
The King of Bahrain has met Israeli Rabbi and ‘recommended’ that the recent blacklisting of Lebanese resistance movement, Hezbollah, as a “terrorist organization” by the Gulf Cooperation Council be taken up by the Arab League as well, Israeli daily, Jerusalem Post reported.
Hamad bin Isa al Khalifa received Rabbi Marc Schneier, and president of the Foundation of Ethnic Understanding based in New York, in the royal palace in Manama in order to discuss “concerns in the Middle East,” JP reported.
The six-member GCC formally blacklisted Hezbollah as a “terrorist organization” on Wednesday.
During Scheier’s meeting with Khalifa, the king noted that there were one or two countries among the GCC who had wanted to distinguish between Hezbollah’s military wing and its political wing, although this was rejected, the Israeli paper said.
According to Schneier, who has met with Khalifa on two other occasions, the king told him “he was advocating for the struggle against Hezbollah to be expanded as widely as possible in the Arab world, stating that the Arab League and its 22 members should take up this mantle and label the group as terrorists.”
“Iran is not only an obstacle but an opportunity for peace between Israel and Arab nations,” Schneier told The Jerusalem Post on Thursday after his meeting on Wednesday with Khalifa.
“Both Israel and the Gulf states share a common enemy, so it’s the makings of a natural alliance, in terms of joining forces against the evil of terrorism, religious extremism and fanaticism,” the Israeli Rabbi said.
“It’s a real opportunity and a silver lining in the dark cloud of terrorism. The Gulf states recognize Israel as an ally against Iran, and its ability to stabilize the region and support moderate Arab countries, so this could be a game changer in the geopolitical climate of the Middle East.”
Schneier added that Khalifa has also said during their meeting that in his opinion “it is just a matter of time before some Arab countries begin opening diplomatic ties” with the Zionist entity.
March 5, 2016
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | Bahrain, GCC, Hezbollah, Israel, Zionism |
Leave a comment
Israel has been obstructing Jordanian agricultural exports to the Occupied Palestinian Territories under the pretext that Jordanian products do not conform to Israeli specifications, leading to exports completely stopping in 2015 and early 2016, a Jordanian official revealed.
Salah Al-Tarawneh, assistant secretary-general of the Jordanian ministry of agriculture for marketing and information, said in remarks to Quds Press that the Palestinian Authority asked last month to import tomatoes from Jordan but the Israeli side refused to allow their entry under the pretext that they contain viruses.
Al- Tarawneh explained that although the PA has repeatedly asked the Israeli side to increase agricultural trade with Jordan to meet its needs, Israel has continually refused under the pretext that Jordanian products do not conform to Israeli specifications.
According to data from the Jordanian ministry of agriculture, Jordan’s exports of vegetables and fruits to PA controlled areas completely stopped in 2015.
During the same year, Jordan’s agricultural exports to Israel amounted to more than 20,000 tons of vegetables and 5,000 tons of fruit.
March 3, 2016
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture | Human rights, Israel, Jordan, Palestine, West Bank, Zionism |
Leave a comment
As soon as the Gulf Cooperation Council blacklisted the Lebanese party of Resistance – Hezbollah – on Wednesday, Zionist mass media welcomed the resolution, considering it “critical and serious,” reflecting a great relief among Israelis who have been seeking to fight Hezbollah from the Arab gate.
Former Zionist foreign minister Tzipi Livni hailed the GCC resolution as “an important step, while Zionist daily Maariv stated that “blacklisting Hezbollah is an achievement that serves Israel.”
Moreover, the entity’s mass media correlated the GCC resolution against Hezbollah with “the ongoing coordination between Saudi Arabia, Israel” which has recently emerged to public through exchanging visits between both parties.
“Arab world is approaching closer to Israel’s stances, which has been revealed through the Saudi delegations’ visit to Israel, as well as when Saudi Arabia decided to blacklist Hezbollah as a terrorist organization,” the presenter of Tonight at Six talk show for Zionist Channel 1 said.
“It is very important and dramatic development,” he added.
For his part, Yoval King, an expert of Arab affairs, said that “it is an important resolution,” recalling that it is not the first time that Gulf states blacklist Hezbollah as a terrorist group.
“They had labeled him as ‘militia’, and announced that violence and provocations he is carrying out in Syria, Yemen and Iraq contradicts with the moral and humanitarian values,” King said.
The Saudi-Zionist coordination witnessed a major shift on the Syrian arena in the face of axis of Resistance, as Zionist sources revealed discussions took place between the armed groups operating in Syria on one hand, and Riyadh and Tel Aviv on the other, about the Syrian developments following the ongoing truce.
“Syrian opposition groups, funded by Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Israel are meeting with their sponsors and discussing with them whether they can make gains in the meantime,” Shmerit Maeir, a Zionist analyst of Arab affairs, said during an interview on the Jewish Channel 2.
“Israel needs a key chair on this table whether through the American players or others, because the bases will now determine whether Hezbollah is allowed to do what the ISIL and Al-Nusra Front are banned from doing. If this really is to happen, we will be facing a major catastrophe,” Maeir stressed.
The Zionist position was symmetrical to the Saudi’s, as it doesn’t rule out the possibility of communicating with the armed groups, like Al-Nusra Front and ISIL in order to coordinate for later steps in Syria.
The GCC, which has been committing a genocide in Yemen since March 2015, held a meeting on Monday during which it blacklisted all Hezbollah affiliated institutions.
March 3, 2016
Posted by aletho |
Aletho News | al-Nusra Front, GCC, Hezbollah, ISIL, Israel, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Zionism |
Leave a comment
Over 140 psychotherapists, researchers and other mental health professionals have written an open letter to the Society for Psychotherapy Research (SPR) to express dismay at its decision to hold its next international conference in Jerusalem.
In the letter, the group of professionals called for the conference to move locations, explaining that Israel’s policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, including house demolitions, movement restrictions and imprisonment without trial, result in “insecurity, despair, helplessness and humiliation”.
“The calamitous impact of Israel’s occupation on the psychological health of the Palestinians is well documented,” read the letter.
The group expressed shock over the organiser’s response to their concerns, which included a promise to assist Palestinian psychotherapy researchers to attend the conference.
“This may ease SPR consciences but it is as nothing weighed against the political message they will be sending by meeting in this beleaguered city,” it added.
March 2, 2016
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture | Human rights, Israel, Jerusalem, Palestine, Society for Psychotherapy Research, Zionism |
Leave a comment

JERUSALEM – Israeli forces physically assaulted an entire family in the occupied East Jerusalem village of al-Issawiya overnight Sunday after the family resisted during an arrest raid, the head of the village said.
Darwish Darwish said Israeli forces stormed the home of Tareq and Tahreer Darwish with the intention of detaining the couple’s sons Yousef, 18, and Laith, 17.
The two teens, along with their father, resisted the detention, and Israeli forces attacked the three, beating them.
Darwish said the family told him that when Israeli forces began beating the father and two brothers, other members of the family stepped in and tried to stop Israeli forces, who then turned on the rest of the family.
According to the mayor, the mother, Tahreer, 37, her daughter, Batoul, 14, and 2-year-old son Darwish all suffered from bruises and lacerations all over their bodies.
Israeli forces detained the entire family, including the toddler, after the assault. The family was detained while still barefoot and in pajamas, the mayor said.
Darwish added that Israeli forces ransacked the family home, destroying valuables, before taking the family to a police station in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of occupied East Jerusalem, and then transferring them to the Salah al-Din police station near Damascus Gate.
After four hours of detention, Israeli forces released the mother and her young son, but kept the rest of the family, including the 14-year-old daughter, under detention.
The 17-year-old son Laith is set to appear in Israeli court for a trial on Monday. The charges levied against him are unknown.
While the mayor shares a last name with the family, Darwish is one of the most popular surnames in al-Issawiya village, and the family is not necessarily directly related to the mayor.
February 29, 2016
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Subjugation - Torture | Human rights, Israel, Palestine, West Bank, Zionism |
Leave a comment
The 12th annual Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW) has been a remarkable success, with more than 250 cities worldwide marking the week of solidarity with the Palestinian people. Although it doesn’t please everyone, those who criticise IAW activities were brought abruptly to their senses last week when Israel demolished a Palestinian primary school in Al-Azariyeh, east of occupied Jerusalem. It is an action of the kind that highlights why IAW activism remains essential.
Israel’s deliberate targeting of the Palestinian education sector is, in fact, nothing new. During its 51-day war on the Gaza Strip in 2014, the Israel “Defence” Forces (IDF) completely destroyed six government and private schools, eleven kindergartens and three higher education institutions. Around 450 other education facilities – more than half of them kindergartens – sustained minor, partial, major or severe damage; 83 UNRWA-run schools were also damaged.
At the time, the justification given was that the schools were either being used to store weapons or as bases from which to fire rockets at Israel. Of course, no rockets were ever fired into Israel by the Abu Al-Nawar Bedouin of Al-Azariyeh. Nevertheless, their school was demolished. The only difference is that whereas F16 bombers were deployed to destroy education facilities in Gaza, bulldozers were used in Al-Azariyeh.
So why was the school knocked down by the Israelis? Did it pose a threat to Israel’s national security? Hardly. Palestinians believe it was because it was located too close for comfort to the illegal Ma’ale Adumim settlement, which Israel wants to expand still further. Even the most dedicated friends of Israel find the actions of its government revolting and indefensible in this respect. Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron described the settlements around Jerusalem last week as “genuinely shocking”.
There is no doubt that the sorry sight of children sitting on the ground in the bitter Jerusalem cold, or the image of them scurrying for shelter from the rain, brought back memories of the bad old days of South African apartheid. It is no wonder, therefore, that this year’s IAW was marked with 200 events at over 20 campuses in South Africa, and endorsed by more than 85 national organisations.
Not satisfied with the demolition of the Abu Al-Nawar School, the IDF confiscated its benches and tables, according to the school director Asma Sheha. While the demolition of a primary school is about as vile as it can get, taking its benches and tables speaks of an official mindset that is much worse; it is the sort of petty, vindictive action for which the white-run government in Pretoria used to be reviled.
It is exactly 10 years since the Guardian’s Chris McGreal wrote his devastating two-part appraisal of South African and Israeli apartheid. He quoted John Dugard, the former UN human rights rapporteur in Palestine, who said that under South African apartheid the best parts of the country were reserved for the whites while blacks were sent to the least habitable and desirable areas: “One can draw certain parallels with respect to South Africa that, during the heyday of apartheid, population relocation did result in destruction of property, but not on the same scale as the devastation in Gaza in particular, [or in] the West Bank.”
Having funded the Abu Al-Nawar School, the French government rightly condemned its demolition by the occupation forces. A statement by the foreign ministry deplored the demolition policy and called “on the Israeli authorities to end it.”
Unfortunately, “concern” and timid calls of this kind will not bring an end to the destructive campaign, which many view as a form of 21st century ethnic cleansing. Last week, the UN special coordinator for the Middle East peace process, Nikolay Mladenov, told the Security Council that since the beginning of 2016, Israel has demolished, on average, 29 Palestinian structures per week, three times the weekly average for 2015. Although 79 of the destroyed structures were funded by international donors, their response has not gone beyond verbal condemnation.
In Britain, the Conservative-led government has, despite the prime minister’s apparently genuine shock, moved to reward Israel by threatening to withdraw funds from public bodies which support the international Boycott, Sanctions and Divestment (BDS) campaign against the Zionist state. It is precisely because of this kind of calculated indifference and collusion by Western governments that IAW has grown among caring citizens around the world; ordinary people are determined to make a difference by turning their backs on racism and religious bigotry.
Like the BDS campaign, IAW has provided a platform for people from across the political divide, of all racial backgrounds and faiths, including many Jews, to support what is right and just in Palestine.
The destruction of the Abu Al-Nawar School is a gross injustice and, above all, an act of naked racism, the type of which could only come out of an apartheid state. Israel’s claim that the inhabitants did not have a permit to build on the land epitomises its arrogance. It is Israel which is on the wrong side of the law. Thankfully, through the efforts of initiatives such as Israeli Apartheid Week, the world has woken up to what is going on in the name of Israeli democracy. If you have any doubts about the travesty of the latter, just ask the children of Abu Al-Nawar School what they think.
February 29, 2016
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism, Subjugation - Torture, Timeless or most popular | Israel, Jerusalem, Palestine, Zionism |
Leave a comment
A central problem of the implementation of the Levy Report by the government is the effective abolishment of Palestinians’ property rights

Jewish settlers run towards the West Bank village of Asira al-Qibilya near Nablus during clashes with Palestinian villagers July 3, 2011. According to witnesses, the clashes erupted after the settlers cut down olive trees belonging to the village. An Israeli army spokesperson said one Israeli was injured by a rock before security forces dispersed the crowd. REUTERS/Abed Omar Qusini – WEST BANK
Our previous post on Yesh Din’s new position paper, “From Occupation to Annexation,” explored the various ways the Israeli government implements the Levy Report. This post will focus on another critical point: the erasure of the Palestinians’ right to property.
Prior to the Levy Report, the Israeli government was careful to avoid legalizing the seizure of private Palestinian property, except when it could argue it was done due to pressing military needs (“military seizure”) or by declaring it state land and claiming that it was never, in fact, private property at all. This took place, in part, because the laws of occupation demand that the occupier protect the private property of protected persons in occupied territory. The legal appeals against the illegal outposts, about 80% of which are at least partially built on private Palestinian land, challenged this way of thinking.
And then came the Levy Report, which claimed the government has the right to build settlements and outposts in the West Bank. On paper this claim may have been harmless, had its implementation not directly threatened the property of private persons.
Let’s look at some examples. The future of the Adei Ad outpost – which was at the heart of another one of our reports, “The Road to Dispossession” – is being debated by the High Court of Justice. The report detailed how Israeli civilians took over private Palestinian land while using violence against Palestinian residents who tried to hold on to their land, all while the Israeli authorities stood aside. Although the report was published in 2013, the reality it describes continues even today.
As our position paper shows, the Israeli government relies on Levy’s exceedingly broad legal interpretation to legalize a series of illegal outposts, under the pretense they are in fact neighborhoods of already existing settlements – even when they are outside the jurisdiction of their “mother settlement.” Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked even boasted that “anyone who knows the Adei Ad [appeal], knows that the state responds differently these days.”
Therefore the state informed the High Court that although the outpost was illegal, it does not intend to remove it. On the contrary, it announced that it would try and legalize it. In practice, then, what Shaked meant to say was that “we decided to give criminals a prize.”
If the state told the court in 2008 that it – some day — intends to enforce the law and evacuate the outposts, its position had radically changed by 2011. Now, said the state, it will enforce the law only vis-a-vis structures built on private land, while legalizing structures built on state land. The Levy Report came out in 2012; by 2013, the state was telling the courts that in some cases “state reasons” may supersede the need to enforce the law. By 2015, the state spoke expressly about retroactive legalization.
Another case that represents the erasure of Palestinian property rights is that of Amona. Amona is the largest illegal settlement outpost in the West Bank – a significant part of the land on which it stands belongs to Palestinian residents, whose theft was followed by violence against the Palestinians. In court, the state opposed the evacuation of Amona time after time. At the end of 2014, the High Court of Justice ruled that Amona was to be evacuated by the end of 2016. So what did the government do? Did it accept the ruling and follow the instructions of the court? Of course not. It tried to bypass the court through a new bill titled the “re-ordering bill.”
This law follows one of the comments made in the Levy Report, according to which compensation for Palestinians whose land has been taken from them is preferable to evacuating the invaders. Once it can be proven that an outpost was illegally built on Palestinian land, the Palestinian owners would be forced to accept compensation and give up their rights to their own property.
According to the Levy Report, therefore, all people are equal before the law, but some are more equal. You own land? Jewish invaders took it with government aid? We won’t evacuate them, we simply legalize the invasion. Here are your 30 pieces of silver. Oh, you don’t want to take them because you’re afraid of living next to Israelis who have already proven their affinity for violence? You won’t take the silver because you don’t want to take part in Jewish expansion over parts of Palestine? Tough. Your property rights are secondary to our historical rights. Do yourself and us a favor and take the money, because, you see, this outpost won’t be removed. It will remain here whether you like it or not. The court ruled otherwise? We’ll try and change the law. What about your rights? What rights?
The bill currently names three outposts and a part of a settlement – three outposts that the court had already ordered be removed, and one whose case is still debated. Amona is mentioned specifically as an outpost covered by the bill. Politicians are not even trying to conceal the fact the point of the bill is to prevent the High Court from slowing down the violation of Palestinian rights. Just in case, the bill – which has been frozen for the time being – allows other outposts to be added to it even after it passes.
The state’s responses to the court and the “re-ordering bill” deal outposts whose fate were either ruled on by the High Court or are still being debated. But the government ministers, being people of vision, take care not only of the past and present but also of the future. The “re-ordering committee,” created by Prime Minister Netanyahu, is supposed to provide other solutions, as it has a mandate to “examine the current process of evidence needed for proof of land ownership.” To put it more bluntly: its purpose is to make it even more difficult for them to prove they are landowners. The purpose of the committee is to create “an outline for the legalizing of structures and neighborhoods in Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria that were built with the support of the authorities.”
The Israeli government never authorized the Levy Report’s recommendations while effectively endorsing and carrying them out in secret. The government implements an unofficial policy of annexation – one that does not grant equal rights to those being annexed, while at the same time depriving them of the legal defenses they are entitled to as protected persons, since, allegedly, there is no occupation.
As for the people who live there? It’s their own problem. They should have lived someplace else. Didn’t they get the hint already?
February 29, 2016
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, Timeless or most popular | Human rights, Israel, Levy Report, Palestine, West Bank, Zionism |
Leave a comment
A United Nations meeting in Geneva this week could have enormous implications for United States national security, but it is being ignored by most of the media and by America’s political leaders. It deserves serious attention.
A new policy-making body called the Open Ended Working Group will consider ways to break the current impasse in efforts to reduce the danger of nuclear war. The group expects to make formal recommendations to the UN this fall. The initiative is especially important given recent studies on the catastrophic effects that would follow even a limited use of nuclear weapons.
The group was established by an overwhelming majority at the UN. The U.S. and all of the other nuclear weapons states voted against and are boycotting the meeting. Why?
Robert Wood, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Conference on Disarmament, recently defended the American decision in a tweet: “agenda ignores security dimension of nuclear weapons. Only practical and realistic efforts will lead to a world w/o nukes.” His claim would have more weight if the United States were pursuing “practical and realistic efforts” instead of planning to spend $1 trillion over the next three decades to maintain its nuclear arsenal indefinitely.
The real reason for the boycott is that this meeting will explore ways to make the nine nuclear weapons states, which include Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom, live up to their obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1970, which requires them to negotiate the abolition of their nuclear arsenals. It very well may recommend negotiation of a new treaty that will effectively ban nuclear weapons, defining their possession as a violation of international law.
Based on the medical evidence, the nonnuclear weapons states are right to call for the elimination of these weapons.
Over the last three years, a series of major global conferences have explored the medical consequences of nuclear war. The new scientific data presented at these meeting have demonstrated the unacceptable, existential threat to humanity posed by nuclear arsenals.
Representatives of the International Red Cross have testified that the world’s leading disaster relief organization can do nothing significant to mitigate the consequences of even a single nuclear explosion, let alone a nuclear war.
Climate scientists and medical experts have presented new data showing that even a very limited nuclear war would cause catastrophic effects worldwide. The fires caused by as few as 100 small nuclear weapons, less than one-half of one percent of the world’s nuclear arsenals, directed against urban targets, would cause global climate disruption. The resulting decline in food production would trigger a “nuclear famine” across the planet and put up to two billion people at risk. A famine on this scale would be unprecedented in human history. While it would not mean the extinction of our species, it would almost certainly mean the end of modern civilization.
A limited war between India and Pakistan, using less than half of their current arsenals, could cause that kind of famine, as could the use of the nuclear warheads on a single US Trident submarine. The US has 14 of them and an arsenal of nuclear bombers and land-based missiles as well.
A full-scale war between the US and Russia using all of these weapons would cause a “nuclear winter,” with ice-age conditions across the planet persisting for a decade or more. The collapse of food production under these circumstances would lead to the death of the vast majority of the human race. It might cause our extinction as a species.
The US and Russia are now engaged in a new game of nuclear chicken in Europe and the Middle East, with the ever-present danger that one side or the other will miscalculate, or that an accident will trigger a nuclear exchange. There have been at least five occasions since 1979 when either Moscow or Washington prepared to launch a nuclear war, in the mistaken belief that they were already under attack.
The determination to hold on to these weapons stems from a deeply held belief that they somehow make a nation more secure. For most of human history, having more powerful weapons did protect us. But as Albert Einstein observed at the beginning of the nuclear era, the splitting of the atom changed everything, except the way we think and thus we head for unprecedented disaster.
If the use of even a tiny fraction of our nuclear arsenal will cause a global holocaust that engulfs us as well as the rest of humanity, how can these weapons be seen as agents of our security? They are suicide bombs. By possessing them, we are a nation of suicide bombers.
Nuclear weapons, the evidence, is now clear, are the greatest threat to our national security. We need to make their elimination our highest national security priority. The U.S. should start by joining the working group in Geneva and, as the next step toward that goal, working for a treaty to ban nuclear weapons.
Ira Helfand MD practices internal medicine at an urgent care center in Springfield, MA. He is a Past President of Physicians for Social Responsibility and is currently the Co-President of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the 1985 Nobel Peace Laureate.
February 29, 2016
Posted by aletho |
Militarism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | China, France, India, Israel, Pakistan, Russia, UK, United Nations, United States |
Leave a comment
Moscow has noted a large volume of information fleecing and attempts to disrupt the truce in Syria, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Monday.
“I’d like to say that there are very many dupes and attempts to distort facts and deliberately disrupting the agreements. Our Western colleagues must very carefully approach the task of controlling those groups that for the most part listen to them and Syria’s neighbors. We are strictly fulfilling all the agreements,” Ryabkov said.
February 29, 2016
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | Israel, Syria, Turkiye, United States |
Leave a comment
Israeli channel 10 reported that a senior Israeli delegation visited the Saudi capital, Riyadh, in the last few weeks.
The Israeli channel meanwhile, said that the delegation was headed by a prominent Israeli official.
The visit was not the first one to the Kingdom, but the Israeli Military Censor prohibits the reports talking about such visits, according to Channel 10.
King Salman Bin Abdulaziz and the Saudi princes are not ashamed by the Israeli ties. However, they prefer they remain confidential, the report added.
Meanwhile, the Israeli channel 10 quoted Saudi officials as saying during the meetings that they are not interested in solving the Palestinian cause. However they want the Zionist entity to stand by Saudi against Iran.
February 29, 2016
Posted by aletho |
Militarism, Wars for Israel | Iran, Israel, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Zionism |
Leave a comment
Throwing people off high buildings is one of the ways, along with drowning and shooting, that the American authorities get rid of inconvenient people (the Europeans seem to like poisoning). From an article by Roger Bowen, the biographer of Canadian diplomat E. Herbert Norman:
“A Canadian diplomat and scholar who was serving in Japan at the onset of the Second World War, and was interned there following the attack on Pearl Harbor, Mr. Norman was accused of being a Communist in 1951 by allies of Joseph McCarthy in the U.S. Senate. Interrogated twice in secret by the RCMP at the urging of U.S. intelligence agencies, he was exonerated by Canadian authorities and allowed to resume his duties in the foreign service.
In the fall of 1956, following the Suez crisis, Mr. Norman, then 47, was Canada’s ambassador to Egypt. Mr. Norman worked tirelessly to find a peaceful solution in negotiations with Gamal Abdel Nasser. His eventual success in persuading Egypt’s president to admit United Nations peacekeepers into his country was, for that era, a singular achievement. Mr. Norman’s boss, Lester Pearson, later won the Nobel Peace Prize, in part because of Mr. Norman’s efforts.
In March of 1957, suspicions about Mr. Norman were revived by the U.S. Senate. On April 4, Mr. Norman stepped off the roof of a nine-storey apartment building in the heart of Cairo.”
and:
“. . . it is clear that someone or some agency fabricated the details of Mr. Norman’s death and ‘leaked’ them to the U.S. press in 1957, making it appear that Mr. Norman was guilt-ridden and psychologically unstable, and that he chose to kill himself rather than face additional inquiries over his alleged Communist background.
One of several suicide notes leaked to the press then seemed to imply that Mr. Norman had had a close, perhaps homosexual, relationship with the Swedish ambassador to Egypt, Brynolf Eng. The New York Daily News account in April of 1957 reported Mr. Norman as having written to Mr. Eng on the eve of his death: ‘I wanted to spend some time with you during these last few days of my life and tell you about what has been worrying me but am afraid that even in this letter I cannot bring myself to tell you [the] true reasons that impel me to commit suicide. I have decided to die near your home. I know this may cause you some trouble and I am sorry but you are my best friend. Farewell. Sincerely, Norman.’
This account stood as the ‘truth’ for 30 years, contradicted only by Canadian sources whose comments did not register in the U.S. in 1957. The actual note Mr. Norman wrote to Mr. Eng, in his handwriting and found in the RCMP files, reads: ‘Mr. Eng, I beg forgiveness for using your flat. But it is the only clear jump where I can avoid hitting a passerby. E. H. N.’”
Norman is a fairly important guy, as his negotiations invented the concept of UN peacekeepers. Bowen has made repeated requests to the CIA to release its remaining cache of classified documents on Norman, without success. What are they hiding? It is clear that the Americans fabricated the released ‘suicide note’ to the press in order to create a motive for Norman’s suicide. If they had nothing to do with the death, why did they go to all this trouble? I note that the Canadian Right, represented by David Frum’s father-in-law, the ancient Peter Worthington, maintains the cold war interpretation of the death of Norman.
Throwing people off tall buildings is a perfect method of assassination as it doesn’t leave any forensic evidence of a crime if it is done properly (both drowning and shooting can leave inconvenient forensic evidence). The only tricky part is forging the suicide note, or forcing the victim to write it. Some other prominent examples:
- The recent death of progressive lawyer Paul Sanford. It has been surmised that this was Karl Rove’s revenge for an embarrassing question that Sanford asked then press secretary Scott McClellan about Rove, but my guess would be that it related to what Sanford was working on just before his death. From the Monterey Herald account, we learn that he was pacing the hallway of an upper floor, his car was parked next to the hotel, but he was not checked in as a guest. It appears he was invited to the upper floor, presumably by people who had rented a room. They could very well have tried to convince him not to publish what he was working on, ‘for the good of the country’. His pacing outside the room might reflect his trying to make up his mind. When he told them his conscience wouldn’t allow him to suppress the truth, they threw him out the window.
- The deaths of State Department official John J. Kokal, and long-time American government policy advisor Gus W. Weiss, both opposed to the Iraq attack.
- The amazing story of CIA victim Dr. Frank Olson (excellent coverage here, despite the crappy author, including discussion of CIA use of defenestration as a method of assassination, and the use of LSD as a truth serum regarding Olson’s knowledge of American biological weapons programs). After years of denial, the American government finally admitted that the CIA had given Olson LSD without his knowledge, and that this led to the suicide of Olson. It then turned out that Olson had committed ‘suicide’ by going through a closed window. Since no one would commit suicide by jumping at a closed window, it was apparent that the U. S. government admissions were part of a ‘limited hangout’ to hide the fact that the CIA had thrown Olson through the closed window. I assume CIA training handbooks now include instructions to open the window before throwing the victim out!
- James Forrestal, first United States Secretary of Defense, was almost certainly suicided, probably as a direct result of his principled opposition to American assistance in the stealing of land required to establish the State of Israel.
February 27, 2016
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular | Central Intelligence Agency, CIA, David Frum, E. Herbert Norman, Israel |
Leave a comment