Arch of Titus, Rome : The Roman triumph

The Arch of Titus is the oldest of the two remaining arches on the Forum Romanum. The triumphal arch was built in 81-85 AD to commemorate the capture of Jerusalem over the Jewish Zealots.

Jewish Revolt

Arch of Titus, Forum Romanum, Rome

Arch of Titus
In 66 AD Jewish Zealots started a revolt against the Roman occupation of Judea. Vespasian was sent from Rome to suppress the revolt. After Vespasian became emperor, his son Titus took over command of the besieging troops.

Titus captured Jerusalem in 70 AD with four legions and the revolt was completely crushed after the fall of the Masada fortress in 72 AD.

Emperor Titus

In 79 AD Titus succeeded his father as emperor of the Roman Empire. He died just two years later, in September 81 AD. The popular emperor was soon deified by the Roman Senate. Emperor Domitian, Titus’s brother and successor, commissioned the construction of the Arch of Titus that same year to honor his late brother and to commemorate the victory in the Jewish War. The arch was dedicated in 85 AD with large festivities.

The Arch

West facade of the Arch of Titus, Forum Romanum

West facade

Panel with triumphal procession, Arch of Titus, Forum Romanum

Triumphal Procession

inscription on the Arch of Titus

Inscription on the arch
The fifteen meter (about 50ft) tall arch is located at the Forum Romanum, at the highest point of the Via Sacra. It is the oldest surviving example of a Roman arch.

At the inside of the arch are two panels with reliefs. One depicts the triumphal procession with the spoils taken from the Second Temple in Jerusalem – the seven-branched candelabrum or Menorah, the silver trumpets and the Table of the Shewbread. The other one shows Titus in a chariot accompanied by the goddess Victoria and the goddess Roma.

The inscriptions in the frieze which mean ‘The Roman Senate and People to Deified Titus, Vespasian Augustus, son of Deified Vespasian’ were originally in bronze. The reliefs were also colored and the arch was topped by a bronze quadriga.


In the eleventh century the Arch of Titus was integrated into a fortress built by the Frangipani family, which helped the preservation of the monument. In 1821 the arch was restored by Giuseppe Valadier. Sections of the outer sides were rebuilt between 1822 and 1823 in travertine instead of marble, so they would be distinguishable from the original.

The Arch of Titus

Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema, The Triumph of Titus: AD 71, The Flavians, 1835 oil on panel, 44.3 x 29 cm (The Walters Art Museum) “In this canvas, the artist shows Titus returning to Rome in triumph following his capture of Jerusalem in AD 70. His father, Emperor Vespasian, clad in a white toga, leads the procession. Titus comes next, holding the hand of his daughter, Julia, who turns to address her father’s younger brother and successor, Domitian. In the background is the Temple of Jupiter Victor. Among the spoils from Jerusalem is a 7-branched candlestick from the temple. Alma-Tadema depicted these events by drawing on classical sources, like the reliefs on of the Arch of Titus and on the latest 19th-century scholarship regarding everyday life in Rome.”
Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema, The Triumph of Titus: AD 71, The Flavians, 1835 oil on panel, 44.3 x 29 cm (The Walters Art Museum) “the artist shows Titus returning to Rome in triumph following his capture of Jerusalem….His father, Emperor Vespasian…leads the procession. Titus comes next, holding the hand of his daughter, Julia, who turns to address her father’s younger brother and successor, Domitian…Alma-Tadema depicted these events by drawing on classical sources…and on the latest 19th-century scholarship regarding everyday life in Rome.” (source)

The Roman triumph

The Roman triumph was an ancient martial tradition—a parade so riotous that its symbolic culmination involved catapulting the victorious general (triumphator) to quasi-divine status for a single, heady day. The Romans marked his status by staining his face red using the mineral pigment cinnabar (Jupiter’s countenance was said to have the same ruddy hue).
The Romans traced the traditions of the triumph back to their own beginnings. Rome’s legendary founder, Romulus, was the first to celebrate the rite when he defeated and killed Acron, the king of Caenina.

Victory in Judea

In the summer of 71 C.E. the Roman emperor Vespasian and Titus, his eldest son, had quelled a dangerous revolt in the Roman province of Judea and returned to Rome to celebrate this major accomplishment. Not only that, but the Flavian dynasty (Vespasian and his two sons Titus and Domitian) had succeeded in winning the throne during the year 69 C.E.—a time of bloody civil turmoil known as the “Year of the Four Emperors.”

Judaea Capta Sesterti with portrait of Titus (photo: copyright © David Hendin, used by permission)
Judaea Capta Sesterti (Roman coin) with portrait of Titus (left) and a personification of Judea, captured (right)  (photo: copyright © David Hendin, used by permission)
A great deal was at stake for Vespasian and Titus, both relative political newcomers from a family line (Flavius) that was not particularly illustrious. The honor of the triumph was accorded to them jointly, and the spectacle (as described by Flavius Josephus in his text known as The Jewish War) rivaled anything that Rome had ever seen before: spoils, prisoners, pictorial narratives in abundance. All this was meant to awe the spectators and to transport the viewers to the battlefields of the war in the east. But the ritual of the triumph, its parade—even the semi-divine status accorded the triumphator—was ephemeral. For this reason, the later construction of permanent monuments (like the Arch of Titus) served to make an impact on the urban landscape (and the collective memory of city dwellers) that lasted far longer than the events of the day itself.

Arch of Titus, after 81 C.E., Rome
Arch of Titus and the Colosseum, Rome 
(photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
The tradition of triumphal monuments connects the Flavians to the traditions of the Roman Republic. Early monuments included columns—for instance the rostrate column (columna rostrata) of Caius Duilius (c. 260 B.C.E.)—and the early triumphal arch prototype known as the fornix Fabianus erected in the Forum Romanum by Q. Fabius Allobrogicus in 121 B.C.E. The emperor Augustus continued the use of the triumphal arch, even though he restructured the institution of the triumph itself. Since the Flavians were relative newcomers to the Roman power structure, they needed as much legitimization as they could find, and thus participating in the time-honored traditions of the triumph and its stock monuments made a good deal of sense.

Topography and the triumph

View across the Roman Forum (Forum Romanum) to the Arch of Titus (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
View across the Roman Forum (Forum Romanum) to the Arch of Titus (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
The Arch of Titus is located in Summa Sacra Via, the highest point of the Sacra Via, Rome’s “Sacred Way” that served as its main processional street. Furthemore, the Arch of Titus   commands a key point along the triumphal route (via Triumphalis)—one that visually links the valley of the Flavian amphitheater (known to us as the Colosseum) to the valley of the Forum Romanum and the Capitoline Hill beyond. Many triumphal parades had passed along this route for many centuries, thus the choice to place a permanent triumphal monument astride the route was not accidental but, rather, deliberately evocative of the fact that the triumph as a ritual both created and reinforced collective memory for Romans. This arch, built as an honorific monument, honored Titus posthumously and was a project executed by his younger brother and imperial successor, Domitian (emperor, 81-96 C.E.). Another arch dedicated to Titus, triumphal in its nature, was located in the valley of the Circus Maximus—but this arch only survives in the form of scattered sculptural fragments and a Medieval transcription of its dedicatory inscription. Recent archaeological excavations (2015) in the Circus Maximus have revealed previously unknown remains of this “lost” arch, including elements of its foundations.

The attic inscription

Attic inscription, Arch of Titus, after 81 C.E., Rome (photo: Dr. Steven Fine, used by permission)
Attic inscription, Arch of Titus, after 81 C.E., Rome (photo: Dr. Steven Fine, used by permission)
The surviving ancient attic inscription (above) records the dedication of the monument to Titus. Given that Titus is identified as having been deified (divus), we learn that the monument’s completion can only have occurred after Titus’ death in September of 81 C.E.
The text of the attic inscription reads:
The Senate and the Roman people (dedicate this) to the deified Titus Vespasian Augustus, son of the deified Vespasian
The inscription makes the dedication a public one—undertaken on the part of the Senate and the Roman People (Senatus Populusque Romanus), and reminds viewers of Titus’ link to his likewise deified father, Vespasian, who had died in 79 C.E. This dedication is an example of shrewd power politics on the part of the Emperor Domitian—he had been too young to take part in the military glory enjoyed by his father and brother. Perhaps he sought to bask in the generally favorable public opinion they enjoyed as he himself made the transition to power.

Relief sculpture

View of the vault of the arch’s passageway, with a relief of the apotheosis of Titus
View of the vault of the arch’s passageway, with a relief of the apotheosis of Titus (photo: Dr. Steven Fine, used by permission)
Two panel reliefs flank the single passageway of the arch, and a third adorns the vault (the vault relief is above). The subject matter of the flanking reliefs draws upon the 71 C.E. triumph of Vespasian and Titus, depicting key triumphal episodes following the fall of Jerusalem. In one scene (below)  Romans carry spoils from the Temple in Jerusalem, including a Menorah, sacred trumpets and the showbread table. Recent studies have shown these items were painted with yellow ochre.

Relief panel showing The Spoils of Jerusalem being brought into Rome, Arch of Titus, Rome, after 81 C.E., marble, 7 feet,10 inches high
Relief panel showing The Spoils of Jerusalem being brought into Rome, Arch of Titus, Rome, after 81 C.E., marble, 7 feet,10 inches high (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
The triumph panel opposite depicts Titus in a triumphal four-horse chariot (quadriga) followed closely by the goddess of Victory (Victoria), preceded by official attendants known as lictors, and accompanied by symbolic representations (genii) of the Senate, the Roman people, and Virtus (manly virtue) (below).

Relief panel showing Titus in a triumphal four-horse chariot, Arch of Titus, Rome, after 81 C.E., marble, 7 feet,10 inches high
Relief panel showing Titus in a triumphal four-horse chariot, Arch of Titus, Rome, after 81 C.E., marble, 7 feet,10 inches high (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
Since the triumphal parade would have passed through the very spot on which the arch was constructed, these images serve as powerful evocations of collective memories shared and held by the Roman people. The depiction in the reliefs echoes the riotous parade described by Flavius Josephus. The program of Flavian architecture largely transformed the physical landscape of Rome; this program was replete with visual cues and reminders of Flavian success, all of which stemmed from and centered around the great triumph at the culmination of the Jewish War.

Restoration and current state

Canaletto, The Arch of Titus in Rome, 1742-44, oil on canvas, 38 x 28 cm (Galleria dell’Accademia Carrara, Bergamo)
Canaletto, The Arch of Titus in Rome, 1742-44, oil on canvas, 38 x 28 cm (Galleria dell’Accademia Carrara, Bergamo)
During the eleventh century the arch was incorporated into a fortress built by the Frangipani family in Rome, resulting in damage to the panel reliefs that is still visible today. In 1821, during the pontificate of Pope Pius VII, Giuseppe Valadier undertook a major restoration of the surviving structure. In order to identify those portions that had been restored, Valadier employed travertine as opposed to the original marble. The western side of the attic received a new inscription at the time of this restoration. Canaletto’s famous painting of the arch grants a view of the monument’s condition prior to Valadier’s restoration.

Paul Philippe Cret, The National Memorial Arch In Valley Forge Park in Pennsylvania, erected 1910
Paul Philippe Cret, The National Memorial Arch In Valley Forge Park in Pennsylvania, erected 1917


The Arch of Titus has long provided a source of artistic inspiration. Leon Battista Alberti was inspired by its form as he designed the facade of the basilica of Sant’Andrea in Mantua, Italy, after 1472. The Arch of Titus has inspired many modern commemorative arches, notably the Arc de Triomphe in Paris (1806), Stanford White’s Arch in Washington Square Park in New York City (1892), the United States National Memorial Arch in Valley Forge National Historical Park designed by Paul Philippe Cret (1917), and Edward Lutyens’ India Gate in New Delhi (1921).
Essay by Dr. Jeffrey Becker

Additional resources:
Mary Beard, The Roman Triumph (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap, 2009).
A. J. Boyle and W. J. Dominik, Flavian Rome: culture, image, text (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2003).
F. Coarelli, Divus Vespasianus. Il Bimillenario dei Flavi (Milan: Electa, 2009)
R. H. Darwall-Smith, Emperors and Architecture: a Study of Flavian Rome (Latomus, 1996).
J. C. Edmondson, S. Mason, and J. B. Rives, Flavius Josephus and Flavian Rome (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005).
R. Ross Holloway, “Some Remarks on the Arch of Titus,” L’antiquité classique 56 (1987) pp. 183-191.
M. Pfanner, Der Titusbogen (Mainz: P. von Zabern, 1983).
L. Roman, “Martial and the City of Rome.” The Journal of Roman Studies 100 (2010) pp. 1-30.
H. S. Versnel, Triumphus: an inquiry into the origin, development and meaning of the Roman triumph  (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970).
L. Yarden, The spoils of Jerusalem on the Arch of Titus: a re-investigation (Stockholm : Svenska Institutet i Rom; Göteborg : Distributor, P. Åströms, 1991).

Holocaust Day – The Time Is Ripe For A Jewish Apology

by  Gilad Atzmon

A mass protest in Paris on Sunday against French President François Hollande turned into an anti-Jewish demonstration and ended in clashes between police and protesters.

Seemingly, Jewish organisations around the world are scared by the recent developments in France. Once again, they clearly failed to appreciate the growing mass fatigue of Shoah indoctrination and belligerent lobby politics.

However, I would contend that instead of whining about the “rise of anti-Semitism”, Jews better, once and for all, learn to ask why?  Why the Jews again? Why are they hated? What is it in Jewish politics that evokes so much resentment? Why does it happen time after time?

It wasn’t easy for me to admit in my latest book that Jewish suffering is actually embedded in Jewish culture. In other words, Jews are actually destined to bring disasters on themselves. Jewish politics and culture, unfortunately, is obnoxious, abusive, as well as racist, and supremacist to the bone. Jewish culture is set to infuriate the Goyim just because Jews are defined by negation – that chilling sensation of being hated.

Interestingly enough, early Zionism, was a promise to change it all. Herzl, Nordau, Borochov and Weizmann believed that a “homecoming project” would transform the Diaspora Jews into ethical new Israelites.  They were sure that a settlement project would make the Jew lovable and respected.

But they were obviously wrong. Zionism was destined to crash.  In spite of being driven by anti-Jewish sentiments, Zionism was quickly defeated by Jewishness (Jewish spirit, culture and ideology). It matured into a vile chauvinist amplification of every possible crude Jewish symptom it was initially supposed to eradicate.

YouTube – Veterans Today –

Many Jews around the world are commemorating the Holocaust this week. But if I am correct, maybe the time is ripe for Jewish and Zionist organisations to draw the real and most important lesson from the Holocaust.

Instead of constantly blaming the Goyim for inflicting pain on Jews, it is time for Jews to look in the mirror and try to identify what it is in Jews and their culture that evokes so much fury. It may even be possible that some Jews would take this opportunity to apologise to the Gentiles around them for evoking all this anger.

Indeed, I take this opportunity to make an apology, even though I have not been a Jew for quite a while.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity politics and Jewish Power in particular – available on  &


Holocaust Memorial Day in Liverpool

Liverpool’s homosexual Lord Mayor Gary Millar in full regalia and defender of the Big Lie Rabbi Mordechai Wollenberg crept into the gardens of St Johns prior to 9am on the morning of the 27th January 2014 where it appeared that a rather secretive memorial took place. –…

Before and after the “Holocaust”: Jewish population numbers in 1933 and 1948

By wmw_admin on November 30, 2013

Rebel of Oz — Nov 30, 2013

For over a century, the Jewish World Almanac has been widely regarded as the most authentic source for the world’s Jewish population numbers. Academics all over the world, including the editors of the Encyclopedia Britannica, used to rely on the accuracy of those numbers. Here is what the World Alamanacs of 1933 and 1948 had to say about the world population of Jews.

World Almanac 1933

World Almanac 1948

In other words, according to the World Almanac the world population of Jews increased (!) between 1933 and 1948 from 15,315,000 to 15,753,000. If the German government under Adolf Hitler had – as alleged – murdered six million Jews those losses should have been reflected in the Jewish population numbers quoted in the World Almanac.
The suspicions raised by above numbers concerning the veracity of the allegations made against the Hitler government are confirmed by the official three-volume report by the International Committee of the Red Cross, released 1948 in Geneva, according to which 272,000 concentration camp inmates died in German custody, about half of them Jews. The following article elaborates.

A Factual Appraisal Of The ‘Holocaust’ By The Red Cross

The Jews And The Concentration Camps: No Evidence Of Genocide

There is one survey of the Jewish question in Europe during World War Two and the conditions of Germany’s concentration camps which is almost unique in its honesty and objectivity, the three-volume Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War, Geneva, 1948.
This comprehensive account from an entirely neutral source incorporated and expanded the findings of two previous works: Documents sur l’activité du CICR en faveur des civils détenus dans les camps de concentration en Allemagne 1939-1945 (Geneva, 1946), and Inter Arma Caritas: the Work of the ICRC during the Second World War (Geneva, 1947). The team of authors, headed by Frédéric Siordet, explained in the opening pages of the Report that their object, in the tradition of the Red Cross, had been strict political neutrality, and herein lies its great value.
The ICRC successfully applied the 1929 Geneva military convention in order to gain access to civilian internees held in Central and Western Europe by the Germany authorities. By contrast, the ICRC was unable to gain any access to the Soviet Union, which had failed to ratify the Convention. The millions of civilian and military internees held in the USSR, whose conditions were known to be by far the worst, were completely cut off from any international contact or supervision.
The Red Cross Report is of value in that it first clarifies the legitimate circumstances under which Jews were detained in concentration camps, i.e. as enemy aliens. In describing the two categories of civilian internees, the Report distinguishes the second type as “Civilians deported on administrative grounds (in German, “Schutzhäftlinge”), who were arrested for political or racial motives because their presence was considered a danger to the State or the occupation forces” (Vol. 111, p. 73). These persons, it continues, “were placed on the same footing as persons arrested or imprisoned under common law for security reasons.” (P.74).
The Report admits that the Germans were at first reluctant to permit supervision by the Red Cross of people detained on grounds relating to security, but by the latter part of 1942, the ICRC obtained important concessions from Germany. They were permitted to distribute food parcels to major concentration camps in Germany from August 1942, and “from February 1943 onwards this concession was extended to all other camps and prisons” (Vol. 111, p. 78). The ICRC soon established contact with camp commandants and launched a food relief programme which continued to function until the last months of 1945, letters of thanks for which came pouring in from Jewish internees.

Red Cross Recipients Were Jews

The Report states that “As many as 9,000 parcels were packed daily. >From the autumn of 1943 until May 1945, about 1,112,000 parcels with a total weight of 4,500 tons were sent off to the concentration camps” (Vol. III, p. 80). In addition to food, these contained clothing and pharmaceutical supplies. “Parcels were sent to Dachau, Buchenwald, Sangerhausen, Sachsenhausen, Oranienburg, Flossenburg, Landsberg-am-Lech, Flöha, Ravensbrück, Hamburg-Neuengamme, Mauthausen, Theresienstadt, Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen, to camps near Vienna and in Central and Southern Germany. The principal recipients were Belgians, Dutch, French, Greeks, Italians, Norwegians, Poles and stateless Jews” (Vol. III, p. 83).
In the course of the war, “The Committee was in a position to transfer and distribute in the form of relief supplies over twenty million Swiss francs collected by Jewish welfare organisations throughout the world, in particular by the American Joint Distribution Committee of New York” (Vol. I, p. 644). This latter organisation was permitted by the German Government to maintain offices in Berlin until the American entry into the war. The ICRC complained that obstruction of their vast relief operation for Jewish internees came not from the Germans but from the tight Allied blockade of Europe. Most of their purchases of relief food were made in Rumania, Hungary and Slovakia.
The ICRC had special praise for the liberal conditions which prevailed at Theresienstadt up to the time of their last visits there in April 1945. This camp, “where there were about 40,000 Jews deported from various countries was a relatively privileged ghetto” (Vol. III, p. 75). According to the Report, “‘The Committee’s delegates were able to visit the camp at Theresienstadt (Terezin) which was used exclusively for Jews and was governed by special conditions. From information gathered by the Committee, this camp had been started as an experiment by certain leaders of the Reich … These men wished to give the Jews the means of setting up a communal life in a town under their own administration and possessing almost complete autonomy. . . two delegates were able to visit the camp on April 6th, 1945. They confirmed the favourable impression gained on the first visit” (Vol. I, p . 642).
The ICRC also had praise for the regime of Ion Antonescu of Fascist Rumania where the Committee was able to extend special relief to 183,000 Rumanian Jews until the time of the Soviet occupation. The aid then ceased, and the ICRC complained bitterly that it never succeeded “in sending anything whatsoever to Russia” (Vol. II, p. 62). The same situation applied to many of the German camps after their “liberation” by the Russians. The ICRC received a voluminous flow of mail from Auschwitz until the period of the Soviet occupation, when many of the internees were evacuated westward. But the efforts of the Red Cross to send relief to internees remaining at Auschwitz under Soviet control were futile. However, food parcels continued to be sent to former Auschwitz inmates transferred west to such camps as Buchenwald and Oranienburg.

No Evidence Of Genocide

One of the most important aspects of the Red Cross Report is that it clarifies the true cause of those deaths that undoubtedly occurred in the camps toward the end of the war. Says the Report: “In the chaotic condition of Germany after the invasion during the final months of the war, the camps received no food supplies at all and starvation claimed an increasing number of victims. Itself alarmed by this situation, the German Government at last informed the ICRC on February 1st, 1945 … In March 1945, discussions between the President of the ICRC and General of the S.S. Kaltenbrunner gave even more decisive results. Relief could henceforth be distributed by the ICRC, and one delegate was authorised to stay in each camp …” (Vol. III, p. 83).
Clearly, the German authorities were at pains to relieve the dire situation as far as they were able. The Red Cross are quite explicit in stating that food supplies ceased at this time due to the Allied bombing of German transportation, and in the interests of interned Jews they had protested on March 15th, 1944 against “the barbarous aerial warfare of the Allies” (Inter Arma Caritas, p. 78). By October 2nd, 1944, the ICRC warned the German Foreign Office of the impending collapse of the German transportation system, declaring that starvation conditions for people throughout Germany were becoming inevitable.
In dealing with this comprehensive, three-volume Report, it is important to stress that the delegates of the International Red Cross found no evidence whatever at the camps in Axis occupied Europe of a deliberate policy to exterminate the Jews. In all its 1,600 pages the Report does not even mention such a thing as a gas chamber. It admits that Jews, like many other wartime nationalities, suffered rigours and privations, but its complete silence on the subject of planned extermination is ample refutation of the Six Million legend. Like the Vatican representatives with whom they worked, the Red Cross found itself unable to indulge in the irresponsible charges of genocide which had become the order of the day. So far as the genuine mortality rate is concerned, the Report points out that most of the Jewish doctors from the camps were being used to combat typhus on the eastern front, so that they were unavailable when the typhus epidemics of 1945 broke out in the camps (Vol. I, p. 204 ff) – Incidentally, it is frequently claimed that mass executions were carried out in gas chambers cunningly disguised as shower facilities. Again the Report makes nonsense of this allegation. “Not only the washing places, but installations for baths, showers and laundry were inspected by the delegates. They had often to take action to have fixtures made less primitive, and to get them repaired or enlarged” (Vol. III, p. 594).

Not All Were Interned

Volume III of the Red Cross Report, Chapter 3 (I. Jewish Civilian Population) deals with the “aid given to the Jewish section of the free population,” and this chapter makes it quite plain that by no means all of the European Jews were placed in internment camps, but remained, subject to certain restrictions, as part of the free civilian population. This conflicts directly with the “thoroughness” of the supposed “extermination programme”, and with the claim in the forged Höss memoirs that Eichmann was obsessed with seizing “every single Jew he could lay his hands on.”
In Slovakia, for example, where Eichmann’s assistant Dieter Wisliceny was in charge, the Report states that “A large proportion of the Jewish minority had permission to stay in the country, and at certain periods Slovakia was looked upon as a comparative haven of refuge for Jews, especially for those coming from Poland. Those who remained in Slovakia seem to have been in comparative safety until the end of August 1944, when a rising against the German forces took place. While it is true that the law of May 15th, 1942 had brought about the internment of several thousand Jews, these people were held in camps where the conditions of food and lodging were tolerable, and where the internees were allowed to do paid work on terms almost equal to those of the free labour market” (Vol. I, p. 646).
Not only did large numbers of the three million or so European Jews avoid internment altogether, but the emigration of Jews continued throughout the war, generally by way of Hungary, Rumania and Turkey. Ironically, post-war Jewish emigration from German-occupied territories was also facilitated by the Reich, as in the case of the Polish Jews who had escaped to France before its occupation. “The Jews from Poland who, whilst in France, had obtained entrance permits to the United States were held to be American citizens by the German occupying authorities, who further agreed to recognize the validity of about three thousand passports issued to Jews by the consulates of South American countries” (Vol. I, p. 645).
As future U.S. citizens, these Jews were held at the Vittel camp in southern France for American aliens. The emigration of European Jews from Hungary in particular proceeded during the war unhindered by the German authorities. “Until March 1944,” says the. Red Cross Report, “Jews who had the privilege of visas for Palestine were free to leave Hungary” (Vol. I, p. 648). Even after the replacement of the Horthy Government in 1944 (following its attempted armistice with the Soviet Union) with a government more dependent on German authority, the emigration of Jews continued.
The Committee secured the pledges of both Britain and the United States “to give support by every means to the emigration of Jews from Hungary,” and from the U.S. Government the ICRC received a message stating that “The Government of the United States … now specifically repeats its assurance that arrangements will be made by it for the care of all Jews who in the present circumstances are allowed to leave” (Vol. I, p . 649).
Biedermann agreed that in the nineteen instances that “Did Six Million Really Die?” quoted from the Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War and Inter Arma Caritas (this includes the above material), it did so accurately.
A quote from Charles Biedermann (a delegate of the International Committee of the Red Cross and Director of the Red Cross’ International Tracing Service) under oath at the Zündel Trial (February 9, 10, 11 and 12, 1988).

The above is chapter nine from the book “Did Six Million Really Die?”.


Posted in Essential Reading, Hidden and Revisionist History, Israel, ‘Anti-Semitism’, Zionism and US-UK allies | 32 Responses


anne frank

Ed note (Trevor) ~ (((Anne Frank))) has now (figuratively speaking) come back from the dead to chastise Trump. But did you know her “diary” is an admitted fake, just like the rest of the holocrock? (See: Zundel Trial, Hilberg testimony)

Israel Won the First Round of the French Election

                                                                                By Sajjad Shaukat for Veterans Today

Recall that three days before the general elections in Spain, the train bombings in Madrid on March 11, 2004, which killed more than 200 people turned the election results in favour of Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero whose Socialist Party won the elections, as he had said that Spain where the “US war has been deeply unpopular”, “would withdraw its troops.” While government led by the Prime Minister Jose Maria staunchly supported the American-led war in Iraq lost the election. General masses in Spain held the North African immigrants linked to Al-Qaeda for the train bombings, while the Prime Minister Aznar’s attempts to blame the attack on Basque terror group ETA backfired the voters.

Immediately after his victory in the Spanish elections, Zapatero had announced that Spain would withdraw its troops from Iraq. The statement of the Zapatero was greatly criticized by America that was made after the bomb blasts in Spain.

The victory of the Socialist Party in Spain was being called by some in Europe and America as a victory of terrorism, a precedent that offers Al-Qaeda or groups like it the notion that they can alter the democratic process with bombs and murder. A former member of the Spanish Parliament, Pedro Schwartz remarked, “Al-Qaeda won the election”.

Similarly, three days before France’s presidential elections, held on Sunday (April 23, 2017), a French policeman was shot dead and two others were wounded in central Paris on April 20, this year whena gunman wielding a machine gun leapt out of a car and opened fire on the Champs-Elysees, Paris’s most famous boulevard. Via its Amaq news agency, the Islamic State group (Also known as Daesh, ISIS, ISIL) claimed that the attack was carried out by “Abu Yousuf al-Baljiki (the Belgian) and he is one of the Islamic State’s fighters.”

French President Francois Hollande said that he was convinced the “cowardly killing” on the Champs Elysees boulevard was an act of terrorism.

Karim Cheurfi, a 39-year-old French national who was shot dead by the police was identified as the attacker. Prosecutors said that a note defending ISIS fell out of his pocket, although there was no previous evidence of radicalization.

After the shooting, the three main candidates canceled campaign events and instead made televised statements in which they competed to talk tough on security and vowed a crackdown on ISIS.

The incident brought issues of terrorism, security and immigration back to the forefront of the campaign. The ultra-nationalist and far-right candidate—the anti-immigration National Front leader Marine Le Pen demanded the closure of all Islamist mosques, repeating her call for Europe’s partly open borders to be closed. He has also called for campaigning generally to be suspended.

Le Pen’s opponents, meanwhile, urged France to stand against the hard-line rhetoric that has dominated her campaign.

Prime Minister Cazeneuve Bernard accused Le Pen of trying to capitalize on the attack by seeking to exploit fear “for exclusively political ends.”

As regards the results of the first round of the presidential election, the French Interior ministry announced on Monday (April 24) that centrist Emmanuel Macron of the independent En Marche party won 23.75 percent votes and the far-right’s Marine Le Pen of France’s National Front party won 21.53 percent votes.

According to a poll from Ipsos/Sopra Steria, “Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen will face one another in the final round of the French presidential election on May 7. Macron is expected to win the second round of the French election with 62 percent of the vote versus 38 percent for Le Pen.”

In a speech made after Sunday’s exit polls were released—the far-right candidate Le Pen vowed to defend France against globalization and declared that now is the time to free the French population from arrogant elite. On April 24, Le Pen continued to emphasize the anti-immigrant and anti-globalization views which propelled her into the second round, and she denounced the efforts of the mainstream parties to keep her out of the presidency. Le Pen also called Macron “weak” on terrorism, an issue that drew renewed attention days before the first round of voting, when a gunman on the Champs-Élysées, in central Paris, killed a police officer.

Some of Le Pen’s advisers said, in interviews with French media on April 24, “They were hoping to lure some of the supporters of the defeated Mélenchon, whose populist program bore similarities to that of Le Pen: hostility to the European Union, NATO and the forces of globalization; and a forgiving attitude toward Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin.”

The Republican Party’s Francois Fillon who got 20 percent votes, was slightly ahead of the far-left’s Jean-Luc Melenchon, who had 19 percent. Fillon said that he was the sole person responsible for his defeat and adding that he also intends to vote for Macron as Le Pen, he stated, would lead the country to failure.

Le Pen also wants France to leave the EU, and dropping the shared euro currency to return to the French franc.

Macron who wants closer cooperation between the bloc’s 28 nations, a united Europe with open borders, supports globalization and the pro-free market.

Besides Fillon and Socialist Prime Minister Bernard Cazeneuve, including politicians from the Socialist and Les Républicains parties–the mainstream centre-left and centre-right groups which have dominated French politics for decades, but found themselves shut out by voters–united on April 23 in urging the people to vote for Macron on May 7, also stated that because Le Pen’s programme would bankrupt France and throw the EU into chaos, while citing the history of violence and intolerance of Le Pen’s far-right National Front party.

President, François Hollande stated, “He would vote for Macron who is his former economy minister, because Le Pen represents both the danger of the isolation of France and of rupture with the EU…A far-right president would deeply divide France.”

The fact of the matter is that if becomes the president of France, Emmanuel Macron will maintain the US-led status quo in the world and will further advance the Israeli agenda against Russia, China, Syria, Pakistan etc, and the Muslims, while further advancing the international forces of globalization, controlled by the wealthy Jews and the elite class at the cost of small countries and the poor class.

He has set aside the fact that after the disintegration of the former Soviet Union, in the unipolar world, the Third World and Muslim countries were compelled to realign their domestic policies according to Washington’s dictates. In order to obtain the hidden agenda of Jews, the US imposed its sudden terms of globalization such as free markets, privatization and de-nationalization etc. on the ill-prepared developing countries, which left behind shattered nations and a global financial crisis. It further widened the gap between the poor and the rich countries or G-7 countries. The corporations and international financial institutions like IMF and World Bank which are indirectly controlled by Jews have continued to drive the project of globalization through the United States.

Regarding Macron’s relationship with Israel, under the Caption “Emmanuel Macron’s Israeli Ties”, Gil Hoffman wrote in Jerusalem Post, “Israeli politicians across the political map boast of friendship with the French presidential candidate, expressing their support ahead of the second round of elections. Israeli politicians who have met Emmanuel Macron said Monday they are impressed with the French presidential candidate. Macron, who will face a runoff race against far-right candidate Marine Le Pen on May 7, was in Israel in September 2015 when he was economy minister and met with his counterpart at the time, Arye Deri…I was very impressed by him,” Deri said…But two Israeli politicians who see themselves as future prime ministers have built close ties with the French candidate…Macron met Labor leadership candidate Erel Margalit…Margalit, who was a hi-tech entrepreneur before he entered politics, said the two have met four or five times, sometimes spending a full day together discussing innovation…If Macron is elected, France will embark on an innovation economy and Israel will be at the center of its economic cooperation, Margalit said.”

On April 18, 2017, under the title Macron Fights for France’s Jewish Vote, Michael Wilner wrote in Jerusalem Post, “France’s leading presidential candidate sees threats to the nation’s Jews from the Right and Left. Across France’s largest cities, where the nation’s remaining Jews are concentrated, up to 10 armed guards protect each synagogue on a daily basis ever since a national emergency went into effect over two years ago…Indeed, French Jews have been fleeing the country in fear of violence against them for Israel and the United States….Emmanuel Macron fears this as well. The 39-year-old presidential candidate–an unknown quantity here just two years ago–is campaigning for the Jewish vote, keenly aware of the threat. But when France goes to the polls on Sunday, its Jews will face a unique choice: To vote in the spirit of Jewish Americans…or in the Israeli posture…Macron is betting…appealing to Jewish community values shared with the French Republic…He knows there is a real danger from a double extremism–from the far-Right with Marine Le Pen, and from the far-Left, said Gilles Taieb, a prominent member of the French Jewish community who joined Macron’s En Marche! campaign in August…Senior campaign officials told The Jerusalem Post that Macron considers Le Pen (National Front) a threat to French Jews, woven from the same cloth as her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, who famously minimized the Holocaust during his own political rise…Yet in recent weeks, she has made comments of her own that suggest she shares her father’s views.”

In this regard, Haaretz an Israeli newspaper ( pointed out on April, 23 and 24, 2017, “In a race…Macron, a pro-European Union ex-banker and economy minister…received slightly more votes than Le Pen…Speaking on Holocaust Remembrance Day, Moshe Kantor described Le Pen as “dangerous” and added that it was extremely regrettable that more than one in five French voters voted for Le Pen…Kantor highlighted that the 48-year-old National Front leader recently made comments against the historic record of the Holocaust which makes her no less dangerous than her Holocaust-denying father who she has tried to hide…[On April 21] Russian Chief Rabbi Berel Lazar called on French Jews to leave their country if the far right politician Marine Le Pen is elected president…Le Pen recently called for banning the wearing of the kippah in public and for making it illegal for French nationals to also have an Israeli passport…As for Le Pen, she has been officially ostracized by Israel throughout her political career. Israel accepts the policy of the French Jewish leadership that sees her National Front party as anti-Semitic and therefore has no ties with it.”

It is notable that Macron did not mention, as to how he will eliminate ISIS, while all other candidates have vowed to destroy the ISIS. It further creates doubt about her Israeli connections.

Fillon had stated that if elected, his foreign policy priority would be the destruction of ISIS. He said, “In times such as these we have to demonstrate that France is united…We also have to be clear that we are in a state of emergency. We are at war. This fight for freedom and for the security of the French people must be the priority of the next five-year term.”

Fillon’s statement reminds that just after the September 11 tragedy inside the United States, President George W. Bush said, “We are at war” and used the words, “crusade against the evil-doers”, adding to the perception that the ongoing ‘different war’ against terrorism is actually a war against the Muslim countries.

Under the mask of the 9/11 catastrophe, preplanned strategy of the neo-conservatives headed towards unexpected developments such as employment of pressure-diplomacy on the weak states—Muslim countries like Pakistan, Indonesia etc., including almost all the Arab states and the Western countries which also include Europe joined Bush’s fake global war on terror. US did not bother for rise of more militancy and internal instability in these countries, because it wanted to destabilize these countries such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan etc. to obtain the goals of a greater Israel. Al-Qaeda which was created by America has continuously been used by the US President Bush and the President Barack Obama and some Western countries as a scapegoat to target Labia, Syria and to malign Pakistan as the latter is the only nuclear country in the Muslim World, and to propagate against Tehran’s peaceful nuclear progragmme. In all cases, the purpose behind was to safeguard the interests of the Zionists and Israel.

It is notable that while making Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda as scapegoats, a number of fake video messages were telecast on various TV channels and websites by some Zionist Jews and Israeli secret agency Mossad to obtain Israel’s anti-Muslim aims. For example, during the November 2004 elections in the US, a fake video tape helped the George W. Bush to get lead over John Kerry.

President Obama who created ISIL, used it and Al-Qaeda, including their affiliated outfits through CIA to continue the phony war on terror to secure the illegitimate interests of Israel. If the double game of President Bush (The Senior) and George W. Bush franchised Al-Qaeda on global level, President Obama’s dual policy franchised both Al-Qaeda and ISIS as part of the anti-Muslim campaign and left no stone unturned in advancing the agenda of the Zionists, Israeli lobbies and the neoconservatives in the pretext of global war on terror.

It is mentionable that when Iraq-based ISIS which itself broke away from Al-Qaeda, proclaimed a worldwide caliphate by its leader Abu Baker al-Baghdadi, on 29 June 2014, ISIS’s criminal actions had widely been criticized in the world, with many Islamic communities judging the group to be unrepresentative of Islam. One of ISIS’s goals has been to establish a radical Sunni Islamic state in Iraq and Syria Jordan, Palestine etc. (Levant region). It has been used by the CIA and Mossad for distorting the image of Islam and for inciting the feelings of Western Christians and Kurds against Muslims. Besides some Islamic countries, a majority of the religious extremists (Muslims) from the Western world, especially from France joined the ISIS. In this context, oblivion on the part of America and Europe about ISIS recruits from their countries is questionable.

Taking cognizance of the grievances of the international community, and the sole superpower’s injustices, Russian President Vladimir Putin exposed the fake global war on terror—since September 30, 2015, various unexpected developments frustrated Israel and America. In this respect, Russian successful airstrikes on the ISIS targets in the northern Syria and Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, its coalition with Iran, Iraq, the Syrian army-the National Defense Forces (NDF) and Lebanon-based Hezbollah in support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, retreat of the CIA-supported rebels and mercenaries after their failure to topple the Assad government, proving links of Al-Qaeda’s Al-Nusra Front and ISIS with America and Israel, Putin’s clear-cut statement, indicating the Zionist regime in the US and  Israel for their “phony war on ISIS” surprised the Israel-led America and some European countries who wanted to oust the Assad regime.

Taking note of these developments and some other ones such as reluctance of NATO countries to support America’s fake global war on terror, acceptance of Syrian refuges by the European countries, especially Germany and the EU rule to boycott goods produced in Israeli settlements on the West Bank, Israeli Mossad which was in collaboration with the vulnerable CIA operatives arranged terror attacks in Paris on the night of November 13, 2016. As part of the double game, these terror assaults were conducted by these secret agencies, particularly Mossad which was in connivance with the ISIS terrorists who used the home-grown terrorists of France.

French President Francois Hollande who declared emergency in the country, said, “It is an act of war that was committed by a terrorist army, a jihadist army, Daesh against France…France would act with “all the necessary means, and on all terrains, inside and outside, in coordination with our allies, who are, themselves, targeted by this terrorist threat.”

Israel succeeded in its sinister designs, Europe was put on high alert and Paris attacks were being taken as assaults on the whole continent. Afterwards, France started airstrikes on the ISIS targets in Syria.

However, owing to the irresponsible approach of Western leaders, far right-wing parties and “Stop Islam” movement in the West, especially in Europe are becoming popular by largely attracting their people. Amid a migrant crisis, sluggish economic growth and growing disillusionment with the European Union, right-wing parties in a growing number of European countries have made electoral gains. The right-wing parties range across a wide policy spectrum, from populist and nationalist to far-right neofascist.

But, some other developments such as criticism of the controversial Turkish-EU refugee deal by a number of human rights groups, Britain’s decision to leave the European Union (EU), after the referendum (Brexit) on June 24, 2016, prospects of Scotland and some other countries for separation from the EU, and the divide between the elite class which run multinational companies with the direct or indirect control of the Jews and the general masses who are suffering from multiple problems in wake of differences on the refugee crisis, Syrian war, Greece’s weak economy, violent protests and strikes against the labour laws in France in 2016 in favour of the employers at the cost of the employs etc.—the chances of European Union’s disintegration which will give a greater blow to the US-Europe alliance against Russia and a rift between the NATO countries, as noted in the recent past by the “Stop NATO protests” in Europe were quite opposite to the Israeli secret interests.

 Besides revival of the fake global war on terror, Israeli-led America also got the support of its Western allies (NATO) against Russia in relation to Syrian civil war, and as part of the double game and secret strategy, American jet fighters and those of its Western coalition started targeting the ISIS terrorists in Iraq and Syria.

But, some other developments—a rift was created on a number of issues between the President Trump and America’s Western allies, especially Europe, while failure of  CIA-Mossad scheme to promote sectarian violence in the Islamic World on larger scale, after creating a rift between Saudi Arabia and Iran, failure of the Saudi Arabia-led 40 countries military alliance of the Sunni Muslim nations, which was, in fact, against Iran and Yemen and visit of foreign minister of Saudi Arabia to Iraq on February 25, 2017 to reestablish cordial relationship between both the countries frustrated Israel.

 Besides, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan took steps to improve relations with Russia and to join Russian coalition in fighting against militants and ISIS. After the failed rebellion-attempt of July 15, 2016, Turkey’s president Erdogan and top officials of his government have held the US and CIA for the failed coup to topple his regime by backing and replacing Erdogan with the CIA’s “designated figurehead”, cleric Fethullah Gülen, currently living in Pennsylvania in the US.

It is mentionable that the US-led West, especially Europe has already started a new Cold War with Russia. The US has decided to station permanently additional troops in Eastern Europe as part of NATO move to defend the continent against the presumed threat of Moscow. In response, Moscow also responded that it would send 30,000 Russian troops along its western and southern borders. Especially, Tel Aviv wants to intensify this new Cold War so as to avoid the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, as some European countries have been emphasizing on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to stop the expansion of West Bank settlements and restart a negotiation process for the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Even, backing out of his earlier statement, pro-Israeli American President Trump has opposed the expansion of the settlement policy of Tel Aviv, while emphasizing the solution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue in wake of the debate between the Zionists and non-Zionist Jews  in relation to the two-state solution of the dispute.

Earlier, on January 15, 2016, France who is staunch supporter of the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue conducted a summit in Paris which was attended by 70 nations. In a statement, delegates at the summit also restated their commitment to the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and emphasized on them to restart negotiations. Palestinians welcomed the conference, but Israel called it “rigged”. The conference came at a time of rising tension in the region, and there were fears President-elect Trump’s plans to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem could stoke it further.

 In his speech to open the meeting, French President Francois Hollande said, “The international community had to be reminded of its obligations to build peace…the much-needed reconciliation between Israel and its neighbours can go forward”.

Besides, a prolonged war of history in Afghanistan by the US-led NATO countries, continued ambush attacks on their military installations and personnel by the freedom fighters (Taliban) have demoralized, particularly American military personnel who think that they have been sent abroad—Afghanistan, Syria and elsewhere in the world to maintain the supremacy of Israel, instead of protecting American national interests or their citizens. The cost of the endless war in Afghanistan is rapidly increasing, adding to the plight of ordinary citizens of the US and its Western allies. In order to divert the attention of Americans and its Western public, Mossad-CIA are acting upon the secret strategy of the US and Israel.

Similarly, by pursuing the double standards of America in its worst form, Trump also intends to favour India, while opposing the nuclear weapons of Pakistan.. However, like Obama, Trump has brushed aside the ground realities that Indian Prime Minister Modi led by the ruling fundamentalist party BJP has been implementing anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan agenda, while encouraging Hindutva (Hindu nationalism).

As part of the double game, based in Afghanistan, operatives of American CIA, Indian RAW and Israeli Mossad which have well-established their collective secret network there, and are well-penetrated in the terrorist outfits like ISIS, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and their affiliated Taliban groups are using their terrorists to destabilize Tibetan regions of China, Iranian Sistan-Baluchistan and Pakistan by arranging the subversive activities. In this context, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is their special target. Recent acts of terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan’s Balochistan are part of the same scheme. Notably, in one of the major raids Taliban killed more than 140 soldiers on April 22, this year on northern army base, located the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif. And quite contrary to his previous statement and setting aside the ground realities President Trump wants to dispatch more troops in Afghanistan.

In order to divert attention from NATO’s defeatism in Afghanistan, at a news conference in Kabul, on April 24, 2017, Defense Secretary James Mattis and Gen. John Nicholson, the American commander in Afghanistan supposedly said that Russia was providing weapons to the Taliban. But, Moscow denied these false allegations.

And, through the executive order, President Trump on January 27, 2017 blocked visas being issued to anyone from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Trump also announced strict conditions for the citizens from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Lebanon.  Although a federal judge temporary suspended the executive order on February 4, this year restoring travel for refugees and the people from seven Muslim countries, yet American President Trump stated that the executive order which he stated was part of an extreme vetting plan to keep out “radical Islamic terrorists—also established a religious test for refugees from Muslim nations, especially from Syria. Trump also ordered that Christians and others from minority religions be granted priority over Muslims.

President Donald Trump’s anti-Muslim order faced severe criticism inside America, opposition by 900 of the State Department diplomats and around the world, particularly Europe in wake of protest-rallies.

 US intelligence agencies, particularly FBI are still investigating that Russia and President Putin authorized the hacking in the November 8 US presidential election aimed to help Donald Trump to win it. Both Putin and Trump have denied the charges.

It was owing to these developments that Israeli Mossad with the assistance of its CIA and FBI sympathizers, while using ISIL militants accelerated terror assaults, as noted in case of the recent attacks in London, St. Petersburg (Metro train) and Stockholm.

Suddenly tension has intensified between Russia and the US with the order of the American President Donald Trump, when on April 7, this year, using the pretext of chemical weapons attacks and blaming the Assad regime, American warships fired 59 cruise missiles at the Shayrat Airfield controlled by the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s forces. This was supposedly in response to the deadly chemical weapons attack which killed at least 100 people and injured 400 individuals on April 4, 2017 in Khan Sheikhoun town, located in Syria’s northwestern province of Idlib, controlled by a rebel alliance which also includes a former Al-Qaeda affiliate.

Both Russia and Syria condemned aerial strikes in Syria as violation of the international law and the UN charter. In response to American airstrikes, Russia suspended a cooperation pact with the US aimed at avoiding incidents between the two countries’ planes over Syria by establishing direct hotlines between their militaries. Russian Foreign Ministry said, “The chemical attack was used as pretext for a demonstration of force.”

Some online sources confirmed that the “armed terrorist groups” supported by CIA and especially by Mossad are responsible for the attack of poisonous gases in Khan Sheikhoun.

 At the United Nations, Russia’s deputy ambassador, Vladimir Safronkov, strongly criticized the airstrikes what he called the US ‘‘flagrant violation of international law and an act of aggression’’ whose ‘‘consequences for regional and international security could be extremely serious.’’

On the other side, during an emergency session of the UN Security Council session, Nikki Haley, the US ambassador to the UN said, ‘‘The world is waiting for Russia to reconsider its misplaced alliance with Bashar al-Assad…the United States took a very measured step…we are prepared to do more”.

It is noteworthy that America and its allies such as UK, Germany, France etc. who are determined to oust President Assad appreciated the US missile strikes. Some Muslim countries who support the CIA-Mossad rebels groups and ISIS terrorists also welcomed the missiles attack, calling it a courageous decision by Trump. Iran, which supports the other side of the six-year war, condemned the strikes, describing unilateral action as dangerous.

Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu welcomed the US attack. Syrian rebel groups and ISIL outfit also appreciated America’s aerial attack.

 Hundreds of protesters have taken to the streets in cities across the US, as well as other countries, to demonstrate against the airstrikes in Syria. In London, the British anti-war campaign group Stop the War Coalition took to the streets of Westminster to protest the US airstrikes. In a message posted to the group’s Facebook page, the organization said, “The Stop the War Coalition condemns Donald Trump’s decision to launch attacks against Syrian targets…As well as deepening the tragedy of the Syrian people, this utterly irresponsible act threatens to widen the war and lead the West into military confrontation with Russia.”

On April 12, 2017, Russia vetoed a UN resolution condemning the killings, believed to have been carried out with sarin gas, and called on Moscow ally Syria to cooperate with an international investigation of events on the ground. The resolution was backed by America, UK and France who still want to oust President Assad, as part of regime change policy of the US to achieve Israeli illegal goals.

 Now, the US-led countries and Israel are manipulating the chemical attack of Khan Sheikhoun town against the Assad regime and Russia.

 Apart from the recent terror attacks in London, Stockholm, Paris, the chemical weapons attack inKhan Sheikhoun town of Syria was also false flag terror attack which was conducted particularly by Mossad in collaboration with the ISIS militants or the Syrian rebels groups to reunite the US and Western powers, especially Europe against the Assad regime. President Trump and America’s Western allies are still blaming Moscow and Assad government in this respect.

 In the meantime, no breakthrough has yet been achieved in the talks, at the UN-sponsored international donor conference which was held on April 4-5, 2017 in Brussels—the latest round of intra-Syrian negotiations which took place in Geneva recently. Some representatives of the US-led countries, including EU’s top diplomat held Syrian President Assad responsible for chemical weapons Idlib province, while, some emphasized upon investigation. Similarly, in the G-7 meeting,Foreign ministers from the Group of Seven industrialized nations who met April on 10, this year, divided in imposing new sanctions on Syria in relation to the chemical weapons attack, though America has imposed some new sanctions on Syria on some limited scale.

 Meanwhile, on April 17, 2017, Russia warned the United States against any “unilateral action” against North Korea, saying any response to Pyongyang’s nuclear activities should not violate “international law,” amid reports of potential military confrontation between North Korea and the US. Earlier, on April, 14, this year, China also warned America in the same terms.

 On the same day, North Korea, for its part, issued a statement which denounced what it called the Trump administration’s “maniacal military provocations,” including the deployment of the carrier group. The statement elaborated, “Nothing will be more foolish, if the United States thinks it can deal with us the way it treated Iraq and Libya, miserable victims of its aggression, and Syria, which did not respond immediately even after it was attacked.”

When American President Trump’s extremist policies were strongly criticized inside America and around the world, including especially her Western allies, his advisers, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, neoconservatives and Israel-backed officials directed him to implement dual strategy of Bush and Obama, with the aim to keep America and Western allies, particularly Europe united against Syria, Russia, China, Pakistan etc., while covertly continuing anti-Muslim rhetoric so as to safeguard the interests of Tel Aviv.

Hence, President Trump has softened his extremist policies. Trump voiced optimism that the US had successfully enlisted China to try to persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons program through negotiations. In a news conference alongside Italian Premier Paolo Gentiloni, Trump also stated on April 20, 2017 that the US is committed to a strong Europe, though he didn’t say directly whether he prefers that the European Union stay intact.

Regarding Iran, backing out of his earlier statements, Trump and his top officials have been walking a narrow line as they seek to show an aggressive stance. While disparaging the nuclear deal and accusing Iran of fomenting violence and terrorism throughout the Middle East, Trump has avoided committing to abandoning the nuclear agreement, a move which would be staunchly opposed by US businessmen and European allies.

 Trump stated on April 13, 2017 that US relations with Russia may be at “an all-time low” and declared a new-found faith in NATO, suggesting the alliance was “no longer obsolete”.

 Despite this, the US president’s remarks at the White House followed a two-hour meeting in Moscow between his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson and President Putin which failed to resolve any of the deep differences between the two nations on Syria, Ukraine and Moscow’s alleged interference in the 2016 US election. Bur, Tillerson’s meeting with his counterpart and Putin led to the removal of the most immediate threat of escalation, as Putin “reaffirmed” the maintenance of a hotline between the two countries’ militaries to avoid midair collisions between their aircraft operating in Syrian airspace.

 In the latest of a series of dramatic foreign policy reversals in recent days, Trump also dropped an allegation he had repeated throughout his presidential campaign, telling the Wall Street Journal that the Chinese were “not currency manipulators”.

 Following the dual diplomacy of Bush and Obama, Trump has also started double game. It could also be judged from the US State Department’s recently leaked documents which said that the Trump administration announced last month that it planned on reducing the diplomacy and foreign aid budget by 28 per cent in the next fiscal year, while increasing funds for military programmes and preserving Israel’s  current $3.1bn (£2.4bn) security aid package. The leaked documents proposed a cut in assistance for several countries across the world, but a 4.6 per cent rise for both the West Bank and Gaza.

In the meantime, results of the referendum in Turkey, held on April 16 went in favour of the Turkish President Erdogan, expanding his powers. It gave another setback to Washington and Tel Aviv who were covertly backing Kurds and ISIL militant against the Erdogan’s regime. The EU which has criticized Erdogan’s referendum earlier this month, which will also revive the death penalty would be the final blow to any chance that the EU could still let Turkey join. The warning from Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn came that EU will redefine its relationship with Ankara.

Notably, despite dispatch of additional troops to assist the ISIS and rebel groups, Analysts opine thatowing to the skilful diplomacy of Russian President Putin, very soon, Russian-led coalition will liberate Syria and Iraq from the hold of the US-Israeli-led some Western powers. Therefore, in the pretext of targeting ISI terrorists, in depression, Israeli has also started airstrikes in Syria.

 Nevertheless, like Trump, Israeli rulers have also been confused due to the above mentioned developments which do not favour Israel like the past, while, still some CIA agents, Indian RAW and especially Mossad want to divide the world on religious lines.

 Although President Trump has softened his external policy, yet he is implementing the conspiracy of Mossad and RAW, as his rigid and racist policies, including America’s Western partners continue against the Muslims. If not checked in time by the peace-loving Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Jews and Buddhists, these policies of the President Donald Trump who is particularly completing the extremist agenda of Israel are likely to result into more recruitment in the militant outfits, especially in the ISIS group, inspiring the extremist Muslims for more terrorism-related attacks. Israel, who will never accept the two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian issue, will prefer to seek the final revenge by bringing about a major war between the Muslim and the Christian worlds or to cause a major war between Russia and the US-led some Western countries, which will convert the entire world into holocaust.

Nonetheless, various leaders and politicians of the West, especially those of the EU who are pro-Macron congratulated him in the victory of the first round of the presidential election. The US President Donald Trump, who had suggested the recent terror attack in Paris could have an impact on the vote, has not commented.

Unlike several of his opponents on the left and right, Macron has avoided making pronouncements against Muslim dress codes and discriminatory laws which are, in fact, being used in persecution of the Muslims in France.

Returning to our earlier discussions, like the train bombings in Spain, three days before France’s presidential elections, shooting at Champs-Elysees-Paris-famous Boulevard was conducted by Mossad through ISIS to ensure the victory of the pro-Israeli Emmanuel Macron in the first round of the election. In other worlds, Israeli won the first round of the French election.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants,Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations



Elor Azaria and the Myth of Jewish Universal Values

The Jewish lobbies, both Zionists and ‘antis,’ are more obnoxious and arrogant than ever.

Gilad Atzmon interviewed by Alimuddin Usmani for La Pravda and E&R

Alimuddin Usmani: IDF soldier Elor Azaria was convicted of manslaughter for shooting dead a  wounded Palestinian. The case deeply divided Israel. Many Israelis said he was just doing his duty and was scapegoated by the army. On the other hand, a military spokesperson said“This is not the IDF, these are not the values of the IDF and these are not the values of the Jewish people”. Gideon Lévy called the 18 month sentence “a sentence fit for a bicycle thief”.

What are your comments on this case?

Gilad Atzmon: A lot of issues are at stake here. Azaria was obviously a cold-blooded murderer who shot a wounded Palestinian in the head. Basically, he committed an execution in broad daylight.  From an Israeli perspective, Azaria’s main crime was being caught on camera. Yet, the circumstances in which he operated were pretty impossible. These Israeli soldiers are deployed in policing tasks. They, the occupiers, are engaged in conflict with the indigenous people of the land. It is a recipe for disaster. More often than not, Israeli soldiers and police forces end up operating as execution squads. Yet, these vile practices do not necessarily reflect any official military order. Instead, they bring to light the atmosphere within the Israeli street: the PRE-traumatic stress, the impunity to kill, the lack of any ethical sense and so on.

Putting aside Azaria’s brutal act, the court case exposed a deep conflict within Israeli society. Zionism, as we know, promised to make the Jews ‘people like other people.’ Yet, the reality on the ground suggests that Israelis have to spend a lot of time and energy concealing the fact that they actually share very little with other people, if anything at all.

Azaria was found guilty of manslaughter, which is surprising considering the clear evidence of 1st degree murder. Yet he was sentenced to just 18 months in prison.  The explanation of this discrepancy between the court’s verdict and the light sentence can be understood on more than one level.

Military courts, as opposed to civilian courts, are not committed to any notion of ethics but rather to the needs of the military system. For instance, a military court sentencing a soldier to death at daybreak is not guided by the seeking of justice but by the needs of the system. It attempts to deter other soldiers from insubordination, cowardice or defection.

Similarly, because Israel needs the IDF to sustain the occupation, Israel must make sure that its soldiers are confident that the system will always eventually stand by them even if they are  caught in an unfortunate situation such as shooting a wounded Palestinian in the head.

On the day of the verdict, veteran chief of staff Moshe Yaalon, admitted that his initial and harsh reaction to the Azaria incident was because there was an immediate need to calm the situation on the ground. He basically had to throw something at the Palestinians, hoping to prevent mass protest and possible escalation. But at the end of the day, Israel wants the Palestinians to know that any form of resistance will be met with by radical and unpredictable measures.

This leads us to the notion of Jewish values in general and the IDF’s moral values in particular. As I have said many times before, there are no Jewish universal values. Judaism and Jewish culture are tribally-oriented. Moreover, Judaism is guided by Torah and Mitzvoth (commandments). Accordingly, the Jew is expected to follow rules rather than forming ethical judgments. Haskalah, the Jewish enlightenment, was an attempt to universalize Judaism by mimicking European secular thinking. Thus, those universal values that were introduced by Haskalah are not Jewish, but simply borrowed by the Jews from their host nations.

Zionism was a promise to civilise the Jews by means of ‘homecoming.’ It implicitly accepted that Jews weren’t people like all other people, but it believed they could be. Zionism promised to make the Jews productive, to gravitate towards labour and farming. The IDF was supposed to be a humane and ethical military force.  I grew up with photos of Israeli soldiers giving their own water to Egyptian POWs in the desert (1967). It took a few years before I learned that in fact, the Sinai desert was a slaughter zone for thousands of Egyptian soldiers who were sent to their deaths in the burning sand. It took a few more years before I became aware of the Nakba horror – the brutal ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population in 1948. Just 3 years after the liberation of Auschwitz the young Israeli army, together with Jewish paramilitary forces, massacred dozens of  Palestinian villages. I assume I don’t have to go into details of current Israeli war crimes.  To sum it up,  the IDF as never been a moral army. IDF moral values are a myth. What we have instead is a growing record of crimes against humanity.  The facade of the military trial was, in practice, an attempt to convey the image of ethical thinking. After all, ‘by way of deception’ must be a kosher procedure.


Alimuddin Usmani: The Jewish Telegraphic Agency wrote that Socialist primary winner in France, Benoit Hamon, had the backing of prominent anti-semites. Before the vote, Dieudonné and Alain Soral called for Manuel Valls to be knocked out of the race and Valls, known for his zealous support of Israel, did indeed receive a slap in the face.

What do these things reveal about the mood of French people?

Gilad Atzmon: It isn’t just France. We detect a global fatigue with Jewish politics and lobbying. We see it in Britain and in the USA – and Jews are the first to notice it. Jewish organisations have long been complaining about the rapid growth in ‘antisemitic’ incidents (whatever that means). Yet, instead of engaging in some elementary self-reflection, asking themselves what is it about them and their behaviour that brings such anger and opposition, these organisations manage to repeat the same mistakes over and over again. Instead of opening the discussion on Israel and Jewish power, they use every means at their disposal to suppress freedom of speech and to silence legitimate criticism of Jewish ID politics, global Zionism and the brutality of the Jewish state.

One would think that, after the Shoah, Jews would learn the necessary lessons and would go out of their way to conceal Jewish arrogance. But In practice, the complete opposite has happened. The Jewish lobbies, both Zionists and ‘antis,’ are more obnoxious and arrogant than ever.


Alimuddin Usmani: CRIF defines itself as the political representation and official mouthpiece of the organized Jewish community. In the FAQ on it’s website we find this question : Does CRIF have an influence on French politics? 

And the answer is:

Yes, CRIF influences French politics by defending its vision of what should be the public policy against racism and anti-Semitism, offering its thoughts on the transmission of the memory of the Holocaust, or defending its idea of the peace in the Middle East.

In summary, CRIF acts exactly like any other association concerned by the public interest.   

What do you think of this answer?

Gilad Atzmon: I believe that it is a valid answer as long as French people are willing to accept that one minority group that just happens to be privileged can dominate the discourse on public matters such as racism, French past and foreign affairs. But Jewish history actually teaches us that these celebrations of Jewish power always come to a tragic end.


Alimuddin Usmani: On CNN, Bernard-Henri Lévy wrote that the Trump administration has a problem with Jews.

How do you explain that BHL is so worried about Trump?

Gilad Atzmon: It is simple. BHL realises that, considering his intensive bellicosity and war-mongering, he himself is a serious Jewish problem. Zionism was all about a promised land yet global Zionism, for which BHL is a prime conduit, signals the transformation from a ‘promised land’ into a ‘promised planet.’ It is, in fact, immoral interventionists such as BHL who bring disasters on the Jews.

When BHL accuses Trump, the first American Jewish President, of antisemitsm, he may be providing us with a glimpse into his own sense of guilt. It is a last and desperate attempt to prevent the floodlight from exposing the criminal continuum between Israel and the Ziocon wars spreading around our planet.

Alimuddin Usmani: Recently you gave concerts and talks in Czech Republic. You announced that you will be back there in June. What do you like about this country?

Gilad Atzmon: pretty much everything. It is a country that has managed to sustain its culture, its work ethic, its cuisine, its productivity. It is a country that is living in peace with its past and sees a prospect of a future ahead.

Brzezinski: US must stop following Israel “like a stupid mule”

Leading US strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski – unofficial dean of the realist school of American foreign policy experts – has drawn an unflattering picture of US-Israel relations.

by Kevin Barrett


In a speech to the National Iranian American Council, Brzezinksi said:

“I don’t think there is an implicit obligation for the United States to follow like a stupid mule whatever the Israelis do. If they decide to start a war, simply on the assumption that we’ll automatically be drawn into it, I think it is the obligation of friendship to say, ‘you’re not going to be making national decision for us.’ I think that the United States has the right to have its own national security policy.”

By denying any US “obligation” to “follow like a stupid mule whatever the Israelis do,” Brzezinski accurately implied that this is exactly what the US has been doing up until now. And by plaintively opining that “the United States has the right to have its own national security policy,” the former National Security Adviser underlined the fact that since the assassination of John F. Kennedy, who secretly went to war with Ben Gurion in a doomed effort to abort the Israeli nuclear weapons program, the US has not enjoyed that right.

Brzezinski’s assertion that the US is being led by the nose like a stupid mule by the Israelis is perhaps the most candid statement of its kind ever uttered in public by a high-level US strategist. Brzezinski’s remarks reflect the mainstreaming of the arguments presented by leading US political scientists Walt and Mearsheimer in their book The Israel Lobby.

Indeed, Brzezinski has gone much further than Walt and Mearsheimer, who couch their critique of the tail-wags-the-dog US-Israel relationship in extremely cautious language. By laying it out so explicitly, Brzezinski is in effect joining the ranks of such scholars as James Petras and Grant Smith, who leave Walt and Mearsheimer in the dust as they boldly and accurately describe the outrageous, destructive, and quite literally criminal Israeli domination of the US. (As Smith argues in Foreign Agents, the hundreds of thousands of members of the Zionist Power Configuration described by Petras are acting as unregistered agents of a foreign power; if the law were properly enforced, they would all be in prison.)

The strong words from Brzezinski, and the mainstreaming of similar sentiments, illustrate a growing backlash against Israel’s ever-more-shameless, ever-more poorly concealed domination of the USA. The post-9/11 era has witnessed a rash of unbelievably arrogant Israeli actions, including:

  •  Benjamin Netanyahu’s reaction to 9/11. (He triumphantly chortled that 9/11 was “very good,” then hastily added that he meant it was very good for Israel.)
  •  Ariel Sharon’s reaction to 9/11: “We Jews control America, and the Americans know it.”
  •  Allegedly retired Mossad chief spook Mike Harari’s  huge victory party in Bangkok, Thailand celebrating the success of the 9/11 operation.
  •  The team of “dancing Israelis,” later outed as Mossad spies by The Forward, who were arrested for wildly celebrating the success of the 9/11 operation.
  • The use of organized crime assets like then-NYC Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik to cover up the 9/11 story of the century: The arrest of Israelis with vans full of explosives trying to blow up New York’s bridges and tunnels on the morning of 9/11.
  •  The actions of newly-retired Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak in the immediate aftermath of 9/11: Barak, Christopher Bollyn’s top 9/11 suspect, had come to the US for mysterious reasons after stepping down as PM in March 2001, and immediately after 9/11 all but ordered the US to declare a “war on terror” and invade Afghanistan and other countries – making him the first public figure to describe the “war on terror” response to 9/11.
  •  The Israel lobby’s demolition of the Congressional career of 9/11-truth-seeker Rep. Cynthia McKinney.
  •  The Israel lobby’s persecution of American Muslims including Sami al-Arian, who was imprisoned and tortured for the “terrorist” crime of supporting the Palestinians’ right to defend themselves.
  •  The Israel lobby’s persecution of Christian peacemaker Mark Siljander, who was sent to prison on trumped-up charges for the crime of telling other Christians the truth about Islam, and thereby undermining the Israelis’ islamophobic “war on terror” narrative.
  •  The Israel lobby’s increasing use of its organized crime assets to dominate American politics through blackmail, fraud, drug trafficking, money laundering, assassination, and other crimes.
  • Israel’s assassination threats against President Obama, notably the one delivered by unregistered Israeli agent Andrew Adler.
  • Israel’s blatant intervention in US elections, including its use of organized crime in vote-fraud efforts – which may finally have failed in 2012 when Netanyahu imploded at the UN, and his hand-picked puppet Mitt Romney imploded in the final election results.
  • Israel’s ongoing attempts to drag the US into wars-for-Israel that damage US interests – including wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Pakistan and elsewhere, as well as Israel’s proposed attack on Iran.
  • And finally, of course, Israel’s ever-more-arrogant refusal to do what the US and every other country on earth insists it must do: Return to its pre-1967 borders and make peace with its neighbors.

Is the “stupid American mule” described by Brzezinski finally waking up?

Or, to use Anatole Lieven’s animal metaphor: Is the dog finally noticing that “this is not a case of the tail wagging the dog, but of the tail wagging the unfortunate dog around the room and banging its head against the ceiling” ?


We are witnessing an historical reversal in France, where the ancient political spectrum is exploding into pieces as new fractures appear – The French scuttle their own ship

The French scuttle their own ship

We are witnessing an historical reversal in France, where the ancient political spectrum is exploding into pieces as new fractures appear. Because of the intensive storm of media propaganda which has recently almost drowned the nation, the French can now perceive nothing more than the essential markers, and cling to red lines which no longer exist. However, the facts are clear, and certain evolutions are predictable.


JPEG - 19.8 kb
Private soiree at La Rotonde – congratulated as the new French President, Emmanuel Macron welcomes personalities from the CAC40 and the entertainment world on the evening of the first round of the election. Seen here with his friend, the banker Jacques Attali.

After a very agitated electoral campaign, the French chose Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen for the second round of the Presidential election.

Already, almost all the losing candidates, with the exception of Jean-Luc Melenchon – and that’s no accident – have appealed to their followers to support Macron, who should then be easily elected.

The two major historical parties which have governed France since the beginning of the Fifth Republique – Les Republicains (ex-Gaullists) and the Parti Socialist (ex-Jaurèsians) – have been beaten. A newcomer, En Marche !, has made it to first place on the podium, facing the Front National.

Is there fascist candidate?

This is not the first time that this sort of cleavage has occurred in the history of France – on one hand, a partisan of an alliance with what seems for the moment to be the world’s greatest power (the United States), and on the other, a movement seeking national independence – on one hand, the totality of the ruling class, without notable exceptions, and on the other, a party cobbled together of various bits and pieces, composed mostly of proletarians, two thirds of whom come from the right wing and one third from the left.

Evidently, the next French President will be Mr. Macron – a man from the Banque Rothschild & Cie, now supported by the totality of the business leaders of the CAC40.

However, whether our prejudices like it or not, the unanimity of the power of money is the fundamental characteristic of fascist parties.

This unanimity of Grand Capital is always accompanied by a National unity which erases the differences. In order to become equal, we must become identical. This is what President Hollande began with the law « Marriage for all », in 2012-13. Presented as establishing equality between citizens, whatever their sexual orientation, it posited de facto that the needs of couples with children are the same as those of gay couples. And yet there were several other more intelligent solutions. The opposition to this law led to a number of very important demonstrations, but they unfortunately failed to provide any other proposition, and were sometimes mixed with homophobic slogans.

Identically, the attack against Charlie-Hebdo was celebrated to the chant of « I am Charlie ! », and those citizens who declared that they were « not Charlie » were prosecuted.

It is a shame that the French people do not react either against the unanimity of Grand Capital, nor against the injunctions to use the same judicial techniques and to favour the same slogans. On the contrary, they insist on considering the current Front National as « fascist », with no other argument than its ancient past.

Can a fascist candidate be resisted?

In the majority, the French think that Emmanuel Macron will be a President à la Sarkozy and à la Hollande, men who will pursue their political beliefs. They therefore expect to see their country increasingly decline. They accept this curse, thinking that in this way, they will evacuate the menace of the extreme right.

Many of them remember that at its creation, the Front National gathered together the losers of the Second World War and the losers of the social politics of the colonisation of Algeria. They focused on the figures of a few men who had collaborated with the Nazi occupier, without seeing that the Front National of today has absolutely nothing in common with those people. They persist in holding Second-Lieutenant Jean-Marie Le Pen (Marine’s father) responsible for the Algerian tragedy, and exonerating from their responsibilities the Socialist leaders of the time, particularly their dreadful Minister of the Interior, François Mitterrand.

No-one remembers that in 1940, it was a Fascist minister, General Charles De Gaulle, who refused the shameful armistice with Nazi Germany. This man, the official heir apparent of Marechal Philippe Petain (who was his daughter’s godfather), charged into the Resistance alone. Struggling against his education and his prejudices, he slowly gathered around himself, against the wishes of his ex-mentor, French people from all horizons to defend the Republic. He linked up with a left-wing personality, Jean Moulin, who, a few years earlier, had secretly embezzled money from the Minister of the Marine, and trafficked weapons with which to support the Spanish Republicans against the fascists.

No-one remembers that a colleague of De Gaulle, Robert Schuman, wrote his signature on the armisitice of shame, then, a few years later, founded the European Economic Community (currently the European Union) – a supra-national organisation based on the Nazi model of the « New European Order », against the Soviet Union and today against Russia.

The Obama-Clinton model

Emmanuel Macron has recieved the strong support of ex-US President Barack Obama, and has gathered a team for foreign policy composed of the main neo-conservative diplomats. He makes no secret of supporting the external politics of the US Democratic Party.

Barack Obama, although he presented his foreign policy with a rhetoric which was diametrically opposed to that of his predecessor, the Republican George W. Bush, in practice followed his lead in all points. The two men successively continued the same plan for the destruction of the societies of the Greater Middle East – a plan which has already caused more than 3 million deaths. Emmanuel Macron supports this policy, although we do not yet know whether he intends to justify it by speaking of « democratisation » or « spontaneous revolution ».

If Hillary Clinton was beaten during the US election, Emmanuel Macron had to be elected in France.

Nothing proves that Marine Le Pen will be capable of playing the rôle of Charles De Gaulle, but three things are certain :
- Just as in 1940, the British, choking back their disgust, welcomed De Gaulle to London, today Russia could support Le Pen.
- Just as in 1939, only a few Communists braved the orders of their party and joined the Resistance, there will only be a few of Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s partisans who will take that step. But as from the Nazi attack on the URSS, it was the whole Communist party who supported De Gaulle and formed the majority of the Resistance. There is no doubt that in the years to come, Mélenchon will fight side by side with Le Pen.
- Emmanuel Macron will never understand people who resist the domination of their homeland. So he will not understand any better the people of the Greater Middle East who struggle for real independence alonside Hezbollah, the Syrian Arab Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Pete Kimberley


Duff on Press TV: Putin Diplomacy “Trumps” US, Israeli Plans


Will Le Pen be put to the Sword?

They say that the pen is mightier than the sword, but sadly it rather looks as though Marine Le Pen will be put to the sword when France votes in the second round of the presidential election on May 7th. A French presidential election is not at all like an American one. The losing candidate doesn’t start to throw champagne bottles at TV sets within a few hours of the polls closing. The process takes a few weeks.

Of course Marine Le Pen is a rather classier lady than Hillary Clinton, no offense intended. It’s unlikely, if she loses, that she will be throwing anything at a TV set, let alone champagne. They don’t throw champagne away in France, well not good champagne anyway.

The odds are stacked against Marine. Her support base is fairly narrow and the entire French media and pro-EU political establishment is arrayed against her. Socialist, communist and soft right votes will tend to go to the EU-loving centrist candidate, Macron. If you’ve never heard of him, don’t worry. There’s no reason why you should have. He’s a colorless nonentity, no offense intended, chosen precisely because nobody knew he was and he hadn’t managed to offend anybody in his brief and undistinguished political career.

I know he was French finance minister, but how many people could name the current French finance minister? I’d have to Google it. France is in the euro, so all key economic decisions are taken in Frankfurt anyway.

The Fifth Republic

The key to understanding the Fifth Republic is that it is essentially a Vichyist construct. Please don’t remind me that De Gaulle was Free French. He was, but he was also blackmailed by the Abwehr and in turn the DVD over his sexuality (he was gay). After the Allies liberated Paris in 1944, only the German military withdrew. The Abwehr stayed behind.

Our community partner Jerry was keen to regain control of Paris. Since the German army had been comprehensively beaten, the only way to do that was by bribery, blackmail, terrorism and assassination, i.e. the usual Hun methods. Jerry sponsored a violent campaign of terrorism in Algeria and cut a deal with De Gaulle. In return for being installed in power he would support French membership of the EEC and govern France, in effect as a German puppet.

Unfortunately for Jerry we found out about De Gaulle’s homosexuality and dealings with the Abwehr – we had never entirely entrusted ‘mon general’. We were able to leverage this intelligence into two very handy vetoes of the applications to join the EEC made by two German assets, Harold Macmillan and Harold Wilson, in each case supported by the Cabinet Office, then under firm German control.

Once De Gaulle was no longer of any use to the Jerries they dumped him, in 1968, organising a few riots in Paris. Jerry knows how to organise a riot. De Gaulle’s successor, Pompidou, was a former Vichyist and a German asset, who of course tried to pretend that he had been Free French during the war.

The electoral system of the Fifth Republic is designed to favour centrists. The Jerries love centrists – they tend to be unprincipled, they’re cheap and they can pull in votes from the soft right and the soft left. Remember it was the Zentrum (Center Party) which delivered key votes in the Reichstag for our community partners the Nazis.

The DVD has a black operation in Paris, just at it has in London. The Jerries never voluntarily shut down their intelligence network in any country they occupy. This black agency co-ordinates terror attacks and assassination attempts on patriotic French politicians.

The Jerries are afraid of Marine Le Pen and have good reason to be. The sad reality is that the Hun knocked the stuffing out of the French at Verdun, ably assisted by their man General Pétain, who agreed to sacrifice French troops by the hundreds of thousands. The seeds of the French collapse in 1940 were sown 23 years before. Unlike the French political and bureaucratic establishment, however, Marine Le Pen has spirit.

My Prediction

Sadly, despite the discreet support of President Trump, my prediction is that Macron will win. He simply has too much support. The polls are saying that it’s a done deal, 60:40. It may be a bit tighter than that – no polling organisation in the Western world is capable of objectively assessing support for conservative causes or candidates, but the errors are usually of the order of 4-5%.

I can see at least half of Fillon’s voters backing Marine. Conventional wisdom says only a third, but that may ignore the effect of the recent wave of German-backed Islamist terrorist attacks in France. Marine might get 45%.
I do however predict her winning in 2022, always assuming that the Jerries don’t stage a re-run of November 1963 and assassinate her first. She will need careful guarding between now and then.

Macron will govern France in the German, not the French, interest. He won’t even try to solve France’s problems, let alone actually solve them. In five years’ time Macron will no longer be a fresh face, just another failed, establishment politician. Thankfully his somewhat artificial party is unlikely to win a majority in the National Assembly next Sunday.

The EU Summit

As I predicted, the Brexit negotiations have turned into a farce. They’re over before they’ve even begun. The EU27 have rubber-stamped Donald Tusk’s recommendations, which were doubtless dictated to him by Angela Merkel. The EU will demand an exit fee before discussing tariff-free access to the so-called single market, which we don’t want anyway, given our massive trade deficit with the EU27.

The media are talking nonsense, if that’s not a tautology, about the amounts Britain ‘owes’ the EU. We owe the EU nothing, apart from our contribution to the EU budget between now and March 2019 when we finally leave.

There is no provision for exit fees in Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union. This can probably be put down to German arrogance. They were so sure of their control over EU member states, they never really thought that Article 50 would ever be used. Right up to the count they thought that they had successfully murdered their way to victory in last year’s referendum by assassinating Jo Cox. Victory was a sweet moment over opponents willing to drench themselves in the blood of a harmless, innocent Labour MP.

Article 50 is sloppily drafted, like much of EU law, but there is no doubt that a departing member state does not owe a penny to those that remain. EU pensions are an EU responsibility, e.g. The EU27 accept this, which is why they’re demanding an exorbitant sum as the price of tariff-free access to the single market, which they’re probably not willing to offer anyway without uncontrolled labor dumping on the UK. They want us to stump up the cash first, against a non-binding commitment to agree tariff-free access, which will be worth about as much as our community partner Adolf Hitler’s promise not to invade Poland.

This is all good news. The very last thing the UK wants or needs is a deal with the EU. They wouldn’t agree to any deal which was fair to Britain. The important thing is that we’ve served the Article 50 notice. We don’t need the agreement of the EU27 to leave – we’re off. These negotiations are about a possible post-departure deal.

German assets in Washington are doing their best to block the Anglo-American free trade deal. I still think it will happen, but it will take some time, given Germany’s evident influence over the Trump Administration’s foreign policy.

Sergeant Alexander Blackman RM

I refrained from commenting further on Sgt Blackman’s case lest I prejudice his appeal. I am delighted that he has now been released from prison, but I am not buying the substituted manslaughter verdict. Apart from anything else, the manslaughter conviction means that he won’t be able to own a firearm for at least five years, which is ridiculous.

Police protection in this country is largely a joke, as Theresa May saw when the Metropolitan Police let a terrorist into the Palace of Westminster in the hope that he would assassinate her. Most police forces are controlled by the Cabinet Office and would be unwilling or unable to offer any meaningful protection to Sgt Blackman. No Second Amendment rights here, let alone an NRA!

I should recap, for those unfamiliar with the case. Sgt Blackman, outrageously, was prosecuted by the Cabinet-Office controlled Service Prosecuting Authority, a pointless quango forced on us by the anti-British European Court of Human Rights, for the non-offense of slotting a badly wounded Taliban terrorist in Afghanistan.

The terrorist in question was part of a cell which had very properly been strafed by an Apache helicopter gunship. At no stage was an autopsy ever performed on this muppet. There are two major legal problems with causation for culpable homicide:

(1) There was no medical evidence tending to establish that the said terrorist was still clinging on to life when Sgt Blackman shot him. He might have been, but the prosecution had to prove that the round that Sgt Blackman fired accelerated his death, and

(2) Even if he was still alive the unlawful enemy combatant had been hit with cannon fire. Putting the matter at its lowest, he had been fatally wounded. Humanely dispatching mortally wounded enemy combatants, whether lawful or unlawful, is both morally and legally justified and in accordance with the honorable traditions of men at arms. Whatever may be said at the time, it is an act of mercy. Those arguing otherwise are welcome to try dying in agony and see how they feel about a quick bullet instead.

The Laws of War do not oblige you to be nice to the enemy you are dispatching, not least if he or she is an unlawful combatant who has been waging war outside the Laws. This particular terrorist seems to have been a murderous piece of filth, no offense intended, who richly deserved to die. Doubtless he had raped and murdered in the brutal cause to which he had dedicated himself. He was a Taliban terrorist after all, not a doctor with MSF.

The British legal system has failed Sgt Blackman, the Royal Marines and Western Civilization. Sgt Blackman put his life on the line to free Afghanistan from tyranny and barbarism. The least we owe him is to clear his name. He should be granted a Royal Pardon, restored to the ranks and promoted. I’m not saying that he should have been given a medal for slotting this particular terrorist in these particular circumstances, if he did in fact slot him, but he should not have been condemned, let alone prosecuted.

The Service Prosecuting Authority should be abolished and the old system restored. The learned trial judge, with great respect, should be shuffled off to a quiet county court somewhere, preferably in the North, or sent out to
New South Wales.

So who froze the rabbit?

The fate of Simon the big bunny has made headlines across the English-speaking world. The Chinese aren’t concerned of course, since he wasn’t a panda.

Not content with dragging elderly doctors off their aircraft in order to make them miss their appointments, United Airlines has now taken to killing fluffy bunnies. What on earth are they on?

If they were going to freeze a bunny to death, couldn’t they have chosen a skinny one? Instead they had to choose the fluffiest, cutest bunny they could find, and a British one at that. No offense, but they might have been better off freezing poor old Dr Dao to death and dragging Simon off the plane unconscious.

I’m glad my frequent flyer miles with United have expired! Next internal flight I take in the States will be on American. There is no sign, yet, that the DVD were involved, although knocking off fluffy bunnies would be just their style.

Why is France’s Macron Threatening Poland With Sanctions?

French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron presents his program

© Sputnik/ Irina Kalashnikova

14:31 30.04.2017Get short URL
142 0 0

French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron said that if elected, he would call for EU sanctions against Poland. Macron’s threat flies in the face of Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski, who only recently hailed Macron as “a predictable and experienced” politician.

In an interview with Sputnik, Polish political analyst and journalist Konrad Rekas said that the ruling Law and Justice Party had shot itself in the foot by rejecting Marine Le Pen’s offer of a serious discussion of the EU’s future and reaffirming its allegiance to Brussels and EU supporters at home by backing Macron whom they never bothered to learn about even during the ongoing presidential campaign in France.

“France’s fledgling Demo-Liberal political camp is totally at variance with what Law and Justice Party’s voters are holding out for. It wants a stronger EU and will try to persuade Poland and Hungary to embrace Brussel’s idea of a European super-state. This new diplomatic and geopolitical flop speaks volumes about the party’s dim view of the European future,” Konrad Rekas told Sputnik Poland.When asked about the unfolding scandal in France over the planned closure of a Whirlpool factory in northern France and its relocation on Poland causing hundreds of French workers to lose their jobs, he said that Poland is just a passive victim of a game played by the world’s high and mighty.

“Securing foreign investments has been topmost on our government’s mind ever since 1989. Another underlying premise  was that Poland is competitive because labor here is cheap. As a result, our cheap labor moved to places where it was no longer cheap and Poland ended up as an assembly line foreign companies use to put together their products,” Rekas emphasized.

He added that just as before, Poland remains a source of cheap labor and a major market for outsourcing in Europe.Macron’s criticism of Warsaw comes amid an ongoing row over the planned closure of a Whirlpool tumble-dryer factory in France as production shifts to Poland.

Emmanuel Macron criticized local companies, which employ cheaper labor from other EU member-states or move production to lower-wage countries like Poland.

Never miss a story again — sign up to our Telegram channel and we’ll keep you up to speed!

Here Come The Bilderbergs: The Complete 2014 Cast And Host Nation Breakdown

Tyler Durden's picture


The only thing more ominous for the world than a Fed raising interest rates is a Bilderberg Group meeting. The concentration of politicians and business leaders has meant the organisation, founded at the Bilderberg Hotel near Arnhem in 1954, has faced accusations of secrecy. Meetings take place behind closed doors, with a ban on journalists. As InfoWars notes, the 2014 Bilderberg meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark is taking place amidst a climate of panic for many of the 120 globalists set to attend the secretive confab, with Russia’s intransigence on the crisis in Ukraine and the anti-EU revolution sweeping Europe posing a serious threat to the unipolar world order Bilderberg spent over 60 years helping to build.

Current list of Participants (source):


  • FRA    Castries, Henri de    Chairman and CEO, AXA Group


  • DEU    Achleitner, Paul M.    Chairman of the Supervisory Board, Deutsche Bank AG
  • DEU    Ackermann, Josef    Former CEO, Deutsche Bank AG
  • GBR    Agius, Marcus    Non-Executive Chairman, PA Consulting Group
  • FIN    Alahuhta, Matti    Member of the Board, KONE; Chairman, Aalto University Foundation
  • GBR    Alexander, Helen    Chairman, UBM plc
  • USA    Alexander, Keith B.    Former Comdr, U.S. Cyber Command; Former Director, NSA
  • USA    Altman, Roger C.    Executive Chairman, Evercore
  • FIN    Apunen, Matti    Director, Finnish Business and Policy Forum EVA
  • DEU    Asmussen, Jörg    State Secretary of Labour and Social Affairs
  • HUN    Bajnai, Gordon    Former Prime Minister; Party Leader, Together 2014
  • GBR    Balls, Edward M.    Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer
  • PRT    Balsemão, Francisco Pinto    Chairman, Impresa SGPS
  • FRA    Baroin, François    Member of Parliament (UMP); Mayor of Troyes
  • FRA    Baverez, Nicolas    Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
  • USA    Berggruen, Nicolas    Chairman, Berggruen Institute on Governance
  • ITA    Bernabè, Franco    Chairman, FB Group SRL
  • DNK    Besenbacher, Flemming    Chairman, The Carlsberg Group
  • NLD    Beurden, Ben van    CEO, Royal Dutch Shell plc
  • SWE    Bildt, Carl    Minister for Foreign Affairs
  • NOR    Brandtzæg, Svein Richard    President and CEO, Norsk Hydro ASA
  • INT    Breedlove, Philip M.    Supreme Allied Commander Europe
  • AUT    Bronner, Oscar    Publisher, Der STANDARD Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H.
  • SWE    Buskhe, Håkan    President and CEO, Saab AB
  • TUR    Çandar, Cengiz    Senior Columnist, Al Monitor and Radikal
  • ESP    Cebrián, Juan Luis    Executive Chairman, Grupo PRISA
  • FRA    Chalendar, Pierre-André de    Chairman and CEO, Saint-Gobain
  • CAN    Clark, W. Edmund    Group President and CEO, TD Bank Group
  • INT    Coeuré, Benoît    Member of the Executive Board, European Central Bank
  • IRL    Coveney, Simon    Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine
  • GBR    Cowper-Coles, Sherard    Senior Adviser to the Group Chairman, HSBC Holdings plc
  • BEL    Davignon, Etienne    Minister of State
  • USA    Donilon, Thomas E.    Senior Partner, O’Melveny and Myers; Former U.S. NSA
  • DEU    Döpfner, Mathias    CEO, Axel Springer SE
  • GBR    Dudley, Robert    Group Chief Executive, BP plc
  • FIN    Ehrnrooth, Henrik    Chairman, Caverion Corporation, Otava and Pöyry PLC
  • ITA    Elkann, John    Chairman, Fiat S.p.A.
  • DEU    Enders, Thomas    CEO, Airbus Group
  • DNK    Federspiel, Ulrik    Executive Vice President, Haldor Topsøe A/S
  • USA    Feldstein, Martin S.    Professor of Economics, Harvard University; President Emeritus, NBER
  • CAN    Ferguson, Brian    President and CEO, Cenovus Energy Inc.
  • GBR    Flint, Douglas J.    Group Chairman, HSBC Holdings plc
  • ESP    García-Margallo, José Manuel    Minister of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation
  • USA    Gfoeller, Michael    Independent Consultant
  • TUR    Göle, Nilüfer    Professor of Sociology, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales
  • USA    Greenberg, Evan G.    Chairman and CEO, ACE Group
  • GBR    Greening, Justine    Secretary of State for International Development
  • NLD    Halberstadt, Victor    Professor of Economics, Leiden University
  • USA    Hockfield, Susan    President Emerita, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • NOR    Høegh, Leif O.    Chairman, Höegh Autoliners AS
  • NOR    Høegh, Westye    Senior Advisor, Höegh Autoliners AS
  • USA    Hoffman, Reid    Co-Founder and Executive Chairman, LinkedIn
  • CHN    Huang, Yiping    Professor of Economics, National School of Development, Peking University
  • USA    Jackson, Shirley Ann    President, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
  • USA    Jacobs, Kenneth M.    Chairman and CEO, Lazard
  • USA    Johnson, James A.    Chairman, Johnson Capital Partners
  • USA    Karp, Alex    CEO, Palantir Technologies
  • USA    Katz, Bruce J.    Vice President and Co-Director, The Brookings Institution
  • CAN    Kenney, Jason T.    Minister of Employment and Social Development
  • GBR    Kerr, John    Deputy Chairman, Scottish Power
  • USA    Kissinger, Henry A.    Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc.
  • USA    Kleinfeld, Klaus    Chairman and CEO, Alcoa
  • TUR    Koç, Mustafa    Chairman, Koç Holding A.S.
  • DNK    Kragh, Steffen    President and CEO, Egmont
  • USA    Kravis, Henry R.    Co-Chairman and Co-CEO, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co.
  • USA    Kravis, Marie-Josée    Senior Fellow and Vice Chair, Hudson Institute
  • CHE    Kudelski, André    Chairman and CEO, Kudelski Group
  • INT    Lagarde, Christine    Managing Director, International Monetary Fund
  • BEL    Leysen, Thomas    Chairman of the Board of Directors, KBC Group
  • USA    Li, Cheng    Director, John L.Thornton China Center,The Brookings Institution
  • SWE    Lifvendahl, Tove    Political Editor in Chief, Svenska Dagbladet
  • CHN    Liu, He    Minister, Office of the Central Leading Group on Financial and Economic Affairs
  • PRT    Macedo, Paulo    Minister of Health
  • FRA    Macron, Emmanuel    Deputy Secretary General of the Presidency
  • ITA    Maggioni, Monica    Editor-in-Chief, Rainews24, RAI TV
  • GBR    Mandelson, Peter    Chairman, Global Counsel LLP
  • USA    McAfee, Andrew    Principal Research Scientist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • PRT    Medeiros, Inês de    Member of Parliament, Socialist Party
  • GBR    Micklethwait, John    Editor-in-Chief, The Economist
  • GRC    Mitsotaki, Alexandra    Chair, ActionAid Hellas
  • ITA    Monti, Mario    Senator-for-life; President, Bocconi University
  • USA    Mundie, Craig J.    Senior Advisor to the CEO, Microsoft Corporation
  • CAN    Munroe-Blum, Heather    Professor of Medicine,, McGill University
  • USA    Murray, Charles A.    W.H. Brady Scholar, American Enterprise for Public Policy Research
  • NLD    Netherlands, H.R.H. Princess Beatrix of the
  • ESP    Nin Génova, Juan María    Deputy Chairman and CEO, CaixaBank
  • FRA    Nougayrède, Natalie    Director and Executive Editor, Le Monde
  • DNK    Olesen, Søren-Peter    Professor; Member of the Board of Directors, The Carlsberg Foundation
  • FIN    Ollila, Jorma    Chairman, Royal Dutch Shell, plc; Chairman, Outokumpu Plc
  • TUR    Oran, Umut    Deputy Chairman, Republican People’s Party (CHP)
  • GBR    Osborne, George    Chancellor of the Exchequer
  • FRA    Pellerin, Fleur    State Secretary for Foreign Trade
  • USA    Perle, Richard N.    Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
  • USA    Petraeus, David H.    Chairman, KKR Global Institute
  • CAN    Poloz, Stephen S.    Governor, Bank of Canada
  • INT    Rasmussen, Anders Fogh    Secretary General, NATO
  • DNK    Rasmussen, Jørgen Huno    Chairman of the Board of Trustees, The Lundbeck Foundation
  • INT    Reding, Viviane    Vice President and Commissioner for Justice,European Commission
  • USA    Reed, Kasim    Mayor of Atlanta
  • CAN    Reisman, Heather M.    Chair and CEO, Indigo Books & Music Inc.
  • NOR    Reiten, Eivind    Chairman, Klaveness Marine Holding AS
  • DEU    Röttgen, Norbert    Chairman, Foreign Affairs Committee, German Bundestag
  • USA    Rubin, Robert E.    Co-Chair, Council For’n Rel’ns; Former Secretary of the Treasury
  • USA    Rumer, Eugene    Senior Associate and Director, Russia Carnegie Endowment for Intnl Peace
  • NOR    Rynning-Tønnesen, Christian    President and CEO, Statkraft AS
  • NLD    Samsom, Diederik M.    Parliamentary Leader PvdA (Labour Party)
  • GBR    Sawers, John    Chief, Secret Intelligence Service
  • NLD    Scheffer, Paul J.    Author; Professor of European Studies, Tilburg University
  • NLD    Schippers, Edith    Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport
  • USA   Schmidt, Eric E.    Executive Chairman, Google Inc.
  • AUT    Scholten, Rudolf    CEO, Oesterreichische Kontrollbank AG
  • USA    Shih, Clara    CEO and Founder, Hearsay Social
  • FIN    Siilasmaa, Risto K.    Chairman of the Board of Directors and Interim CEO, Nokia Corporation
  • ESP    Spain, H.M. the Queen of
  • USA    Spence, A. Michael    Professor of Economics, New York University
  • FIN    Stadigh, Kari    President and CEO, Sampo plc
  • USA   Summers, Lawrence H.    Charles W. Eliot University Professor, Harvard University
  • IRL    Sutherland, Peter D.    Chairman, Goldman Sachs International;
  • SWE   Svanberg, Carl-Henric    Chairman, Volvo AB and BP plc
  • TUR    Taftal?, A. Ümit    Member of the Board, Suna and Inan Kiraç Foundation
  • USA    Thiel, Peter A.    President, Thiel Capital
  • DNK    Topsøe, Henrik    Chairman, Haldor Topsøe A/S
  • GRC    Tsoukalis, Loukas    President, Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy
  • NOR    Ulltveit-Moe, Jens    Founder and CEO, Umoe AS
  • INT    Üzümcü, Ahmet    Director-General, Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
  • CHE    Vasella, Daniel L.    Honorary Chairman, Novartis International
  • FIN    Wahlroos, Björn    Chairman, Sampo plc
  • SWE    Wallenberg, Jacob    Chairman, Investor AB
  • SWE    Wallenberg, Marcus    Chairman of the Board of Directors, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB
  • USA    Warsh, Kevin M.    Distinguished Visiting Fellow and Lecturer, Stanford University
  • GBR    Wolf, Martin H.    Chief Economics Commentator, The Financial Times
  • USA    Wolfensohn, James D.    Chairman and CEO, Wolfensohn and Company
  • NLD    Zalm, Gerrit    Chairman of the Managing Board, ABN-AMRO Bank N.V.
  • GRC    Zanias, George    Chairman of the Board, National Bank of Greece
  • USA    Zoellick, Robert B.    Chairman, The Goldman Sachs Group

And, broken down by country of origin:

Oddly, not many Russians in there…

A Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptor arrives at Osan Air Base in Pyeongtaek, South Korea, in this handout picture provided by the United States Forces Korea (USFK) and released by Yonhap on March 7, 2017. Picture taken on March 6, 2017

National Security Adviser Reaffirms US to Pay for THAAD Deployment in S Korea


11:13 30.04.2017Get short URL

US National Security Adviser Herbert Raymond McMaster has reaffirmed on Sunday that Washington, and not Seoul, should pay for the deployment of its anti-ballistic missile system the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), despite US President Donald Trump’s claims, media reported.

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — On Friday Trump told in an interview with the Washington Times that Seoul should pay for the $1-billion defense system, which will be stationed in South Korea in order to shield it from a possible missile attack by Pyongyang. The South Korean military in response reiterated that its position on the system’s deployment remained unchanged, meaning that Washington has to pay.

McMaster had a 35-minute talk with his South Korean counterpart on Sunday at Washington’s request, saying that Trump’s statements “were made in a general context with American people’s hopes for [defense] cost sharing by allies in mind,” as quoted by the Yonhap news agency.

According to the agency, both sides have agreed that South Korea’s only contribution will be the land that it has provided for the THAAD deployment earlier.

Kim and McMaster also agreed to increase their pressure on North Korea in cooperation with China and the international community in the light of Pyongyang’s failed missile launch on Saturday, the agency reported.

On Friday, the South Korean Foreign Ministry’s representative said that Seoul has not received US demands to pay the costs of the THAAD despite Trump’s statements.

In July 2016, Seoul and Washington reached an agreement to deploy THAAD in South Korea amid growing tensions with North Korea. China and Russia have criticized the decision, calling it inappropriate, possibly disproportionate and likely to affect the interests of other nations.

The construction of the system had begun in South Korean Seongju County on Wednesday despite protests from the local residents.

The THAAD system has a range of some 200 kilometers (125 miles) and is designed to intercept short, medium and intermediate ballistic missiles at the terminal incoming stage.

100s march in Tokyo against US military presence, mark Okinawa murder

Sun Apr 30, 2017 8:23AM – PressTV

PressTv User

Hundreds of Japanese protesters have staged a rally in Tokyo against the US military presence in their country, as they mark the first anniversary of the murder of a local woman by a US Marine.

Protesters marched on the streets of the Japanese capital on Saturday, calling for the removal of US military bases from the island prefecture of Okinawa.

The demonstration also marked the murder of Rina Shimabukuro by a US Marine in Okinawa in April 2016, when the 20-year-old victim, who worked at the base, was raped, struck in the head, and stabbed on her way back home.

US Marine Kenneth Franklin Gadson, 32, later admitted to the murder. The case triggered mass protests across Japan.

A grab from a Ruptly video released on April 29, 2017 shows Japanese protesters marching on the streets of Tokyo against US military presence in Japan.

More than half of the 47,000 US military forces in Japan are stationed in Okinawa.

Okinawa has become known as a source of enduring concern for the Japanese people. Pacifist inclinations as well as security and safety concerns have prompted the Japanese to protest against the US military presence in Japan from time to time.

Multiple cases of misconduct by US forces have also raised anti-American sentiment among the islanders.

Back in 2013, two American sailors admitted to raping a woman in Okinawa in the previous year in a case that sparked massive protests.

In 1995, the abduction and rape of a 12-year-old girl by three US servicemen also triggered huge protests, prompting Washington to pledge efforts to strengthen troop discipline to prevent such crimes and reduce US footprint on the island.

Sun Apr 30, 2017 10:21AM
Families of Palestinian prisoners demonstrate in front of EU offices in East Jerusalem al-Quds on April 27, 2017 after hundreds of the detainees launched a mass hunger strike earlier. (Photo by AFP)
Families of Palestinian prisoners demonstrate in front of EU offices in East Jerusalem al-Quds on April 27, 2017 after hundreds of the detainees launched a mass hunger strike earlier. (Photo by AFP)

An open-ended mass hunger strike by Palestinians to draw the world’s attention to harsh conditions at Israeli prisons has entered its second week, with some of those refusing food experiencing health decline.

The media committee of the hunger strike, dubbed the Freedom and Dignity Strike, said that several of the hunger-striking inmates had lost 10 kilograms of their weight, the Palestinian Ma’an news agency reported on Sunday.

A number of the hunger strikers held in the Israeli Ofer prison are suffering from low blood pressure, severe headaches as well as stomach and joint problems, the report added.

It further noted that the Israeli authorities do not allow the Palestinian prisoners to drink cool water and instead force them to drink warm water.

On Sunday, Palestinian churches were expected to ring bells in solidarity with the hunger strikers.

Protesters who have handcuffed and blindfolded themselves hold banners during a protest in support of prisoners in Israeli jails, in the West Bank city of Ramallah on April 27, 2017. (Photo by AP)

The long-planned mass strike, which is led by a jailed leader of the Fatah Movement, Marwan Barghouti, began on April 17.

The strike initially began with 1,500 prisoners, but now some 2,000 people are believed to be refusing food to denounce the inhumane treatment of the Palestinians held in Israeli jails.

Read more:

According to figures provided by the Palestinian prisoners’ rights group Addameer in January, 6,500 Palestinians are currently being held in Israeli jails, 536 of them arbitrarily.

Palestinian prisoners have continuously resorted to open-ended hunger strikes in an attempt to voice their outrage at the so-called administrative detention, which is a form of imprisonment without trial or charge that allows Israel to incarcerate Palestinians for up to six months,

Palestinian detainees complain that they have been subjected to assault and torture at Israeli prisons.

Sun Apr 30, 2017 9:2AM
An Iraqi Army soldier fires his machinegun at Daesh positions in the northern city of Mosul's al-Sahiroun neighbourhood on January 12, 2017. (Photo by AFP)
An Iraqi Army soldier fires his machinegun at Daesh positions in the northern city of Mosul’s al-Sahiroun neighbourhood on January 12, 2017. (Photo by AFP)

A plot by the Takfiri terror group of Daesh to copy in Iraq an alleged chemical strike in northeastern Syria in April and pin it on Iraqi security forces has been nipped in the bud.

Iraq’s al-Sumariah news network reported the development on Saturday, citing an unnamed security source.

The source said the terrorists had been arrested in the east of the northern Iraq city of Mosul in possession of toxic materials used in manufacturing chemical weapons and explosives.

They confessed to have received orders from their higher-ups to carry out gas attacks against the civilians fleeing them, the source said, adding the incidents were supposed to be caught on camera in such a way that would portray Iraqi forces as the perpetrators.

The terrorists said the entire scenario had been planned to mirror an alleged gas attack in the northeastern Syria Idlib Province that claimed dozens of civilians on April 4, he noted.

Blaming Damascus for the attack, the United States later carried out a missile strike against the southeastern part of the western Syria city of Homs, causing some 15 fatalities, including civilians.

In this image provided by the US Navy, USS Ross fires a tomahawk land attack missile Friday, April 7, 2017, from the Mediterranean Sea. (Via AP)

The missile barrage came either before a fact-finding investigation into the circumstances surrounding the alleged gas attack, or a United Nations Security Council mandate.

Read more:

Russia, a Syria ally, laid into the United States for the attack, saying it had seriously damaged Russo-American ties. It rescinded a bilateral pact aimed at preventing the Russian and American aircraft from clashing over Syria, and also vowed to boost the Arab country’s defenses.

Daesh has in the past used chlorine gas and other toxic agents against Iraqi security forces and civilians in Mosul. The group, which has called Mosul its so-called headquarters in the city, has already lost half of it to Iraqi forces and is increasingly losing grip over the rest.

Terrorists have also been documented, time and again, deploying the agents against the Syrian people and military. The West and its associated media outlets keep incriminating the Syrian government and military in alleged application and possession of such weaponry, while Damascus has fully handed over its chemical arms stockpiles in a UN-monitored process.

Iranian FM Calls Netanyahu’s Purim Story ‘Fake History’, Falsifying of Torah

Javad Zarif 3a3d8

Zarif made the comment on his official Twitter account on Sunday in response to claims made by Netanyahu that Iran had been trying to “destroy the Jewish people” for some 2,500 years.


Dr. Gundry reveals the top 3 common foods that you would have never guessed were the cause of your fatigue.

“To sell bigoted lies against a nation which has saved Jews 3 times, Netanyahu resorting to fake history & falsifying Torah. Force of habit. Once again Benjamin Netanyahu not only distorts the realities of today, but also distorts the past — including Jewish scripture. It is truly regrettable that bigotry gets to the point of making allegations against an entire nation which has saved Jews three times in its history,” he said.

Zarif Purim 24d47

Netanyahu made the claims during a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Friday. He was referring to a legend commemorated through the Jewish holiday of Purim, which Israel started celebrating Saturday night.

While scholars do not agree on the accuracy of the Purim story, Netanyahu has constantly referred to the legend as a basis of his anti-Iran arguments in his meetings with different world leaders.

Earlier on Sunday, Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani said that Netanyahu had both misreported Iran’s pre-Islam history and inverted facts. “Apparently, neither he is acquainted with history, nor he has read the Torah,” said Larijani.

Palestinian child in blood 84c8f

At a glance, Israel appears a true democracy. Take a closer look, and that facade of democracy will soon dissipate, turning into something else entirely.


Dr. Gundry reveals the top 3 common foods that you would have never guessed were the cause of your fatigue.

Tuesday, February 28 was one of those moments. The chain of events was as follows:

An official Israeli State Comptroller issued another report on the Israeli government’s handling of the July 2014 war on Gaza; it chastised Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and then-Defense Minister, Moshe Ya’alon –  among others – for the lack of preparedness and for their mishandling of the subsequent 50-day conflict; Netanyahu reacted angrily; Ya’alon took to Facebook to defend his record; the opposition in the Israeli Knesset (parliament) went on the offensive; politicians lined up, taking sides; a media frenzy followed; the country was in an uproar.

This is not a precedent. It is a repeat of a recurring scenario that often follows Israel’s military plunders.

When such reports are issued, Israelis sort out their differences in fierce parliamentary and media battles.

While Israelis begin to examine their failures, demanding accountability from their government, western mainstream media finds the perfect opportunity to whitewash its own record of failing to criticize Israel’s military onslaught at the time.

(Over 2,200 – of whom over 70 percent were Palestinian civilians – were killed and thousands more wounded in Israel’s so-called ‘Operation Protective Edge’ in 2014.)

According to US media logic, for example, Israel’s investigation of its own action is a tribute to its thriving democracy, often juxtaposed with Arab governments’ lack of self-examination.

When Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982, instigating a war that resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of Lebanese and Palestinians, culminating in the Sabra and Shatilla Massacres, a familiar scenario ensued: The United States did its utmost to prevent any international intervention or meaningful investigation, while Israel was allowed to investigate itself.

The outcome was the Kahan Commission Report, the conclusion of which was summarized by international law expert, Professor Richard Falk, as such: “The full measure of Israel’s victory is rather its vindication, despite all, as a moral force in the region—as a superior state, especially as compared to its Arab rivals.”

The US media touted Israel’s ‘moral victory’, which, somehow, made everything okay, and with a magic wand, wiped the record clean.

The ‘Washington Post’ editorial led the congratulatory chorus: “The whole process of the Israeli reaction to the Beirut massacre is a tribute to the vitality of democracy in Israel and to the country’s moral character.”

This sorry state of affairs has been in constant replay for nearly 70 years, ever since Israel declared its independence in 1948.

International law is clear regarding the legal responsibility of Occupying Powers but since Israel is rarely an enthusiast of international law, Israel has forbidden any attempt at being investigated for its actions.

In fact, Israel abhors the very idea of being ‘investigated’. Every attempt by the United Nations, or any other organization dedicated to upholding international law, has either been rejected or failed.

By Israeli logic, Israel is a democracy and democratic countries cannot be investigated over their army’s involvement in the death of civilians.

This was, in fact, the gist of the statement produced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin’s Netanyahu’s office in June 2010, soon after Israeli army commandos intercepted a humanitarian aid flotilla on its way to Gaza and killed ten unarmed activists in international waters.

Israel is an Occupying Power under international law and is held accountable to the Fourth Geneva Convention. The international community is legally obliged to examine Israel’s conduct against Palestinian civilians and, needless to say, against unarmed civilians in international waters.

Israel’s record of investigating itself, aside from being spun to praise Israel’s moral superiority, has never been of any help for Palestinians.

In fact, the entire Israeli justice system is systematically unjust to occupied Palestinians.

The Israeli rights group ‘Yesh Din’ reported that out “of the 186 criminal investigations opened by the Israeli army into suspected offenses against Palestinians in 2015, just four yielded indictments.” Such indictments rarely yield prison sentences.

The recent indictment of Israeli army medic, Elor Azarya, sentencing him to (now postponed) a term of 18 months in prison for the killing in cold blood of an alleged Palestinian attacker is an exception, not the norm. It has been years since an Israeli soldier was sentenced. In fact, several thousand Palestinian civilians have been killed between the last time a ‘manslaughter’ conviction of an Israeli soldier in 2005 and Azarya’s indictment.

Azarya, now perceived by many Israelis as a hero, has received such a light punishment that it is less than that of a Palestinian child throwing rocks at an Israeli occupation soldier.

Some United Nations officials, although powerless before the US backing of Israel, are furious.

The 18-month verdict “also stands in contrast to the sentences handed down by other Israeli courts for  other less serious offenses, notably the sentencing of Palestinian children to more than three years’ imprisonment for throwing stones at cars,” UN human rights spokeswoman, Ravina Shamdasani, said in response to the Israeli court decision.

While pro-Israel social media activists and media pundits went on to praise the supposedly unmatched Israeli democracy, a campaign in Israel to pardon Azarya continues to garner momentum. Prime Minister Netanyahu is already on board.

Not only is the Israeli justice system unjust to Palestinians, it was never intended to be so. A careful reading of the recent comptroller’s remarks and findings would clarify that the intent was never to examine war against a besieged nation as a moral concept, but the government’s inability to win the war more effectively: the breakdown of intelligence; Netanyahu’s lack of political inclusiveness; the death of an unprecedented number of Israeli soldiers.

Israel’s appetite for war is, in fact, at an all-time high. Some commentators are arguing that Israel might launch yet another war so as to redeem its ‘mistakes’ in the previous one, as stated in the report.

But war itself is a staple for Israel. Hard-hitting Israeli journalist Gideon Levy’s reaction to the comptroller’s report says it best. He argued that the report is almost a plagiarized copy of the ‘Winograd Commission Report’ which followed the 2006 Second Lebanon War.

All wars since 1948 “could have been avoided”, Levy wrote in the ‘Haaretz’. But they were not, frankly, because “Israel loves wars. Needs them. Does nothing to prevent them and, sometimes, instigates them.”

This is the only way to read the latest report, but also all such reports, when war is used as a tool of control, to ‘downgrade’ the defenses of a besieged enemy, to create distraction from political corruption, to help politicians win popular support, to play, time and again, the role of the embattled victim, and many other pretenses.

As for Palestinians, who are neither capable of instigated or sustaining a war, they can only put up a fight, real or symbolic, whenever Israel decides to go for yet another bloody, avoidable war.

No matter the outcome, Israel will boast of its military superiority, unmatched intelligence, transparent democracy and moral ascendancy; the US, Britain, France and other Europeans will enthusiastically agree, issuing Israel another blank check to ‘defend itself’ by any means.

Meanwhile, any attempt at investigating Israeli conduct will be thwarted, for Israel is a ‘democracy’ and, for some reason, self-proclaimed democracies cannot be investigated. Only their sham investigations matter; only their dead count.

*(ICU child Shifa hospital, Gaza. Image Credit: Kashfi Halford/ flickr).