Until now.

The mainstream media's favorite scapegoat, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, resurfaced on Saturday amidst reports that he called the attacks of September 11, 2001 "a big lie." According to the immediate and rabid response of virtually every Western news network around, this was simply the latest insane claim of the same raving madman who has previously threatened to wipe a foreign state off the map and denied the Holocaust.

Yet, as with those other mistranslated or misunderstood statements, this new claim hardly stands up to even the most cursory scrutiny, as it has been reported with little accompanying context and comparison. According to a translation by Reuters, Ahmadinejad, addressing the staff of the Iranian Intelligence Ministry, stated that, "The September 11 incident was a big fabrication as a pretext for the campaign against terrorism and a prelude for staging an invasion against Afghanistan." PressTV translated the President as saying that the circumstances of 9/11 were a "big lie intended to serve as a pretext for fighting terrorism and setting the grounds for sending troops to Afghanistan."

Most of the press, including CBS, Huffington Post, and Fox, ran with an Associated Press report by Ali Akbar Dareini entitled, "Iran's Ahmadinejad: Sept. 11 attacks a 'big lie'" while CNN and Ha'aretz reprinted the AP with some slight variations like using the headline "Ahmadinejad Calls 9/11 'A Big Fabrication'."

Robert Mackey, writing for The New York Times editorialized that Ahmadinejad told Iranian intelligence officials that the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York City was "staged."

By reporting that he called 9/11 a "lie" or "fabrication," the press has completely subverted the meaning of Ahmadinejad's actual statement. Headlines and ledes like the ones printed by the mainstream media give the intentionally misleading interpretation that Ahmadinejad claimed that 9/11 didn't actually happen. But the full quote obviously reveals something quite different. The events of 9/11 – that hijacked airplanes were flown into buildings, killing tens of hundreds of people – is not questioned or denied by Ahmadinejad in these statements. The attacks, in and of themselves, are not debated or disputed. What Ahmadinejad says is that the event itself was the result of, as PressTV reports, a premeditated "scenario and a sophisticated intelligence measure," that was subsequently used as an excuse to justify the so-called "War on Terror" and invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

In short, President Ahmadinejad does not claim that 9/11 itself is a lie. He never has. In May 2006, in a letter written directly to George W. Bush, Ahmadinejad states, clearly and unequivocally,

"September Eleven was a horrendous incident. The killing of innocents is deplorable and appalling in any part of the world. Our government immediately declared its disgust with the perpetrators and offered its condolences to the bereaved and expressed its sympathies."

Ahmadinejad's words echo those of his predecessor, President Mohammad Khatami, who in the wake of the attacks declared, "On behalf of the Iranian people and the Islamic Republic, I denounce the terrorist measures, which led to the killing of defenseless people, and I express my deep sorrow and sympathy with the American people." Furthermore, Iran was one of the first countries to hold candle-light vigils in solidarity and sympathy with the victims of the attacks.

What Ahmadinejad does claim, however, is that the official story of the events – publicly memorialized in the publication of the US government-sponsored The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9/11 Commission) – is dubious, incomplete, and may very well have been the result of well-calculated misinformation and deliberate action (or, perhaps, inaction on previously obtained intelligence) by the US government. This is neither a new revelation for Ahmadinejad nor for the world community in general. In his letter to Bush, Ahmadinejad wrote,

"Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services – or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess. Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren't those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial?"

In questioning the job done by American intelligence agencies, and questioning the US government's official version of events and responsibility, in the lead-up to September 11th, the Iranian President isn't alone.

Esfahan is Half the World, and Half the World Questions the 9/11 Story

To read the hysterical reports about his recent 9/11 comments questioning the accepted story of the event, one would think that Ahmadinejad is voicing roundly rejected, widely unpopular, and insanely outrageous conspiracy theories, devoid of any reasonable evidence or public support. This is hardly the case.

In fact, Ahmadinejad is in the company of more than half of planet Earth, half of New Yorkers, and almost half of all Americans. His views are not particularly uncommon, let alone unique. They surely don't demonstrate a lunatic fringe viewpoint, but rather an opinion well within the public discourse, though not often discussed by Western media.

Whereas the 9/11 Commission was officially "created by congressional legislation and the signature of President George W. Bush in late 2002…to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, including preparedness for and the immediate response to the attacks," a plurality of the public believe this goal was not successfully accomplished and have doubts about the Commission's findings.

An August 2004 Zogby poll, conducted right after the Commission's report was made public and just days before the Republican National Convention was held in Manhattan, found that over 49% of New York City residents and 41% of New York State citizens say that at least some US government officials "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act."

Another Zogby poll from May 2006 found that 42% of Americans believe that "the US government and its 9/11 Commission concealed or refused to investigate critical evidence that contradicts their official explanation of the September 11th attacks" and said "there has been a cover-up." Another ten percent of respondents were unsure. The same poll found that 44% of Americans believe that "the Bush Administration exploited the September 11th attacks" in order to advance its own foreign policy agenda in the Middle East, namely, "to justify the invasion of Iraq."

Furthermore, 45% of those polled agree that "so many unanswered questions about 9/11 remain that Congress or an International Tribunal should re-investigate the attacks, including whether any US government officials consciously allowed or helped facilitate their success," while eight percent remain "unsure."

A Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll from July 2006 discovered that "More than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East."

The next year, in May 2006, a Rasmussen poll revealed that "overall, 22% of all voters believe the President [sic] knew about the attacks in advance," while "a slightly larger number, 29%, believe the CIA knew about the attacks in advance."

Between May 2002 and October 2006, polls conducted by The New York Times and CBS News found that upwards of 79% of the American public believed that "When it comes to what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States," members of the Bush Administration were either "mostly telling the truth but hiding something," "mostly lying," or "not sure." In those four and a half years, the number of respondents convinced that the government was "mostly lying" grew by 20%.

A September 2008 World Public Opinion survey, asked "16,000 people in 17 countries who they thought was responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington." The results showed that "majorities in only nine of the 17 countries believed that al-Qaida was behind the attacks." In response, WPO director Steven Kull stated,

"Broadly, I think what this tells us is that there is a lack of confidence in the United States around the world. It is striking that even among our allies, the numbers that say al-Qaida was behind 9/11 do not get above two-thirds, and barely become a majority. So this is a real indication that the United States is not in a strong position to, in a sense, tell its story. The American narrative is not as powerful in the world today."

Evidence aside, the mainstream media presents Ahmadinejad's recent statements as if they represent an outlandish theory based upon nothing more than paramount insanity.

Wiping Context Off the Map

Disingenuously reporting that Ahmadinejad called 9/11 a "big lie" without exploring the context his statement, notably his claim that 9/11 was used as a "pretext" to carry out the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, is much akin to headlines announcing that Ahmadinejad threatens to "wipe out" Israel without presenting the statement in full. For instance, a Jerusalem Post article from December 12, 2006 and entitled "Ahmadinejad: Israel will be 'wiped out'" states in the first paragraph that the Iranian President "vowed once again that Israel would be 'wiped out.'" Only later in the piece does writer Herb Keinon reproduce the entire quote, which reveals a contextually vital qualification:

"The Zionist regime will be wiped out soon the same way the Soviet Union was, and humanity will achieve freedom…[elections should be held among] Jews, Christians and Muslims so the population of Palestine can select their government and destiny for themselves in a democratic manner."

Similarly, press reports from the previous fall, which sparked the entire "wiped off the map" fiasco, failed to tell their readers the whole story. In that speech, analyst Arash Norouzi explains, "Ahmadinejad declares that Zionism is the West's apparatus of political oppression against Muslims. He says the "Zionist regime" was imposed on the Islamic world as a strategic bridgehead to ensure domination of the region and its assets." Apparently, in his reading of history, Ahmadinejad was simply reiterating the suggestions of Zionism's founder Theodor Herzl. In chapter 2 of his 1896 manifesto, Der Judenstaat, Herzl wrote,

"We [Jews] should there form a portion of a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism. We should as a neutral State remain in contact with all Europe, which would have to guarantee our existence."

Ahmadinejad reminded his audience that, while the eventual weakening or complete dissolution of America's hegemony over the Middle East via its colonial-settler garrison state may be unthinkable or unimaginable to some, "as Khomeini predicted, other seemingly invincible empires have disappeared and now only exist in history books." He listed the Shah's tyrannical monarchy in Iran, the repressive and expansionist Soviet Union, and the Iraqi dictatorship of Saddam Hussein, as examples of "regimes that have collapsed, crumbled or vanished" in only the past three decades. In conclusion, Ahmadinejad repeated Khomeini's prescient view that the political demise of the Zionist government of Israel would soon follow: "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."

Of course, all we've ever heard from Western press reports is that Ahmadinejad threatened to "wipe Israel off the map," an idiom that doesn't even exist in the Persian language, and that was the end of the discussion.

Confusing "Pretext" with "Pretense"

When Ahmadinejad speaks about historical events acting as pretexts to subsequent injustices, he is not claiming that the first event never happened, but simply stating that the event served to justify what followed. This pretext, then, is the exploitation of terrible tragedies as an excuse, motive, and ostensible reason ascribed to explain what historically occurred next. Using horrific events to nefarious advantage is what Naomi Klein has essentially defined as "The Shock Doctrine." This is what Ahmadinejad has spoken about when he uses the term "pretext," which is why, in his speech on Saturday, he stated that "Depredation, bullying and killing the reality of humanity are the outcomes of the capitalist way of thinking."

Unfortunately, the media has decided to equate the term "pretext" with "pretense" and insist that they are both identical synonyms for a claim, invention, myth, fabrication, or lie. With this in mind, it is easy to see how the demonization campaign of Ahmadinejad has been so successful.

This deliberate misinterpretation is not at all new. Even though it is commonplace in the press to insist that Ahmadinejad is a virulent anti-Semite who believes the Nazi holocaust never happened, this is an absurd suggestion unsupported by the facts.

When, at last April's Durban II conference, Ahmadinejad addressed the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 by stating, "As was the case after World War II, armies occupied other territories and people were transferred from territories…In reality, under the pretext of compensating for the evil done in the name of xenophobia, they in fact set up the most violent xenophobes, in Palestine."

He continued, "The Security Council made it possible for that illegitimate government to be set up. For 60 years, this government was supported by the world. Many Western countries say they are fighting racism; but in fact support it with occupation, bombings and crimes such as those committed in Gaza. These countries support the criminals."

The media reported that Ahmadinejad called the holocaust a myth, which promoted a pre-staged walkout by attending European delegations. But the usage of the word "pretext" is obvious to anyone willing to actually read.

Ahmadinejad's Durban II comments repeat remarks he previously wrote back in early September 2006, in a letter sent to German Chancellor Angela Merkel. In it, Ahmadinejad stated, "World War II came to an end with all its material and moral losses and its 60 million casualties. The death of human beings is tragic and sad. In all divine religions and before all awakened conscience and pure nature of mankind and the sense of right and wrong, the life, property and honor of people, regardless of their religious persuasion and ethnic background, must be respected at all times and all places."

By accepting the 60 million death toll of World War II, how could Ahmadinejad be denying the mechanized ethnic cleansing of millions of European Jews? He continued,

"Honorable Chancellor

I have no intention of arguing about the Holocaust. But, does it not stand to reason that some victorious countries of World War II intended to create an alibi on the basis of which they could continue keeping the defeated nations of World War II indebted to them. Their purpose has been to weaken their morale and their inspiration in order to obstruct their progress and power. In addition to the people of Germany, the peoples of the Middle East have also borne the brunt of the Holocaust. By raising the necessity of settling the survivors of the Holocaust in the land of Palestine, they have created a permanent threat in the Middle East in order to rob the people of the region of the opportunities to achieve progress. The collective conscience of the world is indignant over the daily atrocities by the Zionist occupiers, destruction of homes and farms, killing of children, assassinations and bombardments.

Excellency, you have seen that the Zionist government does not even tolerate a government elected by the Palestinian people, and over and over again has demonstrated that it recognizes no limit in attacking the neighboring countries."

If Ahmadinejad's point still isn't clear, he elaborates:

"Using the excuse for the settlement of the survivors of the Holocaust, they encouraged the Jews worldwide to migrate and today a large part of the inhabitants of the occupied territories are non-European Jews. If tyranny and killing is condemned in one part of the world, can we acquiesce and go along with tyranny, killing, occupation and assassinations in another part of the world simply in order to redress the past wrongs?"

The question is not whether the holocaust happened or not, rather, it is how that horrendous tragedy has been exploited in order to justify the establishment of a "Jewish State" in Palestine and rob indigenous Palestinians of their own rights to self-determination. The issue is not to call history into question, but rather to explore the consequences of historical acts.

Furthermore, Ahmadinejad has always made a stark distinction between Jewish people and Zionists. He has said on numerous occasions that his opposition to a Jewish State is a political and ideological one, and not to be confused with a violent ultimatum or military threat to the Israeli people. Ahmadinejad has repeatedly said that Iran has "no problem with people and nations" and that Iran does "not have any confrontation with anyone. We seek relations based on respect and justice." Even more specifically, in a 2008 CNN interview with Larry King, he stated quite clearly that "we don't have a problem with the Jewish people."

Just to be extra clear, Ahmadinejad declared, "We are opposed to the idea that the people who live there should be thrown into the sea or be burnt," reiterating his belief in self-determination of all people based upon elections: "We believe that all the people who live there [in Israel and Palestine], the Jews, Muslims and Christians, should take part in a free referendum and choose their government."

Even during his widely lambasted Durban II speech, Ahmadinejad clearly demarcated the distinction between the 19th century colonial ideology of Jewish nationalism and the Jewish religion, stating, "The word Zionism personifies racism that falsely resorts to religion and abuses religious sentiments to hide their hatred and ugly faces."

Despite the fact that Ahmadinejad called for an "end to Zionism," countless news agencies erroneously reported that he sought the "destruction of Israel," and numerous commentators, including British ambassador Peter Gooderham, called these remarks "anti-Semitic."

In his piece about Ahmadinejad's 9/11 statement on Saturday, The New York Times' Robert Mackey, reminded his readers about comments made by the Iranian President during an International al-Quds (Jerusalem) Day rally on September 18, 2009, a national celebration in solidarity with the Palestinian people and in opposition to Zionism. Mackey, who refers to Quds Day as "Iran’s annual anti-Israel day," writes that Ahmadinejad told the crowd that "The pretext for the creation of the Zionist regime is false…It is a lie based on an unprovable and mythical claim." Again, the pretext of the holocaust is not at all the same thing as a lie.

The holocaust, as an historical occurrence admitted to by its own perpetrators in Europe and widely described as the systematic and mechanized murder of millions of Jews, is not being called a lie in this statement. Considering that the indigenous people of Palestine bear no responsibility for the atrocities committed by the Nazis, the consequences of the holocaust, however, as it was used to justify the creation of Israel in Palestine, is what Ahmadinejad states is based on a "mythical claim." This becomes quite clear by listening to the very next line of Ahmadniejad's speech, unreported by Mackey or anyone else in the Western press: "The occupation of Palestine has no connection with the issue of the holocaust."

Later in the Quds Day speech, Ahmadinejad once again made sure to distinguish between Judaism and Zionism:

"The Zionists have no faith. It is a big lie that the Zionists should be considered tantamount to the Jews or the Christians. Zionists are not Jews nor Christians, and, rather, the Zionists seek to destroy all the values brought about by the divine prophets…the basis of Zionism is to destroy human culture and human values and the values of all nations."

Iran itself has an ancient community of over 25,000 Jews, the second largest Jewish population in the Middle East after Israel itself. Along with Ahmadinejad, Siamak Morsadegh, the Jewish Iranian legislator and community leader, has criticized Israel's policies towards Palestinians, especially in Gaza, saying it showed "anti-human behavior…they kill innocent people," and continuing that the Jewish community in Iran does "not recognize a government or a nation for the Zionist regime."

"A New Pearl Harbor"

That Ahmadinejad – along with millions and millions of others around the world – would find the official story of 9/11 suspicious is not without good cause.

A year before the September 11, 2001 attacks, neocon think tank Project for a New American Century, published a 90-page manifesto for a imperially dominant American Empire, urging "that America should seek to preserve and extend its position of global leadership by maintaining the preeminence of U.S. military forces." Among its aims, the report, entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources For a New Century, calls for the United States to "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars" and achieve "a global security order that is uniquely friendly to American principles and prosperity."

PNAC's members, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Eliot Abrams, Zalmay Khalilzad, Paul Wolfowitz, Bill Kristol, Robert Kagan, Norman Podhoretz, John Bolton, Scooter Libby, and Richard Perle, believed that "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor." Maybe those many PNAC members who, later that year, were subsequently appointed to top level positions in Bush's new administration didn't want to wait that long for such a galvanizing moment in order to pursue their own agenda of unilateral preemptive invasions of Middle Eastern countries.

When Ahmadinejad speaks of 9/11 as involving a "complicated intelligence scenario and act," shouldn't the media perhaps contextualize his statement by discussing the exaggerated and manipulated 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident which was largely responsible for launching the American military campaign in Vietnam, the 1954 Israeli false flag operations known as the Lavon Affair conducted against Egypt, or the planned, but never implemented, Operation Northwoods scheme in 1962 concocted by the U.S. Department of Defense to instigate a war with Cuba (one of the plans consisted of hijacking an airplane and blaming the new Castro regime).

IranAffairs' Cyrus Safdari reminds us of "Emad Salem, an undercover FBI informant who had infiltrated the group that carried out the first WTC bombing back in 1993. He was smart enough to record his conversations with the FBI. Turns out, he specifically warned the FBI of the bombing, and offered to replace the bomb material with a harmless substance, but the FBI said no." What about the completely bogus, but thoroughly hyped, "Newburgh bomb plot" to bomb synagogues in Riverdale, NY and fire a missile at a US military jet, which was entirely set up by FBI informant Shahed Hussain.

What about the 2007 statement by National Medal of Science laureate Lynn Margulis in which she referred to 9/11 as a "new false-flag operation, which has been used to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as unprecedented assaults on research, education, and civil liberties"? Or former CIA Middle East operative Robert Baer, who has written, "Until we get a complete, honest, transparent investigation – not one based on 'confession' extracted by torture – we will never know what happened on 9/11." Or former senior CIA official Bill Christison, who wrote that there is a "strong body of evidence showing the official US government story of what happened on September 11, 2001 to be almost certainly a monstrous series of lies." What about the other CIA officials who question the official story?

What about the Guardian report from November 1, 2001 which revealed that, according to French intelligence officials, "Two months before September 11 Osama bin Laden flew to Dubai for 10 days for treatment at the American hospital, where he was visited by the local CIA agent"?

What about the mysterious collapse of Tower 7, Able Danger, the failure to scramble jets, the myriad National Security experts denied, ignored, or censored from the 9/11 Commission report, deception and non-cooperation by the Department of Defense, whistle-blowers like Coleen Rowley, supposed short-selling and text message warnings, or the five dancing Israelis seen watching and videotaping the attacks from New Jersey's Liberty State Park across the Hudson River?

What about the British intelligence report, entitled "Responsibility for the terrorist atrocities in the United States," which purports to provide evidence that "Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, the terrorist network which he heads, planned and carried out the atrocities on 11 September 2001, yet begins with the following disclaimer: "This document does not purport to provide a prosecutable case against Osama Bin Laden in a court of law"?

What about the BBC report, entitled "The investigation and the evidence," which concludes, "There is no direct evidence in the public domain linking Osama Bin Laden to the 11 September attacks…At best the evidence is circumstantial."

What about the evidence that, in no verified audio or video tapes, has bin Laden actually claimed responsibility for the attacks, yet has even been quoted as stating, "I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act…we are against the American system, not against its people, whereas in these attacks, the common American people have been killed."

What about the fact that Osama bin Laden is, to this very day, not specifically wanted in connection with the 9/11 attacks, according to FBI's own Most Wanted List?

As a result, is there not plenty of dubious information and spurious evidence surrounding the official story of the September 11 attacks to warrant some sort of suspicion, regardless of what you may personally think actually happened? In this way, with his recent comments, President Ahmadinejad has given voice to the majority of the world. But clearly, for fear they might stumble on some uncomfortable truths, it appears easier for the mainstream media to decontextualize his statements and label him a crackpot conspiracy theorist who is a danger to the American way of life, thus leading the United States down the path to attacking a third Middle Eastern country, than to do its own job.

By misrepresenting the country of Iran, its people, its system of government, its culture, its religion, its elected and unelected leaders, the Western press has already set the stage for an attack on the Islamic Republic. Because of the media's sensational and propagandistic reporting, 71% of Americans already believing that Iran currently possesses nuclear weapons. 90% think that the power of Iran's military poses either a critical or important "threat to U.S. vital interests" (despite the fact that Iran's military budget that is literally one hundred times smaller than that of the US). 59% of American citizens even support unilateral, preemptive US military action against Iran regardless of whether economic or diplomatic efforts achieve the government's desired effect.

Perhaps, as was seen with the lead up to the invasion of Iraq, the press is doing exactly what the US government wants it to do.

*****

Contact him at wideasleepinamerica@gmail.com.
–
Wide Asleep In America
Brooklyn, NY
http://www.wideasleepinamerica.com

The following eleven voices from different countries show views on Palestine after the breakdown of Zionism, written in 2030, three years after the State of Israel had collapsed.

1. Shlomo Berge: "Three years ago, the last war in the region ended. We as Israelis never knew how real peace would feel like, because we were told that there will always be anti-Semites who want to exterminate us. In a way, the way things went was inevitable. We just saw no other solution and were backed by so many countries in our violent delusion. I remember from kindergarten and school how our army was glorified as was the defense against the enemies. Gaza 3 changed a lot of that. While in Gaza 1 and 2 some thousands of Palestinians were killed, Gaza 3 reduced the population by about 20 percent. Of course there had been many outcries, but Israel was used to face opposition and to preserve what was called 'self-defense'. Things then happened very quickly: riots and terror attacks from Palestinians inside Israel led to their expulsion by the army. When the settlements in the West Bank were attacked, the army went all the way and cleared the West Bank completely from the Arabs, claiming that the enemy wanted to make the region 'judenfrei', i.e. free from Jews. There was a huge celebration when Israel was finally freed, a little like back in 1967. As Israel had pre-emptively struck Iran with small nuclear bombs and also invaded Syria and Lebanon, there was no power left to immediately threaten us. The US had already weakened all other powers in the region. Only international rejection became really harsh and massive and Israel finally left the United Nations, stating that the anti-Jewish Nazi spirit in the UN countries was unacceptable and that nobody was to tell Israel what to do to save its existence. By that time, about four million people had been killed by Israel, while about 40.000 Zionist soldiers and some Jewish civilians were killed. Although the number of enemies had increased, nobody dared to attack the Zionist state, because Israel openly threatened to drop more nuclear weapons as it had done in Iran. But instead of having peace, Israel fell into a civil war. Some settlers tried to take over large portions of land declaring they represented the real Israel. Several Jewish groups launched terror attacks while Jews from many countries entered and claimed land and property. The army split up into several factions and soon we had no more government. There were hundreds of dead Jews every day and nobody could help us. Whoever tried to analyze the situation was called an anti-Semite, because allegedly Jews were seen as the perpetrators of all evil which is an old anti-Semitic cliché. People did not distinguish between Jews and Zionists. Many Jews were not perpetrators, but as non-Zionists they were not accepted as real Jews by the people in power. It was such a shame. The militias just had way too many weapons. It was chaos. Far more than a million Jews left the country in despair. In the end, the Palestinians just came back and founded the Democratic Republic of Palestine. They were the only ones left to run the country."

2. Lubna Younis: "I lost my whole family in the second Nakba, when the Zionists drove us out of Nablus to stop all resistance and terror attacks forever. I was just a child then, but I remember how the missiles flew and the tanks came in. The Zionists called it a 'transfer' and said it was to reach peace from the terrorists, but like in 1948 they killed many of the men in combat age. I played outside when a bomb destroyed our home. Everybody inside was dead. Such a typical Palestinian story ever since 1948. The neighbors took me with them to Jordan. Unlike 1948, the exile of the second Nakba only lasted for five years. The Zionists had no more targets and so they started killing each other. In the end, the whole country was devastated. You know, in the 5000 years of the history of this country it never faced such a destruction. Olive trees need decades and centuries to grow and so many thousands of them were pulled out of the ground. Pollution and the wall also helped in ruining the beautiful landscapes. Nothing like this had ever happed to this country before and never was the local population forced out like that. When the Zionists used up their weapons against themselves and when the government broke down in the Civil War, the United Nations sent troops to Dimona to make sure nobody uses nuclear weapons again. It was enough that some of them had been used against Iran. Then, when it was quiet, we just returned to our homes and villages. There were several waves of people returning, also from the refugee camps in Lebanon, Syria, and other places. Today, a majority of 70 percent Palestinians live in Palestine, Muslims, Christians, Jews and atheists. The rest are former Israelis, the survivors of the Civil War minus the emigrants. Many went back to where they or their parents originally came from, the USA, Russia and other places. More than a million Jews moved during the Civil War and many others after the establishment of Palestine. Of course we persecuted the war criminals among the remaining Jews, but in the end only three or four thousand were put into jail. Some incidents of lynch mobs are known, but the new authorities were strictly against that and cooperated with the UN. (By that time the UN headquarters had already moved to Europe.) We wanted to stop all extra-judicial killings, we just had enough of all that. We then rebuilt our cities and villages and kind of resumed our history in a way that we had been deprived of since the days of Lawrence of Arabia. Nobody talks about terrorism anymore, all the borders are open now, and soon all Arabs will have a shared currency. It is good now, no more killing, and yet we still mourn the millions of victims. At least, so we want to think, all these people did not die in vain. But sometimes it is hard to recall all this horror. Every year, we commemorate the dead of all sides including the European Holocaust in the Count Bernadotte Congregation Hall in Jerusalem."

3. Umm Midian: "I belong to the very few Israeli Jews who have always been in solidarity with the oppressed Palestinian people. I lived in Israel then and I live much better in Palestine now. There was a huge fear that the Arabs would kill all Jews once the army would not defend them anymore. But it turned out that ironically the Jews in the country have never been as secure as they are now. Many Arabs felt honest sympathy when they saw how Jews killed Jews by the thousands, despite the fact that millions of Arabs and Muslims had been killed by the Zionists before. Racist Zionism was the original problem, there is no more doubt about that today, even in the US. Nobody seems to want to talk about Zionism anymore, as if the Zionists had come from outer space and then disappeared again like extra-terrestials. Of course the Zionist perpetrators were and are taken to account by their victims. This is normal and it is a matter of justice. But the fear of a heavy revenge proved to be unwarranted. Maybe deep in their hearts the Zionists thought: since we have been so brutal with them on a regular basis, they just have to hate us and give us exactly what we gave to them. But they forgot that those Arab and Muslim victims are no Zionists, they do not follow this logic."

4. Theodor Madden: "By the time Israel fell apart I worked in the US Foreign Office. They were difficult years ever since it came out that 9/11 was an inside job, orchestrated by parts of our own government. You remember the conspiracy theory according to which Islamic terrorists did the job. When the voices of architects and firemen got louder, asking how three buildings could collapse like that against all laws of physics, the pressure got really hard. Then there were many other unsolved questions, e.g. about the much too small hole in the Pentagon building, the lack of remains, the suspicious drills, strange facts about the so-called terrorists and so on. The government should just have provided answers. Instead, the Patriot Act was used against the critics. And we lost so many soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan/Pakistan and spent so many billions of dollars. Why? All this was originally linked to 9/11 without any logic. People started asking what we were trying to accomplish in the countries we attacked. So we were almost paralyzed when Israel targeted Iran unilaterally, when it expelled the Palestinians and when it started destroying itself physically. There was nothing at all the US could have done to prevent this. What should we have done? Send in troops into a civil war zone? To support whom? Our own country was about to collapse and this is actually still possible, although rather unlikely, because we brought all our troops back home now. The situation thus has deescalated for us. Moreover, we do not send weapons to what is now Palestine and do not pay the Egyptians and other regimes any more money, which saves billions of dollars. The whole arms industry is in decline and we do not really care after this nightmare. My personal opinion is that we should have arrived at this conclusion soon after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I personally never was an adherent of Zionism, but of course it was a shock to see our close ally Israel breaking down like a house of cards. The good thing is that there are many fewer weapons in the region now. We never thought that stability could be so cheap, financially speaking. We had to give up our hegemony of the oil fields and strategic places, but we are learning to appreciate the new possibilities that go with regional stability. We don't have the choice, anyway, I guess."

5. Agathe Mengel: "As a German politician it has always been clear to me that we had to stand by the side of Israel and there is nothing we have to be sorry for! The constant rocket-fire and anti-Semitism forced Israel to defend itself. The collapse of the State of Israel is a catastrophe, because it was a safe haven for all the Jews in the world. This is why we have recognized the new state only because the EU has made this decision and we could not have opposed it. It is beyond question that the German history has made the State of Israel necessary. Anti-Semitism is still very strong in the world and Israel was the only democracy in the Middle East. It may be true that there have not been any combat actions observed in the region for three years, but this can change any time. We certainly did not make a mistake here in Germany when we supported Israel, because we have a responsibility."

6. Yossi Feinsand: "I am one of the survivors of the Civil War and I admit that I used to be an ardent Zionist before this war. But in the end I recognized that we were the ones who made the biggest mistakes. I feel betrayed by my parents, schools, politicians, and media. They always told us we cannot be wrong and that it is an old anti-Semitic cliché that the Jews are the guilty ones. But it is we who were guilty in Palestine! Not because we were Jews, but because we were Zionists. It developed into a racist ideology not much better than Nazism, if at all. How many people did we kill? Millions. It started when we came from abroad, made our state without any agreements and at the same time expelled the indigenous population. We were told in our schools that we are special, the chosen people, eternal victims, and that we need a strong army to fight our vicious enemies. Today I live in Jerusalem among all these 'enemies' and they are much nicer than what we used to be. As Zionists, we actually projected all of our own faults onto the Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims. We accused them of hostility when we were hostile. We called them violent while being violent. We held Islam to be an evil religion, because we as Zionists acted in an evil way. We claimed they want to take our land and what we did was take their land. Why did our friends not stop us? I feel so ashamed and can only say how proud I am to be a Palestinian now. I tell my story to everyone and even learned Arabic to do so. Wherever I come I receive so much affection and friendship that it makes me cry. How generous my fellow countrymen are, how great also the Islamic religion. They do not torture me, they all forgave me and I have nothing to fear in my great country, in Palestine!"

7. Naser Ateeq: "Like every Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, and Human Rights advocate I am more than happy that the long Zionist nightmare finally has ended. And it is clear to the world now what the 'conflict' was all about. They had taken our land and expelled us, killing many, and most of the world had called our legitimate resistance 'terrorism' and turned us from victims to perpetrators, because the weakest always become the scapegoat. Why did they not learn from the German history? But in the end the world saw the real face of Zionism and now they are quiet at last and we got our land back. Now we must face our own demons, because we do not want to make the same mistakes and project our traumas onto others. One of the taboos of our Palestinian society is, for example, child abuse. It has always been normal for our fathers to beat the children. And society has covered it up. Parents used to be like gods, beyond justice. Even for driving a car you need a license, but children can be raised by every idiot. This must stop now! The problems of our society were not all produced by Israel. By beating our children we have destroyed ourselves and by oppressing our sisters, because they are women, we also did wrong. We have had a damned pasha society and some even derived this sinful behavior wrongly from the Qur'an or the Bible. Some groups have killed and threatened Jewish civilians and there is no excuse for that, not occupation, not anything. We have killed collaborators and showed that we can also be killers, just like them. And we witnessed lynch mobs, even if they were few, after the collapse of the Zionist state. All this must stop immediately and without condition. No more killing! No more oppression! No more beating of our beloved and helpless children! In many respects, we are completely retarded and backward. 'Takhalluf' is the Arabic word for that, in case you have forgotten. A lot of all that is claimed to be Islamic, but I don't believe that. Fortunately, we are a democratic society now. It did not astonish me that in our second free elections the Islamic parties have lost their majority. They have their place and they are important, but Palestine has always been open to all faiths and so it is only normal that the Democratic Party has won the last elections. In it we find all currents in the good manner of Bir Zeit campus society in its best days. There are even some people in it who used to be in the collaborator party of Fatah."

8. Muna el-Missiry: "Egypt profited so much from the new time. Not only because the borders to Palestine and ALL other Arab countries plus Iran are open now, but we also got rid of the unwanted regime, even without a military coup. Like in some other Arab countries the Islamists started with a big success after Gaza 3. They are the only popular currents that were able to gain a huge block of voters, because they represent our main religion and because they are not as corrupt as other trends, especially those affiliated with the West. But then, like in Palestine itself, the peoples recognized that a liberal society in the end works better and that it does not deny religion, anyway. We will not forget that it was the Islamists who opened all the borders, in their quest to restore Islamic unity and the 'umma', i.e. the universal Muslim community. Traveling educated us Egyptians, us Arabs and Muslims a lot and we had hungered for that. Of course, not all of our problems have ceased with the disappearance of the Zionist state, but a lot of them really have. The falcons in Arab countries cannot take Israel as a pretext for weapon-trade and sternness anymore, and indeed we do not feel threatened, especially since the US has completely withdrawn all its troops from the region. Today I can travel from Cairo to Jerusalem in only a few hours, without a visa! In fact, I went there only two weeks ago to help rebuild the Dome of the Rock and the Aqsa Mosque which were heavily damaged in the last years of the Zionist Civil War."

9. Yousuf Sharif: "Since we threw our king out of the country, Jordan faces much more than a renewal. People call it a rebirth. Everything seems possible now. We have a free press and nobody has to fear anything when speaking out against injustice. Jordanian kings have a long history of collaboration with the Zionists and this chapter is closed now forever! Every Palestinian in Jordan – that is about 70 percent of the population – is free to return to Palestine. Most of them don't, because they found a home in Jordan and they can travel to Palestine whenever they want. Only the victims of the second Nakba returned with an overwhelming majority."

10. Gulamhusein: "I am now an old man of 102 years. I was born in Bombay. For most of my life there I lived in terror, what with ghastly Hindu-Muslim riots breaking out on a regular basis. To make matters worse we had the British occupying our land, our beloved India, and lording it over us. Under the leadership of Gandhi we mounted a movement to drive them out and we ultimately did. Even as we gained independence in India, Palestinians lost more than half of their land to an Israeli state imposed on them by the international community, many members of which had their arms twisted to vote for the UN partition resolution. There followed a massacre of Palestinians. I simply could not understand how the Jews, who had suffered so much under the Germans and others, could inflict so much death, destruction and misery on the Palestinians so as to be able to create a Jewish state of their own on the land the Palestinians had occupied for centuries. Nor could I understand how those living in Israel, and even more puzzlingly, those living in other countries, could believe the Israeli propaganda that the Palestinians were trying to take their land and drive them into the sea when the truth was that the Jews were taking Palestinian land and trying to drive the Palestinians, if not into the sea or the Jordan River, then out of what used to be their land. It took me some time to learn and understand that not all Jews were complicit. Many were, from the start, opposed to Zionism. It was only the Zionists who were to blame and, even most of the Zionists believed and acted as they did because the truth was hidden from them and they were fed lies from childhood. As time went on, more and more of these came forward and said so. The Nakba of 1947/48, the 1967 War, the 2009 Israeli invasion and destruction of Gaza, and the failure of the international community to come to the aid of the Palestinians, take suitable action against Israel for its violations of international law and end Israel's illegal and brutal occupation of West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights, left me shaken, and almost destroyed my faith in justice. I wondered if Palestinians would ever get justice. But history, as life, takes strange and unexpected turns. After the Civil War, the Palestinians, who had been driven out of their lands, started coming back from Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Iraq and even from far away countries. The Israelis feared that the Palestinians would do unto them as they had done unto the Palestinians. But the Palestinians, the majority of them Muslims, remembered their beginnings. Their Prophet and his followers (the Muslims), had been persecuted and tortured for years by the Meccans and had ultimately been driven out of Mecca. Years later, the Muslims marched triumphantly back into Mecca, led by Prophet Muhammad. At that moment, the Meccans hid, fearing that the Muslims would be vengeful and there would be a massacre. But Muhammad had ordered the returning Muslims that there was to be no looting or pillaging, no killing, no rape, no taking of slaves. And there was none. – In the three years that have elapsed since the collapse of Israel there has been a great change. There is, at last, peace in the region. The inhabitants of the Democratic Republic of Palestine — Jews, Muslims, Christians, no matter what their faith or ethnic origin – live in peace and harmony, as of old. The phony "war on terror" has ended. I never imagined this day would come. Nor did millions of others. But come it did, three years to this day. It is a miracle. As is my being alive at 102 years!"

11. Dana Azulai: "At the beginning of the Civil War my parents got killed in a bombing. I had just finished school by the time and did not know how to carry on. I was in despair. When my relatives in Canada invited me to come to them, I accepted their offer gratefully. They took care of all the formalities and, luckily, it all worked out rather quickly. Despite the fact that Israel had gained a very bad reputation in world, due to the 'transfer' of the Arabs, the attacks on Iran and the Civil War, I was well-received by most of the Canadians, and treated in a friendly way. I also found a job very soon. But despite all of that I never really felt well. The weather and the landscape are so much different and also the mentality of the people. When the Civil War was over I certainly thought about returning. But then the Palestinians founded their state and my dream to go back home, was soon over. Surely, the Palestinians would not allow the return of Jews. Besides, how could I voluntarily go to a land that was now governed by our enemies? But I still was in touch with some friends, who had stayed in Israel and who had survived. They, too, were afraid after the new state was built. But in the course of time they reported about the reconstruction work and about the peaceful coexistence. It was not so easy for me, but the country, that now called itself the Democratic Republic of Palestine, was my homeland. I missed my friends, the Mediterranean Sea, the sun, and everything. So half a year ago I returned. I was astonished about the fact that it was so easy. I just had to prove that I was born in the territory of what today is Palestine and immediately got my papers. It is not easy to be back. I am always confronted with what my people did to the Palestinians and to themselves. But I am happy that I ventured to do it."

# 10 written by Gulamhusein Abba (www.anis-online.de/1/rooms/gulamhusein/index.htm), # 11 written by Sabine Yacoub, www.sabine-yacoub.de, all other entries by Anis
http://www.anis-online.de/2/literatur/2030.htm

Khalid Amayreh

In addition to its protracted war of terror against the Palestinian people, Israel has long waged an unrelenting campaign of psychological warfare against the Palestinian will, aimed at debilitating the domestic front across the occupied territories. The Israeli media, which often operates in sync with the Israeli occupation army and intelligence agencies, readily and routinely parrot the carefully concocted lies coming out of the Disinformation Department at the Israeli Defence Ministry headquarters at Hakirya in Tel Aviv.

The dirty propaganda is based on half-truths or outright falsehoods. Sometimes these lies are leaked to pro-Israeli media organs abroad in order to give them an air of credibility. But in most cases, the "scoops" are released to the Israeli media itself.

This pattern of disinformation is as old as Israel itself and has been used frequently. I remember that during the Romanian revolution Israeli radio reported that the bodies of dozens of Arab mercenaries, who had been fighting for the Ceausescu regime, were scattered on the streets of Bucharest and Timisoara, a claim that turned out to be totally untrue.

During the First Palestinian Intifada (1987-1992), the Israeli media would often describe a Palestinian activist freshly arrested by the Israeli army as "a high-ranking leader of the uprising" who was responsible for attacks on Israeli soldiers. However, a few days or weeks later, when the suspect was arraigned before a military court, all the talk about being a "high-ranking leader" of the intifada would have disappeared from the list of charges. In many cases, the activist would be released a few months later for lack of evidence against him.

Similarly, the Israeli media will often publish reports claiming that major Palestinian businesses and factories faced bankruptcy and were closing down. This, of course, has a demoralising effect, as is intended.

These are examples of the psychological warfare Israel has been waging against the Palestinians, which, by the way, failed to stop the intifada or, indeed, force the Palestinians to succumb to the Israeli occupation.

When I first read the fictionalised story of Musa’ab Yousuf, the son of Hasan Yousuf, a former Hamas spokesman in Ramallah, I remembered these and other examples of Israeli disinformation. We Palestinians have been living under the Israeli occupation for decades and not even the Americans know the Israeli way of thinking better than us. To put it bluntly, the Israelis lie as often as they breathe. Indeed, it is only a slight exaggeration to say that Israel is based on three elements: murder, theft and mendacity.

The Israeli media claims, inter alia, that Musa’ab, who had been recruited by Israel’s chief domestic security agency, the Shin Beth, penetrated the high echelons of Hamas and that he prevented and thwarted resistance operations against the Israeli occupation army and other targets. Well, it is true that the Shin Beth succeeded in recruiting the disoriented young man when he was 17 years old through blackmail. However, it is also true that Hamas and his own father knew about his tryst with Shin Beth from the very inception as a result of which Hamas’s student activists were warned against dealing with him.

Moreover, it is well known that Sheikh Hasan Yousuf, whom I have met several times, was never involved, either directly or indirectly, in the activities of Hamas’s military wing, the Izzidin al Qassam Brigades. Any claim to the contrary should be treated with contempt. Indeed, with all due respect, Sheikh Yousuf was no more than a media spokesman who would explain the Hamas position and reaction to certain events, and he would do that after careful coordination and consultation with the movement’s political leaders in the occupied territories.

Hence, the claim that the Sheikh’s son, Musa’ab, was able to penetrate the military wing of Hamas and thwart several resistance operations, including an assassination attempt against Shimon Peres, the certified war criminal responsible for the Qana massacre in 1996, looks like a vile lie.

I have spoken to several peers of Musa’ab who knew him very well both when he was a student at Beir Zeit University and following his graduation. The following are taken from their testimonies:

"He was not a serious person, he was kind of happy-go-lucky, he would go out with foreigners and tourists, brag about his English. I think very few people took him seriously," said Ahmed.

One college classmate described Musa’ab as "looking insecure, a person without an intellectual direction, infatuated with the luxurious life, would do anything to attract attention."

These and other statements indicate that Musa’ab was nearly always viewed with suspicion by Hamas people in Ramallah, including his own father.

Toward the end of the 1990s, Musa’ab mingled with evangelical Christian missionaries who, probably through a feminine connection, brainwashed him to "accept Jesus as his saviour". They also promised that they would facilitate his migration to the US, where Christian Zionists used him on his arrival as a propaganda asset in their war against Islam and the Palestinian people. Musa’ab, nearly penniless when he arrived in the US, was given a house and a job in exchange for praising Israel, maligning Islam and singing halleluiah.

According to Ha’aretz newspaper (27 February), the Shin Beth officer who looked after Musa’ab, code-named Captain Loay, said, "The amazing thing is that none of his actions were done for money. He did things he believed in. He wanted to save lives."

What lives? Even a person with minimal intelligence and living in Ramallah during the Second Intifada would know all too well that the Israeli occupation army murdered Palestinian civilians in cold blood, including children. These murders were nearly always carried out knowingly and deliberately just like the killings in Gaza last year.

For example, on 4 March 2002, and not far from Musa’ab’s home, Israel bombed the car of Hussein Abu Kweik, a political activist affiliated with Hamas, killing his wife and three children as they were returning home from school. So, why did we not hear anything about "saving lives" when the targets were Palestinian civilians? Could Musa’ab have converted secretly to the Chabad sect of Judaism which, apparently, views all non-Jews as animals whose lives have no sanctity?

In fact, the repeated invocation of "saving [Jewish] lives", terminology characteristic of the Israelis, suggests that Musa’ab was instructed, perhaps in return for a certain sum of money, to say what the author of the story wanted him to say in order to sell the book, or that the author wrote what he did in Musa’ab’s name.

The Shin Beth handler makes many claims suggesting that Musa’ab was aware of what was going on with the Izzidin al Qassam Brigades. "Let me tell you a story. One day we received information that a suicide bomber was going to be picked up at the Manara Square in Ramallah and be given an explosive belt. We didn’t know his name or what he looked like-only that he was in his twenties and would be wearing a red shirt. We sent ‘the Green Prince’ [Musa’ab] to the square and with his acute sense, he located the target within minutes."

Being thoroughly aware of the vicissitudes of Hamas and its military wing, I can safely say that this story is unlikely to be true since only two or three people are normally put in contact with any given military operation. This, I venture to suggest, means that people like Musa’ab would have no opportunity to know what was going on inside the Izzidin al Qassam Brigades.

In the beginning of the Ha’aretz’ article, written by Avi Issacharoff (who is notorious for his Shin Beth connections), Musa’ab is quoted:

"I wish I were in Gaza now. I would put on an army uniform and join Israel’s special forces in order to liberate Gilad Shalit. If I were there, I could help. We wasted so many years with investigations and arrests to capture the very terrorists that they now want to release in return for Shalit. That must be done."

Such a quote could only come from a person who is so badly disoriented and so thoroughly brainwashed, that he identifies himself with the enemies of his own family.

Such a coup is not uncommon in the history of bitter conflicts, as the Israelis know very well. The Jewish Virtual Library has the following information: "The German concentration camps depended on the cooperation of trustee inmates who supervised the prisoners. Known as Kapos, these trustees carried out the will of the Nazi camp commandants and guards, and were often as brutal as their SS counterparts. Some of these Kapos were Jewish, and even they inflicted harsh treatment on their fellow prisoners. For many, failure to perform their duties would have resulted in severe punishment and even death, but many historians view their actions as a form of complicity. After the war, the prosecution of Kapos as war criminals, particularly those who were Jewish, created an ethical dilemma which continues to this day."

Such an emotional-cognitive phenomenon is known as "identification with the criminal aggressor", a more than appropriate term for the relationship between Musa’ab Yousuf and his Israeli handlers.

I read your article 'Why no Jewish writer can be believed' with much interest. You know, sometimes I feel like that about the Anglo Saxons. Often times, as history is evidence, especially vis a vis the East India Company and its colonial conquests whose enduring shackles of mental servitude are still felt daily in my native nation, can one really tell the difference between the Jewish white Anglo-Saxon and the Christian white Anglo-Saxon race? While the religious rituals may be different, the imperial practices aren't when the reference begins and ends with 'race'! Any conflict between them is often only the white man's burden negotiation between two ubermensch fighting over primacy!

Let me therefore, begin this response by first agreeing that every name which you have mentioned in your article, I too have similarly unraveled some aspects of their narratives which weren't entirely wholesome (to put it charitably). The last one, Gilad Atzmon's, was here:

But that website took down my comment (now why would they do that?)! Fortunately, I had saved a local copy which is cached here:

Often times, as G. Edward Griffin also puts it, the sins of the 'left' are uncovered by their enemies on the 'right', and vice versa. The in-fighting among hegemonic pigs often betrays their criminal secrets. For an astute non-bigoted seeker of truth and justice for all, that's simply the low hanging fruits of the rotten tree to be plucked for forensic analysis. Especially, if they also happen to be the type-3 of Hitler's classification of people:

"In journalistic circles it is a pleasing custom to speak of the Press as a 'Great Power' within the State. As a matter of fact its importance is immense. One cannot easily overestimate it, for the Press continues the work of education even in adult life. Generally, readers of the Press can be classified into three groups: First, those who believe everything they read; Second, those who no longer believe anything; Third, those who critically examine what they read and form their judgments accordingly." (Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Chapter X)

Otherwise, I for one do not have the infinite resources to dig out the dirt on all the hectoring hegemon pigs on the planet. Let them dig it out on each other. I'll only use it circumspectly. I cannot permit my mind, and my guard, to take vacation for even a single moment - for the 'devil' knows no race, color, cast, or creed! Minimally I need to protect myself from being tainted by your prejudices - but I also find your views interesting, and often worth refuting lest they taint the feeble of mind too comfortable in their own adjusted worldview.

So, back to your narrative, I find the race construct disturbing no matter who uses it, the antagonist, or the protagonist.

I quite agree that the Talmud is a major tortuous source of Jews' misanthropic ambitions as god's ubermensch created on earth to lord over the Goy. But not completely. Atheism too is not an unfamiliar imperial driving force in the same vein:

By that token, I could condemn your non-beliefs the same way - couldn't I? It is just logic.

People generally do not lie, cheat, deceive, murder, become water boys or house negroes for the ubermensch, or endeavor to conquer the 'untermenschen' by way of deception, by their race or religion - the political ponerologists advocating the psychopathic view of ubermensch not withstanding. In my humble view, people do so by choice (including perverse indoctrination and the 'banality of evil').

I am unwilling to condemn such misanthropes by their race, religion, caste, or creed � because, by its logic, I would unfairly have to condemn all peoples belonging to those sets. That is guilt by association! I see no difference between that, and the crimes of Nazism, Zionism. I condemn criminals only by their acts. To the extent that misanthropic doctrines from their books, cultural heritage, or tortuous philosophies might motivate them, well, there are at least 60 million white Anglo Saxon ubermensch Christian misanthropes alone in the Bible Belt of America trying to bring on Armageddon and Jesus! I think they far surpass the Jews in sheer numbers. Therefore, should I condemn all Christians for the twisted perversion of such a large number of criminals among them who think bombing other nations will lead to some Rapturous Nirvana? Or, perhaps the entire white Anglo Saxon population by their race alone, for between Jews and Christians, that's the entire Western civilization? By your logic, why not?

I find the following recipe which was legally averred at Nuremberg by Robert H. Jackson rather defining, reasonable, equitable, and wisely applicable to all cases of misanthropic thoughts that transform into inflicting actual harm upon others, whether by bombs, or by debt-enslavement, whether in the quest of Lebensraum, Zionistan, or one-world government:

"The intellectual bankruptcy and moral perversion of the Nazi regime might have been no concern of international law had it not been utilized to goosestep the Herrenvolk across international frontiers. It is not their thoughts, it is their overt acts which we charge to be crimes." (Nuremberg, Closing Speech)

I charge as crimes against humanity, the enactment of the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. All those who crafted it, proposed it, enabled it, aided and abetted in its passage as well as in its obfuscation over the past 100 years, and benefitted from its enslaving action of the entire nation, are more appropriate candidates for being accorded the full 'enemy combatant' protocol at Guantanamo Bay than its present indigent inhabitants! For indeed, in that one enabling Act, is accumulated the combined evil of all the evil that has followed over the past 100 years, including all the wars, its 100 million victims, and entire nations entrapped in un-payable debt to steal their public commons! That first monumental crime is independent of the race - all the Congressman who signed the Bill under the stewardship of Bernard Barauch and Col. House, including the President of the United States at the time who approved it, and the vast numbers of newsmedia and PR spokespersons of both political parties who got on the Hegelian Dialectic bandwagon of sloganeering "banking reform" and filled the newspapers with their bullshit, were Christian white folks right alongside the Jewish white folks. (The blacks in America at the time only lived in their ghettos after their escape/emancipation from the clutches of their white Christian Anglo Saxon plantation owners, and therefore can't rightly be counted among the races who contributed to the hijacking of America.)

So, are all the white Anglo Saxons of America guilty of that first monumental crime against the American public, and the world's peoples? Are they all complicit in hiding it, spinning it, obfuscating it? But you have already absolved Eustace Mullins. I apologize for using an obvious truism to make the blatant point that by your criterion of guilt by association, you should have dismissed the good Samaritan Christian Mullins too without reading, just like the anti-Semitic choir does!

In a previous communication regarding another article way back in September 2009, titled: 'Jewish disinfo the specialty of popular Rense columnist', I had also noted your zeal for gross, and what I felt at the time was ignorant, generalization. In that article, you had carelessly maligned Islam in the same breadth as Christianity by asserting: "Throughout human history, the Talmud is the heart of darkness, and the Bible and the Qu'ran are complicit in concealing this fact." I had written to you:

'As a Muslim, I would only like to inquire on your statement: "Qu'ran are complicit in concealing this fact". Would you kindly let me know what you have based that assertion upon? While I might concur with anyone that the Talmud contains some really abhorrent things, nay shocking things, I also wonder who among the Jews really believes in what's in their old books…. but that's not the purpose of this letter to you. It is to only inquire the basis upon which you chose to malign Islam, by asserting that the Qur'an is deliberately complicit in concealing some abhorrence, some distortions in Judaism like its Talmudic teachings. As you surely [must] know [Islam], both Prophet Moses and Jesus are revered in the Qur'an as among the Great Prophets. Qur'an assert that God sent both Moses, and Jesus, among many other prophets, to mankind, to every people, and each time sent a new one to correct the erroneous man-made teachings that had cropped in the previous prescription over time, or to generalize the particularized teachings, as the case between Moses followed by Jesus, with Prophet Muhammad being the last one to correct all past manmade errors, and to generalize God's religion to all mankind. So, while one may not believe in Islam, or any religion [for that matter], the fact of your assertion being false [in the context of Qur'an and Islam] is plainly manifest. Thus I inquire if it was inadvertent, malicious, or merely ignorant. And if none of those, then kindly do enlighten me the reason for your statement. We can always learn from each other � no one has monopoly over knowledge.'

That moment onwards, I could easily have dismissed you on the same grounds as you have dismissed all the Jews: "[Anglo Saxon] writers inevitably [distort and prevaricate], blur and twist the contours of any argument to invariably shape it into advantage for only themselves."!But I still read your present article with care, and I am even taking the time to respond to you, once again - since it warrants a response - because I refuse to bow to the vagaries of your personal prejudices and myopia lest it infect others. You already may have a great following among the white supremacists I imagine, despite perhaps your own aversion to it - I hope.

Finally, I do thank you Mr. John Kaminski for your often provocative and bold viewpoints, whether or not one agrees with them. I think it is courageous and un-inhibited people like yourself who continually push on the acceptable envelop of thought and its public expression, and thus widen the discourse space for many more ordinary people like myself to have our tiny voice (for what little that's worth). Minimally, the brownshirt thought-police will chase you before they might chase me (or perhaps they will soon lock up all the non-conformists regardless)! Be that as it may, let's not get carried away as the self-proclaimed avantgarde in provocative thought, into realms of moral absurdity, especially in falling prey to the antagonists own vices: guilt by association, the race factor, arrogance, and ignorance.

Thank you.

Zahir Ebrahim

Project Humanbeingsfirst.org

Source URL: http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2010/02/respto-johnkaminski-jewish-writers.html

Source PDF: http://humanbeingsfirst.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/respto-johnkaminski-jewish-writers-feb282010.pdf
Kaminski article URL: http://www.johnkaminski.info/pages/the_next_chapter/too_late_for_trust.htm

We may idealize human intellect and enlightenment, but in practice, human social biology usually proves to be stronger than ideology. While most people today believe that their strength lies in the success of their perceived Utopian model of society, and that the ideas of a prominent persona are more important than his personal characteristics, their behavior is often indicative of the opposite. Being herd animals, changes usually happen when the majority of the human herd flocks behind a leader who is perceived as charismatic, strong, sympathetic and courageous.

The effect of charisma

In democratic societies, politicians seem to be very aware of this human behavioral phenomenon, especially during campaign time. A good example is the victory of Barack Obama in the American elections of 2008. We can all clearly see that the policies of the new administration, with its promises of 'change', barely show any significant differences – especially in foreign affairs – when compared to the much reviled Bush administration. To perceptive observers this has come as no surprise, since it was rather easy to read it between the lines of those 'historical' election campaigns. Still, people not only in the USA but even worldwide were under the spell of Obama's personal charm, eloquence and strong charisma, which consolidated his famous landslide electoral victory regardless of these simple facts.

Many people seem to believe that it was Gandhi's famous and impressive philosophy of non-violence (Satyagraha), which gave him the leverage to be able to rally the vast majority of the population of India behind him and make them take to the streets. They seem to forget that India's independence was immediately followed by war, strife and violence which still has not been resolved today. While one can easily maintain that India, Pakistan and Bangladesh owe their independence from British colonial rule to the persona of Gandhi, it is quite difficult to make the case that it was his ideology that won the victory. If this was indeed the case, then Satyagraha would have survived its charismatic founder, and would have been instated as the region's main philosophy. What we see instead, is that India and Pakistan have gone to war with each other three times since their independence, and can both boast nuclear destructive capability, not Satyagraha, as their source of power.

There is no doubt that Gandhi's non-violence was an incredibly effective strategy for liberation, but its success at the same time was entirely dependent on his leadership in that struggle. No wonder that this successful feat has not yet proven to be reproducible under the leadership of other activist figures in the world.

With the assassination of Malcolm X, who was able to inspire millions into taking action against overwhelming odds, his movement was effectively stopped in its tracks before it could be consolidated into a victory. His legacy now lives on as a powerful inspiration, rather than as an example of liberation. The Libyan struggle for independence under Omar El Mukhtar, who was able to mobilize the Libyan population against colonialism and oppression, was effectively maimed by the elimination of his inspiring leadership, when he was hanged at the gallows.

People need leaders, not ideologies

Almost every significant mobilization for change of a population in history has taken place under the charismatic leadership of a person. It is very difficult to find any examples in history of successful uprisings or revolutions that were not inspired by a leader who was considered to be a hero by the majority of the people. People need a leader, not an ideology.

Even the qualities that define these historical figures of change, are almost disappointingly simple. The leader needs to be someone of high intelligence, with deep strategic insights and communication skills which enable him (or her) to express the concerns of the people in a way that appeals to them. He needs to possess rhetorical qualities that can appeal to people of different levels of education and social background. He also needs to have personal traits that enable a majority of people to identify with him, instead of seeming alien or superimposed to them. His message needs to be simple and convincing, and contain a promise of change. Once this person has earned the love of the majority of the people, the awe-inspiring herd-behavior of the human race makes it easy for this leader to rally the people behind him, whether we are talking about national elections, a revolution or a popularity contest at a local school.

When we observe other herd animals, we can see that they always have some leading animals that are followed by the rest. In the savannas of Africa, we can see how these herd animals migrate in a splendidly concerted flow, without any confusion about the herd's direction, which can often be seen from an breathtaking aerial view in wildlife documentaries. In the skies of Europe, during the fall season, one can see the impeccable figures drawn in the skies by huge clouds of thousands of starlings, which seem almost surreal in their coordinated movements as they elegantly sway between the treetops. Since there seems to be no difference of opinion among them on whom to follow, these starlings never collide with one another. This requires an almost unfathomable level of coordination, but is mainly achieved by their complete acceptance of their leadership's commands.

The fallacy of negotiations

In the Palestinian situation there is little confusion about which stated principles have the potential to unite the majority of the people. Our common cause, which is liberation from oppression, is our common interest; this suffices as an ideology and is the common denominator of all existing Palestinian factions. Nevertheless the popular movement against zionist occupation and persecution is chaotically torn into many shreds. There is an abundance of opinions and ideologies, which concern themselves with end goals and final solutions, and end up leading to people sometimes being fanatically opposed against one another. What Palestine lacks is not a 'one-state' or 'two-state' solution, and not a progressive or conservative movement, but simply a leader who has the trust of the majority of the people. Coming from such a loved leader, people would most likely be prepared to accept any solution he would present, as long as he would promise to lead their struggle for liberation with full dedication.

While a significant portion of the population has been led to believe that negotiations are the way forward out of their dire situation, it is a matter of realism to conclude that this can never be successful. Again, history is our teacher. No overwhelming military or economical superpower has ever gone against its own interests simply because its adversaries were such smart speakers. It is therefore rather simplistic to expect the US-Israeli-European axis of racist colonization to steer off its course of total domination of the region, based on the communication skills of some intelligent or eloquent Palestinians. In fact, as long as they are aware that the representatives they are negotiating with are not backed by a massive majority of the population, they cannot even be blamed for not taking their so-called Palestinian 'partner in peace' seriously.

In truth, if they were certain that a leader had such a massive popular backing, they would most likely start a campaign of vilification against him. They would contend that he is an 'impossible partner in peace', based on whatever argumentation they would deem useful to prove their point to the masses in the West. Eventually, they would aim to physically eliminate him, as they have done with many promising Palestinian leaders, from all existing resistance groups.

The ineffectiveness of moderation

One can be sure that a population is in a state of confusion when a significant proportion of it, despite living under harsh oppression, puts its hopes in a moderate leader. No oppressed people in history ever won their freedom by choosing a moderate leader to represent them; even Gandhi was a radical, although his unique method was non-violence. Changes come about when a leader is massively hated and reviled by the adversary, and equally overwhelmingly loved by his own people. Therefore, rallying behind a leader who is deemed acceptable to the enemy, is by definition a crucial waste of time and effort. He has no choice but to balance between serving the occupier's goals and keeping his own people appeased, since these maneuvers are his only guarantee to keep his undesirable position at the negotiating table intact. Undesirable, not for the personal ambitions of that leader, but for the Palestinian cause. These 'negotiations at gunpoint' merely create an illusion of progress, while consolidating the domination of the zionist colonizer, day after day, even when negotiations are 'stalled', as has often been the case.

In Palestine, a leader with the necessary charisma is absent on the political stage. We have a variety of candidates; some of them are more interested in gaining popularity among Western politicians and masses, than among their own people, in the meantime deriving their position of power from the status and popular backing of their organizations. Others care so little about their public relations status towards the world community, that they lose the trust of a portion of their own people in terms of being representative to the outside world. None of them is massively feared or reviled in Israeli society on their personal merits, not in the way Ahmad Yasin and Yasser Arafat were. None of them is massively loved by an overwhelming majority of Palestinians, across the entire spectrum.
Palestine is full of heroes

Therefore, these painful and tragic decades have not really been spent waiting for a 'solution'. Palestine is waiting for her leader, who is radical, sincere, courageous, charismatic and not only speaks clearly in terms of the liberation of Palestine, but proves and displays his full dedication to achieving it. Once this leader emerges, only a minority of the people will still give priority to serving the goals of their factional leadership, party or even their ideology. Once this leader appears on the stage and unites the people, not even Barack Obama, Binyamin Netanyahu and the whole leadership of the European Union combined will be able to stop the Palestinians from claiming their freedom and turning it into a reality.

Are you disappointed by my view? Do you feel as if I have dashed all our hopes for the future, because no such leader exists? Then perhaps you have misunderstood me. The point I am trying to make contains a message of hope, despite all the cynicism. We just have to stop being impressed by people who wave around US dollars or Euros, or brag about their Western contacts, because these people ultimately represent nothing but a dead end street for the Palestinian cause. The leader who can really make a change, will have to be one who has the courage to be a truly independent Palestinian.

We need to start realizing that Palestine is full of selfless and charismatic heroes, although they are seldom seen on center stage, and are rarely revered by their surroundings, unless they have achieved the status of martyrdom – which effectively means they are not there to lead us anymore. We have to try and modify our cultural practice of celebrating heroes only when they are dead, and start embracing and supporting the powerless but dedicated and trustworthy Palestinian heroes who are still alive and kicking in every village and town.

Only then we will have started to prepare the ground for that rare person who will eventually grow to win all of our hearts, and whom we can trust to lead us towards our liberation. The 'Palestinian Gandhi' most likely already exists; all it takes is for us to start noticing him, and supporting him.

Tariq Shadid is a Palestinian surgeon living in the Middle East, and has written numerous essays about the Palestinian issue over the years. Most of these were published by the Palestine Chronicle http://www.palestinechronicle.com , and have been bundled in the book "Understanding Palestine", which is available through Amazon.com. He also runs a website of internationally oriented music dedicated to the Palestinian cause, which can be found at http://www.docjazz.com .

Today, Israel continues to prevent a large number of consumer products from entering Gaza. This policy, often justified by security considerations, has actually nothing to do with security. It is a deliberate measure aimed at further tormenting the inhabitants of Gaza by showing them that Israel has the final say and that they would have to submit themselves to the Zionist will. This is how the Nazis behaved toward the inhabitants of the Ghetto Warsaw, forcing them to smuggle food and other consumer products into the camp.

What is more scandalous is that the  Zionist regime is adamantly preventing the entry into Gaza of building materials needed for the reconstruction of the estimated 40,000 homes destroyed, either completely or partly during last year’s Nazi-like onslaught against the impoverished territory.

Unfortunately, this callous and criminal policy is not being challenged by the international community which keeps issuing platitudinous remarks about the need to meet the humanitarian needs of the people of Gaza,  this is while thousands of  Gazans, whose homes were destroyed by the Nazis of our time, remain without shelter and are totally exposed to the elements of nature.

In fact, the enduring nightmare in Gaza is beyond the pale of common sense. The Israelis, who killed more than 1,400 Gazans, including more than 350 children last year alone, claiming they did it in self defense, are maintaining this suffocating blockade as an expression of sadism, callousness and hateful vindictiveness. What else can be said about a government whose ministers and spokespeople routinely appear on TV screens bragging and gloating over the suffering of Gazan children?

There is no doubt that the continued blockade of Gaza has exposed the brutal ugliness of Israel’s face, demonstrating that Israel and Nazi Germany are very much two sides of the same coin. Nonetheless, exposing Israel’s ugly face alone won’t save Gazan lives or enable the thoroughly tormented inhabitants of the largest detention camp in the world to rebuild their lives, torn into smithereens by a state that murders, steals and lies and then claims to be the only democracy in the Middle East.

Hence, it is important to make every conceivable effort and make every possible undertaking to help Gaza rebuild its life and restore a semblance of normal life. Undoubtedly admirable efforts have been made by courageous men and women from around the globe who often put their lives at risk in order to highlight the Gaza plight. However, it is imperative that more qualitative and pro-active efforts be made in order to make a real difference.

In short, Gaza must never be allowed to die quietly or silently. This was the message more than three years ago when the cruel blockade began. This is still the message today; because the overall situation in Gaza doesn’t really differ much now from what it was three years ago.

Unfortunately, we can’t rely much on the “good will” of most countries, perhaps with the exception of some magnanimous governments such as the Turkish government which has utilized much of the diplomatic weight of the Turkish state in order to help the just cause of the oppressed people of Gaza.

The Obama administration, which many people had given the benefit of the doubt when it came to power more than a year ago, has turned out to be quite impotent in the face of Israeli insolence and arrogance of power.

Similarly, Europe is doing nothing in real terms, apart from issuing nice-sounding statements about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the need to allow Gazans to rebuild their homes.

And Egypt, the supposedly brotherly neighboring Arab country which is supposed to hasten to aide Gaza is completing and perfecting a nefarious underground concrete wall along its borders with Gaza in order to prevent the smuggling of food into the blockaded region.

Even the Palestinian Authority (PA) is implicitly encouraging Israel and Egypt and the West to keep up the pressure on Gaza in the hope that this pressure would prompt the people of Gaza to rise up against Hamas.

Well, how can such an entity, which is colluding and conspiring with Israel against its own people, be a true party to any Palestinian national reconciliation?

In light, it is necessary to once again mobilize the peoples of the world to rise up and demonstrate loudly in order to exert pressure on their respective governments to pressure Israel to put an end to this shameful, sadistic and cruel collective punishment.

We need to see millions of people take to the streets everywhere to demonstrate for Gaza and for humanity. In the final analysis, Gaza has become the ultimate test for humanity’s moral commitment.

If we, God forbid, don’t succeed in saving Gaza from the claws of Zio-Nazism, the future of humanity itself will be bleak.

"Right and wrong are the same in Palestine as anywhere else. What is peculiar about the Palestine conflict is that the world has listened to the party that has committed the offence and has turned a deaf ear to the victims."
–Prof. Arnold Toynbee, Foreword to the Transformation of Palestine, 1971

"Israel may have the right to put others on trial, but certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial."
–Ariel Sharon

"Well, it's a trick, we always use it. When from Europe somebody is criticizing Israel then we bring up the holocaust. When in this country US) people are criticizing Israel then they are anti-Semitic. And the organization (Israel Lobby) is very strong and has lot of money. And the ties between Israel and American Jewish establishment are very strong – and they are strong in this country as you know. And they have power which is ok."
–Shulamit Aloni, Former Israeli Minister of Education, On Democracy Now, August 14, 2002

Honorable President of Harvard University Dr. Drew Faust
Honorable Members of the Board of Directors
Harvard Faculty Members
Harvard Student Organizations

Dear Madame President Faust;

I must strenuously and in the strongest terms possible protest the silence and inaction of Harvard University toward the outrageous, inhumane, offensive, even racist eugenic proposal that Dr. Martin Kramer, a Visiting Scholar at Harvard made during his speech at the Israeli Herzliya Conference on January 31, 2010.

In that speech Dr. Kramer implored the West to stop its Pro Natal services to the already besieged and starving Gaza Palestinian pregnant mothers and infants as a method of controlling the rapid birth rate in Gaza as a matter of political and social policy. To him such control will naturally lead to a decrease in the radicalization of Palestinian youth which he calls "superfluous men" as well as relieve the "demographic threat" to Israel's Jewish identity.

How racist is the term "superfluous men" to describe young Palestinian men who are constant fodder for Israeli soldier's bullets, missiles, and tank shells (as soldiers themselves have told "Break the Silence" group of former IDF Soldiers) as unnecessary and wasteful human beings.

Dr. Kramer's eugenic proposal not to provide Pro Natal care, which I take he means Pre and Post Natal care, is tantamount to genocide of fetuses and infants. Pregnant mothers would not receive the preventive care, regular OB exams, nutritional guidance (such as providing Folic Acid and Vitamins given their already malnourished state), appropriate vaccines or a healthy medically supervised delivery in hospitals, which all are damaged by Israel's assault on Gaza in 2008-2009. Infants would not receive the necessary medical care, or intensive care if necessary (difficult given the lack of electricity, oxygen, or antibiotics in Gaza), regular immunizations, nutritional guidance, or regular Pediatric checkups. Dr. Kramer shouldn't worry about a Palestinian population explosion; Israel's militarily with our tax dollars and weapons is determined not to leave any Palestinian child behind.

His proposal meets the accepted definition of eugenics, passive euthanasia, and genocide and no amount of spin cover up, rationalization, justification, taken out of context lies; nor the canard of Freedom of Speech that's available to Pro Israelite hate mongers to the exclusion of Pro Justice proponents for Palestinians and peace in the Holy Land.

In addition to Israel's three year physical devastating siege of Gaza, Dr. Kramer is proposing another physical and medical siege, this time of a Palestinian woman's womb that would ultimately result in a secondary ethnic cleansing of Palestinians that has continued unabated since 1947.

In Harvard as elsewhere, Academic Freedom and Free Speech means never having to say Israel is wrong, or that Israel defies all divine and human laws, or that Israel's occupation and theft of Palestinian land is illegal and immoral, and Israel's wars upon a captive population under its control is tantamount to "war crimes, nor that the Israel Lobby dominates the formulation of our foreign policy in the Middle East and the Islamic world. To them it's Baghdad, next stop is Iran.

No politician, academic institution, or American citizen dare have an honest public discourse on our self destructive relationship with Israel. Even the Pentagon's Defense Science Board confirmed that the Muslim world doesn't hate our freedoms but hates our blind policy of supporting Israel.

In describing freedom of speech the famous Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard wrote:

"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use."

Contrary to Dr. Kramer's assertion and his defense by WCFIA controlling or preventing a population's birth right and rate meets the definition of Genocide according to the First Geneva Convention Against Genocide which states:

"This convention bans acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religion group…imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group".

Dr. Kramer need not worry that Gaza's children are growing up healthy, safe, able to go to school, eat right, receive medical care, play, or even visit family, given Israel's persistent military attacks, invasions, and total blockade of Gaza. During the unprovoked onslaught on Gaza a year ago Israel killed hundreds of infants and children. That is why the Goldstone report accusing Israel of committing war crimes never appeared in TV news or most of our print media. Neither will the media report on Dr. Kramer's speech or the angst of many Americans who find it abhorrent and offensive.

While Israel destroys the lives of current Palestinian children, Dr. Kramer seeks to ensure the end of future Palestinian children.

In fact Palestinian children are living breathing beings who often serve as fodder and target practice for Israel's soldiers. (Guardian, Nov. 24, 2004: "Israeli Officer: I was right to shoot 13 year old child")

Chris Hedges, the famed journalist, author, and war correspondent who was also a Neimen Fellow at Harvard and served for years as MidEast Bureau Chief for the New York Times horrifically captured the plight of Palestinian children in Gaza in a Harper Magazine article titled, "A Gaza Diary", October 2001.

"It was in Gaza, where I lived for weeks at a time during the seven years I spent in the Middle East, that I came to know the dark side of the Israeli Defense Force….Children have been shot in other conflicts I have covered-death squads gunned them down in El Salvador and Guatemala, mothers with infants were lined up and massacred in Algeria, and Serb snipers put children in their sights and watched them crumple onto the pavement in Sarajevo-but I have never before watched soldiers (IDF) entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."

Madame President, imagine the outrage in Harvard and among worldwide Jewish groups if a Harvard Muslim Professor suggested that limiting Jewish births in the U.S. will lead to a dramatic decline in their political, financial, and media clout thereby ending their stranglehold on U.S. foreign policy and its blind support of the rogue state of Israel. How long before you, Madame President, the Board of Trustees, Deans, Faculty, the ADL, AIPAC, ZOA, JDL, JINSA, WINEP, and the mainstream media would be calling for his Anti-Semitic head not just to be fired, even with tenure.

Madame, you'd be the first to initiate the firing of such a person who'll be blacklisted never again to find academic employment in this country. Such is the power of Pro Israelite's wrath.

Again, I am under no illusion that you or Harvard's Board of Trustees would even consider the slightest reprimand against Dr. Kramer for his most offensive call to limit the freedom for Palestinians to procreate lest their population growth translates into future political violence, an argument used effectively for years by Apartheid South Africa.

Dr. Kramer enjoys the protection of rich philanthropic donors to Harvard, Jewish colleagues and superiors, Jewish organizations, and a supportive media.

But, in the larger scheme of education which is the foundation of any civilization is Harvard's mission and responsibility to its students, community, and the world; to teach the truth on any subject or at least present both sides of an argument, to stand up for the principles of freedom and equality for all, for justice, for world peace, constructive dialogue, respect for human life and human rights, respect for the law and due process; or is Harvard akin to all institutions in our capitalistic money corrupted society where special interest groups with money and power determine the content of our education and the extent of our freedoms.. If so, who will speak for and advocate for the voiceless, the invisible poor, the homeless and the oppressed?

This is the issue and challenge for our times. Will we lend an ear and voice for those who have no money to endow chairs, hold no high positions in the government, think tanks, banking and financial institutions, the media and the entertainment industry?

Have we all lost our souls for the expediency and reward of the moment at the expense of others and our future?

Given that our nation's future demographics will result in today's minorities becoming tomorrow's majorities, should we adopt Dr. Kramer's proposal and limit by any means necessary the procreation of our Hispanic, African American and Asian populations?

How will such a future majority impact our relationship with Israel and the power of the Israel Lobby upon our foreign policy?

If Harvard remains silent regarding Dr. Kramer's speech, as I expect it will, perhaps we should recall Elie Wiesel's hypocritical statement:

"Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented."

The famous Harvard graduate John Kennedy once said:

"The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest; but the myth, persistent, persuasive and realistic"

How tragic that in Harvard there is no longer a commitment to Veritas or Justice. Fear and the maintenance of the status quo have become the corruptive regressive tools of an outstanding institution denying its bright young minds the dream of a brighter, safer, and peaceful future for this fragile planet.

With all due respect to you, the Board of Trustees, Faculty and students of our beloved Harvard, I remain.

Note: Martin Kramer is Senior Fellow at the Shalem Center in Jerusalem, and President-Designate of Shalem College (in formation). He is also the Wexler-Fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and National Security Security Studies Program Visiting Scholar at Harvard University.

Dr. Kramer was also former editor of the Middle East Quarterly a publication of the Middle East Forum founded by Daniel Pipes founder of campuswatch.org which "monitors" universities and scholars who teach Middle East Studies. lest they, God forbid, describe Israel in its true historical colors.

http://www.martinkramer.org/sandbox/2010/02/wcfia-at-harvard-accusations-are-baseless/
M. Kramer's blog which contains his speech and the defense of his speech by the Directors of WCFIA at Harvard where he is a Visiting Scholar.

http://www.wcfia.harvard.edu/
Weatherhead Center for International Affairs (WCFIA) at Harvard where Dr. Kramer is described as Visiting Scholar, National Security Studies Program. Former Director, Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, Tel Aviv University.

From the Electronic Intafada website which brought the issue to the attention of WCFIA at Harvard:

"In her initial response to a query from the Electronic Intifada regarding Dr. Kramer's speech, Professor Beth Simmons, the director of WCFIA, wrote, "I agree with your assessment of the appalling nature of these [Kramer's] statements," but added, "the WCFIA does not have a policy of censoring or censuring our affiliates on the basis of their opinions." Simmons also stated, "I very much hope you bring these [Kramer's] words to the attention of others affiliated with the WCFIA, Harvard and the broader community, where I hope they will garner their just reaction." She encouraged individuals to make their concerns known to Professor Stephen Rosen, who is in charge of the National Security Studies Program of which Kramer is a fellow.

Naturally and as expected the Directors of WCFIA reversed their assessment from "appalling" to defending the "appalling" speech.

http://www.michaelheart.com/songforgaza.htm
PLEASE WATCH this Song by an American Humanitarian Songwriter on GAZA

http://vodpod.com/watch/122002-the-israel-lobby-the-influence-of-aipac-on-us-foreign-policy
Important Dutch Video on Influence of AIPAC on US Foreign Policy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H88gVDrIlPs
UK Channel 4 Video: Inside Britain's Israel Lobby

http://quicksilverscreen.com/watch?video=34545
BBC Panorama Video: THE WAR PARTY, the Neocons Behind Iraq War

http://www.bintjbeil.com/articles/en/011001_hedges.html
Chris Hedges, "A Gaza Diary", Harper's Magazine, October 2001

* Mohamed Khodr M.D., M.P.H. is a political activist who frequently writes on the plight of Palestinians living under the brutal occupation of Israel, U.S. Foreign Policy, Islam, and Arab politics.

The Washington Times publishes story questioning official account.

Newly released photos of New York on September 11, 2001 by the NY Police Association

The mainstream press is showing interest in a taboo, however glaring subject; the inconsistencies in the Bush White House 9/11 account.

As The Washington Times reports today, "A lingering technical question about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks still haunts some, and it has political implications: How did 200,000 tons of steel disintegrate and drop in 11 seconds? A thousand architects and engineers want to know, and are calling on Congress to order a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7 at the World Trade Center."

The problems with the official federal stories are endless and according to some of the world's top minds, the suggested account is impossible^[1].

When we first began to write about these seemingly pressing questions, our Web Designer Matt Lintz caught the U.S. Air Force attempting to hack into Salem-News.com^[2].

One person who has never let the matter fade away is Richard Gage. He's a San Francisco architect and founder of the nonprofit Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

Gage told The Washington Times, "In order to bring down this kind of mass in such a short period of time, the material must have been artificially, exploded outwards."

The federal government wants you to believe that fires brought the buildings to the ground, yet in all recorded history, no fire has ever toppled a skyscraper. They burn to the framework but they don't fall down.

Even if it was possible, the World Trade Towers were the least likely candidates. The steel core design of these buildings would not have come down, even if the building collapsed.

Even when you get past that, perhaps finding ways to justify the impossible "official" circumstances, how on earth could any logical explanation account for Building 7?

This is curious, I would suggest that half of all living Americans still don't realize that a third building also came down that day, and it wasn't hit by an airplane. But it did contain a lot of records that certain members of the financial industry didn't miss. Then there are the billions of dollars in missing gold evacuated just before Building 7 pancaked to the ground.

The words of Gage are reflected all over the nation in universities and engineering firms. The Trade Tower buildings were specifically designed to withstand the impact of a jet liner, specifically. Jet fuel is similar to diesel and it doesn't burn very hot. Firefighters, talking on radios, talked about how the aircraft crash fire in one building were going to easily be extinguisher by a few firefighters.

One of our writers, Jeff Gates, suggested that the only country that benefited from the ensuing wars is Israel.

"For instance, a skilled game theorist could foresee that, in response to a 911-type mass murder, "the mark" (the U.S.) would deploy its military to avenge that attack. With phony intelligence fixed around a preset goal, a game theory algorithm could anticipate that those forces might well be redirected to invade Iraq-not to avenge 911 but to pursue the expansionist goals of Greater Israel^[3].

Enforcing that thought, our writer Maidhc Ó Cathail wrote, "The day after 9/11, Benjamin Netanyahu let slip that the deaths of almost 3,000 Americans was 'very good' for Israel. In particular, the mass murder was very good for an emerging sector of the Israeli economy. In Laboratory for a Fortressed World, Naomi Klein detailed the post-9/11 "explosion of Israel's homeland security sector."^[4]

Another Salem-News.com writer, Dr. Alan Sabrosky, wrote about the connection between 9/11 and Israel in the article, Treason, Betrayal and Deceit: The Road to 9/11 and Beyond, "Second, only two intelligence agencies had the expertise, assets, access and political protection to execute 9/11 in the air and on the ground: our CIA and Israel’s Mossad. Only one had the incentive, using the 'who benefits' principle: Mossad."^[5]

The answers remain tangled up. Many Americans believe questioning the government over this is unpatriotic, then they turn around and burn effigies of Obama at tea bagger parties. I say it is highly unpatriotic and even disingenuous, to not question facts about the integrity of this nation.

I won't even start on Shanksville and the Pentagon; those stories are packed with more holes and in your face inconsistencies than there is time for in this report, but I have written about the Pentagon in particular, at great length^[6].

The tragedy of September 11th 2001 is so far reaching that we could never truly describe it. The event was the reasoning to launch two very costly, ongoing wars. The very notion of Arab terrorists selecting the day that is synonymous with emergency response in the U.S. is as hard to believe as the "terrorists" passports recovered so conveniently on the sidewalks in New York that day.

The Washington Times cites how Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects, managed to persuade more than a thousand of his peers to sign a new petition requesting a formal inquiry.

"The official Federal Emergency Management [Agency] and National Institute of Standards and Technology reports provide insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers' destruction. We are therefore calling for a grand jury investigation of NIST officials."

Gage says technical issues surrounding the collapse of the towers have prompted years of debate, rebuttal and ridicule.

The article cites how he is particularly disturbed by the fall of the 47-story skyscraper, Building 7. This engineer says, like the other two buildings, tower 7 fell in "pure free-fall acceleration."

He also talked about how more than a hundred first-responders observed flashes and explosions during the fall of the towers.

Even more disturbing evidence Gage says, are "multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally 600 ft. at 60 mph". He also talked about the "mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking."

Firefighters and Trade Tower employees en mass reported explosions before the buildings came down. They also talked about building closures in the weeks preceding 9/11, and men carrying large amounts of equipment into the elevator shafts.

Most experts agree that the buildings could only have come down the way they did if they were imploded. Experts who perform this type of work, common in places like Las Vegas, at least before the nation's economic downturn, place the main explosives in the elevator shafts, but also in many other strategic locations in a building's structure.

If you watch the World Trade Towers fall in slow motion, it is easy to observe what appear to be a series of planned explosions, running essentially the length of each building.

Gage says evidence of "advanced explosive nano-thermitic composite material" was found in the World Trade Center dust. Of course Rudy Gulliani, mayor of New York at the time, had all of the building evidence shipped away from the state almost immediately.

There is a long list of federal investigators who say they were not allowed to do their jobs or complete the investigation. Tie this to the revelations in 9/11 Commissioner John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, where the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version is almost entirely untrue, according to our writer Gordon Duff, and you just might be lifting a corner of the dirtiest rug that ever was used to suppress truth^[7].

Gage says the group's petition at ae911truth.org is already on its way to members of Congress.

He Told The Washington Times, "Government officials will be notified that 'Misprision of Treason,' U.S. Code 18 (Sec. 2382), is a serious federal offense, which requires those with evidence of treason to act."

"The implications are enormous and may have profound impact on the forthcoming Khalid Shaikh Mohammed trial."

For me, the biggest story here is that a mainstream member of the press published this article, I am amazed and encouraged. It is hard to suggest that we have perhaps been had in the biggest and worst way possible, but honesty is the only thing that matters.

Israeli Espionage – Part 1 of 4

Video link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEOecRtBU7U

Israeli Espionage – Part 2 of 4

Video link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o17SSuuZDkA

Israeli Espionage – Part 3 of 4

Video link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VclAeKYYvBc

Israeli Espionage – Part 4 of 4

Video link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVRsmodmCTE

Also, this video from CoreofCorruption.com which was released just over a year ago, details the information regarding four alleged "art students" who had free access to the Trade Towers, including construction passes, in the immediate weeks preceding 9/11:

Video link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA9MvV-SrCo

References:

[1] Apr-07-2006 : Huge Contradictions in Official Theories on 9/11 Crash at Pentagon – Tim King Salem-News.com

[2] Apr-16-2006: U.S. Air Force Hackers Caught in Their Tracks by Salem-News.com – Tim King Salem-News.com

[3]Oct-20-2009: How Israel Wages Game Theory Warfare – Jeff Gates Salem-News.com

[4] Jan-20-2010: The Merchants of Fear: Israel's Profiting from Homeland Insecurity – Maidhc Ó Cathail Sabbah.biz

[5] Sep-10-2009: Treason, Betrayal and Deceit: The Road to 9/11 and Beyond – Alan Sabrosky Sabbah.biz

[6] Mar-21-2006: What Really Hit The Pentagon? – Tim King Salem-News.com

[7] Sep-11-2009: The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies – Gordon Duff Salem-News.com

* Tim King is a former U.S. Marine with twenty years of experience on the west coast as a television news producer, photojournalist, reporter and assignment editor. In addition to his role as a war correspondent, this Los Angeles native serves as Salem-News.com's Executive News Editor. Tim spent the winter of 2006/07 covering the war in Afghanistan, and he was in Iraq over the summer of 2008, reporting from the war while embedded with both the U.S. Army and the Marines. Tim holds numerous awards for reporting, photography, writing and editing, including the Oregon AP Award for Spot News Photographer of the Year (2004), first place Electronic Media Award in Spot News, Las Vegas, (1998), Oregon AP Cooperation Award (1991); and several others including the 2005 Red Cross Good Neighborhood Award for reporting. Serving the community in very real terms, Salem-News.com is the nation's only truly independent high traffic news Website. You can send Tim an email at this address: newsroom@salem-news.com

Source: Salem-news.com