Freemasonry and the Creation of the New World Order

The Complete History of the Freemasonry and the Creation of the New World Order

, ,  – Humans are Free

The creation of the New World Order (NWO) agenda was put in motion by the infamous character, Mayer Amschel Rothschild, the one who decided to control the entire planet by any means necessary.

Of course, this meant: deception, control, financial enslavement, blackmail and murder… but also far graver things, like: wars, famine and depopulation… a genocide unlike any other before it.

If you want to better understand just how powerful and black-hearted the Rothschild family is, then you must read their complete history HERE.

They are the richest clan in the world, and their empire was built on mountains of bones and sufferance.

1773 – Mayer Amschel Rothschild assembles twelve of his most influential friends, and convinces them that if they all pool their resources together, they can rule the world. This meeting takes place in Frankfurt, Germany.

Rothschild also informs his friends that he has found the perfect candidate, an individual of incredible intellect and ingenuity, to lead the organization he has planned – Adam Weishaupt.

May 1, 1776 – Adam Weishaupt (code named Spartacus) establishes a secret society called the Order of the Illuminati. Weishaupt is the Professor of Canon Law at the University of Ingolstadt in Bavaria, part of Germany. The Illuminati seek to establish a New World Order.

Their objectives are as follows:

1) Abolition of all ordered governments 
2) Abolition of private property 
3) Abolition of inheritance 
4) Abolition of patriotism 
5) Abolition of the family 
6) Abolition of religion 
7) Creation of a world government 

July, 1782 – The Order of the Illuminati joins forces with Freemasonry at the Congress of Wilhelmsbad. The Comte de Virieu, an attendee at the conference, comes away visibly shaken. When questioned about the “tragic secrets” he brought back with him, he replies:

“I will not confide them to you. I can only tell you that all this is very much more serious than you think.”

From this time on, according to his biographer, “the Comte de Virieu could only speak of Freemasonry with horror.”

The insignia of the Order of the Illuminati first appeared on the reverse side of U.S. one-dollar bills in 1933. One can read, at the base of the 13-story pyramid, the year 1776 (MDCCLXVI in Roman numerals). The eye radiating in all directions is the “all-spying eye” that symbolizes the terroristic, Gestapo-like, agency set up by Weishaupt.

The Latin words “ANNUIT COEPTIS” mean “our enterprise (conspiracy) has been crowned with success.” Below, “NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM” explains the nature of the enterprise: a “New Social Order” or a “New World Order”.

1785 – An Illuminati courier named Lanze is struck by lightning, and killed while traveling by horseback through the town of Ratisbon. When Bavarian officials examine the contents of his saddle bags, they discover the existence of the Order of the Illuminati, and find plans detailing the coming French Revolution.

The Bavarian Government attempts to alert the government of France of impending disaster, but the French Government fails to heed this warning. Bavarian officials arrest all members of the Illuminati they can find, but Weishaupt and others have gone underground, and cannot be found.

1796 – Freemasonry becomes a major issue in the presidential election in the United States. John Adams wins the election by opposing Masonry, and his son, John Quincy Adams, warns of the dire threat to the nation posed by the Masonic Lodges:

“I do conscientiously and sincerely believe that the Order of Freemasonry, if not the greatest, is one of the greatest moral and political evils under which the Union is now laboring.”

1797 – John Robison, Professor of Natural History at Edinburgh University in Scotland, publishes a book entitled “Proofs of a Conspiracy” in which he reveals that Adam Weishaupt had attempted to recruit him. He exposes the diabolical aims of the Illuminati to the world.

1821 – George W. F. Hegel formulates what is called the Hegelian dialectic – the process by which Illuminati objectives are achieved. According to the Hegelian dialectic, thesis plus antithesis equals synthesis. In other words, first you foment a crisis.

Then there is an enormous public outcry that something must be done about the problem. So you offer a solution that brings about the changes you really wanted all along, but which people would have been unwilling to accept initially.

1828 – Mayer Amschel Rothschild, who finances the Illuminati, expresses his utter contempt for national governments which attempt to regulate International Bankers such as him:

“Allow me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who writes the laws.”

1848 — Moses Mordecai Marx Levy, alias Karl Marx, writes “The Communist Manifesto.” Marx is a member of an Illuminati front organization called the League of the Just.

He not only advocates economic and political changes; he advocates moral and spiritual changes as well. He believes the family should be abolished, and that all children should be raised by a central authority. He expresses his attitude toward God by saying:

“We must war against all prevailing ideas of religion, of the state, of country, of patriotism. The idea of God is the keynote of a perverted civilization. It must be destroyed.”

Jan. 22, 1870 – In a letter to Italian revolutionary leader Giuseppe Mazzini, Albert Pike – Sovereign Grand Commander of the Southern Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry – announces the establishment of a secret society within a secret society:

“We must create a super rite, which will remain unknown, to which we will call those Masons of high degree of whom we shall select. With regard to our brothers in Masonry, these men must be pledges to the strictest secrecy. Through this supreme rite, we will govern all Freemasonry which will become the one international center, the more powerful because its direction will be unknown.”

This ultra-secret organization is called The New and Reformed Paladian Rite. (This is why about 95% of the men involved in Masonry don’t have a clue as to what the objectives of the organization actually are. They are under the delusion that it’s just a fine community organization doing good works.)

1875 – Russian occultist Helena Petrovna Blavatsky founds the Theosophical Society. Madame Blavatsky claims that Tibetan holy men in the Himilayas, whom she refers to as the Masters of Wisdom, communicated with her in London by telepathy. She insists that the Christians have it all backwards – that Satan is good, and God is evil. She writes:

“The Christians and scientists must be made to respect their Indian betters. The Wisdom of India, her philosophy and achievement, must be made known in Europe and America.”

1884 – The Fabian Society is founded in Great Britain to promote Socialism. The Fabian Society takes its name from the Roman General Fabius Maximus, who fought Hannibal’s army in small debilitating skirmishes, rather than attempting one decisive battle.

July 14, 1889 – Albert Pike issues instructions to the 23 Supreme Councils of the world. He reveals who is the true object of Masonic worship:

“To you, Sovereign Grand Instructors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st and 30th degrees: The Masonic religion should be, by all of us initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian doctrine.”

1890-1896 – Cecil Rhodes, an enthusiastic student of John Ruskin, is Prime Minister of South Africa, a British colony at the time. He is able to exploit and control the gold and diamond wealth of South Africa.

He works to bring all the habitable portions of the world under the domination of a ruling elite. To that end, he uses a portion of his vast wealth to establish the famous Rhodes Scholarships.

1893 – The Theosophical Society sponsors a Parliament of World Religions held in Chicago. The purpose of the convention is to introduce Hindu and Buddhist concepts, such as belief in reincarnation, to the West.

1911 – The Socialist Party of Great Britain publishes a pamphlet entitled “Socialism and Religion” in which they clearly state their position on Christianity:

“It is therefore a profound truth that Socialism is the natural enemy of religion. A Christian Socialist is in fact an anti-Socialist. Christianity is the antithesis of Socialism.”

1912 – Colonel Edward Mandell House, a close advisor of President Woodrow Wilson, publishes “Phillip Dru: Administrator”, in which he promotes “socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx.”

Feb. 3, 1913 – The 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, making it possible for the Federal Government to impose a progressive income tax, is ratified. Plank #2 of “The Communist Manifesto” had called for a progressive income tax. (In Canada, the income tax is introduced in 1917, as a “temporary measure” to finance the war effort.)

1913 – President Woodrow Wilson publishes “The New Freedom” in which he reveals:

“Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the U.S., in the field of commerce and manufacturing, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.”

Dec. 23, 1913 – The Federal Reserve (neither federal nor a reserve – it’s a privately owned institution) is created. It was planned at a secret meeting in 1910 on Jekyl Island, Georgia, by a group of bankers and politicians, including Col. House.

This transfers the power to create money from the American Government to a private group of bankers. The Federal Reserve Act is hastily passed just before the Christmas break. Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh Sr. (father of the famed aviator) warns:

“This act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President signs this act the invisible government by the money power, proven to exist by the Money Trust Investigation, will be legalized.”

1916 – Three years after signing the Federal Reserve Act into law, President Woodrow Wilson observes:

“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”

1917 – With aid from Financiers in New York City and London, V. I. Lenin is able to overthrow the government of Russia. Lenin later comments on the apparent contradiction of the links between prominent capitalists and Communism:

“There also exists another alliance – at first glance a strange one, a surprising one – but if you think about it, in fact, one which is well grounded and easy to understand. This is the alliance between our Communist leaders and your capitalists.”

(Remember the Hegelian dialectic?)

May 30, 1919 – Prominent British and American personalities establish the Royal Institute of International Affairs in England and the Institute of International Affairs in the U.S. at a meeting arranged by Col. House; attended by various Fabian socialists, including noted economist John Maynard Keynes.

1920 – Britain’s Winston Churchill recognizes the connection between the Illuminati and the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. He observes:

“From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, to those of Trotsky, Bela Kun, Rosa Luxembourg, and Emma Goldman, this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence and impossible equality, has been steadily growing.

It played a definitely recognizable role in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the nineteenth century, and now at last this band of extra- ordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads, and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”

1920-1931 – Louis T. McFadden is Chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Curency. Concerning the Federal Reserve, Congressman McFadden notes:

“When the Federal Reserve Act was passed, the people of these United States did not perceive that a world banking system was being set up here. A super-state controlled by International Bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the world for their own pleasure.

Every effort has been made by the Fed to conceal its powers, but the truth is – the Fed has usurped the Government. It controls everything here, and it controls all our foreign relations. It makes and breaks governments at will.” Concerning the Great Depression and the country’s acceptance of FDR’s New Deal, he asserts: “It was no accident. It was a carefully contrived occurrence. The International Bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so they might emerge as the rulers of us all.”

1921 – Col. House reorganizes the American branch of the Institute of International Affairs into theCouncil on Foreign Relations (CFR). (For the past 60 years, 80% of the top positions in every administration – whether Democrat or Republican – have been occupied by members of this organization.)

December 15, 1922 – The CFR endorses World Government in its magazine “Foreign Affairs.” Author Philip Kerr states:

“Obviously there is going to be no peace nor prosperity for mankind as long as the earth remains divided into 50 or 60 independent states, until some kind of international system is created. The real problem today is that of world government.”

1928 – “The Open Conspiracy: Blue Prints for a World Revolution” by H. G. Wells is published. A former Fabian socialist, Wells writes:

“The political world of the Open Conspiracy must weaken, efface, incorporate, and supersede existing governments. The Open Conspiracy is the natural inheritor of socialist and communist enthusiasms; it may be in control of Moscow before it is in control of New York. The character of the Open Conspiracy will now be plainly displayed. It will be a world religion.”

1933 – “The Shape of Things to Come” by H. G. Wells is published. Wells predicts a second world war around 1940, originating from a German-Polish dispute. After 1945, there would be an increasing lack of public safety in “criminally infected” areas.

The plan for the “Modern World State” would succeed on its third attempt, and come out of something that occurred in Basra, Iraq. The book also states:

“Although world government had been plainly coming for some years, although it had been endlessly feared and murmured against, it found no opposition anywhere.”

Nov. 21, 1933 – In a letter to Col. Edward M. House, President Franklin Roosevelt writes:

“The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government since the days of Andrew Jackson.”

March 1942 – An article in “TIME” magazine chronicles the Federal Council of Churches (which later becomes the National Council of Churches, a part of the World Council of Churches) lending its weight to efforts to establish a global authority.

A meeting of the top officials of the council comes out in favor of:

1) a world government of delegated powers;
2) strong immediate limitations on national sovereignty;
3) international control of all armies and navies.

Representatives (375 of them) of 30-some denominations assert that “a new order of economic life is both imminent and imperative” – a new order that is sure to come either “through voluntary cooperation within the framework of democracy or through explosive revolution.”

June 28, 1945 – U.S. President Harry Truman endorses world government in a speech:

“It will be just as easy for nations to get along in a republic of the world as it is for us to get along in a republic of the United States.”

October 24, 1945 – The United Nations Charter becomes effective. Also on October 24, Senator Glen Taylor (D-Idaho) introduces Senate Resolution 183, calling upon the U.S. Senate to go on record as favoring creation of a world republic, including an international police force.

Feb. 7, 1950 – International financier and CFR member James Warburg tells a Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee:

“We shall have world government whether or not you like it – by conquest or consent.”

Feb. 9, 1950 – The Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee introduces Senate Concurrent Resolution #66 which begins:

“Whereas, in order to achieve universal peace and justice, the present Charter of the United Nations should be changed to provide a true world government constitution.”

1952 – The World Association of Parliamentarians for World Government draws up a map designed to illustrate how foreign troops would occupy and police the six regions into which the United States and Canada will be divided as part of their world-government plan.

1954 – Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands establishes the Bilderbergers: international politicians and bankers who meet secretly on an annual basis.

1961 – The U.S. State Department issues Document 7277, entitled “Freedom From War: The U.S. Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.”

It details a three-stage plan to disarm all nations and arm the U.N. with the final stage in which “no state would have the military power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force.”

1966 – Professor Carroll Quigley, Bill Clinton’s mentor at Georgetown University, authors a massive volume entitled “Tragedy and Hope” in which he states:

“There does exist and has existed for a generation, an international network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so.

I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims, and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies, but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.”

April 1972 – In his keynote address to the Association for Childhood Education International, Chester M. Pierce, Professor of Education and Psychiatry in the Faculty of Medicine at Harvard University, proclaims:

“Every child in America entering school at the age of five is insane because he comes to school with certain allegiances toward our founding fathers, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being. It’s up to you, teachers, to make all of these sick children well by creating the international child of the future.”

July 1973 – International banker and staunch member of the subversive Council on Foreign Relations, David Rockefeller, founds a new organization called the Trilateral Commission, of which the official aim is “to harmonize the political, economic, social, and cultural relations between the three major economic regions in the world” (hence the name “Trilateral”).

He invites future President Jimmy Carter to become one of the founding members. Zbigniew Brzezinski is the organization’s first director.

There are three major economic areas in the world: Europe, North America, and the Far East (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc.).

If, under the pretext of having to join forces to be able to face economic competition with the two other economic regions, the member countries of each of these three regions decide to merge into one single country, forming three super-States, then the one-world government will be almost achieved.

Like Fabian socialists, they achieve their ultimate goal (a world government) step by step.

This aim is almost achieved in Europe with the Single European Act (Maastricht Treaty) that was implemented in 1993, requiring all the member countries of the European Community to abolish their trade barriers, and to hand over their monetary and fiscal policies to the technocrats of the European Commission in Brussels, Belgium.

In January, 2002, all these European countries abandoned their national currencies to share only one common currency, the “Euro”. Moreover, the Nice Treaty removed more powers from countries to give them over to the European Commission.

What begun innocently in 1952 as the EEC (European Economic Community, a common authority to regulate the coal and steel industry among European nations), finally turned into a European super-state.

Jean Monnet, a French socialist economist and founder of the EEC, had this in mind when he said: “Political union inevitably follows economic union.” He also said in 1948:

“The creation of a United Europe must be regarded as an essential step towards the creation of a United World.”

As regards the North American area, the merger of its member countries is well under way with the passage of free trade between Canada and the U.S.A., and then Mexico.

In the next few years, this free-trade agreement is supposed to include also all of South and Central America, with a single currency for them all.

Mexico’s President Vucente Fox said on May 6, 2002, in Madrid:

“Eventually, our long-range objective is to establish with the United States, but also with Canada, our other regional partner, an ensemble of connections and institutions similar to those created by the European Union.”

1973 – The Club of Rome, a U.N. operative, issues a report entitled “Regionalized and Adaptive Model of the Global World System.” This report divides the entire world into ten kingdoms.

1979 – FEMA, which stands for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is given huge powers. It has the power, in case of “national emergency”, to suspend laws, move entire populations, arrest and detain citizens without a warrant, and hold them without trial.

It can seize property, food supplies, transportation systems, and can suspend the Constitution.

Not only is it the most powerful entity in the United States, but it was not even created under Constitutional law by the Congress. It was a product of a Presidential Executive Order.

An Executive Order becomes law simply by a signature of the U.S. President; it does not even have to be approved by the Representatives or Senators in the Congress.

A state of “national emergency” could be a terrorist attack, a natural disaster, or a stock market crash, for example. Here are just a few Executive Orders associated with FEMA that would suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

These Executive Orders have been on record for nearly 30 years, and could be enacted by the stroke of a Presidential pen:

# 10995: Right to seize all communications media in the United States.

# 10997: Right to seize all electric power, fuels and minerals, both public and private.

# 10999: Right to seize all means of transportation, including personal vehicles of any kind, and total control of highways, seaports, and waterways.

# 11000: Right to seize any and all American people and divide up families in order to create work forces to be transferred to any place the Government sees fit.

# 11001: Right to seize all health, education and welfare facilities, both public and private.

# 11002: Right to force registration of all men, women, and children in the United States.

# 11003: Right to seize all air space, airports, and aircraft.

# 11004: Right to seize all housing and finance authorities in order to establish “Relocation Designated Areas”, and to force abandonment of areas classified as “unsafe”.

#  11005: Right to seize all railroads, inland waterways, and storage facilities, both public and private.

# 11921: Authorizes plans to establish Government control of wages and salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institutions.

1991 – President George Bush Sr. praises the New World Order in a State of the Union Message:

“What is at stake is more than one small country; it is a big idea – a new world order… to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind… based on shared principles and the rule of law… The illumination of a thousand points of light… The winds of change are with us now.”

(Theosophist Alice Bailey used that very same expression – “points of light” – in describing the process of occult enlightenment.)

June, 1991 – World leaders are gathered for another closed door meeting of the Bilderberg Society in Baden Baden, Germany. While at that meeting, David Rockefeller said in a speech:

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”

Oct. 29, 1991 – David Funderburk, former U.S. Ambassador to Romania, tells a North Carolina audience:

“George Bush has been surrounding himself with people who believe in one-world government. They believe that the Soviet system and the American system are converging.”

May 21, 1992 – In an address to the Bilderberger organization meeting in Evian, France, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger declares:

“Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence.

It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government.”

July 20, 1992 – “TIME” magazine publishes “The Birth of the Global Nation,” by Strobe Talbott, Rhodes Scholar, roommate of Bill Clinton at Oxford University, CFR Director and Trilateralist (and appointed Deputy Secretary of State by President Clinton), in which he writes:

“Nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single global authority… All countries are basically social arrangements… No matter how permanent or even sacred they may seem at any one time, in fact they are all artificial and temporary… Perhaps national sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all… But it has taken the events in our own wondrous and terrible century to clinch the case for world government.”

1993 – A second Parliament of World Religions is held in Chicago on the 100th anniversary of the first. Like the first convention, this one seeks to join all the religions of the world into “one harmonious whole,” but it wants to make them “merge back into their original element.”

Traditional beliefs of monotheistic religions such as Christianity are considered incompatible with individual “en- lightenment”, and must be drastically altered.

July 18, 1993 – CFR member and Trilateralist Henry Kissinger writes in the “Los Angeles Times” concerning NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement):

“What Congress will have before it is not a conventional trade agreement but the architecture of a new international system…a first step toward a new world order.”

1994 – In the Human Development Report, published by the UN Development Program, there was a section called “Global Governance for the 21st Century.”

The administrator for this program was appointed by Bill Clinton. His name is James Gustave Speth. The opening sentence of the report said:

“Mankind’s problems can no longer be solved by national government. What is needed is a world government. This can best be achieved by strengthening the United Nations system.”

May 3, 1994 – President Bill Clinton signs Presidential Decision Directive 25, and then declares it classified so the American people can’t see what it says.

(The summary of PDD-25 issued to members of Congress tells us that it authorizes the President to turn over control of U.S. military units to U.N. command.)

Sept. 23, 1994 – The globalists realize that as more and more people begin to wake up to what’s going on, they have only a limited amount of time in which to implement their policies. Speaking at the United Nations Ambassadors’ dinner, David Rockefeller remarks:

“This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long… We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order.”

March 1995 – U.N. delegates meet in Copenhagen, Denmark, to discuss various methods for imposing global taxes on the people of the world.

Sept. 1995 – “Popular Science” magazine describes a top secret U.S. Navy installation called HAARP (High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program) in the state of Alaska.

This project beams powerful radio energy into the earth’s upper atmosphere. One of the goals of the program is to develop the capability of “manipulating local weather” using the techniques developed by Bernard Eastlund.

(The program has been underway since 1990.)

September 27, 1995 – The State of the World Forum took place in the fall of this year, sponsored by the Gorbachev Foundation located at the Presidio in San Francisco.

Foundation President Jim Garrison chairs the meeting of who’s-who from around the world, including Margaret Thatcher, Maurice Strong, George Bush, Mikhail Gorbachev, and others.

Conversation centers around the oneness of mankind and the coming global government. However, the term “global gov- ernance” is now used in place of “new world order” since the latter has become a political liability, being a lightning rod for opponents of global government.

1996 – The United Nations’ 420-page report “Our Global Neighborhood” is published. It outlines a plan for “global governance,” calling for an international “Conference on Global Governance” in 1998 for the purpose of submitting to the world the necessary treaties and agreements for ratification by the year 2000.

2003 – The world is on the verge of another global war, the “state of emergency” looked for by the one-worlders to impose martial law and the universal microchip under the skin… But with the global shift in awareness, they will not have the last word!

Published in 2002 by Michael, MichaelJournal; additions by Alexander Light,;

Sponsored by Revcontent

The Entire Internet History of UK Citizens Now Viewable by Government Organizations Such as Police, Military, Taxes, Jobs and Pensions

Share on Facebook
Tweet on Twitter


The Investigatory Powers Bill forces internet providers to keep a full record of every site visited by each of its customers for over a year. Of course, government accounts are exempt from this Orwellian law.

This bill is not simply about notifying the government if a specific site has been visited, it is about listing every single site that has been visited by each citizen and when. This information will be made available to a very large range of government bodies. Of course, there’s the police, the military and the secret service but also others entities such as the Food Standards Agency and the Department for Work and Pensions.

Here’s a full list of the agencies allowed to search the browsing history of UK citizens.

  • Metropolitan Police Service
  • City of London Police
  • Police forces maintained under section 2 of the Police Act 1996
  • Police Service of Scotland
  • Police Service of Northern Ireland
  • British Transport Police
  • Ministry of Defence Police
  • Royal Navy Police
  • Royal Military Police
  • Royal Air Force Police
  • Security Service
  • Secret Intelligence Service
  • GCHQ
  • Ministry of Defence
  • Department of Health
  • Home Office
  • Ministry of Justice
  • National Crime Agency
  • HM Revenue & Customs
  • Department for Transport
  • Department for Work and Pensions
  • NHS trusts and foundation trusts in England that provide ambulance services
  • Common Services Agency for the Scottish Health Service
  • Competition and Markets Authority
  • Criminal Cases Review Commission
  • Department for Communities in Northern Ireland
  • Department for the Economy in Northern Ireland
  • Department of Justice in Northern Ireland
  • Financial Conduct Authority
  • Fire and rescue authorities under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004
  • Food Standards Agency
  • Food Standards Scotland
  • Gambling Commission
  • Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority
  • Health and Safety Executive
  • Independent Police Complaints Commissioner
  • Information Commissioner
  • NHS Business Services Authority
  • Northern Ireland Ambulance Service Health and Social Care Trust
  • Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service Board
  • Northern Ireland Health and Social Care Regional Business Services Organisation
  • Office of Communications
  • Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland
  • Police Investigations and Review Commissioner
  • Scottish Ambulance Service Board
  • Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission
  • Serious Fraud Office
  • Welsh Ambulance Services National Health Service Trust

Source: Belfast Telegraph, Your entire internet history to be viewable by PSNI, taxman, DWP and Food Standards Agency and other government bodies within weeks

Let’s face it, this law is custom made to create a climate of fear and paranoia in the UK. Studies have shown that government surveillance stops people from sharing controversial opinions online as it has a ‘chilling effect on democratic discourse’. Also, since people sometimes visit explicit websites and tend to google their most personal issues, they could easily be subjected to blackmail or other nefarious actions.

Will government officials be subjected to the same transparency? Nope. In fact, the only amendment politicians have submitted to the controversial bill is to stop MPs from being spied on.

New Wikileaks Dump About CIA Hacking Sheds Light On the Mysterious Death of Michael Hastings

Share on Facebook
Tweet on Twitter


The latest Wikileaks dump is said to be the “biggest exposure of CIA spying secrets ever”. It reveals how the agency hacks into consumer products to turn them into spying devices … and how it can even remotely take control of cars.

Entitled Vault 7: CIA Hacking Tools Revealed, the latest Wikileaks dump contains tons of documents explaining how the CIA has hundreds of zero-day exploits (holes in software that are unknown to the vendor) and can hack almost any smart tv, Android phone, iPhone, or router, and, apparently, recent cars as well. Not only that, the agency can even leave the “footprint” of another entity while doing the hacking, effectively allowing them to put the blame on a foreign nation or organization. The documents state:

“The CIA had created, in effect, its “own NSA” with even less accountability and without publicly answering the question as to whether such a massive budgetary spend on duplicating the capacities of a rival agency could be justified.”

Hacking into Your Products

The CIA, working with British spy agency MI5, have developed a back door for a smart TV that allows government snooping while the television is turned off. And that may now include live video streaming of your living room and office. In a 2014 document detailing future and improvements to the program, CIA officials said they planned to add a feature where the Agency could capture video and video snapshots of people through their televisions. This would put the federal government and the CIA right in your family room and office.

Recently, the CIA lost control of the majority of its hacking arsenal including malware, viruses, trojans, weaponized “zero day” exploits, malware remote control systems and associated documentation. This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA. The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.

Foreign Menace

According to the documents, the CIA has been using the State Department consulate in Frankfurt Germany as a headquarters for hackers in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.

The organization has been collecting a library of attack techniques from malware produced in other states, including Russia. The CIA has the ability to use this library to misdirect attribution of hacks by leaving behind the “fingerprints” of stolen malware.

Remote Controlling Cars for “Undetectable Assassinations”

Probably the most startling portion of this dump is the revelation that the CIA has gained the ability to “hack” into recent cars through their control systems. Note that we are not even talking about self-driving cars (which will certainly become 100% CIA-remote-controlled), but regular cars with computerized components (around 2011 and earlier). Why would they want to do that? To “engage in nearly undetectable assassinations”.

“As of October 2014 the CIA was also looking at infecting the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks. The purpose of such control is not specified, but it would permit the CIA to engage in nearly undetectable assassinations”

These revelations shed a new light on the very mysterious death of journalist Michael Hastings, who lost his life after his car suddenly went out of control and crashed.

Michael Hastings

Hastings was a journalist, a contributing editor to Rolling Stone and reporter for BuzzFeed. He became a vocal critic of the surveillance state during the investigation of reporters by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2013, referring to the restrictions on the freedom of the press by the Obama administration as a “war” on journalism. His last story, “Why Democrats Love to Spy On Americans”, was published by BuzzFeed on June 7. Hastings died in a fiery high-speed automobile crash on June 18, 2013, in Los Angeles, California.

On June 18, 2013, Hastings died in a single vehicle automobile crash in his Mercedes C250 Coupé at approximately 4:25 a.m. in the Hancock Park neighborhood of Los Angeles. A witness to the crash said the car seemed to be traveling at maximum speed and was creating sparks and flames before it fishtailed and crashed into a palm tree. Video from a nearby security camera purportedly shows Hastings’ vehicle speeding and bursting into flames.

Witnesses described the car’s engine being ejected 50 to 60 yards (46–55 m) from the scene. Hastings’ body was burned beyond recognition. The coroner identified the body by matching fingerprints with those the FBI had on file. Two days after the crash, the Los Angeles Police Department declared that there were no signs of foul play. The coroner’s report ruled the death to be an accident. An autopsy showed that the cause of death was massive blunt force trauma consistent with a high-speed crash.
– Los Angeles Times, “Michael Hastings death: New video of crash emerges”

A news article from 2015 actually mentioned that Hasting’s death was most like the result of a “car cyber attack”.

Former U.S. National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism Richard A. Clarke said that what is known about the crash is “consistent with a car cyber attack”. He was quoted as saying “There is reason to believe that intelligence agencies for major powers — including the United States — know how to remotely seize control of a car. So if there were a cyber attack on [Hastings’] car — and I’m not saying there was, I think whoever did it would probably get away with it.”

“Hastings’ work as a thorn in the side of government and the 33-year-old journalist’s death in an unusual crash in June 2013 immediately triggered speculation. A witness reported seeing Hastings’ new silver Mercedes C250 coupe speeding down a Hollywood street before dawn when it bounced, slammed into a tree and burst into flames.

Shortly before Hastings’ death, he sent what was described as a “panicky” email to friends expressing concern that associates were being interviewed by “the Feds.” He also wrote that he was onto a big story and needed to “get off the radar for a bit.” His 2010 story for Rolling Stone in which Stanley McChrystal skewered the White House and its strategy in Afghanistan led to the general’s resignation.

The FBI denied Hastings was the target of any investigation, yet a Freedom of Information Act request later unearthed an FBI file on Hastings. Hastings also told a neighbor he thought someone had been tampering with his car. At the time of his death, he was working on an article about CIA director John Brennan.

According to several sources, Hasting’s last days very hectic.

“In an email to colleagues, which was copied to and released by Hastings’ friend, Army Staff Sergeant Joe Biggs, Hastings said that he was “onto a big story”, that he needed to “go off the radar”, and that the FBI might interview them. WikiLeaks announced that Hastings had also contacted Jennifer Robinson, one of its lawyers, a few hours prior to the crash, and the LA Weekly reported that he was preparing new reports on the CIA at the time of his death. His widow Elise Jordan said his final story was a profile of CIA Director John O. Brennan. The FBI released a statement denying that Hastings was being investigated.

USA Today reported that in the days before his death, Hastings believed his car was being “tampered with” and that he was scared and wanted to leave town.

‘At 12:30 a.m. on the morning he died, an agitated Michael Hastings went to his neighbor and friend Jordanna Thigpen and asked to borrow her car. He said he was afraid to drive his own car, because he believed that someone had been tampering with it.

“He was scared, and he wanted to leave town,” Thigpen recalls.

But she declined, saying her car was having mechanical problems. When she woke up, Hastings was dead, his car having crashed into a tree.’

Hastings died in a single vehicle automobile crash in his Mercedes C250 Coupé at approximately 4:25 a.m. in the Hancock Park neighborhood of Los Angeles. A witness to the crash said the car seemed to be traveling at maximum speed and was creating sparks and flames before it fishtailed and crashed into a palm tree. Video from a nearby security camera purportedly shows Hastings’ vehicle speeding and bursting into flames. ”
– USA TOday, “Hastings thought his car was being tampered with”

Several US officials told CNN that a federal criminal investigation is being opened into WikiLeaks’ publication of documents.

Authorities Are Using Paris Attacks To Rush New Mass Surveillance Laws

Share on Facebook
Tweet on Twitter


The CIA and government officials around the world are using the Paris attacks to push brand new surveillance laws. And it was all planned in advance.

While democratic systems usually take months (if not years) to pass new laws and legislation, it only took a few days after the Paris attacks to slap honest citizens with more surveillance laws. Several organizations are indeed capitalizing on the fear and panic caused by the attacks to bring forth a brand new agenda that takes a bold new step towards total government surveillance. What’s worse: Leaked information proves that authorities were waiting on a terror attack to go forward with their plan.

In a leaked e-mail written by Robert S. Litt, the intelligence community’s top lawyer during the month August, the plan is clearly outlined: There is a lack of support for the banning of encrypted communications but a terror attack could quickly turn the tide.

“Although the legislative environment is very hostile today, it could turn in the event of a terrorist attack or criminal event where strong encryption can be shown to have hindered law enforcement.

There is value keeping our options open for such a situation.”
– Washington Post, Obama faces growing momentum to support widespread encryption

Only a few months after this e-mail, a terror attack occurs in Paris. Only a few hours after the attacks, news  strangely blamed “encrypted communications”. Only days after the attacks, officials are calling for…the banning of encrypted communications.

The New York police commissioner, Bill Bratton, called it a “game changer” and, insinuated new legislation that would outlaw encryption was necessary by adding: “[Encryption] is something that is going to need to be debated very quickly because we cannot continue operating where we are blind.
– The Guardian, Intelligence agencies pounce on Paris attacks to pursue spy agenda

CIA Director John Brennan is also using the terror attacks to plead for unrestricted government surveillance of all communications, blaming “privacy groups” for hindering their job.

Then on Monday, in an epic episode of blame shifting, the CIA director, John Brennan, reportedly said privacy advocates have undermined the ability of spies to monitor terrorists. He explained:

“Because of a number of unauthorized disclosures and a lot of hand-wringing over the government’s role in the effort to try to uncover these terrorists, there have been some policy and legal and other actions that are taken that make our ability collectively, internationally to find these terrorists much more challenging”, adding that there is a “misrepresentation of what the intelligence security services are doing”.

Read Brennan’s comments carefully because they are very revealing. When he says “legal actions”, he’s referring to the fact that multiplefederal courts have ruled that the government’s secret mass surveillance on millions of Americans is illegal. So it sounds like the CIA director is saying it’s a shame that intelligence agencies can’t operate completely above the law any more, and is scapegoating any failings on his agency’s part on accountability that is the hallmark of any democracy. (Though he still can apparently operate above the law.)

More importantly, Brennan’s comments are incredibly dishonest. The post-Snowden USA Freedom Act passed by Congress reformed exactly one of the countless mass spying programs the US runs. It was the one that sucked up the phone calls of Americans only, and here’s the thing: it has been active this whole time and isn’t scheduled to shut down until the end of the month.
– Ibid.

Government officials in the UK are also capitalizing on fear to rush sweeping new laws.

On the other side of the Atlantic, politicians in the United Kingdom, which already has the most expansive surveillance laws in the western world, are using the tragedy to attempt to rush through their even more invasive, new mass-spying bill that aims at allowing police to see the websites every citizen visits and to force companies like Apple to backdoor their encrypted tools.
– Ibid.

Not Effective

None of these laws have proven effective in preventing terror attacks. In fact, the Paris attacks took place six months after the enactment of a massive (and controversial) surveillance law in France.

Passed by the French Parliament in May in response to the attacks on the Paris-based magazine Charlie Hebdo, the law allows the government to monitor phone calls and emails of people suspected of connections to terrorism without the authorization of a judge.

But it goes further than that. The law requires Internet service providers to install “black boxes” that are designed to vacuum up and analyze metadata on the Web-browsing and general Internet use habits of millions of people using the Web and to make that data available to intelligence agencies.

In exceptional cases, the law allows the government to deploy what are called “ISMI catchers” to track all mobile phone communications in a given area. These catchers are basically designed to impersonate cell towers, but they intercept and record communications data from phones within its range, and can also track the movements of people carrying the phones.

Finally, the law allows government agents to break into the homes of suspected terrorists for the purpose of planting microphone bugs and surveillance cameras and installing keyloggers on their computers, devices that capture data on every keystroke and mouse click.
– Recode, France Has a Powerful and Controversial New Surveillance Law

In short, after each traumatic event in the Western world (manufactured or not), attention is turned towards a very specific and targeted item that “needs to be addressed as soon as possible”. This item is, in fact, part of controversial law that is sitting on shelves until in can be passed insidiously, while the masses are struck with horror. It happened with the Patriot Act and, almost 15 years later, it is happening again. Their formula is “Order Out of Chaos” and it keeps working.


End Of WW II – One lucrative expression of this seemingly endless campaign has been Germany’s massive and historically unparalleled reparations payoff to Israel and world Jewry for the alleged collective sins of the German people


Germany’s Holocaust Payoff
to Israel and World Jewry

By Mark Weber

The passions and propaganda of wartime normally diminish with the passage of time. A striking exception is the Holocaust campaign, which seems to grow more pervasive as the years go by. One lucrative expression of this seemingly endless campaign has been Germany’s massive and historically unparalleled reparations payoff to Israel and world Jewry for the alleged collective sins of the German people during the Hitler era. Between 1953 and 1992, the Federal Republic of (West) Germany paid out more than $35 billion in reparations to the Zionist state and to millions of individual “victims of National Socialism.”

How did this remarkable program get started? How lucrative has it been? What does it suggest about the “six million” figure? And what are its social and political implications?

Bowing to pressure

In September 1945, shortly after the end of the Second World War, Jewish leader Chaim Weizmann submitted a memorandum on behalf of the Zionist Jewish Agency to the governments of the United States, the Soviet Union, Britain and France “demanding” (in the words of the Encydopaedia Judaica) “reparations, restitution and indemnification due to the Jewish people from Germany” The western Allies lost no time in responding favorably to Weizmann’s demands. /1 The American government was particularly eager to have the Germans pay up. /2 As a result, the German government set up by the western Allies at Bonn in 1949 never had any real choice but to acknowledge the alleged collective guilt of the German people during the Hitler era, and pay what was demanded.

Indeed, a major provision of the treaty of May 1952 by which the United States, Britain and France granted “sovereignty” to the Federal Republic of (West) Germany obligated the new state to make restitution. /3 German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer laid the emotional and psychological groundwork for the reparations program when he solemnly declared to the Bundestag on September 27, 1951:

The Federal government and the great majority of the German people are deeply aware of the immeasurable suffering endured by the Jews of Germany and by the Jews of the occupied territories during the period of National Socialism … In our name, unspeakable crimes have been committed and they demand restitution, both moral and material, for the persons and properties of the Jews who have been so seriously harmed …

Adenauer went on to promise speedy conclusion of restitution and indemnity laws and announced that reparations negotiations would begin soon. Accordingly, delegations representing the Bonn government, the State of Israel and an ad hoc organization of Jewish groups began talks in the Netherlands in March 1952.

The representative of the Jewish organizations was the “Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, Inc.” or “Claims Conference,” a body formed for the sole purpose of demanding maximum reparations from the German people. The 20 member organizations represented Jews in the United States, Britain, Canada, France, Argentina, Australia and South Africa. Jews in the Soviet Union, eastern Europe and the Arab countries were not represented. /4

The German government was under pressure to conclude quickly a reparations agreement satisfactory to the Jews. In his memoirs, Chancellor Adenauer wrote:

It was clear to me that, if the negotiations with the Jews failed, the negotiations at the London Debt Conference [which were going on at the same time] would also run aground, because Jewish banking circles would exert an influence upon the course of the London Debt Conference which should not be under-estimated. On the other hand it was self-evident that a failure of the London Debt Conference would bring about a failure of the negotiations with the Jews. If the German economy was to achieve a good credit standing and become strong again, the London Conference would have to be ended successfully. Only then would our economy develop in a way that would make the payments to Israel and the Jewish organizations possible. /5

Zionist leader Nahum Goldmann, President of the World Jewish Congress and chairman of the Claims Conference, warned of a worldwide campaign against Germany if the Bonn officials did not meet the Zionist demands: “The non-violent reaction of the whole world, supported by wide circles of non-Jews, who have deep sympathy with the martyrdom of the Jewish people during the Nazi period, would be irresistible and completely justified.” /6 The London Jewish Observer was more blunt: “The whole material weight of world Jewry will be mobilized for an economic war against Germany, if Bonn’s offer of reparations remains unsatisfactory.” /7

The talks culminated in the Luxembourg Agreement, which was signed on September 10, 1952 by German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, Israeli Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett and World Jewish Congress President Nahum Goldmann.

A Legal Novelty

This agreement between the Federal German government, on the one hand, and the Israeli state and the Claims Conference, on the other, was historically unprecedented and had no basis or counterpart in international law. For one thing, the State of Israel did not exist at the time of the actions for which restitution was paid. Moreover, the Claims Conference had no legal authority to negotiate and act on behalf of Jews who were citizens of a range of sovereign countries. Jews were represented in an internationally recognized treaty with a foreign state not by the governments of the countries of which they were citizens, but rather by a supranational and sectarian Jewish organization.

It was as if the Catholic citizens of the United States had allowed themselves to be represented in a treaty with a foreign government not by the U. S. government, but rather by some ad hoc supranational Catholic organization or by the Vatican. The Luxembourg Agreement thus legally implied that Jews everywhere, regardless of their citizenship, constitute a distinct and separate national group, and that world Jewry was a formal party to the Second World War. /8

Nahum Goldmann, a co-signer of the Agreement, was one of the most important Jewish figures of this century. From 1951 to 1978, he was president of the World Jewish Congress, and from 1956 to 1958, he was also president of the World Zionist Organization. In his autobiography, Goldmann recalled his role in the negotiations and the remarkable nature of the agreement: /9

My negotiations with German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer and his associates, which culminated in the Luxembourg Agreement of 1952, make up one of the most exciting and successful chapters of my political career.

There hardly was a precedent for persuading a state to assume moral responsibility and make large-scale compensation for crimes committed against an unorganized ethnic group lacking sovereign status. There was no basis in international law for the collective Jewish claims …

In a 1976 interview, Goldmann said that the agreement “constituted an extraordinary innovation in the matter of international rights,” and he boasted that he had obtained 10 to 14 times more from the Bonn government than he had originally expected. /10

The Payoff for Israel

The agreement meant economic security for the new Zionist state, as Goldmann explained in his autobiography:

What the Luxembourg Agreement meant to Israel is for the historians of the young state to determine. That the goods Israel received from Germany were a decisive economic factor in its development is beyond doubt. I do not know what economic dangers might have threatened Israel at critical moments if it had not been for German supplies. Railways and telephones, dock installations and irrigation plants, whole areas of industry and agriculture, would not be where they are today without the reparations from Germany. And hundreds of thousands of Jewish victims of Nazism have received considerable sums under the law of restitution. /11

Goldman said in 1976:

Without the German reparations, the State of Israel would not have the half of its present infrastructure: every train in Israel is German, the ships are German, as well as the electricity, a large part of the industry … without mentioning the individual pensions paid to the survivors … In certain years, the amount of money received by Israel from Germany exceeds the total amount of money collected from international Jewry-two or three times as much. /12

As a result of the West German reparations program, wrote Jewish historian Walter Laqueur:

The ships laden with German capital goods began to call at Haifa regularly and unfailingly, becoming an important — ultimately a decisive — factor in the building up of the country. Today [1965] the Israeli fleet is almost entirely “made in Germany,” as are its modern railway equipment, the big steel foundry near Acre, and many other enterprises. During the 50’s and early 60’s about one-third of investment goods imported into Israel came from Germany … In addition to all this, many individual Israelis received restitution privately. /13

It is difficult to exaggerate the impact of the program: the five power plants built and installed by Germany between 1953 and 1956 quadrupled Israel’s electric-power-generating capacity. Germans laid 280 kilometers of giant pipelines (2.25 and 2.5 meters in diameter) for the irrigation of the Negev (which certainly helped to “make the desert bloom”). The Zionist state acquired 65 German- built ships, including four passenger vessels. /14

Payments to Individuals

Federal German reparations have been paid out through several different programs, including the Federal Indemnification (or Compensation) Law (BEG), the Federal Restitution Law (BReuG), the Israel Agreement, and special agreements with twelve foreign countries (including Austria). /15 By far the most important of these has been the BEG indemnification law, which was first enacted in 1953 and revised in 1956 and 1965. It was based on a compensation law promulgated earlier in the American zone of occupation.

In the words of a background article about the reparations program that appeared in a 1985 issue of Focus On, an official publication of the Bonn government, the BEG laws “compensate those persecuted for political, racial, religious or ideological reasons-people who suffered physical injury or loss of freedom, property, income, professional and financial advancement as a result of that persecution.” It also “guarantees assistance to the survivors of the deceased victims.” /16

The BEG compensation law defined “persecution” and “loss of freedom” very liberally. It stipulated payments for Jews who had simply been required to wear the yellow star, even in Croatia, where the measure was ordered by non-Germans. Payments were also ordered for any Jew who was ever in a concentration camp, including the one in Shanghai, China, which was never under German control. The BEG law authorized payments to any Jew who was ever arrested, no matter what the reason. This meant that even Jews who were taken into custody for criminal acts were entitled to German “compensation” for “loss of freedom.” /17

The 1965 revision of the BEG specified that Germany was to be held accountable for measures taken by Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary as early as April 1941, if these actions had deprived the victims of all their freedom. The fact that these countries acted against Jews in 1941 independently of Germany did not matter. /18

Significantly, the many Jewish survivors living in the Soviet Union and the other Communist countries of eastern Europe were not covered by Germany’s BEG compensation program. /19 And, of course, Jewish “Holocaust survivors” who died before the Federal German compensation law (BEG) was enacted in 1953 or before it really became effective in 1956 also never received BEG restitution money.

By the end of 1980, a German government agency reported, the number of successful claims was 4,344,378, with payments reaching 50.18 billion German marks. About 40 percent of the claimants lived in Israel, some 20 percent were living in West Germany, and 40 percent elsewhere. /20 The Focus On article cited above noted that between October 1953 and the end of December 1983, the Federal German government paid out 56.3 billion marks on a total of 4,390,049 claims from individuals under the BEG legislation. /21

Nevertheless, the Atlanta Journal and Constitution stated in 1985 that about half of the Jewish “survivors” in the world have never received reparations money. “An estimated 50 percent” of the Holocaust “survivors throughout the world are on West German pensions,” the newspaper reported. /22 In addition to survivors in Communist countries who are not entitled to German compensation, the paper reported that many Jewish survivors living in the United States have never received reparations money. The paper found that 79 percent of the Jewish “Holocaust survivors” living in the Atlanta area had, at one time or another, asked the Bonn government for restitution. About 66 percent received something.

About 40 percent of those receiving BEG compensation money live in Israel, the Focus On article reported, while 20 percent live in Federal (West) Germany and 40 percent live in other countries. /23 It would thus appear that about 80 percent, or 3.5 million, of the 4.39 million claims are from Jews.

Although the number of BEG compensation claims is larger than the number of individual claimants, it is nevertheless difficult to reconcile these figures with the familiar “six million” Jewish wartime dead, particularly since at least half of the world’s Jewish “survivors” never received German compensation.


The Luxembourg Agreement obligated Federal Germany to pay three billion German marks to the State of Israel and 450 million marks to various Jewish organizations. Accordingly, the German Finance Minister announced in 1953 that he expected that the reparations payments would eventually total four billion marks. Time would prove this a gross underestimate. /24

By 1963, the German people had already paid out 20 billion marks, and by 1984 the total had risen to 70 billion. /25 In late 1987 the German parliament approved an additional 300 million marks in “restitution to the victims of National Socialist crimes.” The Bonn government announced at that time the 80 billion marks had already been paid out and estimated that by the year 2020 the payoff would total 100 billion marks which, at recent exchange rates, would be the equivalent of $50 billion. /26

Although the German reparations program is accepted and often praised in the democratic West, it is also, at least implicitly, strikingly undemocratic in two fundamental respects:

First, it regards Jews not as equal and fully integrated citizens of whatever country they live in, but rather primarily as members of an alien and cosmopolitan national group.

Second, it is based on the premise that the German nation, including even those Germans who grew up since 1945, is collectively guilty of terrible crimes, contrary to the generally accepted notion of individual responsibility for crime.

Germany’s lucrative and historically unparalleled payoff to Israel and world Jewry is a legacy and permanent reminder of the nation’s catastrophic defeat in 1945, and subsequent domination by foreign powers.


  1. “Reparations, German,” Encyclopaedia Judaica, Vol. 14, pp. 72-73.
  2. D. v. Westernhagen, “Wiedergutgemacht?,” Die Zeit, No. 41, Oct. 5, 1984, p. 33.
  3. “Restitution in Germany,” Focus On, (New York: German Information Center), May 1985, p. 2.
  4. Kenneth Lewan, “How West Germany Helped to Build Israel,” Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, pp. 48-49.
  5. Konrad Adenauer, Erinnerungen 1953-55 (Stuttgart 1966), pp. 140-142. Quoted in: K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, pp. 53-54.
  6. Quoted in. K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, p.54.
  7. J. Kreysler and K. Jungfer, Deutsche Israel-Politik (Munich 1965); p. 33. Quoted in: K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, p. 54.
  8. L. Sebba, “The Reparations Agreement: A New Perspective,” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 450, July 1980, p. 206.
  9. Nahum Goldmann, The Autobiography of Nahum Goldmann, p. 249.
  10. LeNouvel Observateur, Oct. 25, 1976, p. 120. See also interview with Robert Faurisson in The Journal of Historical Review Winter 1981 (Vol. 2, No. 4), pp. 350, 373.
  11. N. Goldmann, Autobiography, p. 276.
  12. Le Nouvel Observateur, 25 Oct. 25, 1976, p. 122.
  13. Walter Laqueur, Commentary, May 1965, p. 29.
  14. Nicholas Balabkins, West German Reparations to Israel. Cited in K. Lewan, Journal of Palestine Studies, Summer 1975, p. 42.
  15. “Restitution in Germany,” Focus On, May 1985.
  16. “Restitution in Germany,” Focus On, May 1985, p. 3.
  17. Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews, Vol. 3, p. 1166.
  18. R. Hilberg, Destruction, Vol. 3, p. 1173.
  19. R. Hilberg, Destruction, p. 1170. The New York Times reported in 1983 that the clients of the New York office of the Conference on Material Claims Against Germany “are primarily newly arrived Russian Jewish] victims of the Nazi era” (D. Margolick “Soviet Emigre Lawyer …,” The New York Times, Thursday, March 10, 1983, p. B2.)
  20. Canadian Jewish News, Nov. 12, 1981, p. 4 (or, Dec. 11, 1981, p. 4), and Nov. 26, 1981, p. 6. Source cited: German Information Centre in New York.
  21. “Restitution in Germany,” Focus On, May 1985, p. 3.
  22. The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, March 31, 1985,14A,15A,17A.
  23. “Restitution in Germany,” Focus On, May 1985, p. 3.
  24. D. v. Westernhagen, Die Zeit, Oct. 5, 1984, p. 36.; “Restitution in Germany,” Focus On, May 1985.
  25. D. v. Westernhagen, Die Zeit, Oct. 5, 1984, p. 36.
  26. “Bundestag Approves Additional DM 300 Million for Victims of Nazis,” The Week in Germany (New York: German Information Center), December 11, 1987. The dollar value of the German mark has fluctuated over the years. A recent exchange rate was 50 cents per mark.

From The Journal of Historical Review, Summer 1988 (Vol. 8, No. 2), pages 243-250. A few changes / corrections were made in April 2012, and also in July 2016.


The Morgenthau Plan (AKA The Jewish plan to rid the world of Germans.)

The Morgenthau Plan (AKA The Jewish plan to rid the world of Germans.)

I take this somewhat personally since if this Evil JEWISH plan had been implimented I would NOT be typing this!

The Morgenthau Plan, proposed by United States Secretary of the Treasury Henry (The Jew) Morgenthau, Jr., advocated that the Allied occupation of Germany following World War II include measures to eliminate Germany’s ability to wage war. (AKA Genocide)

Roosevelt’s support for the plan

Secretary of the Treasury Henry J. Morgenthau Jr. convinced Roosevelt to write to Secretary of State Cordell Hull and Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson saying that a US occupation policy which anticipated that “Germany is to be restored just as much as the Netherlands or Belgium” was excessively lenient. A better policy would have the Germans “fed three times a day with soup from Army soup kitchens” so “they will remember that experience the rest of their lives.” Morgenthau was the only Cabinet member invited to participate in the Quebec Conference during which the Plan was agreed to.

Roosevelt’s motivations for agreeing to Morgenthau’s proposal may be attributed to his desire to be on good terms with Joseph Stalin and to a personal conviction that Germany must be treated harshly. In an August 26, 1944 letter to Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands, Roosevelt wrote that “There are two schools of thought, those who would be altruistic in regard to the Germans, hoping by loving kindness to make them Christians again — and those who would adopt a much ‘tougher’ attitude. Most decidedly I belong to the latter school, for though I am not bloodthirsty, I want the Germans to know that this time at least they have definitely lost the war.” Roosevelt is also quoted as saying to Morgenthau that “We have got to be tough with Germany and I mean the German people not just the Nazis. We either have to castrate the German people or you have got to treat them in such a manner so they can’t just go on reproducing people who want to continue the way they have in the past…

Germany must perish forever!

In fact – not in fancy! […]

The population of Germany, excluding conquered and annexed territories, is about 70,000,000, about equally divided between male and female. To achieve the purpose of German extinction it would be necessary to only sterilize some 48,000,000. […]

Concerning the males subject to sterilization the army groups, as organized units, would be the easiest and quickest to deal with. Taking 20,000 surgeons as an arbitrary number and on the assumption that each will perform a minimum of 25 operations daily, it would take no more than one month, at the maximum, to complete their sterilization. Naturally the more doctors available, and many more than the 20,000 we mention would be available considering all the nations to be drawn upon, the less time would be required. The balance of the male civilian population of Germany could be treated within three months. Inasmuch as the sterilization of women needs somewhat more time, it may be computed that the entire female population of Germany could be sterilized within a period of three years or less. Complete sterilization of both sexes, and not only one, is to be considered necessary in view of the present German doctrine that so much as one drop of true German blood constitutes a German.

Of course, after complete sterilization, there will cease to be a birth rate in Germany. At the normal death rate of 2% per annum, German life will diminish at the rate of 1,500,000 yearly. Accordingly in the span of two generations that which cost millions of lives and centuries of useless effort, namely, the elimination of Germanism and its carriers, will have been an accomplished fact.”


Henry Morgenthau


SPIELBERG LAWSUIT .Irene Weisberg Zisblatt, Caught on Tape Lying About The holocaust

Hunt, 25, who was convicted last year in the attack on Wiesel in San Francisco in 2007, claims Zisblatt’s new book “The Fifth Diamond: The Story of Irene Weisberg Zisblatt” is a fraud, according to the Sun-Sentinel.The lawsuit, filed on Oct. 6 in Broward Circuit Court, alleges that “Zisblatt blatantly stole other Jewish people’s experiences during World War II and passed them off as her own in order to further the Jewish political agenda and profit off of these fantastical tales.”Hunt, who is representing himself in the suit, adds that “the defendants must not go unpunished for tormenting Gentiles and instilling hatred in Jews using such hideous lies.”Zisblatt appeared in Spielberg’s 1998 documentary “The Last Days.”


Waffen-SS Veterans March In Baltic States, Jews Unusually Nuanced About It

Eric Striker
Daily Stormer
March 31, 2017

It goes without saying that the Waffen-SS was the army of light in the dark days of the war of the worlds. The pan-Aryan fighting force spanned from Spain to Estonia, all answering the call for a Western Crusade against Bolshevism and Judeo-Capitalism in the battle for Europe’s destiny. Their heroics can never be forgotten.

Yet, even though most of Europe had large representation in the Waffen-SS – France, Belgium, Holland, Italy, Denmark, not to mention Germany – the only European Union states allowed to celebrate their veterans are the small Baltic buffer states: Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia.

In any other situation, there would be outraged condemnations, and calls for action and boycott by trans-national Jewry. In Croatia, vague nods to the Ustasa in memorials provoke vigorous Jewish indignation, with all their proxies echoing this sentiment.

But when it comes to Latvia, World Jewry is shockingly nuanced. A few groups provide tepid reactions, but nothing like what would happen if the Wallooniens, Totenkopf or Blau Divisionen were met by legislators and nationalists in the street of their respective countries.

As usual, they have an agenda.

World Jewish Congress:

In the Latvian capital Riga, hundreds of people took part in a march of former Waffen SS members who had fought alongside Nazi Germany during World War II. The march was allowed by Riga municipality despite protests.

The participants held Latvian, Lithuanian and Estonian flags and flowers. Among the marchers were several Latvian lawmakers.

The veterans’ march has been harshly criticized by a number of international organizations, including the European Jewish Congress, as well as by governments worldwide.

Every 16 March, veterans observe Latvian Legion Day. On 16 March 1944 both divisions of the Latvian Legion fought alongside for the first time against the Soviet Red Army. It was the only battle in World War II led solely by Latvian commanders.

Many Latvians, whose country was under Soviet occupation at the time, saw the German army as a lesser of two evils.

Since when does an organization with permanent froth at their mouth, like the WJC, actually give the side of the story from the point of view of the Waffen-SS volunteer?

The answer is: Judah wants a world war against Russia!

Jews have no qualms tolerating things like this as long as it inflates Russophobia. Right now, they need Baltic and Eastern European states to be in a state of anti-Russian agitation, because Jewry wants a war. Pushing or protecting certain forms of jingoism in Eastern Europe is nothing new, as we can see with the Anti-Defamation League and other Jewish groups refusing to support a bill that would’ve kept American weapons out of the hands of supposed “Neo-Nazi” Azov Battalion two years ago.

Coverage of the Latvian event in the media hints at the long-game here. The Russians put out a statement asking how the so-called “liberal European Union” will imprison all kinds of patriotic dissidents throughout its bloc, while allowing this in its member state. They sought an explanation from Brussels and got nothing.

Are Jews and plutocrats willing to allow a measured degree of strategic nationalism in irrelevant countries if it escalates anti-Russian tension in the East? You bet. Meanwhile, World War II veterans everywhere else who fought for the good guys must meet underground and live in fear for their service.

It’s understandable that these Baltic states have grievances against the Soviet Union, and it’s great that their veterans are allowed to come out as heroes. But at the same time, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia can’t seriously continue to demand that the United States risk a nuclear exchange with Russia over their territorial claims and historic grudges.

If Putin and the Kremlin are ever overthrown and Russia again becomes the Jewish Disneyland it was under Boris Yeltsin, the Latvians will see just how quickly the police will put down their Waffen SS marches. The (((Brussels elites))) will then deliver their overdue order of blacks and Arabs right after.

Jews have no principles other than winning, and if strategically tolerating “Nazis” is what it takes, well, they feign all that “pain” about the Holohoax to begin with, so you do the math.

Rockefellers And The Medical, Pharmaceutical and Chemical Industry

Rockefellers And The Medical, Pharmaceutical and Chemical Industry

How did one family manage to get control over the medical, pharmaceutical and chemical industry? What is the history of the FDA, the food and drug administration, and how did it influence the course of medicine over the years? Watch this to find out!
This is the latest anonymous message from 2017. This could be of interest to you! Important events could take place this year. Will 2017 be the year of the change? Watch the following material to find out!

Anonymous The Most Important Families In The World And Their Secrets

The Rockefeller family, The Rothschild family, but do you know the third most important family? Watch this video to find out!
This is the latest anonymous message from 2017. This could be of interest to you! Important events could take place this year. Will 2017 be the year of the change? Watch the following material to find out!

David Rockefeller has passed away on 20 march 2017. Rockefeller has lived to be 101 years old and has survived 6 heart transplants! These are his family’s darkest secrets!

Credits to fearless one:…

The Rockefellers have always had intimate business and family relations with other powerful family dynasties, such as the Morgan banking family, members of the steel magnates of the Carnegie family, the DuPont family and the Rothschild banking families from Europe. The Rockefellers were connected to the Union Pacific Railroad company of E.H. Harriman. They were involved in the sponsorship of the Kuhn & Loeb bank in the United Kingdom and they had numerous business deals with Hitler’s Nazi regime in Germany.

Rockefeller & Global Mind Control

Excerpts from Steps toward Global Mind Control

See also Rockefeller and the Global Media Censors

Chronology of Global Education and The Aspen Institute

Skip down to



 Hitler’s eugenic’s program

Rockefeller Brothers Fund: “Rockefeller Brothers Fund is a philanthropic organization working to promote social change that contributes to a more just, sustainable and peaceful world.”

Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Aspen Institute Release ‘U.S. In the World: Talking Global Issues with Americans: “The book is a communications guide, not a compilation of policy recommendations or proposals – a tool to help communicators of all kinds reach out to Americans with a broadly shared, positive vision of U.S. global engagement.

     “‘The guidebook is a unique resource not only for policy advocates and issue experts, but for candidates and those already in office who want to communicate with voters on pressing global issues,’ said David Devlin-Foltz, director of The Aspen Institute‘s Global Interdependence Initiative. ‘This is also great tool for journalists, who are charged with explaining complex issues to a diverse audience.’…

    “‘The most valuable contribution this guide could make in 2004 – – or indeed, in any year – is to get citizens thinking, caring, and talking about foreign policy issues and to empower them to ask questions of policymakers and candidates.'”

The Rockefeller Brothers Fund: “…and the Aspen Institute are pleased to announce the publication of U.S. in the World: Talking Global Issues with Americans – A Practical Guide. For information and to download a PDF version of the Guide, please go to

Quotes from David Rockefeller’s Memoirs (Random House, New York, 2002) Chapter 27, pages 404 and 405. Cited by Dr. Dennis Cuddy:

“My lifetime pursuits as an internationalist might best be summarized by one rather extraordinary day in 1995. October 23 was a busy day at the Council on Foreign Relations. The fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations had drawn almost two hundred heads of government to New York, and many had asked to speak at the Council. but even then the day was unusual for the diversity of the speakers: Jiang Zemin, president of the People’s Republic of China and heir apparent to Deng Xiaoping; Vaclav Havel of the Czech Republic… Yasser Arafat… and, finally, Fidel Castro…. With the exception of Havel, these men had vowed to fight to the death against imperialist America. Now, with the end of the Cold War, they flocked to the center of world capitalism, eager to meet and close deals with American bankers and corporate executives, or at least to be seen with them — even Castro….

“For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure–one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.

“The anti-Rockefeller focus of these otherwise incompatible political positions owes much to Populism. ‘Populists’ believe in conspiracies, and one of the most enduring is that a secret group of international bankers and capitalists, and their minions, control the world’s economy. Because of my name and prominence as the head of the Chase for many years, I have earned the distinction of ‘conspirator in chief’ from some of these people.

“Populists and isolationists ignore the tangible benefits that have resulted from our active international role during the past half-century. Not only was the very real threat posed by Soviet Communism overcome, but there have been fundamental improvements in societies around the world, particularly in the United States, as a result of global trade, improved communications, and the heightened interaction of people from different cultures. Populists rarely mention these positive consequences, nor can they cogently explain how they would have sustained American economic growth and the expansion of our political power without them.”


1863-1903.John D. Rockefeller’s Charity Index Cards: “A Subject Guide to John D. Rockefeller’s Charities.” Separate links lead to hundreds of donations to “Institutions, Churches and Missionary Organizations [both Baptist and Non-Baptist], Social Welfare and Moral Reform… Education – Schools and Universities, Culture, Arts, Conservation, Environment, Emergency Relief, Promotion of Knowledge, Civic Life, Public Policy & Politics, Medical and Health Care…”

1909. Lord Milner’s secretive Round Table Group was established. Professor Quigley exposed some of the evolving ties between the global banking fraternity and these evolving “semi-secret discussion and lobbying groups,” which helped foment World War I as a means to raise public support for a League of Nations

“By 1915, Round Table Groups existed in seven countries, including England…(and) the United States…. Since 1925, there have been substantial contributions from wealthy individuals, and from foundations and firms associated with the international banking fraternity, especially… organizations associated with J. P. Morgan, the Rockefeller and Whitney families….” Quigley, 950-951.

1909. Five years after his release from a primitive “insane asylum,” Clifford Beers, formed the U.S. National Committee for Mental Hygiene” and called for a network of mental hygiene societies throughout the world.1

1917. In its report published in 1954, the Reece Committee (the Special House Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations) explained and quoted the official minutes of the Board of Trustees of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace [See also:Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution]

“These trustees in a meeting about 1917 had the brashness to congratulate themselves on  the wisdom of their original decision because already the impact of war had indicated it… could alter life in this country. … they even had the brashness to … dispatch a telegram to Mr. Wilson, cautioning him to see that the war did not end too quickly….

    “The concern became, as expressed by the trustees, seeing to it that there was no reversion to life in this country as it existed prior to 1914. And they came to the conclusion that, to prevent a reversion, they must control education. and then they approached the Rockefeller Foundationand they said, ‘Will you take on the acquisition of control of education as it involves subjects that re domestic in their significance? We’ll take on the  basis of subjects that have an international significance..’ And it was agreed…. They decided the key to is the teaching of American history, and they must change that.” [The Tax-Exempt Foundations, p. 60-61]

1919. With funding from the Commonwealth Fund and the Rockefeller Foundation, Clifford Beers “formed the predecessor of WFMH [World Federation for Mental Health], the International Committee for Mental Hygiene (ICMH). Other supporters were Clarence Hincks, M.D., of the Canadian Medical Association, Adolph Meyer, M.D. of Johns Hopkins Hospital; and psychologist William James of Harvard.  William James, John Dewey and other socialist visionaries spread the philosophy of pragmatism, which denies Biblical truth, sees truth as relative, and tests its validity by its practical and measurable effects.

    Note: Remember, almost every public step in this social revolution won public sympathy and acceptance by focusing on a real crisis. But in the hands of socialist change agents, the nice-sounding “solution” became a stepping stone to an ever expanding web of control.1

William James (father of American Psychology) founded the National Committee for Mental Hygiene, and according to B. K. Eakman in CLONING OF THE AMERICAN MIND: ERADICATING MORALITY THROUGH EDUCATION, he ‘persuaded Rockefeller to contribute millions to the National Committee for Mental Hygiene….The goal of the Committee was specifically to prevent mental illness, and its focus was elementary and secondary schools. The thrust of the Committee’s philosophy was that mental illness hinged on faulty personality development in childhood and that, therefore, personality development should supersede all other educational objectives. Stress was seen as the chief culprit, and parents and other authority figures as the second.” Cuddy, Mental Health, Education and Social Control, Part 8  

1921.  The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) was founded — mainly through Col. House‘s influence. To build the needed network of globalist support groups, it would disperse tens of millions of dollars annually from the major tax-exempt foundations such as the Carnegie and Rockefeller foundations. Global Tyranny, page 54

       The CFR would be the U.S. equivalent of the British RIIA, the Royal Institute of International Affairs. As Professor Quigley wrote, “…the original plans for the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the Council on Foreign Relations were drawn up at Paris.”  Quigley, 952.

1925. The Rockefeller Foundation funded the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry in Munick, directed by Dr. Ernst Rudin. Additional funding was provided by the Harrimans, Warburg and the British Crown. It continued to sponsor the Institute and its Nazi leader throughout the devastating holocaust of World Ward II. 4?

1925. A  Rockefeller Foundation’s grant gives birth to the International Bureau of Education.2 Cuddy 15

1932. Rockefeller Foundation president Max Mason tells trustees that “The Social Sciences will concern themselves with the rationalization of social controlthe control of human behavior.” 2 Cuddy 18

1932. Dr. Ernst Rudin, the Nazi director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry (funded by the Rockefellers) was appointed president of the global Eugenics Federation.

1934 (February). A Rockefeller “progress report” (by one of the division heads) asks, “Can we develop so sound and extensive a genetics that we can hope to breed, in the future, superior men?”2 Cuddy, 18.

1930-33. Hitler came to power and delegated Rudin to direct the Racial Hygiene Society, which called for sterilization or death of people considered “racially impure.” The Rockefeller Foundation funded an anthropological survey of the eugenically correct population by Nazi eugenicists Rudin and others. 4?

1939. Rockefeller Foundation helps launch the School-Health Coordinating Service.2 Cuddy 22

1940s. “Otmar Verschuer and his assistant Dr. Joseph Mengele together wrote reports for special courts, which enforced Rudin‘s racial purity law against the illegal cohabitation of Aryans and non-Aryans. In the early 1940s, a large factory was built “at Auschwitz… to utilize the Standard Oil IG Farbin patents with concentration camp slave labor to make gasoline from coal.  The SS guarded the Jewish and other inmates and selected for killing those who were unfit for IG Farbin slave labor.Standard Oil and German President Emil Heilfeck testified after the war at the Nuremberg Trial that Standard Oil funds [Rockefeller]helped pay for the SS guards at Auschwitz. The Rockefeller Foundation defends its record by claiming that its funding of Nazi Germany programs during World War II was limited to psychiatric research.”  4

1943: The Rockefeller Foundation helped fund the Allen Memorial Institute at McGill University in Montreal. Working with the Canadian military and the Office of Strategic Services (The OSS became the CIA in 1947), Dr. Cameron conducted torturous experiments on human guinea pigs in order to perfect the various mind control techniques. These brainwashing tactics included coercive interrogation, psychosurgery, drugs, hypnosis and “between 30 to 60 electroshocks over a short period” along with powerful tranquilizers to control anxiety. Cameron’s justification: his patients, “like prisoners of Communists, tended to resist and had to be broken down.” This is described in the 1989 book, Journey Into Madness: The True Story of Secret CIA Mind Control and Medical Abuse

1943. Joseph Mengele appointed medical commandant of the Auschwitz concentration camp.

1946 or 1947. (Both dates have been cited) Tavistock Institute of Human Relations is formed as an independent not-for-profit organization — with a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation, which “was interested in seeing if the kind of social psychiatry that had been developed during World War II could be relevant for the civilian society.”

    It would own the journal Human Relations. “Canadian-born psychologist and social analyst Elliott Jacques…. was the man who first identified the midlife crisis… Jaques was… a founder member of the Tavistock Institute.” 9,12212,934548,00.html

1973. After a trip to China, David Rockefeller praised Mao Tse-tung who had slaughtered over 40 million people. His report, “From a China Traveler,” highlights the goals presented in UN reports such as “The Commission on Global Governance” and UNESCO’s Our Creative Diversity. Both focus on lofty ideals such as peace, harmony and unity in the communitarian “global” village — a vision that demands absolute control and universal participation in facilitated small groups (modeled by the hierarchy of “soviets” or councils in Communist lands):

“One is impressed immediately by the sense of national harmony…. Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution it has obviously succeeded… in fostering high morale and community purpose. General social and economic progress is no less impressive….The enormous social advances of China have benefited greatly form the singleness of ideology and purpose…. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in history.” New York Times, 8-10-1973.

1974. In his book, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, Anthony Sutton “documented the fact that Rockefeller and Morgan banks provided the Bolsheviks with loans, while American industry provided them with the plants and the technology thy needed. Westinghouse, Henry Ford, Averill Harriman, Armand Hammer, Exxon, and other American firms built the infrastructure that allowed the Soviet Union to survive.” Dr. Stanley Monteith, Brotherhood of Darkness (Oklahoma City: Hearthstone Publishing, 2000), page 71.

1979. Supported by the Rockefeller Foundation, the National Institute of Education and the U.S. Department of Education, Schooling for  A Global Age is published. In the Preface, John Goodlad wrote: “Enlightened social engineering is required to face situations that demand global action now. Education is a long-term solution…. Parents and the general public must be reached also… Otherwise, children and youth enrolled in globally oriented programs may find themselves in conflict with values assumed in the home. And then the educational institution frequently comes under scrutiny and must pull back.”2 Cuddy 65.

1987. Among the notable members of the Study Commission on Global Education were (then) Governor Bill Clinton, AFT president Albert Shanker, Professor John Goodlad, CFAT (Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching) president Ernest Boyer, and Frank Newman, president of the Education Commission of the States. Together, they prepared a report titled The United States Prepares for Its Future: Global Perspectives in Education. The Rockefeller, Ford and Exxon Foundations helped fund this report. In the Foreword, New Ager Harlan Cleveland, author of The Third Try at World Order, wrote:

“A dozen years ago… teaching and learning ‘in global perspective’ was still exotic doctrine, threatening the orthodoxies of those who still thought of American citizenship as an amalgam of American history, American geography, American lifestyles and American ideas…. It now seems almost conventional to speak of American citizenship in the same breath with international interdependence and the planetary environment.”13

1996 (December ). “A Symposium organized by The Peter F. Drucker Foundation for Nonprofit Management, sponsored by The Rockefeller Brothers Fund….  The Drucker Foundation believes that a healthy society requires three vital sectors: a public sector of effective governments; a private sector of effective businesses; and a social sector of effective community organizations [the focus is on large churches]. The mission of the social sector and its organizations is to change lives. It accomplishes this mission by addressing the needs of the spirit, the mind and the body–of individual, the community, and society….

     “As government cuts back social spending, many people expect the social sector to absorb much of the anticipated need for services….

     “The one million nonprofit organizations… that comprise the social sector have only one common characteristic–their tax exempt status. It is their diversity–in mission, philosophy, and community–that uniquely qualifies them to deliver effective services to the community. … We are now talking about a true partnership to build community and produce people who are needed by healthy businesses and a healthy society.” Emerging Partnerships: New Ways in a New World

     Note: The large community oriented and purpose-driven churches fit right into the new communitarian model for organizing institutions and monitoring people. That’s why the Rockefellers are involved.



See also Rockefeller and the Global Media Censors


Endnotes: Sources followed by (?) still need verification

1.Origins of the World Federation for Mental Healthand Clifford Beers: The Origins of Modern Mental Health Policy at

2. Dennis Laurence Cuddy,Ph.D., Chronology of Education with Quotable Quotes (Pro Family Forum, Highland City, FL 33846, 1994); page 13.

4.Gary Null (?)

13. The United States Prepares for Its Future: Global Perspectives in Education, Report of the Study Commission on Global Education,” 1987. The report is financed by the Rockefeller, Ford and Exxon Foundations. Cuddy, 80.


Book review: Hijacking America’s Mind on 9/11 by Elias Davidsson

hijack_DVby Dr. Ludwig Watzal, 


Before I came across the book “Hijacking America’s Mind on 9/11” by Elias Davidsson, I believed in the official narrative on 9/11. I read the book twice. It shattered completely my former belief.

I’m no expert on 9/11 and do not believe in esoteric theories. My attitude towards 9/11 has been marked by a certain curiosity, but also by healthy skepticism. When I initially stumbled across articles questioning the official 9/11 narrative, I just read them and put them away. With Davidsson’s book, it was different: it immediately captivated me.

Having hitch-hiked extensively all over the United States and studied international relations at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, I am somewhat familiar with how American society ticks. I have noted that after every severe calamity in the US, an immediate inquiry is initiated to determine the facts. When it comes to airplane crashes, it befalls on the National Transportation Security Board (NTSB) to determine the circumstances in which the airplane crashed: the plane is pieced together from the debris, the cause of the crash is determined and a public report is issued regarding the circumstances of the crash. The U.S. government did not, however, permit the NTSB to investigate the 9/11 crashes. It had to be carried out, exceptionally, by the more secretive FBI, which has no obligation to publish its findings. Why did the U.S. government insist on such unprecedented secrecy?

Elias Davidsson’s book may provide an answer to this question. His book is a very thorough study of specific aspects of the 9/11 events that have hitherto been neglected. The strength of his book lies in its reliance on primary evidence, the sources for which are provided so that readers can check for themselves the accuracy and relevance of the evidence. Davidsson does not merely provide footnoted references to the sources but has actually posted a great number of source documents on his website, sparing readers tedious searches. This unusually user-friendly approach indicates the author’s willingness to subject himself to the most exacting scrutiny by readers. What makes his study so compelling is his judicious use of official U.S. government documents to undermine the assertions of the U.S. government itself. A great part of his sources are FBI documents culled from the U.S. National Archives (NARA).

The author provides persuasive evidence that the official narrative is riddled with contradictions, anomalies, puzzling coincidences, lies, forged and planted evidence; that witnesses were intimidated; and that news was fabricated. A substantial chunk of his book is devoted to an analysis of the telephone calls made between passengers and crew-members with their colleagues or loved-ones on the ground. It is actually the most comprehensive and thorough analysis of these phone calls undertaken to this date. One gets the rather sinister impression – reading the quoted phone calls – that the callers were not experiencing true hijackings. Readers will have to judge for themselves whether this impression is justified.

Elias Davidsson was born in Palestine in 1941 to Jewish parents and grew up in Jerusalem but lived for most of his life in Iceland. Apart from his double professional career, first as a computer expert and then as a music teacher and composer, he became interested in international law in the 1990s and published a number of extensive papers in the fields of international law, human rights law and international criminal law. In 2002, prompted by anomalies he discovered in the official narrative on 9/11, he started researching these events. The present book represents the culmination of ten years’ work.

The book is divided into four parts and 14 chapters. The style of the presentation is narrative and easy to follow. Davidsson’s book is the first one that demonstrates, beyond reasonable doubt, that there exists no evidence for the claim that Muslim terrorists hijacked planes on 9/11. His book is not limited to debunking this claim. He also shows that the U.S. authorities have failed to identify the debris of the aircraft that crashed or allegedly crashed at the various sites on 9/11. Based on his comprehensive analysis of the phone calls, Davidsson invites readers to consider what he designates as his best theory regarding the nature of the phone calls.

Before involving readers with the intricate forensics of the case, the author highlights the incredible swiftness with which the official narrative on 9/11 emerged: CBS news named Osama bin Laden as the main suspect within 15 minutes. Approximately 20 minutes after the second plane crash, President Bush declared that “America is under attack,” although he had no evidence that the events were related to a foreign source. The facts of the case were not determined by investigators, but by the U.S. Congress, meeting 24 hours after the events. Relying on a statement made by Senator Lott, Davidsson reveals that the congressional resolution was already in the works on the very day of the incident.

For the author, 9/11 was a brilliantly orchestrated “propaganda coup.” The dramaturgists of 9/11 must have envisaged that the events, played out real time on television, would serve to unite the American people and rally the population behind the flag. This turned out to be the case. The role of U.S. and European media in promoting the official 9/11 version is well known. Established media deliberately and routinely suppress facts that might undermine public belief in the official version, for example the admission by the FBI in June 2006 to possess no hard evidence of a link between Osama bin Laden and 9/11.

Is it possible to challenge Davidsson’s work? One might argue that a colossal crime such as 9/11 would involve so many people, that the plot could not be kept secret. According to this argument someone, among the many participants, would have long ago “spilled the beans.” How compelling is this view? What does it mean to “spill the beans”? How likely will eyewitnesses “spill the beans”?

First, it should be clarified that government conspiracies do not always remain secret. They are often exposed by scholars and historians. But as long as such exposure is limited to scholarly books and suppressed by the corporate media, these plots remain – for the general public – “conspiracy theories.” A few examples should suffice.

In 1967, the US and Israel conspired in attempting to sink the USS Liberty off the coast of Israel. The US Navy personnel who survived the perfidious attack attempted to raise public knowledge about this conspiracy but did not succeed. The facts have been thoroughly documented by British journalist Peter Hounam, who interviewed survivors and participants. They are known to those who wish to know, but are kept suppressed from the larger public.

The Tuskegee Syphilis experiment is cited as “arguably the most infamous biomedical research study in U.S. history.” This experiment was conducted between 1932 and 1972 by the U.S. Public Health Service. The conspiracy of deception on which this experiment was based was only brought to public in 1972 by a whistleblower, i.e. 40 years after the experiment began.

Operation Gladio refers to terrorist acts secretly engineered by the secret services in Italy, Belgium, Greece, Turkey and possibly Germany during the Cold War. These murderous acts were staged to appear as terrorism by leftist groups. The operation was kept secret for 40 years in Western Europe with no one blowing the whistle. It was revealed in 1990 by the Italian Prime Minister Julio Andreotti, addressing the Italian parliament, but even that did not ensure wide public knowledge because major media did not cover the story. Most European people, including academics, journalists and politicians, are not aware of this murderous conspiracy which was carried out by their own government [under the control of US-led NATO -KB]. Those unaware of this operation will be tempted to call it a “conspiracy theory”.

In addition to media reluctance to report government conspiracies, the modus operandi of covert operations needs also to be considered. Covert operations carried out by the military are always organized according to the “need to know” principle. Michael Ruppert, one of the first independent investigators of 9/11, reminded readers: “From the Manhattan Project to the Stealth fighter, the US government has successfully kept secrets involving thousands of people. Secondly, in order to execute a conspiracy of the size and type I am suggesting [9/11], it is not necessary that thousands of people see the whole picture. The success of the US in maintaining the secrecy around the atom bomb and the Stealth fighter, or in any classified operation, lies in compartmentalization. A technician in Tennessee refining uranium ore in 1943 would have had no knowledge of its intended use or any moral culpability in any deaths that occurred as a result of it. Another technician in Ohio, mixing a polymer resin in 1985, would have had no knowledge of what an F117A looked like or what it was intended to do.”

Many people believe that a government employee aware of illegal practices by his agency or his superiors will immediately report to the police or speak to a journalist. This belief is not justified. Exposing high state crime requires great personal courage and entails risks to ones career, security or even life. Even the courageous whistleblower cannot be certain that those to whom he confides will publicize the information, suppress it, or inform on him to his superiors. Just consider what happened to Bradley Manning, Edward Snowdon or Julian Assange! Sadly, most people do not even dare to ask elementary questions about 9/11, afraid to be ostracized or even lose their jobs. Civil courage is a rare commodity.

Summing up his findings, Elias Davidsson refers to human rights norms according to which the families of 9/11 victims are entitled to know what happened to their next-of-kin; and society is entitled to have the perpetrators, planners and facilitators of the mass-murder identified, prosecuted and convicted. He furthermore sees in efforts to expose 9/11 a “revolutionary potential” because it would reveal what he sees as the monumental failure of our institutions to seek the truth on these murderous events.

Davidsson’s book is not an introduction to 9/11 critical studies. It caters to those who are already aware of the major anomalies in the official narrative. The book is a must read to those concerned with the stealthy transformation of Western democracies into police states and to those who oppose the wars conducted by the United States and its allies.


Is Steve Bannon plotting another 9/11?

By Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor

All sources on “Trump’s brain” Steve Bannon agree on one thing: Bannon wasn’t particularly interested in politics until September 11th, 2001.

Since then, they say, Bannon has been on an Islamophobic rampage.

Bannon is terrified that Islam is rising and the West, as Spengler foretold, is declining. He wants an all-out “civilizational war” against Islam and Muslims.

But something here does not compute.

Bannon is a smart guy. He has been called “the best-read man in Washington, DC.” And he is fully aware of “conspiratorial” analyses of current events. In fact, he is credited as the main force “mainstreaming conspiracy theories.”

Could Steve Bannon, the “best-read man in Washington,” have somehow missed the dozens and dozens of first-rate books, many published by some of the world’s leading academic presses, shredding the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 and revealing it as an inside job?

Does Bannon really believe that the three New York skyscrapers committed suicide by exploding into dust at near-free-fall acceleration due to relatively minor office fires? Can he actually believe that pilots who couldn’t fly Cessna training aircraft performed amazing feats of piloting to hit extremely difficult targets at absurdly improbable speeds? Does he really think that shrimpy little “muscle hijackers” armed with mere box-cutters magically took over commercial aircraft in some unimaginable manner that prevented the pilots from squawking the hijack code? Does he really think that the alleged 19 hijackers were somehow aboard the aircraft, despite the complete lack of every item of evidence (official passenger lists, ticket stubs, authenticated security videos, and testimony by airline employees that would have ticketed and boarded them) that the US government was obliged to provide under international law? And does he actually think those 19 patsies, who were not even on the planes, were “radical Muslims” even though they have been fully documented to have been coke-snorting, stripper-dating, gambling-junket-loving, pork-chop-relishing, Hebrew-speaking imposters?

These are just a few of the hundreds if not thousands of ridiculous official myths and legends that no intelligent, well-read person could ever believe about 9/11 – myths and legends that you would have to believe to think that Muslims, rather than the enemies of Muslims,  committed the crime of the century.

Is Bannon actually an idiot?

Maybe Bannon isn’t so smart after all. Maybe he is an idiot. Maybe he flew into a rage on 9/11 and remains so angry at Muslims that he has never looked beneath the surface of events.

But there is another, more likely possibility. Maybe Bannon isn’t stupid. Maybe he’s EVIL.

This isn’t just speculation. It is what Bannon himself is telling us. Listen to him:

‘Darth Vader. Dick Cheney. Satan. That’s Power’

The above seven-word quote speaks volumes. It suggests that Bannon understands that Dick Cheney played the role of “ultimate villain” on 9/11. That is what the two seminal books on the subject, David Ray Griffin’s The New Pearl Harbor and Mike Ruppert’s Crossing the Rubicon, prove beyond any shadow of a doubt.

It isn’t hard to understand what’s going on in Steve Bannon’s mind.

Bannon, like Oswald Spengler before him, believes Western Christian civilization is in steep decline, and that only Sparta-like militarization can at least slow the process. In Bannon’s view, the only way to militarize the West, and thus slow or perhaps even reverse its decline, was to stage a massive false flag “attack on Western civilization.” So 9/11 was a good thing; being evil like Darth Vader, Dick Cheney, and Satan is proper conduct for political leaders, who — as Michael Ledeen puts it — should periodically “enter into evil.”

“Steve is a strong militarist. He’s in love with war. It’s almost poetry to him.”  – Bannon’s former close friend and writing partner, Julia Jones

But 9/11 failed to fully militarize the US and the West. We are still too much like Athens, not enough like Sparta.

We’re going to war in the South China Sea in five to 10 years. There’s no doubt about that.” -Steve Bannon

So what would it take to put the US on total war footing, as during World War II? That is what Bannon wants. He yearns for a “fourth turning” — a war even bigger than World War II, which killed over 60 million people.

Bannon believes in authoritarian politics as preparation for a massive conflict between East and West, whether East means the Middle East or China.”  – Business Insider

Steve Bannon knows that the only way to get the “total war” situation he craves is to stage a false flag much bigger than 9/11. Then the whole “fifth column” he hates could be locked up in concentration camps. Then virtually the entire US GDP could be devoted to war. Then (in his demented imagination) the glorious Christian West could rise from the radioactive ashes to spread light and beneficence all over what is left of the planet.

Steve Bannon clearly wants to take his place on the list of his most admired leaders: Darth Vader. Dick Cheney. Satan. Maybe he even wants to upstage them. 

Bannon is undoubtedly the single most dangerous human alive today. He needs to be removed from power as quickly as possible.


The Khazarian Cabal still cannot forgive Mel Gibson

Why is Mel Gibson still being crucified for his past sins while the Israeli regime continues to liquidate Palestinian men, women, and children?

…by Jonas E. Alexis


Uri Klein of Haaretz still cannot forgive Mel Gibson. Klein cannot understand why Hollywood has already forgotten about Gibson’s past so “quickly” because Gibson committed an unpardonable sin back in 2006.[1] What was his sin?

Gibson got drunk and said really bad things about Jews. It’s not that Klein and others have never said things that they have regretted; Klein obviously thinks that if Gibson gets caught in the act—and he did—then he ought to be politically stoned to death.

But there is more here than meets the eye and ear, and Klein doesn’t seem to be prepared to follow his ideology consistently. Even actor Gary Oldman conceded that Gibson is not the only sinner in town who needs to be politically expunged.

“I don’t know about Mel,” Oldman said. “But some Jewish guy in his office somewhere hasn’t turned and said, ‘That f***ing kraut’ or ‘F*** those Germans,’ whatever it is? We all hide and try to be so politically correct? It’s like, take a f***ing joke. Get over it. He got drunk and said a few things, but we’ve all said those things. The policeman who arrested him has never used the word ‘n*****’ or ‘that f***ing Jew?”[2]

Gibson, Oldman moved on to say, “is in a town that’s run by Jews and he said the wrong thing because he’s actually bitten the hand that fed him.”[3]

Oldman obviously ruffled some feathers by saying that people like Bill Maher “hide behind comedy and satire to say things we can’t ordinarily say, because it’s all too politically correct. If I called Nancy Pelosi a c***—and I’ll go one better, a f***ing useless c***—I can’t really say that. But Bill Maher and Jon Stewart can and nobody’s going to stop them from working because of it.”[4]

This is an important point that people like Klein fail to address. For example, Jewish producer Scott Rudin called Angelina Jolie a “minimally talented spoiled brat” with a “rampaging spoiled ego” from “Crazyland.” In fact, Hollywood has a long history of manipulating, humiliating and enslaving the Goyim. Listen to this:

Rudin forced an employee to tape the definition of ‘anticipate’ above his desk. Another had to make 300 calls in a row, in one day. Rudin once pitched a fit when brought the wrong sushi. He is known for issuing the following declarations:

“Don’t ever f–king think — I hired you from the neck down.”

“This is a new level of stupid.”

“Why doesn’t everyone just do what I say?”

“My silence is high praise.”

“Do you think you’ll even vaguely perform your duties as my ­employee?”

“You have three things to do: answer the phone, listen to me and die.”

Similarly, Jewish screenwriter Aaron Sorkin literally humiliated X-Men actor Michael Fassbender, who prostituted himself in the pornographic movie Shame. Sorkin said of Fassbender, “He just makes you feel bad to have normal-sized genitalia.”

No, the media did not ask that Rudin and Sokin be removed from their posts. But anyone who criticizes the Powers That Be must be punished. And Gary Oldman himself had to recant precisely because his career was in jeopardy. “I am deeply remorseful that comments I recently made in the Playboy Interview were offensive to many Jewish people,” he said.

“Upon reading my comments in print—I see how insensitive they may be, and how they may indeed contribute to the furtherance of a false stereotype. Anything that contributes to this stereotype is unacceptable, including my own words on the matter. I hope you will know that this apology is heartfelt, genuine, and that I have an enormous personal affinity for the Jewish people in general, and those specifically in my life.”[5]

The Anti-Defamation League was not impressed. They put out a statement saying, “We have just begun a conversation with his managing producer.”

You see, the prevailing vision doesn’t work at all. Gibson himself asked for forgiveness and made it very clear that what he said was completely wrong. But Klein and others keep bringing this issue up.[6]

Gibson is not and never will be the only person to behave badly. Let us not forget the wise words of the late Rabi Ovadia Yosef, who said explicitly that “Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that they have no place in the world… They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat. That is why gentiles were created.”[7]

Numerous rabbis agreed with Yosef. But the fact is that Yosef didn’t lose his post in Israel for saying perverse things like this.

When Yosef passed away in 2013, “Hundreds of thousands of his supporters took the streets of Jerusalem to mourn.” One of his supporters was none other than Benjamin Netanyahu, who said that “the Jewish People have lost one of the wisest men of his generation.”[8]

What did “one of the wisest men” say about Muslims? “It is forbidden to be merciful to them. You must send missiles to them and annihilate them. They are evil and damnable.”[9]

If 2013 seems to be “ancient history” for some, keep in mind that this perverse sentiment is still alive and well among Israeli officials. Israeli politician and Minister of Justice Ayelet Shaked has said:

“Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people. Why? Ask them, they started… “Behind every terrorist stand dozens of men and women, without whom he could not engage in terrorism. Actors in the war are those who incite in mosques, who write the murderous curricula for schools, who give shelter, who provide vehicles, and all those who honor and give them their moral support.

“They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there.”[10]

Shaked is still Israel’s Minister of Justice. As I have argued elsewhere, this ethnic cleansing has been the nuts and bolts of the Israeli regime since 1948.

So, why is Gibson still being crucified while the Israeli regime continues to liquidate Palestinian men, women, and children?

Obviously we have reached an intolerable situation. People like Uri Klein cannot forgive Gibson because Gibson released a movie back in 2004 entitled The Passion of Christ. All hell broke loose then. After the movie was released, Charles Patterson blamed all the horrors of Jewish suffering on the gospels’ accounts.

“The trouble with Mel Gibson’s film ‘The Passion’ is not the film itself,” he writes, “but the gospel story on which it’s based. The gospel story, which has generated more anti-Semitism than the sum of all the other anti-Semitic writings ever written, created the climate in Christian Europe that led to the Holocaust. Long before the rise of Adolf Hitler, the gospel story about the life and death of Jesus had poisoned the bloodstream of European civilization.”[11]

Heinrich Graetz drew the same conclusion more than a century earlier, charging that Christians’ “hatred against Jews” was “derived from the gospels and their theological literature.”[12]

For Jami Bernard of the New York Daily News, Gibson’s Passion was “the most virulently anti-Semitic movie made since the German propaganda films of World War II.”[13] Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, author of the fraudulent book Hitler’s Willing Executioner, wrote that

“Gibson’s film takes the fetishizing of horror and death that exists within Christianity to some sort of sickly logical conclusion. Visually, iconographically and symbolically, Gibson’s ‘Passion’ is a sadomasochistic, orgiastic display that demonizes Jews as it degrades those who revel in viewing the horror…

“Its orgy of unsurpassed and virtually unremitting sadism restores this part of the Jesus story—de-emphasized by the Catholic Church since the Vatican II reforms—to center stage, to haunt all those who would follow Jesus with indelible, iconic images of cruelty. Gibson has thus unwittingly exposed the misguidedness of this cult of death.”[14]

This is the prevailing way of looking at the gospels’ accounts or anything that portrays Jews as being accomplices in the crucifixion.

Jewish professor Paul Fredriksen declared when the movie came out, “When violence breaks out, Mel Gibson will have a much higher authority than professors and bishops to answer to.”[15] The Los Angeles Times added that the movie is “a gasoline-soaked rag tossed on the already roaring flames of anti-Semitism.”[16]

Rabbi Tovia Singer was more pessimistic. “By the time the first nail is hammered into the cross,” he said, “viewers in Germany will be passing around knife sharpeners in the theater. Israel may have to absorb a massive flight of European Jewry.”[17]

I honestly have no interest in Mel Gibson, but to portray the movie as anti-Semitic is a contradiction, which is inherent in the anti-Semitic tactic.

For example, Fredriksen implies that the movie is anti-Semitic, but Fredriksen writes it was the Jews who inspired Pilate to kill Jesus! After reading Fredricksen’s work, David Klinghoffer wrote, “Pilate Killed Jesus. But even Fredriksen allows that it was the priests who tipped him off to the threat posed by the Christian savior—or rather, by those who followed him.”[18]

Jewish novelist and television writer Howard Fast wrote in The Jews: Story of a People that “unless Christians finally come to understand the bitter and almost inadmissible truth, that the murder of six million Jews by the Germans was the final, hideous outcome of a Christian ideology that had spent two thousand years teaching mankind to hate the Jews—then the crucifixion of the Jews and the connected inhumanity of the Christian will continue, on and on, until finally mankind, in the name of that gentle Jew Jesus, who died without ever hearing the word Christian or knowing what agony his own people would suffer in his name, destroys itself.”[19]

Gibson even deleted scenes drawn from Matthew 27. Sharon Waxman of the New York Times wrote that Gibson,

“responding to focus groups as much as to protests by Jewish critics, has decided to delete a controversial scene about Jews from his film…A scene in the film, in which the Jewish high priest Caiaphas calls down a kind of curse on the Jewish people by declaring of the Crucifixion, ‘His blood be on us and on our children,’ will not be in the movie’s final version.[20]

The fact is that the historical accounts show that the Pharisees were accomplices in the death of Christ. Even the Talmud does not shy away from declaring that Christ was condemned and executed by rabbinical court.[21] (However, according to the Talmud, Jesus was rightly executed for practicing sorcery and for leading Israel astray into idolatry.[22]) Rabbinic scholars and writers over the centuries have agreed on this.

Moses Maimonides was very clear on this issue. Rabbi Eliyahu Touger likewise noted,

“The Jews did not actually carry out the execution, for crucifixion is not one of the Torah’s methods of execution. Rather, after condemning him to death, the Sanhedrin handed him over to the Roman authorities who executed him as a rebel against Roman rule.”[23]

If people like Uri Klein want to attack Gibson for his “anti-Semitic” movie, why won’t they devote equal time and energy to condemning the Talmud for the same reason? Who are those people really fooling this time?

[1] Uri Klein, “Oscars 2017: Hollywood Forgave Mel Gibson Too Quickly,” Haaretz, February 26, 2017.

[2] “Actor Gary Oldman Defends Mel Gibson’s Anti-Semitic Remarks, Slams PC Hollywood Culture,” Jerusalem Post, June 24, 2014.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Eliana Dockterman, “Gary Oldman Is Sorry He Defended Mel Gibson’s Anti-Semitic Rant,” Time, June 26, 2014.

[6] “Mel Gibson: ‘It’s Annoying’ People Won’t Let anti-Semitic Rants Go,” Haaretz, November 1, 2016.

[7] “Tradition Today: Jews and Gentiles,” Jerusalem Post, November 12, 2010.

[8] Quoted in Dan Murphy, “Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, in his own words,” Christian Science Monitor, October 7, 2013.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ishaan Tharoor, “Israel’s new justice minister considers all Palestinians to be ‘the enemy,’” Washington Post, May 7, 2015.

[11] Quoted in Gentry, Navigating the Book of Revelation, 183.

[12] Graetz, History of the Jews, Vol. V, 44.

[13] Ben Child, “Jim Caviezel Claims the Passion of the Christ Made Him a Hollywood Outcast,” Guardian, May 3, 2011.

[14] Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, “Mel Gibson’s Cross of Vengeance,” Jewish Daily Forward, March 5, 2004.

[15] David Klinghoffer, Why the Jews Rejected Jesus (New York: Doubleday, 2005), 2.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid., 73.

[19] Howard Fast, The Jews: Story of a People (New York: Dial Press, 1968), 325.

[20] Gentry, Navigating Revelation, 184.

[21] See Peter Schaffer, Jesus in the Talmud (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007), chapter six; Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion (London: Pluto Press, 2002), 97-98; Travers R. Herford, Christianity in Talmud and Midrash (London: Williams & Norgate, 1903), 78-89.

[22] Schaffer, Jesus in the Talmud, 66.

[23] Quoted in Michael Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Vol. I, 156.







Mel Gibson confirmed that he is making a movie about the resurrection of Jesus, recalling that he had the “tar kicked out of” him for his 2004 movie about the last days of the Christian messiah, “The Passion of the Christ.”

“That’s a very big subject and it needs to be looked at because we don’t want to just do a simple rendering of it,” Gibson said last weekend at SoCal Harvest, an evangelical Christian arts festival. “I mean, we can all read what happened.”

At the beginning of his interview with evangelist Greg Laurie, first reported by IndieWire, a film business news website, Gibson thanked the cheering audience for the support of evangelicals during the controversies surrounding “The Passion,” a movie critics and Jewish groups said stoked anti-Semitic themes.

“I love you folks,” said Gibson, who belongs to an ultraconservative Roman Catholic sect. “You know, about 12 years ago, when I was literally, when I made this film, I was literally getting the tar kicked out of me (by jews), and it was you people out there, evangelicals, who stood up and supported me, I thanked you at the time, but I thank you again, and that was great of you.”


Jewish groups said at the time that Gibson relied on anti-Semitic stereotypes to depict Jesus’s persecutors, including Caiaphas, the high priest.

The movie nonetheless was a box office success, resonating among devout Christian audiences. As the controversy ensued, it emerged that Gibson’s sect rejected much of the Vatican II doctrine that had absolved the Jews for the death of Christ, and that his father was a Holocaust denier.

melgibsontruechristianmeme3Two years later, Gibson, during an arrest for driving while intoxicated in Southern California, spewed an “anti-Semitic” rant against the Jewish sheriff’s deputy who arrested him. That and subsequent scandals involving his marriage and allegations of abuse toward his girlfriend tanked his career for a period, although he has scored some recent successes.

Randall Wallace, a screenwriter who has collaborated with Gibson in the past, said in June that they were working on a sequel to “Passion,” but Gibson at the time would not confirm the project.

In his SoCal Harvest interview, Gibson clarified that he did not view the project as a sequel to “The Passion.” “It’s not the ‘Passion 2,’” he said.














NEO – David Rockefeller’s Gruesome Legacy

by F. William Engdahl,  … with New Eastern Outlook,  Moscow

[ Editor’s Note: I knew that Engdahl would not take a pass on David Rockefeller’s passing. He doesn’t miss a good opportunity to weigh in on a controversial contemporary figure, or to assess his values and share some historical gems on the man, which the rest of us might have missed.

Gosh, what’s not to love about David Rockefeller, from his support of the Nazi Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for its eugenics work, tying grant money to population control, the GMO food revolution, and even the Bilderberg Group. The man made his mark on the world, but for whose benefit?

In 1973 with Kissinger as his ringer, we had the OPEC oil embargo, which made millions for the Rockefeller oil gangsters, and later we saw their double-pump, when they ran interest rates up to crash the currencies of developing countries; after this, the banksters could move in and buy gem asset properties for ten cents on the dollar.

Predatory capitalism was their game, and we were all on the target list, and to some degree still are, as the Rockefeller Gang did view the world as one big plantation and the rest of us… as stock. So we will shed no tears for Mr. Rockefeller, or Henry K. when he punches out. It will be goodbye and good riddanceJim W. Dean ]

Jim’s Editor’s Notes are solely crowdfunded via

This includes research, needed field trips, Heritage TV Legacy archiving, and more – Thanks for helping out



– First published … March 26,  2017 –

The death of David Rockefeller, the de facto Patriarch of the American establishment, at age 101, is being greeted by establishment media with praise for his alleged philanthropy. I would like to contribute to a more honest picture of the person.

The Rockefeller American Century

In 1939, along with his four brothers–Nelson, John D. III, Laurance and Winthrop–David Rockefeller and their Rockefeller Foundation financed the top secret War & Peace Studies at the New York Council on Foreign Relations, the most influential private US foreign policy think-tank which also was controlled by the Rockefellers.

A collection of American academics gathered even before outbreak of World War II to plan a postwar world empire, what Time-Life insider Henry Luce later called The American Century.

They made a blueprint for taking over a global empire from the bankrupt British, but carefully decided to call it not an empire. Rather they called it “spreading democracy, freedom, the American way of free enterprise.”

Their project looked at the geopolitical map of the world and planned how the USA would replace the British Empire as de facto the dominant empire. The creation of the United Nations was a key part.

The Rockefeller brothers donated the land in Manhattan for the UN Headquarters (and in the process made billions in the increased prices of the adjoining real estate that they also owned). This is the Rockefeller “philanthropy” method. Every grant donated is calculated to increase family wealth and power.

After the War David Rockefeller dominated US foreign policy and the countless wars in Africa, Latin America, Asia. The Rockefeller faction created the Cold War against the Soviet Union, and NATO in order to keep a reviving Western Europe under American vassal status. How they did so I documented in detail in my book, The Gods of Money. Here I consider several examples of David Rockefeller’s crimes against humanity.


Rockefeller Biology Research: ‘Control the people…’

If philanthropy should be motivated by love of our fellow man, the grants of the Rockefeller Foundation are not. Take medical research. During the period until 1939 and the War, the Rockefeller Foundation financed biological research at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Berlin. It was Nazi eugenics—how to breed a superior race and how to kill off or sterilize those they deemed “inferior.”

Rockefeller financed Nazi eugenics. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil also violated US law to secretly supply the Nazi Air Force with scarce fuel during the War.

After the War the Rockefeller brothers arranged for leading Nazi scientists involved in ghastly human experiments to be brought to the USA and Canada under sanitized identities to continue their eugenics research. Many worked in the CIA top secret MK-Ultra project.

In the 1950’s the Rockefeller brothers founded the Population Council to advance eugenics, disguised as population research into birth control. The Rockefeller brothers were responsible in the 1970’s for a US Government Top Secret project directed by Rockefeller National Security Adviser Kissinger, NSSM-200 titled, Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for US Security and Overseas Interests.”

It argued high population growth in developing natons with strategic raw materials like oil or minerals were a US “national security threat” as more population demands national economic growth, using those resources internally (sic!). NSSM-200 made developing world population reduction programs a precondition of US aid.

In the 1970s David Rockefeller’s Rockefeller Foundation also financed together with WHO development of a special tetanus vaccine that limited population by making a woman incapable of maintaining a pregnancy, literally going after the human reproductive process itself.

The Rockefeller Foundation created the entire field of genetic manipulation through its ownership of Monsanto Corporation and financing of university biology research to create the “gene cannon” and other techniques to artificially alter gene expression of a given plant.

The aim of GMO, since Rockefeller sponsored the disastrous Philippine Golden Rice project, has been to use GMO to control the human and animal food chain. Today more than 90% of all soybeans grown in USA are GMO and more than 80% all corn and cotton. Yet it is not labelled.


Control the oil…’

The Rockefeller fortune is based on oil around companies such as ExxonMobil, Chevron and others. Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller’s political adviser since 1954, was involved in every major Rockefeller project. Kissinger secretly manipulated Middle East diplomacy in 1973 to trigger an Arab OPEC oil embargo.

The Oil Shock of 1973-74 was orchestrated by a secretive organization David Rockefeller created in the 1950s known as Bilderberg Group. In May 1973 David Rockefeller and the heads of the major US and UK oil majors met in Saltsjoebaden, Sweden at the annual Bilderberg Meeting to plan the oil shock.

It would be blamed on “greedy Arab oil sheikhs.” It saved the falling US dollar, and made Wall Street banks, including David Rockefeller’s Chase Manhattan, into the world’s largest banks. This author has the “confidential” protocol of that meeting where the price increase strategy is described six months before the Arab-Israeli war.

Please see my book, A Century of War, for documentation. In the 1970’s Kissinger summed up David Rockefeller’s world strategy: “If you control the oil, you control entire nations; if you control food, you control the people; if you control money, you control the entire world.”


Control the money…’

David Rockefeller was chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, the family bank. He was responsible for getting Chase Vice President, Paul Volcker, to become President Carter’s Federal Reserve chairman to make the Volcker interest rate shock that again, like the oil shock, saved the falling US dollar and Wall Street bank profits, including Chase Manhattan, at the expense of the world economy.

Volcker’s October 1979 interest rate ‘shock therapy’, backed by Rockefeller, created the 1980’s “Third World Debt Crisis.”

Rockefeller and Wall Street used that debt crisis to force state privatizations and drastic national currency devaluations in countries such as Argentina, Brazil, Mexico. Rockefeller and friends such as George Soros then grabbed the crown jewels of Argentina, Brazil, Mexico at dirt-cheap prices.

The model was much like the British banks used in the Ottoman Empire after 1881 when they de facto took control of the finances of the Sultan by controlling all tax revenues through the Ottoman Public Debt Administration (OPDA). Rockefeller interests used the 1980s debt crisis to loot much of the indebted Latin America and African countries, using the IMF as their policeman.

David Rockefeller was personal friends to some of the more savage military dictators in Latin America including General Jorge Videla in Argentine or Pinochet in Chile, both of whom owed their jobs to CIA coups arranged by then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger on behalf of Rockefeller family interests in Latin America.

Through organizations such as his Trilateral Commission, Rockefeller was the foremost architect of the destruction of national economies and advancing so-called Globalization, a policy that mainly benefits the largest banks of Wall Street and City of London and select global corporations—the same who are invited members of his Trilateral Commission. Rockefeller created the Trilateral Commission in 1974 and gave his close friend Zbigniew Brzezinski the job of choosing its members in North America, Japan and Europe.

If we speak of an unseen, powerful network some call the Deep State, we might say David Rockefeller saw himself as Patriarch of that Deep State. His true acts deserve to be honestly seen for what they were—misanthropic and not philanthropic.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”


NEO – Does Flynn Exit Aid World Peace?

Flynn Fired for Iran, Not For Russia

by F. William Engdahl,  … with New Eastern Outlook,  Moscow

[ Editor’s note: This is a week-old NEO piece but Engdahl is often worth a good read even if one disagrees with some of his points, like I do with his claim that Flynn was fired because of his “off the cuff” press conference putting Iran “on notice” for its ballistic missile testing.

Frankly, to think that a new national security adviser to the president would give such a press conference without a clearance from the Chief of Staff and Trump does not compute. You might as well not have a chief of staff.

As Kissinger has been invisible during Trump’s stumbling first month, I had forgotten that Henry was one of Donald’s key kitchen-cabinet foreign policy people, and buddies with Putin even, if some private messages needed to be passed.

Putin just loves Kissinger, and why is beyond me, as he is a dyed-in-the-wool Cold War dude. He’s all about wars for the elites for increased market share, and even better, market dominance, where the winner basically runs the rest of the world like a plantation. I don’t think that is in the UN’s mandate anywhere.

But sometimes Bill over analyzes when it is not really needed. Take Putin for example. One of the things I love about him and Lavrov is they are masters of the simple but powerful message. What the U.S. spins as an evolving expansionist Russian threat, in simple terms, wanting a New Cold War…Putin parries by clearly stating that Russia is, and always will be, against a uni-polar dominated world structure, because it is inherently destabilizing for the reason that it throws out the balance of forces, which was the success of the Cold War. No one had a survivable “I want to rule the world” play up their sleeve.

The U.S. foreign policy since 9-11 has been to deem anyone not agreeing to be subservient to be a threat, and a fair target for both the Cold and Hot War treatment. Hence we had this recent silliness about Iran’s missile test, which Engdahl points out was not in violation of the G5+1 nuclear deal or any UN resolution for that matter.

Our fake president was pulling it all out of his behind, thinking that if he was on the offensive calling everybody else fake, no one would pick him out of the fake perp line up down at the station.

So I ask everybody, if we have a new administration that cannot even manage to deal with the press in less than a uni-polar fashion, why would anyone think it could be capable of dealing with the complex world problems we have?

What we have on the table now is a prime example of “chaos theory”, and a president who claims to be the shadow president of Israel, the well-known top title holder of the best chaos theory talent on the planet. Could that be just a coincidence? I will be betting my money that it isn’t, but I hope I would lose that bet. William has a good read below; enjoyJim W. Dean ]


New Eastern Outlook, Moscow

– First published  … February 21, 2017 –


The abrupt firing of President Trump’s key National Security Adviser, General Michael Flynn, after only days on the job, may be a blessing in disguise for those interested in a more peaceful world.

It may also have been the splash of cold water that the Russian leadership needed to disabuse them of any fantasies or thoughts they would do good for their nation by cutting Flynn’s dirty deal over “peace” in Syria.

It’s essential to look beyond the headlines to get a sense of what’s really afoot. From the onset, as I’ve stated many times, the Trump Presidency is about deception and about replacing Obama’s failed “Plan A” for global dominion with what we might call Henry Kissinger’s “Plan B.

What did the abrupt firing of Flynn do to possibly aid world peace? Was he not the dear friend of normalizing relations with Putin’s Russia? Was he not the ardent foe of the war-mongering neo-cons that dominated the foreign policies of George W. Bush and B. Obama? In a word, No. He wasn’t.

The issue is not Flynn as though he single-handedly was about cleaning the filth out of the Augean Stables of the Washington intelligence community. The issue is the declared priority foreign policy of the Trump Project.

Since the election campaign, certain themes have been clearly sounded: The nuclear deal with Iran was “bad” and new hostile sanctions are in order. Relations with Bibi Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud government must again become special Washington priority. Relations with Saudi Arabia, the world’s biggest financier of terrorism, must also be elevated. What has taken place in the four weeks since the inauguration?

Not a new policy, post-Flynn. What is taking place is a strategic pivot, as planned, to build a war coalition for US control of the oil and gas of the Middle East. It is not about “peace” in cooperation with Russia in Syria. Never was.


Breaking the Eurasian Development Triangle

From the outset, if we take utterings of Trump, of Flynn, of Defense Secretary James “Mad Dog” Mattis, the aim of the American Patriarchs and their messengers such as Henry Kissinger, has been to try to break the Eurasian economic triangle that offers our war-torn world a new hope of economic growth, not war, through construction of a network of deep water ports and high-speed rail infrastructure linking the nations of Eurasia, largely independent of the domination of the dollar system or NATO.

As I outlined in an earlier article, published just before the Trump inauguration, it was clear then that, “With Kissinger now in a unique relationship with President-elect Trump as shadow foreign policy adviser, with Kissinger allies Tillerson as Secretary of State and Mattis as Secretary of Defense, it is beginning to appear that the heavy hand of Kissinger and his version of British Balance of Power political manipulations is about to target China, as well as Iran, and to try to use Putin and Russia to destroy the genuine possibility of a counterweight to Western One World delusions, by fostering mistrust and bad blood between China and Russia and Iran.”

Kissinger, in his recent criticisms of Obama foreign policy argued that Obama gave Iran a lifting of some sanctions while not demanding in return that Iran leave Syria and cease support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and Syria.

He argues that a deal with Russia over Syria should Balkanize or “cantonize” Syria as Washington did in Yugoslavia in the wars of the 1990s, with an agreed exit of Bashar al Assad. Kissinger argues, “Iran must be contained, much as the Soviet Union was in the Cold War, because it poses a similar threat, acting as both an imperial state and a revolutionary cause.”

For Kissinger, Trump’s de facto foreign policy strategist, the greatest threat to his (and David Rockefeller’s) version of a World Order, is emergence of regional blocs asserting their self-interest and not acting as de facto vassals of a US-led order. Kissinger stated back in 2014, “A struggle between regions could be even more destructive than the struggle between nations has been.”


Flynn Fired for Iran, not for Russia

The official reason for firing Flynn so early on was allegedly his refusal to disclose all details to Vice President Pence and others of his pre-inauguration phone call to the Russian Ambassador in Washington, Sergey Kislyak, in the days before Trump became President.

Far more plausible as reason is the shoot-from-the-hip remarks of Flynn aimed at Iran in early February. Then Flynn held an unusual press conference in the White House to declare, “As of today, we are officially putting Iran on notice.”

His remarks were aimed at Iran’s testing of a ballistic missile and a recent attack on a Saudi naval vessel by Yemeni militants, which Washington said were backed by Teheran. Sounds tough, or? Real Rambo macho, a la USA again asserting its power in the region. Grrrrrrrowl!

There were many things wrong with that inane declaration of Flynn. One, it had no content, much like Obama’s August 2012 “red line” statement on chemical weapons in Syria that almost got the US in a boots-on-the-ground war in Syria and resulted in a disastrous loss of US credibility in the Middle East. As Kissinger noted, the Obama “red line” disaster, “created the impression—and the reality—of an American strategic withdrawal from the region.”

Moreover, there is no international ban on Iran’s testing ballistic missiles. As former White House Middle East specialist Philip Gordon pointed out, “By issuing a warning so imprecise — in such a dramatic, public fashion — he has set himself and the United States up for either an embarrassing retreat or a risky confrontation.” Ballistic missile tests are not a part of the Iran nuclear agreement or any UN Resolution.

As it sunk in within the neophyte Trump Administration what a stupid thing Flynn had done, even before the Administration even had picked all its ducks– let alone set them all in a neat row on Iran policy– it became clear Flynn had to fall on his sword. The Russian Ambassador was useful deflection.

Notable was that the stupid and imprecise threat from Flynn led both Russia and China to publicly declare their firm support of Iran, the opposite of what Plan B is supposed to bring.

Three days before Flynn fell on his sword, the Kremlin Presidential spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, stated, “Russia disagrees with a remark recently made by US President Donald Trump’s that branded Iran as ‘the number one terrorist state.’ All of you know that Russia enjoys warm relations with Iran, we do cooperate on a range of issues, and we do appreciate our economic ties which, we hope, will go further.”


Anti-Iran Military Bloc?

If we look closely at what the new Trump initiatives have been, certain features become clear. Take the obscene, fawning performance of new CIA Director, Mike Pompeo, kissing the posterior of the ultra-reactionary Saudi Royal Prince. On February 12 in his first foreign trip as CIA head, Pompeo presented Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, heir to the throne, with the “George Tenet Medal” for his efforts to combat terrorism.

Pompeo has echoed the Trump Administration mantra that Iran is the primary source of conflict in the Middle East. It echoes what Trump has declared, what Kissinger has written and what Defense Secretary James Mattis declared when accusing Iran of being, “the single biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the world.”

Over the past decades Saudi Arabia has spent an estimated $100 billion fostering the radical Wahhabite brand of fanatic Islam, including sending Osama bin Laden to Pakistan in the early 1980’s to create what became Al Qaeda to wage a CIA decade-long war against the Soviet Red Army. Saudi money is a prime reason war still rages after almost six years in Syria today as well as in Yemen.

The mending of Washington ties with the Saudi monarchy is part of a larger strategy to rebuild Washington ties to Netanyahu’s Israel and to a coalition of ultra-reactionary Sunni Gulf states including Saudi, Kuwait, Qatar, Jordan, Egypt. The Obama Iran nuclear deal had chilled Washington ties deeply with Israel and the Gulf Arab states.

On February 15, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Trump Administration plans to build an anti-Tehran military bloc with Saudi Arabia, other Gulf Sunni states and Israel, states that would cooperate with the United States and Israel on sharing intelligence to oppose the growing regional influence of Iran.

The report stated that Washington seeks to create, “a new ‘NATO’ agreement between four Arab nations, where intelligence would be shared openly with Israel. The new agreement has been proposed to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Egypt and Jordan and is seen as a formal military alliance against a growing geopolitical threat from Iran.”

Netanyahu, in Washington to meet Trump, immediately embraced the Trump proposal of creating an “Arab NATO,” of course, with Israel shrewdly in the background, providing “targets.” The Israeli Prime Minister declared it was a “great opportunity for peace.” (sic).


The Deeper Geopolitics

Creating a new Sunni war against Iran by the Trump Administration is, however, not the end game. It’s a step in a far larger, vastly more strategic gambit: To break the emerging Eurasian triangle of growing cooperation between Russia, China and Iran. Washington and Israel’s Netanyahu see Iran as the best way to do that, the weak link.

A seminal paper recently by Washington neo-conservative guru, Michael Ledeen, the same Ledeen who co-authored a book in 2016 with Mike Flynn, is worth close reading.

Ledeen, an architect of the Iran-Contra scandals in the 1980s as well as of the fraudulent Niger uranium yellowcake affair that the Bush-Cheney Administration used to justify the mad war against Iraq in 2003, is at the center of Trump efforts to demonize Iran. Today Ledeen is a so-called Freedom Scholar at the Netanyahu-linked Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington.

On February 13 in an OpEd in Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal, submitted just before Flynn’s resignation from the NSC, Ledeen wrote, “Want a deal with Vladimir Putin in the Middle East? Then start with the real questions: Are the Russians prepared to abandon Iran and Bashar Assad’s Syria? If so, what would it take to pull it off? “

Ledeen continues, “An American deal with Russia that pulls the plug on Mr. Putin’s alliance with Mr. Assad and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei threatens the Iranians. Without Russian bombers and special forces, Iran would face defeat, as would Mr. Assad. Without Syria, Hezbollah—an integral part of the Tehran regime—would at least be seriously threatened, and could function no longer, along with the military pipeline from Tehran to the Mediterranean. “

Ledeen then proposes that Trump back a new CIA Color Revolution to topple Khamenei’s Iran: “With US support, these millions of Iranians could topple the Islamic Republic and establish a secular government resembling those in the West. With the Islamic Republic gone, the Trump administration would be in a much stronger position to strike a deal with Mr. Putin. The road to Moscow runs through Tehran.”

Michael Ledeen is a nasty piece of work. He is on record in 2002 as part of his push for an Iraqi invasion stating, “If ever there were a region that richly deserved being cauldronized, it is the Middle East today. If we wage the war effectively, we will bring down the terror regimes in Iraq, Iran, and Syria, and either bring down the Saudi monarchy or force it to abandon its global assembly line to indoctrinate young terrorists. That’s our mission in the war against terror.”


Russia steps back

How does this all tie into the resignation of Flynn and the shift in Moscow perceptions of the true motives of the Trump Administration towards Moscow?

Trump’s Administration was well on the way, by all signs coming out of Moscow and Washington, to offer Moscow a very poor deal over Syria that would rupture Russia-Iran relations and destroy the new-found Russian influence as a major Middle East actor or a reliable ally to other nations. Vague promises of possible sanctions relief and maybe some “understanding” of Russian Crimea policies were reported to be some of the “carrots” Trump and Co. dangled before Moscow.

On February 14, the day following the Flynn resignation, putatively over his contacts with Russian officials, the Pentagon accused the Russian military of flying “too close” to the USS Porter, a guided-missile destroyer, in international waters in the Black Sea, the strategic home of Russia’s Black Sea naval fleet in Crimea.

The Pentagon claimed the Russian jets were flying without transponders turned on. The very presence of the US ships so close to Russia is part of Washington provocations begun under Obama and obviously not altered by Trump.

Then a week before that, US UN Ambassador Nikki Haley told the United Nations that, “the United States continues to condemn and call for an immediate end to the Russian occupation of Crimea…Crimea is a part of Ukraine. Our Crimea-related sanctions will remain in place until Russia returns control over the peninsula to Ukraine.”

Trump himself then tweeted, “Crimea was TAKEN by Russia during the Obama Administration. Was Obama too soft onRussia?During his campaign Trump had suggested reviewing the Crimea sanctions on Russia as part of repairing relations.

At this point Russia has clearly stepped back from making major deals with Washington over Syria since the firing of Mike Flynn. Russia sees the recent visit of CIA head Pompeo to Turkey to try to woo Erdogan back into the NATO camp and enlist Turkish support for a new offensive in Syria as yet another sign of basic dishonesty in the Trump Administration as to their true intentions for a joint peace effort in Syria.

Whether embedded networks within the Washington intelligence community – committed along with the US military industrial complex to a permanent war economy – were behind the firing of Flynn, Moscow is clearly in a strategic reassessment in the aftermath.

A rupture of Iran-Russia ties owing to a foul Russian deal in Syria would also facilitate the breaking of the strategic other leg of the Eurasian Golden Triangle, namely the strategic ties between Xi Jinping’s China and Iran, where China has invited Teheran to join its One Belt, One Road port and high-speed rail infrastructure project, described as the most significant infrastructure project in the world today.

Washington must break that Eurasian triangle or face superpower twilight. That is what the entire Kissinger-Trump project is about.

If we put the efforts of Washington to drive a wedge between Russia and Iran over Syria into the global context of Washington targeting China over the South China Sea and with coming currency wars, the true purpose of the Trump Project architected by Henry Kissinger becomes clearer.

The aim is to destroy the one regional alliance in the world today capable of seriously displacing American hegemony as sole superpower, namely the Russia-Iran-China Eurasian triangle with its gold, its technology, its rail links and its formidable military deterrence. Fortunately for the world, they are off to a disastrous start.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

How Arab Jewish children were kidnapped in Israel

Israeli forces violently detaining a Palestinian minor [File photo]

Israeli forces violently detaining a Palestinian minor [File photo]

A scandal has been brewing in Israel that has been decades in the making. During Israel’s foundational years, thousands of babies born to Jews from Arab countries were kidnapped from their parents and given to white, Ashkenazi families for adoption. The affected families were mostly Jews newly-arrived from Yemen, but babies from Moroccan, Iraqi and Tunisian families were also targeted. As a settler-colonial movement, Zionism has always been deeply imbued with the kind of racist ethno-nationalism which considered “eastern” Jews (“Mizrahim”) to be inferior to white, Ashkenazi Jews from Europe.

Zionism’s project has always been to “gather” Jews from all around the world into a new “Jewish state” in the land of Palestine, most of which is now called “Israel”. The majority of the Palestinian people were expelled by Zionist militias between 1947 and 1948 in what at least one Israeli historian has labelled “ethnic cleansing”. This was because they were overwhelmingly non-Jewish, and as such stood in the way of Zionism’s colonial project. The Arab Jews’ very Arab-ness was another obstacle that stood in Zionism’s way, and so also had to be removed.

Image of Israel's first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion [file photo]

This racism went to the very top. Israel’s first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, complained that the Arab Jews lacked even “the most elementary knowledge” or “a trace of Jewish or human education.” He explained that, “We do not want Israelis to become Arabs. We are bound by duty to fight against the spirit of the Levant that corrupts individuals and society.”

This racism was fundamental to Zionism’s animating ethos: the superiority of “the Jews” (implicitly, and sometimes explicitly, conceptualised as “white”) over “the Arabs” who were viewed as a “corrupting” spirit in the region. As such, Jews with an Arab cultural and linguistic background were viewed as a problem to overcome. Common slurs by Israeli soldiers against Arab Jews in those early years were that they were “negroes” who were “too primitive to learn” and with intelligence “much lower than that of white men.” Ben-Gurion himself told one magazine as late as 1965 that Jews from Morocco “had no education. Their customs are those of Arabs.”

Because of antiquated and racist colonial attitudes like this, the Arab Jews were subjected to an intensive process of de-Arabisation. This primarily targeted children so that, in Ben-Gurion’s words to the same magazine, “Maybe in the third generation something will appear from the Oriental Jew that is a little different.”

Among survivors of this process now living in Israel, anecdotes abound from Yemeni and other Arab-Jewish families of babies and very small children in the late 1940s and early 1950s being taken from their mothers and declared dead in highly suspicious circumstances. Mothers were refused access to the bodies, and death certificates were not issued.

As many of 5,000 of these children had, in reality, not died; they were, in fact, kidnapped and given to white Jewish families to bring up as their own. Often these families were childless Holocaust survivors. The racist standards prevalent in Israel meant that white European Jews were considered as being able to provide “superior” family environments compared to the “uneducated” Jews hailing from Arab countries.

Although this scandal certainly has its unique qualities, in some ways there are commonalities with other settler-colonial movements. Indigenous children in the lands that are now the United States, Canada and Australia were often taken from their families and compelled to live in establishments where the aim was to “Kill the Indian, Save the Man”. Australia’s officially-sanctioned policy of forcibly “breeding out the colour” from the black Aboriginal population is also well documented.

In the case of Israel, several state investigations into the allegations have denied any systematic state involvement. One Mizrahi activist in Israel has described this as 60 years of the entire political, media and legal establishment colluding to hide the truth.

An Israeli government minister tasked with re-examining the evidence conceded last year that hundreds of Yemeni children were taken away from their parents, although he claimed that he “did not know” where they went. According to Haaretz, “Between 1948 and 1954, between 1,500 and 5,000 children, mainly Yemenite toddlers, were reported missing, with many parents being told their children had died.”

A report on the issue in the Financial Times last year pointed out that, “Most parents believe — and in a handful of cases it has been proven, through DNA tests or paper trails — that their children were taken from hospitals or refugee camps and given to childless Ashkenazi Jewish Israelis of east European descent, including Holocaust survivors.” One Mizrahi campaigner told the Financial Times it was an act of “genocide” under the UN definition. Furthermore, “it’s something that can’t be separated from the Zionist project.”

Although denial over the affair goes deep in Ashkenazi Israel, there seems little realistic doubt that the kidnapping of thousands of “eastern” babies from their “uneducated” mothers so that they could be brought up and de-Arabised in white Jewish families must have involved some sort of establishment collusion. The only real question seems to be whether the Israeli government organised this effort actively or was otherwise complicit in it.

This, though, says one Israeli author, is essentially an academic question. “Ultimately, I don’t think it matters whether government officials actively planned what happened or they simply looked the other way while others carried out the kidnappings,” Shoshana Madmoni-Gerber told Al-Jazeera. “Either way it was a crime perpetrated against thousands of parents who still don’t know the truth about their children’s fate.”

Fact-checking Israeli Ambassador Mark Regev

Mark Regev

Mark Regev, the Israeli ambassador to the UK

Israel’s Ambassador to the UK, Mark Regev, places a premium on speaking at university campuses. The context? Israel’s uphill struggle to assuage a growing sense of frustration and anger at a Benjamin Netanyahu-led government seen as a serial violator of international law and human rights.

In October, Regev addressed Cambridge University students at its famous Debating Union. The event was recently uploaded onto YouTube, and of particular interest is the Q&A (beginning 27 minutes in). The questions are predominantly critical, or sceptical, and Regev has to shoot from the hip.

So here are three claims that the Israeli ambassador made in response to students’ questions – and an analysis of their accuracy.

1. “Israeli democracy is very, very strong” and “on a positive trajectory”.

In the first question to be taken from the audience (46 minutes in), a student put it to Regev that there is a lot of evidence to suggest Israel is “undemocratic”.

Regev was defiant, telling the Union that “Israeli democracy is very, very strong.” He went on: “If you look at a timeline, Israeli democracy is stronger today than it was 10 years ago, and it’s stronger still than 20 years ago.” After citing the judiciary, media and NGO community, Regev reiterated: “I, as an Israeli, am confident that our democracy is strong, and is actually on a positive trajectory.”

Even putting aside the long-standing “institutional and societal discrimination” (the words of the US State Department) experienced by Palestinian citizens of Israel, Regev’s claim that things have been getting better over recent years is laughable. But don’t take my word for it; let’s see what the NGOs – whose work Regev is apparently so proud of – say about the subject.

Take the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), for example, who has warned of “intensifying infringements on democratic freedoms in Israel” over “the past few years”. This has included “harsh and unprecedented statements against human rights organisations, political groups, and minorities” by “senior officials”, who “have made various attempts to curtail their operations.”

In ACRI’s view, 2016 was a year when Israel “moved backwards” with respect to human rights. Similarly, Adalah, the legal centre for Arab minority rights in Israel, noted last December that “the civil society space available for human rights defenders to work is further shrinking”, adding: “we expect to have to redouble our efforts to defend basic human rights.”

International human rights groups echo such observations. Last year, Amnesty International said an “escalation of acts of intimidation by the [Israeli] government” has contributed to creating “an increasingly dangerous environment” for human rights defenders. The group also noted “recent legislative initiatives…apparently aimed at constricting freedom of expression.”

The regional director of Human Rights Watch, having been refused a working visa earlier this year by the Israeli authorities, described the decision as “part of larger pattern of shrinking the space for critical voices within Israel”, adding: “it signals a significant deterioration in basic democratic values.”

2. Under Netanyahu, settlement construction has gone down.

The second question from the audience (50’11) zoomed in specifically on the issue of Israel’s illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt).

“You kept on saying that the Israeli government is committed to peace,” the student said, “but Netanyahu’s relentless settlement expansion entirely contradicts this. So surely you can understand that settlements are only hindering the peace process?”

Under pressure, Regev looked to an unlikely source for assistance: Israeli newspaper Haaretz. “Last year,” he told the students, “some of their smart people crunched all the numbers, and looked at the growth of settlement under Netanyahu and compared to previous [Prime Ministers].” According to Regev, it was discovered that “under Bibi, settlement construction has gone down.”

The ambassador was almost certainly referring to an article published by Haaretz in October 2015, which examined Netanyahu’s boast the previous day that the West Bank settler population had grown by 120,000 since he took office in 2009. According to Haaretz staffer Chaim Levinson, the population increase was due to “natural growth”, not construction.

Two weeks later, however, a follow-up article appeared in Haaretz, asking whether settlement growth really had slowed under Netanyahu.

The authors first noted that “the statistic on new housing starts ignores East Jerusalem, an area in which for the past six years settlement construction has been at its highest annual level since 2000.” Much of that construction, they wrote, “alters potential future borders, in significant ways.”

In addition, they pointed out, the figures are skewed by Netanyahu’s 2009-2012 term, when there was a 10-month “moratorium” on settlement approvals in the context of US-led peace talks. By contrast, “during Netanyahu’s 2013-2015 term, new construction starts in West Bank settlements have spiked, reaching a higher level than under any government since 2000.”

Regev’s misrepresentation of the facts is even more shameless, since when he appeared at the Union he would have known that official Israeli data showed a 16.7 per cent increase in the number of housing starts in West Bank settlements during the first half of 2016 – a number (1,195) that surpassed the annual totals in 2010 and 2011.

By the end of 2016, construction on new Israeli settlement homes in the occupied West Bank had risen by 40 per cent compared to the previous year, “the second highest number of construction starts in the past 15 years”. 2016’s figures brought the total number of settlement units started under Netanyahu since 2009, excluding East Jerusalem, to 14,017 units.

3. Netanyahu never rejected the goal of establishing a Palestinian state.

When a member of the audience asked (1’05’40) Regev to condemn Netanyahu’s pre-election vow in March 2015 that a Palestinian state would not be established on his watch, the ambassador seemed to be in an awkward spot. So how did he respond?

“The Prime Minister was doing an interview, and he was being asked about the peace process and all the problems,” Regev began, “and he was asked does he think there’ll be a Palestinian state during the next four years, during his next term of office, and he said ‘No, I don’t think so’. And he was describing a descriptive situation, he wasn’t saying what his goal is.”

So, let’s see how Regev’s account compares to the actual interview. Here’s the relevant section from the original article, as published by NRG – and thanks to Ofer Neiman for the translation.

NRG: Some people are hesitating between Jewish Home and Likud. You said the Bar Ilan speech is irrelevant. According to you, and as Bennett says, a Palestinian state will not be established?  

Netanyahu: I think whoever is going to establish a Palestinian state today and evacuate land, will cede offensive terrain to extreme Islam against the State of Israel. This is the true reality which has been formed here in recent years. Whoever is ignoring that is burying their head in the sand. The left is doing so, burying its head in the sand time after time. We are realistic and we understand. The test is who will form the next government. I do not fold under pressure. After all, they would not focus this huge effort against me if they thought I am not the braking force. They understand that. We have stood up to enormous pressures, and we will keep working.  

NRG: If you are the Prime Minister, a Palestinian state will not be established?

Netanyahu: Indeed.

The idea that these were simply “descriptive” comments, as Regev put it, rather than a declaration of intent, is laughable. Even more so when you recall that, just 24 hours before the NRG interview was published, Netanyahu had openly vowed: “We won’t divide Jerusalem, we won’t make concessions, we won’t withdraw from land.”

In October 2014, for example, Netanyahu told CNN: “I think we have to adjust our conceptions of sovereignty.” Earlier this year, Netanyahu acknowledged that what he is “willing to give to the Palestinians is not exactly a state with full authority, but rather a state-minus, which is why the Palestinians don’t agree [to it].”

But it’s not just the prime minister. In October 2015, Israel’s Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked declared: “We are against a Palestinian state. There is not and never will be a Palestinian state.” Economy Minister Naftali Bennett is also a long-standing, opponent of Palestinian statehood.

Indeed, as of June 2016, only one out of 20 Israeli ministers were on record as backing the two-state solution (before you even get into how they define such a formulation).

In one 24-hour period last month, Israeli ministers variously described Palestinian statehood as a “hallucination” and “no solution for peace.” Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan affirmed: “I think all the members of the cabinet oppose a Palestinian state, and the prime minister first among them.”

Just this week, Israel’s deputy foreign minister Tzipi Hotovely told an audience in Washington DC: “We need to go to a million settlers in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank]…We need to think of new ways of thinking that will include Judea and Samaria under Israeli sovereignty forever.”

At the same meeting, Israeli minister Tzachi Hanegbi declared that the West Bank was given to Israel “not by Google and Wikipedia, but by the Bible.”

Palestinian options dwindle without reinforcement of collective memory

Children perform during the commemoration titled 'Our Land is Our Identity', organized by Culture and Free Thought Association (CFTA) of Palestine, as part of 41st Palestinian Land Day at The Rashad Shawa Cultural Center in Gaza City, Gaza on March 29, 2017 (Mustafa Hassona - Anadolu Agency )

Children perform during the commemoration titled ‘Our Land is Our Identity’, organized by Culture and Free Thought Association (CFTA) of Palestine, as part of 41st Palestinian Land Day at The Rashad Shawa Cultural Center in Gaza City, Gaza on March 29, 2017 (Mustafa Hassona – Anadolu Agency )

President Donald Trump generated considerable discussion earlier this year with his vague suggestion that the US may no longer abide by the two-state “solution”, albeit while offering no alternative in the process. In 2016, international institutions started voicing the very obvious observation that the two-state imposition is obsolete, yet still insisted upon negotiations tethered to the same paradigm.

Debates over two-state or one-state drew two main conclusions. Israel is opposed to both, although the cycle of negotiations based upon the two-state hypothesis provides it with an unregulated opportunity to colonise more and more Palestinian territory. A one-state possibility is, apparently, unacceptable to Israel due to its demography altering the concept of a “Jewish state”; there would be “too many” Palestinians in it. Palestinians and Palestinian supporters, on the other hand, are more partial to a one-state result, given that such an arrangement would stand more of a chance of ensuring equal rights and addressing outstanding issues such as the legitimate right of return.

Between these opposing views, there is a sinister reality which has been depicted clearly by a recent poll conducted by the Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs, a research institute specialising in public diplomacy and foreign policy. The poll’s findings, based upon a total of 521 Jewish-Israeli respondents, were described as representative of the Israeli population as a whole and seeking “to examine the attitudes of the Jewish public in Israel on several issues regarding a peace agreement or other arrangements with the Palestinians.”

Among other issues, this “representative sample” is opposed to ending Israel’s military occupation and in favour of a “unified Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty”; the latter drew the approval of 79 per cent of the respondents. Withdrawal from the entire occupied West Bank was opposed by 77 per cent of the participants in the poll; full Israeli security control of the occupied West Bank was preferred by 76 per cent; and in case of any agreement between Israel and Palestine, 74 per cent favour US involvement.

In light of these findings, there are several factors which are overlooked, primarily the absence of any importance attached to Palestinian historical narratives. This is contributing overtly to a situation in which any possible outcome will eliminate permanently any concept of Palestinian rights, let alone a semblance of a state. The findings not only represent what Jewish-Israelis are thinking, but also provide proof of the irreparable damage that the international community has inflicted upon the indigenous Palestinians.

Both the two-state and the one-state paradigm presage an identical quagmire. Since the international community has sought consistently to find “solutions” which protect colonialism and its associated violence, Palestinian rights, as well as territory, have been classified as impediments rather than urgent considerations requiring attention over and above Israeli whims. A just solution would entail a reversal of priorities: placing Palestine and Palestinians – who are, after all, facing a very real existential threat – first, while Israel becomes the unfavourable point of contention.

If this does not happen, it should be remembered that, as altruistic as a one-state option might sound, the current poll suggests that much has to be done in respect of replacing imposed international colonial narratives with the authentic Palestinian voice. If the international community continues in the same vein of accommodating Israel almost exclusively, neither option will guarantee Palestinian rights.

Hence, instead of premature discussions that only address the immediate concerns with increasing, and indeed justified, alarm, a more comprehensive approach would entail going back to the early colonisation process which lacerated Palestinian territory and people. Bringing back Palestinian collective memory in an organised manner should form the basis for ensuring that a one-state hypothesis, if ever implemented, does not become a euphemism for complete colonial dominance and the extinction of the Palestinians in their own land.

SYRIA: Trump and Netanyahu Lead us to Brink of Another Oil War in Golan Heights


William Enghdahl
New Eastern Outlook

What has unfolded in the region since Netanyahu’s February 16 Trump talks gives reason to believe the US and Netanyahu’s Israel covertly agreed to a strategy to allow Trump to recognize Israel as the de facto occupier of Golan Heights amid what they will call the growing chaos of the Syrian “civil war.”

Events are moving rapidly to a possible new war involving Israel, the United States, Syria and Russia. Were it to take place, I honestly hope not, it would be yet another stupid war over oil. Only this oil war somehow feels far more dangerous than the US war against Iraq or Libya or previous oil wars. It’s about the part of Syria named the Golan Heights.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was one of the first heads of government to go to the United States to meet Donald Trump on February 16, in Trump’s new role as President. After the event major media focused on the themes of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, the Iran nuclear deal or a Palestine two-state solution.

Virtually no mention was made by CNN or other US mainstream media of the most strategic point the two discussed. Netanyahu asked the US President to recognize the Israeli illegal occupation of Syria’s Golan Heights, something no US President has done since Israel openly declared it theirs in 1981.

What has unfolded in the region since Netanyahu’s February 16 Trump talks gives reason to believe the US and Netanyahu’s Israel covertly agreed to a strategy to allow Trump to recognize Israel as the de facto occupier of Golan Heights amid what they will call the growing chaos of the Syrian “civil war.”

Two weeks following Netanyahu’s Washington talks the Jerusalem Post wrote about the real issue discussed between the two leaders: “The biggest news to come out of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Washington is not what’s grabbing most headlines. Rather, it’s his decision to ask the US to recognize Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights.”

The Israeli paper went on to argue, “the risk of returning the Golan Heights should be measured against the fact that Iran is actively setting up another forward command along Israel’s border with Syria…Capitalizing on Netanyahu’s idea will help the US limit Russia’s reemergence as a Middle East power broker after a 40-year absence.”

Israel, in violation of the UN Charter, illegally occupied the Golan Heights after the Israeli army took it in the 1967 Six Days War. When Israel declared applicability of Israeli law in the territory and began Israeli settlements in a de facto act of annexation of Golan Heights in 1981, the UN Security Council passed UN Resolution §497, which declared that, “the Israeli decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights is null and void and without international legal effect.”

Until now the official US Government position has been that the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights is a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention’s prohibition on the acquisition of territory by force, and in contravention of the United Nations Security Council Resolution §242 passed in November, 1967 which mandates, Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent (1967-w.e.) conflict.”

Location of the Syria Golan Heights annexed by Israel in 1981 in violation of UN Resolution 242

Some days after Netanyahu left Washington, in an OpEd in the Rupert Murdoch Wall Street Journal, Mark Dubowitz, Executive Director of the Washington pro-Israel think-tank, Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, argued that American recognition of Israel’s control of the Golan “would provide the Israeli government with a diplomatic win while helping the Trump administration signal to Russia and Iran that the US is charting a new course in Syria.” Dubowitz is an adviser to the Trump Administration on Iran and the Middle East. Other neo-conservative editorials echoed the theme. There is big change brewing in Washington and it looks ugly in terms of a possible US-backed war with Israel against Russia ally, Syria, over the Golan Heights. That immediately poses the question what Russia would do if it materializes.

Tillerson’s Strange ‘Global Coalition’

Against the backdrop of the Netanyahu talks on US recognition of Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights, the ensuing events begin to make strategic sense, mad though they may be.

On March 22 in Washington US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson convened a US Ministerial conference of something the Trump Administration calls the Global Coalition Working to Defeat ISIS. The State Department said that a combined 68 nations and organizations were present. Washington explicitly stated that the three most important states with deep interest in defeating ISIS in Syria and the three parties essential to any serious move to dislodge ISIS in Syria– Russia, Iran and Syria–were not welcome. When asked, Secretary of State Tillerson quipped, “they’re not part of the global coalition.” Curious indeed.

In his remarks Tillerson declared that US policy of the Trump Administration will be to “the regional elimination of ISIS through military force. The military power of the coalition will remain where this fraudulent caliphate has existed in order to set the conditions for a full recovery from the tyranny of ISIS.” In other words, a US-led permanent occupation of the ISIS-controlled areas of Syria. That echoes a recent Pentagon RAND report calling for the permanent partition of Syria by Turkey, Syrian “opposition” and US.

Israeli intelligence, in a recent annual evaluation, concluded that Hezbollah was not interested in sparking a war in 2017, but it warned of the danger of a “dynamic of escalation” leading to conflict. The Times of Israel also reports that the Netanyahu government has drawn up something codenamed Operation Safe Distance in which “up to 250,000 civilians cleared out of border communities if they come under major attack by…Hezbollah.” That “dynamic of escalation” appears to be precisely what Netanyahu’s IDF is engaged in in the Golan Heights.

The next act in the clearly staged Netanyahu Golan Heights drama aimed at isolating Russia as defender of the Assad Syrian regime, was the illegal air strike by Israeli air force F-16 jets against a major site outside Damascus, Syria. Israel claimed the site was a Hezbollah weapons depot. Some hours alter on March 19 an Israeli drone hit a vehicle in the Golan Heights carrying Yasser al-Sayed who was killed on the spot. Sayed was reportedly a commander of a pro-regime militia and was close to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Bashar al-Assad responded to the Israeli strikes inside Syria by firing S-200 missiles at the Israeli air force planes.

When an Israeli Arrow air defense missile intercepted the Syrian SA-5 missile fired against the invading Israeli Air Force jets as they left Syria, Israel’s Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman declared to the press, Israel “will not hesitate” to destroy Syria’s air defense systems if that country ever again targets IAF jet fighters. That of course would bring Russia, provider of the Syrian air defense systems, into the developing fray., openly close to the Israeli military and Israeli intelligence, is claiming that Yasser al-Sayed was “on his way to join the Hezbollah forces” grouping at the Lebanon-Syria Golan Heights, under Iranian direction, preparing for a full war on Israel. DebkaFile writes, “Israel can be expected to intervene again to put a stop to this dangerous Russian-Iranian-Hezbollah ploy to exploit the turbulence in Syria for allowing Israel’s enemies to grab forward assault positions in Syria.”

A Revealing Moshe Dayan admission

Israel is carefully setting the propaganda stage that will now let it claim that a coalition of Russia, Iran, Syria and Hezbollah are preparing to forcefully retake the Syrian Golan Heights from the illegal Israeli occupiers. It’s a tried and tested Israeli IDF method of provoking an opponent, here Syria, then using the opponent’s predictable reaction to provocation as pretext for military strikes that escalate a confrontation they, the IDF, initiated in the first place.

In an off-record discussion with an Israeli journalist in 1976 before his death, Israeli General Moshe Dayan, who gave the order in the 1967 War to take the Golan Heights, admitted that it was deliberate Israeli provocations into Syrian Golan lands that gave Israel the manufactured pretext to invade and occupy.

Dayan told that to journalist Rami Tal, who kept his notes secret for 21 years until persuaded after Dayan’s death by Dayan’s daughter and others that it was important to publish the Dayan admission. The Israeli journalist wrote that when Tal claimed to Dayan that the Golan Heights were vital for Israeli security, Dayan interrupted him: “Never mind that. After all, I know how at least 80 percent of the clashes there started…It went this way: We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn’t possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn’t shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance farther, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that’s how it was.”

Today a similar provocation game is clearly in motion with provocative illegal Israeli jet strikes near Damascus and drone attacks in Golan Heights. The new element this time is the decided more Israel-friendly stance of the Trump Administration compared to that of Obama.

But there is another element Dayan was not aware of in the Syrian Golan Heights. What no one is openly discussing is the treasure that Israel’s Netanyahu is lusting after in the Golan Heights–Oil, huge, recently-discovered reserves of black gold in the Golan Heights.

Genie Energy and Golan Oil

The Israeli subsidiary of a Newark, New Jersey oil company, Genie Energy, has been given permission to drill for oil on the Golan Heights.

As I noted in a piece published on NEO in 2015, Genie Energy is no “penny stock” run-of-the-mill oil company. Its board of Advisors includes Dick Cheney. It includes former CIA head and chairman of the above-mentioned Foundation for Defense of Democracies, James Woolsey. It includes Jacob Lord Rothschild of the London banking dynasty and a former business partner of convicted Russian oil oligarch, Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Before his arrest Khodorkovsky secretly transferred his shares in Yukos Oil to Rothschild.

Further this little-known Newark, New Jersey oil company board includes former US Energy Secretary Bill Richardson, pro-Israel media mogul and owner of Trump’s favorite Fox News TV, Rupert Murdoch. Also on the board are former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers and hedge fund billionaire Michael Steinhardt. Steinhardt, a philanthropic friend of Israel and of Marc Rich, is also a board member of Woolsey’s neo-con Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, which advises Trump among other things that it would be good for Washington to recognize Israel as legitimate owner of the Golan Heights lands taken by Dayan in the 1967 War.

The plot thickens indeed.

Genie Energy, tied to Netanyahu, to Trump, to a reportedly huge oil find in the illegally-occupied Syrian Golan Heights. Something very ugly is being brewed between Washington and Tel Aviv and Newark, New Jersey.

Genie Energy in 2013 was granted exclusive oil and gas exploration rights to a 153-square mile radius in the southern part of the Golan Heights by the Netanyahu government.

On October 8, 2015 only days after the surprise Russian announcement it had accepted the request of the elected Bashar al-Assad government to militarily intervene against ISIS, Al Qaeda and other terrorists in Syria, Genie Energy made a major announcement. Yuval Bartov, chief geologist from Genie Energy’s Israeli subsidiary, Afek Oil & Gas, told Israel’s Channel 2 TV that his company had found a major oil reservoir on the Golan Heights: “We’ve found an oil stratum 350 meters thick in the southern Golan Heights. On average worldwide, strata are 20 to 30 meters thick, and this is 10 times as large as that, so we are talking about significant quantities.”

On January 10, 2017, Genie Energy Ltd. announced it was creating a new company, Atid Drilling Ltd., an on-shore drilling services venture based in Israel to drill for oil in the Golan Heights among other places. They will expand the drilling by Genie Energy’s subsidiary Afek Oil & Gas which since the October, 2015 announcement has completed five exploratory wells in Golan Heights.

The creation of Atid Drilling by Genie confirms they are convinced based on the preliminary drilling results that there is something “big” in Golan. A month later, in mid-February soon after Trump is sworn in as President, Netanyahu flies to Washington to discuss US recognition of Israel’s annexation of Golan Heights.

A few weeks later, Israel violates the Syrian airspace in an act of war, escalating tensions over the Golan Heights. Then on March 22, in an appearance before the US Senate Defense Appropriations Committee, Defense Secretary James Mattis called for Congress to formally authorize use of US military force against ISIS/DAESH in Syria.

It is becoming increasingly clear than unless there is some very careful rethinking on the part of Washington and of Israel, we might find ourselves in another war for oil in of all places the Golan Heights, this one a war involving Syria, Russia, Iran, Lebanon’s Hezbollah on one side and Israel and Rex Tillerson’s 68 nation “anti-ISIS coalition” on the other side, another senseless war over control of oil.


READ MORE SYRIA NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Syria Files

SYRIA: Washington’s Kurdish Pawns in the Geopolitical Chess Tournament

pawn 22

Sarah Abed
21st Century Wire

The situation in the North East of Syria regarding the Kurds seems to be a topic of confusion for most. Understandably so as they have been made to appear by US politicians and news outlets as the most effective fighters against terrorism in Syria. 

Although they have in fact been successful in driving out terrorists in some areas there is information that needs to be discussed that explains the other half of the story that is purposely hidden in the Kurdish and mainstream media news outlets.  We have only been hearing from the Kurdish side now it’s time for the Syrians in Kurdish held areas to have their chance to tell us about the hardships they have been put under by the Kurds.

I have been actively collecting information and conducting interviews with Syrians who live in Kurdish held areas since 2015. Some reached out to me in hopes that their message will reach the West. They have read what the Kurdish and Western mainstream media news says about the situation in their area and are disheartened that the truth is not being told.

As a Syrian American who was born in Al Qamishly and having experienced living there before the war I felt it was my moral obligation to make sure their voices were being heard. In this article, the second in a series, that focuses on the situation in the lesser known and often mis-reported North East of Syria we will discuss in more detail how life has changed for Syrians due to the Kurds taking on an illegal leadership role in the area.

three flags
Netanyahu: Israel supports Iraqi Kurds’ ambition of independence

Treatment of non-Kurds by the minority Kurd population in Al Hasaka (also referred to as Hasaka) governorate is unethical and criminal. 

The minority Kurd population in Qamishly treats the majority non-Kurd population poorly. They are trying to impose their will on everyone by force. They pretty much have the Hasaka governorate under their control and those that oppose them are usually driven out of their homes. They are monopolizing everything for themselves trying to maintain self-Governance. They are placing unqualified people in positions of power, there is no law whatsoever to control the area.

They are willing to take anyone who agrees to fight with them, even if they are criminals they get them out of jail immediately so that they can grow their army.  PKK fighters were brought into Syria from the Qandil Mountains in Turkey and made managers and heads of institutions in the Hasaka governorate. They are very authoritative and Syrians fear them. Kurds differentiate and provide better treatment to the Yazidi and Kurds that are displaced in Syrian than the Syrian Arabs. All passages from Turkey and North Iraq are under Kurdish control.

The Syrian government condemns separatist Kurdish ambitions and vows to keep Syria united as one country.

Washington sponsored state of Kurdistan ~ Global Research

Lately, Kurds have been more vocal about their desire to create a federation. The areas they want to claim are Al-Malkiya to Efrin, the entire border line with Turkey including Al-Malkiya, Qamishli, Hassaka, Ein Arab, Al-bab, Efrin, in addition to the rural villages.  They have also mentioned that if they are able to liberate Al Raqqah they will add that to their federation.  As can be seen in their SDF insignia. The USA’s support to the SDF as was mentioned, in more detail, in the first article, has had a negative impact on Syrians and infringed on their sovereignty. USA is preparing to build a second military base in Syria at Tel-Baidar.

First article published at 21st Century Wire: Washington’s Greater Middle East Project – Hand in Hand with Israel

The NATO-aligned Kurdish minority corrupts the Syrian educational system.

Education which was once an area of pride for the Hasaka region has now become one of the worst catastrophe’s as a result of the Kurds.  They have imposed a new school curriculum unaccredited by the Syrian State. Almost all government schools are now under Kurdish control. Kurds are teaching Kurdi in all of the nongovernment elementary schools, next year they will implement this in all middle schools under their control and the following year their plan is to implement this in high schools as well.

Syrians in Kurdish areas are not able to study in Kurdi and have either pulled their children out of the Kurdi schools or send their children to Syriac schools which have limited space, at the moment they have 1,800 students. The only other option is to send their children to schools that are government held but farther away from their homes. Even Kurdish teachers are struggling with teaching the Kurdi curriculum. There is one private University Qurtuba in the Hasaka region.

 Illegal Western sanctions are benefitting the un-elected Kurdish minority that is imposing its undemocratic will on the community.

All daily activities are monitored by the Kurds. Social life in general has seen a drastic decline. Before the war the streets were bustling with movement and music. Restaurants were opened on every corner. Now people are afraid of assembling for fear of being targeted by terrorists. An example of this took place in Al Qamishly when a restaurant was targeted by a suicide bomber in December 2015 and at least 16 people were killed. Kurds demanding federalism make up 30% of population. Churches and mosques are practicing their religious rituals quite normally. I wrote about a specific Syriac church that one of the individuals I interviewed goes to every Sunday and also included pictures in this article

Living in isolation

The general consensus of Syrians in the Hasaka area is that they feel isolated from the rest of the country. They feel that Syrians in other parts of the country do not know much about their living conditions. The only way to travel outside of the Hasaka region is via plane.  The airport in Al Qamishly is operating, but until about a year ago it was simply too expensive for the average citizen to travel via air. An airplane ticket from Al Qamishly to Damascus reached 80,000 Syrian Pounds (3 times the average salary in the country) which would equate to about $160 USD. About a year ago, two new airlines started operating in Syria, so the price decreased and it became more affordable but is still out of many people’s budget.

Efforts to balkanize Syria are increasing the displacement of Syrians and causing Christians to flee Syria

Migration has become a major issue. Just this past month, more than 80 Christian families have left Qamishli, Al-Malikiya and Al-Qahtaniya. Most of those families took asylum in Belgium, Australia and Sweden, and most likely they will not return as long as the situation in the country unstable, said Samir one of my contacts in Al Qamishly . Al-Malkiya is almost empty of Christians now. It is estimated that 50% of Hasaka Christians have left; the majority of those who have left to Turkey were Christians (different ethnicities). Also a fair number of Kurds also left to Turkey.

Concluding remarks:

Imperialists are instrumentalizing the Kurdish minority to balkanize Syria, to destroy its nation-state self-determination, to destroy its sovereignty, and to destroy its territorial integrity.  These violations derogate international law, and undermine world peace, prosperity, and democracy.

Whereas the Syrian government and its allies are aligned with the forces of international and national law and order, the West and its allies — including all of the terrorists in Syria, and a minority of the Kurdish population – continue to be perpetrators of the highest crimes according to Nuremburg principles.

If the West succeeds in carving out a part of Syria, ostensibly to serve Kurdish interests, more Western military installations will be built on Syrian soil, and the Kurds will soon discover that their new polity, in whatever form it may take, will become a corrupt stooge “government” at the service of Empire.

Sarah Abed is a Syrian American independent investigative political commentator who focuses on exposing the lies and propaganda in mainstream media news and social media. She is a truth advocate who uses her social media accounts and website The Rabbit Hole to counter the fictitious stories and allegations that are part of a well-funded, highly intellectual, emotionally driven media campaign against Syria. Her goal is to help end the war in Syria by educating the masses. She has spoken on radio shows and contributed to news publications.

This article was first published at Global Research.

READ MORE SYRIA NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Syria Files

America, the World’s Public Enemy Number One – An Interview with Dr. Gary Brumback

Mohsen Abdelmoumen: How do you explain the long history of US interventionism? What is your analysis?

Dr. Gary Brumback: “Interventionism” is a very appropriate term.  It covers a lot of territory, and that is exactly what America has been doing even before she became a nation 240 years ago. The US is a habitual interventionist. Domestically it is in the form of fascism, or a police state, that treads on human rights. Internationally, it is in the form of militaristic imperialism. In either form the intervention is always exploitative of the weak and powerless, often violent, destructive, and deadly (countless millions of people in many lands have been killed directly and indirectly by US overt and covert wars).

The roots of US interventionism can be traced to the American Revolution and its antecedents (e.g., importing slaves from Africa). The plutocrats who were soon to be enthroned as our “founding fathers” wanted to replace the rule by King George and his own corpocracy (e.g., his East Indies Corporation) with their own home-grown version of American corpocracy, which I refer to as the Devil’s marriage between powerful corporations and government that quickly became corrupted by, indebted to and thus controlled by corporate America.

Those “founding fathers” by the way, rather than being idolized should be condemned instead. An objective review of history reveals them to be “greedy, hypocritical elites who—set out to put in place a government that would ‘weaken the many and empower the few’” (quote is from a New Yorker review of the book, American Revolution by Alan Taylor). Precisely! That government started out and has always been for corporate America, not for the people. Moreover, America’s corpocracy should be regarded as “public enemy number one,” enemy of the American people and of the world (world opinion sees the US as the greatest threat to world peace).

“Founding fathers”, rather than being idolized should be condemned instead.

There undoubtedly would never be any US interventionism, at least the unfriendly, violent kind, therefore, without the corpocracy and its five elements; the power elite, the courtiers and ideologues, the functionaries, and active accomplices. Inactive accomplices are another element, but outside the corpocracy.

The population of the power elite is infinitesimally small compared to the total US population. The power elite comprises leaders of most industries (especially defense/war and related industries) and their major trade associations, major financial institutions (behind every war is a bankster); leaders of mainstream media corporations; the US President and chairs of war related Congressional committees; military leaders, and key members of the shadow government (e.g. the CIA); and the US Supreme Court—yes, even the latter is a pawn of corporate America.

The courtiers and ideologues are influential advisors and zealous boosters such as The Defense Policy Board, the Brookings Institute, and the National Endowment for Democracy that recently called for the US to oust Russia’s President Vladimir Putin.

The functionaries are the millions of people in government and industry who carry out the everyday dirty business of interventionism, including continuous overt and covert war activities.

Active accomplices are individuals, organizations or groups that give assistance to war-related activities. They give intentional (rarely acknowledge) assistance in some form or another. They include investors in corporate America; most nongovernmental organizations that feed off of government and corporate funding; the “behavior shapers” (e.g., hawkish think tanks; hawkish religious leaders; educators; PR firms; journalists); certain professions, especially the legal profession; and many physical and social sciences (e.g., the recent active support by the leadership of the American Psychological Association in the torturing of Guantanamo prisoners).

Inactive accomplices are the “innocent” or silent bystanders” of America who never in any meaningful way speak out against or actively protest the corpocracy, especially its war making. During my career, I am ashamed to say, I was basically part of this element, keeping my protests mostly muted.

My answer so far does not really explain the behavior of the people inside the corpocracy. Why, for instance, do real people of the power elite do what they do? Long ago I developed a nonmathematical equation to explain human behavior. Filling in both sides of the equation explains the corpocracy’s members’ behavior very well. I will illustrate its use in answering the third question.

Are the United States a State or is it a war machine controlled by the military-industrial complex? 

The US is a corpocracy controlled mostly by corporate America, not its government lackey. The military-industrial complex is a major part of the corpocracy when it comes to rattling sabers and conducting overt and covert wars.

What good is a president in the United States if the real decision-maker is the military-industrial complex?

All but two presidents in the history of the US have been “warriors-in-chiefs” (the two died shortly after entering office).  None of them has been a “solo” decision maker, and some more than others have been more acquiescent to the rest of the power elite. President Obama, for instance, is considered by some observers to be the ”biggest puppet” of all presidents. JFK was probably the least acquiescent as he learned more about the machinations of his shadow government, and that revelation and his defiance of the CIA cost him his life (there is for me convincing evidence that he was assassinated according to a CIA scheme cooked up by CIA Director Allen Dulles and others).

In my book, America’s Oldest Professions: Warring and Spying, I examine the human equations of the two most recent warriors-in-chiefs, Bush and Obama. The right side of that equation has two parts, behavior and its consequences. We know all too well the details about their behavior, including their decisions and their consequences. Let’s turn briefly to the two inputs on the equation’s left side, the person and the person’s situations, and list them for President Obama, starting with Obama the person. The abundant evidence to back up the list is cited in my book.

Obama the person: a) male, as have been all of his predecessors, and males tend to be the more domineering and aggressive gender; b) his background; Obama’s parents were allegedly on the CIA payroll, and that agency reportedly “financed his college education and gave him his first job afterwards, and once in the Oval Office is quoted as having said the “CIA gets whatever it wants;” and c) his personality; ambitious; morally unprincipled; narcissistic; psychopathic (an attribute found in all US presidents); close-minded; his belief that America is an exceptional country; and egotistical.

Obama’s situation: a) his seductive position as President; b) the enormous, weighty size of government; c) its hierarchical organizational structure that makes ignoble decisions easier; d) its pathological organizational culture and that of society at large (e.g., male domineering, jingoistic patriotism) e) upside-down incentives (e.g., he’s rewarded rather than being prosecuted for his drone bombings); f) best or worst of times (he can use either to help justify what he does); g) global enticements (e.g., all that oil to be seized); and finally h) the corpocracy that engulfs and pressures him.

It is clearly and abundantly obvious from the two lists that Obama, like all human beings, is not solely responsible for what he does. One of my sayings is that “it takes two to wrong do” (i.e., the two categories of inputs). But not being solely responsible should not immunize him, or any other human being, from being accountable for wrong doing of any kind.

You constantly pull the alarm bell in your writings, for example in your book The Devil’s Marriage: Break Up the Corpocracy or Leave Democracy in the Lurch where you do a damning conclusion. Don’t we live the total bankruptcy of the capitalist system and its highest stage imperialism and what is in your opinion the real alternative to this moribund system?

Actually, I wrote my most “damming conclusions” in a chapter entitled “America’s Future: Brighter or Bleaker” for my follow up book, America’s Oldest Professions. After listing over 30 “sadtistics” depicting what the corpocracy has inflicted on humanity domestically and internationally over the years (e.g., spiraling poverty, unemployment, endless wars and other destructive and deadly interventions), I describe five possible future scenarios for America if the corpocracy continues its ruinous path: 1) a failed state and beyond; 2) armed revolution (which I never have endorsed because our militarized police and army would pulverize it and because violence is never a viable or morally right alternative); 3) escalating blowbacks from enemies the US has created; 4) global calamities of one form or another such as climate catastrophe, and finally 5) and I do mean “finally,” Armageddon. The five are not necessarily mutually exclusive or sequential.

I have written copiously concerning your question about our living in a capitalistic system and what I see as a viable alternative. In the Devil’s Marriage, for example, I propose in considerable detail an alternative form of capitalism that I refer to as “socially responsible capitalism.” The putative “father” of capitalism, Adam Smith, was a moral philosopher who would have recoiled at the very idea of the corpocracy and its capitalism, for he thought the emerging corporations of his time posed threats emanating from their unlimited life span; unlimited size; unlimited power; and unlimited license. The right kind of capitalism would be far better than a state controlled economy, or socialism.

You say in your writings that the United States is a fascist state. Is there currently a Government in the West that can claim to be democratic? Is it not rather a plutocracy that governs the United States and their Western allies?

There are indeed some Western countries that are democratic, not corpocratic. Iceland and the Scandinavian countries would certainly qualify. My family and I recently visited Iceland, for instance, and I was so impressed that I wrote an article published in several venues entitled, “Iceland, an Exemplary Nation in a Troubled World.” I compared the virtues of Iceland to the vices of America (see, e.g., Dissident Voice, August 19; OpEdNews, August 20; The Greanville Post, August 24; or Uncommon Thought Journal, August 24, 2016). In her marvelous book The Real Wealth of Nations that I relied on extensively in writing The Devil’s Marriage, Riane Eisler writes about the high quality of life in the “Nordic Nations.”

My answer to the second part of your second question is that the plutocracy you mention basically defines America’s corpocracy.

How do you explain the very low level of the debates between the candidates Trump and Clinton to the election of the presidency of United States? Doesn’t we attend to a reality TV of which the main actor is Hillary Clinton?

My answer to the first part of your question is that the “low level of the debates” is entirely expected because of the low level of the candidates. As for the second part, reality TV does indeed play into the hands of “Killery.”

Why in your opinion the neocons and various powerful lobbies such as AIPAC and the military-industrial complex do they want at all costs to see Hillary Clinton in the White House when she has health problems and even mental health problems ?

They want Killery because she caters to them, whatever her health condition may be.

Why Western policymakers continue to regard Russia as an enemy?

The corpocracy, especially its military-industrial complex, needs enemies in order to profit and grow. Russia, which actually defeated Hitler, not the US, has been the US foil since the end of WWII. Truman dropped the atomic bombs on Japan to scare Russia. Think about that for a moment. The only head of state to ever drop nuclear bombs on populated areas was a US president, and it was totally unnecessary. Japan would have surrounded without Truman’s nihilistic act and he knew it.

How do you explain the uniformity of mainstream media, their conformism and submission to the empire? This can it be explained only by the influence of money on the media?

The mainstream media are firstly the mouth piece of their owners, a hand full of big corporations, and secondly of government propaganda. That perfectly explains why mainstream media dupe the general public daily.

Do you think the alternative media are an asset in the fight against the Empire?

Yes, but it is a limited asset. They give objective reports and analyses, but they don’t as far as I know, try to instigate initiatives to end the endless imperialistic interventionism.

In front of the ultra liberal offensive, how do you explain the lack of a serious response of the progressive movements worldwide?

I don’t know what an ultra liberal offensive is. Political labels don’t have any consistent and clear meaning. As for progressive movements, there has never been a movement of any kind in America that succeeded in accomplishing a significant goal. The anti-Vietnam war movement, for instant, was not the real cause of US ending the war. Moreover, the government cleverly ended the draft so there would be no more antiwar movements of any significance.

Are we immune to a total war?

We are absolutely not immune to a total war, nuclear or non nuclear. To the contrary, we are the primary cause of war. Moreover, there are wise pundits who seriously believe the US is edging toward a nuclear with Russia by constantly provoking Russia.

Interview realized by Mohsen Abdelmoumen


Who is Dr. Gary Brumback?

Gary Brumback, PhD is a retired psychologist and Fellow of both the American Psychological Association and the Association for Psychological Science. He is the author of numerous books, the most relevant of which for this interview article are The Devil’s Marriage: Break Up the Corpocracy or Leave Democracy in the Lurch(; America’s Oldest Professions: Warring and Spying (; and Corporate Reckoning Ahead  (

 His website:


Tillerson in Turkey: Assad doesn’t have to go

The timing of Rex Tillerson’s visit to Turkey says as much as the statement itself.

If there was a Nobel Prize for hypocrisy, Turkey Foreign Minister Mevut Cavusoglu just won it. Speaking along side American Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in Ankara, Cavusoglu  said,

“It is not good or realistic to work with a terrorist group while fighting another terrorist group”.

The irony is that Turkey claims to be fighting terrorism in Syria and they are doing so by funding, arming and fighting alongside jihadist FSA terrorists. The terrorist group that the Turkish Foreign Minister had in mind is the  Kurdish YPG who are currently fighting as part of the strongly US backed SDF in Syria. Turkey and America are at a serious crossroads over the Kurds, with America seeing them as important allies and Turkey viewing them as dangerous terrorists.

In addition to desiring regime change in Damascus, Turkey’s other main goal and more recently their primary goal, has been to fight Kurdish forces in Syria. Things have reached critical mass as under Donald Trump, America now virtually exclusively backs Kurdish led forces in Syria, having given up on the Salifist jihdists favoured by both Obama and Turkish President Erdogan.

In spite of this tension, Tillerson said,

“There’s no space between Turkey and the US and our commitment to defeat Daesh(ISIS)”.

Tillerson also affirmed that the US and Turkey are strong NATO partners who are unified in the war against terrorism.

This statement is patently untrue not only because of Turkey’s avowed support for the terrorist group FSA, but also because Erdogan still blames the US and Gulenist forces in America, including Fethullah Gülen himself, for orchestrating the failed Turkish coup in 2016.

This all comes as Turkey’s National Security Council claimed that Operation Euphrates Shield, the code name for Turkey’s illegal invasion and occupation of Syria has been successfully completed.

The timing of Turkey’s ‘mission accomplished’ statement and Tillerson’s visit may not be coincidental. In spite of Turkey’s differences with the United States, it was clear that Turkey was an obstacle to the US objective using Kurdish forces to form a peace settlement in Syria. Given the timing, it looks increasingly likely, that someone in Washington phoned someone in Ankara and told Turkey to end Euphrates Shield.

Perhaps most interestingly of all, Tillerson said that the future of President Assad can only be decided by the Syrian people. This is as clear an indication as any, that under President Trump, the US has fully abandoned the ‘Assad must go’ mantra which guided Barack Obama’s Syrian policy.

In between the lines of hypocrisy, this statement is one of the most important developments yet in the still deeply shrouded foreign policy of Donald Trump.


SYRIA: Washington’s ‘Greater’ Middle East Project – Hand in Hand with Israel


Sarah Abed & Mark Taliano
Global Research

The US-led coalition of war criminals is using elements of Syria’s Kurdish population to achieve the U.S Empire’s goal of destroying the non-belligerent, democratic country of Syria, led by its hugely popular, democratically-elected President, Bashar al-Assad. 

Empire seeks to create sectarianism and ethnic divides in a country that, prior to the Western-launched criminal dirty war, had neither.

President al-Assad is well aware of the imperial forces behind the mercenaries invading his country. In a speech to the newly elected members of the People’s Assembly of Syria (Syria’s Parliament) on 7 June 2016, he elaborated upon the modus operandi of the invaders:

• They seek to attack the constitution by means of a so-called “transition” stage.

• They seek to destroy the two pillars of the government: the army and the diverse, national, pan-Arab and religious identity of Syrians.

• They seek to rebrand the savage terrorists as “moderates” and then to eternally provide them with a cover of legitimacy.

• They seek to create chaos, sectarianism, and ethnic enclaves that turn the people’s commitment from the homeland to conflicting groups that seek help from foreigners against their own people.

• They seek to be branded as “humanitarian” and “protectors” to save the people from (externally engineered) conflict and misery.

plane and liberty

By imposing economic and armed terrorism on Syrians, by waging a phony war against their own terrorist proxies (including ISIS and al Qaeda), by creating sectarian and ethnic tensions, and by destroying Syria’s infrastructure — including water and electrical infrastructure — the Western, Zionist, and GCC agencies of terrorism seek to be perceived as saviours, humanitarians and protectors, who can then introduce the “free market” of international capital, which will be the coup de grâce to effect the final destruction of the host country. And mainstream fake news provides the criminal warmongers with on-going, 24/7 cover to commit their war crimes.

Syrian-American Sarah Abed, was born in Al Qamishly and has lived in both the USA and Syria throughout her life. She makes frequent trips back and forth. Sarah is in direct daily contact with family and friends that reside in different parts of Syria. Sarah conducted and translated an interview with a close family friend, “Samir”, who lives in Syria and is well informed about the conditions on the ground.

Samir’s commentaries are consistent with President Assad’s assessment of the Imperialists’ strategy of “divide and conquer”:

Picture taken by Samir sent directly to Sarah Abed, for exclusive use in articles. March 2017 showing the streets of Al Qamishly which is where the Kurds are trying to establish their capital.

Question: What was life like in Al Hasaka prior to the launch of the dirty war on Syria?

Answer: Life was great. The diversity was a positive attribute to the area. Al Hasaka is influenced by the Turkish, Syrian, and Kurdish cultures. You would see Turkish soap operas on local TV. , hear Turkish music, along with Merdali, and other types in the streets, blaring from the speakers of cars. I used to go to the music shops and pick up the latest Turkish songs. There were many restaurants, hospitals, hotels, and outdoor parks. Kurds had assimilated into the culture. They were considered Syrian citizens. Many of the Christians had family in Sweden. They would come for the summer.  There were good relations between all of the different ethnicities and religious affiliations. It was hard to distinguish who was who in the streets. There was a bustling social life and people were generally content with their lives.

Question: Did the Kurds have equal opportunities for education, healthcare, and work?

Answer: Since the 19th century when most of the Kurds came into Syria there was a peaceful coexistence. Kurds lived and interacted with Muslim and Christian Syrians. Yes, they had equal rights in every sector. They attended schools with the Syrian government approved Arabic curriculum.  They had access to free education, free healthcare, must like their Syrian counterparts. They were in fact Syrian Kurds and were not treated any differently.

Question: Are the people in Al-Hasaka well educated?  Well informed?

Answer: Yes, they were considered to be among  the most educated people in Syria. They are also very conscious of what is happening in their country as well as abroad. Education was very important and they took pride in it.  Many had completed college.  Kurds represent about 30% of the population in the Al-Hasaka governorate.

us led coalition
“On February 3, the coalition’s aviation destroyed four bridges: two in Raqqa and two in the settlements of El-Calta and El-Abbara. As a result of these actions, the communication between the northern and southern parts of the city, with over 200 thousand inhabitants, has been completely interrupted. On February 18, a bridge in El Megle was completely destroyed in the vicinity of the city of Maadan, 60 kilometers east of Raqqa,” ~ Sputnik

Question:  How does the rest of the population feel about Kurdish aspirations for independence from Syria?

Answer:  Syrians are not entirely surprised by these recent demands by the Kurds for autonomy. They are however upset by it. Syrians feel that the Kurds were allowed to come in and have lived in Syria for centuries and were treated fairly therefore the need to now take a part of the country and claim it as their own federation is quite frankly an insult to the hospitality they were shown. They feel as though the Kurds are being unappreciative and are only looking out for their own interest and not taking into account the Syrians that live in the area. Kurds are the minority yet their demands for autonomy and to take over the areas  that they have alleged are now their property is very unfair to Syrians in the area. Kurds moved into Syria and called it home, but now they are acting like the Syrians in their areas are living in their federation and need to abide by their rules and share their views and follow their commands or else they will be driven out of their homes. This is a very harsh and criminal way to treat others. Lest we forget that  Kurds are ultimately nomads and their alliance lies with Israel.

Question: Do all Kurds in the area want independence from Syria?

Answer: In the beginning of the war the Kurds fought alongside the Syrian army, they were paid, armed, and trained by the SAA. When the USA came in and basically created the SDF Syrian Democratic Forces that’s when the Kurds became more adamant about wanting independence and autonomy.  This is a very important point that needs to be made clear, The USA’s involvement in Syria led to the Kurds demanding autonomy.  Had the US military not given them weapons, training, armed vehicles, and most likely paid them wages as well there is a good chance that the Kurds would not have made these demands. Not all Kurds want independence but those who speak up against it  are silenced and told to not say anything or else they will be sent out of the country. They have received threats that saying anything negative about the Kurdish desires for autonomy will have negative consequences.

Question: Why do they want independence?  Did Assad government not treat them well?  Did the U.S government promise support and democracy and other lies?

Answer: They have always wanted to establish Kurdistan, that has been a life- long desire of theirs stemming from centuries ago. They are originally nomads that moved into countries such as Syria, Iraq, Turkey but their origins are in Iran. It was brought up from time to time but recently it has been discussed more openly and adamantly. It has now become a demand and one they will stop at nothing to achieve. This is quite problematic and many people in the region are waiting to see how this will unfold. It is surely a battle, the end results are unknown. The Kurds were treated well and did not have any issues with the Syrian Government. They had equal rights, free education, free healthcare like the rest of the Syrians.   Many do not have a passport which makes traveling legally an issue but it doesn’t seem to be a big concern for them.

Question: How have the illegal Western sanctions on Syria impacted the Al-Hasaka area?

Answer: The illegal sanctions have had a detrimental affect on the entire country. Due to its location in the North East of the country at times it felt like the Hasaka province was cut off from the rest of Syria. It was not receiving any sort of shipments from the other parts of Syria and had to rely on goods coming in from Iraq that were originally made in Turkey and Iran such as food, oil, rice, sugar, sanitary products, children’s items such as diapers and formula. At some points during the war the only thing they were receiving from inside of the country was Medicine coming from Damascus, even this was cut off during certain periods. Medical concerns and issues have multiplied and caring for illnesses and health conditions has become a big concern. It is both very expensive and also very difficult to find medicine and items such as infant formula. Another concern is that medical equipment has now become outdated and most of the machines do not work. Spare parts to repair them are unavailable. Most people with severe health conditions have had to move out of the area. The price of everything has multiplied. In 2015-2016 people had to rely on whatever products, food, healthcare, medicine, and everyday products that were already in the stores.. nothing else was being brought in. The demand was still there but the supply was dwindling and that of course caused severe economic turmoil and inflation.  Another issue related to the sanctions is that right now there are no exports from Syria, which in turn made the price of the dollar rise which then had a negative effect on everything else. For instance the price of infant formula had reached 5,000 syp which is about 10x what it was worth before.. some people were stating they are willing to pay 10,000 syp for a few days of formula but even that was difficult to locate in the stores. For the past few months they have been receive more medicine.

Question: What do other people in the governorate think about the Mandatory Self-Defence Duty and the prospect of killing Syrian soldiers?

Answer: In Al Qamishly they have had a few conflicts between the SAA and the Kurdish soldiers.  The last one was nine months ago and it lasted for four days. Right now they are not having any issues, but there is tension and it could break out into a fight at any time.  Last time they killed four Syrian soldiers, and at that time there were Arabs who said they would no longer fight against the Syrian army, and they gave up their weapons and left the SDF. They refused to fight against the Syrian soldiers.

When they are taking over new areas they are forcing the people in the new area to fight along with them.  There were a few families in the villages that refused to fight along with them and they kicked them out of the villages and claimed that their homes now belong to the Kurds and they are not to return and claim their properties in the future.

SAA Hasakah
“Tensions erupted between pro-government forces and Kurdish groups in Hasaka on Tuesday, leading to the most significant violence between the sides since several days of fighting in Qamishli in April.” ~ Reuters 18/8/2016 (Photo: Press TV)

Question: What happens if citizens refuse to fight the SAA? Are they threatened?

Answer: See above yes, they were given an ultimatum either fight with us or you will be forced to leave and forfeit their properties. Usually they would then move to other villages or the city where they are not forced to fight alongside the Kurds.  Once you start fighting with them, you are forced to fight whoever they need you to fight against and that includes the Syrian Army. You become trapped and ordered to follow their commands

Question: Do some people have no option?  (ie fight against Syria or starve? Fight or go to jail? )

Answer: As mentioned previously yes, the ultimatum is either fight with us or you will relinquish your property and move out of town. They have already done this numerous times.

Question: Which country is paying the Kurdish soldier wages?  How do they receive payment? Are they paid better than SAA soldiers?

Answer: Initially when they were fighting alongside the SAA it was the Syrian government that was paying their wages. Then the USA got involved and they formed the Syrian Democratic Forces on October 10th 2015.  Right now we are not certain who is paying their wages,  but it is rumoured that the U.S is the one providing them with money since we know that they are providing them with weapons, training and  armoured vehicles.

 Question: Are some of the Kurdish leaders criminals?

Answer: Many of the local leaders didn’t hold any titles or ranks before the war, they didn’t have any army or political experience.  They were not educated or well to do and most of them were in fact troublemakers with prior criminal convictions. These are on the local level. A differentiation needs to be made between the local leaders and their followers and the ones that came from Qandal Moutains in Turkey. On the local level yes they were smugglers and it’s been said that some are in the drug business. They loitered and stole items from the shops and homes in the areas they took control over. They were considered thugs. The ones that are coming from Qandal mountains have political and military experience.

Question: Can you tell us about the SDF?

Answer: First, I want to say that it’s not what the USA is trying to make it out to seem. The USA needed to support a group of people in Syria that did not have direct ties to terrorist groups. They did this after their union with the Free Syrian Army and “moderate rebels” fell through when it became clear that these were nothing less than terrorists and had ties to Al Qaeda and Daesh. The allies of SDF are the USA, France, UK, and a number of other smaller groups. Their headquarters is in AlQamishly. They state that they have about 50,000 fighters but we are unsure of that. They are mostly Kurdish and recently just a few days ago a large number of fighters defected from the SDF. They are led by the People’s Protection Units (YPG) and their goal is to create their own federation in the NE of Syria.  There are US forces embedded with the SDF forces. The Pentagon confirmed the arms, ammunition, rifles, mortars, and ammunition it sent to them. The USA is heavily funding them and recently stated that they would continue to train and equip forces of the Manbij Military council.

The SDF flag. “During the SDF’s late summer 2016 Western al-Bab offensive against ISIL, the U.S. Air Force provided close combat support for SDF forces. Late September 2016, the U.S. spokesman for the Combined Joint Task Force – Operation Inherent Resolve (CJTF–OIR) confirmed that the SDF, including the YPG, is also part of the “vetted forces” in the train and equip program and will be supplied with weapons. ~ Wikipedia


Sarah’s interview with Samir was a process that extended over a period of time, and she has amplified and clarified some of his commentaries.

What is clear is that the US and its allies, in particular Turkey in this case, are committing crimes of aggression against the sovereign state of Syria beneath the Big Lie of combatting terrorism.  The real plan, which is self-evident in this overview of the Kurdish issue, is to divide, conquer, and destroy Syria through economic and armed terrorism.

When a family chooses to leave, terrorists are quick to occupy the house, and to claim ownership.


READ MORE SYRIA NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Syria Files


No Top Position at UN for Palestinians, Says US Envoy

  • Ambassador Nikki Haley accused the UN of being unfairly biased in favor of the Palestinian Authority to the detriment of Israel.

    Ambassador Nikki Haley accused the UN of being unfairly biased in favor of the Palestinian Authority to the detriment of Israel. | Photo: AFP

Published 29 March 2017
“I wanted to let them know that, look, that happened but it will never happen again. The days of Israel-bashing are over,” declared Haley.

According the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations (UN) Nikki Haley, the Donald Trump Administration will not allow any Palestinians to hold high office at the UN until the Palestinian Authority cooperates in peace talks with Israel. Haley made the declaration on Monday, while addressing the annual Policy Conference of the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

US Furious over Another Scathing UN Report on Israeli Abuses

Washington recently blocked the appointment of Salam Fayyad — the Palestinian Authority’s prime minister from 2007 to 2013 — to lead the UN political mission in Libya. Haley accused the UN of being “unfairly biased in favor of the Palestinian Authority to the detriment of our allies in Israel.”

She also added that the Trump Administration was not pleased with the UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’ decision to appoint Fayyad as upcoming UN special representative to Libya. She used this appointment as reference for U.S. opposition to Palestinian officials being given top posts in the UN. “So when they [UN] decided to try and put a Palestinian [Fayyad] in one of the highest positions that had ever been given at the UN, we said no, and we had him booted out. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t a nice man. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t good to America,” Haley explained to AIPAC. “What it means is until the Palestinian Authority comes to the table, until the UN responds the way they’re supposed to, there are no freebies for the Palestinian Authority anymore,” she added.

The envoy firmly stated that the U.S. would not allow “Israel-bashing” at the UN. “I wanted to let them know that, look, that happened but it will never happen again. The days of Israel-bashing are over.” Peace talks to settle the Israel-Palestine conflict have been hampered on several occasions. Last month, Trump said the two-state solution was not the only way to resolve the conflict.


Why Netanyahu Is Upset About UN Security Council Resolution 2334: The Total Illegality of Israel’s Settlements

Members of the world community finally reached a limit witnessing Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. The United Nations Security Council presented a peace offering to Palestinians days before the official birthday of Jesus in what is now occupied Bethlehem: resolution 2334, with a “vision of a region where two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders.” Ironically, the seemingly toothless resolution’s main notoriety comes from Netanyahu’s fury at its passage.

The resolution, which aims to bring a lasting peace to Israelis and Palestinians based on international law, comes at a time when Israel seemed to be in the “mop-up” phase of its theft of Palestinian resources (such as water and gas) and its annexation of whatever it wanted of the Palestinian territories it has occupied since 1967: East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza.

The media censorship of Israel’s brutality towards the Palestinians has made their horrific situation virtually invisible to the western public, allowing Israel to ignore — besides basic human decency — virtually all international laws protecting Palestinian human, civil and property rights.  Israel has been ethnicly cleansing East Jerusalem, which it is trying to annex; it is maintaining apartheid in the occupied West Bank according to the 2012 Russell Tribunal, and committing genocide against Gazans according to the 2013 Kuala Lumpur tribunal.  Despite such findings, Israel’s allies are attempting to criminalize speech critical of Israel or advocating redress.

What the resolution calls for

Resolution 2334 lays out the Security Council’s intention to start diplomatic meetings to create a lasting peace based on “the relevant United Nations’ resolutions, and other peace agreements and initiatives”, along with periodic follow-up reports.  More specifically, resolution 2334 calls for:

Israel to “immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem” because of their illegality;

  the international community to recognize the difference “in its dealings” between Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories;

immediate steps to prevent all violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as acts of provocation and destruction;

calls for accountability in this regard,

both parties to act on the basis of international law, including international humanitarian law… ; and

 efforts aimed at achieving, without delay a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions, and … an end to the Israeli occupation.


The resolution confirms the total illegality of Israel’s settlements; the wording “completely cease all settlement activities” might also be interpreted to mean the dismantling of the settlements.

If Israel refuses to abide by the resolution’s call to end all settlement activity, the Palestinians can pursue cases against Israeli leaders at the International Criminal Court.

By calling for the international community to differentiate between Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories “in its dealings“, the UN is calling for an end to trade agreements(such as Canada’s) that support the financial viability of the settlements by allowing Israel to mislabel products produced in the settlements as from “Israel” in order to facilitate sales and avoid duties.

The call to prevent all violence against civilians, including acts of terror … provocation and destruction”, is a stunning rebuke of Israeli violence against Palestinian civilians and the destruction of their homes and properties. The currently-used definition of terrorism*, which excludes state terrorism (and thus actions by Israel or Hamas) includes the actions of Jewish settlers, the major source of terrorism in Israel.

The call for accountability is a call for an end to Israel’s impunity for crimes including its massive attacks on Gaza as well as its almost daily attacks on Palestinian farmers, fishermen and other civilians.

The call for “both parties” to “act on the basis of …. international humanitarian law” is a demand that Israel, as the Occupying Power, respect the Fourth Geneva Convention, the law governing the treatment of civilians under military occupation.  Israel’s obligations are not only to protect the welfare of those civilians, but to refrain from moving its population into occupied territory or retaining the territory under any circumstances.

The resolution calls for efforts to end Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory, which Israel would find costly. Its confinement of millions of Palestinians is hugely profitable, largely because the world community has assumed Israel’s legal obligation to provide for their food, education and other humanitarian needs.  Israel skims off humanitarian aid money and forces funds to be converted into the shekel, propping up its currency. Palestinians are used as cheap and disposal labor in Israel’s industrial zones and as guinea pigs for its weapons testing.  The West Bank, from which Israel gets much of its water and farm land, is used for Israel’s toxic dumps.

This resolution’s intent to follow up on final status peace negotiations is a major problem for Israel because the next world conference on Israel/ Palestine is on January 15th, when President Obama is still in office.  If a resolution is passed that sets parameters such as the issue of Israel’s borders, the status of Jerusalem and the Palestinian right of return, along with a time-limit for the negotiations, it would be almost impossible for Donald Trump to intervene.  Trump would have to get the support of at least nine countries in the Security Council  behind a new resolution that would overturn the offending resolution — and then ensure that the permanent members, including Russia and China, would not veto it.


Israel’s violations of UN SC Resolution 2334 — which calls for an end to the settlements, steps to prevent acts of violence against civilians, and for accountability — justify boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel, particularly of products from Israel’s settlements.

Israel’s ongoing violations should also end the current efforts to criminalize speech critical of Israel.  People of conscience can not be said to be guilty of “racism”, “anti-Semitism”, or “hate speech” when they describe Israel’s defiance of this resolution and of international laws — or advocate economic responses to facilitate a just peace.

Hopes for an ending to the Palestinian plight now hinge on the passage of a follow-up resolution at the January 15th conference that will call for final status negotiations on Israel’s borders, the status of Jerusalem and the Palestinian right of return — with set time limits.

The United Nations SC resolution 2334 demonstrates that the world body retains its credibility in calling for justice.

The UN has been responsible for the Palestinian tragedy; members must now take responsibility for ending it.

The definition of “terrorism” presumably the one used by the annual Global Index of Terrorism:

The Global Terrorism Index uses data supported by the Department of Homeland Security which includes incidents meeting the following criteria:

1. The incident must be intentional – the result of a conscious calculation on the part of a perpetrator.

2. The incident must entail some level of violence or threat of violence — including property violence, as well as violence against people

3. The perpetrators of the incidents must be sub-national actors. This database does not include acts of state terrorism. In addition to this baseline definition, two of the following three criteria have to be met in order to be included in the START database from 1997: ….The violent act was aimed at attaining a political, economic, religious, or social goal. ….The violent act included evidence of an intention to coerce, intimidate, or convey some other message to a larger audience (or audiences) other than the immediate victims. ….The violent act was outside the precepts of international humanitarian law. (Vision of Humanity)




Land Day 2017: Israel’s relentless land grab continues

As Israel resumes its settlement expansion with impunity, Palestinians have plenty to protest at this year’s Land Day.

Women sit next to ruins from their homes, which were demolished by Israeli bulldozers in Umm Al-Hiran, a Bedouin village in southern Negev Desert, on January 18 [Ammar Awad/Reuters]
Women sit next to ruins from their homes, which were demolished by Israeli bulldozers in Umm Al-Hiran, a Bedouin village in southern Negev Desert, on January 18 [Ammar Awad/Reuters]


Rachel Borrell is Amnesty International’s research and campaigns assistant on Israel/ Palestine.

Today’s commemoration of Land Day is an emblematic reminder of the countless human rights violations that have characterised half a century of Palestinian land confiscation and dispossession.

During the first Land Day in 1976 Palestinian citizens of Israel protested against the Israeli government’s expropriation of 2,000 hectares of land surrounding Palestinian villages in the Galilee. Six Palestinians were killed and more than 100 were injured when Israeli forces crushed the protests.

Every year since, Palestinian communities in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) have gathered on March 30 to commemorate these events to highlight Israel’s ongoing seizure of Palestinian land, and to reaffirm their connection to the land.

This year’s Land Day will be marked with a march between Deir Hana and Sakhnin in northern Israel, as well as demonstrations and events across central Israel and the Negev/Naqab region, and in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. The protests are often met with brutal and excessive use of force by Israel. 

In Umm al-Hiran, one of the unrecognised Bedouin villages in the Negev/Naqab region, protesters are planning to plant trees and rehabilitate some of the structures demolished earlier this year by the Israeli authorities, after residents lost a long legal battle against eviction orders to enable government construction of a new community for Jewish residents. 

In the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, concerts, marches and olive tree planting events are planned in acts of protest against Israel’s continuous occupation and aggressive land-grab policies. The first few months of 2017 alone have seen an alarming surge in illegal settlement activity and home demolitions in the occupied West Bank.

Surge in illegal settlement activity

Since January the Israeli government, emboldened by President Donald Trump’s inauguration, has authorised the construction of more than 6,219 illegal settlement homes in the occupied West Bank, including 719 in East Jerusalem. These announcements not only mark a shift from the Israeli government’s more cautious approach under the Obama administration but also fly in the face of UN Security Council resolution 2334 (pdf), passed in December last year, which calls on Israel to immediately cease all settlement activities in the OPT.

In recent weeks a number of Israeli Knesset members have proposed a law to annex the West Bank settlement of Ma’ale Adumim to Jerusalem, along with other settlements in close proximity to the city.

Although the bill has been temporarily blocked by Prime Minister Netanyahu, the proposal is alarming. In addition to flagrantly violating international law, such a move would have potentially catastrophic consequences. Ma’ale Adumim and Jerusalem are connected by the contentious E1 area, a 12sq km piece of land that provides a vital passage between the northern and southern West Bank. Should Israeli construction take place on this land, a continuous Israeli settler presence will be established from occupied East Jerusalem to the Jordan Valley, effectively cutting the West Bank in half and severing East Jerusalem from the remainder of the occupied West Bank.

OPINION: What did the UN apartheid report expose in reality?

Recent months have also seen a marked increase in demolitions of Palestinian homes. At least 24 Bedouin homes and other structures around the Ma’ale Adumim settlement were demolished in the first two months of 2017, compared with an average of 32 total demolitions per year between 2013 and 2015.

As long as the world continues to turn a blind eye to Israel’s relentless land grab and settlement expansion, both serious violations of international humanitarian law, the human rights of Palestinians will continue to be trampled on with impunity.

In another push to consolidate their land confiscation, on February 6, the Israeli Knesset also passed a law that retroactively legalises the seizure of private Palestinian land on which settlements have already been established. The law prevents Palestinian landowners from laying claim to their land if Israeli settlers are living on it, despite the fact that the settlers’ presence in occupied territory is illegal under international law.

It has been estimated that the law will retroactively legalise 53 settlements and outposts – allowing for the expropriation of about 8,000 dunams (80 hectares) of private Palestinian land. The law also risks galvanising the confiscation of yet more private Palestinian land by providing a basis for further retroactive legalisation of land grabs.

Fifty years of indifference

The recent acceleration in home demolitions, combined with the push to expand settlements and moves to legalise prior land grabs, gives a damning indication of the Israeli government’s intention to continue and accelerate its land-grab policies 50 years on from its initial capture and occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip.

Fifty years of indifference from the international community has only served to spur on the Israeli government in its expropriation of Palestinian land and expansion of illegal settlements. In a speech last Friday UN special coordinator for the Middle East peace process Nikolay Mladenov confirmed that no steps have yet been taken to cease settlement activities in the OPT in order to comply with UN resolution 2334. The fact that Mladenov’s update was not delivered in a written report by the UN secretary general himself has been interpreted by some as a lack of commitment by the UN to implement the resolution.

OPINION: Portrait of an occupation – Human rights of the settler

As long as the world continues to turn a blind eye to Israel’s relentless land grab and settlement expansion, both serious violations of international humanitarian law, the human rights of Palestinians will continue to be trampled on with impunity and UN resolutions such as resolution 2334 or the resolution passed by the UN Human Rights Council last week calling on states to regulate trade with illegal settlements, will remain little more than empty gestures. The international community must take a clear stand and show that it will no longer tolerate Israel’s illegal policies of annexation and settlement. Otherwise, Palestinians will continue to have plenty to protest about at annual Land Day demonstrations.

Rachel Borrell is Amnesty International’s research and campaigns assistant on Israel/Palestine. Rachel previously worked for the Palestinian human rights organisation Al-Haq and at Anti-Slavery International in London. Rachel studied International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law at the University of Essex. 

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.

Jewish Fingerprint: GAZA
  • Thumbnail

    Apartheid Israel
  • ———————————————

Security cabinet approves for the first time in 20 years the building of a new settlement in the occupied West Bank.

Israel blasted for approving Emek Shilo settlement

Security cabinet approves for the first time in 20 years the building of a new settlement in the occupied West Bank.

Israeli settlements are considered illegal under international law [File: Atef Safadi/EPA]

Israel’s government has approved the building of the first new settlement in 20 years in the occupied West Bank – a move swiftly condemned as an obstacle to peace based on a two-state solution.

The move late on Thursday – considered illegal under international law –  was adopted less than a week after the United Nations criticised Israel for not taking any steps to halt settlement building on occupied Palestinian territory, as demanded by the Security Council in a resolution it passed in December.

It also came as thousands of Palestinians gathered on Thursday for annual demonstrations marking Land Day, which commemorate the 1976 killing of six peacefully protesting Palestinians by Israeli forces.


The cabinet’s vote wasn’t a surprise. We were expecting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to say something because earlier this year he had to clear the settlement of Amona.

Amona is one of the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank that was built on private Palestinian land. An Israeli high court said that this was illegal, so Netanyahu had to get rid of the people who lived there and move them on to somewhere else.

At that stage, he said by March 31 ‘I will announce a new settlement for where these people can live’, and he’s done his part of the deal.

Whether this settlement actually gets built or not is a whole other discussion to be had within the Israeli society. It’s also something to do with the fact that today is Land Day.

Netanyahu is under a lot of pressure from the coalition that helps him govern to build more of these settlements. He’s avoided so far by announcing extensions to settlements but the fact he’s announced a new one is going to anger many people within the international community, however it remains to be seen what the Americans think about this.

Trump, at the beginning of the year, had said ‘it’s OK, you can build more settlements’, however he rode that back around March.

The unanimous vote in favour of construction of the new settlement in an area called Emek Shilo, which was announced in an Israeli government statement, drew instant criticism by Palestinian leaders.

“Today’s announcement once again proves that Israel is more committed to appeasing its illegal settler population than to abiding by the requirements for stability and a just peace,” said Hanan Ashrawi, an executive committee member of the Palestine Liberation Organization.

Ashrawi also said it was “ironic” that on the same day that Palestinians somberly marked the killing of six Palestinians and the wounding of more than 1,000 others that Israel’s government announced the establishment of a new illegal settlement.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu first promised the new settlement at Emek Shilo in February, shortly before dozens of Israeli families were evicted from another West Bank settlement called Amona. The eviction came after Israel’s Supreme Court said the houses were built illegally on privately owned Palestinian land.

Israel has approved thousands of new homes since Donald Trump was elected US president, but they all have been additions to existing settlements.

There was no immediate reaction from Trump’s administration, but the Israeli cabinet’s decision came a day after the heads of Arab League states – attending a one-day summit in Jordan – stressed their own continued backing for an independent Palestinian state, demanding a two-state solution to the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Netanyahu effectively dares ICC to come and get him as he is set to approve first new settlement in two decades.

Ghassan Khatib, a political scientist at Birzeit University, called the Israeli cabinet’s decision “a very dangerous development” and “a major step on behalf of Israel towards closing the historic opportunity” of a two-state solution.

“Israel is trying to test the seriousness of yesterday’s resolution by the Arab summit, and would not have drawn that step without making sure that new US administration would be tolerant with it,” he told Al Jazeera.

Inside Story – How’s Israel dealing with fallout of UN vote?

“It’s a challenge not only to the Palestinians, but also to the international community represented by the Security Council that passed a resolution only three months ago against settlement expansion.”

The UNSC Resolution 2334, which reaffirmed long-standing positions of the international community, was adopted with 14 votes after the United States abstained in the vote.

The abstention defied pressure from then President-elect Trump, Israel and some US politicians who urged Washington to wield its veto.

The resolution condemned Israel’s settlements on Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, saying they had “no legal validity”.

It also demanded a halt to “all Israeli settlement activities”, saying this “is essential for salvaging the two-state solution”.

Israeli settlements are seen as a major stumbling block to peace efforts as they are built on land the Palestinians see as part of their future state.

Source: Al Jazeera and news agencies

Murdered palestinian teen was ‘burned alive’

An autopsy has revealed that a murdered Palestinian teenager was burned alive.

16 year old Mohammed Abu Khudair was kidnapped from outside his father’s shop in Shuafat in East Jerusalem on Wednesday. His charred body was found in a forest a few hours later.

Residents in Shuafat believe the killing was carried out by Israeli settlers, angry at the murder of three Israeli teens in the West Bank, and say they fear there could be more attacks.

Fatima Abu Khadair, a relative of the murdered teena…

What is in the news today? Click to watch:…

euronews: the most watched news channel in Europe

Israel’s Netanyahu Phones Father Of Murdered Palestinian Teen

Burn, Baby, Burn…Judaic hellfire, from the Dawabshe family to the Middle East and beyond

‘I will place you high in my councils Trash, and I will send you to burn…’

–The devil speaking to the pyromaniac ‘Trashcan Man’ in Stephen King’s horror novel The Stand

‘Oscars’ season is over, and as such, the infamous hive of enchanters, witches, and sorcerers making up that place of ill-repute known as Hollywood are now basking in the afterglow of yet another successful year.

And with good reason are they celebrating. As expected, the previous year’s black magic indeed did the trick in (further) intoxicating and incapacitating the collective American mind, degrading it deeper and deeper into its already seemingly bottomless stupor and narcosis. The ship of fools making up Populus Americanus, proudly and yet stupidly characterizing their sinking ship of state as ‘the land of the free’ and ‘home of the brave,’ continue their steady stampede backwards, all the while the Spielbergs, Weinsteins, Katzenbergs, Milchons, Seinfelds, Silvermans, Sandlers, etc, continue grinding forward with all the unstoppable inertia of an Israeli Merkava tank flattening a matchstick-constructed Palestinian home filled with terrified women and children.

Such success being ‘a wrap’ however–even amidst the ongoing reverberations of ‘Mazel Tov’, ‘L’Chaim’ and the celebratory clinking of wine glasses full of Manischewitz and Magen David–doesn’t mean that the ‘fat lady’ has sung and that those holding membership in the coven have been granted a sabbatical. Indeed, Hollywood sorcery after all being a never-ending/ever-occurring process and as unavoidable as death and taxes means that–just as the old saying indicates–‘the show must go on’, as there is no rest for the wicked and the Devil’s work is never done.

And nowhere is all this show business more apparent–complete with volume, makeup, theatrics and special effects–than with the all-star lineup and over-the-top ‘jrama’ on display in the aftermath of the recent ritual murders of 18-month old Ali Saad Dawabshe and his father Sa’ad by Jewish terrorists aiming to appease the violent, vengeful, vindictive god of Israel.

Despite what has been a very loud, public, and–at the risk of over-repetition–‘jramatic’ gang war taking place these days within the organized pro-Israel community (otherwise known as La Kosher Nostra) with right-wing Likud and left-wing Labor trading political bullets with each other on the streets of Tel Aviv, D.C., New York, etc, nevertheless both sides have now declared a temporary cease-fire of sorts in order to deal with what inarguably is one of the most dangerous existential threats the Jewish state has faced in a long time. The deliberate, premeditated, and (more importantly) religiously-driven incineration of a Palestinian father and his tiny son, not as an accident or ‘incident’ (as obligatorily portrayed in both Israeli and American media when it invariably takes place) has brought not only new curiosity to the kinds of ‘ethics’ guiding the Jewish state and her ‘chosen people’, but new clarity as well. This combination of both curiosity and clarity on the part of civilized Gentile peoples the world over (heretofore obediently compliant to Israel’s demands of blind acceptance and unquestioning recognition) and increasing in intensity on a daily basis portends nothing less than what paleontologists refer to as an ‘ELE’, or ‘Extinction Level Event’ in terms of the Jewish state’s future survivability. Similar in many respects to those moments where some Hollywood icon is caught on film saying or doing something erupting in some scandal where irrevocable damage is done to the refined and sophisticated image falsely crafted by their handlers for the furtherance and maintenance of their stardom, likewise the recent tragedy surrounding the deliberate holocausting of two innocent Palestinians has ripped away the thin mask of civility and ‘humanness’ inaccurately and unjustifiably attributed to the Zionist entity from its inception, a gross misappropriation of respect that has functioned as the primary mechanism by which this dysfunctional and dangerous criminal enclave has been provided an undeserved seat at the table of nations.

Now however, Gentiledom–whose political and monetary support is as intrinsically necessary to the continued existence of the Jewish state as healthy blood is to mosquitoes, lice, and other parasites–is obviously having second thoughts about further investment. The exponentially-increasing instances of overt, extreme, epileptic violence against non-Jews, both in Israel and beyond, resulting from the yet-to-be-named religiously-induced mental illness Jtosis (the inevitable end result of Judaic ‘ethics’ being imposed on an otherwise healthy human mind) is reviving all the old stereotypes fairly and accurately attributed to Jews as a group since the days of the Pharaohs as described in the book of Genesis. Day by day, with each new episode of violent, psychotic behavior on the part of the self-appointed/self-anointed Chosenites, the mountain of money and resources expended over the last century by groups such as ADL, WJC, etc, in drugging the Gentile mind with various hallucinogenic ideas designed to bring about the equivalent of an ideological ‘acid trip’ where Jews are seen as a harmless, powerless, beneficent people who just want to ‘get along’ with their Gentile counterparts shatters into tiny shards of sharp, cutting reality, leaving the broken fantasy naked before the world in all its brutal, ugly truth.

And both sides of the right/left spectrum operating at the higher levels within the Kosher Nostra power structure know this. They understand that this latest act of religiously-induced psychosis whereby a Palestinian father and his tiny son become the sacrificial burnt offerings in a Judaic black mass in honoring the violent, racist, Old Testament god of Israel stands no chance of being ‘explained away’ as typically takes place whenever the Jewish state embarks upon one of her chronic feeding frenzies of innocent non-Jews. Both sides know there is no amount of sorcery or seduction that can succeed in painting this as a case of the Jewish state ‘defending’ itself against terrorism or ‘protecting’ itself against those who pose an ‘existential threat’, as ceremoniously occurs each and every time some Judaically-inspired, ritualistic bloodbath explodes in Gaza or wherever.

Rather, they know that it is what it is, and, more importantly, that it will be seen for what it is–the deliberate, pre-meditated murder of 2 innocent Gentiles (more and more characterized these days by Jewish religious and political leaders as ‘donkeys’, ‘cockroaches’ ‘beasts walking on two legs,’ etc) by Judaic terrorists acting in accordance with what their Judaic ‘ethics’ demand.

As such then, both sides understand the looming danger associated with this latest act of Judaic terrorism in an up-until-now sleeping Gentile society of 7 billion souls coming to rational terms with the dangers posed–not only to those in the tragic circumstance of living in close proximity to the 6,000,000 + mentally-unstable individuals making up ‘the Jewish state’, but as well–to all Gentiledom by a sprawling, organized criminal conspiracy operating at the highest levels within the world’s most powerful nations and protected by layer upon layer of obscurity and duplicitous denial.

And it is for this reason then why suddenly–despite a years-long campaign of snarling, scratching, hissing, and biting at each other–the two otherwise bitter enemies are now putting down their Tommy guns, folding up their switchblades, pocketing their brass knuckles and finding themselves the best of friends. Putting aside their ‘differences’–in truth more methodological than ideological in nature–they are now seen rushing together with the same speed as newlyweds to their first-time marriage bed in offering their empty condemnations of the deliberate ritualistic murders of father and son Dawabshe and with all the same ‘jrama’, special effects, and theatricism successfully used year after year by extended family members with names such as Spielberg, Weinstein, Katzenberg, Milchon, Seinfeld, Silverman, Sandler, etc.

Netanyahu–personally responsible for the incineration of THOUSANDS of innocent Palestinians just like the Dawabshe family in the various bloodbaths he has personally ordered and overseen on a regular basis against the people of Gaza, nevertheless playing the role of the ‘compassionate‘ Jew acting in accordance with his ‘compassionate’ Judaism by visiting the hospital room of the surviving family members writhing in agony as they fight tooth and nail to save every microbe of life left in them following being doused in gasoline and set aflame by Jewish terrorists…Rabbis, both in Israel and throughout Gentiledom, slithering their way to the nearest microphone to condemn such savagery with truckloads of well-rehearsed, over-the-top theatrics and buckets of crocodile tears, claiming that such evil, barbaric behavior contradicts the basic precepts of ‘Jewish ethics’ as laid out in both the Torah and Talmud, despite the fact they themselves know better than anyone else exactly what appears in black and white and in impossible-to-misunderstand clarity within the various chapters and various books making up the beating heart of ‘Jewish ethics’, to wit–

“When the LORD your God brings you into the land you are to possess and casts out the many peoples living there, you shall then slaughter them all and utterly destroy them…You shall save nothing alive that breathes…You shall make no agreements with them nor show them any mercy. You shall destroy their altars, break down their images, cut down their groves and burn their graven images with fire. For you are a holy people unto the LORD thy God and He has chosen you to be a special people above all others upon the face of the earth…”–Book of Deuteronomy

…and all of this, with quivering, sympathetic lower lips and watery eyes gushing rivers of faux tears, a lump of behavioral Fool’s Gold meant to whet the appetites of world Gentiledom seeking some expression of humanity in a morally bankrupt Jewish state over-funded to the hilt by gullible Gentile investors.

But then, what must be remembered is that–as an operational protocol–lying is indeed as much the Judaic way as tomatoes are the main component making up tomato sauce. ‘Deception’ and ‘Judaism’ are as much irrevocably intertwined with each other as are the two strands making up the double helix in a molecule of DNA. It was neither by some grammatical accident that Israel’s Mossad happened to adopt ‘by way of deception, we shall make war’ as its motto, given that dishonesty, duplicity and all their synonymic cousins have always functioned as the pistons and spark plugs driving Jewish interests in their war against Gentiledom. Beginning with the biblical account of Abraham selling his wife Sarah into prostitution to Egypt’s Pharaoh under the pretext she was his ‘sister’ rather than his wife, to Jacob stealing his brother Esau’s inheritance through the Judaic involuntary reflexes of chicanery and identity fraud, to the Pharisee’s use of false witness and perjury in removing the troublesome Jesus of Nazareth as a political threat to Israel’s deliberate murderous attack on the USS LIBERTY that was characterized as a case of ‘mistaken identity’, lying–seen more as a virtue than a vice–is not as much ‘necessary’ in furthering Judaic interests as it is ‘indispensable’.

Indeed, the biblical account of Jesus praising the character qualities of Nathanael, one of His up-and-coming footsoldiers in the fight against Jewish supremacism, in saying ‘Behold, an Israelite in whom there is no deceit’ was not as much a compliment towards the individual as it was a general statement about the seemingly magnetic pull that those holding membership in the Judaic cult possess towards all flavors of dishonesty, a nuanced fact that sadly the ‘Christian West’ seemed to have overlooked when allowing this toxic element to dwell within its midst for the last 20 centuries now.

Besides the political damage–in both the near and distant future–that the deliberate burning-to-death of the Dawabshe family portends for Israel and for institutionalized Jewish power around the world, what both sides making up the Judaic right/left paradigm fear viz a viz this new  ‘curiosity’ on the part of ‘the nations’ is a more-precise understanding of just what-the-hell (no pun intended) authentic Judaism in all its myriad of forms and structures truly is. Like any crime organization whose true nature must remain obscure and subterranean and whose members are sworn under pain of death never to reveal the inner workings of ‘the family’, likewise the inner workings of Judaism must be–as described by former AIPAC official Steve Rosen when discussing the machinations of the Zionist power structure in America–‘Like a night flower that thrives in the dark & shrivels up in the sunlight.’

Likewise then, Judaism as an organized conspiracy against Gentiledom can only exist where an accurate understanding of its inner workings remains foggy and confused. What the ‘made’ members of  Kosher Nostra fear now resulting from the increasingly frequent instance of anti-Gentile Judaic violence is that along with this new curiosity comes its inevitable by-product–a chain reaction of sorts resulting in a reversal of the amnesial spell cast upon the Gentile mind over the last century as to the nature of the conspiracy working against them, thus revealing Judaism in all its forms to be the violent, racist, imperialist, rapacious ideology that it is.

The truth is, the only difference between what took place in setting aflame the Dawabshe family by Jewish terrorists and what takes place with periodic regularity by Israel in inflicting state-sponsored terrorism against Gaza (or wherever) is purely cosmetic. In the case of the Dawabshes, those tossing the Molotovs weren’t wearing IDF uniforms and doing so with courtesy-of-Uncle-Sam-state-of-the-art equipment and therefore forfeiting that certain degree of legitimacy that generally accompanies a nation’s right to engage in war to protect itself.

All those inclined to be receptive to the present theatrics surrounding the ritualistic murder of the Dawabshes and thus seduced into believing what both sides of the Judaic power structure are putting forth, namely that it is/was an aberration and an abrogation of ‘Judaic ethics’ should remember well that as Gaza was being annihilated, incinerated, immolated, and in general ripped to pieces by Judaic dogs clad in IDF uniforms during various Judaic massacres proudly bearing made-for-Hollywood titles such as ‘Cast Lead’, Pillar of Cloud’ and ‘Defensive Edge’, Jews the world over celebrated and supported the carnage taking place and did so in numbers as high as 95%. They danced in the streets, wrote supportive OpEds in their local papers, gathered at the border with refreshments to watch the carnage with shock and awe and Tweeted about the ‘orgasms’ they experienced when hearing about Palestinian children being killed.

In other words, thousands of families being incinerated in the very same religiously-ritualistic manner as the Dawabshes (and of Mohammed Abu Khdeir last year, forced by Jewish terrorists to drink gasoline before being set on fire) was a cause for celebration, but one family being burned to death was a cause for ‘soul searching?’

As they say on Oscar’s night before announcing the winner for best screenplay, ‘The envelope please…’

More than this though as it relates to the recent holocausting of the Dawabshe family, what the goombahs of Kosher Nostra fear more than anything is the Gentile nations coming to understand how central to Judaic ritual murder–past and present–is the burning of innocent living creatures. Lest we forget, it was none other than Abraham himself, as recounted in the book of Genesis, hearing voices in his head commanding him to murder his own son Isaac and then incinerate his young body in ‘proving’ his love to the god of Israel, just as took place with Mohammed Abu Khdeir, the Dawabshe family and every other family in Gaza or wherever when Israel hears the call of the wild and decides to obey it. Following the conquest of the Holy Land and the mass murder and displacement of every non-Judaic people living there, the slaughter and incineration of innocent living creatures then becomes the focal point of all Judaic religious ritual, to wit–

‘The priest is to lay his hand on the head of the goat and slaughter it at the place of the burnt offering. The priest is then to take some of the goat’s blood and smear it on the horns of the altar of burnt offering and then pour out the rest of the blood at the base of the altar. He shall remove all the fat and then the priest shall burn the victim on the altar as an aroma pleasing to the LORD, and in this way the priest will make atonement for the people of Israel and they will be forgiven their sins.’–Book of Leviticus

And today, Gentiles occupying no place higher in value than donkeys, sheep, and cattle, it is easy to see then how various holocausts of innocent people–from Mohammed Abu Khdeir to the Dawabshes to the people of Gaza and beyond–are consummated and then celebrated.

More than this though, what both wings of the Kosher Nostra vulture fear is the Gentile awareness that it is not just some small house owned by a Palestinian family named Dawabshe that has been set on fire, but rather that the entire world has been set ablaze, a case of deliberate mass-arson on the part of organized Jewish interests who believe that burning down the entire non-Judaic system of the civilized world becomes in effect ‘an aroma pleasing to the Lord’, as written in the various ‘holy’ books of Judaism. Besides the Judaically-engineered (and demanded) literal incineration of countries such as Iraq, Palestine, Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc, there are the symbolic infernos and holocausts to consider as well. Europe and the West, seen as the legacy of Rome and as the great, great, grandchildren of the same Romans who destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D. watch helplessly as their economies go up in flames, due entirely to the undeniable, overwhelming control that Judaic interests maintain over money and finance. The societies of the West–ravaged by the flames of moral and social breakdown as the Judaic virtues of vice, vulgarity, viciousness, venality, and violence become the new catechism–are powerless in extinguishing the flames presently devouring their communities and families, a situation due entirely to the undeniable, overwhelming control that Judaic interests maintain over media and other forms of mass-mind control. The political structures of the West, thousands of years old, having gotten their birth in ancient Greece and Rome, are now left smoldering ruins, as nations ranging from the US to Canada to Great Britain, France, Germany and beyond are unable to act in their own best interests, due entirely to the undeniable, overwhelming control that Judaic interests maintain over the political affairs of Gentile nations.

Like the character ‘Trashcan Man’ in Stephen King’s horror novel The Stand, a psychotic with a penchant for pyromania who hears voices in his head from the devil instructing him to burn, likewise will Israel and all her people continue to heed the call of the wild and to follow in the footsteps of all those who have done likewise in their own Judaic past because, at the end of the day, it is in the nature of the beast to do so.

All can be rest assured that the present Judaic theatrics surrounding the holocausting of Sa’ad Dawabshe and his infant son by Jewish terrorists acting in accordance with the ‘ethics’ of Judaism, theatrics represented in the present over-the-top/pedal-to-the-metal wailing and gnashing of teeth splayed across newspapers and the internet is but a small portion of the noise taking place surrounding it, in that after the show is done and the audience has gone home, behind closed doors where Gentile ears are not welcome are heard shouts of Mazel Tov’, ‘L’Chaim’ and the celebratory clinking of wine glasses full of Manischewitz and Magen David. The wailing is replaced with singing–nothing sad, somber, serious, or solemn, but rather–something orgasmic, such as that disco song from the 1970’s made fabulously popular by certain promoters with names such as Spielberg, Weinstein, Katzenberg, Milchon, Seinfeld, Silverman, Sandler, etc–

‘To my surprise…

One hundred stories high…

People getting loose y’all

Getting down on the roof

Folks are screaming…

Out of control…

It was so entertaining…

When the boogie started to explode

I heard somebody say

Burn baby burn…

Burn baby burn…

Burn baby burn…

Burn baby burn…

Satisfaction came in a chain reaction

Couldn’t get enough…

So I had to self-destruct…

The heat was on

Rising to the top

Everybody’s going strong

And that is when my spark got hot

I heard somebody say

Burn baby burn…

Burn baby burn…

Burn baby burn…

Burn baby burn…

Mark Glenn, 2015

Mideast Israel Palestinians


“The Human Cost” of US Sponsored “Liberty” (aka Terrorism): Civilians in the “Liberation” of Mosul

Bombs do not have a conscience, however named, blessed or created. They go, at least in a rough sense, where directed, and if the deliverer is ill disposed, confused or simply incompetent, disaster follows. Between the ideological rants and principled feelings about killing the enemy, there is only one fact worth nothing: death and the ordinance used to cause it are intimately twinned.

The very concept of a moralised arsenal, or a principled form of humanitarian liberation, is always problematic. An “arsenal for democracy” against the arsenal of a thousand year Reich, a theme dating from the Second World War, is symbolic rather than functional, based on discriminations artificially made. At the end of any war or battle, however intentioned, is a stocked grave.

The narrative on fighting Islamic State is this: good guys size up bad guys and the former will triumph in a dark-light narrative of childish simplicity. But consequentially, it is always difficult to distinguish a Bomber Harris, architect of the Dresden bombing of 1945 that had no military value, from the camp commander who orders murderous gas for extermination camps. We can well draw distinctions about how wars begin, and regimes behind them, but the methods of war, including their outcomes, are also important.

Put the treacle-pudding guff of humanitarian virtue to the side, and what matters is the result, which usually involves fresh graves strewn over fields of dissolved hopes. Politics tends to follow, patching such matters up with comforting cosmetics. Islamic State is an enemy of certain cherished values, which is deemed more than sufficient in terms of getting onto a plane and unleashing a salvo on a civilian packed suburb.

All of this ties rather bloodily in the supposed liberation of Mosul. The operation is not going according to plan. That, of course, presumes a coherent plan to begin with, with neat objectives, spread sheet directives, and boxes to tick.

The Iraqi forces, packed with US coalition participation in terms of coordinated air strikes, has realised that fighting in urban quarters, ballasted by air support, is a costly affair. It is a discovery that had already been made centuries before, and such fighters, it would seem, are none the wiser.

For the insurgent, the civilian is not merely a shield but a gold asset rich in dividends. Guerrillas, liked or otherwise by the local populace, blend in the landscape of rubble and charred ruins, finding protection in shattered remains and broken families.

The whole point, in a sense, is to obliterate the distinction between guerrilla and civilian, a fact that the intervening voices duly answer by inflicting heavy casualties – on civilians. Be it the ubiquitous car bomb or the air strike with delusionary famed weapons of precision, the distinction of being a combatant or civilian is irrelevant.  If you are in Mosul, you either flee, die or chance your luck. Forget the official line, and believe no one.

The casualty rate amongst civilians in the Mosul operation has spiked for the obvious reason that all sides in this conflict wish to capitalise on immediate gains with minimal concern. As Iraqi forces make the bloody advance into a city of half a million, with some 2,000 remaining Islamic State forces, US-led strikes have flattened entire blocks.

The attack on a Mosul block led to as many as 200 civilian deaths, though the response from Iraqi authorities was a steadfast demurral: Islamic State, it was suggested, was behind it with one of their murderous car bombs. Account and counter-account have followed.

According to Amnesty International, hundreds have died in their homes or places of refuge, advised by the Iraqi government to stay put as the cavalry charge in for the rescue.

“Survivors and eyewitnesses in East Mosul said they did not try to flee as the battle got underway because they received repeated instructions from Iraqi authorities to remain in their homes.”[1]

In the newsrooms, civilian casualties are an embarrassment for the Coalition forces, though a confession to error made in good faith always goes down well for the home tax payers fronting the bills for such lethal adventures. This is war, and war can be untidy and imperfect, despite immaculately filled spread-sheets and blueprints for victory.

Removing Islamic State forces from the city should remind the US personnel engaged about the disastrous operations run by the Coalition in Iraq from 2003. Cluttered, dense, and unforgiving, warfare in the streets, where indiscriminate, opportunistically detonated car bombs meet air delivered weapons, can only mean more remorseless suffering.

The pity of war lacks sincerity when monopolised by those who claim the motivations of liberation. Such positions start making combating sides look plain and similar: every warring outfit wants to know they are on the side of the angels when they massacre populations and put a city to the sword. They all ultimately did it for a “good” cause.

The only difference is the hypocrisy associated with those moralist warriors who still claim that God, the Responsibility to Protect, or some fantastic notion of shielding civilians before modern carnage is ever feasible. In war, there is dull, inevitable, cruel death, and in the modern era, the civilian is a pawn to be idealised in terms of protection, and killed in terms of expediency.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge and lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne.  Email:



Bomb defused near US embassy in Philippines: police

arab news

Members of police bomb disposal unit prepare a water bomb disruptor to be used to detonate a suspicious package found near the US Embassy in Manila on Monday. (AFP / TED ALJIBE)
MANILA: Police defused a bomb near the US embassy in the Philippine capital Monday, with militants who had declared allegiance to the Daesh group likely behind the attempted terrorist attack, authorities said.
A taxi passenger dropped the mortar bomb with a mobile phone detonator in a rubbish bin about 200 meters (650 feet) from the embassy along one of Manila’s busiest roads, but a street sweeper found it and alerted authorities, police said.
“This is an attempted act of terrorism,” national police chief Ronald dela Rosa told reporters, adding he believed the Maute Islamic militant group currently facing a military offensive in the southern Philippines was the prime suspect.
“Because of an ongoing police/military operation there, (the militants) have many casualties. We can theorize that this is a diversion to loosen our operations.”
Police said they detonated the bomb just over an hour after it was discovered.
The Maute gang was also blamed for a bombing in President Rodrigo Duterte’s home town in the southern city of Davao in September that killed 15 people.
The military has since Thursday been battling dozens of Maute gang members holed up in an abandoned government building in the mainly Muslim rural town of Butig on Mindanao island, about 800 kilometers (500 miles) south of Manila.
Thirteen soldiers have been injured in the fighting, military spokesman Brig. Gen. Restituto Padilla told reporters.
He said 19 militants had been killed, although none of those bodies had been recovered and the death toll could not be verified. Fighting continued on Monday.
Padilla supported the police theory of who was behind Monday’s attempted bombing.
“It is possible that these groups are doing this to help their fellow terrorists and divert (government) attention,” Padilla said.
Muslim groups have waged a decades-long armed independence struggle in the southern Philippines that is believed to have claimed more than 120,000 lives.
The main rebel groups are in peace talks with the government.But the Maute gang is one of several to have declared allegiance to IS and continued fighting.
The Abu Sayyaf, infamous for kidnappings for ransoms, is another.
Leaders of the main rebel organizations have repeatedly warned that the failure of previous peace efforts, including with Duterte’s predecessor, could lead to disaffected youth joining more extreme groups such as the Maute gang.
The Jakarta-based Institute for Policy Analysis of Conflict also said last month that deepening cooperation among the Maute gang, the Abu Sayyaf and other pro-IS groups meant more deadly violence was “a matter of when, not if.”
The Philippine military has staged a series of deadly battles against the Maute gang in its mountainous and remote strongholds around Butig in recent months.
Eight Maute gang members were captured in August, but fellow militants easily broke them out of a local jail.
The Davao bombing prompted Duterte to put the nation under a “state of emergency” which allowed the military to do law enforcement with police.
His office said security measures would be increased further after the attempted bombing at the US embassy, particularly at airports, seaports and other transport terminals.
Most of the Islamic militant-related violence has been limited to the southern Philippines, and foreign governments warn their citizens against traveling there because of the threat of kidnapping or being caught up in conflicts.
However militants have also staged attacks in Manila, a megacity of more than 12 million people.
The Abu Sayyaf was blamed for the bombing a ferry in Manila Bay in 2004 that killed 116 people, in the nation’s deadliest terrorist attack.


US is like ‘armed robber breaking into your house’ – Iranian defense minister

US is like ‘armed robber breaking into your house’ – Iranian defense minister
Iran’s defense minister, Hossein Dehqan, has advised the US military to leave the Persian Gulf and stop causing trouble there, local media report. The Minister was firing back at a US general who accused Iran of being a destabilizing force in its own region.

“What are Americans doing in the Persian Gulf? They had better get out of this region and not cause trouble for the countries in the region,” Dehqan said in a statement carried by Iranian state media on Thursday.

He also compared the United States to a home intruder.

“Is it acceptable for an armed robber to enter your house and expect to get the red carpet treatment?

“This is an example of modern ignorance in the 21st century,” he said.

Dehqan’s was responding to remarks made earlier in March by United States Central Command General Joseph Votel, who accused Iran of being a destabilizing influence in the region.

“We are also dealing with a range of malign activities perpetrated by Iran and its proxies operating in the region,” Votel said at a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee in describing Tehran’s alleged influence over Iraq and Syria.

“It is my view that Iran poses the greatest long-term threat to stability for this part of the world,” he said.

The statements made by military officials on both sides reflect the growing tensions between Iran and the United States. On Saturday, Iranian officials denied that its fast-attack boats had “harassed” an American aircraft carrier passing through the Strait of Hormuz last week, while, earlier in March, the Iranian Navy accused a US tracking ship of changing course to head towards Iranian Revolutionary Guard boats, calling the conduct “unprofessional.” The US Navy responded with counter-claims, however, alleging that it was the Iranian boats that had chased the US ship, risking “miscalculation or an accidental provocation.”

A set of ballistic missile tests carried out by Iran has further enraged Washington, the latest of which came just in early March, when Iran announced it had successfully fired the Hormuz-2 naval missile capable of hitting targets within a range of 300 kilometers (180 miles). The US rolled out new sanctions against the Islamic Republic in turn.

Putin ready to meet Trump at upcoming Arctic summit in Finland

Putin ready to meet Trump at upcoming Arctic summit in Finland
Russian President Vladimir Putin has said he would be ready to meet with US President Donald Trump at the upcoming summit of Arctic countries in Finland, if the talks are properly prepared.

“I believe Finland suits this purpose well, and Helsinki is a very convenient platform to organize an event like this,” Putin said, when asked if he thought a meeting between him and Trump was possible in Finland.

Putin was speaking at the International Arctic Forum in Russia’s northwestern city of Arkhangelsk.

However, he added that any meeting between him and Trump should be well prepared “by both sides.”

“If this happens, we – and I personally – would be glad to take part in such an event. If not, the meeting [with Trump] could take place in the framework of the G20 summit [set to take place in July],” Putin concluded.

Finnish President Sauli Niinisto said earlier that his country would “certainly be very happy to have the opportunity to hold such a summit.”

The summit is set to take place at Finlandia Hall in Helsinki on September 18-20, 2017, according to the event’s official website.

Russia considers the US a great power, and would like to get its relationship with Washington back on track, and claims alleging anything else are lies and fiction, Putin said.

The Russian president added that, while relations between Moscow and Washington are currently “at zero level,” he counts on the situation improving someday – and the sooner the better.

The anti-Russian card is being played by various political forces in the US to reinforce the positions of certain politicians, Putin added, slamming as nonsense claims that the Russian ambassador to the US had held “spy” meetings with officials connected to Trump.

Putin also slammed the way the Russian ambassador is being treated in the US. The diplomat’s contacts have been limited and any meetings he has are regarded as a spy activities, according to the Russian president.

Putin warned that the attempt of some US political forces to bring US-Russian relations to the point of “Caribbean crisis” [October missile crisis] is a huge mistake.

Putin also confirmed that he will personally meet with Rex Tillerson to discuss the fight against terrorism during the US secretary of state’s upcoming visit to Moscow.

Ambassador Tefft to :
hopeful to see a visit of our Secretary of State to Moscow in the next few weeks

The US State Department said Tillerson is planning to visit Russia in April following a G-7 meeting in Italy. An exact date hasn’t been announced.

READ MORE: US delegation ushers out media as Tillerson starts talking to Lavrov at G20

The first high-profile Russia-US meeting was held in mid-February, when Tillerson met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Bonn, although journalists were asked to leave when the US’ top diplomat began speaking.


Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

The Jerusalem Post has finally asked the question on everyone’s mind: How long have Jewish organizations known that the wave of “anti-Semitic” threats has been coming from Israel and not the “right wing”?

Jerusalem Post: “How Long Have they Known?”

The Jerusalem Post has finally asked the question on everyone’s mind: How long have Jewish organizations known that the wave of “anti-Semitic” threats has been coming from Israel and not the “right wing”?

In an article titled “How and Why We Were Duped by Antisemitism Hysteria in America,” the Jerusalem Post’s op-ed editor, Seth J. Frantzman, says that “for the past two months mass hysteria swept America and Jewish communities abroad that are tuned into the happenings in the US, with claims of a wave of ‘antisemitism.’”

The wave of reports—using headlines such as “Rising anti-Semitism,” “A wave of attacks,” “Violent attacks,” “The worst in our lifetime,” “A radical KKK/right wing on the loose”—was the “hysteria gripping America through mid-March,” Frantzman continued.

“Now all those voices are silent,” he added, pointing out that a black former journalist had been arrested for a “half-dozen bomb threats,” and then had come the news that Jews in Israel had been arrested for “making almost all the bomb threats.”

In addition, Frantzman said, in “Arizona a well-publicized case of a menorah vandalized and turned into a swastika ended up being an African-American teen and his friends.

“A 65-year-old Hispanic man named Pasquale Vargas from Brooklyn was accused of drawing swastikas in Penn Station in New York. No KKK. No Trump supporters.

“So far the main culprits behind the ‘wave’ of antisemitism in America have been a Jew, black teens, a black journalist and an old Hispanic man.

“This doesn’t fit the hysterical narrative we were fed for months.

“For those who say that for the first time in their life they are experiencing antisemitism, they should preface that now by saying ‘for the first time in my life I’m experience antisemitism from a Jewish teenager in Israel.’”

Now, Frantzman said, the “narrative today of those who pushed the hysteria and invented the ‘false flag’ quote is that the teenager accused of the attacks is just ‘a very disturbed young man.’

“Gone is the hysteria about the ‘wave of antisemitism,’ the supposed ‘worst in our lifetime.’ So if a ‘disturbed young man’ was responsible for most of this why didn’t the major media and community leaders ever attempt to present a more nuanced narrative?”

Frantzman goes on to answer his own question by pointing out that Jerry Silverman, CEO of the Jewish Federations of North America, noted on March 23 that “Jewish leaders” were briefed by top officials from the FBI ten days previously.

Since January, he said the calls have been suspected to be the work of a single person, and it “was known for weeks, perhaps months, that the source was not in the US. Yet from all the reports you wouldn’t know that,” he said.

Also, in early March the Jewish Telegraphic Agency “reported that US senators were seeking to renew grants of $20 million a year in funds for security assistance, much of which has gone to Jewish institutions.”

“Why,” Frantzman asked, “were people still using the bomb threats as an excuse for funding in March, when law enforcement knew that they were almost all not credible and that this was not a case of terrorism, but a disgusting hoax?”

“Today, when the source is known, why have we not heard one person come forward who exaggerated the ‘false flag’ story, admitting they were wrong?

“Isn’t it time for some soul searching? The truth is that we don’t want to discuss real acts of antisemitism because it might reveal something troubling.”

Frantzman doesn’t say what that “troubling” thing might be, but a separate AFP article inadvertently provided some insight. Titled “Jews, Israelis fear fallout from bomb hoax arrest,” the AFP article said that “Jewish organizations and Israeli media said the arrest [of the Jews for making the threats] was likely to boost conspiracy theories.”

An article in Israel’s Yediot Aharonot newspaper said that an outcome of the arrests is “that the classic anti-Semitic conspiracy theory will be given a tailwind—the Jews portray themselves as victims, but are orchestrating the supposed attacks.”

A representative of a “major global Jewish organization,” who did not want to be named, told the AFP that Trump’s false flag claim would gain traction.

“Those sort of statements that everyone thought were totally outlandish at the time now sound somewhat more reasonable.”

Recommended reading: The Jews

By Hilaire Belloc. This defining work on Jews, Jewish ethnicity, behavior, impact, and the causes of anti-Semitism, remains one of the most ground-breaking and incisive such studies ever produced in the English language. The book—dedicated to Hilaire Belloc’s Jewish friends—laid the blame for anti-Semitism squarely on Jewish behavior, that is, Gentile reaction to what he called the “inevitability of friction” caused by the presence of Jews in non-Jewish society.

He explains his thesis through a historical survey of Jewish behavior, and his conclusion is that Zionism, or the creation of a Jewish homeland, offered the only hope for a realistic solution to the problem of the “endless tragic cycle of anti-Semitism”—but not in Palestine, where he predicted it would cause conflict with the Arab world.

“Now these causes of friction permanently present tend to produce what I have called the tragic cycle: welcome of a Jewish colony, then ill-ease, followed by acute ill-ease, followed by persecution, exile and even massacre. This followed, naturally, by a reaction and the taking up of the process all over again.”

Click here for details.

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 pounding 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 act of war (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 that ‘history not 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 inside and outside the Bush administration who are trying to prevent an otherwise 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 former long-time 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 (or delayed) 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 and devoted Zionist 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, sentimental or even–Heaven forbid–guilty over the way the Liberty 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 probable. 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



Minister Louis Farrakhan: Israel’s Days Are Numbered


THE FORWARD – During an annual celebration of the Nation of Islam, the group’s leader Minister Louis Farrakhan told the audience that Israelis and Prime Minister Netanyahu had no biblical claim to the land — and that their days in the region were numbered.

“Netanyahu, you’re coming out of there. You don’t have a permanent home there,” Farrakhan said. “Your desire is to conquer that entire area lying that Abraham promised you — you lying. He ain’t promise you a damn thing.”

Farrakhan also said that Israel was not a true democracy — and offered a brief impersonation of President Trump.

“Israel is supposed to be … the only democracy in the Middle East. Lie. Or as Mr. Trump would say, ‘Wrong,’” Farrakhan said.

Farrakhan delivered the comments to a large crowd last month at the annual holiday known as Saviours’ Day, which commemorates the birth of Master Wallace Fard Muhammad, the founder of the Nation of Islam.

Farrakhan and the Nation have drawn criticism over the years for comments some see as inflammatory and anti-Semitic. This past year, Farrakhan has also surprisingly praised Trump several times.


Jewish leaders demand Farrakhan denounce “Secret Relationship” book


Russia to Deport U.S. Chabad Rabbi Declared ‘Threat to National Security’

Rabbis pose for a group photo in front of Chabad-Lubavitch world headquarters in Brooklyn, New York, Nov. 23, 2014.

HAARETZ – On Tuesday, a Russian appeals court affirmed an expulsion order issued against an American rabbi working in Sochi, in what a local leader of the Chabad movement called a “dark day” for Jews.

In its ruling against Ari Edelkopf, the Krasnodar Court of Appeals accepted the determination of a Sochi tribunal that Edelkopf, who had been working as Chabad’s emissary to the city, was a threat to national security. Edelkopf now has no further legal recourse and is legally obligated to leave the country in the near future, Interfax reported.

Boruch Gorin, a senior spokesperson for Russian Chief Rabbi Berel Lazar, condemned the ruling Tuesday as “hostile.” For the first time “in the modern history of Russia, a rabbi is declared a ‘threat to national security,’” Gorin wrote on Facebook, adding that authorities have refused to divulge any details about the alleged threat, citing laws on state secrets. Gorin told Interfax the ruling was “Kafkaesque” and “grounds for lawlessness.”

Tuesday was “a dark day in the history of the Jews in Russia,” Gorin wrote on Facebook.

Edelkopf, a father of seven who grew up in the United States and lived in Israel before settling in the Black Sea resort city of Sochi, has denied engaging in any activity that can reasonably be considered unsavory to authorities.

The deportation comes amid a Russian crackdown on organizations with foreign funding. Edelkopf’s permit to be in the country was revoked in December, according to Interfax. He lost an appeal in regional court.

The Chabad-affiliated Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia condemned the deportation order when it was first issued. Gorin told the French news agency AFP that this was “far from an isolated incident.” He added that at least seven rabbis have been forced to leave Russia in recent years for alleged immigration violations.

Gorin said this was “an attempt to establish control” over Jewish communities in Russia, which he said are serviced by some 70 rabbis, about half of whom are foreign.

The ruling comes two and a half years after Israeli Chabad Rabbi Krichevsky was deported from Russian following reports by local news organizations that he had been charged with spying for Israel.

The Goals of Chabad-Lubavitch

Destroy Zionism
December 3, 2013

jewish racism31From a Chabad writing, quoted in a text about the Noahide Laws:

The main avodah [spiritual goal] of this generation is to go out to the final war of the golus, to conquer and to purify all the gentile countries (such that ‘and kingship will be Hashem’s,’ Ovadiah 1:21). (Shabbos Parshas VaYelech, 5746)

Consequently, it is obvious and self-evident that in modern times we must carry out the Divine Command we received through Moshe [Moses]: ‘To compel all human beings to accept the commandments enjoined upon the descendants of Noach. (Shabbos Parshas Tsav, 5747, Sichos in English, vol. 35, p. 75)

The Seven Laws must be explained in a way that the nations can relate to and, because non-Jews do not possess genuine free will, they will be willing to change more quickly and easily than a Jew. (Hisvaduyos 5748 3:183, cited in “The Deed is the Main Thing,” Kol Boi Ha’olam, p. 385-386)

Even in the future, the nations will continue to exist, to serve and help the Jewish people . . . (Shabbos Parshas Vayeishev, 21 Kislev, 5745


Hawaii judge extends order blocking Trump’s Muslim ban

Thu Mar 30, 2017 4:21AM
US President Donald Trump listens to a speaker during a meeting in the Cabinet Room at the White House in Washington, DC, on March 29, 2017. (Photo by AFP)
US President Donald Trump listens to a speaker during a meeting in the Cabinet Room at the White House in Washington, DC, on March 29, 2017. (Photo by AFP)

A federal judge in the US state of Hawaii has placed a stronger hold on Donald Trump’s revised travel ban, striking another legal blow against the president’s repeated attempts to bar people from several Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States.

On March 15, US District Judge Derrick Watson was the first to rule against the president’s revised executive order, saying that the state of Hawaii had established that the law could not be enforced because it was unconstitutional. The ruling blocked the travel ban but it was to last only a couple of weeks.

After hearing arguments from the attorneys for the Hawaii attorney general and the Department of Justice, Watson on Wednesday extended his previous temporary restraining order.

State Attorney General Douglas Chin argued that the implied message in Trump’s revised ban is like a “neon sign flashing ‘Muslim ban, Muslim ban'” that the administration did not care to address it.

US District Judge Derrick Watson

The judge issued a longer-lasting preliminary injunction, which will continue to extend the temporary order until the state’s lawsuit is resolved. He said that it would ensure the constitutional rights of Muslim citizens across the country.

The Trump administration could now file an appeal to the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, which had already once ruled against the travel ban.

In the previous ruling, Watson, a President Obama appointee, cited several comments made by Trump and declared that the travel ban is, despite the administration’s denials, a Muslim ban.

The judge concluded in his ruling that the revised ban is in fact not all that different to the original one. “Based upon the current record available, however, the Court cannot find the actions taken during the interval between revoked Executive Order No. 13,769 and the new Executive Order to be ‘genuine changes in constitutionally significant conditions.’”

The court in Hawaii was the first to rule on several legal challenges against the travel ban, which targets people from six mainly Muslim countries.

Protests have been held against plans to block travelers from six Muslim-majority countries. (Photo by AFP)

A day after Trump signed the new executive order on March 6, attorneys for Hawaii filed their proposed revision in federal court, along with a motion asking that it be allowed to proceed.

The revised travel ban changed and replaced the original, more sweeping executive order issued on January 27 that caused chaos and protests at airports and was challenged in more than two dozen lawsuits across the US.

Trump’s new order maintained a 90-day ban on travel to the US by citizens of Iran, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Sudan, but excluded Iraq and applied the restriction only to new visa applicants. It also removed an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees.

Thu Mar 30, 2017 5:22AM
US Central Command Commander Army General Joseph Votel testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee in Washington, DC, March 9, 2017. (Photo by AFP)
US Central Command Commander Army General Joseph Votel testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee in Washington, DC, March 9, 2017. (Photo by AFP)

The United States should consider using “military means” against Iran, US Army General Joseph Votel says, calling Tehran “the greatest long-term threat to stability” in the Middle East.

Votel, who heads the US Central Command (CENTCOM), made the hostile remarks while speaking before the House Armed Services Committee on Wednesday.

“I believe that Iran is operating in what I call a gray zone, and it’s an area between normal competition between states — and it’s just short of open conflict,” he told the panel.

Votel went on to accuse Iran of “destabilizing” the region through “lethal aid facilitation,” using “surrogate forces” and cyber operations.

“We need to look at opportunities where we can disrupt [Iran] through military means or other means their activities,” he said. “We need to look at opportunities where we can expose and hold them accountable for the things that they are doing.”

The general’s statements fall in line with the anti-Iran rhetoric of US President Donald Trump, who has accused Iran of supporting terrorism and said “nothing is off the table” in terms of a response to the country’s defensive missile program. Trump has also said that his administration formally put Tehran “on notice” over its missile test.

As the commander of CENTCOM, Votel is tasked with leading Washington’s military efforts in Central Asia and the Middle East. More than 80,000 US soldiers are stationed across the area under Votel’s command.

The general also oversees the US-led coalition’s airstrikes and other military operations against purported terrorist targets inside Syria and Iraq, a campaign that began in 2014 and has led to the death of many civilians without any meaningful achievement.

Votel’s comments came less than two weeks after a deadly coalition strike that killed over 200 civilians in the Iraqi city of Mosul.

Read More:

The Pentagon has admitted to carrying out such “unintentional” raids against civilian targets in Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen as well.

Relatives mourn as bodies of Iraqi children of west Mosul killed in an airstrike by the US-led coalition are covered with blankets, March 17, 2017. (Photo by AFP)

Additionally, Washington has come under pressure for forging a close military and political alliance with Saudi Arabia, ignoring the regime’s bloody war on Yemen and its clear support for extremist groups.

This is while the international community has constantly hailed Iran’s active role in curbing the terrorism threat plaguing the region.

Persian Gulf encounters

In his testimony before the lawmakers, Votel also discussed the recent surge in Iran-US military encounters in the Persian Gulf, saying his team was “paying extraordinarily close attention” to the issue.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC)’s Navy has on several occasions forced US Navy vessels to change course before wandering into Iranian territorial waters.

The last of such encounters occurred earlier this month, when a US Navy ship and three British Royal Navy boats steered out of the course approved for international naval transit in the Persian Gulf and came within 550 meters (0.3 nautical miles) of IRGC vessels, drawing serious warnings from them.

Iran has repeatedly warned that any act of transgression into Iran’s territorial waters would be met with an immediate and befitting response.

Thu Mar 30, 2017 7:49AM
A US Air Force F-16C Fighting Falcon performs its flight routine during the Australian International Airshow in Melbourne, March 5, 2017. (Photo by AFP)
A US Air Force F-16C Fighting Falcon performs its flight routine during the Australian International Airshow in Melbourne, March 5, 2017. (Photo by AFP)

The administration of US President Donald Trump has decided to ignore Bahrain’s human rights record in order to sell F-16 fighter jets to the Arab monarchy.

The US State Department informed Congress on Wednesday that it plans to approve a request by the Persian Gulf nation to purchase 19 of the jets from Lockheed Martin worth up to $2.7 billion.

The figure would reach $4.9 billion if 23 engines, radars and other avionics, air-to-air and air-to-ground ordnance and related equipment required to upgrade other jets in Bahrain’s fleet are included.

The deal was brought to a halt under former President Barack Obama, who had called on Bahrain to deliver on its promises to improve the human rights condition.

Lockheed, however, strenuously lobbied for the contract to go through, amid outrage among human rights groups concerned with the regime’s crackdown on dissidents.

Read More:

Bahrain’s ruling Al Khalifah family has been leading a ruthless crackdown against domestic dissent since 2011, killing scores of protesters with Saudi Arabia’s help.

“The sale will send exactly the wrong signal to the dictatorship: that the White House thinks the political crackdown is not just morally acceptable but also not dangerous, when in fact it’s what’s fueling the country’s instability,” Brian Dooley of the Washington-based group Human Rights First.

One of Obama’s conditions for the kingdom was the immediate release of Nabeel Rajab, a famed human rights activist who helped lead the anti-regime protests.

Trump’s State Department said earlier this week that Rajab should be released because there is not enough evidence against him.

The government’s notice gives lawmakers 40 days to review the deal. Given the Republican majority in Congress, the sale is expected to pass without any drama.

Senator Bob Corker, chairman of the Senate Foreign relations Committee, praised the deal, saying in a statement that such conditions would have been “unprecedented and counterproductive.”

“There are more effective ways to seek changes in partner policies than publicly conditioning weapons transfers in this manner,” he argued.

Bahrain is home to the US Navy’s 5th Fleet. Last year, the UK celebrated the 200th anniversary of mutual relations with the Arab kingdom by opening a massive Royal Navy base there.

Jewish teenager behind: Jewish Center Bomb Threat Suspect Is Arrested in ……. Israel

Jewish Center Bomb Threat Suspect Is Arrested in Israel

Jewish Center Bomb Threat Suspect Is Arrested in Israel

Mar 24, 2017Source:

A monthslong wave of bomb threats against Jewish institutions in the United States that prompted evacuations, heightened security and fears of rising anti-Semitism gave way to an unexpected twist on Thursday. The person responsible for many of the threats, law enforcement officials said, was half a world away, in Israel, a Jewish teenager.

An intensive investigation spanning multiple countries culminated on Thursday in the arrest of the 18-year-old suspect, who holds dual Israeli and American citizenship, and his father. The teenager’s lawyer said he suffered from a brain tumor that could affect his behavior.

The surge in threats over the past few months — well over 100 sent to Jewish community centers, schools and museums since the start of the year — coincided with an increase in hate crimes against a number of groups, from scrawled swastikas to homicides, feeding worries about a new era of bigotry. American and Israeli officials refused to say how many of the threats the suspect was accused of making. And some recent anti-Semitic acts were apparently committed by others, like threats against Jewish centers for which a Missouri man was charged, and the vandalizing of Jewish cemeteries.

Looks like Trump was right:

Trump was right

More: Wave of Fake ‘Hate Crimes’ Sweeps anti-Trump Social Media

There Have Been Over 100 Hate Crime Hoaxes In The Past Decade

More: Jewish Student Admits faking Hate Crime

But officials made it clear that they considered the teenager, who lived in the Ashkelon area of southern Israel, as the primary source of the threats, though they did not offer a motive. “This is the guy we are talking about,” an Israeli police spokesman, Micky Rosenfeld, said.

The suspect made threats to sites in Australia and New Zealand, as well as the United States, and to at least one commercial airline flight, prompting an emergency landing, Mr. Rosenfeld said.

A judge ordered the suspect, who has not been charged, held until at least March 30 and ordered a medical examination. His father was also ordered held for eight days, on suspicion that he might have been aware of the threats, or even been involved.

The father denies any knowledge of the threats, his lawyer said. The judge imposed an order of silence forbidding Israeli authorities to release either man’s name.

The teenager, who was born in Israel, has a brain tumor that can affect his cognitive abilities and lead to “irrational” behavior, his lawyer, Galit Bash, said. She would not say whether her client, who she said did not have a criminal record, had admitted or denied involvement.

Ms. Bash and the father’s lawyer, Eran Rau, who are both from the Office of the Israeli Public Defender, said the young man was an only child who lived with his parents and had been home-schooled, which is unusual in Israel. While most Israelis are drafted into military service, the teenager was rejected, which Ms. Bash said was because of his medical condition. Israeli media reported that she said in court that he had the tumor since he was 14.

The father, an engineer in his early 50s, was cooperating with investigators, Mr. Rau said. He said his client, who also has no criminal record, was concerned primarily with his son’s welfare, given his medical condition.

“This all seems very strange and preliminary to me,” Mr. Rau said.

Israeli news outlets reported that when the teenager was arrested, he tried to grab an officer’s gun. In his brief court appearance, the suspect, wearing khaki cargo pants, bowed his head and pulled up his shirt to conceal his face.

On Thursday morning, after months of investigation and waves of turmoil and panic, the Federal Bureau of Investigation held a conference call with leaders of Jewish organizations to discuss the surprising denouement to the investigation. As the news spread, it drew mixed reactions from Jewish leaders and anti-discrimination groups who tried to make sense of it.

Joel Dinkin, the executive vice president of the Evelyn Rubenstein Jewish Community Center of Houston, said that it was “a little bit perplexing from the standpoint of the fact that it’s somebody Jewish.”

Jonathan A. Greenblatt, chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League, cautioned that many of the people responsible for anti-Semitic threats, vandalism and “a torrent of abuse online” remained at large. And even the threats attributed to the Israeli teenager, he said, should still be considered acts of anti-Semitism.

“The motive may have been unclear, but the impact was crystal clear,” Mr. Greenblatt said. “These were acts that terrorized a community just because of their faith.”

Critics of President Trump have accused him of playing down hatred and violence against minority groups, and charged that his anti-immigrant remarks are fueling conflict. He did not publicly condemn the anti-Semitic threats and vandalism until Feb. 21, weeks after Jewish groups began calling on him to speak out. On Feb. 28, in a meeting with state attorneys general, Mr. Trump suggested that some of the threats and vandalism could be a politically motivated effort to “make people look bad,” rather than actual expressions of bias, according to people who took part in the meeting.

Read the rest at

Jews caught in the act again….Why would a group of people do these things is the question?


Healthcare Bill Fiasco Explained

The fiasco surrounding the collapse of the Trump administration’s attempt to replace “Obamacare” was caused by the fact that the now withdrawn legislation was ill-thought out and not substantially different from the rules it was going to supposedly replace.

In the rush to “repeal” Obamacare, no genuine thought was given to the measures really necessary to “fix” the healthcare system in general—mainly because the system is so broken that it, and the way the U.S. economy is run, and the racial makeup of that society, needs more than a “fix” but actually a complete overhaul.

Firstly, it is untrue—as many leftists still claim—that the poorest in America were without healthcare, even before Obamacare. Those who genuinely could not afford healthcare could always get what was called “Medicaid.”

The official definition of Medicaid is that it is a “joint federal and state program that helps with medical costs for some people with limited income and resources.”

In addition, another program called “Medicare” provides a federal health insurance program for people who are 65 or older, and certain younger people with disabilities.

In other words, there was always healthcare provided in America for people who could not genuinely pay for it themselves.

This service has, of course, become increasingly financially onerous on the taxpayers as the Third World element of the U.S. population has become more numerous. All the statistics show that there are three groups who draw the most from the entire welfare system while putting the least back in by way of tax revenue: blacks, and the legal and illegal Third World immigrant population.

“Obamacare,” or, as it is properly called, the Affordable Care Act, was supposed to provide “more Americans with access to affordable health insurance.” What this actually meant was that the taxpaying element of the population—which is overwhelmingly white—would be called upon to subsidize the premiums for privately provided healthcare for the “poorest” element of the population.

It is hardly necessary to point out who this “poorest” element of the population is.

As pointed out earlier, all that Obamacare actually does is obligate all working individuals to take out compulsory medical insurance—with private companies—to pay for health services.

Obamacare is not, as many still believe, “socialized healthcare,” but is in fact state-enforced capitalism.

Refusal to take part in this state-enforced capitalism is punishable by fines and other penalties—and contributors are expected to cross-subsidize those who cannot afford to pay, such as “immigrants,” and illegal aliens.

As a result, premiums charged by these private companies have sky-rocketed—because they are out to make a profit. As the unaffordability of the system becomes obvious, more and more of the healthcare insurers have dropped out of the market, leading to the inevitable crisis Obamacare now faces.

As pointed out in an editorial in the Investor’s Business Daily, the “decision to pull the American Health Care Act from the House floor because it lacked enough votes to pass was a culmination of months of bad decisions, poor planning, and terrible messaging by the GOP leadership in the House.”

The Investor’s Business Daily editorial accurately summed up the problem with last week’s so-called “replacement” bill as follows:

[U.S. House Leader and main architect of the bill, Paul] Ryan’s team repeatedly fumbled the ball, diluted the free-market message they should have been selling, and lost sight of the point of repealing ObamaCare — which was to bring down insurance costs for millions of middle class families who’ve seen their premiums skyrocket and their benefits diminish under ObamaCare.

The culmination of all this was a misbegotten bill that was far less free-market than Ryan’s “Better Way” blueprint issued over the summer, and that kept in place the very regulations and mandates that were causing ObamaCare to fail in the first place.

Having accepted the core premise of ObamaCare — that health insurance is a right that should be guaranteed by the federal government — the House bill ended up, by necessity, recreating various other pieces of ObamaCare as well.

ObamaCare’s income-based subsidies became age-based tax credits that were phased out at higher incomes. The individual-mandate tax penalty became a premium surcharge. The minimum benefits rules remained. The House even presented a watered-down fix for Medicaid.

The “Ryancare” bill was defeated by a group known as the “Freedom Caucus,” a group of at least 30 conservative Republican members in the House.

The chairman of the Freedom Caucus is Mark Meadows of North Carolina—and in a statement released on his official website, he had the following to say about the fiasco:

“I promised the people of North Carolina’s 11th District that I would fight for a full repeal of the Affordable Care Act and a replacement with a market-driven approach that brings down costs and provides more choices for the American people. I remain wholeheartedly committed to following through on this promise. I know President Trump is committed to repealing Obamacare and replacing it with a system that works for American families, and I look forward to working with him to do just that.”

It is increasingly clear that Trump erred significantly in allowing Ryan to try and push through an ill-thought out “reform” as quickly as possible, when it was clear to anyone who had studied the problem in detail that this “fix” would exacerbate, if not keep, the problems inherent in Obamacare.

Ultimately, healthcare in America can only really be “fixed” by a radical overhaul on societal and economic levels.

Firstly, the entire social structure needs to be reformed. The millions of Third Worlders currently parasiting off the welfare system need to be returned to their countries of origin.

This is vital because no medical aid system—financed as it will always be—by the white, First World population, will ever be able to provide endless medical services to an  ever-growing Third World population, which contributes almost nothing to the tax base.

Secondly, a clear definition has to be drawn between state-supplied medical services and those provided by the private sector, with no cross-over allowed. This step is necessary to prevent the capitalist profit-driven motive becoming paramount, and skewing the system.

Given the extent of these demands, it might well be asked if the American healthcare “system” can ever be “fixed” at all. It is a task which might very well be beyond the legendary ability of even a Donald Trump to correct.

Wikileaks: Hypocritical Marxist Feminist Clinton and Likeminded Dimwits Guilty of Soros´ Immigration Destruction of Europe

I know – it´s all in vain: Human stupidity is growing exponentially with education in the NWO. Nevertheless, I feel I have an obligation to inform people of what they are eagerly working at spreading in our societies.
Not because I think this devilry can be stopped – but because one or 2 might have second thoughts and omit joining the NWO – thereby possibly saving his soul on the coming Doomsday.

The Libyan War was Hillary Clinton´s war acc. to Julian Assange/Wikileaks.  Obama was opposed to it. When this cork of Africa was pulled, Africa´s migrants poured into Europe

Pat Condell: Sweden has the world´s first feminist government – and what a blessing: The stupid feminists love Muslims and their daily violence and raping which neither Muslim migrants, feminists or the Swedish police consider  crimes worth fighting. The law does not protect. The people you elected don´t protect against these Barbarians. 

The emancipated feminists have become so “liberated” that they fight for their right to return to slavery – this time Muslim slavery. See what this imam unwittingly commands women for hidden camera.

“Kill, kill, kill!!!” Broadcast on local TV2, “Danish” Imam Ismail says: ‘If a married or divorced woman engages in fornication, and she is not a virgin, she should be stoned to death. He added: ‘If someone violates their marriage, either man or woman, they commit adultery and their blood is thus halal and they should be killed by stoning.  If anyone abandons the religion he, too, should be killed. ‘If someone kills a Muslim, then he should be killed.’

Video Player


Here ignorant feminists can see what awaits them in the Sharia: Stoning

We are just conquering these countries” says this “Danish” Imam

And the Sharia has been meticulously planned – for the NWO Technocracy

Norway: Oslo Police: “We Have Lost the City”

Peter Springare is a courageous Swedish police officer, stating 22 of 24 suspects to be immigrants.
Police has lost control of Sweden´s 55 no-go-zones for whites and here and police officers are fleeing the corps in droves.

“Did you ever wonder why Sweden is so rapidly deteriorating into Muslim chaos? Sweden has the world´s first feminist government” 

Swedish Vice-Primeminister Isabella Lövin and the sister-hood of latter-day saints (pregnant and non-pregnant) recently posed for this photo to signal that the self-declared ‘first feminist government in the world’ will be taking no lectures from the current US President.

The Organisation of Iranian American Community Feb. 12, 2017 — UN Watch expressed concern that Sweden’s self-declared “first feminist government in the world” sacrificed its principles and betrayed the rights of Iranian women as Trade Minister Ann Linde and other female members walked past Iranian President Rouhani on Saturday all covered up in compliance with Iran’s compulsory Hijab law,
despite Stockholm’s promise to promote “a gender equality perspective” internationally,“European female politicians are hypocrites, says Mahsig Alinejad . “Because they stand up with French Muslim women and condemn the burkini ban—because they think compulsion is bad—but when it happens to Iran, they just care about money.”(Mahsig Alinrejad.

Swedish feminist disgrace: They betray the West and submit not only themselves – but all of us to Barbarian Islam 

“Sweden has the first feminist government in the world”.
Marxist Feminism is the NWO elite´s method to humiliate the males and pave the road for the Jesuit/Rothschild Communist New World Order. That these Marxist feminists want to change their freedom into Muslim slavery, Burqas, Niqabs, Burqas in their immense self-hatred after having educated their sons like girls – and vice versa is now making Europe crumbling. These sick minds even demand us to reintegrate into “the New Land”, their Muslim “Paradise”, the Sharia.  They even are sexually attracted by the low-IQ potent Muslim men rather tan with the miserable male products of their insane ideological education.

In declaring its “feminist foreign policy,” managed by foreign minister Margot Wallström (former EU Commission vice-president), deputy prime minister Isabella Lövin, and trade minister Ann Linde, the government pledged:

Equality between women and men is a fundamental aim of Swedish foreign policy. Ensuring that women and girls can enjoy their fundamental human rights is both an obligation within the framework of our international commitments, and a prerequisite for reaching Sweden’s broader foreign policy goals on peace, and security and sustainable development.

Swedish Trade Minister Ann Linde

The Swedish government of Marxist, hypocritical feminists is a catastrophe to Sweden´s neighbours as well

Sweden has world record of raping – risen by 1472% since Masonic Sweden became multicultural – and has become a disgrace to decent humanity.

These brainwashed women  are the willing tools in the hands of NWO manager George Soros – who has clearly presented his plan and motive.