Adam Werritty: Liam Fox’s friend ‘bankrolled by corporate intelligence firm and Israel lobbyist’….

Adam Werritty: Liam Fox’s friend ‘bankrolled by corporate intelligence firm and Israel lobbyist’
Adam Werritty, the Defence Secretary’s unofficial “adviser”, was funded by a corporate intelligence company and the chairman of an Israeli lobbying organisation, documents have disclosed….

Liam Fox & Adam Werritty, but no mention of Luke Coffey, CIA agent with access all areas pass at the MOD

The big story is of Liam Fox & his special relationship with Adam Werritty, homo-honeytraps aside, the real story here is of another one of Fox’s special advisors Luke Coffey that is going unreported.

Liam “I’m not a homo” Fox hired an American, Luke Coffey to work in the Defence Department as a special advisor.

On 6 June 2010, The Sunday Times reported that Liam Fox, the UK Defence Minister lets a US ‘mole’ roam the Ministry of Defence

According to the Sunday Times in June 2010:

UK Defence Secretary Liam Fox hired Luke Coffey as a special adviser.

Luke Coffey runs the London branch of an American think tank called CENSA (Council for Emerging National Security Affairs).

At least a quarter of the members listed on its website have been in the CIA or other American intelligence agencies. They include Matthew Thompson, a former CIA analyst in the Directorate of Intelligence; Jeff Benson, who worked in the US Office of Naval Intelligence; Sean Bielat, who serves in the United States Marine Corps Reserve as an intelligence watch officer; and Paul Crespo, who served as a defence and naval attaché at American embassies in the Balkans, the Gulf and Latin America. Coffey was encouraged to establish a London chapter by one of his former army commanders.

Luke Coffey has been issued with a pass giving him access to all areas of the Ministry of Defence.

Liam Fox now wants the UK to buy American, rather than British made military equipment.

Adam Werritty is a director of a company called Security Futures and has been seen setting up deals where the real Weapons of Mass Destruction (British made military exports) can be sold – Sri Lanka, Libya and the Gulf States who are so scared of a revolution they have bought in crypto soldier of jesus, Eric Prince and his Blackwater/Xe mercenaries to protect the scumbag shakes (misspelt deliberately).

Former UK armed forces minister Kevan Jones has told the Guardian that Fox’s unrecorded meetings with Adam Werritty could pose “a threat to national security”.

So Liam “The lady doth protest too much” Fox has a thing for hiring young men (as special advisers) who have their own financial interests and those of the American military before any loyalty to Britain.

What was that about THE special relationship again?

The Military Industrial Complex runs shit….ask Dr. Fox



Monday, June 07, 2010
Image from:…/

There is a view that the CIA controls many nations.

1. One example is New Zealand, whose former prime minister David Lange died in mysterious circumstances. (David Lange says US threatened to kill him.)

And, at times, Indonesia, Ecuador and many more (The CIA’s control of countries around the world)

Japan may be another example.

Japan’s prime minister has resigned after failing to move a US base

In June 2010, his replacement, Naoto Kan, promised close ties with Washington. (Kan pledges closer ties with US)

Sarkozy of France and Merkel of Germany are said to be working for the CIA. (SARKOZY AND THE CIA / Angela Merkel of the CIA?)

American Luke Coffey works for US Defence Secretary Liam Fox

2. Meanwhile, in the UK, we learn from The Sunday Times, 6 June 2010, that the UK Defence Minister lets a US ‘mole’ roam the Ministry of Defence

UK Defence Secretary Liam Fox (Fox dismisses gay smears ) has Luke Coffey, a man with links to the CIA, as a special adviser.

Liam Fox is said to want the UK to buy American, rather than British, military equipment.

Luke Coffey runs the London branch of an American think tank called Censa (Council for Emerging National Security Affairs).

At least a quarter of the members listed on its website have been in the CIA or other American intelligence agencies.

Luke Coffey has been issued with a pass giving him access to all areas of the Ministry of Defence.

Lord Moonie

3. The Americans seem to have very strong links to certain UK politicians and people in the military.

The Sunday Herald discovered that about half the parliamentary questions tabled by Lord Moonie, the former UK defence minister, ‘relate to areas of commercial interest to US-based Northrop Grumman Corporation.’

Moonie has been a consultant to Northrop Grumman IT.

Moonie has been accused of being one of four Labour lords ready to accept money in return for helping amend legislation. Moonie, 61, said he would make introductions in return for £30,000 a year. – Cash for questions: new row over Scottish lord’s £30k deal

4. According to Private Eye (UK), August 2005:

Sir Robert Walmsley, former head of UK defence procurement, procured himself a job as director of US arms firm the EDO Corporation.

Admiral lord Boyce, the chief of the UK defence staff who retired in 2003, became an adviser to the American Computer Sciences Corporation in 2004. Boyce told Private Eye that he advised CSC on its bid for a £6 billion defence contract.

“Sir Clive Whitmore, the Ministry of Defence’s top civil servant at the time of the monster and totally corrupt al-Yamamah arms deal with Saudi Arabia, shares his Directorship of NM Rothschild with the Old Harrovian Charles Guthrie.” – Lord Guthrie supporting the Military Industrial complex … and Israel

Brown, agent of the CIA?

5. Britain’s leaders all seem to work for the CIA.

“When Gordon Brown was a student at the University of Edinburgh… the young Labour and anti-apartheid activist was handed a list by an individual known to be a top CIA agent based in Britain.

“On the list were the names of a number of British socialists and anti-apartheid activists. Although Brown was said not to have known of his American contact’s intelligence ties at the time, the British intelligence sources revealed that Brown has been on the CIA’s payroll ever since he took possession of the list.” – Columns: ‘Washington watch’ by Tumbler Prospect Magazine July …

Leyland ceased to exist. Iberdrola took over Scottish Power. Ferrovial took over BAA…

6. Many of Britian’s top companies have disappeared or been taken over.

BP may be next.

“The most startling takeover target of the year will be BP, which will attract interest from Exxon Mobil… With the crude oil price falling to its lowest level since the 1990s, BP will be historically cheap by most measures…” – After a year of shocks, prepare for more in 2009

7. Britain’s military now appears to be run by the Pentagon and Britain’s nuclear missiles are American-controlled. – Anger as Britain secretly sells off its stake in Aldermaston …

8. The CIA seems to be able to control Britain’s police and courts, when it suits them. – LOCKERBIE BOMBING EVIDENCE ‘PLANTED’ – Mail on Sunday 21 December 2008

Victor Rothschild worked for the British security services. Was he also working for Mossad?

9. In 1965 Angleton, and President Johnson, decided to commission a report on Britain’s secret services.

This report recommended sending more spies to Britain.

It seemed that the CIA was going to treat Britain like Indonesia or Pakistan.

In order to ensure that there was an elite which would support US interests, the CIA would try to gain control of MI5 and MI6, use dirty tricks to get rid of anti-American politicians, and place pro-American puppets into positions of power.

In 1996, in the Guardian, Martin Kettle suggested that New Labour was all about Britain being in with the Americans.

10. In a talk to Labour Party branches in 1996, Robin Ramsay (Lobster Magazine) pointed out some interesting links between New labour and the USA:

Jonathan Powell, Blair’s top man in Downing Street, used to work in Britain’s Washington embassy and is suspected by some of having been our spook liaising with the CIA.

Former UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband is the son of a Jewish Marxist.

Top Blair aide David Milliband did a degree at the USA’s MIT and Brown’s top aid Edward Balls went to Harvard.

Gordon Brown spent his holidays in the library at Harvard.

The US encouraged large numbers of Labour MPs to take free trips to America (Israel also invited a large number of Labour MPs to Israel).

In 1986 Tony Blair went on a US-sponsored trip to America and came back a supporter of the nuclear deterrent.

In 1993 Blair attended a Bilderberg Group meeting (secretive right wing organisation) and not long afterwards became Labour leader.

Four of the Blair cabinet were members of the Anglo-American elite group the British American Project; three of the Blair cabinet attended Bilderberg meetings.

Peter Mandelson become Chair of British Youth Council which began as the British section of the World Assembly of Youth, which was set up and financed by MI6 and then taken over by the CIA in the 1950s.

And the unions?

According to Ramsay: “The CIA also ran the anti-communist international trade union movement, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, the ICFTU…

By the mid 1950s nearly a quarter of the TUC’s annual budget was going to the ICFTU, a CIA operation.


Human Experimentation at the Heart of Bush’s Torture Program



Something Fishy?






Tue, 10/11/2011 – 10:23
Website for this image

The CIA and Israel and Iran and Hezbollah have all been supporting the anti-Gaddafi forces in Libya.

Iran and Hezbollah hail rebels – Hurriyet Daily News /
Libyan rebels will recognise Israel, Bernard-Henri Lévy tells.


Dual Citizenship — Loyal to Whom?

by Dan Eden

Please also see Omert Humiliates America and Who Controls Hollywood and the Media?.
Someone wrote and asked me, “Why are there Israeli- but not Mexican-American Dual Nationals?”

Well, here’s my take on this. I’d also like your views and opinions.

Before I begin I’d like to day something important. There is a new law — the so-called “Hate Speech” law, that just passed the House and is expected to pass the Senate and become law very soon. It was originally designed to guard against discrimination of oppressed minorities but was soon recognized as a way for Israel to forever end any criticism of the state of Israel and Zionism. When it is law, this page, and many like it will be deleted from the internet as yet another mile marker of the infringement of truth and free speech by certain dual-nationals at the expense of true and patriotic Americans. Enough said.

Unless we are Native American Indians, all Americans have their origins in some other country. Both of my parents were from England. They were proud to be “British” but they were most proud of achieving their American citizenship. Sure, we had pictures of the Queen and nick-nacks with the Union Jack on them. My mother even celebrated the traditional 4 o’clock tea time and was good at making Yorkshire Pudding. In the late 60’s my older brother served in the US Army and did his tour in Viet Nam. When it came down to “allegiance,” we were all patriotic Americans. Period.

The word “allegiance” means that we promise loyalty. It also carries with it the expectation that this loyalty will be exclusive and unrestrained. In the case of a declared war or real threat or conflict, for example, our allegiance to America should preclude any other interest, be it another country or political ideology.

When they took their oath to become American citizens, my parents had to pledge their “allegiance” exclusively to America and renounce their allegiance to “any and all foreign governments.” That included Great Britain, one of our strongest allies.

Before Viewzone asked me to research the meaning of “dual citizenship,” I had never heard of the term. How could someone be a citizen of two countries at the same time? But I was just ignorant. Dual nationalities and citizenships are quite common.

From my internet research, I learned that in 1997, a French Canadian with a U.S. passport ran for mayor of Plattsburgh, N.Y. He argued that the incumbent spoke French too poorly to be running a city so close to Quebec. He lost. Also in 1997, a retired top American official for the U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) ran for president of Lithuania. He was inaugurated in February to a burst of fireworks!

In 1996, Dominicans from New York not only could vote in the Dominican Republic’s presidential elections for the first time, they could vote for a fellow New Yorker. Multiple nationalities have become so commonplace that some analysts fear the trend is undermining the notion of nationhood, particularly in the place with the most diverse citizenry on Earth: the United States.

Debate over the issue intensified in the late 1990s, when Mexico joined the growing list of poor nations that say it’s OK for their nationals to be citizens of the countries to which they have migrated. Under the law that took effect in 1998 Mexicans abroad — most of them in the United States — will be able to retain Mexican citizenship even if they seek U.S. citizenship. And naturalized Americans of Mexican descent will be able to reclaim their original citizenship. The Mexican government stopped short, for now, of giving expatriates the right to vote.

Security Issues

Since citizenship carries with it a responsibility to be exclusively loyal to one country, the whole concept of dual citizenship and nationality raises questions about which of the dual citizenships have priority. This is extremely important when the two countries have opposing interests. It can be a deadly problem when a dual citizen is in a high position within our American government.

Can one imagine a Japanese citizen serving in the Pentagon during WWII? Or how about a citizen of the Soviet Union holding a cabinet position in the White House during the Cold War?

Today’s conflicts are centered in the Middle East. America needs to balance foreign policies towards oil producing Arab nations with our goal being peace and stability in the region. This places a burdon on our government to be even-handed in our dealings with the Arab world and Israel. While the Iraq War was waged on lies about Weapons of Mass Destruction and revenge for 911, the real reason has emerged as a well designed global plan to improve the power and leverage of Israel. Added to this policy is yet another potential blow to American interests and security — the impending War with Iran. This war will be waged for the security of Israel and will be paid for by the blood of American soldiers and the hard-earned money of American citizens whose quality of life is inversely tied to the cost of petrolium.

Recently, in their much lauded paper, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, Harvard professor, Stephen Walt, and University of Chicago professor, John Mearsheimer, focused attention on the strong Israeli lobby which has a powerful influence over American foreign policies (see BBC article). They detail the influence that this lobby has exerted, forming a series of international policies which can be viewed as in direct opposition to the interests and security of the American people. These acts and policies are more often than not carried out by US government appointees who hold powerful positions and who are dual American-Israeli citizens. Since the policies they support are often exclusively beneficial to Israel, often to the detriment of America, it has been argued that their loyalties are misdirected.

A few classic examples can be cited here.

Jonathan Jay Pollard [right] was an American-Israeli citizen who worked for the US government. He is well known because he stole more secrets from the U.S. than has any other spy in American history. During his interrogation Pollard said he felt compelled to put the “interests of my state” ahead of his own. Although as a U.S. Navy counter-intelligence specialist he had a top-secret security clearance, by “my state” he meant the state of Israel.

Literally tens of thousands of Americans holding U.S. passports admit they feel a primary allegiance to the state of Israel. In many instances, these Americans vote in Israeli elections, wear Israeli uniforms and fight in Israeli wars. Many are actively engaged both in the confiscation of Palestinian lands and in the Israeli political system. Three examples come to mind:

One is Rabbi Meir Kahane, who founded the militant Jewish Defense League in the U.S. in the 1960s, then emigrated to Israel where, eventually, he was elected to the Knesset. Until he was shot and killed at one of his U.S. fund-raising rallies in 1990, the Brooklyn-born rabbi shuttled between Tel Aviv and New York, where he recruited militant American Jews for his activities in Israel against Palestinians. He claimed to be a “dual citizen” of America and Israel.

Another Jewish American, James Mahon from Alexandria, Virginia, reportedly was on a secret mission to kill PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat when he was shot in 1980 by an unknown assailant. When he was shot, Mahon held an American M-16 in his hand and a U.S. passport in his pocket.

Then there was Alan Harry Goodman, an American Jew who left his home in Baltimore, Maryland, flew to Israel and served in the Israeli army. Then, on April 11, 1982, armed with an Uzi submachine gun, he walked, alone, to Al-Aqsa, Jerusalem’s most holy Islamic shrine, where he opened fire, killing two Palestinians and wounding others. Both the U.S. and Israeli governments played down the incident, as did the media.

Most recently, US Navy Petty Officer, Ariel J. Weinmann, while serving at or near Bahrain, Mexico, and Austria, “with intent or reason to believe it would be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation (Israel), [attempted] to communicate, deliver or transmit classified CONFIDENTIAL and SECRET information relating to the national defense, to a representative, officer, agent or employee of a foreign government.” Weinmann was apprehended on March 26 after being listed as “a deserter by his command,” according to the US Navy. The information he gathered was supplied to Israel.

Ben-Ami Kadish, a Connecticut-born U.S. dual citizen who worked in New Jersey was arrested and charged with giving top secret nuclear information and details about the US Patriot Missile to an Israeli agent — the same agent involved with the Jay Pollard case. The espionage charges reportedly stem from acts committed in the 1980s. These activities, like the ones with convicted spy Pollard, were immediately denied by Israel (Pollard pleaded guilty in 1986). It is further reported that Israeli officials instructed Kadish to lie to US investigators. Kadish was scheduled to be arraigned on April 22, 2008 at U.S. District Court in Manhattan.

In 2009 it was revealed that the NSA had secretly taped conversations of Congresswomen Jane Harman [pictured above on the right with Israeli Knesset Speaker, Dalia Itzik] negotiating with two AIPAC spies accused of giving sensitive information about US military activities to the Israeli government. In the taped conversation she is being asked to dismiss their espionage charges in return for large politiacl contributions and (are you ready) a chairmanship of the US Intelligence Committee! One has to assume that they thought they could actually “arrange” for this to happen. This information was secretly revealed by the NSA to Nancy Polosi prior to the selection of the committee chairman and was a factor (let’s hope, anyway) in Harmon’s failure to obtain this highly sensitive position. After all was said and done, however, the case against the two Israeli lobbyists was dismissed — against the insistance of the FBI. No satisfactory reason has been given for this.

Unfortunately, such an act of treason remains unchallenged and Jane Harman remains at her congressional job and enjoys being the third wealthiest member of Congress. Only in America!

The examples of Kahane, Mahonm, Goodman and Weinmann raise the question of when a U.S. citizen ceases to be, or should cease to be, a U.S. citizen. U.S. Law at one time clearly stated that an American citizen owed first allegiance to the United States. A U.S. citizen should not fight in a foreign army or hold high office in a foreign country without risking expatriation. What the heck happened?

The 1940 Nationality Act

Section 401 (e) of the 1940 Nationality Act provides that a U.S. citizen, whether by birth or naturalization, “shall lose his [U.S.] nationality by…voting in a political election in a foreign state.”

This law was tested many times. In 1958, for instance, an American citizen named Perez voted in a Mexican election. The case went to the Supreme Court, where the majority opinion held that Perez must lose his American nationality. The court said Congress could provide for expatriation as a reasonable way of preventing embarrassment to the United States in its foreign relations.

But then something very odd happened.

In 1967 an American Jew, Beys Afroyim received an exemption that set a precedent exclusively for American Jews. Afroyim, born in Poland in 1895, emigrated to America in 1912, and became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 1926. In 1950, aged 55, he emigrated to Israel and became an Israeli citizen. In 1951 Afroyim voted in an Israeli Knesset election and in five political elections that followed. So, by all standards he lost his American citizenship — right? Wrong.

After living in Israel for a decade, Afroyim wished to return to New York. In 1960, he asked the U.S. Consulate in Haifa for an American passport. The Department of State refused the application, invoking section 401 (e) of the Nationality Act — the same ruling that had stripped the American citizen named Perez of his U.S. citizenship.

Attorneys acting for Afroyim took his case to a Washington, DC District Court, which upheld the law. Then his attorneys appealed to the Court of Appeals. This court also upheld the law. The attorneys for Afroyim then moved the case on to the Supreme Court. Here, with Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas, Lyndon Johnson’s former attorney and one of the most powerful Jewish Americans, casting the swing vote, the court voted five to four in favor of Afroyim. The court held that the U.S. government had no right to “rob” Afroyim of his American citizenship!

The court, reversing its previous judgment as regards the Mexican American, ruled that Afroyim had not shown “intent” to lose citizenship by voting in Israeli elections. Huh?

While Washington claims it has a “good neighbor” policy with Mexico, the U.S. does not permit Mexicans to hold dual nationality. The US makes them become either U.S. or Mexican — you can’t be both. But the U.S., in its special relationship with Israel, has become very sympathetic to allowing Israeli-Americans to retain two nationalities and allowing U.S. citizens not only to hold public office in Israel, but to hold US government positions as well! No other country holds this special exception to our laws of citizenship.

So, you might ask, are there any other dual Israel-American citizens who hold US government positions that could compromise American security? Yes. Consider the following list that I obtained on the web:

Michael Mukasey
Recently appointed as US Attorney General. Mukasey also was the judge in the litigation between developer Larry Silverstein and several insurance companies arising from the destruction of the World Trade Center on 9/11/2001.

Michael Chertoff
Former Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, at the Justice Department; now head of Homeland Security.

Richard Perle
One of Bush’s foreign policy advisors, he is the chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board. A very likely Israeli government agent, Perle was expelled from Senator Henry Jackson’s office in the 1970’s after the National Security Agency (NSA) caught him passing Highly-Classified (National Security) documents to the Israeli Embassy. He later worked for the Israeli weapons firm, Soltam. Perle came from one the above mentioned pro-Israel thinktanks, the AEI. Perle is one of the leading pro-Israeli fanatics leading this Iraq war mongering within the administration and now in the media.

Paul Wolfowitz
Former Deputy Defense Secretary, and member of Perle’s Defense Policy Board, in the Pentagon. Wolfowitz is a close associate of Perle, and reportedly has close ties to the Israeli military. His sister lives in Israel. Wolfowitz came from the above mentioned Jewish thinktank, JINSA. Wolfowitz was the number two leader within the administration behind this Iraq war mongering. He later was appointed head of the World Bank but resigned under pressure from World Bank members over a scandal involving his misuse of power.

Lawrence (Larry) Franklin
The former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst with expertise in Iranian policy issues who worked in the office of Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith and reported directly to Feith’s deputy, William Luti, was sentenced January 20, 2006, “to more than 12 years in prison for giving classified information to an Israeli diplomat” and members of the pro-Israel lobbying group American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
Franklin will “remain free while the government continues with the wider case” and his “prison time could be sharply reduced in return for his help in prosecuting” former AIPAC members Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman, [who] are scheduled to go on trial in April [2006]. Franklin admitted that he met periodically with Rosen and Weissman between 2002 and 2004 and discussed classified information, including information about potential attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq. Rosen and Weissman would later share what they learned with reporters and Israeli officials.” (source:

Douglas Feith
Under Secretary of Defense and Policy Advisor at the Pentagon. He is a close associate of Perle and served as his Special Counsel. Like Perle and the others, Feith is a pro-Israel extremist, who has advocated anti-Arab policies in the past. He is closely associated with the extremist group, the Zionist Organization of America, which even attacks Jews that don’t agree with its extremist views. Feith frequently speaks at ZOA conferences. Feith runs a small law firm, Feith and Zell, which only has one International office, in Israel. The majority of their legal work is representing Israeli interests. His firm’s own website stated, prior to his appointment, that Feith “represents Israeli Armaments Manufacturer.” Feith basically represents the Israeli War Machine. Feith also came from the Jewish thinktank JINSA. Feith, like Perle and Wolfowitz, are campaigning hard for this Israeli proxy war against Iraq.

Feith was investigated by the FBI under suspicion of leaking classified information to Israel, being that he was Larry Franklin’s boss when Franklin leaked those documents to Rosen and Weissman of AIPAC. For that he was forced to leave the National Security Council. Feith was also investigated by the Senate Intelligence Committee for sexing up ‘intelligence’ that was used to justify invading Iraq.

Edward Luttwak
Member of the National Security Study Group of the Department of Defence at the Pentagon. Luttwak is reportedly an Israeli citizen and has taught in Israel. He frequently writes for Israeli and pro-Israeli newspapers and journals. Luttwak is an Israeli extremist whose main theme in many of his articles is the necessity of the U.S. waging war against Iraq and Iran.

Henry Kissinger
One of many Pentagon Advisors, Kissinger sits on the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board under Perle. For detailed information about Kissinger’s evil past, read Seymour Hersch’s book (Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House). Kissinger likely had a part in the Watergate crimes, Southeast Asia mass murders (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos), Installing Chilean mass murdering dictator Pinochet, Operation Condor’s mass killings in South America, and more recently served as Serbia’s Ex-Dictator Slobodan Milosevic’s Advisor. He consistently advocated going to war against Iraq. Kissinger is the Ariel Sharon of the U.S. Unfortunately, President Bush nominated Kissinger as chairman of the September 11 investigating commission. It’s like picking a bank robber to investigate a fraud scandal. He later declined this job under enormous protests.

Dov Zakheim
Dov Zakheim is an ordained rabbi and reportedly holds Israeli citizenship. Zakheim attended Jew’s College in London and became an ordained Orthodox Jewish Rabbi in 1973. He was adjunct professor at New York’s Jewish Yeshiva University. Zakheim is close to the Israeli lobby.

Dov Zakheim is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and in 2000 a co-author of the Project for the New American Century’s position paper, Rebuilding America’s Defenses, advocating the necessity for a Pearl-Harbor-like incident to mobilize the country into war with its enemies, mostly Middle Eastern Muslim nations.

He was appointed by Bush as Pentagon Comptroller from May 4, 2001 to March 10, 2004. At that time he was unable to explain the disappearance of $1 trillion dollars. Actually, nearly three years earlier, Donald Rumsfeld announced on September 10, 2001 that an audit discovered $2.3 trillion was also missing from the Pentagon books. That story, as mentioned, was buried under 9-11’s rubble. The two sums disappeared on Zakheim’s watch. We can only guess where that cash went.

Despite these suspicions, on May 6, 2004, Zakheim took a lucrative position at Booz Allen Hamilton, one of the most prestigious strategy consulting firms in the world. One of its clients then was Blessed Relief, a charity said to be a front for Osama bin Laden. Booz, Allen & Hamilton then also worked closely with DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which is the research arm of the Department of Defense.

Judicial Inc’s bio of Dov tells us Zakheim is a dual Israeli/American citizen and has been tracking the halls of US government for 25 years, casting defense policy and influence on Presidents Reagan, Clinton, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. Judicial Inc points out that most of Israel’s armaments were gotten thanks to him. Squads of US F-16 and F-15 were classified military surplus and sold to Israel at a fraction of their value.

Kenneth Adelman
One of many Pentagon Advisors, Adelman also sits on the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board under Perle, and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor, who supported going to war against Iraq. Adelman frequently is a guest on Fox News, and often expresses extremist and often ridiculus anti-Arab and anti-Muslim views. Through his racism or ignorance, he actually called Arabs “anti-Semitic” on Fox News (11/28/2001), when he could have looked it up in the dictionary to find out that Arabs by definition are Semites.
I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby
Vice President Dick Cheney’s ex-Chief of Staff. As chief pro-Israel Jewish advisor to Cheney, it helps explains why Cheney is so gun-ho to invade Iran. Libby is longtime associate of Wolfowitz. Libby was also a lawyer for convicted felon and Israeli spy Marc Rich, whom Clinton pardoned, in his last days as president. Libby was recently found guilty of lying to Federal investigators in the Valerie Plame affair, in which Plame, a covert CIA agent, was exposed for political revenge by the Bush administration following her husband’s revelations about the lies leading to the Iraq War.

Robert Satloff
U.S. National Security Council Advisor, Satloff was the executive director of the Israeli lobby’s “think tank,” Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Many of the Israeli lobby’s “experts” come from this front group, like Martin Indyk.

Elliott Abrams
National Security Council Advisor. He previously worked at Washington-based “Think Tank” Ethics and Public Policy Center. During the Reagan Adminstration, Abrams was the Assistant Secretary of State, handling, for the most part, Latin American affairs. He played an important role in the Iran-Contra Scandal, which involved illegally selling U.S. weapons to Iran to fight Iraq, and illegally funding the contra rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua’s Sandinista government. He also actively deceived three congressional committees about his involvement and thereby faced felony charges based on his testimony. Abrams pled guilty in 1991 to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to a year’s probation and 100 hours of community service. A year later, former President Bush (Senior) granted Abrams a full pardon. He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Reagan Administration’s State Department.

Marc Grossman
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. He was Director General of the Foreign Service and Director of Human Resources at the Department of State. Grossman is one of many of the pro-Israel Jewish officials from the Clinton Administration that Bush has promoted to higher posts.

Richard Haass
Director of Policy Planning at the State Department and Ambassador at large. He is also Director of National Security Programs and Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the first Bush (Sr) Administration who sat on the National Security Council, and who consistently advocated going to war against Iraq. Haass is also a member of the Defense Department’s National Security Study Group, at the Pentagon.

Robert Zoellick
U.S. Trade Representative, a cabinet-level position. He is also one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Bush (Jr) Administration who advocated invading Iraq and occupying a portion of the country in order to set up a Vichy-style puppet government. He consistently advocates going to war against Iran.

Ari Fleischer
Ex- White House Spokesman for the Bush (Jr) Administration. Prominent in the Jewish community, some reports state that he holds Israeli citizenship. Fleischer is closely connected to the extremist Jewish group called the Chabad Lubavitch Hasidics, who follow the Qabala, and hold very extremist and insulting views of non-Jews. Fleischer was the co-president of Chabad’s Capitol Jewish Forum. He received the Young Leadership Award from the American Friends of Lubavitch in October, 2001.

James Schlesinger
One of many Pentagon Advisors, Schlesinger also sits on the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board under Perle and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor, who supported going to war against Iraq. Schlesinger is also a commissioner of the Defense Department’s National Security Study Group, at the Pentagon.

David Frum
White House speechwriter behind the “Axis of Evil” label. He lumped together all the lies and accusations against Iraq for Bush to justify the war.

Joshua Bolten
White House Deputy Chief of Staff, Bolten was previously a banker, former legislative aide, and prominent in the Jewish community.

John Bolton
Former UN Representative and Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. Bolton is also a Senior Advisor to President Bush. Prior to this position, Bolton was Senior Vice President of the above mentioned pro-Israel thinktank, AEI. He recently (October 2002) accused Syria of having a nuclear program, so that they can attack Syria after Iraq. He must have forgotten that Israel has 400 nuclear warheads, some of which are thermonuclear weapons (according to a recent U.S. Air Force report).

David Wurmser
Special Assistant to John Bolton (above), the under-secretary for arms control and international security. Wurmser also worked at the AEI with Perle and Bolton. His wife, Meyrav Wurmser, along with Colonel Yigal Carmon, formerly of Israeli military intelligence, co-founded the Middle East Media Research Institute (Memri),a Washington-based Israeli outfit which distributes articles translated from Arabic newspapers portraying Arabs in a bad light.

Eliot Cohen
Member of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board under Perle and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor. Like Adelman, he often expresses extremist and often ridiculus anti-Arab and anti-Muslim views. More recently, he wrote an opinion article in the Wall Street Journal openly admitting his rascist hatred of Islam claiming that Islam should be the enemy, not terrorism.

Mel Sembler
President of the Export-Import Bank of the United States. A Prominent Jewish Republican and Former National Finance Chairman of the Republican National Committee. The Export-Import Bank facilitates trade relationships between U.S. businesses and foreign countries, specifically those with financial problems.

Steve Goldsmith
Senior Advisor to the President, and Bush’s Jewish domestic policy advisor. He also served as liaison in the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (White House OFBCI) within the Executive Office of the President. He was the former mayor of Indianapolis. He is also friends with Israeli Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert and often visits Israel to coach mayors on privatization initiatives.

Adam Goldman
White House’s Special Liaison to the Jewish Community.

Joseph Gildenhorn
Bush Campaign’s Special Liaison to the Jewish Community. He was the DC finance chairman for the Bush campaign, as well as campaign coordinator, and former ambassador to Switzerland.

Christopher Gersten
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and Families at HHS. Gersten was the former Executive Director of the Republican Jewish Coalition, Husband of Labor Secretary.

Mark Weinberger
Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Public Affairs.

Samuel Bodman
Deputy Secretary of Commerce. He was the Chairman and CEO of Cabot Corporation in Boston, Massachusetts.

Bonnie Cohen
Under Secretary of State for Management.

Ruth Davis
Director of Foreign Service Institute, who reports to the Office of Under Secretary for Management. This Office is responsible for training all Department of State staff (including ambassadors).

Daniel Kurtzer
Ambassador to Israel.

Cliff Sobel
Ambassador to the Netherlands.

Stuart Bernstein
Ambassador to Denmark.

Nancy Brinker
Ambassador to Hungary

Frank Lavin
Ambassador to Singapore.

Ron Weiser
Ambassador to Slovakia.

Mel Sembler
Ambassador to Italy.

Martin Silverstein
Ambassador to Uruguay.

Lincoln Bloomfield
Assistant Secretary of State for Political Military Affairs.

Jay Lefkowitz
Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy Council.

Ken Melman
White House Political Director.

Brad Blakeman
White House Director of Scheduling.

I don’t know about you, but dual citizenship is fine with me for an ordinary citizen. But if you hold an official position that demands that you put American interests above all else — if you should look transparent and fair to the rest of the world regarding your formation of Middle East foreign policies, then this is a dangerous trend. Even if there were no pro-Israeli agenda, the fact that decision makers have a bias or an allegiance to one of the parties involved in the current conflict should have raised red flags long before now.

If you think we’re being unfair here, ask yourself: How you would react to the Head of Homeland Security if he or she were a dual national with citizenship in Iran, Lebanon or Saudi Arabia? Ask yourself why you don’t feel the same about Israeli dual citizenship. Then you will understand how powerful the Israeli lobby has been in “adjusting” your acceptance of their special status.

Hey, I could be way off on this. Let’s hear from you.

FBI arrests US scientist on spying charges

In Jerusalem, Israeli government officials had no immediate comment.

A scientist credited with helping discover evidence of water on the moon has been arrested on charges of attempting to pass on classified information to an FBI agent posing as an Israeli intelligence officer.

The US justice department said Stewart David Nozette, 52, was charged with attempting to communicate, deliver and transmit classified information to an individual he believed to be an Israeli intelligence officer.

The criminal complaint against Nozette does not allege that Israel’s government or anyone acting on its behalf violated US law. In Jerusalem, where the story broke late at night, Israeli government officials had no immediate comment.

Nozette, from Maryland, was arrested yesterday by FBI agents. He is expected to appear in federal court in Washington today.

In an affidavit supporting the complaint, Leslie Martell, a FBI agent, said that on 3 September, Nozette received a telephone call from an individual purporting to be an Israeli intelligence officer. The caller was an undercover FBI agent.

Nozette agreed to meet with the agent later that day at a hotel in Washington. During the meeting the two discussed Nozette’s willingness to work for Israeli intelligence. The scientist allegedly said that he had, in the past, held top security clearances and had access to US satellite information, the affidavit said.

Nozette also was alleged to have said he would be willing to answer questions about this information in exchange for money. According to the affidavit, the agent explained that the Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad, would arrange for a communication system so Nozette could pass on information in a post office box.

Nozette agreed to provide regular, continuing information and asked for an Israeli passport, the government alleged.

The affidavit then alleged the following sequence of events:
Sept. 4: Nozette and the agent met again in the same hotel. The scientist allegedly said that while he no longer had legal access to any classified information at a US government facility, he could, nonetheless, recall classified information by memory. He allegedly asked when he could expect to receive his first settlement, saying he preferred cash amounts “under ten thousand” so he didn’t have to report it to merchant accounts. (Anti-money laundering laws require that all transactions of $10,000 (£6,000) or more must be reported to the US tax authorities).

Nozette allegedly told the agent, “Well, I should tell you my first need is that they should figure out how to pay me … They don’t expect me to do this for free.” Like most businessmen he was watching and securing his personal finance.
Sept. 10: Undercover FBI agents left a letter in the designated post office box, asking Nozette to answer a list of questions about US satellite information. The agents provided a $2,000 cash payment. Serial numbers of the bills were recorded.

Sept. 16: Nozette was captured on videotape leaving a manila envelope in the post office box. The next day, agents retrieved the sealed envelope and found, among other things, a one-page document containing answers to the questions and an encrypted computer thumb drive.

One answer contained information, classified as secret, that concerned capabilities of a prototype overhead collection system.

Sept. 17: Agents left a second letter in the post office box with another list of questions about US satellite information. The FBI also left a cash payment of $9,000. Nozette allegedly retrieved the questions and the money the same day.

Oct. 1: Nozette was videotaped leaving a manila envelope in the post office box. FBI agents retrieved it and found a second set of answers. The responses contained information classified as top secret and secret, involving US satellites, early warning systems, means of defence or retaliation against large-scale attack, communications intelligence information, and major elements of defence strategy.
Nozette had worked in varying jobs for the department of energy, the national aeronautics and space, and in the national space council in the president’s office in 1989 and 1990.

The scientist developed the Clementine bistatic radar experiment that purportedly discovered water on the south pole of the moon. He worked from approximately 1990 to 1999 at the department of energy’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, where he designed highly advanced technology.

At the department of energy, Nozette held a special security clearance equivalent to the defence department top secret and “critical nuclear weapon design information” clearances. Department of energy clearances apply to access to information specifically relating to atomic or nuclear-related materials.

Nozette also held top offices at the Alliance for Competitive Technology, a nonprofit company that he organised in March 1990. Between January 2000 and February 2006, Nozette, through his company, had several agreements to develop advanced technology for the US government.

He performed some of the research and development at the US Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency in Arlington, Virginia, and at Nasa’s Goddard Space Flight Centre in Greenbelt, Maryland.


March 2010

Four-fifths of the U.S. House and Senate recently declared in correspondence to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the U.S. must reaffirm its “unbreakable bond” with Israel. What persuaded our Congress to proclaim their loyalty to Israel while our military is waging war in the Middle East based on fabricated intelligence? Any sober assessment of this bond must concede a need to reappraise its cost in blood and treasure. Yet the Congress – our Congress – opposed that reassessment even as our commander-in-chief seeks to end a brutal Israeli occupation of Palestine that has provoked worldwide outrage for more than six decades. The Congress and the president are sworn to the same oath of office. That oath obliges them to protect the U.S. from all threats, both foreign and domestic. The facts confirm a common pro-Israeli source of the phony intelligence that took our military to war in Iraq. All the evidence points to Israel or its surrogates, including those in the Congress. Is that why the Israel lobby pressed the Congress for a pledge of allegiance to Israel?



Thursday, October 13, 2011



17 responses to “Adam Werritty: Liam Fox’s friend ‘bankrolled by corporate intelligence firm and Israel lobbyist’….

  1. Libya video serte.


    Actress Helen Mirren, who has played the part of a Mossad agent.

    In Israel, in the late 1980s, author Julia Pascal met a former agent of Mossad.

    (Honeypot: The startling story of the killer in heels)

    The Mossad agent was blonde and Swedish.

    Julia Pascal has written a play about an agent of Mossad called Susanne.

    According to Pascal (Julia Pascal.):

    “Susanne is raised a Swedish Christian by her father who was in fact a hidden Jew…

    “When Susanne discovers this, she finds a whole new unexplored identity which leads her to Israel to join Mossad, to use her intelligence and her body as a honeypot.”

    Mariella Novotny

    Mossad makes great use of sexy female agents.

    In 1986, Mordechai Vanunu revealed that Israel had nuclear weapons.

    While Vanunu was in London, negotiating his story with the UK’s Sunday Times, he met a blonde tourist called Cindy

    Cindy was very critical of Israel.

    Cindy invited Vanunu to come with her to Italy.

    In Rome, Vanunu woke up naked and blindfolded, with his wrists and ankles tied.

    He had been kidnapped by Mossad.

    Cindy’s real name was Cheryl Ben Tov, or Cheryl Hanin.

    One of the most famous female spies was Mariella Novotny, who was reportedly Jewish.

    (aangirfan: DOUBLE AGENTS)

    Novotny was involved with J F Kennedy and UK government minister Jack Profumo.


    Friday, February 25, 2000 |

    The CIA no longer trusts Jews—and for good reason
    by Joseph Aaron

    The chickens are coming home to roost. Or soon will be.

    Case one: Earlier this month, “60 Minutes” featured the case of Adam Ciralsky, an observant Jew fired by the CIA.

    During the segment, a CIA official said the agency believes the Israeli government has a program that recruits religious American Jews to spy on the United States.

    Ciralsky himself said the agency subjected him to “ethnic profiling” and suspected him of spying for Israel.

    You know what? Tough.

    I bow to no one in my condemnation of anti-Semites. And if, in fact, anti-Semitism is at all in operation here, that must be stopped and those who engage in it, fired.

    But I’m not so sure anti-Semitism is at play here, as quick as some Jews are to believe that.

    What’s really happening here, to my mind, is that the chickens have come home to roost.

    Let’s face it. If there is suspicion about Jews working at the CIA, it’s understandable. Let’s face it. If Jews, especially religious Jews, are feared to be working for Israel, we deserve it.

    For we have done so much to make the suspicions seem justified.

    No, I’m not talking about Jonathan Pollard. One lousy, rotten apple shouldn’t spoil the barrel for the rest of us. What I am talking about is how the Jewish community has seen the Pollard case and reacted to the Pollard case.

    In a word, the Jewish community’s behavior has been nothing short of shameful.

    Almost all Jews, and even more sickeningly, almost all Jewish organizations have taken up Pollard’s cause. They have called for his release and have either stated or implied that anti-Semitism is keeping him in jail.

    They say that even though President Clinton, Israel’s best friend ever, has said that Pollard should not be released because he did so much damage to U.S. national security.

    Don’t like or trust Clinton? How about the fact that every single top administration official has said the same thing. How about the fact that every single top congressional official, including Republicans such as Newt Gingrich, has said the same thing. How about the fact that Les Aspin, Clinton’s first defense secretary and one of Israel’s best friends, has said the same thing.

    Now, you either have to believe that every top American official — Democrat and Republican, civilian and military, executive branch and legislative — is an anti-Semite or you’ve got to recognize that Pollard did such overwhelming harm that all agree he must be punished by staying in prison the rest of his life.

    Still, most American Jews call for his release and excuse, if not justify, his actions. Doing that most loudly and strongly are right-wing Jews, right-wing both politically and religiously.

    And so, why shouldn’t the CIA have reason to be suspicious. If we, as a community, had shown how much we abhor Pollard, we would have sent one kind of signal. Instead, we’ve sent a very different kind of signal.

    After all, how many Jews have I heard say, “Well, he was doing it for Israel” — as if that made it OK or at least not so bad, as if doing it for Israel is any kind of excuse or explanation or factor.

    But to many Jews, it is. And that is why the chickens have come home to roost and why the CIA has reason to think twice about Jews who are religious or have ties to Israel.

    Case two: I didn’t think it could get this bad. I didn’t think my friends on the right-wing could sink so low. But they have. And the chickens are going to come home to roost big time on this one.

    As we all know, Israel and Syria are involved in negotiations that will probably involve Israel giving up the Golan Heights, a prospect many Jews are not very happy about.

    It’s their right to be upset. And it’s their right to voice their views and to try to convince the Israeli government not to do it. They have that right as Jews and as lovers of Israel.

    But there is a line, a line that American Jews have no right to cross. Ever. No matter what.

    And that line is fighting the Israeli government via the American government.

    That is out of bounds. That is so harmful to Israel in such fundamental ways that it is unbelievable any American Jew would do that.

    But a bunch of right-wing American Jews did just that earlier this month. What they did was go to Capitol Hill to lobby legislators to oppose U.S. support for a peace deal between Israel and Syria.

    Reading about that took my breath away. Here are Jews, who probably think of themselves as the ultimate lovers of Israel, going to American politicians to urge them to be against something the elected government of Israel deems is in Israel’s best interest.

    How dare they? It is one thing to express their views within the Jewish community, one thing to try and influence Israeli public opinion and policy. But for American Jews to go to Congress to tell it to oppose the Israeli government is an act almost treasonous in nature.

    Yes, I know that’s a harsh charge, but it is appropriate for those who try to get Congress involved in a Jewish family disagreement.

    Think of the signal it gives, the message it sends. And think of what it may mean for Israel in the future.

    The one thing that has been true and consistent during Israel’s first 50 years is that Congress has known the American Jewish community is behind it all the way. Sure, they know we fight among ourselves, but they also know those fights stop at the borders of Washington.

    Do the right-wingers really think changing that scenario is best for Israel.

    I can already hear the chickens.

    The writer is editor and publisher of the Chicago Jewish News.

  3. Pingback: Blackwater Watch » Blog Archive » Adam Werritty: Liam Fox's friend 'bankrolled by corporate …


    Gilad Atzmon: Being in Time

    Wednesday, September 14, 2011 at 7:13AM Gilad Atzmon
    (A talk given at the ‘Palestine, Israel, Germany- The Boundaries of Open Discussion Conference’, Freiburg 11th September 2011)

    Dear ladies and gentlemen.

    I will begin my talk with an unusual confession. Though I was born in Israel, in the first thirty years of my life I did not know much about the Nakba, the brutal and racially driven ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian population in 1948 by the newly born Israeli State. My peers and myself knew about a single massacre, namely, Deir Yassin but we were not at all familiar with the vast scale of atrocities committed by our grandparents. We believed that the Palestinians had voluntarily fled. We were told that they had run away and we did not find any reason to doubt that this had indeed been the case.

    Let me tell you that in all my years in Israel, I have never heard the word Nakba spoken. This may sound pathetic, or even absurd to you — but what about you? Shouldn’t you also ask yourself — when was the first time you heard the word Nakba? Perhaps you can also try to recall when this word settled comfortably into your lexicon. Let me help you here — I have carried out a little research amongst my European and American Palestinian solidarity friends, and most of them had only heard the word Nakba for the first time, just a few short years ago, whilst others admitted that they had only started to use the word themselves three or four years ago.

    But isn’t that a slightly strange state of affairs? After all, the Nakba took place more than six decades ago. How is it that only recently it found its way into our symbolic order?

    The answer is, in some respects, quite a straightforward one: to be in the world means to be subject to changes and transformations. It entails grasping and reassessing the past through different present realisations. History is shaped and re-shaped as we proceed in time. Accordingly, we seem to understand the Palestinian expulsion and plight through our current understanding of Israeli brutality: In the light of the destruction Israel left behind in Lebanon in 2006, followed by our witnessing of the genocidal crimes performed in Gaza in ‘Operation Cast Lead’, and observing the footage of the IDF execution of peace activists on the Mavi Marmara — we have subsequently, managed to amend our picture of the scale of the 1948 Palestinian tragedy. As we grasp more fully what the Israelis are capable of — we are also able to re-construct our vision of Israel’s ‘original sin’ i.e. the Nakba. We are able to empathise more deeply with the expelled Palestinians of 1948 via our current evolving comprehension of Israel, the Israeli, ‘Israeli-ness’, Jewish nationalism, global Zionism, and the relentless Israeli lobby.

    The meaning and significance of it becomes clearer — the past is far from being a precisely sealed off set of events with a fixed meaning, pre-decided for us by a fixed viewpoint and then closed off from further debate. Instead, our understanding of the past is shaped and transformed, constantly, as we progress and grow in knowledge and experience. And, as much as our current reality is shaped by our world vision — our past too, is shaped, re-shaped, viewed and re-viewed by the narratives we happen to follow at any given time.

    This is the true meaning of ‘being in time’; this is the essence of temporality, and this is what historical thinking is all about. People possess the capacity to ‘think historically’– to be transformed by the past — but also to allow the past to be constantly shaped, and re-shaped, as they proceed towards the unknown.

    Deir Yassin Remembered

    But here is an interesting set of historical anecdotes that deserve our attention: Indeed, one may be left perplexed on learning that — just three years after the liberation of Auschwitz in 1945 — the newly-formed Jewish state ethnically cleansed the vast majority of the indigenous population of Palestine (1948). Just five years after the defeat of Nazism — the Jewish state brought to life racially-discriminatory return laws in order to prevent the 1948 Palestinian refugees from coming back to their cities, villages, fields and orchards. These laws, still in place today, were not categorically different from the notorious Nuremberg race Laws. One may also be totally perplexed to find out that Yad Vashem, the Israeli Holocaust Museum, is located on the confiscated land of a Palestinian village Ein Karem, next door to Deir Yassin, which is probably the ultimate symbol of the Palestinian Shoa.

    One may wonder what is the root cause of this unique institutional lack of compassion that has been exhibited and maintained by Israel and Israelis for decades. One might expect that Jews, having been victims of oppression and discrimination themselves, would locate themselves at the forefront of the battle against evil and racism. One might expect the victims of discrimination to resist inflicting pain on others.

    Yet, some deeper and far more general questions come to mind here — how is it that the Jewish political and ideological discourse fails so badly to draw the obvious and necessary moral lessons from history and Jewish history in particular? How is it that in spite of ‘Jewish history’ appearing to be an endless tale of Jewish suffering, the Jewish State is so blind to the suffering it inflicts on others?

    On the face of it, what we see here is a form of alienation from historical thinking. Israeli historian Shlomo Sand has noted that Rabbinical Judaism could be realised as an attempt to replace historical thinking: instead of history, the Torah provided Rabbinical Judaism with a spiritually-driven plot. It conveyed an image of purpose and fate. However, things changed in the 19th century. Due to the rapid emancipation of European Jewry together with the rise of nationalism and the spirit of Enlightenment, assimilated European Jews felt bound to redefine their beginnings in secular, national and rational terms. This is when Jews ‘invented’ themselves as ‘people’ and as a ‘class’: like other European nations, Jews felt the urge to posses a coherent narrative about themselves and their history.

    Inventing history is not a crime – people and nations often do it. Yet, in spite of the rapid process of assimilation, Jewish secular ideology and politics failed to encompass the real meaning of historical thought and historical understanding. Indeed, the assimilated secular Jew was very successful in dropping God and other religious identifiers. And yet, at least politically, the assimilated Jew failed to replace divinity with an alternative Jewish anthropocentric secular ethical and metaphysical realisation.

    Temporality and Alienation

    I only recently understood that the ‘Jewish Identity political discourse’ is not only foreign to history; not only is it actually antagonistic towards historical thinking, but it is also detached from the notion of temporality.

    Temporality is inherent to the human condition: ‘To be’ is ‘to be in time’. Whether we like it or not, we are doomed to be hung between the past that is drifting away into the void, and the unknown that proceeds towards us from the future.

    Through the present, the so-called ‘here and now’, we meditate on that which has passed away. Occasionally we hope for forgiveness; and sometimes we are cheered by a pleasing memory. At other times we become angry with ourselves for not having reacted appropriately at some moment in our past. And from time to time we may recall a sensation of love.

    In the present we can also envisage the future, and in the awareness of that presence we may sense the fear of the unknown. But we can also experience waves of happiness and optimism when the future seems to smile at us.

    More often than not, we draw lessons from the past. But far more crucially important and interesting perhaps, is the idea that an imaginary future can easily re-write, or even re shape the past.

    I will try to elucidate this subtle idea through a simple and hypothetical yet horrifying war scenario:

    For instance, we can easily envisage a horrific situation in which an Israeli so-called ‘pre-emptive’ attack on Iran could escalate into a disastrous nuclear conflict, in which tens of millions of people in the Middle East and Europe would perish.

    I would guess that amongst the few survivors of such a nightmarish imaginary scenario, some may be bold enough to say what they ‘really think’ of the Jewish state and its inherent murderous tendencies.

    The above is obviously a horrific fictional scenario, and by no means a wishful one, yet such a vision of a ‘possible’ horrendous development should restrain Israeli or Zionist aggression towards Iran.

    But as we know, this hardly happens — Israeli officials threaten to flatten and nuke Iran all too often.

    Seemingly, Israelis and Zionists around the world fail to see their own actions within a historical perspective or context. They fail to look at their actions in terms of their consequences. From an ethical perspective, the above ‘imaginary’ scenario could or should prevent Israel from even contemplating any attack on Iran. Yet, what we see in practice is the complete opposite: Israel wouldn’t miss an opportunity to threaten Iran.

    My explanation is simple. The Jewish political and ideological discourse is foreign to the notion of temporality. Israel is blind to the consequences of its actions; it only thinks of its actions in terms of short-term pragmatism. Within the Jewish political discourse the time arrow is a one-way road. It goes forward, yet it never turns the other way. There is never an attempt to revise the past in the light of a possible future. Instead of temporality, Israel thinks in terms of an extended present.

    But Israel is just part of the problem. The Jewish lobby is also blinded to the immanent disaster it brings on Diaspora Jews. Like Israel, the lobby only thinks in terms of short term gain. It seeks more and more power. It never looks back , and neither does it regret.

    To sum up, the notion of temporality is the ability to accept that the past is ‘elastic’. The notion of temporality allows the time arrow to move in both directions. From the past, forward, but also, from the (imaginary) future, backward. Temporality allows the past to be shaped and revised in the light of a search for meaning. History, and historical thinking, are the capacity to re-think the past. Ethics is bounded with temporality, for ethics is the ability to judge and reflect on issues that transcend beyond the ‘here and now’. To think ethically is to produce a principled judgment that stands the test of time.

    Looking at the Past

    To a significant extent then, the ability to revise one’s perspective on, and understanding of the past, is the true essence of historical thinking — it allows us to reshape our comprehension of the past through an awareness of an imaginary future perspective, and vice versa. To think historically becomes a meaningful event once our past experience allows us to foresee a better future.

    Revisionism then, is imbued in the deepest possible understanding of temporality, and therefore inherent to humanity and humanism. And it is obvious that those who oppose proper and open historical debate are operating not only against the foundations of humanism, but also against ethics.

    And yet, in Israel some lawmakers insist that commemoration and historical debate of the Nakba should become illegal. And, interestingly enough, Jewish anti Zionists also oppose any attempt to deconstruct or revise Jewish past. I, for instance, have been criticised recently for being an ‘anti Semite’ for suggesting that Zionism is not colonialism. In case you do not know, this conference was under severe pressure mounted by some leading Jewish anti Zionists who insisted on preventing any discussion about the history of Jewish suffering.

    But I guess that it is pretty clear by now that my philosophical outlook is not very flattering to Jewish political and ideological discourse. Yet, the truth must be spoken: Jewish political discourse openly opposes any form of revisionism. Jewish politics is there to fix and cement a narrative and terminology.

    Though the Zionist ideology presents itself as a historical narrative, it took me many years to grasp that Zionism, Jewish identity politics and ideology were actually crude, blunt assaults on history, the notion of history and temporality. Zionism, in fact, only mimics an historical discourse. In practice, Zionism like other forms of Jewish political discourse, defies any form of historical discussion. Thus, those who follow the Zionist and Jewish political ideologies are doomed to drift away from humanism, humanity and ethical conduct. Such an explanation may throw light on Israeli criminal conduct and Jewish institutional support for Israel.

    Self-Reflection Is Overdue

    Inventing a past, as Shlomo Sand suggests, is not the most worrying issue when it comes to Israel and Zionism. People and nations do tend to invent their past.

    However, celebrating one’s phantasmic past at the expense of others is obviously a concerning ethical issue. But in the case of Israel the problem goes deeper. It is the attempt to seal the yesterdays that led to the collective ethical collapse of Israel and its supporting crowd.

    However, as much as I enjoy bashing Israel and Zionism, I will also have to ask you to self-reflect. Sadly enough, Israel is not alone. As tragic as it appears to be, America and Britain also managed to willingly give up on temporality. It is the lack of true historical discourse that stopped Britain and America from understanding their future, present and past. As in the case of Jewish ‘history’, American and British politicians insist on a banal, binary and simplistic historic tale regarding WWII, The Cold War, Islam, and the events of 9/11. Tragically, the criminal Anglo-American genocide in Iraq and Afghanistan, AKA ‘The War against Terror’, is a continuation of our self-inflicted blindness. Since Britain and America failed to grasp the necessary message from the massacres in Hamburg and Dresden, Nagasaki and Hiroshima, there was nothing that could stop English-speaking imperialism from committing similar crimes in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq.

    And what about you, my dearest Germans. What about your past? Are you free to look into your past and to re-shape your understanding of it as you move along? I don’t think so. Your history, or at least some chapters of it, are sealed by some draconian laws. Consequently, you younger generation do not attempt to grasp the true ethical meaning of the holocaust. Clearly, Germans do not understand that the Palestinians are actually the last victims of Hitler, for without Hitler, there wouldn’t be a Jewish State. Your young generations fail to see that the Palestinians are certainly victims of a Nazi-like ideology, which is both racist and expansionist. Let me also advise you, if any of you feel guilty about anything to do with your past, it should be the Palestinians whom you should care for. The fact that Germany is detached from its past clearly explains German political complicity in the Zionist crime. It certainly explains why your government provides Israel with a nuclear submarine every so often. But it also explains why you may remain silent when you find out that Yad Vashem is built on Palestinian land stolen in 1948.

    But it isn’t just Israel, Zionism, Britain, America and Germany. Let us look at ourselves, the supporters of Justice in Palestine. Even within our movement, we have some destructive elements who insist that we shouldn’t dare to touch our past: in the last month, Café Palestine Freiburg and the organiser of this conference were subjected to relentless attack by some established elements within the Jewish ‘anti’ Zionist movement. They were demanding that the conference should drop me because I am a ‘holocaust denier’. Needless to say, I have never denied the Holocaust or any other historical chapter. I also find the notion of ‘holocaust denial’ to be meaningless, and on the verge of idiotic.

    However, I do indeed insist, as I did here today, that history must remain an open discourse, subject to changes and revision, I oppose any attempt to seal the past, whether it is the Nakba, Holocaust, the Holodomor or the Armenian genocide. I am convinced that an organic and ‘elastic’ understanding of the past is the true essence of a humanist discourse, universalism and ethics.

    I clearly don’t know how to save Israel from itself, I do not know how to liberate Jewish anti Zionists from their Judeo centric ideology; but as far as America, Britain, Germany, the West, and us here today are concerned, all we have to do is to revert to our precious values of openness.

    We must drift away from a restrictive, monolithic Jerusalem, and reinstate the ethical spirit of pluralist Athens

    You can now pre-order Gilad Atzmon’s New Book on or

  5. 1948 Palestine

  6. shishi87 on 30 Jul 2007

    The Palestinian Exile, also known as Al Nakba (Arabic for “The Catastrophe”), refers to the ethnic cleansing of native Palestinian peoples … all » during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.

    From December 1947 until November 1948, Zionist forces (namely the Irgun, Lehi, Haganah terrorist gangs) expelled approximately 750, 000 indigenous Palestinians–almost 2/3 of the population–from their homes.

    Hundreds of Palestinians were also murdered for refusing to leave their homes. The most notable massacre is the Deir Yassin Massacre, in which an estimated 120 Palestinian civilians were brutally murdered by an Irgun-Lehi force. Other massacres include the ones at Sahila (70-80 killed), Lod (250 killed), and Abu Shusha (70 killed). About 40 other massacres were carried out by Zionist forces in just the summer of 1948.

    Not only did Zionist forces conduct massacres of Palestinian civilians, rape occured as well. According to Israeli historian Benny Morris, “In Acre four soldiers raped a girl and murdered her and her father. In Jaffa, soldiers of the Kiryati Brigade raped one girl and tried to rape several more. At Hunin, which is in the Galilee, two girls were raped and then murdered. There were one or two cases of rape at Tantura, south of Haifa. There was one case of rape at Qula, in the center of the country. At the village of Abu Shusha, near Kibbutz Gezer [in the Ramle area] there were four female prisoners, one of whom was raped a number of times. And there were other cases. Usually more than one soldier was involved. Usually there were one or two Palestinian girls. In a large proportion of the cases the event ended with murder. Because neither the victims nor the rapists liked to report these events, we have to assume that the dozen cases of rape that were reported, which I found, are not the whole story. They are just the tip of the iceberg.”

    During Al Nakba, Palestinians were murdered, raped, and ethnically cleansed from their villages. According to Israeli historian, Ilan Pappe, “In a matter of seven months, 531 villages were destroyed and 11 urban neighborhoods emptied.”

    Palestinians were forced into were forced out of Palestine and into neighboring countries (i.e. Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan), where they lived in refugee camps. Many were also sent to camps in West Bank and Gaza Strip.

    Most Palestinian towns were demolished and taken by the newly established Israeli government to make room for new Jewish immigrants. Old Palestinian infrastructures, as well as many ruins dating back from the Canaanites, Romans, Greeks, Crusaders, Arabs, and Ottoman Turks were completely destroyed. This signified the end of historical Palestine and the birth of modern-day Israel.

    Al Nakba marked the beginning of the Palestinian refugee crisis. Al Nakba destroyed a thriving and diverse Palestinian society and scattered them into diaspora. According to the UNRWA, the number of registered Palestinian refugees today is approximately 4.5 million. These refugees are dispersed throughout the world, many of which are still living in poverty-stricken refugee camps. Today, the situation keeps worsening and thousands die from malnutrition, contaminated water, or scarce medical supply.

    Israel has since refused to allow Palestinian refugees to return to their homes, and has refused to pay them compensation as required by UN Resolution 194, which was passed on December 11, 1948.

    Historically, the Israeli government, Israeli schools, and Israeli historians have denied that Al Nakba has occured. However, The New Historians, a loosely-defined group of Israeli historians, have recently published information recognizing the Al Nakba tragedy and controversial views of matters concerning Israel, particularly events concerning its birth in 1948. Much of their material comes from recently declassified Israeli government papers. Leading scholars in this school include Benny Morris, Ilan Pappe, Avi Shlaim, and Tom Segev. Many of their conclusions have been attacked by other scholars and Israeli historians, who continue deny Al Nakba even occured.

    News & Politics


    In the second half of the last century when Communism and Zionism began their simultaneous assault on the West, Europe was a place of strong and confident states well able to withstand the effects of inner troubles and foreign wars. The revolutionary outbreaks of 1848 had been overcome without great exertion. Austria-Hungary and France were not much weakened by their Prussian defeats in 1866 and 1871; they resumed their national existences, as defeated countries for centuries had done, side by side with yesterday’s victor, and soon were tranquil again. The Balkan people, emerging from five centuries of Turkish rule also were moving towards prosperity, in the kindlier air of national freedom. On the eastern borders of Europe Russia, under the flag of Christendom, appeared to be joining in this process of national and individual improvement.

    The appearance was deceptive, for the two maggots were in the apple, and today’s scene shows the result. The eighteen Christian centuries which, despite ups and downs showed a total sum of human betterment greater than that of any earlier time known to man, were coming either to an end or an interregnum; which, we still do not know, though believers have no doubt about the good resumption, somewhen. However, one eminent man of that period, from whom confidence in the outcome might have been expected, foresaw what was to come in our century and thought it would be the end, not a transient Dark Age.

    This was Henry Edward Manning, the English c1ergyman who was converted to Rome, became Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster, and, had he accepted nomination by his fellow cardinals, might have become Pope. Edmund Burke, John Adams and Alexander Hamilton had all perceived the worldwide aims of the revolution and foretold its spreading eruptions. Disraeli, Bakunin and others, a half-century later, had testified to, and warned against, the Jewish usurpation of the revolutionary leadership. Manning joined in these warnings but also foresaw the coming of Zionism and the part it would play in the dual process.

    Of the revolution he said, “The secret societies of the world, the existence of which men laugh at and deny in the plenitude of their self-confidence; the secret societies are forcing their existence and their reality upon the consciousness of those who, until the other day, would not believe that they existed” (1861). He expected the full success of Weishaupt’s original plan and thought the time in which he lived was “the prelude of the anti-Christian period of the final dethronement of Christendom, and of the restoration of society without God in the world”. Today the anti-Christian revolution holds temporal power in half of Europe, the Christian cross has been expunged from the flags of all great European nations save the British and from those of many small ones, and a “society without God” has been set up as a potential world-government, so that


    these words of ninety years ago are seen as an impressive forecast part-fu1filled.

    Then (and in this he rose above the other seers) he depicted the part which Zionism would p1ay in this process: “Those who have 1ost faith in the Incarnation, such as humanitarians, rationa1ists and pantheists, may well be deceived by any person of great political power and success, who should restore the Jews to their own land. . . and there is nothing in the political aspect of the world which renders such a combination impbssib1e”.

    Finally, he said that he expected the personal coming of Antichrist in the form of a Jew. (In these words he moved from the ground of political ca1culation, where as events have shown he was expert, to that of interpreting prophecy; he re1ated Saint Paul’s message to the Thessalonians, 2.1.iii-xi, to the coming time, saying, “It is a 1aw of Ho1y Scripture that when persons are prophesied of, persons appear”.)

    Thus, whi1e Europe outward1y appeared to be slow1y moving towards an improving future on the path which for eighteen centuries had served it well, in the Ta1mudic areas of Russia Zionism joined Communism as the second of the two forces which were to intercept that process. Communism was designed to subvert the masses; it was the “great popu1ar movement” foreseen by Disraeli, by means of which “the secret societies” were to work in unison for the disruption of Europe. Zionism set out to subvert ru1ers at the top. Neither force cou1d have moved forward without the other, for ru1ers of unimpaired authority wou1d have checked the revolution as it had been checked in 1848.

    Zionism was essentially the rejoinder of the Ta1mudic centre in Russia to the emancipation of Jews in the West. It was the intimation that they must not invo1ve themse1ves in mankind but must remain apart.

    Never since Babylon had the ruling sect ventured to p1ay this card. It can never be p1ayed again, if the present attempt ultimate1y ends in fiasco. For that reason the Ta1mudists ever refrained from p1aying it, and on1y did this when emancipation confronted them with a vital emergency, the 1oss of their power over Jewry. Indeed, they had a1ways denounced as “false Messiahs” those who clamoured that the day of fulfilment was come. ‘Had Sabbatai Zevi, or for that matter Cromwell or Napo1eon, been able to deliver Palestine to them, they might have proclaimed one of these to be the Messiah. On this occasion they proclaimed themselves to be the Messiah, and that bold enterprise can hardly be repeated. Historically therefore, we are probab1y moving towards the end of the destructive plan, because it obvious1y cannot be fu1filled, but the present generation, and possib1y some generations to come, by all the signs have yet a heavy price to pay for having encouraged the attempt.

    Dr. Chaim Weizmann’s book is the best single fount of information about the twin roots of Communism and Zionism and their convergent purpose. He was present at the birth of Zionism, he became its roving p1enipotentiary, he was for forty years the darling of Western courts, presidentia1 offices and cabinet rooms,


    he became the first president of the Zionist state, and he told the entire tale with astonishing candour. He shows how, in those remote Talmudic communities nearly a hundred years ago, the strategy took shape which in its consequences was to catch up, as in a vortex, all peoples of the West. Americans and Britons, Germans and Frenchmen, Italians, Poles, Scandinavians, Balts, the Balkanic peoples and all others were to be implicated. The lifeblood and treasure of the West were to be spent on the promotion of these two complementary purposes like water from a running tap.

    Millions, living and dead, were during two wars involved in their furtherance. Men now being born inherit a share in the final upheavals to which they must inexorably lead. The Jews shared in all that tribulation, in their small proportion to the masses affected. Dr. Weizmann’s account enables today’s student to see the beginnings of all this; and now this narrative reaches our own time, which receives daily shape from what then occurred.

    He explains that the Jews in Russia were divided into three groups. The first group was that of the Jews who, seeking “the peace of the city”, simply wanted to become peaceable Russian citizens, as the Jews of the West, in the majority, at that time were loyal German, French or other citizens. Emancipation was for this group the final aim, and it chiefly contained those Jews who, by talent, diligence and fear of Talmudic rule, had escaped from the ghettoes.

    Dr. Weizmann dismisses it as small, unrepresentative and “renegade”, and as it was swept away it must also disappear from this narrative, which belongs to the two other groups. By the edict of the Talmudists it has “disappeared from the face of the earth”, or been excommunicated.

    The remaining mass of Jews in Russia, (that is, those that lived in the ghettoes under Talmudic rule) were divided into two groups by a vertical line which split households and families, including Dr. Weizmann’s own house and family. Both groups were revolutionary; that is to say, they agreed in working for the destruction of Russia. The dissension was solely on the point of Zionism. The “Communist-revolutionary” group held that full “emancipation” would be achieved when the world-revolution supplanted the nation-states everywhere. The “Zionist-revolutionary” group, while agreeing that the world-revolution was indispensable to the process, held that full “emancipation” would only be achieved when a Jewish nation was established in a Jewish state.


    Sunday, May 30, 2010

    More Definitive Proof Of Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal: Israel Now Positioning Nuclear Missile Subs Off Coast Of Iran!
    When the heck will the civilized world finally wake the hell up and tell their liars in their own governments to stop with the BS and admit that not only does Israel possess nuclear weapons, but they also have the means of projecting that power all over the globe, and they are the ones who are the real threat to touching off a new global nuclear war? That time is definitely now>

    Now comes a new article from the Times Online News service, at, out of the United Kingdom that says outright and clearly that not only does Israel possess nuclear weapons, but they have stationed three of their nuclear armed Dolphin class submarines off the coast of Iran. Each of these submarines according to this article are armed with nuclear tipped cruise missiles, and are ready at any given notice to launch a nuclear strike into Iran! Here is the article:

    May 30, 2010
    Israel stations nuclear missile subs off IranUzi Mahnaimi in Tel Aviv

    Three German-built Israeli submarines equipped with nuclear cruise missiles are to be deployed in the Gulf near the Iranian coastline.

    The first has been sent in response to Israeli fears that ballistic missiles developed by Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, a political and military organisation in Lebanon, could hit sites in Israel, including air bases and missile launchers.

    The submarines of Flotilla 7 — Dolphin, Tekuma and Leviathan — have visited the Gulf before. But the decision has now been taken to ensure a permanent presence of at least one of the vessels.

    The flotilla’s commander, identified only as “Colonel O”, told an Israeli newspaper: “We are an underwater assault force. We’re operating deep and far, very far, from our borders.”

    Each of the submarines has a crew of 35 to 50, commanded by a colonel capable of launching a nuclear cruise missile.

    The vessels can remain at sea for about 50 days and stay submerged up to 1,150ft below the surface for at least a week. Some of the cruise missiles are equipped with the most advanced nuclear warheads in the Israeli arsenal.

    The deployment is designed to act as a deterrent, gather intelligence and potentially to land Mossad agents. “We’re a solid base for collecting sensitive information, as we can stay for a long time in one place,” said a flotilla officer.

    The submarines could be used if Iran continues its programme to produce a nuclear bomb. “The 1,500km range of the submarines’ cruise missiles can reach any target in Iran,” said a navy officer.

    Apparently responding to the Israeli activity, an Iranian admiral said: “Anyone who wishes to do an evil act in the Persian Gulf will receive a forceful response from us.”

    Israel’s urgent need to deter the Iran-Syria-Hezbollah alliance was demonstrated last month. Ehud Barak, the defence minister, was said to have shown President Barack Obama classified satellite images of a convoy of ballistic missiles leaving Syria on the way to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

    Binyamin Netanyahu, the prime minister, will emphasise the danger to Obama in Washington this week.

    Tel Aviv, Israel’s business and defence centre, remains the most threatened city in the world, said one expert. “There are more missiles per square foot targeting Tel Aviv than any other city,” he said.

    NTS Notes: Read it and weep, America… Israel possesses nuclear weapons, and the facts are right in this article for everyone to see. The fact is that the rest of the world knows that Israel has nuclear weapons, and yet the United States Government continues to abide by their Zionist Jewish masters wishes and continues to lie to their own people, and deny their existence!

    The United States people must be made aware that according to the Symington Agreement over nuclear arms dating from 1976, the US government must immediately stop all aid, military shipments, and support for the Zionist state of Israel. There must also be an immediate demand for the return of some 300+ billion dollars in “aid” to Israel since the Symington Agreement came into effect back in 1976. I doubt that any of this will happen though thanks to the total control of the US Government itself by Zionist Jewish criminals.

    Israel wants war with Iran desperately. Now with their nuclear missile submarines stationed off of Iran, that war may happen sooner than any of us may expect. It is up to the people of this planet to see the real threat in the Middle East for the evil that they truly are, and that is Israel itself.

    More to come



    Israel’s Nuclear Blackmail

    Samson Option: Israel’s Plan to Prevent Mass Destruction Attacks
    David Eberhart
    Tuesday, Oct. 16, 2001
    With American bombing raids into Afghanistan and a tough President Bush intimating more of the same for other terrorist-harboring nations, experts and armchair war-watchers are inserting nuclear powerhouse Israel into the calculus of potential Armageddon in the Middle East.
    Adding yet other variables, a defiant Saddam Hussein issued an ominous warning in late August, just weeks before the terror attacks on New York City and the Pentagon: “The battle [against the U.S.] continues on the economic, political and military fields. We are convinced we will be victorious.”

    All that the saber-rattling Iraqi dictator left out of this latest diatribe was a bold repeat of his 1991 pre-Desert Storm boast that if America attacked, the first to feel his wrath in the “mother of all battles” would be Israel.

    After decades of living among hostile neighbors, Israel has yet to be attacked by an enemy using nuclear, chemical or biological weapons. One reason may be the horrific plan some claim Israel drew up to prevent such an attack. The plan was called the Samson Option. An astute investigative journalist and student of history chalked a dramatic potential solution to the volatile equation on the blackboard – a decade ago.

    “Should war break out in the Middle East again and should the Syrians and the Egyptians break through again as they did in 1973 [Yom Kippur War], or should any Arab nation fire missiles again at Israel, as Iraq did [in the 1991 Gulf War], a nuclear escalation, once unthinkable except as a last resort, would now be a strong possibility.”

    Pulitzer Prize-winning author (“My Lai 4”) Seymour M. Hersh made this hypothesis in his 1991 best seller “The Samson Option.”

    Captured and cruelly maimed, the book’s biblical namesake uttered the ultimate fighting words, “Let my soul die with the Philistines.”

    That said, the divinely empowered Samson pushed apart the temple pillars – collapsing the roof and killing himself as well as his enemies.

    In his exposé of Israel’s clandestine nuclear arsenal, Hersh suggested that in the early days (late 1960s) of crude big-flash-and-bang nukes, one defensive option to counter an attack on Israel with weapons of mass destruction was for the beleaguered nation to mimic Samson and grimly trade holocaust for holocaust.

    Hersh’s 1991 prognostication of a “strong possibility” of the use by Israel of nuclear weapons rested on his knowledge that by the mid-1980s, Israeli technicians at the super-secret Dimona nuclear plant had produced hundreds of low-yield neutron warheads capable of destroying large numbers of enemy troops with minimal property damage.

    Israel’s ability to use nukes tactically and surgically, however, has evolved a great deal since the Samson option was still realistically an option.

    Israel’s Military Might

    In 1997, Jane’s Intelligence Weekly examined satellite photographs of what it described as an Israeli military base at Kfar Zechariah, concluding academically, “Israel’s nuclear arsenal is larger than many estimates.”

    According to Jane’s, the site was said to house about 50 Jericho-2 missiles, believed to have a maximum range of about 3,000 miles with a warhead of about 2,200 pounds.

    According to the report, the installation contained nuclear bombs, configured for dropping from bombers.

    Furthermore, five bunkers at the site were cited as capable of safeguarding 150 weapons.

    “This … supports indications that the Israeli arsenal may contain as many as 400 nuclear weapons with a total combined yield of 50 megatons,” the report concluded.

    In 1998 the New York Times reported a Rand Corp. study commissioned by the Pentagon that opined Israel had enough plutonium to make 70 nuclear weapons.

    More light was shed on the issue in February of last year when the Israeli Knesset (parliament) held the first public discussion on the country’s nuclear arms program.

    Issam Mahoul, an Arab Israeli MP and member of the Hadash (Communist) Party, petitioned that country’s Supreme Court to force the government to permit a parliamentary debate on the forbidden subject.

    The upshot of this bold and generally unpopular tactic was an unprecedented televised session of the Knesset at which Mahoul stated that, according to experts’ estimates, Israel had stockpiled huge numbers of nuclear warheads.

    This had increased to what he described as the “insane amount of 200-300.” The weapons had been developed with the help of the South African apartheid regime.

    Working up a head of rhetorical steam, Mahoul grandly alleged that three new German-built submarines just purchased by Israel were to be fitted with nuclear weapons.

    Their stated purpose, he said, was “to cruise deep in the sea and constitute a second strike force in the event that Israel is attacked with nuclear weapons.”


    Another major use of the Israeli bomb is to compel the U.S. to act in Israel’s favor, even when it runs counter to its own strategic interests. As early as 1956 Francis Perrin, head of the French A-bomb project wrote “We thought the Israeli Bomb was aimed at the Americans, not to launch it at the Americans, but to say, ‘If you don’t want to help us in a critical situation we will require you to help us; otherwise we will use our nuclear bombs.'” During the 1973 war, Israel used nuclear blackmail to force Kissinger and Nixon to airlift massive amounts of military hardware to Israel. The Israeli Ambassador, Simha Dinitz, is quoted as saying, at the time, “If a massive airlift to Israel does not start immediately, then I will know that the U.S. is reneging on its promises and…we will have to draw very serious conclusions…” Just one example of this strategy was spelled out in 1987 by Amos Rubin, economic adviser to Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, who said “If left to its own Israel will have no choice but to fall back on a riskier defense which will endanger itself and the world at large… To enable Israel to abstain from dependence on nuclear arms calls for $2 to 3 billion per year in U.S. aid.” ….

    ….It is clear from Israel Shahak that Israel has no interest in peace except that which is dictated on its own terms, and has absolutely no intention of negotiating in good faith to curtail its nuclear program or discuss seriously a nuclear-free Middle East,”Israel’s insistence on the independent use of its nuclear weapons can be seen as the foundation on which Israeli grand strategy rests.”

    According to Seymour Hersh, “the size and sophistication of Israel’s nuclear arsenal allows men such as Ariel Sharon to dream of redrawing the map of the Middle East aided by the implicit threat of nuclear force.” …. Ze’ev Shiff, an Israeli military expert writing in Haaretz said, “Whoever believes that Israel will ever sign the UN Convention prohibiting the proliferation of nuclear weapons… is day dreaming,” and Munya Mardoch, Director of the Israeli Institute for the Development of Weaponry, said in 1994, “The moral and political meaning of nuclear weapons is that states which renounce their use are acquiescing to the status of Vassal states. All those states which feel satisfied with possessing conventional weapons alone are fated to become vassal states.”

    ….. Seymour Hersh warns, “Should war break out in the Middle East again,… or should any Arab nation fire missiles against Israel, as the Iraqis did, a nuclear escalation, once unthinkable except as a last resort, would now be a strong probability.” Ezar Weissman, Israel’s current President said “The nuclear issue is gaining momentum (and the) next war will not be conventional.” Russia and before it the Soviet Union has long been a major (if not the major) target of Israeli nukes. It is widely reported that the principal purpose of Jonathan Pollard’s spying for Israel was to furnish satellite images of Soviet targets and other super sensitive data relating to U.S. nuclear targeting strategy. (Since launching its own satellite in 1988, Israel no longer needs U.S. spy secrets.) Israeli nukes aimed at the Russian heartland seriously complicate disarmament and arms control negotiations and, at the very least, the unilateral possession of nuclear weapons by Israel is enormously destabilizing, and dramatically lowers the threshold for their actual use, if not for all out nuclear war.

    Seymour Hersh sites other threats in The Samson Option. Referring to the U.S. failure to support Israel’s invasion of Egypt in 1956, including in the face of nuclear threats from the Soviet Union, one unnamed former Israeli official told Hersh in the late 1980s: “You Americans screwed us…We got the message. We can still remember the smell of Auschwitz and Treblinka. Next time we’ll take all of you with us.”


    These things do not happen by accident, and the vengeance on Germany, like the earlier one on Russia, was in this way given the imprint of a Talmudic vengeance (that is, a vengeance on Christendom, the Talmud being the specifically anti-Christian continuation of the pre-Christian Torah). The vengeful writ ran on both sides of the line which by that time was supposed to be an “Iron Curtain” dividing “the free world” from the enslaved Asiatic one; in this matter of vengeance there was no iron curtain. Nuremberg was in the Western zone; Oberammergau in the Soviet one.

    Finally, the New York Times, which may be described as the world’s leading Jewish newspaper (it is Jewish-owned and New York is today primarily a Jewish city) in 1948 published what claimed to be an authoritative statistical article, computing the Jewish population of the world (three years after the war’s end) between 15,700,000 and 18,600,000. If either figure was near truth this meant that the Jewish world-population had remained stationary or increased during the war years.

    Newspaper articles are soon forgotten (unless some diligent student preserves them) but the great propagandist fabrications are handed on. Thus the historians, those men of precision in other questions, passed on the legend of “mass-extermination” to posterity.


    The Talmudic vengeance was the start of a new era in the history of the West, during which all national considerations were to be subordinated to the cause of Jewish nationhood, as represented by the Talmudists from Russia.


    In April 2002 Jewish academic David Perlmutter in the Los Angeles Times inferred Israel under some circumstances would launch revenge attacks against targets worldwide: “Israel has been building nuclear weapons for 30 years. The Jews understand what passive and powerless acceptance of doom has meant for them in the past, and they have ensured against it. Masada was not an example to follow–it hurt the Romans not a whit, but Sampson in Gaza? With an H-bomb? What would serve the Jew-hating world better in repayment for thousands of years of massacres but a Nuclear Winter. Or invite all those tut-tutting European statesmen and peace activists to join us in the ovens?
    “For the first time in history, a people facing extermination while the world either cackles or looks away–unlike the Armenians, Tibetans, World War II European Jews or Rwandans–have the power to destroy the world. The ultimate justice?”

    The same month Senator John McCain’s brother Joe wrote a piece called NEVER AGAIN which began with the statement: There is a lot of worry popping up in the media just now — “Can Israel Survive?” Don’t worry about it. It relates to something that Palestinians, the Arabs, and perhaps most Americans don’t realize — the Jews are never going quietly again. Never. And if the world doesn’t come to understand that, then millions of Arabs are going to die. It’s as simple as that.



    It has been also stated that the term Bolshevik refers to the “larger” or more violent program of the majority faction. After (1918) the Bolsheviki called their organization the Communist Party.

    The Zionist Jews were another group that laid its plan in Russia as a part of the new reorientation of Russian Jewry after the collapse of Haskalah and the assassination (1881) of Alexander II. “On November 6, 1884, for the first time in history, a Jewish international assembly was held at Kattowitz, near the Russian frontier, where representatives from all classes and different countries met and decided to colonize Palestine. . .”(The Haskalah Movement in Russia, p. 285). For a suggestion of the solidarity of purpose between the Jewish Bund, which was the core of the Communist Party, and early Zionism, see Grayzel (op. cit., p. 662). “Henceforth a heightened sense of race-consciousness takes the place formerly held by religion and is soon to develop into a concrete nationalism with Zion as its goal” (Graetz-Raisin, Vol. p. 168).

    In Russia and abroad in the late nineteenth century, not only Bundists but other Khazar Jews had been attracted to the writings of Karl Marx (1818-1883), partly, it seems, because he was Jewish in origin. “On both paternal and maternal sides Karl Marx was descended from rabbinical families” (Univ. Jew. Encyc., Vol. VII, p. 289).

    The Marxian program of drastic controls, so repugnant to the free western mind, was no obstacle to the acceptance of Marxism by many Khazar Jews, for the Babylonian Talmud under which they lived had taught then to accept authoritarian dictation on everything from their immorality to their trade practices. Since the Talmud contained more than 12,000 controls, the regimentation of Marxism was acceptable — provided the Khazar politician, like the Talmudic rabbi, exercised the power of the dictatorship.

    Under Nicholas II, there was no abatement of the regulations designed, after the murder of Alexander II, To curb the anti-government activities of Jews; consequently, the ” reaction to those excesses was Jewish support of the Bolsheviks. . .”(Univ. Jew. Encyc., Vol. I, p. 286.) The way to such support was easy since the predecessor organization of Russian Communism was the Jewish “Bund.” Thus Marxian Communism, modified for expediency, became an instrument for the violent seizure of power. The Communist Jews, together with revolutionaries of Russian stock, were sufficiently numerous to give the venture a promise of success, if attempted at the right time. After the rout of the less violent faction in 1903, Lenis remained the leader.

    The blow fell in the fateful year, 1917, when Russia was staggering under defeat by Germany — a year before Germany in turn staggered to defeat under the triple blows of Britain, France, and the United States. “The great hour of freedom struck on the 15th of March, 1917,” when “Czar Nicholas’s train was stopped” and he was told “that his rule was at an end. . . Israel, in Russia, suddenly found itself lifted out of its oppression and degradation” (Graetz-Raisin, op. cit., Vol. VI, p. 209).

    At this moment Lenin appeared on the scene, after an absence of nine years (Encyc. Brit., Vol. XIII, p. 912). The Germans, not realizing that he would be anything more than a trouble-maker for their World War I enemy, Russia, passed him and his party (exact number disputed — about 200?) in a sealed train from Switzerland to the Russian border. In Lenin’s sealed train, “Out of a list of 165 names published, 23 are Russian, 3 Georgian, 4 Armenian, 1 German, and 128 Jewish” (The Surrender of an Empire, Nesta H. Webster, Boswell Printing and Publishing Company, Ltd., 10 Essex St., London, W.C.2, 1931, p. 77). “At about the same time, Trotsky arrived from the United States, followed by over 300 Jews from the East End of New York and joined up with the Bolshevik Party” (op. cit., p. 73).

    Thus under Lenin, whose birth-name was Ulianov and whose racial antecedents are uncertain, and under Leon Trotsky, a Jew, whose birth -name was Bronstein, a small number of highly trained Jews from abroad, along with Russian Judaized Khazars and non-Jewish captives to the Marxian ideology, were able to make themselves masters of Russia. “Individual revolutionary leaders and Sverdlov — played a conspicuous part in the revolution of November, 1917, which enabled the Bolshevists to take possession of the state apparatus” (Univ. Jew. Encyc., Vol. IX, p.668). Here and there in the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia other Jews are named as co-founders of Russian Communism, but not Lenin and Stalin. Both of these, however, are said by some writers to be half-Jewish. Whatever the racial antecedents of their top man, the first Soviet commissariats were largely staffed with Jews. The Jewish position in the Communist movement was well understood in Russia. “The White Armies which opposed the Bolshevik government linked Jews and Bolsheviks as common enemies” (Univ. Jew Encyc., Vol. I, p. 336).

    Those interested in the ratio of Jews to others in the government in the early days of Communist rule in Russia should, if possible, see Les derniers jours des Romanof (The Last Days of the Romanovs) by Robert Wilton, long the Russian correspondent of the London Times. A summary of its vital passages is included in the “foreword to Third Edition” of The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World (Brown and Nolan , Limited Waterford, Dublin, Belfast, Cork, London, 1939, 1947) by Rev. Denis Fahey, a well-known Irish professor of philosophy and Church history. Professor Fahey gives names and nationality of the members of the Council of Peoples Commissars, the Central Executive Committee, and the Extraordinary Commissions, and in summary quotes from Wilton as follows:

    According to the data furnished by the Soviet press, out of 556 important functionaries of the Bolshevik State. . . there were in 1918-1919, 17 Russians, 2 Ukrainians, 11 Armenians, 35 Letts, 15 Germans, 1 Hungarian, 10 Georgians, 3 Poles, 3 Finns, 1 Karaim, 457 Jews.

    As the decades passed by — after the fateful year 1917 — Judaized Khazars kept a firm hand on the helm of the government in the occupied land of Russia. In due time they built a bureaucracy to their hearts’ desire. The government – controlled Communist press “issued numerous and violent denunciations of anti-Semitic episodes, either violence or discriminations.” Also, “in 1935 a court ruled that anti-Semitism in Russia was a penal offense” (Univ. Jew Encyc., Vol. I, p. 386). Among top-flight leaders prominent in the middle of the twentieth century. Stalin, Kaganovich, Beria, Molotov, and Litvinoff all have Jewish blood, or are married to Jewesses. The latter circumstance should not be overlooked, because from Nero’s Poppaea (Encyclopedia Italiana, Vol. XXVII, p. 932; also, The Works of Flavius Josephus, translated by William Whiston, David McKay , Philadelphia, n.d., pp. 8, 612, 616) to the Montreal chemist’s woman friend in the Canadian atomic espionage trials (Report of the Royal Commission, Government Printing Office, Ottawa, Canada, 1946, $1.00) the influence of a certain type of wife — or other closely associated woman — has been of utmost significance. Nero and Poppaea may be allowed to sleep – if their crimes permit – but Section III, 11, entitled “RAYMOND BOYER, Montreal,” in the Report of the Canadian Royal Commission should be read in full by all who want facts on the subject of the corruption of scientists, and others working on government projects. In the Soviet Embassy records, turned over to Canadian authorities by Ivor Gouzinko, was Col. Zabotin’s notebook which contained the following entries (pp. 375 and 397 respectively):


    Frenchman. Noted chemist, about 40 years of age. Works in McGill University, Montreal. Is the best of the specialists on VV on the American Continent. Gives full information on explosives and chemical plants. Very rich. He is afraid to work. (Gave the formula of RDX, up to the present there was no evaluation from the boss.)


    1. Freda

    Jewess — works as a co-worker in the International Bureau of Labour. A lady friend of the Professor.

    In view of the facts furnished above as to the racial composition of the early Communist bureaucracy, it is perhaps not surprising that a large portion of the important foreign efforts of the present government of Russia are entrusted to Jews.

    This is especially notable in the list of current or recent exercisers of Soviet power in the satellite lands of Eastern Europe. Anna Rabinsohn Pauker, Dictator of Rumania; Matyas Rakosi, Dictator of Hungary; Jacob Berman, Dictator of Poland; D.M. Manuilsky, Dictator of the Ukraine; and many other persons highly placed in the governments of the several Eastern European countries are all said to be members of this new Royal Race of Russia.

    Of Eastern European origin are the leaders of late nineteenth century and twentieth century political Zionism which flowered from the already recorded beginnings at Kattowitz in 1884. Born at Budapest, Hungary, was Theodor Herzl (1860-1904), author (1896) of Der Judenstatt (The Jews’ State), who presided over the “Zionist Congress,” which “took place at Basel, Switzerland, on August 29, 30, and 31, 1897” (Univ. Jew. Encyc., Vol. II, p. 102). Dr. Chaim Weizmann, the head of political Zionism at the moment at the moment of its recourse to violence, was born in Plonsk, Poland. Since these top leaders are Eastern Europeans, it is not surprising that most of the recent immigrants into Palestine are of Soviet and satellite origin and that their weapons have been largely from the Soviet Union and from Soviet-controlled Czechoslovakia (see below, Chapter VI).
    As a number of writers have pointed out, political Zionism entered its violent phase after the discovery of the incredibly vast mineral wealth of Palestine. According to “Zionists Misleading World with Untruths for Palestine Conquest,” a full-page article inserted as an advertisement in the New York Herald Tribune (January 14, 1947), “an independent Jewish state in Palestine was the only certain method by which Zionists could acquire complete control and outright ownership of the proven Five Trillion Dollar ($5,000,000,000,000) chemical and mineral wealth of the Dead Sea.” The long documented article is signed by R. M. Schoendorf, “Representative of Cooperating Americans of the Christian Faiths”; by Habib I. Katibah, “Representative of Cooperating Americans of Arab Ancestry”; and by Benjamin H. Freedman, “Representative of Cooperating Americans of the Jewish Faith,” and is convincing. Irrespective, however, of the value of the Dead Sea minerals, the oil flow of Middle Eastern wells. Also in 1951, oil was “discovered” in the Negeb Desert, an area for which “Israel” authorities had so much fervor that they seized it (see Chapter VI, b, below).

    The dominance of the motive of self-aggrandizement in political Zionism has been affirmed and denied; but it is difficult for an observer to see any possible objective apart from mineral wealth or long range grand strategy, including aggression (see Chapters VI and IX, below), in a proposal to make a nation out of an agriculturally poor, already overpopulated territory the size of Vermont. The intention of aggression at the expense of Moslem peoples, particularly in the direction of Iraq and Iran, is suggested also by the fact that the Eastern European Jews, adherents to the Babylonian Talmud, had long turned their thoughts to the lands where their sages lived and where most of the native Jewish population had embraced the Moslem faith. Any possible Zionist religious motive such as the hope of heaven, which fired the zeal of the Crusaders, is apparently ruled out by the nature of Judaism, as it is generally understood. “The Jewish religion is a way of life and has no formulated creed, or articles of faith, the acceptance of which brings redemption or salvation to the believer. . .” (opening words, p. 763, of the section on “Doctrines.” in Religious Bodies: 1936, Vol. II, Part I, Denominations A to J, U. S. Department of Commerce, Jesse H, Jones. Secretary, Bureau of Census, Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C.).

    The secret or underground overseas efforts of Khazar-dominated Russia apparently have been entrusted principally to Jews. This is especially true of atomic espionage. The Report of the Royal Commission of Canada, already referred to, shows that Sam Carr (Cohen), organizer for all Canada; Fred Rose (Rosenberg), organizer for French Canada, and member of the Canadian Parliament from a Montreal constituency; and Germina (or Hermina) Rabinowich, in charge of liaison with U. S. Communists, were all born in Russia or satellite lands. In this connection, it is important to stress the fact that the possession of a Western name does not necessarily imply Western European stock. In fact, the maneuver of name-changing frequently disguises an individual’s stock or origin. Thus the birth-name of John Gates, editor of the Communist Daily Worker was Israel Regenstreif. Other name changers among the eleven Communists found guilty by a New York jury in October, 1949, included Gil Green — born Greenberg; Gus Hall — born Halberg; and Carl Winter — born Weissberg; (For details on these men and the others, see the article, “The Trial of the Eleven Communists,” by Sidney Shalett, Reader’s Digest, August, 1950, pp. 59-72.) Other examples of name-changing can be cited among political writers, army officers, and prominent officials in the executive agencies and departments in Washington. Parenthetically, the maneuver of acquiring a name easily acceptable to the majority was very widely practiced by the aliens prominent in the seizure of Russia for Communism, among the name-changers being Lenin (Ulianov), Trotsky (Bronstein), and Stalin (Dzugashvili), The principal founders of state Communism.


    immigration brought us almost exclusively European people whose ideals were those of Western Christian civilization; these people became helpers in subduing and settling our vast frontier area; they wished to conform to rather than modify or supplant the body of traditions and ideals summed up in the word “America.”

    After 1880, however, our immigration shifted sharply to include millions of persons from Southern and Eastern Europe. Almost all of these people were less sympathetic than predecessor immigrants to the government and the ideals of the United States and a very large portion of them were non-Christians who had no intention whatever of accepting the ideals of Western Christian civilization, but had purposes of their own. These purposes were accomplished not by direct military invasion, as President Monroe feared, but covertly by infiltration, propaganda, and electoral and financial pressure (Chapters I, III, IV, V, VI, VII). The average American remained unaware and unperturbed.

    Among those who early foresaw the problems to be created by our new immigrants was General Eisenhower’s immediate predecessor as President of Columbia University. In a small but extremely valuable book, The American As He Is, President Nicholas Murray Butler in 1908 called attention to “the fact that Christianity in some one of its many forms is a dominant part of the American nature.” Butler, then at the zenith of his intellectual power, expressed fear that our “capacity to subdue and assimilate the alien elements brought . . . by immigration may soon be exhausted.” He concluded accordingly that “The dangers which confront America will come, if at all, from within”

  14. November 16, 1933 – at midnight! That is a date in American history our children will long have tragic cause to remember. That was the day Soviet Foreign Commissar Maxim Litvinov, plunderer of Estonia and the Kremlin’s first agent for socializing England, sat down with Franklin Roosevelt, after Dean Acheson and Henry Morgenthau had done the spadework of propaganda, and made the deal that has led the American people, and our once vast resources, into a social and economic calamity to the very brink, now, of national and international disaster. . .


  15. The government was infiltrated with “risks” from the above described groups of Eastern Europeans and with contaminated native Americans, but those were not all. After the beginning of World War II, so-called “refugees” immediately upon arrival in this country were by executive order introduced into sensitive government positions without the formality of having them wait for citizenship, and without any investigation of their reasons for leaving Europe. The way for this infiltration was paved by an executive order providing specifically that employment could not be denied on the grounds of race, creed, or national origin.

    Since no form of investigation could be made by the United Stated in the distant and hostile areas from which these refugees came, and since their number contained persons sympathetic to the Soviet Union, this executive order was a potential and in many instanced a realized death blow to security.

    Almost as if for a double check against security, the control of security measures in the new atom projects was not entrusted to the expert F.B.I., but to the atomic officials themselves. In view of their relative inexperience in such matters and in view of the amazing executive order so favorable to alien employees, the atomic officials were probably less to blame for the theft of atomic secrets than the “left-of-center” administrations which appointed them. Among those admitted to a proper spot for learning atomic secrets was the celebrated alien, the British subject — but not British-born — Klaus Fuchs. Other atomic spies, all aliens or of alien associations, were named in Chapter II.

    Next to the atomic energy employees, the United Public Workers of America offered perhaps the best opportunity for the theft of secrets vital to the U.S. defense. This union included a generous number of people of Eastern European stock or connections, among them Leonard Goldsmith and Robert Weinstein, organizers of Panama Canal workers, and both of them said to have definite Communist affiliations (Liberty, May, 1948). This union — whose chief bloc of members was in Washington — was later expelled (March 1, 1950) by the C.I.O. on charges of being Communist-dominated (“Directory of Labor Unions in the United States,” Bulletin No. 980, U.S. Dept. of Labor, 1950. 25c). However, if the U.S. Government has shown any signs of being as particular about its employee (see Tydings Committee Report, U.S. Senate, 1950) as the C.I.O. is about its members, the fact has escaped the attention of the author.

    As the years passed, the infiltration of Eastern Europeans into the government had swelled to a torrent. Many of these persons, of course, were not Communists and were not sympathetic with Communist aims. As repeated elsewhere in this book, the contrary is neither stated nor implied. the author’s purpose is simply to show that persons of Eastern European stock, or of an ideology not influential in the days of the founding and formative period of our country, have in recent years risen to many of the most strategic spots in the Roosevelt-Truman Democratic Party and thereby to positions of great and often decisive power in shaping the policy of the United States. The subject was broached by W. M. Kiplinger in a book, Washington Is Like That (Harper and Brothers, 1942). According to a Reader’s Digest condensation (September, 1942), entitled “The Facts About Jews in Washington,” Jews were by 1942 conspicuously “numerous” in government agencies and departments concerned with money, labor, and justice. The situation stemmed from the fact that “non-Jewish officials within government, acting under the direction of the President,” were “trying to get various agencies to employ more Jews. . .”

  16. JewishQuestion on 7 Jul 2011

    We have only heard about 85 million times about how the Nazis wanted to wipe out all the Jews. Just like we are now hearing over and over about how the Muslims want to wipe out “all” the Jews but I can never find any documentation to verify these claims. On the contrary, I can always find plenty of “documentation” that Jews wanted to wipe out all the Germans and that Jews want to wipe out all the Muslims.

    News & Politics


    In September 2003 Tom Ambrose, commentary editor of WorldNetDaily, made a similar veiled threat as the last sentence of an article called “Big, bad Israel?” attacking libertarians for daring to question Israel’s right to keep confiscated land and commit other human rights violations. In light of this key role in which Israel helps guarantee U.S. security, it is small wonder why so many people foam at the mouth in hope of the appalling myopia on this matter is inexcusable. (And they wonder why Americans are reluctant to vote them into office?) For if the day should ever arrive that Israel is destroyed by its enemies, the U.S. will surely and shortly thereafter meet its own demise. issues the following screed: SHARE THE PAIN The Wrath of God !

    Israel Has Nuclear Weapons and MUST Use Them and All Those Arming the Arabs Must Share the Pain!
    Israel must notify each of the Arab nations and their Western backers that, if Israel is attacked or is about to be attacked with unconventional weapons (or overwhelming conventional forces), there will be a “Share the Pain” response…
    Therefore, Israel would be wise to notify each country that, either pre-emptively or as a vicious second-strike option, Israel will hit all hostile parties with nuclear weapons, regardless of who launched the first attack. Israel will hold all collectively and severally responsible – as if they had met and conspired together.
    …One hundred or 200 nukes will reduce the hostile cities and army sites of the Middle East to rubble in minutes. Of course, the ensuing debris would also envelope those nations who sold the Arab world the weapons of nightmares. After all, they enjoyed the money and clearly understood that what they were selling was to be targeted at Israel.
    Perhaps with a dedicated and credible deterrence, the Europeans selling weapons will make some effort, along with American Arabists, to have the Arab nations stand down their plans which call for the destruction of Israel and its replacement by an Islamic State….
    Prof. Martin Van Crevel, a professor of military history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, recently put it this way… “Our armed forces are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. Israel has the capability of hitting most European capitals with nuclear weapons. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that this will happen before Israel goes under.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s