Posts
Welcome to 9-11 Movies
-
The idea behind this site is to present the most rudimentary, simplified,
common-sense information about the anomalies that fuel our doubts about the
offic...
Showing posts with label Zionist Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Zionist Media. Show all posts
Friday, September 21, 2012
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
“The Innocence of Muslims”: Blasphemy as a Political Tactic
Global Research
Thierry Mason
The circulation on the Internet of the trailer for a film, The Innocence of Muslims, sparked demonstrations across the world and resulted in the killing in Benghazi of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya and members of his entourage.
* * *
At first glance, these events can be located in the long line leading from Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses to the burnings of the Koran by Pastor Terry Jones. Nevertheless, this new attack differs from other incidents in that the film was not directed at a Western audience but instead was uniquely conceived as an instrument of provocation directed at Muslims.
In political terms, the affair can be analyzed from two angles: from the tactical perspective as an anti-U.S. manipulation; or from a strategic one, as an anti-Muslim psychological attack.
The film was produced by a Zionist group composed of Jews of double Israeli-American nationality and by an Egyptian Copt. It was completed several months ago but was released at a calculated moment to provoke riots targeting the United States.
Israeli agents were deployed in several large cities with a mission to channel the rage of the crowd against American or Coptic targets (though not Israeli ones). Not surprisingly, their maximum effect was attained in Benghazi, the capital of Libya’s Cyrenaica region.
The population of Benghazi is known to harbor particularly reactionary and racist groups. It is useful to recall that at the time the cartoons of Mohammed appeared in September, 2005, Salafists attacked the Danish Consulate. In keeping with the Vienna Convention on diplomacy, the Libyan government of Muammar al-Gaddafi deployed troops to protect the diplomatic service then under attack. The repression of the riot resulted in numerous deaths. Subsequently, the West, seeking to overthrow the Libyan regime, financed Salafist publications which accused Gaddafi of protecting the Danish Consulate because he had allegedly been behind the cartoon operation.
On February 15, 2011, Salafists organized in Benghazi a demonstration commemorating the massacre during which shooting erupted, an incident that marked the beginning of the Benghazi insurrection that opened the way to the NATO intervention. The Libyan police arrested three members of the Italian Special Forces who confessed to having fired from the rooftops on both demonstrators and the police to sew chaos and confusion. Held prisoner throughout the war that followed, they were released when NATO seized the capital and smuggled them out of the country to Malta in a small fishing boat on which I was also a passenger.
This time, the manipulation of the Benghazi crowd by Israeli agents had as its goal the assassination of the U.S. Ambassador, an act of war not seen since the Israeli bombardment of the USS Liberty by the Israeli Air Force and Navy in 1967. This constitutes the first assassination of an ambassador in the line of duty since 1979. The act is all the more grievous considering that in a country where the current central government is a purely legal fiction, the U.S. Ambassador was not merely a diplomat but was functioning as Governor, as the de facto head of state.
It should be emphasized that in the past few weeks, the highest-ranking U.S. military officers have entered into open conflict with the Israeli government. They have issued declarations signifying their intention to halt the cycle of wars begun after September 11 (Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria) and which, in light of the informal agreements of 2001, will expand further (Sudan, Somalia and Iran). The first warning shot occurred in Afghanistan, in August 2012, when two missiles were fired at the parked plane of General Martin Dempsey, head of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. This second warning turned out to be even more brutal.
If, on the other hand, we examine this affair from the viewpoint of social psychology, the release of the film and its aftermath appear to be a frontal attack on the beliefs of Muslims. In this regard, it is similar in nature to the Pussy Riot episode trampling on the freedom of religious practice inside the Orthodox Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow and the mulitple performances of conceptual pornography the group engaged in afterwards. These are operations geared to violate societies that resist the project of global domination.
In democratic and multicultural societies, the sacred is seen as belonging to and being expressed within the private sphere. But a new collective space of the sacred has been in the process of elaboration. Western European states have passed “historical memory” laws which have transformed a historical event—the Nazi destruction of European Jews—into a religious occurrence: the “Shoa” in Jewish terminology, or the “Holocaust” as expressed in Christian evangelical parlance. Nazi crimes are thereby elevated to the level of a unique event at the expense of the victims of other massacres, including other victims of the Nazis. Questioning the dogma, i.e. this religious interpretation of historical facts, subjects one to criminal penalties, just as blasphemy was punished in the past. Similarly, in 2001, the U.S., the European Union member states and a number of their allies imposed by decree that entire national populations must observe a minute of silence in memory of the victims of the September 11 attacks. This ruling was underpinned by an ideological interpretation of the causes of the massacre. In both cases, having been killed because one was Jewish or because one was American confers a particular status on these victims before whom the rest of humanity must genuflect.
During the Olympic Games in London, both the Israeli and the American delegations attempted to enlarge their sacred space still further by imposing a minute of silence during the opening ceremony of the most-watched televised event in the world, this time on behalf of the hostages seized during the Munich Games of 1972. In the end, the proposal was rejected, with the Olympic Committee holding instead a separate ceremony. This is just a further indication of the effort to create a collective liturgy legitimating the global empire.
The Innocence of Muslims serves both as a device to bring Washington back into line at a moment when it may be stepping back from the Zionist agenda and as a means of pursuing it further by attacking the faith of still others who resist it.
Translated from French at Voltairenet.org by Michele Stoddard
Thierry Mason
* * *
At first glance, these events can be located in the long line leading from Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses to the burnings of the Koran by Pastor Terry Jones. Nevertheless, this new attack differs from other incidents in that the film was not directed at a Western audience but instead was uniquely conceived as an instrument of provocation directed at Muslims.
In political terms, the affair can be analyzed from two angles: from the tactical perspective as an anti-U.S. manipulation; or from a strategic one, as an anti-Muslim psychological attack.
The film was produced by a Zionist group composed of Jews of double Israeli-American nationality and by an Egyptian Copt. It was completed several months ago but was released at a calculated moment to provoke riots targeting the United States.
Israeli agents were deployed in several large cities with a mission to channel the rage of the crowd against American or Coptic targets (though not Israeli ones). Not surprisingly, their maximum effect was attained in Benghazi, the capital of Libya’s Cyrenaica region.
The population of Benghazi is known to harbor particularly reactionary and racist groups. It is useful to recall that at the time the cartoons of Mohammed appeared in September, 2005, Salafists attacked the Danish Consulate. In keeping with the Vienna Convention on diplomacy, the Libyan government of Muammar al-Gaddafi deployed troops to protect the diplomatic service then under attack. The repression of the riot resulted in numerous deaths. Subsequently, the West, seeking to overthrow the Libyan regime, financed Salafist publications which accused Gaddafi of protecting the Danish Consulate because he had allegedly been behind the cartoon operation.
On February 15, 2011, Salafists organized in Benghazi a demonstration commemorating the massacre during which shooting erupted, an incident that marked the beginning of the Benghazi insurrection that opened the way to the NATO intervention. The Libyan police arrested three members of the Italian Special Forces who confessed to having fired from the rooftops on both demonstrators and the police to sew chaos and confusion. Held prisoner throughout the war that followed, they were released when NATO seized the capital and smuggled them out of the country to Malta in a small fishing boat on which I was also a passenger.
This time, the manipulation of the Benghazi crowd by Israeli agents had as its goal the assassination of the U.S. Ambassador, an act of war not seen since the Israeli bombardment of the USS Liberty by the Israeli Air Force and Navy in 1967. This constitutes the first assassination of an ambassador in the line of duty since 1979. The act is all the more grievous considering that in a country where the current central government is a purely legal fiction, the U.S. Ambassador was not merely a diplomat but was functioning as Governor, as the de facto head of state.
It should be emphasized that in the past few weeks, the highest-ranking U.S. military officers have entered into open conflict with the Israeli government. They have issued declarations signifying their intention to halt the cycle of wars begun after September 11 (Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria) and which, in light of the informal agreements of 2001, will expand further (Sudan, Somalia and Iran). The first warning shot occurred in Afghanistan, in August 2012, when two missiles were fired at the parked plane of General Martin Dempsey, head of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. This second warning turned out to be even more brutal.
If, on the other hand, we examine this affair from the viewpoint of social psychology, the release of the film and its aftermath appear to be a frontal attack on the beliefs of Muslims. In this regard, it is similar in nature to the Pussy Riot episode trampling on the freedom of religious practice inside the Orthodox Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow and the mulitple performances of conceptual pornography the group engaged in afterwards. These are operations geared to violate societies that resist the project of global domination.
In democratic and multicultural societies, the sacred is seen as belonging to and being expressed within the private sphere. But a new collective space of the sacred has been in the process of elaboration. Western European states have passed “historical memory” laws which have transformed a historical event—the Nazi destruction of European Jews—into a religious occurrence: the “Shoa” in Jewish terminology, or the “Holocaust” as expressed in Christian evangelical parlance. Nazi crimes are thereby elevated to the level of a unique event at the expense of the victims of other massacres, including other victims of the Nazis. Questioning the dogma, i.e. this religious interpretation of historical facts, subjects one to criminal penalties, just as blasphemy was punished in the past. Similarly, in 2001, the U.S., the European Union member states and a number of their allies imposed by decree that entire national populations must observe a minute of silence in memory of the victims of the September 11 attacks. This ruling was underpinned by an ideological interpretation of the causes of the massacre. In both cases, having been killed because one was Jewish or because one was American confers a particular status on these victims before whom the rest of humanity must genuflect.
During the Olympic Games in London, both the Israeli and the American delegations attempted to enlarge their sacred space still further by imposing a minute of silence during the opening ceremony of the most-watched televised event in the world, this time on behalf of the hostages seized during the Munich Games of 1972. In the end, the proposal was rejected, with the Olympic Committee holding instead a separate ceremony. This is just a further indication of the effort to create a collective liturgy legitimating the global empire.
The Innocence of Muslims serves both as a device to bring Washington back into line at a moment when it may be stepping back from the Zionist agenda and as a means of pursuing it further by attacking the faith of still others who resist it.
Translated from French at Voltairenet.org by Michele Stoddard
Monday, September 17, 2012
America’s War. Next Stop Iran: Who Will Save Us?
Global Research
Colin Todhunter
One of the most awe inspiring photographs ever taken was by a machine, not a person. The ‘Pale Blue Dot’ is the name of the photograph.It is an image of the Earth taken in 1990 by the Voyager spacecraft, some six billion kilometers away from our planet as the craft was about to leave the Solar System. The Earth appears as a miniscule dot, almost lost in the vastness of space.
The ‘Blue Marble’ is another image from space that also shows the Earth. It was taken by the US Apollo 17 spacecraft in 1972. The entire planet is a vivid, enchanting swirl of deep blue oceans, scattered white clouds and solid green land masses set in stark contrast against the apparent emptiness of space.
To see the magnificent fragility of Earth hanging in a mind boggling expanse of blackness is as wondrous as it is humbling.
The late astrophysicist Carl Sagan commented on the ‘Pale Blue Dot’ by saying that from out there in space, there is no inkling, no clue whatsoever, that there is life here. There is no hint of humankind’s squabbles, posturings, religions, civilizations or doctrines. There is no possible comprehension of the intensity or magnitude of human joys and wonder, prejudices and sufferings.
Beneath Earth’s colourful blue mask from space, lies a sorry tale. It’s a tale about the hundreds of millions of deaths due to pointless wars and conflicts that have taken place down the ages. We have had little compulsion in destroying living creatures in their droves and gorging on and depleting finite natural resources. And we destroyed in a blink of an eyelid what took the Earth millions of years to nurture.
Sagan once asked us to consider how much blood has been spilled by generals and emperors just to become temporary masters of one part of this small blue dot and how much cruelty has been visited time and time again by one set of the planet’s inhabitants on a barely indistinguishable other set of inhabitants. Sagan is not alone. During our more self reflective moments, each of us may care to chew over such sentiments ourselves.
But how easy those sentiments fall prey to hate, fear and anger and how easy we turn to killing and violence.
As we watch the possible build up to a US-led war with Iran and bear witness to the wail of propaganda and the deception of peace through the barrel of a gun, the world is told that Iran threatens global stability. Due to what is becoming an incessant pro war media onslaught, an increasing number of US citizens now favour a military attack on Iran’s nuclear installations, despite no credible evidence that indicates Iran is actually developing nuclear weapons at all.
One news report by a US channel even showed a US aircraft carrier passing through the Strait of Hormuz saying the ship was ‘the world’s’ first line of defence in case non-nuclear-armed Iran decided to rein down ‘terror’ on nuclear-armed Israel in response to any first strike attack on Iran by Tel Aviv. What twisted logic. What arrogance. In the case outlined, any ‘terror’ would be instigated by the said Israeli attack itself on Iran. That was conveniently brushed aside. And for ‘the world’ read only the US and its client states. And by what sort of garbled reasoning is Iran a threat to the US, the most militarily powerful country the world has ever seen – notwithstanding the fact that the US has military bases encircling Iran in neighbouring countries. Yet, the US media, like it did over Iraq, is convincing large sections of the public that Iran, on the opposite side of the world, is a direct threat to the US.
The threat to global peace and stability does not lie with Iran, or with China for that matter or any other bogeyman the Pentagon cares to dream up. Historian William Blum last year wrote that, since 1945, the US has attempted to overthrow more than 50 governments, most of them democratically elected. It has attempted to suppress a populist or national movement in 20 countries. It has grossly interfered in democratic elections in at least 30 countries. It has dropped bombs on the people of more than 30 countries. And it has attempted to assassinate more than 50 foreign leaders.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says Iran is destabilising the world and its aggression must be stopped. No mention from Israel of the assassinations of nuclear scientists in Iran. No mention of cyber attacks on Iran, the funding of anti-government militias inside Iran or other destabilisation strategies waged against Tehran by the US, Mossad, the CIA or MI6.
It’s not a case of who will save us from Iran, but who will save us from the type of terror and instability we have seen instigated by US or US-backed forces in Pakistan, Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq. Who will save us from militarism and imperialism? Who will save us from the economic terror brought to Greece or any other number of countries, including the US itself, by the corporate cartels and the financial institutions who silt away profits in tax havens while expecting ordinary people to bear the brunt of their criminality?
With Washington already having done its level best to destabilise Iran, a huge build up of US troops has been taking place in the region for many months. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) may also be crying wolf over Iran’s intention to acquire a nuclear weapon, which is hardly surprising given that a US diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks describes the Director General of the IAEA Yukiya Amano as “solidly in the US court” and “ready for prime time.”
China’s ambassador to the UN has already warned Yukiya Amano not to create “unfounded” evidence to justify a military attack on Iran in the name of halting its nuclear programme.
Having had its influence curtailed in Libya, a top Chinese government official has already warned that any threat to Pakistan would be taken as a direct threat to China, according to the JunshiJia website, which some months ago cited a report by China’s Central TV. The report also stated that as the US war in Afghanistan deepens and the threat of military action against Iran becomes stronger, the threat of confrontation with China increases.
As the West contemplates another dose of murder and mayhem, surely the lies in the build up to the invasion of Iraq are too fresh in the mind for the Western public to be fooled once again. By now they should have seen through the ongoing US-led deception of perpetual war for perpetual peace. Ultimately, there’s no peace to be found in Armageddon.
Let’s hope so because, in all our obscurity and isolation on this insignificant blue dot, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere. We must act to save us from ourselves.
Originally from the northwest of England, Colin Todhunter has spent many years in India. He has written extensively for the Bangalore-based Deccan Herald, New Indian Express and Morning Star (Britain). His articles have also appeared in many other newspapers, journals and books. His East by Northwest site is at: http://colintodhunter.blogspot.com
Colin Todhunter
The ‘Blue Marble’ is another image from space that also shows the Earth. It was taken by the US Apollo 17 spacecraft in 1972. The entire planet is a vivid, enchanting swirl of deep blue oceans, scattered white clouds and solid green land masses set in stark contrast against the apparent emptiness of space.
To see the magnificent fragility of Earth hanging in a mind boggling expanse of blackness is as wondrous as it is humbling.
The late astrophysicist Carl Sagan commented on the ‘Pale Blue Dot’ by saying that from out there in space, there is no inkling, no clue whatsoever, that there is life here. There is no hint of humankind’s squabbles, posturings, religions, civilizations or doctrines. There is no possible comprehension of the intensity or magnitude of human joys and wonder, prejudices and sufferings.
Beneath Earth’s colourful blue mask from space, lies a sorry tale. It’s a tale about the hundreds of millions of deaths due to pointless wars and conflicts that have taken place down the ages. We have had little compulsion in destroying living creatures in their droves and gorging on and depleting finite natural resources. And we destroyed in a blink of an eyelid what took the Earth millions of years to nurture.
But how easy those sentiments fall prey to hate, fear and anger and how easy we turn to killing and violence.
As we watch the possible build up to a US-led war with Iran and bear witness to the wail of propaganda and the deception of peace through the barrel of a gun, the world is told that Iran threatens global stability. Due to what is becoming an incessant pro war media onslaught, an increasing number of US citizens now favour a military attack on Iran’s nuclear installations, despite no credible evidence that indicates Iran is actually developing nuclear weapons at all.
One news report by a US channel even showed a US aircraft carrier passing through the Strait of Hormuz saying the ship was ‘the world’s’ first line of defence in case non-nuclear-armed Iran decided to rein down ‘terror’ on nuclear-armed Israel in response to any first strike attack on Iran by Tel Aviv. What twisted logic. What arrogance. In the case outlined, any ‘terror’ would be instigated by the said Israeli attack itself on Iran. That was conveniently brushed aside. And for ‘the world’ read only the US and its client states. And by what sort of garbled reasoning is Iran a threat to the US, the most militarily powerful country the world has ever seen – notwithstanding the fact that the US has military bases encircling Iran in neighbouring countries. Yet, the US media, like it did over Iraq, is convincing large sections of the public that Iran, on the opposite side of the world, is a direct threat to the US.
The threat to global peace and stability does not lie with Iran, or with China for that matter or any other bogeyman the Pentagon cares to dream up. Historian William Blum last year wrote that, since 1945, the US has attempted to overthrow more than 50 governments, most of them democratically elected. It has attempted to suppress a populist or national movement in 20 countries. It has grossly interfered in democratic elections in at least 30 countries. It has dropped bombs on the people of more than 30 countries. And it has attempted to assassinate more than 50 foreign leaders.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says Iran is destabilising the world and its aggression must be stopped. No mention from Israel of the assassinations of nuclear scientists in Iran. No mention of cyber attacks on Iran, the funding of anti-government militias inside Iran or other destabilisation strategies waged against Tehran by the US, Mossad, the CIA or MI6.
It’s not a case of who will save us from Iran, but who will save us from the type of terror and instability we have seen instigated by US or US-backed forces in Pakistan, Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq. Who will save us from militarism and imperialism? Who will save us from the economic terror brought to Greece or any other number of countries, including the US itself, by the corporate cartels and the financial institutions who silt away profits in tax havens while expecting ordinary people to bear the brunt of their criminality?
With Washington already having done its level best to destabilise Iran, a huge build up of US troops has been taking place in the region for many months. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) may also be crying wolf over Iran’s intention to acquire a nuclear weapon, which is hardly surprising given that a US diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks describes the Director General of the IAEA Yukiya Amano as “solidly in the US court” and “ready for prime time.”
China’s ambassador to the UN has already warned Yukiya Amano not to create “unfounded” evidence to justify a military attack on Iran in the name of halting its nuclear programme.
Having had its influence curtailed in Libya, a top Chinese government official has already warned that any threat to Pakistan would be taken as a direct threat to China, according to the JunshiJia website, which some months ago cited a report by China’s Central TV. The report also stated that as the US war in Afghanistan deepens and the threat of military action against Iran becomes stronger, the threat of confrontation with China increases.
As the West contemplates another dose of murder and mayhem, surely the lies in the build up to the invasion of Iraq are too fresh in the mind for the Western public to be fooled once again. By now they should have seen through the ongoing US-led deception of perpetual war for perpetual peace. Ultimately, there’s no peace to be found in Armageddon.
Let’s hope so because, in all our obscurity and isolation on this insignificant blue dot, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere. We must act to save us from ourselves.
Originally from the northwest of England, Colin Todhunter has spent many years in India. He has written extensively for the Bangalore-based Deccan Herald, New Indian Express and Morning Star (Britain). His articles have also appeared in many other newspapers, journals and books. His East by Northwest site is at: http://colintodhunter.blogspot.com
Monday, September 10, 2012
Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu Linked to Nuclear Technology Smuggling Ring - FBI Files
The following is being released by the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy -- The FBI partially declassified and released files linking Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahuto a nuclear technology smuggling ring that targeted the United States. The declassified files are now publicly available online athttp://www.IRmep.org/ila/krytons/06272012_milco_mdr.pdf
FBI agents interviewed indicted American smuggler Richard Kelly Smyth on April 16-17, 2002, at the U.S. attorney's office in Los Angeles. The secret interview report details how during trips to Israel Smyth's handler placed him in contact with Benjamin Netanyahu at Heli Trading Company. The FBI report suggests that "Smyth and [Netanyahu] would meet in restaurants in Tel Aviv and in [Netanyahu's] home and/or business. It was not uncommon for [Netanyahu] to ask Smyth for unclassified material."
Smyth was indicted in the mid-1980s for smuggling 800 dual use "krytrons" without proper export licenses through a multi-front company network. Smyth fled the U.S. and lived abroad, supported by unknown means, until he was captured by Interpol and returned to the U.S. in 2001. He was convicted in 2002.
During the 2002 Smyth counterintelligence debriefing, the FBI learned that the Israeli Ministry of Defense ordered and paid an Israeli company called Heli Trading for krytrons. Heli in turn sourced them from California-based MILCO in a clandestine operation codenamed "Project Pinto." The report reveals how MILCO illegally shipped other prohibited military articles under general Commerce Department export licenses rather than smuggling them out via Israeli diplomatic pouches.
Released on the Internet on July 4, 2012, the files have been the subject of reporting in the Israeli press, including Israeli National News, Ma'ariv and The Marker. Some U.S. alternative media also explored the implications of the formerly secret files including Antiwar.com, Tikkun Olam, Mondoweiss and CounterPunch. WBAI radio and the Scott Horton Show have hosted interviews.
Although the FBI report has now been sent to the New York Times, Washington Post, all members of Congress and United Nations members, no top-tier establishment news coverage, Congressional or UN investigations have been made public. On Friday, National Public Radio syndicated host Diane Rehm immediately disconnected IRmep Research Director Grant F. Smith when he asked her reporter roundtable to assess the implications of the Netanyahu espionage ring. An audio clip of the brief exchange is available at:http://www.IRmep.org/NPR.mp3
PR Newswire (http://s.tt/1jilE)Monday, August 20, 2012
AIPAC Wants War on Iran
Stephen Lendman Blog
AIPAC is an unregistered foreign agent. It calls itself "America's Pro-Israeli Lobby." It's represented Israeli interests since 1953.
Congressional and administration sentiment reject containment. Preventing an Iranian nuclear capability is prioritized. Doing so heads America closer to war. Timing alone is unknown.
Notions about "closing windows," "red lines," "zones of immunity," and other rhetoric are political ploys to "stifle diplomacy, strengthen sanctions," and pressure Washington to use force. Israel needs America for its "heavy lifting."
Virtually no one in Congress confronts it. Doing so is a career-ender. It has enormous influence over US Middle East policies affecting Israel, including war and peace.
It disseminates disinformation, lies and hate. It viciously attacks opponents. It calls Iran "the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism and is racing toward a nuclear weapons capability."
It manufactures threats to promote fear. It wants the Islamic Republic destroyed. It targets other regional states. It wants unchallenged Israeli regional dominance.
James Petras says its sole purpose "is to ensure Israel’s unchallenged military and political power over a huge region from North Africa to the Persian Gulf."
Its annual meeting "is the most outrageous public display of Zionist-Jewish power as it shapes US foreign policy."
It threatens "to drag the US into another major war in the Middle East - this time against Iran." Doing so is lawless, madness, and self-destructive.
Its web site says "While the World Talks, Iran Enriches; More Pressure Needed." A litany of disinformation and lies followed.
Negotiations failed. Iran got more time "to advance its nuclear program and cleanse a suspected nuclear site."
The international community "must dramatically" increase pressure.
Iran "is believed to have carried out experiments on nuclear explosives."
"Satellite images indicate Iran has been working to cleanse (a suspect) site by removing buildings and soil."
Iran's nuclear capabilities have advanced. It fuel stockpile approaches nuclear weapons production capability.
"America must make clear that it will act to prevent Iran from achieving the capability to build a nuclear weapon at a time of its choosing."
Contain(ing) a nuclear Iran" is inadequate. US policy must reject any possibility of Tehran developing nuclear weapons. All options must be considered, including "military action."
Economic sanctions must be "accelerated" and "crippling." Washington should do whatever it takes to prevent a nuclear Iran.
AIPAC is a destructive, malevolent, evil force. It's heading Washington for war. Waging one on Iran assures losers, not winners. Israel may self-destruct in the process. Catastrophe will affect the region. America won't escape harm.
War on Iran may go nuclear. Weapons of mass destruction may be used against a nonbelligerent state. The potential economic and human consequences are staggering. At issue is either stopping this madness or be consumed by it.
Nuclear war leaves no middle ground. General Omar Bradley said the only "way to win an atomic war is to make certain it never starts." It may be closer than most imagine.
Congressional and administration sentiment reject containment. Preventing an Iranian nuclear capability is prioritized. Doing so heads America closer to war. Timing alone is unknown.
In mid-August, Foreign Policy featured a debate of sorts.David Rothkopf headlined "The Drums of August." He's Foreign Policy's CEO and Editor-at Large. Earlier he served as Kissinger Associates managing director and US Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trade Policy.
"Israel is not bluffing," he said. The punch line about a boy crying wolf is that "the wolf shows up." Reasons for attacking Iran are "clearly growing more compelling for Israeli leaders."
A litany of canards followed, including:
Diplomacy isn't working. Sanctions alone aren't enough. Iran's nuclear program is accelerating. It's advancing closer to weapons capability. Tehran threatens to destroy Israel. It "murder(ed) five Israeli tourists in Bulgaria. (It's) hard for Americans to grasp (its) existential threat."
Failure to confront Iran is "imprudent." He implies might equals right as the bottom red line.
Stephen Walt's view differs. He headlined "Another reason the US shouldn't go to war with Iran," saying:
Washington should avoid war. It's not in America's interest. Diplomacy should be prioritized, not conflict. Policy makers mustn't "get buffaloed into a war by Israel." He urges reengaging Iran directly.
It "makes so much sense," he stresses, even though AIPAC and other hardliners reject it. Together with Netanyahu, they're heading America for war. They're "paint(ing) the United States into a corner."
Why is "simple." Israel can't go it alone. It lacks enough power. It can't sufficiently damage Iran's nuclear facilities without US help. Israel understands. It's pushing Washington into a war it shouldn't wage.
Netanyahu/Barak war talk is "bluff, but one can scarcely blame Israel for employing a tactic that keeps working so well. It's our fault we keep falling for it."
Walt's argument falls short. Vital issues too important to ignore weren't discussed. No evidence suggests an Iranian nuclear program. Nations with them don't lob them at each other or non-nuclear states. Aggressive war is lawless.
Iran threatens no one. It urges peace, not war. It wants a nuclear free Middle East. Claiming an alleged nuclear threat is red herring cover for regime change.
Attacking Iran may go nuclear. Doing so assures mass casualties. Israel will be affected like Iran. So will America, other regional nations, and Western ones.
Anytime war is waged, it's hell. Potential nuclear war is madness and self-destructive. Netanyahu and Barak allegedly set a September 25 deadline. Obama's got until then to commit to military action or Israel will go it alone.
Israel's US ambassador Michael Oren said Israel will attack even if destroying Iran's nuclear facilities entirely isn't possible. "Diplomacy hasn't succeeded," he said.
"We've come to a very critical juncture where important decisions do have to be made." He added it won't be "in the too far distant future."
Oren also raised the bogus issue of an alleged Syrian chemical weapons threat. He suggested dealing with it might have to be prioritized. Earlier, Israel threatened to attack Syrian facilities where chemical weapons are stored. Doing so increases the likelihood of full-scale war.
Israel is spoiling for a fight. Ideally it wants Washington to do its heavy lifting. Either way, it wants regional rivals removed. War is its final solution.
A Final Comment
Last March, Occupy AIPAC said "AIPAC wants war with Iran. We don't!" Its open letter to Congress said "AIPAC is on the warpath - this time with Iran. They say the US should be willing to attack Iran or support an Israeli attack."
"AIPAC pushed our government into the catastrophic war in Iraq by exaggerating Saddam Hussein’s threat and lying about weapons of mass destruction. Now they are repeating history, with AIPAC lobbyists vastly exaggerating Iran’s nuclear threat and eschewing negotiations."
"AIPAC continues to lobby for policies that prohibit a just peace for Israelis and Palestinians and support violations of international law. AIPAC’s views do not represent the values and interests of the majority of the American people who voted for you, who pay the taxes that fund our government, and whose family members serve in the U.S. military."
"The majority of Americans do not want another war in the Middle East and the US can’t afford a war during the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression."
"The Iraq war left thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead. We implore you not to repeat this tragic mistake. Say no to AIPAC, no to war with Iran and yes to diplomacy."
Wars don't solve problems. They create them. War with Syria and/or Iran may cross a line too potentially catastrophic to risk. Priority one is stopping leaders willing to chance it.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
His new book is titled "How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War"
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
Sunday, May 20, 2012
‘King Bibi’ is ready for his close up, and ‘Time’ is willing to oblige
MondoWeiss
Craig Higgins
I feel a little slow on the draw. Time beat me, Barak Ravid of Ha’aretz and everybody else to the punch to give Benjamin ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu a massive dose of free publicity and attention that’s size-appropriate for his ego. One of America’s finest news publications decided to crown Bibi King of Israel! Long May He Reign! I mention Mr. Ravid because he almost sounds miffed about not getting to do the laying on of hands himself. Not that he’s alone. According to Ravid, Netanyahu, “rarely has in-depth conversations with Israeli reporters, and makes do with short telephone conversations in which he passes messages on issues that are of priority to him, or speaks in order to minimize damage.” The Prime Minister apparently assumes that Ha’aretz, Yediot Ahronoth, and the others are out to get him and so doesn’t talk to them, other than to give out sound bites to the writers to fill space in their columns. In Israel reporters don’t understand the role that His Majesty has set out for them to play.
So King Bibi barely has time for the scribes there, preferring to bask in the glow of his American ‘journalist’ loyal subjects who line up to pay him homage. Time sent Managing Editor Rick Stengel to work on polishing the laurels of His Majesty for publication in the States. Stengel was given great access to Netanyahu at his private Jerusalem residence, and the Prime Minister disseminated bon mots of Bibi-Think to his new friend. Although a far more sophisticated politician than George W. Bush ever was Netanyahu shares 43’s love of an obedience streak when dealing with the Fourth Estate, and it’s clear the Time editor got the gig in part on his willingness to play gossip columnist.
So, what did Bibi want to gossip about? From the piece we are led to believe that the Prime Minister has risen to the ranks of peerage by brave deeds of political skill. Stengel writes, “Netanyahu is poised to become the longest-serving Israeli Prime Minister since David Ben-Gurion, the founding father of Israel. He has no national rival.” The proof of this claim is Netanyahu’s approval rating, “roughly 50%”, and the 94 seat- “bullet-proof majority” he has constructed by getting the ex-Likudniks from Kadima to go back to being Likudniks again. It’s also clear from the article that Netanyahu, a man who keeps a picture of Winston Churchill on a shelf behind his desk, is now eyeing his role as “a defining figure in Israeli history and a significant player on the world stage.” It’s not enough that His Highness has power and prestige; he must also cement his claim to being a demigod in the pantheon of World Leaders.
Craig Higgins
So King Bibi barely has time for the scribes there, preferring to bask in the glow of his American ‘journalist’ loyal subjects who line up to pay him homage. Time sent Managing Editor Rick Stengel to work on polishing the laurels of His Majesty for publication in the States. Stengel was given great access to Netanyahu at his private Jerusalem residence, and the Prime Minister disseminated bon mots of Bibi-Think to his new friend. Although a far more sophisticated politician than George W. Bush ever was Netanyahu shares 43’s love of an obedience streak when dealing with the Fourth Estate, and it’s clear the Time editor got the gig in part on his willingness to play gossip columnist.
So, what did Bibi want to gossip about? From the piece we are led to believe that the Prime Minister has risen to the ranks of peerage by brave deeds of political skill. Stengel writes, “Netanyahu is poised to become the longest-serving Israeli Prime Minister since David Ben-Gurion, the founding father of Israel. He has no national rival.” The proof of this claim is Netanyahu’s approval rating, “roughly 50%”, and the 94 seat- “bullet-proof majority” he has constructed by getting the ex-Likudniks from Kadima to go back to being Likudniks again. It’s also clear from the article that Netanyahu, a man who keeps a picture of Winston Churchill on a shelf behind his desk, is now eyeing his role as “a defining figure in Israeli history and a significant player on the world stage.” It’s not enough that His Highness has power and prestige; he must also cement his claim to being a demigod in the pantheon of World Leaders.
Monday, May 7, 2012
Israel should be stopped or all will be lost: Mark Glenn
PressTV
An American author says Israel is a threat not only to the innocent people of the Middle East but the entire world and “if this evil is not stopped, all will be lost.”
 |
| Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (L) with Defense Minister Ehud Barak. |
“Christianity has been corrupted by Zionist interests and is now being used as a tool in infecting the rest of the world,” Mark Glenn, from the Crescent and Cross Solidarity Movement, wrote in a letter addressed to the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Glenn said the Zionists are trying to pit the Christians and Muslims against each other, in what has become the “clash of civilizations,” through corrupt media, corrupt culture, immorality, war, economic exploitation, and a whole host of other diseases.
“Their goal is obvious - to see these two peoples destroy each other so that like some vulture she can pick the carcasses clean for herself,” Glenn said.
He further asked for an extensive interview with the Iranian president on issues ranging from the Israeli plots for the Middle East and how it is trying to bring its “evil desires” about, such as war and terrorism etc., to the conspiracies that the US and Israel have committed against Iran since 1953 to the commonalties between Islam and Christianity.
Israel is widely known to be the sole possessor of nuclear weapons in the Middle East. Tel Aviv began building its first plutonium and uranium processing facility, Dimona, in the Negev desert in 1958.
Former US President Jimmy Carter said Israel has a nuclear arsenal that includes between 200 and 300 warheads. Decades of recurrent reporting and aerial footage have also established the possession of atomic arms by Israel.
Under its official policy of nuclear ambiguity, Tel Aviv neither confirms nor denies the possession of nukes and refuses to join the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) or allow inspections of its nuclear facilities.
“I am convinced that if the Christian world were made aware of the fact that their enemies are NOT the Muslims but rather the Zionists who have all but destroyed their religion and culture, that we will be able to eventually get a rope around the neck of this animal where it could be thrown back into the cage where it belongs,” Glenn concluded.
Sunday, April 22, 2012
CNN Pressures RNC to dump Ron Paul & Newt
RunRonPaul
CNN is pushing RNC Chairman to dump Ron Paul and Gingrich out of the race so they can call the election for Romney.
Join us at MSMBoycott.com now and participate in the boycott of mainstream media advertisers. We can’t expect a different kind of mainstream media unless we take action!
CNN is pushing RNC Chairman to dump Ron Paul and Gingrich out of the race so they can call the election for Romney.
Join us at MSMBoycott.com now and participate in the boycott of mainstream media advertisers. We can’t expect a different kind of mainstream media unless we take action!
Saturday, March 24, 2012
US journalist fired after calling Israeli occupation 'brutal'
The Muslim News
A veteran American journalist has been fired after referring to Israel's occupation of Palestinian and Syrian land as "brutal."
Sunni Khalid, managing news editor at WYPR-FM in Baltimore, was dropped by the public radio station on Thursday after more than nine years on the job.
He had been on probation following criticism of comments he made on Facebook about Israel's continued illegal occupation of Palestine.
"I, for one, have had enough of this pandering before the Israeli regime," he wrote.
"The war-mongering toward Iran has, once again, distracted the world from Israel's brutal military occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights."
Khalid, who previously worked for National Public Radio, has also written for Time Magazine, The Washington Times, and USA Today.
Israel maintains economic control over Gaza and the West Bank, with devastating consequences for the Palestinian civilian population.
Rights groups including Amnesty International have repeatedly condemned rights abuses against Palestinians.
 |
| Sunni Khalid (left) |
Sunni Khalid, managing news editor at WYPR-FM in Baltimore, was dropped by the public radio station on Thursday after more than nine years on the job.
He had been on probation following criticism of comments he made on Facebook about Israel's continued illegal occupation of Palestine.
"I, for one, have had enough of this pandering before the Israeli regime," he wrote.
"The war-mongering toward Iran has, once again, distracted the world from Israel's brutal military occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights."
Khalid, who previously worked for National Public Radio, has also written for Time Magazine, The Washington Times, and USA Today.
Israel maintains economic control over Gaza and the West Bank, with devastating consequences for the Palestinian civilian population.
Rights groups including Amnesty International have repeatedly condemned rights abuses against Palestinians.
Monday, March 19, 2012
Israel War Crime Videos Now Violate YouTube Policy? ‘Sorry About That’
A YouTube video showing Israeli forces using IDF military dogs to violently attack peaceful unarmed Palestinian protestors has been pulled from YouTube.
Apparently, videos that document Israel’s war crimes against Palestinians are an official violation of YouTube policy of spam, scams, and commercially deceptive content and as such are being censored.A popular video making its away around the alternative media purported to show Israeli military attack dogs attacking a peaceful unarmed Palestinian protestor.
I have seen it embedded on the websites of several alternative media sites that I am familiar with so, I decided I would give it a watch.
Unfortunately, upon visiting the page I was prompted with a message:
This video has been removed as a violation of YouTube’s policy against spam, scams, and commercially deceptive content. Sorry about that.Clearly the sites that already posted this video such as The Intel Hub, David Icke and What Really Happened are not going write an article or post a video that is a spam, scam or commercially deceptive tactics.
The only spam, scam or commercially deceptive tactic going on here is the wool being pulled over the world’s eyes that Gaza is anything more than a prison of men, woman and children who are trapped inside the massive wall that Israel has built to surround the entire nation.
GRAPHIC Military dog used to attack peaceful protester
Uploaded by 91177info (UK)
Although he was bleeding, in agony and in need of urgent medical attention, soldiers decided to arrest Mr. Shtawi after the dog finally released his arm. The protester and a relative who attempted to free him were both arrested.
Israeli human rights NGO B’Tselem has called several time for the Israeli army to stop using attack dogs on unarmed Palestinians.
In February 2012 a 19 year-old Palestinian was attacked by an IDF dog.
B’Tselem reported another five such incidents in 2011.
Video credit: Odai Qaddomi/B’Tselem
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Dennis Kucinich and 'Wackiness'
Common Dreams
Glen Greenwald
Last week, Rep. Dennis Kucinich was defeated in a Democratic primary by Rep. Marcy Kaptur after re-districting pitted the two long-term incumbents against each other. Kucinich’s fate was basically sealed when the new district contained far more of Kaptur’s district than his. His 18-year stint in the House will come to an end when the next Congress is installed at the beginning of 2013.
Establishment Democrats have long viewed Dennis Kucinich with a mixture of scorn, mockery and condescension. True to form, the establishment liberal journal American Prospect gave Kucinich a little kick on the way out, comparing his political views to the 1960s musical “Hair” (the Ohio loser talked about “Harmony and understanding”!), deriding him as “a favorite among lefty college kids and Birkenstock-wearers around the country,” and pronouncing him “among the wackiest members of Congress.” Yes, I said The American Prospect, not The Weekly Standard.
The Prospect article also praises as “great” a snide, derisive Washington Post piece which purports to “highlight some of the particularly bizarre facts about” Kucinich. Among those is the fact that “he introduced impeachment articles against former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Cheney for their roles in the Iraq war” and “proposed a Cabinet-level agency devoted to peace.” What a weirdo and a loser. Even more predictably, a team of four interns at The New Republic – the magazine that spent years crusading for the attack on Iraq, smearing Israel critics as anti-Semites, and defining its editorial mission as re-making the Democratic Party in the image of Joe Lieberman – denounced the anti-war Kucinich as “ludicrous,” citing most of the same accusations as the Prospect and the Post. [...]
So let’s recap the state of mental health in establishment Democratic circles: the President who claims (and exercises) the power to target American citizens for execution-by-CIA in total secrecy and with no charges — as well as those who dutifully follow him — are sane, sober and Serious, meriting great respect. By contrast, one of the very few members of Congress who stands up and vehemently objects to this most radical power — “The idea that the United States has the ability to summarily execute a US citizen ought to send chills racing up and down the spines of every person of conscience” — is a total wackjob, meriting patronizing mockery.
Both the Prospect and Post recite the trite case demonstrating Kucinich’s supposed weirdness. He’s friends with Shirley McLaine, who believes in reincarnation, and he once (according to McLaine) claimed to have an encounter with a UFO. Is any of that really any more strange than the litany of beliefs which the world’s major religions require? Is Barack Obama “wacky” because he claims to believe that Jesus turned water into wine, rose from the dead and will soon welcome him to heaven? Is Chuck Schumer bizarre because he seems to believe that there’s some big fatherly figure sitting in the sky who spewed fire and brimstone at those who broke the laws he sent down on some stones and now hovers over him judging his every move? Is Harry Reid a weirdo because he apparently venerates as divine the “visions” of a man who had dozens of wives, including some already married to other men?
Neither the Prospect nor the Post would ever dare mock as “wacky” the belief in invisible judgmental father-figures in the sky or that rendition of life-after-death gospel because those belief systems have been deemed acceptable by establishment circles. ”Wacky”, like its close cousin “crazy,” is a term of establishment derision exclusively reserved for those who deviate from such conventions. And that’s the point worth making here: the real reason anyone with D.C. Seriousness, including many establishment liberals, relished mocking Kucinich is because he dissented from the orthodoxies of the two political parties. That, by definition, makes one wacky and weird, even when — as is true for the Obama assassination powers and so many other bipartisan pieties — the actual wacky and crazy beliefs are those orthodoxies themselves (we’ve seen this repeatedly with those who stray from two-party normalcy). In reality, the actual crazies are those who fit comfortably within that two-party mentality and rarely challenge or deviate from it, while those who are sane, by definition, dissent from it (just today, the Super Serious Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, a prime co-sponsor of the indefinite detention bill passed late last year, called for a naval blockade of Iran). [...]
Read the rest of this article including updates here.
Glen Greenwald
Last week, Rep. Dennis Kucinich was defeated in a Democratic primary by Rep. Marcy Kaptur after re-districting pitted the two long-term incumbents against each other. Kucinich’s fate was basically sealed when the new district contained far more of Kaptur’s district than his. His 18-year stint in the House will come to an end when the next Congress is installed at the beginning of 2013.
The Prospect article also praises as “great” a snide, derisive Washington Post piece which purports to “highlight some of the particularly bizarre facts about” Kucinich. Among those is the fact that “he introduced impeachment articles against former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Cheney for their roles in the Iraq war” and “proposed a Cabinet-level agency devoted to peace.” What a weirdo and a loser. Even more predictably, a team of four interns at The New Republic – the magazine that spent years crusading for the attack on Iraq, smearing Israel critics as anti-Semites, and defining its editorial mission as re-making the Democratic Party in the image of Joe Lieberman – denounced the anti-war Kucinich as “ludicrous,” citing most of the same accusations as the Prospect and the Post. [...]
So let’s recap the state of mental health in establishment Democratic circles: the President who claims (and exercises) the power to target American citizens for execution-by-CIA in total secrecy and with no charges — as well as those who dutifully follow him — are sane, sober and Serious, meriting great respect. By contrast, one of the very few members of Congress who stands up and vehemently objects to this most radical power — “The idea that the United States has the ability to summarily execute a US citizen ought to send chills racing up and down the spines of every person of conscience” — is a total wackjob, meriting patronizing mockery.
Both the Prospect and Post recite the trite case demonstrating Kucinich’s supposed weirdness. He’s friends with Shirley McLaine, who believes in reincarnation, and he once (according to McLaine) claimed to have an encounter with a UFO. Is any of that really any more strange than the litany of beliefs which the world’s major religions require? Is Barack Obama “wacky” because he claims to believe that Jesus turned water into wine, rose from the dead and will soon welcome him to heaven? Is Chuck Schumer bizarre because he seems to believe that there’s some big fatherly figure sitting in the sky who spewed fire and brimstone at those who broke the laws he sent down on some stones and now hovers over him judging his every move? Is Harry Reid a weirdo because he apparently venerates as divine the “visions” of a man who had dozens of wives, including some already married to other men?
Neither the Prospect nor the Post would ever dare mock as “wacky” the belief in invisible judgmental father-figures in the sky or that rendition of life-after-death gospel because those belief systems have been deemed acceptable by establishment circles. ”Wacky”, like its close cousin “crazy,” is a term of establishment derision exclusively reserved for those who deviate from such conventions. And that’s the point worth making here: the real reason anyone with D.C. Seriousness, including many establishment liberals, relished mocking Kucinich is because he dissented from the orthodoxies of the two political parties. That, by definition, makes one wacky and weird, even when — as is true for the Obama assassination powers and so many other bipartisan pieties — the actual wacky and crazy beliefs are those orthodoxies themselves (we’ve seen this repeatedly with those who stray from two-party normalcy). In reality, the actual crazies are those who fit comfortably within that two-party mentality and rarely challenge or deviate from it, while those who are sane, by definition, dissent from it (just today, the Super Serious Democratic Sen. Carl Levin, a prime co-sponsor of the indefinite detention bill passed late last year, called for a naval blockade of Iran). [...]
Read the rest of this article including updates here.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Journalists Mike Murphy of NBC and Donna Brazile of CNN to speak at conference promoting Iran war
MondoWeiss
AIPAC's list of confirmed speakers for its upcoming policy conference includes some network journalists-- notably liberal commentators Paul Begala of CNN and Donna Brazile of CNN and ABC. Brazile formerly headed the Voting Rights Institute. I wonder what she's going to say about Palestinian rights. And there's Mike Murphy of NBC, a Republican strategist hired by the network as a political analyst.
All these folks will be speaking at a gathering that will be pushing war on Iran... As the Forward reports (thanks Annie Robbins):
Oh and AIPAC denied my application for credentials.
All these folks will be speaking at a gathering that will be pushing war on Iran... As the Forward reports (thanks Annie Robbins):
What are the networks' ethics policies on this sort of appearance?A proposed Senate resolution, supported by the pro-Israel lobby, would shift America’s red line in dealing with Iran from preventing the Islamic Republic’s acquisition of nuclear weapons to stopping it before it achieves “nuclear capabilities.”The resolution, now gaining signatures in the Senate, will be the legislative centerpiece of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee as it convenes for its annual Washington conference, to take place in early March.
Oh and AIPAC denied my application for credentials.
Friday, February 24, 2012
Flashback: Israeli Suicide Bomber Attempts to Blow Up U.S. Capitol
Editor's Note: Notice how there are no signs of FBI entrapment for this incident...
Associated Press
WASHINGTON, Nov. 1, 1983—The Capitol police re-adjusted metal detectors and installed sensitive bomb-detecting equipment last month after a tourist entered the House gallery with a homemade bomb under his shirt.
Jack Russ, the sergeant-at-arms of the House, said today that the urgent steps following the Oct. 18 scare were the beginning of a tighter security system.
In an interview, Mr. Russ said the bomb taken into the building ''was not a dud.'' It failed to explode because the man ''had not placed his wiring properly,'' he said.
Aiming at Tighter Security
If the new detection devices and metal detector settings had been in place Oct. 18, he added, the man ''would not have been able to get in the front doors,'' adding that ''I think we'll have the state of the art'' in security measures when the changes were made.
The Capitol Police said the man arrested in the gallery was Israel Rubinowits, a 22-year-old Israeli who threatened to blow up the Capitol when approached by the police. His court-appointed lawyer, Carl Angelis, told a hearing in the District of Columbia Superior Court that Mr. Rubinowits wanted to address Congress about world hunger.
Mr. Rabinowits was charged with making threats of bodily harm, a charge that carries a maximum 20-year prison term and a $5,000 fine. He was held when he failed to make bond of $25,000.
Mr. Russ said Mr. Rubinowits had under his clothes two plastic one-liter bottles wrapped in cardboard, strapped to his body with a rope and wrapped in a white cloth bag. The thin copper wire attached to the bottles did not set off a metal detector outside the gallery entrance.
irections for Making a Bomb
The bottles contained black powder, a flammable liquid of unknown composition, glass, stones, ceramic tile and metal fragments, Mr. Russ said. The man carried several typed pages with diagrams entitled, ''How I Made the Bomb,'' instructions that were ''technically correct,'' Mr. Russ added.
The device was taken to the Fort Belvoir in suburban Virginia and was exploded.
Mr. Russ said preliminary estimates indicated that the blast could have had the force of two to five sticks of dynamite, enough to injure ''quite a few people.''
As the House was voting on establishing a medal to commemorate Vietnam veterans, the man got up, walked to the front rail of gallery and pulled out the device.
Mr. Russ said that Mr. Rubinowits was flicking a switch on a battery when four plainclothes officers closed in. ''Stop or I will blow it up,'' Mr. Rubinowits yelled before he could be subdued.
Congress has metal detectors outside each gallery entrance, but on Oct. 18, Mr. Russ said, the machines were calibrated to pick up such items as guns, knives and large belt buckles.
''We have made them more sensitive,'' he said. ''We have made significant changes and we intend to make more.''
Associated Press
Jack Russ, the sergeant-at-arms of the House, said today that the urgent steps following the Oct. 18 scare were the beginning of a tighter security system.
In an interview, Mr. Russ said the bomb taken into the building ''was not a dud.'' It failed to explode because the man ''had not placed his wiring properly,'' he said.
Aiming at Tighter Security
If the new detection devices and metal detector settings had been in place Oct. 18, he added, the man ''would not have been able to get in the front doors,'' adding that ''I think we'll have the state of the art'' in security measures when the changes were made.
The Capitol Police said the man arrested in the gallery was Israel Rubinowits, a 22-year-old Israeli who threatened to blow up the Capitol when approached by the police. His court-appointed lawyer, Carl Angelis, told a hearing in the District of Columbia Superior Court that Mr. Rubinowits wanted to address Congress about world hunger.
Mr. Rabinowits was charged with making threats of bodily harm, a charge that carries a maximum 20-year prison term and a $5,000 fine. He was held when he failed to make bond of $25,000.
Mr. Russ said Mr. Rubinowits had under his clothes two plastic one-liter bottles wrapped in cardboard, strapped to his body with a rope and wrapped in a white cloth bag. The thin copper wire attached to the bottles did not set off a metal detector outside the gallery entrance.
irections for Making a Bomb
The bottles contained black powder, a flammable liquid of unknown composition, glass, stones, ceramic tile and metal fragments, Mr. Russ said. The man carried several typed pages with diagrams entitled, ''How I Made the Bomb,'' instructions that were ''technically correct,'' Mr. Russ added.
The device was taken to the Fort Belvoir in suburban Virginia and was exploded.
Mr. Russ said preliminary estimates indicated that the blast could have had the force of two to five sticks of dynamite, enough to injure ''quite a few people.''
As the House was voting on establishing a medal to commemorate Vietnam veterans, the man got up, walked to the front rail of gallery and pulled out the device.
Mr. Russ said that Mr. Rubinowits was flicking a switch on a battery when four plainclothes officers closed in. ''Stop or I will blow it up,'' Mr. Rubinowits yelled before he could be subdued.
Congress has metal detectors outside each gallery entrance, but on Oct. 18, Mr. Russ said, the machines were calibrated to pick up such items as guns, knives and large belt buckles.
''We have made them more sensitive,'' he said. ''We have made significant changes and we intend to make more.''
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Friday, January 20, 2012
Newspaper Editor: Israel Should Consider Assassinating Obama
Gawker
Andrew Adler, the owner and publisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times, a weekly newspaper serving Atlanta's Jewish community, devoted his January 13, 2012 column to the thorny problem of the U.S. and Israel's diverging views on the threat posed by Iran. Basically Israel has three options, he wrote: Strike Hezbollah and Hamas, strike Iran, or "order a hit" on Barack Obama. Either way, problem solved!
Here's how Adler laid out "option three" in his list of scenarios facing Israeli president Benjamin Netanyahu (the column, which was forwarded to us by a tipster, isn't online, but you can read a copy here):
A nervous Adler told me over the phone that he wasn't advocating Obama's assassination by Mossad agents. "Of course not," he said.
But do you think Israel should consider it an option? "No."
But do you believe that Israel is in fact considering the option in its most inner circles? "No. Actually, no. I was hoping to make clear that it's unspeakable—god forbid this would ever happen. I take it you're quoting me?
"
Yes. "Oh, boy."
When I asked Adler why, if he didn't advocate assassination and didn't believe Israel was actually considering it, he wrote a column saying he believed that the option was "on the table," he asked for a minute to compose himself and call me back. He did a few moments later, and said, "I wrote it to see what kind of reaction I was going to get from readers."
And what was the reaction? "We've gotten a lot of calls and emails."
Nothing from the Secret Service, though. Yet.
UPDATE: Adler has told JTA that he "regrets" the column and plans to publish an apology. Oh, and the Secret Service says it will "make all appropriate, investigative follow-up in regard to this matter," according to ABC News.
Here's how Adler laid out "option three" in his list of scenarios facing Israeli president Benjamin Netanyahu (the column, which was forwarded to us by a tipster, isn't online, but you can read a copy here):
Three, give the go-ahead for U.S.-based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current vice president to take his place, and forcefully dictate that the United States' policy includes its helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies.
Yes, you read "three" correctly. Order a hit on a president in order to preserve Israel's existence. Think about it. If I have thought of this Tom Clancy-type scenario, don't you think that this almost unfathomable idea has been discussed in Israel's most inner circles?
Another way of putting "three" in perspective goes something like this: How far would you go to save a nation comprised of seven million lives...Jews, Christians and Arabs alike;
You have got to believe, like I do, that all options are on the table.It's hard to tell whether or not Adler is just some crank. But the Atlanta Jewish Times, which he purchased in 2009, appears to be a real community newspaper. It was founded in 1925 and, according to Wikipedia, claims a circulation of 3,500 and staff of five. To judge from its web site, it's a going concern.
A nervous Adler told me over the phone that he wasn't advocating Obama's assassination by Mossad agents. "Of course not," he said.
But do you think Israel should consider it an option? "No."
But do you believe that Israel is in fact considering the option in its most inner circles? "No. Actually, no. I was hoping to make clear that it's unspeakable—god forbid this would ever happen. I take it you're quoting me?
"
Yes. "Oh, boy."
When I asked Adler why, if he didn't advocate assassination and didn't believe Israel was actually considering it, he wrote a column saying he believed that the option was "on the table," he asked for a minute to compose himself and call me back. He did a few moments later, and said, "I wrote it to see what kind of reaction I was going to get from readers."
And what was the reaction? "We've gotten a lot of calls and emails."
Nothing from the Secret Service, though. Yet.
UPDATE: Adler has told JTA that he "regrets" the column and plans to publish an apology. Oh, and the Secret Service says it will "make all appropriate, investigative follow-up in regard to this matter," according to ABC News.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Gaza youth hear about Israel lobby’s role from Abunimah via Skype
Mondowiess
Yousef M. Aljamal
For the second week in a row, the Center for Political Development Studies holds a video link on the role of the Zionist lobby in US elections. Ali Abunimah, the founder of The Electronic Intifada, joined Gaza activists via Skype and emphasized the reasons for this "unshakable" relation between Israel and the US, which is known to Palestinians more than any other nation in the world.
"The reason of this would be briefly put up into two theories. Some people say Israel plays an important role in U.S imperialism, in allowing it to control the Middle East and its resources. Meanwhile, there are other people (theory) that say there are powerful organizations and networks that consider support for Israel very important and they influence the politics of the United States through elections and contributions to political campaigns to make candidates adopt to Israel's position," he emphasized.
Still, America is a country of institutions and it has its own political interests, so that no one can say Israel controls all walks of life there, or it gets its way to everything it wants.
"We have seen a historical battle in the United States over the role of Israel and the Israeli lobby and it's focus on Iran more than Palestine, where there is a lot of pressure from pro-Israel groups to take a very hard line towards Iran and even to launch a war against it.
Some of these battles are taking place behind the scenes. There is a growing feeling in the United States that Israel is turning into a burden and a problem for the United States. That’s why America is favoring a diplomatic solution to this issue. The is an emerging idea that Israel and US interests are not identical and conflict with each other," he added.
General David Petraeus was quoted, saying the activities of Israel are making the position of the US harder. There is a conflict about the value of Israel to the United States, and the Israel lobby is worried about this and they are fighting to maintain the idea that Israel and the United States have the same interests.
"Palestinians are few in number, though they take an important place in the primary elections, which asserts the role of the Zionist lobby. A candidate called Palestinians invented [people] while another went further by saying they never existed at all," Abunimah clarified.
Yousef M. Aljamal
For the second week in a row, the Center for Political Development Studies holds a video link on the role of the Zionist lobby in US elections. Ali Abunimah, the founder of The Electronic Intifada, joined Gaza activists via Skype and emphasized the reasons for this "unshakable" relation between Israel and the US, which is known to Palestinians more than any other nation in the world.
"The reason of this would be briefly put up into two theories. Some people say Israel plays an important role in U.S imperialism, in allowing it to control the Middle East and its resources. Meanwhile, there are other people (theory) that say there are powerful organizations and networks that consider support for Israel very important and they influence the politics of the United States through elections and contributions to political campaigns to make candidates adopt to Israel's position," he emphasized.
Still, America is a country of institutions and it has its own political interests, so that no one can say Israel controls all walks of life there, or it gets its way to everything it wants.
"We have seen a historical battle in the United States over the role of Israel and the Israeli lobby and it's focus on Iran more than Palestine, where there is a lot of pressure from pro-Israel groups to take a very hard line towards Iran and even to launch a war against it.
Some of these battles are taking place behind the scenes. There is a growing feeling in the United States that Israel is turning into a burden and a problem for the United States. That’s why America is favoring a diplomatic solution to this issue. The is an emerging idea that Israel and US interests are not identical and conflict with each other," he added.
General David Petraeus was quoted, saying the activities of Israel are making the position of the US harder. There is a conflict about the value of Israel to the United States, and the Israel lobby is worried about this and they are fighting to maintain the idea that Israel and the United States have the same interests.
"Palestinians are few in number, though they take an important place in the primary elections, which asserts the role of the Zionist lobby. A candidate called Palestinians invented [people] while another went further by saying they never existed at all," Abunimah clarified.
Monday, January 16, 2012
The Times admits it deep-sixed Ron Paul
NJ.com
Paul Mushine
It's been obvious for almost a year now that the New York Times was participating in the media conspiracy to kill Ron Paul's candidacy by pretending it didn't exist.
Nice to see them admit it.
In Sunday's Times, public editor Arthur S. Brisbane wrote of the decision to deep-six the only candidate in the race who has anything interesting to say.
Here's what Brisbane wrote:
Brisbane is showing admirable candor here. Reporters do indeed have to find a way to frame a story to make it interesting to the audience.
But he's wrong about Ron Paul. There was a "coherent narrative" to his race from the very beginning. Ron Paul consistently ran in the top four in the polls. He had a ground game and fund-raising operation second only to Mitt Romney. Not only that, but polls showed he was the only candidate other than Romney who was close to Barack Obama in head-to-head polls.
It was obvious from the beginning that Paul was going be a factor in the race. In the summer, when he finished in a statistical dead heat at the top of the Iowa straw poll, it became obvious tha Paul was going to do well in the Iowa caucuses as well, since they are just a glorified version of the straw poll. Yet the Times joined with other papers in ignoring his finish and trumpeting Michele Bachmann.
As with Sarah Palin, the members of the media love to play up the role of attractive but not-so-bright women in the Republican Party. It makes Republicans look like a bunch of rubes. Alas, Bachmann was not as popular with the voters as she was with reporters looking for a way to caricature the GOP.
As for Santorum, Brisbane makes a mistake in lumping him in with Paul. Santorum lingered near the bottom of early polls and it truly was a surprise when he rose in Iowa. Paul's showing there and in New Hampshire was entirely predictable; Santorum's wasn't.
And Santorum said nothing in the debates that made him stand out. He never departed from the party line of promising both budget cuts and a bigger military.
Paul Mushine
 |
| Ron Paul campaigns outside the Statehouse in Trenton with state Senator Michael J. Doherty |
Nice to see them admit it.
In Sunday's Times, public editor Arthur S. Brisbane wrote of the decision to deep-six the only candidate in the race who has anything interesting to say.
Here's what Brisbane wrote:
In a Dec. 4 column, I wrote about journalists’ reflex to impose their own narrative on a race, a dynamic that can eclipse what candidates are actually saying. Well, as last week’s Iowa caucuses demonstrated, the Republican nomination contest steadfastly resists any coherent narrative.
Early in the campaign, The Times decided to remain low key in its coverage of Ron Paul, the libertarian Texas congressman, and Rick Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator. Their strong showings on Tuesday, following the serial derailments of other contenders, showed just how hard it is for the paper to read the plotline of this contest.
Brisbane is showing admirable candor here. Reporters do indeed have to find a way to frame a story to make it interesting to the audience.
But he's wrong about Ron Paul. There was a "coherent narrative" to his race from the very beginning. Ron Paul consistently ran in the top four in the polls. He had a ground game and fund-raising operation second only to Mitt Romney. Not only that, but polls showed he was the only candidate other than Romney who was close to Barack Obama in head-to-head polls.
It was obvious from the beginning that Paul was going be a factor in the race. In the summer, when he finished in a statistical dead heat at the top of the Iowa straw poll, it became obvious tha Paul was going to do well in the Iowa caucuses as well, since they are just a glorified version of the straw poll. Yet the Times joined with other papers in ignoring his finish and trumpeting Michele Bachmann.
As with Sarah Palin, the members of the media love to play up the role of attractive but not-so-bright women in the Republican Party. It makes Republicans look like a bunch of rubes. Alas, Bachmann was not as popular with the voters as she was with reporters looking for a way to caricature the GOP.
As for Santorum, Brisbane makes a mistake in lumping him in with Paul. Santorum lingered near the bottom of early polls and it truly was a surprise when he rose in Iowa. Paul's showing there and in New Hampshire was entirely predictable; Santorum's wasn't.
And Santorum said nothing in the debates that made him stand out. He never departed from the party line of promising both budget cuts and a bigger military.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
ABC Debate Treatment of Mitt Romney vs Ron Paul
Everyone has known for quite some time now that the media bias towards Ron Paul has been occurring without even a shadow of doubt, so add this one to your playlist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
