Reality Reversal: It’s Really the Jews Who are Discriminated Against, says Jerusalem Editor

By Richard Edmondson

Caroline Glick is an editor at the Jerusalem Post. In the talk above, she seems to have forgotten who is occupying whom. Glick obviously believes it is Palestinians who are discriminating against Jews, rather than the other way around.

“What they (Palestinians) are saying essentially is that Jews should not be allowed to live there just because they are Jews.”

Glick tries to advance an argument that Israeli settlements are not an obstacle to peace, that the real problem is Palestinian racism, and she alleges that a Palestinian state in “Judea and Smaria” would be so “inherently bigoted” that Jews wouldn’t even be “allowed to live there.” She further claims that dismantling the illegal settlements that have been built would be tantamount to “ethnic cleansing.”

Are Palestinians calling for a state that would be ethnically cleansed of all Jews? I have never heard any Palestinian official issue such a call, but Glick is repeating a talking point that has been made by other Israelis, including Benjamin Netanyahu.

This is not simply a case of twisting the truth; it is standing reality on its head.

Three questions here should be asked:

  1. Does a sovereign state have the right to deport aliens who have entered the country illegally?
  2. Should sovereign states have the right to set immigration policies based upon concerns about national security and public safety?
  3. Should a sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank, were one to be established, have the right to expel settlers who have carried out, for instance, arson attacks on Palestinian homes, or poisoned Palestinian livestock, or destroyed olive trees?

The answer to all three of these questions is yes. But this is not the same as saying “No Jews allowed.” To the contrary, were Jews who have demonstrated their good will, and there are a number of these, a few of them quite prominent and whose names come readily to mind–were Jews such as these to apply for residence permits or even citizenship in the new Palestinian state, would they be turned down? The answer almost surely is no. But in Glick’s view “this is a racket.” She goes on:

Jews don’t have civil rights. We’re not allowed to live wherever we have property rights to build–just because we’re Jewish? And this is a moral argument? This is a reasonable argument? This is establishing what, exactly? Ethnic purity? This is where we’ve come to?

But wait–is it not Israel which demands to be recognized as a “Jewish and democratic state”?

Recently Stuart Littlewood published a commentary on a publication put out by a pro-Israel advocacy group called The Israel Project. The publication is a 116 page booklet entitled “Global Language Dictionary,” a document intended as a “guide to visionary leaders who are on the front lines of fighting the media war for Israel,” as an official with The Israel Project describes it.

Basically you could think of this as a manual designed to teach people how to stand reality on its head. Littlewood’s commentary on the Global Language Dictionary can be found here. The full PDF is here. Included is a whole chapter devoted to settlements. The following, described as “the best settlement argument,” provides the opener for the chapter:

“If we are to have real peace, then Israelis and Palestinians will have to live side by side. The idea that anywhere that you have Palestinians there can’t be any Jews, that some areas have to be Jew-free, is a racist idea. We don’t say that we have to cleanse out Arabs from Israel. They are citizen (sic) of Israel. They enjoy equal rights. We cannot see why it is that peace requires that any Palestinian area would require a kind of ethnic cleansing to remove all Jews. We don’t accept it. Cleansing by either side against either side is unacceptable.”

You’ll notice that the future state of Palestine is referred to not as a country or nation, but as a “Palestinian area,” and that the passage fails to take into account any Jewish responsibility for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian villages that occurred in 1948, or for the near 70 years of home demolitions and denial of building permits that have occurred since. Moreover, the idea that Palestinian citizens of Israel enjoy “equal rights”–as this “best argument” does claim–is preposterous to say the least. The chapter goes on:

The settlements are the single toughest issue for Israel and the hostility towards them and towards Israeli policy that appears to encourage settlement activity is clearly evident. Unless and until Israeli government policy changes, here’s the best communication approach:

The document then proceeds to list four talking points, followed by tips on how to obfuscate the whole issue with such irrelevant declarations as:

“Peace is not just about settlements. It’s about jobs, prosperity, and hope for all sides of the conflict–for Palestinians and Israelis alike. Every Palestinian child deserves a better future, and so does every Israeli child. If we can agree on that, and stop doing those things that hurt our children, we can start on the road to mutual understanding and mutual respect.”

And if you’ve any doubts this manual for standing reality on its head was written as a guide for fooling Americans especially, then consider that it also advises readers to:

Emphasize solutions wherein nobody has to leave their own homes. Americans are far more favorable towards solutions that are “just a redrawing of borders on the map” and do not require anyone–Israeli or Palestinian alike–to leave their own homes, businesses, and communities. Again–mutuality and the right to live in your home are the key themes to weave in.

Basically, the whole approach comes down to a simple tactic: accuse the Palestinians of being racists while portraying Israeli Jews as the very embodiment of liberal tolerance. And this in effect is the approach Glick takes in the video above. Glick, of course, is Jewish, and the Jerusalem Post, where she works, is one of the most prominent newspapers in Israel. In other words, she is a Jew who holds a high-ranking position in a major media outlet (albeit in Israel).

A couple of days ago I put up a post that included the following graphic:

 photo medialies_zpsefpioihs.gif

One picture is worth a thousand words, as they say, and the artwork provides a perfect illustration of how the western mainstream media basically stand reality on its head. In addition to the Palestine-Israel conflict, other areas in which mainstream media news organizations are hard at work inverting truth into its mirror opposite include:

  • Syria, where a democratically elected president is depicted as a dictator and where terrorist, head-chopping cannibals are rendered as “moderate rebels” deserving of Western support;
  • Russia–accused of “aggression” even as NATO builds bases and holds war game exercises on its borders;
  • Ukraine, a country portrayed as a peace-loving democracy but which in reality is ruled by a US-installed puppet government that has been rejected by a sizeable portion of the population–ethnic Russians who have broken away and established a de facto independent state in the country’s eastern region

So far as I’m aware, “Global Language Dictionaries” have not been published in these other areas, but the pattern of “reality reversal” is the same. Reporting on 9/11 has also followed the same pattern, with the “terror attack” vs. “false flag attack” dichotomy serving as the antipodal opposites, and in this case the equivalent of a “Global Language Dictionary” has been published–in the form of the official 9/11 report. The most obvious tip-off that the media are engaged in willful deception on 9/11 is the stubborn and persistent refusal to report the overwhelming body of evidence assembled by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth pointing to controlled demolition as the cause of the collapse of Building 7, but were the media to report even a sliver of this information it would cause the whole house of cards to fall.

So here we have a small group of people who together enjoy the vast majority of ownership and/or executive control of the mainstream media, now engaged, in almost perfect sync with each other, in a number of deceptions so utter and absolute that the truth in each case is almost literally inverted.

Never before in history has one group of people exercised such power.

isrlunatics

So what can be said of such people? Well, a starting point might be their “singularity.”  That at least is the word used in a book review, here, published by Daniel Lazare, a liberal Jewish writer whose articles have appeared in The Nation.

“Eventually, nearly every discussion of the Jews, pro or con, sympathetic or hostile, gets around to their alleged singularity,” Lazare writes in an article which poses the question: “Are the Jews Unique?”

Jews, he says, have always been “stubborn, clannish and standoffish, and even when they stopped wearing those funny clothes in the modern era and tried to blend in–especially when they tried to blend in–something about them remained at odds with the larger society.”

The article, as I say, is a book review. The book Lazare is reviewing is The Jewish Century, by Yuri Slezkine, a Russian-American Jew who holds a faculty position at the University of California at Berkeley. Slezkine’s thesis is that the human race is comprised of two different types of people, “Apollonians,” or food producers, and “Mercurians,” who provide a variety of services to the food producers. Comments Lazare by way of his review:

In Greek mythology, Apollo is the god of livestock and agriculture and hence of settled existence in general. Hermes–Mercury to the Romans–is, by contrast, a trickster god who serves as “the patron of rule breakers, border crossers, and go-betweens,” i.e., less permanent types who prefer to live by their wits. Rather than settling down and blending in, the Mercurians seek the opposite goal: to keep themselves apart by deliberately cultivating strangeness‚ strange customs, strange languages and so on.

In what seems to be an exercise in public relations (perhaps not unlike the Global Language Dictionary), Slezkine argues that the Jews are not the only population group that has played the Mecurian role, and he names others, including the Koli such’ok people of medieval Korea along with a number of tribal groups in northern Africa, who have played similar roles–but of course none of these peoples presently find themselves perched at the pinnacle of world power.

So in evaluating Glick’s comments in the video above, along with similar speeches and commentaries by other Zionist speakers, should we perhaps keep in mind the “trickster” and “Mercurian” tendencies which may be at play?

Back in December I wrote and posted an article entitled “Light and Darkness,” which included a commentary on the following passage from the first epistle of John:

Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

Modern day scholars, as I noted, have argued that the “antichhrists” John referred to were the Gnostics, but the early Gnostics–as I also noted–held a reverence for Christ, and I argued that the reference in reality is to Jews–specifically Jewish Christians who, at the end of the first century, abandoned the faith and returned to Judaism. This is what John means by “they went out from us, but they did not really belong to us.”

Jewish Christians were persecuted (by other Jews), thrown out of the synagogue, and following the sacking of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 AD, the intensity of these persecutions increased. The “Mercurians” apparently wanted nothing to do with any teaching about loving one another or seeing all peoples as fellow children of God.

In the video above, Glick seems well aware that the settlements are “the single toughest issue for Israel,” and she lays the blame for the turbulent situation on the Palestinians, the Egyptians, the Iraqis, Syrians, the British–everybody pretty much is at fault…except of course for the Jews.

And so we find ourselves in a world of inverted realities–where Palestinians who have had their lands stolen are the “racists” and Jewish settlers who believe that “one million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail” are absolved of blame; where Russia is an “aggressor”; where terrorists are “moderates”; where light becomes darkness and where darkness is celebrated.

Haaretz Confirms: Britain Has Been Operating As An Israeli Puppet Within The EU

June 26, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

Reported by Gilad Atzmon

 “With Brexit, Israel Loses a Major Asset in the European Union,” Haaretz reports today. 

 “Britain helped moderate and balance EU decisions about the peace process, blunt criticism and even harness the member states against anti-Israel moves at the UN; voices sympathetic to the Palestinian cause could now become more dominant.”

The Israelis have started to recognize that the Jewish State:

“has lost a significant asset in the European Union…, Britain leaving would not serve Israeli interests, especially on the Palestinian issue.”

But why was Britain an Israeli asset? How was Britain reduced to act as an Israeli colony? Simple. British foreign affairs are dominated by the Jewish Lobby.

According to the Israeli paper, PM David Cameron met leaders of the Jewish community in London a few days before the referendum.

Cameron asked the Jewish oligarchs,

“do you want Britain – Israel’s greatest friend – in there opposing boycotts, opposing the campaign for divestment and sanctions, or do you want us outside the room, powerless to affect the discussion that takes place?”

At least 52% of the Brits felt neglected by Cameron’s government. Clearly the Jewish community leaders weren’t. Their foreign interests were looked after.

However, the Jews were not totally convinced by Cameron’s plea.

“Quite a few of the participants in the discussions argued that Britain’s leaving the EU would actually serve Israel’s interests.”

The official cited one argument to the effect that

“Britain’s leaving would considerably weaken the EU and its institutions, reduce its international influence, and take the sting out of its Israeli-Palestinian decisions.”

Another argument was that

“Britain’s leaving would undermine the EU’s stability and require its institutions and members to direct their energy toward unifying the ranks, rather than toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

Maybe Brussels needs to familiarize itself with the elements within the UK Jewish lobby that seek to weaken or even dissolve the EU. I guess that the Brits can see that their politicians repeatedly compromise their national interests. The emergence of Boris Jonson, Michael Gov and Theresa May is not going to change this fact. The Israeli press has already confirmed that these three are the most devoted Zionist enthusiasts in the Kingdom and beyond.

The Blood of the Saints, Pure Evil, and Zionist Preferences

yabroud1

Ruins left by terrorists at the Greek Catholic Church of Our Lady in the Syrian town of Yabroud in March of 2014

ISIS Sends Parents Rape Video
Plus Body Parts of Their Kidnapped Daughters

“In Syria, if the choice is between Iran and the Islamic State, I choose the Islamic State.”

–Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon, as quoted January 20, 2016 in Newsweek

“Al-Qaida control over Syria would be preferable to a victory by Assad over the rebels.”

–Senior Israeli officials, quoted by Israel Hayom in 2013

“The initial message about the Syrian issue was that we always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren’t backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran…We understand that they are pretty bad guys…still, the greatest danger to Israel is by the strategic arc that extends from Tehran, to Damascus to Beirut. And we saw the Assad regime as the keystone in that arc. That is a position we had well before the outbreak of hostilities in Syria. With the outbreak of hostilities we continued to want Assad to go.”

–Michael Oren, in 2013 interview with the Jerusalem Post

By Richard Edmondson

Some people have a hard time grasping the concept of “pure evil.” It has such a surreal tendency to boggle the mind that for most people, the notions of “purity” and “evil” are seen as opposites, and the fact that you can combine the two together, and in so doing derive an extract, or a concentrate, so hideous it gives rise to primordial fears in the heart as well as a sickening feeling in the gut–well, this is something that busy, workaday people seldom contemplate.

So perhaps that’s how we might explain the comments above by Israeli officials in their preferential views of ISIS–is that these officials simply haven’t grasped the concept of pure evil.

The other possible explanation, of course, is that they have grasped it all too well.

Events testified to at a recent conference on the plight of Christians in the Middle East would suggest that some of those giving testimony have seen pure evil–up close and personal.

sleman3

Jacqueline Isaac (L) with Samia Sleman, a Yazidi girl who at the age of 13 was kidnapped and raped by ISIS terrorists

sleman4

And I would think that their views on the matter might be slightly different from those expressed by the leaders of the Jewish state.

“I was in captivity for six months and twelve days, in the hands of the Islamic State,” said fifteen-year-old Samia Sleman during the #WeAreN2016 international conference, held April 27-30 in New York. Sleman is a Yazidi girl who was kidnapped by ISIS from her village of Hardan, Iraq in August of 2014. She was thirteen years old at the time.

“They raped and violated myself and the girls that were with me in captivity. There were thousands of Yazidi girls in captivity in this headquarters, then they separated us into two different groups,” she said, adding that girls as young as seven and eight years were raped, while older women, along with large numbers of Yazidi men, were killed.

The #WeAreN2016 conference was sponsored jointly by In Defense of Christians, CitizenGo, and the Vatican’s permanent mission to the United Nations. The “N” in the name stands for the Arabic letter “nun,” often spray painted on the homes of Christians by ISIS terrorists when they capture an area. The letter is a reference to “Nazarenes,” and the people in such homes usually are killed or forced to pay a special tax known as the Jizya.

A report on the conference by the Catholic News Agency described the testimonies given as “graphic, brutal and raw.” And perhaps the rawest of all was that of California Attorney Jacqueline Isaac, who works with Roads to Success, a nonprofit organization providing aid to Middle Eastern refugees, and who spoke of the calamity that overtook one family in particular.

“They got a knock on their door. They opened that door and they found plastic, black bags. The bags had the body parts of their daughters…and a video–a video of their daughters being raped and tortured,” Isaac said. “They’re parents. They’re just like us. They’re parents. They’re mothers, they’re fathers, these are not numbers.”

Another story told concerned that of a Christian woman in Mosul whose daughter died when the family home was torched by ISIS, while three Christian clergy, Monsignor Jean-Clément Jeanbart, Father Rodrigo Miranda, and Sister María Guadalupe, spoke of ghastly events in Syria, especially in the city of Aleppo.

“We have seen things you cannot understand,” said Jeanbart. “We have seen people killed because they were Christians. We have seen bishops abducted, priests abducted–myself I have been three times in danger of death, two times in my archbishopric, one on my way to Beirut.”

But perhaps the most powerful presentation of all was that given by Sister María, who discussed not only the agony of the people of Aleppo, but also the outright fictions about the conflict pedaled by the media. Her talk is one of the most engaging and riveting  I have seen in recent memory, and what it reveals about the courage and resilience of Aleppo’s Christian martyrs is quite stunning.

It’s interesting that Michael Oren, who formerly served as Israeli ambassador to the US, would express such concern over what he refers to as a “strategic arc that extends from Tehran, to Damascus to Beirut.” Oren is of course referring to the governments of Iran and Syria and to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

I’m sure Israeli intelligence is well aware–and probably even Michael Oren himself knows this as well–that Christians in the Middle East have nothing to fear from either the Syrian or Iranian governments, and I’m guessing they equally are aware that Hezbollah has even forged a political alliance with a Maronite Christian party in Lebanon.

In fact, when I visited Beirut in 2014, I saw the St. Joseph Church, located right in the heart of the Hezbollah neighborhood of Haret Hreik–and I saw no visible sign the church had been vandalized. It was well maintained, looking just as it does in this photo:

maryoussef

No surprise, then, that Hezbollah issued a statement in 2014 denouncing crimes against religious sites–a statement that of course received no coverage in the mainstream media.

Besides posing no threat to Christians, the governments of Syria and Iran and Hezbolla, the “strategic arc” Michael Oren is so paranoid over, have, in combination with Russian air support, done the most by far to defeat ISIS–morethan all 59 countries making up the US-led coalition combined.

In addition to describing the attempts on his life, Jeanbart also talked about the Syrian government of Bashar Assad, defining it as “pluralistic” and “nonconfessional”–describing it as well as a government that had been in need of some changes and reforms, but insisting that these changes could have been achieved peacefully through the political system.

“Changing a few things, mending the Constitution, changing the government–and everyone would have been okay,” he said. “Why did they do all this war to destroy everything in Syria?”

It is an excellent question. Why did they? Another excellent question is why, instead of the present government in Syria, Israeli officials would prefer to see a Middle Eastern nation bordering their own state run by a bunch of blood thirsty maniacs–maniacs with a fondness for dismembering Christian children, and stuffing their body parts in plastic bags, and leaving them on the doorsteps of their families. It almost sounds like an anti-Semitic “blood libel,” doesn’t it? In fact, if you were to hear such a statement made about Israeli leaders in another context you’d likely leap to the conclusion that that must surely be what it is.

 photo mdtrtnetanterrst_zpswdr70kxg.jpg

But it does appear as if this is what they would prefer. Moreover, in addition to the statements quoted above, we’ve had a number of reports of terrorists being treated in Israeli hospitals, while the UN has released reportsdocumenting contacts between Israeli forces and Syrian armed opposition groups in which the Israelis were observed providing assistance to the militants. The reports were compiled by the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force.

“UNDOF sporadically observed armed members of the opposition interacting with IDF across the ceasefire line in the vicinity of United Nations position 85,” said one of them.

A couple of questions here are worth asking:

1. Is Israeli intelligence convinced that such things as “moderate rebels” actually in exist in Syria? If not, then,

2. Have the Israelis intentionally provided assistance, including weapons, to Syrian armed groups, and have they done this knowing the weapons would end up in the hands of ISIS?

Numerous reports have appeared in the past year or so of so-called “moderate rebels” defecting over to Al-Nusra or ISIS and taking their US-supplied weapons with them. In fact, the phenomenon has been discussed in a couple of recent articles.

“While Washington is pouring billions of US taxpayer dollars into various training and arming programs in the Middle East and Central Asia, the US-backed fighters regularly defect to Islamists – Daesh, al-Qaeda, Taliban – taking their weapons and invaluable knowledge to ‘the dark side,’” comments Gordon Duff in a May 5 article published at Veterans Today.

The New Eastern Outlook also published a commentary on the issue, written by Martin Berger, who speculates that the defections are in reality a “planned event.” The idea, says Berger, is that those who’ve undergone US training are then able to pass their knowledge on to the members of the respective terrorist organizations “at a time when Washington was unable to train them openly.”

It’s not an altogether implausible theory. As Berger notes, last August it was revealed that the Pentagon had spent $42 million on two months of training for a group of moderates, half of whom were “immediately” captured by Al-Nusra and agreed to defect.

The only idea that’s farfetched is that a ragtag group of clueless (or maybe diabolical) misfits could arise from out of nowhere, wreak havoc upon the cradle of civilization, flood the Internet with slickly-produced videos…all with no backing or support whatever from any government, and with the intent of killing every “infidel” they can get their hands on but without launching an attack on Israel.

It would seem that these ever-buzzing, ever-replenished minions (of whomever) have a decided predilection for the blood of saints.

Nagorno-Karabakh and the Passover Feast: Hollywood’s Glorification of the Arms Trade

divpack

David Packouz (L) and Efraim Diveroli

By Richard Edmondson

From Ukraine to North Africa to the Middle East, and most recently in the Caucasus with the outbreak of hostilities between Azerbaijan and Armenia, death and destruction are on the prowl in multiple wars, while at the same time international laws governing armed conflict are rapidly being cast onto the rubbish heap.

Many of these wars have been instigated by powers outside the countries in which they are being fought, and the tide of violence threatening to engulf the world now is unprecedented in history. You would think that at such a time, Hollywood would have better taste than to make a movie glorifying the arms trade.

But of course, you would be wrong.

Scheduled for release in August, “War Dogs” is based on the real life story of Efraim Diveroli and David Packouz, two twenty-something Jews who got involved in the arms trade and ended up bidding on Pentagon contracts, in the process scoring deals to supply weapons, ammo, and other military equipment to forces the US was arming in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Their story was told in a 2011 Rolling Stone article which detailed their passion for money-making, recreational drug use, and their predilection for shady business dealings. “Packouz and Diveroli met at Beth Israel Congregation, the largest Orthodox synagogue in Miami Beach,” the story informs us, and then goes on to describe how they landed some lucrative contracts, including one worth $300 million, all while operating a small company known as AEY, a shell company Diveroli’s father had set up. All of this was in the years 2005-2007.

For decades, weapons had been stockpiled in warehouses throughout the Balkans and Eastern Europe for the threat of war against the West, but now arms dealers were selling them off to the highest bidder. The Pentagon needed access to this new aftermarket to arm the militias it was creating in Iraq and Afghanistan. The trouble was, it couldn’t go into such a murky underworld on its own. It needed proxies to do its dirty work — companies like AEY. The result was a new era of lawlessness…

One evening, Diveroli picked Packouz up in his Mercedes, and the two headed to a party at a local rabbi’s house, lured by the promise of free booze and pretty girls. Diveroli was excited about a deal he had just completed, a $15 million contract to sell old Russian-manufactured rifles to the Pentagon to supply the Iraqi army. He regaled Packouz with the tale of how he had won the contract, how much money he was making and how much more there was to be made….

Diveroli, by the way, is the nephew of celebrity rabbi Shmuley Boteach, a staunch supporter of Israel and author of several books, including one entitled “Kosher Sex”–a book in which he “breaks down sexual taboos” while  pioneering “a revolutionary approach to sex, marriage, and personal relationships, drawing on traditional Jewish wisdom.” Boteach has also run inflammatory ads in the New York Times defending Israel, and in 2012 was bankrolled by Las Vegas casino magnate Sheldon Adelson in an unsuccessful campaign for Congress.

So in other words, while Boteach was doing the TV talk show circuit advising Americans how to improve their sex lives, his nephew Diveroli was finding his niche in the “murkey underworld” of arms trafficking.

Above all, Diveroli cared about the bottom line. “Efraim was a Republican because they started more wars,” Packouz says. “When the United States invaded Iraq, he was thrilled. He said to me, ‘Do I think George Bush did the right thing for the country by invading Iraq? No. But am I happy about it? Absofuckinglutely.’ He hoped we would invade more countries because it was good for business.”

The big $300 million deal they landed found them purchasing stocks of Chinese-made ammunition in the Balkans and transporting them to Afghanistan, but a US embargo against Chinese weapons meant the whole thing had to be carried out clandestinely. The ammo was repackaged in cardboard boxes with no Chinese lettering. But some of the ammo was quite old, a number of the crates were infested with termites, and the two ended up being indicted for fraud and pleading guilty. And now we have a forthcoming Hollywood movie about their endogamic escapades.

It’s tempting to dismiss “War Dogs” as just another piece of Hollywood trash, but of course it comes as millions are coping with the destruction of homes and lives in the bogus war on terror and as whole nations are being torn apart. In Syria, the US has aligned itself with so-called “moderate” rebels, equipping them with vast stocks of weapons, many of which have ended up in the hands of ISIS, while in Yemen, we have assisted Saudi Arabia in an air campaign which, as of January 2016, had resulted in 2,795 killed and 5,324 wounded.  At least 62 civilians were killed by coalition airstrikes in December alone, reports the UN, which was more than twice the number killed in the previous month. Many others have been left homeless.

yemenigirl

A girl drinks from a broken street pipe in Yemen, where millions are without regular access to drinking water

But this hasn’t stopped the US from continuing to fuel the fire, so to speak. According to Defense News, the State Department has facilitated $33 billion worth of weapons sales to its Arab Gulf allies since May of 2015. The weapons–including anti-armor missiles, attack helicopters, and ballistic missile defense capabilities–have been sold to the six countries that make up the Gulf Cooperation Council, or GCC. These would of course be some of the same countries that have been supplying arms to ISIS while also carrying out war crimes in Yemen.

“In addition, the U.S. government and industry also delivered 4,500 precision-guided munitions to the GCC countries in 2015, including 1,500 taken directly from U.S. military stocks — a significant action given our military’s own needs,” said David McKeeby, a spokesman with the State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs.

How much of this ordnance may have ended up in the hands of not-so-moderate terrorists is unclear, but in December of 2015, Amnesty International published a report entitled “Taking Stock: The Arming of the Islamic State,” which found that the terrorist army “now deploys a substantial arsenal of arms and ammunition, designed or manufactured in more than 25 countries.”

A lot of this was looted or captured from poorly secured Iraqi military stocks, says the report, but illicit weapons transactions also seem to have played a considerable role in building up the ISIS arsenal–and some of the “chain of custody” evidence cited in the report, including a cache of weapons transferred from Croatia to the Free Syrian Army, sounds almost eerily similar to the sort of shady weapons trafficking operation run by Packouz and Diveroli.

Of course there is the old adage about art imitating life, and, on some level the fact that Hollywood would make a film about two Jews and then go on to entitle it “War Dogs” is perhaps not surprising. This, keep in mind, coming at a time when evidence of Israel’s support for terrorists in Syria is as clear as the hand in front of your face. And of course who could forget the lovable Victoria Nuland and her famous “f**k-the-EU” comment, mouthed off at a time when her State Department was busy engineering a coup in Ukraine?

In fact, efforts by Zionist Jews to create instability and instigate wars are getting to be about as common as fireflies on a summer night. They’re not always easy to spot, but you know they’re out there because they occasionally involuntarily light up, as when someone like Nuland gets caught in a taped phone conversation.

And now it looks like certain fireflies have moved into the Caucasus where they seem to be taking advantage of a long-simmering dispute between Azerbaijan and Armenia over the region of Nagorno-Karabakh. On April 2, intense fighting broke out followed by a series of charges, countercharges, claims and counterclaims, made by both sides. According to the Armenians, it started with an offensive launched by Azerbaijani troops using tanks and artillery. Azerbaijan, on the other hand, insists it was responding to large-caliber weapons fire from inside the ethnic Armenian-controlled Nagorno-Karabakh area. So who is telling the truth? Or are both sides lying?

Hard to say for sure, but a couple of knowns are worth mentioning: A) Armenia is closely allied with Russia, and, B) Azerbaijan, too, has ties, including trade ties, with Russia, but it also is closely aligned with Turkey and maintains extensivetrade relations with Israel. And the trade with Israel has been especially heavy in the area of military procurement.

Israeli drones, anti-aircraft and missile defense systems have been supplied to Azerbaijan in the wake of a $1.6 billion agreement struck between the two countries in 2012. Israeli companies are also active in the Azerbaijani telecommunications, agriculture, water supply medical technology, and energy sectors. That makes for a lot of sayanim on the ground inside inside a relatively small country.

Perhaps no surprise, then, that Armenian forces shot down an Israeli drone on April 2–the very day hostilities broke out.

The ThunderB drone is known for its light weight, 62 pounds, and its long flying time–25.5 hours–on a single tank of fuel. It is made by an Israeli company known as BlueBird, which reportedly may be about to be purchased by Elbit Systems.

And then on Tuesday came news of yet another Israeli drone spotted over Nagorno-Karabakh–this one believed to be a Harop drone, made by Israeli Aerospace Industries. The Harop is also known as a “suicide drone” in that rather than firing a missile at a target it simply becomes the missile itself, ramming the target and destroying it.

According to Gordon Duff, senior editor at Veterans Today, the key tounderstanding the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict is to recognize “that Azerbaijan is a client state of Israel and the CIA.” He adds that Azerbaijan has as well become “the regional operating center for Google Idea Groups,”  which he refers to as the “shadow CIA.”

Google Ideas was formed in 2010. At that time Google CEO Eric Schmidt tapped the State Department’s Jared Cohen to direct the new venture, dubbed as a “think/do tank.” In late 2015, Google was reorganized under a parent company called Alphabet, Inc., and in February of this year Google Ideas was rebranded as “Jigsaw”–although it is still run by Cohen and still affiliated with Google.

Cohen, by the way, is also an adjunct senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and during his years with the State Department (2006-2010) he worked closely with Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton, and became a strategic advisor in US policy toward Iran. Jigsaw’s mission is to “use technology to tackle the toughest geopolitical challenges, from countering violent extremism to thwarting online censorship to mitigating the threats associated with digital attacks,” says Schmidt.

Sounds nice, but a purview of Jigsaw’s website–fittingly kind of creepy and dark-looking–suggests that virtually all of the “activists” it has provided support to seem to be from countries with governments the US seeks to overthrow. And indeed, in 2012 Wikileaks released a cache of emails concerning Cohen’s activities in the Middle East, including one, apparently written by Cohen himself, in which he discusses efforts to stir up trouble in Iran:

I wanted to follow-up and get a sense of your latest thinking on the proposed March trip to UAE, Azerbaijan, and Turkey. The purpose of this trip is to exclusively engage the Iranian community to better understand the challenges faced by Iranians as part of one of our Google Ideas groups on repressive societies. Here is what we are thinking: Drive to Azerbaijan/Iranian border and engage the Iranian communities closer to the border (this is important because we need the Azeri Iranian perspective).

So here, it seems, we have Cohen basically setting up shop on the Iran-Azerbaijan border. It should be noted that both Azerbaijan and Armenia border Iran, while Azerbaijan also shares a border with Russia. A conflict breaking out in this region could easily spill over into Russia or Iran–both of which have called for the two warring parties to adhere to a 1994 ceasefire agreement.

But of course, such a spillover would advance certain geopolitical interests. For one thing, it would pose a dilemma for Russia at a time when it is engaged in Syria. Sergei Zheleznyak, vice speaker of the Russian state Duma, has voiced the view that a “third force” is behind developments in Nagorno-Karabakh. According to the Russian News Agency Tass:

“It is clear that the force that continues to fan the flames of war in the Middle East, Central Asia and the Caucasus dissatisfied with the peacekeeping and counter-terror success of Russia and our allies in Syria is interested in the speedy exacerbation of the protracted conflict in the Nagorno-Karabakh region,” the parliamentarian wrote on his Facebook page on Saturday.

According to Zheleznyak, “neither Azerbaijan nor Armenia essentially need this exacerbation now.” He noted that “there is every likelihood that this provocation has been organized by a third force,” adding that “information on its presence is beginning to leak out.” In view of this, he drew attention to the fact that “at night in the mountains it is enough to have a few trained armed persons who know the opposing sides’ balance of forces to provoke them to open reciprocal ‘reprisal’ fire.”

Most people probably assumed Zheleznyak, in talking about a “third force,” was referring to Turkey–and certainly Turkey’s downing of a Russian jet in Syria factors into the equation. But another element that perhaps figures even more prominently is the “clash of civilizations” that hardcore Zionists have long salivated over the thought of.

We might theorize that ISIS was created with a two-fold objective: one was to break apart Syria and bring about the overthrow of Bashar Assad, while the other was to jockey into existence a clash of civilizations between Christians and Muslims. In both of these objectives it has failed. Assad is still standing, and while the rise of ISIS certainly inflamed anti-Muslim sentiments in the West, it has not resulted in the all-out war between Christianity and Islam that would have played so well into the hands of the Jewish state.

But where the ISIS plan failed, the conflict in the Caucasus could well succeed. Armenia is predominantly a Christian state, while Azerbaijan is mostly Muslim. A war between these two could galvanize public opinion in the region along religious lines. Regional political alignments and the history of the Armenian genocide are also to be considered. Turkey, though sharing a border with Armenia, has openly sided with Azerbaijan. Russia, on the other hand, has remained officially neutral. However, an RT report filed April 5 shows journalist Murad Gazdiev reporting from inside Armenian Karabakh trenches.

genocide

Armenian genocide

So where is Israel in all of this? Officially it doesn’t seem to be saying much about it, but in May of 2015, the Jewish Daily Forward published an article entitled, “Why Israel’s Alliance with Azerbaijan is so Shortsighted.” The writer, Christopher Atamian, takes the Jewish state to task over its refusal to recognize the Armenian genocide as well as for its lucrative arms contract with Azerbaijan, a country he refers to as an “authoritarian regime that is fueling regional conflict.”

“This is the same country that attempted to wipe out the entire Armenian population of Nagorno Karabakh in 1991 before losing a bloody war against the Armenians,” he adds.

What he leaves unspoken, of course, is that Israel’s refusal to recognize the Armenian genocide is tantamount to holocaust denial. More than 1.5 million Armenians were massacred from the years 1915 to 1922, and the Jewish state’s silence on the matter became a particularly hot-button issue last year on the genocide’s 100th anniversary.

Zheleznyak, the Duma vice speaker, seems for his own part to be offering sage advice to both parties in the current conflict, noting that Russia’s president as well as its government agencies “urge Armenia and Azerbaijan to cease fire and not to allow to draw them into someone else’s insidious game, as long as it is still possible.”

“As long as it’s still possible” is of course the key question. The more people die, the further recede the possibilities of the regional players not getting trapped or caught up in the “insidious game”–and the greater  grow the chances of the conflict’s becoming the parabolic curve that ignites World War III.

Should that come to pass, maybe Diveroli and Packouz will vie for ringside seats–although it doesn’t appear they’ll especially want to sit next to each other. According to the article in Rolling Stone, the two had a major falling out.

“Listen, dude, if you f**k me, I’m going to f**k you,” one of them warned during an argument over money.

“Whatever,” replied the other.

One wonders why they didn’t name the movie “War Pigs” rather than “War Dogs.” Perhaps it wouldn’t have been kosher enough.

In the past year in Israel we’ve seen an arson attack on a Palestinian home which left a mother, father and their 18-month-old baby dead; we have seen a video of Jewish settlers dancing and celebrating the attack by stabbing a photo of the baby; we have observed continued expropriation of Palestinian land in the West Bank, including one of the biggest land grabs in recent years–579 acres near the Dead Sea; and more recently we have seen a second video showing an Israeli soldier executing a wounded Palestinian with a gunshot to the head.

The execution video showed Israeli soldier Elior Azaria pump a bullet into the head of 21-year-old Abdul Fattah Sharif, as he lay on the ground wounded and barely moving. The murder took place on Purim, the Jewish holiday which celebrates the massacre of thousands of Gentiles, as told of in the Book of Esther. The next holiday on the Jewish calendar is Passover, coming up on April 22-23. The significance of Passover is laid out in twelfth chapter of Exodus:

On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn–both men and animals–and I will bring judgement on all the gods of Egypt. I am the Lord. The blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are; and when I see the blood I will pass over you. No destructive plague will touch you when I strike Egypt.

This is a day you are to commemorate; for the generations to come you shall celebrate it as a festival to the Lord–a lasting ordinance…And when your children ask you, ‘What does this ceremony mean to you?’ then tell them, ‘It is the Passover sacrifice to the Lord, who passed over the houses of the Israelites in Egypt and spared our homes when he struck down the Egyptians.’

It seems that both Purim and Passover are in essence celebrations of the deaths of non-Jews. Suppose Gentiles observed holidays each year in which we celebratedJewish deaths? What do you suppose would be said of it?

Whatever one’s views of Judaism may be (there are some admirable sentiments expressed in the Old Testament as well as some repellent ones), Zionism has morphed from the simple idea of a homeland for a specific group of people into a supremacist ideology that has had appalling consequences–not only for its victims but also even for its adherents, dehumanizing them to a degree never thought imaginable.

Zionism is the great Passover feast that has become a celebration of war.

World Bank Warns of ’High Risk’ of Zionist-Palestinian Conflict

The World Bank warned of the “high risk” of renewed Zionist-Palestinian conflict if the political and economic status quo between the two sides persists, in a report released Tuesday.

“The persistence of this situation could potentially lead to political and social unrest,” it said.

“In short, the status quo is not sustainable and downside risks of further conflict and social unrest are high,” said the World Bank.

The percentage of the population living under the poverty line has reached 39 percent in Gaza and 16 percent in the West Bank.

It said the “Palestinians are getting poorer on average for the third year in a row. Donor support has significantly declined in recent years,” especially for the war-ravaged Gaza Strip.

Unemployment “remains high, particularly amongst Gaza’s youth where it exceeds 60 percent, and 25 percent of Palestinians currently live in poverty,” the World Bank said.

On the positive side, it said that “even without a final peace deal, there is substantial upside potential in the Palestinian economy,” provided the Zionist “restrictions” are lifted, especially on freedom of movement of people and goods.

“The blockade on Gaza imposed by countries neighboring the Strip needs to be lifted in a way that protects legitimate security concerns of those countries,” it said, referring to the Jewish state and Egypt.

The World Bank welcomed the Zionist measures to let more goods leave Gaza are welcome, but more needs to be done: only six percent of what left Gaza prior to the blockade is currently being allowed out.”

The report also hailed the “very good progress” made by the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority in reducing its fiscal deficit.

It said unemployment in the West Bank in the first half of 2015 had eased to 16 percent, down from 18 percent in the same period of last year, thanks to the growing number of Palestinians working in the occupied territories, which has reached 112,200.

“Even without a final peace deal, there is substantial upside potential in the Palestinian economy if existing agreements are implemented and restrictions lifted,” the World Bank said.

It forecast 2.9 percent growth in the Palestinian territories this year.

Source: AFP

29-09-2015 – 12:26 Last updated 29-09-2015 – 12:26


Related Articles

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  

 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

‘An Outsider’s Inside View’ of the Group That Zionists Loathe and Fear

bkreview_hezb

 

Book Review: Hezbollah: An Outsider’s Inside View
by Brenda Heard

Reviewed by Richard Edmondson

Hezbollah is routinely branded a “terrorist” organization by Western media, but if asked, most Americans would probably be hard-pressed to name a single terrorist act the group has committed (armed resistance against a military occupation of one’s country does not constitute terrorism).

Yet the media resolutely go on labeling the group with words like “extremist,” “militant,” “fanatic,” etc. in a deliberate effort to manipulate public opinion. Why?

In her book, Hezbollah: An Outsider’s Inside View,” Brenda Heard gives us an answer to that question. It is an answer that can be found in the words of dozens in the Resistance movement she has interviewed going back to the year 2006—when she first arrived in Lebanon in the immediate aftermath of the July War.

In this book we find the stories of Hezbollah fighters, its health care workers and other support personnel, as well as average, ordinary people in southern Lebanon, some of whom have lived through repeated Israeli onslaughts upon their country. All have a story to share, and make no mistake about it, some of these stories are deeply moving. They entail courage, endurance, sacrifices, and yes, the willingness to make the ultimate sacrifice.

Taken altogether, Heard paints a picture of a movement whose rank and file members are loyal to an ideal and also guided by a deep faith in God, along with a leadership that has, at least thus far, refused to be corrupted. From the perspective of Israel and the US, that’s a dangerous threat.

In other words, what Heard gives us is the story of Hezbollah the mainstream media doesn’t want us to hear.

“We emphasize and focus on integrity and honesty because our religion calls on us to do so,” says Sheik Naim Qassem, whose meeting with Heard is described in chapter four of the book. “To be Hezbollah, we must be frank with others. If we aren’t like that, then we would be something else, but not Hezbollah.”

Described by Heard as “a man at the core of Hezbollah,” Qassem is a co-founder of the organization and has served as its deputy secretary general since 1991. He is also the author of what might perhaps be described as the definitive, go-to book on the group, Hizbullah: The Story From Within, published in 2004. According to Qassem, “we find that the resistance fighter who fights is at the same time a university student, a homemaker, and has social relationships and personal relationships.” He refines the profile even further:

He goes to the ballot and to demonstrations. And he prays and acts in a very honest fashion. All of this is part of our duty. We can never be religious and not have morals in dealing with others. Praying is not enough. Praying is a means to behavior to steer us away from wrong doings.

Heard tells of her first visit to a Hezbollah resistance camp in southern Lebanon in the autumn of 2008, and in the process casts doubt on one of Israel’s most standard, boiler plate claims. “Had I not read allegations that the Resistance hid themselves amongst the civilian populations as shields?” she asks. “Was that not the justification cited for bombing civilian communities? Here I was on the threshold of a Resistance camp, and there was neither sight nor sound of any civilian. The birds were their only companions.”

The author ends up touring the camp in the company of a Hezbollah fighter named Abbas, who she finds helpful, friendly, and open. In fact, her reception in the camp shatters the media stereotypes we so often hear:

I found it ironic that the Western media stated time and again that the men of Hezbollah despised and shunned all things Western. They were supposed to be half-serious, half-crazed men full of hate and judgement. Yet here was a man at the heart of the Hezbollah Resistance, and he talked to me with respect and with kindness…I sensed a graciousness in Abbas, who seemed so proud of his work as he ushered us about the grounds, yet who at the same time seemed so humble when explaining his own role. I picked up a shell casing from the ground and asked if I could keep it. His eyes widened with delight and answered, “of course,” as though I’d merely popped by for a social visit and requested a second cup of tea.

Later, when Abbas walked Heard and her guide back to their car, he bade her farewell with the words, “May God bless you.”

Heard’s experiences are not dissimilar from my own encounters when I visited Beirut last year, during which time I spent several days in the city’s southern suburb of Dahiyeh. The people were friendly and more than willing to stop and offer help to a confused westerner. We are all accustomed to the lies and deceit of the mainstream media, yet I have come to suspect that one of the most malevolent deceits of all is the media’s attempts to equate Hezbollah with ISIS, for what Heard’s book by and large conveys is that the truth may just well be the opposite—and that Hezbollah, if anything, is the complete antithesis of ISIS.

In addition to Abbas and other Resistance people active in the struggle today, Heard also introduces us to Hezbollah veterans of previous conflicts, some of whom gave and sacrificed much in the fight against the Israelis. One of these is Haj Hussein, one of the group’s very first fighters, who is today blind and wheelchair-bound but who says he would do it all over again. Or take Abu Hassan, who in January of 1989 set off on a Hezbollah mission to seize an Israeli command post built on the hill of Beer-Kallab during the Jewish state’s occupation of southern Lebanon. This was still in the early years of that occupation, and Hassan was the only one of his unit of ten men to make it back alive. Spotting their movements down below, the Israelis began to open fire. In Hassan’s words:

For almost an hour, the Israelis, sheltered in their Merkavas, were bombing us. Their 105mm cannons fired shells toward our location. Some shells were just explosive, some poisonous, some packed like cluster bombs with nails. Myself, I was hit with thirty-four nails. Thirty-four. One of our men was hit just once, directly between the eyes. I watched a thin trickle of blood run down his nose, and instantly he was still, and the blood was just frozen there on his nose…

We waited. Many of the men were hit severely. Some were bleeding badly, missing legs and arms. I managed to bring some water from the stream, and I offered it first to one and then another, but each man waved me off and, looking toward the others of our unit, told me to save it for his fellow fighters, as they were worse off and needed it more.

One of our unit, Ahmed, was only eighteen years old. He was popular and clever in school. He was dedicated in religion. He was popular amongst his family and friends. A shell hit him and took off one of his legs completely. He stumbled up and held onto a tree. He said ‘Ya-Hussein, I’m here, I’m ready to go with you.’

Eventually “all the men lay as martyrs around me,” with only Hassan left alive. Then a strange thing happened; a wild animal, a hyena, appeared.

I watched the animal, afraid that it would try to eat the bodies. It walked around them, sniffing. But instead of setting on them as prey, the hyena nestled up to each of them, flipping the bodies over, one by one. It nuzzled them the way a cat will do and then it licked their wounds. The hyena then reached to Ahmed. It watched him for a moment and then turned and walked back toward me.

The hyena continued toward me, stopped and just looked at me. I stood up. It walked in front of me and I followed. I didn’t think about it, I just followed. I knew it was three days walk back to the safe-house in Ein et Tine. I asked Sayyeda Zahra [ed.-the daughter of the Prophet Muhammad] to take care of me. It was snowing. I started walking. The trees, the ground, it was all covered with snow.

The hyena stayed just in front of me and it seemed as if it were guiding me all the way back through the Bekaa Valley. I just followed and ended up back at the safe-house.

Reading Hassan’s words, we kind of get a feeling of what the Arabic word sumud, or “steadfastness,” is all about. From a strategical standpoint the mission was a failure. But Hassan doesn’t view it that way. “That mission was a victory in that we were opening the door for those who would follow,” he says. And follow they did—until eventually, in the spring of 2000, Hezbollah drove the Israelis out of southern Lebanon.

The victory of 2000, and the “’divine victory” which followed in 2006 are also covered in Heard’s work. But in addition to supplying us with war stories, Heard also details the efforts of Hezbollah social services organizations. One of these is the Islamic Health Society. With 102 health centers located throughout Lebanon, the IHS provides all levels of health care, from physical exams to surgeries, making its services available to one and all, without distinction to religious affiliation. “We serve all people,” says Hasan Ammar, IHS assistant general manager. “A human being is a human being, whether he is Shia, Christian, Sunni, whatever, a human being is a human being.”

Another organization is Jihad al Binaa, a construction and engineering firm that undertakes the task of rebuilding homes and infrastructure following each Israeli assault upon the country (al binaa means “the construction” in Arabic). As may be imagined, the firm was faced with monumental challenges in the wake of the 2006 war. Its achievements earned for it the wrath of the US Treasury Department, where Under Secretary Stuart Levey initiated an endeavor to freeze its assets and forbade Americans from engaging in financial transactions with it, this while the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, one of America’s more ignominious think tanks, issued a policy paper, in February 2007, entitled “Shutting Hizbollah’s ‘Construction Jihad.’” Commenting upon it all, Heard states the matter rather succinctly:

The sell line was, in other words, that if Jihad al Binaa were to build a roof over the heads of orphans Ali and Mohammed, heaven only knows what terrorism they may get up to. The rationale was more likely that they had just spent millions of dollars knocking down all those buildings, and down is where they wanted them to stay. And they were certainly not going to tolerate Hezbollah looking like the good guys when they had invested so much time and effort painting them as the bad guys.

Another valuable aspect of the book is an analysis of mainstream media’s almost universally negative portrayals of Hezbollah, and particularly of interest here are the New York Times’ treatment of the Mahdi Scouts, Hezbollah’s youth movement, in two articles published in 2008, as well as a discussion on the film Syriana, a Hollywood production whose objective, in the author’s words, is to “reinforce in the viewer’s mind that Hezbollah is a mafia-styled militia maintaining an oppressive society over which they rule with absolute authority.”

Heard has also set up a website, which functions more or less as an appendix to the book and which includes a number of documents pertaining to various topics covered in the book. Among these is a series of letters exchanged between officials in Lebanon and the World Scout Bureau in Geneva pertaining to the Times’ reporting on the Mahdi Scouts. In one of the letters, the head of the Lebanese Scout Federation assures that the main Times article, headlined “Hezbollah Seeks to Marshal the Piety of the Young” and published on November 21, 2008, “does not rely on any facts or evidences,” and that “the source of these rumors was Israel.”

Heard covers a lot of ground here, and through it all serves up observations of her own that are at times witty and often thought provoking. The author says she wrote the book to answer “the question that has been asked for years by the concerned Westerner: who are those people over there and do we really need to be scared of them?” My answer to that question, after reading her book, is that Americans have much more to fear from the Zionist lobby than from Hezbollah.

Generally speaking, the author has been thorough. However, one criticism I would offer is that nowhere in the book is there any discussion on where Hezbollah gets its funding. Does it levy taxes? Does it perhaps collect religious tithes from the Shia community in Lebanon? We haven’t heard any stories about Hezbollah engaging in drug trafficking, and one would assume that if something of that sort were going on that the media would be all over it like flies on honey.

More than likely there’s a certain amount of foreign assistance from Iran, but does that cover all of its costs, including equipping its soldiers as well as keeping the doors of its 102 medical clinics open? Doubtful—particularly given the sanctions that Iran has been under all these years. Maybe the Lebanese government appropriates some funds for the clinics. That would seem like a reasonable arrangement given the services they provide to the public. Or maybe the answer is simply that “God provides.” Still, it would be nice if the author had offered some information or at least some speculation on the matter.

Be that as it may, if you are interested in how a minority population in an invaded and occupied country defied the odds and kicked out the occupiers, this is a book you should read. Hezbollah: An Outsider’s Inside View was published in 2015. It is available from Arkadia Books, and can be purchased here, here, and here.

 

 

 

 

The Saudi throne has long served as anti-democratic bulwark in the region

Rothschild’s Saudi Lapdog Armed Libyan Rebels

http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/rothschilds-saudi-lapdog-armed-libyan-rebels/110277

Left Hook – by Dean Henderson

In a March 7, 2011 article in The Independent of London (“America’s Secret Plan to Arm Libya’s Rebels”, journalist Robert Fisk reported that the Obama Administration had asked Saudi Arabia to arm the Libyan rebels. The Saudis have played this role for the City of London banker cabal for nearly a century – part of a quid pro quo which involves oil, arms, drugs and covert operations.

The Saudis have also invaded Bahrain to save the al-Khalifa monarchy. The Saudi throne has long served as anti-democratic bulwark in the region for the London/Wall Street bankers and their inbred royal European shareholder brethren. It was all part of a plan hatched by the Rothschild-controlled Business Roundtable a century ago to seize control of Middle East oil.   

The Rothschilds are majority owners of BP and Royal Dutch/Shell, as well as the Bank of England, the Federal Reserve and the Saudi central bank – Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency (SAMA).

(Excerpted from Chapter 3: The House of Saud & JP Morgan: Big Oil & Their Bankers..)

In 1917 the British made a client of Ibn Saud, who was told to encourage Arab tribesman to repel the Ottoman Turks from the Persian Gulf Region.  That same year the British House of Rothschild pushed through the Balfour Declaration, lending Crown support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine.  A year later the Ottomans were defeated.

Iraq, Jordan and Saudi Arabia were carved out of the Ottoman Empire and fell under British rule, with Ibn Saud taking control of his namesake – Saudi Arabia.  In 1922 the Treaty of Jeddah gave Saudi Arabia independence from Britain, though the Crown still exerted considerable influence. To this day British mercenaries serve as bodyguards for the House of Saud.

During the 1920’s – with help from British troops – Ibn Saud grabbed more territory from the Ottomans. He annexed Riyadh and seized the holy cities of Mecca and Medina from the Hashemites.

Standard Oil of California (now Chevron Texaco) found oil in Saudi Arabia in 1938. The company formed ARAMCO with its Four Horsemen cartel buddies Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch/Shell and BP. The US and Britain signed security agreements with the House of Saud and Bechtel busied itself building ARAMCO’s oil infrastructure.

In 1952, on the heels of the US/Saudi Security Agreement, SAMA was created as the Saudi Central Bank.  By 1958 SAMA was run by Pakistani native Anwar Ali, later adviser to King Faisal.  Anwar had been Chief of the International Monetary Fund’s Middle East Department.

Ali recruited three Western bankers to serve as SAMA advisers.  Known as the Three Wise Men or White Fathers, these Western bankers called the shots at SAMA, with Ali serving as figurehead.  The most powerful of the three was John Meyer, Jr., chairman of Morgan Guaranty’s (now JP Morgan Chase) International Division and later chairman of the entire Morgan mother ship.

The White Fathers funneled SAMA petrodollar royalties into Morgan Guaranty accounts. In turn Morgan served as well-paid investment counselor to SAMA.  Anwar Ali’s son even landed a job at Morgan Guaranty. With billions in petrodollars flowing, the oil for arms quid pro quo was established.

Ibn Saud’s progeny form the modern-day House of Saud monarchy, which rules Saudi Arabia.  Less than twenty families connected to the throne control the Saudi economy.  The House of Saud spreads its influence through money and reproduction. Male members of the Saud family now number over 5,000.

Crown Prince Abdullah – half-brother of King Fahd – runs the Saudi National Guard and has assumed day to day control of the Kingdom since King Fahd suffered a serious stroke in 1995.  Prince Sultan, Prince Nayef and Prince Salman are full brothers of King Fahd and serve as Ministers of Defense and Interior and Governor of Riyadh, respectively. Prince Sultan’s son is Prince Bandar bin Sultan, long-time Saudi Ambassador to the US.  Prince Bandar’s cousin, Prince Saud al-Faisal is the Saudi Foreign Minister.

These Saudi princes use the government agencies they run as personal piggy banks and represent foreign companies bidding for contracts in the Kingdom.  They handle trillions in overseas investments. King Fahd is the second richest man in the world with a personal fortune of over $20 billion.

Prince Bandar is part of the Sudeiri clan which is comprised of the offspring of the late King Adbul Aziz and his favorite wife.  The Sudeiris are the most powerful and most Westernized family in the kingdom.  The House of Saud encourages a fundamentalist Wahhabist interpretation of Islam, but practitioners of Wahhabism in the Kingdom consider the Sudeirismunafaqeen (hypocrites).

While the Sudeiri clan lives in opulence, most Saudis struggle to put food on their tables.  The increasingly unpopular Sudeiris rule with an iron fist and are constantly cited by international human rights organizations for their brutality and opposition to democratic freedoms.

The Saudi monarchy rules by decree.  Women are not allowed to drive cars and are banned from many restaurants.  The Kingdom has no democratic institutions.  Opposition to the House of Saud is criminalized, driving political opponents underground.  In 1990 the Saudis beheaded 111 dissidents.

US corporations acquiesce in the Saudi oppression of women.  At Pizza Hut, McDonalds and Starbucks establishments in Saudi Arabia, there are segregated sections for men and women.  The women’s sections are run down. Starbucks has no seating at all for women.  Women who show up at other Western restaurants without their husbands are turned away.

In January 2002 the US-based Freedom House released a survey which ranks countries in accordance with the freedoms they allow.  Saudi Arabia was ranked as one of the ten least free countries in the world.

Human Rights Watch recently accused the United States of ignoring Saudi human rights violations to ensure a continuous oil supply.

The US/NATO intervention in Libya is not about “freedom”. It is about snuffing out a long-time nemesis of the House of Saud, the London & Paris-based Rothschilds and the neo-colonial international economic system which these financial parasites lord over at the expense of developing and resource-rich nations.

%d bloggers like this: