Unspeakable grief and horror


ÇáäÊÇÆÌ ÇáÃæáíÉ ááÍá ÇáÃãíÑßí ÇáÍÐÑ ááãÞÇæãÉ ÇáÚÑÇÞíÉ Ýí ÇáÝáæÌÉ (ÇáÌÒíÑÉ)
Know them by their fruit:
Read below and think about your government.
Remember, if you are a U.S. taxpayer you have been paying the people who bombed the USS Liberty
Paying to the tune of 15 million dollars a day.
Think — if the government could cover up the attack on the USS Liberty, what else WILL it do.
9/11?
A nuclear attack wiping out some city?
Martial Law — complete absorption of control by the elite through the tool of police, state and local, military, multiple government security agencies too numerous to place here.
Complete absorption of control!
We are there now!
When the shit hits the fan, those on the right who have guns will resist.
Those of the right who truly believe in freedom — many of them — will resist.
Will the left do what it usually does.
Stand unarmed, helpless, and watch!
June 8, 2007
Rockets, Napalm, Torpedoes & Lie
Israel's Attack on the USS Liberty, Revisited
By JEFFREY ST. CLAIR
I n early June of 1967, at the onset of the Six Day War, the Pentagon sent the USS Liberty from Spain into international waters off the coast of Gaza to monitor the progress of Israel's attack on the Arab states.
The Liberty was a lightly armed surveillance ship.
Only hours after the Liberty arrived it was spotted by the Israeli military.
The IDF sent out reconnaissance planes to identify the ship.
They made eight trips over a period of three hours.
The Liberty was flying a large US flag and was easily recognizable as an American vessel.
A few hours later more planes came.   These were Israeli Mirage III fighters, armed with rockets and machine guns.
As off-duty officers sunbathed on the deck, the fighters opened fire on the defenseless ship with rockets and machine guns.
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
Napalm bomblets coating the deck with flaming jelly
A few minutes later a second wave of planes streaked overhead, French-built Mystere jets, which not only pelted the ship with gunfire but also with napalm bomblets, coating the deck with the flaming jelly.
By now, the Liberty was on fire and dozens were wounded and killed, excluding several of the ship's top officers.
The Liberty's radio team tried to issue a distress call, but discovered the frequencies had been jammed by the Israeli planes with what one communications specialist called "a buzzsaw sound".
Finally, an open channel was found and the Liberty got out a message to the USS America, the Sixth Fleet's large aircraft carrier, that it was under attack
Two F-4s left the carrier to come to the Liberty's aid.  Apparently, the jets were armed only with nuclear weapons.
Get those aircraft back immediately
When word reached the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Robert McNamara became irate and ordered the jets to return.
"Tell the Sixth Fleet to get those aircraft back immediately," he barked.
McNamara's injunction was reiterated in saltier terms by Admiral David L. McDonald, the chief of Naval Operations: "You get those fucking airplanes back on deck, and you get them back down."
The planes turned around.
And the attack on the Liberty continued.
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
"Fuck you!"
After the Israeli fighter jets had emptied their arsenal of rockets, three Israeli attack boats approached the Liberty.
Two torpedoes were launched at the crippled ship, one tore a 40-foot wide hole in the hull, flooding the lower compartments, and killing more than a dozen American sailors.
As the Liberty listed in the choppy seas, its deck aflame, crew members dropped life rafts into the water and prepared to scuttle the ship.
Given the number of wounded, this was going to be a dangerous operation.
But it soon proved impossible, as the Israeli attack boats strafed the rafts with machine gun fire.
No body was going to get out alive that way.
After more than two hours of unremitting assault, the Israelis finally halted their attack.
One of the torpedo boats approached the Liberty.
An officer asked in English over a bullhorn: "Do you need any help?"
The wounded commander of the Liberty, Lt. William McGonagle, instructed the quartermaster to respond emphatically: "Fuck you."
The Israeli boat turned and left.
A Soviet destroyer responded before the US Navy, even though a US submarine, on a covert mission, was apparently in the area and had monitored the attack.
The Soviet ship reached the Liberty six hours before the USS Davis.
The captain of the Soviet ship offered his aid, but the Liberty's commanding officer refused.
Finally, 16 hours after the attack two US destroyers reached the Liberty.
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
34 US sailors were dead and 174 injured
By that time, 34 US sailors were dead and 174 injured, many seriously.
As the wounded were being evacuated, an officer with the Office of Naval Intelligence instructed the men not to talk to the press about their ordeal.
The following morning Israel launched a surprise invasion of Syria, breaching the new cease-fire agreement and seizing control of the Golan Heights.
Within three weeks, the Navy put out a 700-page report, exonerating the Israelis, claiming the attack had been accidental and that the Israelis had pulled back as soon as they realized their mistake.
Defense Secretary Robert McNamara suggested the whole affair should be forgotten.
"These errors do occur," McNamara concluded.
 What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
Bloodbath on board the Liberty tragic 'cautionary tale'
In Assault on the Liberty, a first-hand account by James Ennes Jr., McNamara's version of events is proven to be as big a sham as his concurrent lies about Vietnam.
Ennes's book created a media storm when it was first published by Random House in 1980, including (predictably) charges that Ennes was a liar and an anti-Semite.
Still, the book sold more than 40,000 copies, but was eventually allowed to go out of print.
Now Ennes has published an updated version, which incorporates much new evidence that the Israeli attack was deliberate and that the US government went to extraordinary lengths to disguise the truth.
It's a story of Israel aggression, Pentagon incompetence, official lies, and a cover-up that persists to this day.
The book gains much of its power from the immediacy of Ennes's first-hand account of the attack and the lies that followed.
More than a little 'cautionary' for me — Kewe: TheWE.biz
Now, 35 years later, Ennes warns that the bloodbath on board the Liberty and its aftermath should serve as a tragic cautionary tale about the continuing ties between the US government and the government of Israel.
The Attack on the Liberty is the kind of book that makes your blood seethe.
Ennes skillfully documents the life of the average sailor on one of the more peculiar vessels in the US Navy, with an attention for detail that reminds one of Dana or O'Brien.
After all, the year was 1967 and most of the men on the Liberty were certainly glad to be on a non-combat ship in the middle of the Mediterranean, rather than in the Gulf of Tonkin or Mekong Delta.
But this isn't Two Years Before the Mast.
In fact, Ennes's tour on the Liberty last only a few short weeks.
He had scarcely settled into a routine before his new ship was shattered before his eyes.
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
Admiral McCain, father of the senator from Arizona, never forwarded the message to the ship
Ennes joined the Liberty in May of 1967, as an Electronics Material Officer.
Serving on a "spook ship", as the Liberty was known to Navy wives, was supposed to be a sure path to career enhancement.
The Liberty's normal routine was to ply the African coast, tuning in its eavesdropping equipment on the electronic traffic in the region.
The Liberty had barely reached Africa when it received a flash message from the Joint Chiefs of Staff to sail from the Ivory Coast to the Mediterranean, where it was to re-deploy off the coast of the Sinai to monitor the Israeli attack on Egypt and the allied Arab nations.
As the war intensified, the Liberty sent a request to the fleet headquarters requesting an escort.
Request denied, by Admiral William Martin.
The Liberty moved alone to a position in international waters about 13 miles from the shore at El Arish, then under furious siege by the IDF.
On June 6, the Joint Chiefs sent Admiral McCain, father of the senator from Arizona, an urgent message instructing him to move the Liberty out of the war zone to a position at least 100 miles off the Gaza Coast.
McCain never forwarded the message to the ship.
A little after seven in the morning on June 8, Ennes entered the bridge of the Liberty to take the morning watch.
Ennes was told that an hour earlier a "flying boxcar" (later identified as a twin-engine Nord 2501 Noratlas) had flown over the ship at a low level.
Ennes says he noticed that the ship's American flag had become stained with soot and ordered a new flag run up the mast.
The morning was clear and calm, with a light breeze.
At 9 am, Ennes spotted another reconnaissance plane, which circled the Liberty.
An hour later two Israeli fighter jets buzzed the ship.
Over the next four hours, Israeli planes flew over the Liberty five more times.
 What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
 
When the first fighter jet struck, a little before two in the afternoon, Ennes was scanning the skies from the starboard side of the bridge, binoculars in his hands.
A rocket hit the ship just below where Ennes was standing, the fragments shredded the men closest to him.
After the explosion, Ennes noticed that he was the only man left standing.
But he also had been hit by more than 20 shards of shrapnel and the force of the blast had shattered his left leg.
As he crawled into the pilothouse, a second fighter jet streaked above them and unleashed its payload on the hobbled Liberty.
At that point, Ennes says the crew of the Liberty had no idea who was attacking them or why.
For a few moments, they suspected it might be the Soviets, after an officer mistakenly identified the fighters as MIG-15s.
They knew that the Egyptian air force already had been decimated by the Israelis.
The idea that the Israelis might be attacking them didn't occur to them until one of the crew spotted a Star of David on the wing of one of the French-built Mystere jets.
Ennes was finally taken below deck to a makeshift dressing station, with other wounded men.
It was hardly a safe harbor.
As Ennes worried that his fractured leg might slice through his femoral artery leaving him to bleed to death, the Liberty was pummeled by rockets, machine-gun fire and an Italian-made torpedo packed with 1,000-pounds of explosive.
      JEFFREY ST. CLAIR      www.counterpunch.org      June 8, 2007
 
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
The cover-up had begun
By JEFFREY ST. CLAIR
A fter the attack ended, Ennes was approached by his friend Pat O'Malley, a junior officer, who had just sent a list of killed and wounded to the Bureau of Naval Personnel.
He got an immediate message back.
"They said, 'Wounded in what action?
'Killed in what action?'," O'Malley told Ennes.
"They said it wasn't an 'action,' it was an accident.
I'd like for them to come out here and see the difference between an action and an accident.
Stupid bastards."
The cover-up had begun.
Pentagon lied to the public from the very beginning
The Pentagon lied to the public about the attack on the Liberty from the very beginning.
In a decision personally approved by the loathsome McNamara, the Pentagon denied to the press that the Liberty was an intelligence ship, referring to it instead as a Technical Research ship, as if it were little more than a military version of Jacques Cousteau's Calypso.
The military press corps on the USS America, where most of the wounded sailors had been taken, were placed under extreme restrictions.
All of the stories filed from the carrier were first routed through the Pentagon for security clearance, objectionable material was removed with barely a bleat of protest from the reporters or their publications.
Predictably, Israel's first response was to blame the victim, a tactic that has served them so well in the Palestinian situation.
First, the IDF alleged that it had asked the State Department and the Pentagon to identify any US ships in the area and was told that there were none.
Then the Israeli government charged that the Liberty failed to fly its flag and didn't respond to calls for it to identify itself.
The Israelis contended that they assumed the Liberty was an Egyptian supply ship called El Quseir which, even though it was a rusting transport ship then docked in Alexandria, the IDF claimed was suspected of shelling Israeli troops from the sea.
Under these circumstances, the Israelis said they were justified in opening fire on the Liberty.
The Israelis said that they halted the attack almost immediately, when they realized their mistake.
What the elite has done to one country...
...it can do to yours
"The Liberty contributed decisively toward its identification as an enemy ship," the IDF report concluded.
This was entirely false, since the Israelis had identified the Liberty at least six hours prior to the attack on the ship.
Perhaps Liberty's flag had lain limp on the flagpole
Even though the Pentagon knew better, it gave credence to the Israeli account by saying that perhaps the Liberty's flag had lain limp on the flagpole in a windless sea.
The Pentagon also suggested that the attack might have lasted less than 20 minutes.
After the initial battery of misinformation, the Pentagon imposed a news blackout on the Liberty disaster until after the completion of a Court of Inquiry investigation.
The inquiry was headed by Rear Admiral Isaac C. Kidd. Kidd didn't have a free hand.
He'd been instructed by Vice-Admiral McCain to limit the damage to the Pentagon and to protect the reputation of Israel.
Kidd interviewed the crew on June 14 and 15.
The questioning was extremely circumscribed.
According to Ennes, the investigators "asked nothing that might be embarrassing to Israel and testimony that tended to embarrass Israel was covered with a 'Top Secret' label, if it was accepted at all."
Ennes notes that even testimony by the Liberty's communications officers about the jamming of the ship's radios was classified as "Top Secret".
The reason?
It proved that Israel knew it was attacking an American ship.
"Here was strong evidence that the attack was planned in advance and that our ship's identity was known to the attackers (for it its practically impossible to jam the radio of a stranger), but this information was hushed up and no conclusions were drawn from it," Ennes writes.
What the
elite has
done to
one
country...
...it can
do to
yours
Similarly, the Court of Inquiry deep-sixed testimony and affidavits regarding the flag.
Ennes, remember, had ordered a crisp new one deployed early on the morning of the attack.
The investigators buried intercepts of conversations between IDF pilots identifying the ship as flying an American flag.
It also refused to accept evidence about the IDF's use of napalm during the attacks and choose not to hear testimony regarding the duration of the attacks and the fact that the US Navy failed to send planes to defend the ship.
"No one came to help us," said Dr. Richard F. Kiepfer, the Liberty's physician.
"We were promised help, but no help came.
The Russians arrived before our own ships did.
We asked for an escort before we ever came to the war zone and we were turned down."
None of this made its way into the 700-page Court of Inquiry report, which was completed within a couple of weeks and sent to Admiral McCain in London for review.
McCain approved the report over the objections of Captain Merlin Staring, the Navy legal officer assigned to the inquiry, who found the report to be flawed, incomplete and contrary to the evidence.
Staring sent a letter to the Judge Advocate General of the Navy disavowing the report.
The JAG seemed to take Staring's objections to heart.
He prepared a summary for the Chief of Naval Operations that almost completely ignored the Kidd/McCain report.
Instead, it concluded:
"...that the Liberty was easily recognizable as an American naval vessel.
That its flag was fully deployed and flying in a moderate breeze.
That Israeli planes made at least eight reconnaissance flights at close range.
The ship came under a prolonged attack from Israeli fighter jets and torpedo boats."
 
Wanted to sink it and kill as many US sailors as possible
This succinct and largely accurate report was stamped Top Secret by Navy brass and stayed locked up for many years.
But it was seen by many in the Pentagon and some in the Oval Office.
There was enough grumbling about the way the Liberty incident had been handled that LBJ summoned that old Washington fixer Clark Clifford to do damage control.
It didn't take Clifford long to come up with the official line: the Israelis simply had made a tragic mistake.
It turns out that Admiral Kidd and Captain Ward Boston, the two investigating officers who prepared the original report for Admiral McCain, both believed that the Israeli attack was intentional and sustained.
In other words, the IDF knew that they were striking an American spy ship and they wanted to sink it and kill as many sailors as possible.
Officers follow orders
Why then did the Navy investigators produce a sham report that concluded it was an accident?
Twenty-five years later we've finally found out.
In June of 2002, Captain Boston told the Navy Times: "Officers follow orders."
It gets worse.
There's plenty of evidence that US intelligence agencies learned on June 7 that Israel intended to attack the Liberty on the following day and that the strike had been personally ordered by Moshe Dayan.
As the attacks were going on, conversations between Israeli pilots were overheard by US Air Force officers in an EC121 surveillance plane overhead.
The spy plane was spotted by Israeli jets, which were given orders to shoot it down.
The American plane narrowly avoided the IDF missiles.
Initial reports on the incident prepared by the CIA, Office of Naval Intelligence and the National Security Agency all reached similar conclusions.
Until Liberty sunk and all on board killed
A particularly damning report compiled by a CIA informant suggests that Israeli Defense minister Moshe Dayan personally ordered the attack and wanted it to proceed until the Liberty was sunk and all on board killed.
A heavily redacted version of the report was released in 1977.
It reads in part:
"[The source] said that Dayan personally ordered the attack on the ship and that one of his generals adamantly opposed the action and said, 'This is pure murder.'
One of the admirals who was present also disapproved of the action, and it was he who ordered it stopped and not Dayan."
So as not to embarrass Israel
This amazing document generated little attention from the press and Dayan was never publicly questioned about his role in the attack.
The analyses by the intelligence agencies are collected in a 1967 investigation by the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations.
Two and half decades later that report remains classified.
Why?
A former committee staffer said: "So as not to embarrass Israel."
 US out of our homeland
One Israel pilot identified and refused to attack USS Liberty — on return to air base was arrested
More proof has recently come to light from the Israeli side.
A few years after Attack on the Liberty was originally published, Ennes got a call from Evan Toni, an Israeli pilot.
Toni told Ennes that he had just read his book and wanted to tell him his story.
Toni said that he was the pilot in the first Israeli Mirage fighter to reach the Liberty.
He immediately recognized the ship to be a US Navy vessel.
He radioed Israeli air command with this information and asked for instructions.
Toni said he was ordered to "attack".
He refused and flew back to the air base at Ashdod.
When he arrived he was summarily arrested for disobeying orders.
US gives Israel money to give back to them to pay for damages to ship
How tightly does the Israeli lobby control the Hill?
For the first time in history, an attack on an America ship was not subjected to a public investigation by Congress.
In 1980, Adlai Stevenson and Barry Goldwater planned to open a senate hearing into the Liberty affair.
Then Jimmy Carter intervened by brokering a deal with Menachem Begin, where Israel agreed to pony up $6 million to pay for damages to the ship.
A State Department press release announcing the payment said, "The book is now closed on the USS Liberty."
It certainly was the last chapter for Adlai Stevenson.
He ran for governor of Illinois the following year, where his less than perfect record on Israel, and his unsettling questions about the Liberty affair, became an issue in the campaign.
Big money flowed into the coffers of his Republican opponent, Big Jim Thompson, and Stevenson went down to a narrow defeat.
McCain insists on complete quiet — confines and interrogates two sailors who do speak — MK Ultra style
But the book wasn't closed for the sailors either, of course.
After a Newsweek story exposed the gist of what really happened on that day in the Mediterranean, an enraged Admiral McCain placed all the sailors under a gag order.
When one sailor told an officer that he was having problems living with the cover-up, he was told: "Forget about it, that's an order."
The Navy went to bizarre lengths to keep the crew of the Liberty from telling what they knew.
When gag orders didn't work, they threatened sanctions.
Ennes tells of the confinement and interrogation of two Liberty sailors that sounds like something straight from the CIA's MK-Ultra program.
Sailors locked in psychiatric ward
"In an incredible abuse of authority, military officers held two young Liberty sailors against their will in a locked and heavily guarded psychiatric ward of the base hospital," Ennes writes.
"For days these men were drugged and questioned about their recollections of the attack by a 'therapist' who admitted to being untrained in either psychiatry or psychology.
At one point, they avoided electroshock only by bolting from the room and demanding to see the commanding officer."
Also been painted as anti-Semites
Since coming home, the veterans who have tried to tell of their ordeal have been harassed relentlessly.
They've been branded as drunks, bigots, liars and frauds.
Often, it turns out, these slurs have been leaked by the Pentagon.
And, oh yeah, they've also been painted as anti-Semites.
In a recent column, Charley Reese describes just how mean-spirited and petty this campaign became.
"When a small town in Wisconsin decided to name its library in honor of the USS Liberty crewmen, a campaign claiming it was anti-Semitic was launched," writes Reese.
"And when the town went ahead, the U.S. government ordered no Navy personnel to attend, and sent no messages.
This little library was the first, and at the time the only, memorial to the men who died on the Liberty."
For this plan to work, Liberty had to be destroyed, its crew killed
So why then did the Israelis attack the Liberty?
A few days before the Six Days War, Israel's Foreign Minister Abba Eban visited Washington to inform LBJ about the forthcoming invasion.
Johnson cautioned Eban that the US could not support such an attack.
It's possible, then, that the IDF assumed that the Liberty was spying on the Israeli war plans.
Possible, but not likely.
Despite the official denials, as Andrew and Leslie Cockburn demonstrate in Dangerous Liaison, at the time of the Six Days War the US and Israel had developed a warm covert relationship.
So closely were the two sides working that US intelligence aid certainly helped secure Israel's swift victory.
In fact, it's possible that the Liberty had been sent to the region to spy for the IDF.
A somewhat more likely scenario holds that Moshe Dayan wanted to keep the lid on Israel's plan to breach the new cease-fire and invade into Syria to seize the Golan.
It has also been suggested that Dayan ordered the attack on the Liberty with the intent of pinning the blame on the Egyptians and thus swinging public and political opinion in the United States solidly behind the Israelis.
Of course, for this plan to work, the Liberty had to be destroyed and its crew killed.
War crime Israel wanted to conceal from prying eyes
There's another factor.
The Liberty was positioned just off the coast from the town of El Arish.
In fact, Ennes and others had used the town's mosque tower to fix the location of the ship along the otherwise featureless desert shoreline.
The IDF had seized El Arish and had used the airport there as a prisoner of war camp.
On the very day the Liberty was attacked, the IDF was in the process of executing as many as 1,000 Palestinian and Egyptian POWs, a war crime that they surely wanted to conceal from prying eyes.
According to Gabriel Bron, now an Israeli reporter, who witnessed part of the massacre as a soldier: "The Egyptian prisoners of war were ordered to dig pits and then army police shot them to death."
The bigger question is why the US government would participate so enthusiastically in the cover-up of a war crime against its own sailors.
Well, the Pentagon has never been slow to hide its own incompetence.
And there's plenty of that in the Liberty affair: bungled communications, refusal to provide an escort, situating the defenseless Liberty too close to a raging battle, the inability to intervene in the attack and the inexcusably long time it took to reach the battered ship and its wounded.
 
Israel had become the largest buyer of US-made arms and aircraft
But — most important — using US taxpayer money to buy the weapons
That's par for the course.
But something else was going on that would only come to light later.
Through most of the 1960s, the US congress had imposed a ban on the sale of arms to both Israel and Jordan.
But at the time of the Liberty attack, the Pentagon (and its allies in the White House and on the Hill) was seeking to have this proscription overturned.
The top brass certainly knew that any evidence of a deliberate attack on a US Navy ship by the IDF would scuttle their plans.
So they hushed it up.
In January 1968, the arms embargo on Israel was lifted and the sale of American weapons began to flow.
By 1971, Israel was buying $600 million of American-made weapons a year.
Two years later the purchases topped $3 billion.
Almost overnight, Israel had become the largest buyer of US-made arms and aircraft.
US government partner in continuing killing of the people of Palestine — an attempt at slow, but speeding up, genocide
Perversely, then, the IDF's strike on the Liberty served to weld the US and Israel together, in a kind of political and military embrace.
Now, every time the IDF attacks defenseless villages in Gaza and the West Bank with F-16s and Apache helicopters, the Palestinians quite rightly see the bloody assaults as a joint operation, with the Pentagon as a hidden partner.
Thus, does the legacy of Liberty live on, one raid after another.
US air strike Baquba
Bodies of cousins Karim Suhail Abedand and Jassim Khalaf
U.S. warplanes dropping bombs twice that of a year ago
 
Know them by their fruit
Bush — continuing to support increasing genocide of Palestinians
Mass killings of innocents in Afghanistan
Mass killings of innocents in Iraq
Development of more nuclear weapon horror
Complete abrogations of Nuclear Arms Treaty
Ratzinger — now Benedict XVI — issued letter designed to prevent sex abuse from becoming public knowledge or being investigated by the police
Coverup continued for years until overwhelmed by amount of abuse
Do not be deceived by evil
Think of Opus Dei — both present and former Pope married
Think of US Supreme Court — many also have married Opus Dei
Think how Bush was appointed
 
Think about your government.
If you are a U.S. taxpayer you have been paying the people who bombed the USS Liberty
Paying to the tune of 15 million dollars a day.
If the government can cover up the attack on the USS Liberty, what else WILL it do.
9/11?
A nuclear attack wiping out some city?
Martial Law — complete absorption of control by the elite through the tool of police, state and local, military, multiple government security agencies too numerous to place here.
Complete absorption of control!
We are there now!
When the shit hits the fan, those on the right who have guns will resist.
Those of the right who truly believe in freedom — many of them — will resist.
Will the left do what it usually does.
Stand unarmed, helpless, and watch!
Earth, a planet
hungry for peace

Peace logo
Details of Israeli Murder of 72-Year-Old Palestinian Yehia Al-Jabari
HR Organisation Reveals the Details of Israeli Murder of Palestinian Elderly
RAMALLAH, June 7, 2007, (WAFA)
Human Rights organisation revealed the details of the Israeli crime in the West Bank city of Hebron, in which Israeli soldiers murdered a 72-year-old man yesterday.
In a statement issued Thursday, al-Haq revealed the details of how Israeli soldiers extrajudicial executed Yehia al-Jabari.
Details, according to al-Haq:
"At approximately 12:20 am on Wednesday, 6 June 2007, a large Israeli military force, comprising at least 50 soldiers, came to the house of Yehia al-Jabari.
Yehia, who was 72-years-old, lived with his family in a two-storey house in the B'er Haram area of Hebron city.
Upon opening the front door of the house to the soldiers, Rajih al-Jabari, the 26-year-old son of Yehia, was dragged outside.
Without any warning or justification, the Israeli soldiers began to beat Rajih, violently hitting his head against the wall of the house.
At this point, Yehia, who had only moments earlier returned home from visiting a relative, came outside with his wife Fatima to see what was happening.
Seeing the soldiers attacking his son, Yehia, who was unarmed, attempted to intervene and protect his son.
While doing so, he was shot once in the forehead by an Israeli soldier, the bullet exiting the rear of his head.
He then fell to the ground, where he lay motionless, presumably having been killed instantly.
Immediately after her husband's killing his wife began screaming attempting to reach his body.
She was also killed
Immediately afterward, his wife, who was also unarmed, began screaming and attempted to reach Yehia's body.
The Israel army force of fifty did not kill his two sons who they had not yet beaten.
They only shot one in the foot.
The other lay by his father and started to cry.
An Israeli soldier, however, opened fire on her, hitting her six times.
Fatima, who was hit in numerous parts of her body, including the head and chest, fell to the ground.
After his brother was was hit Radi knelt by his father and began to cry
At this time, two of Yehia's sons, 24-year-old Kamil and 36-year-old Radi, exited the front door of the house.
There, they found their parents lying in pools of blood on the ground, surrounded by a large number of Israeli soldiers.
In attempting to move their father's corpse from the front steps, where it was lying, the two brothers were screamed at by an Israeli soldier who ordered them to stop.
Radi ignored the soldier, pushing him away.
In response, however, the soldier opened fire on the brothers, hitting Kamil in the foot.
After Kamil had fallen to the ground, Radi knelt beside his father's body and began to cry.
The soldiers, however, began to beat him in an attempt to move him away.
By this stage, a number of other family members and neighbours had gathered nearby.
They were prevented from reaching the injured persons by the Israeli soldiers who forced them back violently, in some instances, beating the men and women with the butts of their guns.
Soon after the aforementioned events had taken place, the injured were transferred to ambulances that had arrived at the scene.
Ambulances were not allowed to leave for a full 15 minutes after they were ready to do so
Despite the serious condition of several of the wounded, the Israeli soldiers refused to allow the ambulances to leave the area for a full 15 minutes after they were ready to do so.
Once the injured persons were eventually transferred to hospital, the soldiers gathered the remaining family members, as well as a number of other individuals who were present, inside the house.
There, the women were kept in a single room, while the men were kept under guard in the corridor outside.
They remained there for 45 minutes while the Israeli soldiers carried out an extensive search of the house, in the course of which they found no weapons, nor did they arrest any individuals.
Only after the soldiers had completed the search did they inform the Palestinians present that they were looking for Salih al-Jabari, the 17-year-old son of Yehia.
At approximately 2:30 am, the soldiers finally agreed to leave the area after receiving assurances that Salih would present himself to the Israeli authorities the following day.
They shot one of the sons in the foot
The other lay by his father and started to cry
The fifty soldiers were looking for the 17 year old brother who wasn't at home
Regarding those Palestinians taken to hospital for treatment, a number of individuals were released after being treated for shock and/or for the injuries they sustained having being beaten by the Israeli soldiers.
More worryingly, 57-year-old Fatima al-Jabari is presently in a critical condition, while her son, Rajih al-Jabari, remains in an extremely serious condition."
Al-Haq expressed its grave concern by the actions of Israeli soldiers during an arrest raid in Hebron early this morning, which left one person dead and several others seriously injured.
It said it was deeply disturbed by the nature of this and other recent military operations where the intention to kill and/or the indifference to preserving civilian life on the part of the Israeli forces has been all too evident.
Al-Haq strongly condemned this morning's unprovoked and unjustifiable attack on civilians as an egregious violation of the fundamental principles of international law.
The non-derogable right to life, that most basic of human rights from which all others stem, was brazenly disregarded by the Israeli soldiers involved.
Under customary international humanitarian law, the Israeli army is obliged to distinguish at all times between civilians and combatants, and to in all circumstances refrain from directing attacks against civilians.
How in this horror can you express tears
What is left of feeling
Father killed
Mother shot six times
Brother Rajih in extremely serious condition
All paid for the US taxpayer
The daughter of Palestinian Yehia al-Jabari, who was killed during an Israel raid, cries during his funeral procession in the West Bank city of Hebron, Wednesday, June 6, 2007.

A large Israel military force, comprising at least 50 soldiers, came to the house of Yehia al-Jabari.

The Israeli soldiers began to beat Rajih the 26-year-old son of Yehia, violently hitting his head against the wall of the house.

Coming outside 72 year old Yehia al-Jabari, Yahiya Jaabari, tried to stop the beating of his son.  

The Israel soldiers shot him through the head.

Immediately after her husband's killing his wife came outside and began screaming attempting to reach his body.

An Israeli soldier opened fire on her hitting her six times.

Then his two younger sons came out.

The Israel army of fifty did not kill his two sons.

They only shot one in the foot.

The other lay by his father and started to cry.

More than Fifteen million US dollars is given by US taxpayers each day for this military use, which presently involves the imprisonment of the remaining segregated ' Bantustan - Apartheid ' parcels of land occupied by millions of Palestinian.

Funding by the US Taxpayer for the enslavement of the Palestinian people continues to increase, estimated now considerably more than the previous 4 billion US dollars per year.

Photo: AP/Muhammed Muheisen     

The daughter of Palestinian Yehia al-Jabari, who was killed during an Israel raid, cries during his funeral procession in the West Bank city of Hebron, Wednesday, June 6, 2007.
A large Israel military force, comprising at least 50 soldiers, came to the house of Yehia al-Jabari.
The Israeli soldiers began to beat Rajih the 26-year-old son of Yehia, violently hitting his head against the wall of the house.
Coming outside 72 year old Yehia al-Jabari, Yahiya Jaabari, tried to stop the beating of his son.
The Israel soldiers shot him through the head.
Immediately after her husband's killing his wife came outside and began screaming attempting to reach his body.
An Israeli soldier opened fire on her hitting her six times.
Then his two younger sons came out.
The Israel army of fifty did not kill his two sons.
They only shot one in the foot.
The other lay by his father and started to cry.
More than Fifteen million US dollars is given by US taxpayers each day for this military use, which presently involves the imprisonment of the remaining segregated ' Bantustan - Apartheid ' parcels of land occupied by millions of Palestinian.
Funding by the US Taxpayer for the enslavement of the Palestinian people continues to increase, estimated now considerably more than the previous 4 billion US dollars per year.
Photo: AP/Muhammed Muheisen
  uruknet.info
  اوروكنت.إنفو
    informazione dall'iraq occupato
information from occupied iraq
أخبار منالعراق المحتلة
An Interrogation Role Model
U.S. picked up tactics — including torture — from Israeli intelligence
Yossi Melman, International Consortium of Investigative Reporters
June 3, 2007
Occupied Afghanistan.

An Afghan man looks on as a British soldier of the 2nd Royal Regiment of Fusiliers patrol in Sangin, in northern Helmand province, Afghanistan, Monday, April 23, 2007. 

Picture: AP/Rafiq Maqbool
TEL AVIV, Israel — The King Hussein bridge is the most direct route from Amman to Jerusalem, but it was not a trip Marwan Ibrahim Mahmoud Jabour wanted to make — he had no choice.
It was September 2006, and Jabour, a 30-year-old Jordanian engineer who says he made the mistake of going to Afghanistan in a fruitless attempt to join the jihad, had spent the last two years as a U.S. prisoner — possibly in Afghanistan but he wasn't sure, since his captors had never revealed the location.
According to a sworn affidavit he gave to an Israeli military court, he'd spent much of that time naked and alone in a tiny cell with a bucket to serve as a toilet, being subjected to loud music and hot or freezing temperatures, presumably to soften him up for interrogations that went on for as long as 14 straight hours.
But now, apparently, the Americans were done with Jabour.
They'd drugged him and sent him on a jet back to the Middle East.
The trip was what is known in the U.S. war on terror as an "extraordinary rendition," the transfer of a terror suspect to a foreign country for interrogation — and sometimes torture, human rights activists charge — outside of any legal process.
Jabour says he never faced a judge, a prosecutor or a jury.
CIA standing policy of not commenting on extraordinary rendition
When asked for comment on Jabour's affidavit, the CIA cited its standing policy of not commenting on allegations of extraordinary rendition.
Naksa
Stealing
of
land
1948
1967
Today
Stealing
of
land
paid for
by US
tax
payers
Jordan hands him to Israel
Jabour found himself in the back seat of a car driven by Jordanian intelligence agents.
At the other side of the King Hussein bridge, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, they handed him over to Israeli intelligence agents.
In his affidavit, Jabour said that one of the Israelis mocked him in greeting:
"Welcome, Osama bin Laden. Where are you coming from?"
Jabour's case is the first documented instance of a terror suspect who was not linked to Hezbollah or Palestinian terror groups making his way from American hands to Israeli custody.
That such a thing could happen should probably come as no surprise, given the traditionally close cooperation between the United States and Israel on security matters.
The controversial techniques Jabour says his American captors used were not concocted out of thin air.
Israel — exporters of torture
Many were perfected and put into regular practice by the Israelis, who in the post-9/11 era have quietly become one of the world's ' most important exporters '
[Name another country that exports anything comparable to Israel's torture techniques other than the US — TheWE.biz]
of interrogation and counterterrorism methods decried by human rights groups as constituting torture and violating basic human rights.
Stand guard over the people
they have stolen the land from
Rafah, Gaza
Israeli soldiers stand guard over the people they have stole the land from in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip June 5, 1967.

Continuation of stealing of land — 1948-1967-today

Paid for by US taxpayers.

The Palestine people were first forced from their homes 60 years ago.

The people who stole the land from the Palestinians have been aided by American Taxpayer funding for more than fifty years.

More than Fifteen million US dollars is given by US taxpayers each day for this military use, which presently involves the imprisonment of the remaining segregated ' Bantustan - Apartheid ' parcels of land occupied by millions of Palestinian.

Funding by the US Taxpayer for the enslavement of the Palestinian people continues to increase, estimated now considerably more than the previous 4 billion US dollars per year.

Picture: Handout
This is how the world has allowed
US taxpayers and Israel
to proceed after the land was stolen
Khan Younis refugee camp
Palestinian refugee children play in an alleyway in front of their family home in the Khan Younis refugee camp, southern Gaza Strip, Tuesday, June 5, 2007, on the 40th anniversary of the start of the continuation of the stealing of their land known in the West as the ' Six Day War '.

In 1967 Israel paid for by the US and using American weapons seized the West Bank and additional parts of Jerusalem from what had been protected by Jordan and the Gaza Strip from what had been protected by Egypt, putting this addtional stolen land in control of US paid for Israel.

Continuation of stealing of land — 1948-1967-today

Paid for by US taxpayers.

The Palestine people were first forced from their homes 60 years ago.

The people who stole the land from the Palestinians have been aided by American Taxpayer funding for more than fifty years.

More than Fifteen million US dollars is given by US taxpayers each day for this military use, which presently involves the imprisonment of the remaining segregated ' Bantustan - Apartheid ' parcels of land occupied by millions of Palestinian.

Funding by the US Taxpayer for the enslavement of the Palestinian people continues to increase, estimated now considerably more than the previous 4 billion US dollars per year.

Picture: AP/Adel Hana

(left)
Israeli soldiers stand guard over the people they have stole the land from in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip June 5, 1967.
(right)
Palestinian refugee children play in an alleyway in front of their family home in the Khan Younis refugee camp, southern Gaza Strip, Tuesday, June 5, 2007, on the 40th anniversary of the start of the continuation of the stealing of their land known in the West as the ' Six Day War '.
In 1967 Israel paid for by the US and using American weapons seized the West Bank and additional parts of Jerusalem from what had been protected by Jordan and the Gaza Strip from what had been protected by Egypt, putting this addtional stolen land in control of US paid for Israel.
Continuation of stealing of land — 1948-1967-today
Paid for by US taxpayers.
The Palestine people were first forced from their homes 60 years ago.
The people who stole the land from the Palestinians have been aided by American Taxpayer funding for more than fifty years.
More than Fifteen million US dollars is given by US taxpayers each day for this military use, which presently involves the imprisonment of the remaining segregated ' Bantustan - Apartheid ' parcels of land occupied by millions of Palestinian.
Funding by the US Taxpayer for the enslavement of the Palestinian people continues to increase, estimated now considerably more than the previous 4 billion US dollars per year.
Photos: Handout, AP/Adel Hana
  uruknet.info
  اوروكنت.إنفو
    informazione dall'iraq occupato
information from occupied iraq
أخبار منالعراق المحتلة
An Interrogation Role Model
U.S. picked up tactics — including torture — from Israeli intelligence
Yossi Melman, International Consortium of Investigative Reporters
June 3, 2007
The land
has been
stolen
from him
and must be
returned
to him
and his
children
One of Israel's "students," the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) has found, has been the United States.
For its part, the United States reciprocates through continued massive military aid and assistance to Israel, thanks in no small part to strong Israeli lobbying of the U.S. Congress.
ICIJ's database of foreign military assistance shows that Israeli governmental entities spent more than $30 million in the three years after September 11, 2001, on expenditures governed by the Foreign Agents Registration Act, including lobbying Congress and the executive branch.
Since the late 1940s, the United States has given Israel nearly $50 billion in military assistance — financial aid and access to weaponry that has helped make the Israeli armed forces one of the most technologically sophisticated, powerful militaries on the planet.
$9 billion given in three years (accounted money)
Unknown how much black budget money (unaccounted US taxpayer money) has been given
Since 9/11, Israel has remained the No. 1 recipient of U.S. military aid, pulling in more than $9 billion in the three years after the terrorist attacks.
While other countries have been influenced by U.S. aid, Israel has influenced its patron as well.
In the post-9/11 world, the United States has turned to Israel for advice and training for urban combat against insurgents in Iraq and has borrowed controversial tactics that Israeli forces have used against Palestinians.
In Iraq and elsewhere, the United States also has emulated Israel's hard-nosed methods against terrorism, allegedly including the use of torture in interrogations.
The growing closeness between the two intelligence services also raises the question of just how far Washington will go in the future in continuing to apply one of Israel's most controversial anti-terrorism techniques: targeted killings.
Terrorism
all paid for
by US
taxpayers,
and their
children,
for it is
to them
the debt befalls
Learning from the ' best '
Since the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, U.S. intelligence officials have visited Tel Aviv to meet with their counterparts from Mossad, Israel's version of the CIA, and Shabak (or Shin Bet)
The Israeli counterintelligence and anti-terrorism agency, as well as the Aman, Israel's military intelligence service, according to Israeli intelligence and diplomatic sources who requested anonymity in order to speak candidly with ICIJ.
In addition to exchanging information on ' terrorist organizations ' with their Israeli hosts, the visitors are reported to have viewed presentations by special forces units of the Israeli Defense Forces and the Israeli National Police describing methods and equipment employed by Israel in ' anti-terrorism ' operations.
According to those same sources, other countries have also sent their own intelligence officials to learn from the Israeli experience and to be briefed and trained by their Israeli counterparts.
Hosts torture guests from South America, Africa, Eastern and Western Europe and South Asia
Almost every week, the sources said, the Tel Aviv-based headquarters of Mossad, Shabak and Aman host guests from South America, Africa, Eastern and Western Europe and South Asia, including countries such as Indonesia, which does not even have diplomatic relations with the Jewish state.
Visitors also talk about ways to block the flow of financial funding from the United States, Europe and Latin America to Palestinian militants.
[ Note the inclusion of continuing nonsense propaganda below — TheWE.biz ]
"Under the disguise of donating money to Palestinian charity, contributions are channeled to terrorist groups in Gaza and [the] West Bank," says a senior Israeli official dealing with terrorist issues at Israel's National Security Council.
"Before 9/11, it was hard for us to persuade governments that money raised in mosques in their respective countries found its way to buy weapons and explosives in the Palestinians areas which eventually was turned against innocent Israelis.
In the last two to three years, we find more attention to our claims and readiness to cooperate.
On several occasions we provided names of charities and bank accounts in the UK, Italy, Paraguay, Argentina and a few other countries, and the security services there followed accordingly and took action.
Offices were raided, documents confiscated and in some rare cases accounts were frozen."
Terrorism
all paid for
by US
taxpayers,
and their
children,
for it is
to them
the debt befalls
Eichmann case a precedent
Additionally, at least twice a year, delegates from various branches of the Israeli intelligence community visit the United States to exchange information and engage in ' brainstorming ' sessions with their U.S. counterparts.
These discussions are "frank, open and intimate," according to an Israeli intelligence source who has been involved.
Due in part to these exchanges of ideas, the United States has been able to copy and learn from Israeli counterterrorist methods.
Although Israel certainly did not invent techniques such as clandestine kidnapping or the use of stress positions during interrogation, it was one of the first countries to employ those techniques as part of a broader ' counterterrorism ' campaign.
The CIA's abduction of Egyptian cleric Hassan Osama Nasr (also known as Abu Omar) as he walked to a Milan mosque in 2003, for example, had a famous precedent — the 1960 Mossad operation that tracked, cornered and abducted Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
"He [Eichmann] passed our car, which was parked on the margin," Rafi Eitan, the Mossad officer in charge of the operation, recounted in an interview with ICIJ.
"One member of our team, Tzvi Malchin, was shadowing and closing in on him.
It all took a few seconds.
Tzvi jumped on him.
Both of them fell down into a ditch.
Tzvi grabbed him.
We opened the door, and Tzvi put him inside."
The parallels with the 2003 Abu Omar abduction are striking, where, according to Italian prosecutors investigating the involvement of 26 Americans, Omar was grabbed off the street by CIA agents and thrown into a waiting van.
Just as the detainees of CIA "extraordinary renditions" are reported to have been hidden at secret prisons and transported across borders in clandestine flights, Eichmann was taken to a safe house in the Argentine capital, interrogated, sedated and dressed in the uniform of a crew member of El Al, Israel's national airline.
He then was driven to the airport, forced to board an Israeli aircraft and flown to Israel for trial, according to Eitan and other published accounts of the operation.
Eichmann was later convicted and put to death.
Terrorism
all paid for
by US
taxpayers,
and their
children,
for it is
to them
the debt befalls
Israel produced in Dimona sufficient plutonium to manufacture 200 nuclear bombs
Twenty-six years later, the Mossad conducted a similar operation.
According to interviews with relatives and Israeli intelligence officials involved in the operation, in the fall of 1986, the agency acted against Mordechai Vanunu, an Israeli technician who worked at Israel's secret nuclear reactor in Dimona. Vanunu was fired, left the country and then revealed to The (London) Sunday Times that Israel had produced in Dimona sufficient plutonium to manufacture 200 nuclear bombs.
The Israeli government instructed the Mossad to abduct Vanunu and bring him to justice in Israel.
Mossad teams tracked Vanunu in London, where a female agent seduced him and persuaded him to accompany her to a "love nest" in Rome.
There he was kidnapped by other Mossad operatives, sedated and taken by force to a yacht that sailed to a rendezvous off the Italian coast with an Israel naval boat manned by cadets.
"In the middle of the sailing we were told to put anchor off the Italian coast," according to the recollections of the Israeli cadets relayed to ICIJ by Israeli intelligence sources.
"We didn't bother to ask why.
We were only cadet officers who hoped to be soon commissioned. After three days, I believe, a yacht arrived near us at the middle of the night.
We were all asked to stay in our cabins — only a few officers were allowed to be on the deck.
Only a few days later by word of mouth and rumors spreading around, we found out that a group of people, mostly male and few females in civilian clothes, had boarded our ship.
They stayed throughout the remaining sail in their cabins.
A few weeks later when the government announced that Vanunu was captured, we understood that we were the ship which was ferrying him."
 
 
Forced to flee by US
There must be an accounting
Similar torture techniques
When the boat reached Israeli soil, Vanunu was interrogated, charged and convicted of treason, espionage and unauthorized disclosure of secrets.
He served 18 years in prison.
Despite the strong similarities between Israeli abductions and those carried out by the CIA after 9/11, one important distinction remains: Eichmann and Vanunu were eventually put on public trial, whereas Jabour and his fellow "ghost" detainees by the United States have rarely been subject to official legal proceedings — or legal protections.
When the United States invaded Iraq and overthrew Saddam Hussein's regime in 2003, the close U.S.-Israeli relationship became even more pronounced.
U.S. forces soon found themselves in a bloody, protracted struggle against non-uniformed Iraqi insurgents in Iraqi cities and villages, a conflict that bears eerie parallels to Israel's battles with Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza.
American forces knew where to turn for advice.
According to American and British newspapers, U.S. soldiers journeyed to Israel to train in a mockup of an Arab town that the Israeli army has used to prepare for urban warfare in the occupied territories, and the Israeli Defense Forces sent urban warfare specialists to Fort Bragg in North Carolina to help train U.S. special forces for counterinsurgency operations.
Not surprisingly, U.S. forces in Iraq began using an array of tactics previously employed by the Israelis in the occupied territories.
When U.S. Marines conducted house-to-house searches for insurgents, they used portable battering rams to knock holes through interior walls as a way of avoiding booby-trapped doors — one of the classic urban warfare tactics borrowed from the Israelis.
U.S. forces also began demolishing houses and buildings used by insurgents, mimicking the controversial Israeli practice of using bulldozers to take down the homes of Palestinian militants or their families.
And, as the Israelis had done, the Americans cordoned off villages and neighborhoods suspected of harboring insurgents and set up armed checkpoints through which Iraqis were forced to pass.
"I see no difference between us and the Palestinians," an Iraqi man named Tariq told The New York Times in 2003.
"We didn't expect anything like this after Saddam fell."
The U.S. Army officer formerly in charge of the now-infamous Abu Ghraib prison, Col. Janis Karpinski, told British Broadcasting Corp. radio in 2004 that during a visit to a U.S. intelligence center in Baghdad, she met an Israeli who was involved in interrogating Iraqi prisoners.
"I asked him what did he do there, was he an interpreter?   He was clearly from the Middle East," said Karpinski, who was demoted from her previous rank of brigadier general after the revelations of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib.
"He said, 'Well, I do some of the interrogation here.   I speak Arabic but I'm not an Arab.   I'm from Israel.' "
The Israeli government has strongly denied that any of its own interrogators were working with the Americans in Iraq, as has Virginia-based CACI, the large American defense contractor that performed interrogations at Abu Ghraib.
However, some of the techniques used by American interrogators — such as putting hoods on prisoners and subjecting them to loud music, and forcing them to remain in painful physical positions — bear discomforting similarities to controversial techniques Israeli intelligence has used for decades.
60 years of enslavement all paid for by US taxpayer money
Shabak torture methods
Beginning with Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, Israeli intelligence agencies — mainly the Shabak — have interrogated Arab and Palestinian terrorism suspects.
For years, Shabak interrogators used brutal methods that included sleep deprivation, hanging subjects from walls and threats of sexual assault.
Rough treatment of interrogation subjects essentially was legal.
Even after a 1987 special inquiry commission led by former Israeli Supreme Court Judge Moshe Landau found that Israeli interrogators not only used torture to compel confessions, but also were instructed by superiors to lie about it to the courts.
It recommended that interrogators be allowed to continue "moderate physical pressure" on suspects who might have information about an impending ' terrorist ' attack.
In a 1999 ruling, the Israeli Supreme Court described in detail some of the methods used by Israeli interrogators.
One particularly violent practice was the "forceful shaking of the suspect's upper torso, back and forth, repeatedly, in a manner which causes the neck and head to dangle and vacillate rapidly."
The court noted that "the shaking method is likely to cause serious brain damage, harm the spinal cord, cause the suspect to lose consciousness, vomit and urinate uncontrollably and suffer serious headaches."
Another technique was the "shabach" position, in which a prisoner would be left between interrogations in a small chair with his arms tied, in a position that "causes serious muscle pain in the arms, the neck and headaches."
Interrogators also covered the subject's head with a sack and played "powerfully loud music" in the room.
The Israeli Supreme Court decided that such practices were illegal.
But Israeli human rights activists contend that the ban was never fully enforced and that Israeli interrogators sometimes continue to mistreat prisoners today.
For example, a Palestinian government official who was arrested and held by the Israelis for six weeks in the summer of 2005 later said that interrogators had left him tied for six to seven hours straight in the "shabach" position.
"It caused a lot of pain in my neck," Palestinian Minister of Labor Mohammed Barghouthi told The Christian Science Monitor.
"But the psychological pain is much worse."
Caused by the US taxpayer
Forced enslavement for more than 60 years
Amari refugee camp
But rather than being Shia and pro-Hezbollah, today's groups are largely Sunni and anti-Hezbollah.
Hence they qualify for US aid, funneled by Sunni financial backers in league with the Bush administration which is committed to funding Islamist Sunni groups to weaken Hezbollah.
BEHIND THE SCENE
Caused by the US taxpayer
Forced enslavement for more than 60 years
Jebaliya refugee camp
Coming home
Marwan Ibrahim Mahmoud Jabour said in his sworn affidavit that he would find himself subjected to similar — but even more intense — mistreatment by U.S. interrogators before he ended up on Israel's doorstep.
In Jabour's sworn affidavit, he presents himself as little more than a would-be jihadist.
In subsequent interviews with human rights groups and The Washington Post, he acknowledges having facilitated transportation and assistance for al Qaeda fighters fleeing Afghanistan into Pakistan after the 2001 U.S. invasion.
A U.S. ' counterterrorism official ' described him as "an all-around bad guy" who had contact with senior al Qaeda officials.
The offspring of Palestinian refugees, he spent his youth in Jordan and Saudi Arabia before moving to Pakistan in the 1990s to study computer engineering.
While in Pakistan he found religion, and a few years later he tried to answer the call of Saudi religious leaders who were urging followers to take up jihad against the Russians in Chechnya.
Jabour managed to make his way to Kabul, where he got a few months of rudimentary firearms instruction in a camp operated by the ' Taliban ' before being told that the Chechens didn't really want any more Arab fighters.
He returned to Pakistan and got married.
A couple of years later, after the September 11 attacks led to the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, he again felt the call — not to fight for al Qaeda, but "to protect Afghanistan as a Muslim country."
Jabour went to Afghanistan and tried to join a group of Arab fighters, but when the ' Taliban ' deserted them on the front line, he decided to go home again without firing a shot.
Jabour made the mistake of befriending an assortment of wounded, destitute ex-comrades who wandered into Pakistan after the conflict, his affidavit goes on.
In 2004, he says, Pakistani intelligence agents forced him and a friend into a car, put hoods on their heads and took them to a facility in Lahore where Jabour was beaten and tortured for several days before his captors handed him over to the Americans.
He then describes a haze of sedative injections and a jet ride.
Jabour found himself in a nameless facility where he says men in black uniforms and masks stripped off Jabour's clothes, bound him and put him in a tiny cell with a bucket for a toilet.
He remained naked and bound for three months, with a video camera suspended from the ceiling watching his every move.
Outside, large speakers played jet engine noises.
According to Jabour's affidavit, a U.S. interrogator told him that "whenever you hear this sound, you will remember why you are here" — a reference to the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
After interrogators questioned Jabour, he related, they would throw him back in his cell, tie him in various uncomfortable positions and then subject him to loud noises and music, sometimes for up to four days at a time.
"I would scream for them to stop … and I would tell them I was going to talk," he says.
On other occasions, he says in the affidavit, interrogators tied a rope to his handcuffs and lifted him up for several minutes at a time or squeezed him in a tiny closet that had breathing holes punched in the door (he would later tell human rights advocates and journalists that he was threatened only with being put in the closet).
By the time a year had passed, the affidavit goes on, the severity of Jabour's treatment eased somewhat.
He was still subjected to interrogations, but he was in a larger cell and his captors let him out occasionally to watch documentary films on DVD or to take books out of the facility's library, which had thousands of books in Arabic and other languages.
Eventually, they gave him a drawing pad and an electronic chessboard.
By then, apparently, the United States had decided that Jabour either had no more useful information to offer or was too small of a catch to bother keeping in custody.
In July 2006, a clerk at the facility suddenly told Jabour that he was about to be transferred.
"Where to?" Jabour asked.
The American, the affidavit says, told him he didn't know.
The next day, guards came to Jabour's cell, bound him in chains, taped cotton over his eyes and put plugs in his ears.
He says he was driven to an airport, loaded on another jet and injected with something that made him lose consciousness.
After the jet landed hours later, Jabour reports that he was carried into a building.
When his blindfold was removed, he was in a room with portraits of King Hussein and King Abdullah on the wall.
Jabour was back in Jordan, the land of his birth.
Jordanian agents began questioning him, he says, but the sessions were less brutal.
"The interrogators told me they know everything I've been through," he says.
For the first time, he was allowed to meet with a Red Cross representative.
He also was allowed to see his parents and other relatives.
But instead of releasing Jabour, the Jordanians turned the former U.S. prisoner over to the Israelis.
While U.S. interrogators reportedly have used the threat of rendition to Israel to frighten captives into talking, Jabour says that after a humiliating initial search (in which he was stripped and forced to squat several times), the Israelis didn't treat him quite as roughly as the Americans had.
He relates that he was questioned by a Shabak interrogator named Levi, who talked to him roughly a dozen times, three to four hours each time.
Levi had Jabour tell his life story, while Levi took notes on a computer.
None of the questions had anything to do with Israel or its national security, Jabour recalled in the affidavit.
Even so, Jabour was held without charges and was not allowed to see an attorney for the first month of his Israeli captivity.
Then, in late September 2006, he finally got a chance to speak with Nizar Mahajna, a lawyer for the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel, an Israeli human rights organization, who happened to run in to Jabour in the Kishon Prison where Jabar's military court hearing was taking place.
"I'm not one of them," Mahajna quotes Jabour as telling him, meaning that he was not a Palestinian from the West Bank or Gaza.
"Do you have time for me?"
"He seemed very frightened," the attorney would later recall.
In October 2006, Israeli security sources told ICIJ that Jabour most likely would be charged with membership in a terrorist organization, unauthorized military training and posing a threat to state security.
But apparently, over the next several weeks, Israeli officials changed their minds and decided that the former U.S. prisoner was not so much of a threat after all.
In November 2006, the day before a military court was scheduled to consider extending his remand, authorities simply released him to relatives in Gaza.
Monday, June 4th, 2007
Politics of Naming: Genocide, Civil War, Insurgency
US Columbia University Professor Mahmood Mamdani discusses how the media and the Save Darfur Coalition has been misrepresenting the situation in Darfur.— Click Here
AMY GOODMAN:    Last week's US announcement of sanctions blocks thirty-one companies tied to the Sudanese government from using the US banking system.
MAHMOOD MAMDANI:    I think the larger question is the names — genocide, in particular — come into being against a background of the twentieth century and mass slaughter of the twentieth century, and particularly the Holocaust.
And against that background, Lemkin convinced the international community, and particularly states in the international community, they have an obligation to intervene when there is genocide.
He’s successful in getting the international community to adopt a resolution on this.
Then follows the politics around genocide.
And the politics around genocide is, when is the slaughter of civilians a genocide or not?
Which particular slaughter is going to be named genocide, and which one is not going to be named genocide?
So if you look at the last ten years and take some examples of mass slaughter:
For example, the mass slaughter in Iraq, which is — in terms of numbers, at least — no less than what is going on in Sudan
Or the mass slaughter in Congo, which, in terms of numbers, is probably ten times what happened, what has been happening in Darfur.
But none of these have been named as genocide.
Only the slaughter in Darfur has been named as genocide.
So there is obviously a politics around this naming, and that’s the politics that I was interested in.
AMY GOODMAN:    And what do you think this politics is?
Instrumentalized by United States
MAHMOOD MAMDANI:    Well, I think that what’s happening is that genocide is being instrumentalized by the biggest power on the earth today, which is the United States.
It is being instrumentalized in a way that mass slaughters which implicate its adversaries are being named as genocide and those which implicate its friends or its proxies are not being named as genocide.
And that is not what Lemkin had in mind.
I was struck by the fact -- because I live nine months in New York and three months in Kampala, and every morning I open the New York Times, and I read about violence against civilians, atrocities against civilians.
There are two places that I read about
Une is Iraq.
The other is Darfur.
Largest political movement against mass violence on US campuses is on Darfur
I’m struck by the fact that the largest political movement against mass violence on US campuses is on Darfur and not on Iraq.
And it puzzles me.
Because most of these students, almost all of these students, are American citizens.
I had always thought that they should have greater responsibility, they should feel responsibility, for mass violence which is the result of their own government's policies.
And I ask myself, “Why not?”
I ask myself, “How do they discuss mass violence in Iraq and options in Iraq?”
And they discuss it by asking -- agonizing over what would happen if American troops withdrew from Iraq.
Would there be more violence?
Less violence?
It is easy to hold a moral position emptied of political content
But there is no such agonizing over Darfur.
Because Darfur is a place without history.
Darfur is a place without politics.
Darfur is simply a dot on the map.
It is simply a place, a site, where perpetrator confronts victim.
And the perpetrator’s name is Arab.
And the victim’s name is African.
And it is easy to demonize.
It is easy to hold a moral position which is emptied of its political content.
This bothered me, and so I wrote about it.
Donkey Carcass, Darfur, Sudan

Photo: US AID
Donkey Carcass, Darfur, Sudan
Photo: US AID
MAHMOOD MAMDANI:   
Well, let’s begin with the numbers of the dead, OK?
The only group in a position to estimate how many people have died in Darfur is UNICEF, because UNICEF is the only one that did a comprehensive survey in 2005 in Darfur.
Everybody else only knows the piece of ground on which they work and will then extrapolate from it, like any other NGO, like Oxfam or Medecins Sans Frontieres or World Food Program.
The WFP estimate was 200,000.
Out of these 200,000, the WPF report tells you that roughly about 20% died of actually being killed, of violence, and 80% died mainly from starvation and from diseases.
And normally in our understanding of genocide, we put both those together and look at them as a result of the violence, because the violence prevents the medicine going in, etc., except in the case of Darfur, it’s not a single-cause situation.
Darfur is also the place which has been hit hard by global warming.
The UN commission which sat on global warming very recently spoke of Darfur as the first major crisis of global warming.
Desertification — Global Warming
In other words, from the late 1970s you have had a significant desertification, and you’ve been having in the north of Darfur basically a situation where people’s simply entire livelihoods are destroyed, and which has been one of the elements, because it has driven the nomadic population in the north down into the south.
So how many people are dying from desertification?
How many people are dying from the violence that has been unleashed through this civil war in Darfur?
Second element in this is that there’s a civil war going on in Darfur.
There are two rebel movements, and both rebel movements were born in the aftermath of the peace in the south.
And those who were unwilling to accept the peace in the south, who thought the peace in the south should have included a resolution for all of Sudan, particularly for Darfur and not simply for the south, they were the inspiration behind the two movements that developed.
One movement, the Sudan Liberation Army, was a movement strongly connected with the SPLA in the south, especially with those sections of the SPLA who were not happy with the partial nature of the settlement in the south.
Islamist rebel movement and secular rebel movement 
The SPLA is the Sudan People's Liberation Army, which had organized and led the guerrilla war in the south for several decades under John Garang.
The second movement was the Justice and Equality Movement.
The Justice and Equality Movement, unlike the SLA, which is a secular movement, Justice and Equality is an Islamist movement.
And it was a break-off from the regime in the Sudan.
It was a break-off between two sections of the regime, the military and the civilian section, and particularly the section led by the chief ideologue, Hassan al-Turabi, who split from the military wing and was the inspiration behind the formation of the Justice and Equality Movement.
So you have, in a way, a very strong Islamist rebel movement and you have a strong secular rebel movement, and these two began their operations in 2003.
Sudan government's response was to pick a proxy and arm it 
The government's response — and I saw the ambassador's response there, which was as disingenuous as Bush's response, in a sense, because he’s claiming that it’s just a civil war inside, the government has nothing to do with it.
It’s not true.
The government's response was to pick a proxy and arm it.
And the government was, in a way, smart enough to pick those who were the worst victims of the desertification and the drought.
It picked the poorest of the nomads from the north whose livelihoods had been entirely destroyed and who had simply no survival strategy at hand and gave them weapons.
And these guys went down south, and their object was not to kill the peasants in the south, but to drive them off their land.
The larger came from the regular Salvadoran armed forces and police.
He also had U.S. backing.
In fact, D’Aubuisson launched his career as a major figure in Salvador by going on TV and making a speech.
He had a video role as he spoke with an illustrated death list of union people and religious figures and others who he said should be killed as traitors to the country.
And the data for the list were supplied to him by American intelligence, again according to the officers there I interviewed.
Displaced boy, Darfur, Sudan

Photo: US AID
Displaced boy, Darfur, Sudan
Photo: US AID
MAHMOOD MAMDANI:   
The government’s response was also to pick a second group, and that second group are the nomads from Chad who have come into Darfur.
Problem stems from Colonial Empires enhanced by US intervention
And to understand that, one has to look at the third dimension of the conflict, which is that over the last twenty-five, thirty years there has been a civil war going on in Chad.
Chad, during the Cold War, was a bone of contention, first and foremost between the US and France, and both had their allies in the region.
France allied with Libya.
The US allied with the military dictatorship in Sudan, with the Numeri dictatorship in Sudan.
And every oppositional movement in Chad had a base in Darfur, and they armed themselves, organized themselves in Darfur.
So Darfur was awash with weapons for two decades, OK.
And those who ran away from the civil war in Chad came into Darfur.
So the other wing of those who were armed, whether by the government or whether by this weaponry which was awash, were the Chad refugees in Darfur.
So what we call the Janjaweed are two groups.
They are the Chad refugees in Darfur, and they are the poorest of the northern camel - the pastoralists divide into two: the camel pastoralists and the cattle pastoralists.
And the camel pastoralists, because the camel is the only game which will survive in the worst conditions where even cattle will not survive, they are the poorest of the poor.
So these are what are called the Janjaweed.
AMY GOODMAN:    I wanted to play a clip for you from John Prendergast.
He is the senior adviser for the International Crisis Group, leader of the Save Darfur Coalition, has argued that genocide is occurring in Darfur, that the Sudanese government is trying to mask what’s really happening.
JOHN PRENDERGAST:    This policy of divide and conquer, which has been in place since the early part of this decade, had as its objective the creation of anarchy in Darfur.
So when people take a snapshot today and see Darfur and go, “My god, all these groups are fighting against each other. It seems like it’s chaos,” it’s precisely what the government intended.
US state-sponsored terrorist movement in Mozambique 
MAHMOOD MAMDANI:    We need to keep in mind, and John Prendergast needs to keep in mind, that the history of state-sponsored terrorism in that part of Africa begins with the US providing a political umbrella to South Africa to create a state-sponsored terrorist movement in Mozambique: RENAMO.
And it is after a full decade of that impunity that others learn the experience, and Charles Taylor begins it in Liberia.
The Sudanese government begins it in the south.
But this is the second thing, which builds on this history of political violence.
The third thing is that when the rebel movements begin in 2003 in Darfur, the Khartoum government responds in the same way, which is it looks at the scene, and it picks the weakest, the most vulnerable, the ones that they can bring under their wing.
It arms them and says, “Go for it.”
And they go for the land.
AMY GOODMAN:    Professor Mamdani, you quote the saying, “Out of Iraq, into Darfur.”
What about intervention?
MAHMOOD MAMDANI:    Well, look, the question in Darfur is really, how do we stop the fighting.
Because if we want to stop the killing of civilians, we have to stop the fighting.
The only way to stop the fighting is a political resolution.
In 2005, African Union troops came into Darfur.
I interviewed the Ghanaian general who was deputy to Dallaire in Rwanda and who is the chief of the UN nucleus force in Darfur.
And he said to me that the African Union troops were spectacularly successful in 2005.
The killing came down dramatically.
Human bones and skulls lie inches below the surface
Mukjar, West Darfur, Sudan
And then, he said, two things happened.
Both happened around the question of finances, because African countries can provide troops but they don’t have finances to provide salaries or logistics.
So the first shift was around salaries.
The salaries of African troops were being paid by the European Union, which paid them from an emergency fund, and it shifted the payment to quarterly payments.
So they would make payment every three months.
They would only make the next three-month payment if the paperwork was done properly, if there was accountability.
So, as I speak now, African Union troops have not been paid for four months, because the EU says there hasn’t been proper accountability.
Second is about logistics.
The troops have to work with planes, and the planes provided are not military planes.
They are planes flown by civilian pilots.
And civilian pilots have the right to refuse to fly in areas which they consider dangerous.
Now, of course, all these areas are dangerous.
So you’re operating with logistics that you don’t control.
Civilian pilots will not.
The Ghanaian general said to me - I asked him, I said, “Why do you think these changes happened?”
He said, “I don’t know.
But the only thing I can think is that the reason would only be political.”
I had the same response when I heard President Bush’s speech.
Shelters, displaced camp, Darfur, Sudan

Photo: US AID
Shelters, displaced camp, Darfur, Sudan
Photo: US AID
West Darfur town of Mukjar
'Security bubble'
Janjaweed fighters stroll through marketplace rifles over shoulders
MAHMOOD MAMDANI:   
The contention has been over who has political control over the troops in Darfur.
The African Union troops are under the political control of African Union.
And there is a concerted attempt being made to shift the political control of any intervention force inside Darfur from inside Africa to outside Africa.
The second thing is that the African Union is convinced that they cannot go in and fight.
They can only go in with the agreement of both sides, so they can only intervene consensually.
And that is crucial and important, because if they go in with the two sides not agreeing, the fighting will simply increase and the slaughter of civilians will increase.
President Bush's speech yesterday — the response of the UN, the UN Secretary General, was, “Look, we’re just arriving at an agreement.
We’ve been working for the last four, five months, and the Sudan government is agreeing.”
The South African response was the same.
Why sanctions now when we are about to arrive at an agreement?
Any sane thinking person would think that, intended or unintended, the consequence of these imposition of sanctions is to torpedo that process on the ground.
And that process is the political process which is absolutely vital to stopping the fighting.
AMY GOODMAN:    You mentioned Congo.
What about the comparison of the conflicts and the attention given to each?
MAHMOOD MAMDANI:    Well, no two comparisons are exactly alike, of course.   We know that.
But to the extent that numbers are being highlighted, the numbers are huge in Congo.
The Congo estimates are four million-plus [killed] over several years.
The Darfur estimates go from 200,000 to 400,000.
So why no concern about Congo?
Congo involves, again, multiple causes, like Darfur.
It’s a huge place.
But both states are allies of the US in the region so there's nothing said about it 
But in Kivu province, where I have been, the conflict has been very Darfur-like, in the sense that you’ve had proxies being fed from the outside, the Hema and the Lendu.
You have the recruitment of child soldiers.
You have two states in the region arming these proxies: Uganda and Rwanda.
But both states are allies of the US in the region, so there's nothing said about it.
The most recent example is Somalia.
We can see that the civilian suffering is going up dramatically in Somalia since the intervention, Ethiopian intervention force.
And we know that the Ethiopian intervention force had at least the blessings of the US, if not more than that — I’m not privy to the information.
And nothing is being said about it.
So one arrives back at the question: what is the politics around it?
And I’m struck by the innocence of those who are part of the Save Darfur — of the foot soldiers in the Save Darfur Coalition, not the leadership, simply because this is not discussed.
Where does Save Darfur Coalition money go? 
Let me tell you, when I went to Sudan in Khartoum, I had interviews with the UN humanitarian officer, the political officer, etc., and I asked them, I said, “What assistance does the Save Darfur Coalition give?”
He said, “Nothing.”
I said, “Nothing?”
He said, “No.”
And I would like to know.
The Save Darfur Coalition raises an enormous amount of money in this country.
Where does that money go?
Does it go to other organizations which are operative in Sudan, or does it go simply to fund the advertising campaign?
AMY GOODMAN:    To make people aware of what’s going on in Darfur.
MAHMOOD MAMDANI:    To make people aware of what is going on.
But people, who then, out of awareness, give money not to fuel a commercial campaign, but expecting that this money will go to do something about the pain and suffering of those who are the victims in Darfur.
So how much of that money is going to actually — how much of it translates into food or medicine or shelter?
And how much of it is being recycled?
Prepare mud bricks
Abu Shouk refugee camp, Al-Fasher, Darfur, Sudan
AMY GOODMAN:    Do you think the UN process, if allowed to carry forward, would be the answer right now?
MAHMOOD MAMDANI:    Well, the answer has to be a political process.
The African Union, if its hands are not tied — if this money was translated into salaries and logistics for the African Union force, it would untie those hands.
If the governments who claim to be speaking and acting for the people of Darfur, if they actually directed the money they intend to spend on intervention to paying salaries for the African Union forces, to providing the logistics without these constraints, the problem would be much closer to solving.
This traditional storage vessel for excess food would normally help a family cope during times of food insecurity.  

Attackers have destroyed the container and emptied it of its contents.

Photo: US AID
Traditional storage vessel for excess food would normally help a family cope during times of food insecurity
Attackers have destroyed the container and emptied it of its contents
Photo: US AID
Daniel Estulin

Unique Bilderberg documents.

The idea is to give to each country a political constitution and an appropriate national economic structure organised for the following purposes:

(1) Place the political power into the hands of chosen people and eliminate all intermediaries.

(2) Establish a maximum concentration of industries and suppress all unwarranted competition.

(3) Establish an absolute control of prices of all goods and raw materials.

[Bilderbergers make it possible through their iron grip control of the World Bank, IMF and the World Trade Organization]

(4) Create judicial and social institutions that would prevent all extremes of action.

Image: danielestulin.com
Published on Sunday, March 3, 2007 by Daniel Estulin — DanielEstulin.com
Bilderberg 2007 comes to an end
The sun has set on Bilderberg 2007.
After a sumptuous lunch, most Bilderbergers will return to their countries of choice freshly armed with precise instructions from the Steering Committee on how to proceed in covertly expanding the powers of One World Government.
Amongst this year’s delegates we can find:
Henry Kissinger
Henry Kravis of KKR
Marie Josee Kravis of Hudson Institute
Vernon Jordan
Etienne Davignon, Bilderberger President
Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, daughter of one of the founders, Prince Bernhard and the Queen and King of Spain.
Final objective of this despicable group of hoodlums is World Fascist — One World Empire
As a rhetorical question, can someone please explain to me how is it that “good” liberals such as John Edwards and Hillary Clinton as well as “do-gooder” humanitarians with multiple social projects on the go such as Rockefeller and every Royal House in Europe can perennially attend Bilderberger meetings knowing that the final objective of this despicable group of hoodlums is a World Fascist — One World Empire?
Western Elite Militarism
Western Elite controlled Terror States
We'll replace a state here
Destroy a nation at will
Who cares how many people we kill
How could it be orchestrated?
The idea is to give to each country a political constitution and an appropriate national economic structure organised for the following purposes:
(1) Place the political power into the hands of chosen people and eliminate all intermediaries.
(2) Establish a maximum concentration of industries and suppress all unwarranted competition.
(3) Establish an absolute control of prices of all goods and raw materials.
[Bilderbergers make it possible through their iron grip control of the World Bank, IMF and the World Trade Organization]
(4) Create judicial and social institutions that would prevent all extremes of action.
Not private but secret
Although participants emphatically attest they attend the Club’s annual meeting as private citizens and not in their official government capacity, that affirmation is dubious — particularly when you compare the Chatham House Rule to the Logan Act in the United States.
The Logan Act states is absolutely illegal for elected officials to meet in private with influential business executives to debate and design public policy.
Bilderberg meetings follow a traditional protocol founded in 1919 in the wake of the Paris Peace Conference held at Versailles for the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) based in Chatham House in London.
While the name Chatham House is commonly used to refer to the Institute itself, the Royal Institute of International Affairs is the foreign policy executive arm of the British monarchy.
Western Elite Militarism
Western Elite controlled Terror States
We'll replace a state here
Destroy a nation at will
Who cares how many people we kill
According to RIIA procedures, “when a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed; nor may it be mentioned that the information was received at a meeting of the Institute.”
U.S. Logan Act
The Logan Act was intended to prohibit United States citizens without authority from interfering in relations between the United States and foreign governments.
There appear to have been no prosecutions under the Act in its almost 200-year history.
However, there have been a number of judicial references to the Act, and it is not uncommon for it to be used as a political weapon.
None of which is to say that private citizens can get away with anything when visiting or interacting with foreign countries.
Among those who have attended Bilderberg Club meetings and flaunted the Logan Act have been:
Allen Dulles (CIA)
Sen. William J. Fulbright (from Arkansas, a Rhodes Scholar)
Dean Acheson (Secretary of State under Truman)
Nelson Rockefeller and Laurence Rockefeller
Gerald Ford (former President)
Henry J. Heinz II (Chairman of the H. J. Heinz Co.)
Thomas L. Hughes (President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace)
Robert S. McNamara (Kennedy’s Secretary of Defence and former President of the World Bank)
Western Elite Militarism
Western Elite controlled Terror States
We'll replace a state here
Destroy a nation at will
Who cares how many people we kill
William P. Bundy (former President of the Ford Foundation, and editor of the Council on Foreign Relations’s Foreign Affairs journal)
John J. McCloy (former President of the Chase Manhattan Bank)
George F. Kennan (former U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union)
Paul H. Nitze (representative of Schroeder Bank—Nitze played a very prominent role in matters of Arms Control agreements, which have always been under the direction of the RIIA)
Robert O. Anderson (Chairman of Atlantic-Richfield Co. and head of the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies)
John D. Rockefeller IV (Governor of West Virginia, now U.S. Senator)
Cyrus Vance (Secretary of State under Carter)
Eugene Black (former President of the World Bank)
Joseph Johnson (President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace)
Henry Ford III (head of the Ford Motor Co.)
Gen. Andrew J. Goodpaster (former Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, and later superintendent of the West Point Academy)
Zbigniew Brzezinski (National Security Adviser to President Carter, founder of the Trilateral Commission)
Gen. Alexander Haig (once European NATO Commander, former assistant to Kissinger, and was later Secretary of State under Reagan)
James Rockefeller (Chairman, First National City Bank).
Bilderberg 2007 conclusions
Thanks to our inside sources at the conference, we have compiled what we believe to be an accurate and a credible model of Bilderberger 2007 conclusions.
We are working against the clock to bring this information into the open.
Our Robert Zoellick report from Friday has now been confirmed by the Financial Times when this well respected periodical announced on the front page of June 2, 2007 edition that “Robert Zoellick is the World Bank’s new chief.”
We, of course, already knew that.
The issues we are working on deal with European Bilderbergers anger at Bush´s shift on climate issue.
The upcoming G8 meeting in Heiligendamm, Germany where Merkel and her European Bilderberg allies will position themselves as true leaders of the environment.
European Bilderbergers were fairly unhappy that a pre-G8 Bilderberg could not resolve and reconcile contradictory views on the issue.
As one German attendee stated:
“This requires feats of diplomatic acrobatics, something unfortunately greatly lacking in the current U.S. administration.”
Western Elite Militarism
Western Elite controlled Terror States
We'll replace a state here
Destroy a nation at will
Who cares how many
CHILDREN we kill
Another issue of great concern to both American and European Bilderbergers is Russia’s current muscle flexing on the energy issue.
The TNK-BP license is just one of the many signs causing anger amongst the globalist elite.
After years of economic stagnation, said one American Bilderberger:
“Russia is acting against unipolarity's accommodating ideologies and politics, against its recently resurgent manifestations and machinations, and against the instruments of its perpetuation, such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).”
Bilderberg 2007 served as a consensus building to decide on a common policy and strategy to deal with Russia’s resurgence.
Another subject under discussion dealt with Afghanistan.
It was commonly agreed by the attendees that the US-led NATO alliance and mission is in a state of quagmire and “that the situation is getting worse.”
Bilderbergers will be urging NATO and the US to decide on their real mission goals — economic development or the hunt for al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
Finally, get ready for a new phrase in the lexicon of realpolitik shortly to have its coming-out party — “sustainable consumption,” to define a more humane approach to global warming.
Western Elite militarism
Western Elite Terror States
Western Elite War Crimes
BBC — Sunday, 3 June 2007
Putin warns Europe in missile row
Mr Putin says US missile defence plans may spark another arms race.

Moscow may target weapons at Europe if the US builds planned missile defence facilities in the region, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said.

Russia has not pointed missiles towards Europe since the end of the Cold War.
Mr Putin says US missile defence plans may spark another arms race
Moscow may target weapons at Europe if the US builds planned missile defence facilities in the region, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said.
Russia has not pointed missiles towards Europe since the end of the Cold War.
Last week, Russia said it had tested a ballistic missile to maintain "strategic balance" in the world.
The US wants to expand its missile defences into Eastern Europe. It says the system is not aimed at Russia but Moscow says its security is threatened.
'Not our fault'
Mr Putin made the comments in an interview published in Italian newspaper Corriere Della Sera ahead of the G8 meeting which starts in Germany on Wednesday.
If the American nuclear potential grows in European territory, we have to give ourselves new targets in Europe
President Vladimir Putin
He repeated warnings that the US defence shield could lead to a new arms race but said it would the fault of the Americans if this happened.
He said the US had "altered the strategic balance" by unilaterally pulling out of the anti-ballistic missile (ABM) treaty in 2002.
"If the American nuclear potential grows in European territory, we have to give ourselves new targets in Europe," Mr Putin said.
"It is up to our military to define these targets, in addition to defining the choice between ballistic and cruise missiles."
US President George W Bush is due to meet Mr Putin at the three-day G8 summit in the German resort of Heiligendamm.
Washington wants to deploy interceptor rockets in Poland and a radar base in the Czech Republic to counter what it describes as a potential threat from "rogue states" such as Iran and North Korea.
Last Tuesday, Russia tested an RS-24 missile that successfully struck its target 5,500km (3,400 miles) away.
It was designed to evade missile defence systems, Russia's defence ministry said.
BBC — Sunday, 3 June 2007
Gorbachev criticises US 'empire'
Mikhail Gorbachev.

Moscow may target weapons at Europe if the US builds planned missile defence facilities in the region, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said.

Russia has not pointed missiles towards Europe since the end of the Cold War.

The former Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, has blamed the US for the current state of relations between Russia and the West.

In a BBC interview, Mr Gorbachev said that the Russians were ready to be constructive, but America was trying to squeeze them out of global diplomacy.

Mr Gorbachev accused America of ' empire-building ', which he said the UK should have warned it away from.
Mr Gorbachev said relations between Russia and the West were in a bad state
Gorbachev interview
The former Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, has blamed the US for the current state of relations between Russia and the West.
In a BBC interview, Mr Gorbachev said that the Russians were ready to be constructive, but America was trying to squeeze them out of global diplomacy.
He added that the Iraq War had undermined Tony Blair's credibility.
Mr Gorbachev accused America of "empire-building", which he said the UK should have warned it away from.
'New empire'
Moscow and the West have been in dispute over Iraq, America's plans for a missile defence system and civil rights within Russia itself.
Britain's extradition request for a Russian man in connection with the murder of ex-agent Alexander Litvinenko has also caused tension.
In an interview with Radio Four's The World This Weekend, Mr Gorbachev said relations between Russia and the West were in a bad state.
If the American nuclear potential grows in European territory, we have to give ourselves new targets in Europe
President Vladimir Putin
"Well, it's worse than I expected," he said through a translator.
"We lost 15 years after the end of the Cold War, but the West I think and particularly the United States, our American friends, were dizzy with their success, with the success of their game that they were playing, a new empire.
"I don't understand why you, the British, did not tell them, 'Don't think about empire, we know about empires, we know that all empires break up in the end, so why start again to create a new mess.'"
He added that the war with Iraq had damaged Britain's relationship with Russia after a promising start.
"Tony Blair and Putin established a very good relationship and that made it possible to advance our relationship," he said.
"But then Iraq happened and Tony found himself in the embrace of that military monster, of that war situation, and he lost a lot of his credibility in the world and in Europe."
It's kind of a fun game
You see the aim of those inner forces who guide the Elite —
For them the real agenda is to kill you
your children
your grandchildren
It is to have fun watching your stupidity as you destroy your planet
But most haven't figured it out yet!
If you stop them with the nuclear weapons — then it's the 400+ MPH, KPH wind, the UVB, UVC, UVA rays due to loss of stratospheric ozone.
It's the climate!
Your Elite — tools and servants of Lucifer
The fall of Lucifer, Gustave Doré's illustration for Paradise Lost by John Milton.

Photo: wikipedia.org/
The fall of Lucifer
Gustave Doré's illustration for Paradise Lost by John Milton
Published on Friday, June 1, 2007 by Marjorie Cohn — Uruknet.info
The Unitary King George
As the nation focused on whether Congress would exercise its constitutional duty to cut funding for the war, Bush quietly issued an unconstitutional bombshell that went virtually unnoticed by the corporate media.
What about the other two co-equal branches of government?
The directive throws them a bone by speaking of a "cooperative effort" among the three branches, "coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers."
The Vice-President would help to implement the plans.
Courtesy
"Comity," however, means courtesy, and the President would decide what kind of respect for the other two branches of government would be "proper."
This Presidential Directive is a blatant power grab by Bush to institutionalize "the unitary executive."
A seemingly innocuous phrase, the unitary executive theory actually represents a radical, ultra rightwing interpretation of the powers of the presidency.
Championed by the conservative Federalist Society, the unitary executive doctrine gathers all power in the hands of the President and insulates him from any oversight by the congressional or judicial branches.
Alito — not just some executive powers, but the executive power — the whole thing
In a November 2000 speech to the Federalist Society, then Judge Samuel Alito said the Constitution:
"...makes the president the head of the executive branch, but it does more than that.
The president has not just some executive powers, but the executive power — the whole thing."
These "unitarians" claim that all federal agencies, even those constitutionally created by Congress, are beholden to the Chief Executive, that is, the President.
This means that Bush could disband agencies like the Federal Communications Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, the Federal Reserve Board, etc., if they weren't to his liking.
Indeed, Bush signed an executive order stating that each federal agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political appointee.
Consumer advocates were concerned that this directive was aimed at weakening the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Audacious presidential overreaching into the constitutional province
The unitary executive dogma represents audacious presidential overreaching into the constitutional province of the other two branches of government.
This doctrine took shape within the Bush administration shortly after 9/11.
On September 25, 2001, former deputy assistant attorney general John Yoo used the words "unitary executive" in a memo he wrote for the White House:
"The centralization of authority in the president alone is particularly crucial in matters of national defense, war, and foreign policy, where a unitary executive can evaluate threats, consider policy choices, and mobilize national resources with a speed and energy that is far superior to any other branch."
Western Elite militarism
Western Elite Terror States
Once was in Baquba
Returning to do the same to the 'land of the free' — soon
Six weeks later, Bush began using that phrase in his signing statements.
Afghan Independent Radio, which broadcasts a program in Kandahar city, reports that missing children declarations are the most commonly placed adverts on the show.
"We get about four or five missing children a month.  About 20 percent of them are found before we hit the air," said Ismael Tahir, director of radio programming at the station.
However, others are taken for child labour, or abuse, or are runaways, Tahir said, adding that the station is planning to log their names and addresses to help with investigations.
The radio station is at the front line of the search for missing children because public confidence in the police has sunk so low.  Even the newly appointed police chief, Lieutenant General Mohammed Ayoub Salangi, concedes that there was probably official corruption behind the kidnappings.
"It seems as if local militia or tribal commanders were involved," he told AFP.
For Mohammed Tahir's family their nightmare had only just begun when they lost their son.  Police arrested two of the child's uncles, keeping one of them, Abdul Zahir, for 18 days and torturing him to try and force him to admit to the crime.
"I couldn't admit it because I haven't done anything, but now our whole family wants to leave Kandahar because we think there were powerful people involved," he said.
No police investigators have been to look at the pictures the kidnappers sent to try to find out who might be behind the killings, he added.
"It should be possible to work out where this was developed and try to trace the kidnappers that way," he said holding out a picture of his dead nephew.
Western Elite militarism
Western Elite Terror States
Once was in Fallujah
Heading for the USA
Returning to do the same to the 'land of the free' — soon
As of December 22, 2006, Bush had used the words "unitary executive" 145 times in his signing statements and executive orders.
Yoo, one of the chief architects of Bush's doctrine of unfettered executive power, wrote memoranda advising Bush that because he was commander in chief, he could make war any time he thought there was a threat, and he didn't have to comply with the Geneva Conventions.
In a 2005 debate with Notre Dame professor Doug Cassel, Yoo argued there is no law that could prevent the President from ordering that a young child of a suspect in custody be tortured, even by crushing the child's testicles.
The unitary executive theory has already cropped up in Supreme Court opinions.
Structural advantages of unitary Executive
In his lone dissent in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Justice Clarence Thomas cited "the structural advantages of a unitary Executive."
He disagreed with the Court that due process demands an American citizen held in the United States as an enemy combatant be given a meaningful opportunity to contest the factual basis for that detention before a neutral decision maker.
Thomas wrote:
"Congress, to be sure, has a substantial and essential role in both foreign affairs and national security.
But it is crucial to recognize that judicial interference in these domains destroys the purpose of vesting primary responsibility in a unitary Executive."
Justice Thomas's theory fails to recognize why our Constitution provides for three co-equal branches of government.
In 1926, Justice Louis Brandeis explained the constitutional role of the separation of powers.
He wrote:
"The doctrine of the separation of powers was adopted by the convention of 1787 not to promote efficiency but to preclude the exercise of arbitrary power.
The purpose was not to avoid friction, but, by means of the inevitable friction incident to the distribution of the governmental powers among three departments, to save the people from autocracy."
Eighty years later, noted conservative Grover Norquist, describing the unitary executive theory, echoed Brandeis's sentiment.
You don't have a constitution — You have a king
Norquist said, "you don't have a constitution; you have a king."
One wonders what Bush & Co. are setting up with the new Presidential Directive.
Western Elite militarism
Western Elite Terror States
What they can do in Baquba
They can do in the 'land of the free'
This administration has gone to great lengths to remain in Iraq.
It has built huge permanent military bases and pushed to privatize Iraq's oil.
Bush and Cheney may be unwilling to relinquish power to a successor administration.
Her new book, Cowboy Republic: Six Ways the Bush Gang Has Defied the Law, will be (is) published by PoliPointPress.
What if, heaven forbid, some sort of catastrophic event were to occur just before the 2008 election?
Bush could use this directive to suspend the election.
Marjorie Cohn, MWC News Magazine senior editor, is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, president of the National Lawyers Guild, and the US representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists.


Western Elite militarism
Western Elite Terror States
Western Elite War Crimes
Robert Scheer: Rice More Sordid Than Foley
Posted on Oct 3, 2006
By Robert Scheer
They are such liars.   On Monday, a State Department spokesman conceded that then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice had indeed been briefed in July 2001 by George Tenet, then-director of the CIA, about the alarming potential for an Al Qaeda attack, as Bob Woodward has reported in his aptly named new book, “State of Denial.”
“I don’t remember a so-called emergency meeting,” Rice had said only hours earlier, apparently still suffering from some sort of post-9/11 amnesia that seemed to afflict her during her forced testimony to the 9/11 Commission.
The omission of this meeting from the final commission report is another example of how the Bush administration undermined the bipartisan investigation that the president had tried to prevent.   Nor is it just Rice who should be challenged, for Tenet seems to have provided Woodward with details concerning the administration’s indifference to the terrorist threat that he did not share with the 9/11 Commission.
Said he needed to see her right away
In his book, Woodward described an encounter between Rice and Tenet, in a near panic about a rising flood of intelligence warnings just presented to him by top aide Cofer Black.   Tenet forced an unscheduled meeting with Rice on July 10, 2001, because he wanted the Bush administration to take action immediately against Al Qaeda to disrupt a possible domestic attack.
“Tenet ... decided he and Black should go to the White House immediately.   Tenet called Condoleezza Rice, then national security adviser, from the car and said he needed to see her right away...”
“He and Black hoped to convey the depth of their anxiety and get Rice to kick-start the government into immediate action.”
A mountain of evidence proves that the Bush administration did nothing of the sort.
Not remembering confirms her inattention to terror reports
Now, if Rice truly does not remember that now-confirmed meeting—which was apparently first reported in the Aug. 4, 2002, Time magazine in an article titled “Could 9/11 Have Been Prevented?” — wouldn’t that indicate she didn’t take it that seriously?
Not remembering confirms her inattention to terror reports at a time the Bush administration was already fixated on “regime change” in Iraq.
Rice is famously sharp and has an awesome memory.
Considering the trauma of 9/11 and its effects, it is inconceivable that Rice would not recall such an ominous and prescient briefing by Tenet and Black, especially after the 9/11 Commission forced her to document and review her actions in those crucial months.
We were not presented with a plan
It is, however, as she stated Monday, “incomprehensible” that she, then the national security advisor to the president and the person most clearly charged with sounding the alarm, would have ignored the threat.
But ignore it the administration did, and then later tried to lay the blame on the Clinton administration, which, Rice claimed at the 9/11 Commission hearings, lied when it said it had given the incoming White House team an action plan for fighting Al Qaeda.
“We were not presented with a plan,” Rice infamously argued under questioning from former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.), but instead were given a memo with “a series of actionable items” describing how to tackle Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.
Such weaseling would be funny if the topic were not so serious.
But there is no way Rice can squirm out of this one, despite her impressive track record of calculated distortion on everything from Iraq’s nonexistent WMDs to the trumped-up ties between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.
Can there be any better case for turning over control of at least one branch of Congress to the opposition party so that we might finally have hearings to learn the truth of this matter, which is far more important, and sordid, than the Foley affair?
Western Elite militarism
Western Elite Terror States
Western Elite War Crimes
Raul Castro turns 76 June 3, 2007
June 1, 2007
47 Years Later in Havana
Return to Cuba
By SAUL LANDAU
I landed at Jose Marti International airport in May of 1960, 17 months after a young, bearded man and his fellow barbudos had captured control of the island and sent a hated dictator fleeing.
Musicians played a lively tune as the passengers deplaned, a young woman pushed a rum-flavored drink into my hand and I spotted a young, uniformed man with lieutenant's bars on his shoulders.
I gave him the note that Raulito Roa (of the Cuban UN delegation) had given me in New York, saying I was a young progressive writer and to provide me with help in understanding the revolution.
Cuba signs trade agreements with Vietnam General Secretary Nong Duc Manh
Bola de Nieve performing at Hotel Nacional where Meyer Lansky ran Mafia operations until January 1959
Richard's velocity of speech outpaced my meager comprehension of Spanish, but I did understand that "the revolution had opened the prisms of hope in the eyes of the Cuban people," and that I should wait outside the Hotel Presidente at 8 a.m. to get picked up for a trip to eastern Cuba.
I spent a few hours walking around Havana and trying to engage people in conversations.
I had a rum drink at Club Red and heard a singer called La Lupe.
I saw a sign for Bola de Nieve performing at the Hotel Nacional where Meyer Lansky ran Mafia operations until January 1959.
I saw the sign Habana Libre, flashing from the hotel that used to say Havana Hilton.
Disabled children and dolphins play
Cuba's National Aquarium has been helping children with special needs
I hadn't yet realized Santeria played a more powerful role in spiritual life of the island than the Church
I didn't hear explosions and shooting in the street, although the CIA's terrorist campaign from Florida was well underway.
I walked along the Malecon (the ocean walk), passing couples necking, others fishing.
In the morning, a jeep stopped in front of the hotel, a young man asked my name, introduced himself as Julio, grabbed my suit case and motioned for me to hop in.
I shared the ride with three Chileans back to the airport, bound for Santiago de Cuba, some 500 miles to the east.
What kind of revolution is this, I thought, filled with music and dancing in a Catholic country — I hadn't yet realized that Santeria played a more powerful role in the spiritual life of the island than the Church.
Marta, one of the Chileans, questioned Cuba's growing connection to the Soviet Union as well as the ever advancing role of the Cuban Communist Party in revolutionary decisions.
Dolphins, sea tortoises and sea lions all get into the action
We cruised the countryside outside Santiago de Cuba seeing the revolution's new construction and slum clearance projects
In the October 1959 election for head of Cuba's National Labor council Fidel personally had stepped in to prevent the victory of David Salvador who was an outspoken anti-communist.
In the same time period, Fidel personally arrested Huber Matos, who commanded Camaguey Province.
Matos had objected to the sweeping land reforms and to the growing relationship with Moscow.
The militant anti-imperialist and anti-Yankee language of Che Guevara, for example, and Raul Castro's past links with Cuba's Communist Youth movement had provoked U.S. newspaper columnists and Congressmen alike to question Fidel's commitment to the very axioms of the Cold War: anti-Sovietism uber alles.
By June 1960, we cruised the countryside outside Santiago de Cuba and saw the revolution's new construction and slum clearance projects; I heard only praise for the Soviets from revolutionary cadre.
Marta's skepticism increased.
 Cuba's National Aquarium
April, 11, 2007
Disabled child watches
The slum neighborhood seemed endless as we trudged through mud and slime
The Manzana de Gomez, a slum neighborhood in Santiago, seemed endless as we trudged through mud and slime, rickety shacks made of every leftover substance one could imagine on either side.
A trickling stream filled with garbage and feces wound its way through the center of the makeshift street.
One middle aged man, seemingly drunk, offered a girl, of about 13 or 14, to the Chilean men and me.
His daughter?
The Cuban guides said something harsh to him.
He laughed.
Some women seemed intent on sweeping their dirt floors; some even looked clean, with ironed dresses.
Mostly, I recall the barefoot kids, the emaciated dogs
Mostly, I recall the barefoot kids, the emaciated dogs, my sense of being inside chaos and cacophony.
It had seemed like hours of watching a live horror show. My watch indicated that we had only walked for ten minutes.
"Seen enough?" one of the guides asked.
You can not make this stuff up folks
The United States is in Spain asking that Spain use its influence to get Cuba to change its ways
It should not be permitted for human to live like this
One of the Chilean men shook his head, his complexion slightly green.
Marta looked angry. "It should not be permitted for human to live like this," she said:
"But in Chile there are similar shantytowns.
I would imagine that almost every city in Latin America has them."
By the end of the visit Marta had become convinced that Cuba could not rely on any help from the United States, and had no option but to turn to Moscow. "But in Chile there are similar shantytowns.
"This one won't be here long," one of the Cubans pledged.   "But in Chile there are similar shantytowns."
"The plans to raze it and construct new housing are well underway.
But under the old regimes no one cared to do anything about such conditions.
This is why we're showing it to you, so you'll understand why we had to make a revolution."
 No, you really cannot make this up
Rice reproaches Spain for its business contacts with Cuba, says Spain should be killing more Afghanistan people as the United States is doing.
Madrid, Spain
June 1, 2007
 
The jeep took us about a thousand feet up into the Sierra Maestra where the guerrillas successfully operated for two years between late December 1956 and their successful capture of the island in January 1959.
I asked Julio how a few hundred men could possibly have defeated an army that numbered some fifty thousand.
He smiled.
"We had will, determination, the cooperation of a large underground organization and the vast majority of the people.
The Batista government had no support, except from Washington.
They not only tortured and murdered; they did nothing for the people.
Look around.
Moreover, Cuba's institutions did not function, which made it ripe for revolution."
The villages we saw had neither electricity nor running water.
Kids ran barefoot.
I saw no school or a church in most of the villages.
In two, I noticed a crude, hand painted sign: "El Dios se encuentra aqui. (God is here)"
"Protestants," explained our guide.
"Some kind of primitive religion," said Julio.
The sun seemed to toast the ground.
The villages had no electricity or running water.
The thatched-roof houses, bohios, had existed even before Columbus, one guide asserted.
I didn't ask how he knew.
The rocky dirt roads worsened as we climbed.
Patches of corn and malanga, clusters of coffee trees and unhealthy farm animals dotted the landscape.
The villagers filled sacks with ripe coffee beans, loaded them on burros and brought them down the dirt roads to market.
      Saul Landau      www.counterpunch.org      June 1, 2007
 
Western Elite Terror States
Western Elite militarism
Canberra, Australia
47 Years Later in Havana
— Return to Cuba
By SAUL LANDAU
D ark-skinned peasants, in dirty yellowish hats and weathered faces waved or nodded as we passed their caravans of animals with jingling bells on their necks.
Often the men rode on horseback; their wives — I presumed — walked next to them.
"Seen enough?" Julio asked, as one Chilean complained of physical discomfort — kidney exercise in the jeep.
I tried to imagine Fidel and his bearded men disembarking to face an ambush, cries of betrayal amidst rifle and machine gun fire
Then the guides brought us to the place near Manzanillo where the yacht Granma landed in early December 1956.
Western Elite militarism
Western Elite Terror States
Madrid, Spain
I tried to imagine Fidel and his bearded men disembarking to face an ambush, cries of betrayal amidst rifle and machine gun fire, the sight and smell of human blood on the road lined with white shelled crabs, crawling to and from the swampy grasses on either side of the road.
Fidel and a small group of sick, wounded and exhausted guerrillas somehow escaped and climbed to the high points of the nearby mountains.
One of the guides told us of Fidel peering across the island and commenting to the weary survivors: "The days of the dictatorship are numbered."
As we drove downhill, I wondered whether President Eisenhower, who had supposedly authorized the CIA to organize anti-Castro Cuban exiles to in the near future invade the island and overthrow the revolutionary government, had any idea of the already living legend he would be facing.
Plans to redistribute wealth to and make investment in the impoverished countryside
Julio talked of plans to redistribute wealth to and make investment in the impoverished countryside.
The revolutionaries had already expropriated large estates and many other businesses, including major U.S. companies.
Shortly after I returned to Havana, in July 1960, Fidel took over the U.S.-owned oil refineries, which had refused on orders from Washington to refine imported Soviet oil.
Eisenhower retaliated by cutting the Cuban sugar quota, depriving Cuba of badly needed cash and credit as well.
Walking from the bus to the Tropicana to hear a jazz combo, we ran into Guillermo Cabrera Infante, then editor of Lunes de Revolucion, the cultural supplement of Revolution, the government's newspaper, and passed a demonstration denouncing Ike.
"Sin cuota pero sin amo" read the placards carried by chanting marchers.
Cabrera Infante sneered: "Sin cuota pero sin ano."
(Without a quota but without an ass).
I chuckled at his wit.
Rice, US Dollars
and Torture
I also feared both slogans might be right.
(Lunes de Revolucion was closed in 1961. Cabrera Infante served as Cuba's cultural attaché in Belgium. He defected in 1964 and in England wrote several acclaimed novels before his death.)
When I left Cuba in February 1961 I saw young men hoisting four barreled anti aircraft guns onto the roof of the lobby of the Hotel Riviera.
Others planted dynamite under bridges.
All of Cuba awaited the U.S.-backed invasion that finally came in April 1961 at the Bay of Pigs.
When the battle ended, Cuba had symbolically lost its boss and still had its ass.
Over the next decades it struggled to keep it.
 Boy buys bread at Agro (farmers market)
March 1962, Cuba guarantee citizens a basic amount of food at low prices
Havana
June 1, 2007
I would look that way also if I were a member of the U.S. congress visiting Cuba, May 29, 2007
No, you really cannot make this stuff up.
Rice is in Spain two days later reproaching Spain for its business contacts with Cuba, saying Spain should be killing more Afghanistan people as the United States is doing
 Kisses Dolphin
 
Ecuador's Vice President Lenin Moreno tours Old Havana during his official visit to Cuba May 27, 2007
 
From Kewe      TheWE.biz
It is not possible for me to adequately express wording for what has taken place in American society, from Bush down, with regard to the U.S. government's practices of torture.
Needless to say all who have been involved should not in the future — to human, animal or insect — have any contact.
All in the medical profession, all psychologists and psychiatrists, all military personnel, all government servants involved, should be tried as war criminals of the highest order.
A court based upon the Nuremberg trials must be convened.
These people do need to be removed from society.
As for torture itself, no one has spoken of it better that Orwell:
"The object of torture is torture!"
Friday, June 1st, 2007
"The Task Force Report Should Be Annulled" - Member of 2005 APA Task Force on Psychologist Participation in Military Interrogations Speaks Out — Click Here
In 2005, the American Psychological Association convened a Presidential Task Force on Psychological Ethics and National Security that concluded psychologists' participation in military interrogations was "consistent with the APA Code of Ethics."
It was later revealed that six of nine voting members were from the military and intelligence agencies with direct connections to interrogations at Guantanamo and elsewhere.
In a Democracy Now! broadcast exclusive, we speak with two members of the task force, Dr. Jean Maria Arrigo and Dr. Nina Thomas.
Arrigo says the task force report "should be annulled," because the process was "flawed."
As an example, Arrigo says she was "told very sharply" by one of the military psychologists not to take notes during the proceedings.
She later archived the entire listserve of the task force and sent it to Senate Armed Services Committee.
We also speak with Dr. Eric Anders, a former Air Force officer who underwent harsh training in "SERE" (Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape) techniques, as well as Dr. Leonard Rubenstein, Executive Director of Physicians for Human Rights.
Unspeakable grief and horror
ÇáäÊÇÆÌ ÇáÃæáíÉ ááÍá ÇáÃãíÑßí ÇáÍÐÑ ááãÞÇæãÉ ÇáÚÑÇÞíÉ Ýí ÇáÝáæÌÉ (ÇáÌÒíÑÉ)
                        ...and the circus of deception killing continues...
Most recent 'Circus of Killing' click here
Archives for 2007:  December   1 — 31
— 2010
— 2009
— 2008
— 2006
— 2005
— 2004
— 2003
Circus of Torture   2003 — now
He says, "You are quite mad, Kewe"
And of course I am.
Why, I don't believe any of it — not the bloody body, not the bloody mind, not even the bloody Universe, or is it bloody multiverse.
"It's all illusion," I say.   "Don't you know, my lad, my lassie.   The game!   The game, me girl, me boy!   Takes on interest, don't you know.   T'is me sport, till doest find a better!"
Pssssst — but all this stuff is happening down here
Let's change it!
To say hello:     hello[the at marker]Kewe.info
For Kewe's spiritual and metaphysical pages — click here
 Kewe ArchivesTheWE.bizThe Poles