Conference to Lay Plans to Prosecute High Level US War Criminals

Conference to Lay Plans to Prosecute High Level

US War Criminals



A two-day conference on obtaining prosecutions of high level American war criminals will open September 13th, in Andover, Mass. The conference will explore the legal grounds for, and plan for, obtaining prosecutions of President Bush and top officials of his Administration for war crimes.

In the tradition of America’s Chief Prosecutor at the Nuremburg War Crimes Trials after World War II, Justice Robert Jackson, the Conference’s purpose is “to hold high U.S. officials accountable in courts of law and, if guilt is found, to obtain appropriate punishments. Otherwise,” said the Conference’s convener, Lawrence Velvel, “the future will be threatened by additional examples of Executive lawlessness by leaders who need fear no personal consequences” for their actions, leading to “the possibility of more Viet Nams, more Iraqs, and more repression.”

Velvel emphasized, “This is intended to be a planning conference, one at which plans will be laid, and necessary organizational structures will be set up, to seek prosecutions to determine guilt and, if guilt is found, appropriate punishments.”

Attendees will hear from prominent authorities on international law, criminal prosecutions, and constitutional rights who are determined to give meaning to Justice Jackson’s words: “The common sense of mankind demands that law shall not stop with the punishment of petty crimes by little people. It must also reach men who possess themselves of great power and make deliberate and concerted use of it to set in motion evils which leave no home in the world untouched.”

Topics to be discussed, Velvel said, include:

# What international and domestic crimes were committed, which facts show crimes under which laws, and what punishments are possible.

# Which high level Executive officials — and Federal judges and legislators as well, if any — are chargeable with crimes.

# Which international tribunals, foreign tribunals and domestic tribunals (if any) can be used and how to begin cases and/or obtain prosecutions before them.

# The possibility of establishing a Chief Prosecutor’s Office such as the one at Nuremburg.

# An examination of cases already brought and their outcomes.

# Creating an umbrella Coordinating Committee with representatives from the increasing number of organizations involved in war crimes cases.

# Creating a Center to keep track of and organize compilations of relevant briefs, articles, books, opinions, and facts, etc., on war crimes and prosecutions of war criminals.

Scheduled to address the Conference are:

# Famed former Los Angeles prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi, author of the best-selling “The Prosecution of George W. Bush For Murder”(Vanguard).

# Phillippe Sands, Professor of Law and Director of the Centre of International Courts and Tribunals at University College, London . He is the author of “Torture Team: Rumsfeld’s Memo and the Betrayal of American Values” (Penguin/Palgrave Macmillan), among other works.

# Jordan Paust, Professor of Law at the University of Houston and author of “Beyond The Law.”

# Ann Wright, a former U.S. Army colonel and U.S. Foreign Service official who holds a State Department Award for Heroism and who taught the Geneva Conventions and the Law of Land Warfare at the Special Warfare Center at Ft. Bragg, N.C. She is the coauthor of “Dissent: Voices of Conscience.”

# Peter Weiss, Vice President of the Center For Constitutional Rights, which was recently involved with war crimes complaints filed in Germany and France against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others.

# Benjamin Davis, Associate Professor at the University of Toledo College of Law and former American Legal Counsel for the Secretariat of the International Court of Arbitration.

# David Lindorff, journalist and co-author with Barbara Olshansky of “The Case for Impeachment: Legal Arguments for Removing President George W. Bush from Office”(St. Martin ’s Press).

# Francis Boyle, Professor of International Law at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, responsible for drafting the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, and the U.S. implementing legislation for the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention.

# Lawrence Velvel, a leader in the field of law school education reform, has written numerous internet articles on issues relevant to the conference.

Legal authorities, media representatives, and the general public are invited to attend the conference. Attendees will receive a special hotel rate of $99 per night.

Andover is nearly equidistant from both Boston’s Logan Airport , served by all major airlines, and the Manchester , N.H. , Airport, served by Southwest Airlines and USAir.

Further Information: Jeff Demers (see above) or Sherwood Ross, Ross Associates, Suite 403, 102 S.W. 6th Ave., Miami, FL 33130 or

The Military-Industrial Complex

The Military-Industrial Complex

It’s Much Later Than You Think

By Chalmers JohnsonMost Americans have a rough idea what the term “military-industrial complex” means when they come across it in a newspaper or hear a politician mention it. President Dwight D. Eisenhower introduced the idea to the public in his farewell address of January 17, 1961. “Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime,” he said, “or indeed by the fighting men of World War II and Korea… We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions… We must not fail to comprehend its grave implications… We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.”

Although Eisenhower’s reference to the military-industrial complex is, by now, well-known, his warning against its “unwarranted influence” has, I believe, largely been ignored. Since 1961, there has been too little serious study of, or discussion of, the origins of the military-industrial complex, how it has changed over time, how governmental secrecy has hidden it from oversight by members of Congress or attentive citizens, and how it degrades our Constitutional structure of checks and balances.

From its origins in the early 1940s, when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt was building up his “arsenal of democracy,” down to the present moment, public opinion has usually assumed that it involved more or less equitable relations — often termed a “partnership” — between the high command and civilian overlords of the United States military and privately-owned, for-profit manufacturing and service enterprises. Unfortunately, the truth of the matter is that, from the time they first emerged, these relations were never equitable.

In the formative years of the military-industrial complex, the public still deeply distrusted privately owned industrial firms because of the way they had contributed to the Great Depression. Thus, the leading role in the newly emerging relationship was played by the official governmental sector. A deeply popular, charismatic president, FDR sponsored these public-private relationships. They gained further legitimacy because their purpose was to rearm the country, as well as allied nations around the world, against the gathering forces of fascism. The private sector was eager to go along with this largely as a way to regain public trust and disguise its wartime profit-making.

In the late 1930s and early 1940s, Roosevelt’s use of public-private “partnerships” to build up the munitions industry, and thereby finally overcome the Great Depression, did not go entirely unchallenged. Although he was himself an implacable enemy of fascism, a few people thought that the president nonetheless was coming close to copying some of its key institutions. The leading Italian philosopher of fascism, the neo-Hegelian Giovanni Gentile, once argued that it should more appropriately be called “corporatism” because it was a merger of state and corporate power. (See Eugene Jarecki’s The American Way of War, p. 69.)

Some critics were alarmed early on by the growing symbiotic relationship between government and corporate officials because each simultaneously sheltered and empowered the other, while greatly confusing the separation of powers. Since the activities of a corporation are less amenable to public or congressional scrutiny than those of a public institution, public-private collaborative relationships afford the private sector an added measure of security from such scrutiny. These concerns were ultimately swamped by enthusiasm for the war effort and the postwar era of prosperity that the war produced.

Beneath the surface, however, was a less well recognized movement by big business to replace democratic institutions with those representing the interests of capital. This movement is today ascendant. (See Thomas Frank’s new book, The Wrecking Crew: How Conservatives Rule, for a superb analysis of Ronald Reagan’s slogan “government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem.”) Its objectives have long been to discredit what it called “big government,” while capturing for private interests the tremendous sums invested by the public sector in national defense. It may be understood as a slow-burning reaction to what American conservatives believed to be the socialism of the New Deal.

Perhaps the country’s leading theorist of democracy, Sheldon S. Wolin, has written a new book, Democracy Incorporated, on what he calls “inverted totalitarianism” — the rise in the U.S. of totalitarian institutions of conformity and regimentation shorn of the police repression of the earlier German, Italian, and Soviet forms. He warns of “the expansion of private (i.e., mainly corporate) power and the selective abdication of governmental responsibility for the well-being of the citizenry.” He also decries the degree to which the so-called privatization of governmental activities has insidiously undercut our democracy, leaving us with the widespread belief that government is no longer needed and that, in any case, it is not capable of performing the functions we have entrusted to it.

Wolin writes:

“The privatization of public services and functions manifests the steady evolution of corporate power into a political form, into an integral, even dominant partner with the state. It marks the transformation of American politics and its political culture, from a system in which democratic practices and values were, if not defining, at least major contributory elements, to one where the remaining democratic elements of the state and its populist programs are being systematically dismantled.” (p. 284)

Mercenaries at Work

The military-industrial complex has changed radically since World War II or even the height of the Cold War. The private sector is now fully ascendant. The uniformed air, land, and naval forces of the country as well as its intelligence agencies, including the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency), the NSA (National Security Agency), the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency), and even clandestine networks entrusted with the dangerous work of penetrating and spying on terrorist organizations are all dependent on hordes of “private contractors.” In the context of governmental national security functions, a better term for these might be “mercenaries” working in private for profit-making companies.

Tim Shorrock, an investigative journalist and the leading authority on this subject, sums up this situation devastatingly in his new book, Spies for Hire: The Secret World of Intelligence Outsourcing. The following quotes are a précis of some of his key findings:

“In 2006… the cost of America’s spying and surveillance activities outsourced to contractors reached $42 billion, or about 70 percent of the estimated $60 billion the government spends each year on foreign and domestic intelligence… [The] number of contract employees now exceeds [the CIA’s] full-time workforce of 17,500… Contractors make up more than half the workforce of the CIA’s National Clandestine Service (formerly the Directorate of Operations), which conducts covert operations and recruits spies abroad…”To feed the NSA’s insatiable demand for data and information technology, the industrial base of contractors seeking to do business with the agency grew from 144 companies in 2001 to more than 5,400 in 2006… At the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), the agency in charge of launching and maintaining the nation’s photoreconnaissance and eavesdropping satellites, almost the entire workforce is composed of contract employees working for [private] companies… With an estimated $8 billion annual budget, the largest in the IC [intelligence community], contractors control about $7 billion worth of business at the NRO, giving the spy satellite industry the distinction of being the most privatized part of the intelligence community…

“If there’s one generalization to be made about the NSA’s outsourced IT [information technology] programs, it is this: they haven’t worked very well, and some have been spectacular failures… In 2006, the NSA was unable to analyze much of the information it was collecting… As a result, more than 90 percent of the information it was gathering was being discarded without being translated into a coherent and understandable format; only about 5 percent was translated from its digital form into text and then routed to the right division for analysis.

“The key phrase in the new counterterrorism lexicon is ‘public-private partnerships’… In reality, ‘partnerships’ are a convenient cover for the perpetuation of corporate interests.” (pp. 6, 13-14, 16, 214-15, 365)

Several inferences can be drawn from Shorrock’s shocking exposé. One is that if a foreign espionage service wanted to penetrate American military and governmental secrets, its easiest path would not be to gain access to any official U.S. agencies, but simply to get its agents jobs at any of the large intelligence-oriented private companies on which the government has become remarkably dependent. These include Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), with headquarters in San Diego, California, which typically pays its 42,000 employees higher salaries than if they worked at similar jobs in the government; Booz Allen Hamilton, one of the nation’s oldest intelligence and clandestine-operations contractors, which, until January 2007, was the employer of Mike McConnell, the current director of national intelligence and the first private contractor to be named to lead the entire intelligence community; and CACI International, which, under two contracts for “information technology services,” ended up supplying some two dozen interrogators to the Army at Iraq’s already infamous Abu Ghraib prison in 2003. According to Major General Anthony Taguba, who investigated the Abu Ghraib torture and abuse scandal, four of CACI’s interrogators were “either directly or indirectly responsible” for torturing prisoners. (Shorrock, p. 281)

Remarkably enough, SAIC has virtually replaced the National Security Agency as the primary collector of signals intelligence for the government. It is the NSA’s largest contractor, and that agency is today the company’s single largest customer.

There are literally thousands of other profit-making enterprises that work to supply the government with so-called intelligence needs, sometimes even bribing Congressmen to fund projects that no one in the executive branch actually wants. This was the case with Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham, Republican of California’s 50th District, who, in 2006, was sentenced to eight-and-a-half years in federal prison for soliciting bribes from defense contractors. One of the bribers, Brent Wilkes, snagged a $9.7 million contract for his company, ADCS Inc. (“Automated Document Conversion Systems”) to computerize the century-old records of the Panama Canal dig!

A Country Drowning in Euphemisms

The United States has long had a sorry record when it comes to protecting its intelligence from foreign infiltration, but the situation today seems particularly perilous. One is reminded of the case described in the 1979 book by Robert Lindsey, The Falcon and the Snowman (made into a 1985 film of the same name). It tells the true story of two young Southern Californians, one with a high security clearance working for the defense contractor TRW (dubbed “RTX” in the film), and the other a drug addict and minor smuggler. The TRW employee is motivated to act by his discovery of a misrouted CIA document describing plans to overthrow the prime minister of Australia, and the other by a need for money to pay for his addiction.

They decide to get even with the government by selling secrets to the Soviet Union and are exposed by their own bungling. Both are sentenced to prison for espionage. The message of the book (and film) lies in the ease with which they betrayed their country — and how long it took before they were exposed and apprehended. Today, thanks to the staggering over-privatization of the collection and analysis of foreign intelligence, the opportunities for such breaches of security are widespread.

I applaud Shorrock for his extraordinary research into an almost impenetrable subject using only openly available sources. There is, however, one aspect of his analysis with which I differ. This is his contention that the wholesale takeover of official intelligence collection and analysis by private companies is a form of “outsourcing.” This term is usually restricted to a business enterprise buying goods and services that it does not want to manufacture or supply in-house. When it is applied to a governmental agency that turns over many, if not all, of its key functions to a risk-averse company trying to make a return on its investment, “outsourcing” simply becomes a euphemism for mercenary activities.

As David Bromwich, a political critic and Yale professor of literature, observed in the New York Review of Books:

“The separate bookkeeping and accountability devised for Blackwater, DynCorp, Triple Canopy, and similar outfits was part of a careful displacement of oversight from Congress to the vice-president and the stewards of his policies in various departments and agencies. To have much of the work parceled out to private companies who are unaccountable to army rules or military justice, meant, among its other advantages, that the cost of the war could be concealed beyond all detection.”

Euphemisms are words intended to deceive. The United States is already close to drowning in them, particularly new words and terms devised, or brought to bear, to justify the American invasion of Iraq — coinages Bromwich highlights like “regime change,” “enhanced interrogation techniques,” “the global war on terrorism,” “the birth pangs of a new Middle East,” a “slight uptick in violence,” “bringing torture within the law,” “simulated drowning,” and, of course, “collateral damage,” meaning the slaughter of unarmed civilians by American troops and aircraft followed — rarely — by perfunctory apologies. It is important that the intrusion of unelected corporate officials with hidden profit motives into what are ostensibly public political activities not be confused with private businesses buying Scotch tape, paper clips, or hubcaps.

The wholesale transfer of military and intelligence functions to private, often anonymous, operatives took off under Ronald Reagan’s presidency, and accelerated greatly after 9/11 under George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Often not well understood, however, is this: The biggest private expansion into intelligence and other areas of government occurred under the presidency of Bill Clinton. He seems not to have had the same anti-governmental and neoconservative motives as the privatizers of both the Reagan and Bush II eras. His policies typically involved an indifference to — perhaps even an ignorance of — what was actually being done to democratic, accountable government in the name of cost-cutting and allegedly greater efficiency. It is one of the strengths of Shorrock’s study that he goes into detail on Clinton’s contributions to the wholesale privatization of our government, and of the intelligence agencies in particular.

Reagan launched his campaign to shrink the size of government and offer a large share of public expenditures to the private sector with the creation in 1982 of the “Private Sector Survey on Cost Control.” In charge of the survey, which became known as the “Grace Commission,” he named the conservative businessman, J. Peter Grace, Jr., chairman of the W.R. Grace Corporation, one of the world’s largest chemical companies — notorious for its production of asbestos and its involvement in numerous anti-pollution suits. The Grace Company also had a long history of investment in Latin America, and Peter Grace was deeply committed to undercutting what he saw as leftist unions, particularly because they often favored state-led economic development.

The Grace Commission’s actual achievements were modest. Its biggest was undoubtedly the 1987 privatization of Conrail, the freight railroad for the northeastern states. Nothing much else happened on this front during the first Bush’s administration, but Bill Clinton returned to privatization with a vengeance.

According to Shorrock:

“Bill Clinton… picked up the cudgel where the conservative Ronald Reagan left off and… took it deep into services once considered inherently governmental, including high-risk military operations and intelligence functions once reserved only for government agencies. By the end of [Clinton’s first] term, more than 100,000 Pentagon jobs had been transferred to companies in the private sector — among them thousands of jobs in intelligence… By the end of [his second] term in 2001, the administration had cut 360,000 jobs from the federal payroll and the government was spending 44 percent more on contractors than it had in 1993.” (pp. 73, 86)

These activities were greatly abetted by the fact that the Republicans had gained control of the House of Representatives in 1994 for the first time in 43 years. One liberal journalist described “outsourcing as a virtual joint venture between [House Majority Leader Newt] Gingrich and Clinton.” The right-wing Heritage Foundation aptly labeled Clinton’s 1996 budget as the “boldest privatization agenda put forth by any president to date.” (p. 87)

After 2001, Bush and Cheney added an ideological rationale to the process Clinton had already launched so efficiently. They were enthusiastic supporters of “a neoconservative drive to siphon U.S. spending on defense, national security, and social programs to large corporations friendly to the Bush administration.” (pp. 72-3)

The Privatization — and Loss — of Institutional Memory

The end result is what we see today: a government hollowed out in terms of military and intelligence functions. The KBR Corporation, for example, supplies food, laundry, and other personal services to our troops in Iraq based on extremely lucrative no-bid contracts, while Blackwater Worldwide supplies security and analytical services to the CIA and the State Department in Baghdad. (Among other things, its armed mercenaries opened fire on, and killed, 17 unarmed civilians in Nisour Square, Baghdad, on September 16, 2007, without any provocation, according to U.S. military reports.) The costs — both financial and personal — of privatization in the armed services and the intelligence community far exceed any alleged savings, and some of the consequences for democratic governance may prove irreparable.

These consequences include: the sacrifice of professionalism within our intelligence services; the readiness of private contractors to engage in illegal activities without compunction and with impunity; the inability of Congress or citizens to carry out effective oversight of privately-managed intelligence activities because of the wall of secrecy that surrounds them; and, perhaps most serious of all, the loss of the most valuable asset any intelligence organization possesses — its institutional memory.

Most of these consequences are obvious, even if almost never commented on by our politicians or paid much attention in the mainstream media. After all, the standards of a career CIA officer are very different from those of a corporate executive who must keep his eye on the contract he is fulfilling and future contracts that will determine the viability of his firm. The essence of professionalism for a career intelligence analyst is his integrity in laying out what the U.S. government should know about a foreign policy issue, regardless of the political interests of, or the costs to, the major players.

The loss of such professionalism within the CIA was starkly revealed in the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction. It still seems astonishing that no senior official, beginning with Secretary of State Colin Powell, saw fit to resign when the true dimensions of our intelligence failure became clear, least of all Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet.

A willingness to engage in activities ranging from the dubious to the outright felonious seems even more prevalent among our intelligence contractors than among the agencies themselves, and much harder for an outsider to detect. For example, following 9/11, Rear Admiral John Poindexter, then working for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) of the Department of Defense, got the bright idea that DARPA should start compiling dossiers on as many American citizens as possible in order to see whether “data-mining” procedures might reveal patterns of behavior associated with terrorist activities.

On November 14, 2002, the New York Times published a column by William Safire entitled “You Are a Suspect” in which he revealed that DARPA had been given a $200 million budget to compile dossiers on 300 million Americans. He wrote, “Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every web site you visit and every e-mail you send or receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book, and every event you attend — all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as a ‘virtual centralized grand database.'” This struck many members of Congress as too close to the practices of the Gestapo and the Stasi under German totalitarianism, and so, the following year, they voted to defund the project.

However, Congress’s action did not end the “total information awareness” program. The National Security Agency secretly decided to continue it through its private contractors. The NSA easily persuaded SAIC and Booz Allen Hamilton to carry on with what Congress had declared to be a violation of the privacy rights of the American public — for a price. As far as we know, Admiral Poindexter’s “Total Information Awareness Program” is still going strong today.

The most serious immediate consequence of the privatization of official governmental activities is the loss of institutional memory by our government’s most sensitive organizations and agencies. Shorrock concludes, “So many former intelligence officers joined the private sector [during the 1990s] that, by the turn of the century, the institutional memory of the United States intelligence community now resides in the private sector. That’s pretty much where things stood on September 11, 2001.” (p. 112)

This means that the CIA, the DIA, the NSA, and the other 13 agencies in the U.S. intelligence community cannot easily be reformed because their staffs have largely forgotten what they are supposed to do, or how to go about it. They have not been drilled and disciplined in the techniques, unexpected outcomes, and know-how of previous projects, successful and failed.

As numerous studies have, by now, made clear, the abject failure of the American occupation of Iraq came about in significant measure because the Department of Defense sent a remarkably privatized military filled with incompetent amateurs to Baghdad to administer the running of a defeated country. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates (a former director of the CIA) has repeatedly warned that the United States is turning over far too many functions to the military because of its hollowing out of the Department of State and the Agency for International Development since the end of the Cold War. Gates believes that we are witnessing a “creeping militarization” of foreign policy — and, though this generally goes unsaid, both the military and the intelligence services have turned over far too many of their tasks to private companies and mercenaries.

When even Robert Gates begins to sound like President Eisenhower, it is time for ordinary citizens to pay attention. In my 2006 book Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic, with an eye to bringing the imperial presidency under some modest control, I advocated that we Americans abolish the CIA altogether, along with other dangerous and redundant agencies in our alphabet soup of sixteen secret intelligence agencies, and replace them with the State Department’s professional staff devoted to collecting and analyzing foreign intelligence. I still hold that position.

Nonetheless, the current situation represents the worst of all possible worlds. Successive administrations and Congresses have made no effort to alter the CIA’s role as the president’s private army, even as we have increased its incompetence by turning over many of its functions to the private sector. We have thereby heightened the risks of war by accident, or by presidential whim, as well as of surprise attack because our government is no longer capable of accurately assessing what is going on in the world and because its intelligence agencies are so open to pressure, penetration, and manipulation of every kind.

[Note to Readers: This essay focuses on the new book by Tim Shorrock, Spies for Hire: The Secret World of Intelligence Outsourcing, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2008.

Other books noted: Eugene Jarecki’s The American Way of War: Guided Missiles, Misguided Men, and a Republic in Peril, New York: Free Press, 2008; Thomas Frank, The Wrecking Crew: How Conservatives Rule, New York: Metropolitan Books, 2008; Sheldon Wolin, Democracy Incorporated: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008.]

Chalmers Johnson is the author of three linked books on the crises of American imperialism and militarism. They are Blowback (2000), The Sorrows of Empire (2004), and Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic (2006). All are available in paperback from Metropolitan Books.

Copyright 2008 Chalmers Johnson

Think Tanks to Holding Tanks, Board Rooms to Gallows

Think Tanks to Holding Tanks,

Board Rooms to Gallows

The perversion and demise of the U.S. Republic and the global shakedown of U.S.- and Israeli-chosen enemies would not be possible without the neocon-Likudnik empire’s Propaganda Ministry.

This three-part document makes a layman’s case against the members thereof — most notably, News Corporation, The Associated Press, and the various ideological agents that are keeping media and state incestuously bonded and heading down the road to fascist self-destruction and global immolation.

Bite the Lamb; Cry Wolf

On September 6, 2007, Israeli Air Forces (IAF) jets violated Syrian airspace and destroyed a construction site which was alleged by Israeli officials to have been a nuclear facility intended for weaponization. The evidence accompanying the Israeli allegations, which was not officially put forward until months later, showed no wrongdoing on Syria’s part. That any mainstream news outlet would report the Israeli accusations without a healthy dose of skepticism would be a travesty.

But that’s just what happened: corporate news media practically parroted the U.S.-corroborated Israeli claims and omitted the exclusive criminality on the part of the accusers. The IAF raid was an act of aggressive war in gross violation of international law, and U.S. officials colluded with the Israelis; but you could go blind trying to find one mainstream news report wherein Syria’s defensive disposition or even its presumed innocence is implied, much less stated as fact.

Damascus is in good standing with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and has not violated the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) — an agreement the nuclear-armed state of Israel has refused to enter, and the most indomitably-nuclear USA has serially ignored. Still, the plot has been spun around the Israeli- and U.S.-contrived threat of a nuclear-armed Syria.

How is that possible?

Nazi-German war criminal and propaganda guru, Joseph Goebbels, is often quoted on how leaders convince their subjects to believe the biggest lies in favor of the state. His instructions on the use of entertainment via theater and wireless media, to distract the captive audience from the dark cynicism of the regime’s desired ends — and techniques like repetition and omission for brainwashing purposes — have not been lost on the propagandists of the neocon-Likudnik empire.

Nine months before the Israeli-U.S. war crime against Syria, a rare news report surfaced about a campaign aimed at demonizing and overthrowing the Syrian and Iranian regimes (boldness mine):

For nearly a year, a select group of US officials has been quietly coordinating actions to counter the looming threat of a nuclear-armed Iran, including increasing the military capabilities of Arab allies such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain.

The group, known as the Iran Syria Policy and Operations Group, or ISOG, is also coordinating a host of other actions, which include covert assistance to Iranian dissidents and building international outrage toward Iran by publicizing its alleged role in a 1994 terrorist attack in Argentina, according to interviews with half a dozen White House, Pentagon, and State Department officials who are involved in the group’s work. [1]

Government officials do not reveal illicit government plans to reporters without a hitch; hence the editor’s apple-polishing sterilization of the language. Notice that the so-called threat of a nuclear Iran and Iranian culpability in the Argentina attack are stated as facts, while the dubious legal status of the operation is omitted.

Those U.S. officials would have insisted on a “deep background” interview, or no story at all, if not for the editor’s assurance that the final draft would reflect the U.S. venture as a benign and necessary response to rogue actions of the Iranian and Syria governments. This is one way in which news media lie for the government with subtlety and plausible deniability while appearing to challenge power.

Fraudulent chicken-hawking for violent regime-change in Tehran and Damascus is nothing new for Michael Ledeen and his neocon contemporaries. One week after the above report, the co-architect of pre-invasion lies about Iraq WMDs could be found trumpeting the ISOG battle call:

[T]he only way to demonstrate a will to win is to go after the Iranians and the Syrians … God knows the evidence of Syrian involvement is overwhelming, and the latest information reportedly shows they are on both sides of the Sunni/Shiite divide. …

If we do not tackle Syria, we will simply provide the terrorists with more targets. If we do go after them, we may yet win this thing. As luck would have it, this is the ideal moment to go after the Iranians, since their supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, is either dead or dying, and a vicious internal power struggle is under way in Tehran.

We should propose a better solution to the Iranian people: revolution, leading to their freedom. That would require the president and the secretary of State to call for regime change in Iran and Syria, something from which they have always retreated in the past. But if we want to win, that’s the first step. Anybody ready? [2]

One columnist, constantly spewing false and criminally-subversive filth, isn’t enough to affect mass sentiment. But, if enough Michael Ledeen’s spew their lies and conjecture via a substantial array of media — regularly, consistently, and over a duration — a sufficient portion of the audience will eventually, if unwittingly, accept the insanity as normalcy.

Thus, a dumbed-down (mainstream) mindset is incubated and the illegal wars on Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran are easily sold.

[Source: bravenewfilms]

The efforts of ISOG, Ledeen, et al., have successfully passed through Congress numerous times over the past few years. The latest such effort is — surprise! — House Resolution 385: “Condemning the Attack on the AMIA Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, Argentine, in July 1994 and for other purposes, before the US House of Representatives, July 15, 2008.”

Luckily, some U.S. officials actually know what’s up, or at least care to speak out. Congressman Ron Paul warns that the neocon regime-change fanatics are ”using a crime to justify a war,” and as usual, he is right.

Indeed, the natural complement to the repetition of big lies is the omission of even bigger truths.

Around the same time that ISOG was reported to have intensified its campaign against Syria and Iran (early-2006), ISOG member and Iran-Contra pal of Ledeen’s — Elliot Abrams — was planning his own shakedown operation in the Israeli-Occupied Territories of Palestine: uncivil war.

The plan, which employed a mercenary militia loosely connected to Palestinian minority party, Fatah, was to overtake Gaza and overthrow the newly-elected Parliamentary majority party, Hamas. (Neocon-Likudniks won’t put up with the self-determination of those who resist their ethnic cleansing of them.)

Curiously enough, funding, training, and safe haven toward what Abrams termed a “hard coup” were provided by the U.S. and Israeli governments and some of the same ”Arab allies” mentioned in the above report on the ISOG’s campaign against Iran and Syria.

By the time the Boston Globe ”covered” ISOG’s treachery, Abrams’ conspiracy had already been leaked to European and Middle Eastern news media and governments. By Winter 2006–7, the leaked story made its way to independent media outlets on the Internet. By June ‘07, Hamas had put down the Abrams coup in street battles against the Fatah-linked mercenaries (in part, because they’d caught word of it).

Very few non-Ministry experts, like Nir Rosen, were able to relate this truthful version of the events in the mainstream, but as marginalized voices. Rosen’s interview with CNN’s John Roberts only appears on the Internet in transcript form. As is typically the case, the story that did make the mainstream was a total inversion of reality in favor of the state criminals. [3]

Reuters’ and AP’s reports on this subject read like U.S. and Israeli government press releases. As with the Israeli aggression against Syria, the victims are blamed. Instead of U.S. and Israeli entities committing war crimes, Hamas — and by extension, all Palestinians who resist the Israeli occupation of their land by supporting Hamas and electing them to power — are deemed militant insurrectionists and conspirators. The illicit state acts are omitted altogether.

A complete fantasy has been reported over and over in thousands of newspapers and other news media since. It goes roughly thus: ”The violent, anti-Israel, Islamist (AP: “Islamic”) Hamas plotted and carried out a coup against Israel’s partner in peace, pro-U.S. moderate Fatah. . . [Therefore] Israel responded by blockading Gaza in an effort to make the Palestinian people rise up and toss out Hamas, which is dedicated to the violent destruction of the Jewish state.”

What is most heinously omitted is the Israeli and U.S. destruction of the state-less Palestinian people they are occupying. Absent are the Israeli kidnappings and assassinations of Hamas legislators, their family members, and their supporters since the party was elected to power.

Omitted also are the crippling sanctions that have been in place since then, and the supreme Israeli war crimes, like the destruction of Gaza’s only power plant and vital civilian infrastructure the previous Summer. News media would have us believe that the illegal blockade began after Hamas “staged a bloody, violent, brown-skinned, Islamist coup.”

As a result of the repetitions of lies and omissions of truths, all Palestinians who work for Hamas, support Hamas, or refuse to collaborate with the Fatah junta or the Israeli occupiers in the West Bank, are seen as being worthy of the collective punishment they receive at the hands of the U.S., Israeli, and E.U. governments.

These conspiracies against Syria, Iran, Iraq, and the Palestinians take root in neocon-Likudnik policy papers penned for U.S. and Israeli leaders like Benyamin Netanyahu, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush; conceived by neocons like Richard Perle, Meyrav and David Wurmser, Paul Wolfowitz, and Lewis Libby; peddled by neocons like Ledeen, Charles Krauthammer, and Bill Kristol on Fox News and in print media; and implemented as U.S. policy and legislation by neocons like Abrams, Gary Ackerman, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and Joe Lieberman.

All of them should be held accountable for their willing participation in these schemes, which have involved aggressive war and collective economic punishment against innocent civilian populations.

A Precedent

During the Nüremberg Trials after WWII, Nazi German politicians, media moguls, bankers, arms makers, ideologues, and other ranking arms of the state were charged and sentenced for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes against peace for inciting, committing, and conspiring to commit those acts of aggression.

Among the exhibits entered as evidence against the defendants were public statements similar to the type made by Ledeen: the kind that discount potential genocides and economic disasters, while encouraging insurrection and perpetual war — all semantically smoke-screened as noble acts of liberation.

Other statements were more explicit and nakedly asserted, along the lines of what U.S. mainstream news media are inciting today: state-sponsored criminal acts of terror, aggressive war, and insurrection in Iran, for instance.

[Source: irancoverage]

Ideologues of the neocon-Likudnik empire follow the repetition-omission principle religiously. One prime example is their favorite fear-mongering fallacy that says Iran is Nazi Germany and President Ahmadinejad is Hitler.

Of course, Iran is neither a regional military-superpower nor an occupier of foreign lands, while the neocon-Likudnik empire is even more aggressive and more militarily dominant than the Third Reich ever was. But that aside, there are, in fact, striking parallels between Nazi treatment of their chosen enemies and the U.S. and allied approaches to theirs.

Nazi ideologues and news publishers alike portrayed certain ethnic, religious, and political groups in ways similar to the way Arabs, Muslims, and Persians are portrayed today by the neocon Ministry. And like the neocon-Likudnik empire, the Reich’s blamed such groups for all “attacks on the homeland.”

Almost immediately after the attacks on the World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001, Arab- and Muslim-demonizing propaganda permeated the airwaves. One particularly conniving and hideous concoction involved footage of Palestinians dancing joyously in the streets. But it was a fraud: the celebration shown was taken from footage of something from several years earlier. The real dancing celebration involved Israeli covert agents who were also filming the event as it unfolded.

This false and demonizing propaganda is the kind Nazi propagandists were punished for.

[Source: Ryantineocons]

Why is the story of Israel spying on the United States NOT on the evening news? Well, it actually was, but was quickly pulled by the news outlet that ran the story (Fox!) as a result of pressure from the attack dogs of the Israel Lobby.

Neocon ideologists like Daniel Pipes, Brigitte Gabriel, Steve Emerson, and Andrew Bostom make comfortable livings as marginalizers and dehumanizers for that Lobby. Their job is to make people believe that Israel is not the most prolific terrorist state, and that the U.S. government is not the biggest sponsor of Israeli and other international terror entities.

Their craft boils down to dissent-crushing guilt projection.

A favorite pastime for these bigoted pseudo-scholars is blackmailing so-called moderate Muslims using vitriol against so-called extremist, Islamist, or terrorist Muslims — holding all Muslims (and the non-Muslims who defend them) accountable for the actions of a few.

“If you’re not speaking out, you’re aiding the Islamofascists,” to paraphrase the erstwhile-Lebanese Gabriel, who has had no trouble with Israel’s carpet-bombings and occupation of her native country all her life.

“Western European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene. All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most.” — Daniel Pipes, quoted in Le Monde Diplomatique, July 2003.

These Arabists [sic], orientalists [sic], Middle East [sic] experts, and terrorism [sic] experts claim, either baselessly or according to rigged polls, that a certain percentage of Muslims in the world are extremists, and that thus, tens of millions of Islamofascists [sic] are out there somewhere — ESPECIALLY IN THE UNITED STATES! — therefore, we better heed their counsel. Which requires their captive audience to put pressure on local governments to prevent new mosque construction in their towns and to shut down existing ones. College professors must be reported to law enforcement and the dean if they disagree with the government’s so-called war on terror. And if they don’t comply, the educators must be forced to resign or be fired.

Dark Age justice from those claiming to be on the ”civilized” side of their fantastic Clash.

These xenophobic charlatans baselessly claim that there are Hamas, Hezbullah, and Al-Qaeda “sleeper cells” in the United States. But to this day, the only cells shown to exist are the ones which mostly Arabs and Muslims are stuffed into without formal charges or due process. Many violent and inhuman activities transpire in and around those cells, but precious little of it involves sleep.

Most of these agents of inhumanity have been exposed and discredited more than once. Still, corporate media and news agencies rely heavily on them for TV ratings and newspaper and periodical readership. Again: If enough of them are given air time to spew their lies and conjecture via a substantial array of media — regularly, consistently, and over a duration — a sufficient portion of the audience will eventually accept the inhumanity as necessary or even noble.

Thanks mostly to the dehumanizers and their partners in news media, the Bush Administration and the Pentagon have gotten away with this and this, for example.

Like that of today’s ideologists, Nazis Alfred Rosenberg’s and Julius Streicher’s demonizing and dehumanizing propaganda helped to convince the audience that anyone or any group deemed as a threat to the Third Reich deserved tyranny and death.

For their false condemnation and collective punishment of their chosen enemies, Nazi Ministry figures were convicted of crimes against humanity. For similar offenses, neocon-Likudnik ministers have received a pass (so far).

Goddamn Pieces of Paper

Also entered as evidence at Nüremberg were violations of the post-WWI Versailles Treaty: a one-sided affair conceived by the “victors” and meant to humiliate the nation of Germany, blame it for the war, and keep its foreign-occupied population from self-determination or a healthy, competing economy. Any proud and self-respecting people would have defied such a tyrannical mandate.

Unfortunately for the German people, from their radicalized masses arose the most undesirable leadership, whose belligerent nature only lent credence to the ideological demons hyperbolized by FDR & Co. But if the Germans violated Versailles out of self-preservation, the Allied powers did much worse out of sadistic self-enrichment and the necessity of projecting their own guilt.

Which brings up another good comparison between USA versus Germany and USA versus Iran: the illegitimacy of the international mandates cited as justifications for preemption, the rank hypocrisy of prosecuting them unilaterally, and the disastrous effects those aggressive measures have on civilians.

Sanctions against Iran are legally baseless but for conjured neocon fear-mongering in the media and strong-arming in the U.N. The United States is perhaps the worst violator of the NPT, yet the neocon-Likudnik empire has convinced the world, through false propaganda, that Iran is.

Iran has been accused by some U.S. leaders of providing aid to those who have killed “hundreds of our brave men and women.” Yet in Iraq, the U.S. and allies are known to have killed more than a million non-combatants and caused millions more to be refugees, and U.S.-backed mercenary armies operate inside Iran, along its Iraqi and Pakistani borders, committing acts of terror and war.

You may have noticed that mainstream news reports never mention the U.S.-Iranian Algiers Accords, or even the U.S. Constitution, in the context of current U.S. build-up of aggressive war on Iran.

Signed in January 1981 by the United States and Iran, the Accords prohibit political and military intervention in Iranian affairs by the United States. The U.S. Constitution states that such binding agreements not violating the spirit of the Constitution itself are to be treated as a constitutional mandate. Every U.S.-involved sanction, asset-freeze, and embargo against Iran, and every U.S. dollar and man-hour spent in support of Iranian opposition groups, should be prosecuted as a violation thereof.

The Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MeK) is listed as a foreign terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department. Its members live in, and operate out of, Camp Ashraf, Iraq, under U.S. and ”Coalition” military protection. Its administrative headquarters are located in London, under the name NCRI (National Council of Resistance of Iran). This much has been revealed in some mainstream news media.

But the so-called Iranian dissident group has also received hundreds of millions of U.S.-taxpayer dollars for its operations inside Iraq and Iran and in exile over the past few years, as well as secure training grounds in the United States. Illicit only begins to describe the nature of these acts; yet, barely a handful of conscientious investigative journalists and credible military- and foreign-affairs experts have reported on them.

[Source: artbell]

Painful Parallels

The Allied powers mindfully committed far more atrocities, against non-combatants, than any other party of either world war. They violated not only Versailles, but many other international agreements including Wilson’s 14 Points, the Hague Regulations of 1907, and the post-war precedents set at Nüremberg for which the Nazis were condemned and punished.

Allied malfeasance was rampant. Up to a point during WWII, U.S. and international bankers, politicians, and enterprising corporatists, including President Bush’s grandfather, were financing and profiteering off both sides, and generally rigging the apparatus quite handily.

How did those agents of empire get away with it? Well, for obvious starters, the three main so-called victors of WWII — the USA, Great Britain, and Russia — comprised the panel of judges, thanks to their self-granted infallibility (UN veto power, ultimately) by way of being “the winners.” We all know that saying about victors and spoils. And besides, who’s going to challenge the bullies when they have all the wherewithal and they’re all on the same side?

But how was this U.S. and Allied exceptionalism and legal immunity justified with the real world? The same way the initiation of those wars were made possible: Absolutist Propaganda.

During the build up to war in Europe, U.S. and Allied news media hyped Adolf Hitler’s extreme rhetoric and Germany’s violations of treaties and such, while omitting the more numerous violations by the FDR (and Truman) Administration. Allied savagery in the form of sanctions, embargoes, blockades, and boycotts were easily packaged as a credible and lawful means of enforcing ill-conceived, pro-allied mandates like Versailles, and ”reining in the Third Reich.” (Sound familiar?)

The tens of millions of non-combatants massacred and starved to death by the Allied powers were not newsworthy during the war; nor were their murders prosecutable afterward. The U.S. and its allies were fighting evil, spreading freedom, and saving the world; or at least that was the predominant message over the airwaves and front pages of most of the world’s media. Nagasaki, Hiroshima, and Dresden didn’t happen.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq and the ongoing shakedown of Iran have been sold even more prolifically. The U.S. government, during George W. Bush’s second term alone, has spent hundreds of millions in U.S.-taxpayer dollars on insurrection and propaganda operations overseas.

The Third Reich’s propaganda operations were nasty, for sure; but they were only effective within a regional radius, at best. Neocon apologists would rather you not know that the Angelic FDR or the Noble Wilson or the Merciful Lincoln shut down newspapers and incarcerated journalists, intellectual dissidents and in the rarest cases, politicians, that even-handed coverage of “the noble effort” were deemed unpatriotic and treasonable, and that Japanese-Americans were kidnapped and forced into “internment camps” by the FDR regime. (And if these things are discussed as facts, they are used as proof that “even our most lionized leaders did it, so what’s the big fuss? It’s a ‘necessary evil’ for our own good!”)

And never mind the ridiculously contradictory triad of Allied leaders. The only genocidal tyrants were Hitler and Mussolini. Oh yeah, and Stalin. But he was our tyrant. He was always reacting to the aggression of others — to the tune of tens of millions murdered. Just like Israel is “our best ally in the war on terror” and is always reacting to the aggression from that army-less existential threat called the Palestinians — to the tune of a 60-year, genocidal ethnic cleansing. Just like the Jewish [sic] state and the House of Saud are our greatest partners in “free trade” and “national defense” in the Middle East — to the tune of at least $5 billion per year and the looming vengeance of millions of the region’s oppressed.

Nor will corporate media even hint at the parallels between: 1) the Russian and German military occupations in Europe and 2) the U.S. and Israeli regimes operating within the Israeli-Occupied Territories of Palestine (IOPTs) and Iraq.

But are prison camps not being operated, wherein detainees are held without charges or due process, tortured, and murdered? Are journalists and cameramen not being unlawfully detained, beaten, and killed by occupation forces? Are major news centers like Al-Jazeera, as well as local press offices, not being raided and shut down? Are U.S. occupation forces not writing self-lauding pieces and paying Iraqi newspapers to publish them as news reports? Are hotels where dozens of journalists stay not being shelled?

Are occupied people not collectively punished for lawfully resisting the occupation and ethnic cleansing, or for simply being? Are the houses of the occupied people not being demolished to pay the penance for their relatives’ alleged crimes, or to make way for racial colonies?

Are U.S. attorneys general and other government officials not perverting the rule of law to justify these acts and immunize themselves and their cronies from future prosecution (thus admitting guilt)?

Do these and all other such acts on the part of the indomitable occupiers not constitute war crimes?

Of course not. The global policemen are always right, and their inconceivable policies are always justified, because they were fighting the evil terrorists and their evil ideologies. At least, that’s what they would have mainstream society believe.

But who are “they” and how do they do it?

Part Two

[1] http://www%5Bdot%5Dboston%5Bdot%5Dcom/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/01/02/us_unit_works_quietly_to_counter_irans_sway/

[2] http://article%5Bdot%5Dnationalreview%5Bdot%5Dcom/?q=ZTYxZDcxMzkzNzhiMzFkNTAwMzkxNjE0Y2FkNmM0MTE=

[3] The conspiracy was actually laid out in unprecedented detail by the respectable Vanity Fair, but was released a year late and under the byline of a reporter whose otherwise high career marks were lowered by his being duped by the Ahmed Chalabi scam a few years earlier. In this case, the Ministry tweaked both the flow of information and the perception of verity.
See: http://www%5Bdot%5Dnewstatesman%5Bdot%5Dcom/politics/2007/09/mi6-mi5-intelligence-briefings

THE KISSINGER REPORT and the GLOBAL 2000 REPORT on Forced Population Reduction

National Security Study

Memorandum 200

(NSSM 200)– April 1974


on the need for massive population

reduction, advocating war,famine

and disease to reduce the world’s

population of “useless eaters”

to an acceptable,

meaning“profitable,” level.

The Global 2000 Report to the President: Volume 1

The Global 2000 Report to the President: Volume 2

How You Keep Your Country From Being Bombed “Back to the Stone Age”



Failed coup against ISI was to appease US

Updated at
Monday, July 28, 2008

By Shaheen Sehbai

WASHINGTON: The politically ill-advised developments in Islamabad to take over control of the otherwise notorious ISI are deeply linked to Prime Minister Gilani’s US visit, as the most painful and probably the only sticking point in his talks with the Bush administration would be the role of Pakistani agencies inside Afghanistan, Fata and against the US interests.

Informed members of the PM’s entourage, who have arrived in advance, privately say Gilani will be put on the spot in some of his top-level meetings, confronted with evidence that some out-of-control parts of the Pakistani agencies, either with or without Islamabad’s nod, were working at odds with the US goals and this has to be curbed by the political government if it wants generous economic and political support from Washington and even its allies and friends, including Saudi Arabia.

Pakistani diplomats are confident that while the visit will sail through without hitch, the issue of controlling the undesirable role of the agencies will be too hot to handle for an inexperienced prime minister. Thus, he was more than eager to take some decision on who would control the ISI before landing at the Andrews Air Force Base on the outskirts of Washington at 12:30 am Monday morning (Pakistan Standard Time).

The US side is prepared with all kinds of evidence, videos, audios plus transcripts to show Gilani that his agencies were playing double games in seriously stopping the terrorists inside Pakistan from operating freely. One such example to quote is the press conference addressed by Baitullah Mehsud with dozens of journalists travelling inside Fata to secret locations which, the US side claims, could never have remained secret from the vigilant Pakistani agencies. But if a terrorist can call and address a news conference with all TV and media presence in full force, there is no excuse for the agencies not to know where he was located.

The Pakistani side is also preparing its own counter arguments claiming that if the US can immediately track down the voice of Baitullah Mehsud, within hours after Benazir Bhutto’s murder claiming responsibility for the heinous act, why could they not track down and share the information with Pakistan on the whereabouts of the militant leader so that Pakistan could act in real time.

But all these arguments bring into sharp focus the role of the agencies and by ordering that, henceforth, the ISI would be controlled by the interior ministry, Gilani was trying to arm himself with talking points to assure the Americans that he was serious in dealing with the situation and should be given time and support to handle what has been a long and ongoing notorious operation without any civilian political oversight.

Yet the manner in which Gilani and even Asif Ali Zardari handled the matter so casually and without deep thought has now caused not only a public embarrassment for the prime minister, even before he landed on the US soil, but he will be hard pressed to avoid the gazing looks of uniformed US generals when they seek answers to their pointed questions.

Both Pakistani and US sides preparing for these serious discussions are deeply skeptical of the role of some of the Pakistani leaders, specially the over-zealous interior ministry bosses, in misleading and misguiding their own leadership as well as the people and the media on how and why the sensitive ISI affair was handled.

Rehman Malik has repeatedly said on Pakistani TV channels that the president, the Army chief, the prime minister and Asif Ali Zardari were not only consulted but had agreed to the change of command of the ISI but each of these players, importantly the presidency and the GHQ, have said categorically that they were not on board. So, Malik has to do a lot of explaining on what was going on and why he was making misleading claims.

It is not the first time that Malik has been acting in such an arbitrary manner and his action of postponing the by-elections without consulting anyone, a decision which had to be reversed, was a similar attempt at exercising power that did not exist in the manner he wanted to use it.

The cryptic remarks of some of the military people made to important journalists about imagining a situation in which the ISI would be run by Malik indicate the level of mistrust and contempt about some of the unelected leaders in the PPP government. But they are thriving and it is a deepening mystery why.

So when Prime Minister Gilani lands in Washington, he will not only have to worry about what he will face in meetings with the US leaders but will also have to prepare some convincing explanations for his own party leader, who is believed to have already reprimanded the PM for not being able to comprehend the seriousness and sensitivity of the decision that he took and caused a huge backfire.

The Politics of Christian Persecution

The Politics of Christian Persecution

by Henry Makow Ph.D. – (From Oct. 5 2003, updated July 27,2 008)

Last year, a lesbian here in Winnipeg clobbered a mugger with her handbag and he ran away.

When she reported this “hate crime,” she was annoyed to find the police had no procedure to deal with it because there hadn’t been any other “hate crimes.”

Nevertheless a month ago the Canadian government passed a law (Bill C-250) that will have a chilling affect on freedom of speech. It is aimed at protecting homosexuals and other minorities from anything they deem to be “hate.”

At a local “Prophesy Conference” here last week, 600 Christians heard Berit Kjos’speech entitled: “How to Prepare Your Children for Persecution.” She said conditions for Bible believing Christians are starting to resemble those of Jews in Nazi Germany.

Thus while gays are protected from non-existent hate, thousands of honest, hard working Christian families fear persecution. But they don’t count. What gives?


Canada has been the New World Order’s favorite bitch ever since McKenzie King (the man J.D. Rockefeller called “my best friend”) became Prime Minister in 1921.

The NWO champions multiculturalism, inter faithism and homosexuality because they undermine the hitherto dominant European Christian heterosexual majority. This is necessary to create a world where no group is able to challenge the power of the wealthy Illuminati families.

Jews, homosexuals, women and racial minorities enjoy an official monopoly on persecution because the New World Order is using them to undermine society and bring about tyranny.

What better way to persecute the majority than do it covertly, and deny that it is even taking place?

Let the majority think they are the oppressors. And if they realize the truth, they will be afraid to mention it for fear of appearing “intolerant.”

Thus Indian medicine wheels and “Gaia” are discussed in public school classrooms but the Lord’s Prayer and Jesus Christ are banned. We cannot be outraged when our children are forced to learn that gay sex is normal, and when heterosexual norms are outlawed in schools.

It’s just a mind-game. They can be intolerant of us. We can’t be intolerant of them.


A registered nurse, grandmother and Bible teacher; Berit Kjos is a leading researcher into the United Nations’ hidden agenda. Author of the books “Brave New Schools” and “A Twist of Faith,” her web site ( is a treasure trove of research on the subversion of popular culture and education.

Berit Kjos’ father was tortured by the Nazis in Norway. She told the Prophesy Conference that the elite is following Hitler’s advice in “Mein Kampf” to create an “enemy.” For example, “Time” magazine blamed the Oklahoma City bombing on “tax protesters, Christian home schoolers, conspiracy theorists and self reliant types.”

She said Christians would be persecuted if they have an uncompromising commitment to the Bible as the Word of God. They are guilty of the “sin of separatism” which the United Nations says causes hatred and war.

The UN promotes the New Age dictum that all religions are equal as a way to negate them all. In other words, this opens the field to a new World Religion dedicated to Lucifer. The official UN Chapel is Luciferian.

The UN’s “Declaration of Human Rights” pays lip service to the individual’s freedom of conscience and speech. As in Nazi Germany, individuals must sacrifice these for nebulous “community values” (like “saving the earth,” “peace” and “tolerance” which the UN defines.)

Kjos says American schoolchildren are being conditioned rather than given facts and encouraged to think independently. Techniques of brainwashing developed in totalitarian countries are routinely used in American schools. These include emotional shock and desensitization, isolation, cross-examination and psychological inducements to accept alternative values.

“Like Nazi youth, they are taught to react, not think, when told to do the unthinkable,” like inform on their own families.


After Kjos’ speech I asked a young man how I could network with other Christians there. Manitoba has just floated a plan to include fingerprints and eye scans on our driver’s licenses and I wanted to organize a protest.

He replied that resistance is futile since the Bible has prophesied one world government. Elsewhere when the subject arose, Jesus’ words “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s…” (Luke 20: 24-25) were mentioned.

I asked Berit about this. She thought Christians must prepare for persecution but they must also do their utmost to resist the New World Order. However, both in terms of prophesy and pragmatically speaking, she believes defeat is inevitable. “They are too far advanced, and hold too much power,” she said.

I respect people who believe in prophecy but I don’t believe anything is inevitable. The world is an eternal contest between God and the devil; human beings were put on earth to represent one or the other. I am certain that a popular outcry against repressive government measures would be effective.

It would be pathetic if we lost our birthright due to fatalism or apathy. As Ian Crane has pointed out, the elite interprets lack of dissent and civil unrest, as consent. (


I was also disturbed by Berit’s negative references to Islam. She said Muslims slaughtered many Christians in the past and still worship animistic images today. I am no expert on Islam but many Muslims impress me as genuinely devout.

In the present danger, all God-fearing people must unite. We don’t have to agree on everything, only that the devil’s agents control the world and are turning it into Hell.

There is only one God and naturally people in different cultures are going to approach Him from different angles. Mark Glenn has ably shown that Islam holds Christians and Christ in high regard, which cannot be said for the Jewish Talmud.

Christians and Muslims are natural allies. Muslims are being persecuted for the same reasons as Christians: they uphold an uncompromising vision of God. They will not accept the Satanic bargain that our elite masters proffer, “thou shall be as Gods.”

Like Christians, Muslims know that God is Love, and we cannot be God-like unless we express this Spirit. We cannot pretend to God while completely devoted to selfish material appetites. There is nothing wrong with these appetites; only we must transform ourselves into something higher.

If Christians still think Muslims were behind the attack on the World Trade Center, please wake up. This is classic “Protocols of Zion” divide-and-conquer. Pit the stupid Christian goyim against the Muslims and let them destroy each other. The Neo Cons and the Mossad have been signaling this attack for a decade. How can Christians be so stupid as to fall for it, and imagine Islam and not Masonic Zionism (i.e. NWO) is their enemy?

Islamic militancy is encouraged and funded by the New World Order through Masonic groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and by the Saudi Arabian government. Here is a report that shows Saudia Arabia is behind extremism taught in British mosques. The New World Order funds the Taliban through the Pakistan Secret Service.

Here is a report that shows the British may actually be training the Taliban. All of this to create the mythic bogus “war of civilizations.”

If they think George W, Bush is a born-again Christian. How little they understand their own religion. The essence of Christianity is to imitate Christ. Do you think Christ would have carpet-bombed the Taliban or invaded Iraq? George W. and his cronies are profiteering from oil and military contracts while American solders are dying and the country is looted. They profess to be Christian in order to discredit Christianity.


Religious people can stop focusing on the past. God speaks directly to each of us as His Creation. We have an immediate relationship to God. We need only initiate an ongoing conversation. (See Brother Lawrence, “Practice of the Presence of God.”)

We can bring God into our life by obeying Him. How you do this is up to you. Ultimately religion and life are one in the same. Our life is our religion. It’s not what we believe; it’s what we do.

It’s time all people recognized our real enemy and united to resist persecution.

Leading leaders to a grand vision

Leading leaders to a grand vision

By James Keye
Online Journal Contributing Writer

Jul 28, 2008, 00:21

Email this article
Printer friendly page

Over the last seven years much of the world has been traumatized into worrying about what was happening in the moment: war in Afghanistan, war in Iraq, genocidal violence in North Africa; the list is long and depressing.

The USA, often a hedge against the worst of human behavior, at least in political mythology, had become a major malefactor and the ‘middle way’ people of the world were looking (stunned and dazed daily by random, mindless, often deadly, world events) to a confusing Europe, weak nations such as Brazil and even the inscrutable China for guidance. The US had been like a teenage Soccer star, self-centered and cocky, though with a good heart and many times willing to help out, but suddenly having become a monster.

The coming political changes, especially in the USA, and the shifting power relationships in South America as well as other power centers are exciting a rising vision of new possibilities. People are more ready than usual to hear new ideas. Certainly the self-interested will be quick to offer their own programs and solutions, and it is most likely that we will, as a world, continue on the same trajectory toward our mindless collision with ecological reality, but it is in times such as these that perspectives can be shifted.

Most of what I am hearing from presumptive world leaders are those small changes in detail that are supposed to impress us with their grasp of issues and breadth of vision: reduce troop strength in Iraq and increase numbers of soldiers in Afghanistan; if people don’t have the money to pay for medical care force them to buy medical insurance (presumably with money that they don’t have?); continuation of tax policies or minor changes in tax policies; and the always appealing, reduction or elimination of nuclear weapons.

One of the excuses from the Bush administration for the narrowly self-interested management of our government and foreign policy was a “failure of imagination.” This was presented as though no one could have imagined the cascade of events that befell them; the ‘failure’ part of the formulation was intended to be ‘tongue-n-check.’ Only a few pronouncements of this administration have been simply true and honest; this was one. We as a nation, the greater ‘We’ of the world can no longer tolerate a ‘failure of imagination’ in discovering what to do about the problems that face us.

There needs to be a clear presentation of those problems, triaged for importance in both the short term and the longer term. And we must not look first to solutions. Solutions will always gore someone’s ox, and to the end of self-protection a constituency will be formed to deny the problem. As soon as this pattern is established, imaginations fail as a matter of course. Options for action are then limited to those that cannot possibly work since to be effective means that some real change will occur.

What do we face as a class, ethnic or religious (tribal) group? What do we face as a nation? What do we face as an economic system? What do we face as a species? Ten thousand years ago the first question, and generally the second, would have been the vital one and yet it is still the one that has the most powerful appeal. Most of us don’t strongly identify with an economic system, except in a sort of tribal way. The most important questions of all for us today are considered effete and too abstract, too distant; this is a prejudice that we will have to overcome to survive.

The population of the earth is rapidly approaching 7 billion people, half of whom live in the most abject poverty — no people in the history of the world have lived in such deprivation and anxiety. The other half of the earth’s human population begins, at the least wealthy end, to use material and energy at levels that, if equaled by everyone on earth, would not be sustainable. As individual wealth increases the use of material and energy increases to levels clearly available to only a tiny few — one person’s consumption can be equal to that of thousands of the poorest.

Combine this population reality with the increasing costs (read: energy requirements) of acquiring the materials and energy to maintain our numbers, physical infrastructures, agricultural, economic and military systems and it is clear that we cannot continue on as we have been. Our greatest difficulties do not come from the failures of the earth to supply in sufficient amount, but in our failure to inhibit our demands from the earth.

Every other life form on the earth lives in some homeostatic balance with its available resources and its needs; we must come to understand how it is that we do not and we must use that understanding to find a way to do so. That must be our preeminent concern; its consequences run through all of our other issues. It will not do to say that ‘we are humans and therefore are not subject to the biological and physical principles of other living things.’ Our question has to be: What allows us to believe that we are not subject to the rules of all other living things and that we, more and more clearly, must adapt to?

If from the species perspective it is mandated that humanity must reduce its total consumption while increasing the consumption to survival levels for nearly half of our population, a number of changes in both how we see and act in the world would be required. We need a leadership that first acknowledges the issues and analyses our options in these terms.

Our first concern should be that we have some good chance to survive as a species; that we have grown in number from one billion 200 years ago to nearly 7 billion today and that we have increased per-capita consumption by orders of magnitude in that same time is not evidence for our success and solid future, but seen from a distance and biological perspective is evidence of disorder. Realizing, diagnosing and responding to such a disorder is presently incumbent on us. Our attachments to economic and political systems have to be reexamined; our social arrangements, values and beliefs questioned in light of growing understanding of our place in the ecology of the earth and our possible relationships with each other.

There may be those who would suggest that we shouldn’t make any effort at change, our behaviors will run their course and the chips will fall where they may — this is, in fact, what is most likely to happen. However, a simple, back of the envelope, calculation makes it pretty clear that we are increasingly in danger from economic and ecological instability. Only our thoughtful action can reduce the danger. Our billions will not starve gently when it comes to that; the total ecological devastation should billions of people be forced to graze directly off the land is truly unimaginable.

Bridging the great gulf between this level of analysis and the more common and expected detail of economic, political and social intrigue is the work of great leaders. It also can only be done at certain times, when people have been jarred by something like the disrepute and incompetence of the Bush administration.

Details can contain excitement, pathos or outrage, but the details must be under the control of larger ideas or we act ad hoc from moment to moment. Lincoln once spoke disparagingly of a man who held the views of the “last man he talked to.” Since this condition is more true of most people than not, leadership has as one of its major roles the keeping of a vision. The tendency is to speak of high purpose in one breath and argue for details that violate that purpose with the next.

If it is agreed that humans wish to survive as a species and that the killing off of a few billion people is not an option, then there are things that must be done. All people need the knowledge and wisdom to live in ecological balance with the world immediately around them; this requires education, education requires resources. If it is agreed that world population must stabilize and reduce, then education in “family planning” and the empowerment of women are required, again with resource requirements. Also, if population is to be reduced and if consumption is to be reduced, our economic system will have to be rethought and reformed: capitalism, as presently functioning, will fight against the details of consumption and population reduction. It is impossible to follow the wisdom of an essential vision using the elements of detail that conspire to defeat the vision.

A growing body of knowledge, both scientific and experiential, is forming about how we humans act, about our natural history as an animal, along with new understandings of the power and dangers of the adaptive tool of consciousness. This is the time to press on those who would be leaders the need to recognize the larger visions and honestly present the implications to their constituencies.

Vast resources will be needed to educate and re-educate us all and to reform our economic and political designs. Redistribution of the wealth that has been extracted from the earth and accumulated into fewer and fewer hands will have to seen as essential for the vision of species survival and not just for personal pleasure and aggrandizement. I am not saying that this is our last opportunity, but it certainly will be among the last and is one that, at the very least, those who have an inkling about these matters should attempt.

James Keye publishes the blog, Keye Commentary. Email him at

Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal

WARNING From Australia–Economic Tsunami on Horizon

NAB will shock Wall Street

Robert Gottliebsen
The National Australia Bank’s decision to write off 90 per cent of its US conduit loans will have dramatic repercussions around the world. Wall Street will be deeply shocked when they understand the repercussions of what NAB has done. It is clear global banks have nowhere near provided for their exposures to US housing loans which in the words of John Stewart are experiencing a “meltdown”.

We are now way beyond sub-prime. NAB says that it is suffering a 55 per cent loss on American housing loans an event that has never happened in the history of a developed country in recent memory. This is an unprecedented event and means that the cost of bailing out the US financial system is now far beyond the highest estimates. A US recession is now locked in, but more alarmingly, 55 per cent loan losses point to the possibility of a depression.

It means the cost of bailing out housing exposures to the two mortgage insurers will be so great that it will leave no room to bail out anything else and there are several US banks that are now in big trouble. NAB says that the dislocation in the residential market is separate from the corporate market, but the flow on is inevitable.

While global banks have been writing down their balance sheet assets, few have tackled their conduit exposures which are off balance sheet but to which they are ultimately liable.

This morning at around 6am I wrote that we had been experiencing a ‘dead cat bounce’. I had no idea that NAB would trigger the downturn and confirm what I had written. And of course Wall Street will receive a deep shock when it wakes up.

How did NAB get caught in $1.2 billion mess? They had a number of big clients who wanted to invest in these US housing loans. They were sucked in by the ‘triple A rating’ given to the securities by the rating agencies. They did not take into account that the monoline insurers who guaranteed some of the loans had no substance. To become a player NAB took out $1.2 billion in these triple A securities and 90 per cent of it has been lost.

Many Australian institutions are very angry. NAB is paying out far too much in dividends and should be conserving capital. The American bank it purchased, Great Western, was a good idea but it is now clear it overpaid for it. Fortunately it only has a small exposure to the bad loans. But what’s happening to the NAB is not the main game.

The global banks have been marking to market the assets they held on their balance sheet, but the vast amounts held in so called ‘conduit trust accounts’ have not been written down because they were not marketable. NAB wrote them down when they saw the bad mortgages.

US banks have written down $450 billion in bad housing loans. The revelation from NAB means that they will now certainly need to take provisions to $1,000 billion. But write-downs of $1,300 billion and perhaps even more are on the cards.

Where will the equity come from to cover these bad loans? The world has never attempted a rescue effort of this size and it will make liquidity in the globe very tight. That’s why corporates will be hit. All Australian companies that need equity should raise it now.

ASX Stock Chart for NAB

US Warns Israel –There Will Be No ‘USS Liberty Pt II’

US Warns Israel –There Will Be No ‘USS Liberty Pt II’

For the last 41 years, Israel’s attack on the USS Liberty has been a taboo topic about which neither the Jewish state nor the US has allowed free and open discussion. Like a paid-off judge in the service of organized crime interests who pounds his gavel on the bench, for the last 4 decades Israel and her supporters in the US government have bellowed ‘case closed’ and have raked over the coals anyone–including the survivors of the attack themselves–from arguing otherwise. Realizing the tidal wave of outrage that would occur if the American people were to come of age and lose their innocence in realizing what Israel did in murdering 34 American servicemen 4 decades ago in a premeditated attack, (to say nothing of the cover-up perpetrated by the US government) it has been on the list of forbidden topics……until recently.

Cutting short his trip in Europe the first week of July, recently-appointed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Adm. Mike Mullen flew to Tel Aviv along with an entourage of high-ranking US military personnel and, upon his arrival, rushed to meet with the highest-ranking members of Israel’s military establishment. While this is not unusual (as many such meetings have been taking place as of late) what was unusual was the topic discussed–Israel‘s attack on the USS Liberty 41 years ago during the 6 day war and how ‘important’ it was ‘not to allow history to repeat itself,’ given the present tensions existing between Israel and Iran. Considering the subject of that meeting and the well-known cover-up that has taken place these last 41 years, the meeting should have made headline news all over America. Sadly, however, it did not, just another testimony to the fact that America is now officially ‘occupied territory’ every bit as much as Arab Palestine.

The fact that the meeting took place at all is news enough, but what is of even more importance is what can be inferred from the meeting. Given the fact that this brazen 2 hour attack upon the United States has been hushed up these last 41 years, there can be little else to conclude by Mullen’s meeting other than the obvious–That someone from within the intelligence or military apparatus of the United States has looked towards the horizon and concluded that Israel is planning a ‘USS Liberty Pt II,’ meaning an attack on a US ship, most likely in the Persian Gulf, leading to a massive loss of life to be then blamed on Iran. As was intended in 1967 when Israel attacked the Liberty, Americans would be incensed into such a war frenzy that they would demand the ‘obliteration’ (a la Hillary Clinton) of the guilty party, the false identity of which the Jewish media establishment in America would be all too glad to provide. And while all players involved have been tight-lipped about the particulars of this story, what can be concluded nevertheless is that Mullen’s impromptu trip to Israel and subsequent discussion was in effect a stern warning to Israel of ‘Don’t even think about it bubba’.

Those who suspect that Mullen (a company man not cut from the same cloth as the recently ‘retired’ Adm. William Fallon) has been afflicted with a sudden case of patriotic fever should consider this recent news against the more likely backdrop of sheer pragmatism. The sad fact is, patriotism more than likely had little to do with it. The US is having its rear end handed to it in Iraq and Afghanistan and now some in Washington are beginning to realize that they‘ve just put their foot into something nasty with regards to Israel’s dirty wars in the Middle East that will never be finished as long as she exists. With oil and virtually all consumer products skyrocketing in price simultaneous to the US economy going down the drain, some now understand that by signing on as Israel’s pit bull in the Muslim world that America will wind up paying the ultimate price for her devotion to the Jewish state, meaning the complete destruction of her economy and her position as a world power.

It is no secret Mullen is very friendly when it comes to the great experiment in Jewish self rule in the Middle East as well as his willingness to tow the line with regards to the sworn enemies of that great experiment. Immediately after the release of the National Intelligence Estimate in early December of 2007 stating that Iran had no nuclear weapons program America’s highest ranking military officer high-tailed it to Israel (the first Chairman of the Joint Chiefs to do so in a decade) to reassure her of America’s support that would ‘last 1,000 years’.

As of late however, America’s top general officer seems to be singing a different tune with regards to widening the present debacle to include war with Iran that stands the very real chance of bringing into the fray nuclear-armed nations such as Russia and China. Out of necessity therefore he has now joined with saner voices both within and outside the Bush administration who are trying to an apocalyptic end to America. In discussing an attack on Iran Mullen recently stated that opening a third front would be ‘extremely stressful’ on the US military and added that it would lead to consequences ‘difficult to predict’, adding that “There is need for better clarity, even dialogue at some level.”

And this, added to all the other things taking place these days (not excluding of course the talk of withdrawing US troops from Iraq) is what is making Israel jittery to the point she would contemplate pulling off another ‘USS Liberty’. For the sake of her own survival she simply cannot afford to have her ‘fixer’ in the Middle East walk away from a ‘hit’ to which he has been assigned, and it is for this reason that forward-thinking people in the US are beginning to sense Israel may soon pull a few surprises out of her infamous black bag of dirty tricks.

Once the stomping grounds solely of ‘anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists’ that the Jewish state might pull a fast one in order to get the US involved in a war for her own interests, now ‘respectable’ people have begun to voice such thoughts openly as well. In a recent piece appearing in an issue of American Conservative Magazine entitled ‘If Iran is Attacking, It Might Really Be Israel’, ex-CIA officer Phillip Giraldi writes as follows–

‘Some intel types are beginning to express concerns that the Israelis might do something completely crazy to get the US involved. There are a number of possible “false flag” scenarios in which the Israelis could stage an incident that they will make to look Iranian, either by employing Iranian weapons or by leaving a communications footprint that points to Tehran’s involvement. Those who argue Israel would never do such a thing should think again. Israel is willing to behave with complete ruthlessness towards the US if they feel that the stakes are high enough. Witness the attack on the USS Liberty and the bombing of the US Consulate in Alexandria in the 1950s. If they now believe that Iran is a threat that must be eliminated it is not implausible to assume they will stop at nothing to get the United States to do it for them, particularly as their air force is only able to damage the Iranian nuclear program, not destroy it…’

Joined alongside Giraldi is long-time former CIA analyst Ray McGovern who in his most recent piece ‘Israel Planning a September/October Surprise?’ writes the following with regards to the US pulling out of the Middle East and what Israel might do as a result–

‘My guess is the Israeli leaders are apoplectic…This dramatic change — or even just the specter of it — greatly increases Israel’s incentive to ensure US involvement in the area that would endure for several years. The Israelis need to create “facts on the ground” — something to guarantee Washington will stand by “our ally.” The legislation drafted by AIPAC calls for a blockade of Iran. That would be one way to entangle; there are many others. The point is that the growing danger the Israelis perceive will probably prompt them to find a way to get the US involved in hostilities with Iran. All Israel has to do is to arrange to be attacked. Not a problem. There are endless possibilities among which Israel can choose to catalyze such a confrontation. Viewed from Tel Aviv it appears an increasingly threatening situation, with more urgent need to “embed” (so to speak) the United States even more deeply in the region — in a confrontation involving both countries with Iran. A perfect storm is brewing…In sum, Israel is likely to be preparing a September/October surprise designed to keep the US bogged down in Iraq and in the wider region by provoking hostilities with Iran. And don’t be surprised if it starts as early as August…

Readers will recall that American Free Press newspaper predicted in the aftermath of the National Intelligence Estimate being released that the prospect of war with Iran being cancelled would likely result in Israel resorting to desperate measures in getting her way. AFP further speculated that the timing of the release of the NIE was suspicious, coming just a few days before Dec 7, the day Americans remember the attack on Pearl Harbor and that possibly the release of the report was timed to prevent a sneak attack by an Israeli sub on a US ship stationed in the Persian Gulf.

For her part, Israel is attempting to play the role of the innocent, cooperative and concerned ally in the wake of Mullen’s meeting by summoning Judge Jay Cristol, a federal bankruptcy judge in Miami who wrote a book in 2002 exculpating Israel of any wrongdoing in the Liberty attack. He is lecturing at military academies in Haifa and Ashdod on how to avoid the ‘mistakes’ that led to the attack on the Liberty.

One thing is for certain. Out of all the topics to be discussed with his Israeli counterparts, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mullen picked the topic of the USS Liberty, and not because he felt nostalgic or guilty over the way the survivors have been treated these last 41 years. He, like many within the military and intelligence establishment, no doubt realizes that America sits at the precipice of destruction and is no doubt trying to pull her back before that proverbial ‘point of no return’ is reached, if in fact it has not been reached already.

And as sobering a theme as all this may be, the fact is that it may turn out to be much worse. What Israel wants, Israel gets, and the fact that an attack on a US ship has been thwarted does not mean that the fat lady has sung, as now the likelihood of a false flag attack on the American mainland has been made all the more likely. This time however, just for good measure and for spite, it might not be a city building coming down after being struck by an airliner, but rather an entire city being consumed in a mushroom cloud, courtesy of a place called Dimona and a criminal organization known as Mossad.

2008 by Mark Glenn

Correspondent, American Free Press Newspaper

Will Survivalists Get the Last Laugh?

Massive Economic Disaster Seems Possible —

Will Survivalists Get the Last Laugh?

By Scott Thill, AlterNet. Posted July 26, 2008.

With multiple crises on the horizon, survivalist views don’t seem as marginal as they did before.


_GA_googleAdEngine.createDOMIframe(‘google_ads_div_alt_workplace_btf_right_300x250′ ,’alt_workplace_btf_right_300x250’);

They used to be paranoid preparation nuts who built bomb shelters for a place to duck and cover during nuclear dustups with communist heathens, but their tangled roots go back to the Great Depression for a reason. If you want to get sociological about it, survivalism started out as a response to economic catastrophe. And now, with a cratering stock market, a housing meltdown that has devalued everything in sight, and skyrocketing prices for food, gas and pretty much everything else, survivalists are preparing for — and are prepared for — the rerun. In fact, they may be the only people in America feeling good about the prospects of a major crash.

And the interesting thing about the once-fringe movement at this moment in history is that survivalism has now gone green — at least in theory.

From peak oil and food crises all the way to catastrophic payback from that bitch Mother Earth, there are more reasons to hide than ever. Conventional society as we know it is already undergoing some disastrous transformations. Ask anyone ducking fires in California, floods in the Midwest or bullets in Baghdad. Maybe it didn’t make sense to run for the hills, stockpile water and food, grow your own vegetables and drugs, or unplug from consumerism back when America’s budget surplus still existed, its armies weren’t burning up all the nation’s revenue and its infrastructure wasn’t being outsourced to a globalized work force.

But those days are gone, daddy, gone.

What’s coming up is weirder. Author, social critic and overall hilarious dude James Kunstler tackled that weirdness, otherwise known as an incoming post-oil dystopia, in his recent novel, World Made by Hand, which has since become one of a handful of survivalist classics. And as Kunstler sees it, whether you are talking about gun nuts or green pioneers, at least you are talking.

“At least they’re aware that we’ve entered the early innings of what could easily become a very disruptive period of our history,” the Clusterfuck Nation columnist explains. “Most of them are responding constructively rather than just defensively. They’re much more interested in gardening and animal husbandry than firearms.”

Not that the gun nuts have gone away. Their ranks have just diversified.

“The gun nuts have been on the scene longer than the peak oil argument has been in play,” he adds. “They were initially preoccupied with Big Government and its accompanying narrative fantasy of fascist oppression, which is why they adopted a fascist tone themselves. But peak-oil survivalists are different from the Ruby Ridge generation. They don’t think that a bolt-hole in the woods is a very promising strategy. We have no idea at this point what the level of social cohesion or disorder may be, but if the rural areas, especially the agricultural centers, become too lawless for farming, then we’ll be in pretty severe trouble because there will be nothing for us to eat.”

That’s not on the to-do list of author and SurvivalBlog owner James Rawles, who has been getting asked more and more questions by a mainstream press finally waking to the consequences of disaster capitalism, climate crisis and the hyperreal dream of bottomless consumption. He has fielded questions from the New York Times, and he has taken an online beating from conscientious pubs like Grist, but he hasn’t gone Hollywood. The times, which are a-changin’, have caught up to him.

“There is greater interest in preparedness these days because the fragility of our economy, lengthening chains of supply and the complexity of the technological infrastructure have become apparent to a broader cross section of the populace,” Rawles wrote to me via e-mail (but only after asking how many unique monthly visitors AlterNet commanded). “All parties concerned may not realize it, but the left-of-center greens calling for local economies and encouraging farmers markets have a tremendous amount in common with John Birchers decrying globalist bankers and gun owners complaining about their constitutional rights. At the core, for all of them, is the recognition that big, entrenched, centralized power structures are not the answer. They are, in fact, the problem.”

Co-sponsors of Resolution 1308, to brand Mideast media as terrorists

All but 6 of these anti-First Amendment Congressmen were co-sponsors

of Iran War Resolution

Rep. Gus Bilirakis [R-FL]hide cosponsors

Cosponsors [as of 2008-07-06]

Rep. John Boozman [R-AR]

Rep. Dan Burton [R-IN]

Rep. Ken Calvert [R-CA]

Rep. Eric Cantor [R-VA]

Rep. Russ Carnahan [D-MO]

Rep. Steven Chabot [R-OH]

Res.Com. Luis Fortuño [R-PR]

Rep. Bob Inglis [R-SC]

Rep. Mark Kirk [R-IL]

Rep. John Linder [R-GA]

Rep. Thaddeus McCotter [R-MI]

Rep. Mike Pence [R-IN]

Rep. Ted Poe [R-TX]

Rep. Jon Porter [R-NV]

Rep. James Ramstad [R-MN]

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R-FL]

Rep. Edward Royce [R-CA]

Rep. Bill Sali [R-ID]

Rep. Christopher Shays [R-CT]

Rep. Christopher Smith [R-NJ]

Rep. Lee Terry [R-NE]

Rep. Gerald Weller [R-IL]

Rep. Addison Wilson [R-SC]

Saudi Arabia compared to israel, Easy to see who controls the US

Saudi Arabia compared to israel

There is no greater contrast from the point of view of costs-benefit in comparing Saudi Arabia to Israel.

The latter is subsidized by the US, which has given over $120 billion dollars over the last 30 years while it competes, as the second largest arms exporter, with the US-military industrial complex thus costing American jobs and supplies absolutely no strategic materials to the US economy.

Indeed Israel has direct access to the most up-to-date US funded military technology, which it then sells to its clients. This is in stark contrast to Saudi Arabia’s servile relation with the US.

Israel has constantly demanded and received US support and financing for its wars, its illegal colonization of Palestinian land and has unwavering US support for its repudiation of international law and numerous violations of United Nations mandates.

While Saudi Arabia supports the US economy and is a strategic supplier of petroleum, Israel drains the US economy and secures its petroleum from it.

Beginning in early 2007, the entire Zionist power configuration (ZPC) mobilized to block the US arms and military technology sales to Saudi Arabia. Zionist pressure was so intense and its control over Congress was so evident to the White House and Pentagon that Defense Secretary Gates did not even try to counter the ZPC’s campaign in the US Congress. Instead he went straight to the ZPC’s control center in Israel and not with empty hands.

He pleaded with Israel to call off its American attack dogs in exchange for a ‘donation’ of over $30 billion dollars in US military handouts to Israel over the next ten years. Olmert accepted Gates offer: The US had paid the price but still the ZPC did not turn over their hostage Congress.

President Bush and Secretary Gates were convinced that Israel would muzzle the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations to allow the Saudi sale to go through. This did not happen. Why should it?

President Bush could not withdraw the well-publicized pay-off to Israel; it was already in the legislative books. He could not retaliate – the ZPC-controlled Congress would oppose any and all counter measures.

So Bush and Gates went ahead and sent the bill to Congress authorizing the $20 billion sales to Saudi Arabia, a trillion dollar economy with a two-bit military wholly dependent on its US military protector.

Immediately the ZPC rounded up its automatic 190 members of the House of Representatives to sign a letter opposing the sale.

The ZPC formulated the position embodied in the letter and oversaw its draft with the collaboration of its co-religionists in Congress.

Zionist Congress members Shelley Berkeley and Anthony Weiner teamed up with Michael Ferguson. The Zion-Cons claimed justifiably that they could mobilize over three quarters of the Congress on any issue affecting Israel’s ‘security’. Zionist lawmakers claimed, “the sale would undermine Israel’s superiority in the region”.

Every major independent military think tank would dispute this argument since Israel is the only nuclear power in the region, has the biggest and most technologically sophisticated air force and missile system, while Saudi Arabia and all the Gulf States have trouble even controlling local ground level bomb throwers.

There are two likely outcomes both demonstrating categorically that it is the ZPC that dictates US policies in the Middle East:

The military sales will not fly.

The military sale will be approved on conditions that Israel is privy to all its details and can modify or omit any part of the agreement.

The ZPC was even able to strong arm the Congress-people who have made a lifelong career out of aggressively promoting the interests of Big Oil (BO) and the Military Industrial Complex (MIC) to switch sides and vote against the sale of weapons to Saudi Arabia – BO’s strategic partner and the MIC’s best overseas customer.

Congress members from BO states like Texas and states with large military industries like California endorsed the ZPC letter prejudicing their constituents and big campaign financers. The feeble ‘lobbying’ by BO and the MIC in favor of the White House were crushed by the ZPC Congressional juggernaut.

The major trade unions of the AFL-CIO, like the steel workers, machinists, oil and chemical workers, electrical workers – whose members’ jobs were at stake, did not protest, let alone challenge the ZPC, demonstrating the high degree of Zionist influence over the trade union bosses. The obvious point is that the Congress and the ZFL-CIO are both Zionist colonized institutions.

The issue is not whether the US should or should not sell arms to Saudi Arabia (I oppose all arms sales and the MIC and BO around the world). The fundamental issue is whether we, the citizens, the elected representatives and the trade unionists in the United States, can be free of foreign colonization to decide the issue.

The issue is whether we are or can be a free and independent nation or a subject of a tiny powerful elite acting for a foreign power.

The narrative on the US proposed multi-billion dollar arms sales to a wealthy third rate military power demonstrates once again that Israeli interests have priority over US trade, jobs and geopolitical interests. Secondly the narrative confirms that the Israeli state dictates US political relations in the Middle East through its US conduit – the ZPC. Finally it refutes the Zionist geo-politicians and ‘oil’ and ‘military experts’ who cover up for the ZPC by falsely blaming Big Oil for policies they oppose because it prejudices their strategic partnership.

By blackmail and deceit, the Israelis got their additional $30 billion dollars over the next ten years and they double-crossed ‘their’ president by unleashing their Fifth Column to block his military sales to the Saudis.

And if Bush dares a complaint, he will be added to the list of ‘anti-Semites’the only honorable list in his entire 8 years in office.

The Creation of the Saudi Crime Syndicate

The Creation of the Saudi Crime Syndicate

When it was discovered that money from Saudi Princess Haifa bint Faisal had found its way, into the hands of Al Qaeda operative and advance man for the 9/11 hijackers Omar al-Bayoumi, the Saudi Princess put forward one of the worst alibis ever concocted. Princess Haifa claimed that she was giving the money to a woman named Majeda Ibrahin Dweikat so she could treat her thyroid condition (“The Saudi Money Trail,” no pagination). The good Princess claimed she had no idea that Majeda and her husband, Omar Basnan, were passing the money to Omar al-Bayoumi (no pagination). The problem is that Majeda’s husband, Osama Basnan, was known to be a “vocal Al-Qaeda sympathizer” (no pagination). According to a law enforcement official, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, Basnan “celebrated the heroes of September 11” and referred to September 11 as a “wonderful, glorious day” (no pagination). Basnan is also known to have “met with a high Saudi prince who has responsibilities for intelligence matters and is known to bring suitcases full of cash into the United States” (no pagination). Princess Haifa also connected to Omar al-Bayoumi through her husband, Prince Bandar bin Sultan. Omar al-Bayoumi had worked for Dallah Avco, the aviation services company owned by Prince Bandar’s father, Prince Sultan (no pagination). All of this seemed to suggest that more connected Princess Haifa to Omar al-Bayoumi than just unintended charity.

However, the 9/11 Commission accepted Princess Faisal’s alibi at face value. Why did the Commission give thumbs-up to such a flimsy explanation? The Commission never intended to find the truth behind 9/11. Its job was to cover up the fact that the United States government and the American aristocracy were intimately tied to the amalgam of terrorist financiers and criminals collectively referred to as the Saudi elite or Saudi Royals. This alliance goes back to the birth of the modern state of Saudi Arabia. This genesis story doesn’t begin with a charismatic Arab leader, but with a member of British intelligence: St. John Philby, known also as Jack Philby.

Jack Philby: Saudi Arabia’s Founding Father

Many people are more acquainted with Jack Philby’s son, the notorious Communist double agent, Harold Adrian Russell Philby, also known as Kim Philby. However, Jack’s story is no less important. Jack could be considered the founding father of Saudi Arabia. Jack Philby was a British Civil Servant who was dismissed for sexual misconduct (Loftus and Aarons 25). From there Jack was picked up by British secret service MI6 in 1915 (25). The British secret service was known for its anti-Jewish ranks that viewed all Jews as secret communists (31-2). The anti-Jewish sentiments found in the British secret service had trickled down from the British power elite. The British saw the Balfour Declaration as merely a foreign propaganda tool meant to get American military support during World War 1 (29). The British actually favored more of an Arab presence in the Palestine territory with a small Jewish minority to placate America (29). This is why the Balfour Declaration of 1917 promised that Palestine would be “a national home” as opposed to “the national home” for the Jews (29). The Balfour Declaration’s language would allow for a situation where the Jews would be insignificant in the Middle East.

Jack’s involvement in British secret service probably helped shape his anti-Jewish mindset. John Loftus and Mark Aarons elaborates:

During the early 1920s, Philby and his secret service colleagues did everything they could to undercut Zionist immigration. Philby’s secret service station organized anti-Jewish propaganda in Palestine. To be fair, he was merely carrying out a policy organized by his predecessors to stir up the Arabs against the Jews. According to several of our sources, Great Britain was the first modern country to use its intelligence service to organize terrorist acts against the Jews. (33)

However, Jack was more than just a Jew-hater. Philby’s fanaticism went much further than the fanaticism of his colleagues in MI6 or the British power elite. While the British power elite and MI6 were anti-Jewish, they were still not supportive of Arab self-determination and political independence. From the perspective of the British oligarchs and MI6, the Arab world was to be divided into French and British spheres of influence. The secret Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 was concocted for just this purpose (28-9). Jack Philby was fanatically pro-Arab. In 1917, Jack met with the chieftain of the Wahhabi sect, Ibn Saud (30). This was supposed to be just a minor political mission, but what came out of it was an alliance between Jack and Ibn Saud as well as Philby’s adoption of Wahhabism (30-1). Philby passed intelligence information to Ibn Saud that allowed the House of Saud to defeat Sharif Hussein and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was born (35).

Did Jack Philby help found Saudi Arabia on behalf of the British power elite and MI6? In all likelihood, the answer is no. Philby’s support of Ibn Saud was motivated by his hatred for Britain. When Philby realized that British promises of Arab independence were not genuine, he broke politically with England (28). Still, Philby’s pro-Arab fanaticism buttressed the British power elite’s anti-Jewish agenda. While he may have been a renegade, Jack Philby’s work seemed to always help one or more faction of the power elite. This included the American elite. With the aid of Allen Dulles, Jack Philby would connect the Saudi elite to American elite.

Dulles, Big Oil, and ARAMCO

In the 1930s, Philby was able to convince Ibn Saud to allow foreign investment in the Kingdom in the name of discovering oil. Philby convinced Ibn Saud to allow Charles Crane to facilitate exploration of Saudi Arabia’s subsoil assets (42). In 1933, Standard Oil of California (SOCAL) negotiated with Philby for a 60-year contract that allowed SOCAL to have exclusive rights to explore and extract oil (42-3). This was the beginning of what would become the Arabian-American Oil Company (ARAMCO). The U.S. State Department classifies ARAMCO as the richest commercial prize in the history of the planet (“St. John Philby,” no pagination).

A key player in the creation of ARAMCO was Dulles ally James Forrestal. Forrestal brought SOCAL and Texaco together in an agreement that formed Caltex, the parent company of ARAMCO (Loftus and Aarons 63). James Forrestal’s ties to the Dulles brothers were extremely important. Not only was the Dulles brothers agents of the power elite, but Allen Dulles had also been in a criminal relationship with Jack Philby since 1921 (39). In that year, Philby, who was then the secret service head of intelligence for Transjordan, met Allen, who was then stationed in Istanbul (39). Allen helped Jack guarantee the economic and political survival of Ibn Saud through his connections to American oil companies (38). Together, Philby and Dulles helped build the modern state of Saudi Arabia and connect the American elite to the Saudi elite.

The 9/11 Cover-Up

A real inquiry into the September 11th attacks would have proven disastrous for the American power elite. A genuine investigation would have revealed that the Saudi elite had their hands all over the attacks. This would have led to a deeper examination of the Saudi elite, which would have revealed that the American power elite has been connected to the Saudi criminal and conspiratorial infrastructure since Philby and Dulles created it. A bogus investigation had to be concocted. The first indication of a cover-up came when President Bush attempted to appoint Henry Kissinger to head the 9/11 Commission. Kissinger’s consulting firm, Kissinger Associates, has had dealings with Saudi Arabia in the past (Scheer, no pagination). When the public and activists raised the roof over this move, Henry was replaced with Thomas Kean. Kean is the director of oil giant Amerada Hess (Hicks 76). At the time of the 9/11 hearings Amerada Hess was conducting a joint venture with the Saudi Arabian oil company Delta Oil (76). The idea that Kean would follow the Saudi money trail of 9/11 was laughable.


The political landscape is filled with many discomforting truths that the common man must wrap his head around. One of those truths is that those who claim to be defending us are in bed with the very forces they claim to be defending us from. The connection between the American elite and the Saudi elite illustrates this point. It is time to take responsibility for our own protection, instead of leaving it in the hands of those who see us as cattle to be harvested.

Globalists Created Wahhabi Terrorism to Destroy Islam and Justify a Global State

Globalists Created Wahhabi Terrorism

to Destroy Islam and Justify a Global State

The House of Saud — no more Islamic than Billy Graham

The House of Saud

by David Livingstone

Left Abd al aziz ibn Saud (seated) with other male members of his family 1911 Following the dictates of Hegelian dialectic, the Globalists have created two antagonizing forces, the Liberal-Democratic West, against Terrorism, or political Islam, to force us into the acceptance of their final alternative, a New World Order.

The West and Islam have had a long era of compatibility, but this history has been denied to foster the myth of a Clash of Civilizations. In order to inflame the sentiments of the West against Islam, our attention has been focused on the specter of fanatical Wahhabism, and more specifically, its most notorious exponent, Osama bin Laden.

However, as outlined in an excellent article by Peter Goodgame, The Globalists and the Islamists, the Globalists have had a hand in shaping and financing all the terrorist organizations of the twentieth century, including the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, Hamas of Palestine and the Afghan Mujahideen. But the history of their duplicity dates farther back still, to the 18th Century, when British Freemasons created the Wahhabi sect of Saudi Arabia itself, to further their imperialistic objectives.

That a British spy by the name of Hempher was responsible for shaping of the extreme tenets of Wahhabism was mentioned in a Turkish work, Mir’at al-Haramain, by Ayyub Sabri Pasha between 1933-1938. British policy in its colonies often involved the creation of deviant sects, in order to Divide and Conquer, as was the case with the Ahmadiyya sect of Islam in India in the nineteenth century.

The details of this conspiracy are outlined in a little known document by the name of The Memoirs of Mr. Hempher published in series (episodes) in the German paper Spiegel, and later in a prominent French paper. A Lebanese doctor translated the document to the Arabic language and from there on it was translated to English and other languages.

The document is a first-hand account by Hempher of his mission for his government, which sent him to the Middle East to discover ways to undermine the Ottoman Empire. Among the vices the British were to promote were racism and nationalism, alcohol, gambling, fornication and tempting Muslim women to uncover themselves.

But most important was the strategy to insert heresies into Muslims creedal tenets and then criticize Islam for being a religion of terror.To this purpose, Hempher located a particularly corrupt individual by the name of Mohammed Ibn Adbul Wahhab.

To understand the brand of fanaticism that Wahhabism inculcated, it is first necessary to recognize that Islam called upon all Muslims, regardless of their race or nationality, to see themselves as brothers in faith. The killing of another Muslim was strictly forbidden.

However, as part of their strategy of Divide and Conquer, the British hoped to pit the Arab Muslims against their Turkish brothers. The only way to do so was to find a loophole in Islamic law whereby the Arabs could declare the Turks as apostates.

Abdul Wahhab was the instrument by which the British were able to insinuate this vile idea into the Muslims of the Arabian Peninsula. Basically, Wahhab contrived the idea that, simply by the trivial act of offering prayers to saints, their Turkish brethren had forfeited their faith, and therefore, that it was permitted to kill all who refused to adhere to his reforms, and to enslave their women and children. But that included the entire Muslim world, except for his small misguided band of followers.

But the Wahabbi movement was insignificant without the allegiance of the Saudi family, who, despite claims otherwise, were descended from Jewish merchants from Iraq. Orthodox jurists of the time branded the Wahhabis as heretics and condemned their fanaticism and intolerance. Nevertheless, the Wahhabis then demonstrated their contempt for their pretended faith by indiscriminately slaughtering Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

The Wahhabis then set about destroying all the holy tombs and burial grounds. They stole the Prophet\’s treasure, which included holy books, works of art and innumerable priceless gifts sent to the city during the previous thousand years. The leather and gilt bindings of the Islamic holy books they had destroyed were used to make sandals for the Wahhabi criminals.

The Ottoman Sultan brought an end to the first Wahhabi rebellion in 1818, but the sect revived under the leadership of the Saudi Faysal I. The movement was then somewhat restored until once again destroyed at the end of the nineteenth century.

After WWI, the former regions of the Ottoman Empire were divided into varying puppets regimes. For aiding to undermine the Ottoman authority in the region, Ibn Saud was duly rewarded with the creation of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1932. One year later, in 1933, the Saudis granted oil concessions to California Arabian Standard Oil Company (Casoc), affiliate of Standard Oil of California (Socal, today’s Chevron), headed by Rothschild agent, and chief among [US] Illuminati families, Rockefeller. Since that time, Saudi Arabia has been the most important ally to the West in the Middle East, not only providing ready access to its plentiful oil reserves, but also in tempering Arab aggression against Israel. Due to the evident hypocrisy of the regime, it has been necessary to suppress the ensuing dissent with brutality. Another important aspect has been preventing scholars from speaking of politics, that is, to criticize the regime.

In The Two Faces of Islam, Stephen Schwartz writes, Their tastes led them to taverns, casinos, brothels … They bought fleets of automobiles, private jets, and yachts the size of warships. They invested in valuable Western art they did not understand or like and which often offended the sensitivities of Wahhabi clerics. They spent as they wished, becoming patrons of international sexual enslavement and the exploitation of children.

The result has been that, in order to nonetheless appear to be espousing Islam, the Saudi regime and its puppet scholars have evolved a version of Islam that emphasizes ceremonial details of the religion, at the expense of helping to understand broader political realities. Their manner has encouraged a literal interpretation of Islamic law, permitting the likes of bin Laden to exploit the Koran to justify the killing of innocents.

Ultimately, the profusion of Rothschild financed petro-dollars in the coffers of the Saudi family has made it possible for them to propagandize their bastardized version of Islam to other parts of the world, most notably to America, where they purportedly subsidize up to 80 percent of the mosques in the country, a version of Islam that substitutes political awareness for dogmatic insistence on ritualistic fanaticism.

In 1999 King Fahd of Saudi Arabia attended the Bilderberg meeting, presumably to discuss his role in furthering the interests of world government, along with other such luminaries as Yasser Arafat and the Pope. Evidently, the Saudi family are part of the deceptive ploys of the Illuminati network. Their complicity in the accumulation of petro-dollars has gone into the financing of global terrorism, from Afghanistan to Bosnia, merely for the purpose of fomenting the necessary animosity of the world against Islam.


See also David Livingstone’s Reply to Criticism.


David Livingstone is the author of
The Hidden History of Western Civilization
His website is here.

Article from:

Negative Wahhabi Influence in the Balkans

Muslims in the Balkans

In an article published at ADNKronos International, we find another typical example of the type of corruption that the Wahhabis are used to insinuate.

This example takes place in Bosnia, which has an Islamic tradition that it four centuries old. And yet, how Saudi Arabia propagates its deviant ideology is by offering a free 4-year education at their universities. There, instead of learning the traditions of Islam, they learn the severe Wahhabi interpretation, which teaches them to be critical of other Muslims, and to hate the Jews and Christians. In other words, intolerance.

On the other hand, Islam had been based on a degree of pluralism, as it was recognized that sometimes it was possible to arrive at a different conclusion from the very same evidence. It resulted in 4 distinct schools of thought in the Islamic world, that were all mutually compatible. Not one school was believed to be “going to Hell”. Each was recognized as legitimate.

So the Bosnians followed the Hanafi school of jurisprudence, which they inherited from the Turks. Other parts of the Muslim world were divided into adherence to the 3 other schools.

But during the Bosnian conflict, many “Mujahideen”, unwittingly under the employ of the CIA, through the sponsorship of Saudi Arabia, brought their infectious Wahhabi creed to the country. Since, several young Bosnian men were sent to be “educated” in Saudi Arabia as well, only to come back to stir up more conflict in the country.

Essentially, these young dupes, after only a few years of “Islamic” education, feel equipped to return to their countries and “correct” its errant ways.

But it should be understood that Wahhabism/Salafism is a modern phenomenon, one created by the British and occult secret societies, precisely for the purpose of, not only disuniting the Muslims, but also steering them towards a very literal and dogmatic version of the faith, which creates the fundamentalism necessary to foment their desired Clash of Civilizations.

“Strike and crush Pakistanis, enemies of Jews and Zionism, by all disguised and secret plans.” – David Ben Gurion

David Ben Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister.His words, as printed in the Jewish Chronicle,9 August 1967, leaves nothing to imagination:

“The world Zionist movement should not be neglectful of the dangers of Pakistan to it. And Pakistan now should be its first target, for this
ideological State is a threat to our existence. And Pakistan, the whole of it, hates the Jews and loves the Arabs. “This lover of the Arabs is more
dangerous to us than the Arabs themselves. For that matter, it is most essential for the world Zionism that it should now take immediate steps
against Pakistan. “Whereas the inhabitants of the Indian peninsula are Hindus whose hearts have been full of hatred towards Muslims, therefore, India is the most important base for us to work there from against Pakistan. “It is essential that we exploit this base and strike and crush Pakistanis, enemies of Jews and Zionism, by all disguised and secret plans.”

Strike and crush Pakistanis, enemies of Jews and Zionism-David Ben Gurion





At least 29 rounded up as part of bombing


AHMADABAD, India (AP) — Authorities scoured a western Indian city Sunday for those behind a series of bombings that killed at least 29 people, reportedly rounding up more than two dozen residents as a little-known group claimed responsibility for the attack.

At least 16 bombs went off Saturday evening in several crowded neighborhoods of Ahmadabad — a historic city that in 2002 was the scene of some of the worst rioting between India’s Hindu majority and its Muslim minority. The attack came a day after seven smaller blasts killed two people in the southern technology hub of Bangalore.

The attacks prompted authorities to put cities around the country on alert, and security was stepped up in markets and at hospitals, airports and train stations.

A group calling itself the Indian Mujahedeen claimed responsibility for Saturday’s attack but offered few other details in e-mails sent to several television news stations, the CNN-IBN station reported. The group was unknown before May when it said it was behind a series of bombings in Jaipur, also in western India, that left 61 people dead.

In its latest e-mail Sunday, the group reportedly made no mention of the smaller bombings Friday in Bangalore and it was not clear if the two attacks were connected.

HERE IS THE REAL WORD FROM PAKISTAN, TELLING OF THE MOSSAD/RAW (INDIAN SECRET SERVICE), MEANING CIA, ILLEGAL WAR PLAN TO SET PAKISTAN UP FOR THE KILL. People, we live in a rogue terrorist state, which has regularly bought friends in mostly Muslim countries and paid them to wage war against their own populations and their neighbors. Notice the quote from Zionist leader David Ben Gurion:

David Ben Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister.His words, as printed in the Jewish Chronicle,9 August 1967, leaves nothing to imagination:

“The world Zionist movement should not be neglectful of the dangers of Pakistan to it. And Pakistan now should be its first target, for this
ideological State is a threat to our existence. And Pakistan, the whole of it, hates the Jews and loves the Arabs. “This lover of the Arabs is more
dangerous to us than the Arabs themselves. For that matter, it is most essential for the world Zionism that it should now take immediate steps against Pakistan. “Whereas the inhabitants of the Indian peninsula are Hindus whose hearts have been full of hatred towards Muslims, therefore,

India is the most important base for us to work there from against Pakistan. “It is essential that we exploit this base and strike and crush Pakistanis, enemies of Jews and Zionism,

by all disguised and secret plans.”

Indian Raw + Israeli Mossad Vs. Pakistan And Islam.

It is a long article, but very well done with facts, it is important that we read it and try to understand what lies ahead in the context of current crisis in Kashmir.

We had been reading the name MOSSAD in the newspapers. But today you will know little bit more about Mossad and its role is destroying Muslims around the world and specially in South East Asia with the help of India RAW. Please read on….. In a fascinating plot, full of intrigue and betrayal, Mossad, RAW and Israeli Russian Ukrainian drug mafia seem to have joined hands:

The whole story may never be available but it has enough pieces to give a fair idea of what may be in store for all of us. There are many ways to tell this story but let begin at the most convenient point – the Recent Recruitment drive of Mossad.

Mossad is the nickname of ‘The Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks'(ha-Mossad le- Modiin ule-Tafkidim Meyuhadim).A compact body of about 1500 regular employees, Mossad relies on Jews and sympathizers worldwide forits operations. During last couple of years it has begun paying special attention to Pakistan,Iran and Central Asia. Hi-Tech Mossad Dan Yahkin, a Jewish analyst, wrote an article which was published on 19 April 2001 in Globes, a Tel Aviv publication.He narrates the story of ‘Gil’ and ‘Or’, pseudonym of two former operatives of Mossad.The contention behind his narrative is that Mossad is as hi tech as any outfit in the world, military or otherwise.

“Political Action and Liaison Department conducts political activities and liaison with friendly foreign intelligence services and with nations with which Israel does not have normal diplomatic relations.In larger stations, such as Paris,Mossad customarily had under embassy cover two regional controllers: One to serve collection department and the other the Political Action and Liaison Department.

“Special Operations Division, also known as Metsada, conducts highly sensitive assassinations, sabotage, paramilitary, and psychological warfare
projects.”LAP (Lohamah Psichlogit) Department is responsible for psychological warfare, propaganda and deception operations.

Research Department is responsiblefor intelligence production, including daily situation reports, weekly summaries and detailed monthly reports. The Department is organized into 15 geographically specialized sections or “desks”, including the USA, Canada and Western Europe, Latin America, Former Soviet Union, China, Africa, the Maghreb Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia,Libya, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iran. A “nuclear” desk is focused on special weapons related issues.

Raw-Mossad Connection:

Janes information group, the world’s foremost source on intelligence information, reported in July 2001 that the Indian spy agency RAW and the
Israeli spy agency Mossad have created “four new agencies”to infiltrate Pakistan to targetimportant religious and military personalities,journalists, judges,lawyers and bureaucrats. In addition, bombs would be exploded in trains, railway stations, bridges, bus stations, cinemas, hotels and mosques of rival Islamic sects to incite sectarianism. Pakistaniintelligence agencies also said that RAW had constituted a plan to lure Pakistani men between 20 and 30 years of age to visit India so they could be entrapped in cases of fake currency and subversion’ and then be coerced to spy for India.”

This was high point of cementing an unholyalliance which began much earlier and which continues to tighten its noose around the neck of Pakistan, Iran,Afghanistan and Central Asia.

It appears that RAW and Mossad-either singly or jointly, either covertly or overtly-have been making efforts to penetrate sensitive circles of top echelon in Pakistan.

It cannot be said with certainty but there are some reasons to assume that Benazir Bhutto, the former prime minister of Pakistan, wittingly or
unwittingly, played in the hands of RAW-Mossad masterminds. High ups in Pakistan’s military still believe that Benazir Bhutto has connections with
RAW-Mossad nexus and General Pervez Musharraf himself declared her as “security risk” during a chat with Pakistan’s leading editors and correspondents justbefore his referendum campaign.

Benazir’s visit to India last year at a time when Pakistan was going through one of the worst crises in its history, and her statements there which aimed to undermine the whole foundation of Pakistan,generated more than a flicker of doubt in analytic minds. The basic question arises: Who is Benazir Bhutto? Leaving BB to her own fate, let’s return to RAW-Mossad connection.

What is clear right now is that Indian RAW and Israeli Mossad are collaborating extensively to curb the freedom movement of Kashmir and destabilize Pakistan.Indian newspaper The Pioneer, wrote on 3 March 2001: “Fencing of the Indo-Pak border is not enough.To check Pakistan sponsored cross-border terrorism, top security experts of Israel have suggested that hi-tech gadgets ranging from an electronic barrier system of radars to thermal imaging devices should be immediately installed on India’s sensitive international border in J&K and Punjab sectors.

“The team of experts, including officials of the Mossad, the Israeli Army and the Israel Aircraft Industries (IAI), also found shocking loopholes in
the security arrangements relating to the much talked about Samjhauta Express. They advised that instead of Lahore, the train should terminate on the Attari border. Sources in the Ministry of Home Affairs said the Israeli experts surveyed the 198 km international border in Jammu and Punjab and reviewed the route of the Samjhauta Express with top officials of the Border Security Force.

“Subsequently, former DG of the Border Security Force,E.N.Ram Mohan was appointed as consultant on border management. Mr. Ram Mohan recommended that besides radars,aerostate balloons and FLIR equipment be used.India is keen to purchase surveillance aircraft UAVs) from Israel to gain intelligence teeth. The UAVs could also help the state police in keeping an eyein naxalite affected areas of Andhra Pradesh. For several years, Mossad and Israel’s internal intelligence agency, Shinbhet,have utilised unmanned air vehicles to patrol the hypersensitive Gaza border.”

Qutbuddin Aziz, former minister in Pakistan embassy in London,wrote an excellent article, titled”Dangerous Nexus between Israel & India.” It was published by a prominent Pakistaninewspaper on April 2001.We must quote extensively from this article.

Aziz writes: “Top secret details of Indian Home Minister LK Advani’s visit to Israel in June 2000, show that the deals he has struck with theIsraelis would make India and Israel partners inthreatening the Muslim world with diabolic conspiracies to fragment and cripple it as a political force in the world. The details of his meetings with Israel’s rulers, particularly the heads of the Israeli Home Ministry and its intelligence agencies, Mossad and Sabak, reveal that the arrangements he has made for joint Indo-Israel espionage operations in key areas of the Muslim world would make the Indian embassies in these Muslim countries the eyes and ears ofthe worldwide cloak-and-dagger Israeli spy network.

“Under the euphemism of “counter-terrorism”, India is allowing Israel to establish a huge spy establishment in India which will,inter alia, unearth and monitor “Islamic fundamentalist and “individuals and groups for elimination by extra judicial process or by cold-blooded murder and kidnapping.

“The most important meeting Indian Home Minister Advani had during his three-day Israeli tour on June 13-16 was with the top brass of Israel’s
intelligence agencies in Tel Aviv. Heading the Israeli team was the powerful chief of Israeli police, Yehuda Wilk,with the heads of the Israeli
intelligence agencies, Mossad and Sabak,and military officials dealing with Israel’s punitive and espionage operations against Arabs in Israel, Palestine and neighbouring states such as Lebanon and Syria. Senior officials from the Israeli Foreign Office and the defence and home ministries attended this meeting.Israeli experts in bomb detection were also present.

“Mr Advani’s large team included India’s highest level spymasters such as the Director of the Intelligence Bureau, Mr Shayamal Dutta, the Director of the Central Bureau of Investigation, Mr R K Raghvan,the head of the Indian Border Security Force, Mr E M Ram Mohan, Indian Home Ministry’s powerful Secretary K Pande who oversees the work of the infamous Indian spy agency, RAW, and liaises with the Indian Foreign Office in respect of undercover RAW agents working in Indian embassies abroad, and a senior officer of India’s military intelligence agency,equivalentofPakistan ISI).

“In this top-level meeting in Tel Aviv on June 14, Advani reportedly thanked the Israeli government for its immense help to India in security matters and spoke of the dangers India and Israel face from their common enemies ie, Muslim neighbours.

“Advani, it is reported, highly praised the help provided by Mossad and army commando personnel to the Indian army in the war on “Muslim militants” in Kashmir and against “Muslim terrorists” such as the “Memon brothers” of Mumbai in Dubai. Advani said he had,throughout his political career,advocated India’s recognition and friendship with Israel and that his party had played a key role in forcing Congress government to have full diplomatic relations with Israel in 1992.

“He lauded the Indo-Israeli cooperation in the military, economic and other fields. Advani recalled that India had voted in favour of a US-sponsored motion in the UN for rescinding a UN resolution that equated Zionism with racism. Mr Advani explained at length India’s security problems in which the danger from Pakistan and Indian Muslims getting Arab money loomed large. Advani gave a long list of the special services in spying and the anti-insurgency devices and spy equipment India urgently needs from Israel to combat “Muslim terrorism”.

“In the June 14 Tel Aviv meeting, the Israeli Police Chief, Yehuda Wilk, profusely praised India for its friendship with Israel and pledged help to
the Indian government in combating “Muslim terrorism” that poses new threats to Israel and India.The heads of India’s intelligence agencies then briefed the Israeli side in the meeting on the ground situation in India in respect of “Muslim terrorists”, especially in Jammu and Kashmir, and the new dangers coming up for India and Israel because of the Pakistani bomb and the fear that Pakistan may give its nuclear weapons to the anti-Israel Arabs.

“The Indian side showed a keen interest in learning from Israeli security experts how they had run the slice of Lebanon which Israel ruled for 18 years and gave up recently.Some information about the Israeli torture and investigation methods was gathered by the Indian side from the Israelis with regard to dealing with Arab dissidents within Israel and in the Palestinian
Authority region.

“The Indians gave the Israelis a long shopping list of spying, torture and surveillance equipment such as electronic fencing of sensitive sites, laser systems, short-range rockets, eagle-eyed long distance snipers, observation blimps, giant shields, night vision device, unmanned aircraft of the MALAT wing of the Israeli Aircraft Industries Limited, special protective dress and gear for security personnel, cross border snopping devices and gadgets, training and deployment of spies and the special gear for them, use of computers and Internet for espionage and disinformation, code breaking, tailing of enemy agents and their elimination, nuclear espionage, purloining state secrets of hostile countries and pooling them for the good of India and Israel and their mutual friends.

“The Israelis were interested in having access to the secret reports of Indian undercover RAW diplomats from certain Muslim countries of special
interest to Israel (especially Pakistan, Libya and Iran). India is apparently willing to grant access to Israeli agents to the Indian Home Ministry’s
Central Intelligence Processing Unit (CIPU) in New Delhi. This was recently set up under Advani’s direction with Israeli and US help. A handpicked RAW officer, trusted by Advani, heads this unit. Israel wants full access to its information data. The Indian government has already allowed access to it by American intelligence agencies now working with the Indian government on so-called anti-terrorist assignments.”

Federation of American Scientists website comments on RAW in these words :”RAW has engaged in disinformation campaigns, espionage and sabotage against Pakistan and other neighboring countries. RAW has enjoyed the backing of successive Indian governments in these efforts. Working directly under the Prime Minister, the structure,rank,pay and perks of the Research & Analysis Wing are kept secret from Parliament.”

Tarek Fatah, a scholar settled in Canada, wrote: “Britain’s authoritative and respected defense publication, Jane’s Terrorism & Security Monitor,
reports that Israel and India have formed military relationship and that Israeli intelligence is active in Occupied Kashmir. “It says: “Israeli intelligence agencies have been intensifying their relations with India’s security apparatus and are now understood to be heavily involved in helping New Delhi combat Islamic militants in the disputed province of Kashmir…” Ed Blanche writes in Janes’ Security on 14 August 2001: “Israeli intelligence agencies have been intensifying their relations with India’s security apparatus and are now understood to be heavily involved in helping New Delhi combat Islamic militants in the disputed province of Kashmir, India’s only Muslim-majority state which lies at the core of the conflict with neighbouring Pakistan.

“Israel has several teams now in Kashmir training Indian counter-insurgency forces to fight the dozen separatist guerrilla groups operating in the
Indian-controlled sector of the disputed state.

“The exact extent of the involvement in Kashmir by Israel’s intelligence agencies is far from clear, but it fits into Israel’s increasing focus on
events in Central Asia, and as far a field as Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim state, to counteract Islamic fundamentalism, which it
perceives as a major threat.

Shimon Peres, currently Israel’s foreign minister, said during a visit to New Delhi in January 2001 (shortly before he took his current post in Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon’s coalition government) that Israel was prepared to co-operate with India to fight terrorism. Weeks earlier, an Israeli
counterterrorism team, including military intelligence specialists and senior police commanders, paid a visit to Indian-administered Kashmir and other regions of the country that are grappling with anti-government militants to
assess India’s security needs.” If there is still any doubt as to the real intentions of Israel, then please see this statement issued by David Ben Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister.His words, as printed in the Jewish Chronicle,9 August 1967, leaves nothing to imagination:

“The world Zionist movement should not be neglectful of the dangers of Pakistan to it. And Pakistan now should be its first target, for this
ideological State is a threat to our existence. And Pakistan, the whole of it, hates the Jews and loves the Arabs. “This lover of the Arabs is more
dangerous to us than the Arabs themselves. For that matter, it is most essential for the world Zionism that it should now take immediate steps
against Pakistan. “Whereas the inhabitants of the Indian peninsula are Hindus whose hearts have been full of hatred towards Muslims, therefore, India is the most important base for us to work there from against Pakistan. “It is essential that we exploit this base and strike and crush Pakistanis, enemies of Jews and Zionism, by all disguised and secret plans.”

This brings us to the other reason for the Jewish Hindu friendship. Israel knows that the Hindus are the dominant group, at least numbers wise, in the Middle East. In UAE, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait they are very strong businessmen and hold strategic positions in many institutions. In Medina in Saudi Arabia, the best hotel closest to the Prophet’s mosque is owned by a Hindu — the Oberoi. These Hindus are a very effective third column in these Gulf States providing a wealth of information and ready for subversive action when required.(Can Muslims do something aboutthis?).One of the greatest abilities of Mossad is that it can mobilize US resources anywhere to protect Israeli interests. Now when Pakistan has already allowed US forces to use its soil, air and intelligence, is not it possible that Mossad’s clever brains workout a scenario and push the American troops to do what the Mossad would like to do in Pakistan?