Owen Parsons

Your comments are "foolish" because they allege that Hitler's war service has been covered up in mainstream history books, which isn't the case, and leave out some other aspects of his service, as Andy outlined. Gee. I find your continued support of Mr. Walker, even after he had outed himself as a holocaust "revisionist," to be intellectually dishonest. Especially so, since prior to that you had been defending him from these charges. Why has his "revisionism" now become kosher? Mr. Walker, by the way, is the king of intellectual dishonesty. Witness his recent exchange with Len Colby, wherein he invited Len to "blow me." This was after complaining of alleged "smutty language" directed at him. After his hypocrisy was pointed out, Walker denied any sexual connotations to this phrase. After being corrected with the dictionary definition, Walker pointed to some song lyrics containg the phrase "blow me away," asserting that that was what he really meant (I guess?). The man's intellectual fraudulence extends beyond his holocaust "revisionism" to just about every subject he touches.

Yes, and I'd add that the only reason Belgian negationism law hasn't been updated to include the Rwandan and Armenian genocides is because of the power of the Turkish lobby over there (see here).

Of course my bio is real. Its outdated now, since I'm no longer in high school and I haven't bothered to update it. As for Daniel, I have no idea why he felt the urge to rewrite his bio in the manner that he did. And Swift Boaters are the "Swift Boat Veteran for Truth," who came out around the time of the last Presidential election here in the states to blow smoke about John Kerry's war record.

The first line in Daniel's new bio is obviously a homage to the first line of the classic Steve Martin movie The Jerk. You take things too literally. Also, Len, I think you need to stop feeding the shark. Sid, unlike the Swift Boaters, only really comes out when you call him out.

Looks good. More university presses need to publish books like this.

Yes, Robert Maheu was heavily involved in the effort. William Blum pinpoints Maheu as being the driving force behind the effort (here).

Isn't this where the CIA sought to entrap Sukarno in the company of some peroxide hookers? Good old Bing, more interesting than we ever suspected - he ran an Agency knocking shop, complete with cameras... Actually, the CIA made a porn film to discredit Sukarno and Bing Crosby was involved in the production of it: Also along the lines of the Valentine article is this excerpt from Jim DiEugenio's article The Posthumous Assassination of JFK, which gives an overview of Hersh's career:

Good find, James. These documents seem to settle the issue of the name of the landing boat: Barbara J, not Barbara.

No, Brendan, Sirhan is indeed a Christian. And you made a second mistake here, too. Sirhan is Palestinian, not Jordanian. And there is a slight problem with the idea that Sirhan killed RFK because he planned to sell fighter planes to Israel. Namely this: Sirhan's totally incoherent "diary" entries about killing RFK started before anyone knew about RFK's fighter plane pledge. Get a clue.

There are problems with this one too. First of all, the PLO is not an "Islamist" organization. Second, while this hijacking and murder was carried out by "Middle Eastern... males," the real responsibility lies with the Mossad. I quote from former Israeli intelligence operative Ari Ben-Menashe's book, Profits of War, page 122: Ben-Menashe was one of the October Surprise whistle-blowers and an effort was made to discredit him as a phony. He has recently been authenticated by Rafi Eitan (see here), however, so I see no reason to doubt him. In addition, I find your reference to "hundreds" of Israeli civilian casualties from rockets this year (in reality 43 casualties, see here from the Israeli government) to be very telling, seeing as how Israel is responsible for around 1,000 civilian casualities in Lebanon (link). None of this is to say that Islamic terrorism doesn't exist or isn't a danger. Indeed, there are some problems with PON (as this review in The Nation shows). Your "research" and knowledge are just really sloppy and superficial.

Aside from the fact that Sirhan appeared to be shooting blanks (if we are to credit the descriptions in the eyewitness accounts) and the autopsy report (which shows the shots coming from behind), Sirhan was not an "Islamist." He was (and I think still is) a Christian.

A belated thanks to Mr. Hogan for his words. With the current talks about Kosovo's status being held (and with indepence looking ever more inevitable), I've decided to update and edit my post. I've added new information and many more sources (including replacing some of my old references with better ones), such as articles from the Berliner Zeitung and Toronto Sun that, on the basis of the Finnish report, declare "no massacre" and "hoax." I've also added a link to the report itself, among much else.

And it seems Hassan Nasrallah, leader of the organization with which Israel is at war, has fallen for this "unconvincing ploy." In reality, the only things that are "unconvincing" are these superficial analyses of the Israel Lobby which ignore some rather important evidence, as I have outlined elsewhere. Its all very convenient for the United States government, as most of the people who write this stuff go out of their way to portray the U.S. as an innocent lamb whose primary interest is fostering and protecting democracy. If only it weren't for the Israel Lobby, which has hijacked this magnificent institution. People here may not subscribe to this viewpoint when they endorse the "Israel Lobby controls the U.S." thesis, but that is what is being pushed. Nowhere do I assert that Israel was "pushed unwillingly by Washington." What I am asserting is that the United States is the primary mover. In fact, it appears as if Israel had enough power of its own to reject the Bush administration's urging for an attack on Syria. Some good articles by Robert Parry of Consortium News on the subject: - Bush Wants Wider War - A 'Pretext' War in Lebanon - Israeli Leaders Fault Bush on War Also, I don't think you are in any position to accuse others of "falsify[ing] history."

Looks like I'm not the only who thinks the power of the Lobby is over-hyped. Owen, Try as I might, I couldn't get your link to the article to come up, but it doesn't matter--I get the gist. Fiery anti-US rhetoric indeed, but where does Nasrullah explicitly state that, in his opinion, the power of the Israeli lobby in the US is over-hyped? I believe this is your conclusion, not his. Of course Nasrallah isn't directly adressing the Israel Lobby, but by saying that the Bush regime is to blame and that Olmert and his thugs are just puppets ("mere executive tools"), he makes it pretty clear who he thinks is the dominant partner in this relationship. From that it follows that he would probably not put much stock in the notion that U.S. Foreign Policy is run by the Israel Lobby. Also, I checked the link again and it works fine. Edit: Here's another link for the Nasrallah speech. It has a transcript and video footage.

Norman Finkelstein's site has posted a very interesting August 3rd speech from Hassan Nasrallah. An excerpt: Looks like I'm not the only who thinks the power of the Lobby is over-hyped.

Huh. I was just wondering yesterday what Jim has been up to and where the Probe site had gone. Good to see the site back (and updated!) and good to see this article. It outlines the real problems with AF2J, unlike some of the anti-Garrison rantings that punctuate this thread (yes, you know who you are). I agree with most of what he says about Mellen's book. Its a shame she had to mix all the valuable and new information she has on Garrison with a few dubious assertions and much RFK-bashing. I think the review is particularly dead-on about Ralph Schoenmann's influence on Mellen's view of the Kennedys. I came to this same conclusion a while ago and told Dawn about it. Its still a valuable book for research purposes (with a good deal of suplementary reading and familiarity with the case) and the new edition should at least improve its aesethetic qualities, if nothing else. Unfortunately, the book isn't the thorough and definitive take on Garrison's investigation that many of us were hoping it would be. Nor is it a particularly good overview and introduction for the newcomer.

There you go again with your odd insinuation that I only "claim" to believe what I post. What my taking offense at Holocaust "revisionism" has to do with Zionism I don't know. Your Holocaust postings were relevant to Peter's questioning of your motives and/or information, so I brought them up. And no, I'm not trying to get you banned, nor could I if I wanted to; I've said it before and I'll say it again here. Affirmative, these people follow a pretty linear course.

Well Sid, I'd really have to know what I'm being asked to rebut. You always pose this sort of thing in the form of a rhetorical question with no supporting evidence. The evidence in the Mark Crispin Miller FAIR article, which names names of powerful (non-Jewish) media seems to me to trump the non-evidence offered by the likes of Walker. If you mean that it isn't valid because the mainstream media shills for Israel, that is true, but it is not the point. Also, if one of your sources on Jewish fundamentalism and its eschatology is Israel Shahak, I don't have a problem with that. I've bashed him here at least once in the past, but now that I've actually read some of his writings, I retract my previous attacks. He's been misread and misrepresented by both the pro-Israel attack dogs and anti-Semites (and perhaps not unintentionally ).

Yes, "legendary" is the appropriate word. See here. Falwell has probably been bought off by the "Zionists." However, he has also been bought off by Rev. Sun Myung Moon and his Moonies, who are quite politically powerful here in America and also have a small media empire. See here. People will also get offended if you start suggesting that a cabal of black people run everything, or say that slavery wasn't really such a bad thing for black people. It will probably also bring about about "moral panic and calls for bans and excommunication." Many of your postings are at that level. And it is not even the case that anti-Semitism is a career ruiner, anyway. Some of the biggest right-wing media pundits here in America can spew anti-Semitic crap and get away with it with hardly any scrutiny at all. See here and here. There is also a range of opinion among Orthodox Jews that is downplayed (e.g. Neturei Karta, who are Orthodox Jews and extremely anti-Zionist). Whats your point? Here is some additional reading material for Sid (although I know he won't read it, as his mind is made up): * The Demographics of American Jews by Lenni Brenner * A Response to Paul Eisen's "Jewish Power" by Joel Finkel * The Influence of the Christian Right on U.S. Middle East Policy by Stephen Zunes * The Israel Lobby: How Powerful is it Really? by Stephen Zunes * The Israel Lobby: Its not Either/Or by Norman Finkelstein Also, Peter, Sid has outed himself as a Holocaust "revisionist" in the Political Conspiracies forum, so I think there may be more than just latent anti-Semitism at play here.

Venezuela Withdraws Israel Ambassador Egypt and Jordan, Mauritania – the only Arab countries having diplomatic ties with Israel – have rejected calls to withdraw ambassadors. CARACAS - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Thursday, August 3, ordered the withdrawal of Venezuela's ambassador in Israel in protest against the Israeli offensives in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories. "I have ordered the withdrawal of our ambassador in Israel," Chavez said during a speech in the northwestern state of Falcon, Agence France-Presse (AFP) reported. "It's really outrageous to watch Israel as it continues to abuse, bomb and massacre innocent people with its yankee planes," added the leftist leader. Up to 900 Lebanese civilians, third of whom were children, since Israel has launched a 24-day-long blitz in Lebanon on the claim of seeking the release of two soldiers taken prisoner by the Lebanese resistance group Hizbullah. The sepulchral silence and hoary-old clichés of Arab and Muslim rulers at the non-stop Israeli massacres have left their peoples boiling. Turkey was among the few Muslim countries — if not the only — to have take a firm action of protest. Some 70 Turkish MPs have resigned from Turkey-Israel Inter-parliamentary Friendship Group. Egypt and Jordan, Mauritania – the only Arab countries having diplomatic ties with Israel – have rejected calls to withdraw ambassadors from Tel Aviv or expel the Israeli envoys. Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia have rather blamed Hizbullah for triggering the conflict. Pundits believe that some Arab rulers hoped that Hizbullah would be defeated by Israel, fearing that a victory by the resistance group would serve as a catalyst for reformists to push forward with their demands. Indignation Chavez also hit out at the excessive Israeli force. "It really causes indignation to see how the state of Israel continues bombing, killing ... with all of the power they have, with the support of the United States," he added. Israel on Friday, August 4, continued its destruction of the Lebanese infrastructure, destroying three highway bridges north of Beirut. Up to 23 Lebanese were killed Friday in Israeli air strikes on southern Lebanon. Israel also stepped up its offensive against the Gaza Strip on Friday, killing four Palestinians in Rafah, taking to 12 the number of people killed in the area in less than 24 hours. At least 164 Palestinians, mostly civilians, have been killed since Israel launched an open-ended military offensive on Gaza on claims of recovering a soldier taken prisoner by Palestinian groups to swap for 95 women and 313 children who are among almost 10,000 Arabs in Israeli prisons. Genocide Chavez also denounced the world indifference to the Israeli massacres against the Lebanese and Palestinian people. "You can't understand why the world looks on with nonchalance. You can't understand why nobody does anything to stop this horror," he said, blaming the United States for failing to stop the Israeli onslaught. "The United States has prevented the (UN) Security Council from taking any action to stop Israel's genocide against the people of Palestine and Lebanon." Washington has resisted mounting calls for an immediate ceasefire of the Israeli offensive in Lebanon. Washington also drew rebuke across the Arab and Muslim world for shipping arms and leaser-guided bombs to Israel to be used during its attacks in Lebanon. "That's one of the reasons behind the United States' blatant, frank and immoral drive to bar us from joining the UN Security Council," said Chavez, referring to Venezuela's efforts to seek a permanent seat on the council. Venezuela is the world's No. 5 oil exporter and a key supplier of oil to the United States. [link] EDIT: More complete source.

Recently I've become interested in the Algerian Civil War of the 1990s, which was triggered by the Algerian military's nullification of the Islamic Salvation Front's win in the January 1992 elections on the interesting pretext that they would destroy democracy. Its been something of an open secret that the hideously brutal massacres of civillians, sometimes wiping out entire villages, that were so characteristic of the conflict were actually carried out by the Algerian state and its proxies. This was strongly hinted at by many human rights organizations at the time the carnage was occuring and now it doesn't even seem to be particularly controversial. Noam Chomsky notes: A very good and thorough overview of the conflict is provided by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, "Algeria and the Paradox of Democracy," which may be read here. Discussion is welcome.

Read the rest here.

I want to emphasize that I'm pretty neutral on this issue. You seem to have it in for Rodriguez, who is by all acounts one of the "heroes" of 9/11. Anyway, assuming he has not been misquoted by CNN in its quick blurb, I wouldn't exactly call it a "different" version. Replace the word "rumble" with the closely related "explosion" and you have the same story he's always told, but in an undetailed manner, with explosion/rumble #1 coming from below and explosion/rumble #2 coming from above and coinciding with the plane strike. A detailed account of his story can be read here. Talk about reaching for straws. On a side note, Rodriguez also gave testimony to the 9/11 commission that he encountered one of the hijackers in the north tower in June 2001 (link). An expert what? An expert janitor? What Peter is saying here is that Rodriguez would know about explosions in the WTC, having been there the first time around and that he knows the building like the back of his hand.

Mike Griffith did a pretty thorough review/debunking of Myers' Tippit tome a while back. It can be read here. I wonder if Mr. Gillespie has ever come across it?

UPDATE ON QANA: It would not have been possible for Hezbollah to have fired rockets from the building as described by the IDF in the first place. What exactly was the IDF retaliating against? Hizbullah rockets cannot be fired from buildings 31/07/2006 | The Irish Times Tom Clonan Hizbullah has fired almost 2,000 missiles into Israel over the last fortnight, killing more than 50 Israelis and forcing almost one million into air raid shelters. Despite this provocation, however, Israel's response has been sharply criticised as "disproportionate" in many quarters. In the aftermath of the deaths of dozens of innocent Lebanese women and children at Qana yesterday, even the US has urged the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) to modify their responses to Hizbullah's attacks. IDF spokespeople are maintaining that Hizbullah had been mounting missile attacks on Israeli territory from Qana in recent days. The IDF has claimed it targeted the three-storey house in Qana at 1.30am local time in the belief it contained a Hizbullah "asset". Any investigation into the targeting of this house will have to consider precisely what kind of Hizbullah "asset" could possibly have been hidden in a modest, low-rise building among the narrow streets of a village such as Qana. The type of missiles being fired by Hizbullah at Israeli cities cannot be fired from within houses, mosques, hospitals or even UN facilities as has been suggested by the IDF. Due to the massive "back-blast" caused by the rocket launchers of these missiles, they can only be fired from open ground. To fire them from within a building would result in the instant death of the missile crew and probable destruction of the missile before launch. Most of the missiles are truck-mounted and are fired - on open ground - from the backs of flat-bedded trucks or larger four-wheel-drive vehicles. When fired, these missiles generate an enormous flare of light, heat and sound energy - a heat and light signature which is readily detected by IDF target-acquisition systems. Accurate retaliatory fire can be directed at Hizbullah launch sites by IDF aircraft and ground artillery in seconds. Such a reaction would be considered by international military norms to be proportionate and within the general "rules of engagement". In these circumstances, having fired their missiles, Hizbullah tends to disperse as rapidly as possible. It is unlikely that a flat-bedded truck with a multilaunch rocket-system mounted on it could be easily and rapidly hidden in a village as small as Qana. Nor is it likely that such a truck-mounted weapon or four-wheel-drive vehicle could easily be hidden in a house such as the one targeted by the IDF yesterday. The pattern and circumstances of the attack are sinister. With no telltale scorch marks from a Hizbullah missile launch visible near the destroyed house, and with no Hizbullah fighters among the dead and injured, the question remains as to what kind of "asset" the IDF could credibly allege to have been contained within the building. The timing of the attack, taking place as it did during a period of relative calm and not in the immediate aftermath of a Hizbullah missile launch, speaks of a punitive strike designed simply to kill members of the Shia community from which Hizbullah is drawn and receives its moral support. The targeting of unarmed Shia women and children would represent a deliberate targeting of innocent civilians for retaliatory or punitive purposes, and may well constitute a war crime. Tom Clonan is The Irish Times security analyst. © The Irish Times [link] Ok, let's recap: 1. The eyewitnesses are consistent. The IDF's unsubstantiated timeline is refuted by them. 2. The condition of the bodies is not consistent with an 8 A.M. death. 3. Hezbollah fighters couldn't have fired rockets from the building without killing themselves. Nor were there any scorch marks near the house consistent with a missile launch. Is there anything left of the IDF's crude excuse?