Mark Stapleton
-
Posts
1,846 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Mark Stapleton
-
-
. Maybe this will shake followers of evangelical Christianity out of their slumber:
Mark, I somehow doubt it, these crazies believe they are going to be "raptured away"to sit at Gods right hand throughout the Earthly tribulations. What is truely terrifying is that many in this nut-job neo-con administration, Bush included, believe in essentially the same thing. Makes the Regan admin seem tame by comparison.
Hi Steve,
Abolish religion and most of the world's problems go away.
-
The decriminalisation of drugs is certainly a controversial topic. I have believed for a long time that the 'war on drugs' is a sham designed to line the pockets of parasites within society. Decriminalising drugs puts the drug lords out of business--immediately. It also benefits society in many ways. It doesn't make it a perfect society, just a better society, imo. The following is an article by Norm Stamper, former Seattle police chief and now a board member of LEAP (law enforcement against prohibition):
http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/39565/
Any thoughts are appreciated.
-
San Antonio televangelist Pastor John Hagee wants the US to preemptively strike Iran in order to fulfil a biblical prophesy. A European antichrist has to be included. Enter the EU. Maybe this will shake followers of evangelical Christianity out of their slumber:
-
It's a bit strange how Castro has managed to stay on top for so long. His popularity with his people might be the crucial factor. Also, the fact that more than half his reign encompassed the cold war period, with America more interested in building weapons superiority rather than direct confrontation with the USSR through invasion of its close ally. However, there's been a lot of wealthy people waiting for a long time to get back in, so maybe Castro does hold an Ace.
-
Sid,
Your overplaying the whole Israel thing. She does not support war-period.
The confrontation with Rumsfeld over 9/11 and Dyncorp http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eootfzAhAoU...nney%20rumsfeld .
I agree that the mass media had it in for McKinney. Two such examples of selective media coverage, The possibility of Rove being indicted and the Jack Abramoff scandal were raging, yet the media decided to go with the McKinney story. The media also ran with a reporter following McKinney up the steps of the capitol asking her questions, rather than covering the fact that supporters of Tom Delay disrupted a press conference in Texas that very same day. Footage of the Delay matter was broadcast on tv in Houston, so why not nationally? Because they are told what to cover and what not to cover.
People seem to keep bringing up Israel and McKinney, only because McKinney is a voice for minorities in Congress, thus having support from the muslim community. People equate her relationships with muslim groups as anti=semitism, which is ridiculous as she has a significant mount of Jewish supporters.
John
John,
Cynthia McKinney sounds like a politician of substance. Of course its ridiculous to brand someone as anti-Semitic for merely questioning America's current Middle East policy. Anyone in America brave enough to question America's wholesale support for Israel's actions in Lebanon risks being branded as such, in these decidedly dodgy times.
I must confess that I was unaware of the media's attempt to smear McKinney until you brought it to our attention. It's disgraceful of course. Apparently the mainstream media is attempting to marginalise 'independent' thinkers in the Democratic Party in an attempt to mould that party into a pale reflection of the Republicans, thus giving the electorate no choice at all, really.
The question of America's Middle East policy is important and it's a debate Cynthia McKinney shouldn't shy away from (I'm not saying she does, btw). Sooner or later America must face this question. It may be just one of many progressive policies she advocates, but it's one of the most important, IMO.
You're getting a close-up look at 'democracy' in action
Thanks for your posts keeping us informed, btw. Maybe you should write a book about it all. -
What about the strange disappearance of Harold Holt on 17 December 1967? Was he having doubts about Australia's role in the Vietnam War.
It is clearly possible that the CIA was involved in removing Australian politicians from power in order to shape the country's foreign policy. Is this an issue in Australia? Has the CIA and the Murdoch media been involved in a long-term conspiracy to make sure that Australia slavishly followed US foreign policy.
I'm not certain but I think Holt drowned. The problem with a conspiracy scenario is that the conspirators would have had no certainty about who would succeed him. William McMahon was favored to win the subsequent leadership ballot but it was won by John Gorton, McMahon becoming PM three years later upon Gorton's resignation. Their policies differed, Gorton leaning more to the left.
The famous 'all the way with LBJ' tour of Australia in 1966 was organised by Holt and the US Ambassador. As for Holt having second thoughts about Vietnam, I don't know. I can't really see CIA complicity in Holt's death.
-
Jack Ruby a communist?
Seems unlikely. Mob connected since youth, suspected of drugs and gun smuggling, then a nightclub owner prone to violent outbursts, with his staff often the target. He never stated his advocacy of the working classes. He was never known for his anti-capitalist sentiments. He lived and operated in the middle of nut country, committing a string of offences with seeming impunity, due to his connections with the DPD and perhaps beyond. His general demeanor is erratic. He's a candidate for psychopath and psychotic. As for being a communist, the evidence seems to be thin.
-
I am surprised that our Australian members have not added to this thread. Is it an issue that is ever discussed today? It seems strange that you allow your governments to slavishly follow US foreign policy.
Yes, I agree with Evan's opinion of Gough (pronounced Goff). He was a great PM. The introduction of universal health care was his greatest legacy, IMO, although he also did great things for indigenous Australians with the introduction of the Aboriginal Land Council and the handing back of much Commonwealth land to its traditional custodians.
A few things impacted adversely on his time in office, IMO. After 23 years in opposition, most of the incoming ministers had never been in Government and had sat on opposition benches for many years. Few were media savvy and Gough's time in office was peppered with scandals involving ministers. The OPEC oil shocks of the early seventies also caused high inflation which was exacerbated by Gough's loose fiscal policy. Australia had seldom seen such free spending Governments and the media fanned the flames of an electorate which was soon suffering from reform fatigue. One particularly bitter media criticism concerned the Government's purchase of Jackson Pollock's painting 'Blue Poles' for the National Gallery for $1 million. Of course, it turned out to be the Gallery's shrewdest investment (now valued at about $100 million, I think).
The ACTU, led by future PM Bob Hawke, also did Gough no favors. The militant fringe of the union movement called many strikes in support of pay claims considered unreasonable by those in the non union sector. With the backdrop of high inflation, a credit squeeze largely blamed on the Crean budget of '73 which caused high interest rates, Government scandals and a media driven perception of Gough as haughty and imperious, the last thing he needed was an overly militant union movement. Ironically, one of Hawke's first actions on becoming PM in '83 was to introduce Government mandated national wage accords between unions and employer groups, which minimised the potential of union militancy doing the same thing to him.
A great PM, who dragged Australia across 20 years of much needed change in just three. As with many reformist Governments, he exceeded the electoral 'speed limit' and paid the price exacted by a very conservative electorate.
I've got no doubt your research on the CIA's involvement in Gough's sacking by the Governor-General is close to the mark. The Pine Gap issue really rankled our American allies.
-
Thompson makes a timeline for the day of September 11 only:
Great timeline, Michael. Thanks for posting that.
Venezuelan Government To Launch International 9/11 InvestigationAh, good old Chavez.
At last--an honest investigation.
-
Another 57 dead from the bombing of a building in Qana. Connie Rice told to get lost (she denies it of course). Israeli PM says Israel might need 'another ten to fourteen days' to achieve its aims. Nice going Israel, you murderous scum.
How about the 411 members of Congress who voted in favor of Israel's continuance of hostilities, against 8 against. So much for those who say Israel doesn't control the US Congress.
-
He's been pimping the Fox News series on Israeli spying in America for awhile now, which very prominently features the art student ring.
More odd sexual innuendo.
A week ago, I was accused of 'masturbation' on this forum. Whatever next? Paeodophilia?
The truth is that Len started this thread - not me.
He may very well prefer to confine debate to 'faux arts students in Florida' or some other distraction, but his intent was clear: to suggest that massive Israeli 'intelligence' penetration of American society is purely mythic. If he can also insinuate that the suggestion arises from malice alone, so much the better...
A confession. I have no real idea what the 200 Israeli spies were doing in the USA between 2000 and 2001. How could I? The authorities in the USA simply want to forget about the whole incident. Israeli ain't saying. The mass media is not following up.
In any case, this particular Israeli spook 'operation', while significant because there were so many arrests (it was by far the largest 'intelligence' bust on home soil in US history), is in the past.
More important, perhaps, to consider more current events.
In this context, I recommend a couple of recent articles by Christopher Bollyn, an investigative journalist who writes for American Free Press:
Israelis Hold Keys to NSA and U.S. Government Computers
_____________________________________-
A short quote from the former article:
The most critical computer and communication networks used by the U.S. government and military are secured by encryption software written by an Israeli "code breaker" tied to an Israeli state-run scientific institution.The National Security Agency (NSA), the U.S. intelligence agency with the mandate to protect government and military computer networks and provide secure communications for all branches of the U.S. government uses security software written by an Israeli code breaker whose home office is located at the Weizmann Institute in Israel.
Here's an extract from the latter:
Olmert, who has long been tarnished by allegations of financial crimes, was implicated in a financial scandal involving forged receipts for donations to the 1988 Likud campaign, of which he was co-treasurer. This affair culminated in the March 1996 conviction of three other Likudniks, including Menahem Atzmon, the Likud treasurer. Olmert was also later indicted in the Likud affair, but was acquitted.During the 1970s Olmert had worked in the law firm owned by another Atzmon, Uzi Atzmon.
Menahem Atzmon, convicted in Israel, went on to become the founder and head of International Consultants on Targeted Security (ICTS), the parent company of Huntleigh USA, the airport security firm that ran passenger screening operations at the airports of Boston and Newark on 9/11.
Huntleigh USA is a wholly owned subsidiary of an Israeli company called International Consultants on Targeted Security (ICTS) International N.V., a Netherlands-based aviation and transportation security firm headed by “former [israeli] military commanding officers and veterans of government intelligence and security agencies.”
Menachem Atzmon, convicted in Israel in 1996 for campaign finance fraud, and his business partner Ezra Harel, took over management of security at the Boston and Newark airports when their company ICTS bought Huntleigh USA in 1999. UAL Flight 175 and AA 11, which allegedly struck the twin towers, both originated in Boston, while UAL 93, which purportedly crashed in Pennsylvania, departed from the Newark airport. The convicted Israeli criminal Atzmon also controls and operates the German port of Rostock on the Baltic Sea.
Some 9/11 victims’ families brought lawsuits against Huntleigh claiming the security firm had been grossly negligent on 9-11. While these relatives have a right to discovery and to know what Huntleigh did or did not do to protect their loved ones on 9-11, Huntleigh, along with the other security companies, was granted complete congressional protection in 2002 and will not be called to account for its actions on 9-11 in any U.S. court.
Atzmon, a convicted criminal, political ally and co-defendant of Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert, was directly responsible for passenger and airline security at Boston's Logan Airport, whence the two airliners which struck the World Trade Center originated.
Bollyn recently began a weekly two-hour radio program - the archives are freely available HERE.
Bollyn's interview with international lawyer Francis Boyle (second half of second hour on July 28th) is especially recommended.
Sid,
I just listened to an hour of Bollyn's radio show from the archive link you posted. The interview with Professor Boyle was fascinating. It provides a great insight into the way the Israelis and their neocon buddies in Washington view the Middle East. Israel considers Palestinians to be a lower life form, unworthy of protection within the Geneva Convention provisions, which is why they sought to have them excluded.
The two articles by Bollyn were also interesting. Thanks again. It seems that America's defence and security is inextricably tied to Israel. Maybe its time for Israel to become the 51st state, or more accurately, for America to declare it is merely a colony, wholly controlled by Israel.
-
A powerful article by an American conservative from the era before US Republican Administrations became 100% 'neoconned'
The Shame of Being an American
By Paul Craig Roberts - July 21, 2006
Gentle reader, do you know that Israel is engaged in ethnic cleansing in southern Lebanon? Israel has ordered all the villagers to clear out. Israel then destroys their homes and murders the fleeing villagers. That way there is no one to come back and nothing to which to return, making it easier for Israel to grab the territory, just as Israel has been stealing Palestine from the Palestinians.
Do you know that one-third of the Lebanese civilians murdered by Israel’s attacks on civilian residential districts are children? That is the report from Jan Egeland, the emergency relief coordinator for the UN. He says it is impossible for help to reach the wounded and those buried in rubble, because Israeli air strikes have blown up all the bridges and roads. Considering how often (almost always) Israel misses Hizbollah targets and hits civilian ones, one might think that Israeli fire is being guided by US satellites and US military GPS. Don’t be surprised at US complicity. Why would the puppet be any less evil than the puppet master?
Of course, you don’t know these things, because the US print and TV media do not report them.
Because Bush is so proud of himself, you do know that he has blocked every effort to stop the Israeli slaughter of Lebanese civilians. Bush has told the UN "NO." Bush has told the European Community "NO." Bush has told the pro-American Lebanese prime minister "NO." Twice. Bush is very proud of his firmness. He is enjoying Israel’s rampage and wishes he could do the same thing in Iraq.
Does it make you a Proud American that "your" president gave Israel the green light to drop bombs on convoys of villagers fleeing from Israeli shelling, on residential neighborhoods in the capital of Beirut and throughout Lebanon, on hospitals, on power plants, on food production and storage, on ports, on civilian airports, on bridges, on roads, on every piece of infrastructure on which civilized life depends?
Are you a Proud American? Or are you an Israeli puppet?
On July 20, "your" House of Representatives voted 410-8 in favor of Israel’s massive war crimes in Lebanon. Not content with making every American complicit in war crimes, "your" House of Representatives, according to the Associated Press, also "condemns enemies of the Jewish state."
Who are the "enemies of the Jewish state"?
They are the Palestinians whose land has been stolen by the Jewish state, whose homes and olive groves have been destroyed by the Jewish state, whose children have been shot down in the streets by the Jewish state, whose women have been abused by the Jewish state. They are Palestinians who have been walled off into ghettos, who cannot reach their farm lands or medical care or schools, who cannot drive on roads through Palestine that have been constructed for Israelis only. They are Palestinians whose ancient towns have been invaded by militant Zionist "settlers" under the protection of the Israeli army who beat and persecute the Palestinians and drive them out of their towns. They are Palestinians who cannot allow their children outside their homes because they will be murdered by Israeli "settlers."
The Palestinians who confront Israeli evil are called "terrorists." When Bush forced free elections on Palestine, the people voted for Hamas. Hamas is the organization that has stood up to the Jewish state. This means, of course, that Hamas is evil, anti-Semitic, un-American and terrorist. The US and Israel responded by cutting off all funds to the new government. Democracy is permitted only if it produces the results Bush and Israel want.
Israelis never practice terror. Only those who are in Israel’s way are terrorists.
Another enemy of the Jewish state is Hizbollah. Hizbollah is a militia of Shia Muslims created in 1982 when Israel first invaded Lebanon. During this invasion the great moral Jewish state arranged for the murder of refugees in refugee camps. The result of Israel’s atrocities was Hizbollah, which fought the Israeli army, defeated it, and drove it, with its Satanic tail between its legs, out of Lebanon. Today Hizbollah not only defends southern Lebanon but also provides social services such as orphanages and medical care.
To cut to the chase, the enemies of the Jewish state are any Muslim country not ruled by an American puppet friendly to Israel. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the oil emirates have sided with Israel against their own kind, because they are dependent either on American money or on American protection from their own people. Sooner or later these totally corrupt governments that do not represent the people they rule will be overthrown. It is only a matter of time.
Indeed Bush and Israel may be hastening the process in their frantic effort to overthrow the governments of Syria and Iran. Both governments have more popular support than Bush has, but the White House Moron doesn’t know this. The Moron thinks Syria and Iran will be "cakewalks" like Iraq, where ten proud divisions of the US military are tied down by a few lightly armed insurgents.
If you are still a Proud American, consider that your pride is doing nothing good for Israel or for America.
On July 20 when "your" House of Representatives, following "your" US Senate, passed the resolution in support of Israel’s war crimes, the most powerful lobby in Washington, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), quickly got out a press release proclaiming "The American people overwhelming support Israel’s war on terrorism and understand that we must stand by our closest ally in this time of crisis."
The truth is that Israel created the crisis by invading a country with a pro-American government. The truth is that the American people do not support Israel’s war crimes, as the CNN quick poll results make clear and as was made clear by callers into C-Span.
Despite the Israeli spin on news provided by US "reporting," a majority of Americans do not approve of Israeli atrocities against Lebanese civilians. Hizbollah is located in southern Lebanon. If Israel is targeting Hizbollah, why are Israeli bombs falling on northern Lebanon? Why are they falling on Beirut? Why are they falling on civilian airports? On schools and hospitals?
Now we arrive at the main point. When the US Senate and House of Representatives pass resolutions in support of Israeli war crimes and condemn those who resist Israeli aggression, the Senate and House confirm Osama bin Laden’s propaganda that America stands with Israel against the Arab and Muslim world.
Indeed, Israel, which has one of the world’s largest per capita incomes, is the largest recipient of US foreign aid. Many believe that much of this "aid" comes back to AIPAC, which uses it to elect "our" representatives in Congress.
This perception is no favor to Israel, whose population is declining, as the smart ones have seen the writing on the wall and have been leaving. Israel is surrounded by hundreds of millions of Muslims who are being turned into enemies of Israel by Israel’s actions and inhumane policies.
The hope in the Muslim world has always been that the United States would intervene in behalf of compromise and make Israel realize that Israel cannot steal Palestine and turn every Palestinian into a refugee.
This has been the hope of the Arab world. This is the reason our puppets have not been overthrown. This hope is the reason America still had some prestige in the Arab world.
The House of Representatives resolution, bought and paid for by AIPAC money, is the final nail in the coffin of American prestige in the Middle East. It shows that America is, indeed, Israel’s puppet, just as Osama bin Laden says, and as a majority of Muslims believe.
With hope and diplomacy dead, henceforth America and Israel have only tooth and claw. The vaunted Israeli army could not defeat a rag tag militia in southern Lebanon. The vaunted US military cannot defeat a rag tag, lightly armed, insurgency drawn from a minority of the population in Iraq, insurgents, moreover, who are mainly engaged in civil war against the Shia majority.
What will the US and its puppet master do? Both are too full of hubris and paranoia to admit their terrible mistakes. Israel and the US will either destroy from the air the civilian infrastructure of Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, and Iran so that civilized life becomes impossible for Muslims, or the US and Israel will use nuclear weapons to intimidate Muslims into acquiescence to Israel’s desires.
Muslim genocide in one form or another is the professed goal of the neoconservatives who have total control over the Bush administration. Neocon godfather Norman Podhoretz has called for World War IV (in neocon thinking WW III was the cold war) to overthrow Islam in the Middle East, deracinate the Islamic religion and turn it into a formalized, secular ritual.
Rumsfeld’s neocon Pentagon has drafted new US war doctrine that permits pre-emptive nuclear attack on non-nuclear states.
Neocon David Horowitz says that by slaughtering Palestinian and Lebanese civilians, "Israel is doing the work of the rest of the civilized world," thus equating war criminals with civilized men.
Neocon Larry Kudlow says that "Israel is doing the Lord’s work" by murdering Lebanese, a claim that should give pause to Israel’s Christian evangelical supporters. Where does the Lord Jesus say, "go forth and murder your neighbors so that you may steal their lands"?
The complicity of the American public in these heinous crimes will damn America for all time in history.
COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration.
Original is HERE
Sid,
Thanks for posting that piece. Strong words indeed.
There'll be hell to pay when Americans eventually realise how they've been decieved into blindly supporting Israel's every move, regardless of its morality and damage to America's credibility in the wider global community. Over the last 40 years or so Israel and its multitude of influential supporters in America seem to have cleverly embedded within the American psyche the idea that what's good for Israel must be good for America. There seems to be some kind of prevailing paradigm, which stretches from the intelligensia down to the person in the street, that criticism of Israel is somehow immoral, regardless of how outrageous Israel's actions become. There's a similar situation here and in Europe but its nowhere near as strong, IMO. European leaders regularly criticise Israel, mostly with justification. I guess if I lived in America there's a chance I might subscribe to the 'Israel is on God's side' argument too. But from here in Australia, America's endless pandering to Israel sticks out like the proverbial dog's balls. It might also explain the reluctance of American members of this Forum (with a few notable exceptions) to express their concerns about an ally who has clearly slipped over the edge. They don't want the anti-Semite tag, or any other label inferring immorality.
-
Tony Blair has been rightly criticised by the media for appearing to be George Bush’s lap dog. He has just dashed off to Washington where he will try to persuade Bush to call for a cease-fire. No chance of course. One of the problems is that Bush’s support for Israel has increased his poll-ratings. It seems the American public think that the bombing of the Lebanon is likely to reduce the threat of terrorism. They clearly know nothing about politics in the Middle East.
It's quite incredible. Of course, Rupert Murdoch and friends try to ensure that the American public only get to hear one side of the debate. Hezbollah = Terrorism = Evil is the theme hammered home in all Murdoch's media outlets. All his 200 odd newspapers supported the invasion of Iraq. He's strongly pro-Israel. War and carnage also sells newspapers and increases ratings. It's win win. My opinion of Murdoch is unprintable.
-
Very interesting pieces from Owen and Peter.
I notice the US didn't veto UN resolution 425 calling for Israeli withdrawal in 1978, when Carter was President, but they did veto a resolution in 1985, when Reagen was President. I also remember Carter being critical of Begin during the peace talks between Israel and Egypt during that period. America's brief flirtation with impartiality during Carter's administration must have alarmed Israel greatly. No matter, it's been all one way traffic since.
-
This guy is a little pessimistic for me. He also fails to take into consideration the economic consequences of such a strategy. Against that, you should never underestimate the stupidity of the Bush regime:
-
The major difference between the Liberty incident and the killing of the UN observers is that there was no internet in 1967. Besides the statements of those involved, there was only the mainstream news media so this issue was silenced by LBJ and his friends by threatening retribution for those who spoke out. Even if they did, the media, deeply sympathetic to the Israeli cause, wasn't interested. That's why the Liberty story was never really fully exposed and analysed when it occurred. The fact that the victims of the Liberty attack were all Americans also made it easier for LBJ to cover for Israel.
I came across this yesterday in an Oklahoma State University student publication:
In 1967, President Johnson worked secretly with the Israeli government and used their military to attack the U.S.S. Liberty off the coast of Israel in the Mediterranean. He is quoted on record for saying he wanted to see the ship “on the bottom” of the Mediterranean, according to tapes released in 2001.The U.S. wanted to blame the attack on Egypt to justify a full-scale invasion of the Middle East. Israeli fighter planes could not sink the nation’s most decorated warship in time. They ended after Russian spies were seen watching.
http://www.ocolly.com/read_story.php?a_id=30268
Does anyone have any idea what LBJ tape(s) about the Liberty the writer is talking about?
Nice find, Ron. I suspect the writer is using a bit of 'student poetic license' there. I've never heard of anything like this on the LBJ tapes. LBJ always removed incriminating evidence. I would be keen to find out the author's sources.
Sadly, from what has been revealed in the last 30 years about LBJ's activities, I wouldn't put it past him.
The IDF was reportedly reminded 10 times of the UN peacekeepers presence. Still they copped a direct hit. I can't see the IDF deliberately hitting them because there's no military or political advantage in doing so. However, if it was not deliberate then it's a shocking display of carelessness. Is the IDF that careless?
Hezbollah was reportedly using the UN post as a shield to launch rocket attacks. If true, then a tactical decision was made to remove the shield.
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/s...a9-7f94d5fc6d50
Very interesting. If true, then Kofi Annan was right.
They were told repeatedly that the observers were in the shelter. That would make it murder--and another war crime.
-
Five myths supporting Israeli war crimes:
-
As more news filters in about today's Israeli strikes on the UNIFIL observation team, the story sounds eerily reminiscent of the USS Liberty attack. Apparently there were numerous attacks over a sustained period and the Israelis were warned many times. When the kill came, it was a precision weapon. To dispatch such a missile, exact co-ordinates must be entered by the operator. Little room for acciudents in this procedure, one would have thought. One commentator speculates that the strike might well have been a deliberate assault to remove indpendent witnesses close to the Syrian border.
On cue, the White House announces that there's no evidence the attacks were deliberate. Gee, they sure have good 'intelligence' in Washington. Just like 1967? The quality of spin has been declining ever since the smooth-lying Ari Fleischer left the team; amazingly, Washington has yet to blame Iran or Syria for these UN slayings.
From Rome, Condi Rice calls for "sustainable peace" but not a cease fire. I guess that gives the Lebanese something else to look forward to. Santa Clause is due too in another six months.
Ariel Sharon stirs. Perhaps the 'Hero of Qatana' misses the action? Terror 101.
The suave Israeli Government spokesman Mark Regev appears on the screen once again. He assures the gullible that Israel's Lebanon 'operation' is on behalf of the whole world. The suffering Jewish State is making great sacrifices for humanity by waging the War on Terror on the front lines. He hisses when Syria is mentioned. It's a terrorist country, addicted to war and lying. He says this without a trace of irony.
Meanwhile, Reuters reports that Israeli surgical strikes have destroyed another aid lorry, killing its driver (it's the second in a week).
The Israelis continue to use cluster bombs and phosphorus (a chemical weapon). Even the timid Human Rights Watch is finding this hard to be 'even-handed' about. Those with strong stomaches might care to check THIS link.
Only the most profound racism on the Israeli side can explain their nonchalence about massive civilian casualties in The Lebanon and their determination to persist with military policies that will inevtiably lead to a lot more of the same.
Lest we forget, Gaza continues to scream in agony, its torments largely overlooked in the current excitement.
I received this article via Israel Shamir's email list. It makes grim reading. The courage of the Palestinian people is almost beyond belief. They show us all that the human spirit is still alive, even within their walled, segmented, bombed and largely destroyed ghetto.
_______________________
Gaza is out of news. The Strip could be relocated to Mars - there no reports from there, just brief reports of Jews bombing away the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and another small power plant. Israel allows no reporters inside. Our friend Silvia Cattori tried to get in, could not make it, but managed to record the following interview with a Palestinian located in the North of Gaza:Silvia Cattori: What is the mental state of the population after weeks of bombings and deprivations?
A: We have suffered. We are in a dramatic situation. The Israeli army has entered up to Saladine Street; the military has cut Gaza in two: it is like it was before. They have installed a base. There are a dozen tanks with bulldozers. They are in the process of razing land, greenhouses; they are destroying all that remains of life. For two weeks, the F-16s and the drones bomb and destroy our homes. There are hundreds of dead and badly wounded.
S.C.: Is it blind bombing of everything as opposed to bombing that is targeting "terrorists"?
A: The day before yesterday, for example, the Israelis attacked a house, assassinating an entire family, under the pretext that it sheltered Mohamed Daif, the head of those firing the Qassam rockets. However, it wasn't true. Unfortunately, an entire family, a father, a mother, five daughters and two sons lost their lives.
S.C.: Having cut Gaza in two, are the soldiers threatening the population from this position?
A: Yes, their tanks, posted in the centre of the Gaza Strip, between Del Balla and Kahn Younes, are currently firing rockets - just like in the north of Gaza.
S.C.: Are the tanks moving?
A: No, the Israeli soldiers are chicken; they are afraid of being attacked by the resistance.
S.C.: Do the members of the Hamas Government still show themselves on the street?
A: We are seeing no one. They are all on the list of the next assassinations. They only come out when they have a rendez-vous, but it is always done with great secrecy.
S.C.: During the two weeks of the bombings that have left you without water, without electricity, without food, have you been afraid for your family?
A: The first attack by the Israeli planes at Betlaya was near my house. It was there that there were a large number of wounded and killed. The children were in a panic. Fearing that Israel would attack our neighbourhood, we left our house to move away from the zone. Now, we have returned home.
S.C.: How do people put up with living in such a horrible situation? Do they want you to free the captured soldier as quickly as possible to end Israel's pretext to continue the collective punishment?
A: The majority of the Palestinians support the position of the resistance, the position that the soldier won't be released until Israel releases 1000 of the weakest prisoners they hold, women and children. Prisoners that are living - contrary to the Israeli propaganda film shown recently on television in the west that we have heard about - under inhuman conditions. This film didn't talk about the torture of the prisoners, didn't show prisoners being held like beasts in tents, plagued by insects and disease, didn't say that most of the prisoners can only see their families once every six months. [1]
S.C.: Has the accord signed between Fatah and Hamas two weeks ago taken affect?
A: They were speaking of an entente. But on the ground, it is the contrary. The Fatah militia continues their assassinations, so the Palestinians continue to be threatened by two enemies: that is, by Israel and by those Palestinians who are collaborating with the occupier in order to destablize Hamas. The Israeli attacks actually prevented a civil war between Palestinians. At this moment, each Palestinian, no matter what party, feels above all like a target of Israeli shooting.
S.C.: Can even the father of a family like you, who has nothing to do with the resistance, be hit by what they call a targeted assassination?
A: You must know that our crime is being Palestinian, to belong to Palestine. If I find myself by chance in the same taxi as someone that an Israeli plane wants to assassinate, I can be killed.
S.C.: For that you will have to face more and more aggression? The Israeli army has announced that Operation Summer Rain will last as long as necessary.
A: You know that Israel is government by lunatics at this moment. They are narrow-minded politicians. They have unleashed war in Gaza, and, as of two days, they have declared war on Lebanon. Maybe that will give us a bit of a break because the pressure is only longer only concentrated on us.
S.C.: One thing that is worrisome in any situation of war is the trauma undergone by the children. Are they still normal after all they have had to endure?
A: The other day I wanted to take my kids to the sea. My three-year-old daughter started to cry. She said, "No, Daddy, I never want to go to the beach again." I asked her why. "I don't want to die." I said, "OK, if you don't want to die, I'll go with your brothers and sisters." "You neither. No one should go to the beach," she cried. You can see how a three-year-old child reacts after seeing on television the family massacred on the beach. If I talk about the beach, she cries.
S.C.: Were the victims these last months people like you, people who are not armed, who have no protection, and who do not harm anyone?
A: Almost all of the victims are civilians. However, the Israeli army justifies the bombings of families who are eating or sleeping saying that there are fighters among them. There are members of the resistance, but they aren't among these victims. Everyone in Palestine, with the exception of the collaborators, is a resistor in spirit.
S.C.: With such a catastrophic situation, one that is ongoing, in what kind of mental state are you?
A: We continue to live in spite of the unlivable situation Israel imposes upon us. We are accustomed to living this life that isn't a life. There is no food, there is only brackish water, there is no electricity. This is our life. But it is better than living a life were we crush ourselves.
SC.: How will you be able to rebuild yet again the entire infrastructure that the Israel bombing is destroying? Do you think they can be put back in action quickly?
A: The Israelis will never leave standing anything we build. Each time that we repair the transformer in the north or the south of Gaza, they bomb it again. We have yet to hear any protests from the Arab or European states. Some states have condemned the Israeli operations, but their condemnations are too weak. It isn't enough to make Israel back off. From the moment that Europe cut off our aid, it meant they have been collaborating with Israel in its collective punishment, to starve us and to make us suffer more.
S.C.: Do you have the impression that the journalists who obtained permission to enter Gaza have been correctly informing the world on the suffering you are undergoing?
A: It is always the same thing, whether they come or not. I would have been very happy it if had been you who had gotten permission to come, because I am certain you would have reported with honesty. We follow the news. It is always a superficial and Israeli version of things that is shown. The suffering of the people, our pain, all those at CNN, Fox News, the BBS, have no idea what it is. They lie in our faces. We watch their lies live.
S.C.: Don't you think that those journalists that ignore your reality and repeat the same things are led into error by the Palestinian chauffeurs and guides accompanying and supervising them and informing them in a biased way?
A: All they have to do is what you do, go out into the street and get people to talk. It's not by them all staying in the same five star hotels in Gaza that they will be able to find the truth.
S.C.: They don't go out into the streets?
A: Even when they go, they conform to the information given by Israeli press officers or the supervision of their agencies. At the end of the day, they say what their Jerusalem or other office tells them to say and don't say what they have been told not to say. You're a journalist; you should know how it works.
S.C.: I wasn't able to enter Gaza this time and can't report on what is happening to you. It makes me all the more sad because I have remained very attached to the place and I knew so many Palestinians who were suffering and two members of the ISM as well as the London journalist James Miller - who wanted to report about your suffering and the assassination of children - who were killed in 2003 by the Israeli army.
A: They won't let you in because you are too honest. Israel well knows that you do not look at our reality in the same way as the journalists who generally come here. If you were seeing everything through the eyes of Israeli propaganda, you could have entered Gaza....
S.C. I was interrogated by the Israel secret service Sabak on my arrival at Ben Gurion airport. Won't I put any Palestinian I meet into danger if these services, which have their spies on every Palestinian street, are watching me now?
A: You can't put anyone in danger. Every Palestinian is in danger. At any moment, the drone that is flying overhead can strike me. Don't let yourself be intimidated. Do you know why they intimidated you when you arrived and why they follow you? Because those people are afraid of you?
S.C.: Afraid of me? Are you joking?
A: All of these soldiers and spies that make up the most formidable army in the world, in spite of their power, are afraid of anyone who uses his words...to speak the truth. They are afraid of those who speak the truth. They are weak people. We can win this fight even though our means are nothing compared to theirs, because we have the will and the courage that they don't have.
S.C.: What I have seen since I started traveling through the West Bank is without a doubt less atrocious than what is happening in Gaza, but, believe me, it is already too much to support. I cried when I saw a group of people being held like animals in an enclosed space at the checkpoint in Bethlehem. I cried when I arrived in Naplouse and I saw the crowd of silent people who were waiting for the soldiers to condescend to let them leave. You Palestinians seem so strong in the face of all of these humiliations they impose. Do you cry sometimes?
A: Of course I cry. I often cry now when I see all of these families who have been assassinated. A quarter of the victims are children.
S.C.: Does your wife cry, too?
A: Yes, often. Everywhere around, here in Gaza, or over there in the West Bank, are people struck by misfortune that breaks your heart. We are one people and we are suffering together. We are one unique body.
[1] It may be the film recently shown by the television network Arte.
P.S.: This interview was conducted via internet and telephone.
Translated by Signs of the Times
A disturbing post. The major difference between the Liberty incident and the killing of the UN observers is that there was no internet in 1967. Besides the statements of those involved, there was only the mainstream news media so this issue was silenced by LBJ and his friends by threatening retribution for those who spoke out. Even if they did, the media, deeply sympathetic to the Israeli cause, wasn't interested. That's why the Liberty story was never really fully exposed and analysed when it occurred. The fact that the victims of the Liberty attack were all Americans also made it easier for LBJ to cover for Israel.
Actually, the death of the observers could turn out to be a disaster for Israel as it will prompt more thinking people to circumvent the mainstream media and find out what Israel has actually been doing to the Palestinians. The US/Israeli propaganda machine only gives us the story from the Israeli perspective but the internet provides the opportunity to look beyond the superficiality and get a glimpse of the real story. Of course, the internet can be spiked also, but more politicians and opinion leaders (those not captive to the Israeli lobby, that is) are beginning to speak out. Hopefully, we're getting close to critical mass.
The old fighting terrorism line is wearing very thin. It can't justify the mass slaughter of civilians and constant oppression of civilian populations. It's all total bullxxxx. The Jewish terrorists of pre-Israel days called themselves warriors in the noble struggle for Hebrew liberation. What's it going to take for the world to see the double standards being employed here?
-
In her book Kennedy & Johnson (1968), Evelyn Lincoln has this to say about the trip to Texas. She says that JFK was very reluctant to go on this trip: “Advance reports from our own staff and from many other people gave us cause to worry about the tense climate in Texas – and, most especially, in Dallas. Dallas was removed and then put back on the planned itinerary several times. Our own advance man urged that the motorcade not take the route through the underpass and past the Book Depository, but he was overruled.” She adds that Johnson was insistent that JFK went on the trip.
Thanks John. I knew I'd read somewhere of JFK wavering and LBJ's subsequent insistence and (perhaps) reassurance. I'm not going nuts, after all.
Question for all: Who might have overruled the Advance Man? And who is the mysterious SA Glen Bennett, assigned to the WH detail on November 10, who lied to the HSCA about not being on the Miami trip and whose contemporaneous notes buttressed the notion that JFK was hit from behind?:
http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/03/VP/02-VP.html
Anyway, back to the main theme of this critical thread. Do we have consensus that September was the month that the trip was extended to include November 22? The reason I ask is that if Cliff Carter is the only source then I remain skeptical. This is the man who was a longtime LBJ aide and who called Waggoner Carr, Jesse Curry and Henry Wade (3 times) on the night of the assassination to reinforce the lone nut scenario, adding that any conspiracy talk could be a great threat to America's security. I don't trust his statements at all.
The other thing which is critical to this thread is establishing LBJ's exact movements from the October 4 argument with Governor Connally up to the assassination. We have the Murchison party on November 21 but that's hotly disputed and its the rest of that 7 weeks that is of major importance, IMO. That's a critical period and it seems hard to pin down with certainty. Apparently he was 'ranching' it. The Dallek bio I have doesn't have anything. Maybe the voluminous Caro bio or Larry can tell us more. Why don't the official bios reveal more? Did he need 7 weeks at the ranch to plan this two day extravaganza? btw, this is pure speculation but I believe the reason LBJ was so annoyed with JBC at not being told about the October 4 meeting till afterwards was because he didn't want JBC and JFK to inadvertently change the delicate arrangements he was putting in place.
Dawn, did you actually post that message you were given about DNC man Jack Puterbaugh? If so, which thread is it on--sounds interesting.
-
Greg Palast, IMO, is a more devious shill for not-very-nice political forces than Melanie Phillips on her high-performing days. Blaming big oil for wars in the middle east. Now when did I last hear that decreasingly plausible line? March 2003? Around the time R Murdoch told us to expect lower oil prices after the invasion of Iraq, LOL.
I may have imagined it - but it seemed to me the BBC (international TV service) momentarily lost a little composure, the moment the announcement came through that the four murdered UN observers had been killed by a precision guided missile. This news arrived just after the Beeb had replayed (several times!) an interview with an Israeli Government spokesperson assuring all and sundry that the observers' deaths were just a terribly tragic accident.
The BBC commentators displayed the kind of gentle annoyance one might expect from a doting parent whose delinquent child had been caught out, yet again, electrocuting a family pet and lying about it afterwards. Sheepish grins and shrugs all round. Oh dear, Jonny is naughty sometimes, but he's our boy and we do love him!
Regarding the hotly-debated topic of the "proportionality" of Israel's "response", the figure of 10 to 1 deaths has been quoted often.
Ex-Israeli anti-Zionist Gilad Atzmon writes that a more accurate ratio would be 500,000 : 2
That was the proportion of involuntarily relocated Lebanese refugees to the two involuntarily relocated Israeli soldiers, whose interdiction allegedly triggered Israel's latest assault on its northern neighbour.
Of course, this ratio may need to be revised upwards; the number of Lebanese refugees rises on an hourly basis.
The IDF was reportedly reminded 10 times of the UN peacekeepers presence. Still they copped a direct hit. I can't see the IDF deliberately hitting them because there's no military or political advantage in doing so. However, if it was not deliberate then it's a shocking display of carelessness. Is the IDF that careless?
As far as world opinion is concerned, this war is going very badly for Israel. The death of the peacekeepers means the PR battle is comprehensively lost, IMO. China is furious and demanding an explanation from Israel. I'm keen to see what excuse John Howard comes up with for his dear friends in Jerusalem. What an embarrassment this man is.
-
"(IsraelNN.com) Defense Minister Amir Peretz (Labor) stated Sunday morning that Israel would allow a NATO force to patrol in Lebanon."
So, Israel will "allow" NATO forces into The Lebanon - a sovereign nation whose population is not represented in the Knesset.
How jolly nice.
Does that mean putative NATO forces in The Lebanon won't be attacked and murdered by the Israeli military - a fate experienced by both UN forces and the Red Cross?
It's great to hear from 'left-wing' Zionists such as Peretz on matters such as this, so we can better understand the Zionist 'center of gravity' on this debate.
I agree Sid.
The sad thing is that they'll convince gullible people in the West that they're being fair and reasonable (because the Western media will say this is so, of course).
Israel and the US have zero respect for the sovereignty of other nations. That's an undisputable fact. Under the dubious pretexts of spreading democracy, liberating them from oppression and eradicating terrorism (a problem mostly of their own making), our allies have sunk to the status of global cowards and bullies. The emperor is buck naked and what an awful sight it is.
From today's Sydney Daily Telegraph comes this quote from Connie Rice during her visit to Sydney four months ago:
I do think we were hurt by sixty years of turning a blind eye to the absence of freedom in the Middle East. But we have a different course now and I believe over time the people of the Middle East will see that that's a course supportive of their aspirations.
My interpretation of this garbage is:
We are in deep trouble. We want that oil--ALL the oil, before China gets a sniff. Because of the way Israel and the US have behaved in the region since WW2, there's no chance of us getting it peacefully so we're just going to take it by force. But don't worry friends--we'll say we're bringing freedom to the region. Ain't that hilarious? We get the oil and Israel gets to destroy its regional enemies. It's win win. BTW, if you're not with us, you're against us. That should keep you all in line.
-
It looks like Israel is tired of acting like NATO and now wants to bring NATO into the fray. They've just been paving the way for NATO occupation. This comes from Arutz Sheva, a right-wing Israeli news source:Peretz Opens Door to NATO Force
12:37 Jul 23, '06 / 27 Tammuz 5766
(IsraelNN.com) Defense Minister Amir Peretz (Labor) stated Sunday morning that
Israel would allow a NATO force to patrol in Lebanon. He said the presence of an international force is due to the "weakness of the Lebanese army." However, European officials have pushed for a United National force. Previous U.N. patrols have been ineffective and often have openly aided Hizbullah terrorists to attack Israel.
Ministers Peretz spoke following a meeting with German Foreign Minister Frank Walter Steinmeier. Israel and NATO have forged closer relations the past year, and NATO officials visited Jerusalem earlier this year. (source)
(This isn't my discovery by the way, thanks go to Francisco Gil-White's latest article, although he draws all the wrong conclusions from this.)
EDIT: I've just found some additional interesting information. Apparently Israel conducted a joint "tactical exercise" with NATO about a month ago (its first).
IDF AND NATO STRENGTHEN TIES
"For the first time since its founding in 1949, NATO will fully integrate Israeli naval forces into a military exercise, Arutz-7 reported. Israel has previously only been allowed to observe such exercises. The military exercise will take place in the Black sea off the coast of Romania. The exercise will involve simulated combat between missile boat fleets as well as search-and rescue drills.
Senior IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) officers said that the NATO mission was designed to strengthen ties between Israel and the alliance and to look into possibilities for future military cooperation. Some analysts have speculated that Israel would apply for membership in the NATO alliance, but IDF officials have indicated that formal membership would limit Israel's ability to apply military force independently, as it sees fit." (source)
From the Jerusalem Post:
Israel in first NATO tactical exercise
"The purpose of the exercise, explained Lavi, was to create better interoperability between the Israeli Navy and NATO naval forces. To do that, the exercise practiced communicating between the fleets and emphasized how the different independent systems on each boat worked in concert with one another." (source)
Owen,
Well that is very interesting. It would seem that there's a larger strategy being employed here. The US can't wait any longer. Control of the entire region, with Israel as a willing ally, would seem to be the big picture.
Maybe the concern over Iran's pending nuclear capability has forced their hand. Once Tehran has this capability, there's no way the US and Israel could throw their weight around like this.
-
Last Tuesday the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, delivered a shamefully complacent speech about Britain's proud record in upholding international law, notably in Iraq and Afghanistan. "We in the United Kingdom," he said, "take great care to ensure that we comply with the rule of law ... We take legitimacy very seriously." Operationally, on the battlefield, this is true. But it seems astonishing that any member of a government that has joined with the US in inflicting frightful damage on western legitimacy should dare to speak in such terms. Goldsmith added: "International law cannot be a substitute for morality or political judgment." True enough. Blair, with the help of his attorney, has driven a coach and horses through all three.
Morality alone cannot make an international order work. Few of us, however, want to be represented by governments that are perceived by most of the human race as pursuing policies which have no moral basis at all.
Hizbullah is a profoundly unpleasant and violent movement, which has inflicted as much grief upon the people of Lebanon as the Israelis. But as long as Israel continues to deny justice to the Palestinians, Hizbullah's actions will be deemed by many to possess more legitimacy than its own. Higher standards are expected from a sovereign state than a terrorist organisation.
It is understandable that George Bush should have endorsed the current Israeli campaign, for no more can be expected from him. It is almost incomprehensible, however, that Blair should also have done so, save in the context of the prime minister's wider loss of radio contact with Planet Earth. Israeli actions fail the pragmatic as well as the moral test. There is no possibility that they will suppress terrorist resistance to their polity. An Israeli academic chided me this week: "You columnists witter about proportionality - you should consider what the Israeli public demands from its government."
This only emphasizes the fact that the UK no longer has an independent foreign policy. Blair/Beckett refused to condemn the actions of the Israelis (Blair called it regrettable) or to call for a cease-fire. Whereas the rest of the world, including officials of the United Nations pointed out that Israel’s action was completely out of proportion, and some rightly argued that the bombing of civilian areas in the Lebanon was a war crime.
Rumours began to spread that Bush had given Israel seven days to smash the infrastructure of Lebanon. As it turns out, it seems it was ten days. Today US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has suggested that Bush is now ready to accept a cease-fire. A few hours later Blair claimed he was now in favour of an “immediate cessation of hostilities" in Lebanon.
There was no need for Blair to issue this statement. All we need to do is to read the ones issued by the White House.
I agree, John. It seems this has been a joint US/Israeli effort to establish Israel as a regional superpower. Ultimately Syria and Iran are the targets. Blair and that other poodle John Howard just follow like sheep.
The outcome for Lebanon is that this smoking wasteland will become a rich breeding ground for terrorists. I've read that many fleeing Lebanese have stated they are now prepared to give their lives for Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. As if the US and Israeli Governments didn't know this would be one of the consequences. They would be more than happy to see this occur, IMO. A cynic might suggest that the fanatical Christian neocons in Washington and the equally fanatical zeolots in Tel Aviv are dragging the world into some kind of biblical Armagedden prophesy. Bush has already claimed that his orders come from a "higher power".
When the smoke clears, I wonder who'll get the contract for restoring Lebanon's shattered infrastructure?
War on terror indeed. Create the terrorists, then drag the western world into a war on them. Make billions while you're at it. I know who the "axis of evil" is.
-
Ron,
From the info you posted, it would seem that the details of the Texas trip itinerary had not been finalised before Connally's meeting with JFK on October 4. This would make the period October 4 to October 14 the critical time during which the motorcade was appended to the schedule. Can Cliff Carter's claim that the motorcade was added in September be verified?
Time to rethink the war on drugs
in Political Debates
Posted
Sid,
Agree 100% (sooner or later we'll find something to disagree on).
I am often stunned and aghast at the self serving lies and hypocrisy contained within the war on drugs stance adopted by so many legislators and commentators, who are owned lock, stock and barrel by the same interests which benefit from prohibition.
Prohibition now serves as a gravy train for a vast conga line of hangers on:
More police to investigate and apprehend the (drug) criminals, lawyers to act for them in court, more prisons and prison staff to house the increasing prison populations (70 to 80 percent of whom are there for drug related crimes), more insurance and home security devices to protect against theft from drug addicts who steal in order to pay for drugs at black market prices, and a greater than necessary burden on hospitals and ambulance services in order to treat overdose victims and drug related assault victims.
The DEA in America has now become a huge and costly bureaucracy hostile to any attempts to contain it. Prison building in the US is big business, too. The DEA also influences drug policy in other countries.
What does the public get for this massive investment? Illicit drug use at record levels, billionaire drug barons amassing arsenals of stolen weapons, massive police corruption, a much higher tax burden on the public and inexperienced kids dying in the streets or having their future propects diminished through drug convictions. Sounds like a rotten deal to me.