Kerry Confirms Zionist/Saudi Control of U.S. Foreign Policy

You knew that Khon Kerry and the House of Saud are Jewish, right?

I had actually been hopeful and foolishly believed in the optimism until France stepped forward to fulfill Israel's wishes and then Kerry confirmed it by talking down the talks. I have to hand it to the Iranians, though; they are still in there trying.

"Kerry reassures Israel on Iran, but divisions remain" by Michael R. Gordon |  New York Times,  October 24, 2013

ROME — Secretary of State John Kerry, facing new frictions with America’s most important Middle East allies over its policies in the region, sought to assure Israel on Wednesday....

Before meeting with the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, at the residence of the US ambassador here, Kerry said the Obama administration welcomed the change of tone by Iran but “words are no substitute for action.”

Kerry is on the final leg of a three-day visit to European capitals focused on Middle East diplomacy, most notably US efforts to help start a peace conference on the Syrian conflict. But the trip has been punctuated by criticism directed at the United States from its main strategic allies, Saudi Arabia and Israel, and Kerry has been making an effort to assuage them both.

The Saudis, who are strong supporters of the Syrian insurgency, have been particularly upset over what they view as the Obama administration’s lack of resolve in acting against the Syrian president, Bashar Assad, who is now in some ways stronger politically than he was a year ago. Last week the Saudis rejected taking a seat on the UN Security Council in part to express their displeasure.

They have also voiced alarm over the Obama administration’s steps toward rapprochement with Iran, Saudi Arabia’s main rival in the Middle East, and are fearful that the United States could make compromises in negotiations....

The Israelis are even more alarmed at the possibility that the United States might be too pliant in trying to pursue a compromise with Iran. Netanyahu has called Iran’s nuclear program a guise for weapons development and the most serious security threat facing his country.

Kerry’s public statements before his meeting with Netanyahu were focused largely on reassuring the Israelis.

“No deal is better than a bad deal,” Kerry said, a phrase that US officials have frequently used in recent weeks to try to reassure lawmakers in the United States as well as Israel and Persian Gulf states that the White House will not make risky concessions.

Meaning there never really was going to be a deal.

But Netanyahu listed a range of steps that Israel says Iran needs to take to demonstrate that it is not developing nuclear weapons, steps that appeared to go well beyond a compromise that the United States and other world powers are prepared to explore with Tehran, which insists its nuclear program is for civilian use only. The United States and other world powers are scheduled to resume talks with Iran in Geneva on Nov. 7.

Netanyahu, in a joint appearance with Kerry, said Iran must get rid of all of its fissile material and should not be allowed to have any centrifuges to enrich uranium. Iran should also close its underground nuclear facilities and abandon its construction of a heavy-water plant that would produce plutonium, Netanyahu added.

And the Israeli plant at Dimona?

Having staked out broad demands on the Iranian nuclear program, Netanyahu argued that the international sanctions should not be eased in return for a “partial deal.”

Negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians were also a major subject on Kerry and Netanyahu’s agenda, though not one they were prepared to discuss publicly in detail.

Trying to convey the impression that there is momentum in those talks, Kerry said Israeli and Palestinian negotiators had met 13 times and “are meeting even now.” Martin S. Indyk, Kerry’s special envoy for those talks, is in Jerusalem to facilitate the discussions, the secretary of state emphasized.

Indyk is not allowed in the room at the request of the Israelis.

Despite the multiple meetings, it is not apparent what, if any, headway has been made. When the talks began in July, Kerry said the goal was to complete a comprehensive Middle East peace agreement in nine months, and a third of that time has elapsed.

Kerry has been trying to move the talks along; he met recently in London with Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority, and has had frequent conversations with Netanyahu. Kerry has set aside the entire afternoon and evening for his discussions here with Netanyahu.

On Monday in Paris, Kerry met with senior diplomats from the Arab League to maintain Arab support for the talks.

In an apparent effort to influence Israeli public opinion, Kerry noted on Monday that Prince Saud al-Faisal of Saudi Arabia had endorsed the concept of Middle East peace, one in which Israel would have normal relations with all Arab and Muslim nations.

But Qatar’s foreign minister, Khalid bin Mohamed al-Attiyah, suggested in a joint appearance with Kerry on Monday that the United States needed to put more pressure on Israel and play more of an active role in suggesting compromises. Attiyah said “actual” US participation in the negotiations was needed. 

Kind of hard when his appointed representative is kept out of the room.

--more--"

Other places Kerry has visited in his recent swing through the region:

Kerry presses Israel over peace negotiations

[It is nice to see Kerry turn his sharp tongue towards one of America's true enemies, Netanyahu.  Oh, to have been a fly on that wall.] -- Americans Grow Weary of Serving the Repulsive State of Israel 

UPDATE: 

“Let me ask you something: How, if you say you’re working for peace and you want peace and a Palestine that is a whole Palestine that belongs to the people who live there, how can you say we’re planning to build in the place that will eventually be Palestine?” Kerry said in the interview, causing much consternation among Israeli commentators." 

That must be what he meant.

Kerry persists as Mideast talks flounder

It bears all the hallmarks of shuttle diplomacy, even though I was told he was not doing that.

"Syrian opposition undecided on talks, John Kerry says; Leaders will meet next week about Geneva conference" by Michael R. Gordon and Alan Cowell |  New York Times, October 23, 2013

LONDON — Saudi Arabia has wanted the United States to do more to train and arm rebel fighters. And the Saudi leadership was hoping that President Obama would order a cruise missile attack on the Syrian military in response to what Western and Arab powers said was the Syrian government’s Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack near Damascus.

“We know that the Saudis were obviously disappointed that the strike did not take place,” Kerry said, referring to the cruise missile attack the White House had planned before it seized on a Russian alternative proposal to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons program.

Saudi Arabia has also been worried that the Obama administration may be too eager to seek a compromise with Iran over its nuclear program and was unhappy that Washington did not take a stronger stance against the Muslim Brotherhood when President Mohammed Morsi governed Egypt.

He defended those remarks and the NYT edited it out when I'm staring at the phrase in my printed version? 

As for the Morsi and the Egyptian MB, the Saudis and others were ready to float them a loan after he turned down the IMF. Then the U.S.-approved coup went forward and the Saudis flipped. They are now providing aid to the generals. It is worth noting that the MB is an exten$ion of oil-rich emirates and such.

Kerry said he had discussed these issues with Prince Saud Al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister, when he met with him Monday in Paris.

Saudi Arabia was among the 11 nations that issued the communiqué Tuesday, and Kerry insisted that the Saudis and Americans were now “on the same page” regarding Syria.

He reassured us and them that ties are solid. 

The London talks group also included representatives of Britain, Egypt, France, Germany, Jordan, Italy, Qatar, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates.

--more--"

Related:

"In an apparent warning to Iran, Secretary of State John F. Kerry on Sunday tried to reassure America’s Arab friends that the United States will not allow them to be attacked ‘‘from outside,’’ in an apparent warning to Iran. ‘‘The United States will be there for the defense of our friends and our allies,’’ Kerry said. ‘‘We will not allow those countries to be attacked from outside. We will stand with them.’’ Kerry added that the United States would never allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons." 

Good thing they are not building them then.

“If there aren’t more constraints put on the Iranian centrifuge program, then you haven’t accomplished very much at all,” David Albright, the president of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security, said on a recent conference call organized by the Israel Project, a nonprofit organization.... The potential agreement was derided by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, who called it the “deal of the century” for Iran and said that Israel rejected it unequivocally."

"Kerry said during his recent visit to Israel that the United States was asking Iran, as part of an interim accord, to agree to a “complete freeze over where they are today.”

But when it comes to continued settlement expansion by Israel....  it's all calibrated toward Iran while destroying any two-state solution (which has already been destroyed by Israeli land seizures).

"It is remarkable that these talks are continuing, considering that they have always been doomed to failure primarily because the United States has its orders from its Jewish masters to make sure these talks fail…. Israel does not want peace, they only want war, and they definitely want their minions in the United States to attack and destroy Iran.

--MORE--"

Related: Thousands rally against United States in Iran

I don't care what the Zionist pre$$ says they have on their hands, I don't want US missiles bombing them in any case. No more wars based on Israeli lies for Israeli hegemony. No more lives lost in service to the Jew World Order.

Also see: 

Iranian musician kills three, self over ‘petty conflict’ in N.Y., manager says

Fellow musician kills two members of Yellow Dogs band

Those Iranians are so unreasonable, 'eh? Can't even get along in a rock-and-roll band; how they gonna make peace with anyone?

This is Insanity

UPDATE (2:55 p.m.): Now the pathetic excuse for a human being, John Kerry, is speaking about how chemical weapons being used to kill women and children is unacceptable, blah, blah, blah.  What he means is it is ONLY ACCEPTABLE when the EUSraeli empire or their Al-CIA-Duh allies dumps them on some "enemy." He's claiming the Syrians are destroying evidence, blah, blah, blah.  The TV news is saying he called it a moral obscenity, and says "common sense" says Syria did it -- meaning they have not a shred of evidence against Syria.

I've turned down the sound now because I can't stand that scum, but let me make it clear to Mr. Kerry, Mr. Obama, and the rest of the NSA monitoring this: 

YOU DO THIS with my CONDEMNATION and DAMNATION, because WE ARE TIRED of LIES in the SERVICE of EMPIRE and ISRAEL!! The WHOLE WORLD IS WATCHING ON THIS ONE, and IS NOT FOOLED in the LEAST!  

I would also like the world to know that the AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE OPPOSED to this war criminal action, but OUR LEADERS ARE NOT LISTENING! They ONLY LISTEN to WALL STREET and ISRAEL! This is all being done against our will, consent, and approval!

So DAMN YOU TO HELL, Mr. Kerry! I will FEAST UPON YOUR VERY SOUL when I see you there, you liar!!

*****************

Now back to the original post from earlier this morning:

'Round h're we call it reading the regional flagship known as the Boston Globe. 

Just a small sampling of what I found this morning in a mere eight pages before I stopped reading it:

First up is Syria, and no matter what the evidence shows (not that I would believe any evidence offered by the EUSraeli empire or it's total tool of a U.N. anymore) the evidence is irrefutable and any offer by the Syrians is too late and not credible. Says the US official? The proverbial personification of credibility? 

(The latest insanity coming is from Al-Jewzeera and it says UN inspectors were stopped this morning when their convoy was fired upon; gee, who would want to keep the inspectors from identifying things after the Syrian government agreed to take them there?)

This from the same nation that claimed the same about Iraq and all. We were told babies were thrown out of incubators. We were told he had UAV the size of a model airplane loaded with biological weapons that were ready to be deployed to the eastern seaboard; we were told he had nukes! We were told he used chemical weapons on his own people! 

Ready for a stunner? Maybe he didn't, and that would just be one more lie you were told, wouldn't it? The safe assumption now is your government and its mouthpiece jewsmedia collaborationists and blackmailers tell nothing but lies. On the rare occasions where they deign to hold a limited hangout and reveal a half-truth it's called distortion and obfuscation. Forgetting about it in future propaganda is called omission, and all four are methods of deception. 

Anyway, I stray when I give you the context of the prism with which this well-meaning and concerned American citizen greets each day with in a dewy-eyed optimism that quickly turns sour (usually before opening the thing).

And we called it a newspaper:  

"Powell spoke in an interview with CBS’s “Face the Nation,’’ as Washington held a series of events to mark the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s march that included his ‘‘I Have a Dream’’ speech. ‘‘If Dr. King was here, I’m quite sure he would say, ‘Congratulations on all the progress that’s been made, but let’s keep going. The dream is not fully achieved yet,’’’ said Powell, also the first black to serve the nation as secretary of state."

I'm sure Dr. King would have had a lot to say to the general that led two war criminal assaults on Iraq that killed millions and were based on lies, and I feel quite confident he would endorse my speech as I become a bit teary-eyed right now.



I thought I would put the picture up because it's a perfect look for a response to what I just said. What, what? From what I say on Al-Jewzeera (my jew home for corporate new$) I see he called Assad a born liar, so all that regret about his embarrassing lies at the U.N. in February 2003 was really just public relations bullshit.  I suppose it takes one to know one, and who would ever believe a proven liar like Powell again?

Aye-aye, Genural! 

"Insurgents bent on destabilizing Iraq killed at least 46 people in numerous attacks scattered around the country on Sunday"

Yeah, in Iraq they are insurgents seeking to overthrow the elected government of U.S. liberation. In Syria, they are freedom-fighting rebels looking to overthrow a brutal regime.

Btw, any ideas or thoughts that the wars are coming to an end as promulgated by my pos press here is exposed when the big business story of the day is the development of a new Army boot for the Middle East. But no boots on the ground in Syria, even thought the U.S. already has boots on the ground in Syria. They are the ones who did the chemical attack.

"Hazem el-Beblawi, the interim prime minister, said Saturday that it was important to pursue a political process aimed at restoring democracy, but he emphasized that it should not include ‘‘those who don’t accept the principles of no use of violence, no religion in politics, no attacks against minorities, and no discrimination.’’"

That was said by one of the Egyptian thugs now running the country? The same crew that has basically reoutlawed the Brotherhood (regardle$$ of what you think of their backing or political agenda, the Orwellian comments coming from government speak for themselves)? The same crew that has mowed down over 1,000 souls, MORE than Mubarak's military (even though it's all the same guys)? Talking about nonviolence? About restoring democracy? Are you kidding?

Oh, btw, all you liberal secularists who are nothing but tools for western intelligence and Israel? I hope you like the jail cells.  I think we can remove any and all doubt about that, folks. It's from their own mouths -- as the country returns to normal according to the AmeriKan media.

"With business owners sounding increasingly worried about the threat they believe the homeless pose to Columbia’s economic surge, the City Council approved a plan this month that will essentially evict them from downtown streets. “People are afraid to get out of their cars when they see a homeless person,” said Richard Balser, who owns a luggage store downtown. “They haven’t been a problem. They just scare people.” The city is also planning to impose limits on meal service for the homeless on public property. And it plans to station a police officer at a strategic location between the city’s shelter and downtown to “monitor and control foot traffic.”

What, there are NO CRIMES like RAPE, ROBBERY, or MURDER, in South Carolina? Gotta have cops on the beat and manning a post to watch those homeless now, huh? Talk about total corporate tools dre$$ed all in blue!

Good Lord, the homeless are now akin to TERRORISTS! They SCARE PEOPLE! They THREATEN what is a "a sustainable business model” and "giant risk to business.”

That's odd, because I see them around here and aside from giving them a few bucks in the past, I never felt endangered. I felt pity and fear, thinking that could one day be me.

Oh, and you know, if the economy is so great why are the numbers of homeless rising? Job losses? Fraudulent foreclosures? Crap corporate media lies? How can crime be down and up at the same time?

Hey, it's all for your own good, like Obamacare:

"That ground-level campaign will be reinforced by $41 million worth of national advertising contracts through the federal government. The Obama administration will also spend $67 million on contracts with nonprofits around the country to actually sign people up for insurance."

That will be $108 million not going into to actual healthcare, but it will create jobs, or so I'm told! I wonder which well-connected interests will be getting the contract$.

Just wait until you get the forms and see how less you like it, America. Never mind the cutback in hours and dropping of your spouse from your profitable employer's plan (unless they are of the same sex).

Btw, did you see who is exempt from all this as you will be asked to cough up even more, consumer (I was silly enough to think it was patient)?

"The debate is more about principle than big money, since the staffs of such organizations are relatively small and make barely a ripple in huge state retirement systems. But associations of cities, counties, and school boards argue that a plausible case can be made for allowing them to get state pensions and state health care benefits, and the benefits of those already in the pension system are protected from future cuts, groups aren’t bound by salary restrictions — significant salary increases would result in increasing pension benefits."

Yes, as you suffer under the endless lash of austerity budget cuts and the partisanship of addressing your needs, Americans, the money junkies are grabbing more loot from taxpayers -- and the corporate pre$$ is excusing the behavior. Never mind the billion bucks borrowed and the debt interest payments on biotech when it "more often, years of drug development and the drawn-out approval process ultimately lead nowhere." Just a lot of lost loot from pension funds and colege endowments. And you were wondering why your pension statement is flat and tuition skyrocketing?

Of course, all those union contracts made with teachers, cops, and firefighters? Those gotta be opened up and renegotiated right away! I mean, it's pretty clear to me that the only function of government in AmeriKa today, be it local, state, or federal, is to grab and give all the money to the seven percent of which they are a part. 

That's not an economic recovery, folks, that's a GRAND DEPRESSION!

Leading the corporate news are the fires threatening Yosemite, and that holds a personal connection for me since I visited; however, it's not due to global warming as the fart mi$ters would have you believe; it's because the fire control and firefighting and budgets for this country have been turned over to the war machine, Wall Street, Israel, and any well-connected corporation, along with the full range of perks for the lavish lifestyles of the politicians who are imposing austerity on you.  

The Globe covers the latest Snowden revelations to a certain degree (in my printed paper, briefs not on the web?), but neglects to mention what I saw on Al-Jewzeera: over 80 embassies around the world were monitored in what was called the "Special Collection Service." I'm sure that will make some world capitals happy. 

Oh, just a reminder that there is a missing nuke around somewhere, so if a big bang happens in, say, Chicago, you will know where they really got it and where it really came from. 

One final note that I did not see in my printed Globe, but did see on MSNBC that Miley Cyrus is now officially a slut or tramp or whore or whatever the kids call it these days. I never watch such things, but the clips I saw were disgusting and shocking (btw, Lady Gaga looked fat), especially at 5:55 in the morning! Maybe I'm an old fuddy-duddy, I don't think so, but apparently the perverted Jewish media (wasn't a big deal at all to the Globe, in fact, they were positive about it) has warped and corrupted another child star. Has anyone checked to see who is managing her these days, and has anyone tested her for drugs because she looked like she was on something? 

Jericho and the Jews

"Deconstructing the walls of Jericho

This is what archaeologists have learned from their excavations in the Land of Israel: the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, which is described by the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom.

Webmaster's Commentary:

This article did appear in Ha'aretz and can still be found using their archive search system.

----

One of the great crimes committed against the people of Iraq was the looting of the Baghdad Museum and the destruction of many important ancient sites inside Iraq.

I think that destruction of ancient sites is deliberate policy.

Egypt is literally littered with the ruins of the ancient temples and palaces of her rulers. As much as has been found, it is estimated that only 1/3 of Egypt's archeological wonders have been uncovered. A newly discovered temple was uncovered while digging a sewer line, and a cache of finely preserved mummies was literally stumbled over by a cow in a pasture.

Iraq's ancient heritage was enshrined in its ancient sites and museum. As a result of the war, many of those sites have been damaged or destroyed. Part of the ancient city or Ur now lies underneath a US air base runway. Nebuchadnezzar's palace now lies underneath a US-built parking lot. The treasures of the museum have only partly been recovered. The treasures from the looted archaeological sites have been scattered to the world.

All of this wealth of archaeological treasures must of course annoy Israel. We are raised from birth with Old Testament tales of the greatness of the ancient Israelites, of the powerful kingdoms of Solomon and David and the first temple. Yet Israel, while rich in antiquities, is almost totally devoid of artifacts from this supposedly glorious time in her history. The existence of the fabled First Temple was supported with just two artifacts, a carved staff ornament in the shape of a pomegranate and the Jehoash tablet. Both of these artifacts have been exposed as frauds. We are told that once there was a magnificent temple on that hill, but it "all went away."

The wonders emerging from the soil of Egypt, Iraq, and Iran serve as a constant reminder that ancient buildings of such a scale as we are told the First Temple was simply do not vanish without a trace. There is considerable reason to suspect that the tales told in the Old Testament are just that; tales. The Bible is not science, it is the collected stories of a primitive tribal people telling each other how important they are. And like fishermen talking about the one that got away, or Ramses with his temple carvings of the did-not-really-happen victory over the Hittites at Kadesh, the writers of the ancient testaments assumed that the people they were telling stories to had no way to verify the claims for themselves. So "embellishment" was a low-risk activity.

We do know from the available archaeological evidence that the Exodus probably actually happened to the Hyksos, not the Israelites. We know that the story of Moses is suspect because no Egyptian princess would hide a Hebrew child inside Pharaoh's household, then give the kid a Hebrew name ("Moses" is actually an Egyptian title meaning "Prince" and is included in the names of many Pharaoh's names such as Tut-Moses, Ah-Moses, Ra-Moses (Ramses) etc.)
Likewise, the story of Masada may be less than accurate. The remains found on the mountain were buried with pig bones, something no proper Jewish funeral would tolerate, which suggests that the bodies found and venerated as heroes of ancient Judea were actually those of dead Romans, for whom burial often involved animals as gifts to the spirit of the dead.

But a good story is a good story and the writers of the ancient texts were probably not thinking much further into the future than the guys who pen the "Celebrity dates space alien" stories you see at supermarket checkout lines. The fact that the celebrity is a real person does not prove the space alien exists. It's just a story. Given enough time, even a simple story written in jest can take on a life of its own. Scientology began as a bet between two science fiction writers; look how wide spread that has become in just a short time.

But, over time, entire religions with attendant wealth and power structures have been built on the premise that these old testament stories really happened exactly as written. And today, here in the 21st century world, science has started to catch up with these ancient legends and call many of them into doubt.

So, for a nation that justifies its existence on the writings of the Torah, the plethora of sites and artifacts confirming the ancient histories of Egypt, Iraq, Iran, etc. etc. etc. must seem a dire political threat for a nation whose own ancient history seems to have left little if any traces at all.

In that context, the strange behavior of the US military which posted guards around the Iraq oil ministry while bulldozing Iraq's archaeological sites starts to make sense, if the supporters of a very insecure nation decide that leveling the archaeological playing field is preferable to allowing the obvious disparity in artifacts to remain visible to the world.

Egypt Keeps Gazan Border Closed

What else would you expect?

Everyone in the world knows Mubarek's government has been bought off with Zionist money.

"Egypt stops Gaza-bound medical convoy

July 12th, 2009 8:18 AM

International Movement to Open Rafah Border

Egyptian authorities have refused to allow 'Viva Palestina' activists trying to carry humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip to cross into the Sinai Peninsula.

The largest-ever US aid convoy to help the people of Gaza was stopped at the Suez Canal on Saturday on its way to Al Arish, where the rest of the group and supplies will join them before heading for the border crossing into Gaza.

The activists are part of a convoy of at least 200 people -- all Americans, including Charles Barron, a New York City Councilman -- that plan to be in Gaza by July 13.

Former US Congresswoman from Georgia, Cynthia McKinney, who was arrested by Israeli forces earlier this month while heading to Gaza on a humanitarian mission, will also join the convoy.

Viva Palestina activists say despite earlier arrangements, Egyptian border officials are not allowing the medical convoy to pass and have even threatened them with arrest, saying they have not received a list of the names of the members of the convoy.

The group -- intending to break the crippling Israeli-Egyptian blockade of Gaza, home to 1.5 million Palestinians -- spent the night in their buses despite pressure from security officials to return to Cairo.

"We are determined to cross onto Gaza, and no matter what happens next, out of this first small confrontation, we've achieved a success for the movement in support of the Palestinian people. The convoy is going to move on, and we ain't gonna let nobody turn us around," Barron said.

Egypt and Israel have sealed their borders with the seaside territory since 2007 when Hamas took control of the coastal territory, leaving thousands of Gazans in desperate need of life's essentials.

According to a recent report by the International Committee of the Red Cross, the deadly Israeli-led blockade, which has prevented supplies from reaching Gaza, has created a dire humanitarian situation in the region.

The humanitarian agency says seriously ill patients are not receiving the treatment they need and that thousands of Gazans whose homes were destroyed during Israel's three-week Cast Lead military operation are still without shelter.

--
In Solidarity
from all
International Movement to Open Rafah Border

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=9986479902

"Only a united world against oppression will help unite and free all of Palestine."

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=100454&sectionid=351020202

--source--"

The Western Media and Iran

"The Western media and Iran

Matthew Cassel, The Electronic Intifada, 23 June 2009

Protestors, anywhere in the world, are extremely brave individuals whose reasons for demonstrating openly should be listened to and respected. Protest is democracy at work. However, too often, US and other Western-based media pick and choose which protests to cover and which to ignore completely.

The US media often celebrate themselves as the "freest and fairest" in the world, completely independent of a state unlike, for example, the media in Iran. Yet, an astute observer will notice that the US media generally choose stories and cover them in a way that play directly into the US's global agenda.

Who decides whether or not a particular issue is "newsworthy?" One would think that this is the role of the media, to cover issues like conflict or rights abuses as they happen around the world. Although, it seems this isn't the case. Most Western media appear to follow their government's lead when focusing on different issues and then cover them in a way fitting with the government's position, hence the complete domination of events in Iran in nearly every single Western media outlet and the overwhelmingly positive portrayal of the protestors and the opposition as just. The current case of Iran makes it clear that it is governments who are directing the media's coverage, instead of the actual news organizations themselves.

There was also a noticeable shift in the US media's coverage of foreign affairs after the attacks of 11 September 2001. Soon after, then President George Bush's rule of "with us or against us" was applied to all, and media outlets and individuals critical of American foreign policy were immediately demonized and labeled "unpatriotic" or "anti-American." To counter such charges, it became common for American television journalists to prove their patriotism and loyalty by wearing American-flag lapel pins.

These reasons explain why over recent weeks while the Iran elections were happening there has been virtually no coverage in most media of demonstrations numbering in the tens of thousands in Georgia or Peru. It has even been reported in Peru that dozens of persons have been killed during the protests, or "clashes" as they've also been labeled (since more than a dozen police have also been killed), more than the reported number killed in Iran.

Why are protests in Iran receiving more attention than those in other places? One logical explanation is that the Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili is a key ally of the US and NATO. Thus, the West and its media have remained largely silent about the opposition protests to not give them attention that would likely inspire the demonstrations to continue and grow, undoubtedly weakening the Saakashvili government.

Meanwhile, the situation in Latin America is particularly sensitive. Coverage of protests by indigenous groups and their supporters in Peru might further embolden these efforts and expose the unjust policies of recent Free Trade Agreements with the US and perhaps lead that country down a path like the increasingly popular governments of Venezuela or Bolivia. Of course, both nations are seen as "anti-American" for their critical positions regarding US intervention in Latin America.

However, Iran is different than both Georgia and Peru. Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad has probably overtaken Osama Bin Laden as the most hated individual in the US. Over the past several years, many officials in Washington have called for more aggressive actions to be taken against Iran. More recently, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave US President Barack Obama an ultimatum that the US president better take care of Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program, or else Israel would. It's no coincidence then that the protests in Iran are receiving around-the-clock media coverage and are also one of the only examples in recent years where US government officials have showed support for demonstrators like Obama did when he called on Iran to "stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people." They are certainly not the only protests that have been met with violent government repression.

For years, Palestinians have organized weekly nonviolent demonstrations against Israel's wall in the West Bank. Each week protestors face the heavily-armed Israeli military and are beaten and shot at with rubber-coated steel bullets and tear-gas canisters, sometimes fatally. Yet, during his recent speech in Cairo to the Muslim world, Obama made no reference to these protests and instead called on Palestinians to "abandon violence" and adopt nonviolent means. Days after the speech a Palestinian was killed and a teenager wounded during the weekly protest, yet there has been no call by the US administration for Israel to "stop all violent and unjust actions" against the Palestinian people. And the media has followed and remained silent, even though covering the demonstrations would be as easy as a 30-minute drive from most Jerusalem-based news bureaus on any given Friday.

Furthermore, at the height of the Bush Administration's call for "democracy" in the Middle East, an indigenous democratic movement arose in Egypt to challenge the corruption and failed economic policies of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. Comprised of workers who organized unprecedented strikes for four years that grew in number with each successive rally, the demonstrations received little coverage in the US. An odd occurrence, considering the duration of the strikes and the size of the protests, which a number of observers believe had the potential to lead to something much bigger in Egypt, perhaps even a "revolution." The lack of media coverage of these events can only be explained by the relationship between the US and Egypt. Mubarak, who has governed Egypt for nearly three decades, is often referred to as a dictator for his repression of opposition political figures and journalists critical of his government. Yet, he remains one of the most important US allies in the Middle East, so "violent and unjust actions" against Egyptians are tolerated by the West.

Similarly, during Israel's three-week assault on Gaza this past winter, there were massive and unprecedented demonstrations across the Middle East in support of Palestinians in the besieged territory. Again, these received minor if any mention, likely because it challenged the media and Washington's narrative that Israel was "fighting Hamas."

Also in accordance with that narrative, there was scant footage broadcast in the Western media from inside Gaza. Similar to what Iran is doing now, Israel banned journalists from entering Gaza during the attacks. Despite this, there were large Arabic-language satellite stations like Al-Jazeera reporting from the ground with footage of nearly everything that was happening there.

When images were shown by CNN or its competitors, it was generally not true to the real horror faced by Palestinians in Gaza. I can't recall seeing one video of one of the hundreds of children killed in Gaza shown in the US media. In contrast, two days ago CNN broadcasted footage of a woman who was shot and bleeding to death on a Tehran street. Most of these viral videos are taken on citizens' mobile phones, and they even have a special logo that CNN has created for the "unverified material."

But there is plenty of "verified material" showing violent images from the Middle East and many other places around the world in recent days, weeks, years that has never been shown. Videos and testimonials are readily available on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, waiting, indeed begging, for the US media to take notice. But coverage of certain places might contradict US foreign policy there, something much of the media are proving unwilling to do.

If the elections and demonstrations in Iran have revealed anything, it is that there are undeniably huge divisions that will greatly affect the future of the country. It's the individual's decision to choose which side he or she supports, if any. And it's the responsibility of the media to be independent of the authorities and to present accurate information in context so that news consumers' judgments will be informed and not made based off the foreign policy of Western governments.

A free and independent media is an essential part of any democracy, and something that the West is proving more and more that it lacks.

--MORE--"

The Ramifications of 1967

"The 1967-war revisited (Part 1)

by Khalid Amayreh

In June 1967, when Israel launched the 6-day-war on Egypt, Syria and Jordan, Khalid Amayreh was 10 years’ old. In the following two-part article, he recollects the war, whose outcome and ramifications continue to trouble Palestine, the Middle East and the rest of the world:

Even before 1967, the Israeli army had been carrying out routine incursions into the West Bank, destroying poor people’s homes and killing innocent civilians, very much like what Israel has been doing in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and Lebanon recently. I still vividly remember how the Israeli army, including tanks and warplanes, attacked the small nearby town of Sammou’, 25 kilometres south-west of Dura, in November 1966, destroying the town, virtually completely, and killing many civilians.

You see the condescending Zionist mentality. They are never interested in genuine peace and coexistence with the peoples of the Middle East, but are only intent on subjugating and tormenting people with brute force. This was as much the case 40 or even 60 years ago as it obviously is now.In June 1967, I was ten years old. I remember how we were told to raise the white flag when the Israeli army surrounded our small village, Khorsa, 15 kilometres south-west of Hebron. We were told we would be shot and killed if we didn't raise the white flag aloft. The Jordanian soldiers left in disgrace and headed eastward, a few donned traditional women’s clothing in order to disguise themselves, while King Hussein urged us via Amman Radio to fight the Israelis “with our fingernails, with our teeth.” Well, how could we possibly fend off the mighty Israeli army with our teeth and fingernails?

Frankly, the Arab armies didn’t really put up any real fight against the Israelis. These armies reflected the utter political, moral and ideological decadence and bankruptcy of most contemporary Arab regimes. Indeed, maintaining the regime’s survival was the most paramount priority and strategy for the ruling elites and juntas of that time. Fighting Israel and liberating Palestine were not a real priority for these Arab regimes, despite all the rhetoric.

Interestingly, this state of affairs remains unchanged even today, 40 years after the greatest Arab defeat in modern times.

For many years, Israel and its allies claimed that it was Israel that was attacked by the Arabs in 1967 and that all that Israel did was fight back for its very survival, which was at stake.

This is, of course, a big lie, as Israeli leaders themselves came to admit many years later.
The former Israeli President Ezer Weizmann (who was also a former commander of the Israeli air force) admitted in an interview with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz in 1972 that “there was no threat of destruction…but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could exist according to the scale, spirit and quality she now embodies.” 4

Similarly, the former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, a notorious hawk, was quoted in Noam Chomsky’s book ‘The Fateful Triangle’ as saying that “in 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army’s concentrations in the Sinai desert didn’t prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.”5

Yitzhak Rabin, another former Israeli Premier, had this to say about the so-called Egyptian threat to Israel.

“I don’t think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to the Sinai wouldn’t have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it.”6

This is not to say though that the Arabs, particularly the Egyptian and Syrian regimes didn’t do a lot of sabre rattling, threatening to destroy Israel. However, the Israeli leadership of that time and the Johnson Administration, as well as the British and Soviet (Russian) intelligence knew quite well that Nasser was only indulging in bellicose rhetoric and nothing more than that.

But, Israel, nevertheless, decided to attack with the central purpose being territorial expansion.

Needless to say, territorial expansion had always been a central goal of the Israeli strategy.

For example, Chomsky quoted the first Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion as saying the following:

“The acceptance of partition (by Israel) doesn’t commit us to renounce Transjordan; one doesn’t demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today. But the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concern of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them.”7

Gigantic defeat

The historical defeat of the Arab armies in 1967 (historical because Israel occupied the rest of Palestine, including al-Masjidul Aqsa, one of Islam’s holiest places) didn’t necessarily reflect any inherent Arab inferiority vis-à-vis Israel; it rather reflected the bankruptcy of the regimes.

In 1973, during the October or Ramadan war, the Egyptian and Syrian armies could have scored a decisive victory over Israel had it not been for the massive intervention of Israel’s guardian-ally, the United States. It is likely that the Arab armies could, under favourable circumstances, defeat the Israeli army, as demonstrated by Hezbollah in its war with Israel in the summer of 2006.

At the beginning of the Occupation in 1967, the Israelis launched what one may call a PR campaign, employing Arabic-speaking Jewish immigrants from the Arab world and Druze officers. Some naïve people in our community, who had been disenchanted with the heavy-handedness of the Jordanian regime, prematurely began making positive remarks about the new occupiers. The reason for that is the often-made assumption that people tend to initially make positive statements about any conqueror.

Such people would speak auspiciously and optimistically about the fledgling Israeli era. They would make casual remarks like this: “Oh, they are better than the Jordanians, they are civilized and educated!” and “the Jews are educated people, they treat people with dignity and respect” and “under Israel’s rule, everybody is equal.” These people simply didn’t know what they were talking about.

But such feelings, which were not widespread among the people, didn’t last long, as the occupation army began revealing its ugly face by adopting stringent measures against us. Well, occupation and decency seemed then, as they do now, an eternal oxymoron. There is no such a thing as a civilized or enlightened or benevolent occupation. A foreign occupation is an act of rape, it is by nature a criminal and evil act, otherwise it would be something else.

Actually, the Israeli occupation is probably the worst occupation ever in the history of mankind, not only for its brutality, but for its durability as well.

Indeed, I would argue that, in many aspects, the Israeli occupation is probably worse than the Nazi occupation of Europe. The Nazis wanted to conquer, pacify and stabilize rather than ethnically cleanse and uproot non-German Europeans as Israel has been doing to the Palestinians.

Soon enough, the Israelis began confiscating the land and building settlements, employing all kinds of dirty tactics, including bribery, shadowy deals, deception, tricks, falsification of documents and outright coercion. They also resorted to the harsh policy of collective punishment such as demolishing homes as a reprisal for guerrilla attacks or membership in the PLO, especially in the Fatah organization, founded and headed by the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. In our Palestinian culture, if you want to express extreme ill will towards somebody, you say “Yikhrib Beitak” – may your home be destroyed.

The Israelis sought to take full advantage of this weak spot in our social psychology. Thus, they demolished thousands upon thousands of houses. The demolitions, a clear-cut war crime under international law, have never ceased. Today, they do it mostly by bulldozers and by pinpoint bombing from the air. (See the chapter “Telephone Terror” I don’t know for sure the number of Palestinian homes Israel has destroyed since 1967. However, I can safely claim that they exceed the 15,000 figure.

In fact, the wanton demolitions of Palestinian homes and villages started immediately after the war. Indeed, immediately after hostilities were over, the Israeli army utterly destroyed more than 170 homes in the Maghariba and al-Sharaf neighbourhoods in the vicinity of the al-Aqsa Mosque.

In the third and fourth weeks of 1967, Israeli army bulldozers wiped out the Palestinian villages of Beit Nuba, `Imwas (Emmaus), and Yalu, all on the orders of Yitzhak Rabin.

Approximately twelve thousand people were driven away from their homes, many of them trucked to the River Jordan, others were sent wandering in the desert without food or water.

Eventually, the Israeli government, thanks to a generous gift of Canadian tax-payers’ money, built an infamy on the ruins of ‘Imwas. They called it Canada Park. This is Canada, which claims to be a guardian of human rights and the rule of international law!!!

Actually, Israel continues to behave in such a manner. As I write these words, the Jewish state is unearthing and destroying the ancient Muslim cemetery in West Jerusalem, the Mamanullah (or Mamillah) graveyard, in order to build the ‘Museum of Tolerance’ there!! Yes, Canada Park and Museum of Tolerance!! You see the depravity and brutal ugliness of these criminals? On July 26, 2007, European rabbis held a protest and prayer vigil in Brussels over a 600-year-old cemetery in Vilnius, Lithuania that they said was being used for construction. (See “Rabbis protest construction of Jewish cemetery”: www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa). Of course it is wrong to desecrate cemeteries, Jewish or non-Jewish. However, it is a sign of ultimate hypocrisy to unearth and smash the bones of dead Muslims in Jerusalem in order to build a Museum of Tolerance on the site of the former Muslim graveyard while Jewish leaders would rave and rant and protest when a Jewish cemetery in Eastern Europe is desecrated by authorities there.

Home demolitions would leave deep psychological scars in people’s memories. Children would return from school only to see their homes being destroyed by bulldozers driven by soldiers wearing helmets with the Star of David engraved on them. That Star of David, which we are told is originally a religious symbol, symbolized hate and evil and cruelty. Even today, I couldn't imagine a more hateful and evil symbol. It is very much comparable to the way Holocaust survivors view the Nazi Swastika.

Phobias, deep stress, neurosis and depression are among the disorders children of demolished homes would suffer as post-traumatic effects.

--MORE--"

What Of the Speech?

Also see: Obama in Cairo...Same rhetoric, same lies...

"What Are We to Make of His Speech? Obama in Cairo

by PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

What are we to make of Obama’s speech at Cairo University in Egypt?

“I’ve come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, one based on mutual interest and mutual respect.”

Cairo is the capital of Egypt, an American puppet state whose ruler suppresses the aspirations of Egyptian Muslims and cooperates with Israel in the blockade of Gaza.

In contrast to the Islamic University of Al-Azhar, Cairo University was founded as a civil university. Obama’s Cairo university audience was secular.

Nevertheless, Obama said startling words that many Muslims found hopeful. He said that colonialism and the Cold War had denied rights and opportunities to Muslims and resulted in Muslim countries being treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. The resulting blowback from “violent extremists” bred fear and mistrust between the Western and Muslim worlds.

Obama spoke of the Quran, his middle name, and his family connections to Islam.

Obama praised Islam’s contributions to civilization.

Obama declared his “responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”

Obama acknowledged “the responsibility we have to one another as human beings.”

Obama acknowledged Iran’s “right to access peaceful nuclear power.”

Obama declared that “no system of government can or should be imposed by one nation on any other.”

Obama’s most explosive words pertained to Israel and Palestine: “Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel’s right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine’s. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.”

Obama declared that “the only resolution [to the conflict] is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security. That is in Israel’s interest, Palestine’s interest, America’s interest, and the world’s interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires.”

For Obama’s commitment to be fulfilled, Israel would have to give back the stolen West Bank lands, dismantle the wall, accept the right to return, and release 1.5 million Palestinians from the Gaza Ghetto. As this seems an unlikely collection of events, the nature of the “two-state solution” endorsed by Obama remains to be seen.

After the euphoric attention to idealistic rhetoric dies down, Obama will be criticized for extravagant words that create unrealizable expectations. But were the extravagant words other than a premier act of schmoozing Muslims designed to quiet the Muslim Brotherhood in our Egyptian puppet state and to get Muslims to accept US aggression in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan?

Obama decries regime change, but continues to practice it, invoking women’s rights to gain support from secularized Arabs. He admits that Iraq was a war of choice but claims that al Qaeda, the Taliban, and 9/11 make Afghanistan a war of necessity.

Obama said that “the events of 9/11” and al Qaeda’s responsibility, not America’s desire for military bases and hegemony, are the reasons America’s commitment to combating violent extremism in Afghanistan will not weaken. Will Muslims notice that Obama’s case for America’s violent extremism in Afghanistan and now Pakistan is hypocritical?

Al Qaeda, Obama says, “chose to ruthlessly murder” nearly 3,000 people on 9/11 “and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale.” These deaths are a mere drop in the buckets of blood that America’s invasions have brought to the Muslim world. Moreover, the overwhelming majority of the Muslims America has slaughtered are civilians, just as are the unarmed Palestinians slaughtered by the American-equipped Israeli military.

Against al Qaeda, whose “actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings,” Obama invokes the Koran’s prohibition against killing an innocent. Does Obama not realize that the stricture applies to the US and its “coalition of forty-six countries” in spades?

America’s wars are all wars of choice. The more than one million dead Iraqis are not al Qaeda. Neither are Iraqi’s four million refugees. Yet, Obama says Iraqis are better off now, with their country in ruins and a fifth of their population lost, because they are rid of Saddam Hussein, a secular ruler.

No one has a good tally of the dead and refugees America has produced in Afghanistan. Nevertheless, declared Obama, “The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America’s goals and our need to work together.”

In his first 100 days, Obama managed to create two million Pakistani refugees. It took Israel 60 years to create 3.5 million Palestinian refugees.

What Obama has really done is his speech is to accept responsibility for the neoconservative agenda of extending Western hegemony by eliminating “Muslim extremists,” that is, Muslims who want to rule themselves in keeping with Islam, not in keeping with some secularized, Westernized faux Islam.

Muslim extremists are the creation of decades of Western colonization and secularization that has created an elite, which is Muslim in name only, to rule over religious people and to suppress Islamic mores. All experts know this, and most of them hail it as bringing progress and development to the Muslim world.

Obama said that “human progress cannot be denied,” but “there need not be contradiction between development and tradition.” However, the West defines development and education. These terms mean what they mean in the West. Muslim extremists understand that these terms mean the extermination of Islam.

In typical American fashion, Obama offered Muslims money, “technological development,” and “centers of scientific excellence.”

All the Muslims have to do is to cooperate with America and be peaceful, and America will “respect the dignity of all human beings.”

--MORE--"

I'm glad someone pays attention to this stuff because I didn't see or hear a word. I don't like listening to this fart-misting liar anymore than Bush.

The LACK of CHANGE has been most disappointing and I'm not buying the flowery words when ACTIONS are WHAT COUNTS!

The Lessons of Lavon

But it could never happen here, right, America?



--MORE--"

A Historical Look At Israeli False Flag Operations

"A Historical Look At Israeli False Flag Operations

by Nashid Abdul-Khaaliq

With all that we see happening with the London bombing, I think it is wise for us to consider the following. History could be repeating itself. British and American targets have been bombed before, and the evidence seemed to point to a specific perpetrator. But the evidence was faked.

Numerous writers, scientists, investigators and even political figures have pointed out Israel’s involvement with 911. There is a huge pile of evidence that is being ignored, shoveled under the carpet and being labeled as "urban legend" regarding Israel’s involvement in 911. We should know that Jews have a consistent history of fraudulent actions resulting in the loss of lives of millions of human beings to accomplish their purpose.

False flag operations are not new for Jews. As I will show in the list below, false flag operations, the act of committing terrorist actions and having others blamed for it, is a technique that they have employed in numerous situations for hundreds even thousands of years. Not only have they done false flag operations to blame Muslims, they have done these actions to have others blamed like, the Czarist government in Russia, other Jews, Germany, enemy organizations and states, etc. I also find it interesting that they have been caught red handed in numerous false flag operations. Not once but several times they have been caught. As regards today’s terrorists actions, it is interesting to note that Israelis have been caught in false flag operations attempting to have Muslims blamed, but yet there is not one false flag operation where Muslims were caught attempting to blame Jews. We should really think about this and ask the reasonable question of, "I wonder why that is?"

Here is a brief look at some past Jewish actions showing their treachery, deception and fraud in having innocents take the blame for their horrible actions. I have summarized this and provided links to most of the facts listed below. Doing a google search on any of the facts presented will yield even more information:

Quote:

1. According to our Bible, it was Jews who were responsible for falsely accusing Jesus, deceiving the masses about his true mission and causing him to be crucified by the Romans. It is also true that in the Bible Jesus called Jews murderers, children of the devil, vipers and other vile things. Jesus did not pull any punches in describing them. I guess in today’s world he would have been arrested for anti-Semitism. But he realized the truth and exposed them for what they really were. You Christian Zionists and far right Christians should go study your Bible. You may either learn something or come back denouncing Jesus as an anti-Semite.


2. According to many respected WW1 historians it was Jews who tricked Britain into agreeing to give them Palestine in exchange for getting the U.S. into WW1. Benjamin Freedman, a friend of some of the major leaders in our time and who is also a Jew, admitted this during a major speech given to patriots in 1961. The Neturei Karta, a devoutly Jewish religious group also admits the same. There are numerous scholars, historians and Jews who describe in detail how WW1 was started and fought with one of the main goals being getting Palestine for Jews. Here are links to more information about that:

http://www.the7thfire.com/new_world_order/zionism/benjamin_h_freedman_on_zionism.htm

http://www.geocities.com/mewatch99/therealevil.html


3. It was Jews who caused the pogroms of their own people in Russia around the 1890s, so that the world will hate the regime of the Czar and cause millions of Jews to flee to the U.S. for political gain. Under the orders of Jacob Schiff in New York and the Rothschilds, they massacred hundreds of fellow Jews to have Russians blamed for this act and cause the immigration of thousands of other Jews to the US. Among other things, this resulted in world opinion turned against the Czar and his government and set up the bloody overthrow of his regime by the Bolsheviks.

http://educate-yourself.org/nwo/illuminatiagenda2bestoverviewyet8jun02.shtml


4. As admitted to by many historians and even by the ultra Israeli religious group, the Neturei Karta, WW2 was engineered by Jews and that the leadership of the Jews made an alliance with Hitler causing thousands of German Jews to be killed so that others will flee en mass to Israel. They also forced the U.S. president Roosevelt to get into WW2 by embargoing Japanese oil causing them to attack the U.S. at Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt went along with this plan all the while knowing ahead of time about the Japanese attack and the murder of thousands of Americans. See the following for more:

http://www.geocities.com/mewatch99/therealevil.html

5. The Iraqi Jew Naeem Giladi wrote a book detailing how Israelis performed terrorist actions and caused the deaths of many Jewish Iraqis during the 1950s so that Arab Iraqis can be blamed for it. The purpose of these terrorist actions was to cause Jews to migrate to Israel from Iraq. All but 6,000 of the 125,000 Jews in Iraq fled to Israel.

http://www.savethemales.ca/030203.html

6. A few years after the end of World War II, the Zionist plan to establish the nation of Israel in Palestine was finally realized. But not before the British protectors of Palestine were chased out by acts of terror carried out by ungrateful Zionist terrorists. It was British troops who unwittingly sacrificed their lives in order to steal Palestine away from Arab control and allowed the Jews of Europe to immigrate there. But with Great Britain left weakened and in debt from World War II, the ungrateful Zionists saw their opportunity to now chase the British out of Palestine by committing acts of terrorism against them. The most notorious of the Zionist terror groups was the Irgun, whose leader Menachem Begin would one day go on to become the Prime Minister of Israel and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize.

On the morning of July 22, 1946, a group of 15-20 Irgun terrorists dressed as Arabs entered the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. They unloaded 225 kilograms of explosives hidden in milk churns.(1) The King David Hotel housed the Secretariat of the Government of Palestine and Headquarters of the British Forces in Palestine. When a British officer became suspicious, a shootout took place and the Irgun lit the fuses and fled. The explosion destroyed part of the hotel and killed 91 people. Most of the victims were British but 15 innocent Jews also died. It must not be felt that Begin was merely suspected of being behind these murderous deeds. Begin admitted that the Irgun committed these acts and that they were necessary for the establishment of a Jewish state.

http://www.geocities.com/mewatch99/therealevil.html

7. In 1956, as reported by the Times Of London, during one of Israel's perpetual wars with its neighbors, the Israeli Mossad tried to trick the United States into siding with Israel against Egypt by blowing up a US facility in Cairo and blaming the Egyptians for it. The plot was wrecked when the operatives were caught and confessed, creating a huge scandal. This event was referred to as the Lavon Affair named after the Israeli Defense Minister, Pinhas Lavon, at that time.

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=6854

http://www.the7thfire.com/new_world_order/zionism/mossad/lavon_affair.htm


8. According to Victor Ostrovski, a defector from the Israeli Mossad, the US was tricked into bombing Libya when the Israeli Mossad planted a radio transmitter in Tripoli which sent out fake orders to "terrorists" which the US could intercept. The faked orders caused Libya to be blamed for a German disco bombing. As a result of this fake transmission, Reagan used it as evidence to bomb Libya killing 30 innocent people including Qaddhafi’s baby daughter.

http://100777.com/node/101


9. On June 8, 1967 Israel used unmarked fighters and torpedo boats to launch an hour and one-half attack on the American Navy ship the USS Liberty, costing 34 American lives and 171 wounded. The Israelis first attacked the Liberty's radio towers in an attempt to stop the Sixth Fleet from learning that the Israelis were the attackers. After unmarked Israeli fighters horrendously bombed and strafed the Liberty, Israel sent in torpedo boats to finish the job. They even machine gunned the deployed life rafts in an effort to ensure that there would be no survivors (witnesses) who could expose them. Just as in the Lavon Affair, Israel hoped to blame this act of war on their enemy, the Egyptians. This time, only the courage and resourcefulness of the Liberty's crew prevented a further compounding of the travesty.

http://home.cfl.rr.com/gidusko/liberty/


9. It was Israelis who were armed with 9mm pistols, nine grenades, explosives, three detonators and 58 bullets and caught in Mexico in an attempt to blow the Mexican Congress up on October 10, 2001, one month after 911. Curiously these Israelis were found not with Israeli passports in their possession but with Pakistani passports. The Israelis were booked for conspiracy to destroy a building by means of an explosive by the Mexican police. If they were successful in blowing up the Mexican Congress then like 911 it would have been blamed on Muslim terrorists, especially if Pakistani passports were found at the scene of the crime. They got caught red-handed here and only God knows how many other incidents that innocent Muslims are being blamed for that was really done by Israelis. See the following link for more on this:

http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/01/12/Mexico2.html

I could go on and on with more travesties committed by Jews. But I hope you are getting my point. The information above is all true about Jews and Israel. Yet we don’t learn from these lessons of the past when new terrorists’ actions are committed. I agree with Mark Glenn who wrote the following words:

"America's only ally in the Middle East, Israel, has been responsible for more acts of terror, sabotage, and murder of American citizens than the Muslims ever were. By her duplicity, she has put Americans in more danger than they have ever known or will know. She has bombed hotels, American government buildings, deliberately allowed hundreds of US Marines to be killed in their barracks in Lebanon, assaulted a US intelligence gathering ship, the USS Liberty (for the purposes of blaming the Arabs and thus drawing America into her war against them) stole and then sold America's most sensitive nuclear weapons technology to her enemies, (Russia and China) and by all indicators most certainly was involved in the 9/11 attacks. Whether it was the testimony given by the Israeli pilots who bombed and machine gunned the USS Liberty (killing 34 American sailors and wounding almost 200 more) or whether it was the Israeli intelligence officers who were arrested on 9/11 (while videotaping the destruction and cheering for a job well done) so much evidence exists which leaves no doubt as to who America's real enemy is, and yet short of one individual's conviction and prison sentence, Jonathon Pollard, nothing has been done with Israel with respect to justice or the interests of America's security. By contrast, year after year she is rewarded with more and more money and even more in terms of immunity and insulation from public scrutiny. The American people, supposedly a Christian people, have displayed not an ounce of the same concern for this obvious danger against their physical well-being which they attempt to display now over the supposed danger posed by Islamic extremism. Through the eyes of a Muslim therefore, the picture of the modern day Western Christian is one of an intellectually compliant, politically and religiously complacent individual who cannot think for himself or act in his own best interests outside of the programming which he receives from his Zionist puppet masters. Even today, as the headlines are blaring out the obvious vindication of this image by virtue of the fact that the war in Iraq was fought on completely false pretenses, the average conservative Christian in America who has adopted this irrational fear of Islam has taken no note of this nor does he appear to have been affected in the least."

http://www.geocities.com/mewatch99/muslimview.html

Israel has a proven track record of false flag operations causing death and destruction to their "allies and supporters". Yet we never hear about any of this in the main stream media. When a terrorist act is committed, this false flag history of the Israelis is never brought up as a possibility to consider. If we are going to be intelligent people and truly find the real culprits, shouldn’t we look at all possibilities and learn from the lessons from the past? As the old saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on ME!" Instead of doing this, the first thing we hear from our leaders and without any evidence are "Al-Qaeda", "Muslim terrorists". When at the same time Israelis have been caught attempting to frame Muslims numerous times.

Yet Americans still see Israel as their best friend. Billions of dollars is freely given to Israel every year, we fight their wars for them, and we trust them in the highest positions in our government. For God’s sake America why are we allowing this? Why are we not investigating, sanctioning, attacking, freezing funds, etc from Israel? What more do we need? America is headed towards repeating the mistakes of Czarist Russia. If we are not careful we will have another Bolshevik Revolution on American soil with tragic consequences maybe more deadly than the ones that killed more than 60 million innocent Russians.

--MORE--"

The Missing Iranian Ship

Missing from AmeriKa's MSM coverage (at least, the War Daily I get).

Related: Iran to Aid Gaza

Whatever became of that ship, anyway?

"The "Iranian" Weapon Ships

The seems to be some confusion in the media about ships from Iran that allegedly transport Iranian weapons to Gaza and elsewhere. bea asked to look into it.

Israels aim is to further isolate Iran by any means and to use the U.S. and other countries to do their bidding. To that end it alleges Iranian support for its enemies, currently especially Hamas, and its propaganda machine is doing a hell of a job to confuse the world with disinformation about this.

For starters, let us note that there is no proof at all for any Iranian weapons used by Hamas in defense against the latest assault against Gaza. Over to a former director of the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, Colonel Pat Lang:

It is claimed by the agitpropers that Hamas is a satellite organization of Iran. If that is so, then Iran has done a poor job of supplying their Palestinian subsidiary. Where are the Iranian product improved and manufactured weapons that Hizbullah possessed in numbers in '06? Where are they? Impossible to deliver? All of them?

It would seem that political support and encouragement is one thing. Supply is another.

The best rockets Hamas used so far, says Israeli intelligence, are from China, not Iran. Such weapons get stolen from the Egyptian army or bought from international weapon dealers and smuggled for a profit by Bedouin nomads through the Sinai and through tunnels into Gaza. There is no proof of any Iranian supply of weaponry to Gaza at all.

Onto those ships. There are two in question that are mentioned, and mixed up, in recent news reports.

An Iranian ship with Red Crescent humanitarian goods which was denied access to Gaza and to Egypt and is now in Beirut. That ships name is Iran Shahid, IMO 9184591 (Picture)

A Russian container ship that is transporting some stuff from Iran to Syria and elsewhere and was searched last week by the U.S. Navy. There is yet no proof that it carries any weapon or ammunition at all. It is now in Cyprus. Here is a picture of the Monchegorsk, IMO 8013039.

On December 10 the Iranian Red Crescent announced to send 1,000 tons of humanitarian goods as relief to Gaza:

The official did not disclose the nationality of the ship, but said the cargo will include 500 tonnes of wheat, 200 tonnes of sugar, 200 tonnes of rice, 50 tonnes of cooking oil and 50 tonnes of medical supplies.

The text to a Getty/AFP image late December says:

Iranian Red Crescent workers pack medical aid into boxes before uploading them onto the 'Iran Shahed' ship to send to Gaza Strip in the southern port city of Bandar Abbas on December 28, 2008.

On January 14 the Red Crescent said that the ship was turned back by the Israeli Navy and would try to land its load in the Mediterranean Egypt port of el-Arish to be trucked into Gaza. Egypt denied the ship access to el-Arish and on January 30 it arrived in Beirut. The name of the captain is Qaleh-Golab.

Of course if you believe the Israeli disinformation service Debka:

the vessel has been converted into a floating logistical headquarters for the Hamas leadership, with Hamas frogmen using fishing boats to keep them connected.

Hamas frogmen ....

Now onto the second ship. Here the reporting is fudged incredibly by Israeli disinformation.

Like this report today from the Jerusalem Post:

[T]he American Aviation Week magazine reported Sunday that the US prevented Israel from raiding an Iranian ship believed to be carrying weaponry and explosives for Hamas.

According to the report, the Americans stopped the operation because they wanted to avoid an Iranian-Israeli confrontation.

Aviation Week reporting on naval issues? But indeed the usually reliable Aviation Week blog for military issues Ares gives it a sad try:

The Cypriot Navy has stopped an Iranian ship, believed to be carrying weapons for Hamas, on its way to Syria, Israeli security officials told The Jerusalem Post last Thursday night.
...
According to unofficial intelligence reports, the Iran Shahed set out from the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas Dec. 29, the second day of the Gaza conflict, changing its identity several times until hoisting a Cypriot flag. The vessel was stopped by the US Sixth Fleet in the Gulf of Aden on its way to Egypt, where it was believed to have planned to unload its cargo, which was then to be smuggled into the Gaza Strip.
...
According to unconfirmed reports, the Israelis tried to seize the boat in the Red Sea (...). But the Americans decided not to give the Israeli Navy a chance to seize the vessel and tow it to Eilat for fear of a Tehran ultimatum to Jerusalem, followed by Iranian attacks on Israeli and US naval craft patrolling the Gulf of Aden and Red Sea.

Lots of nonsense in those two graphs and the rest of it is only worse. The Red Crescent goods ship is named Iran Shahed, not the allegedly weapon carrying ship. And why would the U.S. Navy "tow" a ship that can drive by itself?

Notice that the blog entry is by one David Eshel - a retired Colonel of the Israeli army.

Another Debka piece has a sentences that reappears word for word in the Aviation Week blog entry.

The Americans decided not to give the Israeli Navy a chance to seize the vessel and tow it to Eilat ...

So that's how the circle goes. The Jerusalem Post report above is based on an Aviation Week blog entry from a retired Israeli officer who's sources are Debka and the Jerusalem Post.

The same Jerusalem Post article includes this:

The Cyprus Mail newspaper quoted military officials as saying that the boat was carrying hundreds of tons of explosives and that authorities were considering moving the vessel to Larnaca Port.

The Cyprus Mail did not do so. It wrote:

High-ranking army and police officers, however, conducted an initial search to the cargo and reportedly found over hundreds of tons of explosives, reports said.

Cyprus Mail says "reportedly". It did not quote officials. But who "reported" this? Debka? The Jerusalem Post? We don't know, but I suspect it is wrong as the ship, according to the Cyprus Mail, has not even started to unload yet.

The ship in question is a Russian container ship Monchegorsk that sails under the flag of Cyprus. On January 19 the U.S. Navy stopped the ship in the Red Sea and requested to search it. The master, says the U.S. navy, agreed to the search.

On January 20 DEBKA alleged:

US and Egyptian warships were scouring the Gulf of Aden and Red Sea Tuesday, Jan. 20 to waylay an Iranian freighter carrying scores of heavy rockets for delivery to Hamas. DEBKAfile's exclusive sources report they were acting on intelligence that a ship loaded with an estimated 60 tons of arms to replenish Hamas' depleted war stocks had set out from the Iranian Persian Gulf port of Bandar Abbas on Jan. 17.

Our sources reveal that the arms-smuggling vessel started its voyage as the Iran-Hedayat and changed its name in mid sea to Famagustus registered to Panama. The captain was ordered by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards to unload its cargo at a smugglers cove on the southeastern coast of Sinai opposite the Gulf of Suez, to be picked up by armed Bedouin gangs and moved to El Arish in northern Sinai. From there the contraband rockets were to be slipped gradually into the Gaza Strip.

Hmm - smuggler coves ... ?

On January 22 AP reported:

The U.S. military intercepted and searched an Iranian-owned ship that officials feared was carrying arms to the militant group Hamas, but two officials said it was unclear Thursday whether those suspicions were founded.
...
One official said the two-day search turned up ammunition that included artillery shells; and since Hamas is not known to use artillery, officials are now uncertain who the intended recipient was.

This "two officials" "one official" thingy is curious.

AP later said:

The Navy searched the ship with permission of the captain and found small munitions, military officials said.

So one "official" alleges artillery shells, while later "military officials" only talk about small munitions. The AP should straighten up its reporting ...

Point 5 of UN resolution 1747 (pdf) prohibits Iranian arms exports.

If the U.S. would have found anything but a few small weapons or munitions (btw - quite usable against pirates said to be in that area) from Iran on board of that ship it would have had reason to detain it or to seize the cargo.

But even Admiral Mullen said there was not enough evidence to do so:

QUESTION: Tal Schneider from Maariv newspaper, Israel. I want to ask about the anti-smuggling efforts that the U.S. Navy has done in Suez Canal, stopping an Iranian ship that was smuggling probably weapons. And is the U.S. intention to convene a conference about anti-smuggling to Gaza Strip in the near future?

ADM MULLEN: Actually, it was a Cypriot-flagged ship that was boarded by a U.S. Navy boarding team after requesting permission from the master and receiving permission to go aboard to inspect for weapons which were – which were considered – which were considered to go against the UN Security Council resolution which banned these kinds of weapons from being shipped from Iran, which is where they came from, to Syria, which is where we believe they’re headed and, in fact, will probably get there in the next day or so.

The United States did as much as we could do legally. There are authorities, limitations in complying with this particular UN resolution, and we basically went right up to the edge of that and we couldn't do anything else. So we were not authorized to seize the weapons or do anything like that.

So the navy found nothing that would be against the prohibitions in UN resolution 1747. If you reread the above you will find that Mullen does not even confirm that the navy found anything at all.

He also had this gem:

... shipping weapons to Syria that we think, quite frankly, are going to end up in Gaza.

Could the Admiral please check a map? What countries lie between Syria and Gaza? Would they allow weapons transfer from Syria to Gaza? Duh.

The ship was stopped and searched in the Red Sea by the U.S. amphibious transport dock ship USS San Antonio, which is currently supposed to hunt pirates with task force 151 at the Somali coast. Instead it is pirating Russian ships.

The Monchegorsk then passed through the Suez Channel and was greeted in the Mediterranean by the U.S. Navy.

According to the Cyprus Mail:

‘Monchegorsk,’ a Russian-owned ship was yesterday docked at Limassol, a day after the US navy intercepted the vessel at the Suez Canal and led it to Cyprus.

The US and Israel believe the ship, which set off from Iran, was carrying arms, weaponry and explosives for Hamas and Hezbollah, although Russia insists it is a commercial vessel which was carrying cargo from Iran to Syria.
...
Washington has asked the Cypriot authorities to hold the vessel and its crew, thoroughly check its cargo and ensure all its documents are in order.

A later Cyprus Mail report says:

The vessel is being investigated after the US and Israel said it was suspected of carrying Iranian weapons to Gaza.

Russia, on the other hand, says it is a completely legal and commercial container.

The US government has asked for the ship to be investigated and its documents examined.

The ship, which according to reports was heading from Iran to Syria, was forced by the US navy to moor in Cyprus.

According to CyBC, the vessel is expected to remain off the coast for the next two days, until a decision is taken on the matter.

Yesterday Haaretz cited "Israeli officials" saying the Cypriot inspectors found tank ammunition for T-72 tanks and various mortar rounds on the ship.

Maybe in those "secret holds" Debka phantazises about?"

Whatever: Neither Hezbollah nor Hamas have T-72 tanks. The Syrian army has Russian build T-72 tanks. A Russian ship carrying T-72 shells to Syria should not surprise anyone.

But where is the load - if it exists - from?

No source gives any proof that the ammunition, if it exist at all, is actually from Iran or even destined for Syria. Container ships usually load and unload at several harbors along a fixed circle route. That a ship carries something after having visited port C does not mean that the stuff was loaded there and is destined for port D. The stuff might have been loaded at port A or B and be destined for port E or F.

So let us summarize:

One Iranian ship with a humanitarian load was not allowed to land that load in Gaza or Egypt and therefore carried it to Beirut. Good food for poor Shiites in South-Lebanon I guess.

A Russian ship under Cyprus flag and on the way from Iran to Syria was held up and searched by the U.S. Navy, with permission from the master. The U.S. Navy did not find anything that would have allowed it to act under UN Resolution 1747 but escorted the ship to Cyprus for whatever.

The Russians say the ship carries only legitimate load.

All reports about anything more than a few small weapons on that ship are solely based on Israeli reports based on dubious sources.

There is a quite extensive effort by the Israeli disinformation circles to fudge these issue and to thereby make Iran look bad.

--MORE--"