Archive for the ‘9/11 Truth’ Category

Background: Alan Sabrosky (Ph.D., University of Michigan) is a writer and consultant specializing in national and international security affairs. In December 1988, he received the Superior Civilian Service Award after more than five years of service at the U.S. Army War College as Director of Studies, Strategic Studies Institute, and holder of the General of the Army Douglas MacArthur Chair of Research.

He is listed in WHO’S WHO IN THE EAST (23rd ed.). A Marine Corps Vietnam veteran and a 1986 graduate of the U.S. Army War College, Dr. Sabrosky’s teaching and research appointments have included the United States Military Academy, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Middlebury College and Catholic University; while in government service, he held concurrent adjunct professorships at Georgetown University and the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS).

Dr. Sabrosky has lectured widely on defense and foreign affairs in the United States and abroad. You can email Dr. Alan Sabrosky at: docbrosk@comcast.net

Interview with Dr. Sabrosky follows below.


Read Full Post »

9/11 : [What] Did Israel Know?
By Kevin Alfred Strom
Source: National Vanguard

ON DECEMBER 21st, 2001, investigative reporter Carl Cameron of the Fox News Channel filed a report on the detention of sixty Israeli spies by F.B.I. and other government investigators looking into the events of September 11th, some of whom were suspected of having prior knowledge of the attacks. According to the report, over 140 intelligence operatives for the Jewish state, many posing as “Israeli art students,” and some as street and mall kiosk vendors, had been detained earlier in the investigation, which began prior to September 11th. These 200 Israeli spies were considered to be just the tip of the iceberg of a “very aggressive” Israeli intelligence operation against the United States — one of the largest spy rings in American history. According to classified documents seen by Cameron, the “art students,” using the sale of fine art paintings at cut-rate prices as bait, penetrated military bases, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the F.B.I., and dozens of government facilities, secret installations, and even the private homes of law enforcement officers, intelligence personnel, and judges.

Mr. Cameron quoted a senior official who said “Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information,” and, with reference to the lack of any official public statements on this story, he said “Investigators within the DEA, INS and FBI have all told Fox News that to pursue or even suggest Israeli spying … is considered career suicide.” [“Powerless minority”, eh?]

After a complaint from the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC, the heavily Jewish management at Fox News (Rupert Murdoch, the billionaire behind the network, has a long history of Zionist activities though his ancestry is not definitively established) killed the story, and visitors to the Fox Web site now get only a “this story no longer available” message when they try to access it. It’s been erased. Luckily, a few courageous reporters at the Florida Sun-Sentinel and the French newspaper Le Monde broke the blackout on the story.

Since that time, evidence has been accumulating that some in Israel knew in advance that the attacks were going to take place and did nothing to prevent them or warn the victims. Odigo, an Israeli-American instant messaging firm, confirmed that two Israeli workers received messages warning them of the impending attacks on the World Trade Center two hours in advance of the attacks, before the planes took off. The company says that the employees told the company of the messages only after the attacks took place, at which time Odigo’s response was to communicate with Israeli security services. If the unknown informant was a Moslem, why were none of the hundreds of Moslems working at the World Trade Center warned? If the informant was not a Jew, why were Israeli workers chosen to receive the warning?

Some of the arrested Israeli spies were discovered to have been closely monitoring the accused 9-11 hijackers, including Mohammed Atta. More than a third of the Israeli agents were operating in Florida communities where ten of the nineteen hijacking suspects were living — and learning to fly. Five Israeli operatives even lived on the same street as Atta in Hollywood, Florida, the town where Atta and three other terror suspects lived for some time prior to the attacks, strengthening the presumption that Israel was shadowing the 9-11 conspirators and knew of their activities and plans. Knowing all this, Israel did nothing to warn Americans of the impending disaster, possibly calculating the tremendous propaganda value of the attacks in stampeding the American cattle to slaughter the Jews’ Semitic enemies in the Middle East, starting with the Taliban and escalating into a vaguely-defined “War on Terror,” with “terror” being defined as having or wanting a government free from Jewish supervision.

Not long after September 11th, the F.B.I. attitude toward the biggest spy scandal in decades changed abruptly. Suddenly, revelations about Israeli spying were more than just “career suicide” — they became a threat to the Middle East war plans of the Zionists. Just as suddenly, the suspects were no longer in any danger of being charged with espionage and we were told they were merely being held for “routine” visa and immigration irregularities. The sum total of their punishment: they were sent back to Israel. The man reportedly responsible for that decision: Michael Chertoff.

Related Articles:

9/11: The Media Ignores Evidence of WTC Explosives
Rob Lonaker
Source: The Occidental Observer

Persuasive evidence exists (see Christopher Ketcham’s “High-Fivers and Art Student Spies”) that Israeli intelligence was aware of the 9/11 plot well in advance. Not only were Israeli agents found to be tracking alleged Muslim plotters, there was “intense political pressure apparently … brought to bear” to release the five Israeli spies caught filming the event, without any acknowledgment of foreknowledge on their part. Congress never investigated the incident. Nor was there an investigation of the Israeli art students, trained in military intelligence, who allegedly “attempted to form friendships with [New York] federal employees, photograph their offices, tap their phone lines and infiltrate their databases” in 2001, as reported by Nathan Guttman of Ha`aretz.

None of these issues was mentioned in the official 9/11 Commission report.

There was also a great deal of pressure on the media not to discuss these events:

A former ABC News employee high up in the network newsroom told [Ketcham] that when ABC News ran its June 2002 exposé on the celebratory New Jersey Israelis, “Enormous pressure was brought to bear by pro-Israeli organizations”—and this pressure began months before the piece was even close to airing.

Fox News reports by Carl Cameron were also fiercely opposed by Jewish activists.

The attack against Cameron and Fox News was spearheaded by a pro-Israel lobby group called the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA), which operated in tandem with the two most highly visible powerhouse Israel lobbyists, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (itself currently embroiled in a spy scandal connected to the Defense Department and Israeli Embassy). “CAMERA peppered the *** out of us.” … According to a source at Fox News Channel, the president of the ADL, Abraham Foxman, telephoned executives at Fox News’ parent, News Corp., to demand a sit-down in the wake of the Cameron reportage. The source said that Foxman told the News Corp. executives, “Look, you guys have generally been pretty fair to Israel. What are you doing putting this stuff out there? You’re killing us.” The Fox News source continued, “As good old boys will do over coffee in Manhattan, it was like, well, what can we do about this? Finally, Fox News said, ‘Stop the e-mailing. Stop slamming us. Stop being in our face, and we’ll stop being in your face—by way of taking our story down off the web. We will not retract it; we will not disavow it; we stand by it. But we will at least take it off the web.'” Following this meeting, within four days of the posting of Cameron’s series on Fox News.com, the transcripts disappeared, replaced by the message, “This story no longer exists.”[Ketcham]

But what if Israeli involvement extended beyond espionage and advance warning, to ensuring the event would have maximum impact, or even to planning the operation? It is not unreasonable to inquire whether Israel and its operatives in the US may have at least taken steps to ensure that the attack would result in enough destruction and loss of life to create the political impetus for a war against Israel’s enemies, secure in the knowledge that public discussion of these issues could be suppressed.

Sadly, many who understand that the mainstream media and our political elites cannot be trusted to provide the truth on historical events are remarkably credulous when it comes to 9/11. Belief in the official account of 9/11 is common even among many who know of other egregious cases where truth has been concealed, as in Israel’s role in events like the destruction of the USS Liberty and the critical role of the Israel Lobby in promoting the Iraq war within the Bush administration. The general public has been quick to swallow the government’s story, though it fails to explain how, among other things, the two skyscrapers hit by aircraft were rapidly and explosively destroyed in ways inconsistent with gravity-based collapse.

The official story is still synchronously parroted by the media, permitting no mainstream journalist since 9/11 to report on any of the many glaring contradictions in the account.

Obfuscating Science

Since 2009, newly released evidence and physical analysis increasingly indicate that explosives were used to bring down the World Trade Center twin towers and WTC 7. But you won’t learn of it through the mainstream media. Whoever they are, the perpetrators of 9/11 have it in their best interest to keep the public distracted and unaware of basic principles of physics.

The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST), its hand forced by a recent Freedom of Information Act suit, reluctantly released this video of firefighters describing three explosions that occurred after the second plane hit, but before either tower “collapsed,” and that destroyed the WTC tower lobby where the men stood. Hundreds of other emergency responders and survivors, all of whom were interviewed by the 9/11 Commission, and all of whom were inexplicably excluded from its report, witnessed explosions.

Physics instructor David Chandler’s YouTube videos discuss compelling evidence of explosives being used to demolish the towers. One video deals with sound evidence for explosions. Others cover sequential explosions that eject debris and accelerate down the walls of the North Tower, as if by a detonation sequence (also seen here). These explosive ejections are nearly cloaked by a descending canopy of falling concrete and steel, though the canopy lags slightly, giving cameras a view of the ejections.

Chandler also demonstrates that the North Tower top block (the part above the plane impact) fell at around 64 percent of the acceleration of gravity, necessarily implying that no more than about 36 percent of the top block’s weight, and therefore its potential energy, was available to crush the bottom block, i.e., the remainder of the building. This does not appear to have been sufficient energy to lead to collapse of the entire building, even if part of its steel structure were weakened by fire.

Chandler further shows how debris fragments projected from the south tower suddenly change direction in midair, requiring momentum-changing forces likely resulting from explosions in the fragments themselves.

Such explosions may be explained by prior placement of nanothermite or another suitable explosive in the towers, possibly mixed in paint or fireproofing or embedded in ceiling tiles. Nine scientists reported finding nanothermite (an explosive agent) in the tower dust collected from multiple locations in Manhattan (see also here).

Professional engineer Jon Cole shows in videos (part 1 and part 2) how a gravity-driven collapse would have produced a deceleration, or “jolt,” in the North Tower top block’s descent when it hit the bottom block. That didn’t happen. Chandler explains it further.

At minimum, a proper investigation is warranted, as is called for by more than 1300 professional architects and engineers.

Pardon Us for Asking

Our government and media tell us that questioning 9/11 is inappropriate because it insults the families and memories of those killed in the attacks. Such a preposterous position has never been adopted by any law enforcement agency for a crime for which there has never been either a thorough or a forensic investigation. Why should the crimes of 9/11 be the exception?

How scornfully must 9/11’s masterminds laugh at us for believing that merely asking questions in an effort to solve the murders of nearly 3,000 people should be off-limits because it may hurt some family members’ feelings? The willingness of Americans to feel guilty for wanting answers to the largest mass murder on American soil reminds one of the “White guilt,” imposed through relentless cultural assault by Jewish intellectual movements, that prompts White Europeans and Americans to greet gleefully their displacement through mass immigration and multiculturalism.

Why might the media disallow any public questioning of the many unanswered aspects of 9/11?

Could it be because Israeli special operations units may have carried out the attack?

Former Director of Studies at the U.S. Army War College and Marine veteran Alan Sabrosky, PhD, thinks so. So does investigative journalist Christopher Bollyn (interview here).

If enough people try to connect the dots, perhaps 9/11’s real killers can be brought to justice and another such attack prevented.

Rob Lonaker (email him) is the pseudonym of a lawyer and scientist.
These articles aren’t worth reading, by the way, unless you click every one of the links.
Further information HERE.
Review the 9/11 links as well in the right-hand menu, and take your time when scouting for information online.

Read Full Post »

Anti-Fascist Front: A Portland anti-racist group has had a busy—and controversial—summer
Source: Willamette Week

TARGETED: Tim Titrud poses in front of his camper, which reads “911 was an inside job.” On the right are materials he received by mail Sept. 15. PHOTO: Darryl James

On the afternoon of Sept. 15, Tim Titrud arrived home in Clackamas County after finishing his workday as a self-employed landscaper and checked his mailbox.

Along with the usual assortment of bills and junk mail was a pink envelope postmarked from Portland with no return address. Titrud opened it and found a greeting card covered with pink flowers. The card read, “Thinking of You.”

Also included was a color photo of Hitler, with runic symbols scrawled across his face and around his head. On the back of the photo were Germanic runes that spelled out the words “Destroy Yourself.” [Veiztu hvé rísta skal? Veiztu hvé ráða skal? Apparently not!]

Titrud, who is 50 years old and lives with his wife, was not surprised, nor did he call police. The letter included a calling card for Rose City Antifa, a Portland anti-racist group that recently tried to shut down an event Titrud helped organize featuring a speaker who’s been accused of anti-Semitism.

“They don’t really scare me,” Titrud says of the group. “These guys are idiots. It’s just kind of weird. Kind of creepy-weird.”

Little is known publicly about Rose City Antifa—a group that anonymously posts articles about its activities on the Portland Indymedia website [is it really independent?]. Its members, who wear bandannas over their faces when they protest in public, declined repeated requests from WW over the past five weeks to be interviewed for this story.

Despite its secrecy [the PUSSY on their calling card says it all], Rose City Antifa has had an active summer of publicly exposing Titrud and others who members accuse of spreading racist ideas in Portland—including a call for longtime Portland activist Tim Calvert to be fired from his job on the board of CityBikes Workers’ Cooperative. They accuse Calvert of harboring anti-Semitic beliefs.

“We believe that those pushing organized Jew-hatred and pogrom politics should be collectively resisted,” they write on Indymedia. “No compromises and no half-measures!”

The resulting controversy has not only driven a wedge into Portland’s close-knit protest community. It also raises serious questions about the outer limits of free expression and civil protest in a city that puts great value in both.

Some have praised Rose City Antifa for rooting out alleged [key word there] racists in our midst. Others criticize the group’s zero-tolerance approach as nothing more than ideological bullying.

They’re worse than the early colonists with the heretics, where you were removed out into the wilderness to die,” says Grace Grant, a member of the left-wing Laughing Horse Book Collective in Northeast Portland. “I don’t want to be part of that kind of community. It’s pretty heartless. I don’t know who’s setting these standards and norms.”

Anti-fascism first arose in Europe in the 1920s to oppose violent far-right groups, and has since spread to the Americas and Australia. Rose City Antifa is part of the Anti-Racist Action Network, which boasts 20 chapters in cities across the U.S. and Canada.

Rose City Antifa was founded in 2007, when anti-racists organized to shut down a meeting of the neo-Nazi Hammerskin Nation set for the Sherwood Elks Lodge (see “Skin Cancer,” WW, Oct. 3, 2007). The group posts cards and fliers at the Red & Black Cafe, the Black Rose Collective Bookstore and other places where anarchists and the far-left gather, but its total membership is unknown.

On Saturday, Sept. 19, the group set up a recruitment table at a punk concert in North Portland benefiting the volunteer group Portland Books to Prisoners. Stanislav Vysotsky, a Willamette University sociology professor who studies anti-racist groups, was at the table laying out anti-fascist literature next to a sign that said “Rose City Antifa.”

Vysotsky denied he’s a member of the group. But he defended its tactics in an interview with WW.

Vysotsky says publicly outing one’s enemies—including publishing their home addresses and pressuring their employers to fire them—is a widely accepted practice by progressive social movements. (It’s also used by right-wing [Christian fundamentalists], which publishes addresses of abortion doctors on far-right websites.) [Isn’t this what the Leftists commonly bewail as McCarthy-era “blacklisting”? Are they over that grievance, or what?]

“The strategy is to shut them down.” Vysotsky says. “Someone can’t be active if they are out looking for a job, and homes are their base of operation. If you put yourself in the shoes of a movement member, there is very much a logic to this.”

Not everyone agrees. Chip Berlet, a nationally renowned journalist and activist who’s devoted his career since 1967 to fighting hate groups, says wearing masks and relying on intimidation is counterproductive to the cause.

“What you learn early on is that these kinds of stunts are completely ineffective for social change work. It does really nothing to help the people who are being oppressed,” Berlet says. “This is immature, inexperienced organizing from people who haven’t figured out that macho is passe.

Polite Portland may seem the last city in the U.S. in need of anti-fascist squads. But the city has gained a measure of infamy in anti-racist circles as the birthplace of Volksfront, a racist skinhead group founded in 1994 that is still active locally and now boasts chapters in seven countries. [Understand this, however: you needn’t be a skinhead, a violent bigoted thug, or a racial supremacist belonging to any organization whatsoever to find yourself on the receiving end of Antifa’s frankly fascistic tactics of suppression. It is enough of an “offense,” in their eyes, to be unashamedly White and to hold any perspectives which conflict with theirs.]

The Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center and other organizations that track hate groups have reported a steep rise in extremist activity since Barack Obama was elected the nation’s first black president. [The real truth is, “extremists” (if that’s what you want to call them) disapproved of Obama on the basis of policy, not on the basis of his heritage.] The killing of a security guard at the National Holocaust Memorial in June, reports of right-wing extremists recruiting at conservative tea parties, and a rise in militia activity have all stoked worries that the extreme right is gaining a new foothold.

“We see a mainstreaming of white nationalism that we haven’t seen previously,” [right — not for a few decades, anyhow] says Eric Ward, national field director for the Center for New Community, an anti-racism nonprofit in Chicago. He supports Rose City Antifa’s efforts, saying white nationalists may now be infiltrating[?!] the environmental movement and other progressive causes—in part because lefties haven’t taken the threat seriously enough.

Against that backdrop came Rose City Antifa’s busy summer, starting with the episode that led to Titrud finding a snapshot of Hitler in his mailbox.

Titrud and Calvert belong to the Portland 9/11 Truth Alliance, a group that challenges the accepted explanation for the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Some alternative theories assign Mossad a secret role in the attacks. Titrud recently removed signs on his camper, which used to read “End Wars for Oil or Israel” and “Israel, Stop Killing Peace.”

In June, his group organized a talk in Portland by Valdas Anelauskas, a scholar born in the former Soviet Union. Some of Anelauskas’ work has been labeled anti-Semitic, and he’s closely associated with the Pacifica Forum, a discussion group in Eugene that’s been accused of hosting other anti-Semitic speakers.

According to its account on Indymedia, Rose City Antifa learned Anelauskas was set to speak June 10 at Laughing Horse Books and pressured the collective to cancel the event. The fallout led Calvert and two others to leave the collective, and the 9/11 Truthers no longer meet at the bookstore—they’re meeting instead in Milwaukie.

Anelauskas’ talk was moved to the Old Wives’ Tales restaurant on East Burnside Street. About 12 people showed up to hear his talk on the Frankfurt School, a group of 20th-century Marxist scholars Anelauskas accuses of sabotaging Western culture. In a video of the lecture available online, Anelauskas makes no overtly anti-Semitic remarks.

Nonetheless, Rose City Antifa posted a statement June 25 on Indymedia identifying Titrud and Calvert as organizers of what the group identified as an “anti-Semitic” event. [After all, where would they be without this accusation?] They called on CityBikes to fire Calvert, saying his “conspiracy theories about Jewish power and his denial of the Nazi genocide against the Jewish people have been an open secret in Portland for years.”

Calvert refuses even to defend himself against that charge, saying he’s being accused of a thought crime.

“Free speech means hearing people you don’t agree with,” he says. “This totally hearkens back to the days of heresy and the Inquisition, the idea that people are somehow infected and need to be purged. It’s Stalinist. It’s Catholic Church. It’s intellectually embarrassing.”

Some commenters on the Indymedia site were supportive of Rose City Antifa. [Then again, Indymedia happen to reserve the right, in their own words, “to hide posts” which do not meet with their moderators’ approval. Is it a huge stretch of the imagination to suggest that the thoughtful counterpoint of any alleged “anti-Semite” might, then, automatically be “hidden” — i.e. censored — thus preventing any accurate assessment of what kind of support or opposition Rose City Antifa might really have?]

You can bash a fellow’s politics all day long but trying to run him out of a living is going too far,” one commenter wrote. “Or was it OK to do to queers back in the day?”

Few Portlanders can boast Calvert’s lefty credentials. Besides demonstrating against every U.S. invasion from Grenada to Iraq, he volunteered for the sister-city organization linking Portland to the Nicaraguan town of Corinto, helped start Laughing Horse Books in 1985, and built up the Red Rose School for activists in the late 1980s. He made CityBikes a workers’ co-op in 1990 after being hired there in 1989.

Calvert says it’s the first time he’s been attacked in more than 25 years as an activist. He’s kept his $13.50-an-hour job at CityBikes, despite graffiti calling him a Nazi [not that his detractors ever knew what the word meant] that’s sprung up on the co-op’s Southwest Ankeny Street shop. Staff has cleaned up the graffiti without calling police.

CityBikes’ board posted a letter on Indymedia supporting Calvert, then retracted it 12 days later, saying not all its members had been consulted.

“They’re scared, and I still feel threatened,” Calvert says.

Meanwhile, Rose City Antifa’s campaign continues.

On July 7, the group put up 200 fliers along Northwest 21st and 23rd avenues with the name, photo and address of Nob Hill resident Julian Lee. The fliers accuse Lee of plastering the neighborhood with racist stickers, call him “Nazi trash,” and urge residents to “make it clear” that his “racist propaganda is unwelcome” (see WW, July 15, 2009).

The decision to out Lee makes even the head of one of Oregon’s largest Jewish congregations uncomfortable.

“I would caution people to be exceedingly careful about identifying people and where they live for fear of crazies out there who will take the law into their own hands and do something violent [in retaliation],” says Rabbi Daniel Isaak, who leads more than 1,000 member households at Congregation Neveh Shalom in Southwest Portland. “On some level, they [meaning Antifa] have responsibility for any serious harm that would come as a result.

The tactic can also prove clumsy. In May, Rose City Antifa published the addresses of two Volksfront members living in Southeast Portland, including a telephone number for the skinheads’ landlord. Trouble was, the landlord had died more than two months before of diabetes and heart disease. Callers, instead, reached his grieving widow.

“I wish they wouldn’t have done that,” she told WW, declining to give her name. “I’m a Christian, and I don’t support anything like [Nazism].”

Rose City Antifa’s biggest summer coup came July 19, when the group learned the time and location of a Portland talk by David Irving, the notorious British historian who once spent 10 months in an Austrian prison for [allegedly] denying the Holocaust. [In truth, he questions many of the central details — including, though not limited to, the numbers.]

About 50 people showed up to protest Irving’s talk at the Embassy Suites Airport Hotel. They failed to shut down Irving’s event, but Rose City Antifa members congratulated themselves on Indymedia anyway, saying they were “successful in sending a clear message that fascist organizing is not welcome in our community.” [They cannot discern the valid distinction between a Fascist and a National Socialist, for they have a weak understanding of both. They cannot discern the valid distinction between an anti-Semite and an anti-Zionist, for they have an especially weak understanding of the latter. They cannot discern the distinction between a Holocaust revisionist and someone who wants to shove people into ovens, because they appear to understand (or even care to understand) very little, altogether.]

See a video of Rose City Antifa protesting Irving’s appearance July 19 below:

Find this story at http://www.wweek.com/editorial/3546/13087 [Text in brackets, my own. -W.]

Read Full Post »

Watching Israel Delegitimize the U.S.
by Jeff Gates
Source: criminalstate.com

The U.S.-Israeli relationship has long been America’s Achilles heel. Our first president warned against “entangled alliances” particularly when, as here, there’s a “passionate attachment.”

Our “special relationship” with this rogue state has placed the U.S. outside the same system of international law that we now seek to impose on others, including Iran.

Our handling of the current crisis on the Korean peninsula could restore our tattered reputation.

What’s the first issue that needs to be addressed?

Here’s where you the reader may well ask: “Do you mean the issue concerning the collapse of Building 7 of the World Trade Center?” No, but nor is that question irrelevant to this latest crisis.

Here’s the second issue that must be addressed: to which nations has Israel transferred nuclear weapons or nuclear weapons technology? Is North Korea on the list?

That issue became relevant with the release of The Unspoken Alliance: Israel’s Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa. Archival research by author Sasha Polakowsky-Suransky uncovered “top secret” minutes of a military agreement signed in April 1975 between Shimon Peres, now president of Israel, and South Africa’s defense minister P.W. Botha.

Though Israel denies the conclusions reached by reporters for The Guardian (U.K.), the agreement suggests an offer of nuclear weapons while its Apartheid regime was under international sanctions.

Israel was then building a surrogate arms industry in South Africa using what was, in practical effect, slave labor. That industry has since moved to Israel where it employs “guest workers.” Peres was responsible for building Israel’s nuclear program with help from France in the 1950s.

Some weeks before the offer, Israel and South Africa signed a covert agreement (code name Secment) governing their military alliance. In the subsequent meetings, “correct payload” was used to describe the nuclear warheads Israel would provide for a Jericho missile system. As The Guardian explained:

“The use of a euphemism, the ‘correct payload’, reflects Israeli sensitivity over the nuclear issue and would not have been used had it been referring to conventional weapons… the only payload the South Africans would have needed to obtain from Israel was nuclear. The South Africans were capable of putting together other warheads.”

South Africa did not go ahead with the deal it was offered though it did develop its own nuclear weapons, possibly with Israeli assistance. The Apartheid government revealed the program to Nelson Mandela when he became president.

In 1986, nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu revealed Israel’s nuclear weapons program to the Sunday Times (London). Vanunu was kidnapped by Mossad agents in Rome and returned for trial in Israel. Sentenced to 18 years, he served 11 years in solitary confinement. On May 23rd, he was sentenced to another three months in prison for breaking the terms of his release by having unauthorized meetings with foreigners.

Evil Doers vs. Evil Doing

Even now Israel strives against all odds to maintain “ambiguity” about its nuclear weapons. But how can you offer nuclear weapons you don’t have?

Who provided nuclear technology to North Korea? That backward state, now nuclear-armed, was included in G.W. Bush’s post-911 “Axis of Evil” speech. Care to guess who wrote that speech?

Shortly thereafter the U.S. invaded Iraq to remove an Evil Doer. Only later did we learn that our “flawed” intelligence was “fixed” around a goal long sought by Israel as chronicled in A Clean Break, a strategy document written for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by a team of Israeli-Americans led by Richard Perle.

In 2001, Perle became chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Review Board.

The United Nations has long been scheduled to review the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to consider the creation of a Middle East free of nuclear weapons. As the date approached, the world community experienced a well-timed torpedo attack on a South Korean warship, reportedly by a North Korean submarine.

In the midst of these negotiations, mainstream media has been flooding the national consciousness with power-of-association stories about Iran, its nuclear program and even its links to North Korea. Tehran, of course, was the third member in the trio of Bush-era Evil Doers.

News outlets controlled by Israeli-American Rupert Murdoch are particularly active, including Fox News and The Wall Street Journal.

Is it true that Tel Aviv transferred to Pyongyang a German-made submarine? If so, does that qualify as evil doing?

Perhaps here is a good place to pose an out-of-sequence question: What about the collapse of Building 7?

Master Myth Makers

Does Israel routinely transfer war materiél to nations subject to international sanctions?

That would help explain their status as the world’s third largest arms exporter. The U.S. holds first place with Russia second. Israel and France vie for third and fourth trailed by the U.K. and China in the Dirty Half Dozen.

If Israel has an extensive arsenal of nuclear weapons, why does the U.S not insist on inspections?

How does U.S. protection of Israel’s illegal conduct advance U.S. interests?

How is our conduct consistent with the behavior we are now pressing on Iran?

What is so valuable about the U.S.-Israeli relationship that we should sacrifice our credibility to cover-up violations of international law that make us appear guilty by association?

By law isn’t the U.S. obliged to support U.N. sanctions for Israel?

Why discredit the U.S. and undermine the stature of the United Nations? Wasn’t the U.N. the post-WWII organization founded in large part by the U.S. to discourage just such behavior?

Serial Provocations and Murderous Misdirection

Instead of sanctions, what do we see instead? Misdirection and intimidation.

The Internet is awash with Men in Black accounts featuring the usual array of conspiracies. Elvis may yet be blamed for a Korean peninsula incident that could ignite a nuclear war in the region.

How long before we see a story blaming Hezbollah terrorists led by the Pakistan Taliban aboard an Iranian submarine advised by Syrian nuclear scientists and Palestinian strategists?

Or aliens.

The stage has been set for another 911, possibly featuring a nuclear incident. A series of “plausible” Evil Doers have been prominently featured in assorted “terrorist incidents.”

Enough pre-staging has been done that Americans again feel insecure following the media coverage given the Ft. Hood shooting, the Christmas Day Bomber and now the Times Square Terrorist.

One small problem: none of these storylines hold up under close scrutiny. But then that’s not the point. Neither did the “intelligence” on which we relied to wage war in Iraq in response to the provocation of 911. It didn’t need to be true, just believable.

Time to Redo the Report

Anyone of substance associated with the report of the 911 Commission knows we still need a good faith investigation. Mainstream Europeans routinely call for it. Those demands are routinely couched in code due to the perils facing those in the EU who question our “special relationship.”

Instead, commentators ask about the “collapse” of Building 7. Good question. Also a fair question. The answer could lead somewhere useful. Therefore, don’t ask, don’t tell.

This entangled alliance has been an exercise in deceit since a Christian-Zionist president, a Democrat, was induced to extend recognition to an enclave of extremists.

Harry Truman dismissed the concerns of the Joint Chiefs who warned him about their “fanatical concepts” and their plans for “military and economic hegemony over the entire Middle East.”

We were deceived by our own better nature to embrace a relationship that has long been at odds with our national interest. The durability of the relationship has long failed to pass muster as either rational or consistent with our values. The relationship has changed for the worse who we are as a nation.

Yet somehow the relationship endures. Along with the perceived legitimacy of this “state.”

Deception and Self-Deceit

Its persistence can be traced to the strength of a lobby that, to date, has escaped registration as a foreign agent. Those known for their skill at waging war “by way of deception” have routinely betrayed the nation that first befriended and most reliably defended them.

Even when a Christian-Zionist president, a Republican, led us to war on fixed intelligence, we were unable to identity the common source of our troubles. Some blamed G.W Bush. Others now blame Barack Obama. Both critiques miss the point. This treachery is now systemic and thoroughly imbedded in both political parties.

Even now, an undisclosed media bias blocks Americans from the facts they require to make an informed choice about this relationship. And about the legitimacy of a transnational operation that murders with impunity (as in Dubai) and provokes with pleasure—anywhere they please.

Americans are now emerging from many quarters to resist the influence wielded on (and from within) our government by special interests. This special relationship often tops the list.

Many supporters of Israel have been deceived to believe that this relationship is in their best interest. The facts confirm otherwise. Like the nation itself, they too were “the mark” in this long-running fraud.

We have been seduced by those masterful at deceit to freely embrace the very forces that delegitimized us as a nation and collapsed our economy from within.

Which brings me back to the question: what about Building 7?

Read Full Post »

Iraq : A War For Israel
By Mark Weber
Source: Archives, Institute for Historical Review

The U.S. invasion of Iraq in March-April 2003, and the occupation of the country since then, has cost more than four thousand American lives and more than $500 billion, and has brought death to many tens of thousands of Iraqis.

Why did President Bush decide to go to war? In whose interests was it launched?

In the months leading up to the attack, President Bush and other high-ranking US officials repeatedly warned that the threat posed to the US and world by the Baghdad regime was so grave and imminent that the United States had to act quickly to bomb, invade and occupy Iraq.

On Sept. 28, 2002, for example, he said:

“The danger to our country is grave and it is growing. The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons, is rebuilding the facilities to make more and, according to the British government, could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order is given… This regime is seeking a nu­clear bomb, and with fissile material could build one within a year.”

On March 6, 2003, President Bush declared:

“Saddam Hussein and his weapons are a direct threat to this country, to our people, and to all free people… I believe Saddam Hussein is a threat to the American people. I believe he’s a threat to the neighborhood in which he lives. And I’ve got good evidence to believe that. He has weapons of mass destruction… The American people know that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction.”

These claims were untrue. As the world now knows, Iraq had no dangerous “weapons of mass destruction,” and posed no threat to the US. Moreover, alarmist suggestions that the Baghdad regime was working with the al-Qaeda terror network likewise proved to be without foundation.

So if the official reasons given for the war were untrue, why did the United States attack Iraq?

Whatever the secondary reasons for the war, the crucial factor in President Bush’s decision to attack was to help Israel. With support from Israel and America’s Jewish-Zionist lobby, and prodded by Jewish “neo-conservatives” holding high-level positions in his administration, President Bush – who was already fervently com­mitted to Israel – resolved to invade and subdue one of Israel’s chief regional enemies.

This is so widely understood in Washington that US Senator Ernest Hollings was moved in May 2004 to acknowledge that the US invaded Iraq “to secure Israel,” and “everybody” knows it. He also identified three of the influential pro-Israel Jews in Washington who played an important role in prodding the US into war: Richard Perle, chair of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board; Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary; and Charles Krauthammer, columnist and author. [1]

Hollings referred to the cowardly reluctance of his Congressional colleagues to acknowledge this truth openly, saying that “nobody is willing to stand up and say what is going on.” Due to “the pressures we get politically,” he added, members of Congress uncritically support Israel and its policies.

Some months before the invasion, retired four-star US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Wesley Clark acknowledged in an interview: “Those who favor this attack [by the US against Iraq] now will tell you candidly, and privately, that it is probably true that Saddam Hussein is no threat to the United States. But they are afraid at some point he might decide if he had a nuclear weapon to use it against Israel.” [2]

Six months before the attack, President Bush met in the White House with eleven members of the US House of Representatives. While the “war against terrorism is going okay,” he told the lawmakers, the United States would soon have to deal with a greater danger: “The biggest threat, however, is Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. He can blow up Israel and that would trigger an international conflict.” [3]

Bush also spoke candidly about why the US was going to war during a White House meeting on Feb. 27, 2003, just three weeks before the invasion. In a talk with Elie Wiesel, the well-known Jewish writer, Bush said: “If we don’t disarm Saddam Hussein, he will put a weapon of mass destruction on Israel and they will do what they think they have to do, and we have to avoid that.” [4]

Fervently Pro-Israel

President Bush’s fervent support for Israel and its hardline government is well known. He reaffirmed it, for example, in June 2002 in a major speech on the Middle East. In the view of “leading Israeli commentators,” the London Times reported, the address was “so pro-Israel that it might have been written by [Israel prime minister] Ariel Sharon.” [5] In an address to pro-Israel activists at the 2004 convention of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Bush said: “The United States is strongly committed, and I am strongly committed, to the security of Israel as a vibrant Jewish state.” He also told the gathering: “By defending the freedom and prosperity and security of Israel, you’re also serving the cause of America.” [6]

Condoleeza Rice, who served as President Bush’s National Security Advisor, and later, as his Secretary of State, echoed the President’s outlook in a May 2003 interview, saying that the “security of Israel is the key to security of the world.” [7]

Long Range Plans

Jewish-Zionist plans for war against Iraq had been in place for years.

In mid-1996, a policy paper prepared for then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu outlined a grand strategy for Israel in the Middle East. Entitled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,” it was written under the auspices of an Israeli think tank, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies. Specifically, it called for an “effort [that] can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq, an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right…” [8]

The authors of “A Clean Break” included Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser, three influential Jews who later held high-level positions in the Bush administration, 2001-2004: Perle as chair of the Defense Policy Board, Feith as Undersecretary of Defense, and Wurmser as special assistant to the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control.

The role played by Bush administration officials who are associated with two major pro-Zionist “neoconservative” research centers has come under scrutiny from The Nation, the influential public affairs weekly. [9]

The author, Jason Vest, examined the close links between the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) and the Center for Security Policy (CSP), detailing the ties between these groups and various politicians, arms merchants, military men, wealthy pro-Israel American Jews, and Republican presidential administrations

JINSA and CSP members, notes Vest, “have ascended to powerful government posts, where… they’ve managed to weave a number of issues – support for national missile defense, opposition to arms control treaties, championing of wasteful weapons systems, arms aid to Turkey and American unilateralism in general – into a hard line, with support for the Israeli right at its core… On no issue is the JINSA/CSP hard line more evident than in its relentless campaign for war – not just with Iraq, but ‘total war,’ as Michael Ledeen, one of the most influential JINSAns in Washington, put it… For this crew, ‘regime change’ by any means necessary in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority is an urgent imperative.”

Samuel Francis, author, editor and columnist, also looked into the “neo-conservative” role in fomenting war. [10]

“My own answer,” he wrote, “is that the lie [that a massively-armed Iraq posed a grave and imminent threat to the US] was fabricated by neo-conservatives in the administration whose first loyalty is to Israel and its interests and who wanted the United States to smash Iraq because it was the biggest potential threat to Israel in the region. They are known to have been pushing for war with Iraq since at least 1996, but they could not make an effective case for it until after Sept. 11, 2001…

In the aftermath of the 2001 Nine-Eleven terror attacks, ardently pro-Zionist “neo-conservatives” in the Bush administration – who for years had sought a Middle East war to bolster Israel’s security in the region – exploited the tragedy to press their agenda. In this they were backed by the Israeli government, which also pressured the White House to strike Iraq.

“The [Israeli] military and political leadership yearns for war in Iraq,” reported a leading Israeli daily paper, Haaretz, in February 2002. [11]

The Jerusalem correspondent for the Guardian, the respected British daily, reported in August 2002: “Israel signaled its decision yesterday to put public pressure on President George Bush to go ahead with a military attack on Iraq, even though it believes Saddam Hussein may well retaliate by striking Israel.” [12]

Three months before the US invasion, the well-informed Washington journalist Robert Novak reported that Israeli prime minister Sharon was telling American political leaders that “the greatest US assistance to Israel would be to overthrow Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi regime.” Moreover, added Novak, “that view is widely shared inside the Bush administration, and is a major reason why US forces today are assembling for war.” [13]

Israel’s spy agencies were a “full partner” with the US and Britain in producing greatly exaggerated prewar assessments of Iraq’s ability to wage war, a former senior Israeli military intelligence official has acknowledged. Shlomo Bron, a brigadier general in the Israel army reserves, and a senior researcher at a major Israeli think tank, said that intelligence provided by Israel played a significant role in supporting the US and British case for making war. Israeli intelligence agencies, he said, “badly overestimated the Iraqi threat to Israel and reinforced the American and British belief that the weapons [of mass destruction] existed.” [14]

The role of the pro-Israel lobby in pressing for war has been carefully examined by two prominent American scholars, John J. Mearsheimer, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, and Stephen M. Walt, professor of international affairs at Harvard University. [15] In an 81-page paper, “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” they wrote:

“Pressure from Israel and the [pro-Israel] Lobby was not the only factor behind the decision to attack Iraq in March 2003, but it was critical. Some Americans believe that this was a war for oil, but there is hardly any direct evidence to support this claim. Instead, the war was motivated in good part by a desire to make Israel more secure… Within the United States, the main driving force behind the Iraq war was a small band of neoconservatives, many with close ties to Israel’s Likud Party. In addition, key leaders of the Lobby’s major organizations lent their voices to the campaign for war.”

Important members of the pro-Israel lobby carried out what professors Mearshiemer and Walt call “an unrelenting public relations campaign to win support for invading Iraq. A key part of this campaign was the manipulation of intelligence information, so as to make Saddam look like an imminent threat.”

For some Jewish leaders, the Iraq war is part of a long-range effort to install Israel-friendly regimes across the Middle East. Norman Podhoretz, a prominent Jewish writer and an ardent supporter of Israel, has been for years editor of Commentary, the influential Zionist monthly. In the Sept. 2002 issue he wrote:

“The regimes that richly deserve to be overthrown and replaced are not confined to the three singled-out members of the axis of evil [Iraq, Iran, North Korea]. At a minimum, the axis should extend to Syria and Lebanon and Libya, as well as ‘friends’ of America like the Saudi royal family and Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, along with the Palestinian Authority, whether headed by Arafat or one of his henchmen.”

Patrick J. Buchanan, the well-known writer and commentator, and former White House Communications director, has been blunt in identifying those who pushed for war: [16]

“We charge that a cabal of polemicists and public officials seek to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America’s interests. We charge them with colluding with Israel to ignite those wars and destroy the Oslo Accords. We charge them with deliberately damaging US relations with every state in the Arab world that defies Israel or supports the Palestinian people’s right to a homeland of their own. We charge that they have alienated friends and allies all over the Islamic and Western world through their arrogance, hubris, and bellicosity…

“Cui Bono? For whose benefit these endless wars in a region that holds nothing vital to America save oil, which the Arabs must sell us to survive? Who would benefit from a war of civilizations between the West and Islam?

“Answer: one nation, one leader, one party. Israel, Sharon, Likud.”

Uri Avnery – an award-winning Israeli journalist and author, and a three-time member of Israel’s parliament – sees the Iraq war as an expression of immense Jewish influence and power. In an essay written some weeks after the US invasion, he wrote: [17]

“Who are the winners? They are the so-called neo-cons, or neo-conservatives. A compact group, almost all of whose members are Jewish. They hold the key positions in the Bush administration, as well as in the think-tanks that play an important role in formulating American policy and the ed-op pages of the influential news­papers… The immense influence of this largely Jewish group stems from its close alliance with the extreme right-wing Christian fundamentalists, who nowadays control Bush’s Republican party… Seemingly, all this is good for Israel. America controls the world, we control America. Never before have Jews exerted such an immense influence on the center of world power.

In Britain, a veteran member of Britain’s House of Commons bluntly declared in May 2003 that Jews had taken control of America’s foreign policy, and had succeeded in pushing the US into war. “A Jewish cabal have taken over the government in the United States and formed an unholy alliance with fundamentalist Christians,” said Tam Dalyell, a Labour party deputy and the longest-serving House member. “There is far too much Jewish influence in the United States,” he added. [18]


For many years now, American presidents of both parties have been staunchly committed to Israel and its security. This entrenched policy is an expression of the Jewish-Zionist grip on America’s political and cultural life. It was fervent support for Israel – shared by President Bush, high-ranking administration officials and nearly the entire US Congress – that proved crucial in the decision to invade and subdue one of Israel’s greatest regional enemies.

While the unprovoked US invasion of Iraq may have helped Israel, just as those who wanted and planned for the war had hoped, it has been a calamity for America and the world. It has cost many tens of thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars. Around the world, it has generated unmatched distrust and hostility toward the US. In Arab and Muslim countries, it has fueled intense hatred of the United States, and has brought many new recruits to the ranks of anti-American terrorists.

Americans have already paid a high price for their nation’s commitment to Israel. We will pay an ever higher price – not just in dollars or international prestige, but in the lives of young men squandered for the interests of a foreign state – until the Jewish-Zionist hold on US political life is finally broken.


1. Remarks by Ernest F. Hollings, May 20, 2004. Congressional Record – Senate, May 20, 2004, pages S5921-S5925. See also: M. Weber, “”Iraq Was Invaded to Secure Israel,” Says Senator Hollings…”

2. The Guardian (London), August 20, 2002.

3. Bob Woodward, Plan of Attack (Simon & Schuster, 2004), p. 186. See also p. 188

4. Bob Woodward, Plan of Attack (Simon & Schuster, 2004), p. 320.

5. R. Dunn, “Sharon Could Have Written Speech,” The Times (London), June 26, 2002.

6. Bush address to AIPAC convention, Washington, DC, May 18, 2004.

7. A. S. Lewin, “Israel’s Security is Key to Security of Rest of World,” Jewish Press (Brooklyn, NY), May 14, 2003. Rice’s interview with the Israeli daily Yediot Aharnonot is quoted.

8. Text posted at http://www.israeleconomy.org/strat1.htm See also: J. Bamford, A Pretext for War (Doubleday, 2004), pages 261-269; B. Whitaker, “Playing Skittles with Saddam,” The Guardian (Britain), Sept. 3, 2002.

9. J. Vest, “The Men From JINSA and CSP,” The Nation, Sept. 2, 2002 (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020902/vest).

10. S. Francis, “Weapons of Mass Deception: Somebody Lied,” column of Feb. 6, 2004 (http://www.vdare.com/francis/wmd.htm).

11. A. Benn, “Background: Enthusiastic IDF Awaits War in Iraq,” Haaretz, Feb. 17, 2002. Quoted in J. J. Mearsheimer, Stephen M. Walt, “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” March 2006, p. 30, and p. 68, fn. 146.

12. Jonathan Steele, “Israel Puts Pressure on US to Strike Iraq,” The Guardian (London), August 17, 2002.

13. Robert Novak, “Sharon’s War?,” column of Dec. 26, 2002. (http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/26/column.novak.opinion.sharon/).

14. L. King, “Ex-General Says Israel Inflated Iraqi Threat,” Los Angeles Times, Dec. 5, 2003.; See also: J. J. Mearsheimer, Stephen M. Walt, “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” March 2006, p. 29, and p. 67, fn. 142.

15. John J. Mearsheimer, Stephen M. Walt, “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” March 2006, pages 29, 30, 32.(http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011/$File/rwp_06_011_walt.pdf). A shorter version appeared in the London Review of Books, March 23, 2006. (http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html). The two authors followed up their paper with a detailed book, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux: 2007).

16. P. J. Buchanan, “Whose War?,” The American Conservative, March 24, 2003. (http://www.amconmag.com/03_24_03/cover.html).

17. Uri Avnery, “The Night After,” CounterPunch, April 10, 2003 (http://www.counterpunch.org/avnery04102003.html).

18. F. Nelson, “Anger Over Dalyell’s ‘Jewish Cabal’ Slur,” The Scotsman (Edinburgh), May 5, 2003; M. White, “Dalyell Steps Up Attack On Levy,” The Guardian (London), May 6, 2003.

#2018 03/2008 (revised)

Read Full Post »

As Dr. Faurisson has rightly said, “Our ordeals are similar and our Intifadas identical.” And as the Arabian proverb goes, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” -W.

Official Press Release I from Aloha Palestine:
7 June, 2010

Hello all,

I write to inform you about Ken O’Keefe, who was aboard the Mavi Marmara when it was stormed by the Israeli military in the early hours of Monday 31st May, towed to Ashdod Port in Israel and all its passengers detained.

Just a brief background on Ken: He was born and raised in California and served in the US Marine Corps, being deployed to Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War. After many years spent working in the field of marine conservation and green sea turtle rescues (funded by his scuba diving operation, Deep Ecology) and Hawaiian Sovereignty, he left the US shortly after the events of 9/11 and renounced his US citizenship, entering into the political asylum process in Holland. In 2003 he initiated and led the Human Shield Action to Iraq during the invasion. In 2008 he served as a captain and 1st mate with the Free Gaza Movement, which ended the 41 year siege of Gaza by sailing two boats into Gaza. He is currently the director of Aloha Palestine, a company he co-founded to establish a lawful passenger and cargo shipping service between Cyprus and Gaza. He joined the Freedom Flotilla to meet with the Palestinian Chamber of Commerce, exporters and others in relation to Aloha Palestine. However, while on board he took on the role of defending the ship.

Ken has appeared on a number of news programs and live news broadcasts as a political analyst since 2008.

Ken was transferred to Ben Gurion Airport on Wednesday and was due to be deported by the Israeli authorities to Istanbul, then repatriated to Dublin by the Irish officials. He refused deportation and demanded that he be sent to Gaza, or the Occupied Palestinian Territories, using his Palestinian travel documents (he was awarded Palestinian citizenship when he captained one of the two Free Gaza boats into Gaza in August 2008). The Israelis acknowledged that he is a Palestinian citizen, but refused his demand on the basis that his passport was “invalid” since it had not been registered.

The general atmosphere in the airport on Wednesday was quite chaotic, and a scuffle broke out. Ken was bashed on the forehead and then badly beaten by the Israeli officials/police. He sustained a large bloody gash on his head, and some bruised ribs. When I spoke with him he had a hoarse, croaky voice. He had been put in a head lock until he nearly passed out. His aggressor released Ken at the last possible moment. Ken refused medical attention because he was not allowed access to a lawyer, nor was he being allowed to make phone calls.

On Thursday Ken’s case went before a judge who ruled that he be detained pending deportation (Ken wanted to be released without charge).

Having already been complaining of dizziness following his first beating by Israeli police, Ken was beaten again that night in his cell. Again, he has refused treatment for his injuries. Ken was unable to eat for a few days as his throat was sore following being held in a head lock on Wednesday.

He wanted to appeal his deportation and go to Gaza, but his solicitor advised him that for his own safety he should leave Israel. The longer he stayed, the greater the detriment to his health. On Friday morning he signed his Emergency Travel Documents provided to him by the Irish Consulate and was booked onto a flight to Istanbul.

Israeli officials asked him to clean himself up as his face was bloody and he was quite dishevelled. He refused, as he wanted the world to see what had happened to him. The officials threatened to keep him in custody unless he co-operated, but he called their bluff, and was allowed to board his flight to Istanbul as he was. He was met by Irish Embassy staff and a press conference. He also gave an interview with Turkish newspaper the Hurriyet, which was featured on the front page. Prior to the press conference he had issued the following statement:

“I want to discuss my role in defending the ship and disarming two Israeli commandos along with conditions and treatment while in Israeli custody, including two beatings at the hands of Israeli agents.”

Ken will depart Istanbul on Wednesday 9th June for Dublin, where he will stay for two days before returning home to his wife and baby son on Friday 11th June.

Please find attached a personal statement written by Ken in Istanbul.

Press conferences are being arranged in Dublin and London. Please contact me if you would like to interview Ken.

Best wishes,
Mrs O’Keefe
Official Press Release II from Aloha Palestine:
8th June, 2010

Hello all,

I write to inform you that last night the Israeli Defence Force issued a statement identifying Ken O’Keefe as an ‘Active Terror Operative’. Ken was labeled ‘…a radical anti-Israel activist and operative of the Hamas Terror organisation.’ They went on to accuse him of ‘attempt(ing) to enter the Gaza Strip in order to form and train a commando unit for the Palestinian terror organisation.’

Ken responded by making a counter charge. From his hotel room in Istanbul this morning, he issued a statement in which he called the US, Britain and Israel ‘the greatest terrorists of our time’.

Ken attempted to enter Gaza aboard the Mavi Marmara. He intended to meet with officials from the Palestinian Chamber of Commerce in relation to his role as company director for Aloha Palestine, a social enterprise established to conduct Safe Trade between Cyprus and Gaza. Ken felt strongly that AP should not have any political undertones, and that the company would “not deviate from its commitment to trade in goods that build security and promote peace. Aloha Palestine will not trade in weapons or instruments of violence of any kind ever.”

Four other individuals were identified as terror operatives, including two Turkish citizens. There are concerns that these five individuals are now ‘marked’ as targets of future assassination attempts by Mossad, Israel’s Institute for Intelligence and Special Operations.

The IDF identified Ken O’Keefe as an American and British citizen, despite dealing with Irish consular officials in relation to his deportation from Israel.

Please call +44 7890 140 170 to arrange an interview with Ken.
Mrs. O’Keefe

Ken’s statement in full:

“In response to the Israeli government’s claims that I, Ken O’Keefe, am an operative of Hamas who intended to train terrorists in Gaza, I make a counter charge; Israel and the United States, along with their British partner, are the greatest terrorists of our time — selling, distributing and using more weapons of mass destruction than all other nations combined. When I speak of terrorism I am using the Black’s Law Dictionary definition of the word, with that definition it is clear that the United States is the number one terrorist of the 20th and 21st centuries. There are over 800,000 innocent children in Gaza that are among the victims of Israel’s terrorism, in fact the entire population of Palestine is victim of said terrorism. I do not say this as [provocative] rhetoric, I say it as a moral, thinking human being who is capable of seeing the truth.

Despite the threats and slanderous charges I will not repeat the sickening pattern of rejecting the legitimate right of self defense, I wholeheartedly support that right.

As for the charges made against me, the truth lies within my actions in life. I am available for interviews and will happily discuss my associations and actions. My path in life is an open book, and one that I am blessed and proud to have walked.”

Read Full Post »

Source: ProThink.org, the producers of 9/11 Missing Links.

Read Full Post »

Source: ProThink.org, the producers of 9/11 Missing Links.

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »