Haredim Puzzled By World’s Use Of Sukkah Decorations In December-Sheygetz

  Bnei Brak, Israel, December 16 – Israeli ultra-orthodox Jews voiced confusion this week upon seeing vast stretches of foreign cities and towns decorated with tinsel, a material obviously intended for the Sukkah.

The holiday of Sukkot ended two months ago, and Jews of all stripes have by this time dismantled their temporary dwellings for the festival and disposed of, or at least stowed, the decorations. The sight of decorations festooning the streets, houses, businesses, and public facilities across Europe and the Americas therefore sparks bewilderment.

Tinsel decorations for the Sukkah enjoy a robust market in Israel in the weeks preceding the holiday, which marks the end of the harvest season and usually occurs in October. The decorations, almost invariably of Chinese manufacture, feature traditional Sukkot colors of red, green, gold and silver, and include such identifiably Sukkot-themed items as hanging baubles, colorful strings of lights, and reflective, frilled streamers.

Seeing the decorations in use now, closer to Hanukkah, puzzles the Haredim, they report, since no such trappings are a typical part of Hanukkah observance. “I can sort of understand how maybe a totally ignorant sheygetz might get confused between one eight-day holiday and another, on both of which we say a full Hallel,” allows Gedalya Kloister, 50, referring to non-Jews and a series of Psalms of thanksgiving, respectively. “But I can’t see getting them completely confused like this. Everyone knows the decorations have no place outside an actual Sukkah anyway.”


Despite the puzzlement, some orthodox Jews appreciate the aesthetics of the decorations in their current context. “Sukkos is a partially a harvest festival,” says Nosson Nota Tannenbaum, 28, using the Eastern European pronunciation of the holiday’s name. “But it’s wintertime now, so obviously the trappings are going to be different in this season. I kind of like the way everyone uses fir trees as a vehicle for displaying Sukkah decorations.” He acknowledged that although a nod to Hanukkah might be more appropriate this time of year, olive trees are notoriously hard to come by beyond the Mediterranean.

“I especially like the way some families have even put up whole scenes of people visiting a family in a Sukkah,” adds Tannenbaum. “Even though it’s obviously not a kosher Sukkah and there’s always a woman and a baby, who should be pottur,” meaning exempt from the obligation.

“Also, there are sometimes animals, which is just weird.”



Bernard Adelman from Winthrop, Mass, writes:

“How does one derive [the Yiddish plural noun] ‘scotsim’ from [the singular] ‘sheygetz,’ when it seems that ‘scotsim’ would be the plural only of ‘scots’?

Sheygetz, of course, is a Yiddish word referring either to a young gentile male, or else to a young Jewish male who behaves like the Eastern European Jewish stereotype of a young gentile male –— that is, who is fun loving, unruly and more given to physical than to mental pursuits. If Mr. Adelman appears to associate this word with the inhabitants of Scotland, this is not because he really does, but because of the peculiarities both of his own spelling and of the pronunciation of what is known as northeastern Yiddish. This is the Yiddish that was spoken in Lithuania and Belarus, and I would hazard a guess that Mr. Adelman’s family came from this region. Here’s why.

Sheygetz derives from the biblical Hebrew noun sheketz, “abomination,” used in the Bible to refer to an unclean or nonkosher animal. Thus, for example, in a verse in Leviticus stating which fish may be eaten and which may not be, we read: “And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers…they shall be an abomination [sheketz] to you.” In medieval Hebrew, sheketz became a not very complimentary way of referring to young gentiles, and in Yiddish, through a voicing of the unvoiced “k,” it turned into sheygetz. At a later stage, as we have said, sheygetz also came to be a not entirely uncomplimentary way of referring to a young Jew, much as the English word “rascal,” when applied to a boy or teenager, can have an affectionate or even an approving tone.

To take it a step further, the Hebrew plural of sheketz is shkatzim, with the stress on the last syllable, and in Yiddish this became shkotzim, with the stress on the first syllable. (Those of you who still remember last week’s column on “matzo” will understand why.) This in turn yielded in America — to the best of my knowledge, it is not found in European Yiddish — the back formation “shkotz” as a variant form of sheygetz. It was not, therefore, the singular “scots,” as Mr. Adelman imagines, that yielded the plural form “scotsim,” but rather the other way around.

But why “scots” and “scotsim” instead of “shkotz” and “shkotzim”? The “c” in place of “k” is Mr. Adelman’s own idiosyncrasy. The “s” instead of “sh,” on the other hand, is, as we have said, a characteristic of northeastern Yiddish, in which these two sibilant consonants tended to get confused. There is even a jocular Yiddish expression for this confusion, which was called sabbeshdiker losn or “Sabbath speech” — two words that are pronounced shabbesdiker loshn in ordinary Yiddish.

And yet, contrary to the popular notion, it does not actually happen in sabbeshdiker losn that the “s” sounds become “sh” sounds and the “sh” sounds become “s” sounds. Rather, “s” and “sh” merge into a single sound that is halfway between the two. It only seems that the two swap places because of an auditory illusion whereby the speakers of other Yiddish dialects, expecting the word for Sabbath to be pronounced shabbes, heard the first halfway sound as a nonstandard departure from “sh” that they interpreted as an “s,” and the second halfway sound as a nonstandard departure from “s” that they interpreted as a “sh.” In reality, it is the same sound in both cases.

Unlike the biblical noun sheketz, the biblical verb from which it comes, shakatz, “to abominate,” was never applied to sheygetzes. In fact, it was never used much in post-biblical Hebrew at all — although on at least one occasion when it was, the results were remarkable.

The story was told to me by an Israeli doctor, a friend of mine. He told me how once, while attending a medical convention in Madrid, he met a Spanish colleague who offered to show him around town. As they entered one of the city’s churches, my friend heard the Spaniard mumble some incomprehensible words that sounded like, “Sakes sakenu, tev tavenu.”

“What did you just say?” my friend asked his guide. “To tell you the truth, I don’t know,” was the reply. “It’s something my family has always said upon entering a church and that I was taught to say as a child, too.” My friend racked his brain — and then it came to him. “Sakes sakenu, tev tavenu” was the biblical “shaketz teshaktzenu, ta’ev teta’avenu, “You shall surely abominate and abhor it,” a phrase that occurs in a strongly worded injunction against graven images in the book of Deuteronomy. Unbeknown to the Spanish doctor, he was a descendant of Marranos — Jews who were forced to convert to Christianity in the days of the Inquisition, who had taught their offspring never to enter a church without whispering the aforementioned words as an expression of their true feelings. For generations, his ancestors had been saying them with no idea of what they meant. It sent a chill down my spine.

Questions for Philologos can be sent to philologos@forward.com.

All those Xmas decorations are Jewish – oh the irony!!!!

Shabbat Shmoozings: 10 Great Crafts to Help Make Your Sukkah Beautiful

Shalom and chag sameach!

With Yom Kippur happening at sundown tonight, you’ll barely have time to catch your breath before it’s time put the Sukkah up.  Sukkot, the Festival of “booths” or “huts” begins the evening of Wednesday, October 8th and runs through Wednesday, October 15th.

Sukkot is known to celebrate the Fall harvest, and making decorations for the Sukkah has become a long standing tradition and a great way to get the children involved with the holiday.  Below are 10 great crafts from the internet that will ensure a festive and beautiful Sukkah for your family.

(1)  Citron Sun Catchers:  CLICK HERE for instructions

Citron-Sun-Catchers-1(2)  Tissue Paper Corn Craft:  CLICK HERE for instructions

crinkle-tissue-paper-corn-craft-kit (1)(3)  Paper Chains:  CLICK HERE for instructions

PaperChains(4)  Paper Lanterns:  CLICK HERE for instructions

PaperLanterns(5)  Tissue Paper Pom Poms:  CLICK HERE for instructions

PomPoms2(6)  Rustic Star of David Lantern:  CLICK HERE for instructions

StarLantern(7)  Woven Beaded Stars of David:  CLICK HERE for instructions

StarofDavidBeads(8)  Dried Fruit Garlands:  CLICK HERE for instructions

DriedFruitGarland(9) Recycled Plastic Bottle Flowers:  CLICK HERE for Instructions

plastic bottle ornaments(10)  Recycled Lid Apple Craft:  CLICK HERE for instructions

AppleCraftAny one of these crafts will add beauty to your Sukkah.  May your holiday be filled with joy and beauty.

To kick off the Sukkot season, come join the JCC and PJ Library this Monday, October 6th from 5-6:30 in the J’s Sukkah in the Sculpture Garden for Shake It Up Baby:  A Fun Family Sukkah Celebration.

Screen Shot 2014-10-01 at 11.18.52 AM

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment




Satanists Win the Right to Place ‘Grossly Offensive’ Holiday Display Next to the Nativity Inside Florida’s Capitol

Satanists have won the right to place a holiday display inside Florida’s state capitol in Tallahassee later this month — one that features an image of an angel falling into burning flames, Bible verses and a “Happy Holidays” message.

Officials in the state had initially refused the Satanist display and called it “offensive,” but have since changed their minds after Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a church-state activist group, threatened a lawsuit on behalf of Satanists, according to a press release.

The New York-based Satanic Temple, which does not believe the devil to be real and “advocates for religious tolerance and pluralism,” will be free to put the scene on display beginning December 22.

The Florida capitol rotunda has become a place where numerous dueling holiday messages generally emerge. Take 2013, for instance, when an atheist display and a Festivus pole, among other symbols, were placed next to the traditional nativity.

Image via The Satanic Temple/Facebook

Despite the state’s change-of-heart on the Satanic display, Americans United isn’t backing down from its public challenge to the state’s Department of Management Services banning certain displays.

“Free speech is for everyone and all groups,” Americans United executive director the Rev. Barry W. Lynn said in a statement. “State officials simply can’t get into the business of deciding that some unpopular messages are ‘offensive’ and must be banned.”

As TheBlaze previously reported, the Satanic Temple’s holiday display was rejected for inclusion last year in the annual holiday display inside the capitol, who has designated an area as a public forum.

Those familiar with the Bible will recognize that the scene is described in Isaiah 14:12, which reads, “How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!”

Luke 10:18 also references Lucifer’s fall from heaven: “He replied, ‘I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.’”

Florida’s Department of Management Services had reportedly responded to a December 2013 attempt to place the display near a nativity inside the capitol by noting that The Satanic Temple’s holiday imagery was “grossly offensive.”

“The department’s position is that your proposed display is grossly offensive during the holiday season,” Sherrie K. Routt, administrative assistant at Florida Department of Management Services, wrote at the time, according to the Christian Post.

The Satanic Temple has been involved in a number of public causes of late.

Stunned Pastor Noticed Something Very Important Missing From This Disney Billboard
Dec. 5, 2014 1:16pm Billy Hallowell

Charges that Disney — known for producing kid-friendly films, TV shows and theme parks — has diminished God’s importance in its products are nothing new, but the company is facing a fresh round of criticism from a pastor who recently noticed something missing from one of its billboards.

Pastor Eddie DelValle

Pastor Eddie DelValle of With Love Ministries told One News Now that he was surprised to see the word “Christmas” removed from Disney billboards in Orlando, Florida, especially considering that the messages advertise Mickey’s Very Merry Christmas Party at Magic Kingdom, one of the company’s popular holiday-themed attractions.

DelValle told TheBlaze Friday that he made the observation while driving in the car with his wife recently. At first he thought his eyes were deceiving him, but DelValle passed by again and confirmed that the billboard read, “Mickey’s Very Merry Party.”

“I just couldn’t believe it,” he said.

While attending Mickey’s Very Merry Christmas Party has been a tradition for the DelValle family for the past eight years, the preacher said they won’t be partaking this year. In fact, he removed everything Disney-themed from his house, expressing his overarching distaste.

“I think this is a literal element of Disney to just eliminate the word Christmas,” DelValle charged.

He also said that a Disney guest services staffer told him that the marketing decision was intentionally made so “they wouldn’t offend people.”

A representative for Disney, though, told TheBlaze, that the real reason the billboard and some online advertising materials were shortened to remove Christmas had everything to do with “readability.”

“Our event is still named Mickey’s Very Merry Christmas Party, and the majority of our marketing materials reflect that,” Disney spokesman Bryan Malenius said in a statement. “For billboards and a few smaller online ads, we shortened the event name in the interest of space and readability.”

But DelValle isn’t convinced that’s the case.

“I’m not buying that,” he said. “That billboard is huge … there’s plenty of room to put Christmas there.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Balfour Declaration

The little-known origins and history of the Balfour Declaration

The Landman Document

An excerpt from Count Leon de Poncins State Secrets


Is it possible, is it even conceivable that the Jews, by sheer weight of their influence alone, could unleash a world war? It is probably unbelievable, and yet this is exactly what has happened three times in the course of the last half century, in 1900, with the Transvaal war, in 1917, with the entrance of the Americans into the war on the side of the Allies, and in 1939, with the commencement of the Second World War. In this chapter I am simply going to deal with the case of the entry of the United States into the First World War in 1917 on the side of the Allies, and I will show that this contention rests on solid proof.

Let us briefly recall the facts. By 1917 the English-French alliance was in a difficult position and in danger of losing the war against Imperial Germany. The latter, whose hands had been freed from the Russian front by the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, was about to hurl all its strength against the western front, which was in danger of being swept away by the violence of their attack. The Allies urgently needed American aid.

The United States did not hesitate to enter the war on the Allies’ side. The official pretext invoked in favour of this move was the sinking of the English liner, Lusitania, by a German submarine, which resulted in the deaths of a certain number of American passengers.

But the negotiations and pressures which brought about this situation are the subject of this chapter, for the facts which we are about to relate are virtually unknown to the public.

In 1929 a Polish writer, E. Malynski, published a book revealing the unknown facts behind these historic events entitled La Démocratie victorieuse, a work which was subsequently shown to be quite prophetic.

Basing his argument on a profound knowledge of international politics and upon a logical deduction of the facts, Malynski concluded that America’s entrance into the war on the side of the Allies was due to Jewish influence.

‘If there had not been the Lusitania affair, the asphyxiating gases, or the intrigues of German and Austrian ambassadors on American territory, in which they were surely not unique, other ways would have been found to achieve the same results. No provocation would have been too severe to obtain them, since democracy was in danger and it urgently needed American intervention to come to its aid.

‘Democracy was in danger, and that is the most important point and indeed the pivot of all contemporary history. The rest is just empty meaningless phrases, fodder which is thrown to beasts who are being led to the slaughter-house.

‘The apparent spontaneity of their enthusiasm for war, which shook the American people, should not astonish those who know America, or who lived there for some years before 1914. For at that time thousands and thousands of non-Jewish people, who had nevertheless been intoxicated by a costly and clever publicity campaign, demanded at the tops of their voices that diplomatic and commercial relations should be broken off with the Tsar’s government – a measure which would gravely prejudice the American portfolio – for the sole reason that a mean and obscure little Jew, who was completely unknown in his own town, but whose international ubiquity had organized his defence, had been brought before a court of assize and the regular jury of a provincial city in the Russian empire on a charge, whether justly or unjustly, of committing a ritual murder.

‘On both occasions, the result was exactly the same: the nation which above all others claims to be free and in sovereign command of its own destiny was brainwashed to the hilt.

‘In 1914 any American would have laughed to scorn the idea that in three years time he would be struggling and suffering in France for the sake of affairs which had no connection with those of his own country.

‘And yet, when 1917 came, the same man enlisted enthusiastically. Every soldier whom we happened to interview and questioned as to his personal motives for fighting, invariably replied: ‘we are fighting for democracy’. They were one step ahead of their fellow soldiers from other nations, who went for their own country’s sake.

‘It is only when we realize that France was invaded by hundreds of thousands of inhabitants from Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Florida, Illinois, Wyoming, California, Louisiana, and subsequently from Ontario, Manitoba, Rhodesia and New South Wales, whose only possible motive was to hasten the triumph of democracy, that we begin to understand something of the power of Israel. The power to stir up a whole nation of solid, egotistical and utilitarian individuals, and to persuade them that their greatest privilege is to set out and get themselves killed at the uttermost ends of the earth, with no hope of gain for themselves or their children and almost without their understanding against or for whom they are fighting, or why, is a simply incredible phenomenon which makes one afraid when one comes to think about it.’ (E. Malynski: La Démocratie victorieuse)

I remember very well showing this book to the director of a big London daily paper, and asking him his opinion of it. He said that British opinion would never accept it, and he did not conceal from me the fact that he thought the author was suffering from a form of mania.

However, in March 1936, a Zionist Jew named Samuel Landman published a work called Great Britain, The Jews and Palestine under the auspices of the Zionist Association, which deals with Zionism and the entry of the United States into the war. As the preface of the book clearly states, the author is a very well-known English Zionist. He was the honorary secretary of the Zionist Council of the United Kingdom in 1912, editor of The Zionist from 1913 – 1914, and author of various Zionist publications which came out during the war. From 1917 – 1922 he was the solicitor and secretary of the Zionist organization, and later became its legal adviser. As a Jewish document, therefore, it may be considered to carry official weight.

Landman’s work contains a staggering confirmation of Malynski’s thesis. Needless to say, he does not reveal everything, but what he does state reveals a number of stupefying horizons, for he proves in detail that it is the Jews, set in motion, as they themselves admit, by their own exclusively Jewish interests and possessions, who launched America into the world war. The passage which follows is taken without abridgement from the opening pages of Landman’s Great Britain, The Jews and Palestine:

‘As the Balfour Declaration originated in the War Office, was consummated in the Foreign Office and is being implemented in the Colonial Office, and as some of those responsible for it have passed away or have retired since its migrations from Department to Department, there is necessarily some confusion or misunderstanding as to its raison d’étre and importance to the parties primarily concerned. It would, therefore, seem opportune to recapitulate briefly the circumstances, the inner history and incidents that eventually led to the British Mandate for Palestine.

‘Those who assisted at the birth of the Balfour Declaration were few in number. This makes it important to bring into proper relief the services of one who, owing above all to his modesty, has hitherto remained in the background. His services however should take their proper place in the front rank alongside of those Englishmen of vision whose services are more widely known, including the late Sir Mark Sykes, the Rt. Hon. W. Ormsby Gore, the Rt. Hon. Sir Ronald Graham, General Sir George Macdonagh and Mr. G. H. Fitzmaurice.

‘In the early years of the War great efforts were made by the Zionist Leaders, Dr. Weizmann and Mr. Sokolow, chiefly through the late Mr. C. P. Scott of the Manchester Guardian, and Sir Herbert Samuel, to induce the Cabinet to espouse the cause of Zionism.

‘These efforts were, however, without avail. In fact, Sir Herbert Samuel has publicly stated that he had no share in the initiation of the negotiations which led to the Balfour Declaration. (England and Palestine, a lecture delivered by Sir Herbert Samuel and published by the Jewish Historical Society, February 1936.) The actual initiator was Mr. James A. Malcolm and the following is a brief account of the circumstances in which the negotiations took place.

‘During the critical days of 1916 and of the impending defection of Russia, Jewry, as a whole, was against the Czarist regime and had hopes that Germany, if victorious, would in certain circumstances give them Palestine. Several attempts to bring America into the War on the side of the Allies by influencing influential Jewish opinion were made and had failed. Mr. James A. Malcolm, who was already aware of German pre-war efforts to secure a foothold in Palestine through the Zionist Jews and of the abortive Anglo-French démarches at Washington and New York; and knew that Mr. Woodrow Wilson, for good and sufficient reasons, always attached the greatest possible importance to the advice of a very prominent Zionist (Mr. Justice Brandeis, of the US Supreme Court); and was in close touch with Mr. Greenberg, Editor of the Jewish Chronicle (London); and knew that several important Zionist Jewish leaders had already gravitated to London from the Continent on the qui vive awaiting events; and appreciated and realized the depth and strength of Jewish national aspirations; spontaneously took the initiative, to convince first of all Sir Mark Sykes, Under-Secretary to the War Cabinet, and afterwards M. Georges Picot, of the French Embassy in London, and M. Goût of the Quai d’Orsay (Eastern Section), that the best and perhaps the only way (which proved so to be) to induce the American President to come into the War was to secure the co-operation of Zionist Jews by promising them Palestine, and thus enlist and mobilize the hitherto unsuspectedly powerful forces of Zionist Jews in America and elsewhere in favour of the Allies on a quid pro quo contract basis. Thus, as will be seen, the Zionists, having carried out their part, and greatly helped to bring America in, the Balfour Declaration of 1917 was but the public confirmation of the necessarily secret ‘gentleman’s’ agreement of 1916 made with the previous knowledge, acquiescence and/or approval of the Arabs and of the British, American, French and other Allied Governments, and not merely a voluntary altruistic and romantic gesture on the part of Great Britain as certain people either through pardonable ignorance assume or unpardonable ill-will would represent or misrepresent.

‘Sir Mark Sykes was Under-Secretary to the War Cabinet specially concerned with Near Eastern affairs, and, although at the time scarcely acquainted with the Zionist movement, and unaware of the existence of its leaders, he had the flair to respond to the arguments advanced by Mr. Malcolm as to the strength and importance of this movement in Jewry, in spite of the fact that many wealthy and prominent international or semi-assimilated Jews in Europe and America were openly or tacitly opposed to it (Zionist movement) or timidly indifferent. MM. Picot and Goût were likewise receptive.

‘An interesting account of the negotiations carried on in London and Paris, and subsequent developments, has already appeared in the Jewish press and need not be repeated here in detail, except to recall that immediately after the ‘gentleman’s’ agreement between Sir Mark Sykes, authorized by the War Cabinet, and the Zionist leaders, cable facilities through the War Office, the Foreign Office and British Embassies, Legations, etc., were given to the latter to communicate the glad tidings to their friends and organizations in America and elsewhere, and the change in official and public opinion as reflected in the American press in favour of joining the Allies in the War, was as gratifying as it was surprisingly rapid.

‘The Balfour Declaration, in the words of Prof. H. M. V. Temperley, was a “definite contract between the British Government and Jewry” (History of the Peace Conference in Paris, vol. 6, p. 173). The main consideration given by the Jewish people (represented at the time by the leaders of the Zionist Organization) was their help in bringing President Wilson to the aid of the Allies. Moreover, officially interpreted at the time by Lord Robert Cecil as ‘Judea for the Jews’ in the same sense as ‘Arabia for the Arabs’, the Declaration sent a thrill throughout the world. The prior Sykes-Picot Treaty of 1916, according to which Northern Palestine was to be politically detached and included in Syria (French sphere), was subsequently, at the instance of the Zionist leaders, amended (by the Franco-British Convention of December 1920, Cmd. 1195) so that the Jewish National Home should comprise the whole of Palestine in accordance with the promise previously made to them for their services by the British, Allied and American Governments, and to give full effect to the Balfour Declaration, the terms of which had been settled and known to all Allied and associated belligerents, including Arabs, before they were made public.

‘In Germany, the value of the bargain to the Allies, apparently, was duly and carefully noted. In his Through Thirty Years Mr. Wickham Steed, in a chapter appreciative of the value of Zionist support in America and elsewhere to the Allied cause, says General Ludendorff is alleged to have said after the War that: “The Balfour Declaration was the cleverest thing done by the Allies in the way of propaganda, and that he wished Germany had thought of it first” (vol. 2, p. 392). As a matter of fact, this was said by Ludendorff to Sir Alfred Mond (afterwards Lord Melchett), soon after the War. The fact that it was Jewish help that brought USA into the War on the side of the Allies has rankled ever since in German – especially Nazi – minds, and has contributed in no small measure to the prominence which anti-Semitism occupies in the Nazi programme.’ (S. Landman: Great Britain, The Jews and Palestine, pp. 3-6)

It should be obvious that this is a document of capital importance, and yet the press has kept absolutely silent about it, and it has remained virtually unknown.

In order fully to understand the significance and importance of this confession, let us briefly resume the facts which led to its publication.

In 1917, the Allies were in distress and desperately needed American aid, but all their efforts to bring the United States into the war on their side had failed. It was then that the English commenced secret negotiations with the American Zionists. The latter proposed a deal: “If you will promise to hand over Palestine to us if you are victorious, we will guarantee to bring America into the war on your side.” If America was brought into the war, it seemed almost certain that Germany would be unable to resist the strength of the resulting coalition.

The deal was concluded, and the American Zionists fulfilled their part of the bargain, and brought the USA into the war, and by the celebrated Balfour Declaration, the British Government made Palestine into a national home for the Jews.

Up to this moment, everything seemed satisfactory. Both sides had fulfilled their engagements. However, England, in her distress, had not foreseen the consequences of this decision. The Arabs had not been consulted in the course of these negotiations, and it soon became apparent that while one party in the British Government was promising Palestine to the Jews, another branch of the same Government was promising the same land to the Arabs through the intermediary action of Lawrence of Arabia.

These two pledges were manifestly inconsistent, and if England on the one hand was obliged to accommodate the Jews, on the other she had important interests of her own in the Arab countries of the Near East. The Jews had one capital advantage. They were on the spot in both London and New York, whereas the Arabs were a long way away from the centre of action.

At first the British Government played the Jewish card to the full, and endeavoured to maintain a precarious balance between the Jews and the Arabs. At the time of the Balfour Declaration the Jews had promised that they would not infringe the rights of the Arab population, but the whole world knew that it was an impossible undertaking, and one which the Jews had no intention whatever of respecting.

Thus, to start with the British Government was in favour of establishing a Jewish community which would be built up by immigration, but confrontations with the Arabs rapidly became aggravated. Hitler’s rise to power, and his anti-Jewish position, brought matters to boiling point. The British tried to calm the Jews, and cut down on the immigration of international Jews to Palestine. But how is one to reason with the Jews when they are in the grip of their messianic fervour? The influx of Jewish aliens drove the Arabs to flight from a country which they could legitimately consider as their own, since they had lived there for centuries, and they piled into refugee camps in which they have since eked out a miserable and hopeless existence. Massacres, such as at Deir Yassin, provoked a general exodus, and hundreds of thousands more fled to these camps. The Arab States, for their part, did nothing to ameliorate the condition of these unfortunate refugees, and consequently the situation became more and more explosive for the English, who were confronted with a Jewish rebellion armed and supported by secret organizations such as the Irgoun and the Stern gang. Palestine was virtually in a state of war with the British.

It was under these conditions that the Anglo-American Zionists published a threatening warning to the British Government by means of the Landman document. Addressing the British Government as if they were speaking to an equal, they said in effect:

You forget that you did not give us Palestine as an unsolicited gift (Balfour Declaration). It was handed over as the result of a secret bargain concluded between ourselves. We have scrupulously observed our part in bringing America into the war on your side. We call on you to fulfil your obligations in turn. You are aware of our power in the United States: take care that you do not attract the hostility of Israel, otherwise you will come up against grave international difficulties.

The publication of such a serious, revealing and compromising document was grossly imprudent, but it was also a calculated risk. Faced with the terrible menace of Hitler, the Jews were obliged to run risks, but on the other hand they were sure of themselves and of their power over the press in democratic countries. The document had to be published in order to effect the appropriate extortion from the British Government, but it was essential that it should on no account come to the knowledge of the general public. Consequently, the press in the western world kept silence, and the public remained in total ignorance of its existence. If it had been published at large, there might well have been a violent upheaval when it was discovered that the British and American Governments were acting under Israel’s orders. The preparation of war against Hitler would have been singularly hindered. It is one thing to fight for the defence of one’s own country. Fighting for Israel is another, much less inspiring prospect.

In conclusion, the Landman document demonstrates that the Jews are capable of exerting a considerable influence over public opinion and the American Government, and of bringing the USA into the war. It is a clear-cut case of a well organized minority orientating public opinion and manipulating it to its own liking. The Zionists themselves were surprised at the ease and rapidity with which they succeeded in overturning American opinion. It also shows that the world-wide influence of Jewish organizations vis-à-vis national governments is some considerable factor, since the former were able to discuss matters on an equal level with the Government of the British Empire, and finally conclude a deal with the latter on a reciprocal basis.

Thus the secret history of America’s entry into the war in 1917 on the side of the Allies is revealed as the secret history of the creation of a Jewish national home in Palestine – and both these events, it cannot be disputed, are of the utmost importance if one is to understand the evolution of the modern world.

Finally, it is a measure of the value of the press, which is supposed to be a source of objective information, and which is so avid for sensational news, that for thirty years it has maintained a total black-out on a document of absolutely capital importance, so that not so much as a whisper alluding to its existence has been made in the numerous histories of the First World War.

Doubtless, looking back, we may have reason to thank the Jews for pushing America into the war on our side in 1917, but in 1917 it was simply fortuitous that their interests coincided with those of the Allies. Today, in 1975, it is not so reassuring to learn that America’s foreign policy is in the hands of a Jewish Zionist of German extraction, Dr. Henry Kissinger, the man who was first of all President Nixon’s private adviser, and who was then promoted to Secretary of State.


Count Leon de Poncins, State Secrets, 1977

Freedom isn’t free! To insure the continuation of this website and the survival of its creator in these financially-troubled times, please send donations directly to the Birdman at
PO Box 66683, St Pete Beach FL 33736-6683

“The smallest good deed is worth the grandest intention.”

Please contribute today – buy our books – and spread the word to all your friends!
Remember: Your donation = our survival!


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Shot at Dawn


Victor Silvester

Victor Silvester

Victor Silvester (1900-1978), after the war world famous dance orchestra leader, was a boy soldier and participated in the execution of five soldiers.

In an interview he gave just before his death Victor Silvester told how he was ordered to execute a man:

“The victim was brought out from a shed and led struggling to a chair to which he was then bound and a white handkerchief placed over his heart as our target area. He was said to have fled in the face of the enemy.
The tears were rolling down my cheeks as he tried to free himself from the ropes. I aimed blindly and when the gunsmoke had cleared away we were further horrified to see that, although wounded, the man was still alive. Still blindfolded, he was attempting to make a run for it still strapped to the chair. An officer in charge stepped forward to put the finishing touch with a revolver held to the poor man’s temple.
He had only once cried out and that was when he shouted the one word ‘mother’. He could not have been much older than me. We were told later that he had in fact been suffering from shell-shock, a condition not recognised by the army at the time. Later I took part in four more such executions.”

Do the 850,000 ceramic poppies representing a soldier who died in WW1 include the 306 British soldiers shot at dawn?


Execution in the dunes

A few steps from the North Sea, on the beach near the hamlet of Oostduinkerke, Belgian soldier 2é Grenadiers Aloïs Walput is tied to a pole and shot by his fellow-men. The execution of this 21 year old war-volunteer took place on 3rd June 1918.

The picture was made a few seconds after the man died: two soldiers cut the body loose, an officer (the medical doctor?) takes the exact time, the spurred commander of the firing-squad looks on. It was the last of thirteen known cases wherein a Belgian court martial send a soldier to death.

During the Great War many soldiers were executed. The armies wanted to set examples to the troops. Do not walk away from our war – we shoot you if you do. The men were shot for desertion, mutiny, cowardice (even if it was caused by shell shock or other mental affections), and other breaches of discipline.

During the war the executions were kept silent. Robert Graves: “I had my first direct experience of official lying when I arrived at Le Havre in May 1915 and read the back-files of army orders at the rest camp. They contained something like twenty reports of men shot for cowardice or desertion. Yet a few days later the responsible minister in the House of Commons, answering a question from a pacifist, denied that sentence of death for a military offence had been carried out in France on any member of His Majesty’s Forces” (in Goodbye to all That, 1929).

Execution WW1After the war all armies made their files on the executions top secret. Of course there were rumours and in a few cases the truth leaked through. Only these last years some of the archives have been opened and now, slowly, thanks to the efforts of independent researchers and journalists, the stories become public.

As a result of this political debates have been started in several countries. about reviewing the sentences. New-Zealand has already pardoned (through Act of Parliament) the soldiers it executed in WW1. The Canadian government has offered an apology and formally announced its regret for what happened. England announced in August 2006 that it will formally pardon (on moral grounds) all soldiers who were shot by firing squads.


In total British court martials had 306 soldiers shot at dawn. Among them were 25 Canadians, 22 Irishmen and 5 New-Zealanders.

Australia was the only country that did not want its soldiers (all volunteers) to be executed. The 129 Australians (including 119 deserters) that were sentenced to death during the war (117 in France) were not shot.

Between April 1917 and November 1918 American court-martials sentenced 24 American deserters to death. None was actually shot. Stragglers and deserters were often publicly humiliated.

From the German army about 150,000 soldiers deserted. Most of them fled to the neutral Netherlands and to Denmark and Switzerland. From those who got caught no more than 18 were executed (compare this to the 10.000 deserters Germany shot in the second worldwar).

In the French army more than 600 soldiers were put to death. Little known is the French decimation (the shooting of every tenth person in a unit) of the 10e Compagnie of 8 Battalion of the Régiment Mixte de Tirailleurs Algériens. During the retreat at the beginning of the war these French-African soldiers refused an order to attack. They were shot on the 15th of December 1914 near Zillebeeke in Flanders.


Star   Frank Hurley, “the mad photographer”   Star

Click to start the slide-show

The Shell-Shattered Area of Chateau Wood, Flanders
(Picture by Frank Hurley, 1917)

Marching German Army
German Army Marching – postcard 1914

Close to a Consensus on the
Origins of the Great War

By Rob Ruggenberg

Don’t be fooled: there is no such thing as an historical consensus on the origins of the Great War. But there is something close to it.

This happened before. Shortly after the war most historians agreed that Germany, together with Austria-Hungary, were responsible for for the outbreak of this massive world conflict. Even the famous German historian Karl Kautsky came to this conclusion when he edited the official publication of German Foreign Office documents on the origins of World War I, and later in his 1919 book Wie der Weltkrieg entstand (How the World War arose).

But this view soon changed dramatically. In the 1920’s historians from all over the world reached a sort of mutual agreement on a revisionist interpretation in which none of the great powers was held responsible.

This interpretation held that the war was the result of a conflict between imperialist states. It was preceded by a naval race, a great increase in armaments and rivalry between world empires for control of markets.

There was, it was argued, little to choose between the policies of the great powers. War broke out because everyone misjudged the consequences of the crisis created by the assassination of the Austrian Arch-Duke in Sarajevo.

In this version Austria-Hungary, for its unacceptable ultimatum to Serbia, and France and Russia, for their hasty decisions to mobilize, were judged to be the powers most responsible for starting the war. Germany and Britain attempted to find a compromise but were drawn into a conflict which neither imagined would last more than a few months.

The conclusion was: the Great War was a kind of accident and all the parties involved were victims. This view became a standard vision and thousands of older studies breath this interpretation. Until the 1960’s…

In 1961 this view of the origins of the war was challenged by the German historian Fritz Fischer. To the chagrin of other German intellectuals, who preferred the theory that the other countries involved in World War I were at fault, Fischer concluded that the Germans under the Kaiser had expansionist goals in the war. Fischer argued that leading groups in Germany – including the Kaiser – sought a war which would establish German control over much of Europe.

In his book “Griff nach der Weltmacht (Grab at Worldpower, translated as “Germany’s Aims in World War I”), Fischer insisted that Germany deliberately encouraged the Austro-Hungarian monarchy to declare war on Serbia and actively sought war with France, hoping to repeat the victory of 1870, before dealing with Russia. Britain’s small army could be ignored because the decisive engagements would be over within a few months.

Fischer based his material on documents he had found in the German Democratic Republic DDR and in other archives. He had studied the so called September plans and pointed out that there was a continuancy in German war planning. Fischer soon got support. In 1964 German historian Sebastian Haffner pointed out (in his book The seven deadly sins of the German Empire in the First World War) that there had been an crucial change in German foreign policy in 1890 when the Kaiser pushed prime-minister Otto von Bismarck out of his way. Bismarck wanted to make Germany powerful, but in a peaceful way. His successors also strived for German power, but in a way that could not avoid war.

Haffner explained that in the peace system of the 19th century there was a balance of power inside Europe. Outside of Europe England ruled. Bismarck never attacked this system: he just wanted to fit the new German empire into it. Bismarck’s successors wanted to turn the system over and replace it by something else. They wanted a balance outside of Europe and Germany ruling inside.

In 1969 Fischer published another book – Krieg der Illusionen (War of Illusions) – in which he argued that Germany systematically had aimed at war since 1912. In 1992 he threw oil on the fire with the book “Hitler was Not an Accident”.

His view of the origins of the Great War has not gone unchallenged. Fischer’s books have been the subject of numerous discussions over the years (and they still are), with Fischer sticking to his conclusions, even as some opponents claimed he took historical quotes out of context. Fischer died in December 1999.

Today most historians agree with the general outlines of the Fischer thesis. The leaders of the German Empire and of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire both were guilty. The guilt of the people of these nations exists in that they took little notice of the politics of their leaders. But then, this is a fault that these people had – and have – in common with the people of all nations.

Canadian leading military historian prof. Terry Copp, adds that the ‘new consensus’ must seem ironic to those who lived during the First World War and are still alive today, “because it presents the origins of the war much as the people of 1914 understood them”.


“America should have minded her own business and stayed out of the World War. If you hadn’t entered the war the Allies would have made peace with Germany in the Spring of 1917. Had we made peace then there would have been no collapse in Russia followed by Communism, no breakdown in Italy followed by Fascism, and Germany would not have signed the Versailles Treaty, which has enthroned Nazism in Germany. If America had stayed out of the war, all these ‘isms’ wouldn’t today be sweeping the continent of Europe and breaking down parliamentary government – and if England had made peace early in 1917, it would have saved over one million British, French, American, and other lives.”

Winston Churchill (according to the New York Enquirer – in 1936)

See: The Balfour Declaration of 1917


The various impacts of a short peace on the minds of soldiers

Demystifying the Christmas Truce

German and British soldiers fraternize – Christmas 1914  

By Thomas Löwer
(Philipps-Universität Marburg, Germany / Juniata College, Huntingdon, PA, USA)

“But, however, looking back on it all, I wouldn’t have missed that unique and weird Christmas Day for anything.”[1]

The English soldier Bruce Bairnsfather looked back on an event in which he had taken part. This small excerpt shows quite clearly that something extraordinary and unexpected must have happened. Bairnsfather talks about the Christmas Truce, which happened in 1914. After almost six month of war, soldiers fighting for the Entente powers and soldiers fighting for the “Mittelmächte” met in No Man’s Land and celebrated Christmas together.

The soldiers exchanged gifts, sometimes addresses, and drank together. Often the truce started with a request to bury the dead comrades lying between the trenches (picture on the right).

The Christmas Truce was a small peaceful episode in a cruel environment. Certainly, Bairnsfather’s statement is a bit too generalized because it did not occur along the whole frontline. Mostly English and German soldiers took part in the Christmas fraternization, but also in some cases French, Belgian, Austrian and Russian soldiers took part.[2]

In the following years the Christmas Truce was mystified as an act of humanity in an inhuman war. Jorgensen and Harrison-Lever published a picture book for children with the Christmas Truce as the background.

In this book (picture on the right) a young soldier sees a nice colored small bird which was captured in barbed wire. He decides to leave his trench to free the bird, and no enemy shoots at him. The publisher’s text on the back introduces this book with the words:

“Early on Christmas morning the guns stop firing. A deathly silence creeps over the pitted and ruined landscape.

A young soldier peers through a periscope over the top of the trench. Way out in no-man’s land, he sees a small red shape moving on the barbed wire. A brightly coloured robin is trapped. One wing is flapping helplessly.”[3]

The Christmas Truce of 1914 was mystified in another way. Not only was the soldiers’ humanity emphasized in retrospect, but the war was combined with an element of sport. Stories about a football match between German and English soldiers were quite common. Many war diaries report a football match occurring during the 1914 truce, but whether or not a match was really played is unclear. Historians are still debating if a match was really played or if the soldiers just dramatized the truce.[4] Contrary to in 1914, it is certain that a match between German and English soldiers occurred in 1915.[5]

Truce Appeals

From one perspective, the Christmas Truce was not unexpected. Several neutral powers tried to convince the warring nations to keep peace during Christmas and to show the minimum of Christianity. The most successful attempt to arrange a truce was the Pope’s appeal.[6] He appealed the European powers to keep peace at Christmas, which might have helped to arrange a treaty to end the war. Not surprisingly, the nations would only have accepted peace if they were not disadvantaged by it.[7] Not all nations agreed to a truce: Russia, for example, refused, because the orthodox Christmas is almost two weeks later than the catholic and protestant Christmas, making an official truce impossible.[8] On the other hand the truce came totally unexpectedly. Both headquarters forbade a truce and fraternizations and threatened those who ignored their orders with hard punishment.[9]

That it was not viewed well in the headquarters shows how the truce worked. It was not a happening ordered by the authorities, but a truce made by the average soldier. The view on the whole topic is the view at the bottom of the hierarchy, of the people who were only mentioned as numbers in causality reports. Therefore, in most World War I monographs, the Christmas Truce is ignored. One exception is Ekstein in his book Rites of Spring. Contrary to the common way, his approach to World War I is cultural historical.

The Propaganda War

This paper approaches the Christmas Truce within the context of the Propaganda War. It asks if the propaganda of the warring states influenced the soldiers who took part in the truce, and if so, in what ways. If the soldiers were influenced by the propaganda, did they change their opinion about their opponents in the trenches? Maybe the soldiers bought the propaganda and saw the evil the propaganda had claimed in their opponents.

To point out what impact the propaganda had on the soldiers, the first part investigates the different stereotypes which were created by the different propaganda departments. This part is mainly based on secondary literature, such as the Read’s book Atrocity Propaganda 1914-1919. International Propaganda and Communications and Roeter’s book The Art of Psychological Warfare. Primary sources written by propagandists round out this section.

The second part will juxtapose how the soldiers adopted the propaganda or made their own opinions about their enemies. This part is very much based on primary sources. Letters of soldiers who took part in the truce will give information about their personal attitudes. Furthermore, both major books about the truce, Weintraub’s Silent Night and Brown’s Christmas Truce, are used.

The Pictures of the Enemy

That a truce in the trenches between the opponents could happen is more impressive if the Propaganda issues and common stereotypes are also focused on. On both sides, the propaganda was used to create the worst picture of the enemy. The Entente, as well as the Mittelmächte, maintained large Propaganda organizations. On both sides, intellectuals supported the stereotypes with countless publications about the rightness of going to war and to underline the others’ guilt. The German side saw in England a nation of shopkeepers who would do anything to keep their position in the world as the number one trade nation. The German Jew Ernst Lissauer created the Hymn of Hate against England, and received the Roten Adlerorden from the German Kaiser Wilhelm II for this patriotic act. In his poem he claimed England to be Germany’s worst enemy.

French and Russian they matter not; A blow for blow, and a shot for a shot; We love them not, we hate them not… We have but one and only hate, We love as one, we hate as one, We have one foe and one alone. He is known to you all, he is known to you all! He crouches behind the dark gray flood, Full of envy, of rage, of craft, of gall, Cut off by waves that are thicker than blood… We will never forgo our hate, We have all but a single hate, We love as one, we hate as one We have one foe, and one alone – England [10]

This extremely anti-England poem was not only extraordinarily popular in Germany but it was also part of the German lessons in school. The German self-image is evident in the article, “The Kaiser and His People,” published in the Atlantic Monthly and written by Harvard Professor Kuno Francke (picture on the right).

According to Francke, Germany was a country with: “people brimming over with physical and intellectual vitality, flushed with military and industrial success, eager for activity in every field of enterprise and in all parts of the globe.” Furthermore, he takes all blame away from the German Kaiser Wilhelm II. The German Kaiser was not a cruel Hun, he had “Richard Wagner’s Parsifal and the Nietzschean Superman combined in him.” [11]

German Views

England, as Germany’s opposite, is portrayed as “nettled by German business smartness, alarmed by German naval strength, trying to isolate and check and hem in the upstart of every move.”[12] The poem by Lissauer and the article published by an American Professor of German origin portray the picture of an England which is only interested in its own economic well-being and which uses the moment to destroy a common concurrent. To avoid Germany’s competition with England for the best trade routes, England went to war. It was not to protect Belgium as claimed by the English officials, but to annihilate a concurrent.

The German view of the French had been fixed since the Franco-Prussian War. Francke described the German attitude toward France in his article:

“France unwilling to forget her national humiliation, unequivocally refusing to acknowledge the settlement of 1870 as final, incessantly preparing for the day of revenge, persistently attempting to form threatening alliances against her hated foe.”[13]

From the German point of view, France was a cowardly nation without a backbone. It needed a couple of allies to go to war against Germany. Therefore, France decided to go to war only with the help of England and Russia.

Both sides, the Franco-British and the German, accused each other of using an illegal kind of warfare. Since the second conference of The Hague, the use of flat-nosed bullets was illegal. Especially the German side tried to prove that their enemies used this kind of bullets frequently (picture on the right).[14]

On the allied side, the Germans were presented as Huns. This portrayal is based on a historical curiosity. The German Kaiser Wilhelm II compared the German soldiers he sent to China with Huns in a speech held in Bremerhaven on June 27, 1900.[15] The German people, with Kaiser Wilhelm II at the top, were seen as militarism personified. In particular in England, Germany was pictured as the Teutonic enemy and the hatred was so fierce, that a play about the resistance of an English family during a German invasion was the most popular play in 1909.[16]

France and England both underlined the brutality and inhumanity of the German nature. According to the allied propaganda, war prisoners were ill-treated, tortured and under-fed. German soldiers were purported by the allied forces to rape women and cut their breasts off. The hands of small boys were cut off to satisfy the Germans’ sadism and to prevent their service in the enemy’s forces. Furthermore, German soldiers were said to have burned civilians and babies alive.[17] Germany was also accused by France and England of taking hostages as human shields to prevent allied attacks.


Allied intellectuals also supported their governments’ justification of the war. The Academie de Science of France condemned the “pillages and executions approved by the leaders, the massacres of the wounded, of women and children.”[18] Fifteen of the sixteen French universities (Lille was occupied by Germany) asked in a manifest who was to blame for the war, who violated the Belgian neutrality and who destroyed the library in Louvain.[19] The French intellectuals questioned the status of Germany as a civilized country.

The propaganda and the common stereotypes influenced a lot of the soldiers. In particular, young soldiers coming from school or university were extremely affected by the propaganda. On both sides, the young soldiers inspired by patriotism went to war.[20]

Picture: German soldiers in their trenches, Christmas 1914

In his book Rites of Spring Ekstein uses an interesting approach to why the Christmas Truce could happen over this backdrop of hate. After six months of war, a lot of reservists were at the front, who had a life besides the war. He considers this an essential reason for the truce. Elder soldiers with the responsibility for a family more often took part in fraternizations and were more open minded than their younger comrades, who were poisoned by hate.[21] Opposite to their younger comrades elder soldiers had more life experience and were not so easy to convince through propaganda. They had little enthusiasm to go to war, whereas young people, especially students, went with a high amount of nationalism and patriotism. Most young soldiers had a transfigured picture of the war.

Truce Offer Sometimes Rejected

There is no doubt that the propaganda of both sides influenced the soldiers’ attitude toward their enemies. On both sides, the offer of truce was refused. The reason for the refusal was their beliefs in the other’s guilt and in their just cause. A lieutenant from the German “Landwehr” wrote in a letter that

“ such a proposal in the past would have been accepted with pleasure, but at the present time, when we have clearly recognized England’s real character, we refuse to any such agreement. Also we do not doubt that you are men of honor, yet every feeling of ours revolts against any friendly intercourse towards the subjects of a nation which for years has, in underhand ways sought the friendship of all other nations, so that with their help annihilate us, a nation also which, while professing Christianity, is not ashamed to use dum-dum bullets; and whose greatest pleasure would be to see the political disappearance and social eclipse of Germany.[…] But all the same you are Englishmen, whose annihilate we consider as our most sacred duty. We therefore request you to take such action as will prevent your mercenaries, whom you call soldiers, from approaching our trenches in future.”[22]

Neither did the German philosophy student soldier Karl Aldag change his opinion about his English opponents. Although he had a great Christmas with his comrades in the trenches and a truce on New Year’s Eve to bury the dead, he noted that English soldiers were ”only mercenaries.”[23]

“The Only Truce They Deserve”

Similar feelings existed on the other side of the trenches. Captain Billy Congreve from the 3rd division noticed that the Germans did try to make a truce for Christmas.

We have issued strict orders to the men not to on any account allow a truce, as we have heard rumours that they will probably try to. The Germans did. They came over towards us singing. So we opened rapid fire on them, which is the only truce they deserve.”[24]

Bruce Bairnsfather described the Germans he met during the truce as “unimaginative products of perverted kulture” and as “these devils, […], all wanted to be friendly; but none of them possessed the open, frank geniality of our men.”[25] In his diary he labeled the Germans mostly as Huns.

Drawing made by Bruce Bairnsfather, Christmas 1914

The infantry Captain J.D.M. Beckett portrayed Germans as “very simple-minded creatures, and were much elated over alleged victories in Russia.”[26] In his letter which Beckett wrote about the meeting with the Germans he described them as arrogant and self-confident.

The Westminster Rifleman P.H. Jones wrote in his letter that, when the Germans came over toward their trenches, “this was all very well, but we had heard so many yarns about German treachery that we kept a very sharp look-out.”[27] The British lieutenant of the Cameronians emphasizes that trickery by the Germans was a common fear. He was warned not to allow the Germans to come too close to their trenches. Because the Germans did nothing without purpose, they feared the Germans would inspect the British trenches.[28]

Captain Sir Edward Hamilton from the Scots Guards wrote to his mother on December 28 1914 about his experiences of the truce. Although this letter shows a great understanding of each other – one German soldier gave him a letter for his English girl – both sides still stuck in their old patterns.

They think that our Press is to blame in working up feelings against them by publishing false “atrocity reports.” I told them of various sweet little cases which I have seen myself, and they told me of English prisoners whom put they have seen with soft-nosed bullets, and lead bullets with notches cut in the nose; we had a heated, and at the same time good-natured argument, and ended by hinting to each other that the other was lying.”[29]

Interestingly, Hamilton (picture on the right) reports no kind of hatred or mistrust of each other. They exchanged what they had heard about the each other. Stories and reports they had read or heard about the other’s illegal warfare were discussed. He believed the German soldiers when they told him that they were tired of fighting.

Trusting Each Other

Furthermore, this quote shows quite impressively that both sides trusted each other. Otherwise a conversation like this reported one would not be possible. People who hate their enemies or at least mistrust them will not discuss the propaganda stories they have heard. In the following sections of this letter, it becomes clear that both sides still went on with their fraternizations, and there is no kind of mistrust visible.[30]

Although it seems that Hamilton trusted the Germans, he called them in his diary, as Bairnsfather did, Huns, which means that a small part of the propaganda still worked.[31] In opposition to Bairnsfather, who uses the word Huns with a clear negative connotation, Hamilton uses this world only as different word for Germans. The way Hamilton uses the description Huns is neutral and not an expression of mistrust and disdain against the Germans.

Other soldiers like an officer from the Westminster Rifles, started thinking about the way the Germans were presented in the British press. In his letter, which was published first in The Daily News on December 30 and one day later in the New York Times, the officer described his impression of the truce with the Germans.

The Germans opposite us were awfully decent fellows – Saxons, intelligent, respectable-looking men. I had a quite decent talk with three or four have two names and addresses in my notebook. […] After our talk I really think a lot of our newspaper reports must be horribly exaggerated.”[32]

Political Structure

The English officer R.J. Fairhead saw the evil, but not in the soldiers. They just had to fight. In his statement, he strongly attacked the political structure in Europe and looked above the taught national stereotypes.

Politicians do not listen to those whom they claim to represent and the failure to take notice of the fragile peace declared for that brief period led to the anti-government revolution throughout Europe.”[33]

His learned hatred for the Germans was converted to a general hate for the whole situation and the system which made a war like this possible. Lieutenant A.P. Sinkinson describes similar experiences:

As I walked slowly back to our own trenches I thought of Mr. Asquish’s sentence about not sheathing the sword until the enemy be finally crushed. It is all very well for Englishmen living comfortable at home to talk in flowing periods, but when you are out here you begin to realize that sustained hatred impossible.”[34]

Sinkinson saw that Germans were not worse people than himself. Only the people at home, far away from the cruelties, the brutalities, from death and from the war’s real grimace, could keep their hatred. That the opinion toward the enemies had changed after the truce is emphasized by Westminster Rifle Man Percy. The new experiences he had with the Germans whom he met made him rethink everything he had heard about them. He wrote that

they [Germans] where really magnificent in the whole thing [Christmas Truce] and jolly good sorts. I now have a different opinion of the German. Both sides have now started firing, and are deadly enemies again. Strange it all seems, doesn’t it?”[35]

Obviously Percy recognized how surreal the situation was. He started to rethink his attitude toward the Germans but he did not think about stopping fighting them.

English soldiers who fraternized with Germans tended not to see them as Prussians. Prussians were still seen as the evil ones known from the newspaper and all the cruel stories. The aforementioned Westminster Rifle officer portrayed the Germans he met as very decent people, but “those men were Saxons- not Prussians.”[36]

Picture: German and British soldiers fraternizing on the battlefield

That the British soldiers differentiated if their enemies were Prussians or other Germans was common. Brown quotes one officer of the Rifle Brigade who at first had big doubts if he should meet his enemies. The night before, he let his people shoot at the German Christmas trees and the next day he buried with the Germans their fallen comrades. This was possible because he recognized that their opponents were Saxons. Saxons were, in his mind, good fellows who played the game as fair as they did.[37]

The behavior of the British soldiers was shaped by the local origin of their German enemies. Saxons, Bavarians or Wurttembergs were not seen to be as bad as Prussians because they were not in charge of the German policy. British soldiers might see in a Prussian soldier the German Kaiser Wilhelm II and his arrogance. His family, the Hohenzollern, was seen as a family which wanted to rule over the whole of Europe.

“We are not Prussians”

Non-Prussian Germans strongly emphasized that they were not Prussians. Captain Kenny from the Garhwal Rifles fraternized with a German regiment, and the soldiers with whom he talked said that they were Saxons & not Prussians.[38]

It is quite obvious that the soldiers differentiated between German origins because they still thought in their stereotypical patterns. On the one hand they recognized that the Germans whom they met were not as bad as they were told, but some Germans had to be bad, awful and cruel. Insomuch that the German Kaiser (picture on the right) was Prussian and the militaristic stereotype was a Prussian one, they thought that the Prussians has to be as bad as shown in their home propaganda.

Furthermore, some Saxons told the English soldiers not to trust the Prussians. They would not play fair and were nasty fellows. Contrary to that, Saxons were honest. Eckstein quotes a Saxon officer: “We are Saxons; you are Anglo-Saxons; word of a gentleman is for us as for you.”[39]

That it sometimes did not matter what nationality and from what part of Germany the Soldiers come from is shown by Captain Hamilton.He wrote in his letter that we all, English, Scots, Irish, Prussians, Wurttemberg, etc.,[40] sang various Christmas songs together. This case shows that the fraternization sometimes went over all boundaries of hate. The soldiers were not judged by their origins, but as humans and as nothing else.

Other Nationalities

In the most cases, German and British soldiers were engaged in the fraternization at the Western front during Christmas 1914. Fraternization between German and French soldiers occurred but with much less trust than between Germans and British. Often the mutual mistrust caused both to avoid fraternization.[41] Interestingly, when it occurred, the hatred of both was reflected on the British troops and the British government because England had nothing to do with the whole German-French antagonism.[42] In these cases of Franco-German fraternization or truce, both sides were surprised about the others’ humanity.[43]

Although there were a few truces between the Germans and French, the average Christmas of these enemies looked like the German student soldier Gotthold von Rohden described it. Von Rohden had to go on a patrol with seven comrades while the French side fired at him.[44] For both sides, Christmas 1914 meant nothing else then business as usual.

The Christmas Truce becomes really more remarkable if the antebellum stereotypes and the propaganda during the war are taken into account. Certainly some soldiers were so influenced by the propaganda that they refused to meet the enemy in No Man’s Land or even negated a truce proposal. These soldiers did not want to look above their horizons.

Others met with the enemy but still saw them with their propaganda poisoned eyes. Interestingly, they still talked with them and exchanged gifts. Their beliefs in their own government and their own press or in their own intellectuals were too strong to overcome their prejudice. The pictures they had in mind like this of the Germans as barbarous Huns and the English as conscienceless mercenaries was not questioned by them. These soldiers did not want to reflect their opinions about their enemies.

The Thinkers

The most remarkable group is the group of soldiers who, after having met the enemy between the trenches, started thinking about all they had read and heard about them.

For many, the former hatred was vanished. They now recognized the soldiers from the other side of the trenches as human as themselves. They were not mercenaries, no inhuman monsters eager for war, just humans. The stereotypes they know from the time before the war and before they met their enemies did not fit after meeting their enemies. Not all Germans acted like it was described in the newspaper and were not as arrogant as the German Kaiser. On the other hand not all the English soldiers were mercenaries fighting for material well-being.

These soldiers started to reflect their own experiences and started to compare their experiences with what they knew before about their enemies. The conclusion they made was that their prefabricated picture and the experiences they gained did not fit together. It was hard for the soldiers, faced with the reality of the war, to keep the black and white picture. The reality they saw was a grey picture with blurry boundries.

That this example of humanity did not occur again has several reasons. [45] One was definitely the change in warfare. Poison gas was used in 1915 for the first time and British cities were bombed by German Zeppelins. Furthermore, the hatred for the German inhumanity increased with the sinking of the Lusitania by a German submarine.[46] Moreover, the conventional warfare became crueler and the causalities on every side were much higher than in 1914. [47]

Another reason was that the headquarters were better prepared and used precautionary measures to prevent a truce. The punishment was on both sides more or less the death penalty.[48]

Soldiers grave in the Great War

Soldiers Grave

  Five Souls

   First Soul

I was a peasant of the Polish plain;
I left my plough because the message ran:-
Russia, in danger, needed every man
To save her from the Teuton; and was slain.
I gave my life for freedom – This I know
For those who bade me fight had told me so.

   Second Soul

I was a Tyrolese, a mountaineer;
I gladly left my mountain home to fight
Against the brutal treacherous Muscovite;
And died in Poland on a Cossack spear.
I gave my life for freedom – This I know
For those who bade me fight had told me so.

   Third Soul

I worked in Lyons at my weaver’s loom,
When suddenly the Prussian despot hurled
His felon blow at France and at the world;
Then I went forth to Belgium and my doom.
I gave my life for freedom – This I know
For those who bade me fight had told me so.

   Fourth Soul

I owned a vineyard by the wooded Main,
Until the Fatherland, begirt by foes
Lusting her downfall, called me, and I rose
Swift to the call – and died in far Lorraine.
I gave my life for freedom – This I know
For those who bade me fight had told me so.

   Fifth Soul

I worked in a great shipyard by the Clyde;
There came a sudden word of wars declared,
Of Belgium, peaceful, helpless, unprepared,
Asking our aid: I joined the ranks, and died.
I gave my life for freedom – This I know
For those who bade me fight had told me so.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Evryone wants a piece of Syria

Syria crisis: Guide to armed and political opposition

The BBC’s Lina Sinjab reports on the different warring factions in Syria

There are believed to be as many as 1,000 armed opposition groups in Syria, commanding an estimated 100,000 fighters.

Many of the groups are small and operate on a local level, but a number have emerged as powerful forces with affiliates across the country or formed alliances with other groups that share a similar agenda. Here we look at the most prominent.



Supreme Military Council logo
  • Leader: Brig Gen Salim Idris

The Free Syrian Army (FSA) was formed in August 2011 by army deserters based in Turkey, led by Col Riad al-Asaad. Its banner was soon adopted by armed groups that began appearing across the country. Despite this, the FSA’s leaders had little or no operational control over what was happening on the ground in Syria. The opposition’s Western and Gulf Arab backers sought to encourage a centralised rebel leadership and in December 2012 a number of brigades affiliated themselves to a newly-created Supreme Military Council (SMC). The SMC’s chief-of-staff, Gen Idris, wants it to be a more moderate and stronger alternative to the jihadist rebel groups in Syria.

Video purportedly showing Gen Salim Idris visits rebel fighters in Latakia province (11 August 2013)

The SMC has 30 members, six representing each of five “fronts” in Syria – Northern (Aleppo and Idlib), Eastern (Raqqa, Deir al-Zour and Hassaka), Western (Hama, Latakia and Tartus), Central (Homs and Rastan) and Southern (Damascus, Deraa and Suwaida). Each front has a civilian-military council and a commander. The opposition National Coalition describes Gen Idris as the commander of the FSA, however observers have said the FSA is simply a loose network of brigades rather than a unified fighting force. Brigades supposedly report through the chain of command to Gen Idris, but he is yet to assert operational control and serves more as a spokesman and conduit for foreign funding and arms shipments. SMC-aligned brigades retain separate identities, agendas and commands. Some work with hardline Islamist groups that alarm the West, such as Ahrar al-Sham, and al-Qaeda-linked jihadists.


Martyrs of Syria Brigades

  • Leader: Jamal Maarouf
  • Estimated number of fighters: 7,000

Originally called the Martyrs of Jabal al-Zawiya Brigade, the group was formed in late 2011 in Idlib province. Although its name was changed in mid-2012 to the Martyrs of Syria Brigades to reflect the growing ambitions of its leader, its operations are still focused in north-western Syria. Unlike Suqour al-Sham (see below), which also hails from Jabal al-Zawiya and wants an Islamic state, the Martyrs of Syria Brigades reportedly ascribe to no particular ideology.

Northern Storm Brigade

The Northern Storm Brigade is an Islamist FSA unit that controls an important border crossing between Syria and Turkey. In September 2013, there were deadly clashes between the Northern Storm Brigade and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) after the jihadist group stormed the town of Azaz.

Ahrar Souriya Brigade

The Ahrar Souriya (Free Men of Syria) Brigade, which operates under the SMC, was set up by Col Qassem Saad al-Din, a former air force pilot from the northern town of Rastan.

line break


Logo of Islamic Front
  • Leader of Shura Council: Ahmed al-Sheikh (Suqour al-Sham)
  • Deputy leader of Shura Council: Abu Omar Hureitan (Liwa al-Tawhid)
  • General secretary: Sheikh Abu Rateb (Liwa al-Haqq)
  • Head of military office: Zahran Alloush (Jaysh al-Islam)
  • Head of political office: Hassan Abboud (Ahrar al-Sham)
  • Head of Sharia office: Abu al-Abbas al-Shami (Ahrar al-Sham)
  • Estimated number of fighters: 45,000

In November 2013, seven Islamist groups – Harakat Ahrar al-Sham al-Islamiyya, Jaysh al-Islam, Suqour al-Sham, Liwa al-Tawhid, Liwa al-Haqq, Ansar al-Sham and the Kurdish Islamic Front – declared that they were forming the largest rebel alliance yet in the 33-month conflict, with an estimated 45,000 fighters. They said the new Islamic Front was an “independent political, military and social formation” that aimed to “topple the Assad regime completely and build an Islamic state”. They outlined a new command structure, with key roles shared between the seven groups, and said they would work towards a “gradual merger”.

The announcement led to the dissolution of the Syrian Islamic Front (SIF), which was dominated by Ahrar al-Sham, and the effective break-up of the SMC-aligned Syrian Islamic Liberation Front (SILF). Analysts predicted that the move would undermine the SMC, and in December 2013 the front announced that it had withdrawn from the SMC’s command. Days later, its fighters drove out SMC-aligned forces out of their headquarters and warehouses at the Bab al-Hawa border crossing with Turkey, prompting the US and UK to suspend “non-lethal” assistance for rebel groups in northern Syria.

The Islamic Front does not include al-Qaeda affiliates like the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) and the al-Nusra Front, but its charter welcomes foreign fighters, as “brothers who supported us in jihad”, suggesting it is willing to co-operate with them.

Harakat Ahrar al-Sham al-Islamiyya

Members of Ahrar al-Sham near the northern city of Raqqa (25 August 2013)
  • Leader: Hassan Abboud
  • Estimated number of fighters: 10,000 to 20,000

The Harakat Ahrar al-Sham al-Islamiyya (Islamic Movement of the Free Men of the Levant) is a Salafist group that first emerged in the north-western province of Idlib in late 2011 as Ahrar al-Sham and has since made a major impact on the battlefield. In December 2012, it formed the Syrian Islamic Front (SIF) with 10 other hardline Islamist groups, including Liwa al-Haqq. Ahrar al-Sham later merged with three of them to form Harakat Ahrar al-Sham al-Islamiyya. Its leader is Hassan Abboud, also known as Abu Abdullah al-Hamawi, who was imprisoned by the Syrian authorities after taking part in the insurgency in neighbouring Iraq but released in early 2011 as part of an amnesty.

Before its dissolution in November 2013, the SIF became the most powerful rebel force battling the government, operating all over the country. It remained independent and refused to come under the umbrella of the SMC, but co-operated with SMC-aligned brigades on the battlefield, as well as al-Qaeda affiliates.

Harakat Ahrar al-Sham’s fighters are renowned for their discipline and ability. They were some of the first to use improvised explosive devices and to target military bases to capture weapons. The group operates a “technical division” that carries out cyber-attacks and a “relief office” that runs social services and carries out public works.

Jaysh al-Islam

Jaysh al-Islam logo
  • Leader: Zahran Alloush
  • Estimated number of fighters: 9,000+

Jaysh al-Islam (Army of Islam) was formed by some 50 Islamist factions operating in and around Damascus in September 2013. Zahran Alloush, a former imprisoned Salafist activist whose group Liwa al-Islam (Battalion of Islam) is the most prominent and powerful member of the alliance, said it had been formed to “achieve unity among the units of the mujahideen and avoid the effects produced by the divisions within the National Coalition”. More than 30 of the brigades in Jaysh al-Islam were already operating under the banner of Liwa al-Islam. The others include Liwa Fath al-Sham, Liwa Tawhid al-Islam and Liwa al-Ansar. Jaysh al-Islam’s formation was believed to have been an attempt by Saudi Arabia to counter the expanding presence of al-Qaeda affiliates around the Syrian capital, with Salafist groups being offered arms and money in return for loyalty. Zahran Alloush’s father is a religious scholar based in the Gulf Kingdom. Liwa al-Islam, which was founded in mid-2011, is the leading rebel group in the Ghouta agricultural belt around Damascus and is well-armed. The group rose to prominence after claiming it was behind the bombing of the National Security Bureau’s headquarters in Damascus in July 2012, which killed several senior security officials including the defence minister and President Assad’s brother-in-law.

Suqour al-Sham

Ahmed al-Sheikh, leader of Suqour al-ShamAhmed al-Sheikh is leader of the Islamic Front
  • Leader: Ahmed al-Sheikh
  • Claimed number of fighters: 9,000 to 10,000

Suqour al-Sham (Falcons of Syria) was formed in the Jabal al-Zawiya region of the north-western province of Idlib in September 2011. It has since grown in size and influence – drawing in several local factions, including the Daoud Brigades – and expanded its operations into Aleppo and Damascus provinces. Ahmed al-Sheikh, also known as Abu Issa, was the driving force behind the establishment in September 2012 of the SILF and was named its leader. Suqour al-Sham nevertheless said its fighters would not take instruction from an outside leadership and in late 2013 it joined the Islamic Front. Abu Issa, who has previously called for a moderate Islamic state that is not imposed on society, was named head of the new alliance.

Liwa al-Tawhid

  • Leader: Abdul Aziz Salama
  • Estimated number of fighters: Between 8,000 and 10,000

Liwa al-Tawhid (Battalion of Monotheism) was formed in July 2012 to unite the many separate fighting groups operating in the northern Aleppo countryside. It took control of part of the city of Aleppo after leading a rebel offensive that month. Liwa al-Tawhid is now one of the main forces operating in the province. The relatively moderate Islamist group, which calls for an Islamic state that is governed by civilians and protects minorities, joined the SMC-aligned SILF in January 2013. However, it maintained good relations with hardline groups such as Harakat Ahrar al-Sham and the al-Nusra Front. In September 2013, it was called in to broker an end to clashes between ISIS and an SMC-aligned brigade in the northern town of Azaz. Later that month, Abdul Aziz Salama, then Liwa al-Tawhid’s political leader, read out a statement by 11 rebel groups, including al-Nusra, declaring that they did not recognise the National Coalition and calling for the opposition to unite under an “Islamic framework”. Its late military leader Abdul Qadir al-Saleh, a former businessman known as “Hajji Marea”, praised al-Nusra before he was killed in a government air strike in November 2013. After his death, Mr Salama, also known as “Hajji Anadan”, assumed overall command of Liwa al-Tawhid and the following week the group joined the newly formed Islamic Front. In addition to its military operations, Liwa al-Tawhid has medical and media “foundations” and claims to have thousands of civilian “administrators” helping run areas under rebel control.

Liwa al-Haqq

Liwa al-Haqq (Battalion of Truth) was formed in 2012 by Liwa al-Ansar and other Islamist brigades fighting in and around the central city of Homs. Led by a former Syrian army paratrooper, it is one of the most prominent groups in Homs and the surrounding province. Liwa al-Haqq is dominated by hardline Islamists and helped form the now-dissolved SIF alliance with Ahrar al-Sham.

Kataib Ansar al-Sham

Kataib Ansar al-Sham (Supporters of the Levant Brigades) is mainly active in the northern provinces of Latakia and Idlib. The group was a founding member of the SIF.

Kurdish Islamic Front

The Kurdish Islamic Front is a Salafist group that came to prominence only recently when it fought alongside Harakat Ahrar al-Sham and ISIS against the Popular Protection Units (YPG), the Kurdish militia force set up by the Democratic Unity Party (PYD) to provide security in the de facto autonomous Kurdish zone in north-eastern Syria. The KIF reportedly runs a number of Islamic schools for Kurdish children in Aleppo and elsewhere.

line break


Syrian Islamic Liberation Front (SILF) logo

The Syrian Islamic Liberation Front (SILF) is a loose alliance formed in September 2012 by about 20 rebel groups, including the Farouq Brigades, the Islamic Farouq Brigades, Liwa al-Tawhid, Liwa al-Fath, Liwa al-Islam, Suqour al-Sham, and the Deir al-Zour Revolutionaries’ Council. Most of the groups, which ranged from moderate Islamist to ultraconservative Salafist in outlook, recognised the SMC and made up the bulk of its fighting force. In November 2013, Liwa al-Tawhid and Suqour al-Sham declared that they were joining the new Islamic Front, significantly reducing the SILF’s military strength and raising questions about whether it would be disbanded. It is not clear if the remaining members of the SILF will continue to fight under its banner or join the Islamic Front.


Ahfad al-Rasoul Brigades

  • Leaders: Abu Osama al-Julani, Mohammed al-Ali and Maher al-Nuami
  • Estimated number of fighters: Between 7,000 and 9,000

The Ahfad al-Rasoul (Grandsons of the Prophet) Brigades are an alliance of more than 40 moderate Islamist groups formed in 2012. They operate across Syria, although their presence is strongest in the northern province of Idlib. The alliance is independent but aligned to the SMC, and has also been linked to Qatar and Western intelligence agencies. In August 2013, its fighters were forced from the northern town of Raqqa by ISIS.

Asala wa al-Tanmiya Front

  • Claimed manpower: 13,000 fighters and civilian personnel

The Asala wa al-Tanmiya (Authenticity and Growth) Front is a moderate Islamist alliance formed in November 2012. Its fighters are organised across five “fronts” covering most of Syria, but their presence is strongest in Aleppo, where the Nour al-Din al-Zinki Brigades operate, and in the tribal areas of the eastern province of Deir al-Zour, the power base of the Ahl al-Athar Brigade.

Durou al-Thawra Commission

The Durou al-Thawra (Revolution’s Shields) Commission is an SMC-linked alliance of a few dozen small armed factions, most of them in Idlib and Hama provinces. It was set up in 2012 with the help of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood. It describes itself as a moderate Islamic-democratic alliance. It acknowledges receiving support from the Brotherhood, but denies any direct link to it.

Tajammu Ansar al-Islam

Tajammu Ansar al-Islam (Gathering of the Supporters of Islam) was formed in mid-2012 by seven Damascus-based Islamist groups. However, it has since suffered several splits.

Yarmouk Martyrs’ Brigade

The Yarmouk Martyrs’ Brigade is a moderate Islamist group linked to the SMC that was formed in the southern province of Deraa in August 2012 through the merger of eight small units. Led by Bashar al-Zoubi, it operates mainly near Syria’s borders with Jordan and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, where in March and May 2013 fighters briefly detained UN peacekeepers patrolling the demilitarised area.

National Unity Brigades

  • Estimated number of fighters: 2,000

The National Unity Brigades (Kataib al-Wihda al-Wataniya) were created in August 2012. They claim to have several units located in almost all of Syria’s provinces and to operate “for the sake of a civil, democratic state for all ethnicities and social identities”. The NUB operates mainly in the Jisr al-Shughour region of Idlib province and south of Damascus, but also in Jabal al-Zawiya, Deraa and Deir al-Zour. Some fighters are reported to be from the minority Alawite and Ismaili sects.


Al-Nusra Front

  • Leader: Abu Mohammed al-Julani
  • Estimated number of fighters: 5,000 to 7,000
Members of the al-Nusra Front raise its banner above a military base in Idlib province (11 January 2013)

The Nusra (Support) Front for the People of the Levant, is a jihadist group believed to have been created in mid-2011 with the help of the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI), a militant umbrella group that includes al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). It declared its existence in January 2012 and has since emerged as one of the most effective rebel forces. Its fighters are active in 11 of Syria’s 14 provinces, particularly Idlib, Aleppo and Deir al-Zour. Initially, the group was blamed for dozens of suicide bombings in major city centres, killing many civilians. Later, its disciplined and well-armed fighters began to take part in regular rebel operations, then major offensives. Today, they control territory in northern Syria. The US designated al-Nusra a terrorist entity in December 2012, saying it was an “alias” of AQI. In April 2013, the head of the ISI, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, announced the merger of his group and al-Nusra, creating the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS). However, al-Nusra’s leader Abu Mohammed al-Julani – another former insurgent in Iraq released in 2011 by the Syrian government – swiftly rejected the move and asserted his allegiance to al-Qaeda’s overall leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri. Since then, al-Nusra and ISIS have operated as separate entities, with large numbers of foreign fighters joining the latter. Like Ahrar al-Sham, al-Nusra has sought to build popular support by providing social services and carrying out public works.

Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis)

  • Leader: Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi
  • Estimated number of fighters: 3,000 to 5,000
Rebel fighters from Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant

The creation of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant in April 2013 was rejected by the al-Nusra Front. ISI’s leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, known as Abu Dua, nevertheless pressed ahead with expanding its operations into Syria. In August 2013, US intelligence assessed that he was based in Syria and commanded as many 5,000 fighters, many of them foreign jihadists. The group is active mostly in northern and eastern provinces of Syria. It has assumed joint control of municipalities in Aleppo, Idlib and Raqqa provinces. Isis has taken part in a number of major rebel operations, including by carrying out suicide bombings that helped capture two military bases. But it has also had tense relationships with other rebel groups, including those considered Islamist. Its fighters reportedly recently killed a prominent member Ahrar al-Sham, and have clashed with those from Ahfad al-Rasoul in Raqqa and the Northern Storm Brigade in Azaz. They have also targeted Shia and Alawite civilians.

Jaysh al-Muhajirin wa al-Ansar

Jaysh al-Muhajirin wa al-Ansar (Army of the Emigrants and Helpers) is a group comprising hundreds of mostly foreign fighters, many of them from the North Caucasus, that was formed in March 2013 by several jihadist units. The group, which seeks to establish an Islamic state in Syria, operates mostly in Aleppo province, but says it is also fighting in Hama and Latakia. It is led by a Chechen jihadist called Omar al-Shishani, who has aligned himself with ISIS.


Popular Protection Units (YPG)

  • Political leader: Salih Muslim (PYD)
  • Claimed number of fighters: 10,000 to 15,000
Popular Protection Units (YPG) fighters in Aleppo (20 June 2013)

The Popular Protection Units is the armed wing of the Kurdish political party, the Democratic Unity Party (PYD), an affiliate of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) that runs the de facto autonomous Kurdish zone in north-eastern Syria. The YPG emerged as a force in the summer of 2012 when the Syrian army withdrew from Kurdish areas and it sought to provide security. The PYD has tried to keep the Kurds out of the conflict and consolidate its territorial gains. However, there has been occasional fighting with government troops, and since November 2012 also deadly clashes between the YPG and rebel fighters – particularly those from Islamist and jihadist brigades – over control of several border towns and parts of the city of Aleppo. The Syrian rebels and the Turkish government have accused the Kurdish group of acting as an Assad proxy.

Sources: IHS Jane’s, CTC Sentinel, Institute for the Study of War, Carnegie Endowment

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A Christian couple’s legs broken, and burnt alive on fabricated charges of blasphemy by a Kiln Owner

PAKISTAN: A Christian couple’s legs broken, and burnt alive on fabricated charges of blasphemy by a Kiln Owner

November 5, 2014


Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-147-2014


November 5, 2014
PAKISTAN: A Christian couple’s legs broken, and burnt alive on fabricated charges of blasphemy by a Kiln Owner

ISSUES: Blasphemy law, religious minorities, Torture, illegal confinement,

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information about a horrifying incident of a Christian couple being burnt alive on charges of Blasphemy in Pakistan’s Punjab Province. According to information, the couples’ legs have been broken so that they cannot escape the burning. The young Christian couple has been severely beaten and were both thrown into burning kiln by an enraged mob of about 2000 to 3000. This large mob had been instigated by the owner of a kiln in Kasur District in the Punjab Province, where the Provincial Government permits any person, especially organized mobs to do as they please, with impunity to those religious minorities such as Christians, Ahmadi’s etc. This incident too has taken place with full police presence and connivance.

The incident had taken place at the time the couple had met the kiln owner to demand arrears in payments due to them – dues that amounted to about Rupees 500,000 for work done for over a period of several months. The kiln owner had charged them instead with blasphemy and instigated the mobs to break their legs and burn them alive, on allegations that the couple burnt pages from the Holy Quran.


AHRC-UAC-147-2014.jpgAccording to the information received from the Women In Struggle for Empowerment (WISE), Life for All Pakistanis, and other media sources, on 4th November 2014, a Christian couple, Mr. Shahzad Masih, 32 years of age and his wife Mrs. Shama of 30 years, had requested that they be paid monies due to them amounting to about Pakistan Rupees 500,000 from Mr. Yousuf Gujjar, a Kiln owner in the area. A couple of days earlier on 2nd November 2014, the couple who worked in the clay-baking factory, were kidnapped and held hostage for two days inside the factory premise. On 4th 4 November morning at around 7.00 a.m. the couple had been dragged out by the mobs, beaten till their legs were broken and then shoved into the brick kiln. Reports revealed that the Shama, was pregnant at the time.

The couple had been agitating for months, and had wanted to leave the Kiln taking with them their three young children since the Kiln Owner Yousuf Gujjar was not paying their wages. He had in turn demanded Pakistan Rupees 500,000 from the couple if they want to quit their jobs at the kiln.

According to Sardar Mushtaq Gill, a lawyer and human rights defender who visited the scene of the crime, the alleged charges of blasphemy was laid upon them due to an incident following the death of Shahzad’s father a few days earlier. Shama while cleaning her father-in-law’s house, had burnt some personal belongings which included papers , books, etc,. A Muslim man, a passerby seeing Shama disposing of the papers, etc, had spread the word in the village that she was burning pages of the Holy Quran. Upon this instigation a mob of around 100 enraged people had attacked the couple and taken them hostage which ended in them being executed on the 4th November 2014.

Sarfraz, a cousin of the Shahzad, has stated that “Two days ago, after an exchange of words with Yousuf, the owner of the kiln, he had locked the couple along with their children in a room,”. After two local Mosques announced the alleged blasphemy, “a large number of Muslims led by area clerics reached the kiln and dragged the couple out of the room after forcibly breaking in. The mob had first tortured them, broken their legs and then thrown them in the kiln.

According to the information received, as the Christian couple were pleading and protesting their innocence, the mob was shouting “Allah hu Akbar,” (Allah is great) “death to blasphemers,” and “kill the infidel Christians”. Hearing these cries, Christian residents living nearby, had fled from their homes in fear of their lives.  Media reports claim that it was the kiln owner who had instigated the nearby locality and Mosque leaders calling on them to punish the couple for blasphemy. The Mosque leaders used loudspeakers to call to the mob to gather and punish the alleged blasphemers. It is also reported that before throwing the couple in the furnace, the mob had also broken their legs so that they could not be able to run away.

On the day of incident the kiln owner detained them in a room for allegedly desecrating the Holy Quran and had gathered the villagers and informed them about the alleged desecration of the Holy Quran. An activists who had visited the site, following the incident had said that only a few bones and hair were found at the site. Reports also revealed that around two dozen police officers were present and did nothing to stop this heinous crime.  A report published in Pakistan Today said that the couple had three children and Ms. Shama was pregnant with her fourth child.

According to activists and rights based organisations the owner of the kiln had been involved in creating a hostile environment against the Christian couple for some time since the couple were demanding their dues, and these demands were drawing the attention of other workers to the sheer lack of any labour rights in the factory.  The kiln owner  had even appointed several of his supporters to watch the activities of the couple for some time so that they can be punished on any  blasphemy charges.

The District police are now in attempts to shift the blame of the killing the couple to the local people in an effort to save the skin of the brick kiln owner – who has close contacts with the police officers of the District. The District Police Officer (DPO) Kasur, Jawad Qamar said that it was Muhammad Irfan a worker at the kiln who spread the news of  the couple burning the pages of the Quran and that the informant should be punished for the instigation of the mob – that eventually killed the couple.


Pakistan’s brick kiln workers are highly discriminated and a vulnerable community; mostly debt bonded and often subject to harsh practices, and work in slave like conditions at these kilns. There are estimated 4.5 million bonded brick kiln labourers in Pakistan.

Blasphemy is a hugely sensitive issue in Muslim dominated Pakistan, with even unproven allegations often prompting mob violence. Anyone convicted, or even just accused, of insulting Islam, risks a violent and bloody death at the hands of fanatics and unruly mobs.

A Christian woman Asia Bibi has been on death row since November 2010 after she was found guilty of making derogatory remarks about Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) during an argument with a Muslim woman.

Minorities are particularly impacted by the blasphemy law. Firstly, they are disproportionately targeted as compared to their actual representation in the population. Secondly, when any one of them is accused, the entire community is made to suffer, as illustrated by the mob violence. In fact, the desire to grab land or settle personal scores often underlies blasphemy allegations.

According to the Daily Dawn, an estimated number of 1,274 people have been charged under the stringent blasphemy laws of Pakistan between 1986, from when they were included in the Constitution by General Zia ul Haq, in 2010.

Pakistan’s Penal Code Section dates back to pre-partition India when it was introduced in 1860. Section 295, better known as the Blasphemy Law, deals with religious offences and was meant to prevent religious violence. Prior to 1986, only 14 cases pertaining to blasphemy were reported.

The blasphemy laws include a death penalty for the defamation of the Holy Prophet and life imprisonment for the desecration of the Holy Quran.

According to sources, 51 people accused of blasphemy were murdered before their respective trials were over.


Please write the letters to the authorities calling them to initiate immediate inquiry in to the killing of two innocent Christians, (the husband and wife) on the fictitious charges of Blasphemy. The government of Pakistan must abolish the Blasphemy law particularly its clause B and C which are grossly misused with the motive to punish the people from religious minority groups. Please urge them to immediately arrest Yousuf Gujjar, the owner of the kiln, Mr. Javed Qamar, the Districy Police Officer of Kasur, Punjab, the Mosque leaders of the Koy Radha Kishan in the Kasur District on the charges of murder and lynching. The government of Punjab must protect and provide the best possible care to the children of the deceased couple.

The AHRC will write a separate letter to the The UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief minorities calling for his intervention into this matter.

To support this appeal, please click here:


Dear ………………..,

PAKISTAN: A Christian couple’s legs broken, and burnt alive on fabricated charges of blasphemy by a Kiln Owner

Name of victim:

1.Mr. Shahzad Masih 32, resident of Chak 59, a village near Kot Radha Kishan in Kasur District, Punjab

2. Mrs Shama 30 wife of Shahzad Masih, resident of Chak 59, a village near Kot Radha Kishan in Kasur District, Punjab

Names of alleged perpetrators:

Mr. Yousuf Gujjar, owner pf the brick kiln, Chak 59, a village near Kot Radha Kishan in Kasur District, Punjab

Mr. Jawad Qamar the District Police Officer (DPO) Kasur, Punjab,

Date of incident: Kot Radha Kishan, Kasur District, Punjab

Place of incident: November 4. 2014

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the barbaric and utterly horrifying incident of beating and burning alive of a Christian Couple on fictitious charges of Blasphemy. The government’s appeasement towards the religious leaders and failure to control the misuse of Blasphemy is creating a violent atmosphere in the country particularly in Punjab province which is compelling the members of religious minority groups to flee the country.

It is very shocking to me that in this incident not only the Mosque leaders and loudspeakers were used to punish the alleged blasphemers but also the police. The police are also becoming a part of Muslim fanaticism to taking sides with the extremist groups in Pakistan.

According to the information that I have received from the Women In Struggle for Empowerment (WISE), Life for All Pakistanis, and other media sources, on 4th November 2014, a Christian couple, Mr. Shahzad Masih, 32 years of age and his wife Mrs. Shama of 30 years, had requested that they be paid monies due to them amounting to about Pakistan Rupees 500,000 from Mr. Yousuf Gujjar, a Kiln owner in the area. A couple of days earlier on 2nd November 2014, the couple who worked in the clay-baking factory, were kidnapped and held hostage for two days inside the factory premise. On 4th 4 November morning at around 7.00 a.m. the couple had been dragged out by the mobs, beaten till their legs were broken and then shoved into the brick kiln. Reports revealed that the Shama, was pregnant at the time.

The couple had been agitating for months, and had wanted to leave the Kiln taking with them  their four young children since the Kiln Owner Yousuf Gujjar was not paying their wages. He had in turn demanded Pakistan Rupees 500,000 from the couple if they want to quit their jobs at the kiln.

According to Sardar Mushtaq Gill, a lawyer and human rights defender who visited the scene of the crime, the alleged charges of blasphemy was laid upon them due to an incident following the death of Shahzad’s father a few days earlier. Shama while  cleaning her father-in-law’s house, had burnt some personal belongings which included papers , books, etc,. A Muslim man, a passerby seeing Shama disposing of the papers, etc,. had spread the word in the village that she was burning pages of the Holy Quran. Upon this instigation a mob of around 100 enraged people had attacked the couple and taken them hostage which ended in them being executed on the 4th November 2014.

Sarfraz, a cousin of the Shahzad, has stated that “Two days ago, after an exchange of words with Yousuf, the owner of the kiln, he had locked the couple along with their children in a room,”. After two local Mosques announced the alleged blasphemy, “a large number of Muslims led by area clerics reached the kiln and dragged the couple out of the room after forcibly breaking in. The mob had first tortured them, broken their legs and then thrown them in the kiln.

As the Christian couple were pleading and protesting their innocence, the mob was shouting “Allah hu Akbar,” (Allah is great) “death to blasphemers,” and “kill the infidel Christians”. Hearing these cries, Christian residents living nearby, had fled from their homes in fear of their lives.  Media reports claim that it was the kiln owner who had instigated the nearby locality and Mosque leaders calling on them to punish the couple for blasphemy. The Mosque leaders used loudspeakers to call to the mob to gather and punish the alleged blasphemers. It is also reported that before throwing the couple in the furnace, the mob had also broken their legs so that they could not be able to run away.

On the day of incident the kiln owner detained them in a room for allegedly desecrating the Holy Quran and had gathered the villagers and informed them about the alleged desecration of the Holy Quran. An activists who had visited the site, following the incident had said that only a few bones and hair were found at the site. Reports also revealed that around two dozen police officers were present and did nothing to stop this heinous crime.  A report published in Pakistan Today said that the couple had three children and Ms. Shama was pregnant with her fourth child.

According to activists and rights based organisations the owner of the kiln had been involved in creating a hostile environment against the Christian couple for some time since the couple were demanding their dues, and these demands were drawing the attention of other workers to the sheer lack of any labour rights in the factory.  The kiln owner  had even appointed several of his supporters to watch the activities of the couple for some time so that they can be punished on any  blasphemy charges.

The District police are now in attempts to shift the blame of the killing the couple to the local people in an effort to save the skin of the brick kiln owner – who has close contacts with the police officers of the District. The District Police Officer (DPO) Kasur, Jawad Qamar said that it was Muhammad Irfan a worker at the kiln who spread the news of  the couple burning the pages of the Quran and that the informant should be punished for the instigation of the mob – that eventually killed the couple.

Pakistan’s brick kiln workers are highly discriminated and a vulnerable community; mostly debt bonded and often subject to harsh practices, and work in slave like conditions at these kilns. There are estimated 4.5 million bonded brick kiln labourers in Pakistan.

Blasphemy is a hugely sensitive issue in Muslim dominated Pakistan, with even unproven allegations often prompting mob violence. Anyone convicted, or even just accused, of insulting Islam, risks a violent and bloody death at the hands of fanatics and unruly mobs.

A Christian woman Asia Bibi has been on death row since November 2010 after she was found guilty of making derogatory remarks about Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) during an argument with a Muslim woman.

Minorities are particularly impacted by the blasphemy law. Firstly, they are disproportionately targeted as compared to their actual representation in the population. Secondly, when any one of them is accused, the entire community is made to suffer, as illustrated by the mob violence. In fact, the desire to grab land or settle personal scores often underlies blasphemy allegations.

According to the Daily Dawn, an estimated number of 1,274 people have been charged under the stringent blasphemy laws of Pakistan between 1986, from when they were included in the Constitution by General Zia ul Haq, in 2010.

Pakistan’s Penal Code Section dates back to pre-partition India when it was introduced in 1860. Section 295, better known as the Blasphemy Law, deals with religious offences and was meant to prevent religious violence. Prior to 1986, only 14 cases pertaining to blasphemy were reported.

The blasphemy laws include a death penalty for the defamation of the Holy Prophet and life imprisonment for the desecration of the Holy Quran.

According to sources, 51 people accused of blasphemy were murdered before their respective trials were over.

In view of the above, I call on your good offices to initiate an immediate inquiry in to the killing of the two innocent Christians, (the husband and wife) on the fictitious charges of Blasphemy. The government of Pakistan must abolish the Blasphemy law particularly its clause B and C which are grossly misused with the motive to punish the people from religious minority groups. I also earnestly urge you to immediately arrest Yousuf Gujjar, the owner of the kiln, Mr. Javed Qamar, the Districy Police Officer of Kasur, Punjab, the Mosque leaders of the Koy Radha Kishan in the Kasur District on the charges of abetting murder. I also call upon you to make arrangements to protect and provide the best possible care to the children of the deceased couple.

Yours sincerely,

1.Mr. Mamnoon Hussain
President of Pakistan
President’s Secretariat
Fax: +92 51 9207458
Email: publicmail@president.gov.pk

2. Mr. Mian Nawaz Sharif
Prime Minister
Prime Minister House
Fax: +92 51 922 1596
E-mail: secretary@cabinet.gov.pk or pspm@pmsectt.gov.pk

3. Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan
Federal Minister for Interior
R Block, Pak Secretariat
Fax: +92 51 9202624
Email: interior.complaintcell@gmail.com or ministry.interior@gmail.com

4. Mr. Shahbaz Sharif
Chief Minister
Government of Punjab Province
Chief Minister’s Secretariat
5-Club Road, GOR-I, Lahore, Punjab
Fax: +92 42 99205065
Email: cmcomplaintcell@cmpunjab.gov.pk

5. Mr. Pervez Rashid
Federal Minister
Ministry of Law, Justice and Human Rights
4th Floor, Cabinet Block,
Pak. Secretariat,
Islamabad, Pakistan.

Email: webmaster@infopak.gov.pk, OR contact@molaw.gov.pk

6.  Mr. Justice Tahir Shahbaz
Registrar of the Supreme Court of Pakistan
Constitution Avenue, Islamabad
Fax: +92 51 9213452
Email: mail@supremecourt.gov.pk

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Dozens Held After Christian Couple Killed By Mob

Dozens Held After Christian Couple Killed By Mob

The gruesome attack is the latest in a series on people accused of religious offences in Muslim-dominated Pakistan.

14:42, UK, Wednesday 05 November 2014

Pakistan police van taking anti-government protesters to jail in Islamabad

Police have been under pressure to catch the attackers

Dozens of people have been arrested in Pakistan after a mob beat a Christian couple to death and burned their bodies for allegedly desecrating the Koran.

A police official in Kot Radha Kishan, 40 miles (64 kms) from Lahore, said the bodies were set on fire in the brick kiln where the couple worked.

Local media said they were accused of burning a copy of the Koran and throwing it into a rubbish bin.

“We have arrested 44 people, it was a local issue incited by the mullah of a local mosque,” a regional police chief told Reuters.

He added: “No particular sectarian group or religious outfit was behind the attack.”

Video: Dozens Killed In Pakistan Blast

The attack is the latest in a series on people accused of religious offences in the primarily Muslim country.

Last month a British man with a history of mental illness who had been sentenced to death for blasphemy was shot by a prison guard in his cell.

Also in October, a Pakistani court upheld the death penalty against a Christian woman, Asia Bibi, who was found guilty of making derogatory remarks about the Prophet Mohammed.

The case drew global headlines after two prominent politicians who tried to help her were assassinated.

Video: Pakistan Arrests Malala Shooters

Blasphemy is a highly sensitive issue in Pakistan and those accused of it are sometimes lynched on the spot.

Christians make up about four per cent of the population and tend to keep a low profile for their own safety.

Sunni Muslim militants frequently bomb targets they see as heretical, including Christians, and Sufi and Shi’ite Muslims.

All of Pakistan’s minorities say the state fails to protect them against violence.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

9/11: The Mysterious Death of John O’Neill, FBI Counterterror Chief in Charge of the Osama bin Laden Investigation

The Man Who Knew Too Much –
Who Killed John O’Neill?

The propaganda preparation for 9/11


This article was first published by Global Research on June 13, 2002. You can access the original archive here.

In the immediate aftermath of the destruction of the World Trade Center, the finger of guilt was directed toward the only plausible author for such a sophisticated and ruthless act of terror – Osama bin Laden.

Throughout the late ’90′s, we were informed that bin Laden had declared war on America by reason of the American military presence on Saudi soil in the wake of the Persian Gulf War. We were told how bin Laden, ensconced in Afghanistan, headed up a world-wide terror franchise whose sophistication and global reach dwarfed that of the Iranian-financed Hizballah or Islamic Jihad (previously, the most widely known of the terror organizations among the masses in the Middle East). Bin Laden’s organization, al-Qaida, was presented to us as something entirely new in the annals of terrorism – a far-flung, sophisticated empire of terror, possessing – possibly – weapons of mass destruction, while having no clear or viable state sponsor behind it (as the Afghani Taliban were merely its resident protectors).  In short, by September 11, the United States now had a bona fide enemy – and, as they say in criminal justice parlance, a suspect with motive, means, and opportunity.

And while I was a bit taken at how quickly – and confidently – the fingers were pointing only hours after the 9/11 bombings, I was positively shaken by the first red flag that popped up. His name was John O’Neill – or more precisely, he is the seam that shows. Dated September 12, in a Washington Post article by Vernon Loeb, it was revealed that O’Neill, who died in his capacity as head of security for the World Trade Center, was also formerly the New York FBI Counterterror chief responsible for the investigation into Osama bin Laden. That could perhaps be written off as one of those freak synchronicities. There were the other items – reported quite blandly, in that “there’s nothing to see here, folks” tone – that gave me that sinking feeling. Apparently, O’Neill had a falling-out with the Ambassador to Yemen over his investigative style and was banned from returning there. But then there was that other nugget that I had trouble digesting – that O’Neill had resigned from a thirty-year career in the FBI “under a cloud” over an incident in Tampa – and then left to take up the security position at the WTC (only two weeks before!).

The seam that shows…

For the bulk of his career, like most of his FBI colleagues, John O’Neill was largely unknown to the public at large – respected in his circle, to be sure, yet scarcely meriting much mention in the media – beyond being referenced now and then as an expert on counterterrorism. Yet in the few months leading up to September 11, O’Neill was now suddenly the subject of a series of seemingly unrelated controversies – the first, in July, involving his dispute with the State Department over the conduct of the bin Laden investigation in Yemen; and the second, in August, in which he was reported to be under an FBI probe for misplacing a briefcase of classified documents during an FBI convention in Tampa.

In the light of the aftermath of this second controversy – the documents were found, “untouched”, a few hours later – one wonders why this seemingly minor news would merit such lengthy coverage in the Washington Post and New York Times. Keeping in mind the fact that these latter articles on O’Neill appeared a mere three weeks before he was to die in the rubble of the Twin Towers, one wonders if this wasn’t a well-orchestrated smear campaign against O’Neill, with a bit of unintended “blowback” – as this now-discredited counterterror chief in charge of all bin Laden bombings would finally make the news as a fatal casualty of bin Laden’s final bombing. Coincidence? Or was there something more here that would bear investigating?

My gut told me that, in the months preceding September 11, somebody was out to either discredit John O’Neill or, alternatively, to plant disinformation that could later be used to divert any investigator from a fruitful reconstruction of the forces behind 9/11.  Or, quite possibly, was a mistake made – one pointing the way toward a plan whose scope goes well beyond the designs of Osama bin Laden? In other words, could we spot the telltale fingerprints of a propaganda campaign preceding 9/11?

Well, as they say, a hypothesis is only as good as its usefulness in ferreting out reality. My hypothesis: that the events of September 11 were planned by those who not only had the motive, means, and opportunity to carry out the plan, but also were best placed to manage the consequences stemming from it, as well as managing the flow of information. If this were an “inside job”, the first thing to do was to look at who conveyed specific information on bin Laden before – and I stress, before – 9/11, for they were most likely involved wittingly or not with those who masterminded it.

Virtually the first “smoking gun” was presented the day after 9/11, when Vernon Loeb and Dan Eggen reported in the Post that Abdel Bari Atwan, editor of the Al-Quds al Arabi newspaper in London, “received information that he [bin Laden] planned very, very big attacks against American interests” only three weeks before 9/11. Moreover, the article reported that Atwan “was convinced that Islamic fundamentalists aligned with bin Laden were ‘almost certainly’ behind the attacks.” Incidentally, Atwan had personally interviewed bin Laden in Afghanistan in 1996 – among the very few to do so. As reported by Michael Evans in the August 24, 1998 issue of The Times, Atwan “is trusted by bin Laden.”

Curious, perhaps, that Atwan seemed to be one of the major “point men” used in elaborating the Osama bin Laden “legend”, as they say in intelligence parlance. In a U.S. News article dated August 31, 1998, Atwan informs us that bin Laden “is a humble man who lives simply, eating fried eggs, tasteless low-fat cheese, and bread gritty with sand. He hates America.” No flash in the pan, this interviewer. Apparently, bin Laden kept Atwan’s business card tucked away in his toga pocket. “Bin Laden phoned this newspaper, phoned me last Friday,” Atwan revealed in an ABC News LateLine Transcript dated August 25, 1998. We’ll come back to ABC News shortly.

While solidly implicating bin Laden the day after 9/11, Atwan was also the media’s “go-to” guy back in 1998 when he informed us, after President Clinton bombed tool sheds in Afghanistan, that bin Laden issued this threat against the United States: “The battle has not started yet. The response will be with action and not words.” In the same article (which I took from Nando Times), ABC News is the source for an additional threat called in by Ayman al-Zawahiri, a senior bin Laden aide: “The war has just started. The Americans should wait for the answer.” Only a few months before that, ABC had conducted its televised interview of bin Laden. By the summer of 1998, primed by Atwan, ABC NEWS, and a surprisingly small clique of well-worn sources, we had come to know bin Laden as America’s latest “Saddam”, “Qaddafi”, “Noriega” – take your pick and set your bomb sites.

By October 2000, when the U.S.S. Cole was bombed in Yemen, in case there was any doubt, Atwan offered Reuters his helpful analysis with regards to the source of blame: “I do not rule out that this was undertaken by Osama bin Laden. Yemeni groups don’t have the experience to carry out this kind of operation.”  Atwan informed Reuters that bin Laden “was unlikely to claim direct responsibility for Thursday’s attack for fear of U.S. reprisals.” One can imagine, then, that Atwan gave his trusting phone mate cause for many a sleepless night. With friends like these…

Leading up to 9/11, by the Spring of 2001, an incriminating wedding videotape, apparently implicating bin Laden in the Yemen bombing, was circulating around the Middle East after being broadcast on the ubiquitous al-Jazeera television station (reconstituted from the BBC TV Arabic Service – more on them later). In the video, bin Laden, according to the Saudi-owned al-Hayat newspaper (more on them later, too), recited a poem celebrating the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole (shades of deja vu here?) This from the ABCNEWS.com site dated March 1: “Al-Hayat, which carried a photo of bin Laden and his son at the wedding, said its correspondent was the only journalist at the ceremony, also attended by bin Laden’s mother, two brothers and sister who flew to Kandahar from Saudi Arabia.”

And yes, here, too, Atwan offers his thoughtful review of the bin Laden video, courtesy of PTI, datelined London June 22, 2001: “[Atwan] said the video was proof that the fugitive Saudi millionaire [the Bruce Wayne of terrorists] was fit, well equipped and confident enough to send out a call to arms.” Why this sudden need for proof? According to Atwan in the same article: “There have been rumours that [bin Laden] is ill and that he is being contained by the Taliban in Afghanistan. It is quite clear from the film that he is in good health to the point where he can fire a rifle, and is free to operate as he chooses.” In other words, limber enough for his starring role in the months ahead.

So who is Abdel Bari Atwan and why is he anxious to tell us so much? According to the Winter 1999 issue of INEAS (Institute of Near Eastern and African Studies), Abdel Bari Atwan, a Palestinian, was born in a refugee camp in the Gaza Strip in 1950. Educated at the American University of Cairo, Atwan moved to Saudi Arabia and worked as a writer for the al-Madina newspaper. In 1978, he moved to London, where he became a correspondent for the Saudi-owned Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper. In 1988, after shuffling around between Saudi-owned papers, Atwan was offered a position as editor of al-Quds al-Arabi. By his account, he was offered a position as the executive editor of the Saudi-owned al-Hayat (of the bin Laden wedding video coup), yet turned it down to produce a more independent newspaper as a challenge to the “empires” of the Saudi-dominated dailies.

Al-Quds began production in April 1989. A little more than a year later, Saddam invaded Kuwait and al-Quds stood alone as the only Arab newspaper opposed to the Persian Gulf War – at least by Atwan’s account. According to Atwan: “Without the Gulf War, we wouldn’t have taken such political lines, which made us well recognized and well respected.” In November 1996, Bari-Atwan braved a twelve-hour car ride through muddy roads, attired in shabby Afghani rags in below-zero weather, and gave us the early scoop on bin Laden, conducting a one-on-one interview in bin Laden’s [bat]cave. From then on, the mainstream media – CNN, ABC, BBC, Sky News – looked to Bari-Atwan and al-Quds as the “independent” voice of the Arab street.

Incidentally, in a discussion concerning the matter of Saudi domination of the Arabic media, taken from the Carryon.oneworld.org site, Atwan, as editor of his struggling independent, was facing off against Jihad Khazen, the editor of the Saudi-owned al-Hayat. As Atwan proudly related in support of his independence: “One day I was called by the BBC-TV Arabic service [whose staff later reconstituted itself as al-Jazeera television]: ‘There’s a story on your front page today, saying such and such. Is it true?’ I asked why he should doubt it and he replied: ‘It’s not published in al-Hayat [his job offer] or al-Sharq al-Awsat [his alma mater].’ ” Atwan boasts: “At least I can say we are 95 to 96 per cent independent” – leaving out the 4 to 5 per cent spent on bin Laden, I presume. Whether or not al-Quds truly is independent, this is the cover story the mainstream media buys into when they come trolling for their “independent” evidence.

So, to elaborate further on this (so far) fruitful hypothesis, it is my contention that al-Qaida and bin Laden are elaborate “legends” set up to promote a plausibly sophisticated and ferocious enemy to stand against American interests. I am not, however, implying that bin Laden himself is a total fabrication. Rather, it is my contention that confederates, believing themselves to act on behalf of bin Laden, are being set up in a “false flag operation” to perform operations as their controllers see fit.  And who are these controllers? If they’re anything resembling the folks who brought you Hizbullah and Hamas, you wouldn’t be sweating the suitcase nukes (made in America), the Ames strain anthrax (made in America), the MI5-like “sleeper agents” and coded “go” messages. Instead, you would be dodging primitive nail bombs and road mines – and not needing Abdel Bari Atwan to feed you the lowdown on the blame.

In view of the fact that bin Laden is of Saudi origin, that much of the “evidence” on the Arab side initially originated from Saudi-owned or Gulf Anglo-client state sources, and that Saudi Arabia is the major financial sponsor of the Taliban brand of fundamentalism in Afghanistan (as a counter-point to Iran), I believe it is fair to say that Saudi Arabia might possibly be implicated. ” Most likely, the Saudis performed their roles as subservient proxies. We’ll get to the ultimate controllers soon enough (if you haven’t already guessed where this is going). And now, to fill out the picture further, it is necessary to name an equally essential partner as proxy – Pakistan, or, more specifically, Pakistan’s version of the CIA – the ISI (Interservices Intelligence Directorate).

And this is where we begin to “close the circle” of our close-knit pre-9/11 propaganda clique. Returning again to the above-mentioned Dan Eggen and Vernon Loeb Post article of September 12, we’re offered – in a powerful little side-bar – more critical evidence implicating bin Laden for the attacks the day before. This time, the bombshell is offered by Palestinian journalist Jamal Ismail, Abu Dhabi Television’s bureau chief in Islamabad. According to Ismail, a bin Laden aide called him “early Wednesday on a satellite telephone from a hide-out in Afghanistan,” praising the attack yet denying any responsibility for it.  As it turns out, Ismail was also among the select few to conduct his very own bin Laden interview, published by Newsweek in its April 1, 1999 issue. Here is how Newsweek described Ismail’s good fortune: “Palestinian journalist Jamal Ismail’s mobile phone rang just before prayers on December 18. ‘Peace be upon you, ‘ said the voice on the line. ‘You may not recognize me, but I know you.’ ” And thus was Jamal Ismail invited on his own mud-soaked incursion to the bin Laden [bat]cave.

Searching deeper, I found an interesting obscure article penned by respected Pakistani journalist Rahimullah Yusufszai in The News Jang, and dated May 3, 2000.  It details the detention of two men of Kurdish origin, accused by the Taliban of spying for American and Israeli intelligence. As Yusufszai relates it, he spoke to the only journalists allowed by the Taliban to interview the detained men – Jamal Ismail and his cameraman. Apparently, Ismail had a special relationship with the Taliban, allowing him this rare privilege above other journalists. And, as we shall shortly see, so does Yusufszai.  One wonders who debriefs them at the end of a workday. But more interestingly, by May 5, as reported by Kathy Gannon for the Associated Press, the story acquires – as they say – “new legs.” Not only are the basic elements of the Yusufszai story mentioned, but the article leads off with the bombshell that one of the detained men revealed that he was recruited by the United States to find Osama bin Laden. It finishes with a little coda implicating bin Laden in the 1998 embassy bombings. Thus, in the space of two days, Yusufszai’s Pakistani “spy” article sprouts a bin Laden addition when fertilized by the American Associated Press – and nicely provides a plausible explanation as to why a Kurd would be prowling around Afghanistan on behalf of the United States.

Yusufszai, incidentally, moonlighted as an ABC News producer, charged with guiding ABC News correspondent John Miller through the Afghani marshes to the bin Laden [bat]cave – one of the very few American journalists to be accorded such an honour (and also, as it happens, a good friend of bin Laden arch-foe John O’Neill. But not chummy enough to direct O’Neill on to bin Laden’s hideaway). Moreover, Ismail and Yusufszai are mentioned together in a CNN article posted January 4, 1999 – the former for his Newsweek interview, the latter for his own bin Laden dialogue for TIME Magazine the day later.

Rahimullah Yusufszai, regarded by New York Times reporters John Burns and Steve LeVine as “one man who has seen more of the Taliban than any other outsider,” is also named by The Nation, in its article of January 27, 1997, as “one of the favourite journalists of [Pakistan’s] ISI…one of the organizations funding and arming the Taliban. ”

It’s a small world after all. In the September 29, 2001 article of PressPlus, Yusufszai’s ABC colleague, John Miller, mused about running into his buddy John O’Neill in Yemen while reporting on the U.S.S. Cole bombing the year before. “He said, ‘So this is the Elaine’s of Yemen.’ ”

“There is a terrible irony to all this,” Miller said. I’ll say: Miller, one of the very few Americans who can give a first-hand account of bin Laden, bumps into his friend, bin Laden’s chief investigator, while both are investigating a bombing in Yemen that will later be tagged onto bin Laden – and only a year before O’Neill dies at the hands of… allegedly …bin Laden.

Now, following the logic of my hypothesis, if the bin Laden threat was, pre-9/11, a close-knit propaganda campaign, one would expect to find the same names showing up repeatedly in combination with one another. This, too, applies to the American commentators. Let us return to the August 1998 American bombings of bin Laden’s tool sheds as an example. The night of the bombing, Rahimullah Yusufszai received a call from bin Laden aide Ayman al-Zawahiri, in a report from the Associated Press. Later, Yusufszai obtained for ABC News exclusive photos of the damage to bin Laden’s camp. Further commentary describing the layout of the bin Laden camp was furnished to the Washington Post by former CIA analyst and terrorism expert Kenneth Katzman, as well as Harvey Kushner of Long Island University. Only little more than a week before that, Katzman and Kushner were offering their assessment of bin Laden’s culpability for the embassy bombings in Africa in a Washington Post article penned by Vernon Loeb and Walter Pincus. They were joined in this effort by Vincent Cannistraro, the ABC news analyst who also escorted John Miller to his bin Laden interview, as well as provided running commentary in the days immediately following 9/11. Cannistraro, a former CIA counterterrorism chief, provided covert aid to the Afghani mujaheddin in the late ’80′s, as well as supervised CIA operations with the contras. He was also one of the point men in the notoriously circumspect investigation at Lockerbie. In the above-noted Loeb and Pincus article – in which bin Laden is quoted from the ABC News Miller and Yusufszai interview – Cannistraro weighs in with his assessment of the embassy bombings: “I believe Osama bin Laden is the sponsor of this operation, and I think all of the indications are pointing that way.”

Soon after the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen, a Vernon Loeb Post article, dated October 13, 2000, proceeded to implicate bin Laden through the detailed information provided by Kushner, Katzman, and Cannistraro.  Earlier, in a Vernon Loeb Post article dated July 3, 2000, Yusufszai, Kushner, and Cannistraro unveiled bin Laden aides Ayman al-Zawahiri and Muhammed Atef as the men to watch as bin Laden’s likely successors, with a helpful tidbit on the Zawahiri biography thrown in by the Saudi-owned al-Sharq al-Awsat.

None of the above, of course, is offered as the “smoking gun” pointing the way to a propaganda conspiracy, nor are my chosen examples meant to be exhaustive in evidencing this point. According to Felicity Barringer, in a New York Times article dated September 24, 2001:  ”A good deal of the public information on bin Laden comes from the journalists who went to Afghanistan to interview him, including [Peter] Bergen, … Peter Arnett, John Miller, Rahimullah Yusufzai, and Jamal Ismail.”  The article further makes reference to Vernon Loeb, Al Quds al-Arabi (Atwan), Judith Miller, Al Jazeera, and Brian Jenkins (formerly of Kroll Associates – the security firm that obtained the WTC position for John O’Neill by way of Jerry Hauer).  Clearly, I have also not heretofore made mention of the other experts who have worked assiduously toward building our knowledge base on bin Laden – Steven Emerson, Daniel Pipes, Yossef Bodansky, and various British and EU elites. However, the above examples do show how the information flow on bin Laden could be plausibly managed by the skilfully placed revelations of a relatively insular clique of “experts” called upon repeatedly by the mainstream media.

Here is how it would work:  A relatively few well-connected correspondents provide the “scoops” that get the coverage in the relatively few mainstream news sources – the four TV networks, TIME, Newsweek, CNN – where the parameters of debate are set and the “official reality” is consecrated for the bottom feeders in the news chain. In other countries, this is what is known as propaganda – or, put less politely, psychological warfare.

But before I leave this topic, I would like to provide an example of “news management” that is revealing for what is omitted – that is, the “smoking gun” of Pakistani ISI involvement in the events of 9/11.  On October 9, 2001, the Times of India dropped this little bombshell:  “Top sources confirmed here on Tuesday that [ISI Chief Mahmud Ahmad] lost his job because of the “evidence” India produced to show his links to one of the suicide bombers that wrecked the World Trade Centre. The US authorities sought his removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 were wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh at the instance of Gen. Mahmud.”

What makes this particular piece so devastating is that only days before, much of the mainstream American media was touting the news of a “key link” in the chain of evidence linking bin Laden to the events of September 11 – namely, a $100,000 wire transfer to the hijackers from a shadowy operative linked to bin Laden.  Yet once this operative was “outed” as being linked instead to the Pakistani ISI Chief, any propaganda gains initially made through this evidence would now crumble.  One possible reason might stem from this Karachi News item, released only two days before September 11:

“[Pakistani] ISI Chief Lt-Gen Mahmood’s week-long presence in Washington has triggered speculation about the agenda of his mysterious meetings at the Pentagon and National Security Council. Officially, State Department sources say he is on a routine visit in return to [sic] CIA Director George Tenet’s earlier visit to Islamabad…What added interest to his visit is the history of such visits. Last time Ziauddin Butt, Mahmood’s predecessor, was here during Nawaz Sharif’s government the domestic politics turned topsy-turvy within days. That this is not the first visit by Mahmood in the last three months shows the urgency of the ongoing parleys…”

In other words, this was a propaganda piece that went disastrously wrong. After October 9, bin Laden’s alleged paymaster could now be linked to a U.S. “ally” who spent the days before 9/11 in deep consultation at the Pentagon.  The US authorities immediately went into damage control mode by insisting on the quiet retirement of the “outed” ISI chief. Thus removed from the public eye, the ISI Chief’s role in all this could be effectively ignored, and an American media black-out could be safely assumed.

Such a scenario certainly fits in snugly with my hypothesis, which I will now proceed to elaborate completely. The events of September 11 were masterminded by those who were in the best position to manage the consequences – namely, those most able to manage the flow of information, those most able to coordinate all the elements necessary for the perpetration of a successful operation (subverting airport security, guiding the planes to their specific targets), and most significantly, those who stood to reasonably benefit in the aftermath. Conspiracies, by their very nature, are not crimes of passion. They may involve rational, albeit cold-blooded, attempts to achieve a desired end by employing the most effective means available. It is for this reason that “mainstream” terror groups like Hamas and Hizbullah largely avoid attacking American interests where such attacks would serve no practical interest. For all their talk of Jihad, these terror groups tend to plan their specific attacks with an eye to the consequences that could reasonably be expected to follow. Thus, knowing the moral and political constraints of Israeli deterrent strategies, they calibrate their attacks to elicit consequences that are most tolerable for them – and hence, manageable. Yet surely, in the light of the cult of suicidal martyrdom, such considerations no longer hold sway. Perhaps. But then, in the case of such a far-flung anti-Zionist movement as al-Qaida, one would expect at least a little more exertion against Israeli interests than has heretofore prevailed – unless, of course, the “point” of al-Qaida was to provide a plausible dire threat to American interests where none had then existed. In any case, as nobody has noticed this particular anomaly, there was no need for any needless exertion of resources in order to bolster a credibility that needed no bolstering in this one particular sector.

Motive, means, and opportunity. While I presented the Saudis and Pakistani intelligence as clear-cut proxies, the only motive these elements would have to benefit from a crime of this nature is an assurance that no punishment would be forthcoming but rather, they would be on the right side of power and wealth among those in a position to determine the booty.

Another anomaly: on the very day that the ISI Chief was in deep consultation at the Pentagon, Ahmed Shah Massoud, the head of the Afghani Northern Alliance – a cultishly popular figure within that group, and a mortal foe of Pakistan’s ISI – was assassinated by two terrorists posing as cameramen. Keeping in mind the fact that, throughout the ’90′s, American leaders such as Clinton, and American companies such as Unocal, were largely throwing their support over to the Taliban in opposition to the Northern Alliance (or United Front), it seems rather convenient that, in the aftermath of 9/11, the way was now cleared for the Northern Alliance to be co-opted as an instrument for setting up a more pliant Afghani government (now headed, incidentally, by a former consultant to Unocal).

So who are the ultimate controllers? To begin with, the circumstantial evidence seems to point to an operative clique primarily based out of New York City and the State of Florida. I stress the word “operative”, as this clique appears to consist of subservient agents involved in laying the preparations. Once again, John O’Neill serves as an effective Rosetta Stone in interpreting the raw outlines of this operative clique (which is by no means a “rogue” clique). The FBI and CIA elements involved in counterterrorism have a checkered past. For one, Oliver North in the 1980′s served as Counterterrorism Chief while he used his office as a cover to deal with such narco-terrorists as Monzar al-Kassar (who figures in the crash at Lockerbie – also investigated by Cannistraro). In the late ’90′s, O’Neill was transferred from the federal office of Counterrorism to the New York Counterrorism Office of the FBI – and it was the New York branch which was then designated as the primary investigator of all overseas investigations involving bin Laden. Moreover, this branch was also involved in the somewhat suspect investigation of TWA 800 – investigated by O’Neill and reported upon by ABC’s John Miller, who was formerly the Deputy Police Commissioner of Public Relations for the NYPD before he joined up with ABC.

As regards New York, there is another element involved in germ warfare operations. Actually, a multi-million dollar bunker – serving as a command and control center in the event of a biological attack – was set up at 7 World Trade Center at the direction of Rudolph Giuliani, who also oversaw the mass spraying of malathion over the boroughs of New York City when the West Nile Virus hit town a few summers previously.  The man Giuliani placed in charge of that operation, Jerry Hauer, also happened to be the man who found John O’Neill the position at the World Trade Center, as well as being the one who – by his own admission – identified O’Neill’s body.

Moreover, there has been a widespread campaign on to link the threat of al-Qaida with that of a mass biological attack. At least the day after September 11, the link – as the Anthrax mailings had yet to arise – was not so apparent. Yet on PBS’ Frontline, the New York Times’ Judith Miller (no apparent relation to John Miller, as far as I’m aware), accompanied by the New York Times’ James Risen, was interviewed as an expert on al-Qaida. Several weeks later, Judith Miller would once more make the headlines as the apparent recipient of an anthrax mailing which turned out to be a false alarm – yet was all the same conveniently timed with the well-publicized launching of her book on…germ warfare. As was later discovered, the anthrax mailings petered out once the news leaked that a DNA test revealed the material to be of the Ames strain of anthrax, an agent synthesized out of a CIA laboratory in Fort Detrick, Maryland.  Nevertheless, this was sufficient to fast-track Bioport’s exclusive license for the anthrax vaccine toward FDA approval. Formerly, Bioport’s experimental anthrax vaccine was being forcibly administered – under threat of court-martial – to hundreds of thousands of American servicemen (in conformity with Bioport’s exclusive and lucrative contract with the Department of Defense).

Incidentally, Judith Miller, along with Jerry Hauer, was among 17 “key” participants in a biowarfare exercise known as “Dark Winter” – a think tank-funded scenario that aimed to study the nationwide effects of a hypothetical smallpox outbreak.  One of the sponsors of that exercise was the Anser Institute of Homeland Security, an organization established before September 11, 2001.  Interestingly enough, the curious phrase “homeland security” was starting to creep up with increasing frequency in the vocabularies of certain political cliques (Dick Cheney, the Hart-Rudman Commission, et al.) in the year or two leading up to 9/11.

The point of the above-noted information is to draw attention to an apparent propaganda campaign to prepare the public for a catastrophic biological attack. As with the Twin Towers, the blame for any coming attack may be duly and plausibly assigned by those who carefully laid the groundwork in preparing us for this eventuality.

As for Florida, the connection with this state is obvious, for not only was the first anthrax mailing directed to the Florida offices of the National Enquirer, but many of the accused hijackers were also reported to receive their pilot training from flight schools in Venice and Tampa. Notably, it was a Florida bank account to which hijacker Mohamed Atta allegedly deposited his 9/11 pay cheque.  Moreover, Florida, by way of the MacDill Air Force Base, is also Central Command for the war in Afghanistan.  In addition to its function as Central Command for the war on terrorism, MacDill is -outside of Langley – also a major base of the CIA. Thus, in the CIA’s own backyard, we find the infrastructure and financial support that went into the planning for the events of 9/11. And, as we so often find with events surrounding 9/11, another synchronicity – for coincidentally enough, the woman who reportedly happened to find an apartment for one of the alleged hijackers was the wife of the senior editor of the National Enquirer. Moreover, her husband, Michael Irish, also happened to make use of an airfield that reportedly served as flight training for some of the hijackers. I emphasize the word “reportedly,” as the possibility always exists that this “reported fact” may be nothing more than disinformation, strategically placed to divert attention from a possibly more subtle truth.  In intelligence operations, foreign assets are often placed with resident “controllers” whose job it is to supervise the asset as well as provide accommodations as the need arises. Who are Michael and Gloria Irish? Or, perhaps more revealingly, what kind of social circles do they run with? This is certainly an avenue worth exploring – by reason of its many synchrocities if for nothing else. Again, the seam that shows.

As a little side-note, Tampa experienced its own mass spraying of malathion, a mutagenic pesticide, when it encountered a med fly outbreak the year before New York’s West Nile outbreak.  In the end, the flies were contained through a sterile med fly program administered out of MacDill Air Force base.

So, to sum up, it appears that the events of September 11 were planned years in advance, with the groundwork being carefully laid by a propaganda campaign orchestrated to convince the public that the United States has a plausibly sophisticated nemesis with the motive, means, and opportunity to perpetrate a devastating act of terror against Americans. Toward that end, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have been used as the primary proxy agents to run a “false flag” operation, setting up and financing the infrastructure of al-Qaida in Afghanistan. Through madrassas based in Pakistan, Saudi and Yemenite militants were instructed in the Saudi brand of Wahabbi Islam, and subsequently “graduated” to the camps that were set up in Afghanistan – again, under Saudi and Pakistani sponsorship. Stateside, the operative agents were mostly based out of New York City and Florida. In the aftermath of 9/11, elements in the American government are now widely disseminating information in vast quantities, overwhelming the populace and lending credibility to the government’s version of events. Thus, post-9/11, the actions of this formerly insular propaganda clique are no longer perceptible. Information is now being doled out in generous portions to credulous reporters who are outside the loop, yet perform their unwitting service as “bottom feeders” in the downward flow of information.

In all cases, the actions of these proxy agents and operative planners are sufficiently distanced and compartmentalized from the true masterminds to create a condition of “plausible deniability”. In short, the proxies have also been set up as possible patsies with evidence that has been carefully laid to incriminate them should cracks in the “official story” become too discernible. Moreover, the groundwork has already been carefully laid to cast aspersions on another convenient patsy – the Jews, by way of the State of Israel and its supporters. Already, for those prone to perceive Jewish conspiracies, the reliable vein of anti-Semitism – combined with anti-Zionism – has been mined to distract the masses and to create a modern version of the ritual blood libel, thereby further “muddying the waters” should the true masterminds be threatened with exposure. In other words, the present difficulties in the Middle East work perfectly to set up the State of Israel as a plausible alternative suspect with motive, means, and opportunity. Toward that end, a low-level “buzz” has been circulating over the Internet (and especially in Europe) of an Israeli spy ring that was rounded up in the days after September 11.  Whether or not these reports are credible is not the point.  Most likely, there was a spy ring operating, and various Israelis were unwittingly set up as patsies, to be exposed should the need arise. Thus, while evidence may be marshaled to taint the Saudis, Pakistanis, or Israelis, the real guilt must inevitably lie with those in the best position to manage the flow of information as well as reliably benefit from the new order created, primarily, the political and corporate elites of the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union – also, as it happens, the very parties orchestrating the global war on terrorism. In this respect, the Saudis, Pakistanis, or Israelis have far less to gain (other than the benefits of going along with the designs of the rich and mighty).

I could go on and further highlight the obvious geostrategic gains of those who are clearly managing the flow of information – the proverbial pipelines, oil, wealth, and so forth. But I think those purported benefits are a bit of a “red herring” – more of a side benefit than the main motivating factor. Americans and their allies would have easily supported a thrust into Afghanistan for a provocation far less costly and bloody than this (such as Kuwait in the early ’90′s).  It is no small act to intentionally take down such an overarching symbol of financial stability as the Twin Towers, and chance killing thousands in the process. Such a conspiracy, if in fact perpetrated from within, would by its nature necessitate a huge structural, cultural, and demographic change. The very brazenness of the act, the naked aggression, would necessitate a tenacious determination to achieve the ends for which these actions were perpetrated.  There is no going back now. An infrastructure is being laid out – one that will, finally, provide a dissident-proof totalitarian oligarchy composed of like-minded elites served by an under-class kept under constant surveillance. The edifice of this regime is being constructed, brick by brick, with the mortar of the Office of Homeland Security (to centralize and coordinate an effective police state), the Freedom Corps (to indoctrinate the most idealist – and therefore activist – elements of the populace toward service to the state), and the Patriot Act (to provide the legal basis for subverting long-held rights under the screen of national security). If all of this sounds strangely familiar, if it is redolent of Huxley and Orwell, that is perhaps because Huxley and Orwell were both intimately involved with the elites of their time – in fact, were fully subsumed among them – in ways that made their future projections abundantly prescient, and, in their minds, inevitable. With further refinements in mind control technologies – yes, they do exist – as well as the monopolization of the food supply by way of sterile seed “terminator technology” – the approval for which was granted in the months following 9/11 – the masses may be perpetually culled and exploited by those who hold the keys to this fully managed society.

If this notion of reality strikes you as somewhat dissonant, at odds with your own personal experience, it may be perhaps that we have not quite arrived there yet, and that you have personally not felt the corrosive lash of political corruption and governmental malfeasance. In all likelihood, you have not read the mountain of evidence detailing political and elite deviant behaviour in this country. You may even be dismissive of “conspiracy theories”, yet wholly unaware of the well-documented attempts by the CIA and FBI to subvert, surveil, and propagandize the populace through programs such as Project Mockingbird (media infiltration) and MK-Ultra (mind control through chemical, hypnotic, or electro-magnetic means). These programs are effected primarily through “think tanks” that are set up across the United States for the purpose of disseminating information and propaganda under the rubric of “expertise”. Moreover, various foundations, such as the Rockefeller or Ford Foundations, are often used as funnels to finance and feed the arteries of these propaganda networks. In the 1970′s, a good deal of this structural corruption was officially exposed – in a “limited hang-out” – by way of the Church Commission, as well as the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Thereafter, much of the most damaging revelations were played down or ignored by the mainstream media, and the waters were then muddied by a stream of outlandish conspiracy theories – aliens, Elvis, etc. – that merely served to discredit the information that was most credible. “Muddying the waters”, incidentally, is a tried and true staple of the intelligence craft.

It is really just a matter of familiarizing yourself with all the documented anomalies that do not accord with the received, mainstream reality put forth to you by the mainstream media. As a practical guide to begin, you might want to confine your search to strictly “mainstream” sources, as I have sought to do in attempting to construct my case on 9/11. My evidence is by no means exhaustive. In fact, it is merely the proverbial tip of the iceberg. Yet proceeding in this direction, under my hypothesis, has been most fruitful in analyzing the various anomalies that pop up now and then.

Any simple keyword search of the following terms may be helpful in pointing toward a more substantive understanding of the elites who ultimately guide your fortunes: “Iran-Contra” , “Mena”, “BCCI”, “Project Paperclip”, “Michael Aquino”, “Paul Bonacci”, “Operation Northwoods”, “MK-Ultra”. Much of the information on these topics is credible and well-documented. More disturbingly, it highlights behavior committed by the very same elites who are now interpreting the events of 9/11 for you. Read for yourself, and decide, at the end of the day, how much credibility you will continue to accord to those who claim to be the proper trustees of your fate and well-being.

Chaim  Kupferberg is a freelance researcher and writer.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

David Cameron covered up for paedophiles

Sunday, May 12, 2013 14:25

(Before It’s News)

David Cameron disappears Kengate Tapes whilst Head of Corporate Communications for Carlton Television during the “Cash for Questions” scandal back in 1994. Will he be above the law as well?
The Metropolitan Police Paedophile Unit confirmed this week to me personally that there was indeed a government and Carlton Television conspiracy over the Kengate Tapes. The police confirmed that Ian Greer along with Carlton Television conspired to cover up the “Cash for Questions” scandal for John Major’s government back in 1994. So the Prime Minster David Cameron covered up a scandal of paedophilia in 1994 as a corporate “sleaze fixer” for Carlton Television, on behalf of  John Major’s Conservative Government, through Ian Greer.  Now as Prime Minister, David Cameron is preventing the Metropolitan Police from investigating my case against Kenneth Clarke MP, who was involved in the scandal of sexually assaulting me in Ian Greer’s office, which Cameron helped cover up!
Okay, let’s just take a breath…
A number of political scandals in the 1980s and 1990s created the impression of what was described in the British press as “sleaze”: a perception that the then Conservative Government was associated with political corruption and hypocrisy. In particular, the successful entrapment of Graham Riddick and David Tredinnick in the “Cash for Questions” scandal of 1994, the contemporaneous misconduct as ministers by Neil Hamilton, Tim Smith, and the convictions of former Cabinet Member Jonathan Aitken and former party deputy chairman Jeffrey Archer for perjury in two separate cases leading to custodial sentences damaged the Conservatives’ public reputation. Persistent rumours about the activities of the party treasurer Michael Ashcroft furthered this impression. At the same time, a series of revelations about the private lives of various Conservative politicians such as Hague, Portillo, etc, etc., made the headlines. Scallywag Magazine even accused Lord McAlpine of being a paedophile. However the investigation was stopped but McAlpine didn’t sue Scallywag Magazine as they had photographic evidence apparently which then subsequently disappeared. See the pattern? Paedophile rings all operate in the same way.
Kenneth Clarke MP who is above the law according to the Metropolitan Police
Detective Constable Ben Lambskin of the Met Police’s Paedophile Unit told me that Central Television had been bought by Carlton Television in order to shut down the Cook Report and control the now infamous Kengate Tapes.  DC Lambskin said, “The possible location for the tapes is that it was taken away by a Carlton Television lawyer who was dealing with the Cook Report and that was the last time it was seen” However I have discovered that the lawyer who took the tapes was indeed operating under the direct orders of our now Prime Minister David Cameron.
Is it possible that in order to protect  the Major Government from a scandal of both parliamentary corruption and paedophilia at the heart of government David Cameron, then working at Carlton Television, conspired to mislead the British public, hide evidence that is in the public interest and pervert the course of justice in order to protect paedophiles by disappearing the Kengate Tapes. David Cameron was rewarded by being made Prime Minister nominated at Bilderberg by, now Minister Without Portfolio and Chairman of the Bilderberg Steering Committee – Kenneth Clarke MP. In fact this year Kenneth Clarke MP is taking Prime Minister David Cameron to Bilderberg.
We know that Kenneth Clarke MP was in Ian Greer’s office because of the Kengate Tapes. Clarke joked that he was there so often Greer should put a parliamentary bell in his office, so he’d know when it was time to go and vote.
So now it starts to become clear how far reaching the Kengate scandal goes. It appears that the paedophile ring in Westminster is now also connected to the monarchy by Prince Charles, who had a close and intimate relationship with Jimmy Savile.  Of course, if Kenneth Clarke cannot be spoken to by the Police then Prince Charles isn’t going to be spoken to about what exactly his relationship with Savile was. We know now that – “your lovely ladies in Scotland” in a note Prince Charles wrote to Jimmy Savile was actually referring to children.
The Palace is speeding up plans for the Queen to abdicate within the next few months in order to make Charles King to protect him against the Savile scandal. Originally it was planned for the Queen to abdicate before the unveiling of the Ministry of Defence’s release of the World War 2 records of the Royal’s connection to the Nazis. However, the Queen has to allow the Police to question Prince Charles now in order to keep up the pretence of democracy.
On an even more serious note; there is no separation of government and monarch if the Prime Minster is a direct relation to HRH Queen Elizabeth II, which David Cameron is. The fact that the Queen sat in on a cabinet meeting last year was indication enough of the lack of separation. So we’re not living in the democracy we thought, if the Queen can pick up the telephone to the Prime Minister and have her wishes enacted by her relative, the Prime Minister David Cameron.
HRH Prince Charles has questions to answer over the Jimmy Savile scandle
We know that HRH Prince Charles was friends with known paedophile Jimmy Savile. In fact Jimmy Savile was the Prince’s unofficial social secretary. We also know that last year for the Queen’s Jubilee Celebrations the Royals invited a known convicted paedophile onto their Thames Barge.  We know that Kenneth Clarke allowed Jimmy Savile access to Broadmoor, by literally giving him a set of keys to enter the maximum security prison, in order for Savile to abuse patients and associate with imprisoned paedophiles and serial killers. Kenneth Clarke and David Cameron are obviously connected to Ian Greer as Ian Greer Associates had Carlton Television, where David Cameron was Head of Communications, as a major client in the 1990s.
So for the circle to be complete how is Prime Minister David Cameron connected to Prince Charles?
Well, it’s very simple if we understand who David Cameron is.  David Cameron, is related to the Queen. He is the first Eton-educated Conservative leader since Sir Alec Douglas-Home in the early 1960s. David Cameron, Prince Charles, Prince William and Prince Harry are all members of ‘Whites’ a private members gentlemen’s club in Mayfair – they get a family discount I guess!
David Cameron’s  headmaster at Eton was Eric Anderson, who had also been Tony Blair’s housemaster at Fettes Public School, which is dubbed the Scottish Eton. After University Cameron’s first job was in the Conservative Research Department. He progressed quickly through the ranks and was soon briefing ministers such as Kenneth Clarke etc. for their media appearances.  He worked with David Davis on the team briefing John Major for Prime Minister’s Questions, and also hooked up with George Osborne, who would go on to be shadow chancellor and his leadership campaign manager.
Cameron spent seven years at Carlton, as Head of Corporate Communications, travelling the world with the firm’s boss Michael Green. But Mr Cameron’s period at Carlton is not remembered so fondly by some of the journalists who had to deal with him. Jeff Randall, writing in The Daily Telegraph where he is a senior executive, said he would not trust Mr Cameron “with my daughter’s pocket money”. “To describe Cameron’s approach to corporate PR as unhelpful and evasive overstates by a widish margin the clarity and plain-speaking that he brought to the job of being Michael Green’s mouthpiece,” wrote the ex-BBC business editor. “In my experience, Cameron never gave a straight answer when dissemblance was a plausible alternative, which probably makes him perfectly suited for the role he now seeks: the next Tony Blair,” Mr Randall wrote. The Sun newspaper’s Business Editor Ian King, recalling the same era, described Mr Cameron as a “poisonous, slippery individual”.
Prime Minster David Cameron needs to answer questions regarding his direct involvement in the Kengate Tapes disappearance, the purchasing of Central Television by Carlton which he oversaw and why is he protecting what appears to be the lead players in an elite paedophile circle.
So all we need to do now is take bets on which “Clarkian” response he will give to these allegations.
A) I have no recollection of those events, what tapes? Etc, etc,.
B) It wasn’t me. They made me do it. I’ve signed a confidentiality agreement. It’s not my fault. I’ll have to look in to it. It a case of mistaken identity.
What is clear is that the Kengate scandal, whilst perhaps having a small seemingly insignificant start, is set to rock the very foundations of our society as the breakdown of this corrupt civilisation goes to the heart of government. To say what’s happening is biblical is an understatement!
What will the Police do now? Will they be investigating and talking to Prime Minister David Cameron about his involvement in hiding the truth from the British public which was in their interest to know? What will Parliament do now?
There needs to be a General Election. Prime Minister David Cameron’s position is untenable. He needs to do the honourable thing and resign his post in order for an investigation into his personal involvement with the disappearances of the Kengate tapes and the obvious paedophile ring involving politicians and members of the Royal Family to be investigated.
Paedophile Jimmy Savile
It is clear that Prince Charles, Jimmy Savile, Kenneth Clarke MP and Prime Minister David Cameron are simply the Heads of Department for the paedophile ring and it obviously involves many more people. We now know for a fact that it involves Parliament, the Royal Family, the entertainment industry and the Metropolitan Police who are all involved in protecting paedophiles, procuring children for paedophiles or being paedophiles.
When is enough, enough?
This whole situation can easily be resolved. It’s just about the Kengate tapes and there whereabouts? Find the tapes and this matter will be cleared up once and for all. The very fact that the tapes have been disappeared and the person in Carlton Television who did it just so happens to be now Prime Minister David Cameron who conducted a billion pound corporate takeover of Central Television in order to get hold of the tapes in the first place, speaks for itself.
It appears that David Cameron becoming Prime Minister was a reward by the Bilderberg elite for covering up the paedophile and “Cash for Questions” scandal in the 1990′s.
If once you’ve read this and you still think you live in a democracy…wake up and welcome to the real world.
I’ll leave you with a final word from Detective Constable Ben Lambskin of the Metropolitan Police Paedophile Unit, in attempting to explain the disappearance of the Kengate Tapes, he said “You wouldn’t want that kind of thing out there” .
The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.

Source: http://the-tap.blogspot.com/2013/05/david-cameron-covered-up-for.html

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

UK PM declares 9/11 and 7/7 Truthers must be dealt with as harshly as ISIS


UK PM declares 9/11 and 7/7 Truthers must be dealt with as harshly as ISIS

Cameron at UN (featured image)http://www.veteranstoday.com/

UK PM declares 9/11 and 7/7 Truthers must be dealt with as harshly as ISIS

by Jim Fetzer and Nick Kollerstrom

“[T]hat 9/11 was a Jewish plot or the 7/7 London attacks were staged; the idea that Muslims are persecuted all over the world as a deliberate act of Western policy [are lies]“–David Cameron

The recent speech by UK Prime Minister (PM) David Cameron proposed dealing with “non-violent extremists” as harshly as with ISIS.

In his vocabulary, “non-violent extremists” are those who challenge the truth of the official narrative of 9/11 or what the UK has claimed about the London 7/7 subway bombings.

He appears to be unaware or deliberately ignorant of the mountain of proof that 9/11 was brought to us compliments of the CIA, the Neo-Cons in the Department of Defense and the Mossad.

Moreover, we know that 7/7 was a contrived event, where we have documentaries and books that demonstrate it was done by MI-5 using four young Muslim men in the role of patsies.

Calling his bluff, the leading expert on 7/7, who is also a student of 9/11, responded to the PM’s absurd position by turning himself in to Scotland Yard as a “non-violent extremist”, but Scotland Yard refused to arrest him.

David Cameron’s speech to the UN

The distinction between “violent extremists” and “non-violent extremists” should be apparent to all: violent extremists take actions to promote their cause through the use of violence–suicide bombings, blowing up mosques and beheading journalists come to mind–where non-violent extremists are critics of the official narratives who exercise their intellects to dissect the blatant dimensions of these fabricated events as an exercise in thought.  So unless there is no distinction to be drawn between thought and action, the Prime Minister’s position is simply absurd:

YouTube – Veterans Today –

This year, Al- Qaeda had to be replaced as the new demonized enemy-image for the public to despise, because even US Marines had been holding placards saying, “I will not fight against al-Qaeda in Syria.” So here we have David Cameron blustering about the new ISIL menace durng his UN speech and why it justifies the re-bombing of Iraq and now Syria.  This name, now contracted to “Islamic State”, has the great advantage of tying the word “Islam” directly to “terrorism”. This new ‘enemy’ is being used as excuse to invade Syria, plus also to facilitate the division of Iraq into three countries.

But, some believe that the Prime Minister may have gone too far in this UN speech, in trying to demonize “truthers”. He has developed the novel concept of “nonviolent extremists”, who, he avers, somehow stimulate groups like ISIL and al-Qaeda to spring up. The reasoning here is truly bizarre. There may be a problem with British Muslims going out to Syria to fight against the Assad government, because they do not want a secular government to exist.  But “non-violent extremism” is another distorted and indefensible concept, whereby the UK government can arrest anyone it wants.

Challenging the PM’s indefensible position

Maybe Cameron’s advisers have not apprised him that the leader of ISIL, Al-Baghdadi (aka Simon Eliot or rather Elliot Shimon), has both Jewish mother and father and is a Mossad agent. Maybe they have not told him that the beheading videos were fairly obviously fakes with no real blood, which seem to emanate from a group called SITE by Zionist agent Rita Katz. Jim Fetzer was interviewed by Press TV about the PM’s posture on “non-violent extremism” after his speech:

YouTube – Veterans Today –

Some sensible observations about Cameron’s clamoring for more wars in Iraq and Syria has been written the Daily Mail journalist, Peter Hitchins, in an article entitled,  “Dragged into a war by clowns who can’t even run a railway”, who notes, “A year ago, we were on the brink of aiding the people we now want to bomb, and busily encouraging the groups which have now become Islamic State. Now they are our hated foes. Which side are we actually on? Do we know?” Indeed, the entire ISIL (or “IS”) development appears to be a marketing strategy to get the American public to support bombing in Syria, which is being disguised as an attack on ISIL but has the intent of damaging the infrastructure to weaken Assad.

The 7/7 London subway bombings

How shameful that Britain’s Prime Minister feels at liberty to make such patronizing remarks towards Iran at the UN, calling it to change its policies over support for “terrorist organizations”, its “nuclear program” and its “treatment of its people”, to which the President of Iran has replied. All 16 of the US intelligence agencies converged in the conclusion that Iran was not pursuing a nuclear weapons program in 2007, which they reaffirmed in 2011. But more interesting in relation to “non-violent extremism” is that the evidence 7/7 was brought to London by the government itself is simply overwhelming. Here, for example, is a documentary by John Hill that exposes the entire event in the space of an hour:

YouTube – Veterans Today –

To demonstrate the (feigned or genuine) ignorance of the PM about the 7/7 event, Nicholas Kollerstrom discovered that the four young Muslim men, who were alleged to have committed the bombings, had been unable to reach those tube stops because the train from Luton, which they would have had to have caught in order to be in place on time, had been cancelled that day, which is all the more reason to conclude that David Cameron is either extremely naive or else the embodiment of duplicity, since he surely has to know that the research he is assailing on 9/11 and 7/7 is well-founded.

Nicholas Kollerstrom turns himself in

In response to Cameron’s remarks equating persons who question the 9/11 and 7/7 attacks in the US and UK and the West’s policy towards the Middle East with Takfiri preachers who radicalize extremists, Nicholas Kollerstrom, as a student of 9/11 and 7/7, who qualifies as a “non-violent extremist” by the PM’s new definition, recognizing himself as one of those who encompassed by this concept, surrendered to Scotland Yard and brought a copy of his book as evidence:

Nick turning himself inClick here for “9/11 Activist hands himself in as a ‘non-violent extremist’” (Press TV)

Explaining his actions to the Press TV correspondent in London, Kollerstrom said, “David Cameron has redefined ‘terrorism’ at the UN to include people who believe that the London bombings involve government complicity [and] were to some degree arranged, which I certainly do believe–and I’ve published a book on the subject–and also I believe the 9/11 was an inside job. I do think Islamic nations are being selectively targeted, it’s perfectly obvious, and if the police force are going by his directive what constitutes terrorism, it seems to me that they need to arrest me.”

terrorThe Press TV correspondent was present while Kollerstrom handed himself in. “We want to report a possible terror threat, we’ve got a bit of evidence and wonder if we could come in and report it,” Kollerstrom said at Scotland Yard headquarters in London, offering a copy of his book as proof. Scotland Yard refused to accept the book or arrest Kollerstrom, who observed that the definition of “nonviolent extremism” will lead to the arrest of many Muslims who share his views, as another example of UK racial profiling. Others have expressed interest in following his lead, which could become a movement.

False Flag Weekly News

As reported on this weeks edition of “False Flag Weekly News” (with Kevin Barrett and Jim Fetzer), the Islamic State contretemps appears to be a public relations stunt by the Obama administration, which had been thwarted by the public outrage over his proposal to fire cruise missiles into Syria in response to the gas attacks falsely attributed to the Syrian government, which Russia promptly refuted with 50 pages of documentation that it had been launched by the so-called “rebels”, apparently supplied by Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia. The rise of the IS phenomenon are simply staggering:

US attacking Syrian infrastructureClick here for the latest False Flag Weekly News: US attacking Syrian infrastructure, not ISIS

That we are being bamboozled is clear. Alan Sabrosky has reported that the US is targeting the Syrian infrastructure, not IS (to weaken Assad), which has been confirmed by other reports; that the US is taking out oil refineries and grain silos; where the EU ambassador to Iraq admits that the EU is buying oil from ISIS; where ISIS is being advised by a US General Vallely (ret.); and where the US is spending $200 million every week both supporting and attacking the threat. The CIA is funding ISIS.

YouTube – Veterans Today –

Even the beheadings are fake, but still good enough to dupe a gullible American public

Perhaps most telling of all is that a new terrorist entity, the Khorasan group, has been invented out of thin air in order to claim that it poses an “imminent threat” to the United States in order to justify American strikes in another nation without securing the permission of the UN Security Council, because one nation may attack another under the Charter of the United Nations only if it has permission from the Security Council “unless it confronts an ‘imminent threat’”. So between David Cameron and Barack Obama, we see the depths of depravity to which the West will sink to attack Syria.

And all of this is being done to promote the agenda of the Project for the New American Century, which needed a new Pearl Harbor to reverse US foreign policy from one in which we never attacked any nation that had not attacked us first to one in which we have become the greatest aggressor nation the world has ever seen and are undertaking one war after another on behalf of Israel by dismantling every Arab nation that served as a counterbalance to its domination of the Middle East, which it aspires to control from the Tigris-Euphrates to the Nile, which is why we are still there today.

Nicholas Kollerstrom, an historian of science, has authored studies of 9/11 and the book, Terror on the Tube (4th ed., 2012), because of which he qualifies as a “non-violent extremist” by the PM’s new definition.

Bookmark and Share

Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=323794

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT or any other VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners and technicians. Legal Notice

Posted by on Oct 3 2014, With 10416 Reads, Filed under Editor, WarZone. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.


To post, we ask that you login using Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail in the box below.
Don’t have a social network account? Register and Login direct with VT and post.
Before you post, read our Comment PolicyFeedback

86 Comments for “UK PM declares 9/11 and 7/7 Truthers must be dealt with as harshly as ISIS”

  1. This is NOT another demonstration of Cameron’s usual idiocy, but is Cass SunsteinISM Part 2 and should have been analyzed as such.. A Tavistock type speech designed to get the public to associate expressing one’s views by words or thoughts with EXTREMISM which our controlled minds have already been molded to associate with TERRORISM and TERRORIST.

    It is unfortunate that Mr. K did not get on the official record Scotland Yard officers refusing to arrest him because there is no law he has broker and refusing to talk with him about the information he has to give them about possible non-violent extremism. But it was an effort that needed to be made and I thank Mr. K for doing the right thing.

    • That speech is not surprising coming from Zionist Central! The Tavistock mindkontrolled verbage may work on some but mostly the cabal cohorts who seem to need to keep convincing themselves. Everyone else is starting to ignore the ad nauseum same ol same ol.. repeat… switch up the story a bit…. same ol same ol… repeat. They really
      are boring, low gene pool, idiots!!

  2. Well, we have enough evidence now to at least warrant a new investigation and blow the lid off this case. All that’s missing is a full confession by one of the top participants….like Chertoff for instance.

  3. A majority of Israeli’s and their politicians believe in and work for the “Greater Israel”, that’s the problem in a nutshell. Keeping them from realizing this long term goal can probably only be done by force, if desired. Everything else is deception.

  4. New twist on 9/11/01 evidence.
    http //www.wnd.com/2014/10/3-witnesses-reported-911-hijackers-months-before-attack/?cat_orig=us
    http //www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2781191/Three-witnesses-reported-9-11-hijackers-casing-security-Boston-airport-MONTHS-attacks-police-never-did.html

    http //nypost.com/2014/10/05/airport-security-ignored-pre-911-warnings-on-hijackers-court-docs/
    “The testimony is expected to factor prominently in another 9/11 lawsuit brought against the airlines by the owner of World Trade Center Properties. That case, which is on appeal, is expected to be heard next year.” These court cases sure are being kept quiet by the media.
    How about VT reporting on them?

  5. https //www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BstfyrxnpE

    https //www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooSoCDFKUKs

  6. Well history in the form of ‘wars’; false flags; false ‘revolutions’; mass deception and public repression – seems to be repeating itself alright and that is no coincidence. This is because the SAME group of talmudic supremacists (and their eager descendants) are ALWAYS the same architects behind these things. It is their stock in trade and an unmistakable hallmark. This time the internet and the ability to WARN each other MAY save us from the usual outcome – of human slaughter, agony and enslavement – on a gargantuan scale.

    Those who are the most likely to receive ‘Cameron’s Knock’ at the door – will also need to brace themselves for something else – ‘ZERSETZEN’ – or the process of being singled out for character assassination by
    read more …

  7. Cameron is NOT human race;;;

    Cameron is speaking on behalf of his REPTILIAN SHAPE-SHIFTING RACE like Rupert Murdoch & the English Royal Cannibals in Control (CIC) as one documented example below;;;

    Rupert Murdoch’s got some creepy hands! lol


  8. “In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

    George Orwell

  9. Dear General Paul Vallely This article publishes a video on Syria Tube showing images of you, armed with bullet studed vest and weapon, riding around the area implied to be Syria in mostly American vehicles, with the claim you are involved in creating an insurgent force to take down the legitimate government there. You speak no audible words in the video. The same video is shown here http //catholicglasses.com/2014/08/11/retired-u-s-general-vallely-creates-guerrilla-insurgent-group-in-syria-2/ and in a number of other links like Catholic Glasses and Before its news, etc, about 9 months ago. Yet, you reportedly have called for the citizen’s arrest of Obama. Please write to professor Fetzer or Gordon Duff, both former Marines,
    read more …

    • Gen. Vallely was born at DuBose, Pa , North of Pittsburgh. Gen. Smedley Darlington Butler(1881-1940) was born at West Chester, Pa, West of Philly. Butler was a two star general in the Marine Corps but that was the highest rank authorized at the time. He was a two time medal of honor recipient and the most decorated Marine of the day. After a 34 year career, he concluded War is a Racket which dwarfed the protection racket of Al Capone in three districts of Chicago with one which extended over three Continents of the world. He wrote a book of the same name and gave hundreds of speeches in towns all over America in the 1930’s to educate an ignorant public then about this racket. He must have been successful since there was great
      read more …

  10. Howard T.Lewis III

    The limey Cameron doth protest too much, methinks. Where is my badge? England ran up another national debt 10xGDP this year, even with Lizard’s insider trading, the LIBOR fraud, AND the $400 trillion derivatives fishwrap market. Next to the entry of the word ‘fidget’ in this year’s Webster’s Colligiate Dictionary, there is a little picture of Elizabeth II on her throne.

  11. I found the statement of 2nd Lt Scott Bennett quite moving. If he is reading this, I urge him to read a book which led that author to discover many of the truths he discovered, only from a different direction and over some 22 years earlier “IBM and the Corruption of Justice in America” by Earl Carey, Bismarck House, St. Louis, 1992. Earl Carey was not a military officer but an engineer. He made his discoveries acting as his own lawyer pro se in a labor dispute in the State of Arizona. He discovered lawyers are liars and cheaters and have destroyed America by hi jacking all three branches of government. He named no less than 42 federal judges, by name and location, who gang raped the U.S. Constitution they took a meaningless oath
    read more …

    • Quoted from the above book, pp. 330-331 “The ultimate goal of the education and training a person receives to become a lawyer is dramatically different from other professions and occupations. A lawyer’s education and training can be more accurately described as an indoctrination into a type of satanic cult. Behavior which a normal human being would consider to be repulsive, evil and cruel, forms the standard operating procedures in the daily life of a lawyer. The normal human emotions and traits such as conscience, honesty, honor and integrity are completely obliterated. An insatiable greed and a blind allegiance to the preservation of the corrupt legal profession take their place. To lie, cheat and steal become second nature and instinctive.
      read more …

  12. This reminds me of the Inquisition.

      Our main weapon is fear.
      Fear and surprise.
      Two! Our two main weapons are fear, surprise and ruthless efficiency!
      Three! Our three main main weapons are fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.
      Make that four weapons Fear, surprise and, and…..oh start over..

      • John – I love the reference to Monty Python’s ‘Spanish Inquisition’. You will not be too surprised, however, to learn that just about everything we have been taught about the Inquisition is a lie! To discover the truth you need to look in the Vatican archives.

        The Inquisition came about during the Reign of Ferdinand and Isobella of Spain. It was discovered that thousands of JEWS had deliberately infiltrated the Holy Church and had disguised themselves as Catholics. Their aim was to become local parish priests over the whole country and to lead ordinary people astray into satanic worship and debauched behaviour. (Sound familiar?) This was as ‘revenge’ because first King Edward I of England, then followed by many other Kings of European nations,
        read more …

    • To the Inquisition anybody who dared to oppose the official line was the enemy. Cameron is doing the same. I think this absurd statement will cost him the next election. Millions of people have seen the video of WTC3 collapsing, and you don’t have to be a demolition expert or structural Engineer to see that there was something fishy about THAT EVENT, WHICH WAS NEVER INVESTIGATED BY THE 911 COMMISSION.

  13. I’m a Truther

    https //www.youtube.com/watch?v=osTHNUGXoSA&feature=youtu.be

  14. Is this the underlying problem and the elephant in the room? http //www.subvertednation.net/understanding-parasitic-jews/

  15. Mr. Fetzer,
    your fourth paragraph says „He appears to be unaware or deliberately ignorant of the mountain of proof … “
    Oh no he isn´t. He´s aware all right and as shifty as a dunny rat. We Germans have been through all this. The next step of your Mr. Cameron is to forbid the English to just mention the words 9/11 and 7/7 in public and, while he is at it, to also forbid to criticize anything Jewish (Obama same for USA) otherwise – and make no mistake about it – prison!
    While my English friends were conveniently occupied blind to hate fictitious jerries, krauts and huns, their own elite does the real screw job on them now.

  16. OK, OK, I´ll admit it. Your Hitler looks better than ours.

  17. I have now added a brilliant video about the fake beheadings http //youtu.be/KhSztTRX4KI

  18. Obviously Cameron doesn’t follow legal proceeding in his own country. Activist John A. Hill, the maker of ‘7/7 Ripple Effect’ was found not guilty, by a jury of his peers, of subverting the course of justice. In order for that to happen, the jury would have to reject the prosecution’s claim that the video was false.

    So Mr. Cameron, your own legal system has already judged that the official narrative of the London bombings is false. What you, and your fellow treasonous agents of Israel, are demanding is that it is illegal to tell the truth.

    • Interesting, Curmudgeon, that in legal cases which are brought to enforce ‘anti-racism’ in the UK – there is a clause in the law which says “The truth is no defence.”

      This is done so that politically correct judaic subversion can be enforced against the best interests of indigenous peoples like the British – even despite clear evidence, obvious truth and every previous form of common sense. No doubt ‘ant-extremist’ laws will mirror that ridiculous ‘legal’ straight-jacket.

  19. Probably Britain won’t bomb any villages of truthers and send the survivors off to Guantanamo for some quality time. Most likely if anything at all happense it will be some books forbidden on library shelves [and maybe in bookstores], snooping packing slips from Amazon to make sure there’s no explosive literature entering the country by mail. It’s a lot easier to get the foot into the door of the citizenry via that route [which they own] than kicking doors down and having to answer questions afterward.

  20. what i find interesting is how the u.n.is the platform for all ziojews to use ,to announce to world what their next move is and how unbelievably arrogant they are about it.netanyahu/obama/cameron all used it this year.and the main body of delegates just sits there and listen intently and applaud when they are done.almost like the u.s. congress when netanyahu speaks to them ,but of coarse he feels it s just like home ;like the knesset .

    • Like the new World Patriot Act the UN “Security” Council just passed, now international law. Now some rabbi can write the kill lists, anywhere. If he can keep the drool from smearing the ink, that is.

  21. Well Mr. Cameron if you’re going to go medieval then go all the way.

    Have an Inquisition into the beliefs of these non-violent extremists and if they are found to have unacceptable non-conforming beliefs then the guilty individuals must be burned at the stake. Error has no rights. Naturally their property will be divided among the accusers, the interrogators and the courts.

  22. Since, we had a Mossad agent (aka Simon Eliot or rather Elliot Shimon) as leader of ISIS making all those threats against the U.S. , it all makes sense.

    ” because one nation may attack another under the Charter of the United Nations only if it has permission from the Security Council “unless it confronts an ‘imminent threat’”. Clever way to get around the requirements of the Security Council.

    So, the JEW Elliot, as leader of ISIS makes the treats, then the U.S. is entitled to defend itself and it must go into IRAQ and Syria to do it.. How devious. Yet how can it be that the Muslims would be SO STUPID that they would allow themselves to be tricked in such a way.

    You would think Elliot would have been beheaded immediately, once they
    read more …

  23. frederick muhlbauer

    this cretan David ” the zionist” Cameron is one deranged asshole to be espousing rubbish like this. He certainly is in need of a reducation Since when is questioning a farce a crime in this world he needs to be called out and/or possibly arrested for making such a statement We cannot allow crap like this to stand

  24. This is awesome …good job Jesture Cameron. These people are so out of touch with reality …everything blows up in their face. Take the Bolsheviks that are occupying our American government for example. Everytime they perpetrate these insane lone gunman false flags to pass gun laws. Gun sales skyrocket!
    This will just help the truth movement.

    Everyone in Congress needs to be voted OUT!

    • dragged out and thrown into prisons would be more appropriate. not one of them said anything about the CRIME of appointing multiple FELON hillary as secretary of state, criminals aiding criminals.

  25. In case anyone missed it

    Valley is the long-term buddy and colleague of the US-top-of-mind satanist. The worked together with the same “psychological warfare projects”.

    • I didn’t miss the C.I.A./ Vallee connection. Most U.F.O. incidents are of Government origin to manipulate minds. There is no shortage of scientists willing to consort with evil.

  26. the PM (Cameron?), from a position of “power”, has called for MURDER of people who tell the truth.
    that is a call for extreme violence against people who are NOT violent, that just want the truth known!
    why isnt he being dragged out of office in a straightjacket for being a danger to himself and others?
    why are crimes like these always posed as questions like “oh did he step over the line?” when HE DID!

  27. Och Aye! Very kosher haggis!
    Cameron was born in London and brought up in Peasemore, Berkshire… Blairmore was built by Cameron’s great-great-grandfather, Alexander Geddes, who had made a fortune in the grain trade in Chicago and returned to Scotland in the 1880s.
    Through his paternal grandmother, Enid Agnes Maud Levita, Cameron is a lineal descendant of King William IV (youngest son of king of lost America) by his mistress…
    Cameron’s paternal forebears also have a long history in finance. His father Ian was senior partner of the stockbrokers Panmure Gordon, … long been held by Cameron’s ancestors, including … great-great-grandfather Emile Levita, a German Jewish financier (descendant of Renaissance scholar Elia Levita), obtained British citizenship
    read more …

    • Very interesting Tiu – well done. We certainly see history repeating itself. The supply of huge loans to Japan then – and the modernising of the remarkably aggressive Japanese army by the jewish banking cartel was done for a reason. That money was loaned on the understanding that Japan would wage war against Russia – whilst the bolsheviks could simultaneously seize control of the country’s government. The Russo-Japanese war was supposed to dove tail in with the FIRST ATTEMPT at bolshevik overthrow of Russia in 1905. That attempt was thwarted by the Tsar’s forces – and the (remarkably well bank rolled) ‘revolution’ failed. Truthers were active then as well as today. The acquiring of the ‘PROTOCOLS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION’ jewish plan for world dominance by
      read more …

    • The RHEINISCH-WESTFALISCHE SYNDICATE – was prominent in financing the so called ‘peasants revolution’ in Russia – which was in reality a coup-d’etat – just like the one in Ukraine.

      The syndicate was chiefly made up of Kuhn-Loeb & Co., New York; Warburg & Co. of Stockholm; Speyer & Co. of London; Lazar Freres of Paris – and others. They financed the Japanese army which later killed so many American and British servicemen.

    • I think that our old judaic enemy were rather hoping that we had collectively forgotten about all this inconvenient information. When we talk here about imprisoning ‘truthers’ – let us not forget the THOUSANDS of people who died making sure that the PROTOCOLS OF THE LEARNED ELDERS OF ZION survived for subsequent generations to read and understand. Once the jews took over Russia anyone caught with a copy was executed – and every copy of the book was destroyed. They wanted to eradicate all trace of it.

  28. All we ask is for one picture of an airplane in the pentagon, just one picture. No pics, then kill a royal. They too do not believe.

  29. The moronic-mentality has evidently carried over from lil ol’ Georgie boy’s presidential administration. Either you’re with us, or the terrorists was about as embarrassing of a statement that I ever heard coming our of an American president’s mouth living in a Republic where freedoms are the life’s blood of the entire structure of society. Statements as this show the perforations holes in their activities, and the instability of their plans.
    When “We the People…” get the upper hand by being fed by independent patriotic-journalists (as here on VT,) and shoot holes in their “truth,” by revealing vast amounts of undeniable and objective volumes of details and facts evidence that smothers their hoaxes, and snuffs out their plans for world control, amateurish
    read more …

  30. I guess the $6,000,000 Dollar Question ($1 for every Jew targeted by ISIS) is whether the Brits take this lying Bolshevik slimeball seriously.

    At least the copper’s in Britain seem to be smart enough to know sarcasm when they hear it. The cops in America are so dumb they’d already have Mr. Kellerstrom in the FEMA camps, never to be seen again.

    • Another example of why Scotland ( and Wales ) need to secede fm the totally Temple controlled UK.

    • Does anybody find it strange that Isil haven’t even thrown a stone at Israel.

      Then again if Isil is an Israeli ally, Or is run by mossad, It is not surprising at all.

      It seems that they only target Muslims.

      Think about it.

      • Talmudia has given them air support on occasion and field hospitals in Jordan. Of course, Cameron won’t mention that since the Rothschild’s own the Bank of England and once you hand these “dual-nationals” control over your currency creation then you’re doomed. QE II has veto powers over the laws and yet she’s sat and watched a Third World wave nearly sweep her people aside. The “UK” is really, if you think about it, as free and independent as ( still ) occupied Germany.

      • My point exactly. Thanks. Also, Israel doesn’t seem to give a damn about ISIS, except for it’s propaganda value. If ISIS were REALLY a threat, Israel would take them out in a New York nanosecond. But that would be like the IRS going after bankers or the FED auditing itself.

  31. If this ever becomes law, I am totally screwed.

  32. Speaking of that “project for new America” seems things are going right on plan for the elite pigs. General Wesley Clark laid it all out bare which countries were on the agenda. So far we have gone right down that list and it is looking like they will use their patented strain of Ebola to take out Africa and a little population control here at home as well. We need to come together and start arresting the elite greedy pigs and their puppet politicians. I can smell their fear though when they start with their ramblings about “conspiracy theories”. I like smelling their fear. It feels like things may change and they know it. The reality unfortunately though is that until their is a massive uprising (this does not necessarily need to be bloody) and people insist that
    read more …

  33. Superb article by Nick Kollerstrom and Professor Fetzer. The international gangsters make ‘the media narrative’ up as they go along – and are now even attempting to criminalize any dissent to their unending diatribe of falsehoods. Living in the UK I must now await the knock on the door of course.

    I am deeply saddened that operatives within the British intelligence services, who obviously are not stupid and KNOW very well what is really going on, are actually supporting the facade of these wars and false flag outrages instigated for the benefit of israel and the international banker gangster cabal. This support, however reluctant, is High Treason against the Crown and the British people. The treason of political leaders is now beyond doubt – and negates their
    read more …

    • Quite ! It is high time our intelligence services and military senior ranks earnt their salaries & pensions honestly & in the real national interest. Clearly they possess sufficient evidence & resources to round up the despotic criminals & traitors who have seized power in the UK.

      Bolshevik Cameron’s latest rant is an indication of weakness, the cabal are running scared, it is only a matter of time before we are rid of these parasites – tick tock.

    • I think you will find MI5 – MI6 are sh*t scared of Mossad……and are actually their ‘bitches’.

  34. It is amazing how bold Cameron and Obama have become ref their speeches at this years UN get together they have learned from Israel’s PM… and learnt well. They were all three up on their soap boxes claiming 1) Cameron people who are questioning our flase flags are more dangerous than IS… 2) Obama claimed Russia is more dangerous that IS and 3) Netyanuhu claimed Iran is more dangerous that IS…. who very interesting… these guys are getting very nervous… and they should be… as so very many see who they are and what they do the MASTERS OF TERRORISM !!!!

  35. Probably the stupidest thing a prez or PM could do. It’s only words unless he has an enforcement plan, but meanwhile he’s announcing for the world the degree of discomfort he hand his government feel with what truthers are revealing about 9/11 and wossname, 7-something or other..

    • you know I disagree, when its words like that uttered from a position of “power” or “authority”, whether theres a plan or not (yet!), it is serious grounds for immediate removal.

      • captain obvious grounds for immediate “rhetoric about” removal maaybe. By the people who’d be discommoded by enforcement. The ears no longer hear that numbing mantra.

        A far cry from actual removal. I don’t know about Cameron but people have been using the serious grounds for removal rhetoric since this prez took office. They’ll probably still be using it a year after time removes him.

        • Please allow me to clarify. Send the dirty Jewboy to Hell. Straight to Hell. Do not pass GO, do not collect $200.

          • DaveE I assume you mean, “Someone besides DaveE send the dirty etc etc” while DaveE sits home and bitches dreaming up whomever else he can try to send someone else out to send to hell without passing go. That’s groovy mr let’s you and him fight.

          • tell old jules to stick it ,this ziojew troll is disgusting!!!!!

  36. truth by which they fear…their scripted lies rolled out in series, seasons, episodes and acts….Cameron does as he is told. Who was it who said politics is just show business for ugly people… Dr Fetzer your words are nuclear tipped ….lies turned to dust

  37. Great job Jim, Vic and editors of Vt. I don’t see how ISIS can even be given the legitimacy Gordon is giving them if this site I saw back in July is true? It certainly has or had the name and the website.

    http //www.tatoott1009.com/2014/06/27/who-is-isis-really-proof-youre-not-going-to-believe/

  38. Cameron, Obama, and Netanyahu should have been laughed off the stage, or left speaking to an empty auditorium, as soon as they began their arrogant, self-serving, hypocritical, lie filled speeches. It says a lot about the UN as a whole that members stayed in their seats and listened intently as three of the world’s most corrupt, vicious, lying warmongers took the stage to justify perpetual war in the name of peace, the right of strong nations to bully weaker ones, and the right of one, self “chosen” people to ride roughshod over everyone else on the planet.

    Cameron’s Tory party has promised that if re-elected they will
    Support the war on Iraq – Syria
    Continue and increase austerity for the masses
    Continue and increase funnelling money to the already
    read more …

    • “” It has been said that history repeats,””

      Long before that , the Christian NT said ” the truth shall make you free “. As long as the world perpetuates the propaganda histories of the victors instead of the more true histories of conflict , we will not be free of the delusions that misguide us and are established by the false notions in the propaganda in histories . Studying false histories will not break a cycle of inane conflicts .

    • Given the nature of the UK’s faux demockracy voting for the equally corrupted alternative, the Labour party led by Ed Miliband son of a Marxist who just happens to be jewish will result in more of the same, wall to wall iniquity and israel first as usual.

  39. Wonderful article, here we have Cameron, a member of the Friends of Israel Commitee, actually saying 911 and jews in the same sentence.

    That to me is gold.

    I remember PM Gillard from Australia a few years ago stating(with a lot of jews standing behind her) say that she is pleased that the Supreme Court recognised that holocaust denial is illegal, Duh!! New to me,better I hand myself in.

    This article must be posted every where, I have started, have you?

  40. Being that there’s just no proper place for me in polite [Jew-controlled] society, I’m thinking about “turning myself in”, for my manifest thought crimes.

    I wonder, if some of us here were to be among the first “extremists” to voluntarily surrender, would we at least get dibs on some of the nicer rooms at the camps?

  41. you couldn’t say the audience was taken in by him, they looked bored a few looked like “what the hell is wrong with this guy” I think he went too far and only showed how insane they are.. I don’t know, do they take us for fools? this was just stupid.. Luv the British guy who tried to turn himself in…It appears they are losing the battle, world opinion has turned against them.. It looks like an act of desperation to me…

  42. Cameron’s handlers from the CoL feel more ad more cornered so their puppets bark louder and louder… That’s expected, but what really shocked me is this “Biden blames US allies in Middle East for rise of ISIS” “America’s “biggest problem” in Syria is its regional allies, Biden told students at the John F. Kennedy Jr. Forum at the Institute of Politics at Harvard University on Thursday”
    What kind of leverage has the Resistance gotten recently over that pathetic fool to make him express such statements, what kind of realization took place…?

  43. When a world leader is instructed by those who are pulling his strings to get up and say this sort of thing, it simply confirms how close the masses are to reaching an all encompassing awareness and how desperate the cabal is to push on, with ever greater urgency, before that happens.

    Peter Hitchens (brother of the late Christopher) knows the score, but can only go so far in his weekly Mail On Sunday column. He is, however, a journalist in the mainstream who is braver than most.

    • agree about Peter Hitchens. read one or two of his pieces (online) – he writes incisively and on occasion pursues truth further than most of the MSM herd, though as you say, there are well-policed boundaries confining all who require employment within the increasingly ludicrous false world-view which has become the dominant narrative throughout the “free world” establishment.

  44. I was hoping Nick would make an appearance on VT with this.

    Nick, if you’re reading this, I haven’t laughed so hard since Basil Faulty flogged his Audi on that Faulty Towers episode.

    *******http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=78b67l_yxUc******

    Well done, and thanks for the howler.

  45. If the official 9/11 is the truth then the physics, engineer, chemistry and similar science departments of the entire Ivy league, Cambridge, Oxford, Stanford and MIT should resign first thing tomorrow morning.

  46. This is as psychopath as can get. Maybe he should join the faculy of engineers at Cambridge and give them a lecture on how kerosene melts steel and building foundations. He would surely get good reviews.
    Sweden recognises Palestine! Hopefully this would become a snowball effect soon. Nobody normal hates Israel only acknowledges Palestine as well. Stop murdering children.

  47. JLM3 that’s just how the human mind works. Something resonates with the psyche and first thing you know he’s finding one hiding behind every tree, under every rock. For some people it’s illegal aliens or welfare mothers. For others it’s Communists or fascists, rich people or Free Masons. With you it’s Jews.

    Interesting thing the human mind.

  48. Man, you’re on Dianne Feinstein’s shitlist now, brother……… !

  49. Yeah “Old Jules”, yours sure as hell is, at any rate.

  50. Kalin it’s a bit long in years but it still picks the fly larvae out of the BS fairly well.

  51. amazing she aint been hauled off for all her unAmerican activities all this time, as well as her hubby for theft of land from veterans.

  52. R. Nader called Feinstein out for her husband’s CBRE looting of USPS properties

    http //www.corporatecrimereporter.com/news/200/nadertofeinstein10052013/

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment