03-06-04

Rogue Bush Backers prepare Super 9/11 False Flag Terror Attacks

Rogue Bush Backers prepare Super 9/11 False Flag Terror Attacks

INN Preview Exclusive -June 2

By Webster Griffin Tarpley

Toronto, May 30 – Intelligence patterns monitored over the US Memorial
Day weekend now point conclusively to an imminent new round of ABC
(atomic-bacteriological-chemical) terror attacks in the United States,
Great Britain, Canada, and possibly other nations. These attacks could
include nuclear detonations, radiological dirty bombs, poison gas and
other chemical weapons, or biological agents, to be unleashed in such
urban settings as New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington DC,
Vancouver BC, or London.

The goal of these operations would be to
produce a worldwide shock several orders of magnitude greater than the
original 9-11, with a view to stopping the collapse of the Bush
administration, the Wall Street-centered financial structures, and the
US-UK strategic position generally. The attacks would be attributed by
US/UK intelligence to controlled patsy terrorist groups who would be
linked by the media to countries like Iran, Syria, Cuba, or North
Korea.

The organizers of the attacks would in reality be substantially
the same secret command cell in the United States which set up the 9-11
events and its associated networks, which have been able to continue in
operation because of the abject failure of all 9-11 investigations to
date to identify them....

These forces are now in a desperate flight forward to escape from their current increasingly grim position.
Their goal is now to establish a neocon fascist dictatorship in the United
States, complete with martial law, special tribunals, press and media
censorship, and the full pervasive apparatus of the modern police state.

The chatter in Washington points to state-sponsored terrorism on a
grand scale, with the desperados of the neocon faction calling the shots. The
looming event will be an "own goal" of the Am ericans.

In short, a coup d'etat is being prepared in the United States – not a
coup against the existing government, but rather for the purpose of
disciplining and dragooning the entire political process for escalated
foreign aggression, with the homeland secured by emergency rule. It
goes without saying that those associated with such a coup are felons,
war criminals, and traitors to their country.

The leading edge of the propaganda campaign designed to establish the
credibility of the coming ABC (atomic, bacteriological, chemical)
terror wave is the May 26 press conference of Attorney General Ashcroft
and FBI Director Robert Mueller to announce the coming summer "perfect
storm" of terrorism. According to advance wire service reports, "U.S.
officials have obtained new intelligence deemed highly credible
indicating al-Qaeda or other terrorists are in the United States and
preparing to launch a major attack this summer….(AP, 25 May 2004)

The following is a partial grid of evidence backing up this thesis.
This overview cannot be exhaustive, but is sufficiently comprehensive to
establish that a new pattern does indeed exist.

Official Statements

Since the beginning of April, there has been a qualitative escalation in
the urgency and vehemence of the terror demagogy of the Bush
administration. Bush and especially Cheney have made terror warning
their stock in trade since September 11, 2001, but early April 2004
stands out as a watershed, for reasons which are discussed below.

A dramatic turning point on the way to the current emergency came on
April 21, when Bush delivered two speeches which represented a palpable
escalation of the tone of his usual demagogy of terrorism and fear. In
the afternoon, he assured the Newspaper Association of America,
composed of newspaper editors, that Iran "will be dealt with" if they
pursue a nuclear development program. Bush went on to characterize the
United States as "a battlefield in the war on terror."

He was at pains to build up the stature of Al Qaeda, whose members he emphatically
characterized as "smart…tough…and sophisticated." Because the terrorist
are so formidable, Bush said that the United States "is a hard country
to defend. Our intelligence is good. It's just never perfect, is the
problem. We are disrupting some cells here in America. We're chasing
people down. But it is – we've got a big country."

Later, Bush spoke to the same themes at a closed-door gathering at the
White House. "...On Tuesday evening, Bush told Republican congressional
leaders during a meeting at the White House that it was all but
certain that terrorists would attempt a major attack on the United
States before the election, according to a congressional aide. The
leaders were struck by Bush's definitiveness and gravity, the aide
said... (Washington Post, 4/22/04)"

Vice President Cheney has been predicting imminent terrorist attacks on
the US in many of his speeches since no later than May 20, 2002. On
that Sunday, Cheney went on Fox News Sunday to announce that "In my
opinion, the prospects of a future attack against the United States are
almost certain." For Cheney, the question of a new terrorist assault on
the US is "not a matter of if, but when."

Several weeks later, an account published under the title "White House
Nightmare Scenario" in US News and World Report reflected the thinking
of top Bush officials about the relation between terrorism and the
coming US presidential elections. According to this article, 'White
House officials say they've got a "working premise" about terrorism and
the presidential election: It's going to happen. "We assume," says a
top administration official, "an attack will happen leading up to the
election." And, he added, "it will happen here." There are two
worst-case scenarios, the official says. The first posits an attack on
Washington, possibly the Capitol, which was believed to be the target
of the 9/11 jet that crashed in Pennsylvania. Theory 2: smaller but
more frequent attacks in Washington and other major cities leading up
to the election. To prepare, the administration has been holding secret
antiterrorism drills to make sure top officials know what to do. "There
was a sense," says one official involved in the drills, "of mass
confusion on 9/11. Now we have a sense of order." Unclear is the
political impact, though most Bushies think the nation would rally
around the president. "I can tell you one thing," adds the official
sternly, "we won't be like Spain," which tossed its government days
after the Madrid train bombings. (US News and World Report, 17 May
2004)

National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice told Fox News on Sunday,
April 19, that the government is bracing for possible terrorist attacks
before November's Presidential election. Referencing last month's
Madrid bombings, she said the opportunity for terrorists to influence
the election may "be too good to pass up for them," and that "the
terrorists might have learned, we hope, the wrong lesson from Spain."

Condoleezza Rice's remarks came in the context of a lengthy US tour by
Jose Maria Aznar, the defeated Spanish Prime Minister. Aznar was ousted
in Spain's March 13 elections, partly because 90% of Spaniards rejected
Aznar's subservience to Bush in joining the US invasion coalition in
Iraq, and partly because Spanish voters were convinced that Aznar was
lying about the March 11 terrorist attacks on commuter trains in the
Madrid region. Aznar is counted as a neocon, but his party contains the
remnants of Francisco Franco's falangist-fascist apparatus. Aznar is
associated with thesis that the March 11 terrorist attacks decided the
Spanish elections in favor of the PSOE (socialist) challenger,
Zapatero. Aznar also claims that his own defeat was a victory for
terrorism, since the newly elected Zapatero, acting in conformity with
the will of the Spanish people, withdrew the Spanish troop contingent
from Iraq as soon as he had taken office. The Spanish elections were
viewed with hysteria by Washington elites, first because of the Spanish
quitting coalition, but also because the terrorist attacks had failed
to produce the expected effects. The Washington consensus had
previously been that terrorism would infallibly stampede the voters of
any country into voting for the incumbent, but this time it was the
anti-Bush challenger who was the beneficiary. Aznar is known to have
attempted to call off the Spanish vote and to continue to ruling by
decree, but his efforts were blocked. Aznar's briefing would seem to
have included the notion that if there is going to be pre-election
terrorism, it needs to be of sufficient magnitude to provide a pretext
for calling off all scheduled elections.

On May 20, 2004 wires various wires reported that in the U.S. between
May 16/17 and 19, maneuvers have been conducted by Homeland Security
Apparatus, simulating terrorist attacks. On May 19, Yahoo reported a
statement made by Lt. Gen. (ret) Patrick Hughes, who told AP in an
interview, that while America has become better at predicting and
safeguarding itself against attacks since Sept. 11, 2001, he fears that
new terrorists "are being made every single day on the streets of the
Middle East."

Based on captured material, interviews, and other sources
of information, Hughes said he believes al Qaeda wants to strike with
something other than a conventional explosive device. It is reported
that he worries about chemical and biological attacks, including a
dirty bomb.

In mid-April, Aznar began issuing warnings of election-related
terrorism. These warning were directed most immediately to Tony Blair
and George Bush. Aznar said, "I told George Bush, and Tony Blair and
other political leaders to be extremely careful before elections ...
and to be very vigilant." But there are also major election campaigns
going on in Canada (at the federal level) and in the 25 member states
of the European Union for the European Parliament. (Once Noticias,
Once-TV, 4/19/04. Mexico)

During his visit to California, Aznar referred more than once about a
terrorist attack taking place in the United States in June, 2004, which
would lead to a Federal Emergency Management Agency takeover of the
U.S. (International Herald Tribune, May 15, 16, 17, Los Angeles Times,
May 15)

On May 18, El Pais reported that Aznar had visited Los Angeles, and had
then gone one to Washington, where he met Defense Secretary Rumsfeld.
Present at the meeting, reports El Pais, were various Democratic and
Republican Congressmen. Aznar was satisfied with the meeting. After the
meeting, during an intervention at the Heritage Foundation, Rumsfeld
spoke about how he dealt with the ex-Prime Minister by saying: "In
Spain, in Madrid, the terrorists changed the result of the elections,
without any doubt. In a premeditated way as consequence of the aim of
the terrorists, the election results were changed. I had dinner with
Prime Minister Aznar, and he is convinced that this is how it
happened," said Rumsfeld. In California, Aznar told the press on Monday
that Islamic terrorism has as objective, to influence elections in
democratic countries.

"If they could do it in Spain, why would they not intend to do it in another place?" he said and added, "It's important to understand that the terrorists will do everything to change the next elections in the USA.

They will do everything possible to make the U.S.
fail." He furthermore said in Los Angeles that he thought that the
government of Zapatero sent an "inappropriate message to the terrorists
by withdrawing the troops." Aznar on Tuesday had a 40-minute meeting
with President Bush in the White House. Present at the meeting were:
Vice President Dick Cheney; Condi Rice; Colin Powell; and White House
Chief of Staff Andrew Card. The White House press spokesman identified
the meeting as "private" -- "a meeting with a good friend of the
President."

An important sidelight on these statements by Aznar is the revelation
that the group accused of carrying out the Madrid bombings was
thoroughly penetrated by the Spanish police, who had at least
informants within that group, according to El Mundo of May 6, 2004. El
Mundo reported that among the people arrested for the Madrid bombing,
were two police informants.

This paper published an exclusive report given by Rafa Zhueri, who was among those arrested after the March 11 terror bombings. Zhueri revealed that he worked for years as police informant for a part of the Spanish Civil Guard (UCO Undidad Central
Operativa). The article is headlined "I informed the Civil Guard that
an Asturian offered me dynamite."

The Kean-Hamilton Commission of 9-11 has not produced any serious
insights into those events, but it has served as a propaganda soapbox
for figures such as the former Navy Secretary and establishment
operative John Lehman. In the recent New York sessions of the
commission, Lehman stressed repeatedly that the overwhelming consensus
among US officials is that new terror attacks are coming soon This
view was shared by former New York City mayor Rudolph Giuliani.

The former leader of the US Central Command, Gen. Tommy Franks, told
the magazine Cigar Afficionado earlier this year that he considered it
possible that the US would be under emergency rule in the coming months.

(Photo: FEMA CIO Barry West)

Exercises and Incidents

On May 11-12, the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) ran a
large-scale exercise involving more than 2,500 federal employees, to
determine how the federal government could continue operating in the
face of a massive terrorist attack or other catastrophe. The government
employees went to more than 100 secret sites, as part of a training
exercise to prepare them to operate under catastrophic conditions. The
exercise, called "Forward Challenge '04," was in preparation for over a
year, according to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, who spoke to
reporters from an undisclosed location. (Washington Post, May 14)

There is also an unprecedented pattern of local and regional
preparations for emergency rule and continuity of government
operations. For example, Florida television station Wftv.com reports
May 19th under the title "Massive Mock Terror Drill Will Span Three
Local Counties", that Daytona International Speedway (Florida) will be
the second stage of a three-part mock terror drill across Central
Florida. This is to be "one of the largest and longest mock terror
drills ever conducted in Central Florida since 9/11." The wire says
that "dozens of emergency agencies will take part from all across
Central Florida, with more than 1000 responders and actors who will
play victims of a simulated attack." The newswire nynewsdayd.com, under
the title "City stages mock explosion in subway to test emergency
protocols", was reporting May 16th that Lower Manhattan was swamped
with 1,000 police, firefighters, and land emergency personnel
responding to a simulated bombing involving scores of casualties.

"The terror response drill, part of a joint city-federal plan to beef up
response efforts, it is reported, came just two days before the 9/11
commission was scheduled to be in New York to grill local officials
about Gotham's emergency preparedness...." The drill "was the first
large scale test of a new protocol aimed at clarifying the roles of
firefighters and cops at disaster scenes." Yahoo furthermore reports on
May 17th that in Idaho one of the largest disaster drills was staged
over three days in southwest Idaho, conducted by the department of
Homeland Security. The State of Georgia declared "state of emergency",
because of a summit of the group of eight industrialized nations, which
begins June 8.

There is also an intensive pattern of incidents pointing in the
direction of a terrorist attack on rail systems, on the Madrid model.
This pattern includes suspicious activity in the Northeast rail
corridor between Washington and Boston. A Philadelphia television
station reported the discovery of a wireless transmitter carefully
hidden in the gravel along the SEPTA (Southeast Pennsylvania Transit
Authority) rail tracks in Philadelphia. An infrared sensor, painted
black and buried in the trackside ballast, was found along the SEPTA
tracks, which could be used as a triggering device. It sends a signal
when something crosses its infrared beam. (WPVI News, Philadelphia, May
20)

On May 1, New York City police found five empty suitcases at Penn
Station, New York FBI headquarters, and other sensitive points.
According to The New York Post, the police feared that these empty
suitcases represented "a test by terrorist bent on a Madrid-type
attack" on commuter trains. (New York Post, May 2, 2004)

There is also an uptick in the detected activities of foreign
intelligence services, such as the Mossad, on US territory. According
to a Florida newspaper, for the second time in two weeks Israelis in a
moving van were detained near a U.S. nuclear facility, this time at the
Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base near St. Marys, GA., near Sea Island,
host of the G-8 Summit next month." (Jacksonville Times-Union, 21 May
2004)

On May 6, British Prime Minister Tony Blair announced that the new head
of the British intelligence service MI-6 will be John Scarlett. The
choice immediately caused protests from British political opposition
leaders. Scarlett was the author and stubborn defender of the
now-totally-discredited and artificially sexed-up "Iraqi WMD" report
issued by the Blair government in support of the US-UK war drive. Dr.
David Kelley lost his life in the scandal that developed around the
manipulations in this report, but the role of the government was
whitewashed in the inquiry conducted by Lord Hutton of the Law Lords.
This appointment means that MI-6 will lack the leadership of a
competent and independent professional who might act to prevent the
coming terrorism, and will instead be under the domination of a
political hack of dubious judgment and loyalty. (Wire services, May 6)

In addition, the US government appears top have imposed an embargo on
the sharing of critical anti-terror intelligence with European
authorities. Whatever the intent, the net effect of this blackout is to
screen certain activities in the US from scrutiny by the allies. In an
article published May 6 the German economic paper Handelsblatt reported
in reference to a similar article which appeared in the Wall Street
Journal, that Spanish investigators, like many of their colleagues in
Europe, are find it very difficult to obtain information from US
circles which are engaged in the fight against terrorism.

Mentioned is the case of Spanish Judge Balthazar Garzon who reportedly was unable to
proceed with certain investigations on Al Qaeda after Sept 11th, like
the case of Al Qaeda member Ramzi Binalshibh, who is imprisoned in an
unknown location. The problem is compounded by the fact that the
anti-terrorism fight in the US is being conducted by non-public
military courts and military intelligence, neither of which, as the
article claims, is sharing testimony and evidence with their European
colleagues for further use. (Handelsblatt, May 6; Yahoo wires, May 7)

Propaganda Buildup

Lurid accounts of coming ABC terrorist attacks are proliferating in the
US media. Whatever, the subjective intentions or motivations of the
authors, these accounts objectively serve as propaganda preparation for
terror attacks, specifically by introducing to the US ;public the alien
notions of emergency rules, martial law, and the state of siege, all of
which are favorite themes of neocon writers going back to the Nazi Carl
Schmitt.

A particularly fulsome example is the article by Michael Ignatieff
which appeared on May 2, 2004 New York Times Magazine. Here are some
excerpts:
Consider the consequences of a second major attack on the mainland
United States -- the detonation of a radiological or dirty bomb,
perhaps, or a low-yield nuclear device or a chemical strike in a
subway. Any of these events could cause death, devastation and panic on
a scale that would make 9/11 seem like a pale prelude. After such an
attack, a pall of mourning, melancholy, anger and fear would hang over
our public life for a generation.

An attack of this sort is already in the realm of possibility. The
recipes for making ultimate weapons are on the Internet, and the
materiel required is available for the right price. Democracies live by
free markets, but a free market in everything -- enriched uranium,
ricin, anthrax -- will mean the death of democracy. Armageddon is being
privatized, and unless we shut down these markets, doomsday will be for
sale. Sept. 11, for all its horror, was a conventional attack. We have
the best of reasons to fear the fire next time.

A democracy can allow its leaders one fatal mistake -- and that's what
9/11 looks like to many observers -- but Americans will not forgive a
second one. A succession of large-scale attacks would pull at the
already-fragile tissue of trust that binds us to our leadership and
destroy the trust we have in one another. Once the zones of devastation
were cordoned off and the bodies buried, we might find ourselves, in
short order, living in a national-security state on continuous alert,
with sealed borders, constant identity checks and permanent detention
camps for dissidents and aliens.

Our constitutional rights might disappear from our courts, while torture might reappear in our interrogation cells. The worst of it is that government would not have
to impose tyranny on a cowed populace. We would demand it for our own
protection. And if the institutions of our democracy were unable to
protect us from our enemies, we might go even further, taking the law
into our own hands. We have a history of lynching in this country, and
by the time fear and paranoia settled deep in our bones, we might
repeat the worst episodes from our past, killing our former neighbors,
our onetime friends. (emphasis added)

The coming of martial law to the US in the wake of a new large-scale
terror attack was also the theme of Ted Koppel's Nightline broadcast of
April 7, 2004. Here Koppel was joined by former terror czar Richard
Clarke and the Reagan White House chief of staff Kenneth Duberstein.
The broadcast was titled "The Armageddon Plan", and featured questions
of continuity in government (COG) after an attack that had decimated
the US Congress.

Koppel asked Duberstein: "Aren't we left for at least the foreseeable
future with some sort of martial law anyway?"

Duberstein replied: "You have to suspend rights."

Koppel elaborated: "And during that period, then, and given the sense
of panic that is inevitable under circumstances like this, the executive
branch of government takes on extraordinary power doesn't it?"

Clarke chimed in: "I think in any war where Washington were destroyed,
inevitably, there would be a period of, for lack of a better term,
something like martial law." Also taking part in this broadcast was
James Mann of the Brookings Institution, author of the new book Rise of
the Vulcans: The History of Bush's War Cabinet, published this year by
Viking. This work contains an extensive discussion of COG operations,
which also figure in John Dean's new boom comparing the Bush
administration to the Nixon regime. (Nightline, April 7, 2004)

The Washington Post used the release of the latest set of Nixon
administration tapes to issue what can only be interpreted as a signal
piece, indicating to the witting that the operation is indeed on. This
piece bore the headline" Haig Said Nixon Joked of Nuking Hill." The
content involves a telephone conversation between Nixon's then Chief of
Staff, Gen. Alexander Haig, and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, in
March 1974 – a few months before Nixon was forced out of office. "I was
told to get the football," reports Haig to Kissinger, a reference to
the codes used by the president to order nuclear attacks. In response
to a question from Kissinger, Haig specifies that the request is for
"His nuclear black bag. He is going to drop it on the Hill." The
context is Nixon's growing fear of his own looming impeachment. The
message is that a nuclear bomb will detonate on the US Congress.

Canadian newspapers, by contrast, used an all-purpose AP wire story
with very different emphasis. The Montreal Gazette headline, for example,
stressed another incident in which Nixon was too drunk to talk to UK
Prime Minister Ted Heath. Here the headline was "Mr. Nixon can't come
to the phone – he's sozzled." This version contained no mention of
nuking the Congress. The Toronto Star version of the AP wire had a
headline about Nixon being drunk, and relegated the question of nuking
the US Congress to the last paragraphs.

The White House now possesses its own "Continuity of Government"
Commission, a kind of Committee of Public Safety which appears to be
developing plans for the imposition of authoritarian rule. This is a
board made up of Establishment worthies, starting with former
presidents Carter and Ford, and including such figures as Newt
Gingrich, Lloyd Cutler, Alan Simpson, Kenneth Duberstein, Jamie
Gorelick (also of the Kean-Hamilton Commission), Tom Foley, Leon
Panetta, and Nicholas deB. Katzenbach. This is a bi-partisan body that
would seem to be engaged in forming a consensus in the oligarchical
elite circles in favor of the need for police state measures to
preserve the system.

The following are some of the main danger points that emerge from
recent press accounts. It must however be stressed that large-scale attacks
could of course occur anywhere and anytime.

Memorial Day weekend – opening of US World War II Memorial in
Washington DC
June 8: Group of 8 summit in Sea Island, Georgia
NATO summit in Turkey
Olympics in Athens
July: Democratic National Convention in Boston
August-September: Republican National Convention in New York City

Why, and Why Now

The reasons for the genocidal crimes now being prepared are to be found
in the stunning reverses suffered by the Bush regime over the last
several months. These can be identified as follows:

During April, Iraqi resistance forces have initiated a national
uprising against the invasion of their country. The failure of the vaunted US
military machine before Fallujah and Najaf has ended the myth of US
superpower invincibility, and set off uncontrollable processes of
disintegration throughout the global system. The US is politically and
militarily defeated, and the neocons are responsible.

During May, the war crimes and atrocities carried out by US, UK and
other coalition forces in Iraq have wrecked the moral credibility of
the United States and its allies, making these aggressive powers into
an object of absolute execration around the world.

As a result, the ad hoc "Coalition of the Willing" assembled by the
Bush regime has begun to disintegrate, with Spain, Honduras, El Salvador,
Kazakhstan, and Norway either leaving Iraq or announcing their
departure. The Netherlands are expected to defect within 4 to 5 weeks.
Previously, anti-Bush political forces had been defeated in elections
in Germany, South Korea, Spain, and most recently India. Governments
subservient to Bush in Great Britain, Italy, Poland, Denmark, and other
countries now face a grim electoral future, with further pullouts from
Iraq as the likely result. The entire alliance system created by the US
at the end of World War II is now a dead letter.

In the case of Spain, US elites have been shocked by the failure of the
March 11 terror attacks to accomplish their obvious goal of stampeding
support to the right-wing, neo-falangist government of Jose Maria
Aznar. Due to the intelligence and courage of the Spanish people, these
attacks in effect backfired, as Aznar's blatant lying secured the
election of the anti-Bush candidate, Zapatero. US elites have been
profoundly concerned that the terror weapon, which they had regarded as
a sure-fire means of coalescing support around an existing government,
can also bring down that government. Their main conclusion seems to be
that, for guaranteed success, the terrorism must be so colossal that
the planned elections can simply be cancelled, as Aznar tried but
failed to do.

The three principal leaders of world aggression, Bush, Blair, and
Sharon, are now engulfed by domestic political crises threatening them
with ouster over the short term, with increased danger of prosecution
and the wrecking of their political machines amidst recrimination for
the Iraq and other disasters. Bush and his neocon handlers in
particular face a rising tide of hatred in their own armed forces,
especially in the US Army, which has born the brunt of their utopian
aggressive policies. Bush's handlers are also worried that their man's
reputation as an anti-terror leader, his only conceivable basis for
asking to be returned to office, has been deeply tarnished by
Condoleezza Rice's wretched performance and attendant revelations
during the April-May hearings of the Kean-Hamilton Commission on 9-11.
This has gone so far that only a new large-scale terror event could
restore Bush's credentials, they reason.

Concomitantly with these events, the New York-London financial system
has begun to exhibit symptoms of severe instability leading to systemic
crisis. The US is now running a merchandise trade deficit of over $500
billion, and a federal budget deficit which actually approaches $750
billion. This is a bankrupt state. Interest rates on US government
securities have risen sharply since early April, and the resulting
rising interest rates have raised fears of an explosion of the housing
bubble of the past years.

This is expressed by the de facto bankruptcy of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which represent trillions of dollars of mortgage-backed securities, and whose implosion would wreck US capital markets.
The Federal Reserve now says that even the biggest banks may
not be too big to fail. For the average person, the net impact of this
new turbulence is readily seen in the sky-high price of gasoline,
building materials, and related commodities. An integral feature of the
post-coup regime now being planned would be to keep these bankrupt
institutions alive with the help of government bailouts.

Because of the manifest bankruptcy of the United States, the
Anglo-American finance oligarchs fear the termination of the US dollar
as a reserve currency. This would take the form of a dumping of the
dollar as the currency in which the posted price of oil is expressed by
Saudi Arabia, Iran, Indonesia, and other OPEC states. The former
Malaysian Prime Minister Mahatir Mohammed has issued repeated calls for
such a measure, and also urged Moslem countries to sell off their US
Treasury securities, for financial as well as political reasons. The
far stronger and more stable euro would be the beneficiary of these
moves, and it is the euro which would prove to be far more attractive
to most countries in a world divided into currency blocks.

Finally, there are signs that the absurd myth propagated by the US
government and the controlled corporate media about the events of 9-11
is fraying. Although the Kean-Hamilton Commission has been on the whole
a half-baked farce, it has unavoidably produced a number of facts as a
by-product of its proceedings – facts which have begun to undermine
public belief in the Myth. David Ray Griffin's book The New Pearl
Harbor has emerged as a runaway best-seller in the wake of similar
books in France and Germany, and is now among the top ten on
amazon.com. Calls have multiplied for a serious independent
international truth commission on 9-11 to do the work the Kean-Hamilton
cover-up has refused to address. A dismantling of the 9-11 myth would
lead, in all probability, to the collapse of the US Republican Party
and related institutions in the context of a general party
re-alignment.

Taken together, these developments would add up to the collapse of the
entire US imperialist system. The protagonists of the coming terror are
determined to disrupt these processes, imposing on the world a regime
of unilateral US diktat and military intervention, with a domestic
police state to make sure that no opposition emerges on the home front.

What the Neocons Fear

The neocons are also deeply concerned about their own personal fate.
During their assent, this exceptionally ideological and close-knit
faction has by its arrogance and incompetence made many enemies. During
May, there have been repeated editorial calls for the firing of not
just Rumsfeld, but also of Wolfowitz and the other neocons who have
made such a mess of the Pentagon. The demand to oust Rumsfeld and
Wolfowitz has also been raised by the veteran Republican Senators who
exercise great authority within that body. According to press accounts,
Senators Warner and McCain led a group of about a dozen senior GOP
leaders who called on Bush to demand the sacking of Rumsfeld and
Wolfowitz as a matter of urgent political expediency. Bush reportedly
sat stony-faced and said nothing.

Time magazine and the New York Times have both published reports that
the investigation of Ahmed Chalabi and his Iraqi National Congress
(INC) may, in fact, involve a hunt for someone in the White House or
Pentagon who could be guilty of treason in passing top secret
intelligence to Chalabi. The information that Chalabi and his
intelligence chief Aras Karim Habib are alleged to have passed to the
government of Iran "was highly classified, and known only to a few in
the U.S. government,'' wrote Time's Romesh Ratnesar.

"The probe will examine whether U.S. officials illegally transmitted state secrets to
the INC. The investigation could ultimately reach high-ranking civilian
officials at the Pentagon and the Defense Intelligence Agency who had
dealings with Chalabi and his organization.'' Ratnesar cites "a senior
U.S. official'' as his source. New York Times reporters David Johnston
and Richard Oppel, Jr. also citing ``government officials,'' called the
information `"so highly classified that federal investigators have
intensified their inquiry to find out whether anyone in the American
government gave the material to Mr. Chalabi.''

They also cite ``intelligence officials'' saying that the probe, by the FBI, centers
on the handful of U.S. officials with regular contact with Chalabi in
Washington, and an even smaller number who had access to the
intelligence. ``Most of them are at the Pentagon,'' they wrote;
however, Chalabi himself, on `"Meet the Press'' on May 23, acknowledged
three personal meetings with Vice President Cheney. Right-wing
columnist Robert Novak, in a Washington Post op-ed on the Chalabi
scandal, comments on a different angle within the Republican Party and
the uniformed military:

"Republican Senators, who do not yet want to be
quoted by name, feel there must be some accountability for this massive
blunder, as there must be for the prisoner abuse scandal. They want the
President at least to consider'' firing Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and
perhaps others of the neo-con gang. Rumsfeld the senior Republican
Congressional leaders are backed in this, by high U.S. military brass.
(Time, May 25, NY Times May 24, 2004)

Richard Perle is the target of a huge civil suit growing out of his
involvement in the fraudulent conveyances and embezzlement carried out
by the neocon press baron and moneybags Lord Conrad Black, who appears
to have taken money from Hollinger to help fund neocon think tanks like
the American Enterprise Institute. Perle has worked closely with the
purloining Lord in recent years, and might also face criminal charges
in this case.

There is also the special prosecutor investigating the leaking to
Robert Novak of the fact that Valerie Plame, the wife of Bush critic
Ambassador Joseph Wilson (who exposed the fraud of the Bush 2002 State
of the Union charges that Iraq had sought uranium yellowcake in Niger)
was working for the CIA. Prime suspects are Bush's political strategist
Karl Rove, and White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card. Revealing the
identity of a CIA agent is a serious felony under federal law.

Countervailing Tendencies?

The situation of the party of terrorism inside the United States is
uncertain. The political leaders who would be the beneficiaries of new

terror attacks would be figures like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz,
Ashcroft, Ridge, and the neocon Gestapo (as Colin Powell calls it) in
general. The main agencies for their dictatorship would be FEMA
(Federal Emergency Management Agency), Ridge's Department of Homeland
Security, the Department of Justice, and the FBI. The US military,
especially the US Army, has now become profoundly disillusioned with
the Bush-Cheney preventive war policy. They also resent being
scapegoated for the Abu Graib atrocities, which were ordered by CIA,
DIA, and Cheney's mercenary contractors. Some generals now realize that
a successful terror coup, which would have the result of cementing the
current gang in power for the foreseeable future – without benefit of
checks and balances – would guarantee that US forces would be fed into
meatgrinders far worse than Iraq.

In addition to Syria, Iran, North Korea, and Cuba, a post –coup USD regime could not avoid collision with China and/or Russia. It remains to be seen whether this awareness will
be enough to motivate the US military to do something to stop the coup
which is now imminent. Similar considerations apply to the State
Department, which has virtually no place in the post-coup world eagerly
planned by the neocons.

Sidney Blumenthal, a former advisor to the Clinton Administration, now
with Salon.com, wrote a piece in the Guardian on how the U.S. officer
corps has turned against Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. The
piece, by, is headlined "America's Military Coup." Retired General
William Odom, who was the head of the National Security Agency, the
main US electronic spying center, and who is now at the Hudson
Institute, is quoted saying: "It was never in our interest to go into
Iraq. It is a diversion from the war on terrorism; the rationale for
the Iraq war (finding WMD) is phony; the US army is overstretched and
being driven into the ground; and the prospect of building a democracy
is zero. In Iraqi politics legitimacy is going to be tied to expelling
us. Wisdom in military affairs dictates withdrawal in this situation.
We can't afford to fail, that's mindless. The issue is how we stop
failing more. I am arguing a strategic decision." Another military
figure told Blumenthal that Rumsfeld was "detested" and that "if
there's a sentiment in the army it is: support our troops, impeach
Rumsfeld." Blumenthal then references an essay by Lt.Col. Charles
Dunlap, which had received a prize in 1992 from then General Colin
Powell.

The title of the piece was "The Origins of the American
Military Coup of 2012," which was a cautionary tale of how the U.S.

military launched a coup because of the failures of the government.
(Guardian, May 13, 2004) Former CENTCOM commanders Zinni and Hoar have
also published attacks on the Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz policies. One account
suggested that, given the degree of military hatred against the
administration, any other country would have already witnessed a
military coup.

The US Congress ought to be particularly concerned, since one of the
most plausible coup scenarios features the destruction of the US
Capitol and its adjacent office buildings, exterminating large numbers
of Senators, Congressmen, and staff. Incredibly, the Congress is
conniving in its own liquidation through the bill ordering instant
elections to replace deceased Congressmen which is now making its way
in to law. The gullible lawmakers would seem to be signing their own
death warrant, since if there is anything that would facilitate the
erection of a police state, it is the lack of an intact and functioning
legislative branch – a fact illustrated all too well by the Nazi
burning of the German Reichstag shortly after Hitler's seizure of
power. But will the Congress act?

France, Germany, and Russia are the countries with the best recent
track record in opposing the illegal aggressions of the US government. They
need to ponder the devastating challenge to their vital national
interests that would be represented by the events now leading toward a
coup d'etat in the United States. They must mobilize their forces,
including their intelligence agencies, to expose, disrupt, and
frustrate the preparations now being made. The same imperative applies
to the other Europeans, China, India, the Arab and Islamic states, and
the Latin Americans. None could hope to avoid costly confrontation with
a post-coup US bandit regime. Enlightened self-interest ought to
dictate that they take all possible measures to prevent the terror
actions which are the only means the US neocons have of consolidating
their power.

But supporters of civilization around the world cannot wait for the
actions of their government. There are concrete and highly effective
measures they can and moist take at once to defend the survival of
humanity. They should:

What to Do?

Make this analysis into the basis for a parliamentary question in your
nation's parliament.

Bring this analysis to alternative media outlets, or to major media
wherever possible. In the US, bombard talk radio hosts with the demand
that they speak out against this new state-sponsored terrorism.

Inform trade union leaders. They should announce that their response to
a state-sponsored terror coup in the US would be an open-ended general
strike.

Bring this analysis to the attention of lawyers, jurists, university
students, civil liberties groups, humanitarians, and other persons of
good will. Ask them to join in warning public opinion about what is
being prepared.

Webster Griffin Tarpley is a historian and journalist based in
Washington DC. He is the author of the best-selling critical study
George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (1992), on the internet at
www.tarpley.net.

16:08 Gepost door AlphaGamma Permalink | Commentaren (0) | Email dit | Facebook |

27-05-04

Armageddon Almost Not Averted

Armageddon Almost Not Averted

The mental image we all have of a near-nuclear war scenario goes like this: A threat is detected; military men dutifully begin working their way through a crisp and precise set of protocols; maybe it even gets as far as the authorities ordering missile launch officers to break open those little squares of hard plastic we know from the movies, the ones that hold the launch codes.

But the threat is defused, or revealed to have been false -- and then everyone stands down from Armageddon in the same crisp, orderly fashion as they had ramped up for it.

It turns out that it's nothing like that.

Consider, for example, a fun Cold War-era fact from Bruce Blair, who is president of the Washington-based Center for Defense Information (home of Johnson's Russia List).

Blair was a Minuteman nuclear missile launch officer in the 1970s, and regularly ran through simulations in which he and his colleagues launched up to 50 missiles at the Soviet Union.

To launch a Minuteman in those days, one had to "unlock" the missile by dialing in a code -- the equivalent of a safety catch on a handgun. However, Blair reports, the U.S. Strategic Air Command was worried that a bunch of sissy safety features might slow things down. It ordered all locks set to 00000000 -- and in launch checklists, reminded all launch officers like Blair to keep the codes there. "So the 'secret unlock code' during the height of the nuclear crises of the Cold War," Blair says, "remained constant at 00000000."

Blair recently buttonholed Robert McNamara, the former U.S. defense secretary best known for overseeing the escalation of our war in Vietnam.

It was McNamara who ordered that safety locks be put on Minuteman missiles, and he spoke with great pride of this as a reform crucial to preventing accidental nuclear war. So when Blair told him the code was fixed at a line of zeros, he flipped.

"I am shocked, absolutely shocked and outraged," McNamara said. "Who the hell authorized that?"

Hmmm. Now, how could anybody be shocked -- shocked! -- to find we weren't in control of our nuclear arsenals?

Over the decades we've lived with thousands of hair-trigger-launch nukes, there have been four major false alarms (that we know of): in 1979 and 1980 (both American false alarms), in 1983 (a Soviet false alarm) and in 1995 (a Russian false alarm).

And yet the United States and Russia in 2004 -- just as in the 1970s, '80s and '90s -- still have thousands of nuclear weapons aimed at each other and poised to be launched in minutes.

Candidate-for-president George W. Bush back in 2000 talked about de-alerting the U.S. missile fleet -- reducing the launch protocols from mere minutes to hours or even days. Sadly for us, he dropped that once in office.

And so we are left to be protected by the ad-hoc freelancing of men like Lieutenant Colonel Stanislav Petrov, who was honored on Friday in Moscow by a relatively obscure American peace group. Why? Because he did not do his job -- and, frankly, for no real good reason.

Nineteen-eighty-three was, in retrospect, a terrifying year. Ronald Reagan was pushing a nuclear buildup, talking about "winnable" nuclear wars and a "Star Wars" missile defense shield, and putting missiles in Europe; the Soviets were responding with the "dead hand" nuclear launch system and other grim moves to counter a surprise attack.

In June of that year, we had the idiocy of the "Farewell Dossier" -- a recently revealed Cold War episode in which the Reagan team engineered a massive explosion at a Siberian pipeline (one that reportedly had startled U.S. war planners thinking a nuclear exchange was under way). In August, the Soviets shot down Korean Air Lines 007, killing all 269 people on board.

Weeks later, on September 26, 1983, at a half-hour past midnight, Petrov was watching horrified as a warning system he had helped create reported five U.S. missiles launched and headed toward Soviet territory.

Blair says this was the closest we've ever come to accidental nuclear war. "By all rights we should have blown ourselves to bits by now, but good luck and good judgment up and down the chain of command have spared us this fate ... so far."

All the data checked out; there was no sign of any glitch or error. Yet Petrov says, "I just couldn't believe that just like that, all of a sudden, someone would hurl five missiles at us." And: "I imagined if I'd assume the responsibility for unleashing the Third World War -- and I said, 'No, I wouldn't.'"

Petrov declared it to be a false alarm -- not because he had any evidence of that, but because he wanted it to be false.

And then, he says, "I drank half a liter of vodka as if it were only a glass and slept for 28 hours." Which is what I feel like doing every time I'm confronted with our complacence about this system we've built.

Matt Bivens is a former editor of The Moscow Times.

23:10 Gepost door AlphaGamma Permalink | Commentaren (0) | Email dit | Facebook |

JFK Versus World Zionism

JFK Versus World Zionism

On Memorial Day, let US remember John F. Kennedy, the last "American" president. Like Rachel Corrie he was martyred by World Zionism. "WE SHALL WIPE OUT ALL THOSE WHO HINDER US" (Protocol #3). In his few years, he seemed to recognize and do battle against this evil political system described in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

In 1961 Benjamin Freedman, a loyal American, warned that even then "Zionists ruled the United States like monarchs". (Note, Mr. Freedman said "Zionists" not "Jews".) He was personally acquainted with John F. Kennedy who appeared to be the first of a political family dynasty. JFK's policies could change history. JFK instituted measures that would cripple World Zionism and its global cycle of war, financial crises, militarism, inflation, depressions, and usurious debt, all outlined in the Protocols.

Zionist apologists dispute the authenticity of this Devil's Black Bible but that is irrelevant. What is relevant is that World Zionism has been following them word for word for more than a century in its secret scheming for world rule. According to the Protocols, "THE GOYIM ARE A FLOCK OF SHEEP AND WE ARE THEIR WOLVES (#11). IT IS INDISPENSABLE TO UTTERLY EXHAUST HUMANITY WITH DISSENTION, HATRED, STRUGGLE, ENVY, TORTURE, STARVATION, INNOCULATIONS AGAINST DISEASES, WANT" (#10). Like a cancer on humanity, World Zionism has been undetected for many years and now emerges when it is in its deadly final stages. "OUR POWER WILL REMAIN INVISIBLE UNTIL IT HAS GAINED SUCH STRENGTH NO CUNNING CAN UNDERMINE IT (#1). WHO WILL SUSPECT THAT ALL THESE PEOPLE WERE STAGE MANAGED BY US ACCORDING TO POLITICAL PLANS WHICH NO ONE HAS SO MUCH AS GUESSED AT FOR ALL THESE YEARS (#13). WE ARE INVINCIBLE" (#3).

First, JFK ordered the Vietnam War stopped and the troops brought home. Vietnam was the latest Oil War. Who owns World Oil? The Rothschilds. They "own" Yukos Oil in Russia and "own" the Rockefellers in America. Do they also "own" the Saudis? "WE MUST RESPOND TO EVERY ACT BY WAR ON THAT COUNTRY THAT DARES TO OPPOSE US. CHECKING THE OPPOSITION OF THE GOYIM BY UNIVERSAL WAR (#7). THE ASSISTANCE WE GIVE [money] WILL PUT BOTH SIDES AT OUR MERCY" (#2). War fills the graveyards of humanity but war debt fills the cash accounts of World Zionism.

Second, JFK was going to wind down the Arms Race and seek world peace. The trillions spent for "Defense" was never for the defense of America but for an arsenal to enable World Zionism to impose its Capitalism on the rest of the world. "WE SHALL SET UP A SUPER GOVERNMENT THAT SHALL SUBDUE ALL THE NATIONS OF THE WORLD (#5). INTENSIFICATION OF ARMAMENTS ARE ESSENTIAL FOR OUR PLANS. WE SHALL SHOW OUR STRENGTH TO ALL WITH THE GUNS OF AMERICA" (#7). In addition, the vast debt of the Arms Race paid billions in interest every year to World Zionism. This debt has bankrupt America. "LOANS BURDENED THE STATE WITH THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST. ALL THE WEALTH OF THE STATE FLOWED INTO OUR CASHBOXES. TO THIS WE OWE OUR MASTERY OVER THE GOYIM" (#20).

Third, JFK ordered the Treasury to print US currency instead of the Rothschild Federal Reserve Notes supported by the Rothschild illegal income tax. The US bonds, held by the Fed for our Fed currency, pay many billions in interest annually to World Zionism. With a "stroke of the pen" JFK would cost them trillions as well as their domination of global money and finances through debt and speculation. "LOANS HANG LIKE A SWORD OF DAMOCLES OVER THE HEADS OF RULERS. COUNTRIES ARE DEBTORS TO OUR TREASURIES TO AMOUNTS QUITE IMPOSSIBLE TO PAY. STATES ARE DRAINED AND THE GOYIM PAY US THE TRIBUTE OF SUBJECTS" (#20).

Fourth, JFK intruded on the wage price spiral in the steel industry in favor of labor. The corporate stock of US Steel plummeted, a bad omen for Capitalism. "THE DESPOTISM OF CAPITAL IS ENTIRELY IN OUR HANDS (#1). HUNGER CREATES THE RIGHT OF CAPITAL TO RULE THE WORKER MONEYGRINDING SCOUND-RELS HAVE LAID A PITILESS AND CRUEL YOKE UPON THE NECKS OF THE WORKERS (#3). CONCENTRATION OF INDUSTRY IN THE HANDS OF CAPITALISTS HAS DRAINED AWAY ALL THE JUICES OF THE PEOPLE (#20). CAPITAL MUST BE FREE TO ESTABLISH A MONOPOLY OF INDUSTRY AND TRADE; THIS WILL HELP OPPRESS THE PEOPLE (#5). WE SHALL RAISE WAGES WHICH SHALL NOT BRING ADVANTAGE TO THE WORKERS FOR WE SHALL RAISE PRICES FOR THE NECESSARIES OF LIFE" (#6).

Fifth, JFK would not give nuclear weapons to Israel. Jews invented these inhuman weapons in America and Israel could not have them for its global terrorism. This was unacceptable! Ben Gurion resigned. "IT IS INDISPENSABLE FOR US TO ARM OURSELVES (#10). WE MUST ARM OURSELVES WITH ALL THE WEAPONS OUR OPPONENTS MIGHT EMPLOY AGAINST US" (#8).

Sixth, JFK was going to dismantle the Central Intelligence Agency. The CIA with Mossad are essential for World Zionism's global terrorism. "OUR INTERNATIONAL AGENTUR POSSESSES MILLIONS OF EYES EVER ON THE WATCH AND UNHAMPERED BY ANY LIMITATIONS WHATSOEVER (#2). THE FRENCH REVOLUTION WAS WHOLLY THE WORK OF OUR HANDS" (#3). Dreyfus, too.

Seventh, JFK stood in the way of a Zionist puppet in the White House, Lyndon Johnson, who gave up a most powerful position for an office described as "not worth a bucket of pee pee" and as the "gofer" of a man he detested. This decision only made sense three years later. "WE HAVE REPLACED THE RULER BY A CARICATURE, A PRESIDENT. WE SHALL ARRANGE ELECTIONS OF SUCH PRESIDENTS WHO HAVE AN UNDISCOVERED STAIN IN THEIR PAST, THEY WILL BE AGENTS FOR OUR PLANS" (#10).

After JFK, the White House surrendered America to World Zionism. Johnson cancelled all of JFK's anti-Zionist measures, the Arms Race resumed, the Vietnam War was escalated, war debt and interest skyrocketed, nuclear weaponry given to Israel, Henry Jackson in the Senate made Zionist policy Washington policy, the crew of the USS Liberty was murdered by Israel without a murmur, Treasury currency was withdrawn and interest payments to World Zionism increased, and the "flyspeck in the desert" soared from protectorate to partner to patriarch of Washington. A few years later, Zionism cost the American people their standard of living by the oil embargo for Washington's subservience to World Zionism. On Memorial Day, let US remember that Washington's War Memorial for millions of veterans was an afterthought to a Museum for a Zionist Myth. The veterans were really "serving" World Zionism.

Recent books have linked such diverse parties as Lyndon Johnson, George Bush and Nelson Rockefeller as well as Mossad, CIA and Mafia in the murder of JFK. The common denominator is World Zionism. There are connections. Who else could join them in a single enterprise? The Warren Commission was suggested by a Zionist, conducted by a Zionist, and its finding validated and promulgated by Zionists and the Zionist press. It was a Zionist hoax like September 11. "THE GOY LOOK UPON THE EVENTS OF THE WORLD THROUGH THE COLORED GLASSES WE ARE SETTING ASTRIDE THEIR NOSES (#12). WE ARRANGED FOR DARWINISM, MARXISM AND NIETZSCHEISM" (#2).

We must distinguish between Zionism and Judaism. The accusation of anti-Semitism is political terrorism originating in the Protocols. "ANTI-SEMITISM IS INDISPENSIBLE TO US (#9). UNTIL THERE SHALL NO LONGER BE ANY RISK IN ENTRUSTING OUR BROTHER JEWS WE SHALL PUT RESPONSIBLE POSITIONS IN PERSONS WHO FACE CRIMINAL CHARGES" (#8). America's Congress is fervently Zionist yet most of them profess other religions. No, Zionism is politics; its "religion" is Greed. "IT IS INDISPENSABLE TO UNDERMINE ALL FAITH, TO TEAR OUT THE SPIRIT OF GODHEAD AND PUT IN ITS PLACE MATERIAL NEEDS" (#4). Zionism conceals itself in the "shade" of Judaism in order to remain "invisible". "OUR PLAN OF ACTION REMAINS FOR ALL PEOPLE AN UNKNOWN MYSTERY" (#4). It operates through governments like England, Israel and Washington and global corporations, financial and banking conglomerates, international financiers, and secretly interlinked organizations, institutions, "philanthropies", foundations, fronts, and factions with enormous amounts of money at their disposal. But "ALL OF THE ENDS OF THE SPRINGS WHICH MOVE THEM" (#9) lay in the hands of an invisible Rothschild Family. "THE GOYIM WILL ACCEPT US AS THE BENEFACTORS OF THE HUMAN RACE (#7). THERE IS NO EVADING OUR POWER" (#5). Zionism, by its monopolies, frauds, gouging, usury, speculation, bankruptcies and tax evasion, is amassing the wealth of the whole world "WE WANT TO TRANSFER INTO OUR HANDS ALL THE MONEY OF THE WORLD (#6). OUR WEAPONS ARE LIMITLESS AMBITIONS, BURNING GREEDINESS, MERCILESS VENGEANCE, HATRED AND MALICE" (#9).

We have a quisling government in America. Washington is the slave of World Zionism just as predicted in the Protocols. "ABUSES OF POWER WILL BE THE FINAL TOUCH IN PREPARING ALL INSTITUTIONS FOR OVERTHROW" (#3) and "SCATTER TO THE WINDS ALL EXISTING FORCES OF ORDER AND REGULATION" (#1). The American people have been conditioned for decades to submissiveness, like Pavlov's dogs, by the Zionist media and its subliminal messages. "PEOPLE LIVE AND ARE GUIDED BY IDEAS; WE SHALL CONFISCATE TO OUR USE THE LAST SCINTILLA OF INDEPENDENT THOUGHT. THE PURPOSE IS TO TURN THE GOYIM INTO UNTHINKING SUBMISSIVE BRUTES" (#16). The New York metropolitan area (25 millions) is overwhelmed by the Zionist media and its continuous lies and propaganda about war and terrorism. What about Chicago, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Dallas? "THROUGH THE PRESS WE HAVE GAINED THE POWER TO INFLUENCE WHILE REMAINING OURSELVES IN THE SHADE (#2).

NOT A SINGLE ANNOUNCEMENT WILL REACH THE PUBLIC WITHOUT OUR CONTROL" (#12). Turn off all television news programs. It is poison. Let US drop the Zionist media in the toilet and flush these traitors out of America. Another "inside job" like September 11 "THE MOMENT OF ATTACK WILL BE KNOWN TO US AND WE WILL PROTECT OUR OWN" (#3). and America will be "locked down" in permanent martial law, the Patriot Acts, mass detentions in FEMA concentration camps and the end of all liberty in America. We will have lost for our children everything that our ancestors sacrificed for US. "THE END OF NATIONAL LIBERTY IS NEAR" (#19).

The Zionist media has marginalized all presidential candidates but two Zionist puppets. With "fixed" voting machines World Zionism cannot lose. This year, all Americans should vote, destroy the Republican Party together with all Zionists (most Jewish candidates are suspect). For Congress, vote for the other minorities who are under-represented, Women and African, Asian and Latino Americans. Voting machines must be auditable with reliable exit polls. Most important, redistribute the concentrated wealth with an annual tax of fifty percent of all personal wealth, income and property in excess of $5 Millions "WE HAVE CONCENTRATED WEALTH IN PRIVATE HANDS" (#20) and eliminate all wage taxes.

Under World Zionism, Zionists will go to the head of all lines in government, industry, education, employment, finance, entitlements; their certifications will have the force of law. The whole world will become like Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan. "WE SHALL ERASE THE WORD "FREEDOM" FROM THE LEXICON OF LIFE" (#3). The stolen treasures of a zionazi war, the Ancient Tombs of Ur, are on exhibit in Philadelphia. Waco will be the norm. "OUR ABSOLUTISM WILL DESTROY TO THE ROOT ALL DISCONTENTS OF EVERY KIND BY PUNISHMENT OF AN EXEMPLARY CHARACTER. HE WHO WISHES TO KEEP HIS PLACE WILL HAVE TO GIVE BLIND OBEDIENCE (#15). WE ARE INTERESTED IN THE KILLING OUT OF THE GOYIM" (#3).

Without World Zionism there could be universal peace not war, no bankrupting militarism, full employment without wage taxation, no hunger, no poverty, no inflation, no depressions or financial crises, no public debt and little private debt, and the burden of taxation on excess income and wealth. "WE HAVE EUTOPIAN DREAMERS" (#9).

The world must come together to combat a common enemy. "THE NATIONS WILL NOT TAKE NOTE OF THEIR COMMON FOE (#4). WE HAVE SET ONE AGAINST ANOTHER, THE PERSONAL AND THE NATIONAL, RELIGIOUS AND RACE HATREDS WHICH WE HAVE FOSTERED INTO A HUGE GROWTH (#5). WE MUST CREATE FERMENTS, HOSTILITY AND DISCORD ON ALL CONTINENTS" (#7). Or else, "BOW THE KNEE BEFORE HIM WHO BEARS ON HIS FRONT THE SEAL OF THE PREDESTINATION OF MAN" (#23). The anti-Christ. And God help us!

Universal Images of Evil: Years ago, a little girl crying in the devastated rubble of Shanghai; today, a small boy shot through the neck in the rubble of Fallujah, his little schoolbag on his back.

Remember RACHEL CORRIE

15:14 Gepost door AlphaGamma Permalink | Commentaren (0) | Email dit | Facebook |

26-05-04

Even een oogje op de toekomst werpen

Even een oogje op de toekomst werpen:

Bush wil herkozen worden
De polls zien er super-slecht uit voor hem, zelfs na zijn 'lege' speach van 2 dagen geleden
Organisaties binnen de Israelische gemeenschap roepen hun landgenoten op niet naar de Olympische Spelen te gaan
De VS is weer van plan 400 miljoen nieuwe antrax-vaccinaties aan te kopen
De VS is er zeker van dat Al Qaida binnenkort een nieuwe grote aanslag zal plegen
FAKE TERROR - THE ROAD TO DICTATORSHIP
Stranger than fiction: an independent investigation on 911 : http://www.apfn.org/apfn/WTC_STF.htm
"Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It's classified information." -- US official quoted in Carl Cameron's Fox News report on the Israeli spy ring and its connections to 9-11. - M. R.

Conclusie: Mossad heeft zijn spionnen opdracht gegeven een 'nieuwe 911' te organiseren, Israel heeft er alle belang bij dat Bush herverkozen wordt. Gezien de verkiezingen in oktober mogen we een aanslag verwachten in augustus/september (hoe erger de aanslag, hoe vroeger die zal vallen). De datum zal vallen op een symbolisch belangrijke dag (9/11 bijvoorbeeld) omdat 'ze' zoveel van numerologie houden (aanslagen in Madrid 911 dagen na 911). De Moslims in het algemeen en Al Qaida in het bijzonder zullen van minuut 'nul' de schuld krijgen. Mossad zou graag een aanslag organiseren in Athene maar ze kennen de gevaren: Israel heeft niet zoveel macht in Europa als in de VS en zou dus door de mand kunnen vallen (geen AIPAC in Europa). Bij een dergelijke operatie van de geheime dienst gebeuren er altijd fouten (zoals je kan lezen in 'Stranger than Fiction'), die kunnen leiden tot de ware organisators.

Slagzin van de Mossad: By Way of Deception Thy Shalt Do War

(berichtgeving ondersteboven, jongste berichten eerst)

Israëlisch verhuizers doen gekke dingen in de VS:

The mysterious world of Israeli movers

Israeli movers freed, back in Miami

Yet despite convictions for evading arrest, and being in the country illegally on tourist visas, the Israelis were freed on bond Monday morning.

Two More Israelis In Van Arrested Near US Nuke Facility

Nuclear Submarine Base Locked Down

Two Israelis attempted to enter posing as furniture movers.

Mossad Linked To WTC Bomb Suspect

Ahmad Ajaj, a 27-year-old West Bank Palestinian being held in federal custody for conspiring to bomb the World Trade Center, may have been a Mossad mole, according to Israeli intelligence sources.

ANOTHER MOVING VAN INCIDENT

For the second time in the past two weeks Israelis in a moving van have been detained near a U.S. nuclear facility, this time at the Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base near St. Marys, GA., near Sea Island, host of the G-8 Summit next month. A bomb squad was called in after the van tested positive for a bomb. The two Israelis, whose names were not released, were taken into custody by federal immigration officers in Savannah for possible deportation.

3 Israelis arrested after drawing toy guns during flight in Panama

A crew member had to force one man to turn over a toy pistols, according to civil aviation official Humberto Chavarria. More toy guns were found in the luggage of the detainees.

FLASHBACK: Feds holding 60 Israelis in connection with 9/11 – Why?

Israel’s Failed Assassination Attempt on U.S. Ambassador Documented

Had Mossad, Israel’s secret intelligence organization, succeeded, it would have been the perfect crime—the crime of the century. The plan was breathtaking in concept: to assassinate the American ambassador to Lebanon, in Lebanon, with American weapons, intended for Israeli’s defense only. Everything about it would point to Lebanon as the culprit.

Relinked in light of today's arrest of Israeli agents in Lebanon. - M. R.

Lebanon cracks 'Israeli spy ring'

Funny, when anyone else finds Israeli spies they tell the whole world. But when the US finds an Israeli spy ring, it is covered up. - M. R.

"Mover" Is Son of Top Likud Official

The leader of the two Israelis arrested after leading police on a high speed chase in a moving van last Saturday in rural Tennessee is the son of the spokesman for the Likud Party of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon

NEW ISRAELI MOVING VAN MYSTERY

The two Israelis arrested in Tennessee are outed as Israeli military. - M. R.

Israeli men arrested after high-speed chase in Unicoi County

Why throw the vial if it's just a "fuel source"? - M. R.

Vroegere berichtgeving:

Olympics: Greece Prepares for 'Dirty Bomb' Threat

Yep, here comes Bush's made-to-order distraction. - M. R.

Wiesenthal Center to Jews: Don't attend Olympics

Odigo gets another warning? - M. R.

U.S. athletes told to cool it at Olympics

American athletes have been warned not to wave the U.S. flag during their medal celebrations at this summer's Olympic Games in Athens, for fear of provoking crowd hostility and harming the country's already-battered public image.

CNN.com - U.S. in secret Olympic operation - Mar 10, 2004

A secret Athens Olympics security operation involving several hundred U.S. troops has begun, the day after Greece's new conservative prime minister took the troubled Games under his personal wing.

I linked to the cache of this story because all mention of this story at CNN itself leads to error messages. - M. R.

Berichtgeving van vandaag het warm lopen van de amerikaanse bevolking via de pers, de druppelsgewijze indoctrinatie:

FLASHBACK: Chaos in the Middle East is not the Bush hawks' nightmare scenario--it's their plan.
Posted May 26, 2004 06:51 AM PST

Terror threat against U.S. is worst since 9/11
Posted May 26, 2004 06:49 AM PST

New intelligence disturbing, credible. Terrorists may possess and use a chemical, biological or radiological weapon.

Really ramping up the "booga booga" here.

'They Are Going to Attack'
Posted May 26, 2004 06:44 AM PST

Counterterrorism and law enforcement officials told Fox News Tuesday that they are extremely concerned that terrorist groups like Al Qaeda may be planning an attack during one of the major events scheduled for this summer.

"We are planning it, I, I dammit, I mean we are PREDICTING it, to happen in the next several weeks. " -- White Horse Souse

'Better' anthrax vaccine tested
Posted May 26, 2004 06:04 AM PST

All this focus on Anthrax as a terror weapon. Odd, because Anthrax is actually a poor terror weapon due to low secondary communicability. It has been developed as a battlefield weapon, intended to make an enemy army sick but without triggering a wide spread pandemic. As the letters laced with Anthrax from Fort Detrick proved, Anthrax is actually very ineffective as a terrorist weapon (although great at generating fear-amplifying headlines). So how does the US and UK know that out of all the pathogens a real terrorists might choose, that Anthrax is the one and only one to prepare for?

Unconventional US terror strike imminent
Posted May 26, 2004 06:00 AM PST

The next fake terror event staged by the US Government and its "contractors" will most likely involve germs of some kind, attacking several cities simultaneously, to create a sense of immediate fear from a threat which is unseen but which could be in the very air one is breathing at that moment. Many people would be too scared to take the chance that it wasn't true (if they still trusted the government). By announcing that the "terrorists" (nudge nudge wink wink) were "known " to still have more of these germs, the government would have the pretext for warrantless house-to-house searches, detentions of "terror suspects" and shut down of all non-commercial uses of the internet since those danged "terrorists" (nudge nudge wink wink) are using the internet to send their nefarious messages around.

But just ask yourself one question. Is it really possible for the government to know for certain there is going to be this major unconventional attack without knowing who is doing it, where, when, or how? Because the lie the government is trying to sell you is that they know this attack is coming, but hasn't any clue how to prevent it.

Ridge Reveals Terror Threat Against U.S.
Posted May 26, 2004 05:53 AM PST

Not very subtle, are they? Bush's numbers tank even more right after his lame save-the-war speech and next day we get the predictable warnings about a coming terror event that nobody knows where it will happen, who will do it, how they will do it, and no chance to stop it, but it's gonna happen, proving we all need MORE security (i.e. control and surveillance on Americans) because all the security we've already been enduring obviously did not work. Bush will maybe even get to suspend elections is whatever they use to scare us with makes us too scared to go to the polls.

We already know we were lied to about 9-11, Iraq's WMDs, how much the Iraqi people were going to love being invaded, and we now know that the US Government is the sort of government that not only lies to their people but uses torture on innocent victims grabbed at random off of the streets.

We also know that the US Government is in trouble, losing credibility and the trust of the American people on an unprecedented scale. The US Government NEEDS another terror attack, to justify a draconian grab for a totalitarian state. And with all the "advance PR", it looks like they are getting ready to lay one on us all.

17:37 Gepost door AlphaGamma Permalink | Commentaren (0) | Email dit | Facebook |

06-12-03

Fruit, Not Females Promised In Islam Afterlife

Fruit, Not Females Promised In Islam Afterlife
Challenging the Qur'an

A German scholar contends that the Islamic text has been mistranscribed and promises raisins, not virgins Newsweek International, By Stefan Theil, NEWSWEEK INTERNATIONAL

In a note of encouragement to his fellow hijackers, September 11 ringleader Muhammad Atta cheered their impending "marriage in Paradise" to the 72 wide-eyed virgins the Qur'an promises to the departed faithful. Palestinian newspapers have been known to describe the death of a suicide bomber as a "wedding to the black-eyed in eternal Paradise." But if a German expert on Middle Eastern languages is correct, these hopes of sexual reward in the afterlife are based on a terrible misunderstanding.

Arguing that today's version of the Qur'an has been mistranscribed from the original text, scholar Christoph Luxenberg says that what are described as "houris" with "swelling breasts" refer to nothing more than "white raisins" and "juicy fruits."

Luxenberg-a pseudonym-is one of a small but growing group of scholars, most of them working in non-Muslim countries, studying the language and history of the Qur'an. When his new book is published this fall, it's likely to be the most far-reaching scholarly commentary on the Qur'an's early genesis, taking this infant discipline far into uncharted-and highly controversial-territory. That's because Islamic orthodoxy considers the holy book to be the verbatim revelation of Allah, speaking to his prophet, Muhammad, through the Angel Gabriel, in Arabic. Therefore, critical study of God's undiluted word has been off-limits in much of the Islamic world. (For the same reason, translations of the Qur'an are never considered authentic.) Islamic scholars who have dared ignore this taboo have often found themselves labeled heretics and targeted with death threats and violence. Luxenberg, a professor of Semitic languages at one of Germany's leading universities, has chosen to remain anonymous because he fears a fatwa by enraged Islamic extremists.

Luxenberg's chief hypothesis is that the original language of the Qur'an was not Arabic but something closer to Aramaic. He says the copy of the Qur'an used today is a mistranscription of the original text from Muhammad's time, which according to Islamic tradition was destroyed by the third caliph, Osman, in the seventh century. But Arabic did not turn up as a written language until 150 years after Muhammad's death, and most learned Arabs at that time spoke a version of Aramaic. Rereading the Paradise passage in Aramaic, the mysterious houris turn into raisins and fruit-much more common components of the Paradise myth.

The forthcoming book contains plenty of other bombshells. It claims that the Qur'an's commandment for women to cover themselves is based on a similar misreading; in Sura 24, the verse that calls for women to "snap their scarves over their bags" becomes in Aramaic "snap their belts around their waists." Even more explosive are readings that strengthen scholars' views that the Qur'an had Christian origins. Sura 33 calls Muhammad the "seal of the prophets," taken to mean the final and ultimate prophet of God. But an Aramaic reading, says Luxenberg, turns Muhammad into a "witness of the prophets"-i.e., someone who bears witness to the established Judeo-Christian texts. The Qur'an, in Arabic, talks about the "revelation" of Allah, but in Aramaic that term turns into "teaching" of the ancient Scriptures. The original Qur'an, Luxenberg contends, was in fact a Christian liturgical document-before an expanding Arab empire turned Muhammad's teachings into the basis for its new religion long after the Prophet's death.

Such interpretations will undoubtedly draw the ire of many Muslims-and not just extremists. After all, revisionist scholars have been persecuted for much less; in 2001, Egypt's Constitutional Court confirmed the "apostasy" of former University of Cairo scholar Nasr Hamid Abu-Zayd, for considering the Qur'an a document written by humans.

Still, Luxenberg may be ushering in a whole new era of Qur'anic study. "Luxenberg's findings are very relevant and convincing," says Mondher Sfar, a Tunisian specialist on the historic origins of the Qur'an in exile in Paris. "They make possible a new interpretation of the Qur'an." In the West, questioning the literal veracity of the Bible was a crucial step in breaking the church's grip on power-and in developing a modern, secular society. That experience, as much as the questioning itself, is no doubt what concerns conservative Muslims as they struggle over the meaning and influence of Islam in the 21st century. But if Luxenberg's work is any indication, the questioning is just getting underway.

http://www.religionnewsblog.com/archives/00003797.html

Comment
From Nurcahyo Basuki
12-6-03

Dear Sir,

Along with this email is an article to respond to the article "Fruit, Not Females Promised In Islam Afterlife" written by Dr. Maher Hathout.

Source: http://www.islamonline.net/english/Contemporary/2003/08/article03.shtml

Response to "Challenging the Quran" Article in Newsweek

By: Dr. Maher Hathout
05/08/2003

The article published in Newsweek ("Challenging the Quran," July 28) defies categorization and hence troubles whoever may like to respond to it. It claims to draw on excerpts from academic research containing "bomb shells" that could produce "a new interpretation of the Quran."

The article claims Professor Luxenberg's is "likely to be the most far reaching scholarly commentary on the Quran's genesis, taking this infant discipline far into uncharted and highly controversial territory." Who is Luxenberg? An unknown scholar writing under a pseudonym. The "scholar" is hiding his name for fear of repercussions, despite the fact that several people have written on the same subject in the past and present without taking such a precaution.

The professor works at an unnamed "leading German university" and his research is acclaimed by "Moudher Sfar" - probably another pseudonymed scholar from Tunisia we've never heard of. So much for academic credibility. Pending availability of the original paper and the author's real name, this is little more than a pseudo-academic piece published in a non-academic magazine. Thus, any response must pick through the bits and pieces scattered on the pages of Newsweek and conduct a point-by-point analysis.

Describing Luxenberg as one of a small but growing group of scholars studying the language and history of the Quran is amazingly wrong. For 1400 years, there have always been groups in the East and West of Muslims and non-Muslims, faithful and skeptical, who wrote volumes about the history and language of the Quran. The unknown author here is neither a pioneer nor a hero. Muslim scholars, including the likes of the Muatazelite school, Imam Zamakhshari, Al-Tabary, and countless scholars (of various readings of the Quran) are hard to count. There are also so many Western scholars and Orientalists who wrote about the subject in abundance that some of them would be restless in their graves if they read the claims in Newsweek.

The article surmises that "translations of the Quran are never considered authentic." Translations are judged as either accurate or inaccurate. No translation is authentic. When you translate Shakespeare to French or Voltaire to English, you may be accurate or not but the work will never be authentic, simply because it is not what was said by the original author. To make this sound like a peculiarity for the Quran or a particular thinking of Muslims lacks academic objectivity.

Luxenberg's chief hypothesis is that the original language of the Quran was not Arabic, but "something close" to Aramaic. What is the meaning of "something close?" What is it? Where is it? Who would understand it? Who will understand something close to English or German? These are questions that any semi-academic mind would ask.

He asserts that Arabic as a language and system of writing was not developed until 150 years after the death of Prophet Muhammad. This strange assertion contradicts the major volume of pre-Islamic poetry, which is used even today to help in understanding and interpreting the Quran.

This poetry includes seven famous pieces that students study in middle schools throughout the Arab world, known as "Al Muallaquat." This refers to poems that were hung on the walls of the Kaaba as exhibitions of the best literary work in the pre-Islamic era. (The Kaaba, a cubic temple, has always been attributed by Arabs to the patriarch prophet, Abraham.) It also contradicts the Encyclopedia of Literature by Merriam-Webster, which states, "The intermittent revelations to Muhammad were first memorized by followers and used in ritual prayers, although verses were later written down during the Prophet's lifetime."

We have in Al-Azhar library a manuscript "explaining the unusual styles in the Quran" written by Imam Sagistani 153 years after the migration to Medina, in perfect classical Arabic. When we look to what is known as Christian Aramaic, we notice that Jesus spoke in Aramaic, while the gospels are written in Greek. It is far fetched that the Gospel would be written in Greek while the Quran would be written in Aramaic.

We notice that Christian Aramaic, "which is actually the Syrian language was the literally language of the City of Edessa (now Urfa in Southeast Turkey) became the tongue of the entire eastern wing of the church from about the third century C.E. down until past the Muslim conquest." Obviously the Muslim conquest was carrying with it the Arabic Quran.

So the process upon which the rereading of the verses in Aramaic is false and as Muslims jurists wisely say, "what is built on fallacy is false."

Then he talks about "houris," which are allegorically symbolic beings of bliss in paradise, as being raisins and fruits. It is his prerogative but this does not provide anything supernatural to look forward to the life of eternity.

It seems that what he was referring to as raisins is "kawaib." He challenges what he claims as the Arabic meaning of "beings with swollen breasts," while if he had known Arabic, he would have understood the term as "beings of distinction." For this translation, we refer him to a real Austrian scholar on the language of the Quran, later known as Muhammad Asad (Review The Message of the Quran).

The claim that the Quran's commandment to women in surah 24 to "snap their scarves over their bags" becomes in Aramaic "snap their belts around their waists." I challenge the professor to show us where he brought this verse of snapping from? Quran is available and surah 24 is easy to read.

In the Newsweek article, Luxenberg writes, "Even more explosive are the readings that strengthen scholars' views that the Quran had Christian origins. Surah 33 calls Muhammad the 'seal of the prophets.' In Aramaic, the word 'seal' means witness so he must be a witness of the Prophets." We really don't need all these acrobatics to prove a meaning that has been mentioned clearly in several areas of the Quran. Muhammad was a witness just as believers are witnesses, and Muhammad followed the good models of other prophets who came to testify for and confirm the truth they brought from God to humanity. So where is the brilliant discovery?

A similar case can be made for the arguments around the word "revelation." The author had to go to Aramaic or what he calls "something closer to Aramaic" to inform us that it actually means "teaching" of the ancient scriptures. He may be referring to the word "wahye" in Arabic, which means teaching, revelation, suggestion, setting instinct, putting the law of order to things, intuitive ideas, outbursts of thoughts and creativity. Wahye described scriptures, the nature of the heavens and earth, the instinct of the bees, the flow of poetry, etc. So there is no new "revelation" that Luxenberg is bringing here. What Newsweek slips in about Egyptian court, Nasre AbuZaid, Fatwa, etc. is opportunistic journalism, not fitting the standard of the magazine.

Dr. Maher Hathout is the senior advisor the Muslim Public Affairs Council, and spokesperson for the Islamic Center of Southern California.

07:21 Gepost door AlphaGamma Permalink | Commentaren (0) | Email dit | Facebook |

EATING FOSSIL FUELS

by Dale Allen Pfeiffer

[Some months ago, concerned by a Paris statement made by Professor Kenneth Deffeyes of Princeton regarding his concern about the impact of Peak Oil and Gas on fertilizer production, I tasked FTW's Contributing Editor for Energy, Dale Allen Pfeiffer to start looking into what natural gas shortages would do to fertilizer production costs. His investigation led him to look at the totality of food production in the US. Because the US and Canada feed much of the world, the answers have global implications.
What follows is most certainly the single most frightening article I have ever read and certainly the most alarming piece that FTW has ever published. Even as we have seen CNN, Britain's Independent and Jane's Defence Weekly acknowledge the reality of Peak Oil and Gas within the last week, acknowledging that world oil and gas reserves are as much as 80% less than predicted, we are also seeing how little real thinking has been devoted to the host of crises certain to follow; at least in terms of publicly accessible thinking.
The following article is so serious in its implications that I have taken the unusual step of underlining some of its key findings. I did that with the intent that the reader treat each underlined passage as a separate and incredibly important fact. Each one of these facts should be read and digested separately to assimilate its importance. I found myself reading one fact and then getting up and walking away until I could come back and (un)comfortably read to the next.
All told, Dale Allen Pfeiffer's research and reporting confirms the worst of FTW's suspicions about the consequences of Peak Oil, and it poses serious questions about what to do next. Not the least of these is why, in a presidential election year, none of the candidates has even acknowledged the problem. Thus far, it is clear that solutions for these questions, perhaps the most important ones facing mankind, will by necessity be found by private individuals and communities, independently of outside or governmental help. Whether the real search for answers comes now, or as the crisis becomes unavoidable, depends solely on us. ˆ MCR]

Introduction
The Green Revolution
Fossil Fuel Costs
Soil, Cropland and Water
US Consumption
Population & Sustainability
Three Choices
Author's Note
End Notes

Introduction

October 3 , 2003, 1200 PDT, (FTW) -- Human beings (like all other animals) draw their energy from the food they eat. Until the last century, all of the food energy available on this planet was derived from the sun through photosynthesis. Either you ate plants or you ate animals that fed on plants, but the energy in your food was ultimately derived from the sun.

It would have been absurd to think that we would one day run out of sunshine. No, sunshine was an abundant, renewable resource, and the process of photosynthesis fed all life on this planet. It also set a limit on the amount of food that could be generated at any one time, and therefore placed a limit upon population growth. Solar energy has a limited rate of flow into this planet. To increase your food production, you had to increase the acreage under cultivation, and displace your competitors. There was no other way to increase the amount of energy available for food production. Human population grew by displacing everything else and appropriating more and more of the available solar energy.

The need to expand agricultural production was one of the motive causes behind most of the wars in recorded history, along with expansion of the energy base (and agricultural production is truly an essential portion of the energy base). And when Europeans could no longer expand cultivation, they began the task of conquering the world. Explorers were followed by conquistadors and traders and settlers. The declared reasons for expansion may have been trade, avarice, empire or simply curiosity, but at its base, it was all about the expansion of agricultural productivity. Wherever explorers and conquistadors traveled, they may have carried off loot, but they left plantations. And settlers toiled to clear land and establish their own homestead. This conquest and expansion went on until there was no place left for further expansion. Certainly, to this day, landowners and farmers fight to claim still more land for agricultural productivity, but they are fighting over crumbs. Today, virtually all of the productive land on this planet is being exploited by agriculture. What remains unused is too steep, too wet, too dry or lacking in soil nutrients.^[1]

Just when agricultural output could expand no more by increasing acreage, new innovations made possible a more thorough exploitation of the acreage already available. The process of “pest” displacement and appropriation for agriculture accelerated with the industrial revolution as the mechanization of agriculture hastened the clearing and tilling of land and augmented the amount of farmland which could be tended by one person. With every increase in food production, the human population grew apace.

At present, nearly 40% of all land-based photosynthetic capability has been appropriated by human beings.^[2] In the United States we divert more than half of the energy captured by photosynthesis.^[3] We have taken over all the prime real estate on this planet. The rest of nature is forced to make due with what is left. Plainly, this is one of the major factors in species extinctions and in ecosystem stress.

The Green Revolution

In the 1950s and 1960s, agriculture underwent a drastic transformation commonly referred to as the Green Revolution. The Green Revolution resulted in the industrialization of agriculture. Part of the advance resulted from new hybrid food plants, leading to more productive food crops. Between 1950 and 1984, as the Green Revolution transformed agriculture around the globe, world grain production increased by 250%.^[4] That is a tremendous increase in the amount of food energy available for human consumption. This additional energy did not come from an increase in incipient sunlight, nor did it result from introducing agriculture to new vistas of land. The energy for the Green Revolution was provided by fossil fuels in the form of fertilizers (natural gas), pesticides (oil), and hydrocarbon fueled irrigation.

The Green Revolution increased the energy flow to agriculture by an average of 50 times the energy input of traditional agriculture.^[5] In the most extreme cases, energy consumption by agriculture has increased 100 fold or more.^[6]

In the United States, 400 gallons of oil equivalents are expended annually to feed each American (as of data provided in 1994).^[7] Agricultural energy consumption is broken down as follows:

31% for the manufacture of inorganic fertilizer
19% for the operation of field machinery
16% for transportation
13% for irrigation
08% for raising livestock (not including livestock feed)
05% for crop drying
05% for pesticide production
08% miscellaneous^[8]

Energy costs for packaging, refrigeration, transportation to retail outlets, and household cooking are not considered in these figures.

To give the reader an idea of the energy intensiveness of modern agriculture, production of one kilogram of nitrogen for fertilizer requires the energy equivalent of from 1.4 to 1.8 liters of diesel fuel. This is not considering the natural gas feedstock.^[9] According to The Fertilizer Institute (http://www.tfi.org), in the year from June 30 2001 until June 30 2002 the United States used 12,009,300 short tons of nitrogen fertilizer.^[10] Using the low figure of 1.4 liters diesel equivalent per kilogram of nitrogen, this equates to the energy content of 15.3 billion liters of diesel fuel, or 96.2 million barrels.

Of course, this is only a rough comparison to aid comprehension of the energy requirements for modern agriculture.

In a very real sense, we are literally eating fossil fuels. However, due to the laws of thermodynamics, there is not a direct correspondence between energy inflow and outflow in agriculture. Along the way, there is a marked energy loss. Between 1945 and 1994, energy input to agriculture increased 4-fold while crop yields only increased 3-fold.^[11] Since then, energy input has continued to increase without a corresponding increase in crop yield. We have reached the point of marginal returns. Yet, due to soil degradation, increased demands of pest management and increasing energy costs for irrigation (all of which is examined below), modern agriculture must continue increasing its energy expenditures simply to maintain current crop yields. The Green Revolution is becoming bankrupt.

Fossil Fuel Costs

Solar energy is a renewable resource limited only by the inflow rate from the sun to the earth. Fossil fuels, on the other hand, are a stock-type resource that can be exploited at a nearly limitless rate. However, on a human timescale, fossil fuels are nonrenewable. They represent a planetary energy deposit which we can draw from at any rate we wish, but which will eventually be exhausted without renewal. The Green Revolution tapped into this energy deposit and used it to increase agricultural production.

Total fossil fuel use in the United States has increased 20-fold in the last 4 decades. In the US, we consume 20 to 30 times more fossil fuel energy per capita than people in developing nations. Agriculture directly accounts for 17% of all the energy used in this country.^[12] As of 1990, we were using approximately 1,000 liters (6.41 barrels) of oil to produce food of one hectare of land.^[13]

In 1994, David Pimentel and Mario Giampietro estimated the output/input ratio of agriculture to be around 1.4.^[14] For 0.7 Kilogram-Calories (kcal) of fossil energy consumed, U.S. agriculture produced 1 kcal of food. The input figure for this ratio was based on FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN) statistics, which consider only fertilizers (without including fertilizer feedstock), irrigation, pesticides (without including pesticide feedstock), and machinery and fuel for field operations. Other agricultural energy inputs not considered were energy and machinery for drying crops, transportation for inputs and outputs to and from the farm, electricity, and construction and maintenance of farm buildings and infrastructures. Adding in estimates for these energy costs brought the input/output energy ratio down to 1.^[15] Yet this does not include the energy expense of packaging, delivery to retail outlets, refrigeration or household cooking.

In a subsequent study completed later that same year (1994), Giampietro and Pimentel managed to derive a more accurate ratio of the net fossil fuel energy ratio of agriculture.^[16] In this study, the authors defined two separate forms of energy input: Endosomatic energy and Exosomatic energy. Endosomatic energy is generated through the metabolic transformation of food energy into muscle energy in the human body. Exosomatic energy is generated by transforming energy outside of the human body, such as burning gasoline in a tractor. This assessment allowed the authors to look at fossil fuel input alone and in ratio to other inputs.

Prior to the industrial revolution, virtually 100% of both endosomatic and exosomatic energy was solar driven. Fossil fuels now represent 90% of the exosomatic energy used in the United States and other developed countries.^[17] The typical exo/endo ratio of pre-industrial, solar powered societies is about 4 to 1. The ratio has changed tenfold in developed countries, climbing to 40 to 1. And in the United States it is more than 90 to 1.^[18] The nature of the way we use endosomatic energy has changed as well.

The vast majority of endosomatic energy is no longer expended to deliver power for direct economic processes. Now the majority of endosomatic energy is utilized to generate the flow of information directing the flow of exosomatic energy driving machines. Considering the 90/1 exo/endo ratio in the United States, each endosomatic kcal of energy expended in the US induces the circulation of 90 kcal of exosomatic energy. As an example, a small gasoline engine can convert the 38,000 kcal in one gallon of gasoline into 8.8 KWh (Kilowatt hours), which equates to about 3 weeks of work for one human being.^[19]

In their refined study, Giampietro and Pimentel found that 10 kcal of exosomatic energy are required to produce 1 kcal of food delivered to the consumer in the U.S. food system. This includes packaging and all delivery expenses, but excludes household cooking).^[20] The U.S. food system consumes ten times more energy than it produces in food energy. This disparity is made possible by nonrenewable fossil fuel stocks.

Assuming a figure of 2,500 kcal per capita for the daily diet in the United States, the 10/1 ratio translates into a cost of 35,000 kcal of exosomatic energy per capita each day. However, considering that the average return on one hour of endosomatic labor in the U.S. is about 100,000 kcal of exosomatic energy, the flow of exosomatic energy required to supply the daily diet is achieved in only 20 minutes of labor in our current system. Unfortunately, if you remove fossil fuels from the equation, the daily diet will require 111 hours of endosomatic labor per capita; that is, the current U.S. daily diet would require nearly three weeks of labor per capita to produce.

Quite plainly, as fossil fuel production begins to decline within the next decade, there will be less energy available for the production of food.

Soil, Cropland and Water

Modern intensive agriculture is unsustainable. Technologically-enhanced agriculture has augmented soil erosion, polluted and overdrawn groundwater and surface water, and even (largely due to increased pesticide use) caused serious public health and environmental problems. Soil erosion, overtaxed cropland and water resource overdraft in turn lead to even greater use of fossil fuels and hydrocarbon products. More hydrocarbon-based fertilizers must be applied, along with more pesticides; irrigation water requires more energy to pump; and fossil fuels are used to process polluted water.

It takes 500 years to replace 1 inch of topsoil.^[21] In a natural environment, topsoil is built up by decaying plant matter and weathering rock, and it is protected from erosion by growing plants. In soil made susceptible by agriculture, erosion is reducing productivity up to 65% each year.^[22^] Former prairie lands, which constitute the bread basket of the United States, have lost one half of their topsoil after farming for about 100 years. This soil is eroding 30 times faster than the natural formation rate.^[23] Food crops are much hungrier than the natural grasses that once covered the Great Plains. As a result, the remaining topsoil is increasingly depleted of nutrients. Soil erosion and mineral depletion removes about $20 billion worth of plant nutrients from U.S. agricultural soils every year.^[24] Much of the soil in the Great Plains is little more than a sponge into which we must pour hydrocarbon-based fertilizers in order to produce crops.

Every year in the U.S., more than 2 million acres of cropland are lost to erosion, salinization and water logging. On top of this, urbanization, road building, and industry claim another 1 million acres annually from farmland. Approximately three-quarters of the land area in the United States is devoted to agriculture and commercial forestry.^[25^] The expanding human population is putting increasing pressure on land availability. Incidentally, only a small portion of U.S. land area remains available for the solar energy technologies necessary to support a solar energy-based economy. The land area for harvesting biomass is likewise limited. For this reason, the development of solar energy or biomass must be at the expense of agriculture.

Modern agriculture also places a strain on our water resources. Agriculture consumes fully 85% of all U.S. freshwater resources.^[26] Overdraft is occurring from many surface water resources, especially in the west and south. The typical example is the Colorado River, which is diverted to a trickle by the time it reaches the Pacific. Yet surface water only supplies 60% of the water used in irrigation. The remainder, and in some places the majority of water for irrigation, comes from ground water aquifers. Ground water is recharged slowly by the percolation of rainwater through the earth's crust. Less than 0.1% of the stored ground water mined annually is replaced by rainfall.^[27] The great Ogallala aquifer that supplies agriculture, industry and home use in much of the southern and central plains states has an annual overdraft up to 160% above its recharge rate. The Ogallala aquifer will become unproductive in a matter of decades.^[28^]

We can illustrate the demand that modern agriculture places on water resources by looking at a farmland producing corn. A corn crop that produces 118 bushels/acre/year requires more than 500,000 gallons/acre of water during the growing season. The production of 1 pound of maize requires 1,400 pounds (or 175 gallons) of water.^[29^] Unless something is done to lower these consumption rates, modern agriculture will help to propel the United States into a water crisis.

In the last two decades, the use of hydrocarbon-based pesticides in the U.S. has increased 33-fold, yet each year we lose more crops to pests.^[30^] This is the result of the abandonment of traditional crop rotation practices. Nearly 50% of U.S. corn land is grown continuously as a monoculture.^[31] This results in an increase in corn pests, which in turn requires the use of more pesticides. Pesticide use on corn crops had increased 1,000-fold even before the introduction of genetically engineered, pesticide resistant corn. However, corn losses have still risen 4-fold.^[32]

Modern intensive agriculture is unsustainable. It is damaging the land, draining water supplies and polluting the environment. And all of this requires more and more fossil fuel input to pump irrigation water, to replace nutrients, to provide pest protection, to remediate the environment and simply to hold crop production at a constant. Yet this necessary fossil fuel input is going to crash headlong into declining fossil fuel production.

US Consumption

In the United States, each person consumes an average of 2,175 pounds of food per person per year. This provides the U.S. consumer with an average daily energy intake of 3,600 Calories. The world average is 2,700 Calories per day.^[33^] Fully 19% of the U.S. caloric intake comes from fast food. Fast food accounts for 34% of the total food consumption for the average U.S. citizen. The average citizen dines out for one meal out of four.^[34^]

One third of the caloric intake of the average American comes from animal sources (including dairy products), totaling 800 pounds per person per year. This diet means that U.S. citizens derive 40% of their calories from fat-nearly half of their diet. ^[35^]

Americans are also grand consumers of water. As of one decade ago, Americans were consuming 1,450 gallons/day/capita (g/d/c), with the largest amount expended on agriculture. Allowing for projected population increase, consumption by 2050 is projected at 700 g/d/c, which hydrologists consider to be minimal for human needs.^[36^] This is without taking into consideration declining fossil fuel production.

To provide all of this food requires the application of 0.6 million metric tons of pesticides in North America per year. This is over one fifth of the total annual world pesticide use, estimated at 2.5 million tons.^[37] Worldwide, more nitrogen fertilizer is used per year than can be supplied through natural sources. Likewise, water is pumped out of underground aquifers at a much higher rate than it is recharged. And stocks of important minerals, such as phosphorus and potassium, are quickly approaching exhaustion.^[38]

Total U.S. energy consumption is more than three times the amount of solar energy harvested as crop and forest products. The United States consumes 40% more energy annually than the total amount of solar energy captured yearly by all U.S. plant biomass. Per capita use of fossil energy in North America is five times the world average.^[39]

Our prosperity is built on the principal of exhausting the world's resources as quickly as possible, without any thought to our neighbors, all the other life on this planet, or our children.

Population & Sustainability

Considering a growth rate of 1.1% per year, the U.S. population is projected to double by 2050. As the population expands, an estimated one acre of land will be lost for every person added to the U.S. population. Currently, there are 1.8 acres of farmland available to grow food for each U.S. citizen. By 2050, this will decrease to 0.6 acres. 1.2 acres per person is required in order to maintain current dietary standards.^[40^]

Presently, only two nations on the planet are major exporters of grain: the United States and Canada.^[41] By 2025, it is expected that the U.S. will cease to be a food exporter due to domestic demand. The impact on the U.S. economy could be devastating, as food exports earn $40 billion for the U.S. annually. More importantly, millions of people around the world could starve to death without U.S. food exports.^[42]

Domestically, 34.6 million people are living in poverty as of 2002 census data.^[43^] And this number is continuing to grow at an alarming rate. Too many of these people do not have a sufficient diet. As the situation worsens, this number will increase and the United States will witness growing numbers of starvation fatalities.

There are some things that we can do to at least alleviate this tragedy. It is suggested that streamlining agriculture to get rid of losses, waste and mismanagement might cut the energy inputs for food production by up to one-half.^[44] In place of fossil fuel-based fertilizers, we could utilize livestock manures that are now wasted. It is estimated that livestock manures contain 5 times the amount of fertilizer currently used each year.^[45] Perhaps most effective would be to eliminate meat from our diet altogether.^[46^]

Mario Giampietro and David Pimentel postulate that a sustainable food system is possible only if four conditions are met:

Environmentally sound agricultural technologies must be implemented.
Renewable energy technologies must be put into place.
Major increases in energy efficiency must reduce exosomatic energy consumption per capita.
Population size and consumption must be compatible with maintaining the stability of environmental processes.^[47]

Providing that the first three conditions are met, with a reduction to less than half of the exosomatic energy consumption per capita, the authors place the maximum population for a sustainable economy at 200 million.^[48^] Several other studies have produced figures within this ballpark (Energy and Population, Werbos, Paul J. http://www.dieoff.com/page63.htm; Impact of Population Growth on Food Supplies and Environment, Pimentel, David, et al. http://www.dieoff.com/page57.htm).

Given that the current U.S. population is in excess of 292 million, [49] that would mean a reduction of 92 million. To achieve a sustainable economy and avert disaster, the United States must reduce its population by at least one-third. The black plague during the 14th Century claimed approximately one-third of the European population (and more than half of the Asian and Indian populations), plunging the continent into a darkness from which it took them nearly two centuries to emerge.^[50^]

None of this research considers the impact of declining fossil fuel production. The authors of all of these studies believe that the mentioned agricultural crisis will only begin to impact us after 2020, and will not become critical until 2050. The current peaking of global oil production (and subsequent decline of production), along with the peak of North American natural gas production will very likely precipitate this agricultural crisis much sooner than expected. Quite possibly, a U.S. population reduction of one-third will not be effective for sustainability; the necessary reduction might be in excess of one-half. And, for sustainability, global population will have to be reduced from the current 6.32 billion people^[51] to 2 billion-a reduction of 68% or over two-thirds. The end of this decade could see spiraling food prices without relief. And the coming decade could see massive starvation on a global level such as never experienced before by the human race.

Three Choices

Considering the utter necessity of population reduction, there are three obvious choices awaiting us.

We can-as a society-become aware of our dilemma and consciously make the choice not to add more people to our population. This would be the most welcome of our three options, to choose consciously and with free will to responsibly lower our population. However, this flies in the face of our biological imperative to procreate. It is further complicated by the ability of modern medicine to extend our longevity, and by the refusal of the Religious Right to consider issues of population management. And then, there is a strong business lobby to maintain a high immigration rate in order to hold down the cost of labor. Though this is probably our best choice, it is the option least likely to be chosen.

Failing to responsibly lower our population, we can force population cuts through government regulations. Is there any need to mention how distasteful this option would be? How many of us would choose to live in a world of forced sterilization and population quotas enforced under penalty of law? How easily might this lead to a culling of the population utilizing principles of eugenics?

This leaves the third choice, which itself presents an unspeakable picture of suffering and death. Should we fail to acknowledge this coming crisis and determine to deal with it, we will be faced with a die-off from which civilization may very possibly never revive. We will very likely lose more than the numbers necessary for sustainability. Under a die-off scenario, conditions will deteriorate so badly that the surviving human population would be a negligible fraction of the present population. And those survivors would suffer from the trauma of living through the death of their civilization, their neighbors, their friends and their families. Those survivors will have seen their world crushed into nothing.

The questions we must ask ourselves now are, how can we allow this to happen, and what can we do to prevent it? Does our present lifestyle mean so much to us that we would subject ourselves and our children to this fast approaching tragedy simply for a few more years of conspicuous consumption?

Author's Note

This is possibly the most important article I have written to date. It is certainly the most frightening, and the conclusion is the bleakest I have ever penned. This article is likely to greatly disturb the reader; it has certainly disturbed me. However, it is important for our future that this paper should be read, acknowledged and discussed.

I am by nature positive and optimistic. In spite of this article, I continue to believe that we can find a positive solution to the multiple crises bearing down upon us. Though this article may provoke a flood of hate mail, it is simply a factual report of data and the obvious conclusions that follow from it.

ENDNOTES

1 Availability of agricultural land for crop and livestock production, Buringh, P. Food and Natural Resources, Pimentel. D. and Hall. C.W. (eds), Academic Press, 1989.
2 Human appropriation of the products of photosynthesis, Vitousek, P.M. et al. Bioscience 36, 1986. http://www.science.duq.edu/esm/unit2-3
3 Land, Energy and Water: the constraints governing Ideal US Population Size, Pimental, David and Pimentel, Marcia. Focus, Spring 1991. NPG Forum, 1990. http://www.dieoff.com/page136.htm
4 Constraints on the Expansion of Global Food Supply, Kindell, Henry H. and Pimentel, David. Ambio Vol. 23 No. 3, May 1994. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. http://www.dieoff.com/page36htm
5 The Tightening Conflict: Population, Energy Use, and the Ecology of Agriculture, Giampietro, Mario and Pimentel, David, 1994. http://www.dieoff.com/page69.htm
6 Op. Cit. See note 4.
7 Food, Land, Population and the U.S. Economy, Pimentel, David and Giampietro, Mario. Carrying Capacity Network, 11/21/1994. http://www.dieoff.com/page55.htm
8 Comparison of energy inputs for inorganic fertilizer and manure based corn production, McLaughlin, N.B., et al. Canadian Agricultural Engineering, Vol. 42, No. 1, 2000.
9 Ibid.
10 US Fertilizer Use Statistics. http://www.tfi.org/Statistics/USfertuse2.asp
11 Food, Land, Population and the U.S. Economy, Executive Summary, Pimentel, David and Giampietro, Mario. Carrying Capacity Network, 11/21/1994. http://www.dieoff.com/page40.htm
12 Ibid.
13 Op. Cit. See note 3.
14 Op. Cit. See note 7.
15 Ibid.
16 Op. Cit. See note 5.
17 Ibid.
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid.
20 Ibid.
21 Op. Cit. See note 11.
22 Ibid.
23 Ibid.
24 Ibid.
25 Op Cit. See note 3.
26 Op Cit. See note11.
27 Ibid.
28 Ibid.
29 Ibid.
30 Op. Cit. See note 3.
31 Op. Cit. See note 5
32 Op. Cit. See note 3.
33 Op. Cit. See note 11.
34 Food Consumption and Access, Lynn Brantley, et al. Capital Area Food Bank, 6/1/2001. http://www.clagettfarm.org/purchasing.html
35 Op. Cit. See note 11.
36 Ibid.
37 Op. Cit. See note 5.
38 Ibid.
39 Ibid.
40 Op. Cit. See note 11.
41 Op. Cit. See note 4.
42 Op. Cit. See note 11.
43 Poverty 2002. The U.S. Census Bureau. http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/poverty02/pov02hi.html
44 Op. Cit. See note 3.
45 Ibid.
46 Diet for a Small Planet, Lappé, Frances Moore. Ballantine Books, 1971-revised 1991. http://www.dietforasmallplanet.com/
47 Op. Cit. See note 5.
48 Ibid.
49 U.S. and World Population Clocks. U.S. Census Bureau. http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html
50 A Distant Mirror, Tuckman Barbara. Ballantine Books, 1978.
51 Op. Cit. See note 40.

00:07 Gepost door AlphaGamma Permalink | Commentaren (0) | Email dit | Facebook |

Zionism in the Age of the Dictators

Lenni Brenner

Zionism in the Age of the Dictators

7. Hitler Looks at Zionism

Hitler’s view of the Jews and the Jewish problem is sharply expressed in Mein Kampf. He goes to great lengths to demonstrate that his Jew-hatred was quite reasonable, that it flowed from experience and the logical inferences to be drawn from clear evidence. He always insisted that his first thoughts towards the Jews were all benign. His father, “the old gentleman”, looked upon anti-Semitism as a left-over religious prejudice and so, we are told, did the enlightened young Adolf. It was only after his mother died, and he moved from provincial Linz to Vienna, that Hitler found occasion to question the glib assumptions of his youth. For there he wandered through the old inner city and encountered a Galician Hasid, “an apparition in a black caftan and black hair locks. Is this a Jew? was my first thought.” But the more he thought about what he had seen, the more his question assumed a new form: “Is this a German?” [1] It is in the context of his earliest ruminations on what was, for him, the central question of existence that he introduced Zionism into his opus.

And whatever doubts I may still have nourished were finally dispelled by the attitude of a portion of the Jews themselves. Among them there was a great movement, quite extensive in Vienna, which came out sharply in confirmation of the national character of the Jews: this was the Zionists.
It looked, to be sure, as though only a part of the Jews approved this viewpoint, while the majority condemned and inwardly rejected such a formulation. But... the so-called liberal Jews did not reject the Zionists as non-Jews, but only as Jews with an impractical, perhaps even dangerous, way of publicly avowing their Jewishness. [2]

There is no better proof of Zionism’s classic role as an outrider to anti-Semitism than Hitler’s own statement. What more, the reader was to ask, could any reasonable person need? However, before 1914 Hitler had no need to concern himself further with Zionism, as the prospects of a revived Jewish state seemed very remote. It was the Balfour Declaration, Germany’s defeat and the Weimar revolution that made him think again about Zionism. Naturally he rolled all three events together. The treacherous Jews showed their true colours in the way in which they welcomed the Balfour Declaration, and it was the Social Democrats, those servants of the Jews, who brought down the Kaiser; but for them Germany would have won. In 1919 Hitler joined the tiny National Socialists and became their inspired beer-hall rabblerouser, but the dominant ideologist on the finer points of the Jewish question was the Baltic German refugee Alfred Rosenberg, who had developed his theories while still in his native Estonia. By 19l9 Rosenberg had already explained Zionism in his book, Die Spur des Juden im Wandel der Zeiten (The Trace of the Jews in the Wanderings of Time) It was just another Jewish hustle; the Zionists only wanted to create a hide-out for the international Jewish conspiracy. Jews were, by their racial nature, organically incapable of building a state of their own, but he felt that Zionist ideology served wonderfully as a justification for depriving Germany’s Jews of their rights and that, perhaps, there was the possibility of future use of the movement for the promotion of Jewish emigration. Hitler soon began to touch on these themes in his talks, and on 6 July 1920 he proclaimed that Palestine was the proper place for the Jews and that only there could they hope to get their rights. Articles supporting emigration to Palestine began appearing in the party organ, the Völkischer Beobachter, after l920, and periodically party propagandists would return to the point, as did Julius Streicher in a speech given on 20 April 1996 before the Bavarian Landtag. [3] But for Hitler the validity of Zionism only lay in its confirmation that the Jews could never be Germans. In Mein Kampf, he wrote:

For while the Zionists try to make the rest of the world believe that the national consciousness of the Jew finds its satisfaction in the creation of a Palestinian state, the Jews again slyly dupe the dumb goyim. It doesn’t even enter their heads to build up a Jewish state for the purpose of living there; all they want is a central organisation for their international world swindle, endowed with its own sovereign rights and removed from the intervention of other states: a haven for convicted scoundrels and a university for budding crooks. [4]

Jews lacked the essential racial character to build a state of their own. They were essentially leeches, lacking in natural idealism, and they hated work. He explained:

For a state formation to have a definite spatial setting always presupposes an idealistic attitude on the part of the state-race, and especially a correct interpretation of the concept of work. In the exact measure in which this attitude is lacking, any attempt at forming, even of preserving, a spatially delimited state fails. [5]

In spite of any early musings about Zionism’s efficacy in eventually promoting emigration, the Nazis made no effort to establish any relationship with the local Zionists. On the contrary, when the Zionist Congress met in Vienna in 1925, the Nazis were among those who rioted against their presence. [6]

Nazi Patronage of Zionism

Did Hitler always plan to murder the Jews? He set down some early thoughts in Mein Kampf:

If in 1914 the German working class in their innermost convictions had still consisted of Marxists, the War would have been over in three weeks. Germany would have collapsed even before the first soldier set foot across the border. No, the fact that the German people was then still fighting proved that the Marxist delusion had not yet been able to gnaw its way into the bottommost depths. But in exact proportion as, in the course of the War, the German worker and the German soldier fell back into the hands of the Marxist leaders, in exactly that proportion he was lost to the fatherland. If at the beginning of the War and during the War twelve or fifteen thousand of these Hebrew corrupters of the people had been held under poison gas, as happened to hundreds of thousands of our very best German workers in the field, the sacrifices of millions at the front would not have been in vain. [7]

However, these thoughts were never the basis of the Nazis’ popular agitation prior to the 1933 take-over. Instead, the Nazis primarily focused on denouncing the Jews, rather than explaining what they would do about them after they won. However, for decades “Kikes to Palestine!” had been the slogan of European anti-Semitism, and the Nazi propagandists used it in their own agitation. In June 1932 the centrepiece for one of their largest anti-Jewish rallies, in Silesian Breslaw, was a huge banner telling the Jews to “get ready for Palestine!” [8] During the anti-Jewish boycott on 1 April 1933, pickets at the department stores handed out an imitation “one-way ticket to Palestine” to Jewish-looking passers-by. [9] The official Nazi manifesto proclaiming the anti-Jewish boycott declared that anti-Nazi feeling abroad was due to international Jewry’s “trying to act on the program announced in 1897 by the Zionist Leader Herzl to stir up foreign states against any country that opposed the Jews.” [10] However, none of this was very serious; it was just another expression of rabid anti-Semitism. Until he achieved power, Hitler had not given any serious thought to what he would do with the Jews. Beyond his statement in Mein Kampf, there is no evidence to prove that he told even his closest subordinates what he ultimately planned. After all, as he always privately complained, the average SS man was, at bottom, soft – and a blabbermouth. If you talked about killing all the Jews, he was sure to make excuses for his own “good Jew” and then where were you? Besides, the capitalists had their Jewish business connections abroad, and there were the churches and their scruples about murder. Hitler solved his problem by just ignoring it, leaving every department in the party and government to feel its way to a suitable policy. There were inevitably conflicting schools. Straight terror always had its devotees, but these were more than countered by others who saw the Jews as deeply rooted in the domestic economy as well as having many contacts abroad. Immediate imposition of a ghetto had its partisans, but this was met with the same objections. Emigration was the obvious solution, but where to? Not only would wholesale Jewish emigration make Berlin unpopular among other capitals, but what would happen after the arrival of large numbers of Jews in any of the major cities of the world? They would incite others, and not just Jews, against the Reich and the effect they could have on Germany’s trade might well be devastating. It was within this context that the Zionists, Sam Cohen of Ha Note’a and the ZVfD in Germany, first appeared with their proposals.

Ha’avara had several obvious advantages to the Nazis. If Jews went to Palestine, they would only be able to complain to other Jews. In fact, they would even be a moderating influence there, since the fear of worse consequences for their relatives in Germany, if anything were done to make the Nazis cancel the Transfer, would make them reluctant to agitate on a large scale. But the most important use of the Ha’avara agreement was for propaganda. The Nazis now had something to show their foreign detractors who said they were incapable of any policy toward the Jews other than physical brutality. In a speech on 24 October 1933, Hitler crowed that it was he, not his critics, who really was the Jews’ benefactor:

In England people assert that their arms are open to welcome all the oppressed, especially the Jews who have left Germany ... But it would be still finer if England did not make her great gesture dependent on the possession of £1,000 – England should say: “Anyone may enter” – as we unfortunately have done for 30 years. If we too had declared that no one could enter Germany save under the condition of bringing with him £1,000 or paying more, then today we should have no Jewish question at all. So we wild folk have once more proved ourselves better humans – less perhaps in external protestations, but at least in our actions! And now we are still as generous and give to the Jewish people a far higher percentage as their share in possibility for living than we ourselves possess. [11]

Nazi Germany regarded the will of the Fuhrer as having the force of law, and once Hitler had pronounced, an avowedly pro-Zionist policy developed. Also in October Hans Frank, then the Bavarian Minister of Justice, later the Governor-General of Poland, told the Nuremberg Parteitag that the best solution to the Jewish question, for Jews and Gentiles, alike, was the Palestinian National Home. [12] Still in October, the Hamburg-South American Shipping Company started a direct service to Haifa providing “strictly Kosher food on its ships, under the supervision of the Hamburg rabbinate”. [13] Jews could still leave for any country that would have them, but now Palestine became the propagandists’ preferred solution to the Jewish question. However, Zionists were still just Jews, as Gustav Genther of the German Education School very carefully spelt out:

Just as we now have friendly relations with Soviet Russia, though Russia, as a Communist country, represents a danger to our National Socialist State, we shall take the same attitude toward the Jews, if they establish themselves as an independent nation, although we know they will always remain our enemies. [14]

If this was not enough, a children’s game, Juden Raus! (Jews Out), left no illusions as to how the Nazis saw Zionism. The pieces were little pawns wearing pointed medieval Jewish hats; the players moved them by rolling dice; the child winning was the one whose Jew first scurried out, “off to Palestine!” through the gates of a walled city. [15] Zionism was despised in Nazi Germany, but the Zionists desperately needed Nazi patronage if they were to get the capital they required in Palestine and they allowed themselves to believe that the Ha’avara and all the Palestinian talk that followed it would lead to a statesmanlike pact.

“Our official good will go with them”

By 1934 the SS had become the most pro-Zionist element in the Nazi Party. Other Nazis were even calling them “soft” on the Jews. Baron von Mildenstein had returned from his six-month visit to Palestine as an ardent Zionist sympathiser. Now as the head of the Jewish Department of the SS’s Security Service, he started studying Hebrew and collecting Hebrew records; when his former companion and guide, Kurt Tuchler, visited his office in 1934, he was greeted by the strains of familiar Jewish folk tunes. [16] There were maps on the walls showing the rapidly increasing strength of Zionism inside Germany. [17] Von Mildenstein was as good as his word: he not only wrote favourably about what he saw in the Zionist colonies in Palestine; he also persuaded Goebbels to run the report as a massive twelve-part series in his own Der Angriff (The Assault), the leading Nazi propaganda organ (26 September to 9 October 1934). His stay among the Zionists had shown the SS man “the way to curing a centuries-long wound on the body of the world: the Jewish question”. It was really amazing how some good Jewish boden under his feet could enliven the Jew: “The soil has reformed him and his kind in a decade. This new Jew will be a new people.” [18] To commemorate the Baron’s expedition, Goebbels had a medal struck: on one side the swastika, on the other the Zionist star. [19]

In May 1935 Reinhardt Heydrich, who was then the chief of the SS Security Service, later the infamous “Protector” of the Czech lands incorporated into the Reich, wrote an article, The Visible Enemy, for Das Schwarze Korps, the official organ of the SS. In it Heydrich assessed the various tendencies among the Jews, comparing the assimilationists quite invidiously with the Zionists. His partiality towards Zionism could not have been expressed in more unmistakable terms:

After the Nazi seizure of power our racial laws did in fact curtail considerably the immediate influence of Jews. But ... the question as he sees it is still: How can we win back our old position ... We must separate Jewry into two categories... the Zionists and those who favor being assimilated. The Zionists adhere to a strict racial position and by emigrating to Palestine they are helping to build their own Jewish state.

Heydrich wished them a fond farewell: “The time cannot be far distant when Palestine will again be able to accept its sons who have been lost to it for over a thousand years. Our good wishes together with our official good will go with them.” [20]

“It was a painful distinction for Zionism to be singled out for favours”

The Nuremberg Laws of September 1935, the finishing touches of Germany’s pre-Second World War anti-Jewish legislation, were defended by the Nazis as an expression of their pro-Zionism. They had at least the tacit approval of the wiser heads amongst the Jews themselves. As it happened – and naturally it was more than mere coincidence – every nationwide Jewish organ in Germany was under temporary ban when the laws were promulgated – except the Rundschau. It published the codified restrictions with a commentary by Alfred Berndt, the editor-in-chief of the German News Bureau. Berndt recalled that, only two weeks before, all the speakers at the World Zionist Congress in Lucerne had reiterated that the Jews of the world were to be correctly seen as a separate people unto themselves regardless of where they lived. Well then, he explained, all Hitler had done was to meet “the demands of the International Zionist Congress by making the Jews who live in Germany a national minority”. [21]

One aspect of the laws, now long forgotten but which attracted considerable attention at the time, was the fact that from then on only two flags were to be permitted in the Third Reich, the swastika and the blue-and-white Zionist banner. This, of course, greatly excited the ZVfD, who hoped that this was a sign that Hitler was moving closer to an accommodation with them. But for many foreign Zionists this was a searing humiliation, well-expressed in the anguish of Stephen Wise’s own organ, the Congress Bulletin:

Hitlerism is Satan’s nationalism. The determination to rid the German national body of the Jewish element, however, led Hitlerism to discover its “kinship” with Zionism, the Jewish nationalism of liberation. Therefore Zionism became the only other party legalized in the Reich, the Zionist flag the only other flag permitted to fly in Nazi-land. It was a painful distinction for Zionism to be singled out for favors and privileges by its Satanic counterpart. [22]

The Nazis were as thorough in their philo-Zionism as in other matters. Now that the Jews were established as a separate people with a separate soil, should they not also have a separate language? In 1936 they added a new “nach Palästina” ingredient to their repressive measures. Jewish Frontier had to inform its readers distressfully that:

The attempts to seclude the Jews in the cultural ghetto have reached a new height by the prohibition to rabbis to use the German language in their Chanukah [6 December] sermons. This is in line with the effort made by the Nazis to force the German Jews to use the Hebrew language as their cultural medium. Thus another “proof” of Nazi-Zionist cooperation is seized eagerly by the Communist opponents of Zionism. [23]

Nazi leniency towards Zionism

In spring 1934, Heinrich Himmler, Reichsführer of the SS, was presented with a Situation Report – Jewish Question by his staff: the vast majority of Jews still considered themselves Germans and were determined to stay on. Since force could not be used, for fear of potential international repercussions, the way to break down their resistance was to instil a distinctive Jewish identity amongst them by systematically promoting Jewish schools, athletic teams, Hebrew, Jewish art and music, etc. Combined with Zionist occupational retraining centres, this would finally induce the recalcitrant Jews to abandon their homeland. However, this subtle formula was not enough, for whenever pressure against them began to subside the stubborn Jews would start to dig in again. The Nazi policy was therefore to increase support for the Zionists, so that the Jews would plainly see that the way to ward off worse troubles was to join the movement. All Jews, including Zionists, were still to be persecuted as Jews, but within that framework it was always possible to ease the pressure. Accordingly, on 28 January 1935, the Bavarian Gestapo circularised the regular police that henceforward: “members of the Zionist organisations are, in view of their activities directed towards emigration to Palestine, not to be treated with the same strictness which is necessary towards the members of the German-Jewish organisations [assimilationists]”. [24]

The Nazis created complications for themselves with their pro-Zionist line. The WZO needed German-Jewish capital far more than it ever wanted German Jews. It also operated under the immigration quotas set by the British. Its largest following was in Poland, and if it gave out too many certificates to Germans, there would not be enough for its support base in Poland and elsewhere. Therefore the Zionists gave only 22 per cent of the certificates to Germans throughout the 1930s. Furthermore the WZO were not interested in the vast majority of Germany’s Jews, since these were not Zionists, did not speak Hebrew, were too old and, of course, did not have the “right” trades. Either Jewish emigration had to be organised to other countries as well, or Germany would be stuck with the Jews neither it nor the Zionists wanted. Nazi discrimination against anti-Zionists led to problems for those world-based bodies like the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, which tried to provide havens for Jews in countries other than Palestine. Yehuda Bauer, one of Israel’s most widely known Holocaust scholars, has written of a discussion of the ensuing difficulties between two leading officials of the Joint Distribution Committee:

[Joseph] Hyman thought that a statement should be made by the German Jews that Palestine was not the sole outlet which of course, frankly speaking, it wasn’t. [Bernard] Kahn agreed, but explained that the Nazis supported Zionism because it promised the largest emigration of Jews from Germany; hence German Jewish leadership could not make any public statements about other outlets. Still less could they mention the decision to maintain Jewish institutions in Germany. The Nazis had dissolved one meeting in Germany simply because the speaker had said “we have to provide for the people who go away and for the Jews who must stay in Germany”. [25]

In practice, the Nazis’ concern about where the Jews should go disappeared with the Austrian Anschluss, which brought so many Jews with it that further attention to their destination would have crippled the expulsion programme. In October 1938 the Nazis discovered that the Poles were about to revoke the citizenship of thousands of their Jewish citizens resident in Germany. They therefore decided to deport the Jews to Poland immediately so that they would not be stuck with thousands of stateless Jews. It was this cold pogrom that led to the massive violence of Kristallnacht in November 1938.

The story was told, many years later, on 25 April 1961, at the trial of Adolf Eichmann. The witness, Zindel Grynszpan, then an old man, was the father of Herszl Grynszpan who, in despair at the deportation of his father back to Poland, had assassinated a German diplomat in Paris and provided the Nazis with the pretext for their terrible night of broken glass. Old Zindel told them of his deportation from his home in Hanover on the night of 27 October 1938: “Then they took us in police trucks, in prisoners’ lorries, about 20 men in each truck, and they took us to the railway station. The streets were full of people shouting: ’Juden raus! Auf nach Palästina!’ ” [26]

The significance of Zindel’s testimony was utterly lost in the welter of detail in the Eichmann trial. But those Jews were not being sent to Palestine, as the Nazi mob cried; the prosecutor in that courtroom in Jerusalem never thought to ask the elderly Grynszpan a question that we would think to ask: “What did you think, what did the other Jews think, when they heard that strange cry coming up from the savage mob?” Zindel Grynszpan is long dead, as are most if not all the others who suffered there that hellish night; we have no answer to our query. But what really matters was what was shouted, rather than what was thought about it in that police van. However, we can reasonably suggest that if the ZVfD had resisted Nazism’s rise, if the WZO had mobilised Jewry against the New Order, if Palestine had been a bastion of Jewish resistance to Nazism, the Nazis would never have told the Jews, and that mob, that the place for a Jew was in Palestine. Perhaps, then, that Friday night in Hanover the cry would have been “Jews to Poland”, even a straight “kill the Jews”. The sombre fact is that the mob screamed what had been screamed at them by Hitler’s minions: “Jews to Palestine !”

“The Nazis asked for a ‘More Zionist Behaviour’”

That the Nazis preferred the Zionists to all other Jews is a settled point. Even though Joachim Prinz may have winced when he wrote his 1937 article, he was only being honest when he sorrowfully had to admit that:

It was very difficult for the Zionists to operate. It was morally disturbing to seem to be considered as the favoured children of the Nazi Government, particularly when it dissolved the anti-Zionist youth groups, and seemed in other ways to prefer the Zionists. The Nazis asked for a “more Zionist behaviour”. [27]

The Zionist movement was always under severe restriction in the 1930s in Germany. The Rundschau was banned on at least three occasions between 1933 and November 1938, when the regime finally closed down the ZVfD’s headquarters after Kristallnacht. After 1935 the Labour Zionist emissaries were barred from the country, but even then Palestinian Zionist leaders were allowed to enter for specific meetings; for instance Arthur Ruppin was granted permission to enter Gemmany on 20 March 1938 in order to address a mass indoor rally in Berlin on the effects of the 1936 Arab revolt in Palestine. Certainly, the Zionists had far less trouble than their bourgeois assimilationist rivals at the CV, and it was nothing compared with what the Communists had to face in Dachau at the same time the Rundschau was being hawked in the streets of Berlin.

However, the fact that the Zionists became Adolf Hitler’s “favoured children” hardly qualified him as a Jewish nationalist. Even von Mildenstein, for all his Hebrew records, accepted the party line when it turned to outright murder. Throughout the period, the Nazis toyed with the Zionists as a cat would play with a mouse. Hitler never thought he was letting anyone get away from him because he was encouraging Jews to go to Palestine. If the Jews went to far-away America, he might never be able to get at them and they would always remain the foes of the German Empire in Europe. But if they went to Palestine instead? “There”, as a Gestapo agent told a Jewish leader, “we will catch up with you”. [28]

The Zionists could not even claim that they were duped by Hitler; they conned themselves. Hitler’s theories on Zionism, including the Jews’ alleged inability to create a state, had all been there, in plain German, since 1926. The Zionists ignored the fact that Hitler hated all Jews, and that he specifically condemned their own ideology. The Zionists were simply reactionaries, who naively chose to emphasise the points of similarity between themselves and Hitler. They convinced themselves that because they, too, were racists, against mixed marriage, and believed that the Jews were aliens in Germany; because they, too, were opposed to the left, that these similarities would be enough to make Adolf Hitler see them as the only “honest partners” for a diplomatic détente. [29]

Notes

1. Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p.56.

2. Ibid.

3. Francis Nicosia, Zionism in Nationalist Socialist Jewish Policy in Germany, 1933-9, Journal of Modern History (on-demand supplement) (December 1978), pp.D1257-9.

4. Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp.324-5.

5. Ibid., p.302.

6. F.L. Carsten, Fascist Movements in Austria, p.96.

7. Hitler, Mein Kampf, p.679.

8. Donald Niewyk, Socialist, Anti-Semite and Jew, p.149.

9. Elizabeth Poretsky, Our Own People, p.134.

10. No Violence Urged, Israel’s Messenger (Shanghai, 10 April 1933), p.19.

11. Norman Baynes (ed.), Hitler’s Speeches, 1922-1939, vol. I, p.729.

12. Nicosia, Zionism in Nationalist Socialist Jewish Policy p.D1263.

13. Hamburg-Haifa Direct Shipping Line, Zionist Record (20 October 1933) p.15.

14. Members of Pro-Palestine Committee in Germany put on Anti-Semitic Blacklist, Jewish Weekly News (Melbourne, 30 March 1934), p.6.

15. Jewish Central Information Office – The Weiner Library – Its History and Activities 1934-45 (photograph between pp.212-13).

16. Jacob Boas, The Jews of Germany: Self-Perception in the Nazi Era as Reflected in the German Jewish Press 1933-1938, PhD thesis, University of California, Riverside (1977), p.110.

17. Heinz Hohne, The Order of the Death’s Head, p.333.

18. Leopold von Mildenstein (pseudonym von Lim), Ein Nazi fährt nach Palästina, Der Angriff (9 October 1934), p.4.

19. Jacob Boas, A Nazi Travels to Palestine, History Today (London, January 1980), p.38.

20. Hohne, Order of the Death’s Head, p.333; and Karl Schleunes, The Twisted Road to Auschwitz, pp.1934.

21. Margaret Edelheim-Muehsam, Reactions of the Jewish Press to the Nazi Challenge, Leo Baeck Institute Year Book, vol. V (1960), p.324.

22. Baal is not God, Congress Bulletin (24 January 1936), p.2.

23. Abraham Duker, Diaspora, Jewish Frontier (January 1937), p.28.

24. Kurt Grossmann, Zionists and Non-Zionists under Nazi Rule in the 1930s, Herzl Yearbook, vol.VI, p.340.

25. Yehuda Bauer, My Brother’s Keeper, p.136.

26. Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem, p.228.

27. Joachim Prinz, Zionism under the Nazi Government, Young Zionist (London, November 1937), p.18.

28. Lucy Dawidowicz, The War Against the Jews, p.115.

29. Boas, The Jews of Germany, p.111.

00:05 Gepost door AlphaGamma Permalink | Commentaren (0) | Email dit | Facebook |

	1	Availability of agricultural land for crop and livestock production, Buringh, P. Food and Natural Resources, Pimentel. D. and Hall. C.W. (eds), Academic Press, 1989.
	2	Human appropriation of the products of photosynthesis, Vitousek, P.M. et al. Bioscience 36, 1986. http://www.science.duq.edu/esm/unit2-3
	3	Land, Energy and Water: the constraints governing Ideal US Population Size, Pimental, David and Pimentel, Marcia. Focus, Spring 1991. NPG Forum, 1990. http://www.dieoff.com/page136.htm
	4	Constraints on the Expansion of Global Food Supply, Kindell, Henry H. and Pimentel, David. Ambio Vol. 23 No. 3, May 1994. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. http://www.dieoff.com/page36htm
	5	The Tightening Conflict: Population, Energy Use, and the Ecology of Agriculture, Giampietro, Mario and Pimentel, David, 1994. http://www.dieoff.com/page69.htm
	6	Op. Cit. See note 4.
	7	Food, Land, Population and the U.S. Economy, Pimentel, David and Giampietro, Mario. Carrying Capacity Network, 11/21/1994. http://www.dieoff.com/page55.htm
	8	Comparison of energy inputs for inorganic fertilizer and manure based corn production, McLaughlin, N.B., et al. Canadian Agricultural Engineering, Vol. 42, No. 1, 2000.
	9	Ibid.
	10	US Fertilizer Use Statistics. http://www.tfi.org/Statistics/USfertuse2.asp
	11	Food, Land, Population and the U.S. Economy, Executive Summary, Pimentel, David and Giampietro, Mario. Carrying Capacity Network, 11/21/1994. http://www.dieoff.com/page40.htm
	12	Ibid.
	13	Op. Cit. See note 3.
	14	Op. Cit. See note 7.
	15	Ibid.
	16	Op. Cit. See note 5.
	17	Ibid.
	18	Ibid.
	19	Ibid.
	20	Ibid.
	21	Op. Cit. See note 11.
	22	Ibid.
	23	Ibid.
	24	Ibid.
	25	Op Cit. See note 3.
	26	Op Cit. See note11.
	27	Ibid.
	28	Ibid.
	29	Ibid.
	30	Op. Cit. See note 3.
	31	Op. Cit. See note 5
	32	Op. Cit. See note 3.
	33	Op. Cit. See note 11.
	34	Food Consumption and Access, Lynn Brantley, et al. Capital Area Food Bank, 6/1/2001. http://www.clagettfarm.org/purchasing.html
	35	Op. Cit. See note 11.
	36	Ibid.
	37	Op. Cit. See note 5.
	38	Ibid.
	39	Ibid.
	40	Op. Cit. See note 11.
	41	Op. Cit. See note 4.
	42	Op. Cit. See note 11.
	43	Poverty 2002. The U.S. Census Bureau. http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/poverty02/pov02hi.html
	44	Op. Cit. See note 3.
	45	Ibid.
	46	Diet for a Small Planet, Lappé, Frances Moore. Ballantine Books, 1971-revised 1991. http://www.dietforasmallplanet.com/
	47	Op. Cit. See note 5.
	48	Ibid.
	49	U.S. and World Population Clocks. U.S. Census Bureau. http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html
	50	A Distant Mirror, Tuckman Barbara. Ballantine Books, 1978.
	51	Op. Cit. See note 40.

A collection of links to the Alternate Press who found its new voice on the World Wide Web. A reaction to the politicaly and corporative distorted Main Stream Media, nowadays called the Presstitutes.

The Mainstream Press doesn't serve the people anymore

Interesting Reading Material

The U.S. and the Escalating Threat to the World

Authentical Journalists

US Presidential Campain 2004

9-11, a hoax?

Osama Bin Laden: who is he, where does he come from, who did cre

Archieven

03-06-04

27-05-04

26-05-04

Israëlisch verhuizers doen gekke dingen in de VS:

06-12-03

EATING FOSSIL FUELS

Introduction

The Green Revolution

Fossil Fuel Costs

Soil, Cropland and Water

US Consumption

Population & Sustainability

Three Choices

Author's Note

ENDNOTES

Lenni Brenner

Zionism in the Age of the Dictators

7. Hitler Looks at Zionism

Nazi Patronage of Zionism

“Our official good will go with them”

“It was a painful distinction for Zionism to be singled out for favours”

Nazi leniency towards Zionism

“The Nazis asked for a ‘More Zionist Behaviour’”

Notes