Dark waters to navigate;
A fractured mast, I fear.
So far to sail, so deep to sound,
No star by which to steer!
No smiling moon illuminates;
No beacon’s guiding light
Does offers hope, nor tend to ease
This journey into Night.
And to my God I pray now
This voyage soon to end—
And steer my craft and tortured sail
Into a milder wind;
To drift into the sunshine;
To lift my spirits high;
To still this storm which tears my soul,
Then beach me there, to die!
See also Gilbert Huntley’s No Return
Far, far across the roiling sea
My lover waits in reverie
While penning verse she writes for me—
And my return.
Her brow, so perfect and refined,
Casts shadows dancing on the rhyme
While candles waver, marking time
For my return.
Her fingers, coaxing pen to write
Poetic love she feels inside,
Awaiting dawn, the changing tide—
And my return.
Alas! No more our arms we’ll link!
And as this noble ship does sink
I cry her name, while on the brink
Of No Return.
See also Gilbert Huntly’s Dark Waters
An abridged version of this article, edited with pictures and captions by Lasha Darkmoon
God help them if Obama and Romney ever had to participate in a real debate about a real issue at the Oxford Union. They would be massacred.
The “debates” revealed that not only the candidates but also the entire country is completely tuned out to every real problem and dangerous development. For example, you would never know that US citizens can now be imprisoned and executed without due process. All that is required to terminate the liberty and life of an American citizen by his own government is an unaccountable decision somewhere in the executive branch.
No doubt that Americans, if they think of this at all, believe that it will only happen to terrorists who deserve it. But as no evidence or due process is required, how would we know that it only happens to terrorists?
Can we really trust a government that has started wars in SEVEN countries on the basis of falsehoods?
If the US government will lie about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in order to invade a country, why won’t it lie about who is a terrorist?
If we are under such a terrorist threat that the Constitution has to be suspended or replaced by unaccountable executive action, how come all the alleged terrorist cases are sting operations organized by the FBI?
In eleven years there has not been a single case in which the “terrorist” actually decided for himself to commit a terrorist attack!
In the eleven years since 9/11, acts of domestic terrorism have been miniscule if they even exist. What justifies the enormous and expensive Department of Homeland Security? Why does Homeland Security have military-equipped Special Response Teams with armored vehicles?
Who are the targets of these militarized units?
What is Homeland Security’s motivation in creating a Homeland Youth? Is the new FEMA Corps a disguise for a more sinister purpose, a Hitler Youth group, as Internet sites suggest?
Why did not Romney ask Obama why he is working to overturn the federal court’s ruling that US citizens cannot be subject to indefinite detention in violation of the US Constitution? Is it because Romney and his neoconservative advisers agree with Obama and his advisers? If so, then why is one tyrant better than another?
Why has the US constructed a network of detainment camps, for which it is hiring “internment specialists”?
Why does the US Army now have a policy for “establishing civilian inmate labor programs and civilian prison camps on Army installations”?
Here is Rachel Maddow’s report on how Obama criticizes the neoconservative Bush/Cheney regime for violations of the US Constitution and US statutory law and then does the same thing himself.
How did the presidential debates avoid the fact of Predator Drones flying over us here in the domestic United States of America? What is the purpose of this? Why are the smallest police forces in the most remote locations being equipped with armored cars?
I have seen them.
In small lily-white communities north of Atlanta, Georgia, communities of sub-million dollar MacMansions have militarized police with armored cars and automatic weapons. SWAT teams in full military gear are everywhere.
WHAT IS IT ALL ABOUT? WHAT COUNTRY ARE WE IN? IS THIS AMERICA?
These small semi-rural areas will never see a terrorist or experience a hostage situation. Yet, they are all armed to the teeth! They are so heavily armed that they could be sent into combat against the Third Reich or the Red Army!
Any such questions run afoul of the assumption of America’s moral perfection. No such debate will ever happen.
In the 21st century, US citizens became nonentities. They are brutalized by the police whose incomes their taxes pay. American citizens, for protesting some injustice or for no cause at all, are beaten, arrested, tasered and even murdered.
The police, paid by the public, beat up paralyzed people in wheel chairs.
They frame the very people who telephone them for help against criminals.
They taser grandmothers and small children.
They shoot down in cold blood unarmed citizens who have done nothing except lose control of themselves, either through alcohol, drugs, or rage.
Brainwashed Americans pay large taxes at every level of government for protection against gratuitous violence, but what their taxes get them is gratuitous violence against themselves BY THE POLICE.
Police state America
Where Jews rig the race!—
Did you vote for the fist
That flattens your face?
— Lasha Darkmoon, Lullaby
Every American, except for the small number of mega-rich who control Washington, can be arrested and dispossessed, on the basis of nothing but a spurious allegation by some member of the executive branch. He might want your wife, your girlfriend, your property. He might want to settle a score with you. He might want to exterminate you if you happen to be his rival or competitor.
In America today, law serves the powerful. Justice? There’s no such thing. In effect, there is no law. There is no justice. There is only unaccountable power.
What is the point of a vote when the outcome is the same?
Both candidates represent the interests of the military/security complex, agribusiness, the offshoring corporations, the suppression of unions and workers, the total demise of civil liberty and the US Constitution.
Both candidates represent the interests of Israel, not the interests of the US.
In the US today, the power of money rules. Nothing else is in the equation.
Why vote to lend your support to the continuation of your own exploitation? Every time Americans vote, it is a vote for their own extinction.
THIS IS WHAT YOU’RE VOTING FOR
A condensed and edited version of this article, with pictures, captions and quotes by Lasha Darkmoon.
Editor’s Note. I have decided to publish this controversial new article by JB Campbell on Lasha Darkmoon’s strong recommendation, in the interests of free speech. However, I have taken the precaution of italicizing the sentences I regard as politically dangerous and about which Ms Darkmoon herself has expressed grave reservations. Parental guidance advised. — John Scott Montecristo
“In a few weeks’ time, Americans will face the grim prospect of choosing a new government, either headed by the same president or by a new one. Why a grim prospect? Because the choice is between an aggressive war criminal and a draft dodging, chickenhawk warmonger, both of them puppets of organized Jewry. No matter who you vote for, you end up with dystopia. You end up with wickedness in high places.” — Lasha Darkmoon, here
Why don’t vote? Because voting is what destroyed America.
If there’d been voting in 1775, we’d never have had a revolution. We’d have voted on it and the representatives for whom we’d voted would have worked out a deal with England and today we’d be southern Canada.
America is a revolutionary country – the first in history. It was created by violent revolution against government. There was freedom for the first few years after the revolution until 1789, when we got stuck with the US Constitution and the entire federal government. 1789 was also the year that the French got stuck with the Reign of Terror. Both monstrosities courtesy of that friendly brotherhood called the Freemasons.
Voting is passive-aggressive – cowardly. When we vote we license people to use force, to do things we can’t legally do to others, such as steal their money, throw them in prison and kill them. And invade other countries and kill those people. Worse, when we vote we authorize them to do it to us, the very voters! Are we insane?
Some of us definitely are insane, but most just haven’t thought it out. Since childhood, we’ve been told that voting is democracy in action – pure Americana. Sure, it’s purely what America has become: the Jews’ promised land. For Jews, it’s not Israel – it’s America. America is where the money is because the Jews control the vote in America. When we vote, we validate the fraud.
We might ask, well, if we don’t vote, how do we know what to do? How do we be fair?
We will be fair by not authorizing and arming agents to use force against us and others. Voting authorizes aggression. Voting allows our representatives to use force and fraud against ourselves and others. It doesn’t matter if you voted for or against something or someone – by voting you accept the process and the details can be argued some other time.
Vote fraud doesn’t matter. We all should understand by now how the vote is counted, which is by computers! The Collier brothers years ago described how the vote is stolen in their classic book, Votescam, whether by computer or by the League of Women Voters wrecking punch cards one by one.
Bev Harris revealed a dozen years ago on her Blackboxvoting.org website how the computers are programmed to steal virtually all elections. Even if voting is done on paper ballots, the ballots are fed through scanners and tallied by computers. So, who programs the computers that count the votes? We’re not allowed to know because that’s “proprietary information.”
“The Jews are counting your votes; so voting is an irrational act, since the Jews don’t know how to count properly.” (LD)
And now we learn that Mitt Romney himself is an owner of Hart InterCivic, an obscure little outfit that supplies vote computers in key states. Back in ’04, Wally O’Dell, CEO of Diebold, promised to deliver Ohio to George W. Bush. Bob Urosevich and his brother, Todd, owned Diebold and ES&S and between them counted 80% of the vote in the United States. So obviously anyone who votes is a sucker.
But that’s not the point of this essay. Even if the vote were not rigged, it’s still wrong and anti-American to vote for anything.
Even if the vote were not rigged, we’d still only get candidates who are allowed by AIPAC, the Jewish control-of-government agency. Voting is how we are controlled. It is the best possible control because we vote for the controls on us!
When I interviewed General Edwin A. Walker at his home in Dallas in ’76, the first thing he asked me was: “Do you vote?” I hesitated to say that I did not but he immediately said, “Don’t do it! Don’t vote! Don’t give ‘em a mandate!”
We’re not going to vote our way out of this disaster. Voting is how we got into it. By continuing to vote we can only make things worse by endorsing what happens.
Let’s think about our roots as Americans. Doesn’t really matter when you got here – you’re here. This is America. In America, things are done by violence and have been from the very beginning. It is our duty as Americans to continue this tradition and improve on it.
For example, law enforcement here is done by violence and the threat of violence, much more so than it was in the old days. It’s probably a surprise for voting Americans to realize that it’s more violent today than it was in Dodge City or Tombstone in the 19th Century. The police today are doing things to civilians that would never have occurred to Wyatt Earp or Bill Hickok. Today the police will shoot you down without hesitation, simpering that officer safety comes first. They’ll also pull you out of your wheelchair and slam your face into the concrete if you give them any lip. But if there’s a killer shooting up an office, they’ll wait outside till he runs out of ammo. Officer safety comes first.
The cops are this way because we vote. This is how voters get treated. Think about it. “Civilized people delegate their power through the electoral process.” Right. Civilized people are cowardly people who have surrendered their power. They are trained to call 911 and go to a safe room. It’s only human nature that cops treat such cowards with contempt. Contempt breeds brutality.
Obviously this is changing. Millions of Americans who weren’t already armed are arming themselves. Many of these self-defensive people think of themselves on the side of law and order but this is a grave mistake.
There is no law and order — only control. Either we control them or they control us.
The alternative to voting is the revolutionary spirit. We must be left alone to go about our business. This in itself is revolutionary and it’s the only way we can live. We must be left alone. But the government will not leave us alone so we must fight. Government thugs who will not leave us alone, who instead insist that we do what we’re told, must be killed without mercy.
The early American revolutionaries were just people who wanted to be left alone. Empires can’t leave you alone, however. If empires left you alone, there’d be no empire.
The American empire can’t leave anyone alone – it’s in a hundred and fifty other countries, occupying, bossing around and even torturing and killing people who just want to be left alone.
The people in a few of those many countries have decided to do the only thing left to them: they decided to kill the imperial Americans who occupied their countries and bossed them around and tortured and killed their friends and relatives.
That’s only proper. It’s only proper that a so-called “ambassador” who was part of the violent takeover of Libya be killed. That’s what’s supposed to happen to invaders, no matter who they are. Invaders must be killed – there’s nothing else to do with them.
It’s the same here at home. Sic semper tyrannis. Thus always to tyrants. Lincoln was a vicious invader who deserved a bullet in the head. Imagine: over eight hundred thousand Americans slaughtered in his war “to save the Union.” Any union that requires such a death toll doesn’t deserve to be saved.
Imagine: an elected president of the United States arresting thousands of northerners and hundreds of northern publishers who objected to his invasion of the southern states, and sending them to prison without trial or any due process for the duration of his war! And then imagine turning this hideously ugly murderer into a paragon of virtue.
Again, this was the result of voting. Voting also got us George W. Bush. Well, voting actually got us Al Gore and the Supreme Court got us George W. Bush, but you get my meaning. The presidency, the Supreme Court, the Senate and House were produced by the Constitution, the root of all evil.
All those treacherous, deadly executive orders used against us are Constitutional. So are the FEMA camps that are being built for us. So are renditions. So is legalized torture.
Okay, so if we don’t vote, how do we decide things?
It has been our voting that has made us so hated around the world. Again, the voting process in America is totally controlled by Jews. Jews own the banks and the banks pay for the elections and campaigns. How? Banks lend the government credit, a sophisticated fraud that was illegal until legalized in 1913. Government “borrowing” from banks, which cannot be repaid, gives banks total control over the government, as we can plainly see in the case of Goldman Sachs. This so-called investment bank, implicated in megafraud since the Crash of ’29, has a vice-grip on the US government for one reason: THE AMERICAN VOTE IS CONTROLLED BY JEWS.
American politicians are unable to criticize Goldman Sachs or any other Jewish powerhouse because they will be out of office in the next selection. AIPAC sees to this by supplying a Jew-friendly opponent with all the Jewish money he needs to beat the “anti-Semite.”
So voting is a total waste of time and effort. Let’s all quit voting.
THE ETERNAL JEW, anti-Semitic cartoon, 1937
“You have not begun to appreciate the depth of our guilt. We are intruders. We are subverters. We have taken your natural world, your ideals, your destiny, and played havoc with them. We have been at the bottom of not merely the latest great war, but of every other major revolution in your history. We have brought discord and confusion and frustration into your personal and public life. We are still doing it. No one can tell how long we shall go on doing it. Who knows what great and glorious destiny might have been yours if we had left you alone.” – Marcus Eli Ravage, Century Magazine February, 1926
As American revolutionaries it is our duty to overthrow by violence the current dictatorship, just as it was in 1776. We don’t need a new declaration – the old one is still fine. “Whenever any form of government is destructive of these ends [life, liberty, happiness], it is the right of the People to alter or abolish it.” This is our founding document and the only guide we need by which to steer our course.
The first American Revolution was by necessity a violent one. We must also remember that they weren’t Americans fighting a foreign invader – they were Englishmen fighting the English government and the English army – the most formidable in the world at that time.
This time it will be Americans fighting the American government and the American army, certainly the most sadistic in the world at this time. Irregular civilian forces in Iraq and Afghanistan have proven superior to the US Army in those countries, despite all the high-tech, high-fi gadgetry and wonder weapons our Jewish bankers have provided to the US military with lucrative “loans.”
Remember, bankers don’t lend money – they lend credit, which is a pleasant word for nothing. But they demand to be repaid in cash plus interest. This is how Jews get all the money in the world. The license for this insanity was given them in 1913.
We American revolutionaries can only change America by force and violence, just as our tough role models did from 1775 to 1781. This is the proper way to deal with invaders and occupiers, who must be killed without exception. We are occupied by merciless foreign and domestic Jews who must likewise be killed. Judaism is the cancer of society protected and made powerful by Christian dupes, who must be reeducated and rehabilitated in some humane way – if possible.
The purpose of this essay is to energize the American resistance movement that is beginning to stir and remind its members of the deadly nature of our Jewish occupied government. Two reminders of this long occupation are the Jewish attack on the USS Liberty and the Jewish attack of September 11, 2001. Both attacks were joint US/Israel operations with identical goals: to blame the attacks on Arabs resulting in the US invasion of the Middle East and seizure of the oilfields on the side of Israel. The first attack failed in all ways. The second was a complete success—in Iraq and Afghanistan—except the Jewish-led US invading forces were defeated in the end.
It will be the same here in America. Also after much death and destruction. That’s what happens when we let Jews run the show.
This must be the final battle between Americans and the Jews, with no mercy expected or given.
There will always need to be the revolutionary spirit and violent revolutions by future Americans, just as Jefferson recommended. But the deadly Jewish component must be removed from America this time, in order that America might become a decent, humble and friendly member of the world’s nations for the first time in its history.
It can never be this with any sort of Jewish influence still present.
“It’s only a matter of time before the masses are shaken from their slumber and realize that the world that awaits them is a world under the dominion of evil.” — Lasha Darkmoon, here
A slightly edited version of this article, with pictures, captions and additional commenary by Lasha Darkmoon
It is a far deadlier weapon than any weapon Israel has in its armory — and it is capable of destroying Israel. What weapon? To find out, read on.
“If everyone who claims to be a Holocaust survivor actually is one, who did Hitler kill?” — Norman Finkelstein’s mother, quoted in Norman Finkelstein’s The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering.
The energy crisis is causing worry. However, Iran, which possesses huge reserves of oil and gas, wishes to exploit them better, with our help, and sell us the products, a procedure that would lead to a marked softening of worldwide petrol, diesel, fuel oil and gas prices. A good many nations have an eye on this great potential wealth and would be apt to respond favorably to Tehran’s business proposals. But the United States has decreed the boycott of Iran and, up to now, the world’s policeman has generally been obeyed.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can make all the proposals he likes: he still finds himself considered a criminal. His request for a collaboration that would let him fully re-equip the country’s drilling, production and processing operations is refused. He goes so far as to suggest that countries using the single European currency pay in euros and no longer in dollars, but to no avail. People turn their back to him. Some threaten him. Even the Pope refuses to receive him.
In many countries, President Ahmadinejad’s embassies and diplomatic staff are deprived of contact with the local authorities and foreign delegations; they have ended up with pariah status.
One may well ask oneself where such radical behavior towards the Iranians ever originated and why the international community acts so obviously against its own economic interests.
Three grounds are usually brought up to explain this policy of boycott and open hostility toward Iran:
1) The Iranian president is perhaps trying to arm his country with nuclear weapons.
2) It seems he wants to exterminate the Jews in Israel.
3) He holds the extermination of the European Jews during the Second World War to be a myth.
The first two grounds do not make much sense; only the third is serious and, for that reason, instructive.
In reply to the first ground, it’s fitting to observe that if Ahmadinejad’s accusers possessed the slightest evidence that Iran was trying to acquire nuclear weapons, such evidence would long since have been brandished before the world; however, up to now, they have supplied no real evidence.
In any case, if Iran had a nuclear bomb at her disposal, she could not launch it towards a geographic zone populated by as many Palestinians as Jews, since her bomb would kill or maim both populations without distinction.
The second bone of contention against Iran — that it seeks the extermination of the Jews in Israel — is without foundation. It rests on the absurd manipulation of a text. Ahmadinejad has had, and continues to have ascribed to him, an incendiary statement according to which the Jewish State is to be “wiped off the map”, words taken to mean the extermination of the Jews in Israel.
Actually, Ahadminejad had merely repeated (in 2005) Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1979 declaration that “the regime occupying Jerusalem” would one day “vanish from the page of time”. This was the repetition of someone else’s prediction, not a threat.
Ahmadinejad took care to spell out his phrase by specifying that, if all the inhabitants of the land of Palestine – Moslems, Jews and Christians – had the right one day to vote freely and opt for a regime of their choice, the Zionist regime would disappear from Palestine just as, for example, the Communist regime disappeared from Russia. The Western media, as a whole, have reported neither the exact wording nor the explanation.
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD’S EXACT WORDS: “Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad.” — “The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time“.
A literal word-for-word translation of the Farsi: Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).
Note that the word MAP (nagsheh in Farsi) occurs nowhere in Ahmadinejad’s speech; nor do the words ISRAEL or WIPE OUT. The English translation “I want to wipe Israel off the map” is therefore much more than a mischievous mistranslation. It is a complete fabrication. [LD]
The third ground is the true one: if the Iranian president causes so much fear, it’s owing to his revisionism. He has wielded the sole weapon that can deeply worry the Jewish State and its ally, the United States.
He possesses what I’ve called the poor man’s atomic bomb. In the findings of historical revisionism, he effectively holds a “weapon of mass destruction” that would kill no one but could neutralize Israel’s number one political weapon: the Great Lie of the alleged Nazi gas chambers and the alleged genocide of Europe’s Jews.
Raised in the religion of “the Holocaust”, the peoples of North America and Europe generally believe in this Great Lie and see Ahmadinejad as a heretic. Thus they dare not defend any policy of rapprochement with Iran, or call for a lifting of the boycott, although therein lies the only chance of seeing their energy costs decrease. Doubtless some of these peoples’ leaders desire an understanding with Iran, but they back away at the prospect of being criticized as accomplices of the new Satan, of the “denier”, the “negationist” who “kills the Jews once again by denying their death”.
The news of the international “Holocaust” conference in Tehran (December 11th—12th 2006) rang out like a warning shot. By no means reserved to revisionists, that conference was open to all. Confrontation of opposing views was allowed, and it took place. The rout of the anti-revisionists was dramatic. And President Ahmadinejad, already fully apprised of revisionist argumentation, was thus able to restate that “the Holocaust” was a myth.
Bush, Blair, Chirac, who know nothing of revisionism, responded by making a terrible fuss. As for the Israelis, they are aware of the Jewish authors’ utter inability to answer revisionist arguments on the scientific level; they now uphold their Great Lie only with Elie Wiesel-style fake testimony or cinematic guff in the manner of Claude Lanzmann, when they don’t resort to novels, drama or even sham museum exhibitions like those at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem or the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington.
“SOME EVENTS DO TAKE PLACE BUT ARE NOT TRUE; OTHERS ARE, ALTHOUGH THEY NEVER OCCURRED.”
— Elie Wiesel, the world’s most famous Holocaust survivor and — some would claim — the world’s most widely acclaimed liar. “In Buchenwald they sent 10,000 persons to their deaths each day,” he lied. “I was always in the last hundred near the gate. They stopped. Why?”
Concerning Babi Yar, a place in Ukraine where the Germans executed Soviet citizens, Wiesel wrote of Jews being killed: “For month after month, the ground never stopped trembling; from time to time, geysers of blood spurted from it.” (Reporting another witness to this miraculous event).
In 2007, Wiesel stated that President Ahmadinejad of Iran had openly admitted he wanted to nuke Israel into oblivion. “When he says he wants nuclear weapons to destroy the state of Israel, I must believe him,” Wiesel said.
The late Christopher Hitchens had no time for Wiesel and was not impressed by his Nobel Peace prize or his 76 honorary doctorates. “Is there a more contemptible poseur and windbag than Elie Wiesel?” he asked rhetorically. (The Nation, February 11, 2001).
Holocaust revisionism — i.e., any doubts about the official version of the Holocaust as laid down by the Zionists and their camp followers — is illegal in many parts of the world. Questioning the magic six million figure is now a “thought crime” which can get you sent to prison for several years in the following 17 countries: Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, and Switzerland.
Here are two photos of the author of this article, Dr Robert Faurisson, after he was savagely beaten up by three Jewish fanatics for daring to question the sacred tenets of the Holocaust: namely, that 6 million Jews were killed in gas chambers on the orders of Hitler. To this day, not a single gas chamber has actually been seen by anyone. [LD]
The Zionists and their friends are getting more and more alarmed at the diffusion of revisionism over the Internet. They make many attempts, cynical or veiled, to strengthen Internet censorship but, up to today at any rate, they have not yet achieved their aims. Throughout the Western world repression of revisionism is worsening, but it’s all a waste of effort so far. The holocaustic propaganda and Shoah Business grow ever more deafening, but henceforth they tend to annoy or tire people.
The Zionists have therefore seized the occasion to draw up a bill in the Knesset that would let the State of Israel demand that any revisionist, wherever in the world he might be, be delivered to its own courts!
When there’s no proof to show, the cudgel is used.
Herman Rosenblatt and his wife Roma, smirking contentedly after having conned the world into accepting their fake Holocaust memoir Angel at the Fence. TV celeb Oprah Winfrey was taken in by their touching concentration camp romance and gushed breathlessly, “This is the single greatest love story we’ve ever told on the air!” Asked why he had lied, Mr Rosenblatt explained, “I wanted to bring happiness to people.” Despite the book being a proven fake, a $25 million blockbuster movie is now being made by Jewish producer Harris Salomon.
Rosenblatt’s fake memoir is one in a long series of Holocaust hoaxes, some of them even more flamboyantly absurd. e.g., the case of Misha the Wolf Girl who was raised by wolves and fed on raw meat like a wolf cub — a story that netted her over $20 million and was also made into a movie. Nor are matters made any better when we learn that Holocaust scams are frequent, with thousands of fraudulent claims being made every year by bogus “survivors”, costing Germany and other countries tens of millions of dollars. In one case alone, Germany was cheated out of $42 million. All this blatant dishonesty by unscrupulous Jews — to quote a Jewish friend of mine — “only brings the Holocaust into disrepute and gives ammunition to the Holocaust deniers.”
This, then, is the “secret weapon” against Israel that Iran wields so effectively — a weapon far deadlier than all of Israel’s 200-300 nuclear warheads: Holocaust truth. If the truth about the Holocaust should ever turn out to be what historical revisionists and millions of other increasingly skeptical people think it is — a spectacular hoax to prop up Zionism and give the Jewish state a semblance of legitimacy — Israel’s days are numbered.
It is for this reason that Israel is perhaps so desperate to destroy Iran: to silence it before the truth gets out. (LD)
LET us go then, you and I,
When the evening is spread out against the sky
Like a patient etherized upon a table;
Let us go, through certain half-deserted streets,
The muttering retreats
Of restless nights in one-night cheap hotels
And sawdust restaurants with oyster-shells:
Streets that follow like a tedious argument
Of insidious intent
To lead you to an overwhelming question….
Oh, do not ask, “What is it?”
Let us go and make our visit.
In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo.
The yellow fog that rubs its back upon the window-panes,
The yellow smoke that rubs its muzzle on the window-panes
Licked its tongue into the corners of the evening,
Lingered upon the pools that stand in drains,
Let fall upon its back the soot that falls from chimneys,
Slipped by the terrace, made a sudden leap,
And seeing that it was a soft October night,
Curled once about the house, and fell asleep.
And indeed there will be time
For the yellow smoke that slides along the street,
Rubbing its back upon the window panes;
There will be time, there will be time
To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet;
There will be time to murder and create,
And time for all the works and days of hands
That lift and drop a question on your plate;
Time for you and time for me,
And time yet for a hundred indecisions,
And for a hundred visions and revisions,
Before the taking of a toast and tea.
In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo.
And indeed there will be time
To wonder, “Do I dare?” and, “Do I dare?”
Time to turn back and descend the stair,
With a bald spot in the middle of my hair—
(They will say: “How his hair is growing thin!”)
My morning coat, my collar mounting firmly to the chin,
My necktie rich and modest, but asserted by a simple pin—
(They will say: “But how his arms and legs are thin!”)
Do I dare
Disturb the universe?
In a minute there is time
For decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse.
Do I dare
Disturb the universe?
For I have known them all already, known them all:
Have known the evenings, mornings, afternoons,
I have measured out my life with coffee spoons;
I know the voices dying with a dying fall
Beneath the music from a farther room.
So how should I presume?
And I have known the eyes already, known them all—
The eyes that fix you in a formulated phrase,
And when I am formulated, sprawling on a pin,
When I am pinned and wriggling on the wall,
Then how should I begin
To spit out all the butt-ends of my days and ways?
And how should I presume?
And I have known the arms already, known them all—
Arms that are braceleted and white and bare
(But in the lamplight, downed with light brown hair!)
Is it perfume from a dress
That makes me so digress?
Arms that lie along a table, or wrap about a shawl.
And should I then presume?
And how should I begin?
“Is it the perfume from a dress
That makes me so digress?”
* * *
Shall I say, I have gone at dusk through narrow streets
And watched the smoke that rises from the pipes
Of lonely men in shirt-sleeves, leaning out of windows?…
I should have been a pair of ragged claws
Scuttling across the floors of silent seas.
* * *
And the afternoon, the evening, sleeps so peacefully!
Smoothed by long fingers,
Asleep … tired … or it malingers,
Stretched on the floor, here beside you and me.
Should I, after tea and cakes and ices,
Have the strength to force the moment to its crisis?
But though I have wept and fasted, wept and prayed,
Though I have seen my head (grown slightly bald) brought in upon a platter,
I am no prophet—and here’s no great matter;
I have seen the moment of my greatness flicker,
And I have seen the eternal Footman hold my coat, and snicker,
And in short, I was afraid.
And would it have been worth it, after all,
After the cups, the marmalade, the tea,
Among the porcelain, among some talk of you and me,
Would it have been worth while,
To have bitten off the matter with a smile,
To have squeezed the universe into a ball
To roll it toward some overwhelming question,
To say: “I am Lazarus, come from the dead,
Come back to tell you all, I shall tell you all”—
If one, settling a pillow by her head,
Should say: “That is not what I meant at all;
That is not it, at all.”
“I am Lazarus, come back from the dead…”
And would it have been worth it, after all,
Would it have been worth while,
After the sunsets and the dooryards and the sprinkled streets,
After the novels, after the teacups, after the skirts that trail along the floor—
And this, and so much more?—
It is impossible to say just what I mean!
But as if a magic lantern threw the nerves in patterns on a screen:
Would it have been worth while
If one, settling a pillow or throwing off a shawl,
And turning toward the window, should say:
“That is not it at all,
That is not what I meant, at all.”
. . . . . . . .
No! I am not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be;
Am an attendant lord, one that will do
To swell a progress, start a scene or two,
Advise the prince; no doubt, an easy tool,
Deferential, glad to be of use,
Politic, cautious, and meticulous;
Full of high sentence, but a bit obtuse;
At times, indeed, almost ridiculous—
Almost, at times, the Fool.
I grow old … I grow old …
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.
Shall I part my hair behind? Do I dare to eat a peach?
I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each.
I do not think that they will sing to me.
I have seen them riding seaward on the waves
Combing the white hair of the waves blown back
When the wind blows the water white and black.
We have lingered in the chambers of the sea
By sea-girls wreathed with seaweed red and brown
Till human voices wake us, and we drown.
“. . . human voices wake us, and we drown.”
Pictures and captions by Lasha Darkmoon
“This is good for Israel . . . !”
Almost every politically-aware person on the planet is puzzled by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s bizarre obsession with Iran. Netanyahu is risking his political career, his reputation, and Israel’s future by intervening in the US presidential elections.
He is using all of Zionism’s considerable might – including organized crime assets like “Las Vegas Godfather” Sheldon Adelson – to force Obama to attack Iran; or, failing that, to make sure that Obama is defeated by the Zionist puppet Romney. There are even rumors of Israeli-sponsored assassination attempts on Obama.
Even the rabidly pro-Zionist Jewish Daily Forward has editorialized:
“It’s difficult to recall a time when an Israeli prime minister has inserted himself into a presidential election campaign in the way that Benjamin Netanyahu has. It’s even harder to recall a time when a trusted ally openly urged the American president to undertake a questionable, unpopular and highly risky war. We sure hope Netanyahu knows what he’s doing, because the stakes for him – and for the two nations he professes to care about the most – could not be higher.”
The Jewish Daily Forward has good reasons to wonder whether Netanyahu knows what he’s doing. The editorialist cites polls showing that the American people strongly oppose attacking Iran, even if war breaks out between Iran and Israel and only US intervention could save Israel! These polls show that American voters no longer give a damn whether Israel, which has chosen to live by the sword, finally dies by the sword. As Dave Lindorff observes, Netanyahu’s mad obsession with pushing the US into yet another unwanted war for Israel “may have fundamentally undermined the long-standing ‘special relationship’ between the US and Israel.”
And still Netanyahu continues on this seemingly suicidal course. He even orders the Mossad and its CIA assets including Gladio veteran Terry Jones to unleash a rabidly anti-Islam film, spammed into the faces of every Muslim on the planet via millions of dollars of computer server time and intelligence agency expertise – an obvious attempt to fan the flames of Islamophobia and pave the way to a US war on Iran for Israel. Obama, who is on record saying he hates Netanyahu and that Netanyahu is a liar, and who knows that Netanyahu manufactured the “Innocence of Muslims” crisis to try to get Romney elected, responded by refusing to meet with Netanyahu in New York, and going on the David Letterman Show instead. A more blatant snub could hardly be imagined.
I AM IN CHARGE OF AMERICA, UNDERSTAND?
So, what in the world is Netanyahu really up to? Does he actually believe that Iran has a nuclear weapons program, even though the CIA has certified that it does not?
Of course, he doesn’t really believe such nonsense. Even hard-line Israeli strategists admit that Iran appears to be only developing nuclear expertise, not actual weapons. Furthermore, Iran has not attacked another nation in centuries.
Since the “nuclear crisis” is a hoax (like alleged Iraqi WMD in 2003), then what is the real reason for Netanyahu’s Iran obsession? Is it the Iranian government’s support for anti-Zionist resistance groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, and its calls for an end to Zionism through free and fair elections?
Perhaps. Iran’s open commitment to principled anti-Zionism represents the nearly unanimous position of the people of the Middle East, who have never accepted the genocidal Zionist entity as a legitimate state. Israel has been able to bully every other government in the region into shameful silence. The Islamic Republic of Iran will not be silenced. Threats to level Iran with bombs seeks to send a message to future Middle Eastern governments: Do not give a voice to your people’s resistance to Zionism, or else!
But while starting a war might seek to punish Iran for its anti-Zionism, such a war would carry terrible risks for Israel. In the impossible event that all goes well for Israel on the battlefield, the suffering of the people of Iran would probably shame the world into turning against Zionism even more sharply than the world turned against apartheid in the 1980s.
But there is no guarantee that things would go well for Israel on the battlefield. Iran has the capability to riddle Israel with rocket attacks, or even to take out Israel’s Dimona nuclear facility and perhaps render Israel and much of the surrounding region permanently uninhabitable. And Israel does not have the capability to seriously damage Iran’s nuclear energy program without US help. If the US intervened on the side of Israel, Iran could shut the Straits of Hormuz, and possibly sink many, if not all, of the ships there with Sunburn missiles, driving gasoline prices over USD 10 a gallon and paralyzing the world economy.
Additionally, Iran has the capability to massively attack the US bases that surround it, killing thousands, if not tens of thousands, of US soldiers. A US president, especially one who dislikes Netanyahu and puts America’s interests ahead of Israel’s, would be very unlikely to help Netanyahu attack Iran.
Though these 45 American bases threaten Iran, Iran nevertheless has the ability to destroy each of these bases with its long-range missiles, inflicting death on tens of thousands of American soldiers. Iranian anti-ship missiles (like the deadly Sunburns) can easily sink America’s huge aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, drowning 7000 marines on board each ship. (LD)
“The entire lake will become a killing field…the Gulf will run red with American blood.” — Military specialist Mark Gaffney.
Given that a war on Iran is an all-loss proposition for Israel, why is Netanyahu fanatically fanning the flames of war, to the extent that even his American Zionist cheering section is baffled and embarrassed by his behavior?
Some question Netanyahu’s intelligence, arguing that he is just a furniture salesman who has been promoted far beyond his level of competence. While there may be some truth to this – I certainly wouldn’t want to overestimate Netanyahu’s intelligence – I don’t think he’s quite that stupid. I think Netanyahu has a very good reason to prefer war with Iran, despite all its risks, to peace. I think he does know what he’s doing.
Netanyahu needs the 9/11-triggered 100-years-war on Islam to continue for the very good reason that if it does not, the State of Emergency still in place in the US will be lifted, and Americans, unencumbered by the National Security restrictions of wartime, will quickly learn what really happened on September 11th, 2001. That possibility poses a very real existential threat to Israel – and to Netanyahu.
As Alan Sabrosky, former Director of Strategic Studies at the US Army War College, told Press TV: “I have had long conversations over the past two weeks with contacts at the Army War College, at the Headquarters Marine Corps, and I have made it absolutely clear in both cases that it is 100 percent certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation. Period. If Americans ever know that Israel did this, they are going to scrub them off the earth.”
And even if Israel were “scrubbed off the earth” peacefully through a one-state solution, Netanyahu would certainly hang for his role in the 9/11 attacks.
“Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.” — Galatians 6:7
An edited version of this article by Jonathan Cook, with pictures, captions and comments by Lasha Darkmoon
“Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States, it can dry up and blow away.” — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, 2002. (Widely reported, see here)
It is possibly the greatest of American political myths.
President Barack Obama has claimed that the United States enjoys a special bond with Israel unlike its relations with any other country. He has called the friendship “unshakeable”. His Republican rival, Mitt Romney, has gone further, arguing that there is not “an inch of difference between ourselves and our ally Israel”.
While such pronouncements form the basis of an apparent Washington consensus, the reality is that the cherished friendship is no more than a fairy tale.
Politicians may prefer to express undying love for Israel, and hand over billions of dollars annually in aid, but the US security establishment has — at least, in private — always regarded Israel as an unfaithful partner.
The distrust has been particularly hard to hide in relation to Iran. Israel has been putting relentless pressure on Washington, apparently in the hope of manoeuvring it into supporting or joining an attack on Tehran to stop what Israel claims is an Iranian effort to build a nuclear bomb concealed beneath its civilian energy programme.
While coverage has focused on the personal animosity between Obama and the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, the truth is that US officials generally are deeply at odds with Israel on this issue.
The conflict burst into the open this month with reports that the Pentagon had scaled back next month’s joint military exercise, Austere Challenge, with the Israeli military that had been billed as the largest and most significant in the two countries’ history.
The goal of the exercise was to test the readiness of Israel’s missile-defence shield in case of Iranian reprisals — possibly the biggest fear holding Israel back from launching a go-it-alone attack. The Pentagon’s main leverage on Israel is its X-band radar, stationed in Israel but operated exclusively by a US crew, that would provide Israel with early warning of Iranian missiles.
A senior Israeli military official told Time magazine what message the Pentagon’s rethink had conveyed: “Basically what the Americans are saying is, ‘We don’t trust you’.”
The Lavon Affair (1954), the USS Liberty attack on American servicemen (1967), and numerous espionage incidents and acts of Israeli betrayal over the years, have not helped to inspire American trust in Israel (LD)
But discord between the two “unshakeable allies” is not limited to Iran. Antipathy has been the norm for decades. Over the summer, current and former CIA officials admitted that the US security establishment has always regarded Israel as its number one counter-intelligence threat in the Middle East.
The most infamous spy working on Israel’s behalf was Jonathan Pollard, a naval intelligence officer who passed thousands of classified documents to Israel in the 1980s. Israel’s repeated requests for his release have been a running sore with the Pentagon, not least because defence officials regard promises that Israel would never again operate spies on US soil as insincere.
Jonathan Pollard, one in a long line of Jewish American spies. (See here). The total number of Jewish spies convicted or expelled from the US exceeds the number of spies from all other ethnic groups. As Jews make up only 2% of the American population and blacks 14%, there ought to be seven times as many black spies. In fact, there are none. (LD)
At least two more spies have been identified in the past few years. In 2008 a former US army engineer, Ben-Ami Kadish, admitted that he had allowed Israeli agents to photograph secret documents about US fighter jets and nuclear weapons in the 1980s. And in 2006 Lawrence Franklin, a US defence official, was convicted of passing classified documents to Israel concerning Iran.
In fact, such betrayals were assumed by Washington from the start of the relationship. In Israel’s early years, a US base in Cyprus monitored Israeli activities; today, Israeli communications are intercepted by a team of Hebrew linguists stationed at Fort Meade, Maryland.
Documents released this month by the Israeli air force archives also reveal that Israel eventually identified mysterious high-altitude planes that overflew its territory throughout the 1950s as American U-2 espionage planes.
In a sign of continuing US caution, Israel has not been included in the coterie of countries with which Washington shares sensitive intelligence. The members of the “Five Eyes” group, consisting of the US, Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, have promised not to spy on each other — a condition Israel would have regularly flouted were it a member.
America should think twice about revealing its innermost secrets to these four countries. This could well be its Achilles’ heel. None of these Zionized nations can be trusted not to hand to hand over America’s secrets to Israel. The most untrustworthy of these four countries is undoubtedly Canada, followed by Britain and Australia in second place, with New Zealand the least untrustworthy of the four. If America ever wished to feed Israel with false information, one way it it could do this would be to pass on the false “secret” information to Canada — a country so Zionized that it has virtually become an Israeli colony. (LD)
Indeed, Israel has even stolen the identities of nationals from these countries to assist in Mossad operations. Most notoriously, Israel forged passports to smuggle Israeli agents into Dubai in 2010 to assassinate Hamas leader Mahmoud Al Mabhouh.
Israel is far from a trusted ally in the US “war on terror”. A former intelligence official told the Associated Press in July that Israel ranked lower than Libya in a list of countries helping to fight terrorism compiled by the Bush administration after September 11.
So why all the talk of a special bond if the relationship is characterised by such deep mistrust?
Part of the answer lies in the formidably intimidating tactics of the pro-Israel lobby in Washington. Thomas Friedman, the New York Times columnist, spoke for a growing number of observers last year when he wrote that the US Congress was effectively “bought and paid for” by Israel’s lobbyists.
That power was all too evident last week when the Democratic national convention adopted an amended policy designating Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, in opposition to both international law and the vocal wishes of delegates.
But there is another, less spoken-of reason. Francis Perrin, the head of the French Atomic Agency in the 1950s and 1960s, when France was helping Israel develop a nuclear weapon against the wishes of the US, once observed that the Israeli bomb was really “aimed against the Americans”.
Not because Israel wanted to attack the US, but because it realised that — once it possessed the only nuclear arsenal in the Middle East — the US would rarely risk standing in its way, however much its policies ran counter to US interests.
For that reason, if no other, Israel is determined to stop any rival, including Iran, from getting a nuclear weapon that would end its monopoly.
AMERICA UNDER ATTACK
It is not inconceivable that one day, in the not too distant future, America might itself be the object of a major nuclear attack by Israel, especially if relations should deteriorate further into outright hostility.
As if to emphasize the point of Israeli muscularity, Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld has more than once invoked the dreaded Samson option.”We possess several hundred atomic warheads,” he reminds us ominously, “and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets of our air force.”
If most European capitals have been targeted for attack by Israel, including London and Paris, why not Washington? (LD)
The article below was written for the Journal of 9/11 Studies for the eleventh anniversary of September 11, 2001, the day that terminated accountable government and American liberty. It is posted here with the agreement of the editors.
In order to understand the improbability of the government’s explanation of 9/11, it is not necessary to know anything about what force or forces brought down the three World Trade Center buildings, what hit the Pentagon or caused the explosion, the flying skills or lack thereof of the alleged hijackers, whether the airliner crashed in Pennsylvania or was shot down, whether cell phone calls made at the altitudes could be received, or any other debated aspect of the controversy.
You only have to know two things.
One is that according to the official story, a handful of Arabs, mainly Saudi Arabians, operating independently of any government and competent intelligence service, men without James Bond and V for Vendetta capabilities, outwitted not only the CIA, FBI, and National Security Agency, but all 16 US intelligence agencies, along with all security agencies of America’s NATO allies and Israel’s Mossad. Not only did the entire intelligence forces of the Western world fail, but on the morning of the attack the entire apparatus of the National Security State simultaneously failed. Airport security failed four times in one hour. NORAD failed. Air Traffic Control failed. The US Air Force failed. The National Security Council failed. Dick Cheney failed. Absolutely nothing worked. The world’s only superpower was helpless at the humiliating mercy of a few undistinguished Arabs.
It is hard to image a more far-fetched story — except for the second thing you need to know: The humiliating failure of US National Security did not result in immediate demands from the President of the United States, from Congress, from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and from the media for an investigation of how such improbable total failure could have occurred. No one was held accountable for the greatest failure of national security in world history. Instead, the White House dragged its feet for a year resisting any investigation until the persistent demands from 9/11 families for accountability forced President George W. Bush to appoint a political commission, devoid of any experts, to hold a pretend investigation.
On 9/11 Doubts Were Immediate
On September 11, 2001, a neighbor telephoned and said, “turn on the TV.” I assumed that a hurricane, possibly a bad one from the sound of the neighbor’s voice, was headed our way, and turned on the TV to determine whether we needed to shutter the house and leave.
What I saw was black smoke from upper floors of one of the World Trade Center towers. It didn’t seem to be much of a fire, and the reports were that the fire was under control. While I was trying to figure out why every TV network had its main news anchor covering an office fire, TV cameras showed an airplane hitting the other tower. It was then that I learned that both towers had been hit by airliners.
Cameras showed people standing at the hole in the side of the tower looking out. This didn’t surprise me. The airliner was minute compared to the massive building. But what was going on? Two accidents, one on top of the other?
The towers — the three-fourths or four-fifths of the buildings beneath the plane strikes — were standing, apparently largely undamaged. There were no signs of fire except in the vicinity of where the airliners had hit. Suddenly, one of the towers blew up, disintegrated, and disappeared in fine dust. Before one could make any sense of this, the same thing happened to the second tower, and it too disappeared into fine dust.
The TV news anchors compared the disintegration of the towers to controlled demolition. There were numerous reports of explosions throughout the towers from the base or sub-basements to the top. (Once the government put out the story of terrorist attack, references to controlled demolition and explosions disappeared from the print and TV media.) This made sense to me. Someone had blown up the buildings. It was completely obvious that the towers had not fallen down from asymmetrical structural damage. They had blown up.
The images of the airliners hitting the towers and the towers blowing up were replayed time and again. Airliners hit the top portions of the towers, and not long afterward the towers blew up. I turned off the TV wondering how it was that cameras had been ready to catch such an unusual phenomenon as an airplane flying into a skyscraper.
I don’t remember the time line, but it wasn’t long before the story was in place that Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda gang had attacked the US. A passport had been found in the rubble. Another airliner had flown into the Pentagon, and a fourth airliner had crashed or been shot down. Four airliners had been hijacked, meaning airport security had failed four times on the same morning. Terrorists had successfully assaulted America.
When I heard these reports, I wondered. How could a tiny undamaged passport be found in the rubble of two skyscrapers, each more than 100 stories tall, when bodies, office furniture and computers could not be found? How could airport security fail so totally that four airliners could be hijacked within the same hour? How could authorities know so conclusively and almost immediately the names of the perpetrators who pulled off such a successful attack on the world’s only superpower, when the authorities had no idea that such an attack was planned or even possible?
These questions disturbed me, because as a former member of the congressional staff and as a presidential appointee to high office, I had high-level security clearances. In addition to my duties as Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury, I had FEMA responsibilities in the event of nuclear attack. There was a mountain hideaway to which I was supposed to report in the event of a nuclear attack and from which I was supposed to take over the US government in the event no higher official survived the attack.
The more the story of 9/11 was presented in the media, the more wondrous it became. It is not credible that not only the CIA and FBI failed to detect the plot, but also all 16 US intelligence agencies, including the National Security Agency, which spies on everyone on the planet, and the Defense Intelligence Agency, Israel’s Mossad, and the intelligence agencies of Washington’s NATO allies. There are simply too many watchmen and too much infiltration of terrorist groups for such a complex attack to be prepared undetected and carried out undeterred.
Washington’s explanation of the attack implied a security failure too massive to be credible. Such a catastrophic failure of national security would mean that the US and Western Europe were never safe for one second during the Cold War, that the Soviet Union could have destroyed the entire West in one undetected fell swoop.
As a person whose colleagues at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington were former secretaries of state, former national security advisors, former CIA directors, former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, I was troubled by the story that a collection of individuals unsupported by a competent intelligence service had pulled off the events of 9/11.
As a person with high-level government service, I knew that any such successful operation as 9/11 would have resulted in immediate demands from the White House, Congress, and the media for accountability. There would have been an investigation of how every aspect of US security could totally fail simultaneously in one morning. Such a catastrophic and embarrassing failure of the national security state would not be left unexamined.
NORAD failed. The US Air Force could not get jet fighters in the air. Air Traffic Control lost sight of the hijacked airliners. Yet, instead of launching an investigation, the White House resisted for one year the demands of the 9/11 families for an investigation. Neither the public, the media, nor Congress seemed to think an investigation was necessary. The focus was on revenge, which the Bush neocon regime said meant invading Afghanistan which was alleged to be sheltering the perpetrator, Osama bin Laden.
Normally, terrorists are proud of their success and announce their responsibility. It is a way to build a movement. Often a number of terrorist groups will compete in claiming credit for a successful operation. But Osama bin Laden in the last video that is certified by independent experts said that he had no responsibility for 9/11, that he had nothing against the American people, that his opposition was limited to the US government’s colonial policies and control over Muslim governments.
It makes no sense that the “mastermind” of the most humiliating blow in world history ever to have been delivered against a superpower would not claim credit for his accomplishment. By September 11, 2001, Osama bin Laden knew that he was deathly ill. According to news reports he underwent kidney dialysis the following month. The most reliable reports that we have are that he died in December 2001. It is simply not credible that bin Laden denied responsibility because he feared Washington.
But Osama bin Laden was too useful a bogeyman, and Washington and the presstitute media kept him alive for another decade until Obama needed to kill the dead man in order to boost his sinking standings in the polls so that Democrats would not back a challenger for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Numerous bin Laden videos, every one pronounced a fake by experts, were released whenever it was convenient for Washington. No one in the Western media or in the US Congress or European or UK parliaments was sufficiently intelligent to recognize that a bin Laden video always showed up on cue when Washington needed it. “Why would the ‘mastermind’ be so accommodating for Washington?” was the question that went through my mind every time one of the fake videos was released.
The 9/11 “investigation” that finally took place was a political one run from the White House. One member of the commission resigned, declaring the investigation to be a farce, and both co-chairman and the legal counsel of the 9/11 Commission distanced themselves from their report with statements that the 9/11 Commission was “set up to fail,” that resources were withheld from the commission, that representatives of the US military lied to the commission and that the commission considered referring the false testimony for criminal prosecution.
One would think that these revelations would cause a sensation, but the news media, Congress, the White House, and the public were silent.
All of this bothered me a great deal. The US had invaded two Muslim countries based on unsubstantiated allegations linking the two countries to 9/11, which itself remained uninvestigated. The neoconservatives who staffed the George W. Bush regime were advocating more invasions of more Muslim countries. Paul O’Neill, President Bush’s first Treasury Secretary, stated publicly that the Bush regime was planning to invade Iraq prior to 9/11. O’Neill said that no one at a National Security Council meeting even asked the question, why invade Iraq? “It was all about finding a way to do it.”
The leaked top secret Downing Street Memo written by the head of British intelligence (MI6) confirms Paul O’Neill’s testimony. The memo, known as the “smoking gun memo” whose authenticity has been confirmed, states that “President George W. Bush wants to remove Saddam Hussein, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.” In other words, the US invasion of Iraq was based on nothing but a made up lie.
As an engineering student I had witnessed a controlled demolition. When films of the collapse of WTC building 7 emerged, it was obvious that building 7 had been brought down by controlled demolition. When physics instructor David Chandler measured the descent of the building and established that it took place at free-fall acceleration, the case was closed. Buildings cannot enter free fall unless controlled demolition has removed all resistance to the collapsing floors.
If airliners brought down two skyscrapers, why was controlled demolition used to bring down a third building?
I assumed that structural architects, structural engineers, and physicists would blow the whistle on the obviously false story. If I could see that something was amiss, certainly more highly trained people would.
The first physicist to make an effective and compelling argument was Steven Jones at BYU. Jones said that explosives brought down the twin towers. He made a good case. For his efforts, he was pressured to resign his tenured position. I wondered whether the federal government had threatened BYU’s research grants or whether patriotic trustees and alumni were the driving force behind Jones’ expulsion. Regardless, the message was clear to other university based experts: “Shut up or we’ll get you.”
Steven Jones was vindicated when chemist Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen In Denmark reported unequivocally that the scientific team in which he participated found nano-thermite in the residue of the twin towers. This sensational finding was not mentioned in the US print and TV media to my knowledge.
Several years after 9/11, architect Richard Gage formed Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth, an organization that has grown to include 1,700 experts. The plans of the towers have been studied. They were formidable structures. They were constructed to withstand airliner hits and fires. There is no credible explanation of their failure except intentional demolition.
I also found disturbing the gullibility of the public, media, and Congress in the unquestioning acceptance of the official stories of the shoe-bomber, shampoo and bottled-water bomber, and underwear bomber plots to blow up airliners in transit. These schemes are farcical. How can we believe that al Qaeda, capable of pulling off the most fantastic terrorist attack in history and capable of devising improvised explosive devices (IEDs) that kill and maim US troops and destroy US military vehicles would rely on something that had to be lighted with a match? The shoe and underwear bombers would simply have pushed a button on their cell phones or laptops, and the liquid bomb would not have required extended time in a lavatory to be mixed (all to no effect).None of this makes any sense. Moreover, experts disputed many of the government’s claims, which were never backed by anything but the government’s story line. There is no independent evidence that anything was involved other than firecracker powders
The case of the underwear bomber is especially difficult to accept. According to witnesses, the underwear bomber was not allowed on the airliner, because he had no passport. So an official appears who walks him onto the airliner bound for Detroit on Christmas day. What kind of official has the authority to over-ride established rules, and what did the official think would happen to the passenger when he presented himself to US Customs without a passport? Any official with the power to over-ride standard operating practices would know that it was pointless to send a passenger to a country where his entry would be rejected.
The circumstantial evidence is that these were orchestrated events designed to keep fear alive, to create new intrusive powers for a new over-arching federal policy agency, to accustom US citizens to intrusive searches and a police force to conducting them, and to sell expensive porno-scanners and now more advanced devices to the Transportation Safety Administration. Apparently, this expensive collection of high-tech gadgetry is insufficient to protect us from terrorists, and in August 2012 the Department of Homeland Security put in an order for 750 million rounds of ammunition, enough to shoot every person in the US 2.5 times.
Naive and gullible Americans claim that if some part of the US government had been involved in 9/11, “someone would have talked by now.” A comforting thought, perhaps, but nothing more. Consider, for example, the cover-up by the US government of the 1967 Israeli attack on the USS Liberty that killed or wounded most of the crew but failed to sink the ship. As the survivors have testified, they were ordered in a threatening way not to speak about the event. It was twelve years later before one of the USS Liberty’s officers, James Ennes, told the story of the attack in his book, Assault on the Liberty. I continue to wonder how the professionals at the National Institute of Standards and Technology feel about being maneuvered by the federal government into the unscientific position NIST took concerning the destruction of the WTC towers.
What will be the outcome of the doubts about the official story raised by experts? I worry that most Americans are too mentally and emotionally weak to be able to come to grips with the truth. They are far more comfortable with the story that enemies attacked America successfully despite the massive national security state in place. The American public has proved itself to be so cowardly that it willingly, without a peep, sacrificed its civil liberty and the protections of law guaranteed by the Constitution in order to be “safe.”
Congress is not about to expose itself for having squandered trillions of dollars on pointless wars based on an orchestrated “new Pearl Harbor.” When the neoconservatives said that a “new Pearl Harbor” was a requirement for their wars for American/Israeli hegemony, they set the stage for the 21st century wars that Washington has launched. If Syria falls, there is only Iran, and then Washington stands in direct confrontation with Russia and China.
Unless Russia and China can be overthrown with “color revolutions,” these two nuclear powers are unlikely to submit to Washington’s hegemony. The world as we know it might be drawing to a close.
If enough Americans or even other peoples in the world had the intelligence to realize that massive steel structures do not disintegrate into fine dust because a flimsy airliner hits them and limited short-lived fires burn on a few floors, Washington would be faced with the suspicion it deserves.
If 9/11 was actually the result of the failure of the national security state to deter an attack, the government’s refusal to conduct a real investigation is an even greater failure. It has fallen to concerned and qualified individuals to perform the investigative role abandoned by government. The presentations at the Toronto Hearings, along with the evaluations of the Panel, are now available, as is the documentary film, “Explosive Evidence — Experts Speak Out,” provided by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
The government’s agents and apologists try to deflect attention from disturbing facts by redefining factual evidence revealed by experts as the product of “a conspiracy culture.” If people despite their brainwashing and lack of scientific education are able to absorb the information made available to them, perhaps both the US Constitution and peace could be restored. Only informed people can restrain Washington and avert the crazed hegemonic US government from destroying the world in war.
A shorter edited version of this article by Justin Raimondo, with extensive additional commentary by Lasha Darkmoon on the Israel-Iran situation
ISRAEL, STOP RIGHT THERE!
“This is the first time since the days of Bush Senior that a major player has reminded that ‘shitty little country’ of its littleness. For months, the Israelis have been going around acting like they are the superpower.” — Justin Raimondo
The President of the United States may not have the cojones to stand up to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but the chairman of the Joint Chiefs does — and he’s doing it!
When Gen. Martin Dempsey told British reporters he did not want the US to be “complicit” in an Israeli attack on Iran, the boys in Tel Aviv were crushed.
For weeks Netanyahu & Co. had been telling anyone who would listen that the US would have no choice but to be sucked into a devastating regional war in the event of an Israeli first strike on Tehran: their tone was almost gleeful. In the absence of a direct response from the White House, it looked like the Israelis had us over a barrel: the American giant, it seemed, was helpless in the face of the Israeli pygmy’s deft manipulations.
Then came Dempsey, whose comments put the kibosh on Israel’s blackmail threats — and threw Netanyahu’s government into a panic.
Said Giora Eiland, national security advisor from 2003 to 2006:
Dempsey’s announcement changed something. His stark comments made clear to the world that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was isolated. And that if he opted for war, he would jeopardize all-important ties with the Jewish state’s closest ally.
“Dempsey’s announcement changed something.” That’s the understatement of the year, perhaps the decade. This is the first time since the days of George Herbert Walker Bush that a major player has reminded that “shitty little country” of its littleness. For months, the Israelis have been going around acting like they are the superpower, and we are a minuscule dependency relying entirely on our patron’s generosity — and endless forbearance.
“From the days of Jabotinski and Ben Gurion, it has always been the ambition of Zionist fanatics to gain possession of a country stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates, known as “Greater Israel”, and to rule the roost here over 100 million Arab slaves. Greater Israel would then have full control over the Suez Canal and the Persian Gulf, in effect holding the entire world — including the United States — to ransom. As it exists right now, roughly the size of New Jersey, Israel can be wiped off the map in five minutes with a single hydrogen bomb from Russia. Israel must therefore be careful not to goad the Russian bear into a fit of wrath — a fit of wrath which the six million Jews left over in America will have reason to regret.” — Lasha Darkmoon
The Israelis don’t like Dempsey much, and after this they’ll like him much less: in their eyes he’s just a tool of the Obama administration.
Even if this is true, and if Gen. Dempsey is speaking out at the behest of the White House, haven’t we come to a sorry pass when the President of the United States cannot speak in his own name and on his own authority about an issue vital to our national security?
What a testament to the power of the Israel Lobby!
Not bad for a pressure group that supposedly doesn’t even exist.
The real problem is that Dempsey is in all probability speaking for himself, and didn’t require any prompting from the White House. Nor is this the first time that the US military has signaled its opposition to striking Iran.
With US military assets in the region vulnerable to an Iranian counterattack, I wouldn’t be surprised if those alleged secret contacts between Washington and Tehran (via European intermediaries) were made at the military’s insistence: the first instinct of a commander, after all, is to protect his troops.
In effect, the Israelis, by constantly threatening a first strike at Tehran, are holding the tens of thousands of US military personnel in the region hostage — because they are likely to be targets of an Iranian counterattack.
With the White House maintaining radio silence on this issue, Dempsey and the generals had no choice but to go public in order to protect American lives.
US AIRCRAFT CARRIER . . . VULNURABLE TO ATTACK
These impressive Nimitz-class aircraft carriers each come with a full complement of 7–8 supporting ships, 70 or more assorted aircraft, and up to 6000 marines on board. In a 2004 article, military specialist Mark Gaffney, author of Dimona: The Third Temple? (1989), opines: “The US Navy’s largest ships, the massive carriers, have now become floating death traps….In the Gulf’s shallow and confined waters evasive maneuvers will be difficult, at best, and escape impossible….The Gulf will run red with American blood.” (LD)
With back to back deployments, and two wars without a victory — Iraq and Afghanistan — why would the Pentagon want a third war on its hands?
Little wonder they’re beginning to make their opposition known.
Dempsey can’t be the only soldier who resents taking marching orders from Netanyahu.
He can’t be the only soldier to dread a new war started by a belligerent Israel. This has got to be a restraining factor on the Obama administration. It prevents them from capitulating completely to outrageous Israeli demands.
Obama and the Democrats raised the white flag of surrender to the War Party long ago. Well, let’s hope the peaceniks in the Pentagon can hold the fort.
Here is the most recent edition of the Democratic party platform on the question of war with Iran:
“The President is committed to using all instruments of national power to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons…. President Obama believes that a diplomatic outcome remains the best and most enduring solution. At the same time, he has also made clear that the window for diplomacy will not remain open indefinitely and that all options — including military force — remain on the table. But we have an obligation to use the time and space that exists now to put increasing pressure on the Iranian regime to live up to its obligations and rejoin the community of nations, or face the consequences.”
While the document admits that “the Iranians have yet to build a nuclear weapon”, it goes on to assert that they “cannot demonstrate with any credibility that their program is peaceful.”
Iran, it would seem, is guilty until proven innocent.
How can Iran prove it’s NOT going to nuke Israel with the nuclear weapons it MIGHT have in the future IF it decides to get them? (LD)
The standard of proof is impossible.
The Israelis have set a new standard when it comes to Iran. They insist the red line must be the “breakout” capability, as estimated by Tel Aviv’s strategists, of course: that is, the moment when Tehran can theoretically throw together a nuclear weapon of some sort on very short notice.
The catch is that this point exists in theory only: there is no solid evidence the Iranians are pursuing nuclear weapons, and indeed the official US assessment is that they gave up all such attempts in 2003. There have been all sorts of rumors that a new intelligence assessment was in the works. So far it hasn’t surfaced.
The clear implication is that key elements of the intelligence community are refusing to drink the Israeli Kool-Aid: Dempsey’s dissent is the first clear and unequivocal voice raised against the prospect of fighting an unnecessary war for Israel’s sake.
“It is a mystery why Israelis put Netanyahu in public office instead of in an insane asylum.”
— Paul Craig Roberts
Darkmoon’s summary of the Israel-Iran situation
Netanyahu has recently made the following silly comment, so absurd one can only roll one’s eyes in wonder: “Iran is the greatest threat not just to Israel and the Middle East, but to civilization. You just don’t know how they will behave.” Compare this bizarre statement with Israeli General Moshe Dayan’s equally wacky view of what Israel ought to be like: “Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.”
So, which country is “the greatest threat to civilization”: Iran, which hasn’t started a single war for the last 300 years, or Israel, the Mad Dog of the Middle East, a country built on stolen land and guilty of countless war crimes?
Israeli vice prime minister, Moshe Yaalon, talking recently to FM radio, complained that Hezbollah had 60,000 rockets and missiles aimed at Israel. “If they fire rockets and missiles at us,” he warned, “Hezbollah will pay a heavy price — and Lebanon will pay a heavy price.”
Meanwhile in Lebanon, Hezbollah Secretary-General Nasrallah, told a local television station: “A decision has been taken to respond — and the response will be great.” (See here). He was referring to American shipping in the Gulf and the 21 US bases crouched round Iran … like a pack of crazed wolves waiting to move in for the kill.
As for the Israelis, most of them dread an unprovoked attack on Iran because they know it means trouble for them: “widespread destruction, radiation contamination, and large numbers killed or injured.” And the general consensus in Israel is that their three leading warmongers — Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak and Avigdor Lieberman — are psychopaths who belong in a lunatic asylum. (See here and here).
The answer is clear: if the US doesn’t wish to see its antiquated aircraft carriers sunk in the waters of the Persian Gulf, with the tragic loss of thousands of American soldiers, and if Israel doesn’t wish to see its high-rise cities and illegal settlements reduced to rubble, let them keep their hands off Iran.
And if these two aggressors are incapable of self-restraint, let them then take the consequences of their folly: a catastrophic world war in which a nuclear-armed Russia and China will be free to inflict on New York and Washington, on Tel Aviv and Haifa, the same cruelties they plan to inflict on the helpless citizens of Iran; and have already inflicted on the helpless citizens of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, not to mention the false flag terrorist attacks inflicted on the American homeland on 9/11 — an attack in which both America and Israel were almost certainly complicit.
Maybe it’s time the bullies on the block were given a taste of their own medicine. Yes, maybe it’s time for blowback.
Karma is cool — and karma will surely come.
An edited version of this article, with pictures and captions by Lasha Darkmoon
The morons who rule the American sheeple are not only dumb and blind, they are deaf as well. The ears of the American “superpower” only work when Israeli prime minister — the crazed Netanyahu — speaks. Then Washington hears everything and rushes to comply.
Israel is a tiny insignificant state, created by the careless British and the stupid Americans. It has no power except what its American protector provides. Yet, despite Israel’s insignificance, it rules Washington.
When a resolution introduced by the Israel Lobby is delivered to Congress, it passes unanimously. If Israel wants war, Israel gets its wish. When Israel commits war crimes against Palestinians and Lebanon and is damned by the hundred plus UN resolutions passed against Israel’s criminal actions, the US bails Israel out of trouble with its veto.
The power that tiny Israel exercises over the “world’s only superpower” is unique in history. Tens of millions of “Christians” bow down to this power, reinforcing it, moved by the exhortations of their “Christian” ministers.
Netanyahu lusts for war against Iran.
He strikes out against all who oppose his war lust.
Recently, he called Israel’s top generals “pussies” for warning against a war with Iran. He regards former Israeli prime ministers and former heads of the Israeli intelligence service as traitors for opposing his determination to attack Iran. He has denounced America’s servile president Obama and America’s top military leader for being “soft on Iran.”
The latest poll in Israel shows that a solid majority of the Israelis are opposed to an Israeli attack on Iran. But Netanyahu is uninterested in the opinion of Israeli citizens. He has Washington watching his back, so he is war mad.
“It is a mystery why Israelis put Netanyahu in public office instead of in an insane asylum.” — Paul Craig Roberts
Netanyahu is not alone. He has the American neoconservatives in his corner. The American neoconservatives are as crazed as Netanyahu.
They believe in nuclear war and are itching to nuke some Muslim country and then get on to nuking Russia and China.
It is amazing that no more than two or three dozen people have the fate of the entire world in their hands.
The Democratic Party is helpless before them. The Republican Party is their vehicle. The Russians, watching Netanyahu push Washington toward dangerous confrontations, keep raising their voices about the danger of nuclear war.
On May 17 Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev warned the West against launching “hasty wars,” which could result in “the use of a nuclear weapon.”
On November 30 of last year the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Russia warned of nuclear war with NATO. General Nikolai Makarov said that NATO’s eastward expansion meant that the risk of Russia coming into conflict with NATO had “risen sharply.” General Makarov said, “I do not rule out local and regional armed conflicts developing into a large-scale war, including using nuclear weapons.”
Russian president Medvedev — currently serving as prime minister — outlined five steps toward nuclear war that Russia had been forced to take as a result of Washington’s hubristic foreign policy — a policy cooked up by mentally deranged Israel Firsters who had taken control of America.
RUSSIAN PRESIDENT DMITRY MEDVEDEV
“I don’t wish to scare anyone… ” Medvedev noted soberly, and then went on to hint that nuclear weapons might have to be used as a last resort against the crazed warmongers of Washington.
Russian president Vladimir Putin has said, as politely as possible, that the US seeks to enslave the world. That the US seeks vassals, not allies. That the US seeks to rule the world, and that it is a parasite on the world economy.
It would be difficult for any well-informed person to take exception to Putin’s statements.
Putin told the politicians in Washington and Western and Eastern European capitals that surrounding Russia with anti-ballistic missiles “raises the specter of nuclear war in Europe.” Putin said that the Russian response is to point nuclear armed cruise missiles, which cannot be intercepted by anti-ballistic missiles, at US missile bases and European capitals. The American move, Putin said, “could trigger nuclear war.”
Putin has been trying to wake up the American puppet states in Europe at least since February 13, 2007. At the 43rd Munich Conference on Security Policy, Putin said that the unipolar world that Washington was striving to achieve under its banner, “is a world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within.”
That has certainly happened to the US which now has a police state as thorough-going as Nazi Germany.
Putin went on to tell his European audience that in Russia, “we are constantly being taught about democracy. But for some reason those who teach us do not want to learn themselves!”
Instead, Putin said, “we are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law. The United States has overstepped its national borders in every way. Who is happy about this?”
People are not happy, Putin said, because they don’t feel safe. Not to feel safe, Putin added, “is extremely dangerous. It results in the fact that no one feels safe. I want to emphasize this: NO ONE FEELS SAFE!”
Putin politely unbraided the Italian defense minister, a person owned by Washington, for suggesting that NATO or the EU could take the place of the UN in justifying the use of force against sovereign countries. Putin took exception to the idea that Washington could use its puppet organization or its puppet states to legitimize an act of US aggression. “The use of force,” he stated flatly, “can only be considered legitimate if the decision is sanctioned by the UN.”
Putin clearly has Washington’s number. He knows that Washington is the “Great Pretender”, pretending to respect human rights while it slaughters Muslims in seven different countries on the basis of lies and fabricated intelligence.
Awash in hubris like Napoleon and Hitler before they marched off into Russia, Washington has turned a deaf ear to Putin during the entirety of the 21st century.
Speaking on May 10, 2006, Putin said: “We are aware of what is going on in the world. Comrade Wolf [the US] knows whom to devour. He devours without listening. And he’s clearly not going to listen to anyone.”
“Where,” Putin asked, “is Washington’s compassion for human rights or for protecting democracy — when it comes to the need to pursue its own interests?”
For Washington, “EVERYTHING IS ALLOWED — THERE ARE NO LIMITS!”
“Comrade Wolf knows whom to devour.” — Vladimir Putin
China also has caught on. Now the hubris that drives Washington toward world hegemony confronts two massive nuclear powers. Will the criminal gang in Washington drive the world to nuclear extinction?
Washington, thinking that it owns the world, has imposed more unilateral sanctions on Iran without any basis in any recognized law. The imposed sanctions are nothing but Washington’s assertion that its might is right.
The Russian Foreign Ministry said that Washington could stick its sanctions up its ass.
“We consider efforts to impose internal American legislation on the entire world completely unacceptable,” it said.
Washington will do what it can to assassinate Putin.
It will try and effect regime change through the Russian “opposition” that Washington funds.
Failing that, Washington’s pursuit of world hegemony has run up against a brick wall.
If the fools in Washington with their hubris-inflated egos don’t back off, that mushroom cloud they have been warning about will indeed blossom — perhaps over Washington itself.
WASHINGTON . . . ANY DAY NOW
GAY PRIDE PARADE, TEL AVIV
Civilization is safe in other parts of the world, it seems, including Israel, where there are no plans to restrict homosexuality or prevent public displays of affection between members of the same sex.
“We’re a civilized bunch here,” my Jewish classmate Miriam K wrote to me this morning from Tel Aviv. “So if you want to take up lesbianism at any time, dear Pandora, hop on a plane to Tel Aviv — you’re always welcome!”
I had to explain to Miriam that if I were that way inclined, I would hardly need to visit Tel Aviv, since I could get the same action in San Francisco. “It’s only gay parades that are being banned in Moscow,” I added. “Not gay sex!”
Miriam was delighted to hear this.
“In that case,” she said, “I don’t mind visiting Moscow, though I must say I will miss the chance of picking up my soulmate in the crowd of pulsating bodies.”
I was not interested in pursuing this conversation with Miriam who is, if the truth be told, an incredibly depraved young Jewess without a moral compass.
Anyway . . . to change the subject!
Here is Nikolay Alexeyev who has been campaigning for years for the right to stage gay pride parades in Russia.
Ain’t he cute?
In order to spite dear old Nikolay and his kind, Moscow’s top court has upheld a ban on gay pride marches in the Russian capital for the next 100 years!
Russia’s best-known gay rights campaigner, Nikolay had previously gone to court hoping to overturn the city council’s ban on gay parades. The silly boy had actually demanded the right to stage such parades in Moscow for the next 100 years, somehow implying that he didn’t mind what happened when the hundred years was up.
This illogicality on his part obviously didn’t go down very well with the mayor and aldermen of Moscow, not to mention the good burghers of the city — assuming they have mayors, aldermen and burghers in Moscow. I know they have burgers, but I’m not sure about burghers. I’ll have to check!
Nickolay also opposes St Petersburg’s ban on spreading “homosexual propaganda”. The European Court of Human Rights has told Russia to pay him damages. This is because the European Court of Human Rights believes that spreading propaganda is a “human right”, especially if it’s war propaganda or homosexual propaganda. If it is propaganda for traditional moral values and ethical decency, they are understandably not so keen on its dissemination.
I mean, let’s face it, who wants to be decent nowadays? I’ve never heard anything so outrageous. At this rate, they will be threatening to bring back capital punshment, torture, and the Ten Commandments. Actually, they have brought back torture. So it’s geting pretty scary. It could be the Ten Commandments next.
On Friday Nickolay said he would go back to the European Court in Strasbourg to push for a recognition that Moscow’s ban on gay pride marches — past, present and future — was unconstitutional.
Well, that’s interesting, because almost everything done in the United States nowadays is “unconstitutional”, including targeted assassinations, imprisonment without due process, and torture for fun.
The Moscow city government argues that the gay parade would risk causing public disorder and that most Muscovites do not support such an event.
I think this is a shocking attitude to take. It implies there’s something wrong with public disorder. Which is ridiculous. It implies that the democratic will of the people of Moscow, who are strangely enough called “Muscovites” instead of “Moscovites”, ought to be taken into account. Which is even more ridiculous.
Americans will not sympathize with these views since they know it’s now an American tradition never to implement the will of the people. If the people want something, the American government strongly believes, every attempt should be made to give them the opposite. If they want peace, for example, it’s best to give them war. If they want a fairer distribution of wealth, it’s best to rob the poor to make the rich richer. If they want job security, it’s best to export their jobs to the Third World. In short, if they want to be happy, it’s best to make them thoroughly miserable.
This is how government now works in America. It’s called neo-democracy. Not very different from tyranny, in point of fact, but please don’t tell the sheeple that!
When riots in the streets break out and half the American population find themseves behind bars — apart, that is, for the children of Abraham who will fulfil the role of prison warders — the sheeple will be told that locking them up is the new freedom.
And the sillybillies will believe it!
In September, the Council of Europe — the main human rights watchdog in Europe — will examine Russia’s response to a previous European Court ruling on the gay rights issue, Russian media report.
In October 2010 the court said Russia had discriminated against Mr Alexeyev on grounds of sexual orientation. It had considered Moscow’s ban on gay parades covering the period 2006-2008, obviously under the bizarre impression that they had a perfect right to stick their long noses into Russia’s private affairs.
That Russia is a sovereign country, in which Russians decide what is best for themselves, is a principle that has apparently not penetrated the thick skulls of these European politicians — the same politicians, incidentally, who blinked and turned their eyes the other way when pedophilia was running rampant in Belgium during the time of the Dutroux child murders.
You will gather from this that the European Court of Human Rights is not unlike the American government. It also believes staunchly in neo-democracy, i.e., giving the people exactly the opposite of what they want. For their own good, you understand.
It is deeply disturbing to think that loving couples like the above will no longer be able to show their mutual affection in public for the next hundred years in Moscow’s Gay Pride Parades. They will be forced to confine their amorous activities to the private sphere. Is this right or fair? I don’t think so! Russia is clearly showing signs of degeneracy. This is not how civilized countries ought to behave.
I vote we bomb Iran, where they are just as bad, And then take out Russia. And maybe China too.
All these anti-democratric countries, where the will of ordinary people is taken into account, are obviously a threat to civilization and democratic values.
These horrible countries also have a lot of oil and gas, though of course this is totally irrelevant. So why did I mention it? Hmmm, I guess it’s because I’m not very bright — in fact, I’m virtually a moron.