Archive | October 16th, 2014

‘Kill the Messenger’ Recalls a Reporter Wrongly Disgraced


Resurrecting a Disgraced Reporter

Jeremy Renner as the San Jose Mercury News reporter Gary Webb in “Kill the Messenger.”CreditChuck Zlotnick/Focus Features.

If someone told you today that there was strong evidence that the Central Intelligence Agency once turned a blind eye to accusations of drug dealing by operatives it worked with, it might ring some distant, skeptical bell. Did that really happen?

That really happened. As part of their insurgency against the Sandinista government in Nicaragua, some of the C.I.A.-backed contras made money through drug smuggling, transgressions noted in a little-noticed 1988 Senate subcommittee report.

Gary Webb, a journalist at The San Jose Mercury News, thought it was a far-fetched story to begin with, but in 1995 and 1996, he dug in and produced a deeply reported and deeply flawed three-part series called “Dark Alliance.”

That groundbreaking series was among the first to blow up on the nascent web, and he was initially celebrated, then investigated and finally discredited. Pushed out of journalism in disgrace, he committed suicide in 2004.Kill the Messenger,” a movie starring Jeremy Renner due Oct. 10, examines how much of the story he told was true and what happened after he wrote it. “Kill the Messenger” decidedly remains in Mr. Webb’s corner, perhaps because most of the rest of the world was against him while he was alive. Rival newspapers blew holes in his story, government officials derided him as a nut case and his own newspaper, after initially basking in the scoop, threw him under a bus. Mr. Webb was open to attack in part because of the lurid presentation of the story and his willingness to draw causality based on very thin sourcing and evidence. He wrote past what he knew, but the movie suggests that he told a truth others were unwilling to. Sometimes, when David takes on Goliath, David is the one who ends up getting defeated.

The real Gary Webb in 1997. He committed suicide in 2004. CreditRandy Pench

“There were flaws in his writing and flaws in his life,” Mr. Renner, who plays Webb in the film, said in a phone interview. “But that doesn’t mean he was wrong, and it certainly doesn’t mean he deserved what he got.”

The film argues that the same reflexes in the newspaper business that hold others to account can become just as merciless when the guns are pointed inside the corral. Big news organization like The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times and The Washington Post tore the arms and legs off his work. Despite suggestions that their zeal was driven by professional jealousy, some of the journalists who re-reported the story said they had little choice, given the deep flaws. Tim Golden in The New York Times and others wrote that Mr. Webb overestimated his subjects’ ties to the contras as well as the amount of drugs sold and money that actually went to finance the war in Nicaragua.

But Mr. Webb had many supporters who suggested that he was right in the main. In retrospect, his broader suggestion that the C.I.A. knew or should have known that some of its allies were accused of being in the drug business remains unchallenged. The government’s casting of a blind eye while also fighting a war on drugs remains a shadowy part of American history.

Mr. Webb eventually wrote his own book, “Dark Alliance: The C.I.A., The Contras and the Crack Cocaine Explosion,” and Nick Schou, a journalist who covered significant parts of Webb’s downfall, wrote “Kill the Messenger: How the C.I.A.’s Crack Cocaine Controversy Destroyed Journalist Gary Webb.” Both books deeply inform the movie, making the argument that journalism more or less ate itself while the government mostly skipped away with its secret doings intact.

Mr. Webb was a talented investigative reporter who concentrated on local corruption when he worked at The Cleveland Plain Dealer and then The San Jose Mercury News. When he was first approached about C.I.A. duplicity, he was deeply skeptical. But when the tipster, the girlfriend of a drug dealer on trial, said her boyfriend had ties to the C.I.A., she had enough evidence to convince him to read that 1988 report from a special Senate subcommittee documenting instances in which drug dealing by crucial allies, including some in Nicaragua, was tolerated in the name of national security. Major news outlets gave scant attention to the report.

Mr. Webb was not the first journalist to come across what seemed more like an airport thriller novel. Way back in December 1985, The Associated Press reported that three contra groups had “engaged in cocaine trafficking, in part to help finance their war against Nicaragua.” In 1986, The San Francisco Examiner ran a large exposé covering similar terrain. Again, major news outlets mostly gave the issue a pass.

It was only when Mr. Webb, writing 10 years later, tried to tie cocaine imports from people connected to the contras to the domestic crisis of crack cocaine in large cities, particularly Los Angeles, that the story took off. Mr. Webb zeroed in on “Freeway” Ricky Ross, a gang-affiliated drug boss in Los Angeles, who flooded streets with crack. He then drew a line from Mr. Ross to the C.I.A.-backed contras, writing, “The cash Ross paid for the cocaine, court records show, was then used to buy weapons and equipment for a guerrilla army named the Fuerza Democrática Nicaragüense,” or the FDN, one of several contra groups.

The headline, graphic and summary language of “Dark Alliance” was lurid and overheated, showing a photo of a crack-pipe smoker embedded in the seal of the C.I.A. The three-part series would, the summary promised, reveal, among other things, how “a drug network opened the first pipeline between Colombia’s cocaine cartels and the black neighborhoods of Los Angeles, a city now known as the ‘crack’ capital of the world.”

But if the series was oversold, it certainly delivered on the promise of what the web could do for journalism. A pioneering effort in transparency, the report was accompanied by a digital library of source documents, a timeline of events and a list of characters, among other web-only features that have now become commonplace. It was, by most accounts, the first newspaper series to go viral before there were even words to describe the phenomenon.

At first, major news outlets shrugged. But leaders of the drug-ridden communities did not, drawing a line that Mr. Webb had not by suggesting that the C.I.A. had deliberately set out to addict urban black populations.

Representative Maxine Waters, Democrat of California, led protests by the Congressional Black Caucus, and the comedian Dick Gregory was arrested after trying to put crime tape at the entrance to the C.I.A. headquarters.

But Mr. Webb’s victory lap was short lived, as other news organizations responded with significant stories, and his editors at The Mercury News backed away slowly, then all at once. The paper walked back the findings in a 1997 letter to readers signed by the executive editor at the time, Jerry Ceppos. “I feel that we did not have proof that top C.I.A. officials knew of the relationship” between members of a drug ring and contra leaders paid by the C.I.A., he wrote, adding that the series “erroneously implied” that the connection between Mr. Ross and Nicaraguan traffickers “was the pivotal force in the crack epidemic in the United States.”

In a phone call, Mr. Ceppos said good news organizations should hold themselves accountable to the same degree they do others.

“We re-reported the series, and I don’t know of too many publications that have done that,” he said. “We couldn’t support some of the statements that had been made. It was our re-reporting that influenced me the most.”

He added that he had no regrets about that open letter to Mercury readers.

“I would do exactly the same thing 18 years later that I did then, and that is to say that I think we overreached,” he said.

Peter Landesman, an investigative journalist who wrote the screenplay, was struck by the reflex to go after Mr. Webb.

“Planeloads of weapons were sent south from the U.S., and everyone knows that those planes didn’t come back empty, but the C.I.A. made sure that they never knew for sure what was in those planes,” he said. “But instead of going after that, they went after Webb, who didn’t really know what he had gotten into or where he was. The most surprising thing in doing the work to write this movie is how easy it was to destroy Gary Webb.”

Even at the time, some thought the backlash against Mr. Webb was misplaced.

Geneva Overholser, then the ombudsman of The Washington Post, wrote that the newspaper “showed more passion for sniffing out the flaws in San Jose’s answer than for sniffing out a better answer themselves.”

Mr. Golden, who had an extensive background covering the C.I.A. and Central America, said the hand that struck Mr. Webb was mostly his own.

“Webb made some big allegations that he didn’t back up, and then the story just exploded, especially in California,” he said in an email. “You can find some fault with the follow-up stories, but mostly what they did was to show what Webb got wrong.”

The director of “Kill the Messenger,” Michael Cuesta, has also directed several episodes of “Homeland” and knows the C.I.A. has many faces. He said he worked to shrink a sprawling story with global dimensions by showing how it landed on one man.

“There were many things that went wrong,” he added, “the packaging of the story, how it was received and grew, the fact that he was not backed up by his editors. But I was struck by the fact that journalism, which had been the source of his purpose, his bliss, turned on him. It’s tragic.”

While Mr. Webb died alone, after two self-inflicted gunshots, he lived long enough to know that he did not make the whole thing up.

In 1998, Frederick P. Hitz, the C.I.A. inspector general, testified before the House Intelligence Committee that after looking into the matter at length, he believed the C.I.A. was a bystander — or worse — in the war on drugs.

“Let me be frank about what we are finding,” he said. “There are instances where C.I.A. did not, in an expeditious or consistent fashion, cut off relationships with individuals supporting the contra program who were alleged to have engaged in drug-trafficking activity, or take action to resolve the allegations.”

However dark or extensive, the alliance Mr. Webb wrote about was a real one.

Posted in USAComments Off on ‘Kill the Messenger’ Recalls a Reporter Wrongly Disgraced

JERUSALEM عيوننا اليك ترحل كل يوم ” VIDEO”



Posted in Palestine AffairsComments Off on JERUSALEM عيوننا اليك ترحل كل يوم ” VIDEO”

Why Would Saudi Arabia Support the 9/11 Conspirators? Why Would the US Government Cover it Up?


Senator Bob Graham on Reality Asserts Itself (Part 3)

Former Senator Bob Graham, co-chair of the 2002 Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11, believes that the Saudi government “had a high and what has thus far turned out to be credible expectation that their role” in 9/11 “would not be exposed” by the U.S. government.

“Everything that the federal government has done since 9/11 has had as one of its outcomes, if not its objectives—and I believe it was both outcome and objective—that the Saudis’ role has been covered,” says Graham.

Senator Graham had talked to the other co-chair of the Congressional Joint Inquiry and the two chairs of the citizen’s 9/11 commission about the possibility of the 19 hijackers acting independently.

“All three of them used almost the same word—implausible—that it is implausible that that could have been the case. Yet that has now become the conventional wisdom to the aggressive exclusion of other alternatives,” says Graham.

Graham says it is also possible that the Saudis gave financial support for Osama bin Laden’s operations in order to stop him from launching a campaign of civil unrest within Saudi Arabia as retaliation for allowing U.S. troops to occupy a part of the country during the first Gulf War.

The Saudis’ “confidence in the fact the United States would not react, or that the United States would not go to the extremes that in fact it has to cover up their involvement, were sufficient to outweigh the reality that bin Laden had the capability and the will to topple the monarchy,” says Senator Graham.

TRNN Replay: Why Would Saudi Arabia Support the 9/11 Conspirators, Why Would the US<br />
Gov. Cover it Up? - Sen. Graham on Reality Asserts Itself pt3

PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome back to The Real News Network. I’m Paul Jay. And welcome back to Reality Asserts Itself with Senator Bob Graham.

Senator Graham was the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee. He was also the chair of the congressional joint committee into 9/11. And he held many other important positions on intelligence, and from 2010 to 2012 was on the CIA External Advisory Board.

Thanks for joining us again, Senator.

So we were talking off-camera. And I think we’re going to just pick up where we were, and then we’ll kind of get back to where I was headed in the interview.

But we were talking about the role of the media and how little and practically no discourse there is, debate, followup on issues raised by your commission and other books that have come out on the whole issue of the Saudi 9/11 commission. What do you make of that?

BOB GRAHAM, FMR U.S. SENATOR: It’s an enigma to me as to why something that is so important, not just to be sure we have a historical record right, but that justice is done–. One of the side consequences of this coverup of the Saudis is the 3,000 families and survivors of the victims of 9/11 have been trying to get justice in a federal court for their losses. And in each instance, they have been turned away under the shield of sovereign immunity. You cannot sue Saudi Arabia. And the United States government has gone into the courthouse on the side of the Saudis, not on the side of the U.S. citizens who have lost so grievously.

So this is an issue that is contemporary and has real impact and significance today. And why major U.S. media has not seen this as an issue worthy of in-depth investigation and dogged followthrough is an enigma to me.

JAY: Now, when the Saudis are asked about this issue, former head of Saudi intelligence Turki says that the Saudi intelligence actually tried to warn the Bush administration that an attack was coming. He said that they had been monitoring people in the United States and that they told the Bush administration that they had specific information that something was coming and they were ignored, that there seemed to be no interest on the part of the Bush administration in what they had to say.

GRAHAM: I’ve heard rumors of that. I have not personally confirmed that that is an accurate statement. But I wouldn’t be surprised. There was just sort of a general disbelief–I think the 9/11 Commission called it a lack of imagination–that something of this scale could occur in the United States, and therefore when people sounded alarms that it might in fact be on the verge of happening, they were largely ignored.

JAY: So when you say the Saudi state is involved in this, it’s somewhat contradictory if the head of intelligence is trying to warn the United States that it’s coming. I mean, do you see this as something that’s, you know, government policy, or individuals in the government were involved?

GRAHAM: It wouldn’t be government policy in the sense that someone would stand up in the State of the Union address and announce that we are going to have a policy of not following leads that suggest the United States may be in some immediate peril.

JAY: No. Back up. I’m talking about the Saudi policy. When you look at the Saudi role–and we’re certainly going to get to, actually, where you’re headed there, in terms of what we think was the U.S. government consciousness at the highest level on all of this, but right now I just wanted to ask, when you say this is the Saudi government involved, so is this Saudi government at the highest levels making Saudi government policy? Or these are individuals involved in the government and royal family that are doing something sort of on their own?

GRAHAM: The reality is that the line between what is private and what is public in a monarchy of the length and pervasive influence of the House of Saud in Saudi Arabia is ephemeral. And, in fact, in these cases where Americans have tried to sue entities, some of which are governmental, some of which are what we would call private sector–some are even charitable–because of their alleged involvement in 9/11, the same shield of sovereign immunity has been raised by the Saudi government to protect everything that is of a Saudi origin. So they by their actions have accepted the fact that this is a fully integrated country, and it is legally possible to say that everything that happens is an action of the government.

JAY: Now, we’re going to get into more detail later. And there’s much, much more detail in Senator Graham’s book Intelligence Matters about–you know, where his committee really traced the data points that connected Saudi government officials to the conspiracy. And we’ll get into it a little bit later. But I still want to talk a little bit more big picture.

Why would they? Assuming you’re right about the Saudis, what’s in it for them?

GRAHAM: Well, I wrote a novel called Keys to the Kingdom out of frustration that much of what I knew had occurred had not been made available to the American people, because every time it was suggested, it was immediately classified and rendered out-of-bounds. It was mentioned to me by another former high-ranking government official that he, facing the same frustration, had overcome it by writing exactly what he would have written in a nonfiction book, but put the word “novel” on it, and it got by the censors.

So in the novel I suggest some answers to that, and I don’t think they are farfetched or extreme. One of those is that we know that at the end of the first Gulf War, bin Laden was very angry at the royal family for having allowed U.S. troops, foreign troops of any nationality, to essentially occupy a portion of Saudi Arabia. He would–his anger was deepened by the fact that he had offered to become–come to the defense of the kingdom using several tens of thousands of war-hardened troops that had fought with him in Afghanistan against the Russians. That anger upset the royal family.

And so I project: what if bin Laden had said to the royal family, if you won’t deal forcefully with the Americans, we will do it, but we need your help in terms of being able to assist, support, maintain our operatives who are going to be in the United States, and if you refuse to give us that support, then I’m going to launch civil unrest inside the kingdom of Saudi Arabia and your monarchy will be under the same threat that the former Shah of Iran was when he was toppled from power?

JAY: Well, we know the Saudis took this threat pretty seriously, ’cause they actually made the American base move to Qatar.

GRAHAM: Yeah. And so I’m suggesting that something like that may have been the motivation, the excuse, the rationale that the Saudis look to to say, alright, we will in fact provide assistance to the 19 hijackers, or at least significant numbers of them, in order to avoid this credible threat of civil unrest.

JAY: But the Saudis are no fools. They have to know, whatever bin Laden might be able to throw at them, it’s nothing compared to what the United States could throw at Saudi Arabia if it came out that the Saudi were involved at a governmental level. It’s almost like they have to have known going in that this wasn’t going to happen.

GRAHAM: Well, would a country whose ambassador was so brazen as to go into the private quarters of the White House within hours after an attack in which 15 of his fellow countrymen had been in lead positions and almost demand that the president of the United States facilitate 144 additional Saudis being able to get out of the country, would a country that had that kind of attitude towards the willingness of the United States to stand up for its own interest and not be cowered into submission, would not they be likely to have had that attitude towards the United States and therefore felt it was a risk that they were prepared to take to–.

JAY: But doesn’t it lead you to think that they have good reason to think that they’re not going to be targeted? I mean, you know, instead of regime–being in Afghanistan, if this had come out, regime change would have been in Saudi Arabia.

GRAHAM: Their level of confidence in the fact the United States would not react or that the United States would not go to the extremes that in fact it has to cover up their involvement were sufficient to outweigh the reality that bin Laden had the capability and the will to topple the monarchy.

JAY: ‘Cause bin Laden has been quoted, assuming all this really is from bin Laden, that the plan was to suck the United States into a war in Afghanistan and, kind of Russian style, wear the United States out. And I think bin Laden apparently was a little disappointed that in fact the emphasis got moved to Iraq, ’cause they were hoping to tie American troops down in much bigger numbers. And it kind of worked out in the long run, in a sense, what they wanted, but not at the scale they wanted. They wanted a major presentation of U.S. troops in Afghanistan and to be there for decades and decades and bleed the American economy. The Saudis have to understand that’s his logic.

GRAHAM: Well, you know, we talk a lot about the intelligence capabilities of al-Qaeda. That’s one of the reasons that the NSA is engaged in a lot of its data mining and other high-tech intelligence gathering operations.

The fact is, I think that if bin Laden was operating from the premise that he could suck the United States into Afghanistan and, once there, they would be treated as the Russians had been treated, a war of attrition and finally submission, the fact is, if he thought that way, his intelligence wasn’t very good. The United States almost immediately instituted the single most effective aerial bombardment in the history of mankind in Afghanistan against troops and military installations. We were using–this was pre-drone–we were using traditional military aircraft with laser bombs, smart bombs, bombs that were able to get into places that previously had thought to be impregnable, and just devastated the Taliban’s military ability.

JAY: But let’s assume his intelligence was wrong–and I think it was, if that’s what he said afterwards. But if that’s what the plan was and the Saudis are in on this, then they have to do their own kind of math about where does all this lead. If this leads to–I mean, Saudis have to know the United States isn’t going to just sit there and do nothing. It’s going to come after–somebody’s going to pay for this. And if it isn’t going to be them, and they have confidence that their role in this is going to be hidden and covered up (and the evidence is, whether they were confident because they were told to be confident or not, their role was hidden; that much is a fact), then they start doing the math. And what I mean by math is they have to work out what the next steps and the consequences of this are. And either they share the belief that it’s going to be a tie-down in Afghanistan, or for some reason they’re also understanding that the real target’s going to be Iraq and they don’t mind.

GRAHAM: And therefore that they are immune, that the United States is going to take its vengeance out someplace else.

JAY: More or less on Saddam Hussein, yeah.

GRAHAM: Yeah. Well, I think, first, they had a high and what has thus far turned out to be credible expectation that their role would not be exposed. Everything that the federal government has done since 9/11 has had as one of its outcomes, if not its objectives–and I believe it was both outcome and objective–that the Saudis’ role has been covered. So they could be prepared to assess it was a greater risk that bin Laden would attack them than that the United States would attack them, and therefore they, the monarchy in Saudi Arabia, took actions that would avoid bin Laden with some sense of immunity from the possibility of the United States attacking them.

JAY: Is there a possibility they shared the objective of drawing the United States into a war, that it isn’t just out of fear of bin Laden that they share the agenda?

GRAHAM: Well, I don’t know what they would want to accomplish by encouraging the United States to go into a war other than a war against the place where the attack against the United States had been organized and emanating.

JAY: We know within days of the attack, even though there’s talk of what to do to Afghanistan, President Bush is already issuing instructions to get ready for a war with Iraq. If Prince Bandar is so close to President Bush that he sits in the living room–and I think it’s smoking cigars; I don’t know if he drank scotch or not. I don’t suppose he’s supposed to. But would he be unaware of that’s where this would all lead?

GRAHAM: You know, we are now–.

JAY: It’s speculation.

GRAHAM: We’re now into the outer ranges of speculation.

I believe what we do know or are capable of knowing is what was the full extent of the Saudi role. We know they were involved in San Diego, where, under people who were employees of the Saudi government, protection was given to two of the 19 hijackers.

There was a very suspicious case in Sarasota Florida where three of the pilots of the planes were doing their flight training and at the same time were closely connected to a family of Saudis, which in turn was close to the royal family. That has been another area that has been closely held and with–except the American people had been blocked from understanding what happened in that instance.

What we don’t know is what was going on in other places, like Falls Church, Virginia, places in New Jersey, other places in Florida, where there were substantial numbers of hijackers. Was a full investigation done to determine if they were receiving external support? And if so, why has this not been made available?

JAY: And your main point is that these 19 guys can’t do this without a support network, and you have evidence the support network was at least in part linked to the Saudi government.

GRAHAM: Yeah. And I might say, I have personally talked to the other cochair of the Congressional Joint Inquiry, a man who was a very distinguished congressman and, later, director of the CIA, I have talked to the two chairs of the citizens’ 9/11 Commission, asking them, what do you think were the prospects of these 19 people being able to plan, practice, and execute the complicated plot that was 9/11 without any external support? All three of them used almost the same word, implausible, that it is implausible that that could have been the case. Yet that has now become the conventional wisdom to the aggressive exclusion of other alternatives.

JAY: Well, in the next segment of our interview with Senator Graham, we’re going to look at the role of the Bush administration after 9/11 and before. In his book, Senator Graham calls the Bush administration’s hindrance of 9/11 investigation disgraceful. He goes on to write: orchestrated by the White House to protect not only the agencies that had failed, but also America’s relationship with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Posted in USA, Saudi ArabiaComments Off on Why Would Saudi Arabia Support the 9/11 Conspirators? Why Would the US Government Cover it Up?

Palestinian Man Killed During Hebron Ab-A$$ Mafia Raid, Youth Kidnapped by Israeli Forces near Bethlehem


Farmers detained near Jenin

Palestinian Authority security forces killed a 25-year-old man, early this morning, during a raid in the southern West Bank city of Hebron.


Security officials informed Ma’an News Agency that clashes broke out as PA forces attempted to arrest several wanted men who had been hiding south of Hebron, in Area C.

It remains unclear just what the men are accused of. However, they reportedly opened fire at security forces during the raid, injuring seven security personnel, including one who is now in critical condition.

PA forces responded with live fire, injuring one Bilal al-Rajabi, who later died in a hospital.

Security spokesperson Adnan al-Damiri told Ma’an that security forces arrested 21 wanted criminals in the Jabal Jawhar area, where they recovered several stolen vehicles.

PA security continues to work in close coordination with the Israel, despite fierce Palestinian resistance to the occupation.

Also in the occupied West Bank , on Thursday, the Israeli army abducted a Palestinian youth at an Israeli checkpoint near Bethlehem, according to reports by security sources.

They said that Israeli soldiers arrested 19-year-old Mohammad Fanoun who was traveling to Jerusalem through ‘checkpoint 300’, under the pretext of illegal entry to Israel.

Israeli authorities rarely issues entry permits for Palestinians, either for work or for prayers at al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, which provokes a large number to enter without permits.

Meanwhile, WAFA reports that Israeli soldiers broke through into an agricultural area near the village of Rummaneh, northwest of Jenin, where they detained a group of farmers and volunteers who were harvesting olive trees

The soldiers transferred them to the nearby Salim military complex, upon which the farmers were interrogated army officers before being released.

Posted in Palestine AffairsComments Off on Palestinian Man Killed During Hebron Ab-A$$ Mafia Raid, Youth Kidnapped by Israeli Forces near Bethlehem

What an appalling mess: He won £1m from taxpayers after being freed from Guantanamo. Now a terror trial against a Birmingham Muslim radical has collapsed after MI5 admitted links to him


Moazzam Begg

  • Moazzam Begg walked free from jail after terrorist charges were dropped 

  • Police and prosecutors received new evidence and dropped the case

  • MI5 revealed extensive contacts with Begg before and after his Syrian trips

  • He discussed his travel plans and said he was assisting opposition fighters

  • Begg was in custody for seven months awaiting trial, due to start Monday

  • He was held in Guantanamo in 2002, but released without charge in 2005

3 October 2014

Former Guantanamo Bay detainee Moazzam Begg walked free from jail on Wednesday after a string of terrorist charges linked to the civil war in Syria were dramatically dropped

Soon after the Gulf War ended Saddam Hussein’s tyranny, a secret memo about a dangerous British prisoner held in Guantanamo Bay detention camp was sent to America’s military top brass.

It landed on the desks of officers at the U.S. Defence Department in Miami in November 2003 and was signed by Geoffrey D. Miller, the commander of the camp in Cuba, which was notorious for incarcerating suspected Islamic terrorists from all over the world without trial.

The memo said that prisoner UK-000558 (a number tag detailing his country of origin) had been picked up by American secret services during a raid at his rented family home in Pakistan, before being transferred to Guantanamo Bay for interrogation.

He was, asserted Major General Miller, a member of Al Qaeda, a ‘high threat’ to America and her Allies, and should not be set free. The prisoner’s detailed knowledge about terrorist training camps he had attended in Afghanistan and Pakistan during the 1990s meant he was also of ‘significant intelligence value’ to the West.

We only know about this highly confidential memo because it emerged among 779 military intelligence files relating to Guantanamo prisoners discovered and posted online by Wikileaks three years ago.

Prisoner UK-000558 was actually Birmingham-born Moazzam Begg, who was held in Guantanamo after being arrested in Pakistan in February 2002.

He was released in 2005 without charge, along with three other remaining Britons in the detention camp, following ‘intensive and complex’ negotiations between the British and U.S. governments.

On his return to this country, he became a passionate campaigner on behalf of Guantanamo prisoners, a vocal critic of Western foreign policy in the Middle East, and a hero to thousands of followers.

Fast forward almost a decade to this week and Begg was, once again, emerging smiling from jail.

This time, it was from London’s Belmarsh Prison after a terrorism case against him — due to begin at the Old Bailey next Monday — was abandoned by police and the Crown Prosecution Service.

Begg was held in Guantanamo after being arrested in Pakistan in February 2002, but was released without charge in 2005, along with three other remaining Britons in the detention camp

Begg was held in Guantanamo after being arrested in Pakistan in February 2002, but was released without charge in 2005, along with three other remaining Britons in the detention camp

He denied seven charges of terrorism, including attending a training camp in Syria between 2012 and 2013

He denied seven charges of terrorism, including attending a training camp in Syria between 2012 and 2013

This time he had been charged — on seven counts related to terrorism, all of which he denied, including attending a terrorist training camp in Syria between 2012 and 2013, possessing terrorist-related documents and helping to fund terrorism.

Then, astonishingly, the case was suddenly dropped at a pre-trial hearing on Wednesday.

In one of the most embarrassing fiascos for the security services in recent years, at the last minute ‘new information’ fatally undermined the prospect of a successful outcome of the trial for the police and the CPS.

It appears that MI5 belatedly produced documents that revealed their extensive conta-cts with Begg before and after trips he made to Syria in recent years.
They included  minutes of  meetings that MI5  officers and  lawyers held with him at which he discussed his travel plans and said he was assisting opposition fighters in their war against President Assad's regime.

The farcical collapse of the case as he watched via a video link from Belmarsh, where he has been incarcerated for the past seven months, took even the heavily-bearded Begg by surprise.

‘To be honest, I wanted my day in court,’ he said on Wednesday, before being driven back home to his wife and four children in Birmingham. ‘But I was very happy when I heard the news.’

'New information' fatally undermined the prospect of a successful outcome of the trial for the police 

‘New information’ fatally undermined the prospect of a successful outcome of the trial for the police

Needless to say, 46-year-old Begg’s freedom has delighted his supporters in the Muslim community, who have protested his innocence ever since he was arrested in February this year.

The one-time Islamic bookshop owner and human rights activist has become one of the UK’s most high-profile Muslims since the ‘war on terror’ was launched after the attack on the Twin Towers in 2001. And this latest episode — in which once again he has made a fool of the authorities — can only increase his stature.

Speaking from outside prison on his release, he said: ‘Not once, but twice in my case, this Government has been involved either in directly detaining me or indirectly detaining me, and on both occasions it’s been unlawful.’

So who is Moazzam Begg? And how did he come to be such a thorn in the side of the intelligence agencies in their fight against terrorism?

Begg was born in the Midlands to respectable middle-class parents. His father, a bank manager, emigrated here from Pakistan and the family were the first Asians to settle in their Birmingham street. Begg was sent to a Jewish school in the city because ‘it was the next best thing’ to a Muslim education.

His release has  delighted his supporters in the Muslim community, who have protested his innocence ever since he was arrested in February this year

His release has delighted his supporters in the Muslim community, who have protested his innocence ever since he was arrested in February this year

An inmate at Guantanamo Bay being led handcuffed by guards at the detention facility

An inmate at Guantanamo Bay being led handcuffed by guards at the detention facility

Yet in his teens he was already brushing with the law, joining the multi-ethnic Lynx street gang to fight skinheads intent on violence against immigrants, and particularly those from Pakistan.

Eventually, in his 20s, he gave up the gang and began working for a family grocery company.

But he also became increasingly interested in Islam, especially after holidays to visit family in Pakistan, where he was invited to visit a training camp for Muslim fighters who were sympathetic to Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

From there on, many of the stories about the well-spoken and articulate Moazzam Begg descend into hearsay. He has always strenuously denied ever being involved in terrorism, although this is starkly at odds with the signed statement he gave to FBI agents after his capture in Pakistan.

In this, Begg admits to having attended three separate Al Qaeda terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, where he learned to fire AK-47 rifles and rocket-propelled grenades, and use primitive explosive devices.

He also said that, when living in Britain and running his Islamic bookshop in Birmingham, he acted as a ‘communications link’ between radical Muslims in the UK and others living abroad.

The bookshop, he told the FBI in a statement,was a focal point 'for assisting Islamic militants by spreading Islam and recruiting individuals for global jihad'.

The shop was raided by MI5 in 2001 and Begg was questioned about the possession of an illegal weapon and illegal terrorism activities.

It was after this incident that he and his family moved to Afghanistan and, then, Pakistan, where he was arrested by the FBI.

He was taken first to the U.S. military detention centre at Bagram — where he says he was abused, which the Pentagon denies — and then to Guantanamo.

Today, he lives comfortably with his wife and four children in a £400,000 house in one of the smarter suburbs of Birmingham.

The source of his money? A controversial Government compensation payout in 2010 to former Guantanamo detainees, which saw Begg receive £1 million after successfully claiming that Britain was complicit in his original abduction by U.S. intelligence services, and then his mistreatment at Bagram camp in Afghanistan.

The fact is that MI5 has flirted with Begg for years (even allegedly trying to recruit him as an undercover spy), despite — or perhaps because of — their suspicions he has a shadowy past with alleged links to Islamic terrorism.

They have not only held meetings with him in secret, and monitored his blogs and emails, they have sent their operatives to listen as he makes his speeches up and down the country.

Indeed, a blog published by Begg before he was charged in February explains exactly what MI5 knew all the time. He wrote: ‘In October 2012, I was called by an MI5 officer who said he wanted to talk to me about my views on the situation in Syria after reading an article I had written.

‘I told him I was investigating several leads regarding British and American complicity in rendition and torture in Syria. MI5 called back after consulting with their lawyers, and said they understood that and would still like to meet.

‘I agreed to speak to them at a hotel in East London. Both MI5 and I had our lawyers present.’ The blog continues: ‘MI5 was concerned about the possibility of Britons in Syria being radicalised, and returning to pose a potential threat to national security.

‘I told them that Britain had nothing to worry about, especially since British foreign policy, at the time, seemed in favour of the rebels (against President Assad).

‘At the end of the meeting I was assured by MI5 that my proposed return to Syria to continue my work would not be hindered.

‘Subsequently, I travelled to Syria without incident.

‘I witnessed the squalid refugee camps, I visited the wounded — young and old, some of whom I buried; I saw the carnage of the killing machine and I saw the beautiful young faces of children aged beyond their years.

‘I witnessed the harsh winter and saw farmers chop down their olive trees to warm themselves and I heard the horror stories of torture …

‘I also saw aid coming in from all over the Muslim world, which included British ambulances, fire engines, garbage disposal trucks.

‘There were British aid centres and hospitals with British doctors, and volunteers from Britain’s Muslim community. And yes, there were some British fighters, too . . .’

Yet despite MI5’s apparent assurance to him that he would be left unhindered, Begg’s passport was seized when he was stopped at Heathrow Airport last December as he returned from a trip to South Africa for a service to commemorate the life of Nelson Mandela.

‘I was told my previous visits to Syria had constituted involvement in terrorism,’ he wrote in a subsequent blog, before being sent to Belmarsh jail.

And there the matter rested until this week.

So what exactly was the reason for the 11th-hour abandonment of what was going to be a high-profile trial? Was it that MI5’s contacts with Begg and broken assurances to him undermined the case for the prosecution?

Or could Begg’s release be linked to something else? To a behind-the-scenes deal to free British hostages held by the Islamic State in Syria, for instance?

One of the hostages is, of course, Alan Henning, the non-Muslim Manchester taxi driver who was seized while travelling to the strife-riddled country on a convoy run by a charity group, Rochdale Aid4Syria, which had actively campaigned for Begg’s release from Belmarsh on its Facebook page and other websites.

There are lurid — and unconfirmed — rumours that some members of the charity were sympathetic to hard-line Islam, and even Islamic State itself.

The charity, and others in Lancashire, have already come under MI5 scrutiny for naming a fire engine on an earlier aid convoy to Syria after a female terrorist, Aafia Siddiqui, who is dubbed ‘Lady Al Qaeda’ by counter-terrorism police.

Siddiqui is serving an 86-year sentence in America for trying to shoot two U.S. soldiers after being arrested in Afghanistan in possession of bomb-making instructions.

Islamic State demanded Siddiqui’s release in exchange for the life of U.S. hostage and journalist James Foley, who was beheaded six weeks ago.

Do our intelligence services think Begg’s freedom will be a lever to get Alan Henning’s release?

Do they believe he possesses secrets that will help them in the fight against Islamic terror in this country and abroad?

Do they think — just as the U.S. Major General at Guantanamo Bay did of prisoner UK-000558 — that Begg is of ‘significant intelligence value’ to the West.

We cannot know, of course. And this week, after the trial’s collapse, MI5 was staying predictably silent.

Moazzam Begg, meanwhile, will no doubt be preparing his latest compensation claim.

Posted in UKComments Off on What an appalling mess: He won £1m from taxpayers after being freed from Guantanamo. Now a terror trial against a Birmingham Muslim radical has collapsed after MI5 admitted links to him

Ukraine Crisis: Pervasive Lying in U.S. & UK ‘News’ Media


Global Research

The lying is intentional, and it is systematic; but it is so on only the most important news-topics, the ones that affect the nation’s aristocracy as a whole, rather than competing interests within it. On these issues, the lying is pervasive.

What, precisely, are the most important news-topics to America’s aristocracy? The questions that aren’t being asked in a given nation’s press are what show, in the clearest way, what the most important facts are, in order for an ordinary citizen to be able to understand the world without the oligarchs’ systematic distortions and colorations of it.

A case-in-point is the events in Ukraine during this year:

And (to penetrate even deeper into the same topic) what about this cover-up, too? (Especially since there’s also this, and this, that seem to be basic to it?) Russia got slapped with international sanctions for this one — for having supposedly caused the Malaysian airliner, MH-17, to be shot down on July 17th, flying over the Ukrainian civil-war zone — but, as you can see there, the entire presentation was a frame-up, and the real perpetrators were Obama and the Ukrainian Government, both of whom lied, and were allowed (by the Western ‘news’ media) to do it and to get away with having done it. (Similarly, Bush’s stenographic press got away with spreading his lies about “Saddam’s WMD.”)

There’s no demand from Western ‘news’ media to get the evidence (such as the black-box data), much less to investigate it independently (as an authentically free press would be doing); and, when the Ukrainian and U.S. Governments refused to let it be released to the public, Western ‘news’ media simply remained silent about the cover-up, instead of making ceaseless headline news about the government’s lies, until the information becomes forced out, by pressure from the public.

These ‘news’ media, the entire Western press, don’t report certain things at all — they choose instead to participate in the Government’s lies about those matters.

The public are clearly being manipulated, not just by the government, but by ‘our free press,’ which are owned by, and financed largely by advertisements from, America’s aristocrats.

Here is a brilliant, and brilliantly researched and documented, 37-minute video on the history of how this control of the public’s perceptions of public events and of politics in our ‘democracy’ evolved, or came about. You can even see speaking there some of the people who developed it, and who carried it out for the oligarchs — the controlling aristocrats — and who thereby played key behind-the-scenes roles in shaping 20th-Century history. This video comes from the same genius, Aaron Hawkins, who researched and produced the best videos on the Ukrainian coup, and on the resulting Ukrainian civil war, and on the MH-17 shoot-down in Ukraine. Each one of these videos presents the visual and audio evidence, and places it into historical context so that it can be understood truthfully, and it coordinates that evidence with all of the written and other documentary evidence, so as to provide, in each one of these brief videos, authentic history, not myth, regarding its subject-matter. It penetrates through the lies, and gets to the truth about the matters that are being covered.

But, though these videos on the 2014 events in Ukraine were posted to the Internet quickly after the events that they are analyzing, and though each of the videos constitutes, even today, the most-credible reconstruction that’s available about how these historic events actually happened, all Western ‘news’ media ignore them; they ignore the historical evidence. In those videos, you can see and evaluate this evidence for yourself; and, to me, it’s damning against the Western press.

And furthermore, here, from (amazingly, a mainstream news source) the BBC in 1992, is a very long but stunning documentary about the history of “Operation Gladio,” the OSS-CIA operation that started in 1945 and that continues even today, to deceive and manipulate the publics in the U.S. and Europe. Again: the documentation here is of the highest quality; nobody can reasonably contest that what’s shown in this video, and the current applications of it continuing today, are real, are historical, not mythological at all. Moreover, a leading German journalist decided just recently to quit his thriving career and to go public with his having prostituted himself to America’s aristocracy in order to rise to the top in Germany’s major ‘news’ media; and this testimony sounds like a direct extension from what the BBC documentary on Operation Gladio was reporting. (He even explains there the type of “non-official cover” that is used to pay such outside or unofficial CIA agents. The CIA also operates a network of corporations to handle that.)

In a world that has no government, this is how international relations are handled: by subterfuge, deceit, and corruption. The publics just shed blood and pay taxes to fight and finance their wars, using weapons from their factories; and the ‘news’ media fool them to do it willingly — or as willingly as possible.

All that has been discussed here is important history, and (except for that BBC documentary) has been hidden instead of reported by the respected news-media.

Another example of that is this, which concerns the 9/11 attacks. (This was on C-span, which is government-financed but not government-controlled, it’s unique; and the oligarchs consider it to be insignificant, because its audience is small and politically diverse, neither large nor politically partisan nor influential. Anyone who sees this video will recognize that the standard account of 9/11 is mostly lies.)

Sometimes, what a nation’s ‘news’ media don’t cover, is more informative about that nation’s real state-of-affairs, than is what they do cover.

Sometimes, the media actually are the message. They become the message, when they — and not the reality that they claim to be representing — produce or generate the message, which is the regime’s lie, which is then being pumped by all of the regime’s ‘news’ media: that’s now effectively all ’news’ media.

The ultimate lie, in such a matter, is that there is no “regime” — that it doesn’t exist; that democracy is what exists.

Are we there, yet? Have we reached that ultimate lie — the lie about whether our country is a democracy?

Have we yet reached the point where the biggest cover-up of all is the one that all of the ‘news’ media participate in: hiding the fact that, even though the media collectively offer a ‘range’ of ‘news’ and ‘diverse opinions’, they’re all really mouthpieces for the very same group: for the oligarchy that own them, and that pay money to them by advertising in them?

Or, have we perhaps been there ever since the non-existent “Saddam’s WMD,” which supposedly “caused” us to invade Iraq in 2003 (producing thousands of U.S. deaths, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths, millions of Iraqis displaced, and over $3 trillion in costs to the U.S. economy), or perhaps even ever since before that (maybe since 9/11, or even before that)?

Why do the public not boycott all ‘news’ media that charge for their ‘news’? These media constantly misrepresent reality. What they charge should be nothing, because deception is actually worth less than nothing.

Why does anyone subsidize any ‘news’ medium any longer by paying a subscription to it, if all of the mainstream, and almost all of the ‘alternative,’ ‘news’ media, are really just propaganda-media — the type of media that cover-up, instead of report about, the Government’s lying (such as all that lying about Ukraine)?

If there’s something like Obama’s coup in Ukraine and subsequent ethnic-cleansing there, that’s so central to the American regime as to be effectively banned from the West’s ‘news’ media, then that must be especially worth the public’s knowing about. When the Establishment — both its ‘left’ and its ‘right’ — is united in a lie, then that lie has to be extremely important to the individuals who collectively hold the real power in a ‘democracy.’

Is this actually a democracy? How can people intelligently vote, if they’re constantly being lied-to about the most-important things?

Where does this con against the public actually end — or is it endless?

Do you subscribe to The New York Times, or Washington Post, or Fox News Channel, or any other propaganda-vehicle? If so: why do you subsidize them?

Here are the authentic news-media that I have found (and though they’re not many, they are all free, and each one of them invites each reader to be skeptical and to check out and verify any factual allegation made, because they’re all online, and most of them issue news-reports that have links to their sources online, and so these news-reports are just a click or two away from being able to be verified or else disconfirmed, which means that the standard form of deceiving the readers of a printed news-medium, which is the inaccessibility of the sources, is not present here; the website cannot so easily deceive, and deceive repeatedly, without suffering a major loss of credibility):,,,,,, and

Perfection doesn’t exist, and I am by no means endorsing the veracity of each article that’s on each one of these seven sites. I happen to disagree with some editorial positions of some of them. For example, I believe that InfoWars is more-open to news-reports from conservatives and from libertarians than they should be; that the editor at GlobalResearch bends over backwards to accept news-stories that place things out of a scientific context regarding the existence of global warming (it seems he doesn’t believe in it, though it is true); and that ThePeoplesVoice isn’t sufficiently skeptical of submitted left-slanted articles.

However, I have found all seven of those news-sources to be honest, none of them to deceive intentionally. And, furthermore, very importantly, the percentage of false assertions is far lower in each one of these sites than it is in the mainstream ‘news’ media.

Any ‘news’ site which has covered-up the Obama Administration’s having committed a bloody coup d’etat in late February of this year in Ukraine that installed nazis – racist fascists – in control there, should simply be boycotted. None of the seven sites that I list here has covered-up that (though practically all other U.S. and UK sites have). And all seven of them are free: there is no subscription-fee for any of them.

I have had my own news-submissions that deal with other topics than the Ukrainian coup published by mainstream ‘news’ sites, but that’s not the case about the Ukrainian matter. The virtual universality of the ‘news’ blackout on this topic is amazing — far worse than even the blackout on the truth about the 2008 economic collapse. The blackout on the truth about the February 2014 coup and subsequent ethnic-cleansing in Ukraine is nearly total on all U.S. and UK ‘news’ sites, except for the seven authentic news-sites that I link to above. (Each of these 7 sites also has been honest about other things, such as the 2008 collapse, and the 9/11 attacks; however, some of the 7 also go farther into speculation about those partly unresolvable matters than a news-site should. When the government and the mainstream press so constantly lie, speculation as to why that’s happening isn’t entirely bad; it’s forgivable as an attempt to fill in the blanks when the actual evidence is incomplete. But the mainstream press is also full of speculation: only, theirs is dishonest, it is intended to deceive.)

I have also found one honest German-language news site:, “German Economic News.”

In addition, there are hundreds of specialized news-sites online that are also honest, and free, such as, for example, on the subject of economics,, and

So: will someone please explain to me why anyone should subsidize propagandists?

Maybe if we didn’t do that, the oligarchs would just decide to switch to the news-business, and quit the propaganda-business, because a market for truth in news-reporting might actually develop here, somehow?

But, of course, it should only be so easy, to rectify our corrupt political and economic system.

Anyway, this would be a start in the correct direction. And it’s something anyone can do. And it will save wasted money, for anyone who does it.

That’s a good deal, don’t you think?

Posted in UkraineComments Off on Ukraine Crisis: Pervasive Lying in U.S. & UK ‘News’ Media



Dr: Teresinka Pereira


Our throats shout

with fear of plagues,

of wars,

of religions.

But it has been always

like that.

What changed are the news

on TV, on Ipad, from mouth to mouth,

which go from one end to the other

of the continents

and spike in our minds.

Is there a way

to restore joy

in this world?


Posted in LiteratureComments Off on SADNESS IN THE WORLD

U.S., Zio-Wahhabi Conduct Airstrikes Against ISIL In Syria


U.S. and Zio-Wahhabi Saudi  military forces conducted eight airstrikes on Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant targets in Syria yesterday and today, U.S. Central Command officials reported.

Four airstrikes southwest of Kobani struck a large ISIL unit and a small ISIL unit, damaged an ISIL staging location and destroyed an ISIL heavy-machine-gun firing position. Three airstrikes northeast of Kobani struck a small ISIL unit, damaged two ISIL buildings and destroyed an ISIL staging location and three ISIL buildings. An airstrike northwest of Raqqah struck an ISIL garrison, officials said.

To conduct these strikes, U.S. forces used bomber and fighter aircraft deployed to the Centcom area of operations, and Zio-WahhabI Saudi forces used fighter aircraft, Centcom officials said.

All aircraft exited the strike areas safely, officials added.


Posted in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, SyriaComments Off on U.S., Zio-Wahhabi Conduct Airstrikes Against ISIL In Syria

Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei: Palestine resistance should boost defense abilities


Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says resistance groups in Palestine should strengthen their defense capabilities in the face of possible fresh aggression by Israel.

“The Resistance current should boost its preparedness day by day and reinforce its power resources inside Gaza,” Ayatollah Khamenei said in a meeting with Secretary General of the Islamic Jihad of Palestine Ramadan Abdullah in Tehran on Thursday.

The Leader said the Palestinian resistance’s recent victory against the Israeli regime’s 50-day war indicated the realization of the “divine promise”, which will pave the way for greater triumphs.

The Leader also anticipated a promising future for the Palestinian people, saying, “The outlook of the developments is bright and good.”

Ayatollah Khamenei urged Palestinians in the West Bank to get on board in the fight against the Israeli regime, saying, “Fighting the Zionist regime (Israel) is a war of destiny.”

“The enemy should feel the same worries in the West Bank as it does in Gaza,” the Leader added.

Ayatollah Khamenei further vowed more support for the Palestinian people, stating, “The Islamic Republic and the Iranian people are proud of your victory and resistance, and hope that the back-to-back triumphs of resistance [groups] will continue until final victory.”

Abdullah, for his part, extended to the Leader the greetings of senior officials from Islamic Jihad and other Palestinian resistance groups, and presented a report on the latest Israeli war on Gaza.

“Definitely, the victory was achieved with the assistance of the Islamic Republic,” the senior Palestinian official said, adding, “Without Iran’s strategic and efficient help, resistance and victory in Gaza would have been impossible.”

Abdullah further assessed as strategic and effective the Leader’s guidelines on the necessity of arming the West Bank for countering the Israeli regime’s aggression, saying the remarks have re-energized the Palestinian fighters and raised their spirits.

On July 23, Ayatollah Khamenei said armed resistance by Palestinians is “the only way” to confront the Zionist regime.

“We believe that the West Bank should also be armed like Gaza and those who are interested in Palestine’s destiny should act in this regard,” the Leader said at the time.

Israeli launched a deadly onslaught on the besieged Gaza Strip on July 8. Gaza health officials say over 2,140 Palestinians, including 577 children, were killed in the Israeli onslaught. Over 11,100 others, including 3,374 children, 2,088 women and 410 elderly people, were injured. Tens of Israelis were also killed by the Palestinian resistance retaliatory rockets.

The Israeli aggression ended on August 26 with an Egyptian-brokered truce.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, IranComments Off on Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei: Palestine resistance should boost defense abilities

Lest We Forget…


by TUT

‘When the Lord your God brings you into the land he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, he will give you a land filled with large, flourishing cities that you did not build, houses filled with wealth you did not earn, wells you did not dig, and vineyards and olive groves you did not plant…


…And when the LORD your God brings you into the land you are to possess and casts out the many peoples living there…

Then you shall slaughter them all and utterly destroy them…




…You shall make no agreements with them…


…nor show them any mercy…


…You shall destroy their altars…

…Break down their images…

…Cut down their groves…

…And burn their graven images with fire…

And therefore their goods shall become your plunder…



…While their houses become a desolation…

…They shall build houses, but not inhabit them…

…And they shall plant vineyards, but not drink the wine thereof…

“Foreigners will build your walls…


…And their kings will serve you…



Obama's State of the Union Address--We will stand steadfast with Israel

…The gates of your cities will always remain open, day and night, so that Gentiles may bring you the wealth of their nations…

…And their kings led in triumphal procession…


…For the nation or kingdom that will not serve you will perish; it will be utterly destroyed…

…For you are a holy people unto the LORD thy God…






…And He has chosen you to be a special people above all others upon the face of the earth…”


Ed note–these are just a small sample of the various verses found in the Old Testament, called by the Jews the Torah. They are not the words of Netanyahu, Herzl, Ariel Sharon or any of the modern founders of the Jewish state.

Rather, they are the words of the Old Testament ‘prophets’ such as Moses, Zephaniah, Isaiah and others who preached the supremacist,  violent basis of Jewish behavior that is on Colo display before the world right now. These verses, and many more just like them, are the basic building blocks of both Judaism and Zionism and are the religious justification used by the Jews and their supporters worldwide for the types of human sacrifice we are seeing in places such as Gaza, Syria, Iraq, Libya, etc.

Despite the noise put out there by those who are out to confuse Gentiles concerning the violent,  psycopathic nature of Torah Judaism and who claim that this ‘Holy’ religion is distinct and different from Zionism,  nothing could be further from the truth, and until the world begins to deal with this spiritual sickness in a rational, moral way, the holocaust of the Gentle world will continue.

Posted in ZIO-NAZIComments Off on Lest We Forget…

Shoah’s pages