Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Iran nuclear issue overhyped: Ex-IAEA chief Hans Blix

Press TV – March 7, 2013

On February 22, 2012, Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said Iran considers the pursuit and possession of nuclear weapons “a grave sin” from every logical, religious and theoretical standpoint.

The Leader described the proliferation of nuclear weapons as “senseless, destructive and dangerous,” adding that the Iranian nation has never sought and will never seek atomic bombs as the country already has the conventional capacity to challenge the nuclear-backed powers.
A former chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has dismissed as “overhyped” the Western propaganda over the ‘threat of nuclear-armed Iran,’ saying there is no evidence that Tehran is even interested in producing weapons of mass destruction.

“So far Iran has not violated the NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) and there is no evidence right now that suggests that Iran is producing nuclear weapons,” Hans Blix said in Dubai.

He added that no action can be justified against Iran’s nuclear activities on “mere suspicions or intentions that may not exist.”

The former IAEA chief had previously said that Iran has been more open to international inspections than most other countries would be.

Iran has repeatedly expressed its strong opposition to any production, possession or use of nuclear weapons, saying such arms have no place in the Islamic Republic’s nuclear doctrine.

On February 22, 2012, Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said Iran considers the pursuit and possession of nuclear weapons “a grave sin” from every logical, religious and theoretical standpoint.

The Leader described the proliferation of nuclear weapons as “senseless, destructive and dangerous,” adding that the Iranian nation has never sought and will never seek atomic bombs as the country already has the conventional capacity to challenge the nuclear-backed powers.

The US, Israel, and some of their allies have repeatedly accused Iran of pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program.

Iran rejects the allegations, arguing that as a committed signatory to the NPT and a member of the IAEA, it has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

Despite the IAEA’s numerous inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities, the UN nuclear agency has never found any evidence showing that Iran’s civilian nuclear program has been diverted to nuclear weapons production.

Related articles

March 7, 2013 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Argentina’s envoy to Britain: Malvinas referendum is illegal

Press TV – March 4, 2013

A referendum on the Malvinas Islands’ sovereignty is a publicity stunt with no legal ground, Argentina’s ambassador to Britain Alicia Castro has said.

The Malvinas settlers will take part in a referendum next Sunday for the islanders to decide whether they want to remain British or rather they want to rejoin Argentina as motherland.

Argentina, however, has repeatedly announced that the islander’s vote does not count as they believe the Royal Navy has expelled the Argentinians who originally lived on the territory and has replaced them with British settlers.

“This referendum has no legal grounds. It’s not approved, nor will it be recognized by the United Nations or the international community,” Castro said.

“So this referendum is little more than a public relations exercise.”

Britain illegally occupied the Malvinas Islands in 1833 and has since refused to leave. Over the past years, Argentina has repeatedly brought the question of Malvinas to international forums in a bid to highlight its sovereignty over the region.


Some Facts about the Question of the Malvinas Islands

Tripoli Post – 27/02/2013

Dear Editor,

I would like to avail myself of the possibility to reach the readers of The Tripoli Post in order to correct a series of inaccuracies included in the article entitled “Senkaku/Diaoyu: Another Falklands?” of your February 9th issue. I thank your prestigious publication for allowing me to contribute to a fairer and better understanding of the “Question of the Malvinas Islands”.

When comparing the case of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands and the case of the Malvinas Islands, the author of the aforementioned article says that the latter “have been inhabited by some thousands of English-speaking people of British descent for almost two centuries” and that “Argentina’s claim relates to a short-lived colony in 1830-33 which was preceded by somewhat longer-lived French and British colonies in the 1700s.”

Not true: it is well documented that from as early as the XVIth Century the whole austral region of the Americas – with its coasts, seas and islands – was under the effective control of the Spanish authorities by virtue of several treaties signed by Spain and the United Kingdom. The 32 consecutive Governors named by Spain for the Islands further proves this, as also does the fact that the Argentine governments which succeeded Spain took over and exercised themselves both jurisdiction and administrative faculties over the Malvinas Islands.

Furthermore, all through the process leading to its recognition of the Argentine state in 1825, the United Kingdom did not state any intention to stake a claim to the Malvinas Islands. And in June 1829 Argentina formally created the Political and Military Command of the Malvinas Islands.

On the 3rd of February 1833, a corvette of the British Royal Navy forcefully expelled the Argentine authorities from the islands. Thus started the colonial situation which still prevails and which has incessantly been protested by Argentina.

It is important to mention that in 1965 the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 2065 (XX) which recognizes the existence of a sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom, establishes that the situation in the Malvinas Islands is a form of colonialism and invites both governments to engage without delay in negotiations to find a peaceful solution to the problem. This mandate has been reiterated and confirmed up to the present through 40 Resolutions
of the General Assembly and the Decolonization Committee of the UN, as well as by other multinational fora, amongst which the most recent is the Africa – South America Summit held last week in Malabo, where the 54 African countries joined South America in recognizing the legitimate Argentine Sovereignty rights over Malvinas, South Georgias and South Sandwich Islands and the surrounding maritime areas.

Unfortunately, while the United Kingdom refuses to resume dialogue with the Argentine Republic, it does continue carrying out unilateral activities in the disputed area, such as exploration and exploitation of oil and fisheries, thus disrespecting also Resolution 31/49 of the United Nations General Assembly, which calls on both parties in the sovereignty dispute to refrain from adopting decisions which introduce unilateral modifications to the situation. These unilateral activities also include the increasing militarization of the area, which challenges the characterization of the South Atlantic as a Peace Zone, therefore causing concern in the countries of Latin America.

In the meantime, the Argentine Republic reaffirms its vocation for dialogue and its predisposition to comply with the many calls of the international community in order to find a peaceful, fair and definitive solution to the sovereignty dispute.

Mauricio Nine
Chargé d´Affaires
Argentine Embassy in Libya”

March 4, 2013 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ricardo Haussmann – a reliable commentator for the Guardian on Venezuela?

By Dr Francisco Dominguez | Venezuela Solidarity Campaign | March 3, 2013

Last Monday the Guardian Comment is Free website carried a piece by Ricardo Haussmann on Venezuela entitled The legacy of Hugo Chávez: Low growth, high inflation, intimidation.

The piece painted a doomsday scenario for modern day Venezuela, arguing that “Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez is a master at holding onto power, but it has cost his country and people dearly.”

Ironically this came out just days before the Venezuelan economy was announced to have grown 5.6% in 2012 on the back of a huge housing stimulus.

Worse still, the piece appeared just a couple of days before the anniversary of the ‘Caracazo’ of 1989.  The Caracazo is the day when the Venezuelan people rose up against a package of cuts forced on them. Over two thousand people were then brutally executed by state security forces in what has been termed Venezuela’s worst human rights disaster in history. In stark contrast, precisely on February 27 (2013), Venezuela was elected by about three quarters of the governments represented in the UN to become permanent member of the United Nations Human rights Council for three years.

What is the link between this and Ricardo Haussmann?

In 1989, he was an economic advisors to the soon-to-be-disgraced president Carlos Andres Perez who carried out the cuts and subsequent Caracazo violence.

As this academic paper points out:  

“Pérez appointed to his economic cabinet a team of radically pro-market technocrats largely recruited from the Instituto de Estudios Superiores de Administración (IESA). These ministers–among whom were Miguel Rodríguez, Moisés Naím, Ricardo Haussmann, Gerver Torres, and Julián Villalba–became known as the “IESA Boys,” by analogy to the “Chicago Boys” of Pinochet’s Chile. This team designed the shock “paquete” that Pérez promised in his inaugural address in February 1989 and put into effect two weeks later”.

After that, from 1992 to 1993, Haussmann served as Minister of Planning in Venezuela and as a member of the Board of the Central Bank of Venezuela  also under Carlos Andres Perez. Clearly the ‘Caracazo’ was not severe enough to break his link with President Perez.

Around the same time, Haussmann was Chair of the IMF-World Bank Development Committee. Judging by the nature and tone of his attack on the current Venezuelan government, one may have expected this to have been the dawn of some golden IMF-sponsored growth across Latin America.

Yet as economist Mark Weisbrot has pointed out, this period marked the worst economic performance of the Continent in a century. Only with the recent leftward shift (in many ways led by Venezuela) was there a much needed combination of economic growth and social justice.

Rejected by the Carter Centre 

Haussmann later based himself in the US at Harvard, but came to prominence again following the 2004 recall referendum against Hugo Chavez, when he published a paper claiming that “statistically” the outcome could have been the result of fraud. At the time, the Wall Street Journal was amongst those who recycled the claim. The well respected Carter Centre  debunked the myth and the politically motivated claims of fraud by stating clearly that “the results were accurate”.

Haussmann’s and Venezuela’s new right

In the run up to last October’s election, won by Hugo Chavez in a landslide victory, it was Haussmann (acting as an advisor to the defeated right-wing candidate Henrique Capriles) who claimed the right-wing opposition would have 200,000 people at polling stations and could then announce their own results before the official ones.

Luckily this plan – which was seen by many as the start of a worrying destabilisation aimed at getting the legitimate results not recognised internationally – failed to pick up momentum due to the scale of Hugo Chavez’s victory, with Capriles himself recognising the results. But this was not before the Spanish newspaper ABC had published a fake exit poll claiming Hugo Chavez had lost.

Surely his role as an advisor to the  right-wing political candidate should have featured in the Guardian piece. This would better explain the reasons for the content of the piece.

Likewise sections of the British media have also recently quoted Diego Arria (who denies the 2002 coup in Venezuela was even a coup!) and the 2002 coup-supporting, hard right-wing MP (and friend of George W.Bush) María Corina Machado. Both are prominent signatories to a recent public petition calling on the Venezuelan military to overturn the country’s elected government. 

Of course, people are entitled to express their views on Venezuela. But it’s clear that the Venezuelan people have time and again rejected the views pushed by Haussmann and the other members of the Venezuelan right recently attracting such interest in certain quarters of the British media.

Related articles

March 4, 2013 Posted by | Deception, Economics, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Leave a comment

STATIN NATION

View another excerpt from the documentary film Statin Nation.

For more information, please visit www.statinnation.net

Related videos
Related article

March 3, 2013 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Jewish Voice for Weizmann

By Gilad Atzmon | March 3, 2013

I just came across a JVP press release (Jewish Voice for Peace) reporting a 
massive advertising campaign to counter the AIPAC Annual Conference in Washington. Apparently, from today 100 billboards will be stationed in DC Metro bearing a simple but important message.

“AIPAC Does Not Speak for Me”.

AIPAC is certainly a danger to world peace and yes, it is a positive development that a Jewish organization should confront its impact on American foreign policy.

But still, JVP’s tactics are problematic. If anything, they reveal the deep confusion inherent in Jewish politics in general, and Jewish progressive thinking in particular.

On the one hand, JVP’s campaign is simple and transparent: it states “AIPAC does not speak for me. Most Jewish Americans are pro-peace. AIPAC is not.” But on the other hand, JVP falls short in offering any universal or ethical solution to the conflict in the Middle East.

“According to a recent poll by pollster Jim Gerstein” reads the JVP’s press release, “82% of Jewish Americans support a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

So, if I understand it correctly, 82% of Jewish Americans support a solution that dismisses the most essential and elementary Palestinian right to return to their land, in effect supporting  the existence of a Jewish State in historic Palestine, at the expense of the Palestinians and their rights. In other words, the so-called ‘good peace-seeking Jews’ ,who are the vast majority of Jewish Americans (according to JVP), support an utterly non-ethical solution.

But the reference to Gerstein’s statistics is even more embarrassing. Are we interested in what the Dutch think about the solution of the conflict in Ireland? Do we care if Indians approve the Italian recent polls? No, we don’t but, for some reason, we are desperate to find out what ‘Jewish Americans’ think of the Israeli Palestinian conflict. The reason for this is obvious – Israel defines itself as the Jewish State and many Jewish Americans see Israel as their homeland and obviously, they care about their homeland and its politics. In that respect, Zionism should be seen as a success story – a trap into which JVP is foolish enough to fall. By referring to Gerstein’s statistics, JVP actually confirms that Jews are bonded spiritually and politically with their Jewish state and so are subject to an intense conflict of identity.

Chaim Weizmann, the legendary Zionist and the first Israeli President, somehow knew of all those JVPs to come. Already in the early days of Zionism, he observed the Jewish political inclination towards marginalism; he wrote “there are no English, French, German or American Jews, but only Jews living in England, France, Germany or America.” Whether Weizmann was correct or not is open to discussion, but clearly, JVP accepts Weizmann’s observation. JVP refers to the American Jews as ‘Jewish Americans’. It regards Jewishness as a primary political quality and it refers to Jews as a distinctive marginal ethno-centric group.

Interestingly, the ‘anti’ Zionist JVP is actually the embodiment of Weizmann’s Zionist wet dream. It may not agree with AIPAC on some side issues to do with settlements, occupation and Israeli policies, but it agrees on the fundamentals – “there are no American Jews, but only Jews living in America.” And as if this is not enough, JVP, like AIPAC supports the existence of a Jews only State in Palestine.

I guess that from Weizmann’s perspective JVP is Zionist to the bone. It openly promotes the two state solution because, like AIPAC, it is primarily concerned with Jewish tribal interests rather than human rights, ethics, or universal thinking.

JVP, like any other Jews-only ‘progressive’ organisation, may speak universal but it still thinks tribal.

March 3, 2013 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Don’t Mention the War!

By Lesley Docksey | Dissident Voice | March 2nd, 2013

Why is it, just when you think the British Government can sink no lower and visit no more embarrassment and shame upon the country they are supposedly there to represent, that within a week or less one of the Ministers will open his mouth or put pen to paper and demonstrate just how arrogant and useless they are?  Arrogant because they believe that whatever they say will be accepted as the final word on the subject; useless because they apparently can’t foresee how their statements will be received.

Foreign Secretary William Hague, who makes a career of talking down to people, has excelled himself.  According to the Guardian, with the 10-year anniversary of the invasion of Iraq approaching, he has written to all his fellow Ministers and asked them not to discuss the case for, or the legality of, the Iraq war.

According to a source close to Hague: ‘The foreign secretary has written to colleagues to remind them that the agreed position of the coalition government is not to comment on the case or justification for the war until Chilcot has reported.  This is about allowing the inquiry to reach its conclusion, not having the government prejudge them.’  Has Hague forgotten why the long-awaited Chilcot Inquiry cannot deliver its report?

In November 2011 we were told that the report would be delayed until the summer of 2012 because Whitehall departments were continuing to block the disclosure of documents about the circumstances surrounding the invasion of Iraq.  Chilcot’s panel, having read all these classified documents, knew how important it is that they are made public.  And unless they are, it is very difficult for them to produce an accurate, evidence-based judgment on why this country invaded Iraq, and the lessons that need to be learned from this disastrous error of judgment.

In July 2012 we were told the report had been delayed again, when we learned that the Inquiry panel were ‘deeply frustrated by Whitehall’s refusal to release papers, including those that reveal which ministers, legal advisers and officials were excluded from discussions on military action. The papers still kept secret include those relating to MI6 and the government’s electronic eavesdropping centre, GCHQ’.  Chilcot’s letter to David Cameron referred to the ‘sharp exchanges’ with the former cabinet secretary Gus O’Donnell over disclosing details ‘of correspondence and conversations between Blair and Bush….which would illuminate Mr Blair’s position at critical points in the runup to war.’

In late 2012 there was news of a further delay as the issue about disclosing the documents was still being fought over by the Inquiry and the Cabinet Office.  Publication is now postponed until late 2013 or even sometime in 2014.  It is not as if the interested public, with good reason, doesn’t already have a pretty accurate idea of what those documents contain.  And it is clear from much of the evidence given to the Chilcot Inquiry how deals were made, legal advice ignored and vital people were kept out of the discussions.  It was certainly clear to Chilcot and his panel; they had to recall several people, Tony Blair among them, as much of their previous evidence had been rubbished by other witnesses.  And how about this for two-handed dealing?  Gus O’Donnell, the cabinet secretary, told the inquiry that the cabinet should have been told of the Attorney General’s doubts about the legality of invading Iraq before Blair went to war.  Sir Gus, before he retired, was the one blocking the much sought after publication of the classified documents.  Diss Blair with one hand and protect with the other.

Hague wants to block all meaningful discussion on the justifications and the ‘legal’ basis for invading Iraq until Chilcot has delivered his report, while at the same time the Government, including Hague’s own Ministry, are busy blocking the very action Chilcot needs from them in order to finalise his report.  But Hague goes further.  His letter to the cabinet made clear that ‘not prejudging Chilcot should not prevent [ministers] acknowledging the sacrifices of the armed forces’.   However, an honest confronting of the illegality of the invasion would necessarily have to acknowledge that the armed forces did not die in defence of this country but were sacrificed on the altar of Blair’s delusional ambitions.

Why should the Conservatives support Hague’s letter?  Because to a man – and occasional woman, as the Conservatives, looking at their record, also support gender inequality – they voted to go to war.  Labour can comfort itself in a small way with the thought that some Labour MPs disobeyed their Prime Minister and voted against the invasion.  But most of them will keep their heads down.  And the LibDems?  They have suddenly discovered their principles again after recently having one MP found guilty of perverting the course of justice and facing prison, and their former chief executive accused of sexual harassment while Nick Clegg, our deputy Prime Minister prevaricated about knowing of the abuse.  So Hague’s letter has allowed Clegg to climb back on his rather small soapbox to deliver a speech sometime before the anniversary.  For the LibDems were in theory all against the invasion – until we invaded and then, of course, they had to ‘support our brave troops’ and the sacrifices ‘our boys’ were making etc.  So William Hague can rest easy; very few of those in Parliament really want to discuss the war.  It brings up too much embarrassment.  It is too much of a reminder that they were and are a very active part of Perfidious Albion.

Related articles

March 3, 2013 Posted by | Deception, Illegal Occupation, Militarism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Great Cholesterol Con

November 24, 2007

Dr Malcolm Kendrick speaks to Leeds BMA Meeting about why Cholesterol does not cause heart disease:


Cholesterol

~


Familial Hypercholesterolemia

~


About Statins

~


Heart Disease

~


Cardiovascular Disease Populations

http://www.thincs.org

Related articles

March 2, 2013 Posted by | Book Review, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , , , | Leave a comment

NYPD lied under oath to prosecute Occupy activist

RT | March 02, 2013

An Occupy Wall Street activist was acquitted of assaulting a police officer and other charges on Thursday after jurors were presented with video evidence that directly contradicted the NYPD’s story.

Michael Premo was found innocent of all charges this week in regards to a case that stems from a December 17, 2011 Occupy Wall Street demonstration in Lower Manhattan. For over a year, prosecutors working on behalf of the New York Police Department have insisted that Premo, a known artist and activist, tackled an NYPD officer during a protest and in doing so inflicted enough damage to break a bone.

During court proceedings this week, Premo’s attorney presented a video that showed officers charging into the defendant unprovoked. The Village Voice reports that jurors deliberated for several hours on Thursday and then elected to find Premo not guilty on all counts, which included a felony charge of assaulting an officer of the law.

Since his arrest, supporters of Premo have insisted on his innocence. “They’re trying to make something out of nothing and they’re trying to charge him with something that didn’t actually occur,” colleague Rachel Falcone told Free Speech Radio News this week.

After being arrested, the Manhattan District Attorney’s office presented Premo with a deal that would have let him off the hook by pleading guilty to lesser charges. Maintaining his innocence, however, he was determined to fight the case in court.

Premo was “facing serious charges and potential substantial jail sentence, even though he never should have been arrested at all,” his supporters claimed in a post published on The Laundromat Project website.

Nick Pinto of the Village Voice says he was nearby during the December 2011 rally and recalls watching Premo’s arrest from a distance. In his report from court this week, Pinto explains how the details provided by the NYPD in this trial have been fabricated to such a degree that the allegations presented by the cops turned out to be literally the opposite of what occurred.

“Premo charged the police like a linebacker, taking out a lieutenant and resisting arrest so forcefully that he fractured an officer’s bone. That’s the story prosecutors told in Premo’s trial, and it’s the general story his arresting officer testified to under oath as well,” Pinto writes. He adds that attorneys for the defendant underwent a lengthy search to try and find video that verified their own account yjpihj, and found one in the hands of Democracy Now. “Far from showing Premo tackling a police officer,” writes Pinto, that video “shows cops tackling him as he attempted to get back on his feet.”

The footage obtained from Democracy Now also showed that an NYPD officer was filming the arrest as well, but prosecutors told Premo’s attorney that no such footage existed.

“There is no justice in the American justice system, but you can sometimes find it in a jury,” Premo tweeted after he was acquitted this week.

In an interview given to NBC in 2012, Premo identified himself as a spokesperson for the Occupy Wall Street movement. He has also led an initiative in the New York area that has provided relief to those that endured last year’s Superstorm Sandy and has also advocated for fair housing.

“The biggest thing for me coming out of this,” he told the Voice, “is not being discouraged by the attempts of New York City to quell dissent and prevent us from expressing our constitutional rights.”

Related article

March 2, 2013 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception | , , , | Leave a comment

Israel celebrates successful 9/11 operation on purim holiday

salami20130302075703903

Twins win “best costume” contest for Purim 2013
By Dr. Kevin Barrett and Press TV | March 2, 2013

For more than eleven years, Israel has been wildly celebrating the success of its 9/11 operation against the United States of America. The latest example: Israeli children recently dressed up as the burning Twin Towers, complete with impaled exploding airplanes, to celebrate the bizarre Jewish holiday known as Purim.

Purim exalts and commemorates an ancient operation very much like 9/11. It glorifies the deceptions of Esther, who concealed her Jewish identity to seduce the King of Persia, then slyly tricked him into slaughtering 75,000 people deemed “enemies of the Jews.”

In other words, Purim celebrates Jews lying, secretly penetrating the highest levels of government, and manipulating the leaders of an empire into mass-murdering perceived “enemies of the Jewish people.” That is exactly what the neoconservative Likudnik extremists – Wolfowitz, Perle, Libby, and the rest – did on September 11th, 2001. The only difference is that these modern, neocon Esthers would eventually kill millions of innocent people, not just 75,000.

And if they succeed in tricking the US into attacking Iran on behalf of Israel, thereby launching World War III, today’s neocon Esthers could kill tens or even hundreds of millions.

The Israeli schoolchildren dressed up as the burning Twin Towers are not the first Zionists to wildly celebrate Israel’s biggest-ever attack on America. That honor belongs to the “dancing Israelis,” five Mossad spies who set up their cameras in Liberty State Park, across the harbor from the World Trade Center, early in the morning of September 11th, 2001, and pointed those cameras at the as-yet-undamaged Twin Towers. (Their video of the first plane hitting the North Tower has never been publicly released.)

When the planes hit the Towers, the “dancing Israelis” went wild. They began leaping, cavorting, and high-fiving each other. As the Towers burned, the “dancing Israelis” took pictures of each other holding up burning cigarette lighters in front of the burning Towers. And when the Towers were blasted to powder in explosive controlled demolitions, the “dancing Israelis” went crazy with joy. Their plan had succeeded.

Unfortunately for them – and for Israel – their wild celebrations did not go unnoticed. An American woman called the police, who arrested the four Mossad operatives, confiscated the thousands of dollars in cash stuffed in their socks, and held them for weeks. During their incarceration, the Israeli spies repeatedly failed lie detector tests. Nonetheless, they were secretly sent back to Israel, at the request of the Israeli government, by Israeli dual citizen and US Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff.

Later, back in Israel, the “dancing Israelis” went on television and admitted their complicity in 9/11, but denied having planted the explosives that destroyed the Twin Towers, saying: “We were only there to document the event.” (How did they know there would be an event to document?)

Another Israeli who visibly could not contain his joy at the success of 9/11′s “Operation Esther” was Benjamin Netanyahu. When the once and future Israeli Prime Minister was asked about his reaction to 9/11, he said: “It’s very good!” Then, catching himself, he added that while it wasn’t exactly good, it was certainly good for Israel.

Netanyahu would never stop bragging about how wonderful 9/11 was. Seven years after the attack, he was still saying: “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.” (Ha’aretz, Apr 16, 2008 – “Report: Netanyahu says 9/11 terror attacks good for Israel”.)

Netanyahu wasn’t the only high-level Israeli caught celebrating 9/11. Another culprit was the legendary Mossad spy chief, Mike Harari.

On September 11th 2001, as the dancing Israelis danced and Netanyahu chortled, “retired” Israeli Mossad Chief Mike Harari was in Bangkok, Thailand organizing a huge party to celebrate the success of his 9/11 operation. During the merry-making, Harari bragged to one of his associates, Dmitri Khalezov, that he, Harari, had been responsible for 9/11. (You can listen to my radio interview with Khalezov at http://noliesradio.org/archives/29582 .) Khalezov’s testimony is supported by documents showing the fake IDs Harari was using in Thailand.

All of the Israeli celebrations of 9/11 – so far – have been unofficial. But the Israeli government is on the record officially applauding another of its many attacks on the US: The 1954 Lavon Affair, otherwise known as Operation Susannah. In that covert operation, Israeli Mossad operatives, disguised as Egyptians, bombed American targets in Egypt. When the Israeli terrorists were caught by the Egyptian authorities and prosecuted, Israel denied any involvement and complained that the whole thing was an anti-Semitic smear. But later, as the Zionist website Wikipedia admits: “In March 2005, Israel publicly honored the surviving operatives, and President Moshe Katsav presented each with a certificate of appreciation for their efforts on behalf of the (Israeli) state, ending decades of official denial by Israel.”

When will Israel officially award a Certificate of Appreciation to its Mossad operatives who blew up the Twin Towers and WTC-7 and killed almost 3,000 Americans in order to launch a series of US wars against Israel’s enemies?

Not for another few decades, we may safely surmise.

When Israel finally does admit its responsibility for 9/11, and lavish honors on the Mossad terrorists responsible, will it be during Purim – the holiday honoring Jews who seduce gentile rulers and manipulate them into mass-murdering their enemies?

Related article

March 2, 2013 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Iran Is Not Our Enemy

Video is archived.

Despite what all the media are yammering at you, despite all the fear mongering about Iran’s “nuclear threat” (Iran has been fully verified by the IAEA and ALL the U.S. intelligence community agree and are on record that Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons), despite talk that Iran is intolerant, despite the daily barrage of bad press and unpleasant innuendo, Iran is a great country, friendly, cultured, fun and spiritually-minded!

The “Powers That Were” are dead set on taking us to war against Iran, but “They lied about Vietnam… Iraq… Afghanistan…” and “Iran Is NOT Our Enemy ! “

March 1, 2013 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Militarism, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Israeli kids dressed as burning Twin Towers for Purim

By Maidhc Ó Cathail | The Passionate Attachment | February 28, 2013

On the annual Jewish celebration of the Biblical slaying “of their foes seventy and five thousand,” at least one Israeli family seems to think it’s funny to reenact the murder of 3,000 in New York on September 11, 2001. Angrily reacting to the story, 6 Degrees no Bacon, a Jewish entertainment blog, appears to be unaware that these are not the first Israelis to be so provocatively indifferent to American suffering on 9/11:

People all over Israel are celebrating Purim this weekend, and much like Halloween, the dress-up holiday is a perfect opportunity for parents to show off their creativity and then display it on their poor kids.

The winners of the contest for Costume of Poorest Taste are definitely 7-year-old twins Ilay and Nehoray, who dressed up as the burning World Trade Center towers with the planes still in them on 9/11. At least they spared us the jumpers.

Publication of the picture on the Israeli news website Ynet prompted widespread condemnation. How would Israelis feel if Americans dressed up as a burning Tel Aviv bus, or Europeans wore a “train to Auschwitz” costume? some asked.

~

~

Maidhc Ó Cathail is an investigative journalist and Middle East analyst. He is also the creator and editor of The Passionate Attachment blog, which focuses primarily on the U.S.-Israeli relationship.

Related article

February 28, 2013 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , | Leave a comment

Are the Government’s Dietary Guidelines Making Us Obese?

By Margie King | GreenMedInfo | February 25th 2013

Since the early 1980’s the USDA Dietary Guidelines for Americans have urged trusting Americans to eat a low-fat high-carbohydrate diet for their health and weight control. Since then, there has been an alarming increase in chronic diseases such as cancer and diabetes. In addition, obesity rates have shot up to 30%, and more than 70% of Americans are overweight.

Can the dietary guidelines be to blame?

Many experts believe that the USDA and other government agencies have stubbornly disregarded the science and continued a 30-year long nutrition experiment on Americans that has had disastrous results.

Nutrition experts from The Healthy Nation Coalition, which includes the Weston A. Price Foundation, the Salt Institute, and the Nutrition and Metabolism Society, have voiced concerns about the current USDA Dietary Guidelines issued in 2010.  They criticize the guidelines for perpetuating the wrong-headed advice to eat a low-fat diet, high in processed grains and cereals, which has contributed to the current obesity and health crisis.

What’s wrong with the government’s nutrition advice?

Dietary guidelines are a creation of politics and not science. Critics claim that the 2010 USDA Dietary Guidelines Committee ignored scientific research that validates low-carbohydrate diets for weight loss and improved health. Low-carb diets generally recommend 60 to 120 grams of unprocessed carbohydrates per day, although some provide more, and some as little as 20 grams.

Besides encouraging people to eat processed carbohydrates such as cereal, rice, pasta and bread, the guidelines have made Americans fearful of eating real natural whole foods such as whole milk, cheese, red meat, eggs, salt, butter and full-fat yogurt. As a result, Americans have stocked their pantries with processed fake soy meats, vegetable oils, margarine and skimmed dairy products, all of which are depleted or completely devoid of key nutrients, such as vitamins D, A, K and choline.

The Campaign Against Saturated Fats

Sally Fallon Morell, president of the Weston A. Price Foundation, faults the guidelines for continuing to demonize saturated fats based on unsound science.  The most recent guidelines reduce the recommended intake of saturated fats from 10% of calories to less than 7%.

The proposed 2010 USDA Dietary Guidelines perpetuate the mistakes of previous guidelines in demonizing saturated fats and animal foods rich in saturated fatty acids such as egg yolks, butter, whole milk, cheese, fatty meats like bacon and animal fats for cooking. The current obesity epidemic emerged as vegetable oils and refined carbohydrates replaced these healthy, nutrient-dense traditional fats. Animal fats supply many essential nutrients that are difficult to obtain from other sources,” explained Ms. Morell in a press conference sponsored by the Healthy Nation Coalition.

Ms. Morell noted that for the past 60 or 70 years, saturated fats have been blamed for clogging arteries, and for causing heart disease, diabetes and even multiple sclerosis. None of these accusations is based on sound science she says.

Health Benefits of Saturated Fats

On the other hand, Ms. Morell points out the critical roles that saturated fats play in the body, including:

  • Make up 50% of cell membranes
  • Help the body put calcium in the bones
  • Lower Lp(a), a marker for heart disease
  • Protect the liver from alcohol and other poisons
  • Are required for lung and kidney function
  • Enhance the immune system
  • Work together with essential fatty acids
  • Support the body’s detoxification mechanisms

The government’s rationale for promoting a low-fat diet is the belief that fat makes us fat. Ms. Morell cites, however, the famous Framingham Heart Study which demonstrated that those eating more saturated fat, more cholesterol and more calories actually had lower blood serum cholesterol levels, weighed less and were more physically active.

In addition, a 1965 British heart study showed that heart attack survivors eating a saturated fat diet lived longer than those eating a diet of polyunsaturated or mono-unsaturated vegetable oils.

Finally, she cites a study of European countries which found that countries in which the population ate a diet high in saturated fats had lower rates of heart disease and those eating a low saturated fat diet had higher rates of heart disease.

The government and nutrition experts often lump saturated fats in with trans fats. Even worse, the fear of saturated fats has led many to replace the butter in their diets with trans fat laden margarine. Since 1926, Ms. Morell points out, use of butter in the U.S. has plummeted and at the same time rates of cancer and cardiovascular disease have skyrocketed.

Other “grave concerns” with the guidelines include

  1. Restriction of dietary cholesterol to 300 mg per day (less than 2 eggs);
  2. Restriction of sodium to 1,500 mg per day (2/3 of a teaspoon of salt);
  3. Promotion of low-fat milk and lean meats;
  4. Use of meat substitutes in federally funded school lunches; and
  5. Absence of any restrictions on refined carbohydrates and sweeteners in school meals.

Ms. Morell warned that the harm resulting from these misguided recommendations fall disproportionately on the nation’s children who will be fed these nutrient poor, fat inducing diets every day at school.  And that is a tragedy.

Related article

February 28, 2013 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »