, combined with increases in the cost of military medical care and the lagging economy, will likely push the true long-term cost of the war over the $4 trillion mark.

“This may be more of a crisis than the Medicare and Social Security problems we have looming,” said House Veterans Affairs Chairman Bob Filner, D-Calif. “It rivals both in the potential impact. This is another entitlement we’ve committed ourselves to, and it could break the bank.”

In a conference call with reporters, Bilmes said about 600,000 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans have already sought medical treatment from the Department of Veterans Affairs, and 500,000 have applied for disability benefits. That’s about 30 percent higher than initial estimates for care, and could cost the department nearly $1 trillion in costs for  the current wars alone.


Yes, Rupert, progressives are destroying the world so save us!

30 Sep 2010

Andrew Sullivan dissects in a thankless task the profound dishonesty, simplicity and lying of Fox News:


Disaster capitalism envelops us all

30 Sep 2010

My following article appears in the Sydney Morning Herald today:

Last year’s cessation of hostilities between the Sri Lankan government and the Tamil Tigers, after up to 40,000 Tamil civilians were murdered in the last months of the conflict, has heralded a Beijing-led invasion of the island.

The authoritarian Rajapaksa regime was assisted by Chinese weapons and intelligence in its defeat of the Tigers and now China is investing to reap the rewards. Kidnappings and extrajudicial killings in Sri Lanka are irrelevant in the pursuit of regional dominance.

Billions of dollars are being spent to build ports, infrastructure and roads in a country trying to recover from three decades of war, despite reconciliation largely absent from public debate. Referring to China, the Sri Lankan Defence Secretary, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, has said: “We have understood who is important to us.”

The economy is in such poor shape that its leaders are seemingly happy to auction assets, land and influence to friendly countries and corporations.

After the 2004 tsunami, Western multinationals flooded the country to capitalise on Colombo’s willingness to sell off its forests, water and beaches to the highest bidder. “A second tsunami of corporate globalisation,” said Herman Kumara, the head of Sri Lanka’s National Fisheries Solidarity Movement.

China has filled this role, extending the hand of unlimited finances, military hardware and diplomatic cover.

The concept of disaster capitalism, articulated in Naomi Klein’s best-seller The Shock Doctrine, revolves around “orchestrated raids on the public sphere in the wake of catastrophic events”, real or man-made, “combined with the treatment of disasters as exciting market opportunities”. But the definition of “disaster” is deliberately vague, allowing anything from post-conflict zones to water scarcity to be defined as needing corporate intervention. Profit is the motive and human rights an inconvenience. An ironfisted leadership is helpful but not essential to maximise financial return.

Think Iraq since 2003 and the price-gouging by the company Halliburton, or Haiti after the earthquake; latest reports claim the removal of countless refugees from desolate camps to make way for “industrial work zones”.

In Australia, the British firm Serco runs expanding detention centres, despite allegations of asylum-seeker abuse in its facilities. Even the ownership by French firm Veolia of some of Australia’s waste management, water treatment and desalination plants ignores the company’s building of a light-rail network through occupied Jerusalem and illegal settlements in the Palestinian West Bank.

The belief in privatisation and deregulation is shared by the major parties in most Western democracies. We constantly hear the language of “efficiency”, “better services” and “cost-savings”.

Overseas examples don’t offer much comfort. An April report released by the Australian Services Union revealed that, “the French private water companies [Veolia and Suez] have a large chunk of state ownership and they privatise other public water services while their own state ownership protects them from foreign takeovers in France”.

Downsizing the public sector is framed as the inevitable price of progress. We have seen privatisation by stealth, the purchase and management of key resources and infrastructure by local and foreign corporations with little accountability or discussion. Neo-liberal theories have become doctrine.

Sydney Chamber of Commerce said in 2008 that “there’s a raft of state government assets … that, arguably, have no reason to be in government hands”. The group argued that in a “weaker economic environment” there must be “efficiencies” found.

In these cases, the “disaster” is the gradual lack of public funds for infrastructure and willingness of corporations to step in. But there is no public debate over this and the public backlash over electricity and ferry privatisation indicates fierce resistance.

The recent financial collapse of public-private partnerships, especially road and tunnel projects, is a warning sign that business as usual is not delivering the best services to society.

An economist, Steve Keen, argues that the largely bipartisan political and media backing of privatisation is reminiscent of religious fundamentalism, with no analysis of the costs.

Take military outsourcing. ABC Online recently reported that the Australian government had hired Chilean mercenaries to guard its Baghdad embassy despite serious concerns over the conditions and behaviour of the hired men. The foreign affairs department defended the move but it simply justified the continued use of private militias hired by Western governments in places such as Afghanistan and Iraq.

I have spoken to security sources that confirm the defence force’s willingness to outsource key tasks in current and future deployments.

There is no discussion in Australia about the massive expansion of mercenaries since September 11, 2001, including by Australians, and the lack of transparency of outsourcing vital services to the private sector. The Washington Post reported recently there were nearly a million contractors in America working in intelligence and counterterrorism.

The reporting group ProPublica says this year was the first time that more contractors than soldiers were killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, as governments rely increasingly on faceless corporations to fight their battles. The Nation’s Jeremy Scahill revealed allegations that Blackwater agents in Iraq fired indiscriminately into Iraqi homes while they were high on cocaine and steroids. Welcome to a rebranded, privately run occupation.

The unquestioning devotion to disaster capitalism and privatisation revolves around a belief in the market’s wonders. But what if a heart and soul is missing in the negotiation room?

Antony Loewenstein is a journalist, author of My Israel Question and The Blogging Revolution and is working on a book about privatisation.


Mearsheimer/Walt enter the best-seller list via Franzen

30 Sep 2010

Great post by MJ Rosenberg on Jonathan Franzen’s new best-seller Freedom and its deep message about the Zionist lobby:

I just want to comment on a minor stream that runs through the book: it is that neo-conservatives are loathsome, that they joined up with war profiteers to get us into Iraq, and that they were motivated by a combination of pro-Israel zeal, profits, and the belief that we must Americanize the Middle East. One character, who I think is modeled on Norman Podhoretz, gets to pronounce the neocon philosophy at a Thanksgiving dinner (basically a thanks giving for the blessing of the Iraq war).

Before the crazies say it, I want to add that Franzen is by no means anti-Jewish, just anti-neocon. In fact, there is an ultra-Orthodox family in the book, whose dream is to live in the West Bank, who are lovely people — just a little muddled.

So why is this significant? It is significant because this book is so huge (about as big as any work of fiction can be in this country) and that it’s “oh-by-the-way” incorporation of the Walt-Mearsheimer thesis demonstrates that the two professors have won. Nobody much argues about the role of the neocons in promoting Middle East wars.


Whatever you do, don’t allow Cuba use its own resources

30 Sep 2010

The New York Times:

“This isn’t about ideology. It’s about oil spills,” said Lee Hunt, president of the International Association of Drilling Contractors, a trade group that is trying to broaden bilateral contacts to promote drilling safety. “Political attitudes have to change in order to protect the gulf.”

Yes, muscling in on potentially massive reserves of oil near the Cuban coast has nothing to do with greed.


The Zionist lobby sure doesn’t have much appeal anymore with the yoof

30 Sep 2010

The American Jewish student community is increasingly vocal against Israeli crimes and BDS is their justified weapon:

“We are not willing to have our money spent on manufacturing cluster bombs or any ingredients that violate the rights of the people of Palestine. Or any people,” explained Matan Cohen, an Israeli student at Hampshire College and a member of Jewish Voices for Peace (JVP), a grassroots BDS organization active at several colleges.


The modern slave trade for our culinary enjoyment

30 Sep 2010

Do you know where your meal comes from?

Shocking evidence of conditions akin to slavery on trawlers that provide fish for European dinner tables has been found in an investigation off the coast of west Africa.

Forced labour and human rights abuses involving African crews have been uncovered on trawlers fishing illegally for the European market by investigators for an environmental campaign group.

The Environmental Justice Foundation found conditions on board including incarceration, violence, withholding of pay, confiscation of documents, confinement on board for months or even years, and lack of clean water.

The EJF found hi-tech vessels operating without appropriate licences in fishing exclusion zones off the coast of Sierra Leone and Guinea over the last four years. The ships involved all carried EU numbers, indicating that they were licensed to import to Europe having theoretically passed strict hygiene standards.


How to receive a White House pat on the head

29 Sep 2010

Here’s a lesson for progressive and Leftist writers and bloggers. If you want White House approval (God knows why you would, if independence is valued) then don’t be too critical, praise the wonders of Barack Obama and bask in the glow:

The vice president told Democrats to “stop whining.” The president told them to “buck up.” And neither seemed to leave any doubt in separate interviews this week that press secretary Robert Gibbs’s exasperation over the summer with the “professional left” was the official view of the White House.Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow or one of the folks who helps to keep our government honest and pushes and prods to make sure that folks are true to progressive values, then [the president] thinks that those folks provide an invaluable service,” Burton told reporters.

But who, exactly, makes up this “professional left” that is so bothering President Barack Obama and his advisers? On Tuesday, Gibbs’s deputy, Bill Burton, made it clear that the occasionally critical cable personalities originally associated with this comment have the administration’s blessing.

“If you’re on the left, if you’re somebody like

Noticeably absent from Burton’s embrace was anyone from the blogosphere once courted so avidly by the White House. Peter Daou thinks he knows why:

“With each passing day, I’m beginning to realize that the crux of the problem for Obama is a handful of prominent progressive bloggers, among them Glenn Greenwald, John Aravosis, Digby, Marcy Wheeler and Jane Hamsher.”

Posted in Middle EastComments Off on A.LOEWENSTEIN ONLINE NEWSLETTER



The Guardian,

30 September 2010

[from Letters]

• Mordechai Vanunu has been held in Israel, in and out of prison, for 24 years. Since his release from Ashkelon prison in 2004, where he spent 18 years, over 11 of them in solitary confinement, he has been subjected to repressive restrictions and constant harassment and numerous arrests. Despite this ongoing, oppressive treatment Mordechai has remained resilient and determined to survive.

Now, as an example of his courage and resolve, he wants to mark the date of his brutal kidnapping by Mossad agents, from Rome, exactly 24 years ago today. Mordechai is asking all his sympathisers and supporters who are on Facebook to write on their pages as well as communicate worldwide a call for “Freedom for Vanunu, now”. Mordechai should be allowed to leave Israel as he wishes, and perhaps this appeal can help achieve his full freedom.

Ernest Rodker


Posted in UKComments Off on LETTERS TO THE GUARDIAN



This is the following discussion on Abul’s Facebook site last week:

Abul ‘Abz’ Hussain feels like growing a moustache…hmmmm….



  • Abul ‘Abz’ Hussain I should have put u on that convoy to Gaza, could have traded the Jew with the Israelis to let the aid through, but then again they’d probably reject u as ur too much of a jew by their standards!

  • Silly kids messing around is one thing, but Abul Hussain is a national council member and policy maker for Respect, whose founding principles include anti-racism.

    Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

    Posted in UKComments Off on IS RESPECT PARTY RACIST & ANTI-SEMITIC ?



    Avigdor Lieberman takes settlement policy to its logical conclusion

    by Jesse Bacon


    Lost in the debate over the settlement phase is its real purpose, to claim

    Palestinian land for Israel. Even its hardcore defenders like Avigdor

    Lieberman, know there will come a time when that has reached its

    end, when all available Palestinian land has been taken, and all

    Palestinians capable of being forced to leave will have done so.

     What to do then? Well, then

     Israel will suddenly become interested in drawing borders after 60+ years resisting doing so.

    And apparently we are nearing that time. Fortunately, we are also

     nearing a time when Lieberman and company are revealed for

    what they are. Netanyahu has kept him under pretty tight leash

    after his appointment caused outrage around the world. But fresh

     off Israel’s triumphant avoidance of any punishment for allowing

     his fake settlement freeze to end, Netanyahu set Lieberman loose

     on the UN.

    He is apparently seeking international support for the idea that

    Israel has a right to suddenly declare some Palestinians no longer

     Israeli citizens, but citizens of another state without the messy

    process of moving them (though no doubt violence would result

     anyways.) I hope people would protest this just as they would if

    US suddenly declared its Latino citizens of Mexico, though I am

    sure some are in favor of that. And like most racists, Lieberman

     was at pains to stress how un-racist his desire to expel one national

     group without their consent was. 

    Hopefully, this is a sign that Israel recognizes it needs international

     legitimacy for its scheme in the wake of its badly damaged pr.

    Less hopefully, the world does not have a great record of taking actual

     action to withold that legitimacy in any meaningful. I fear this will

     become part of the consensus of “serious people” in the same way that

     “everybody knows” that Ariel will always be part of Israel. But hopefully

     again,  we have seen the power of international citizens led by Palestinians

      to challenge that consensus.

    PS. the article asked whether Lieberman was speaking for himself or

    the Israeli government. If it was the former, and random citizens of

    Israel are now permitted to address the United Nations, I hope the UN

     will give equal time for people calling for some sort of shared democratic

    state or full withdrawal to 1967 borders. If, as I suspect, it was the latter

    then I hope that Jewish groups who are always asking Palestinians to

    condemn other Palestinians are consistent in their treatment of Lieberman.

    More Recent Articles

    Avigdor Lieberman takes settlement policy to its logical conclusion


    Shoah’s pages