Archive | March 23rd, 2015

When Our Monsters Speak, TV Journalists Go Deaf


Chairwoman of the State Department program Partners for a New Beginning (PNB) and former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright speaks during the Investment and Entrepreneurship Conference in Tunis March 5, 2015.


Did the chilling inhumanity Madeleine Albright revealed have any discernible impact on journalist Lesley Stahl?

Public debate on TV in western societies has long been reduced to the spectacle of the 1 percent talking to each other: millionaire journalists pretending to hold even wealthier politicians accountable. This usually constrains debate exactly the way one would expect, but gruesome truths are sometimes revealed, inadvertently, because rotten values are shared by elite journalists and western officials.

Consider the infamous exchange between Madeleine Albright and Lesley Stahl in May of 1996:

Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price–we think the price is worth it.

Albright was then U.S. Ambassador to the UN. About a year after this interview she was promoted and became Secretary of State under Bill Clinton.

In 2004, Amy Goodman confronted Albright over her remark. “It was a stupid statement. I never should have made it…,” said Albright.

Of course it was stupid of Albright to display her total disregard for Iraqi lives. A competent state terrorist would have claimed the death toll was lower and argued that any humanitarian disaster was entirely Saddam Hussein’s fault. Albright unmasked herself because she was too comfortable with a TV journalist like Stahl. But did the chilling inhumanity Albright revealed have any discernible impact on Stahl? The answer is no.

In 1999, three years after the Albright interview, Stahl published a book (“Reporting Live”) which primarily looks back at Stahl’s long career as CBS White House correspondent. Her account ends in 1991 when Stahl was hired by 60 Minutes. She reviews the legacies of the presidents she covered (Carter, Reagan and Bush Senior). Iraq is discussed at length, but she completely ignores the horrific death toll, of which she was clearly aware, that resulted from the 1990 Gulf War and the sanctions that followed. Looking back on Bush Senior’s drive towards war she wrote, without a trace of embarrassment or remorse, that in “all the years I covered the White House, I cannot recall having so much admiration for a president”. She proudly recalls how she “threw off any trace of impartiality” in confronting the Iraqi Ambassador about hundreds of westerners who were being prevented from leaving Iraq before the war: “Is there any wonder…the American people see this as an act of unbelievable inhumanity and view your leader, Saddam, as a monster?”

The western hostages were released a month before the USA initiated a merciless assault on Iraq that would last decades and would kill about a million Iraqis by the time Stahl published her book. As an extravagantly overpaid, high-profile journalist (who was once asked to trim her salary a half million dollars) she conveniently expressed no regrets – and most likely had none – over her role in helping to initiate the slaughter. Stahl says that among Carter’s achievements, for which “he rarely got the credit he deserved” were arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the expansion of the U.S. military into the Persian Gulf which “gave George Bush [Senior] the ability to fight Iraq in the Gulf War”. Her retrospective critique of Bush Senior’s war is limited to noting that the “strategic” decision to leave Hussein in power to “balance” Iran came “to be seen as a mistake.”

However, Stahl did regret failing to ask Kuwait’s ambassador to the USA, as his feudal government was being re-installed by U.S. troops, if Kuwait would now “recognize Israel”.

Decades of covering the White House did not compel Stahl to mention, much less analyze, U.S. sponsored bloodbaths that took place while she was on the job, and that collectively cost hundreds of thousands of lives in East Timor, El Salvador, Guatemala or even Nicaragua despite the Iran-Contra scandal being reviewed by Stahl in detail. She made a very brief mention of Daniel Ortega saying she could not understand his appeal in Nicaragua – judging by her book, because she was ignorant of the monstrous Somoza dictatorships that her government propped up for decades and of the terrorist war the Reagan administration waged which cost 30,000 Nicaraguan lives. No doubt, a great deal of ignorance is both a consequence of being a CBS White House correspondent and a requirement for landing that kind of job, but something worse than ignorance explains much of Stahl’s morally stunted work.

Very recently, a TV journalist in the UK, Cathy Newman, also appeared to go morally deaf when Michael Scheuer — a retired senior CIA Operations Officer — advocated Muslim on Muslim genocide. The key part of the exchange follows:

Cathy Newman: So you’re saying ‘send in Western ground troops’ then?

Michael Scheuer: No ma’am, I think we should back away from the whole thing. The thing was ideal when IS was advancing on Baghdad because Sunnis were killing Shias. That’s exactly what we need. We’ve proven that we’re just militarily incompetent or that the military is so shackled by its political leaders, that it can’t defeat these people. But our best hope right now is to get the Sunnis and Shias fighting each other and let them bleed each other white

Newman: There’s no hope of that happening though is there? I mean, President Obama’s talked about being involved in this war for many years.

Newman’s robotic non-response to Sheuer’s bloodlust makes quite a contrast with the way other TV journalists in the UK — Jon Snow and, even more belligerently, Kate Burley — demanded that British Muslins say they condemn beheadings. Compounding the hypocrisy, Saudi Arabia, a close US/UK ally, routinely engages in beheadings, mutilations and other acts barbarism. It also aggressively seeks to spread its brutal and backward ideology abroad. The UK government received some ridicule at home for flying flags at half-mast after the Saudi Beheader-in-Chief, King Abdullah, passed away, but the UK media generally let it slide. In her book, Stahl described the Saudi government and others who joined Bush Senior’s “coalition” against Saddam Hussein as “moderates”.  A morally bankrupt alliance — one that also places westerners at risk – is passed over in silence. For lavishly paid TV journalists, the price is well worth it.

Posted in USAComments Off on When Our Monsters Speak, TV Journalists Go Deaf

What does Naziyahu’s re-election mean?

Netanyahu and the politics of fear

By Lawrence Davidson

I$raHell public speaks

Elections are public windows onto national hopes and concerns, and this was certainly the case with the March 2015 voting in Israel. You just have to look through that window with analytical eyes to assess those national yearnings in their essential details.

At first glance the campaigning suggested that most Israelis were focused on economics. This would not be unusual. Just about all democratic elections are fought over bread and butter issues, and Israel has evolved into a society that is harshly divided between haves and have-nots. However, as it turned out, this campaign theme could not have been of primary importance. This is so because the man who symbolises the dysfunctional economic status quo, Binyamin Netanyahu (aka Bibi), actually won the election. Indeed, his hard-right Likud Party improved its position in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, from 19 to 30 seats. Obviously, something else was motivating the Israeli voter. What was it?

Israel has evolved into one of the most racist countries on earth and at the heart of its racism is the ideologically driven desire for a state reserved primarily for Jews.

The answer to that question is fear – or, in Israeli terms, the issue of security. Netanyahu stoked this fear with warnings of a massive Arab Israeli turnout and other examples of racist-tinged propaganda, and this led many Israeli Jews to decide, in the privacy of the voting booth, that they were more afraid of Palestinians than of poverty. At the same time, most of these voters refused to face the fact that much of this fear is self-induced. Israel has evolved into one of the most racist countries on earth and at the heart of its racism is the ideologically driven desire for a state reserved primarily for Jews. To accomplish this, Israel as a nation has dispossessed and oppressed the Palestinians. This practice has prevailed for so long that 60 per cent of Israeli Jews cannot envision an end to the resulting struggle. So fear of Palestinian resistance, with its implied threat of destruction, or at least transformation, of the Jewish state has always been their ultimate security issue.

It would seem that concern over security and its attendant fear caused enough Israelis, who would have otherwise voted their pocketbooks, to vote instead for the no Palestinian state on my watch”, free-marketeer Netanyahu. And that allowed his Likud Party to win.

Consequences for Israelis

Given that so many Israeli Jews voted for Netanyahu’s Likud Party or one of the parties allied to it, what can they look for as a result? Well, they can hope against hope for their longed-for security. However, objectively speaking, this expectation is foolhardy. This will be Netanyahu’s fourth term as prime minister and Israel is still the least safe place on the planet for Jews. In addition, thanks to Netanyahu’s policies, life for Jews outside of Israel is less, rather than more, secure. In other words, those who voted for Likud or its allies looking for security seriously misjudged the situation. Indeed, they seem to be unable to understand what is really required for Israel’s security – namely, a just peace with the Palestinians – or how Netanyahu has already and soon will further negatively impact this issue.

This will be Netanyahu’s fourth term as prime minister and Israel is still the least safe place on the planet for Jews. In addition, thanks to Netanyahu’s policies, life for Jews outside of Israel is less, rather than more, secure.

Also, Netanyahu has adopted positions and policies which, if pressed forward (as they now surely will be), can only rebound negatively on Israel in the international arena. These positions and policies include Netanyahu’s refusal to seriously negotiate with the Palestinians, his now open rejection of a Palestinian state (despite his cynical post-election reversal on this point), the speeding up of illegal settlement activity, ever more violent oppressive occupation, theft of Palestinian tax revenue and the utter impoverishment of the Gaza Strip. Over time these policies have upset most of the governments of the Western world (an exception being the US Congress), and that feeling may now grow and make more likely stronger reactions both from the Europeans, the United Nations and the White House as well.

Israel’s voters can also look forward to an emboldened Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions of Israel movement, which will no doubt pick up supporters as a result of Netanyahu’s re-election. Then there is the allegation of Israeli war crimes now being considered by the International Criminal Court (ICC). Netanyahu’s return to power will ensure that this process continues, possibly resulting in indictments against a significant proportion of the Israeli chain of command, including the re-elected Netanyahu.

Finally, many Israelis can expect to stay poor under Netanyahu’s free market policies.

Consequences for the Palestinians

In the short term things may not change much for the Palestinians. With Netanyahu re-elected, any Israeli talk of compromise, if it is articulated at all, will be recognised as empty propaganda. We can speculate that if Likud’s strongest rival, the Zionist Union headed by Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni, had won the recent election, they would perhaps have muddied the waters for the Palestinians – perhaps reopening “negotiations” with Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian National Authority, probably then causing the latter to put on hold Palestinian charges of Israeli war crimes at the ICC, and then tempting the ageing Abbas with some form of Bantustan. That is the very best the Palestinians could have gotten from any Zionist government. It is realisation of this hard fact that many Palestinians and their supporters would rather see Netanyahu in charge: the issues then at least remain crystal clear rather than fogged over by false hopes.

On the bright side of the equation the united Arab List did very well in the recent election and garnered 14 seats. This makes the Israeli Arab coalition the third largest bloc in the Knesset and thus a potential major opposition voice. Arab Israeli leaders will now demand seats on parliamentary committees. They will almost certainly be ignored or, at best, relegated to unimportant places. This will only disillusion many Arab Israelis about politics in general and cause them to look for other avenues to express their longstanding dissatisfaction. For the rest of the world, their poor treatment will become more obvious and Israel’s claim to democratic status all the less persuasive.

Consequences for the United States

The sad truth is that the present leaders of the mainstream Jewish community in the US have long favoured the Likud leadership in Israel. Some of these Jewish leaders believe that tough-minded Likudniks are the best hedge against the “inevitable” next Holocaust, while others will back whoever is in charge because they are ideologically fixated on Israel as their cause celebre. Thus, all of them are no doubt pleased with Netanyahu’s return to power. This is also the case for the US’s Christian Zionists who are motivated by religious delusions about what it takes to bring about the “second coming” of their preferred god. It is a mistake to see these attitudes as generational. In both cases they will be with us for a long time. For all these people, Netanyahu’s re-election means business as usual.

The consequences of Netanyahu’s victory for liberal American Jews and their organisations – J Street, the American branch of Peace Now, and the like – is really problematic. If they can hold onto their membership, they might press on despite all. On the other hand, many liberal Jews might just give up and become quiet, which of course is what the hard-line Zionists want. But it is also likely that liberal Zionist organisations will lose members to more relevant and outspoken organisations such as Jewish Voices For Peace. That would be a move in a progressive, and realistic, direction.

Then there are the Republican Party officials. Their comfort level with Netanyahu and his Likudniks is a matter of style and character. Take a man like John Boehner, Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives, and match him in terms of personality and ethics to Netanyahu. What you have is a compatible fit: two utterly unprincipled politicians who may in fact really like each other.

President Obama, and no doubt many other Democrats, would have preferred Netanyahu’s political demise and replacement with a Herzog-Livni coalition. Obama wants Zionists willing to at least put on a front of flexibility. These are the kind of folks he would feel comfortable working with, and given such partners, he would help them pressure the Palestinians into a Bantustan. He won’t get that now and so we are all spared the farce of further “peace talks.”

Finally, there is Netanyahu’s obsession with the Iran question and US negotiations with that country. Netanyahu will no doubt feel emboldened by his electoral victory, and once he forms his coalition and consolidates power, the White House can expect him to resume his nagging and nay-saying ways on this issue. Once the deal with Iran is struck (and I think it will be), one can anticipate Netanyahu’s collusion with the Republicans to undermine and, if they can, ultimately sabotage President Obama’s one notable contribution to a more peaceful and stable world.


Undermining peace, promoting oppression, assuring poverty, fostering racism, playing on people’s fears and interfering in the domestic affairs of other countries – none of this can be good for the rest of us. Clearly, Netanyahu is bad news for the world at large. He is the political world’s analogue to global warming – the more active he is, the more toxic the environment becomes.

In the long run the Palestinians may be the only ones who benefit from the Israel’s March 2015 elections. The now-guaranteed continued alienation from Israel of a good part of the Western world will work to their benefit over time. Netanyahu would dismiss this possibility as irrelevant, for he is certain that Israeli power wins out in the end. But then there are different types of power: just ask the men who once ran South Africa’s for-whites-only society.

On the other hand, the biggest losers are the Jews. The fact that the behaviour of Netanyahu and his allies is repeatedly endorsed by a significant number of Jews inside and outside of Israel confirms that, except for the Holocaust, Zionism is the worst thing to happen to Jews and Judaism in the modern era. It has tied a people and a religion to a racist political ideology that is a variant on the criminal practice of apartheid.

Given that sort of culture, the worst rises to the top and, sure enough, that is what is happening in Israel.

Posted in Palestine Affairs, ZIO-NAZIComments Off on What does Naziyahu’s re-election mean?

UK Jewish media silent about hooligan

Anthony Dennison

 Discredited solicitor and Zionist lobbyist Anthony Dennison

Paul Eisen writes:

It’s now well known that the Royal Northern College of Music (RNCM) was pressured by the Zionist lobby group North West Friends of Israel (NWFOI) to cancel a concert by internationally acclaimed jazz saxophonist Gilad Atzmon. What is less well known is that the co-chair and spokesperson for NWFOI is one Anthony Dennison (Mr Dennison’s name and role in the organisation can be confirmed here). These machinations by the NWFOI and the leading role played by Mr Dennison were duly reported by the Jewish Chronicle

So far, so… well, if not exactly good, certainly understandable.

Less understandable is the fact (not mentioned by the Jewish Chronicle) of Mr Dennison’s documented and well-known dishonesty. Because of his dishonesty, Anthony Dennison, once a lawyer closely associated with the no win, no fee scam was found by the High Court to be unworthy to practice law and was duly struck off

Everyone knew about it. The BBC knew about it, the Solicitor’s Journal knew about it, the Daily Telegraph knew about it and the Manchester Evening Newsknew about it, so it’s safe to say that the NWFOI and the Jewish Chroniclecertainly knew about it.

But Mr Dennison is not only an aficionado of white-collar dishonesty; in fact he’s not at all averse to getting down and dirty because it seems that Anthony Dennison is also a bit of a football hooligan. Perhaps you remember the incident from October 2014 when Mr Dennison’s all-Jewish football team, Maccabi, was about to be wiped out in a match (9:2 with only 10 minutes left to play) and Mr Dennison took his young players off the pitch claiming “anti-Semitic abuse”. The fledgeling anti-Semite was duly disciplined but Dennison was also later banned and fined by the Football Association – for his “foul and abusive behaviour”. And yes, the incident was duly reported by the Jewish Chronicle here and here.

So, are we entitled to conclude that Anthony Dennison is both dishonest and a hooligan? And if we are, is it then surprising that, when orchestrating the pressure on the RNCM, he should call to his support fellow discredited lawyer Alan Dershowitz, who is now implicated in the Jeffrey Epstein under-age sex scandal?

Leaving aside whether we should allow such a man as Anthony Dennison to bully a British artist and an academic and beloved cultural institution, there is another, wider question to be asked: how come a supposedly respectable lobbying organisation like NWFOI is happy to have as a prime representative a man known to be dishonest and also an occasional hooligan? And further, how come the premier Jewish media outlet representing mainstream Jewish opinion in this country has nothing to say on this matter?

How come?

Well, for us Jews, when something is legitimate and acceptable we say it iskosher. So, in the case of Anthony Dennison we have to admit that some dishonesty is well… kosher!

Posted in ZIO-NAZI, UKComments Off on UK Jewish media silent about hooligan

The First Jewish Lie: The Old Testament fabrication that the Israelites were slaves in Egypt


It seems that Jews have lied about their history in the Old Testament. Overwhelming new evidence by top Egyptian and Israeli scholars shows that Jews were never slaves in Egypt.

Pictures and captions by Darkmoon

If the Jews had been living in Egypt for centuries as slaves, surely they would have noticed the pyramids and the Sphinx?  Strangely, neither of these great architectural wonders of the world are mentioned even once in the Old Testament!

Jews lie. Jews have always lied. And most assuredly, Jews are still lying today about everything that has to do with themselves and their sordid history.

So considering how they have wrecked the United States, Russia, Germany and so many other countries by mentally lobotomizing and financially castrating all of them, it should come as no surprise that Jews have falsified their own history from the very beginning.

Or to put it more concisely in the words of an Egyptian medical doctor named Ashraf Ezzat:

“The truth is that ancient Egypt never knew any Pharaohs nor any Israelites. Egypt was never the land of Exodus and Palestine was never the Promised Land.”

Backed by every reputable expert in the known world, Ezzat argues that ancient Hebrew history as we know it today is based on one colossal lie — that events described as happening in Egypt, if they happened at all, really happened in Arabia. Which means that according to his version, the tales of Joseph, Moses and the Exodus might still be true, but the location in which they are alleged to have happened are false.

To the average person, this would seem a farfetched assertion were it not for the supportive testimony of the world’s top Egyptologists, from James Henry Breasted to Donald Redford to Israel Finkelstein. Even some Israeli experts agree, including the head of archeology at Tel Aviv University. Prof. Ze’ev Herzog, in a 1999 article in Ha’aretz, said:

“The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel.”

The Crossing of the Red Sea ROSSELLI (1439 – 1507)

[LD: The Old Testament tells us that God helped to part the waves of the Red Sea, allowing his Chosen People to cross over miraculously to the other side as they fled from Pharaoh’s pursuing army. As soon as the Egyptian army descended into the same trench, God let the waves return in a huge collapsing wall onto the heads of the evil Egyptians who were all drowned.

Amusing titbit. “Red Sea pedestrians”  =  Monty Python’s politically incorrect euphemism for “Jews”. [LD]

Needless to say, this revelation has profound implications for all of the world’s major monotheistic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam, which all base their deeply flawed legitimacy on these questionable Old Testament legends.

For Dr. Ezzat, the ferreting out of the real story of the Jews is a matter of defending the reputation of his illustrious homeland, the oldest known human civilization, the mysterious land of the pyramids and the Sphinx. Ezzat seeks merely to uncover the truth buried beneath two thousand years of deliberate and slanderous misrepresentation of a culture that provided the foundation of the monotheistic religions which have “borrowed” heavily from Egyptian tradition but neglected to mention the source as they claimed these well-known rituals as their own.

Ezzat has labored at this task for several years on his Pyramidion website, but now has taken a big step forward with the publication of “Egypt Knew No Pharaohs Nor Israelites” (pictured). The book is available in a Kindle edition for a mere $5 and contains lots of very valuable live links, including Breasted’s famous “Dawn of Conscience” essay and instructive background material from the Roman writer Plutarch, Egyptologist Donald Redford and contemporary reporter Juan Cole using archivist Peter Myers’ encyclopedic background data.

The book is a real treasure trove of objective Biblical history, an essential counterweight to the overabundance of unreliable religious proselytization material that handicaps objective historical scholars everywhere with self-absorbed misinformation.

Defending Egypt’s honorable tradition

Many factors set Ezzat on this detective trail of the Biblical deception that castigates Ancient Egypt as an immoral, slave-keeping society.

The first clue was that the Old Testament never mentioned the pyramids, making the writers of that document the first and probably the only visitors to Egypt who never mentioned these awe-inspiring structures.

Ezzat’s contention, backed by solid empirical scholarship, is that the events of the Old Testament occurred in southwestern Arabia, in a province called Mizraim, or Misr, a location now near modern day Yemen, which is where he says the tribe of Israel was really born.

The second tipoff was the terrain, which in the OT more resembles hilly Arabia rather than flat Egypt. Also, the Bible recounts droughts, which Egypt never had, only fluctuations in the flooding of the Nile. Many of the events ascribed to the area of present day Palestine actually occurred much further south down the coast of the Red Sea, Ezzat insists. Furthermore an even more telling detail in the Joseph story was the camel caravan carrying “gum, balm and myrrh”, which were products of Arabian trade, not Egypt’s.

The third and most revealing clue was the notion of slavery, which Ezzat claims was never practiced in Egypt until the Greeks and Persians brought the practice with them a thousand years later than the supposed time of Moses and Joseph.

Some stories state the pyramids were built by slaves, but history shows us the pyramid builders were willing volunteers, as the village of the pyramid builders attests.

And the fourth aspect of this millennia-old Old Testament fraud was the label of pharaoh, which no Egyptian document ever uses. But the leader of the Mizraim tribe was called Faraon, which made the switch from Hebrew to Greek and the creation of a villainous pharaoh many centuries later an easy trick to pull off. Egypt, one of the best documented of all ancient civilizations, never once used the term pharaoh.

This is truly a tale of two Egypts: Egypt was mentioned in the Bible around 700 times; the Israelites were not mentioned once in the Egyptian records.

The 5th century BC historian Herodotus, commonly known as “the father of history”, never mentioned pharaohs, only kings. Herodotus also never mentioned Israel, repeatedly mentioned Palestine, Syria and the Phoenicians, never mentioned Jews or Canaanites, and never mentioned any Jewish holy temple.

But more than anything else, it was the insult to Ancient Egypt’s extremely enlightened religious philosophy — moral practices that have never been equalled by the civilizations that came later — that compelled Ezzat to defend the honor of a remarkable culture that survived for the better part of three millennia, longer – you make take note — than any other culture in world history.

“Deceitfully linking the story of Moses and his Pharaoh has tarnished the image of one of humanity’s greatest civilizations,” Ezzat writes. “Ancient Egypt has been stabbed in the heart by this two-thousand year duplicity. And this deception is likely to continue if we don’t expose the truth about the Israelite stories and their Arabic origin and the Septuagint fraud.”

“Ancient Egypt has been stabbed in the back by a two-thousand year duplicity!”

Corrupt Jewish translators

In the 2nd century BC, the Hebrew bible was translated from Aramaic to Greek at the legendary Library of Alexandria. Seventy Jewish scribes, hence the designation of the Septuagint Bible, were assigned this task by the Ptolemies in which they cunningly replaced this obscure tribal leader Faraon with the mighty Egypt and its king. The Greek version, with this malicious distortion of ancient history, has been the source for all translations of the Bible worldwide ever since.

The Septaguint deception had been the result of a Greek-Jewish bond very similar to nowadays’ American-Israeli one. (Controlling and manipulating world superpowers — ancient and modern — is obviously an old Jewish proficiency also demonstrable in the old Jewish/Persian arrangement that led to the release from Babylonian Captivity and the complicity with the Roman Empire to control and contain Christianity.)

Replacing the Arabic town of Mizraim/Misr with pharaonic Egypt in the stories of the Patriarchs has not only distorted the Israelite stories but the historiography of the whole ancient Near East.

The dangers this misrepresentation presents to modern times are numerous.

Number one, modern Egyptians have been detached from their own culture.

Number two, the lies presented in the Bible that have filtered into other religions present a violent danger based on mistaken information.

For instance, the Salafis, hardened Islamists and jihadists, want to demolish all of ancient Egypt’s monument and temples, including the Pyramids and the Sphinx, because they believe these are the idols Pharaoh worshipped while rejecting the true word of God delivered by Moses.

So here is a closed-minded mass murder plot based on the fairy tale of Jewish slaves building the Pyramids

The Exodus tale is about slaves, toiling in 400 years of continuous bondage. The failure of his brothers to murder Joseph is told both in the Qu’ran and the Bible. The brothers sold him to the Ishmaelites, not the Egyptians, for 20 shekels of silver (Genesis 37:26-28).

The Septaguint deception repeated through contemporary filmmaking was evident in the recent Ridley Scott film (which flopped at the box office!) Exodus: Gods and Kings.

Egypt banned this movie for its “Zionist view of history”. The same scam perpetrated by the Jews for 3000 years — changing history to dupe the public — is still being run today in Hollywood.

Although Exodus: Gods and Kings is set in Egypt, you won’t actually be able to see it there. According to Deadline magazine (and reported by Ezzat), Scott’s adaptation of the biblical story of Moses has run afoul of Egyptian censors. Abdul Sattar Fathi, the head of the Egyptian state censorship board, harshly criticized the film, citing “historical mistakes” such as claiming the Jews built the pyramids and portraying Moses as a general, not a prophet.

“Furthermore,” Fathi said, “it shows ancient Egyptians as a mob group persecuting peaceful Jews. Our board has refused this out of respect for Egyptians’ feelings.”

(Peaceful Jews, I like that. Could be the only example in history of peaceful Jews. No surprise that only Hollywood could come with a concept like peaceful Jews, which is surely a type of human being that has never before been seen in history. Go tell the Palestinians about peaceful Jews.)

Says Ezzat, who remains scrupulously impartial when it comes to contemporary politics, Egypt is simply not where this story took place.

At the time, Israel wasn’t there

Jews lie. How many modern examples do you need? Six million dead in a Holocaust that never happened? People all over the world paying reparations for crimes they didn’t commit and being thrown in jail when they ask for proof of these crimes. A Jewish company producing poison food and a Jewish government forcing people to eat it. Jews murdering thousands of unarmed peasants and calling it self defense, triggering wars all over the world through covert manipulation of governments it has bought.

Current Israeli rabble rouser Binyamin Netanyahu said recently in a speech that the Jewish people were building Jerusalem 3000 years ago. Yet another Jewish lie.

Ezzat says no.

“The Jewish people were not building Jerusalem 3000 years ago, i.e. 1000 BC . . . There was no invasion of geographical Palestine from Egypt by former slaves in the 2200s BCE . . . The chronicle of events of the reign of Ramses II on the wall in Luxor does not know about any major slave results or flights by same into the Sinai peninsula. Egyptian sources never heard of Moses or the 12 plagues.”

Jerusalem not only was not being built by the likely then non-existent “Jewish people” in 1000 BCE, but Jerusalem probably was not even inhabited at that point in history. Jerusalem appears to have been abandoned between 1000 BCE and 900 BCE, the traditional dates for the united kingdom under David and Solomon.

So Jerusalem was not ‘the city of David,’ since there was no city there when he is said to have lived there. No sign of magnificent palaces or great states has been found in the archeology of this period, and the Assyrian tablets, which recorded even minor events throughout the Middle East, such as the actions of Arab queens, don’t know anything about any great kingdom of David and Solomon in geographical Palestine.

Not a thing.

Palestine was not the homeland for the kingdom of Israel and the stories of its early patriarchs. The inception of Judaism and the stories of Abraham, Isaac, Joseph and Moses happened in Arabia and Yemen, Ezzat writes. The blatant failure of Biblical archeology in the land of Palestine is primarily due to a premise completely flawed and a Bible (Septaguint) cunningly tampered with (by the same evil creeps who manipulate our news and educational materials today).

Egypt’s written records date back to 1870 BC. No trace of the Israelites.

Slavery was a common tradition in Arabia but not in Egypt. Slavery didn’t come to Egypt “until 7th to 4th century BC, with the influence of the Persian/Greek invasions.”

This tradition of slavery lingers on in Yemen, where foreigners aren’t allowed to get a job without the sponsorship of a native called a kafeel who control all aspects of their lives.

In his breakthrough theory “Bible Came from Arabia” Dr. Kamal Salibi has discovered more than one hundred place names in Arabia and North Yemen that amazingly matched the ones mentioned in the Torah, Ezzat writes.

“Placing the Israelites back in their native Arabic land will no longer make the pervasive future of slavery in the stories of Joseph and Moses alien or inexplicable, or the walls and fortifications of mountainous villages tumbled by Joshua unreal and unverifiable.

“The land Joshua conquered was a small territory in North Yemen. The Egypt of the Bible is not the Egypt of the NIle Valley but an obscure little town in the southwestern desert of ancient Arabia called Mizraim, or Misr in Hebrew and Arabic.

“The Exodus took place in a much humbler way and on a much narrower scale in an obscure little village in ancient South Arabia,” Ezzat writes.

“If Egypt knew no Pharaohs, then it goes without saying that Egypt never knew Moses, either. And if Moses never set foot in Egypt, then the Exodus’ road map into the Promised Land has to be redrawn.”

A conception of world harmony

The lies began a long time ago. According to the Old Testament, written by Jews, ancient Egypt is the land of idolatry, tyranny and slavery.

It is this slander at which Ezzat bristles, because the precepts of the ancient Egyptian religion were plagiarized by its Christian and Muslim successors lock, stock and barrel.

“Maat is the Egyptian concept of world harmony based on justice, balance and truth. Maat, or the lady of truth, as personified by ancient Egyptians in the shape of a lady wearing the feather of truth on her head and holding the balance of justice, is the code of ethics by which all Egyptians, including monarchs, should follow,” Ezzat writes.

The late Prof. Breasted, in a beautiful introduction to his 1933 classic Dawn of Conscience, writes in a live link from the book:

“The Egyptians possessed a standard of morals far superior to that of the Decalogue (the Ten Commandments) over a thousand years before the Decalogue was written.”

Famous Egyptologist Professor James Henry Breasted
in his office at the Oriental Institute, 1929

So Ezzat is not making this stuff up. Breasted is one of the most respected historians ever. And Ezzat’s insistence that much of the material in the Old Testament is fabricated, distorted and plagiarized is true.

For instance, the wisdom of Amenemope, preserved in an Egyptian papyrus in the British Museum, was translated into Hebrew in ancient times and, circulating in Palestine, was the source for a whole section of the Old Testament Book of Proverbs.

“Our moral heritage derives from a wider human past enormously older than the Hebrews, and it has come to us rather through the Hebrews than from them. Man arose to high moral vision two thousand years before the Hebrew nation was born,” Ezzat writes.

Just like in modern times, when in World War II Germany was presented as the bad guy while the Jewish countries the U.S., Britain and Soviet Union were presented as the good guys, the Hebrews presented Israelite interlopers as the brave heroes and innocent Egyptians as the villains, which like the juxtaposition of Israeli murderers and Palestinian victims into Jew freedom fighters and Islamic terrorists is a historical injustice and unforgivable lie of the type that so debilitates our existence today.

Jews lie. They always have, and they always will.

Posted in ZIO-NAZI3 Comments

ISIS – Why the West Rebranded Al Cia-dah


(Left, CIA-Mossad-sponsored ISIS sends press releases of its atrocities in order
to establish itself as a permanent enemy in the mind of Western public.) 

“Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death.” — Adolf Hitler

Western intelligence had to establish “ISIS” because
the US Military balked at aiding “Al Qaeda,” a group
they had been told was responsible for 9-11. Now Al
Ciada can be seen as an ally against “a greater evil.”

by Richard Evans 

According to government propaganda, we face an enemy in ISIS worse than Hitler, Genghis Khan or Satan himself.

Recently we learned that Boko Haram and the Taliban had pledged allegiance to ISIS. We’re supposed to believe all Islamic terror groups are declaring war under the aegis of a Global Caliphate.  We are supposed to imagine ISIS is new and even more evil nemesis of Western Civilization than al-Qaeda.

In the Middle East and Africa, leaders openly condemn America’s support for ISIS, Boko Haram, al-Qaeda, Taliban, etc. Last month, Omar al-Bashir, President of Sudan, explained CIA and Israel’s Mossad were behind the Islamist militant groups Boko Haram and ISIS.   

Abdullah Ganji, the managing-director of an influential Iranian newspaper, says ISIS is a way  “to engage Muslims against each other, to waste their energy and in this way Israel’s security would be guaranteed or at least enhanced. Secondly, an ugly, violent and homicidal face of Islam is presented to the world. And third, it creates an inconvenience for Iran.”

golem.jpg(left, You won’t see cartoons like this in America, but this is how the Middle East and Islamic Africa sees ISIS, America, UK and Israel.)

Most Americans believed what they see on TV so this new brand of sand pirate, ISIS, is actually accepted as our new reality.

What could be more ludicrous than our CIA recruiting terrorists from desperately poor Islamic countries, training them in Jordan, furnishing them with BLACK uniforms, ski masks, weapons, new Toyota pickups and black (pirate) ISIS flags (for plenty of phony photo ops) and driving them into Iraq and Syria from NATO’s Turkey, the only place they could have originated?

TV viewers only see what Illuminati specialists prompt them to see on TV, yet what if only 51% of America asked, “Why would ISIS send our mass media grizzly videos of shocking cruelties to be used as propaganda against them???”

And Boko Harem and Taliban would not both merge with ISIS unless they were all under CIA control.

Sudan’s President, Omar al-Bashir , said, “there is a connection between the American and Israeli intelligence organizations and both extremist groups.”

How could even mindless Americans believe that two purportedly distinct terrorists organizations in distant parts of the world blindly throw their allegiance and control to ISIS, an organization that didn’t even exist 12 months ago?

The CIA rebranded Al Queda as a pretext for endless wars. The only way far flung factions could suddenly ‘join’  ISIS is they’re all already controlled from a central authority.

Thus, ISIS is actually more like the Trojan Horse –  with US/UK/NATO/Israel inside.


In September 2013, Obama proposed a US NATO no-fly zone over Iraq and Syria to help Al-Qaeda just like we helped Al-CIA-Duh overthrew Qaddafi in 2011 Libya.

protest2.jpgBut there was resistance within the US Military.

McCain and media were casually revealing that some of the US supported ‘rebels’ were al-Qaeda, and this prompted the rare ‘wakeup moment’ for US Military and public. It triggered the YouTube, Twitter and email campaign (left) with US uniformed men holding signs in front of their faces, ‘I DIDN’T FIGHT AL QUEDA IN AFGAHNISTAN TO FIGHT FOR THEM IN SYRIA’

In August 2013, a Christian village was hit by two rockets that released Sarin gas killing about a 800 civilians.  Obama asked Congress for permission to rain death on Syria “for the children”.  Obama’s proposal to bomb Syria fizzled.

IN FACT support for his air strikes on Syria plummeted to 7% in September 2013, so the day before the 9/11 anniversary, Obama had to replace Al Queda with ISIS.

Then the biweekly ISIS EXECUTION SHOW BEGAN. Ever wonder why ISIS uses orange US Gitmo prison jumpsuits?

Then news reports began trickling in about how US Military specialists were training ISIS fighters in Jordan. Later news reported that ISIS headquarters were located in the US Embassy in Ankara, Turkey.



(left, Americans oblivious to the atrocities carried out by their proxies.)

In December 2004, under the Bush Administration, the National Intelligence Council (NIC) predicted that in the year 2020 a “New Caliphate” extending from the Western Mediterranean to Central Asia and South East Asia would emerge, threatening Western democracy and Western values.

The “findings” of the National Intelligence Council were published in a 123 page unclassified report entitled “Mapping the Global Future”.

“A New Caliphate provides an example of how a global movement fueled by radical religious identity politics could constitute a challenge to Western norms and values as the foundation of the global system”  (emphasis added)]

The ISLMAMOFACIST CALIPHATE extending all the way to Great Britain was predictively programmed by none other then Glenn Beck when he was at his height on FOX in 2011. WE KNOW THIS IS FISHY because a Caliphate and STATE are contradictory terms.


Beck didn’t call it ‘ISLAMIC STATE’ but you get the predictive programming.  He seeded the notion and the memes. These were so ridiculous in 2011 and 2012 that Beck’s ratings actually plummeted to the extent that FOX canceled his show. He’d lost his credibility.   
– See more at:

Posted in Middle East, USAComments Off on ISIS – Why the West Rebranded Al Cia-dah





Al-Shaykh Hilaal:  In an operation distinguished more by guile than traditional military tactic, the Syrian Army Military Intelligence used information gathered from informants inside Al-Raqqa City to lure a combined force of Nusra/Alqaeda and ISIS cannibals into a trap resulting in the deaths of hundreds of terrorists.

This is an important point.  This may be the first time we have seen actual coordination between the 2 Takfeeri groups who receive most of their support from the absurd monkey-state of Saudi Arabia.  While the Saudis pretend to fear ISIS, they are, however, complicit in its creation and committed wholly to its nurturance.  It is also Ziad’s belief that the U.S. only wants to kill the “turned” brute Abu Bakr Al-Baghdaadi while keeping ISIS alive and under control to fight the Syrian Army.  Such is the treachery of the United States.

Yesterday, at dawn, 6 convoys of Nusra and ISIS savages were detected approaching SAA checkpoints around the area of Al-Shaykh Hilaal on the Al-Raqqa-Salamiyya Roads.  It was clear from Intel what these mostly foreign rodents were up to: sever the Al-Raqqa – Salamiyya Road and the Salamiyya – Aleppo Road.   The SAA deliberately leaked out information that the checkpoints at Al-Shaykh Hilaal, Al-Majbal, Al-Huwayta would be evacuated in order to avoid unnecessary loss of life because “the attacking force was unstoppable”.  The Syrian Army here was backed up by over 60 frontline battle tanks which are destined to be used in the liberation of Al-Raqqa.  They were dug in with their turrets barely visible to the naked eye.  Behind the armored force were an undisclosed number of mortars, Howitzers and Katyushas at the ready.  Behind those were over a thousand Syrian troops

Intercepted communications indicated the rats fell for the trick and were speeding to what they thought would be a glorious victory to be filmed and exhibited on all Takfiri ape websites.  The terrorists could be seen brandishing new weapons like heat-seeking missiles, and driving vans rigged to explode with their suspension systems depressed indicating a large load of military-grade TNT.  From their communications, it was determined almost all the rodents were from Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Libya, Tunisia.  Because of the involvement of these kinds of cockroaches, the operation was doomed.

As soon as the convoys started to split up in order to occupy the abandoned checkpoints, the field commander ordered the tanks and artillery to open fire.  Infantrymen and Popular Defense Force militia were at the ready to assault the remnant rats once their ranks had been decimated by the force of the rocket and missile attack.  It took 2 hours to finally disable and explode the last vehicle and it took another five hours to find each and every filthy-bearded ape-rodent and kill him.

At last count, Monzer says the number of dead rodents has exceeded 316 with more coming to his desk.  A brilliant victory for our army.

Hazeema Village:  This took place on March 8, 2015, the SAA assaulted a group of ISIS rodents and killed:

Muhammad ‘Abdul-Razzaaq Al-‘Anzi (KUWAITI LEPROUS ROACH.  Known also as “Abu Talha Al-Kuwayti”, he was a financial officer for ISIS in Al-Raqqa)


US Combat Forces, FBI and CIA in Ukraine


Vice President Biden Congratulates Poroshenko for Violating Minsk Peace Agreement

Global Research

Obama continues using Kiev junta proxies to wage war on Donbass. He’s gone all-out to sabotage multiple peace efforts spearheaded by Russia.

He didn’t wage war to quit. He’s supplying Kiev with heavy weapons, munitions and other US aid.

US combat forces are in Ukraine working directly with its military. CIA and FBI operatives infest Kiev.

On March 18, Joe Biden called Poroshenko. He congratulated him for violating Minsk.

It calls for granting Donbass special status autonomous rule. Draft Kiev legislation designates it “temporarily occupied territories.”

A White House statement said Biden “welcomed the (parliament’s) adoption of implementing measures relating to the law on special status for certain areas of eastern Ukraine…”

He lied saying legislation adopted complies with terms stipulated under “September 2014 and February 2015 Minsk agreements.”

Kiev continues violating their letter and spirit with full US support and encouragement.

“The two leaders discussed the upcoming multinational training program for Ukraines (Nazi infested) National Guard forces, which the United States will support,” the White House statement said.

They ‘agreed” on maintaining sanctions on Russia. They lied claiming they’re in response to “Russia(n) violence and instability in” Donbass.

They concurred on pressuring “the international community…to increase the costs to Russia for pursuing such actions.”

Sergey Lavrov responded saying Washington wants Ukrainian crisis conditions settled militarily.

Kiev’s failure to grant Donbass special status violates its pledge to do so.

“If Washington welcomes the action, which undermines the Minsk agreements, then we can only conclude that Washington is inciting Kiev to resolve the issue by military means,” Lavrov explained.

“The Ukrainian leadership..basically terminated their commitments to engage in direct dialogue and negotiate with south-eastern Ukraine, including on the issue of elections, on the implementation of the law on the special status…”

Russia’s OSCE envoy Andrey Kelin accused Kiev of spurning conflict ending dialogue with Donbass.

“No lasting truce and sustainable ceasefire are possible without political settlement, and no such settlement is possible without dialogue,” he said.

“Kiev is categorically reluctant to speak with Donbas about political settlement. Last year’s developments seem to be reoccurring.”

“We saw it a year ago and it ended up, as we know, in Ukraines aggression against Donbas.”

“Kiev is seeking to fall into the same trap, arrogantly ignoring representatives of the Donetsk and Luhansk republics.”

“If they do not observe what has been agreed in Minsk after months of warfare, and Minsk agreements provide for a dialogue between the parties to the conflict to establish the DPR and LPR status, local elections in Donbas and normal political settlement, the risk (of attempts to solve the conflict by military means) considerably increases.”

Kiev systematically breached previous peace initiatives straightaway. It ignores Minsk II provisions.

It wants total control over Donbass regained. It intends seizing it forcefully.

Illegitimate prime minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk explained it several times. Most recently on Wednesday unambiguously saying “(o)ur goal is to regain control of Donetsk and Lugansk.”

Last April, naked aggression was launched to accomplish Kiev’s objective. Low-intensity conflict continues – heading toward resuming full-scale war at Washington’s discretion.

Expect it any time. Expect likely greater mass slaughter and destruction than before.

“We will fight using all method and techniques,” said Yatsenyuk. Meaning no-holds-barred dirty war – using banned weapons, willfully targeting civilians, and committing other egregious crimes of war and against humanity.

Expect Russia and rebels blamed for US/Kiev crimes like earlier. Chances for peace are nil.

At risk is direct US/Russian confrontation. Fox News is one of many presstitute platforms promoting it.

It features anti-Russian gun-slinging retired generals. Robert Scales told Fox the only way to change things in Ukraine is “start killing Russians.”

A criminal case was opened against him in Russia under Article 354 of its Criminal Code.

He advocates cold-blooded murder. He’s not alone. Active and retired US political and military officials want war on Russia.

Giving them national television air time increases the possibility. Lunatic fringe loose cannons infest Washington.

Retired General/former US army vice chief of staff Jack Keane wants US bases closer to Russia’s borders.

Sanctions and provocative military exercises aren’t enough, he says. He urges tougher actions.

“I think weve got to recognize that the security issues in Europe are no longer in Central Europe where our forces were post-WW2,” he said.

“The fact is theyre in Eastern Europe, so we should realign our bases not on a temporary basis but on a permanent basis, put the air bases and the ground bases further into eastern Europe, move them out of Central Germany where they currently are.”

“That’ll cost some expense, but it’s absolutely worth it in terms of letting Putin know clearly that those countries, those Baltic countries…matter to us.”

“They are a part of NATO and we’re not going to accept any challenge to them.”

“This would send a really loud signal to them that clearly the security situation in Europe has changed.”

“Its recognition of those changes. It’s a recognition of the intimidation and the threatening situation that is clearly developing.”

Fact: America’s only threats are ones it invents.

Fact: Eastern and Western European countries claiming Russian threats lie. None exist.

Fact: Positioning increasing numbers of US military combat troops near Russia’s borders heightens chances for direct confrontation.

Posted in USA, UkraineComments Off on US Combat Forces, FBI and CIA in Ukraine

World Water Day & Pakistan


By Sajjad Shaukat

Every year, World Water Day is celebrated on March 22 on global level, focusing attention on

the water crisis as well as the solutions to address it.

An international day to celebrate freshwater was recommended at the 1992 United Nations

Conference on Environment and Development. The United Nations General Assembly

responded by designating March 22, 1993 as the first World Water Day.

Each year, this very day highlights a specific aspect of freshwater. In 2015, World Water Day

has the theme “Water and Sustainable Development.”

Although Pakistan also celebrates World Water Day, yet its case is different from other

countries, as India has stared water terrorism against Pakistan.

It is notable that since the 9/11 tragedy, international community has been taking war against

terrorism seriously, while there are also other forms of bloodless wars, being waged in the world

and the same are like terrorism. Political experts opine that modern terrorism has many meanings

like violent acts, economic terrorism etc., but its main aim is to achieve political, economic and

social ends. Judging in these terms, India’s water terrorism against Pakistan is of special

In March, 2011, speaking in diplomatic language, Indus Water Commissioner of India G.

Ranganathan denied that India’s decision to build dams on rivers led to water shortage in

Pakistan. He also rejected Islamabad’s concerns at water theft by New Delhi or violation of the

Indus Water Treaty of 1960, assuring his counterpart, Syed Jamaat Ali Shah that all issues

relating to water would be resolved through dialogue. However, ground realties are quite

different from what Ranganathan maintained.

Besides other permanent issues and, especially the dispute of Kashmir which has always been

used by India to malign and pressurize Pakistan, water of rivers has become a matter of life and

death for every Pakistani, as New Delhi has been employing it as a tool of terrorism to blackmail

In this regard, Indian decision to construct two hydro-electric projects on River Neelam which is

called Krishanganga is a new violation of the Indus Basin Water Treaty. The World Bank, itself,

is the mediator and signatory for the treaty. After the partition, owing to war-like situation, New

Delhi deliberately stopped the flow of Pakistan’s rivers which originate from the Indian-held

Kashmir. Even at that time, Indian rulers had used water as a tool of aggression against Pakistan.

However, due to Indian illogical stand, Islamabad sought the help of international arbitration.

The Indus Basin Treaty allocates waters of three western rivers of Indus, Jhelum and Chenab to

Pakistan, while India has rights over eastern rivers of Ravi, Sutlej and Beas.

Since the settlement of the dispute, India has always violated the treaty intermittently to create

economic crisis in Pakistan. In 1984, India began construction of the Wullar Barrage on river

Jhelum in the occupied Kashmir.

In the past, the issue of Wullar Barrage has also been discussed in various rounds of talks, being

held under composite dialogue process between the two rivals, but Indian intransigence has

continued. In the mid 1990s India started another violation by constructing the Baglihar dam on

the Chenab river. In 2005, Pakistan had again sought the World Bank’s help to stop construction

of the Baglihar dam. Although WB allowed India to go ahead with the project after a few

modifications, yet it did not permit the interruption of the agreed quota of water flow to Pakistan.

In 2008, India suddenly reduced water flow of the Chenab river to give a greater setback to our

autumnal crops. Islamabad on September 17, 2008 threatened to seek the World Bank’s

intervention on the plea that New Delhi had not responded to its repeated complaints on the issue

appropriately. But, India did nothing to address the problem.

However, New Delhi has been using water as an instrument to pressurize Islamabad with a view

to getting leverage in the Pak-India dialogue especially regarding Indian-held Kashmir where a

new phase of protests against the Indian illegitimate occupation has accelerated. In this respect,

the then Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi had said on February 8, 2010 that Pakistan’s

case on Kashmir and water was based on truth, and the government would fight it with full

Indian diplomacy of water terrorism could also be judged from some other development. Online

reports suggest that New Delhi has secretly offered technical assistance to the Afghan

government in order to construct a dam over Kabul River which is a main water contributor to

In fact, India wants to keep its control on Kashmir which is located in the Indus River basin area,

and which contributes to the flow of all the major rivers, entering Pakistan. It is determined to

bring about political, economic and social problems of grave nature in Pakistan.

In this context, China Daily News Group wrote in 2005: “Another added complication is that in

building a dam upstream of Pakistan, India will possess the ability to flood or starve Pakistan at

will. This ability was witnessed in July of 2004 when India, without warning, released water into

the Chenab river, flooding large portions of Pakistan. The history of conflict between these two

nations makes it possible for New Delhi to use nature as a real weapon against Islamabad.”

According to an estimate, unlike India, Pakistan is highly dependent on agriculture, which in turn

is dependent on water. Of the 79.6 million hectares of land that makeup Pakistan, 20 million are

available for agriculture. Of those 20 million hectares, 16 million are dependent on irrigation. So,

almost 80% of Pakistan’s agriculture is dependent on irrigation.

It is noteworthy that many of Pakistan’s industries are agro-based such as the textiles industry.

Besides, 80% of Pakistan’s food needs are fulfilled domestically. Thus an interruption of water

supply would have broad-ranging effects. For example, when the country suffered a drought

from 1998 to 2001, there were violent riots in Karachi.

It is mentionable that half of Pakistan’s energy comes from hydroelectricity, and at present, our

country has been facing a severe crisis of loadshedding which is the result of power-shortage in

the country. During the recent past summers, people in a number of cities like Karachi, Lahore,

Multan, Faisalabad etc. lodged violent protests against the loadshedding, culminating into loss of

It is of particular attention that Pakistan’s Federal Minister for Water and Power Khawaja Asif

warned on February 10, 2015 that although the electricity shortage in the country would be

overcome within two to three years, the scarcity of water is another issue looming in the country.

While, Pakistan has already been facing multiple challenges of grave nature coupled with a

perennial phenomenon of terrorism like suicide attacks, bomb blasts, targetted killings etc.,

committed by the militants who are being backed by Indian secret agency, RAW, New Delhi

also employs water as an instrument by increasing its scarcity, making life too often miserable

for Pakistanis with the ultimate aim of creating poverty which could produce more terrorism in

turn. And, India is likely to deepen differences among Pakistan’s provinces over various issues

which are directly or indirectly related to water.

Nonetheless, Islamabad must include water as a major focus of agenda in the future dialogue;

otherwise India is likely to continue its water terrorism against Pakistan.

Posted in Pakistan & KashmirComments Off on World Water Day & Pakistan

Shoah’s pages