false flag terrorism

Mimi al-Haram (aka "the Syrian Girl Partisan'), an Australian resident of Syrian nationality, predicted, on her YouTube channel in 2012, the chemical weapons attack of August 2013, staged by anti-government 'rebels' and blamed on the Syrian government, in order to justify an invasion.

Prediction: Impending strike on Syria by Trump or Israel?

In 2014, Mimi predicted that the US would claim that Syria had not disposed of all of its chemical weapons possibly as a pretext for another attack on Syria, but this time attacking both the Syrian government and the al-Qaeda-linked rebels, possibly after another staged chemical attack. She says that "this is exactly what trqnspired earlier this year".

At the end of this video, Mimi warns that she fears that "YouTube has been censoring some of my older videos and that they are rolling out new rules that will further stifle the truth" (see also Appendix 1, below). She continues, "Regardless, I promise to continue fighting the good fight here on YouTube, so long as they will let me. So please subscribe for more videos".

Appendix 1 : Articles about plans by Google, Facebook, YouTube and other social media to stifle free speech

Get Ready for the World Truth Ministry and the Unimaginable
(14/6/2017) by Phil Butler New Eastern Outlook, "Politically Correct": The War on Free Speech, Free Press, Free Internet and the Truth. What is the Endgame? (26/7/2017) by Joachim Hagopian | Global Research, DIGITAL TYRANNY: Google and Facebook's Automated Censorship Program (I Hope You Can Speak Chinese) (6/8/2017) | 21st Century Wire, Social media and the loss of privacy (10/8/2017) | PressTV, Orwellian Google censors news based YouTube videos (19/8/2017) by Adam Garrie | The Duran, Censorship On Youtube: SouthFront Channel Is Again Under Attack (17/8/2017) | The Vineyard of the Saker, An Open Letter to Google: Stop the Censorship of the Internet! (25/8/2017) | Global Research, The West's War on Free Speech (6/6/2017) by Tony Cartalucci || Land Destroyer

Appendix 2 : Articles here on Candobetter about the staged chemical weapons attacks in Syria

White House Appears to Be Planning Attack on Assad - Article by Jason Ditz (27/6/17), Putin shows up BBC propaganda on chemical weapons and Syria (12/6/17), White House claims on Syria chemical attack 'obviously false' - Prof. Theodor Postol of MIT (13/4/2017), Guilty until proven innocent: Assad and the mainstream press (12/4/2017) 19:42 by David Macilwain, More saying how chemical weapons story implausible - Prof Tim Anderson (11/4/2017). Video: Syrian gas attack is a lie - "Stop your governments!" - Russia (8/4/2017).

Appendix 3 : My post about Zionism and anti-Semitism

I posted the following on 30 August 2017 in response to the comment:

"This exactly what Trump said he would not do. Jews run our country. And sent our sons to die for them. We will never see peace in the world until we deal with these Marxist Jews."

Why presume that every jewish person supports the state of Israel?

Even within Irael, some jewish people have voiced opposition to their government's theft of Palestinian land. One notable example is Mordechai Vanunu, who blew the whistle on Israel's illegal nuclear weapons program in September 1986. For that Mordechai was abducted in Italy in October 1986 and taken back to Israel, where, after at a secret trial, he was imprisoned for 18 years, 11 in solitary confinement. Since his release in 2004, he has not been allowed to leave Israel. He has also been forbidden from owning a mobile 'phone, using Internet chat rooms or having any contact with foreigners. All his telephone and Internet use is monitored.

Anti-semitism, serves to reinforce the underlying justification for the original expulsion of Arabs from Palestine in 1947 by the Zionist invaders and Israel's subsequent wars, both covert and overt, against Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Libya, Algeria, Iraq, Syria and Iran.

At the time the Zionists were conquering Palestine in 1947, Israeli Mossad agents went abroad to other Arab countries to, whilst posing as Muslim anti-semites, foment sectarian strife and commit terrorist acts against indigenous jews in order to frighten them into fleeing and becoming settlers on Palestinian land.

Another jew, Abram Leon, also a communist, was murdered by the Nazis in 1944. In his work "The Jewish Question" at https://www.marxists.org/subject/jewish/leon/ , clandestinely written during the war, he explicitly opposed Zionism in the last chapter at https://www.marxists.org/subject/jewish/leon/ch7.htm#e

Appendix 4: SYRIANGIRL: Clues Suggest US or Israeli Attack on Syria Could Happen Soon

Editor's note:

Check your bias at the door gentle reader.

We know SYRIANGIRL personally and can confirm that she is one of the sharpest and best-informed analysts reporting on the Syrian tragedy.

Her name is Maram Susli and she lives in Australia, where she grew up. Five years ago she was a getting her PhD in chemistry and was so outraged by the dishonesty of the media about the war that she started posting videos on Youtube about it.

Since then she has built an influential following with 72K subscribers to her channel, 6 million views, 70K Twitter followers, and 40K Facebook followers. When she posts, important people listen.

We've met her several times when she was speaking at international conferences and she is the real deal - a smart, articulate activist / wonk who does this in her free time when not in the lab. She has worked with MIT professor Theodore Postol in exposing the lie that Assad used chemical weapons.

She is not paid by any government or group, and relies on fan donations. Youtube even blocked her from monetizing her videos, so she really relies on you.

Please support her on Patreon, and follow her on Twitter and Facebook. Her work is invaluable and spot-on.

Here's SYRIANGIRL with another excellent analysis of what is happening in her suffering homeland. Every prediction she has made since 2012 has come true.

Let's see if she gets it right this time:

Her main points:

1. Bannon's departure means no one in the WH opposes US / Israeli escalation.
2. A recent video and photo showing Syrian insurgents teaching school children how to act like chemical weapons victims.
3. A fake news story in Reuters claiming the UN intercepted a North Korean shipment of chemicals to Syria. (Reuters is a well-known channel for this sort of deception - in the summer of 2014 their false stories about the Ukraine war were rampant - Ed.)
4. An article in the Daily Beast, (another notorious alphabet agency / neocon lie factory - Ed.) tying in Iran with Syria and North Korea.
5. A tweet from Nikki Haley, saying that the US will shoot first and ask questions later if any chemical weapons are used in the area, and a WH statement reminding people that Syria used chemical weapons in 2014. (Which has since been proved untrue) - suggesting an upcoming false flag.
6. Netanyahu's trip to Moscow where he told Putin he would prefer for ISIS to win over Syria and Iran and would attack Syria to prevent that from happening.
7. Syria's impending victory in Deir Ezzor puts the US in a position where they would have to attack in order to salvage their rapidly collapsing MIddle East policy.
8. Then she goes on to enumerate the correct predictions she has made since 2012.

Yeah, she's good.

Thursday 28 April 2016 is the 20th anniversary of the Port Arthur massacre. On 28 April 1996, 35 people were killed and 23 others were injured by a single gunman. Later that day, Martin Bryant, a 26 year old man was arrested at the Seascape cottage, some distance away from the site of the massacre, and charged with the murders. He was never tried before a jury for the crime. Martin Bryant initially pleaded not guilty. Allegedly, six weeks after he was arrested and interrogated intensively, isolated from friends and family, he confessed to the crime. As shown in the article Was Martin Bryant the Port Arthur killer? (3/4/2010), this 'confession' flew in the face of overwhelming forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony which pointed to his innocence.

As the 20th anniversary of the massacre approaches, the same 'news' media, that fed us the 'incubator babies' story of 1990, Iraqi WMDs, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the Warren Commission cover-up of the JFK assassination, claims that the Syrian government had been using chemical weapons against its own people, etc., etc., is trying desperately prevent the broader Australian public from critically examining the Port Arthur Massacre.

On 7 News (linked to from here - second embedded video - Melissa Doyle and Peter Fleck 'report':

Melissa Doyle:Chilling public interviews, with the man responsible for the worst mass shooting, have been shown for the first time by 7 Sunday Night. Martin Bryant laughed and bragged after killing 35 people at Port Arthur in Tasmania. For more, we're joined by Peter Fegan.

Pete, Bryant's lawyer says he's still haunted by this case.

Peter Fegan: John Avery, the man who defended Martin Bryant all those years ago, spoke last night on our Sunday Night program and says he is still haunted by Bryant 20 years on.

Now he ... recalls how Bryant pleaded not guilty to murdering 35 innocent people that day at Port Arthur.

Now, you only had to watch those chilling tapes to understand why he is still haunted. Bryant can often be seen laughing with police. Now here is some of those chilling interviews from that Sunday night program last night.

In fact, only parts of the tapes shown on the Sunday Night program were shown in the 7 news bulletin the next day. On one occasion Martin Bryant is shown smiling, but when asked why by the interviewing officer, Martin responded that he was happy to have been taken out of his prison cell.

Those tapes showed to me a young person who appeared to truly not be aware that 35 people had died and that he had been accused by the police of having killed them.

Whilst Martin demonstrated at length how he practised with his automatic weapons, at not one point in the interview did Martin Bryant admit to having used any of his weapons to harm other people.

The more 'complete' version of those interviews, which total all of 65 seconds, by my measurement, can be found in the embedded Video of Sunday Night at the bottom of the page linked to above.

More misreporting of the Port Arthur massacre: Port Arthur changed how we respond to crises | SMH, Port Arthur massacre: commemoration will balance the fascination with a killer (28/4/16) by Carolyn Strange | The Age, Port Arthur: Critical responders recall the day that changed their lives forever (28/4/16) | ABC, John Howard on Port Arthur (19/4/16) | SMH.

See also: 15 Facts About The Port Arthur Massacre You NEED To Know (16/2/08) | Prison Planet.

The Australian
coroner makes a
bizarre ruling.
Why?

Amazingly, 17 months have passed since the crash, and the investigators still can't establish who shot down the plane. Our correspondent digs in to the latest developments

The Victorian (Australia) state coroner Iain West has concluded a 60-minute inquest into the deaths of Australians on board Malaysian Airlines MH17 by issuing a statement of findings contradicting the coroner's own statements, as well as the evidence of reports from the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and courtroom testimony from the senior Australian police officer investigating the MH17 crash.

This article was originally published on 16 December on johnhelmer.net (aka 'Dances with Bears'). This article was republished on 17 December on Russian Insider. Other articles concerning the MH17 cover-up include The little Dutch boy, his finger, and the leak in the dyke story – make that the BUK story (22/12/15), Australian police, Dutch prosecutors break with Dutch Safety Board at first coroner's court inquest on MH17 crash (15/12/15), ...

Australian police examining the evidence
they aren't buying the Dutch government's
version of events

In an 11-page judgement issued on Wednesday morning at the Victorian Coroners Court in Melbourne, West ruled "it was not feasible to conduct a complete autopsy of all deceased", and "in the absence of autopsy there is no other evidence to establish individual causes of death. To attempt to do would be speculative and hence not a basis for making finds of fact."

He then proceeded to endorse the conclusion of the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) that the passengers and crew of MH17 had been killed by the detonation of a "9N314M model warhead carried on the 9M38 series of missiles, as installed on the Buk surface-to-air missile system.

Other scenarios that could have led to the disintegration of the aeroplane were considered, analysed and excluded on the available evidence…I accept and adopt the findings of the Dutch Safety Board."

For details of the DSB report of October 13, the evidence presented, and simulations of missile launches, warhead detonations, and shrapnel impact patterns, read this.

West's ruling contradicts testimony given in his court yesterday by Australian Federal Police Detective Superintendent Andrew Donoghoe. Donoghoe told the court that the DSB finding on the Buk missile was uncertain in the ongoing forensic and criminal investigation.

Donoghoe is the lead Australian investigator in the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) working on the MH17 evidence. "In order to obtain conclusive criminal evidence," he said, the Dutch Prosecution Service has made clear "it was also necessary that other scenarios - such as the possibility that MH17 was shot down by another type of missile, or that it was shot down from the air - must be ruled out convincingly."

Donoghoe repeated the point in an interview outside the courtroom, adding this "is a tougher standard than the DSB report." He acknowledged the DSB had used simulations of missile firings, not direct evidence.

According to the transcript of Donoghoe's court testimony, he implied the Australian Federal Police was not in a position to provide the forensic evidence it has gathered to the Victorian coroner because the Ukrainian government has not consented. "Official communication of the conclusions of the results of the MH17 investigation", Donoghoe said in court, "will only be released after agreement between the two JIT [Joint Investigation Team] countries."

The JIT comprises five countries – Australia, The Netherlands, Ukraine, Malaysia, and Belgium. The two to which Donoghoe referred were Australia and the Ukraine. For details of the JIT, and Malaysian government objections to the way it has been run, read this.

West's judgement is entitled "Finding into Death with Inquest – Inquest into the Deaths of the 17 Victorian residents who died on Flight MH17." The text does not refer to Donoghoe's written report to the court, nor to his courtroom testimony. During Donoghoe's appearance in court, West asked him no questions about the forensic evidence.

Dr David Ranson

West's ruling did go into some detail on the post-mortem and autopsy evidence on the victims' bodies reported yesterday by Dr David Ranson (left); West described Ranson as an associate professor of the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine, and the head of a team of anatomical, dental, and other pathology specialists who worked at the Dutch mortuary centre during July and part of August 2014.

Ranson has also delivered two reports of his findings to the Victorian coroner, one in August of 2014, and a second in December 2014.

Ranson said in an interview in the courtroom, before West announced his ruling, that CT scans were done twice over for the Australian victims, once at the Hilversum military base, and then at the Melbourne morgue after the bodies were flown home. "The CT scans were designed to detect metal", Ranson said. He acknowledges none has been found in the scans of the victims.

Without identifying his source, West ruled that "investigators believe that the total number of hits [on the aircraft] of high-energy objects was well over 800."

He also ruled that "perforation and ricochet damage caused by multiple high-energy objects enabled investigators to conclude that the implicated device was a surface-to-air missile carrying a fragmentation warhead…Forensic evidence determined that that the weapon was a 9N314M model warhead.

It was further determined that the Buk surface-to-air missile system is the only weapon system to carry one of the distinctive pre-formed fragments in its warhead and that such a missile system was present in the region at the time of the incident."

West's statement of finding doesn't reveal the "forensic evidence" he thinks is determinative. By the "presence" of the Buk missile, West appears to have been referring to missile batteries operated by Ukrainian government forces recorded by satellite photographs at locations on the ground at the time.

According to Donoghoe's evidence, if a Buk missile had been fired at MH17 it may have come from a Ukrainian government source. "The Buk missile," Donoghoe told West in court, "was of Russian manufacture, but of a type which had previously also been provided to the Ukraine.

The OVV [Dutch acronym for Dutch Safety Board] was not able to confirm the origin of the specific missile."

West did not report Ranson's evidence that no "distinctive pre-formed fragments" were found in any of the victim's bodies.

For analysis of the computer simulations and metal assay tests reported by DSB in October on the "distinctive pre-formed fragments" attributed to the Buk missile warhead, read this.

The Dutch Safety Board (DSB) Shrapnel Photographs

Source: http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/onderzoek/2049/investigation-crash-mh17-17-july-2014   

The DSB report claims these were the only "distinctive pre-formed fragments" it  could find – three in the cockpit area, and one on one of the wings. The DSB conducted no metal analysis, and the Ukrainian government did not allow matching of the fragment metal to Buk missiles in its armed forces inventory. The Australian Federal Police and Ranson investigations found no traces of these "distinctive fragments" in any of the scans or tests reported to Coroner West. He asked no questions in court about the shrapnel evidence, and ignored it in his statement of finding.

Ranson, the coroner concluded, had described the cause of death without reporting munitions, explosive impact, or shrapnel wounds. 

According to West, Ranson's conclusion was that death had been caused by "injury sustained in high-altitude aircraft disruption…I accept the cause of death as stated by Dr Ranson as appropriate in the circumstances surrounding the loss of MH17 and in the absence of individual medical certainty."

Outside the court, after West closed the inquest, reporters who had listened to the proceedings acknowledged surprise that West's reference to unsourced and unnamed "forensic investigators" excluded both Donoghoe's and Ranson's reports.

West also claimed in his judgement that he was leaving to Donoghoe and other members of the forensic investigative team in The Netherlands the decision on what the evidence indicates for "criminal responsibility for the deaths".  

That process will run until "at least mid-2016", according to the coroner.  "The question of who is to blame for the destruction of the aircraft was not considered by the [Dutch Safety] Board as a criminal investigation is being undertaken in order to gather evidence." 

Tjibbe Joustra

The DSB report, and subsequent media statements by its chairman, Tjibbe Joustra (left), explicitly point blame at Russia for allegedly supplying Buk missiles and to Novorussian units fighting the Kiev regime for firing at least one  of them. For details, read this.  

West announced this disclaimer:  "it is not the role of this Court to attribute blame… the criminal responsibility for the deaths does not form part of the scope of this inquest."

In his sole reference to the political geography of the Ukraine conflict West hinted at the same blame for Russia as Joustra. "The location of the crash site," records West's ruling, "was, and remains, an area subjected to ongoing hostile military action between armed groups and Ukrainian forces."   

If West has decided the "armed groups" weren't Ukrainian, his innuendo is that they were Russian.

"How can the Australian coroner have it both ways," commented an international coronial law expert. "If he won't make findings about the detonation, he shouldn't endorse the DSB's claims about the Buk missile.

If he insists the Buk missile was the culprit, West is contradicting what he says are the limitations of his own inquiry,  and also the evidence of the only experts he called to testify."

By excluding the evidence of the Australian Federal Police and of his own pathologist, adds an Australian barrister, "West has taken sides in the politics of the case. If on top of that he is refusing to release the Donoghoe and Ranson reports, he is covering up. West has discredited his own court." 

Apendix: Other articles, continued

Is there a war crime in what Lord Heh-heh, Tjibbe Joustra of the Dutch Safety Board, is broadcasting? (19/10/15), Dutch reports on MH17 have mistaken BUK missile model, warhead type – the footnote which puts the boot to BUK (16/10/15), Is there a war crime in what Lord Heh-heh, Tjibbe Joustra of the Dutch Safety Board, is broadcasting? (19/10/15), Dutch reports on MH17 have mistaken BUK missile model, warhead type – the footnote which puts the boot to BUK (16/10/15), Autopsy of the MH17 crash – Dutch Safety Board reveals 3 possible pieces of BUK shrapnel in the bodies of the cockpit crew, and chemical evidence it cannot substantiate – Australian Federal Police issue public rejection of Australian government allegations (13/12/15).

As the Ukrainian army launches a new attack on the Donetsk Peoples' Republic, claiming to have retaken Donetsk Airport from 'separatist' forces, the justification for such an attack has once again become a subject for discussion. While the Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko says the new offensive is aimed at 're-uniting' Ukraine, and Western media believe this both to be a reasonable objective and the real one, the actual situation is entirely different...

Much of the perversion of truth on the true nature of the Ukrainian government and the nature of the 'Eastern rebellion' can be put down to the success of the 'False Flag' attack on MH17 - carried out by the Ukrainian air force with as yet unverified assistance from Western intelligence agencies. This tragic state of affairs is thanks to the skill of the propaganda campaign conducted primarily by the US and its close allies, but facilitated by the Western media apparatus. It is tragic because the simplest of investigations of the crash site and wreckage of the plane would have readily demonstrated who was responsible; not only was clear physical evidence of the damage visible, and reported and photographed by some early observers, but forensic analysis would have found traces of the bullets that so clearly perforated the cockpit.

Given this background, the appearance of an article in the Fairfax press by veteran correspondent Paul McGeough describing his visits to the crash site with partner Kate Geraghty should have been cause for optimism; that this renowned 'investigative journalist' seemed uninterested in identifying the criminals responsible for killing so many people and instead focused on collecting sunflower seeds in 'Cockpit village' was cause for exasperation!
I sent the letter below to McGeough, in addition to Jonathan Green who interviewed him on the ABC. It also went to ABC Consumer Affairs, and the editors of the Australian National Review, and the editors of English Pravda.

Dear Paul,

While I admire your desire to give the relatives of victims of the MH17 atrocity something to fill the void left by the loss of their loved ones, I was astonished that your intense focus allowed you to both reveal and overlook crucial evidence that would provide something far more substantial to those relatives.

For those of us who paid no attention to the wild claims made in Western media following the downing of MH17, and made their own judgements based on evidence available, there was little evidence more convincing that photographs of the cockpit of the aircraft showing severe damage from artillery of some kind. For the benefit of the other recipients of this email I copy below your description in the Fairfax press of your visit to ‘Cockpit village’ – the very place where that vital fragment was observed and photographed:

“We headed out of the city before dawn. On a highway strewn with the smouldering wreckage of vehicles destroyed in the previous night's fighting, some with bodies still lying in or near them, we threaded our way through rebel checkpoints, back to what we had dubbed "the cockpit village".

This was Rassypnoe, a hamlet in which locals watched in awe as MH17's nose cone smashed into a field of shoulder-high sunflowers, just metres from buildings on the village's western flank.

When we visited the village in the last week of July, Eugene Lukovkin, a 30-year-old separatist gunman, gave us a graphic account of the crash – "bodies falling like bullets"; the nose section making a muffled sound, "like it landed in a swamp".

Recalling that he had been disposing of his grandmother's trash, Lukovkin told me: "The plane headed towards me. I could see the smoke as it fell to pieces – it had been missiled. One section was coming at me and the rest of it seemed to keep going. I dumped the rubbish cart and started running; others were running too – we think maybe some of the falling people are alive.

"There were lots of bodies – dead." Pointing to the left side of the cockpit, he says: "This is where one of the pilots was – I knew he was in charge because he had stars on his shoulder."

When we returned at dawn on our last day, none of the locals were to be seen. We drove to the field in which the buckled cockpit lay and quietly went to work – chopping enough sunflower heads to fill a big suitcase that we had bought at the market for this purpose. No one came to ask what we were doing.

Thirty minutes later we were back on the road, driving north to the Ukrainian government-controlled city of Kharkiv, from where we caught a commercial flight to the capital Kiev.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/my-christmas-offering-sunflower-seeds-for-mh17-families-from-the-fields-of-ukraine-20141226-12dily.html

You also described this experience in a radio interview on the ABC with Jonathan Green:

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/sunflower-seeds-for-mh17/5992360

While there is little doubt outside the sphere of influence of the Western corporate media that a Ukrainian fighter jet shot down MH17 using both an air to air missile and 30mm cannon fire, the necessary evidence to establish this fact has clearly not been sought by the Dutch investigators, or their findings are being suppressed. Of particular interest here is the report from the ‘separatist gunman’ that he had seen the pilots body in the cockpit wreckage.

In the accepted scenario of the crash, endorsed by the blank black box recording, the pilots were the prime and initial target of the aerial attack; not only are there multiple penetrations of this part of the aircraft, and relatively few elsewhere, but the cockpit came down separated from the main fuselage by some distance.

Examining the high quality photograph of the left side of the cockpit, one can see evenly spaced holes as from strafing, but from bullets fired at the other side of the cockpit – the holes are quite obviously made by objects emerging from inside as the outer layer of the double skin is peeled outward, while the holes in the inner skin are perfectly round and the size of the 30 mm bullets. In the version of your article above there is also a photograph taken by Kate Geraghty of ‘a pilot’s seat’. A forensic analysis on both the seat and the pilot’s body would surely show evidence of perforations by the tungsten shells used by the SU25 and presumed responsible for the damage.

World peace depends on truthful and careful reporting now

Some people may believe that discussion of exactly how MH17 came down is becoming academic, as we lurch from one dangerous crisis to the next. But unlike discussion of the causes of the First World War – so apparently topical at the moment – this is anything but academic. Already the framing of Russia as not just involved but even as responsible for the atrocity has ‘facilitated’ NATO’s expansion eastwards, and enabled the Kiev coup leaders to pursue their corrupt agenda with European approval and assistance. And given that it is now clear ‘cui bono’ as a result of this attack, we must confront the stark possibility that MH17 was an act of state terrorism in which our own governments may have been complicit.

There are already very many commentators, experts and authorities who have come to this conclusion, not simply based on the evidence that MH17 was shot down by a Ukrainian fighter jet – which is considerable – but because of the complete lack of evidence offered by Western agencies and governments for their contention that ‘Russian backed separatists’ shot it down with a BUK surface to air missile. Only days after the attack, Russian authorities appealed to the US to release satellite pictures from a new satellite they apparently had directly over Ukraine at the time of the crash. This information has been repeatedly requested by Moscow but with no response. It is not possible to conclude other than that such information would be incriminating both to Kiev and the US – if it showed a BUK missile launch by the Separatists as it surely would then we would have seen such information immediately.

Russia Today has just released a second documentary on the attack – ‘Reflections on MH17’, ( http://rtd.rt.com/films/reflections-on-mh17film/) which focuses on the extraordinary failure of Dutch and Ukrainian authorities to properly investigate the causes of the accident, while observing that conclusions on what weapon was responsible could be easily made with some simple laboratory analyses. It could not be said that such an investigation would ‘bring closure’ to the relatives of MH17 victims, but exposing the real culprits would do a lot more for the victims and potential victims of NATO’s aggressive policies in Europe. These criminals who would happily sacrifice a few hundred truly innocent civilians as part of their strategic game cannot be allowed to escape justice, and the wrath of their own citizens.

I must just acknowledge the welcome new perspective brought to the Australian media by the Australian National Review – to whom I am also copying this letter. To my knowledge this is the only mention in our print press of the ‘real story’ of MH17, – but I await its serious discussion from our national broadcaster.

This article argues that you could probably get away with some nasty cartoons in a truly free press because such a press would freely report all sides to a dispute and not leave whole regions and classes of people with no expression in an international argument mediatized by the very same bunch of pillaging and plundering power elites, corporate and government, who profit from their silence. The article also wonders (but does not profess to know) whether the cold blooded assassinations at Charlie Hebdo were really an act of Islamic terrorism, or another false flag, on the principle of cui bono.

I remember thinking that Charlie Hebdo was overdoing rather unfunny cartoons to demonstrate defiance without seeming to give any thought to how wronged people in the Middle East have a right to feel, due to the effects of continuing colonialism – corporate and national – under the auspices of a US-led NATO. My observations in this 2012 article, “Anti-Islamic film - not so funny,” earned me capitalized insults as a leftist apologist for Islamic terrorism, anti-feminism and censorship. There was so much sound and fury in this correspondence that it left no room for any alternative explanation or dialogue. And that is the dynamic that false flags exploit.

Western treatment of Middle East and Media support for this

It’s all very well to celebrate a free press, but, since when is the Western mainstream newsmedia actually independent and free? Not only is it heavily biased in its reporting on the Middle East – when so much is at stake – but their barracking for the destruction of US/NATO targets seems actually to incite hatred and thereby encourage some people to join jihads. Let me put it this way, the mainstream newsmedia has a way of presenting the powers it wants to split and topple in the Middle East (and the East) as if they were all variations on Vlad the Impaler, imbuing its reports with quivering outrage and bathos, so that it must seem to many that the only honorable thing to do is to go and fight with the ‘rebels’ whom the press and NATO champion. Hence, it appears, the influx of foreign ‘rebel’ fighters from Australia, France, Britain and elsewhere and the widespread ignorance of the other side.

Charlie Hebdo might have a reputation for being outspoken, but to me it seemed to toe the US/NATO establishment line on illegal wars in the Middle East. For instance it didn’t question virtually baseless Western allegations that Bashar al-Assad is a ‘brutal dictator’, but casually exploited the propaganda in a cartoon showing the Syrian president standing triumphantly in front of a mountain of human bones like a hunter. If Charlie’s objective was largely to lampoon religion of all kinds, then there was another reason not to lampoon Bashar al-Assad, who presides over the last secular Arab state. [1] In other words, modern Charlie Hebdo was not politically subtle, critical, inquiring or a champion of Truth. Perhaps if it had been, it could have built bridges.

It seems to me that if the mainstream news and traditional alternative media really reported fairly, both, all sides of what is happening in the Middle East, then maybe people would not get so bothered about cartoons. Also maybe the cartoons would be a bit funnier and more informed. If the mainstream newsmedia did not constantly support and whitewash the Western military financial and industrial machine, this kind of violent response from the Middle East would have far less support. If the mainstream Western media interviewed, not just ‘rebels’ but government and a wide variety of citizens in Saudi Arabia or in Syria, for instance, those countries would have real voices and we would have ears to hear them. If it had done so in Iraq and Libya those countries might today be intact.

At candobetter.net we have often carried copies of letters to our media, especially SBS and ABC, the Australian state television channels, asking them to report more accurately on Middle Eastern and Eastern affairs because of the danger to peace that reporting propaganda carries. See http://candobetter.net/taxonomy/term/5364 Only on one occasion have we recorded a retraction. See ABC Australia apologises for bias against Russia in reporting MH17 crash. However this was a private apology, not a public statement on television.

False flag?

I have so far written with the assumption that the Charlie Hebdo assassinations were not a false flag. Because false flags are the other side of the history of aggressive capitalist interference in the Middle East and other oil producing countries of the ‘undeveloped world’, and they are fundamental to the history of war. How else do you get peoples who hardly know each other to try to kill each other? You have to give them a reason that they believe is true.

A truly free Western newsmedia would make false flags a lot harder to fly, but today’s newsmedia actively conveys state propaganda designed to terrify the public into supporting wars and bad laws, whilst presenting it as news and entertainment.

False flags have also been used by the US as methods to goad other countries into supporting it. Europe is too close to comfort to the Middle East to be gung ho about starting wars there. Its support for the US in NATO recently has been bizarre. On one interpretation [3], it could be that, like Russia, it chooses to appease the United States, in the hope of preventing all-out war. The terrorist attacks could have been a warning to Hollande not to take an independent stand vis a vis Russia. Just five days ago he was upbeat about the sanctions being lifted if talks went well. How long is that going to last after this series of terrorist attacks?

One cannot help but ask, if this horrible Charlie Hebdo massacre was really an act of terrorism by Muslims, why would they attack cartoonists and lone journalists, instead of the big media owners and NATO policy-supporting politicians? After all, the US has had no qualms in planning and carrying out or supporting assassinations of leaders, such as of Fidel Castro, Sadadm Husein, Muammar Gaddaffi, and, still in the firing line: Bashar al-Assad. One might say it could be too hard for a bunch of poor Muslims to get to anyone rich and powerful, but poor Muslims are supposed to have flown planes into the World Trade Center and to have carried out numerous other sophisticated acts of terror. In the case of false flags though, the power elite is not going to target its own. That would better explain to me the targeting of politically lesser citizens.

I won’t go into the nuts and bolts of the reporting of the Charlie Hebdo massacre and its sequel, but some aspects immediately seem odd. One is the shooting of a policeman in the head without blood appearing, censored by France2 News because of its graphic nature – except that the real footage, whilst tragic, was strangely ungraphic. See http://www.conspiracyclub.co/2015/01/07/paris-fake-terrorism/. Then there was the identity card left in a vehicle by one of the terrorists, reminiscent of the passport found in the wreckage of the 9-11 towers. After that there was the police chase of two suspected terrorists which culminated in a shoot-out where the terrorists lost their lives, leaving no-one to tell their story. And then there was the second in command detective who shot himself at Lieges, the night of the Charlie Hebdo assassinations. http://www.lepopulaire.fr/limousin/actualite/2015/01/08/un-commissaire-de-police-de-limoges-se-suicide-dans-son-bureau_11283307.htmlHe was deeply involved in the investigation of the Charlie Hebdo cases of Muslim protest, which had been ongoing for years and was the second detective to apparently suicide in the same team in slightly over one year.

The mainstream Western press has a tendency to report the US-NATO view and which ever so-called revolutionary group they support. It does not canvas the opinions of people who do not identify with Western supported revolutionaries; it does not ask government opinion. If the press reporting on the Middle East, notably on Syria, Iran, Iraq and Libya (as well as Russia and Ukraine in Eastern Europe) actually got reports from many sides, then the people in those countries and those who identify with them would be less likely to see the Western Press as an enemy.

The West has been instrumental in bringing down leaders and governments and sowing chaos to an extent in the Middle East that most Western citizens have no inkling of because this chaotic war and looting machine called ‘capitalism and democracy’ is marketed by the Western Press as a positive force, whilst the people it is trampling are portrayed as irrational, bloodthirsty religious maniacs and international terrorists. The mainstream press generally does not make overt fun of Islam and Mohammed, but a wing of the press that identifies itself as revolutionary free press and critical of the status quo, does, purportedly to dramatise and ridicule Islam’s apparent contempt for free speech.

Charlie Hebdooriginally became a fatwa target in 2 November 2011when it published an edition on Islam, with a cover of a a cartoon Muslim saying, “100 lashes if you don’t die laughing!”. In 2012 it followed with a large number of insulting cartoons about Mohammed as a gesture of indignation against moves to censor media critical of Islam.

The context was a film called Innocence of Muslims which parts of which available on you-tube portrayed the founder of Islam in a very bad personal and political light and Muslims as aggressively anti-Christian. Publicity about this film was accompanied by widespread riots by Muslims against foreign embassies, particularly US embassies, including riots in Sydney on 15 September 2012, with police injured. At the same time warships from more than 25 countries, including the United States, Britain, France, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, were together launching a military exercise in the Straits of Hormuz, in response to threats to close it off. There was plenty of reason for Muslims to be angry with and frightened by the West apart from that film. Today the stakes are even higher and the misery of war-torn and subdivided Middle East is even greater than it was.

Maybe therefore Westerners should hold their own governments and media proprietors to greater account if we are to avoid World War Three.

Yes, we do need a really free press in the West. That is worth fighting for. Then maybe we can have cartoons and the truth in all its aspects, with a voice for everyone.

NOTES

[1]President Bashar al-Assad, although the butt of so much mediatized professionally politicized opprobrium, totally fails to bluster and threaten, but continues doggedly to present Syria’s case.

[2] International and human rights professor of law, Francis Boyle’s Destroying Libya and World Order: The Three-Decade US Campaign to Terminate the Qaddafi Revolution , (Kindle Locations 1787-1841), have suggested this view to me.

5 Oct 2014, by Colin Todhunter. Republished from Global Research.

See also on Global Research: US Vice-President Joe Biden Blames Washington's Middle East Allies for Financing ISIS (5/10/14) by Patrick Hennigsen, Obama's Plan For a 'No-Fly Zone' Over Northeastern Syria – ISIS Was a Window-Dressing for the Real War Against the (3/10/14) by 21st Century Wire, The Islamic State Opens Its First Consulate in Turkey's Capital. Issuing Visas to Foreign Fighters (2/10/14) by PressTV, War on ISIS and Media Lies: The Comic Book Simplicity Of Propaganda (1/10/14) by Media Lens.

"... those who form the ISIS ... were previously regarded as freedom fighters who fought in Syria against the Government of Al Assad ... the great powers change too easily the concept of friend-enemy or of terrorist-non-terrorist." – President of Argentina Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner in her recent speech to the UN General Assembly.

Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner's recent speech at the UN was a breath of fresh air. She spoke about economic terrorism and the reasons why some people turn to violence and told the audience how a bankrupt Argentina managed to turn away from hard-line economic neoliberal orthodoxy and stimulate growth. She also discussed the need for multilateral approaches to solving the world's problems as well as the need to regulate 'vulture funds' that cripple sovereign states' ability to function.

While the President of Argentina offered some alternatives to US unilateralism and institutionalised economic injustices, British PM David Cameron promoted the usual tired rhetoric. In an attempt to justify attacking Iraq and Syria, he spoke of the supposed virtues of Western-style freedom, democracy and economic neoliberalism, while denouncing the Islamic State (IS), extremism and terrorism.

Cameron also stated that anyone who questions the official stories concerning 9/11 in the US or 7/7 in Britain or who criticises British foreign policy is a 'non-violent extremist'. While pointing the finger at radical Muslims clerics and their followers, Cameron was regarded by many as sending out a warning to anyone, Muslim or otherwise, who questions such things or criticizes certain policies.

After all, who could possibly protest against illegally bombing or invading sovereign nation states to eradicate head-chopping extremists or tyrants or evil-doers that would otherwise attack Britain and carry out butchery and terror?

Defeating terrorism as cover for wars of imperialism

Such made-for-TV narratives are repeated time and again and are so effective because they are so simplistic. Create a threat, demonise it, invoke fear and get the population on board to deal with it militarily. Who could question 'honest Dave' with his 'we are all in this together' platitudes.

Prior to Cameron's speech, British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond told the British press that IS militants are turning large swathes of Iraq and Syria into launch pads to stage terror attacks on Western nations. He said that with the "barbaric ideology" of the Sunni insurgents, "sooner or later they will seek to strike us on British soil."

Not long after, Home Secretary Theresa May announced she was preparing new laws to tackle Islamist militants at home and to stop them going abroad to fight. May said that that Britain faced a long struggle against a deadly extremist ideology that could take even decades.

To the uniformed, Cameron, Hammond and May's narratives can be very convincing – as convincing as Blair's lies were back in 2003 regarding those non-existent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

Leading politicians act as the PR arm of the military-financial industrial complex: the big oil companies, the Wall Street/City of London financial institutions, the weapons manufacturers and huge corporations. All of these own strategic sectors of the economy and determine the nature of politics via their think tanks, foundations, funding and wealth, high-level contacts, revolving doors into the high echelons of power and compliant politicians. From BAe, Lockheed Martin and Boeing to Barclays, Goldman Sachs, BP, Chevron and Occidental Petroleum, these and dozens of other similar entities constitute the backbone of what is a structurally overlapping Anglo-US led Western establishment. Like Tony Blair, Cameron's media-friendly bonhomie is slicker than the most experienced used car salesman and is key to selling the establishment's endless wars to the public.

Of course, you will never hear Cameron bring up the extremism of the Project for a New American Century or discuss the Wolfowitz doctrine, the neo-con blueprints for the West's ongoing wars of terror, destabilisations, covert operations, killings and torture that have nothing to do with humanitarianism or 'fighting evil' and everything to do with securing world domination, pipeline routes and resources, while denying the same to others. Such things are not to be discussed in public. Defeating terrorism serves as rhetorical cover for imperialist wars.

We must keep to the 'facts'; the facts as designated by Cameron and those who wish to bury the real facts. We must listen to rhetoric about the wonders of economic liberalism and a thriving democracy, while populations live under the yoke of banker-imposed austerity and mass state surveillance. We must stick to the story that the proper and effective way of preventing terror involves stopping the brain washing of young Muslims at home and that preventing terror abroad is all about rooting out extremists (in resource-rich or resource-transit countries).

Do not associate the 'Muslim problem' with wars of intervention and occupation and the machinations of Empire in Muslim countries. Out of sight, out of mind, thanks partly to the media, including the BBC – a taxpayer-funded 'public service' broadcaster whose selective reporting and willingness to tow the official line does anything but serve the public.

Economic terror of 'globalisation': democracy under threat

According to economics professor John Foster, the aggregate wealth of Britain's richest 1,000 people was in 2010 some 333 billion pounds. In 2010, Britain's aggregate national debt was half that amount. In 2009, at the height of the economic crisis, the top 1,000 increased their wealth by a third, meaning that the amount they actually increased their wealth by in just one year was half of the national debt. Yet public sector jobs are being slashed and the welfare state dismantled, while money is always readily available for the next war. Is this not extremism?

How easy it is to conveniently ignore state-corporate extremism under the guise of 'globalisation' across the world that has resulted in central states abdicating their responsibilities by submitting to the tenets of the Wall Street/City of London-backed pro-privatisation policies, free capital flows, commodity market rigging, debt speculation, massive profits and unaccountable cartels, which aim to maximise profit by beating down labour costs and grabbing resources. Is that not extremism?

While Cameron stood at the UN eulogising about neoliberalism and Western democracy, powerful financial institutions attempt to impoverish and destabilise states like Argentina and render the concepts of national sovereignty and democracy utterly meaningless. To rake in even further unimaginable profits, 'vulture funds' have no compulsion in wrecking the lives of millions of ordinary people by bankrupting national economies, seizing their assets and crippling sovereign states' ability to properly function by extorting money and chaining them to debt.

Argentina's President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner said in her speech to the UN General Assembly:

"... terrorists are not only those who go planting bombs, there are economic terrorists who destabilise the economy of a country and produce poverty, hunger and misery from the sin of speculation. It is something we should say very clearly."

She also asked who gave the 'terrorists' in the Middle East their weapons in the first place, subtly pointing to the West's complicity in arming 'freedom fighters' who, according to how the geo-political game is going, are suddenly labelled 'terrorists' (and vice versa). From Kosovo to Syria and Libya, the US and its allies have excelled in this.

How easy it is for officials to bypass democratic processes, sideline the public and negotiate secretive 'free trade' deals on behalf of powerful private corporations. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (and similar agreements around the world) could undo decades of hard work that resulted in laws protecting consumers, workers and their families and the environment. Regulations are to be dismantled, laws to be written, investors' rights to be prioritised and democratic processes disregarded for the benefit of wealthy private corporations under the pretence of 'free' trade. Is this type of bare-faced corporate plunder and duplicity not extremism? Is this the type of economic freedom Cameron means?

How easy it is to destroy any notion of freedom via the illegal mass surveillance of the state that pries into habits, beliefs, motivations, conversations, allegiances of every ordinary citizen. Is that not extremism?

As democracy is hollowed out and corrupt global cartels record massive profits and institute their plunder, all of this is portrayed by the mainstream media and political leaders as 'normality' as the way things are and have to be, based on the lie that 'there is no alternative'.

Does the type of democracy that Cameron has in mind involve record levels of inequalities, an unhindered revolving door between government and big business, food safety/regulation authorities being hijacked by corporate interests and police and intelligence agencies infiltrating, harassing or subverting legitimate groups?

From India to South America, the destruction of food sovereignty and traditional agriculture and indigenous people's being driven from their lands by big agritech concerns, resource extraction industries and land grabbing speculators is commonplace and facilitated by the process of 'globalisation'.

The current economic system facilitates plunder and is presided over by well-funded and influential foundations and powerful financial-corporate entities and their stooges in the IMF, World Bank and WTO.The result is the deception that imperialist wars are fought in the name of fighting terror, austerity is imposed in the name of prosperity and mass surveillance is carried out under the banner of protecting freedom.

In finishing, it should be acknowledged that there are extremist violent thugs who carry out barbarity under the banner of Islam and who should never be funded or armed in order to do the bidding of what Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner called the 'great powers' (or their allies) as has been the case. Sovereign states should receive genuine assistance to tackle such groups on their own soil.

Nevertheless, David Cameron, Theresa May and Philip Hammond would do well to ponder on Cristina de Kirchner's speech and just where the heart of extremism really lies in today's world.

Provoking war abroad raises spectre of staged attacks at home.

This article, by Tony Cartalucci, was published on the Land Destroyer Report (landdestroyer.blogspot) on 18 September 2014. Appendix added: End the Sanctions on Syria video by SyrianGirlPartisan.

#8DEEEE;font-size:80%;line-height:120%;">The Australian mainstream media anticipates staged terrorist attacks by supposed Islamist extremists: Terror raids: Attack feared within days, Tony Abbott says, Australia's PM confirms threat to Parliament House, Editorial: Timely police raids on accused terrorists prevent horror on our streets – The Courier-Mail, Live blog: Senior Australian in Islamic State 'ordered kidnappings and beheadings in Sydney and Brisbane'- ABC News, Beheading plot: Where the terrorism raids occurred - ABC News, Authorities thwart beheading plot in Australia's biggest ever counter-terrorism raids - ABC News, Security to conduct train toilet searches as terror threat raised - Brisbane Times, Lone wolves: Small cells of radicals are Australia's greatest terror threat, experts say, Homegrown terrorism Australia's main national security concern says Julie Bishop - ABC 7.30 Report (5/8/14).

September 18, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci, aka Land Destroyer) - The FBI has foiled yet another entirely fabricated terror threat of its own creation, with missing mechanisms in two firearms provided to a potential terrorist being the only thing that prevented this latest case of entrapment from going "live." A Rochester man, Mufid A. Elfgeeh, is accused by the FBI of attempting to provide material support to ISIS (undercover FBI agents), attempting to kill US soldiers, and possession of firearms and silencers (provided to him by the FBI). The FBI's own official press release stated (emphasis added):

According to court records, Elfgeeh attempted to provide material support to ISIS in the form of personnel, namely three individuals, two of whom were cooperating with the FBI. Elfgeeh attempted to assist all three individuals in traveling to Syria to join and fight on behalf of ISIS. Elfgeeh also plotted to shoot and kill members of the United States military who had returned from Iraq. As part of the plan to kill soldiers, Elfgeeh purchased two handguns equipped with firearm silencers and ammunition from a confidential source. The handguns were made inoperable by the FBI before the confidential source gave them to Elfgeeh.

What is perhaps more chilling are the details of Elfgeeh's plans to kill US soldiers. The FBI's press release stated (emphasis added):

Court documents also indicate that Elfgeeh first discussed the idea of shooting United States military members in December 2013 when he told CS-2 that he was thinking about getting a gun and ammunition, putting on a bulletproof vest, and "just go[ing] around and start shooting." In February 2014, Elfgeeh told CS-2 that he needed a handgun and silencer. Elfgeeh later gave CS-2 $1,050 in cash to purchase two handguns equipped with silencers and ammunition. On May 31, 2014, CS-2 delivered the two handguns equipped with silencers and ammunition to Elfgeeh. After Elfgeeh took possession of the items, he was arrested by members of the Rochester Joint Terrorism Task Force. Elfgeeh is currently being held in custody.

Elfgeeh's plans are also - coincidentally - verbatim, the dream scenario of Washington's warmongers currently attempting to sell a war that will straddle both sides of the Syrian-Iraqi border, allow the US to provide terrorists operating in Syria with air support, and lead to punitive operations against the Syrian government for attacking US-backed terrorists with the final objective being long-sought after regime change in Damascus.

With serial beheadings failing to raise Western public support necessary for an expedient intervention in Syria, more insidious provocations appear to be in the works. Setting the stage, a CBS/Associated Press story titled, "Former Deputy CIA Director: ‘I Would Not Be Surprised' If ISIS Member Shows Up To US Mall Tomorrow With AK-47," would claim immediately after the initial James Foley execution video that:

"The short-term concern is the Americans that have gone to fight with ISIS and the west Europeans that have gone to fight with ISIS could be trained and directed by ISIS to come to the United States to conduct small-scale attacks," Morell stated. "If an ISIS member showed up at a mall in the United States tomorrow with an AK-47 and killed a number of Americans, I would not be surprised."

Morell warned that over the long-term the extremist group could be planning for a 9/11-style attack that killed thousands of Americans.

Elfgeeh's entrapment is only the beginning. Staged "terror raids" in Australia are also ratcheting up hysteria ahead of an actual event of mass murder carried out on Western soil. The BBC would report in their article, "Australia raids over 'Islamic State plot to behead'," that:

Police have carried out anti-terror raids in Sydney sparked by intelligence reports that Islamic extremists were planning random killings in Australia.

PM Tony Abbott said a senior Australian Islamic State militant had called for "demonstration killings", reportedly including a public beheading.

The raids, with at least 800 heavily-armed officers, led to 15 arrests.

Image: Australian security forces swept the city of Sydney arresting suspects of an alleged plot by ISIS to behead a random member of the public and then drape an ISIS flag upon their body in an attack that would only stand to serve Western ambitions to expand war on both sides of the Syrian-Iraqi border. The plot is cartoonish in nature, but Westerners should not underestimate what lengths special interests will go through to provoke war.

The cartoonish nature of the plot - beheading a random member of the public before draping an ISIS flag over their body - is meant to provoke maximum fear and anger first, then maximum support for Australia's continued involvement in Wall Street and London's hegemonic ambitions in the Middle East. Likewise, the Rochester arrest made by the FBI amid their own terror plot, serves only to incite fear across the public and irrational support for intervention in Syria that will, in fact, lead to further support of extremists as well as the destruction of the only institution in the region truly fighting terrorism - the Syrian Arab Army.

A Functioning Firing Pin Away From a Staged Mass Shooting

The FBI has a long list of foiled terror plots of its own creation. More disturbingly are the plots they conceived but "accidentally" allowed to go "live." One might recall the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. FBI agents, according to the New York Times, were indeed overseeing the bombers that detonated a device killing six and wounding many more at the World Trade Center.

In their article, "Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast," NYT reported:

Law-enforcement officials were told that terrorists were building a bomb that was eventually used to blow up the World Trade Center, and they planned to thwart the plotters by secretly substituting harmless powder for the explosives, an informer said after the blast.

The informer was to have helped the plotters build the bomb and supply the fake powder, but the plan was called off by an F.B.I. supervisor who had other ideas about how the informer, Emad A. Salem, should be used, the informer said.

The account, which is given in the transcript of hundreds of hours of tape recordings Mr. Salem secretly made of his talks with law-enforcement agents, portrays the authorities as in a far better position than previously known to foil the Feb. 26 bombing of New York City's tallest towers. The explosion left six people dead, more than 1,000 injured and damages in excess of half a billion dollars.

Considering the 1993 bombing and the fact that the FBI literally oversaw the construction and deployment of a deadly bomb that killed 6, it is clear that the FBI can at any time through design or disastrous incompetence, turn one of their contrived entrapment cases into a live terror attack. One can only guess at how many similar FBI operations are currently taking place within the United States involving ISIS sympathizers - any one of which could be turned into a live terror attack provided the weapons handed over to potential terrorists are functioning, just as the bomb was in 1993 when it was driven into the lower levels of the World Trade Center.

Image: The FBI has an impressive portfolio of intentionally created, then foiled terror plots. Its methods include allowing suspects to handle both real and inoperable weapons and explosives. These methods allow the FBI to switch entrapment cases "live" at any moment simply by switching out duds and arrests with real explosives and successful attacks. Because the FBI uses "informants," when attacks go live, these confidential assets can be blamed, obfuscating the FBI's involvement

Everything from a mass shooting to a bombing, and even an Operation Northwoods-style false flag attack involving aircraft could be employed to provide Wall Street and London with the support it needs to accelerate its long-stalled agenda of regime change and reordering in both Syria and across the Iranian arc of influence. Readers may recall Operation Northwoods, reported on in an ABC News article titled, "U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba," which bluntly stated:

In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

That the FBI and Australian authorities are coordinating staged security operations in tandem on opposite ends of the globe to terrify their respective populations into line behind an impending war with Syria suggests a new "Operation Northwoods" of sorts is already being executed. Staged executions on cue by ISIS in the Middle East of US and British citizens at perfectly timed junctures of the West's attempt to sell intervention both at home and abroad also reek of staged mayhem for the sole purpose of provoking war. Could grander and ultimately more tragic mayhem be in store? As ABC News' article on Operation Northwoods suggests, there is no line Western special interests will hesitate to cross.

With the West attempting to claim ISIS now has a "global" reach, the US and its partners' attempts to obfuscate the very obvious state-sponsorship it is receiving will become exponentially more difficult. That the FBI is admittedly stringing along easily manipulated, malevolent patsies who at any time could be handed real weapons and sent on shooting sprees and/or bombings, Americans, Europeans, and Australians would be foolish to conclude that their real enemy resides somewhere in Syria and not right beside them at home, upon the very seats of Western power.

#EndSanctions">Appendix: End the Sanctions on Syria by SyrianGirlPartisan

US intelligence source claims Ukraine part of NATO secret campaign Gladio; Former U.S. Senator and likely 2016 Presidential candidate Jesse Ventura calls for psychopathy tests for political leaders to ensure that they are not of the 4% of the population who are incapable of feeling empathy for other people. A mainstream host storms out the studio after being confronted with the evidence from Jesse Ventura that his haloed political leaders including President Barak Obama are complicit in false flag attacks. Seek truth from facts with Questioning the War on Terror author Kevin Barrett, StopImperialism.org's Eric Draitser, James Corbett of The Corbett Report, and possible 2016 presidential candidate Jesse Ventura.

While mainstream press is only reporting that Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, blocked twitter, the reason he did so goes unreported. Yet that is the most interesting and shocking thing: A leaked conversation between Turkey's intelligence chief and the war room reveals plot to create a casus belli for war with Syria by using ISIL, an alQaeda offshoot, to threaten a turkish shrine Suleiman Shah Tomb. Turkey has blocked youtube in order to cover up the leaks. Turkish Foreign Ministry confirmed the recording of planning for a military incursion into Syria adding that a 'network of treason' was responsible for leak. Part two of the leaked conversation implicates John Kerry US secretary of state in the plot.[1] Retitled from original title which was, " EXPOSED: John Kerry, Turkish PM and Co implicated in Turkey False Flag Using AlQaeda To Start War With Syria".

Transcript with Audio

The leaked recording of a press conference between Foreign Affairs Minister Ahmet Davuto?lu, Turkish intelligence agency’s undersecretary Hakan Fidan, and the Chief of the Turkish General Staff Necdet Özel.Ahmet Davuto?lu suggests that the Turkish Army must enter Syria on the pretext of protecting the tomb of Suleyman Shah, the godfather of the Ottoman Sultanate. He suggests that he can send 2-3 agents and blow up the tomb of Suleiman Shah then claim it was an attack by ISIL. They would then have justifiable reasons to convince their allies they must enter Syria to protect what is commonly considered as Turkish heritage.

Interestingly the leaked recordings do not include any discussions concerning the up-coming elections or the Turkish opposition. 

Some damning excerpts from part one:

Ahmet Davuto?lu: “Prime Minister said that in current conjuncture, this attack (on Suleiman Shah Tomb) must be seen as an opportunity for us.”

Hakan Fidan: “I’ll send 4 men from Syria, if that’s what it takes. I’ll make up a cause of war by ordering a missile attack on Turkey; we can also prepare an attack on Suleiman Shah Tomb if necessary.”

Feridun Sinirlio?lu: That’s what I told back there. For one thing, the situation is different. An operation on ISIL has solid ground on international law. We’re going to portray this as Al-Qaeda, there’s no distress there if it’s a matter regarding Al-Qaeda. And if it comes to defending Suleiman Shah Tomb, that’s a matter of protecting our land.

Feridun Siniro?lu:  That ISIL and all that jazz, all those organizations are extremely open to manipulation.

Damning excerpts from part two:

Yasar Guler: Those Turkish Special Forces are waiting over there for a year! It is not like we plan all this just yesterday, They have been waiting for a year.

Ahmet Davutoglu : Kerry told me exactly this: DID YOU MAKE UP YOUR MINDS?

Yasar Guler : Yes we made up our minds 100 times with USA

Feridun Sinirlioglu: 3 days ago Americans came to the military headquarters and they had a crisis coordination meeting. This is the first time I hear of this

Translation of first tape

In the leaked tape,

• Foreign Minister Ahmet Davudo?lu
• Head of Turkish Intelligence MIT Hakan Fidan
• Undersecretary of Foreign Ministry Feridun Sinirlio?lu
• General Ya?ar Güler

search for a reason (and wants to create one if the search is not fruitful) to declare war against Syria. The leakage has two parts, the latter is yet to be translated to English. Here is the first part.

Ba?çalan?n Seçim Güdümlü Sava? Plan? 1-1

ELECTION DRIVEN WAR PLANS – I PART 1 Ahmet Davuto?lu: “Prime Minister said that in current conjuncture, this attack (on Suleiman Shah Tomb) must be seen as an opportunity for us.”

Hakan Fidan: “I’ll send 4 men from Syria, if that’s what it takes. I’ll make up a cause of war by ordering a missile attack on Turkey; we can also prepare an attack on Suleiman Shah Tomb if necessary.”

Feridun Sinirlio?lu: “Our national security has become a common, cheap domestic policy outfit.”

Ya?ar Güler: “It’s a direct cause of war. I mean, what’re going to do is a direct cause of war.”

FIRST SCREEN:

Ahmet Davuto?lu: I couldn’t entirely understand the other thing; what exactly does our foreign ministry supposed to do? No, I’m not talking about the thing. There are other things we’re supposed to do. If we decide on this, we are to notify the United Nations, the Istanbul Consulate of the Syrian regime, right?

Feridun Sinirlio?lu: But if we decide on an operation in there, it should create a shocking effect. I mean, if we are going to do so. I don’t know what we’re going to do, but regardless of what we decide, I don’t think it’d be appropriate to notify anyone beforehand.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: OK, but we’re gonna have to prepare somehow. To avoid any shorts on regarding international law. I just realized when I was talking to the president (Abdullah Gül), if the Turkish tanks go in there, it means we’re in there in any case, right?

Ya?ar Güler: It means we’re in, yes.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: Yeah, but there’s a difference between going in with aircraft and going in with tanks…

SECOND SCREEN:

Ya?ar Güler: Maybe we can tell the Syrian consulate general that, ISIL is currently working alongside the regime, and that place is Turkish land. We should definitely…

Ahmet Davuto?lu: But we have already said that, sent them several diplomatic notes.

Ya?ar Güler: To Syria…

Feridun Sinirlio?lu: That’s right.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: Yes, we’ve sent them countless times. Therefore, I’d like to know what our Chief of Staff’s expectations from our ministry.

Ya?ar Güler: Maybe his intent was to say that, I don’t really know, he met with Mr. Fidan.

Hakan Fidan: Well, he did mention that part but we didn’t go into any further details.

Ya?ar Güler: Maybe that was what he meant… A diplomatic note to Syria?

Hakan Fidan: Maybe the Foreign Ministry is assigned with coordination…

THIRD SCREEN:

Ahmet Davuto?lu: I mean, I could coordinate the diplomacy but civil war, the military…

Feridun Sinirlio?lu: That’s what I told back there. For one thing, the situation is different. An operation on ISIL has solid ground on international law. We’re going to portray this is Al-Qaeda, there’s no distress there if it’s a matter regarding Al-Qaeda. And if it comes to defending Suleiman Shah Tomb, that’s a matter of protecting our land.

Ya?ar Güler: We don’t have any problems with that.

Hakan Fidan: Second after it happens, it’ll cause a great internal commotion (several bombing events is bound to happen within). The border is not under control…

Feridun Sinirlio?lu: I mean, yes, the bombings are of course going to happen. But I remember our talk from 3 years ago…

Ya?ar Güler: Mr. Fidan should urgently receive back-up and we need to help him supply guns and ammo to rebels. We need to speak with the minister. Our Interior Minister, our Defense Minister. We need to talk about this and reach a resolution sir.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: How did we get specials forces into action when there was a threat in Northern Iraq? We should have done so in there, too. We should have trained those men. We should have sent men. Anyway, we can’t do that, we can only do what diplomacy…

Feridun Sinirlio?lu: I told you back then, for God’s sake, general, you know how we managed to get those tanks in, you were there.

Ya?ar Güler: What, you mean our stuff?

Feridun Sinirlio?lu: Yes, how do you think we’ve managed to rally our tanks into Iraq? How? How did manage to get special forces, the battalions in? I was involved in that. Let me be clear, there was no government decision on that, we have managed that just with a single order.

FOURTH SCREEN:

Ya?ar Güler: Well, I agree with you. For one thing, we’re not even discussing that. But there are different things that Syria can do right now.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: General, the reason we’re saying no this operation is because we know about the capacity of those men.

Ya?ar Güler: Look, sir, isn’t MKE (Mechanical and Chemical Industry Corporation) at minister’s bidding? Sir, I mean, Qatar is looking for ammo to buy in cash. Ready cash. So, why don’t they just get it done? It’s at Mr. Minister’s command.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: But there’s the spot we can’t act integratedly, we can’t coordinate.

Ya?ar Güler: Then, our Prime Minister can summon both Mr. Defence Minister and Mr. Minister at the same time. Then he can directly talk to them.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: We, Mr. Siniro?lu and I, have literally begged Mr. Prime Minster for a private meeting, we said that things were not looking so bright.

FIFTH SCREEN:

Ya?ar Güler: Also, it doesn’t have to be crowded meeting. Yourself, Mr. Defence Minister, Mr. Interior Minister and our Chief of Staff, the four of you are enough. There’s no need for a crowd. Because, sir, the main need there is guns and ammo. Not even guns, mainly ammo. We’ve just talked about this, sir. Let’s say we’re building an army down there, 1000 strong. If we get them into that war without previously storing a minimum of 6-months’ worth of ammo, these men will return to us after two months.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: They’re back already.

Ya?ar Güler: They’ll return to us, sir.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: They’ve came back from… What was it? Çobanbey.

Ya?ar Güler: Yes, indeed, sir. This matter can’t be just a burden on Mr. Fidan’s shoulders as it is now. It’s unacceptable. I mean, we can’t understand this. Why?

SIXTH SCREEN:

Ahmet Davuto?lu: That evening we’d reached a resolution. And I thought that things were taking a turn for the good. Our…

Feridun Sinirlio?lu: We issued the MGK (National Security Council) resolution the day after. Then we talked with the general…

Ahmet Davuto?lu: And the other forces really do a good follow up on this weakness of ours. You say that you’re going to capture this place, and that men being there constitutes a risk factor. You pull them back. You capture the place. You reinforce it and send in your troops again.

Ya?ar Güler: Exactly, sir. You’re absolutely right.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: Right? That’s how I interpret it. But after the evacuation, this is not a military necessity. It’s a whole other thing.

SEVENTH SCREEN

Feridun Siniro?lu: There are some serious shifts in global and regional geopolitics. It now can spread to other places. You said it yourself today, and others agreed… We’re headed to a different game now. We should be able to see those. That ISIL and all that jazz, all those organizations are extremely open to manipulation. Having a region made up of organizations of similar nature will constitute a vital security risk for us. And when we first went into Northern Iraq, there was always the risk of PKK blowing up the place. If we thoroughly consider the risks and substantiate… As the general just said…

Ya?ar Güler: Sir, when you were inside a moment ago, we were discussing just that. Openly. I mean, armed forces are a “tool” necessary for you in every turn.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: Of course. I always tell the Prime Minister, in your absence, the same thing in academic jargon, you can’t stay in those lands without hard power. Without hard power, there can be no soft power.

EIGTH SCREEN

Ya?ar Güler: Sir.

Feridun Sinirlio?lu: The national security has been politicized. I don’t remember anything like this in Turkish political history. It has become a matter of domestic policy. All talks we’ve done on defending our lands, our border security, our sovereign lands in there, they’ve all become a common, cheap domestic policy outfit.

Ya?ar Güler: Exactly.

Feridun Siniro?lu: That has never happened before. Unfortunately but…

Ya?ar Güler: I mean, do even one of the opposition parties support you in such a high point of national security? Sir, is this a justifiable sense of national security?

Feridun Sinirlio?lu: I don’t even remember such a period.

NINTH SCREEN:

Ya?ar Güler: In what matter can we be unified, if not a matter of national security of such importance? None.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: The year 2012, we didn’t do it 2011. If only we’d took serious action back then, even in the summer of 2012.

Feridun Sinirlio?lu: They were at their lowest back in 2012.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: Internally, they were just like Libya. Who comes in and goes from power is not of any importance to us. But some things…

Ya?ar Güler: Sir, to avoid any confusion, our need in 2011 was guns and ammo. In 2012, 2013 and today also. We’re in the exact same point. We absolutely need to find this and secure that place.

Ahmet Davuto?lu: Guns and ammo are not a big need for that place. Because we couldn’t get the human factor in order…

Part 2 of audio (incomplete thus far)

#F5EFFB;line-height:120%;">People all over the world have been shocked to discover that Mother Agnes Mariam, heroine to many women and men all over the world and peace activist on the ground in Syria, withdrew from speaking at a UK peace conference because two British supposedly 'left-wing' male speakers and journalists - Jeremy Scahill and Owen Jones - threatened to withdraw from speaking if she spoke. Neither speaker has given any substantive explanation for their objections to Mother Agnes, but it seems that both have succumbed to propaganda that the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad is brutal and that Agnes Mariam supports the government. This treatment of Mother Agnes Mariam is tragically bizarre, when she has eclipsed professional peace negotiators in so many spheres at once: In her physical bravery in rescuing thousands of people in the war-torn region; as a nun-pacifist woman-leader in the male-dominated politics of church and war; and as a local peace-activist in an internationalised field of jihadists. The article below seeks to highlight just some of these injustices. See links at the end of this article, under "Notes," including a filmed interview with Mother Agnes Mariam done by Susan Dirgham of AMRIS in Australia July 2013.

A few weeks ago, following months of siege in a suburb of Damascus, over 5000 civilians were helped to safety during a ceasefire negotiated by Mother Agnes Mariam of the Cross. This suburb of Moadamiya al Sham was one of several around Damascus held by armed rebel groups and foreign jihadists, with the residents trapped there and facing serious food and supply shortages.

Whether these residents were supportive of the 'revolution' - or insurgency - or not, it was in the rebel groups interests to hold them there as 'human shields'; negotiating their release. Movement to the safety of government shelters in Damascus was therefore fraught with difficulties and dangers.

Mother Agnes risked life and got 5,400 people released from rebel capture

A 'negotiating team' was assembled to go into the heart of rebel territory, led by Mother Agnes - not just figuratively. She went ahead with a white flag, risking her life and faith that a sniper would not put an end to this humanitarian mission. Joined by the rest of the team she then came to a reconciliation and agreement with rebel leaders on the release of some 5,400 people, mostly women and children.

While this was a great success, perhaps more significant was the voluntary surrender of over 500 'rebel fighters', who had clearly been impressed by her entreaties to give up the fight and return to 'fight for Syria', accepting the Government's offer of amnesty.

In her report on the 'rescue of Moadamiya' she emphasises that the Government for its part kept to its word, and faith - that those men who genuinely surrender will not be punished or ill-treated.
/?q=node/3527

Syria inspired

It is as though the spirit of reconciliation and peace embodied in Jesus' preachings and actions 2000 years earlier in this land is being reborn, and it is happening through the agency of people of such genuine good will and faith as Mother Agnes. Such a spirit is infectious, and others are inspired to forgive and to reconcile and to trust; this is the spirit now which can heal Syria's dreadful wounds.

Treacherous foreign powers

The spirit that could heal those wounds .... were it not for the treachery and ill-intent of foreign powers who have already invested so much in destabilising Syrian society and destroying its wealth and infrastructure with their proxy armies of fanatics and mercenaries. The regaining of control by the Syrian government threatens the whole project for regional influence and control that is the driving force behind 'the West's' behaviour over Syria. It is increasingly clear that the West has lost the battle, in the absence of military intervention.

What should the 'Western powers' do?

So what should 'We' do? How can the West stop the truth of the last two and a half years emerging? The truth behind the many 'massacres' confected to excuse Western intervention? The truth of Syrians fleeing from rebel 'liberated' areas? ("Liberated from their inhabitants," as Mother Agnes points out.) The truth of the 'Chemical Weapons attack' on Ghouta that nearly brought about a regional war, despite not a single proven victim? ( The OPCW team did no autopsies.)

Perhaps those responsible for the recent denigration of Mother Agnes Mariam were inspired by biblical history, realising that a 'betrayal' from those who would be her supporters could deliver a mortal blow. And so it came to pass that contributors to the Stop the War Peace Conference in the UK refused to share a platform with this true peacemaker.

Have we learned anything in two thousand years?

NOTES

Related material:

Richard Edmondson, "‘Investigative Journalist’ Scahill Takes Swipe at Mother Agnes" of 17 Nov 2013.

Neil Clark, Mother Agnes and the ‘liberal’ hawks out to silence her of 20 Nov 2013.

Candobetter.net's Mother Agnes Mariam pages.

Mother Agnes Mariam's letter withdrawing from the Stop the War conference (pdf, 66K).

Internet Site of the UK Stop the War Conference.

#E0F8F7;line-height:120%;">August 21st 2013 may go down as the day of 'the Schism' - between the narrative of 'Western' culture as it promotes itself, and the reality for those across the Gulf. Ironically this is both a physical gulf, known both as 'The Persian gulf' by the countries aligned with 'Persia', and as 'The Arabian gulf' by the Arab gulf nations bordering it on the south, and a psychological and cultural gulf.

What happened on August 21st in Damascus was of course NOT a Sarin attack in East Ghouta which killed hundreds or thousands of civilians and children; we have little evidence that any of these assertions are true - that Sarin was used in E. Ghouta, that people died from it there or elsewhere. We have evidence only that some people tested in the area a few days later had been exposed to some form of Sarin. Because these 'victims' were provided by one of the parties in the armed conflict we cannot say where or how they were exposed.

At the same time we have some significant evidence that a different and far more serious crime was committed around this time, by some element of the opposition armed groups. In the many videos released after the alleged attack purporting to show its consequences, and on which the whole series of events of the last month has been based, it appears that some children pictured had been abducted from villages near Lattakia following brutal massacres by Al Nusra groups a few weeks earlier. (1)

Because the armed opposition groups had been struggling to hold ground against the Syrian army recently, and particularly following the stategic recapture of Al Qusair on the Lebanese border, it was clearly in the interests of these groups to stage the 'Chemical Weapons attack' to bring in the foreign assistance they needed. It was also in the interests of certain Western powers seeking to extend their influence in Syria to conspire with these rebel groups to provide a pretext for an 'intervention'.

Since very early in the Syrian conflict, and in fact since the start, 'false flag' massacres and attacks have been staged and used to raise Western voices against the Syrian government. So successful was this campaign, which essentially has brainwashed the mainstream Western audience into a completely false narrative, that Opposition forces were able to stage a 'Sarin Attack' in circumstances which made it almost impossible to believe that the Syrian government would be responsible. Even solid supporters of the Western imperial campaign were forced to concede this point, but finally succumbed to the continuing and unyielding accusations of US and NATO leaders. Vladimir Putin famously called the suggestion that President Assad would use Sarin under these circumstances "Utter Nonsense", but we are told that most of what Putin says cannot be trusted.

Now as time goes on, and we have a 'historic agreement' at the Security Council to secure Syria's chemical weapons, the Gulf has become too wide to cross; we have been brought to the brink of a regional war, and saved from it by Russia, all based on a fabricated narrative about Syria using chemical weapons. Those who believe this lie can see no problem in the events of the last month, while those who know it is a lie can see that all the Western leaders are liars and criminals pusuing Western self interest.

There is no intermediate position possible in this 'schism' of two worlds; for those on the side of 'the Resistance' we can trust nothing and noone from the West and its allies - anything is possible. Whereas for them it is simply a question of who knows it is a lie, and who just believes it.

This is just a start....

NOTES

(1) http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-ghouta-chemical-attacks-us-backed-false-flag-killing-children-to-justify-a-humanitarian-military-intervention/5351363

This article was originally published on 2013-09-29 23:25:48 +1000 but placed on the front page on 31/10/2013 at 12:15 am by Candobetter editors.

#FFFFFF;">President John F. Kennedy, Arabist and renowned for his support for Algerian Independence struggle

#FFFFFF;">President Johnson, who colluded with Israel in its unsuccessful attempt to sink the USS Liberty and blame Egypt

Kennedy, the lobby and the bomb

Exactly fifty years ago a crucial episode took place in the history of "U.S. democracy"; an epic struggle whose outcome would influence the future of the entire world. Laurent Guyénot revisits those events and recalls what was at stake at that critical historical juncture.

Kennedy and the AIPAC

In May 1963, the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations opened an investigation into the covert activities of foreign agents on U.S. soil, focusing in particular on the American Zionist Council and the Jewish Agency for Israel. _{#fnSubj1" id="txtSubj1">1} The investigation was prompted by a report from the Chairman of that standing Committee, Senator J. William Fulbright, written in March 1961 (declassified in 2010), stating: "In recent years there has been an increasing number of incidents involving attempts by foreign governments, or their agents, to influence the conduct of American foreign policy by techniques outside normal diplomatic channels." By covert activities, including "within the United States and elsewhere," Fulbright was referring to the 1953 "Lavon Affair" _{#fnSubj2" id="txtSubj2">2} , where a group of Egyptian Jews was recruited by Israel to carry out bomb attacks against British targets, which were to be blamed on the Muslim Brotherhood so as to discredit Nasser in the eyes of the British and Americans.

The Senate investigation brought to light a money laundering racket through which the Jewish Agency (indivisible from the State of Israel and a precursor to the Israeli Government) was channeling tens of millions of dollars to the American Zionist Council, the main Israeli lobby in the United States. Following this investigation, the Department of Justice, under the authority of Attorney General Robert Kennedy, ordered the American Zionist Council to register as "agents of a foreign government," subject to the requirements of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, involving the close monitoring of its activities.

This attempt to counter Israel's growing interference in U.S. politics undoubtedly enjoyed the support of the President. At the time when he was still a young journalist covering the United Nations inaugural conference, John Kennedy was troubled by Israel's ability to buy politicians, up to and including the President himself. By recognizing the State of Israel on May 15, 1948, (just ten minutes after its official proclamation) despite the unanimous disapproval of his government, President Harry Truman not only gained a place in biblical history ("Truman's historic act of recognition will remain forever inscribed in golden letters in the 4000-year history of the Jewish people", declared the Israeli ambassador), he also pocketed two million dollars to revitalize his re-election campaign. "That's why our recognition of Israel was rushed through so fast," Kennedy told his friend novelist and essayist Gore Vidal _{#fnSubj3" id="txtSubj3">3}

In 1960, John Kennedy himself received a financial aid offer from the Israeli lobby for his presidential campaign. He decoded Abraham Feinberg's proposal for his journalist friend Charles Bartlett in the following terms: "We know your campaign is in trouble. We're willing to pay your bills if you'll let us have control of your Middle East policy." Bartlett recalls Kennedy's promise that "if he ever did get to be President, he was going to do something about it _{#fnSubj4" id="txtSubj4">4} Between 1962 and 1963, he submitted seven campaign finance reform bills but all were defeated by the influential groups they sought to restrain.

All government efforts to stymie the corruption of American democracy by Israeli agents were stopped short by Kennedy's assassination and his brother's replacement at the Department of Justice by Nicholas Katzenbach. The American Zionist Council evaded foreign agent status by dissolving and renaming itself American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Ten years later (April 15, 1973), Fulbright commented on CBS: "Israel controls the U.S. Senate. [...] The great majority of the Senate of the U.S. -- somewhere around 80 percent -- are completely in support of Israel; anything Israel wants Israel gets." AIPAC continued the same practices, dodging any sanction even when its members were caught red-handed in acts of espionage and high treason. In 2005, two AIPAC officials, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman, were acquitted after having received from a member of the Pentagon Office of Special Plans, Larry Franklin, documents classified as Secret-Defense which they transmitted to a senior Israeli official.

In 2007, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt demonstrated in their book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy that AIPAC and less prominent pro-Israel lobbies were the main cause of the war in Iraq and, more broadly, the determining factor in the foreign policy of the U.S. in the Middle East. Considering that nothing has changed, there is no reason to believe that the government of Benjamin Netanyahu will not also obtain from the United States the destruction of Iran that it consistently clamors for.

Kennedy, the bomb and Dimona

Had Kennedy lived, Israel's influence would most certainly have been curbed on yet another front, that of nuclear weapons. By the early 1950s, David Ben Gurion, who combined the functions of prime minister and defense minister, had engaged his country in the secret manufacturing of nuclear weapons, diverting the Atoms for Peace cooperation program, naively launched by Eisenhower, from its intended goals. Briefed by the CIA about the real purpose of the Dimona facility as soon as he moved into the White House, Kennedy put heavy pressure on the Israelis not to pursue it. He demanded that Ben Gurion open up Dimona for regular inspections, at first in person in New York in 1961, then through formal and increasingly insistent letters. In the last one, dated June 15, 1963, Kennedy urged that a first visit should take place immediately, followed by regular visits every six months, otherwise "This Government's commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized _{#fnSubj5" id="txtSubj5">5}." The reaction to this message was astonishing: Ben Gurion resigned on June 16, thus avoiding receipt of the letter. As soon as the new Prime Minister Levi Eshkol took office, Kennedy sent him a similar letter, dated July 5, 1963.

Kennedy's intention was not to deprive Israel of a power which was reserved to the United States and its NATO allies. The President's approach was part of a much more ambitious project, which he had announced on September 25, 1961, nine months after taking office, before the General Assembly of the United Nations: "Today, every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the day when this planet may no longer be inhabitable. Every man, woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut at any moment by accident or miscalculation or by madness. The weapons of war must be abolished before they abolish us. [...] It is therefore our intention to challenge the Soviet Union, not to an arms race, but to a peace race - to advance together step by step, stage by stage, until general and complete disarmament has been achieved _{#fnSubj6" id="txtSubj6">6}." The message was well received by Nikita Khrushchev, who responded favorably in a 26-page confidential letter dated September 29, 1961, delivered through secret channels. After the October 1962 Cuban missile crisis, the nuclear war that was narrowly avoided thanks to their composure brought the two heads of State even closer to the awareness of their shared responsibility to liberate humanity from the nuclear threat. Khrushchev sent Kennedy a second private letter in which he expressed the hope that at the end of Kennedy's eight years of presidency, "we could create good conditions for peaceful coexistence on earth and this would be highly appreciated by the peoples of our country as well as by all other peoples _{#fnSubj7" id="txtSubj7">7}." Despite other crises, Kennedy and Khrushchev continued this secret correspondence, now declassified, comprising a total of 21 letters in which the intention to abolish nuclear weapons was a prominent concern.

In 1963, negotiations led to the first limited test ban treaty prohibiting nuclear weapon tests in the atmosphere, outer space and underwater, which was signed on August 5, 1963, by the Soviet Union, the United States and the United Kingdom. Six weeks later, on September 20, 1963, Kennedy manifested his pride and hope before the United Nations: "Two years ago I told this body that the United States had proposed and was willing to sign a limited test ban treaty. Today that treaty has been signed. It will not put an end to war. It will not remove basic conflicts. It will not secure freedom for all. But it can be a lever, and Archimedes, in explaining the principles of the lever, was said to have declared to his friends: 'Give me a place where I can stand and I shall move the world.' My fellow inhabitants of this planet, let us take our stand here in this Assembly of nations. And let us see if, in our own time, we can move the world to a just and lasting peace _{#fnSubj8" id="txtSubj8">8}." In his last letter to Kennedy, handed to U.S. Ambassador Roy Kohler but which was never forwarded to the addressee, Khrushchev also took pride in this first historic treaty that "has injected a fresh spirit into the international atmosphere." He formulated other proposals, borrowing Kennedy's words: "Their implementation would clear the road to general and complete disarmament and, consequently, to the delivering of the peoples from the threat of war _{#fnSubj9" id="txtSubj9">9}."

In the sixties, nuclear disarmament was a realistic goal. Only four countries had a nuclear weapon. There was a historic opportunity to be seized, and Kennedy was determined not to pass it up. "I am haunted by the feeling that by 1970, unless we are successful, there may be ten nuclear powers instead of four, and by 1975, fifteen or twenty _{#fnSubj11" id="txtSubj11">11}," he uttered prophetically during his press conference of March 21, 1963. While all NATO member states and countries of the communist bloc were following the example of the USA and the USSR and taking a first step towards nuclear disarmament, Israel was acting secretly on its own, and Kennedy was determined to prevent it.

Kennedy's death a few months later eased the pressure on Israel. Johnson chose to turn a blind eye on the activities at Dimona. John McCone, the CIA director appointed by Kennedy, resigned in 1965, complaining of Johnson's lack of interest in the subject. Israel acquired its first bomb around 1967, without ever admitting it. Nixon was just as unconcerned as Johnson, while his National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger privately expressed his satisfaction at the idea of having friendly Israel as a nuclear ally. Nixon, who ushered the "deep state" into the White House so to speak, played a double game: at the same time as he publicly supported the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty (which was not a U.S. initiative), he sent a contradictory top-secret National Security Decision Memorandum (NSDM-6) saying: "There should be no efforts by the United States government to pressure other nations [...] to follow suit. The government, in its public posture, should reflect a tone of optimism that other countries will sign or ratify, while clearly disassociating from any plan to bring pressure on these countries to sign or ratify _{#fnSubj12" id="txtSubj12">12}."

According to 2011 figures from SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute), there are today across the world about 20,000 nuclear bombs with an average power 30 times that of Hiroshima, which equals 600,000 times Hiroshima. Of these, 1,800 nuclear warheads are on alert, i.e. ready to be launched in only a few minutes. With less than 8 million people, Israel is the world's sixth nuclear power.

#mordechaiVanunu" id="mordechaiVanunu">

Johnson and the USS Liberty [#fnSubj16" id="txtSubj16">16]

Kennedy would not be remembered in Tel Aviv as a friend of Israel. In addition to his attacks against the outrageous lobbying activities of Israel and its nuclear power ambitions, Kennedy defended the right of return of the 800,000 Palestinian refugees expelled from their neighborhoods and villages in 1947-48. On November 20, 1963, his delegation to the United Nations called for the implementation of Resolution 194 crafted for this purpose. Kennedy probably never got the chance to read Israel's hysterical reactions in the newspapers: two days later, he was dead. Johnson's rise to power was greeted with relief in Israel: "There is no doubt that, with the accession of Lyndon Johnson, we shall have more opportunity to approach the President directly if we should feel that U.S. policy militates against our vital interests," considered Israeli newspaper Yedio Ahoronot. Far from reproaching Israel for its ethnic cleansing, Johnson fully embraced the myth of "a land without people for a people without a land", even going so far as to compare in front of a Jewish audience, "Jewish pioneers building a house the desert" with his own ancestors colonizing the New World - which, in fact, unintentionally underscored the equivalence between Israel's denial of its ethnic cleansing of Palestine, and the denial by the Americans of their own genocide history.

While Kennedy had cut down aid to Israel, Johnson increased it from 40 million to 71 million and to 130 million the following year. While the Kennedy administration had authorized the sale of a limited number of defensive missile batteries to Israel, under Johnson more than 70% of the aid was earmarked for military equipment, including 250 tanks and 48 Sykhawk offensive aircraft. Military aid to Israel reached 92 million in 1966, more than the total of all previous years combined. Conversely, by denying them U.S. aid, Johnson forced Egypt and Algeria to turn to the Soviet Union to maintain and upgrade their defense systems. In June 1967, Johnson gave Israel a "yellow light" for its so-called "preventive" war against Egypt, by a letter dated 3 June, when he assured Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol of his determination to "protect the territorial integrity of Israel [...] and provide as effective American support as possible to preserve the peace and freedom of your nation and the area."

Kennedy's death deeply affected the Arab world, where his portrait graced many homes. "Now, De Gaulle is the only Western head of state on whose friendship the Arabs can rely," said Gamal Abdul Nasser. While reducing aid to Israel, Kennedy had generously provided grain to Egypt as part of the Food for Peace program. For that country, the short-lived presidency of John F. Kennedy will have been an enchanted interlude, a dream shattered all too soon. In 1954, under Eisenhower, Egypt had been the target of false flag terrorist acts perpetrated by Israel in order to "break the West's confidence in the existing Egyptian regime [and] to prevent economic and military aim from the West to Egypt _{#fnSubj14" id="txtSubj14">14}," according to the very words of the head of military Intelligence (Aman) Benjamin Givli in a secret, today declassified, telegram. The accidental ignition of an explosive device led to the exposure of the conspiracy, sparking the scandal which became known as the "Lavon Affair" after defense minister Pinhas Lavon, a scandal which was quickly stifled by Israel and the United States. Prime Minister Moshe Sharett, who advocated a moderate brand of Zionism, respectful of international rules, acknowledged at that time (but only in private) the irresistible rise of extremists, among which he included future President Shimon Peres, who "wants to frighten the West into supporting Israel's aims"and that "raises terrorism to the level of a sacred principle _{#fnSubj15" id="txtSubj15">15}."

Kennedy's death gave free rein to this Machiavellian terrorism which Israel has developed into an art form. Two days before the end of the Six Day War, the Israeli army launched against the USS Liberty the most famous and disastrous of its false flag attacks. On the sunny day of June 8, 1967, three unmarked Mirage bombers and three torpedo boats flying an Israeli flag bombed, strafed and torpedoed for 75 minutes this NSA (National Security Agency) ship -unarmed, floating in international waters and easily recognizable - with the obvious intention of leaving no survivors, machine-gunning even the lifeboats. They only stopped at the approach of a Soviet ship, after killing 34 crew members, mostly engineers, technicians and translators. It is assumed that if they had succeeded in sinking the ship without witnesses, the Israelis would have attributed the crime to Egypt, so as to drag the United States into war on the side of Israel.

According to Peter Hounam, author of Operation Cyanide: Why the Bombing of the USS Liberty Nearly Caused World War III (2003), the attack on the Liberty was secretly authorized by the White House as part of the project labeled Frontlet 615, "a secret political arrangement in 1966 by which Israel and the U.S. had vowed to destroy (Egypt's Gamal Abdel Nasser)." The orders issued by the White House that day, which delayed the rescue mission by several hours, suggest that Johnson not only covered up the Israelis post-facto, but also conspired with them. Oliver Kirby, the NSA Director for Operations at the time, reported to journalist John Crewdson of the Chicago Tribune (October 2, 2007) that the communications transcripts from the Israeli planes intercepted by the NSA and sent to Washington immediately, left no doubt as to the identity of the attackers, and about the fact that they were aware it was a U.S. target before the attack: "I'm willing to swear on a stack of Bibles that we knew they knew [that it was a U.S. ship]." Unmasked, Israel claimed it was a case of mistaken identity and offered its apology, which Lyndon Johnson meekly accepted on the grounds that "I will not embarrass our ally." When, in January 1968, Johnson received Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol to Washington and then invited him to his Texas ranch, relations were cozy.

Israel will have drawn a lesson of impunity whose influence on its future behavior should not be underestimated: the price for failure in a false-flag operation against the United States is zero. In fact, failure is impossible, since the Americans will themselves step in to cover up Israel's crimes. Better yet, Johnson rewarded Israel by lifting any restriction on military equipment: weapons and U.S. aircraft immediately flocked to Tel Aviv, soon turning Israel into the top customer of the U.S. military industry.