Tag Archives: US Middle East Policy

THE INVISIBLE CRIME – ORLANDO: CLEAR EVIDENCE OF A COVER-UP

Be a good American cut There are many (so-called „conspiracy) theories“ out there about the spectacular shooting in the Pulse gay club and this is not surprising, given that the information that has been fed to the media does not pass the  logical „smell-test.“

Many things need to be investigated i.e. the known CIA-ties of Mateen’s Afghan father; the dark and evil machinations behind G4S; the legend that Mateen was gay himself;  that he supported „IS“ ; even the suspicion, that the whole thing is a charade  with „crisis-actors“, etc.

My approach is a different one as I focus on one aspect which is DEMONSTRABLY A FRAUD and PROVES that there is a huge cover-up going on:

DID TIME STAND STILL IN ORLANDO?

In a criminal investigation the police must interrogate witnesses, collect forensic evidence, find out what exactly happened, when and why. If the available information is authentic and coherent, if the statements from witnesses corroborate each other and match the physical evidence, the police will quickly reach a conclusion and be able to bring charges against the prime suspect, to „solve“ the crime.

In this case the police need not find out who did it (or so it seems) because the „terrorist“ has already been identified and (conveniently) killed.

As usual the synthetic „terror“  is accompanied by a prefabricated, fear- and hate-inducing narrative about the motives of the „radicalized“ Muslim perpetrator which the media-parrots dutifully repeat. First you kill the „shooter“ than you assassinate his character (create a “legend”) …

But  the information that we have gotten so far about the „time-line“ of events in the Orlando night-club is not conclusive at all. Even worse, there are HUGE CONTRADICTIONS about what happened when. So let us take a closer look:

WHY  ARE  THEY  LYING  ABOUT  THE  TIME  OF  THE  ATTACK?

On June 12, a local TV-reporter in Orlando,  Stewart Moore tweeted:

Stewart bomb 20 shot 0005Source tells me suspect wearing a bomb, barricaded inside night-club, more than 20 shot with long gun“ 

This message was posted online at 00:05 (five minutes after midnight). Only 4 Minutes later Moore sends another message:

 

Moore man hostages nightclub 0009

„… Man remains barricaded inside nightclub with hostages“ (00:09)

But the police have said that the massacre (in the main room of the club) DID NOT START BEFORE 2.a.m.

If this is true, HOW COULD THIS REPORTER POSSIBLY KNOW  SO EARLY  THAT 20 PEOPLE HAD BEEN SHOT?  

Who gave him that information? How could he talk about a „hostage situation“ when according to the official statements released to the media, this happened hours later?

49 Minutes later (00:58)  the Orlando Police (OPD) also sent a message on twitter regarding „the Pulse incident:

Orlando POL tweet 0058 12JUNShooting at Pulse on S Orange, multiple injuries, stay away from area“

„Again, the time does not fit the dominant media narrative: If the police tweeted „multiple injuries“ SHORTLY BEFORE 1 A.M., then the shooting must have begun MUCH EARLIER.

So this seems to corroborate the tweet by Stewart Moore and  by one „Emilio“ published in the Daily Mail:

 

GoEmilio tweet shooting 1156„We‘re WT Pulse Orlando HIDING IN THE DRESSING ROOM THERE WAS A SHOOTING TELL THE COPS“ (11:56 p.m.)

sent SHORTLY BEFORE MIDNIGHT on June 11.

 

But if the shooting already started SOME TIME BEFORE MIDNIGHT on June 11, then how come that there are „witnesses“ who claim „I was there. Shooter opened fire at around 2:00am.?“   How many shooters were there? It simply does not add up … and there is more:

1 Independent 935 JUN 12The British newspaper, The Independent  „reports“ the DEATH of the shooter at 09:35 a.m. BST on June 12:

The shooter was killed following a four hour stand-off with Orlando police at the Pulse nightclub, having killed at least 20 people„

If I am not mistaken, 9:35 BST  (British Summer-Time) corresponds to  4:35 a.m. local Orlando time (EST 5 hour difference).

But according to Orlando Police chief Mina „…at approximately 0500 hours this morning, THE DECISION WAS MADE to rescue hostages that were in there.

Only  then did they arrange for the „controlled explosion“, knocked down a wall with an armoured verhicle, etc.

So how could this article be published about HALF AN HOUR EARLIER (local time) with the information that the hostage-taker was already dead?

The disturbing answer to this question can be found in another tweet by the OPD which clearly announces the demise of the shooter.

Orlando Police shooter dead 253So according to this statement THE KILLER WAS ALREADY DEAD at 2:53!

Then why did the police wait until 5:00 a.m. in the morning to reach the “decision to „rescue the hostages“???  WTF is going on here???

Why was there a need to „break down a wall“ anyway and wait FOR TWO HOURS before „rescuing“ anybody?

This is a complete cock and bull story. Was Mateen lying dead outside the bathroom stalls while the freaked out „hostages“ thought he was still alive? What was really going on in there?

Remember, the „hostages“ in the bathroom stalls NEVER SAW the gunman. They only HEARD shots. They saw blood on the floor. They heard that SOMEBODY was there, heard „him“ talk on the phone but there was no visual contact at all.

  • We have not seen your face ..not even heard your voice …“ (Norman CASIANO Interview )
  • He didn’t say anything. He was just shooting“ (Jeanette MCCOY; [main room shooting]; Source: Orlando Sentinel )
  • I was outside … I never saw the gunman, I never heard the gunman“  (Shawn Royster SANTIAGO, Interview )
  • We all know what happened there“ (!) (Dr. Joshua Stephany, Chief Medical Examiner (CME), Orange County, FL)

Patience Carter Pulse victimPatience CARTER stated  the shooter spoke (to them) only once, when he asked if there were any black people inside the bathroom stalls. When this was answered in the affirmative, he responded „this is not about you, you guys suffered enough, it’s about MY country“.

But she had no idea who that person really was at that time.

ANYBODY  could have made the bizarre „911“ calls, post a crazy message on facebook (there are reports that he did not even have an account before but that  „several Facebook pages with the name “Omar Mateen” appear to have been set up AFTER the terrorist attack.“) or talk to a TV-producer in New York.

We know that the Pentagon, CIA, etc. use „social media“ to manipulate public opinion, they even create fake personas and infiltrate chat rooms, fora, comment threads, etc.

Before I am going to show how ABSURD  AND SURREAL the „calls“ Mateen allegedly made („while he was slaughtering innocent people“) REALLY ARE, just one more observation:

KEPT IN THE DARK

One witness said

the gunman had begun shooting at the ceiling initially because the glass from the lights overhead was falling onto the dancefloor.

If you are a „terrorist“ who  wants to  kill as many people as possible why would you want to destroy the lights overhead before you aim at them? To shoot in the dark with a gun that can fire 700 rounds per minute in automatic mode? To „blind“ the 14 cops who allegedly have been shooting at you before (with not one hit anyway)?

Four of us still hiding. Lights are off in club. Cops are here but haven’t got us yet. (tweet by „Emilio“)

Perhaps someone wanted the „lights off“ who had „night vision“ equipment  and wanted to ensure that no-one could really identify the shooter(s) or what was really going on inside the club ..? (Most witnesses only HEARD shots … and „only for a minute“ … „for the duration of a song“

SigSauer MCX 1(I assume this is long enough to kill 50 people with the „Black Mamba“ if you are an expert killer („special forces“ team) but not for ONE MAN who was a puny security guard AND wanted to be a police officer , a fact which is rarely mentioned in the media )

Here are 3 remarkable statements from witnesses:

Jon ALAMO had been dancing at the Pulse for hours when he wandered into the club’s main room just in time to see the gunman. “You ever seen how Marine guys hold big weapons, shooting from left to right? That’s how he was shooting at people,” he said.

One of the wounded, Angel COLON Jr, describes how [the shooter] moved through the club, shooting at each person on the ground to be SURE THEY WERE DEAD.“ (Why would he do that if he was going to commit „suicide by cop“ anyway??)

Patience CARTER:  “It sounded as IF HE WAS COMMUNICATING WITH OTHER PEOPLE who were INVOLVED WITH IT …  Maybe he was just deranged, maybe he’s just talking to himself, but I honestly feel like I DON’T THINK HE WAS ABLE TO PULL THAT OFF ALL BY HIMSELF“.

THE CRAZY PHONE CALLS

News13 transcript screenshotThe most ridiculous tale the FBI has spread are  the bizarre „911 calls“ and the call to an Orlando TV news producer. Let us have a look at the latter first. Here is an account from CBS:

CBS: „Matthew GENTILI, a producer for local cable News 13, told CBS News that Omar Mateen called the station around 2:45 a.m.“  So what did he allegedly say?

(supposedly) MATEEN: Do you know about the shooting?

(Gentili was „cut off“ by the caller but was going to say he had heard about „a shooting“ in the area; at that time he did not know about the crisis situation inside the Pulse, he was not aware of the location)

MATEEN: “I’m the shooter. It’s me. I am the shooter. (sounds like a robot)

CBS: „Gentili revealed that Mateen said he did it for the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and then started to speak in Arabic.“

But in the video-clip CBS shows on the website, Gentili actually says:

„He started saying he did it for the Islamic State, (ISIS) and then he started speaking in  a foreign language..  (soundbite)

He did not say ARABIC. And people in AFGHANISTAN (where his parents come from) do not speak Arabic either, they speak mainly PASHTU or DARI  which are PERSIAN languages. Has anybody verified if Mateen was able to  speak Arabic at all?

Luckily, a complete transcript of an interview with Gentili is available here.

Here are some important excerpts:

MG: It was at 2:45 when I had just received the phone call of someone claiming to be the Orlando shooter. I answered the phone as I always do, ‘News 13 this is Matt,’ and on the other end I heard, ‘Do you know about the shooting?’ and I said ‘Yup, I’m getting information — I’m receiving some calls right now’ and he cut me off and said, ‘I’m the shooter.’ I didn’t know what to say, it was alarming to say the least. He sounded really calm on the phone and he started saying that he did it for the Islamic State — he did it for ISIS, and then he started speaking in a foreign language which at the time, being in Orlando, I thought it was maybe Spanish. But he was speaking so fast I didn’t know what it was, and thinking back now it was most likely Arabic, that he was speaking. I said ‘Sir, sir can you please speak in English?’ and then he started saying ‘I did it for ISIS, I did it for the Islamic State’ again. I didn’t know what to say to him. I was just blown away, and I asked him ‘Who is this? Where are you?’ and he told me that’s none of my effing business. He wouldn’t tell me who he was, he wouldn’t tell me where he was, but he wanted me to know that he did this for ISIS, he did this shooting for the Islamic State.”

COMMENT:

How crazy is it (surrounded by corpses or dying people) to call a journalist, tell him „I DID IT, IT WAS ME, I DID IT!“ but refuse to say one’s name??? Can anyone believe this surreal nonsense? (Was Gentili posssibly „talking“ to a recording? Or to a programmed „Manchurian candidate“?)

Then the interviewer asks him if he heard anything in the background during the call (to hint at or verify the location):

MG:  “You know, when I think back, it’s really surprising, I heard nothing– I heard silence. I feel like if I would have heard sirens or anything in the background it would have been more telling to me, that, you know- how severe this call really was and I heard nothing, I heard nothing on the other end except from him.”

Absolute silence? With all these suffering victims around … no muffled cries for help, no sounds of desperation, of pain, of fear? No crying … no sounds from cell-phones (constant messaging going on)…. no sounds from the police? How is that possible?

NOW PLAYING: FBI-THEATER OF THE ABSURD

But if you thought this sounds weird, you „ain’t seen nothing yet“: here comes the latest insult on our intelligence from – you guessed it – the FBI.

They had the audacity to release a „partial transcript“ of the 911-calls Mateen allegedly made „during the massacre“. MyNews13 provides the following summary:

  • FBI provides partial timeline of events the night of the Pulse shootings
  • FBI: Mateen talked to 911 dispatcher in ‘chilling, calm and deliberate manner’
  • Mateen said he wanted US to stop bombing Syria, Iraq.

Now we have already seen (above)  that the official „Timeline of events“ is a cruel joke so how do the  redacted „data“ released by the FBI fit into this blurry picture? They put a final nail in the coffin of the official narrative as you will soon find out.

The FBI claims that Mateen made the first 911-call at „about“ 2:35 a.m. on June 12 and this is what he allegedly said:

2 FBI redacted transcript 911 callOne might be excused for thinking this weird „dialogue“ was taken out of an absurdist drama script:

„The Absurd in these plays takes the form of man’s reaction to a world apparently without meaning, and/or man as a puppet controlled or menaced by invisible outside forces“ (wikipedia)

3 FBI redacted transcript 911 Pulse 2Precisely.

 

I am sure you noticed that AGAIN the caller REFUSED TO GIVE HIS NAME (and it does not say „omitted“ there) and also his exact location.

I am certain you have also got the impression that the statements from the alleged perpetrator sound very robotic, like a half-wit, not really like an intelligent human-being  (MK Ultra, anyone?) Or was it a recorded message?

Now the forensic value of this released fragment  by the FBI as authentic evidence for their claims is of couse ZERO.

We have no way of knowing whether this wording is accurate, whether it was really Mateen who called 911, an FBI-agent or Santa Claus. The fact, that they refuse to release THE ACTUAL RECORDING of the phone calls are a clear sign that we are being hoodwinked on a grand scale but this has become routine after „911“.

If it weren’t so serious (the „deep state“ does it again … kill with impunity) the whole thing would be absolutely ludicrous: Just read this:

WHAT’S IN A NAME?

„The FBI said it intentionally omitted the name of the shooter and the group to whom he pledged allegiance“ (!)

jens_jerndal faux terror may2015WTF??? And why would that be necessary? First they spread information which makes everybody accept the claim that Mateen was the caller (and the killer). They also release information about his „pledge of alliance to IS, their „leader“, the phony Bagdadi, the Tsarnaev-brothers:

„The FBI says the gunman who attacked a gay nightclub in Orlando called the Boston Marathon bombers his “homeboys.”(?)

but now they prefer not to confirm these statements IN WRITING –  to avoid incriminating themselves?

What’s the point of RELEASING A REDACTED / CENSORED  „CONFESSION“ ANYWAY? How stupid do they think we really are?

 CRISIS NEGOTIATIONS WITH A ZOMBIE?

 „At least three crisis negotiations occurred after the 911 call, during which Mateen identified himself as an Islamic soldier and told the negotiator to tell America to stop bombing Syria and Iraq and that was why he was “out here right now,” the FBI said.

COMMENT: the „caller“ not only refused to give his name, he also avoided mentioning his actual location. How  utterly bizarre.

With regard to the „Stop bombing“ demand, a clarification is necessary:

CNN: „Patience Carter and others hiding in the bathroom HEARD mateen dial 911 and say he’s “doing this is because he wants America to stop bombing HIS country.” (Mateen’s parents are from AFGHANISTAN. He was born in New York.)“

We can all hear what she said on the YouTube videos. She did say „HIS country“. Again, why not release the actual recordings of the 911 calls, if these statements are true? We all know the answer …

We are not in any way trying to hide anything” US Attorney Lee Bentley  (No kidding!)

AMERICA IS AirforceSo obviously, the FBI is distorting the facts here:  they want to establish a connection with the brutal, insidious and cowardly  US-proxy war against Syria (SOLD to the public as a democratic uprising against an evil dictator who cannot be defeated without more foreign military „intervention“) and the US-SAUDI-ISRAELI orchestrated chaos in Iraq.

This fabricated „revenge“-theme serves also to create the (false) impression that the US is actually bombing IS when it is only Russia who really fights against those bastards.

LET’s DO THE TIME-WARP AGAIN

3 FBI redacted transcript 911 Pulse 2Let’s recap the „timeline“ of the FBI: (shooting begins after 2.a.m. which is contradicted by many tweets, a few of them shown above)

  • At 2:35 shooter called 911 – „hung up“; called again – hung up. Is called back by 911 dispatcher (3 calls was the original story. Now we suddenly have FOUR calls) But this does not make sense because
  • At 2:45 shooter called News13 and talked to Matthew Gentili (who can prove time of call with  phone records).
  • At 2:53 OPD sends tweet „shooter is dead“ (If this was not Mateen, who was it???)

Orlando Police shooter dead 253So how could Matteen engage in more „crisis negotiations“ after 3.a.m. when he was no longer alive? Are we talking about two different persons here? Who actually made these bizarre calls?

 

FALSE BOMB SCARE

„Mateen told crisis negotiators that a vehicle outside the club “has some bombs,” and that he would ignite them if they “try to do anything stupid.” (?) The FBI said Monday that no explosives were found inside or outside Pulse the night of the shooting.

At about 4:21 a.m., Orlando Police officers pulled out an air conditioning unit from a window of a Pulse dressing room to let clubgoers get out, according to investigators. Orlando Police Chief John Mina said Monday that about eight people were saved through that window. As the clubgoers were being rescued, they told officers that the shooter inside said he was going to put explosive vests on people in 15 minutes.“ (Source: MyNews13)

COMMENT: Well, according to OPD, the „shooter“ was already dead at 2:53. So who was making „this threat“? Another shooter? A diversion to cover something up inside the club?

And HOW could this person have carried all these explosives, a (91cm) assault-rifle, several magazines, etc. into the club? What did security do? Look the other way? (See last paragraph for more on this)

WHY would he want to put „explosive vests on people“? (He could have just shot them) What was the purpose? If he did, then he would certainly also have died when they exploded so what’s the point?

Aren’t we supposed to think this „crazy Islamist“ wanted to die anyway? As a self-styled „hero“ who took revenge for the „innocent (IS) people“ killed by the US? This story is complete BS. And if „eight people“ could get out thru a window, why couldn’t the cops get in?

„Just after 5 a.m., OPD SWAT and Orange County Sheriff’s Office hazardous device teams set off an explosive charged to breach a wall and used an armored vehicle to try to get inside the club.“

Why the need to install „explosive charges“ and break down another wall? Why indeed, when the (original) shooter was already dead???

I think this phony „bomb-scare“ inside the club was necessary to prevent medics, „innocent“ (not-in-the-loop) cops and reporters from coming too close to the crime-scene. As we have seen from the artificial „time-line“ something inside the Pulse had to be covered up, time needed to be gained before the „hostage-situation“ would be over.

THIS IS THE FINAL BOMBSHELL

“Upon that entry of our officers, there was NO OTHER GUNFIRE until the hostage rescue situation took place,” Mina said. “During that three hours I want to make sure everyone is clear: THERE WAS NO GUNFIRE.

Wait a minute: Do I understand this correctly?  The police-chief says that there was NO GUNFIRE „during that three hours“ – what exactly does he mean? (Mateen allegedly started to kill people between 2 an 2:20 so are the “three hours” a Freudian slip of the tongue, indicating the “shooting” happened much earlier?

Between 2 and 5 a.m.  THERE WAS NO GUNFIRE????  He meant after the initial shooting in the middle section of the club reported shortly after 2 a.m by one officer. Then the gunman allegedly „withdrew“ into the rest room where 20-30 people were taking cover.

Then why did witnessses say someone shot people INSIDE THE STALLS? And that someone DIED outside the stalls in the bathroom? (pools of blood on floor… was it Mateen who died there??? And then fake calls were placed to make it appear he was still alive?

  • So WHOSE SHOTS did the „hostages“ hear outside the stalls? Whose shots killed some people inside the stalls?
  • Which cop reported „shooter is dead“ at 2:53??? (And if it was not Mateen who died then, how many shooters where actually there?)

news13 OPD statement shots bathroomFBI: „Based on OPD radio communications THERE WERE NO REPORTS OF SHOTS INSIDE THE BATHROOM  (after officers entered the club to „engage“ shooter ostensibly at 2:08 a.m.).

So Mateen just talked on the phone  to the cops …(!) but they will not say what he „demanded“ during those „crisis negotiations“?  WTH is going on here? If he just talked then who killed the people inside the bathroom stalls???

MYNEWS13: „Questions concerning reports of SHOTS FIRED INSIDE THE BATHROOM (where the gunman was „barricaded“) were dismissed as part of the ongoing investigation“ ???????????????? 

DEADLY SILENCE

 „Also Monday, the Orange County Medical Examiner’s Office said it had released Mateen’s body from the office. At the request of the FBI, no further information will be available REGARDING THE SHOOTER’S AUTOPSY REPORT, who the body was released to and when the body was released, the office said.“

COMMENT: You bet. The autopsy report must clarify the actual TIME OF DEATH and the precise CAUSE OF DEATH. The CME  Orange County Pathologist did the autopsy ALONE („by myself“ as he admitted on video) with no-one witnessing the proceedings.

In this hugely political case the post mortem report has explosive content  so it can be expected that the autopsy would be painstakingly correct. So why do it alone and then keep the results under wraps? (Again, the answer is obvious…)

„The trauma medical director, Dr. Joseph Ibrahim, says the only thing he would change is that more victims could have gotten to the hospital sooner so that that they could have saved more people“ (Why wait for over two hours when gunman already dead at 2:53???)

JUST A REMINDER

There have been many shootings in the US over the years and normally these crimes would be classified under „homicide“. To ensure that the FBI has full control over the crime scene, the media releases and the investigations,  it had to be designated as a „terrorist act“.

WHY COULD THE SHOOTER NOT BE STOPPED BY 14 COPS?   

LANDofMakeBELIEVEAnd just one more thing … there seems to be some confusion about the role of the OPD officer who first „heard the gunshots“ at the Pulse and encountered the  shooter „ near the entrance“ (ambiguous wording for a police department but could not stop him …

His Name is Adam Gruler and he has a reputation as a „hunter“ in law enforcement circles. Gruler is reportedly feared by the „hunted“ from the poor neighbourhoods in Orlando for his alleged brutality.

As far as I can tell there are 3 versions as to what he was actually doing there: (which is rather suspicious)

 Extra-duty“ to search for a teenager with a fake ID (?)

„Music blared and more than 300 people danced and milled about Pulse nightclub early Sunday as Orlando police officer Adam Gruler searched the area for a teenager who had gotten into the club with a fake ID. He couldn’t find the kid, so he headed back to the club’s parking lot. That’s when the shots rang out. Gruler ran toward the entrance after hearing the shots…. “ (Source)

„Off-duty“, not in uniform, engaged the shooter when he heard the shots (just happened to be there?)

„Around 2 a.m, the shooter walked past the front entrance into the main dance floor, according to a witness. He turned toward the bar area and started shooting. According to police reports, AN OFF-DUTY OFFICER engaged in a firefight with the shooter (some people escape thru patio)

Police respond shortly and enter the club, exchange fire and force the shooter to retreat to the restroom and take hostages. Many people were then able to escape from other parts of the club.“ (Source)

Off-duty“: Working as a PRIVATE SECURITY GUARD at the Pulse (!)

„Officer Adam Gruler was off-duty and working private security at Pulse. He was the first to engage the gunman.“ (Source)

security guard Gruler INDEP If Gruler (an experiencend police officer) was RESPONSIBLE for private security at the club, at that special weekend for the gay community, then the first question he ought to answer is: HOW COULD THE GUNMAN ENTER THE CLUB WITH AN ASSAULT WEAPON IN THE FIRST PLACE????

The accepted media narrative that he „just heard shots“ when he was outside the club rests solely on his testimony. And why would the shooter go back into the club? Why not try to escape in the dark or simply shoot at the cop?

What if Gruler was posted there on that special night (working clandestinely for the FBI or CIA) to ensure that the shooter could get into the club? What if the story about the „fake ID“ ist just a diversion?  This is pure speculation but it cannot be ruled out …

And how come that 14 (!) cops were unable to stop the shooter? How come that not one shot fired by the cops actually HIT the guy? That not one cop was hurt either (the story with the Kevlar helmet is just entertainment) given the Sig Sauer MCX?

What did they actually do when the shooter „retreated to the bathroom“? Why not just use some tear gas or other chemical to disable him ? How could just one guy „overpower“ or outsmart a SWAT-Team?

 „The decision by law enforcement to hold off on entering the Pulse club — where more than 100 people were shot, 49 of them killed — immediately raised questions among experts in police tactics. They said the lessons learned from other mass shootings show that officers MUST GET INSIDE SWIFTLY — even at great risk — to stop the threat and save lives.“ Source

I do not know what really happened inside that club between midnight and 5 a.m. that night but what I do know is that the official story stinks to high heaven.

Is the US ruled by psychopaths …?   Just look at the disgusting choice of presidential candidates and you know the answer ..

 

P.S. I found this on the VeteransToday website recently … (MK Ultra never went away …)

MK Ultra never went away

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Greece for Sale

the new fascist dealThis piece (not all of it, the parts about the Nazi roots of the “European Economic Union” and the quotes from William Blum were not included) was originally written as a reply to the article Yanis Varoufakis published in the German Newspaper DIE ZEIT and which he also presented on his blog in English.

I posted it yesterday in the comment section of his blog but it was completely censored, it simply ‘disappeared’. I wonder why ….

My first question was:

If “Grexit” was the alpha and omega of the German Euro-strategy then why did they give it up in the end?

Yanis, I respect your intellectual honesty very much but I think you have been hoodwinked to believe that “Grexit” was planned all along. They knew perfectly well that Syriza wanted to stay in the EMU (apparently) at any cost (as a matter of national honour) so they

had no incentive to give any ground at all. They can continue to make demands, no matter how unreasonable, with no possible political recourse on the part of Syriza. Hence all Greeks .. [became] prisoners of the Eurozone.” (quote from Andrew Ryder).

It was all a huge Machiavellian bluff, a kind of “psyop”: by showing you the “Schäuble-Plan” they instilled fear (also in the other deficit countries) (like the Holy Officium torturers knew that in some cases just showing the victim the gruesome torture tools was enough for a heretic to “recant” or “confess”)and if that was not enough, they counted on another psychological effect: Schäuble’s ostensible determination to “kick Greece out” of the Eurozone (for which there is NO LEGAL basis) would provoke the desired reaction: after accepting the Troika’s draconian, dictatorial terms, PM Tsipras could cling to the somewhat consoling notion that Syriza had at least “foiled” Germany’s humiliating plan.

At the same time the Greek people were subjected to even more economic “shock treatment” (by cutting off liquidity to the Greek banks) and the ultimate humiliation: after the great “OXI”-vote (which gave them for a brief moment a glimmer of hope) “their” government accepted even harsher terms than originally presented by the Troika: Greece is now effectively FOR SALE (at bargain prices …). The message to all left parties (and their voters) in all of Europe is clear:

IT DOES NOT MATTER AT ALL.

You can vote … but you cannot decide …

The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.     Carroll Quigley

 

blum killing hopeIn his book „Killing Hope” William Blum writes about Greece after the US had taken charge (since Britain could no longer afford the cost of neo-colonialism) in 1947. Here are three telling excerpts:

Blum Killing Hope GREECE

The “request” for aid  was written by the State Department but presented to the world as reflecting the wishes of the Greek government:

2 US aid to Greece 1950s

Blum also quotes from a letter to the director of the US “aid-program” in Greece (AMAG), written by then Secretary of State, George Marshall  in 1947 offering the following advice:

3 US aid to Greece 1950s

Talk about the arrogance of power. Today, the unholy “Troika” does not even bother to camouflage the economic dictatorship they impose on Greece since they control the financial weapons as well as public opinion.

We know that during the Cold War the Anglo-American imperial ruling class stopped at nothing to prevent a (coalition) government with a socialist or communist party (and who knows this better than Greeks …UK/US-assisted fascist take-over in 1944, 1967, then the corrupt, US-trained PASOK puppets …etc.) in Western Europe, including NATO-supported terrorism (see “Gladio). This is no longer necessary since the neoliberal, totalitarian economic “ThinkPol” has succeeded in brainwashing European political leaders and journalists to accept the “TINA”-principle. They realize of course that the huge inequality this system produces will generate opposition, even rebellion but the tyranny of finance* has now reached such a stage that resistance seems futile (at least in the Eurozone).

*excerpt: “I had had the opportunity to hear Mr Alexandre Lamfallusy, the leading technocrat tasked with the introduction of the single currency, speak in Tokyo around 1996. He presented his road map. The astonishing aspect was the level of detail. He told us, years in advance, in which European cities the chiefs of central banks and the finance ministers would meet and WHAT THEY WOULD DECIDE; when and where their deputies would meet and WHAT THEY WOULD DECIDE; and where and when the heads of government would meet, and WHAT THEY WOULD DECIDE: month after month of detailed scheduled meetings, with a complete script of pre-ordained outcomes, named after the cities in which the meetings were to take place. His confident presentation made it clear that he expected this script to be followed to the letter. I saw no reason to doubt his words. (Needless to mention, this is what happened).”

(Back to my questions for Yanis Varoufakis): What I do not understand is this: You know perfectly well that the whole design of the Eurozone is crazy (economically unviable) and I am sure that you are aware of the spot-on warnings of Wynne Godley in 1992:

[…] “the power to issue its own money, to make drafts on its own central bank, is the main thing which defines national independence. If a country gives up or loses this power, it acquires the status of a local authority or colony.”

cartoon 2In several interviews I heard you say that the Euro is doomed if no structural reforms are undertaken (and you know they will not come since Germany is not even willing to confront the question let alone change a system (apparently) to its advantage) then why did you support Syriza’s plan to stay in the EMU as Minister of Finance? Why throw away your pride (as a nation and in your case as a brilliant scholar), give up your sovereignty to keep your place on the Titanic? Why did Syriza not explain to the Greek public what the Euro really is (an instrument of political subjugation)?

Einstein once quipped that

‘You cannot solve a problem with the same way of thinking that created it in the first place’.

The (German) idea that you have “to discipline” European governments with the “threat” of being kicked out of the Eurozone (for which there is NO LEGAL basis) to make the stupid fiscal union work is a perfect embodiment of this insight and shows that we are ruled by “idiots”, [Ιδιώτης / idiotikos: “unprofessional, unskilled; not done by rules of art] not intellectually mature people who really engage in politics for the community [democrates].

Hitlers ShadowThe bitter truth is, the EU never was a truly democratic project, in fact its origins can be traced back to the Third Reich “Großraumwirtschaft”. The incredible irony is, that although these plans were based on dictatorial Germany calling the economic shots (with the “Reichsmark” having the hegemonic position the dollar has today and Berlin replacing London as the financial centre), the economic planning was a lot more intelligent and socially just than the Maastricht regime – here are some major points (taken from the book The Tainted Source by John Laughland):

(See also this – 1942: Conference on the European Economic Community)

  • Labour instead of capital must be the economic yardstick.
  • Prices are no longer the regulator of all economic phenomena. Instead, prices are regulated by the state according to the needs of the collectivity (!). (Ferdinand Fried, Professor of Economics)
  • The need for an integrated European clearing-system (regarding the balance of payments) was clearly identified.
  • Primacy should not be accorded to the exchange rate, instead full employment and purchasing power stability should be the primary goals of currency management … (Dr. Bernhard Benning / The State Theory of Money)
  • Walter Funk was defending the need for state control of foreign exchange to prevent uncontrollable capital flows from disturbing the economy; He realized that in order to establish the greatest possible degree of economic and political autarky, a monetary regime would have to be set up to protect Europe from “uncontrollable international” influences that “could be used as power-political instruments to suppress us
  • To maintain currency stability, price controls and the control of credit (!) were considered necess British commentators criticized the German “hostility to the Gold standard” (and for good reason…), called their ideas “totalitarian” as opposed to economic “liberalism”, the “free-market”-scam, etc.

Well, by now we should realize that nothing is more “totalitarian” than neo-liberalism (with the “market” as cover for plutocratic rule by bankers and their rich clients)

  • Gold became irrelevant once prices were determined not by the market but by governments which regulated all economic activity and once trade was managed through clearing arrangements.
  • Francis Delaisi, an ardent opponent of the gold standard, hated “the reign of money” and was convinced that the economic history of Europe after 1918 had shown the capitalist system to be on the verge of collapse. He rightly argued that the explosion of credit between 1919-29 in the US had led to the crash of 1929, and that the consequent depression had brought massive unemployment in the Anglo-Saxon economies. This threatened to destroy the entire social structure in Europe. (sound familiar?)
  • In Delaisi’s view the gold standard restricted social progress, because (being a world currency), it opened labour markets to world competition and thereby forced down wages .. he considered it to be an “instrument of inhumane competition”. It was important to liberate producers from the competition of exotic countries whose standard of living was too low … (Hitler abolished the gold-standard as soon as he came to power).
  • Capitalism is a political system based on class interests triumphing over those of the community as a whole.

(I never understood where the “socialist” part (in National-Socialist) came from – how could an extreme right, fascist, corporate-friendly party be ‘socialist’ at the same time? Now I get the picture …)

To be clear: I am not endorsing far-right parties here at all but I want to make the point that the rule of “the free market” (serving as a cover for the financial aristocracy) is no less authoritarian than what the Nazis had planned, it is a totalitarian system – just look at what is happening in Greece. There is no ‘agreement’ here, this was pure mafia-style coercion (a ‘reverse Corleone’ someone called it): accept or bury your economy.

So it seems they took the fascist plan for a European “Union”, got rid of the “socialist” part (commanded by the state) and replaced it with the totalitarian market-regime (still favouring Berlin). Dictatorial economic “rules” that must be adhered to – at all cost – (some are more equal here than others as we have seen, since Germany and France were the first countries to violate the Maastricht rules but no ‘punishment’ was meted out to them) should evoke huge resistance but presenting these rules as “necessary” adjustments to which there is no alternative (except economic isolation and bankruptcy) has succeeded in blaming the victims for the crime … the “market” has become the new Hitler … the banks the new weapons of mass (social) destruction .. the governments the willing executioner of a neo-feudal ideology (“neo-liberalism”).

Paul Krugman noted in an interview that the German word for debt (Schulden) is almost synonymous with the German word for guilt (Schuld) and speculated how this would influence German thinking …

 

StiglitzJoe Stiglitz recently wrote about the problems in the Eurozone (and the Greek drama within it):

That concern for popular legitimacy is incompatible with the politics of the eurozone, which was never a very democratic project. Most of its members’ governments did not seek their people’s approval to turn over their monetary sovereignty to the ECB. When Sweden’s did, Swedes said no. They understood that unemployment would rise if the country’s monetary policy were set by a central bank that focused single-mindedly on inflation (and also that there would be insufficient attention to financial stability). The economy would suffer, because the economic model underlying the eurozone was predicated on power relationships that disadvantaged workers.

Yes, this is the key point: economic policy and financial control are about POWER RELATIONSHIPS not mathematical models that have nothing to do with the real world. Steve Keen makes fun of the fact that banks and credit play no role in neoclassical economic models (and rightly so) but I now think this was no “mistake” or oversight, this was done on purpose … to hide the role of banks, finance as power-players in the economy … (they even invented a FAKE NOBEL prize to glorify the fancy mathematics that passes as “econometrics”)

If the consequences for the Greek people – and all of us in Europe – were not so dire, this whole charade (“of debt negotiations”) would be laughable. A kind of sinister, political farce, written by Kafka (“the institutions”) and directed by Orwell (Eurogroup should change its name to “MINISTRY OF TRUTH”.

I leave the last words to Guido Preparata (author of Conjuring Hitler, a very distressing exposé about the rise of Hitler, financed by Anglo-American money …. and encourage you to think about what the role of the US oligarchy in all of this Euro-Game is ….)

So-called democracy is a sham, the ballot a travesty. In modern bureaucratized systems whose birth dates from the mid 19th century, the feudal organization has been carried to the next level, so to speak. A chief objective of what Thucydides referred to in his epoch as synomosiai (literally “exchange of oaths”) – i.e. the out-of-sight fraternities acting behind the ruling clans – has been the process of the exaction of rents from the population (i.e. a free income in the form of rents, financial charges and like thefts) as unfathomable and impenetrable as possible. The tremendous sophistication, and the propagandistic wall of artfully divulged misconceptions surrounding the banking systems which is the chief instrument wherewith the hierarchs expropriate and control the wealth of their supporting community, is the limpid testimony of this essential transformation undergone by the feudal / oligarchic organization in the modern era.

The West has moved from a low-tech agrarian establishment built upon the backs of disenfranchised serfs to a highly mechanized post-industrial hive that feeds off the strength of no less disenfranchised blue- and white collar slaves, whose lives are mortgaged to buy into the vogue of modern consumption. The latter-day lords of the manor are no longer seen demanding tribute since they have relied on the mechanics of banking accounts for the purpose, whereas the sycophants of the median class, as academics and publicists, have consistently remained loyal to the synomosiai.

P.S.

From the “Agreement” with the Troika (page 5):

The government NEEDS TO CONSULT AND AGREE with the institutions ON ALL DRAFT LEGISLATION in relevant areas with adequate time BEFORE submitting it for public consultation or to Parliament …” !!!!

How could Alexis Tsipras even contemplate to sign this capitulation to the “modern dictatorship of money”?! If Greece wants to regain her dignity she MUST get out of the Euro (and NATO) and prevent the BIG SALE of her assets before it is too late …

AND FINALLY ….WHAT ABOUT THIS?

Tulane University oil expert David Hynes told an audience in Athens recently that Greece could potentially solve its entire public debt crisis through development of its new-found gas and oil. He conservatively estimates that exploitation of the reserves already discovered could bring the country more than €302 billion over 25 years. The Greek government instead has just been forced to agree to huge government layoffs, wage cuts and pension cuts to get access to a second EU and IMF loan that will only drive the country deeper into an economic decline. [4]

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Persians, Pharisees and Phony US “Anti-Proliferation

This is a reply to Iran Slams US as ‘World’s Only Atomic Criminal’

ISRAEL: A SAFE HAVEN FOR JEWS? FORGET IT


“Israel never confirms or denies claims that it has nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. The country positions itself outside international treaties, which would make it subject to inspection. They say the costs of such secrecy to Israeli democracy are too great. Uzi Even, was a young scientist working, in the 60s, at Dimona – Israel’s nuclear reactor….Today, Mr Even says it should be shut down.

Forty-year-old reactors tend to have accidents and he believes that Dimona, which is beyond the reach of the Israeli parliament, needs to be brought into a system of accountability and public scrutiny. Mr Even explained: “You should have an outside watchdog. “The secrecy more or less created an extra- territorial area in Israel where standard procedures of safety monitoring are not implemented. “So worker safety, environmental questions and industrial safety procedures, are not covered, and there are thousands of people working there.”

ENFORCED SILENCE


Nothing illustrates this better than the sensitive issue of Dimona’s cancer victims. In an Israeli documentary in 2002, Dimona workers said accidents had been routine. They spoke of explosions, fires and liquid and toxic gas leaks that they had to clean, often without protection.

The authorities denied they had worked with radioactive materials. They have refused to compensate them or their families for their years of loyal service. Because of the strict secrecy rules they were even unable to fight for their rights. When Correspondent approached one of the workers, who was dying of cancer, he refused to be interviewed – but with some regret.

Unaware he was being filmed, he said: “I wanted to talk to you but I have been silenced.

“They came from intelligence and told me not to talk. “They said I would be like Vanunu.” Vanunu has another year in jail. When his sentence is finished he hopes to emigrate to America. But Mr Horev has clearly let it be known he never intends to let Vanunu leave Israel.”

Source: BBC

Watch the shocking and still relevant documentary:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=178254070504611595#

.. the Israel people were exposed only to the Israeli media, the Israel media brainwash, the Israel media bias against me. Not they, they were not open to see all the story and all the danger of nuclear weapons in secret in such small state, Israel.

And also that these people was not exposed to the idea that these Israel people were sending a lot of propaganda, what they call holocaust industry, to know and to understand that nuclear weapons are the real holocaust and the Jewish people have no right and no justification to use the atomic bomb.”

Excerpt from an interview with Mordechai Vanunu by David Frost

From the BBC documentary:

“Despite claims that Dimona was for peaceful purposes only, Israel’s leader Ben Gurion was summoned to Washington.  President Kennedy feared an arms race in the Middle East and demanded inspections.But when inspectors finally entered the plant in May 1961 they were tricked. They were shown a fake control room on the ground floor. They were unaware of the six floors below where the plutonium was made.

Well this was something of great pride and almost a legendary story in Dimona, according to Vanunu.  When the Americans came they were completely hoodwinked. All the entrances including the lift shafts were bricked up and plastered over so it was impossible for anyone to find their way down to the lower floors.”

AFTER KENNEDY’S ASSASSINATION THE PRESSURE ON ISRAEL WAS OFF …


His successor Lyndon Johnson turned a blind eye. Then In 1969 Israel’s Golda Meir and President Richard Nixon struck a deal, renewed by every President to this day. Israel’s nuclear programme could continue as long as it was never made public. It’s called nuclear ambiguity.”

(The reporter interviews the former Israeli Prime Minister (now President) on the subject)

BBC: The term nuclear ambiguity, in some ways it sounds very grand.  But isn’t just a euphemism for deception?

PERES: If somebody wants to kill you, and you use a deception to save your life it is not immoral.  If we wouldn’t have enemies we wouldn’t need deceptions.  We wouldn’t need deterrent.

Remember this argument next time  Obama accuses Iran of  deception, although it has not violated any  (NPT) treaty obligations so far and the IAEA inspectors  have found no evidence for weapons-grade uranium enrichment let alone the production of plutonium …

BBC: Was this the justification for concealing the floors of the plutonium reprocessing areas from the Americans, the inspectors, when they came?

PERES: You are having a dialogue with yourself, not with me.

BBC: But that’s been documented in a number of books

PERES: Ask the question to yourself, not to me.I don’t have to answer your questions even.  I don’t see any reason why.”

Imagine, Ahmadinejad talking like that …  all hell would break loose…

As some arrogant asshole from a conservative think-tank said on the eve of the Iraq war to a peace activist who was accusing USrael of unbearable hypocrisy on the topic of WMD:

“It’s not the weapons, it’s WHO has them.

The same unacceptable and self-delusional “argument” was used by Benjamin Netanyahu recently, trying to justify Israel’s  immoral, hypocriticial and dangerous refusal to sign the NPT, to say nothing of the enforced media silence on the subject of demanding accountability for Israel’s nuclear arsenal,, while harping on about the manufactured “threat” from Iran.

We are the good  (morally and racially superior) guys, our diabolical weapons and even our cruelty are necessary for a “just” cause, so we are entitled to destroy and kill indiscriminately (Arabs, of course) – that line of argument goes back  directly to the Nuremberg trials …

Even US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates acknowledged, that Iran’s alleged “secret” attempts to acquire nuclear weapons are to be viewed in the context of deterrence, not military aggression, but he was quickly admonished for his candour and “brought back” in line with the official Zionist PR-story by Senator Graham …

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Do you believe the Iranians are trying to acquire nuclear weapons capability?

GATES: Yes, sir, I do.

GRAHAM: The president of Iran has publicly disavowed the existence of the Holocaust, he has publicly stated that he would like to wipe Israel off the map [NO, he has NOT!]. Do you think he’s kidding?

GATES: No, I don’t think he’s kidding. And—but I think that there are, in fact, higher powers in Iran than he, than the president. And I think that while they are certainly pressing, in my opinion, for a nuclear capability, I think that they would see it in the first instance as a deterrent. They are surrounded by powers with nuclear weapons—Pakistan to their east, the Russians to the north, the Israelis to the west, and us in the Persian Gulf—

GRAHAM: Do you believe the president of Iran is lying when he says he’s not?

GATES: Yes, sir.

GRAHAM: Do you believe the Iranians would consider using that nuclear weapons capability against the nation of Israel?

GATES: I don’t know that they would do that, Senator. I think that the risks for them obviously are enormously high. I think that they see value—

GRAHAM: If I may?

GATES: Yes, sir.

GRAHAM: Can you assure the Israelis that they will not attack Israel with a nuclear weapon, if they acquire one?

GATES: No, sir, I don’t think that anybody can provide that assurance.

How effective  propaganda (now called “strategic communication”) and global “churnalism” created the global “wiped-off-the-map” hoax, was also analyzed earlier by Jonathan Steele in The Guardian:

“Ask anyone in Washington, London or Tel Aviv if they can cite any phrase uttered by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the chances are high they will say he wants Israel “wiped off the map”.

Again it is four short words, though the distortion is worse than in the Khrushchev case. The remarks are not out of context. They are wrong, pure and simple. Ahmadinejad never said them. Farsi speakers have pointed out that he was mistranslated. The Iranian president was quoting an ancient statement by Iran’s first Islamist leader, the late Ayatollah Khomeini, that “this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time” just as the Shah’s regime in Iran had vanished.

He was not making a military threat. He was calling for an end to the occupation of Jerusalem at some point in the future. The “page of time” phrase suggests he did not expect it to happen soon. There was no implication that either Khomeini, when he first made the statement, or Ahmadinejad, in repeating it, felt it was imminent, or that Iran would be involved in bringing it about.”

If you want to understand what “churnalism” is all about (the media acting as as a flock of sheep or an echo-chamber …) try this video:

Back to the BBC documentary:

“The programme listed more than a hundred Dimona workers
who’d developed cancer and whose claims were being ignored
. A doctor and two lawyers backed their story. It was the first time Dimona workers had spoken out.

BBC: “I want to talk to Ariel Spieler.  He’s suffering from cancer and in the last few years he’s seen a number of his friends and colleagues who worked there with him die of the disease. He’s been fighting for compensation for their families, for their widows, and I know he’d really like to talk to us about this. He’s told me he wishes he could, but he’s also told me he’s been warned off.  He’s been told not to talk.  I’m going to go and see him and see if he’ll change his mind.”

Spieler: “The Secret Service silenced me.They’ve silenced me completely. They told me not to say one word. What can I do?  What can I do? They told me: “You’ll end up like Vanunu”.How long has he been in prison? 15 years? Do you want me to go to jail?

BBC: “I really wanted to talk. I asked the others but they refused.Nobody wants to talk… the doctors, the relatives, the lawyers. Nobody is prepared to talk about it. I just don’t get it.

If this was Iraq or North Korea I’d understand why people are so scared to talk. But this is Israel.

This is supposed to be a democracy.”

(Perception is everything…)







Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

“Crying and Shooting” with EU support

Separation Wall with BalloonUN ENDORSES GAZA WAR CRIMES REPORT

Given the extremely difficult circumstances, I think Judge Goldstone did a good job with his report on Operation Cast Lead. Those who accuse him of “bias” should present facts that support their allegations or keep quiet.

His findings simply confirm a long line of previous reports from Human Rights Organisations (including B’t Selem) and the revelations by groups like “Breaking the Silence” although there is one dubious premise which needs to be clarified:

I absolutely agree with Norman Finkelstein, that to refer to the massacre in Gaza as a “war” is totally unacceptable and deliberately misleading, given the huge disparity of force between Hamas militants and the IDF and the fact, that the real military  target was  the civilian  population (as the report confirmed). From the days of Ben Gurion, it was clear to all Israeli leaders that the greatest threat, the “time-bomb” for the “Jewish” state has been the significantly higher birth rate of Palestinians. So from this cynical standpoint, killing women and children indiscriminately, does make sense ….(even poisoning the survivors (their DNA) with DU, DIME and other “novel” weapons ..)

Who can be so cruel? This is a demonization of the  IDF and the political leaders of Israel you might think. Try this to grasp the moral abyss on which this state was founded:

Video: ?????????

Therefore, even though the “firing of (comparatively ridiculous) rockets” into civilian neighbourhoods may be a violation of humanitarian law in principle, the moral dimensions of Israel’s systemic violence ( i.e. the brutal occupation as such, assassinations of Hamas leaders in broad daylight (“extra-judicial killings”) which usually result in the death of many innocent bystanders, etc.) and the occasional symbolic outbursts of “revenge” through these rockets are totally different. This is also demonstrated by comparing the “fatalities” on each side: Can the killing of 1400 Palestinians be judged on the same moral basis as the death of 9 Israelis? (6 were members of security forces – Source: Bt Selem)

The hypocrisy here is in the legal groundwork: people under occupation are entitled to “resist”, to fight againt the occupier but they ought to restrict their attacks to the military. But in light of the seemingly endless horrors of the occupation, the brutal retaliations against peaceful demonstrations and rather harmless “resistance” like stone-throwing children, let alone the ongoing and intensifying violation of human rights in the form of land expropriation, evictions and the inhumane siege on Gaza, this restraint is practically impossible and would require super-human self-control.

I know I am walking on thin ice here because this kind of reasoning leads quickly  to the “argument” of  the  Israeli government: “Our violence is for a good cause, theirs is evil; we are only fighting back, they are the ones who threaten our security, etc.” Violence is always bad and I am not saying that firing rockets into civilian neighbouhoods is no big deal, but the perception Israel wants to create (that they act only in self-defense) is totally wrong as Professor Avi Shlaim also pointed out in January 2009:

“As always, mighty Israel claims to be the victim of Palestinian aggression but the sheer asymmetry of power between the two sides leaves little room for doubt as to who is the real victim.

This is indeed a conflict between David and Goliath, but the Biblical image has been inverted – a small and defenceless Palestinian David faces a heavily armed, merciless, and overbearing Israeli Goliath.

The resort to brute military force is accompanied, as always, by the shrill rhetoric of victimhood and a farrago of self-pity overlaid with self-righteousness. In Hebrew this is known as the syndrome of bokhim ve-yorim (“crying and shooting”).

Gaza-7thumbShlaim also demonstrates that the hailed “return of the Gaza strip” was just another PR-scam to present Israel (under Sharon) as striving for a peaceful solution while in fact they knew that the cruel (economic) stranglehold on Gaza combined with (little publicised, often clandestine) military aggression now and then would sooner or later lead to more “rocket firing” which could then be presented as proof for the “evil” intentions of Hamas and reinforce the recurring theme of “crying and shooting” … Shlaim goes on:

[…] Gaza, however, is not simply a case of economic underdevelopment but a uniquely cruel case of deliberate de-development. Israel turned the people of Gaza into a source of cheap labour and a captive market for Israeli goods.

The development of local industry was actively impeded so as to make it impossible for the Palestinians to end their subordination to Israel and to establish the economic underpinnings essential for real political independence.”

Numerous reports from the UN have also highlighted the dramatic situation in Gaza even before Operation Cast Lead began  (sewage systems on the brink of collapse, food scarcity, high unemployment, frequent power shortages, etc. – all the result of the isolation and siege of Gaza). And in the West Bank a smiliar strategy to destroy the economy (and hope) was used …

gaza_sewage_lakeGiven these horrific circumstances, this hopelessness, 1,4 million people being imprisoned in this small strip of land, helplessly watching how Israel steals more and more land in the West Bank and East Jeruslaem, and the “international community” does nothing to stop these crimes, it is remarkable that there have not been more outbursts of violence. No-one, not even Ghandi would have advocated civil disobedience in this scenario …

Goldstone knows perfectly well that the accurate historical context is necessary to be able to judge actions on both sides and he draws a clear picture about the events that lead to the end of Hamas initiated cease-fires. That is perhaps the main reason why Israel must prevent any detailed discussion of the report because then the whole “tapestry of lies” would fall apart ….

Besides, as far as I know, at the beginning of the intifada, the Palestinian attacks were limited to IDF soldiers but the massacre in a Hebron mosque in 1994 was the incentive for Hamas to attack also civilians inside Israel.

It is painfully clear, that Israel WANTS and NEEDS to provoke violent resistance so that it can portray its own cruelty and violence as “defense” in the context of the “war on terror” …

It is highly ironic, that the world has been duped into believing that Islam represents a threat to global security while in fact Zionism is the real threat (as political abuse of religion is has replaced Christian hypocrisy in the colonial mindset …) and is never even mentioned in this context (at least not here in Germany).

In his book Overcoming Zionism” Joel Kovel (a Jewish psychiatrist) shows the insanity of Zionism as a political instrument and the staggering hypocrisy and self-deception this has entailed: the eternal “victims” with their (self-attributed) high Jewish morality, created a state on the brutal expropriation and misery of another people. The “victims” (Zionism started long before Hitler appeared on the scene)  became racist perpetrators but in order to maintain their collective identity and exculpatory self-image,  they had to bend over backwards to put the blame somehow on the victims …. so they invented “reasons” why their criminal and inhumane actions could be justified before their conscience and before their God. This can be very well illustrated by a quote from Golda Meir:

“I will never forgive the Arabs for forcing us to kill them

Jewish souls are very special, no less than a part of God, so we have learned. Baruch Goldstein, a medical doctor, who committed the above mentioned massacre in Hebron,  refused to treat non-Jews, even in the IDF …

To return to the UN-GA resolution: I am deeply ashamed that with the exception of IRELAND, NO EU member state  has voted FOR  the resolution.

The majority of the EU-hypocrites abstained …

Considering how hard it was to fight for a Declaration of Human Rights, how many people suffered or even died to reach that goal,  I find it totally unacceptable that a “Human Rights Council” allows abstentions during a voting session.

Recently, I saw a movie called “One against the Wind” which tells the true story of a brave woman, who supported the resistance in France during the German occupation, by taking care of wounded allied soldiers and getting them out of the country. She was eventually sent to a concentration camp but survived … In one scene she tells the American ambassador in Paris (before the US entered the war): “There is a special hell for fence-sitters…” Precisely – in the context of Israel’s impunity this hell must already be heavily overcrowded …

In this insane world, where property rights, the “freedom” of capital  and “strategic interests” make a mockery of human “values” on a regular basis, we can no longer afford to “abstain”, when  the defense of these  values is called for. A supposedly universal “right” that exists only on paper, and is only defended when a certain category of people is involved, has not just lost its meaning, it has become a farce.

So when Jewish wire services report that  “He [Foreign Minister Lieberman] believes Israel’s diplomatic work on the eve of the General Assembly vote led to fitting results” and that “Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon has confirmed that there is a “silent understanding” with the US that it would not let the Security Council endorse such a resolution” – what can one say? That the whole idea of the “United Nations” and “Human Rights” has been turned into a theatre of the absurd? That the UN should replace symbolic decorations like Picasso’s “Guernica” with George Orwell’s “Some are more equal than others” (as a kind of  “mission statement” endorsed by the US) engraved in stone?

Former US ambassador to the UN,  John Bolton, a diplomat who seldom hid behind “diplomatic language”, used to call the UN “an instrument of US foreign policy and nothing else”. His point was proven in a spectacular fashion during the last “Anti-Racism Conference in Geneva, when USrael staged a brilliant PR-event to further demonize and isolate Iran because “the new Hitler” Ahmadinejad had the audacity to talk about Zionism (as a form of racism) and its links to the new forms of colonialism (better known as “globalisation”). Since then the hyped “nuclear threat” to the world, allegedly coming from Iran is the latest attempt to divert attention from the real culprits.

Of course the display of  “outrage” by the Israeli ambassador and his US-“echo” after the endorsement of the  Goldstone report on Gaza,  was yet another attempt to reframe the debate. Let the people forget the clear evidence of Israel’s guilt: If it (the government) has nothing to hide

  • Why did it prevent foreign reporters from entering Gaza?
  • Why did it refuse to cooperate with the UN fact-finding mission? (Refusing even to let Goldstone enter Gaza through Israel, so he had to enter via Egypt)
  • Why did it also treat former UN-envoys with disrespect (not to say contempt)i.e. Richard Falk?
  • Why did it even belittle and debase  the testimony from IDF soldiers ( “Breaking the Silence”)?
  • Why does it always try to get rid of justified criticism by “character assassination”? (claiming its supposedly “superior moral standing” as proof of honesty while accusing opponents of despicable motives, (anti-semitism) or having no right “to teach us about morals…” (the “Zionist” argument par excellence)

One has to concede that, if countries like Saudi Arabia show consternation about human rights violations by Israel, it is appropriate to say “ Mind your own business”. At the same time we all know, that without the great “friendship” of the US, Saudi princes would sleep less soundly. In fact, without US-support many undemocratic and repressive regimes would not have come to power or stayed in power (see for example Mubarak in Egypt)  in the first place.

However, on the other hand, there have been several genuine peace initiatives from the Arab states but all have been rejected by Israel on some pretext. Peace is the last thing, the Zionist government wants. The whole identity of Israel ( “a military with a government”) is based on “defense”, on eternal victimhood, on being a lone island of “European civilization” among the “primitive Arabs” and Jew haters, who want to “drive us into the sea”… Pathetic as it sounds, it still works in the media ….

noEU_320And Europe? What about the “community based on values” as the EU has sought to present itself by adopting the Declaration of Human Rights as part of the Lisbon treaty (formerly called  “constitution”)?

The puppets in Eastern Europe voted against the resolution (… divide and conquer does work …) , but the biggest assholes are GERMANY, ITALY AND THE NETHERLANDS. Germany sells heavily subsidized submarines to Israel and the EU has awarded  Israel a “privileged” trade status …

Professor Avi Shlaim also touched on the subject in his article:

“America and the European Union shamelessly joined Israel in ostracising and demonising the Hamas government and in trying to bring it down by withholding tax revenues and foreign aid. A surreal situation thus developed – where a significant part of the international community imposed economic sanctions not against the occupier but against the occupied, not against the oppressor but against the oppressed.”

This “surreal” picture became even worse when the tendency to decouple the EU’s economic preferential treatment from Israel’s terrible human rights record became clearly visible:

The Czech Republic, which held the European presidency until 30 June, made no secret of its desire to see closer ties and more exchange between the EU and Israel. The outgoing Czech prime minister, Mirek Topolanek, made this clear in an interview with the Tel Aviv daily Haaretz on 26 April in which he said that “the peace process mustn’t be linked to EU-Israeli relations.

In doing so, he was reacting to the view expressed by Benita Ferrero-Waldner, EU commissioner for external relations and European neighbourhood policy. She said: “We believe that good relations with Israel are essential…” (Why?)

While other media sources fell victim to the diplomatic waffle and reported that according to a Senior European diplomat “people are saying there should be a pause in close ties between Israel and the union.”

What breathtaking hypocrisy. While the Norwegian doctor Mads Gilbert described the horrible injuries and deaths he saw in the  Shifa  hospital in Gaza as “scenes from Dante’s inferno” the EU talks about “a pause” in the close relations to Israel. It is like saying “I know, on top of all the other human rights violations, Israel is bombing an overcrowded ghetto right now and hundreds of people are going to be terribly wounded or killed, so what? Let’s just wait till the furor has died down and then we’ll continue with business as usual …”

As LMD reported, The General Affairs and External Relations Council brushed aside the parliamentarians’ concerns [about human rights violations in Gaza] and after France took over the EU presidency at the end of 2008, …. the council expressed its determination to strengthen its links with Israel from April 2009:

“In accordance with the political commitment made on 16 June 2008 at the 8th Association Council meeting between the European Union and Israel, the Council reaffirms its determination to upgrade the level and intensity of its bilateral relations with Israel within the context of the adoption of the new instrument which will replace the current Action Plan from April 2009. That building-up must be based on the shared values of both parties, and particularly on democracy, respect for human rights, the rule of law and fundamental freedoms, good governance and international humanitarian law.”

In the past the European parliament repeatedly tried to call for the suspension of its association agreement with the Israelis (.. when Israeli atrocities received a short media spotlight ..). but the council always undermined these calls for accountability. Even the “diplomatic” (read: alrady hypocritical) rhetoric now shows what all the great talks about “European values” is really worth: The original text stated that “Relations between the Parties, as well as all the provisions of the Agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this Agreement but the latest update (see above) says “it must be based on the shared values of both parties, ..particularly on democracy, respect for human rights ..”, etc.

This is of course totally meaningless. To say in this context that something “must be based on …” is simply a euphemism for saying “it should be based on. It is like the Sunday sermon of a priest, it sounds rather noble, but the people who wrote it,  never expect it to really happen.  In a world where the categorical imperative would rule, moral behaviour would be the norm. (It still is for most ordinary people, I daresay but the profit cult  makes it harder every day …) but in a world based on “might is right”, rules have to be enforced by sanctions and these must be applicable to all parties.

boycott-israel-anim2Will Europe be forever sucking up to the “gangster state” (see Avi Shlaim) Israel because they have excelled at exploiting Holocaust guilt? The perpetrators of unspeakable Nazi crimes are dead. The Holocaust is over. But the crimes against the Palestinians go on and on so we have a moral responsibility to stop them and demand accountability from Israel.

The Eurpean Union has no moral  authority whatsoever. It is a Trojan horse for corporate interests, the financial, neo-feudal, extractive “aristocracy” and the cult of the market. It destroys national sovereignity and undermines democratic decision-making (see the case of Ireland: Voting “No” against a treaty – is not applicable), it pushes for the militarization of Europe  while posing as a “community of values”.

A “European” version of a foreign minister has no democratic legitimacy at all and heaven help us, if it is going to be Tony Bliar ….

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Nobel Peace Prize & Merchants of Death

Obama peaceMy first reaction when I heard the news was disbelief and  spontaneous laughter – the absurdity of  it all is too much and can perhaps best be expressed with paraphrasing Eric Margolis (he was referring to the Afghan elections) : ..”a fraud wrapped up in a farce”.

The PR-industry who invented the brand “Obama” (“Hope & Change” Trademark) has more reason to celebrate….

That any US president should get a “Peace Prize” is utterly ridiculous but in the case of Obama it is plainly absurd because he has done NOTHING for a peaceful world except delivering eloquent speeches.

As many other commentators have pointed out already, Obama is basically continuing the foreign policy of GWB – the only difference is style: he is intelligent, polite, articulate and conciliatory (in his rhetoric) and “offers a hand” to those states whose learders are willing to concede that defying the interests of the United States of Arrogance (by executing policies in the interest of the population)  in the long run is a bad idea and must stop ASAP.

The recent “intervention” of the Obama administration at the UN – to postpone / avert an urgent UNSC discussion of the devastating Goldstone Report on Israeli war crimes in Gaza  is just one absurd example of  …”a  [a new US-] policy  [of] exporting peace and stability to the world…”

But this incredible farce (even the “naked emperor” tale pales in comparison) can also be seen in another, more realistic light which suddenly makes Obama (as US president) a suitable candidate for the prize:

All these awe-inspiring talks about the “Nobel-Prize” are very deceptive because nobody talks anymore about the basis for all this money:

The Nobel family made a fortune with  (possibly the first) “weapons of mass destruction”:  a new class of explosives   that killed thousands of people. Alfred Nobel’s father “made a killing” (excuse the pun) in the Crimean War and the American Civil War – he was perhaps the first mass manufacturer of mines . Alfred Nobel believed in the idea of “deterrence”- not “education for peace” through values like solidarity and working for economic & social justice.

1999_Bertha_von_SuttnerHis life-long (but unfulfilled) love was  Baroness Bertha von Suttner, the first international female peace activist who probably inspired the Nobel Peace Prize. She worked for a short time as his private secretary and became famous with the publication of her novel “Lay Down your Arms”  in 1889 which sold hundreds of thousands of copies and was translated in many languages. The book was sensational not only because of its female aristocratic author but  because it depicted in graphic detail the horrors of war in an era of nationalism, where “the military and patriotic duties to the fatherland” were considered sacrosanct.

She called war “commanded mass murder”, denounced the deceptive language of “patriotism” and  was also aware of the connection between  (systemic) economic / social injustice and war; she also correspondend with the famous Russian novelist Leo Tolstoi, who supported her work. For Tolstoi “the people lead a slave-like existence to serve the interests of a rich minority who lived at their expense” (that was long ago, one might argue but isn’t the “bank bailout” in the trillions yet another symptom for the refeudalisation of society, for serving the interests of a financial aristocracy?)

Bertha von Suttner also travelled to the United States and one of her comments about America is  still highly relevant today: (.. here the circle to Wall Street supporting Obama and Obama supporting Wall Street …. is closed…)

„While talking about doomed monarchies and the constitution of republics, we build  in the “ideal Republic America” a monetary monarchy , which is more absolute than the power of the Russian tsar…”

Bertha von Suttner received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1905. She died shortly before the outbreak of World War I.

Before Alfred Nobel actually died, a premature obituary appeared in a French newspaper titled  “Le marchand de la mort est mort(“The Merchant of Death is Dead”) referring to  Nobel as the man “who became rich by finding ways to kill more people faster than ever before”.

From this perspective, awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to the (current) President of the United States makes a lot of sense. To give this award to  the “Commander in Chief” of the mightiest military machine in the world and to the president of a “superpower” whose economic, financial and military elite sees no problem in demanding  global “full spectrum dominance” – no matter what the moral, social and human cost –  seems quite logical to me.

che statliberty with gun

The profits of one  “Merchant of Death” are being used to reward another MoD, the leader of a country that spends more money on weapons (designed for mass murder)  than all other states combined (but always kills for a “good cause” of course)… and at the same time, we have a government unwilling to provide affordable health insurance to all its citizens (another way to increase suffering and death) because this would means lesser profits for the private health insurers who basically run their business as a racket.

(On “Full Spectrum Dominance” and America’s “role in the world”, how it sees itself” – see also (the second part of) the Nobel Prize speech by Harold Pinter with the theme “What is true and what is false?” and the conclusion: “We are surrounded by a vast tapestry of lies…and if we let this situation of organized deception  prevail, humanity and human dignity are doomed… )

This also resonates with Ghandi’s  concept of “Satyagraha” : the power of truth, to fight for truth, hold on to truth, etc. (…. not to be confused with non-violence…)

Coming back to the Goldstone Report and its instant “burial” by the media, followed by the US-supported demise from the UNSC agenda – Ghandi must be turning in his grave… What did he say about Zionism during his lifetime (in 1938)?

“The cry for the national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me. The sanction for it is sought in the Bible and the tenacity with which the Jews have hankered after return to Palestine.
Why should they not, like other peoples of the earth, make that country their home where they are born and where they earn their livelihood?
Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct. The mandates have no sanction but that of the last war.

Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home. The nobler course would be to insist on a just treatment of the Jews wherever they are born and bred. The Jews born in France are French in precisely the same sense that Christians born in France are French.

[…]  If I were a Jew and were born in Germany and earned my livelihood there, I would claim Germany as my home even as the tallest gentile German might, and challenge him to shoot me or cast me in the dungeon; I would refuse to be expelled or to submit to discriminating treatment. And for doing this I
should not wait for! the fellow Jews to join me in civil resistance, but would have confidence that in the end the rest were bound to follow my example…

[…]  And now a word to the Jews in Palestine. I have no doubt that they are going about it in the wrong way. The Palestine of the Biblical conception is not a geographical tract. It is in their hearts. But if they must look to the Palestine of geography as their national home, it is wrong to enter it under  the hadow of the British gun. A religious act cannot be performed with the aid of the bayonet or the bomb. They can settle in Palestine only by the goodwill of the Arabs. They should seek to convert the Arab heart.

The same God rules the Arab heart who rules the Jewish heart… They will find the world opinion in their favor in their religious aspiration. There are hundreds of ways of reasoning with the Arabs, if they will only discard the help of the British bayonet. As it is, they are co-sharers with the British in despoiling a people who have done no wrong to them. I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting what they rightly regarded as an unwarrantable encroachment upon their country. But according to the accepted canons of right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds.” […]

So much for “non-violence” under all circumstances…

But the astounding “act of hypnosis” (which Pinter referred to in his speech) ist still working: no matter how many “reports” about war crimes or crimes against humanity committed by the Israeli government are being published:  they are followed by –   silence.

How is that possible?  The two involved “Merchants of Death”, the US and Israeli government have eternal impunity, no human law can apparently touch them… they seem to be  a  (immoral) class of their own… as the following dialogue between a professor of international law and a former legal counsel to the IDF, which really took place)  shows:

You have inflicted Nuremberg crimes on the Palestinians”. How can you justify that?

“Military necessity.”

That argument was rejected at Nuremberg”.

We have PR-people in the United States who handle these matters for us.”

(Case closed.)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Iran – Yellow Cake, Green Salt and Red Herrings

IAEA secret report: Iran worked on nuclear warhead”

one_ring

It is a sad day when even The Guardian is spreading cheap PR (propaganda) to influence public opinion: (Cui bono? Israel, the state of eternal impunity…)

“The urgency of dealing with the Iranian nuclear threat was underscored today when a leaked report revealed that the UN inspection agency believes the Islamic republic has “sufficient information” to make a nuclear weapon and has “probably tested” a key component.

The incendiary and misleading rhetoric in the introduction of this paragraph clearly demonstrates the bias behind it because it uses unproven premises to suggest  that they are proven facts:

Premise 1: Iran seeks nuclear weapons

Premise 2: Iran has a secret programme for developing nuclear warheads

Premise 3: (built on the other two): This represents a “threat” to world peace.

The deduction is made from accepted opinions not from first and true sentences in other words a foregone conclusion: there is an “urgency” to deal with a threat whose existence is only imputed, not proven.

For comparison: Here is an excerpt from a REUTERS article which does not violate the principle of  “balanced” reporting:

“The West suspects Iran wants to develop a nuclear weapons capability under the guise of a declared civilian atomic energy program. Tehran rejects the charge, saying its uranium enrichment program is a peaceful way to generate electricity.”

Source: Iran nuclear “threat” hyped: IAEA’s ElBaradei

“Managing Perceptions” Not Reporting Facts

“A secret annexe” has been found – give me a break, after the “Yellow Cake” scam and the “Green Salt” scare what it is now – the “Red Herring” (distract attention from the devastating Goldstone report on war crimes in Gaza which has just been released) – or just lie and distort till you are blue in the face?

As I mentioned in my previous post about the Goldstone report, the JTA laments the “bad timing” of the report just as Israel is trying “to convey the impression in Washington that Israel is more open to negotiations than the Palestinians and that the principal threat to the region is Iran” so it is about time we focus media attention on “evil” Iran….. and the guardian obliges with this shabby piece of journalism?

Western diplomats confirmed that the annexe was authentic”.

“Its absolutely accurate,” one official said. “It shows the agency’s thinking, which is that Iran is a lot further along on this than most people think. It suggests the Iranians have done a lot of work.”

The annexe said Iranian scientists had engaged in “probable testing” of explosives arranged in a hemisphere, which is how an implosion-type nuclear warhead is triggered.

There was also evidence, the report says, that Iran had worked on developing a chamber to carry a warhead on top of one of its missiles “that is quite likely to be nuclear”.

Why are the “”Western diplomats” and  the “official” not identified? How did (could) they verify the authenticity of the document? What kind of  journalism is this? Has Julian Borger actually seen the “secret annexe” or is he just “reporting” hearsay? Does it not occur to journalists these days that they might be used for “psyops”- presented to the world as “ independent media reports”? If there is evidence, then show it to the world and publish the document.

Believes”, “Probable “, “quite likely”- what is this – an insinuation exercise? An illustration of Aristotelian and Schopenhauer’s lessons on rhetoric and dialectic?

Why was the IAEA not given a chance to respond to the allegations in the article?  For comparison the AFP reported recently:

IAEA denies report it is sure Iran is seeking bomb

El baradeiVIENNA The UN atomic watchdog said Thursday it has no concrete proof that there is or has been a nuclear weapons programme in Iran.

The International Atomic Energy Agency rejected a US media report which claimed its experts believed Tehran had the ability to make a nuclear bomb and was on the way to developing a missile system able to carry an atomic warhead.

“With respect to a recent media report, the IAEA reiterates that it has no concrete proof that there is or has been a nuclear weapon programme in Iran,” a statement said.

According to the media report, the proof was contained in a so-called “secret annex” to the IAEA’s latest report on Iran, but was deliberately being withheld by the agency’s director general Mohamed ElBaradei.

“At the board of governors meeting on September 9, Director General ElBaradei warned that continuing allegations that the IAEA was withholding information on Iran are politically motivated and totally baseless,” it said.

Back to the Guardian:

“Attention will now focus on the United Nations in New York next week, where Obama takes the rare step of chairing a security council session in order to generate momentum towards nuclear disarmament, non-proliferation and consensus over Iran.”

The US “generating momentum towards nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation” – are you kidding?

Kofi Annan (from a speech at Princeton, November 28, 2006):

“All of the NPT nuclear-weapon states are modernizing their nuclear arsenals or their delivery systems. They should not imagine that this will be accepted as compatible with the npt.

Everyone will see it for what it is: a euphemism for nuclear rearmament . . . By clinging to and modernizing their own arsenals, even when there is no obvious threat to their national security that nuclear weapons could deter, nuclear-weapon States encourage others—particularly those that do face real threats in their own region—to regard nuclear weapons as essential, both to their security and to their status. It would be much easier to confront proliferators, if the very existence of nuclear weapons were universally acknowledged as dangerous and ultimately illegitimate.”

After the invasion of Iraq, the world must have reached the conclusion that striving for nuclear weapons is the only safeguard against US aggression, that it is  far more protective for states (with valuable resources or “strategic” importance) to have nuclear weapons than to renounce them.

The Iraq War has demonstrated that a state without weapons of mass destruction is vulnerable to invasion and occupation. It would be perfectly logical to conclude that Iraq was attacked not because it had weapons of mass destruction but because it had none. This pathological logic will be further confirmed if the United States continues to pursue diplomacy with North Korea but demonizes Iran  and threatens it with sanctions for which there is no legal base.

The estimated number of casualties from the Iraq-Iran war is  one million Iranians. Many were victims of Saddam’s use of chemical weapons (both civilian and military targets). The Iranian nuclear-weapon programme began in the 1980s, perhaps as a response to Iraq’s use of these weapons.

Neither uranium enrichment nor plutonium reprocessing is prohibited under NPT rules, as long as they are under IAEA safeguards. According to a legal adviser[1] to the Foreign Office ‘safeguards are designed to detect diversion of materials for military or unknown purposes. Nothing in the NPT or safeguards agreements legally prevents a state party to them from acquiring nuclear-weapon capability, for example by enriching uranium to high grades, reprocessing spent fuel and so on’.

Iran was a signatory to the NPT from its inception (1-July 1968) but Israel never signed the NPT, nor even admitted that it has nuclear weapons  let  alone let anyone from the IAEA inspect its nuclear facilities. However, as we all must understand:  it’s not the weapons, it’s who has them..

The Bush administration has tried to smear El Baradei and get rid of him but did not succeed (remember the Yellow Cake scam) . Perhaps he was too decent for the job and even had the audacity to point out the double standards of the “international community”?

“We must abandon the unworkable notion that it is morally reprehensible for some countries to pursue weapons of mass destruction yet morally acceptable for others to rely on them for security—and indeed to continue to refine their capacities and postulate plans for their use.”

Mohamed ElBaradei, NYT, 12 February, 2004

The smear campaign against institutions that do not comply with Israels policies and plans is pretty obvious (see also my last post regarding UNHRC) and the IAEA has been targeted because it did not produce the desired “proof” that Iran is a “threat”( Why do I have a feeling of Dèja Vu? Just remember the accusations against the UN weapons inspectors in Iraq who did not oblige with finding non-existent WMDs…)

Here is an interesting article by Gareth Porter about the latest development in “The laptop of Mass Destruction”-case….

More Sources:

US Iran report branded dishonest (BBC)

Letter from IAEA refuting false allegations in Congressional report

Iran in the Crosshairs (FPIF)

IAEA – Focus Iran – Latest Reports

IAEA Report September 2008


Last words …

As soon as certain topics are raised. the concrete melts into the abstract and no one seems able to think of turns of speech that are not hackneyed: Prose consists less and less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning, and more and more of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated henhouse.”

George Orwell


[1] D. M. Edwards, ‘International Legal Aspects of Safeguards and the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 33, no. 1, 1984.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Hide and Seek in the Holy Land

This insistence by Hamas on denying the reality of the Holocaust is as reprehensible as it is astonishing.”

Denying history gets you nowhere.”

“INFORMATION DOMINANCE”: …” build up and protect friendly information and degrade and deny  information from your adversary … This means  that unfriendly information must be targeted …What is perceived as independent news media is in fact part of a psychological operation” ….

This is a reply to  THE HOLOCAUST AND PALESTINE

I am afraid Matthew Rothchild has also fallen victim to a “psyop”, yet another brillian PR-campaign launched by the Israeli government.  As Hamas has not obliged with any rocket attacks lately, the apparent goal was to reinforce the established negative “frame” for Hamas: “terrorists, fanatics, religious extremists, “no partner for peace”, etc. to “pre-empt” any attempts to end the brutal siege on Gaza or – Heaven forbid – perceive Hamas leaders and the people that voted for them, as human beings. At the same time it served as a smear-campagin against the UN(RWA), which stands accused of “appeasing Hamas” or “collaborating” with Hamas. Could this have anything to do with  the UN investigating and condemning IDF war crimes in Gaza?…. Within hours headlines like these appeared in the media:

“Hamas slams UN over “Holocaust classes” in Gaza”

“Hamas rips UN over Holocaust lessons in Gaza”

UN denies Holocaust to appease terrorists”

The first thing to do is check the source: in this case it came from Reuters and AP. Most journalists stuck to the Reuters text, omitting only quotes from Hamas representatives which dealt with the political instrumentalisation of the Holocaust:

“Regardless of the controversy, we oppose forcing the issue of the so-called Holocaust onto the syllabus, because it aims to reinforce acceptance of the occupation of Palestinian land.”

“I do not exaggerate when I say this issue is a war crime, because of how it serves the Zionist colonizers and deals with their hypocrisy and lies,”

Instead they added statements from “Israeli officials”like these:

….this should make the West think twice about ending its boycott of Hamas, in place since the group seized Gaza by force in 2007. …; the comments are “obscene” and place Hamas in a pariah club of Holocaust deniers that includes Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center called for U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to fire both Abu Zayd and another UNRWA representative, Gaza director John Ging, and to ensure that UNRWA schools teach pupils about the Holocaust.

“The role of UNRWA must be to help set the stage for peace and reconciliation between Palestinians and Israelis, not as agents for the agenda of terrorist groups”

So now we are supposed to see that “this is further proof that the main obstacle for the peace that has eluded the region for far too long lies on the Palestinian side.

Only after the next generations are taught, and take the lessons of the Holocaust to heart, can we have any hope for true and lasting peace in the region.

Of course “using Holocaust denial as a political tool” MUST stop….. (but  not what Norman Finkelstein calls “The Holocaust Industry” … we shall return (to find out about) the “lessons of the Holocaust”  later…)

Then I found a reference to the Palestinian News Agency Maan which is the real source of the story and this lead to the context that was totally omitted in all these articles:

“The Gaza group’s letter was sent THE SAME DAY that Israeli Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar told the government’s cabinet that the word NAKBA had been removed from all lesson plans. “It can be said with certainty that Arab Israelis experienced a tragedy in the war, but there will be no use of the word ‘Nakba,’ whose meaning is similar to Holocaust in this context.”

For Benjamin Netanyahu the  word Nakba in schools is “tantamount to incitement against Israel.”

After studying the matter with education experts it was decided that the term nakba should be removed. It is inconceivable that in Israel we would talk about the establishment of the state as a catastrophe,” said Yisrael Twito, a spokesman for Education Minister Gideon Sa’ar, (Reuters).

Let us for a moment imagine that a German had argued – in a conversation with Polish people like this:

“It is inconceivable that in Germany we would talk about the invasion of Poland ( as part of the establishment of the “Third Reich”) as a “catastrophe” – all hell would break loose and rightly so. Of course the magnitude and monstrosity of the Nazi crimes cannot be compared to the terror, massacres and ethnic cleansing in 1948, which the Palestinians call the “Nakba” and Israel was not invading another country but the point is:

Why must the people of one state forever repent and feel guilty for crimes committed in the past by a former totalitarian regime but the new state, that was to a great extent built on the worldwide empathy for the victims of these crimes, refuses to admit its own crimes in establishing that state?

Instead of  taking the “Holocaust lessons to heart” which means recognize the dangers of organized national chauvinism based on racism and / or religion, of affirming one social body by denigrating another (first a “superior” people than a “chosen” people who could strip the “inferior” human beings of their rights and not feel guilty about it)

How abhorrent Nazi terror and mass murder was, it was over in 1945 but the consequences of the Nakba did not go away, on the contrary. The situation of the refugees and the Palestinians in their own land became worse every year because Israel never intended to accept the territorial restrictions laid down in the UN partition plan of 1947.

The “Holocaust” is over but the “Nakba” is not: the brutal occupation of the West Bank, the cruel bombings and siege in Gaza, the illegal wall that cuts deeply into Palestinian land, the building of further “settlements”, the daily humiliation at checkpoints, the systematic dehumanization of Palestinians, who have been stripped of their rights, because they are not Jews and must make room for the “chosen people” – how can they be expected to put the Holocaust on the curriculum of their schools?

How does a UNRWA teacher explain to a Palestinian child that severe violations of the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Conventions (results of World Wars and Nazi crimes) committed by the state of Israel for decades against its people, is not sanctioned by the “international community”?

The pupil could ask:

Why is past Jewish suffering superior to ours, which seems endless and why can it serve to excuse the injustice and aggression of the Jewish state? We did not build Auschwitz….  How obscene is a contest for suffering and injustice? Why are no questions about the Holocaust allowed? Why does it give them impunity while our legitimate resistance is presented as “terrorism”?

The state which is responsible for their endless suffering refuses to admit its guilt and deal with it, even punishes Jews (see below) for simply acknowledging the Nakba (thus showing compassion,  and respect for historic truth and universal human rights)

Is this a farce, a tragicomedy or a case for a psychiatrist?

One “catastrophe” must forever be omnipresent in our minds or else..(in Germany it is a crime to “deny” the Holocaust but the other “catastrophe” (which pales in comparison) must not even be mentioned because it would shatter the myth of the “essential goodness and moral superiority” of the Jewish people on which Zionism tried to build the “national identity” (along with the “biblical license” to expropriate Palestinian land?

Baruch Spinoza must be turning in his grave….

BUT while the world media sheep are attacking and demonizing Hamas, (to provide Israel with a moral figleaf for the cruel blockade and undermine Hamas ouvertures to negotiate a two-state settlement based on Israel’s withdrawal to the 1967 borders) in  the same article the Palestinian News agency Maan referred to an earlier story and this context was totally omitted in all Western media “reports”:

“On the other hand in January some were angry when, at the height of the Gaza War Palestinians erected a Memorial Site near the West Bank city of Ramallah to MOURN Nazi Germany’s crimes against the Jewish people.   The whole article (published in January) can be read here:

Here are some excerpts:

“Hundreds of Palestinians were estimated to have attended the event in Ni’lin that coincided with the United Nations-declared World HOLOCAUST Remembrance Day with photographs purchased from an Israeli museum.

[…]  “The Koran orders us to acknowledge the Holocaust and understand it,” ….

[…] why the memorial was chosen for Ni’lin, a devastated Palestinian town sliced apart by Israel’s separation barrier.

“We thought the public should understand the pain and suffering the Nazis caused the Jews,” Amira said. “Unfortunately, we are paying the price for the immense pain suffered by the Jews during the Holocaust.”

“People are surprised at what they see here; there are people who are seeing images of the suffering in the Holocaust for the first time,” he said. “There are people who didn’t know anything about Jewish history.”

“In mid-2008, the HAMAS movement CONDEMNED the Jewish Holocaust, as well, insisting that it “was not only a crime against humanity but one of the most abhorrent crimes in modern history.”

What the Hamas minister said can be read HERE. (Source: The Guardian)

How Israel helped to empower Hamas as a rival to the secular Palestinan resistance is another example of “unfriendly information” that must disappear from the public debate….

My “favourite” reaction to the Reuters article comes from – the one and only – Alan Dershowitz:

His headline is Can A State be built on a Pack of Lies? . (The irony escapes him obviously). Here are some pearls of  his “wisdom”:

“There is absolutely no way in which Hamas would ever allow any kind of objective analysis of the Holocaust to be taught to their students. The essence of Hamas education is brainwashing and the shutting down of any marketplace of ideas.  What Hamas fears most is truth, science, history and objectivity.

FACT: This is the ultimate hypocrisy. What would  Ilan Pappe or Neve Gordon have to say about Israel’s commitment “to truth, history and objectivity”? (To say nothing about Norman Finkelstein…)

Just try this

Israeli Holocaust museum fires employee who mentioned Palestinians’ Nakba

“A state built on lies cannot long endure, unless it is an entirely totalitarian state.[…]”

“If it  [Hamas] were to become a state, its control over the minds and actions of its citizens would become even more total.  The sad reality is that totalitarian censorship—provided it is completely totalitarian—really does work.

“The people of Gaza really believe that the Holocaust never occurred.”

FACT:  No, but as as result of “The Holocaust Industry” (which drowns out their own ongoing suffering) they are not very enthusiastic to accept everything at face value.  Besides Many Israelis are kept in ignorance about the crimes committed in 1948 (the Nakba) …  With modern PR-instruments you can establish a totalitarian “thought control” without obvious censorship .. the brilliant control and “information dominance” Israel has established in major parts of the Western media is the perfect example….

“They really believe that firing rockets at school children is God’s command.”

FACT:  Remember Baruch Goldstein’s massacre in a Hebron mosque in 1994It was the incentive for Hamas to target civilians in Israel .... Take a look at the  naked aggression of orthodox Jewish “settlers” and think twice…

“They really believe that Jews are a combination of the devil monkeys, pigs and vermin.”

FACT is that Judaism teaches that only Jews are human beings and several military / political leaders are on the record for calling Palestinians (Arabs)  anything from “cattle” to “cockroaches” (see alsolatest reports from “Breaking the Silence”, in Haaretz  and other sources)

“They really believe that Jews control the world and that Barak Obama is a puppet whose strings are pulled by hook-nosed “Yids.”

FACT is that Obama’s promises to AIPAC and the growing literature documenting massive Zionist influence in the US encourage such “views” enormously…. That Obama does nothing to stop the expropriation of Palestinian land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem speaks for itself… (see also my former post about “Change”)

“They really believe that Israel doesn’t want peace and seeks to destroy the Islamic world and its holy places.”

FACT is that Israel does not want peace –it is so obvious from the historical  and political record that only severe cases of autism (or ideological indoctrination) fail to see it….

In the Jan. 3 Ha’aretz, Yossi Sarid, chairman of the Meretz party, wrote, “What does frighten Sharon [and his successors] … is any prospect or sign of calm or moderation. If the situation were to calm down and stabilize, Sharon would have to return to the negotiating table and, in the wake of pressure from within and without, he would have to raise serious proposals for an agreement.

This moment terrifies Sharon and he wants to put it off for as long as he possibly can.” In contrast, Sarid said that Sharon understands “that the terrorists and those who give them asylum are not the real enemies. Instead, the real enemies are the moderates…. You fight terrorists-a pretty simple operation-but you must talk with moderates, and this is a very tricky, if not dangerous, business.” …

Back to Dershowitz:

“It is difficult to build an enduring peace on such a structure of lies.”

EXACTLY.

The best description of Israel’s contribution to the “peace process” I have ever seen.

To pretend that the violence of Hamas militants is not the unfortunate but legitimate result of  Israel’s state terror, systematic injustice, dehumanization and occupation brutality and instead portray them as deranged antisemites and Holocaust-deniers is pathetic and reinforces the  dangerous stereotype of Judaeophobia (Anti-Semitism is nonsense, as Arabs are also semites).

The ultimate irony is that many Israelis of German descent have applied for German passports ….just in case …. and emigration is rising .. Small wonder as  the “redeemed “Holy Land” ´(far from being a safe haven) is now the most dangerous place on earth for Jewish people …..

“I am a patriot (currently serving in the IDF), I wanted to give everything for Israel  but this state is somehow insane. Life here isn’t normal.”

(Rotem Pappe, a  young Israeli woman with a German passport)

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized